forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Bear in mind that there are very few one shot kills on either side at lowish levels but once characters get a few points under their belts and can often get 4 dice in their main weapon then the frequency of tengwars goes up and a decent body score really allows a PC to dish out damage. One thing to watch for is the special effects, powered by Hate, of a lot of creatures, Great Leap in one of my favourites for pinning down pesky elves shooting from Rearward stance and some like Denizen allow massive damage to player characters.

Havinor wrote:I'm guessing it must work well as it is, because I haven't seen any threads saying 'this doesn't work'.

... And even if it didn't work for some, it doesn't make it universal. I'd always recommend, for any game, working with the rules-as-written before making changes to them.

The initiative mechanic in TOR is there to favour the PCs due to how battles are usually setup as the PCs are usually defending from an attacking group and can often be outnumbered. There are lots of rules in TOR that are asymmetric or differ when applied to PCs and Adversaries, you'll notice this as you get further into the book, but they largely work really well - the game's design balances elements as a whole and not just individually so its important to bear that in mind when reviewing certain rules in isolation.

Totally agree Rich H. When we start playing I will be going by the book. I wouldn't make changes unless I thought something was broken as no one has complained on the forums as far as I can see, it all looks fine. I was just surprised to see that format. I do get the point that the design is there to help the fellowship in most circumstances and I'm looking forward to seeing how it works. Some of the players are coming over on Friday night, for a pre TOR chat. A look at the system and a plan for characters and the Fellowship. Tonight's homework is the Encounters section, so more questions may well be imminent

Havinor wrote:Tonight's homework is the Encounters section, so more questions may well be imminent

Keep an open mind with that section!

Encounters can be a bit of a challenge for certain groups as it's basically a structured social mechanic but remember that you don't have to use it all the time - it's there to be used when the characters are meeting someone and they want something from them. It's meant to simulate within the game such social encounters as when Gandalf, Bilbo and the Dwarves visited Beorn and wished to stay at his house, etc. Although many here have used them for other interactions so there is some flexibility in the system that LMs adapt it to. I can remember 'selling' it to my players as representing the formal way visitors to a region are received - ie, introductions are made, news is shared, and then any requests are made by both parties including their responses. It was a simple overview but it seemed to work for them as an introduction to Encounters before getting into the curnchy detail of how it worked within the rules.

I would suspect you'll be asking a lot of questions regarding Encounters and hopefully people that haven't already posted here will contribute like they have in the past as there's been some great advice over the years of threads on the subject.

I like your description of the Encouters' intentions, Rich.
TOR has many "uncommon" rules for experienced players who played other games... which are its strength according to me, but, never easy to explain it, as it is so bound to the universe.

Hermes Serpent wrote: and some like Denizen allow massive damage to player characters.

I hope you are not doubling attribute for damage calculation, that would be a mistake according to RAW and a very evil House Rule

One idea I liked from reading other threads was the 'Roll for the Interaction and then explain/role play it' theory.

It's something that raises it's head a lot in RPG's when players are interacting with NPCs is the player explains what they want to say to the NPC, puts it across brilliantly, then rolls for the interaction test and epically fails! At best all the GM (Loremaster) can do is modify the difficulty to reflect the player's efforts, but if someone rolls a bunch of 1's, there's not a lot you can do. Rolling first then going through the interaction looks like a interesting and fun way to go about it.

Indur Dawndeath wrote:

Hermes Serpent wrote: and some like Denizen allow massive damage to player characters.

I hope you are not doubling attribute for damage calculation, that would be a mistake according to RAW and a very evil House Rule

No, but adding 8 to 10 or more to Attack rolls means hitting far more frequently and the pesky Dwarf that uses Protect Companion to save his friends with his 20 Stance + Parry looks nervous when fighting things in dark places.

Havinor wrote:This is interesting because I'd have thought the sequence would have been....
for example, Fellowship have initiative.....

Forward Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the most aggressive stance.
Open Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the tactical stance.
Defensive Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the reactive stance.
Rearward Stance: Fellowship then enemies. looking for a clear shot, now that opening volleys are resolved.

Again, I haven't played it yet, but when I was getting into the combat section, I kind expected this layout and was surprised when the process was as it is in the book. I'm guessing it must work well as it is, because I haven't seen any threads saying 'this doesn't work'.

It works well, if differently, either way.

In the standard, the only time it really matters is when ganging up.

aramis wrote:

Havinor wrote:This is interesting because I'd have thought the sequence would have been....
for example, Fellowship have initiative.....

Forward Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the most aggressive stance.
Open Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the tactical stance.
Defensive Stance: Fellowship then enemies. the reactive stance.
Rearward Stance: Fellowship then enemies. looking for a clear shot, now that opening volleys are resolved.

Again, I haven't played it yet, but when I was getting into the combat section, I kind expected this layout and was surprised when the process was as it is in the book. I'm guessing it must work well as it is, because I haven't seen any threads saying 'this doesn't work'.

It works well, if differently, either way.

In the standard, the only time it really matters is when ganging up.

So when would you have the Hill-Troll attack, if he is engaged by one player in Forward and one in Defensive?
I think it only works as per RAW.

Cheers