forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Rich: I'm interested in your points about adventurers and Callings, but I'm not sure how you would go about "fixing" it (if it's a problem, which I guess depends on your point of view). If you want to start a new thread I'll post more there.

Rich H wrote:Also, for many there's a difference between playing a Tolkien RPG and a Middle-earth RPG. Overlap may exist between the two (ie, the regions, people, locations, etc) but they aren't necessarily the same thing and can mean very different things to different people.

Do you mean that Middle-Earth can simply be used as a setting without incorporating Tolkienian continuity and themes? If so I agree, and I think that's something the game could address more too. Obviously it's a choice, but personally I want my game to feel Tolkienian (within reason; a roleplaying game has different requirements than a novel) and some official advice on that would be no bad thing. I do think sometimes my game has less of a Tolkien "style" than it might. That's down to the players too, of course.

I don't think the idea of famous companies is a problem, as long as they formed for a specific purpose. But I do agree that it can be a problem justifying why people go (and keep on) adventuring, and that the Callings could be made a bigger part of the game. I'm not really clear how to do that, though. In my game we just kind of handwaved it; they would be asked to do something or would just stumble across badness that needed dealing with! But that's standard roleplaying fare, and maybe Middle-Earth deserves better.

I'm up for helping--something I've thought about a bit. But I confess, I haven't properly read (only scanned) the section in the AC concerning this yet so what want to understand first what Cub7 have just published with regards to this.

Not being rude, guys, don't have access to a PC at the moment so starting threads and quotations is difficult at the moment. Happy for someone else to do it.

Perhaps the best way to run in Middle Earth without incorporating Tolkien Continuity and themes might be to run a game set in the 4th Age. All of the major players who had such an influence on events are gone within the first few centuries, leaving a Middle Earth that is pretty much wide open for the PCs to interact with.

Actually, complete adventures could be written specifically for various Callings. Not to the exclusion of others, of course, but definitely providing the lure of adventure based on Calling. Perhaps this would give a way to allow for other characters to get "caught up" in an unexpected adventure, since the hook wasn't something aimed at them. This would also give an opportunity to provide various benefits or boons to characters of a particular Calling for accomplishing specific objectives or choosing paths that are true to their nature (similar to the way roleplaying is rewarded in D&D 5e for incorporating Background statements). In part, this could be done by presenting challenges relevant to their Favoured skill groups and the Trait associated with their Calling. So, an adventure written for a Scholar would include at least one opportunity to invoke Rhymes of Lore. It would also feature tests using Common skills in the Perception and Vocation groups.

On the other side of the coin, Shadow weakness tips would also be incredibly helpful. Wouldn't it be great to have a list of possible bouts of madness or a chart showing Loremasters options for invoking Flaws in a certain situation? All these suggestions would be based on the Calling/Shadow weakness that the adventure is geared for.

To make a note of it, the core rules already point out "Other Uses" on page 227. Written adventures could include prompts to let Loremasters know when circumstances can be affected negatively by a hero's Flaw, rather than just leaving it up to a Loremaster to improvise. The greater the Flaw, the worse the circumstance gets. As the rules say, these are obstacles provoked by the hero himself that might require a test, a plot twist, or even the Loremaster briefly taking control of the hero. So, if a hero with such-and-such a Flaw chooses to take a certain action, he may be required to make a test to avoid succumbing to his Flaw, or it may change or limit his future options, or it may cause him to do something he doesn't want to do.

Interestingly, if an adventure were written for a particular Calling, hero's of a different Calling that were "swept up" would have the most chance to mature, as the adventure would be potentially more difficult for them due to not having the relevant Trait to invoke or the skills needed. This would certainly give them a reason to choose "Gain New Distinctive Feature Or Speciality" as an Undertaking during a Fellowship phase if they so desired.

Since there are only a handful of different callings, I suppose adventures aimed at a particular calling are quite viable. It also probably wound't be hard to put in things to make an adventure appeal to two or three callings.

But, I think that in a campaign the Lore Master should (and probably will) write adventures geared towards particular characters, that would include such things as appealing to their callings.

Okay, here's another way to put this:

Name the callings of the following characters when they first take on a major role in the stories. Don't pick something kinda-sorta close; choose the correct calling and be certain. Explain your certainty.

Frodo
Sam
Merry
Pippin
Legolas
Gimli
Boromir
Beren
Túrin
Tuor

Aragorn and Gandalf are easy: leader, though Aragorn has spent time as a warden. Bilbo is a wanderer thanks to his Tookish side—NOT a treasure-hunter, and not a scholar until AFTER his adventure. The thirteen dwarves of Thorin's company are treasure-hunters. Earendel is a wanderer. But the ones above... not so easy, eh? Why is this the case for most of the Fellowship, and many of the major Silmarillion characters?

Perhaps the callings, the basic motivations to adventure for player-heroes, don't reflect the motivations to adventure for most of the characters in the books?

Or perhaps the characters don't fall into rigid classifications? Especially when they are fleshed out. This is kinda like alignments in D&D.

atgxtg wrote:perhaps the characters don't fall into rigid classifications?

So the game's callings don't really reflect the callings of the majority of the books' characters, such that you cannot classify the characters into callings?

Stormcrow wrote:Bilbo is a wanderer thanks to his Tookish side—NOT a treasure-hunter, and not a scholar until AFTER his adventure. The thirteen dwarves of Thorin's company are treasure-hunters.

This is especially amusing, as the Dwarves insisted on calling him a Burglar (which I agree, he probably never really was).