forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Let's say a player raises their default standing from 1 to 2 for 24 points of treasure.

1. Do they need to be home to raise their standing or can they just send money home;
2. Do they spend 2 points per year to keep it up? 24 points?
3. If they fail to spend it, then what happens? Does it drop by 1 or drop to their default?

PencilBoy99 wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 15, 2017 5:21 pm

Let's say a player raises their default standing from 1 to 2 for 24 points of treasure.

1. Do they need to be home to raise their standing or can they just send money home;
2. Do they spend 2 points per year to keep it up? 24 points?
3. If they fail to spend it, then what happens? Does it drop by 1 or drop to their default?

1. The game doesn't specify, but in many cases I'd probably require that the hero return home, unless they're close enough that word of mouth would be sufficient (e.g. if the hero is in Dale and her hometown is Esgaroth then sending gifts to her family and friends doesn't require a personal appearance).

2 & 3. The answers to these questions are on page 193 of the core rules. They spend 2 points of Treasure or it drops by one point. Note that certain benefits might allow a hero to treat their Standing as being higher than it actually is... I would calculate that based on the new (reduced) value.

1, I say that they have to be at home or with a culture from which he has received a title.
2. They pay 2 Treasure per year or lose 1 point of Standing.

However, for the purposes of this rule, I determine that the whole of the Wilderland counts as the same area. I find it unreasonable that adventuring in the southern Mirkwood would not be heard about in Dale or the Woodland realm. When Thengel or Aragorn went to Gondor, they didn't lose any Standing with their people because those people don't consider adventuring to be disreputable.
This concept only seems to really apply to Hobbits. You can No-Prize it to make it work. We can all fit a round peg in a square hole. But it just doesn't feel honest.
The other reason is that the rule seems there to discourage players from taking adventure phases outside of their home. I don't want to do that. I want to encourage my players to explore their world and take all sorts of different Fellowship Phases all over the North.

So feel free to judge this rule at your own discretion.

Arthur Fisher wrote: ↑

Sat Apr 15, 2017 9:13 pm

I find it unreasonable that adventuring in the southern Mirkwood would not be heard about in Dale or the Woodland realm.

Then you're not considering the vast distances between those places. The forest of Mirkwood alone is about the same size as all of Great Britain. I find it quite reasonable that people in medieval Scotland would not have heard of the goings-on of adventurers in Sussex.

The cost to upkeep Standing is so minor compared to gaining the standing, so why is that a problem.
Also, it makes perfect sense that some treasure is required to pay for somebody else to take care of your house during winter, if you are not home.
You need to be home to gain standing. If you just send treasure home, somebody else will gain the standing when parties are held and gifts are handed out.

Stormcrow wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:40 am

Then you're not considering the vast distances between those places. The forest of Mirkwood alone is about the same size as all of Great Britain. I find it quite reasonable that people in medieval Scotland would not have heard of the goings-on of adventurers in Sussex.

I also consider that unreasonable. The people of Scotland knew of the adventures of John Hawkwood in his Italian campaigns and most knew of all the intricacies of the French court. Even the serfs in Inverness knew of the comings and goings of the Hundred Years war.
In fact, nobles from France and Scotland would routinely go off to fight or exile or adventure on the continent and return famous. Henry Tudor or William Marshall, for example.
This wasn't true during the Dark Ages, but in the mid and late Medieval era people kept up with adventuring knights the way people keep up with the Kardashians.

The Easterlings besieging Dale knew about the loss at Pelennor fields the next day. Everywhere the Fellowship went, they'd heard of Aragorn. Even the guy who didn't think Hobbits existed. Every 5 years the heads of the North gather and discuss their alliance. And at the beginning of every year, the Loremaster narrates all the comings and goings of the North.
Bard and Thranduil and Beorn and their courts should know what's happening around Dol Guldur and to narrate that the courts just forgot about the adventures because they went to fight the Shadow, something that all those leader are encouraging, seems untrue.
The only place this seems true is in the xenophobic Shire. The rule is clearly meant to imitate Bilbo's return and presumed death.

But it's also about how you want to motivate your players. If you don't want them to do anything for their Fellowship Phase outside their homes, or if you want to make them pay to have to, then it's a good rule.
If you don't want to discourage them from taking their Fellowship phases throughout the North, then you should ignore it.

Arthur Fisher wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 16, 2017 2:04 pm

Stormcrow wrote: ↑

Sun Apr 16, 2017 12:40 am

Then you're not considering the vast distances between those places. The forest of Mirkwood alone is about the same size as all of Great Britain. I find it quite reasonable that people in medieval Scotland would not have heard of the goings-on of adventurers in Sussex.

I also consider that unreasonable. The people of Scotland knew of the adventures of John Hawkwood in his Italian campaigns and most knew of all the intricacies of the French court. Even the serfs in Inverness knew of the comings and goings of the Hundred Years war.

Okay, sure, let's go down this tangent.

You're talking about major events by high-ranking (high Standing) leaders. I'm talking about the usual adventures that adventurers go on, even ones undertaken by high-standing characters. Even the political or martial maneuverings of a chieftain of the Woodmen (Standing 5) isn't going to have much relevance to the Men of Dale. Remember King Bard saying (in the rule book), "I hope that one day they will find a leader capable of demonstrating that they can join us in our destiny" (i.e., they aren't really on our radar now).

But you're supposing that even the doings of Standing 2 "respectable citizens" of the Woodmen would be news in Dale. Sorry, Hildebald the Farmer's business just isn't going to make the trip to Dale.

And Standing, of course, doesn't represent adventures. Standing is simply your position in society and what you do with it. It's only relevant in your culture. After Bilbo goes back to the Shire after his adventure, people in Dale don't hear about Bilbo the Gentleman Hobbit of Bag End; they hear about Bilbo the Burglar and Companion of Thorin. News of Bilbo's doings might indeed come back to Dale, but that news won't be about living the life of a rich bachelor hobbit.

