forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

As some of you know, parts of TOR mechanics didn't mesh well with my group, and the campaign was dropped. I badly want to re-try the game, and am trying to tweek some of the rules to make the game run smoother (for us).

Here are some house rules I am toying with. Everyone has a personal opinion, but I want your feedback, in whether these proposed changes have unforeseen consequences or problems.

FAVOURED ATTRIBUTES: My group felt having two sets of attributes to track was unneeded complications. I am thinking off dropping Favoured Attributes, and just using the Basic Attributes. A Favoured skill will allow a free attribute bonus (like Adversaries and Loremaster characters--promotes ease of play). Basic Attributes will be raised with Masteries instead of Favoured.

XP and AP: Instead of RAW, I will be incorporating fixed XP (4 per Adventure phase) and fixed AP (10 per Adventure phase). This will keep my players from 'chasing' AP's through silly skill or Trait stretches, and keep them focused on the story. Also, they were horrible at tracking their AP's (kept forgetting) or remembering to invoke Traits for APs.

MASTERIES: I always found it weird that Wisdom Masteries give you combat bonuses. I am thinking of dividing Masteries in to Wisdom and Valour (increases in skills, attributes, and hope will be Wisdom; Fell-handed, Dour-handed, Endurance increases, and Parry increases [house rule stolen from RichH) will be Valour Masteries).

CULUTURAL VIRTUES: Will also be split between Wisdom Virtues (like Elf and Dwarf spells, or Honey cakes)
and Valour Virtues (like Deadly Archery or Old Hatred).

Splitting Masteries and Cultural Virtues will have the effect of clearly focusing characters as 'Wise' or 'Valourous', which is what I think the game intends.

REWARDS: My players had a real problem with the Reward system in the game. Basically, they don't see why they can be in Dale and only get a Keen sword, and not also close-fitted armor at the same time (especially if the Fellowship Phase lasts all winter, for example). Also, while a nice system, it doesn't match the books well--with Bilbo being rewarded with an Elvish blade, Frodo getting Dwarf Mithril mail, Mirkwood Legolas gaining a Lorien bow, etc.

My thought is to allow players to PURCHASE gear Qualities (2 Treasures for the 1st, 4 for the 2nd, and 6 for the 3rd), and then I can Gift them specific items as the story requires. Also, it removes the complications of 'plot immunity' issues for war gear. (If the gear was given to another player, I might require that player to spend XP equal to the weapons Treasure expense to 'learn' the new gear and gain all its benefits).

Thoughts, please?

FAVOURED ATTRIBUTES: What is so complicated about it ? Unterlined skill: Use the favourite attribute bonus. Not underlined: Use the regular bonus. If that would be a problem for my group, I would definitely NOT tweek the mechanics but take another (simpler, f.e. Lone Wolf RPG) gaming system or substitute my players.

XP and AP: Don`t do it ! Getting AP`s as a "reward for invoking traits and the successful use of skills is an essential part of The One Ring. Not to say one of its core aspects. Personally i found the RAW to strict regarding AP`s . Here is a good house rule form Francesco (the developer) in his blog: http://cohorsarcana.blogspot.de/2012/08 ... mment-form

We use it since the beginning of our campaign and it works out really well.

MASTERIES: Matter of taste. If you like it, do it. For me the RAW work perfectly regarding masteries and virtues.

CULUTURAL VIRTUES: Same

REWARDS: This sounds good. I would allow my players to benefit from (fe. woodelven) Rewards if they fought bravely to protect the Mirkwood Realm, spending their Fellowship Phase there and being given a present by the King.
Purchasing qualities ? Don`t do it either. Qualities are meant as rewards for holding back the shadow. Not to be purchased by gold coins. Let your players buy themselves regular travelling gear like tents, "class-tools", grappling hooks, flintstones, weapons, armour, shields, horses etc. regarding their standard of living.

PS. Sorry for bad grammar or vocabulary, but English is not my native language.

ThrorII wrote: My thought is to allow players to PURCHASE gear Qualities (2 Treasures for the 1st, 4 for the 2nd, and 6 for the 3rd)

I don't think that's expensive enough, compared to what you can buy in Esgaroth, according to the Laketown sourcebook. For 2 Treasures, you'd only get a +1 bonus to a common skill, and only until you improve that skill.

