forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Excellent conversation! There are only a few foes who have been given special abilities that would require a Fear test. Therefore, it is up to the Loremaster to call for Fear tests in situations that strike terror. I would agree, perhaps there haven't been enough examples written into official materials, causing Valour to be underused.

So, in what situations would you call for a Fear test? I ask so that we can collaborate and create a useful list.

Being attacked by vampire bats while crossing a deep chasm on a rickety suspension bridge.

Being alone in a parking garage elevator at night. It stops before your floor, and a Nazgul gets in. Then the elevator jams between floors.

Nah. That'd be his Thing of Terror ability. We're looking for Fear tests that aren't triggered by an adversary's abilities.

Ok, it's Boris Johnson who gets in the elevator.

Another use would be to allow a skill to be used, or perhaps to allow Hope to be spent:

Playing riddles with a Dragon.

Searching for a dry cave during a thunderstorm, with giants tossing boulders around.

Using Athletics to run up the side of a Mumakil while shooting arrows. (...)

... The point is, James, that any sufficiently nerve-wracking or frightening situation can trigger a Fear test. They don't only apply to adversary special abilities.

I agree with what you said, but care must be taken that it is meaninful regarding the effects of being Daunted:
the daunted hero cannot spend Hope points as long as he's in the presence of whatever caused the Fear test. That's it.

If the scene that comes after the Fear test is not one that includes difficult tests, that will potentially need a Hope boost, the Fear test might have no effect whether passed or not.
A Corruption test, however, adds automatically 1 Shadow point.

Something a bit different, but related, is if the LM asks for a Valour test (not exactly the same as a Fear test) with other effects that he came up for the situation at hand.

Makes you wonder whether the official battle rules will include more applications for Valour and therefore put it on an equal footing with Wisdom. I realise it doesn't help in the now but as it's evident the rules are being enhanced with each supplement it is something to consider.

I'd personally shy away from Fear tests due to the fact that if it takes an adversary of a particular mien to Strike Terror in the PCs then what 'mundane' circumstances could the PCs encounter that could provoke the same condition in the player-heroes? They'd almost have to be so rare and specific to be impossible to list out. Anything more common and you really are changing the feel of The One Ring and turning the PCs into 'frightened hamsters' as was pointed out upthread.

Valour tests are an option and perhaps should be applied to certain situations; success determining that a player's character can act in a certain way or not. I'm still not sure about this though as I'd prefer such decisions to come from a player rather than the rules.

Rich H wrote: Valour tests are an option and perhaps should be applied to certain situations; success determining that a player's character can act in a certain way or not. I'm still not sure about this though as I'd prefer such decisions to come from a player rather than the rules.

Something along this idea was what made me think of applying the effects of Foul Reek to failed Valour tests:

It doesn't force the player to do/not do anything, but it requires an extra effort from him in case he wants to do something other than defend himself: a daunted hero could climb the cliff of an abyss (roll Athletics), but he should spend a Hope point first. It would represent in some way the tendency to stay paralyzed with fear, but allow a companion to overcome his fear (we're talking about heroes here, after all).