forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Warning! Possible basic set adventure spoilers ahead! Also long post: wall of text incoming!

Finally after a lot of preparation we got TOR on the gaming table this weekend. I had chosen Marsh Bell as the first adventure and we played it in two sessions on Friday night and Sunday morning. We have played quite a lot of RPG's but TOR system was quite different from other stuff we've played. We're also boardgamers, so we're very used playing with rule sets with no or little gray areas or gaping holes.

The first session was quite chaotic. It was Friday evening and although I thought I had prepared well the questions the players threw at me gave me hard time. There was quite a lot of confusion how different numbers on their sheet interact. Luckily I had printed the revised list of contents from Cubicle's webpage so I was able to locate stuff relatively fast. I was also trying to explain how the rules work, so that came in the way of the story quite a bit. We possibly also overextended the session a bit, playing for something like 5-6 hours straight. Needless to say everyone was quite tired in the end. The players commented that they felt there was a lot of rolling in this game and it came in the way of storytelling. To be honest after this session I felt that this game looked good on paper but didn't work for me very well.

But since we're stubborn group of gamers we finished off the adventure this morning in two hour session. The second session was a lot smoother. Everyone was calmer (Sunday morning vs. Friday night) and we set a time limit of two hours to get to the end of the adventure. I also made a conscious choice with the style of play and skipped quite a lot of pointless rolling to keep things moving. In the end everyone had fun and the second session and the player response was positive although with concerns. I asked them straight if this was the kind of game they would wish to continue and they said yes, which is nice since I had fun today too.

As I said I changed the style of play for the second session. Considering the players felt that there was too many rolls I streamlined things and skipped a lot of (needless) rolling. Instead I moved the story instead by utilizing the traits of the PC's. For example there's a six test prolonged action to find the next key location in the adventure. Instead of making the heroes roll a mountain of dice I made the Look Out man roll search / explore once and then gave quite a lot of "free successes" by taking advantage of the Keen Eyed -trait of the Elven PC. At least Marsh Bell is so railroady that making all those test just to move the story is just silly.

The main concern we have is about traits and gaining advancement points through invoking the trait. The players felt that the trait invoking system was very gamey and encouraged the players to come up with often very silly sounding explanations how they use their Firemaking/adventurous/hardy etc. speciality to do something quite unrelated. It was also very confusing how almost every trait could be used to almost any action as long as you came up some kind of story how it could be. "Concerned with the fate of my kinsmen I become very angry and search the tracks while grinding my teeth." (invokes Wrathful after a successful search roll). Is this really how it is supposedly to be played out? That if you can come up with a tall tale you can get advancement point from virtually any successful test? It also encouraged some of the players to come up with some simple tests "I go and hunt some supper." in order to get to roll and gain advantage points. The bad thing is that I think that the players sometimes felt ashamed for "fishing" for the advancement points. It killed the mood (especially during the first session) when everybody was joking about "I will cook Adventurously with new spices and then you can stand in the guard Wrathfully. so no one dares attack us".

My second concern is related to the first one. Our elf has Distinctive features Keen-eyed and Nimble, which are very easy to invoke when adventuring. There's always something to spot or some tight spots where nimbleness can be used. The again our Woodsmen have Distinctive features Bold and Hardy. Hardy of course can be used when making travel rolls, but it was very hard for us to come up with ways to invoke it otherwise. And to use it for the same thing all the time feels a bit like cheating and is no fun. "I don't mind the rain because I'm so Hardy". Bold is even harder: These are heroes, they are supposed to be bold and heroic. It seems that (at least for us) it is very much easier to invoke Traits which are physical of nature (Keen Eyed, Nimble, Elusive) rather than mental (Bold, Hardy, Wrathful, Adventurous). This will lead to a situation where in order to keep up with the elf the other have to "invent" situations where their traits become useful and these are often so unrelated to everything that they disrupt the flow of the story. We even discussed on having some other system how to hand out advancement points, but didn't really come up with any which would work. I really like the idea how this SHOULD work, but it just doesn't for us.

The third concern is with Encounters. In a situation where you should roleplay the situation you're rolling tons of dice to get to the seven successes. The system also encourages the usage of single spokesman (less chance for failed rolls during introduction) but that then effectively sidelines the others from the play. This would be boring, especially if there's always the same character doing the talking.

Related to this it was hard to for us to find the sweet spot between speaking and rolling. There were two approaches towards this during the session:

- Player: "Greetings Gloin son of Groin, I'm your humble servant and I must say that you have a remarkably beautiful house and your beard is as long and fluffy as it has ever been."
- Loremaster: Hmmmm...ok, this is clearly courtesy. So yes, roll courtesy test.
- Player: "Oh, I don't have any levels in courtesy. Can I use persuade or Riddle or Song instead?"

and

- Player: "I very courteously ask him where the dwarfs were last seen".
- Loremaster: "Ok, courtesy check".
- Player: "Done."