ThrorII wrote:FAVOURED ATTRIBUTES: My group felt having two sets of attributes to track was unneeded complications. I am thinking off dropping Favoured Attributes, and just using the Basic Attributes. A Favoured skill will allow a free attribute bonus (like Adversaries and Loremaster characters--promotes ease of play). Basic Attributes will be raised with Masteries instead of Favoured.

While I think that the current system is fine I think that this rule isn't too unbalancing, although removing the favored element will flatten the characters a bit more (a common complain among my players). My biggest concern is how much this might unbalance the game in terms of making some rolls too easy (+6 is quite the big deal).

ThrorII wrote:XP and AP: Instead of RAW, I will be incorporating fixed XP (4 per Adventure phase) and fixed AP (10 per Adventure phase). This will keep my players from 'chasing' AP's through silly skill or Trait stretches, and keep them focused on the story. Also, they were horrible at tracking their AP's (kept forgetting) or remembering to invoke Traits for APs.

I don't like the sound of this. The logic behind the APs is pushing the players to try and fail instead of sitting comfortably in their niche. If they keep forgetting to use their traits (it happens with my group all the time), then the LM should help them and/or restrain them when they push a trait too far.

ThrorII wrote:MASTERIES: I always found it weird that Wisdom Masteries give you combat bonuses. I am thinking of dividing Masteries in to Wisdom and Valour (increases in skills, attributes, and hope will be Wisdom; Fell-handed, Dour-handed, Endurance increases, and Parry increases [house rule stolen from RichH) will be Valour Masteries).

CULUTURAL VIRTUES: Will also be split between Wisdom Virtues (like Elf and Dwarf spells, or Honey cakes)
and Valour Virtues (like Deadly Archery or Old Hatred).

Splitting Masteries and Cultural Virtues will have the effect of clearly focusing characters as 'Wise' or 'Valourous', which is what I think the game intends.

While I can see the logic I'm not 100% comfortable with it. While a hero might be more valourous or more wise, I think that both triats are important to the character development. Heroes who favour one attribute over the other are easier prey for the servant of the Shadow (e.g. Boromir).

ThrorII wrote:REWARDS: My players had a real problem with the Reward system in the game. Basically, they don't see why they can be in Dale and only get a Keen sword, and not also close-fitted armor at the same time (especially if the Fellowship Phase lasts all winter, for example). Also, while a nice system, it doesn't match the books well--with Bilbo being rewarded with an Elvish blade, Frodo getting Dwarf Mithril mail, Mirkwood Legolas gaining a Lorien bow, etc.

My thought is to allow players to PURCHASE gear Qualities (2 Treasures for the 1st, 4 for the 2nd, and 6 for the 3rd), and then I can Gift them specific items as the story requires. Also, it removes the complications of 'plot immunity' issues for war gear. (If the gear was given to another player, I might require that player to spend XP equal to the weapons Treasure expense to 'learn' the new gear and gain all its benefits).

Both these ideas are, for me, completly out of the game style. Rewards aren't just objects, but rather a integral part of the character identity. Many heroes of the Middle Earth are define not just by their deeds, but also by the fame of their weapons. Blades like Anduril or Sting are the stuff of legends, not just something that you can buy at the local market. Also much of the economy of Middle Earth is based on barter and exhanging gifts, rather than money (Esgaroth is notable exception being a major trading centre). Allowing people to purchase qualities cheapens them and make them ordinary rather than extraordinary.

Please take another look at Yusei's post concerning the purchase cost - he summarizes my observation as well

ThrorII wrote:As some of you know, parts of TOR mechanics didn't mesh well with my group, and the campaign was dropped. I badly want to re-try the game, and am trying to tweek some of the rules to make the game run smoother (for us).

Here are some house rules I am toying with. Everyone has a personal opinion, but I want your feedback, in whether these proposed changes have unforeseen consequences or problems.

FAVOURED ATTRIBUTES: My group felt having two sets of attributes to track was unneeded complications. I am thinking off dropping Favoured Attributes, and just using the Basic Attributes. A Favoured skill will allow a free attribute bonus (like Adversaries and Loremaster characters--promotes ease of play). Basic Attributes will be raised with Masteries instead of Favoured.

