forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

I would like to know what to do when an hazard happens but there's nobody there for the relevant role.

For example, one gets "Cruel Weather (Scout — Strain)" but there is not Scout to roll the "Explore" skill and nobody wants to make that roll.

Core Rules p.161 say that " If no one volunteers,the test fails automatically."
But what does it mean such a failure?
Unless the "All companions" result is rolled, all the bad things are supposed to happen ONLY to the companion in the required role.

How do you approach this?
My take is to make bad stuff happen to everybody if nobody volunteers to make that roll.
How do you interpret this?

Most of the time I'd pick one person randomly, but occasionally there may be one person who seems an obvious target for some reason, or it may be more interesting to have it happen to everyone.

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:27 pm

My take is to make bad stuff happen to everybody if nobody volunteers to make that roll.

That's how I play it: if no one volunteers to avoid the Hazard, then everyone is affected by it.

Falenthal wrote: ↑

Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:39 am

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:27 pm

My take is to make bad stuff happen to everybody if nobody volunteers to make that roll.

That's how I play it: if no one volunteers to avoid the Hazard, then everyone is affected by it.

Same.

Note also: A Númenorean in the guide role with the Ways of the wild gets this for free.

A related question: when a role is vacant and a volunteer is needed....can somebody already being in one role volunteer to fill the missing role?
I think the answer is "NO" (otherwise that ability in the Ranger's "Ways of the Wild" virtue is useless).

This is quite important to know since, in this way, one can leave the most-well rounded Companion to have no fixed role and just be available to fill the needed roles.

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:00 am

A related question: when a role is vacant and a volunteer is needed....can somebody already being in one role volunteer to fill the missing role?
I think the answer is "NO" (otherwise that ability in the Ranger's "Ways of the Wild" virtue is useless).

This is quite important to know since, in this way, one can leave the most-well rounded Companion to have no fixed role and just be available to fill the needed roles.

I think this begs Jon's question the last time this came up... was does this 'reserve' hero do? Simply watch their friends struggle until stepping in at the last moment? They never scout ahead? Never have a shift at Look-out? Never try to fourage or Hunt? That seems awfully selfish and thus worth Shadow points.

In my mind, every role should be filled if possible. I.e. The only way it should even come up is if there are more than four heroes, in which case each role is filled. With less than four heroes then a role will gonunfilled, but everyone will have a role.

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:00 am

A related question: when a role is vacant and a volunteer is needed....can somebody already being in one role volunteer to fill the missing role?
I think the answer is "NO" (otherwise that ability in the Ranger's "Ways of the Wild" virtue is useless).

This is quite important to know since, in this way, one can leave the most-well rounded Companion to have no fixed role and just be available to fill the needed roles.

No, it's not.

• Rivendell, p 125, § "Ways of the WIld", ¶ 2 includes:
  When on a journey, if you are the Guide of the company you are considered to be assuming all vacant travelling roles (you are considered to ‘fill in’ as the company’s Huntsman, Scout and Look-out man at the same time, if no other companion is already covering that role).
• TOR 2E Core, p. 161, § "Make the Roll", ¶ 1:
  If no hero assumed the selected role, any companion may spend one point of Hope and be allowed to make the roll (players should remember that there can be only one hero acting as the Guide for the company). If no one volunteers, the test fails automatically.

Note the differences: non-rangers, costs a hope, not automatic.
Rangers, costs nothing, automatic.

In other words, the ranger with Ways of the Wild as guide takes automatically makes any rolls for empty slots - because if no other PC is there, they are automatically there. This also appears to preclude others jumping in by spending hope; the role isn't empty if your guide is a ranger with Ways of the Wild - because the guiding ranger is automatically there.

The Ranger with Ways of the Wild simulates Aragorn's role in leading Frodo and his companions to Rivendell. He basically assumed all journey Roles.

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:27 pm

My take is to make bad stuff happen to everybody if nobody volunteers to make that roll.
How do you interpret this?

This is what I do. This makes the travelling roles so much more important for everyone as well as the core journey skills (Travel, Explore, Hunting, and Awareness). I mean that it becomes important to fill the roles as well as increase those skills to prepare for when the role isn't chosen. That way, someone may step in with a point of Hope and cover it easily enough.

jamesrbrown wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 03, 2017 10:58 pm

lucacherstich wrote: ↑

Wed Mar 29, 2017 6:27 pm

My take is to make bad stuff happen to everybody if nobody volunteers to make that roll.
How do you interpret this?

This is what I do. This makes the travelling roles so much more important for everyone as well as the core journey skills (Travel, Explore, Hunting, and Awareness). I mean that it becomes important to fill the roles as well as increase those skills to prepare for when the role isn't chosen. That way, someone may step in with a point of Hope and cover it easily enough.

I think this is how all the hazards in the published adventures work too, so I'd say this is the semi-official interpretation. Otherwise the rational thing to do is to not fill any roles and the Journey rules become pointless.