Travel Fatigue and Traits

[Stormcrow]

But I would feel the same if someone who is "Fair spoken" used the Trait to autosucceed at every Encounter when using Courtesy. He could act as the spokesman and use Courtesy seven times, invoking the Trait everytime, to get the maximum profit of every Encounter.

I've never seen an encounter, or any game situation, where you could use the same skill seven times in a row. Being Courteous will only get you so much; it won't solve your problems for you. This is where the players and the Loremaster vote: "I don't think Courtesy will help make that merchant divulge any secrets to you. Try something else."

Otherwise a Hardy character could walk into Mordor with a 5D armour and still be fresh as new when reaching Mt. Doom.

If you're comparing him to Frodo and Sam's journey, remember that they were laboring under the influence of the Ring, with Sauron putting out his power, and with no real resources left (like food and water). This is more than just a fatigue test.

[Majestic]

Rich, the one use per scene rule is an exceptionally elegant way to deal with Traits. Definitely the way I'll be using them moving forward!

Yeah, I think this is quite elegant. It's simple to remember, and not a difficult concept to incorporate at all.

I'd asked this very thing a few months ago, and we never really nailed down anything concrete. I like the concept of one per scene even better.

[Feanor]

On the subject on:

1 Automatic succcesses. If i remember correctly according to the revised rules, to automatically succeed in anything that could be or is important is NOT allowed. Sure, a trait can give lower difficulty, or you can be allowed to make a roll which in other case, you would not be.

and 2:

Gaining advancement points. Our GM goes by the rule of claiming the 1s is auto if you succeed in a skill roll. Claiming the second rank in advancements takes a trait as prereq, with added successful ( usual success, great or extraordinary ) skill roll. Claming the third takes a trait and a diffculty of at least 18. All of this is still only considered if it was important to the mission and goal or quest. On another note, our GM doesnt allow more than one claim per skill/trait combo from FELLOWSHIP phase to FELLOWSHIP phase. Meaning i can claim a travel level 2 advancement for mountaineer when in mountains, and a travel level 3 for hardy, IF ALL the ABOVE written is fulfilled.

Also, our GM sometimes allow an advancement point if its entertainingly described ( even if abit far-fetched ), and made him laugh. Roleplaying is by most played because they ENJOY it.

All these uses brings in about 8 to 13 points of advancement til adventuring stops. Mostly weve had one adventure per year. A couple of times weve had a short adventure and gained only 4 or 6. But to me this seems to work quite well.

Craft this ! ( meaning use this if it works for you ).

Also feel free to correct me if im wrong about anything.

[zedturtle]

Automatic Action
When a player is using one of his Common skills to make a roll, he may invoke a Trait possessed by his hero to ensure a successful performance.
If the Trait considered for the action is agreed to be relevant, the Loremaster may allow the acting player to core an automatic success without even rolling the dice. When a player invokes a Trait to get an automatic success he is considered to have unspectacularly achieved his goal: an ordinary success.
The Loremaster may agree with a Trait invocation to speed up play, especially if failing at the roll would not lead to dramatically relevant consequences, or if the action wasn’t difficult. In some occasions, the Loremaster may ask his players whether they possess a pertinent Trait, in order to move the story on.

Your Loremaster seems to be taking the last paragraph a bit differently than I do. In my mind, the whole section is telling me "players can always ask to use traits for automatic success, I should just say 'yes' automatically to low-stress or low difficulty tests" and that using traits for automatic success in more difficult circumstances is possible, I just need to have the player give me some justification.

Your experiences with APs match mine.

[Rich H]

Rich, the one use per scene rule is an exceptionally elegant way to deal with Traits. Definitely the way I'll be using them moving forward!

Yeah, I think this is quite elegant. It's simple to remember, and not a difficult concept to incorporate at all.

I'd asked this very thing a few months ago, and we never really nailed down anything concrete. I like the concept of one per scene even better.

Happy to be of service, gents! It really did sort out the issues with all this for me and my group. Hope it does the same for yours.