XP and AP: Instead of RAW, I will be incorporating fixed XP (4 per Adventure phase) and fixed AP (10 per Adventure phase). This will keep my players from 'chasing' AP's through silly skill or Trait stretches, and keep them focused on the story. Also, they were horrible at tracking their AP's (kept forgetting) or remembering to invoke Traits for APs.

MASTERIES: I always found it weird that Wisdom Masteries give you combat bonuses. I am thinking of dividing Masteries in to Wisdom and Valour (increases in skills, attributes, and hope will be Wisdom; Fell-handed, Dour-handed, Endurance increases, and Parry increases [house rule stolen from RichH) will be Valour Masteries).

CULUTURAL VIRTUES: Will also be split between Wisdom Virtues (like Elf and Dwarf spells, or Honey cakes)
and Valour Virtues (like Deadly Archery or Old Hatred).

Splitting Masteries and Cultural Virtues will have the effect of clearly focusing characters as 'Wise' or 'Valourous', which is what I think the game intends.

REWARDS: My players had a real problem with the Reward system in the game. Basically, they don't see why they can be in Dale and only get a Keen sword, and not also close-fitted armor at the same time (especially if the Fellowship Phase lasts all winter, for example). Also, while a nice system, it doesn't match the books well--with Bilbo being rewarded with an Elvish blade, Frodo getting Dwarf Mithril mail, Mirkwood Legolas gaining a Lorien bow, etc.

My thought is to allow players to PURCHASE gear Qualities (2 Treasures for the 1st, 4 for the 2nd, and 6 for the 3rd), and then I can Gift them specific items as the story requires. Also, it removes the complications of 'plot immunity' issues for war gear. (If the gear was given to another player, I might require that player to spend XP equal to the weapons Treasure expense to 'learn' the new gear and gain all its benefits).

Thoughts, please?

Hi Thror, here are my thoughts:

1-attributes: ok, I don't see any problem about eliminating the Favoured Stats. Just give a +2 to rewards that ask for favoured rating.
On the other hand, I'm deeply set against free attribute bonus, for three reasons: A-it's a too powerful bonus, sometimes is almost an auto success; B- it creates too noticeable differences in combat (cultural weapons are really shafted); C-it unbalance the whole Hope Points economy (big problem).

(As an alternative you can, say, have the chance to reroll 1d6 when using favoured skills)

2-Xp and Ap: no big problems here, imo.

3-Masteries: I did something similar in my game (some Virtues like fell handed can be taken even with a Valour increase). Just beware what Wisdom is in Middle-earth context: many times it's not what we call “wisdom”. A lot of “wise” character in the history of m-e behave in a very un-wise manner: Feanor, Theoden, Denethor... Saruman itself.

4-Purchasing Rewards: here I cannot agree. I disagree from a game-balance pov, and background pov. In my opinion Narsil is a great blade, but unless wielded by a great king it's just a mantelpiece decoration. Elrond could have restored that sword centuries ago, yet he didn't, because there wasn't someone worthy to wield it.

I would not use your house Rühles, mostly for the reasons already given here. But if your players have more fun than before, do it!
However, i think in some cases (AP/XP, purchase of special items) you have a point. The approach in TOR is to focus on the qualities of the setting while sometimes ignorant logic (which weaponsmith would not sell keen swords if the prize is right and the buyer can afford it). While this approach can still be very much fun, it still sometimes makes no sense. So I can understand where you are coming from.

helghast wrote:FAVOURED ATTRIBUTES: What is so complicated about it ? Unterlined skill: Use the favourite attribute bonus. Not underlined: Use the regular bonus. If that would be a problem for my group, I would definitely NOT tweek the mechanics but take another (simpler, f.e. Lone Wolf RPG) gaming system or substitute my players.

XP and AP: Don`t do it ! Getting AP`s as a "reward for invoking traits and the successful use of skills is an essential part of The One Ring. Not to say one of its core aspects. Personally i found the RAW to strict regarding AP`s . Here is a good house rule form Francesco (the developer) in his blog: http://cohorsarcana.blogspot.de/2012/08 ... mment-form

I Looks for the link but was Not able to get the house rules. Can somebody provide a direct link or summarize the rule?

Rubycon wrote: The approach in TOR is to focus on the qualities of the setting while sometimes ignorant logic (which weaponsmith would not sell keen swords if the prize is right and the buyer can afford it). While this approach can still be very much fun, it still sometimes makes no sense. So I can understand where you are coming from.

