Hopeless Cheer

[jamesrbrown]

I was recently reading a passage in Author of the Century by Tom Shippey in which he discusses the concept of Tolkien's "long defeat." My feeble attempt at describing this idea is that heroes in Middle-earth have no real hope in triumphing over evil. The struggle against evil requires courage without the promise of better things to come. In fact, the best the heroes can do is to be satisfied with doing the right thing, right now, expecting personal loss so that future inhabitants of Middle-earth may live awhile longer. If the world has any hope of being restored to its original beauty and glory, it won't come through force or displays of power, superior weapons or wisdom by the inhabitants of Middle-earth, but by some outside will or "luck." In fact, inappropriate responses with such displays will only lead to more evil, not the defeat of it.

Therefore, heroes in Middle-earth are often without hope, but...they are not without cheer. Time and again, in the face of personal loss, Tolkien's heroes find a way to laugh and express sentiment in the face of defeat, knowing very surely that they will die and never return to innocence.

This got me thinking about the mechanic of Hope in The One Ring. Perhaps the loss of it describes a kind of maturity that leads to "hopeless cheer" and pure courage rather than a mechanic that simply leads to greater risk of misery and madness. In fact, characters in The One Ring are only at risk of misery and madness if they have Shadow points, representing the taint of corruption on their spirit and the process of "wraithing." Without any Shadow gain, the loss of Hope is more clearly seen as a measure of growth and courage.

This brings up a good point: that every expenditure of Hope should be a significant decision that requires players to be deliberate and thoughtful of their character's heroic development. Rather than being mindful only of how many points they have left and how they can replenish them to avoid misery, their concerns should be primarily about their pace of maturity.

To reward this and to capture the idea of hopeless cheer, I may be willing to grant an immediate bonus experience point to any hero who would normally be required to make a Valour test, but finds himself with no Hope points remaining (and therefore has no consequence for failure), as long as he narrates a cheerful scene before the episode ends. (He could be made to pass the test of Valour anyway, with failure resulting in no bonus experience point.) Already built into the pace of the game is the reality that more experienced player-heroes rely less and less on Hope points and more on skill. This is good. But, it is also possible for a player-hero to retain Hope points and have great skill. This, I think, is less Tolkienian. The subtle pull to spend more Hope points for maturity's sake will (I think) lead to the kind of courage described in the books.

I don't mean for this discussion to become a house-rules topic (awarding bonus experience points is something that can already be done within the framework of the rules), but I would like to hear ideas about how the long defeat and hopeless cheer can be captured in games of The One Ring.

[spivo]

Very interesting topic, and one I think a lot about when leading the players through the world.

There is hope, and there is joy in Tolkiens work. But it all ends either tragic or at best an empty victory.
Bilbo is not happy when he returns to the Shire, neither was Frodo and Sam grows the same.
The magic from elves is fading and they are leaving.


But I try not to focus on the sad/tragic parts, and stress to the players that it is through doing "good" and bringing hope/light where there is none, that they "win".

I try to imagine being in the trenches of WW(1) and think of the players as soldiers there. They can either succumb to the depression everyone else feels, or sing a song. Or like the story of the soldiers from both sides celebrating Christmas and playing soccer. There is no victory, but defeat does not have to be grim and sad.

[Stormcrow]

"Thus even as Eru spoke to us shall beauty not before conceived be brought into Eä, and evil yet be good to have been... And yet remain evil."

[Earendil]

There is hope, and there is joy in Tolkiens work. But it all ends either tragic or at best an empty victory.
Bilbo is not happy when he returns to the Shire, neither was Frodo and Sam grows the same.

I don't think i really agree with that. It's true that there is a lot of sadness in LOTR, and that victory has a cost; a lot of people die, the Elves leave and fade, Frodo is ultimately unable to find peace in Middle-Earth.

But it's not an empty victory. "Fruitless, did I say? Not wholly..." as Elrond says of the Last Alliance. A good and just king is established, Gondor and Arnor are reunited and prosper, peace is made with former enemies, the evil creatures of Sauron are finally put on the road to extinction. Mirkwood is made wholesome again, the Shire is saved and even expanded, and perhaps the Dwarves will even be able to reclaim Moria now the Balrog is gone.

As for Bilbo, at the end of "The Hobbit", Tolkien wrote that "he remained very happy till the end of his days", and he was careful not to contradict that in LOTR. It's not entirely all joy and peace for him, but it is as much as he could hope for. Neither he nor Sam are broken in the way Frodo is, and they both live happily in the Shire for many years after their adventures, although eventually they do leave to go into the West.

[Earendil]

The way I see Tolkien's moral code, at least within his fiction: it's worth fighting for good even if you don't see any hope of success, partly just because it's the right thing to do whether it succeeds or not, but also because "even the very wise cannot see all ends". Giving in to despair is wrong; that's what happens to Denethor, because he sees no hope, yet hope springs up even so. For example, he sees the black ships of Umbar, and thinks they bring doom. In fact they bring salvation, because the Rangers have taken control of them and are coming to save Gondor.

