Traveling back home

[zedturtle]

I think saying 'life simulator' is pretty dismissive of other peoples' attitudes to this, just sayin'. Also, and I'll talk about it a little more below, but I think it's interesting that you state "after all, we're telling a story", which I'd disagree with somewhat; "we're playing a game" first and foremost.

You're right... it was badly worded and needlessly confrontational. I do think that the game rules should be in service to creating stories that could fit within the wider lore of Middle Earth.

I understand the points you're both making in the above but RPGs are *very* different to books, even RPGs based on books. Tolkien gives his characters plot protection so glossing over the return journey is fine. That's different to RPGs where the story is something you tell after you've played the game, and PCs aren't protected in the same way as an author of a novel protects his primary protagonists. It's important to be true to the game and not impose the story dynamics/rules of books that don't really work very well when applied to RPGs. If you want to use an RPG as a vehicle for simply producing a story, with the trappings used for writing a story, which most play-by-post style games look like (a reason why I don't like them) then that's fine but that is a niche to how RPGs get played where the logic and integrity of the environment of the game world is an extremely important factor in game play.

I agree with you... to a limited extent. We already have examples where the needs of the story trump the integrity of the environment, for example when heroes return home for their Fellowship Phase. We say that those journeys are not worth discussing, but an earlier journey was. I'm ok with that, and think that's this is kind of the same thing.

I won't let myself get too distracted on the PbP thing, but I will say that I really do try to make sure that the players are making decisions in my games, not just being dragged along some pre-plotted thing.

If you can say, "You have many hardships on your journey, but you are never in great danger," then it's a suitable place to begin the fellowship phase and the journey home. If not, then you're still in the adventuring phase and need to get to someplace where you can satisfy the above statement.

I think this is an excellent way of assessing whether to run through a return journey or to end the Adventuring Phase.

I would agree, but love to hear from y'all an example of when it'd be best to play out the return journey. My Tales group is pretty much where Michebugio's group is... (If they survive) I don't plan to play out the return journey, unless they (very foolishly in their case*) try to take the Treasure back to Dale.

- - - - - -

* They've met with Raenar and told him of the secret vault, so he's currently using them as an 'expeditionary force' to either clear the tower or die trying.

[Matthew]

It is very Tolkienesque to not play out the journey home, just look an LotR or the Hobbit. Stuff only happens when they are back home. That's what I did with my group after their watch on the heith. They all were close to death and close to shadow because of corruption rolls, so I skipped their journey and let them play their encounter with Dain before they entered their fellowship phase. Especially, because it is really anti-climatic if you have just befriended a dragon and banned the gibbet king for ever and then you die because of a hazard-encounter with some orcs or you fall down some stones? Sounds stupid to me

I guess this depends on what perspective and feel you want to aim yourself at creating regarding the final 40 -50 years of 'darkening' before the LotR events gather pace.

Have just re-read Unfinished Tales recently and Isildur completed his tasks of defeating Sauron etc only to be ambushed by Orcs at the Gladden Fields 'on his way home' (or rather up to the Northern Kingdoms). That's just one example off the top of my head.

In the Hobbit we have a chapter called out of the frying pan into the fire or what might be thought of in RPG terms as a series of interconnected events that were never possible to plan for. One hazard comes after the next. In LotR Frodo and Sam are inclined to think their journey is done once they reach Rivendell...

This would make me inclined to use the journey home as part of the adventuring phase though perhaps modified with hope as suggested elsewhere. Maybe one of the group's patrons meets them half way and contributes to making life easier for them in some way (the shadow is temporarily less influential, gives the group renewed hope and vigour)? Again there is examples of this in the source material.

[Fridokind Wargaug]

Have just re-read Unfinished Tales recently and Isildur completed his tasks of defeating Sauron etc only to be ambushed by Orcs at the Gladden Fields 'on his way home' (or rather up to the Northern Kingdoms). That's just one example off the top of my head.

This, of course, is true. However, the fact that the journey home was "played out" could be attributed to the fact, that Isildur did not listen to the hints of the Loremaster through the mouth of a NPC (Elrond) but took the ring with him. So if the group takes the treasure from the heith, we should let them encounter another dragon (maybe a smaller one based on the stats from the forest dragon) if they roll an eye on their way home. This could actually be a nice general rule.

[Stormcrow]

love to hear from y'all an example of when it'd be best to play out the return journey.

You've just found the treasure/defeated the bad guy/delivered the McGuffin/failed in your quest and...

... you're all in reasonably good health and spirits and no longer in significant danger: begin fellowship phase.

... you're wounded/exhausted/miserable/in enemy territory: remain in adventuring phase.

In the Hobbit we have a chapter called out of the frying pan into the fire or what might be thought of in RPG terms as a series of interconnected events that were never possible to plan for. One hazard comes after the next.

I would expect "Out of the Frying-pan Into the Fire" to have been a scene planned by the Loremaster, not a hazard episode. It would not be impossible to plan for: if the company escapes the goblin-caves, they'd undoubtedly be pursued.

Isildur did not listen to the hints of the Loremaster through the mouth of a NPC (Elrond) but took the ring with him.

And Círdan, who was also there. "For Isildur would not surrender it to Elrond and Círdan who stood by. They counselled him to cast it into the fire of Orodruin nigh at hand, in which it had been forged, so that it should perish, and the power of Sauron be for ever diminished, and he should remain only as a shadow of malice in the wilderness."

