Getting there is NOT half the fun....

[Stormcrow]

You don't keep track of where Hazards occur.

You may not but I do.

Sigh. Read that as the impersonal you. One does not keep track of where Hazards occur, according to the rule book. One is, as always, free to expand upon the rules.

[Rich H]

Sigh.

Don't get so down SC, it's only a discussion about pretend elves.

Read that as the impersonal you. One does not keep track of where Hazards occur, according to the rule book. One is, as always, free to expand upon the rules.

I'm not really expanding as the RAW allows for both ways to play. Something we both need reminding of, I suspect.

Some other thoughts...

Hope Usage
In particular the Fellowship pool refresh but also personal Hope pools. If you roll up front you're not accounting for the pool refreshing during a journey, which may happen, or other circumstances that may result in Hope usage or Hope being regained depending on what occurs in the journey. Therefore players can only use the Hope that they currently have available before the journey which could certainly cause issues. This would impact on you if you want to use Hope in hazards or other tests during the journey whereas if you roll fatigue tests during the journey this allows more decision points for players as to whether they use their Hope or retain it for later in the journey depending on their circumstances, etc. Do the players discuss their rolls that are all rolled up front? If they do then that seems very artificial and strange to me.

Do you also roll Corruption tests at the start?
- If so then these would need to be logged by the player and could potentially affect further rolls as Hope is used (or not) and PCs potentially become Miserable. A bout of madness could then occur. Which the players will be aware of if you roll everything up front. All these would then affect their future hope resource spends as they roll the rest of their fatigue tests knowing that another PC is going to suffer a bout of madness. But hang on what if someone wants to do something during the journey but they have a bout of madness occurring later but this extra 'thing' they decide to do instead triggers the bout? That could then affect Hope usage as temporary Shadow Points would reset giving access to more of a PCs Hope pool (ie, Shadow Points would be zero so they could spend more Hope and not risk being Miserable). This would affect future Hope use later in the journey but as it's rolled all up-front the players would need to process all these decisions at the 'start'. The Bout of Madness may well impact on the other PCs as they deal with the situation - they may also lose or gain Hope; Hope that they did, or didn't, have when making those up-front fatigue tests for a journey they have yet to start. If you roll at the start then you're also reducing the surprise of such elements and the interesting impact that can have to the scenario and story.

- If you don't apply Corruption checks at the start then such a test and how hope is used within them would impact on future rolls on the journey. What if a player spent Hope on a fatigue test up front but then has none (or they don't want to use it because its too low) for the Corruption check you call for during the journey? They'd have used that Hope point for the corruption check before the usual circumstances of rolling later fatigue tests etc during the journey and altered their 'strategy' going forward accordingly. Rolling up front is denying such flexibility and the interesting/tough decisions PCs have to make within that space. In fact as a player I'd accuse an LM that did that of taking control of my character away from me by employing the 'rolls up front' rule.

Invoking Traits to support Fatigue Tests
As there's no context to when these fatigue tests occur in the journey then you're limiting the potential usage of such traits that can be invoked to offer auto-successes, lessons learnt to gain APs, etc. What are you going to do? At best you're going to let a player stop and narrate invoking a trait as all these dice rolls are happening up-front before the journey? That just seems really unsatisfactory as I know my players take input from what's happening at that particular time on the journey in question. Are you going to let the player use it within the journey? If so then they'd have to track the tests that they wish to invoke their traits on, which would appear to be bookkeeping not currently needed.

.
.
.

Seems like when you consider all the above this "roll at the start" is a bit of nightmare to manage and is extremely unsatisfactory in lots of ways; replacing one issue with many others. I don't want to side-line the thread anymore as you're proposing this and not ThrorII so I won't debate it further, you can PM me if you like or start a new thread. Although I don't think Thror's suggestion is as good as rolling tests during the journey I do think it's vastly more satisfactory than rolling everything up front.

[Rich H]

Still that question for ThrorII...

If you go with a one roll solution, then you can only reduce Fatigue by up to 3 depending on the successes (t's) rolled, yes? That could mean journey legs become extremely taxing if they are of any great length. I know that my players spend Hope to avoid fatigue and often complete journey's without any fatigue loss so I think there could be room for some kind of Hope mechanic within your house-rule to cover it. Perhaps one of the following:

1) For each point of Hope spent, reduce your Fatigue by one.

2) Spend a point of Hope to double the result of your Fatigue Test - ie, double the reduction in fatigue points.

I'm not sure how those would play out but they don't seem game breaking and allow PCs to reduce Fatigue by more than 3.

Also, you won't get as may 'eye' results, which may not be an issue for you, but that means less hazards so you may want to actually set up hazards within a journey whether players roll eyes or not - perhaps 1 hazard for every 10 days of travel or something along those lines.

[ThrorII]

Still that question for ThrorII...

If you go with a one roll solution, then you can only reduce Fatigue by up to 3 depending on the successes (t's) rolled, yes? That could mean journey legs become extremely taxing if they are of any great length. I know that my players spend Hope to avoid fatigue and often complete journey's without any fatigue loss so I think there could be room for some kind of Hope mechanic within your house-rule to cover it. Perhaps one of the following:

1) For each point of Hope spent, reduce your Fatigue by one.

2) Spend a point of Hope to double the result of your Fatigue Test - ie, double the reduction in fatigue points.