Sam, meanwhile, we are told "had not needed hope, as long as despair could be postponed". And that's how I see "hopeless cheer"; not giving in to despair even when you have no hope, because you can't know what will happen. Being willing to keep going, to resist the Shadow with whatever strength you have, just because it's the right thing to do and if you can't win it's better to go down fighting. Maybe your sacrifice will help others, maybe it won't. But you know that giving in is worse.

I have no idea how you would model that in terms of game mechanics. I'm not sure it necessarily requires the character to have no Shadow points and no Hope points; the latter is described in the rules as "reserves of spiritual vigour", and that seems to me to cover this idea of "hopeless cheer" pretty well.

Maybe roleplaying is a better way to do this than game mechanics. Perhaps if you're using points from the Fellowship Pool to keep your Hope just above your Shadow, that could be described/roleplayed as "hopeless cheer": you have no Hope of your own left, but the bonds of your Fellowship are enough to keep you going and to stave off despair.

[Rich H]

[Old] men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.

[Majestic]

Maybe roleplaying is a better way to do this than game mechanics. Perhaps if you're using points from the Fellowship Pool to keep your Hope just above your Shadow, that could be described/roleplayed as "hopeless cheer": you have no Hope of your own left, but the bonds of your Fellowship are enough to keep you going and to stave off despair.

Yes, I was going to point out that it's not really possible (per the RAW) to have "no Hope" (entirely), since there is always the bonds of fellowship (i.e., the Fellowship Pool) to draw on.

[jamesrbrown]

A more experienced group of companions will have less Hope remaining, and it becomes possible to exhaust the Fellowship pool; even more likely for smaller groups. In that case, Fear tests become meaningless mechanically, as the consequence for failure is simply not being able to spend Hope (unless the Loremaster rules that failure means something else, such as the hero running away or not gaining a bonus Experience point).

I imagine Frodo and Sam (a small group), exhausted and without Hope, now realizing they may never see the Shire again, still committed to the quest and able to share a laugh. Perhaps the Sammath Naur itself requires a Fear test. This would be pointless for any player-hero without Hope. In this situation, I imagine facing the fires of the Cracks of Doom as pure courage and a life event of accelerating maturity.

In another vision, imagine a group of Rohirrim advancing in the vanguard, charging their horses toward a sea of Orcs, Trolls, and machines of war. They have already spent all Hope, yet they continue the assault knowing they face certain death. At this point, confronting a Nazgûl or other fearsome beast would certainly cause them to grow up fast.

In this conversation, my wrestling is with the term Hope. Mechanically, is what we get more than a well of "spiritual vigour"? What does that mean exactly? Can it be described in other ways? Is it real, or just a fool's hope? Hope is certainly not a measure of cheer. Tolkien's heroes may have a depleting fool's hope, but they maintain their cheer. Loss of Hope, in the game, should not be played as a loss of cheer.

Hope in what? I kind of see Tolkien's heroes, who may start out filled with hope, tapping into an inner reservoir of spirit or the power of friendship to accomplish great tasks (as they and their friends are unwounded, alive and strong), "believing" they can be victorious; but in the end they realize that greater powers and principles are at work beyond them (as they experience wounds, defeat, and loss). They reach the end of themselves and surrender to a greater will. It is not defeatism, but a calling to be faithful rather than victorious. It is as Aragorn says, after the fall of Gandalf in the Fellowship of the Ring, Chapter IV Lothlórien: 'What hope do we have without you[Gandalf]?' He turned to the Company. 'We must do without hope,' he said, 'At least we may yet be avenged. Let us gird ourselves and weep no more! Come! We have a long road, and much to do.'

[zedturtle]

The main issue that I see with a RAW approach to this idea is that a hero with no Hope points is spent and cannot bear to continue any sort of struggle, whether physical or mental. Not that it's a bad idea, just that you'd need to tweak your conditions a little bit... maybe make it a single point of Hope remaining that triggers the cheer.

[jamesrbrown]

The main issue that I see with a RAW approach to this idea is that a hero with no Hope points is spent and cannot bear to continue any sort of struggle, whether physical or mental. Not that it's a bad idea, just that you'd need to tweak your conditions a little bit... maybe make it a single point of Hope remaining that triggers the cheer.

That's true. Hmmm. Maybe "hopeless" doesn't mean without Hope points (literally), but choosing to perform courageous actions without spending Hope. In this case, perhaps the chance to earn a bonus Experience point would be triggered by the voluntary decision to not spend Hope points during a key part in an adventure (the length of the part to be determined by the Loremaster) while also taking the opportunity to narrate a scene of hopeless cheer. The player would simply say, "I'm going hopeless! But, I've got much to do!"

During the declared part, the player-hero may spend no Hope points. At the end of the part, he is granted a bonus Experience point if he has demonstrated cheer.