Finally, the rules as they are presented in the books fit in perfectly with the notion that news just doesn't travel well in a pre-industrial, low-infrastructure world.

Now, to answer the original question, does a character have to be at home to raise his Standing? The official answer is unclear. It makes sense that you'd have to be present to show yourself off in your new position, setting in the minds of the people that you belong there. On the other hand, Standing upkeep can be performed by sending Treasure home, so is it possible that the Raise Standing undertaking can be performed away from home?

Look at it this way. Would it be possible for a Standing 5 adventurer, say a thain of the Dalelands, to ship 72 Treasure Points home from the Anduin Vale to become socially equivalent to King Bard? I don't think so. No matter how much money you invest in your home culture, if you're not there to do it yourself, I just can't imagine the people actually accepting you as that high a figure. It's about more than paying for the privilege; it's about spreading the wealth around yourself.

This is yet another area of undertakings that could use some clarification.

Stormcrow wrote: ↑

Mon Apr 17, 2017 5:41 pm

You're talking about major events by high-ranking (high Standing) leaders.

I'm using that as an example of people you might have heard of. And the reason you've heard of William Marshall or John Hawkwood is not because they were major political figures, but because they gained enough Standing through their adventures to become so much later in life.
There are plenty of other examples of knights and men-at-arms that traveled off to the continent, and even the Crusades, and returned with more Standing than they left. This is because going off on an adventure isn't detrimental to Standing in a martial culture.

While the people of Dale may not keep up with the comings and goings of Bag End, Bilbo's Standing isn't depleted among the people of Dale or the Dwarves. Because even though he's away, they don't forget about his adventures.
The only place Standing is depleted is The Shire.

The adventures of a Standing 2 adventurer doesn't need to be big news in Dale, but those who have heard of him will not forget about him just because he went to fight the Shadow in the south. Much like Aragorn. That kind of behaviour is encouraged among Bardings. It is discouraged by Hobbits.

The notion that news never traveled in the medieval world is a super modern invention that came with mass media. It has no historical precedent. It took longer for information to reach places, but communication did occur before newspapers and telephones and it occurred with uncanny efficiency and regularity. Mostly due to the massive amount of trade that occurred between peoples.
And I understand where you're coming from. Most people don't believe that either because we're so indoctrinated with mass media, it's hard to imagine any communication without it. But once you've read about how much local vicars in York knew about their parishioners in the Crusades or 100 Years War, mere months after events occurred, it will absolutely shock you.
Everything your high school history teacher told you about pre-industrial communication is a lie.

The Darkening of Mirkwood shows that the political maneuverings of the Beornings and Woodmen is very much of relevance to Dale. The Mirkwood is where the Prince goes to hide in exile. The Woodmen & Elves send troops to fight Viglund. Dale tries to. And all cultures are actively involved in each other's politics at least every 5 years.
They clearly do keep track of what's happening with Standing 5 characters among each other.. And Bard doesn't believe there is another leader in the Woodland, not because they aren't on his radar, but because there isn't a leader in the Woodland. He knows this because they are on his radar.
All of this is very clearly considered to be the same region by those who occupy it, so I consider it the same region for the purposes of reducing Standing.

But even were that not so, Dale is 10 miles away from Erebor. It's 15 miles from Laketown. It's less than 50 miles from Thranduil's Halls. That's Edinburgh to Glasgow.
You're telling me if a player sets up camp 10 miles away, everyone back home is going to forget about him?
That's unreasonable.

I'm fine with the rule for The Shire. I'm fine with it if the adventurers are from Rohan or Dunland or Dorwinion.
But I sometimes want my players to spend their Fellowship phase in the same place. I sometimes want them to pick up an adventure in the place the last one ended. And I don't want to make them pay Treasure if they don't want to do the same thing in the same place every Fellowship phase.

If you don't want your players to do anything outside of their home culture, then it's a good rule for you. If you want to make them pay to take Fellowship phases in other places, it's a good rule for you.
But if you want your players to feel free to spend their Fellowship Phases among other cultures, explore the North and even have Holdings in other places, then you should ignore the rule.

My wife and my friends would think less of me, if I didnt return home after an adventure.
They may forgive me if I sent a few treasures to pay for the bills and a little luxury, but if I kept it all to myself, even if I was very close to my home, I bet that all would think less of me!

How people regard heroes away from home is very well defined by Valour or Wisdom. This is how your reputation is regarded in the region...

Remember that this is End of year fellowship phase! You can stay whereever you want during the year at no cost.

I've had relatives who missed Christmas because they were in the military overseas.
None of us thought less of them because of it.

Like I said, you can No-Prize it. But if you're in the North, you're generally close enough to have your family close enough to go with you to Erebor if you want to study with the smiths there, or guard the Old Ford or, more importantly, see to your Holdings in other places. And you're often close enough to see your family and people when you do.
If you're a Beorning, odds are your home isn't at The Old Ford, but you wouldn't lose Standing by taking the action "Guard the Old Ford." Same with gathering herbs in the Long Marshes or patrolling the Mirkwood. There are tasks that take you weeks away from your hearth & home which are still considered your home region.
I'm saying that an extra half day's journey from your home isn't enough to consider that away from home for the year.
I think the stuff in the Wilderlands is close enough to be considered one region. I have no need for a Treasure sink and I don't feel the need to encourage my players to take Fellowship actions only within their own culture, so I don't punish my players for spending Fellowship phases how they want, as long as it's within reason. Nor should anyone else.

But if you want to, then you should feel free to implement that rule. Both are perfectly valid options.