I'm not sure how those would play out but they don't seem game breaking and allow PCs to reduce Fatigue by more than 3.

Also, you won't get as may 'eye' results, which may not be an issue for you, but that means less hazards so you may want to actually set up hazards within a journey whether players roll eyes or not - perhaps 1 hazard for every 10 days of travel or something along those lines.

We're going to try it as I laid out first (Figure out the number of fatigue test, and roll them in to one test; i.e. instead of 4 TN20 travel tests for 1 Fatigue each, we will do 1 travel test at TN20 for 4 fatigue; Each success rune will lower it by 1 fatigue point). I want my players to know travel is wearying. I want them to incur SOME fatigue on longer journeys.

The key will be to not run one journey for hundreds of miles without breaking it up somehow. That shouldn't be a problem. I'm going to have a separate roll for each region of Wilderland as they are crossed (Dalelands, Western Upper Vales, etc.), because each one has it's own Terrain and Difficulty ratings. Each of those regions rarely goes for more than 100 miles at a shot, also. Additionally, Encounters/Combat will break up the journey.

I'm also incorporating the original journey rules on Ponies and Boats (halving fatigue points).

Yes, there will be fewer unplanned Hazards. That's fine. You are correct, having pre-planned Hazard-like encounters, which are customized for the region, work just as well (River crossings, monsters, etc). I'll use certain Hazards (the railroady ones, which cost fatigue and add minor color) such as getting lost, uncomfortable lodgings, etc) for Eye rolls.

[Corvo]

(...)
Encounters were also frustrating. My players blew two Encounters due to Horrible rolls, despite really trying role-playing.
(...)
Then, they encountered the Hermit of the Forest. Since we had three Woodsmen in the group, they had a Tolerance of 5 (2 for Wisdom, plus 1 per Woodmen). Well, their first Courtesy roll was an Eye of Sauron. Their second roll was an Eye of Sauron. By this time, they had offered him food, talked nice to him, and really tried. After two bad rolls, they could not recover, and gave up. Not from bad roleplaying, but from bad dice. They threatened him and got him to flee his own home, so they could sleep there. By that time, they didn't even care that they incurred Shadow points, they were so frustrated.
(...)

Hi Thror.
Feel some of your pain: while I have no problem with travel rolls (my players think that crossing Mirkwood is an epic feat not unlike the Anabasi, so they can roll lots of dices and feel right), I don't like the encounter rules.
No real solution to offer, just some patching up: if the players want to just roll the dices, fine, the rules are there. If the players want to roleplay the dialogue I adjust the target number according to what they said (down or up, if they mess it).
Btw, you mentioned two "eye" as first rolls. Are you aware that an eye isn't an auto fail?
Keep going and don't lose your hope

[Valarian]

Btw, you mentioned two "eye" as first rolls. Are you aware that an eye isn't an auto fail?
Keep going and don't lose your hope

This is quite true. The Eye is a zero rolled, but if they still make the TN then they succeed.

Personally, I tend to use Eye rolls as a way to introduce complications to the scenario. So, in my game, the character would "succeed, but ...". Similarly, if they fail, the character would "fail, and ..." to add the element of disaster to the situation.

[jamesrbrown]

I personally like a lot of dice rolling during Journeys. It makes players feel as if their character is on a long trek. I haven't had any players complain about this at all, ever. Most of my guys LOVE dice rolling (sometimes more than roleplaying!).

I do, however, prefer to break up long Journeys into legs, "making the calculations and rolls for each leg separately." (LG 32). I have only allowed planning ahead at the beginning of the entire journey to save time, but I wouldn't be opposed to planning rolls before each leg either.

I apply Fatigue increases after any triggered Hazard episodes for that leg, but before the next leg.

Consider the sample Journey found in the LG 37-38, "From the Lonely Mountain to Beorn's House." That's a fairly long journey (400+ miles total!). There are three legs in the trip. If a company travels in Spring-time (which may be the most popular time to travel), they will only be rolling 1 Fatigue test during the first leg, 3 during the second, and 2 during the last. If they plan well and travel by pony, they could actually fare very well on this trip. The ponies wouldn't make a difference during the first leg if they fail their rolls, but they would help to knock off at least 1 point during the second and last leg if they fail their rolls.

Traveling through Mirkwood is much more difficult (as The Heart of the Wild describes very well)!

One last comment for now: Many times our journeys will be resolved without triggering any Hazard episodes. When this happens, the mode I use for storytelling is a narrative overview and quickly try to get to the episode awaiting the Companions at their destination. However, I find myself longing for more 'hazard-like' experiences on the road (including things that require Weapon skills to resolve). So, impromptu episodes work nicely and the reason for having one is not because someone in the Fellowship has failed somehow, but simply because a challenge has found them.

[ThrorII]

Btw, you mentioned two "eye" as first rolls. Are you aware that an eye isn't an auto fail?
Keep going and don't lose your hope

This is quite true. The Eye is a zero rolled, but if they still make the TN then they succeed.

Personally, I tend to use Eye rolls as a way to introduce complications to the scenario. So, in my game, the character would "succeed, but ...". Similarly, if they fail, the character would "fail, and ..." to add the element of disaster to the situation.

When they have only 2 or 3 ranks In a skill, an eye is going to be a fail most of the time.