forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

Hi guys,
I'm about to start my first "real" TOR campaign (meanig that so far I only LMed one-shots and demo games) and I I've got a couple of issues with the rules, the biggest is Fellowship Focus.
While I can see the narrative logic behind the rule I also think that it's a bit unfair to use, at least at first. I know that a Fellowship is different beast copared to the classic adventuring party, but I think that a focus is something that should develop over time not being a granted feature from the start (except in very specific cases).
Anyway I decided not to allow my players to name a Fellowship Focus until the first Fellowship Phase, but I'm looking for an alternative element to balance this.
Does anyone out there have any suggestion?

Nope, have your players write a backstory for their characters that is more that 'we meet in a tavern' and link them together. There's plenty of possibilities for the heroes to have a good reason for one of the other heroes to be their Focus.

You can take some of the ideas from any game that uses links between player characters as part of it's design for ideas.

As long as they have had no fatalities in the party, you can grant them an authomatic Hope point at the first Fellowship phase to represent that they have high morale due to completing a mission together and coming out alive. Thenm, the interactions starts to be more personal, but the first and maybe the second adventures they are forging their bonds (as you say) and centre in the evolution of the group.

this way you do not smack them removing Hope recovery options, and you retain the feeling of achievement.

Cheers,
Xavi

The problem I have with Fellowship Focus is 'what does it mean by wounded to the point you don't get the hope bonus?'

Because it becomes silly to pick a melee character if any endurance lost counts as a no go, and everyone will pick the archer because the archer's safely behind the lines not taking damage.

I think some kind of provision needs to be made where a melee character can be a fellowship focus without it being mechanically stupid to pick them.

Angelalex242 wrote: everyone will pick the archer because the archer's safely behind the lines not taking damage.

My group did that – mostly because his character was the de facto group leader. It was great for me, because I could hit the whole party with no-Hope by wounding one guy.

My criterion is either Wounded, Poisoned, or Miserable. Counting Endurance loss is too much.

doctheweasel wrote:My criterion is either Wounded, Poisoned, or Miserable. Counting Endurance loss is too much.

I use the same standard.

That said, being able to use Protect Companion to defend one's fellowship focus without expending Hope (technically, the Hope is expended and then returned automatically) is a powerful incentive to have a melee character as one's focus.

Elmoth wrote:As long as they have had no fatalities in the party, you can grant them an authomatic Hope point at the first Fellowship phase to represent that they have high morale due to completing a mission together and coming out alive. Thenm, the interactions starts to be more personal, but the first and maybe the second adventures they are forging their bonds (as you say) and centre in the evolution of the group.

this way you do not smack them removing Hope recovery options, and you retain the feeling of achievement.

Cheers,
Xavi

Well, fact is that there is one player in the group that has close to zero tolkien knowledge, hence I don't want to penalize him. Also, the group alreayd had a fatality of sort, one of the players left after the first test game and was replaced by another.
Plus, in spite of the peace across the kingdoms of the Rhovanion, I find a bit unlikely that a Barding, a Dwarf or Erebor, a Wood Elf and a Beorning already have such deep connections without having some really unusual background.

Elmoth wrote:As long as they have had no fatalities in the party, you can grant them an authomatic Hope point at the first Fellowship phase to represent that they have high morale due to completing a mission together and coming out alive. Thenm, the interactions starts to be more personal, but the first and maybe the second adventures they are forging their bonds (as you say) and centre in the evolution of the group.

this way you do not smack them removing Hope recovery options, and you retain the feeling of achievement.

Cheers,
Xavi

I think that this is a really good idea. I think I'll use it.

Mordagnir wrote:

doctheweasel wrote:My criterion is either Wounded, Poisoned, or Miserable. Counting Endurance loss is too much.

I use the same standard.

That said, being able to use Protect Companion to defend one's fellowship focus without expending Hope (technically, the Hope is expended and then returned automatically) is a powerful incentive to have a melee character as one's focus.

Good point. Althought I think that the criteria is sound.