[Arthadan]

It is very Tolkienesque to not play out the journey home, just look an LotR or the Hobbit. Stuff only happens when they are back home. That's what I did with my group after their watch on the heith. They all were close to death and close to shadow because of corruption rolls, so I skipped their journey and let them play their encounter with Dain before they entered their fellowship phase. Especially, because it is really anti-climatic if you have just befriended a dragon and banned the gibbet king for ever and then you die because of a hazard-encounter with some orcs or you fall down some stones? Sounds stupid to me

Does the Scouring of the Shire ring a bell?

About The Hobbit:

He had many hardships and adventures before he got back. The Wild was still the Wild, and there were many other things in it in those days besides goblins; but he was well guided and well guarded-the wizard was with him, and Beorn for much of the way-and he was never in great danger again.
Chapter XVIII - The Return Journey

Now, if it were a game, shouldn't all those "hardships and adventures" be played?

[Fridokind Wargaug]

It is very Tolkienesque to not play out the journey home, just look an LotR or the Hobbit. Stuff only happens when they are back home. That's what I did with my group after their watch on the heith. They all were close to death and close to shadow because of corruption rolls, so I skipped their journey and let them play their encounter with Dain before they entered their fellowship phase. Especially, because it is really anti-climatic if you have just befriended a dragon and banned the gibbet king for ever and then you die because of a hazard-encounter with some orcs or you fall down some stones? Sounds stupid to me

Does the Scouring of the Shire ring a bell?

About The Hobbit:

He had many hardships and adventures before he got back. The Wild was still the Wild, and there were many other things in it in those days besides goblins; but he was well guided and well guarded-the wizard was with him, and Beorn for much of the way-and he was never in great danger again.
Chapter XVIII - The Return Journey

Now, if it were a game, shouldn't all those "hardships and adventures" be played?

The Scouring of the Shire might be another adventure after a fellowship phase in Minas Tirith

I think, if the hardships and adventures were played out, they would be described. Like Stormcrow wrote above, sometimes you just can say: Your journey home is hard, but its doesn't kill you, so you get home save.

But of course, you can play everything out in detail, that's personal LM-style, I guess...

[Rich H]

Now, if it were a game, shouldn't all those "hardships and adventures" be played?

I think so, yes. If The Hobbit had ever been a campaign then I'm pretty damn sure that Bilbo would have been involved in a number of adventures, played out, during his return home. The novel (re actual play) would have been written up afterwards and the author skipped over those for brevity and because he wanted to focus purely on the main plotline.

The Scouring of the Shire might be another adventure after a fellowship phase in Minas Tirith

I think that would make perfect sense.

I think, if the hardships and adventures were played out, they would be described. Like Stormcrow wrote above, sometimes you just can say: Your journey home is hard, but its doesn't kill you, so you get home save.

Well, you could say that about any adventure the PCs survive, so... Like I said earlier, and with Stormcrow's summary and input to support that, I think it's important not to mistake things done in a novel for doing the same things in an RPG. They are different mediums; the most important being that an RPG is a game and the story is something that really happens after the game has finished. Something you look back on and remember.

There's some personal preference here but to finish an adventure and switch to a Fellowship Phase with characters still in dangerous lands, that they know are dangerous because they have previously travelled through them, is something I'd question as a player and LM for the reasons I've expressed in earlier posts. I personally think a journey back from the Heath, with PCs tired and stretched is ripe for exciting and interesting opportunities and if/when I run such a thing I'll certainly be looking at it to do just that.

But of course, you can play everything out in detail, that's personal LM-style, I guess...

No-one's saying they'd play everything out in detail, neither myself or Stormcrow, nor anyone else.

[Rich H]

You're right... it was badly worded and needlessly confrontational. I do think that the game rules should be in service to creating stories that could fit within the wider lore of Middle Earth.

No worries, brevity in responses often creates such things. I agree with you that the rules should service the lore and themes and Middle Earth and Tolkien's work. I don't think travelling back home, in the way that we're discussing it, is one of them though as I've previously described.

I agree with you... to a limited extent. We already have examples where the needs of the story trump the integrity of the environment, for example when heroes return home for their Fellowship Phase. We say that those journeys are not worth discussing, but an earlier journey was. I'm ok with that, and think that's this is kind of the same thing.

It is and it's where you draw the line - a personal thing. Above, Stormcrow gave a really good summary of two types of circumstances where he'd continue an Adventure Phase or complete it and got to a Fellowship Phase. I agree with him and think that the OPs question fits an example of when the AP should be continued. As I've said in my previous post; I think there are still interesting events that could be included in such a return leg, and real dangers associated with it, and the story of an RPG is emergent from playing it; only by playing it out do we discover it.

[zedturtle]

I guess one of my concerns is that it feels like if the players give everything (spending Hope, Endurance, Wounds, etc) then they are punished for succeeding by playing out the return journey. However, I can see a need to do so, if they are doing something unusual.

[Stormcrow]

If The Hobbit had ever been a campaign then I'm pretty damn sure that Bilbo would have been involved in a number of adventures, played out, during his return home. The novel (re actual play) would have been written up afterwards and the author skipped over those for brevity and because he wanted to focus purely on the main plotline.

In Tolkien's original conception, the slaying of Smaug—by Bilbo!—was only the middle of the story. The second half would have been the "back again" part.

if the players give everything (spending Hope, Endurance, Wounds, etc) then they are punished for succeeding by playing out the return journey.

They're not being punished; they're dealing with the natural consequences of their planning and tactics. There's no rule that says players are expected to use up every resource they have in accomplishing their goal. They should save some for the return journey.