That's it. My players had a problem with the 'rules' taking precedence over any sense of reality. If you can Fellowship Phase in Dale or Esgaroth, and story-tell how a dwarf smith (or a Dale-smith) gave you the Quality 'Keen' on your sword, why can't that same smith give you 'close fitting' armor, especially if your FP lasts all winter? Obviously, someone has the skill to reinforce your shield, keen your weapon, better fit your armor, etc. To say you can only do one of those things, regardless of the length of FP or how much treasure you have, is one of the board-gamey aspects they didn't like.

Which is why I'm pondering removing Qualities from Rewards, and making them purchase items (or perhaps saying you can take one as a Reward (RAW)--as a gift of the Elves, King Bard, etc....OR....you can buy them yourself if you are in Dale or Lake-town. The Dwarves and smiths of Dale are the best in Middle-earth, and a center of trade. Do you really believe that they can't or won't improve your weapon if you have Treasure to throw around? If something is being done to your War Gear, then IT CAN BE DONE. If it can be done, then there are those who can do it. If there are those who can do it, why wouldn't they for compensation? Dale and Esgaroth thrive on trade and get wealthy on trade. They understand the value of coin and supply and demand.

The issue becomes, are Qualities things done to your War Gear to improve them? Are they new items? Are they actually skill increases on your character's behalf? (RAW suggests any of the above, based on player narrative) if they are improved or new items, that implies that Treasure should be available for use. If they are skill increases, I can see not buying them. If they are any and all of the above then you should be able to do multiple things ("while the elves of Rivendell re-enforce my shield, I practice with my sword so I am Fell with it..."). But you can't, because many aspects of the game are 'board-gamey' (Whether the Fellowship phase is 1 week or 3 months, it has no bearing on what you can accomplish).

corvo wrote: In my opinion Narsil is a great blade, but unless wielded by a great king it's just a mantelpiece decoration. Elrond could have restored that sword centuries ago, yet he didn't, because there wasn't someone worthy to wield it.

Yes, but I don't see Narsil as just another longsword with the Qualities Keen, Fell, and Grievous placed on it. It is a legendary weapon, granting Aragorn bonuses to Awe, Inpsire, etc due to its lineage and his rightful role as king of the Reunited Kingdoms. And from a game perspective, Aragorn didn't 'earn' Keen, Fell, and Grievous on that sword, it was reforged and had whatever properties from the get-go (unless it was his keen, fell, and grievous dagger, until reforged...). And since it was the blade that EVERY Dunedain chieftain had kept since the fall of Arthedain (1000 years prior), are you suggesting that it wasn't keen, fell and grievous for all the previous chieftains before Aragorn?

And you are confusing the movies with the books. Aragorn carried Narsil with him as a ranger, and apparently used it, even though it was broken a foot from the hilt (the books mention no other weapons on him, only the broken sword).

The same can be said for Bilbo's mithril shirt of mail: It was gifted from Thorin. Was it just a 'Lucky Armor', that over the next 3 Fellowship Phases gained 2 Cunning Makes and 1 Close-fitted Qualities? No, it had all its Qualities because it was Mithril. Certain items do not fit the rules for how the books actually worked. Unless every Hobbit in the Shire had a Mithril shirt, Lucky Armor is not an example of Bilbo's armor. If a Hobbit can spend 4 Rewards and get armor equivalent to Bilbo's, then why is Bilbo's armor so unique?

Hence the thoughts of allowing purchase of Qualities, but keeping Cultural Weapons or 'special items' as Rewards.

Rubycon wrote:I Looks for the link but was Not able to get the house rules. Can somebody provide a direct link or summarize the rule?

Francesco Nepitello21 agosto 2012 09:50

So, we might have some sort of consensus here?
1) AP-for-Trait: if a player succeeds at an action he may invoke a Trait to gain an Advancement point. Additionally, this is the only way to get a point if two circles out of three are already checked.
2) if a player succeeds at an action with TN above 14, he gains an Advancement point (unless it's the third in a row)
3) if a player succeeds at an action producing a great or extraordinary success, he gains 1 Ap as above (not third circle).

We use this variant in our games and as written in my first post, it works out very good (for us).

Thanks helghast...