Evaluating the outcome of an Encounters optional rule

[jamesrbrown]

Rich, this is a great discussion about Tolerance and Loremaster characters and how to build an encounter, etc. Unfortunately, I must get going now, but I will return sometime to see where the conversation goes when I have more time to formulate further responses. Cheers!

[Rich H]

Rich, this is a great discussion about Tolerance and Loremaster characters and how to build an encounter, etc. Unfortunately, I must get going now, but I will return sometime to see where the conversation goes when I have more time to formulate further responses. Cheers!

No problem -just some food for thought on your return; I actually think there are two dynamics at play here with our responses to Angelalex:

1) All the PCs in a fellowship are inexperienced; therefore reducing required successes would be the way to go

2) A mixed group of experience capability in the PCs; where I don't think reducing the tiers would be wise

3) NPCs that are positively disposed to the PCs; where I think it's best to just increase the Tolerance of the character in question

[Falenthal]

But, if I wanted to make it easier for inexperienced player-heroes without making them do more talking, I would try adjusting the ranges of success.

That's, of course, quite reasonable.

I think it's more about how every LM envisions Encounters (and every Encounter in particular) than about the rules. I also think that both ways can work.

For me, I prefer to think that a higher outcome requires more effort (one or more succesful skill tests) from the heroes. Consider that an outcome with just one success is already a succesful Encounter. To make it better than that, I like to think that it requires the characters to show the NPCs that they're special or better prepared than average people.

But I must say I also use lower or higher tiers for outcomes in some Encounters: Beorn or the Lord of the Eagles are probably good examples of NPCs where I raise the tiers.
Or raise the TNs needed. That's another way of making an Encounter more difficult.

[Stormcrow]

I haven't closely followed this thread, so I apologize if I misunderstand where this is coming from.

1) All the PCs in a fellowship are inexperienced; therefore reducing required successes would be the way to go

Why shouldn't inexperienced characters simply achieve less than experienced ones? What's the point of becoming experienced if it just means everything's going to become harder to compensate?

3) NPCs that are positively disposed to the PCs; where I think it's best to just increase the Tolerance of the character in question

This is already in the rule books on the pages I referenced earlier: "The adventurers are already known and appreciated among the people they meet (+2)"

[Rich H]

I haven't closely followed this thread, so I apologize if I misunderstand where this is coming from.

Me too, I was attempting to give a quick summary of my understanding more than anything else.

1) All the PCs in a fellowship are inexperienced; therefore reducing required successes would be the way to go

Why shouldn't inexperienced characters simply achieve less than experienced ones? What's the point of becoming experienced if it just means everything's going to become harder to compensate?

I agree but upthread someone mentioned the disparity in competency and then how someone wise would take pity on such 'noobs' and be more kindly disposed. I was presuming that lowering the success range bands is a way of simulating this disposition but not something I agree with as I'd rather use increases in Tolerance to represent such NPC attitudes.

3) NPCs that are positively disposed to the PCs; where I think it's best to just increase the Tolerance of the character in question

This is already in the rule books on the pages I referenced earlier: "The adventurers are already known and appreciated among the people they meet (+2)"

Agreed. Was just reiterating/asserting for clarity.

[Majestic]

For example, the Tolerance rating is set at 4 and there are 6 player-heroes in the company. They encounter the Elven-king and would each like to introduce themselves. They all make a roll, and get a combined 6 successes with 2 failures. Their introductions only count as 1 roll toward the Tolerance and they only count 3 successes of their 4 (2 were canceled by failures) toward the evaluation. Afterwards, they will get 3 skill rolls during the Interaction.

I must be missing something here. If they get 6 successes and 2 failures, shouldn't the 2 cancel things out such that there are 4 successes instead of 3?

[Falenthal]

have each player-hero roll to introduce himself, but only count it as one roll (like a combined action) and only count up to 3 successes from among the group toward the total

As all individual Introductions count as 1 roll, the maximum number of successes of 1 roll is 3 (success + 2 Tengwars). Makes sense.

[Majestic]

have each player-hero roll to introduce himself, but only count it as one roll (like a combined action) and only count up to 3 successes from among the group toward the total

As all individual Introductions count as 1 roll, the maximum number of successes of 1 roll is 3 (success + 2 Tengwars). Makes sense.

Sorry, I missed seeing this earlier (was away for a few days and got quite behind on reading all the threads). Where in the rules do you find that "all individual Introductions count as 1 roll"?

[Falenthal]

Oh, no! Not in the RAW. It´s only so if using James´ HR. Sorry for the confusion.

[jamesrbrown]

Yeah, sorry guys. I really took this thread into House-rules territory when I made my suggestion and I don't want there to be any confusion with the way Tolerance works according to RAW. My comments were interrelated with the topic, but the the natural consequence of posting my suggestion was eventual confusion about the RAW. So, again, I apologize. I would be less embarrassed if the thread were moved into the House Rules forum