Rascally Raven

[Heilemann]

Many great replies, thank you so much.

We're playing in 45 minutes; we'll see if we get as far as to the battle, and I'll of course write a followup.

Firstly, to 'aramis': Show us on the hit location diagram where the GM hurt you, because wow. I agree with your sentiment, but there's some latent anger hidden there

Now, with regards to the damn bird, I have to say it's one of my lesser favorite parts of TOR (as is the Nightgoer). It transforms the rules of the world so extensively as to be equivalent to the introduction of cell phone technology in a 1920s Call of Cthulhu game. Sure, I can fudge whether the raven gets the message right, or is intercepted, etc. But that'll all feel like me interfering, and either way it can't be done every time even if it did work. Perhaps if there were some rules around how the raven accepts orders, what it'll do, that it can be unreliable etc., it would be a little more interesting.

What many of these replies forget, specifically the ones that talk about the players not knowing where Valter's army will go, is that... the raven. It can track the army. Presumably at some point it will get tired of course, but nevertheless.

Now there is a twist to the situation. When my players discovered Merovech and Odo dead, they were on a (quite cold) trail of a pack of orcs. They believed that those same orcs had done this, and decided to hurry. Hurry to the extent that they left Merovech and Odo on the shore of the river, sending the raven to The Old Ford to tell them of the news. They took the boat to the other side, found the two dead orcs. One of the players then took Merovech's spear, and they went looking for orc tracks. (Why the scenario didn't address this issue is an oddity; the two men were killed by orcs, if the players didn't pick up on the signs of the prisoner, and they decided to either bury or leave the bodies... The most natural thing is to go after the orcs).

That's where our session opens today, and I have to tell you, Beorn is not too damn pleased with how these vagrants, who by the way had spent their fellowship phase at The Old Ford, in the bossom of Merovech's family!, had treated his best. So not only is he ill disposed to begin with, but he already dislikes dwarves; and this one hasn't brought great messages so far. So I might simply use this opportunity to have Beorn call the raven a stormcrow, and tell the characters that if they have something to say, they can say it to his face, etc. At least that'll give them an incentive to do so, even if he's likely to trust the message the raven brings him about Valter nevertheless.

[Aeglosdir]

.

[Rocmistro]

Some great concepts, objections, ideas and solutions here.

I think the best thing you can do, in all aspects of GM/LM/DMing, is determine and always be asking yourself "What would, in all likelihood, happen?"

Considering a Raven as a messenger, what are his limitations? Fatigue, accuracy, the limits of his intellect, as others have said. Asking these questions are not "screwing the players over", they are simply interpreting the qualities of a raven that govern success as much as the game measures the qualities of PC's which govern their success or failure.

If Beorn, for example, has never met the Raven, he might was easily think it a trick of the enemy as a herald for a coming battle. Thus, perhaps he proceeds with caution instead of running as fast and straightways to the battle. If a man showed up on your doorstep and said "There is an accident 8 blocks away, come quick!" what would you do? Would at least not some part of your brain consider it might be a setup?

What about fatigue? Do Ravens share in that? Or accuracy. Do Ravens know exactly where Beorn's house is? Are they homing pigeons?

What about misunderstanding the Raven per the limitations of his intellect? (I think someone else already brought this up).

What about the consideration that this might count as unusual or less that reasonable request, and as such require a Courtesy Roll?

But, as Aramis pointed out, none of these things should be done in the spirit of trying to "block" the players. That should not be your goal or your aim. I've seen too many Loremasters block short-cut thinking problem solving, presumably in an effort to make things more dramatic or to increase the tension of the adventure by increasing the likelihood of conflict. They then get upset when all their players create "fighty" heroes/PC's. They need to be smacked. People will find and bring the right tool for the job. If the only tool you ever allow to be the one that decides the drama is the sword, then that's what your players will bring (and they will become masters of it). Rewarding outside-the-box thinking will give your players the freedom to build outside-the-box PC's.

[Glorelendil]

Roc,

I would argue that the goal should be not what's most likely to happen, but what could reasonably happen that makes the best story.