Both felt very clumsy.

I guess the right way to approach the encounters would be that the rolls are more or less in the background. The players know the tolerance and they know that they have to get to seven successes to get the "best reward". So they choose appropriate style of explanation for the skill they want to use and then just roll while speaking without really minding the result. The problem is that there is normally limited amount of information to give them. At least in Marsh Bell it was hard to give them reasons to keep on rolling after the first couple successes. And then you're rolling just to get to the seven successes, which is just boring.

Oh. My group also thought that Stone Troll was totally disappointing loser who hits like a hobbit. One against four is no fair fight.

Thanks for taking the time to read this rant. I'd really appreciate if anyone would have pointers, comments and advice how to get past our concerns and continue adventuring in Middle-Earth. In some parst in this post I made our gameplay sound dumber that it actually was to make a point. For this I apologize to my friends since they are not bad players, quite contrary. The biggest problem is my inability to understand the rules and not being able to give them satisfactory answers to their rule and playstyle questions. There just seems to be huge gaps in the rules that we fall into while trying to roleplay our style, advance the story and advance the characters effectively.

Cheers!

Hey, Mordjinn and welcome to The One Ring.

In contrast with your players reaction our gaming group found the game system very "refreshing" (our gaming history consists mostly dnd games - from 2nd to 3rd edition, then to 4th and finally settling in 3rd again).

Here is some thoughts on your issues:
Traits - Advancements: The role of traits is to flesh out more the character and pass this flavour to the mechanics. I think your group sees the traits as a mechanic that the players must to flesh out in role playing. If an invocation of a trait seems too fishy for you then don't allow it. I don't reward my players each time they say to me they are "wrathfull" (using your example), but only in a situation that you judge that suits your game and the background of your player. Otherwise greedy or power gamers might exploit the traits.
You can set also a limit to the usage of a trait. For example there are many situations where a pc can be "hardy". Allow that in the first time in the scene. The second time don't allow the player to invoke it ("you already outdo your abilites once, you don't have the energy for the second time this day").
With regard the mental traits i can see that some might look confusing. Have in mind that some became adventurers not because the would like a life like this, but because of necessity. That means they don't be neither bold and adventurous. By being "bold" also means that you are bold more than the normal. For example, you are so bold that alone you would sneak in the lair of the great Smaug. Can you imagine any ordinary adventurer do this?
Finally, with regard the advancement points, if you find something to be to gamey or easy just don't reward the player with that point anyway. If you hunt in a peacful area without any obvious danger there is no need the player to be awarded even with one or two successes. But if the player hunts in the Mirkwood, a place where the danger lies in every step, then he might deserve the advancement.
Making it short: you are the ultimate judge whether a usage of skill or trait would really develop the capabilities of a player. Don't let the traits and the skills be the ultimate law. These are just guides.

Encounter: Let it flow organically and keep the rolls to the mininum needed. A very good start is to ask first the pc how they intent to approach the npcs in terms of their social skills (awe, inspire, etc) and after that let them roleplay. In the end of their talk ask them to roll a die and let the npc answer according to the roll. After that, the character can continue talking according to the response of the npc or another pc interferes.
You never let the pcs learn if the won or loose the social encounter (although sometimes is obvious).


I don't know if helps but this is the way i am playing it.

Hi Mordjinn,

Your frustration with Advancement Points is nothing new. Many of us had difficulty wrapping our heads around how they work at first. I forget where exactly it was said, or who said it for that matter (I think it was Francesco), but the consensus regarding Advancement Points is that the first point in a skill group (Movement, Survival etc) gain be gained merely by gaining a great or extraordinary success on a roll. The second point requires a bit more, usually invoking a Trait on a successful roll (Curious on an Explore roll, for instance). The final point in a group is that hardest to get. It requires the invocation of a Trait to use a roll when ordinarily no roll would be allowed (Invoking Nimble to be able to grab onto a ledge after being knocked off of a cliff, when usually there would be no chance of doing so). Succeeding at this roll then warrants the third Advancement Point. Since this tier system was introduced, my players have never gained three Advancement Points in a single skill group.

Regarding Encounters, not all Encounters need a single spokesman. That's entirely up to you as Loremaster to decide. Beyond that, seven successes can seem like a high number, but it can actually be achieved in only three rolls (two extraordinary successes and one success). Equally, I would highly recommend the Loremaster's screen if you don't already have it, as it lays out how to run an Encounter in more detail, using skills such as Insight to work out what skills would please the NPC most, followed by using Courtesy or Riddle in the introduction, followed by whatever skills would be appropriate. Doing this adds depth to the encounter, takes up at least two of the required success dice, and makes the dice rolling seem a little less tedious. That's what I've found anyway.