[Falenthal]

Automatic Action
When a player is using one of his Common skills to make a roll, he may invoke a Trait possessed by his hero to ensure a successful performance.
If the Trait considered for the action is agreed to be relevant, the Loremaster may allow the acting player to core an automatic success without even rolling the dice. When a player invokes a Trait to get an automatic success he is considered to have unspectacularly achieved his goal: an ordinary success.
The Loremaster may agree with a Trait invocation to speed up play, especially if failing at the roll would not lead to dramatically relevant consequences, or if the action wasn’t difficult. In some occasions, the Loremaster may ask his players whether they possess a pertinent Trait, in order to move the story on.

I assume you could read the bolded part the other way round: The Loremaster MAY NOT agree for an autosucces if failing a roll would lead to dramatically relevant consequences [Can gaining Travel Fatigue and triggering Hazards be considered "relevant consequences"? ], or the action was difficult [Maybe if the TN is higher than 14?].

[Tantavalist]

I can't help but wonder where exactly Falenthal's idea that Traits can only be used to auto-succeed at low TN rolls comes from. To me, this seems to be nerfing the whole point of Traits- they're the things that a character is extremely good at in a way that Skills alone don't show.

If we were to go with the "one use per Trait per scene" houserule (which I suspect I may well be doing) then if anything I'd be inclined to do the opposite. Rolls with a TN below 14 can be auto-succeeded with Traits without this counting as a use, and even if the Trait has been used this scene.

[Falenthal]

I can't help but wonder where exactly Falenthal's idea that Traits can only be used to auto-succeed at low TN rolls comes from. To me, this seems to be nerfing the whole point of Traits- they're the things that a character is extremely good at in a way that Skills alone don't show.

I don't see it exactly that way. My way might be wrong, but is how I understand the use of Traits. Not exactly what RAW says, I must add. Or at least, not what I think it says.

To me a Trait is something a character is good at, but not exactly "extremely good". To be "extremely good", you need to have a high skill.
For example, someone can be hunter in his hometown, and has Beast-Lore. He knows about deers, and wolves, and how to track them, or how old is a footprint. He can invoke the Trait for these "normal" things that a hunter does, when other should roll Hunting. But when it comes to something more special (higher TN), like chasing the White Deer of Mirkwood, that requires a roll with a high TN, or at least something more than an ordinary success. In those cases, the usual knowledge of a hunter is surpassed, and needs a skill check.

That's why I consider Traits usable for normal TNs (14 and lower), but out of place for higher ones.

[Rich H]

I can't help but wonder where exactly Falenthal's idea that Traits can only be used to auto-succeed at low TN rolls comes from.

It does state in the rules:

The advantages conferred by Traits aren’t powerful enough to unbalance the game.

The book never defines what is meant by "unbalance the game" so this allows *all* LMs to decide what this means in their own game. It could be one, or a combination of, not allowing invocations (a) for TNs above 14, (b) for repeated actions (eg, journey rolls) throughout an adventure, (c) if failing an action would lead to dramatic (re: interesting) consequences, etc. It really is up to each LM (and likely his players) on how they interpret and apply the above quotation within their own game. So, for some players/LMs, if trait invocations were allowed all the time, without limitation, then it would unbalance their game and therefore the LM applies their own rulings, using the RAW, to adjudicate and manage trait usage so that the above quotation holds true.

[Feanor]

To me, thats clearly the case of imbalancing the game if the players can use and get benefits of a certain trait everytime they have a plausible excuse for it. Its not fun, at least not for me, plus it doesnt make the game interesting and dynamic. The players would under such circumstances not have a challenge towards improvization and constantly coming up with new ideas. That makes playing the game boring and unvaried.

To live and adventure in Middle-earth isnt a walk on roses. Its rather a struggle from the get go to the finish of a characters life in it. The constant pressure of the Shadow and the desperation in times of great need should always in my opinion, be felt. NOTHING EVER, comes easy. It just doesnt work like that.

A symbolic way of looking at it is David vs Goliat - smart CAN beat big, but its very hard and unlikely. Selflessness and sacrifice is rarely seen, but it IS a powerful tool in that harsch world when it does happen and CAN make miracles.

Otherwise its another version of Tolkiens great work, which is fine. But i think that if one uses that world and setting, one would rather embrace the setting and work with it/ enjoy it, rather than changing the canon to a completely different experience.

Orelst one might as well play a whole different world and roleplaying game.

These are of course my own heartfelt thoughts.