Was it "most likely" that Frodo would actually find a way on foot to Mt Doom? No, that was about the least most likely outcome. If the books had been written differently and somebody on these forums said, "one or two hobbits should have snuck into Mordor on foot..." some folks would have argued how impossible that would have been.

Aegl,

I will go one more round just to demonstrate that there is no "correct" answer:
First, If Frodo had gotten there in hours rather than months he would not have been as corrupted by the ring. Remember he offered to give it to Galadriel?
Also, the Nazgul didn't have flying mounts by then, and they can't outfly eagles anyway.

I'm sure you'll think up counters to those, but my point is that no storyteller can anticipate every alternative that readers/players will come up with. Sometimes rather than rationalize everything you have to just take the path the storyteller offers and trust that it will be a good one.

[Corvo]

Quick reply: when I played this, Beorn was absent, off to the north to follow the trails of the Hillmen of Gundabad who slew Merovech and Odo.

And it wasn't by chance: the Gibbet King orchestrated that diversion to let Valter cross the Old Ford unmolested.

By the way, one of my players suspected something was amiss pretty early: "Killing Beorn's men just one day from his home? These Hillmen are pretty daring to test his legendary wrath like this! It looks like a diversion: I'm almost expecting an army coming down on us... but it's impossible, the orcs are pretty much vanquished..."

[Rocmistro]

Roc,

I would argue that the goal should be not what's most likely to happen, but what could reasonably happen that makes the best story.

Was it "most likely" that Frodo would actually find a way on foot to Mt Doom? No, that was about the least most likely outcome. If the books had been written differently and somebody on these forums said, "one or two hobbits should have snuck into Mordor on foot..." some folks would have argued how impossible that would have been.

Yes, but I'm referring, of course, to things that go outside the scope of what the Loremaster has already conceived, and in actuality, a guideboard for Loremasters on how to resolve player actions that threaten the good story.

I daresay that the advice we are giving here (at least mine), assumes two things:

1. That, as a Loremaster, you have a good story devised.
2. That one of your players, wittingly or unwittingly, is ushering forth an action that might actually threaten your good story.

The broader question then, is: How do you preserve your good story without making your players feel like they are powerless to affect the outcome?

[Glorelendil]

Then we are in agreement.

[aramis]

Many great replies, thank you so much.

We're playing in 45 minutes; we'll see if we get as far as to the battle, and I'll of course write a followup.

Firstly, to 'aramis': Show us on the hit location diagram where the GM hurt you, because wow. I agree with your sentiment, but there's some latent anger hidden there

Nothing "Latent" about it; it's open hostility for one of the worst bits of advice ever written by Gygax and one of the worst playstyles ever foisted upon gamers. The absolute worst times I've ever had are GM's rendering party creative solutions moot. To such GM's: GO WRITE A ≤multiple expletives withheld≥ BOOK INSTEAD!!!

If a player's actions don't matter, then the player doesn't either, and the whole exercise is not but ego-stroking and/or adding dialogue. And that's NOT fun for me, nor for 90% of people I've gamed with. (The rest would be plenty happy playing Once Upon A Time or Hobbit Tales instead of any full up RPG.)

[Rocmistro]

Then we are in agreement.

I believe so. In fact I have every reason to believe you and I would get along famously at the table!

[Heilemann]

Many great replies, thank you so much.

We're playing in 45 minutes; we'll see if we get as far as to the battle, and I'll of course write a followup.

Firstly, to 'aramis': Show us on the hit location diagram where the GM hurt you, because wow. I agree with your sentiment, but there's some latent anger hidden there

Nothing "Latent" about it; it's open hostility for one of the worst bits of advice ever written by Gygax and one of the worst playstyles ever foisted upon gamers. The absolute worst times I've ever had are GM's rendering party creative solutions moot. To such GM's: GO WRITE A ≤multiple expletives withheld≥ BOOK INSTEAD!!!

If a player's actions don't matter, then the player doesn't either, and the whole exercise is not but ego-stroking and/or adding dialogue. And that's NOT fun for me, nor for 90% of people I've gamed with. (The rest would be plenty happy playing Once Upon A Time or Hobbit Tales instead of any full up RPG.)

Still no one arguing with you...