Lastly, regarding your players finding the Stone Troll easy, something to bear in mind is that that particular troll is wounded before the adventurers encounter it, and that ordinarily trolls must be reduced to zero Endurance AND Wounded in order to be taken out of the fight. It's a brilliant mechanic to reflect their sheer size and strength, but it can result in players either defeating a troll instantly through sheer luck, or spending five rounds whittling away at its Endurance, hoping for a Wound. Equally, a piece of erata is that trolls become Weary once their Endurance reaches zero, making it a little easier to inflict a Wound.

I hope I've managed to help in addition to Gweinel's information

Welcome to the game

Hi Gweinel, Beleg and Robin. Thank you for your time and replies, it is always eye opening to hear how others (more experienced) Loremasters and TOR groups handle things. Amazing help.

The system of rewarding the first Advancement Point from just great/extraordinary success with a roll, the second from invoking the trait after a successful roll in a situation which matters and the third from something truly heroic sounds exactly like what I was after. Thanks a lot for that.

But the system raises another question: When you use that system, what happens if a player is unable to roll great/extraordinary successes? Can he still invoke the trait for the first advacement slot? And then later on use great/extraordinary roll to tick the second advacement diamond?

The trait usage guide is really golden. I found similar kind of list from the internet earlier and we were using it to a degree. But to have some instructions and guidelines, especially on the story telling aspect really helps. The key here is really to know your character's personality and style and really play him rather than just think of traits as possible bonuses to get you out of trouble. I will give the players a chance to redo their characters now that we're more familiar with the rules if they wish to have traits that are more in line with the idea they have for their characters.

Regarding Encounter I must admit we plunged into the first encounter with little or no planning. Gweinel's advice to ask the players how they intent to approach the encounter is a good one. This way we can figure the needed skills and rolls before actually starting the encounter. Also I think that the fellowship focus on Encouters is a good way to go. I just need to stop the game for a while and go over the situation.

When it comes to Stone Troll I actually played the battle in a way that it was defeated after it was reduced to zero Endurance and Wounded. What I missed in the heat of the action was Horrible Strenght and this is why the players felt that it wasn't hitting very hard.

Once again thanks a lot for the help, it is very valuable.

Mordjinn wrote: The system of rewarding the first Advancement Point from just great/extraordinary success with a roll, the second from invoking the trait after a successful roll in a situation which matters and the third from something truly heroic sounds exactly like what I was after. Thanks a lot for that.

But the system raises another question: When you use that system, what happens if a player is unable to roll great/extraordinary successes? Can he still invoke the trait for the first advancement slot? And then later on use great/extraordinary roll to tick the second advancement diamond?

The following really cleared it up for me and is how I'm going to explain it to my players next session. It's taken from SirKicley's messageboard at ( http://z6.invisionfree.com/World_Of_Myd ... topic=2218 )

SirKicley wrote: 1st Point (within a given skill grouping). Succeeding at a skill check and then Invoking a trait/distinctive feature to narrate it's success. Succeeding on a skill check with a great success. Failing on an important but not crucial skill check by three or less points, and then explaining what was learned if/when the diffulty is higher than TN 14.

2nd Point (within a given skill grouping). Succeeding at a Hard skill check (TN 16 or 18). Using a skill that heroically aids another by putting yourself in harm's way. Succeeding a skill check with an extraordinary Success. Succeeding on a skill check w/ a great success AND Invoking a Trait. Failing a crucially important skill check by 3 points or less, and then detailing what the character "learned" from his failure. (We learn as much from our failures as we do from successes). Succeeding on a check that the Loremaster points out if you attempt to do this it will carry great consequences if you fail.

3rd Point (within a given skill grouping). Succeeding on an Extraordinary Success AND Invoking a Trait. Succeeding on a Skill check that is TN 20. Succeeding on a skill check that literally saved anothers life. Succeeding on a check that the Loremaster points out that if you attempt to this and fail, it will carry grave/death consequences.


Advancement points are earned only if HOPE points are not used to assure success. Each subsequent category trumps the previous one. Thus they don't have to happen in order. If something in the third category happens at the beginning of a journey it will grant your first point. The inverse is not true. Each subsequent point in a skill grouping needs to be earned with the next tier of difficulty.

SirKicley's rules do sum up how to use Advancement Points very well. Though personally I consider them a little too harsh.

Also, Mordjinn, regarding getting an Advanement Point without being able to get a Great or Extraordinary Success (I'm assuming you mean when someone uses a skill they're untrained in) personally I would award an Advancement Point just for succeeding, since most tests require a successful roll of TN 14 anyway