forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

James Harrison wrote:"I quickly houseruled the second bit so that you could still make a protection test."

If this the case the hounds "weakness" becomes a strict advantage, takes a wound for you when you want it - and everything is normal otherwise... I'd re-consider this house rule personally.

I should also have stated that the PC has to use a point of Hope to step in and risk the wound instead of losing the Hound. Detailed posts on smartphones are not the greatest of bedfellows, so my last post was lacking in detail - will therefore explain it further here...

Anyway, I've used it in active play, for around 2 years and it works for me. The hound can take a wound for you and it's gone for at least a game session (a crappy rule in itself considering the length of a game session can vary significantly for different groups), so that's a Virtue your PC loses access to when other Virtues are not lost by other characters. This was an issue for my group as we play quite long game sessions, so the impact of losing the Hound was very significant. Game mechanics that use out-of-game time measurements are extremely poor ways of enforcing in-game elements, but I've pointed this out on a number of occasions in the past.

James Harrison wrote:And loosing the dog mechanically only looses you some boosts... not crippling.

No, but you're losing a Virtue that (as Francesco has stated previously) should have a certain level of script protection. Yet this one doesn't. This is fine as it's saving your PC from a Wound *but* using the unmodified RAW your character either loses the Hound (a Virtue he has spent XP on) are *has* to take a Wound himself. I prefer the option of letting the PC choose between losing his Hound or taking the risk of a Protection Test (and if failed succumb to a Wound; which is a risk considering Woodsmen are often lightly armoured; something important to consider in the final analysis). I think this is fairer and more in keeping with the spirit of Virtues. The RAW left a very bitter taste in the mouth for me when we started play and that kind of reaction is not something I like in games unless it applies across the board and is necessary to the game's feel; which this isn't. Granted this house-rule does make the Hound a significant Virtue but I also wanted to deliberately promote this within my campaign as I have a significant element within my long term campaign ideas to do with the Hounds and Werewolves of Mirkwood.

YMMV, etc.

I agree the doggy deserves some script protection. Particularly in the case of the Woodsman who, as I suggested, maxes out his dog to utilize its full potential both in and out of combat, and built his character with the obvious skills related to using his dog to full potential in and out of combat.

Given that you spend hope to do so I think that is a much better rule... and yes for long sessions the healing rate of the dog is a big issue.

I've started PbP so need to sort out how long it will be between "sessions" for my hound being healed with the loremaster.

James Harrison wrote:Given that you spend hope to do so I think that is a much better rule... and yes for long sessions the healing rate of the dog is a big issue.

I've started PbP so need to sort out how long it will be between "sessions" for my hound being healed with the loremaster.

In the house rules I have, and how I run my game, I've ditched every mechanical rule that uses session refreshes as, to put it bluntly, such things stink. I have things like Fellowship Hope refresh points within the structure of an adventure and also use rules that allow for opportunities to replenish personal Hope on a point-by-point basis. I still maintain the desired design goal of Hope being a precious and diminishing resource but the adventure, narrative and story decide the peak and troughs of it *not* when you happen to finish a game session. This has, at the same time, added an awful lot of value to my game (Hope etc get more narrative drivers) and removed a crappy set of rules (refreshes occurring at the end of a session).

Nice, I'm gonna point my loremaster at this, as he was coming up with IC breaks for fellowhip anyway. Any additional hints?

James Harrison wrote:Nice, I'm gonna point my loremaster at this, as he was coming up with IC breaks for fellowhip anyway. Any additional hints?

I appreciate that I've withdrawn them at the moment, so this won't be available for some here, but my Additional Rules pdf has what I use instead of the RAW - pages 28 and 29. That's all I base my games off.

Rich H wrote:In the house rules I have, and how I run my game, I've ditched every mechanical rule that uses session refreshes as, to put it bluntly, such things stink. I have things like Fellowship Hope refresh points within the structure of an adventure and also use rules that allow for opportunities to replenish personal Hope on a point-by-point basis. I still maintain the desired design goal of Hope being a precious and diminishing resource but the adventure, narrative and story decide the peak and troughs of it *not* when you happen to finish a game session. This has, at the same time, added an awful lot of value to my game (Hope etc get more narrative drivers) and removed a crappy set of rules (refreshes occurring at the end of a session).

This mirrors my own approach to running the game.

Speaking of hope, does it automatically reset to max during a fellowship phase?

Narritively, that is, did Frodo/Sam/Merry/Pippin and Aragorn get max hope on reaching Rivendell, or the whole company get max hope on reaching Lothlorien?

Nope, it only replenishes via the fellowship pool, the confidence virtue (the only 'refresh to full' in the game) or "hopeful events" given by the loremaster

James Harrison wrote:Nope, it only replenishes via the fellowship pool, the confidence virtue (the only 'refresh to full' in the game) or "hopeful events" given by the loremaster

Also having your Fellowship Focus not be hurt that session.