forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

zedturtle wrote:Note that under my 'B' system it would still be possible for multiple Eyes to be rolled on long journeys, just much less likely. So the LB text doesn't invalidate my idea, but does lend credence to the 'A' interpretation (aka how everyone else does it).

As they say, it's your game. But your interpretation is not supported by the text in either of the two books. The players always roll the Feat Die plus a number of Success Die equal to their Skill in all tests and tasks.

The text does not explicitly say that when making Fatigue Tests, this rule changes and the Loremaster should roll the Feat Die while the players roll only a number of Success Die equal to their Travel Skill. If the designers meant for this to be the way Fatigue tests are handled, they would have stated it.

beckett wrote:

zedturtle wrote:Note that under my 'B' system it would still be possible for multiple Eyes to be rolled on long journeys, just much less likely. So the LB text doesn't invalidate my idea, but does lend credence to the 'A' interpretation (aka how everyone else does it).

As they say, it's your game. But your interpretation is not supported by the text in either of the two books. The players always roll the Feat Die plus a number of Success Die equal to their Skill in all tests and tasks.

The text does not explicitly say that when making Fatigue Tests, this rule changes and the Loremaster should roll the Feat Die while the players roll only a number of Success Die equal to their Travel Skill. If the designers meant for this to be the way Fatigue tests are handled, they would have stated it.

I'm sure you're right. Why do you think the thing is in there about all the players rolling at the same time?

zedturtle wrote:

beckett wrote:

zedturtle wrote:Note that under my 'B' system it would still be possible for multiple Eyes to be rolled on long journeys, just much less likely. So the LB text doesn't invalidate my idea, but does lend credence to the 'A' interpretation (aka how everyone else does it).

As they say, it's your game. But your interpretation is not supported by the text in either of the two books. The players always roll the Feat Die plus a number of Success Die equal to their Skill in all tests and tasks.

The text does not explicitly say that when making Fatigue Tests, this rule changes and the Loremaster should roll the Feat Die while the players roll only a number of Success Die equal to their Travel Skill. If the designers meant for this to be the way Fatigue tests are handled, they would have stated it.

I'm sure you're right. Why do you think the thing is in there about all the players rolling at the same time?

Sorry for being dense here, but I don't understand your question.

In the section that I quoted from the AB there's a curious line about all players making the test at the same time. Trying to understand why that is given its own paragraph is what lead me down the line of thought that I've been calling my 'B' interpretation...

zedturtle wrote:In the section that I quoted from the AB there's a curious line about all players making the test at the same te. Trying to understand why that is given its own paragraph is what lead me down the line of thought that I've been calling my 'B' interpretation...

Oh. Well, it means what it says: All players roll the test at the same time. The caveat here is that there may not be enough dice to go around to make that a reality. Really, it doesn't matter if they roll at the same time or you around the table and have them each roll.

But it certainly doesn't mean that the Loremaster should roll the Feat Die while the players roll only a number of Success Die equal to their Travel Skill on Fatigue Tests.

Hermes Serpent: Sorry for derailing this thread.

Yeah, sorry Hermes Serpent... Didn't mean to take over, I'll start a new thread.

Zed:

I *think* the reason the text states that ALL tests are resolved for ALL players at the same time is so that the Loremaster can fully see how many "hazards" are triggered (or not) before "interpreting" the results of the die.

If the rolls were done one at a time, the LM doesn't have a full panoramic view of what's about to happen. If, then, over the course of a long journey, the fellowship triggers 5 hazards, let's say, and the Loremaster has to interpret them all individually, that can be overwhelming and/or disjointed. If instead, he knows that 5 hazards are coming up, he might choose to incorporate them all into a single "event": A horrible thunderstorm (hazard 1) blocks the fellowship's visibility and they wander into a sinkhold (hazard 2), which is actually a trap set by a group of marauding orcs (hazard 3); the party successfully fights the orcs but doesn't realize that the bag of silver they found on the orcs is cursed (hazard 4), which provokes them into acting belligerently (hazard 5) when they meet the group of woodmen who come to help the heroes after they hear them fighting the orcs.

As a player in your group, I don't have a problem with how you're doing the 1 feat die role (I kind of like it, to a degree, as the one feat die suggests a common environment for everyone; low feat die = miserable weather, high feat die = good weather, finding a road, etc.), but I do agree with the others that I don't think it's the correct interpretation.

Yeah, I've been thinking as I've been driving and that was my other possibility; having the LM text right next to the AB text helps tremendously....

More thoughts later, I'm about to go into a medical prison (to fix a machine) so I'll be out of comms range for a while.

In a con scenario a character who fails a Corruption check AND gets an Eye result is considered temporarily Miserable until they get Hope from somewhere. If that character then fails a subsequent Corruption check they suffer a bout of madness.

I use this to discourage the overuse of Hope (it's supposed to be precious!)

Robin S.

I set the pregen characters for a one shot/con game to have much less Hope than a fresh character would have and so limit the Hope use that way. I'd also point out that over use of Hope leads to madness if players aren't aware of that (i.e. have never read/used the rules). Aklthough I've not yet forced a situation where a Hope spend would tip a character over the edge.

It might be interesting to set a scenario somewhere where the characters are at very low Hope and start In media res which would put them in immediate danger of going mad with using Hope for Combat rolls or skill tests. Say at the end of a trek through Mirkwood where they arrive at a place under attack.