Rivendell Preview 5: Magical Treasure

[Beran]

I could see having either the feat die or the d6 success die when encounter a hoard. But, I agree having to do both seems a little extreme. You could come up with items and histories to put in the index and never use it with the current system. I get the pre determination and fate concepts, but it is skewed a little too much to the rare side of things.

[Glorelendil]

Agreed.

Personally, I'd allow hoards to have more "rolls" per player, depending on their size and other attributes.

They do. The number of asterisks indicates how many times the player gets to roll the Feat die. E.g. 50** means 50 treasure points and 2 rolls each. A Dragon Hoard, for example, means three tries.

[Rich H]

I could see having either the feat die or the d6 success die when encounter a hoard. But, I agree having to do both seems a little extreme. You could come up with items and histories to put in the index and never use it with the current system. I get the pre determination and fate concepts, but it is skewed a little too much to the rare side of things.

I do think for my own game I'd have to tweak it somewhat as the opportunities for acquiring treasure (from hoards) don't come up much so the chance of acquiring such items would be greatly reduced.

I suppose such items could also be given as gifts (paid for with XP) like Galadriel's gifts to the Fellowship upon leaving Lorien.

Will have to think about things. It's very clever though and I like the way such items work and are put together mechanically including how they are acquired and paid for with unspent XP.

I was chatting about this with Andrew and he stated the following:

I think, on reflection, I'm glad we've kept them scarce - I'd sooner GMs thinking they were too rare and then opt to make them more common than the default be them lying around all over the place.

I think he's spot on with that observation.

[Beran]

I think, on reflection, I'm glad we've kept them scarce - I'd sooner GMs thinking they were too rare and then opt to make them more common than the default be them lying around all over the place.

A roll of a Gandalf rune would make them rare. A Gandalf rune and at least 2 tengu runes makes them almost non existent RAW. I think an 8% chance per hoard to find anything of "power" is rare enough.

[Rocmistro]

Agreed.

Personally, I'd allow hoards to have more "rolls" per player, depending on their size and other attributes.

They do. The number of asterisks indicates how many times the player gets to roll the Feat die. E.g. 50** means 50 treasure points and 2 rolls each. A Dragon Hoard, for example, means three tries.

Thanks Elf, I didn't see that the first time around...probably because...err..the first time around, I didn't actually read it. I just skimmed it. And by "skimming" I might be exaggerating...it was more like a "ooh, pretty picture!" and focusing on 3 or 5 words on the page before flipping to the next page.

[Francesco]

A roll of a Gandalf rune would make them rare. A Gandalf rune and at least 2 tengu runes makes them almost non existent RAW. I think an 8% chance per hoard to find anything of "power" is rare enough.

Just to be precise: A Magical Treasure roll scores a success on a Gandalf AND an Eye*. This raises the chance to find something out of the ordinary to 16.666% for every attempt made by a single adventurer.

Now, apply that percentage to a company composed of 4 heroes, possibly having more than one Magical Treasure roll available for each companion(T** or T***). It's 4 to 12 Magical Treasure roll attempts for each hoard encountered.

*Note that Cursed items in TOR are not simply 'bad stuff', but 'interesting stuff', and by default do require simply a Corruption check.

Francesco

[Beran]

First I just want to re iterate that I like the system for magical treasure, and that if a GM wants to have a certain Item of Power in his game then he is not bound by the mechanics to include it when they say it can be. What I am a little iffy on is the need for two rolls. The Eye and Gandalf runes don't show all that often, in my experience, and seldom when you really want it...like when rolling for treasure. But, then to have roll a number of d6s, assuming you have the extra XP to cover the cost and get two more 6 for the really good stuff. Just seems to me to be pushing things a little.

And I do know that T** and T*** treasures offer players multiple rolls, but they represent fairly sizable treasue horads that, surely, should be rare in and of themselves. Would not the average treasure stumbled upon by pcs be a mere Troll hoard(T -class)?

Now, granted this all "on paper" and I might very well change my mind once I see it the rules in full operation during a game.

[aramis]

First I just want to re iterate that I like the system for magical treasure, and that if a GM wants to have a certain Item of Power in his game then he is not bound by the mechanics to include it when they say it can be. What I am a little iffy on is the need for two rolls.

Grab a fate die per asterisk. Throw them all at once. If you get a gandalf, then wager your Experience.

And I do know that T** and T*** treasures offer players multiple rolls, but they represent fairly sizable treasue horads that, surely, should be rare in and of themselves. Would not the average treasure stumbled upon by pcs be a mere Troll hoard(T -class)?

I suspect the average troll horde should be 10*. this provides a chance (1-((11/12)^(PC's))) of a treasure. And most of those are going to be merely precious items.

Chance of hit, per PC.
T* 8.333%
T** 15.972% (double: 0.694%)
T*** 77.025% (double: 1.910% Triple: 0.058%)

Chance of precious item by Experience (noting that the remainder is a wondrous item):
1 Exp 83.333%
2 Exp 69.444%
3 Exp 57.870%
4 Exp 48.225%
5 Exp 40.188%
6 Exp 33.490%

[Glorelendil]

I suspect the average troll horde should be 10*. this provides a chance (1-((11/12)^(PC's))) of a treasure. And most of those are going to be merely precious items.

It's Gandalf or Eye, not just Gandalf.

Chance of hit, per PC.
T* 8.333%
T** 15.972% (double: 0.694%)
T*** 77.025% (double: 1.910% Triple: 0.058%)

I don't think you can get "double" or "triple". You stop rolling on the first successful Feat die.

[Francesco]

First I just want to re iterate that I like the system for magical treasure...

Don't worry about that, I am just being precise for the sake of, well, precision!

You say that Gandalves and Eyes do not come up often, and that might be true if you consider just one particular roll, effective only when one of the two icons comes up. But when designing a mechanic we must consider the scale of a playing group. So, the possibility of finding something cannot go beyond a certain level, otherwise with a certain number of players you'll find something 'out of the ordinary' in each and every hoard (making that something a little less special and 'out of the ordinary'...).

Just look at the group of 4 players I mentioned before: if I am not mistaken, the percentage of at least one hero succeeding in a Magical Treasure roll is as high as 51,77% with a 'standard' hoard, already a sizeable chance. Make it a T**, and the percentage rises already to 76,74% (with almost 40% of having 2 players make the roll). Add more players or make the hoard a T***, and magical objects can be found in each and every smelly Troll cave in the Ettenmoors...

As far as the Success dice are concerned, it's obvious that using these new rules players will start to send their adventurers out with at least a small reserve of Experience points (you also get some at the end of each session, and it's unlikely you'll find a hoard during the first session of an Adventuring phase), and this is a 'side effect' that we considered and approved (with 'floating' xps basically representing your 'luck' or 'predestination'...).

Is the really good stuff found only on an extraordinary success? First, no, Wondrous items are great in play. Second, well, Famous Weapons and Armour are meant to be like that - it is stuff of a level that your heroes should expect to see only once or twice in their adventuring career (if ever).

Francesco
P.S.: sorry if I seem excessively defensive! I'm just taking the chance to illustrate some of the reasoning behind our work.




Francesco