gyrovague
Topic Author
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 18:12

Hope did get wasted on a couple of attack rolls, which weren't Inspired since you can only invoke your Distinctive Feature on Skill rolls (thus Virtues that let you become Inspired on any roll, rather that only on Skill rolls, become quite interesting).

Of course, everybody should take whatever options they think are the most fun, but bear in mind that a Virtue that lets you be Inspired in more situations gives you:
- an additional +1d6 in some situations
- and only in situations where you couldn't already be Inspired
- only as often as you are able to spend Hope

If you weigh that against virtues that give you "always on" bonuses or other cool features, it's really quite weak. And if it turns out that they make Fellowship refresh every session, all that does is cheapen Hope into an even more blandly generic dice mechanic, only distinguishable from environmental modifiers, adversary traits, Useful Items, and (now absent) preliminary rolls by the name attached to them. (Never mind the fact that one of the primary complaints about 1e was "per session" mechanics.)

What about rolls that would have succeeded anyway? Well, unless you roll a Gandalf rune on the Feat die, you'll never know that. But do you really care?

Um, yes, I do care. Not necessarily because at the table, in the moment, I really want to know whether or not I would have succeeded.* But rather because the thing I care most about in games is "informed but difficult decision-making". In the example you gave above (TN 15, 3 dice) it is twice as likely that you will succeed without spending Hope than it is that Hope will turn a failure into a success. So even though those particular odds are a particularly good use of Hope (more on that below) it's still mostly gambling to throw a point at it. Which is fine: lots of games have "gambling" built into the mechanics. It saddens me that a distinguishing characteristic of TOR has become that.

*That said, I also know that in games with analogous mechanics where you CAN tell what would have happened, it's un-fun to realize you wasted the resource. E.g., spending Inspiration in D&D 5e and getting two high rolls. I find it distinctly worse than failing because of two low rolls.

In game practice, all the player has to ask himself before rolling is whether the task is worth spending Hope, and that's it - no calculations, no disappointment in finding out that your Attribute bonus is too low to turn that failure into a success.

It's interesting that in your usage example you picked one in which Hope had a very high chance of guaranteeing a success. Quick: would you have spent that point without Inspired?
Or would you spend a point on 2 dice with TN 18, if Inspired? How about 5 dice with TN 21? Decide quick, no math.

The reality is that the new system "wastes" Hope in a direct (inverse) relationship to how much thinking we do before using it.


The point is not that now Hope may fail, because it could fail also in 1ed (if your Attribute bonus was too low).


Ummm....not sure I count not being able to use it as "failing". If we're going to stretch the definition to mean that "using the other edition's rules, Hope might have resulted in success" then we have to also say that every single time you don't spend Hope in 2e, and fail by an amount equal to or less than your attribute, "Hope failed". Right? Because if you were playing 1e you could then spend a point of Hope.

What seems to cause the most dismay (especially among old players, since new players don't seem concerned at all) is actually that it can now be wasted, but as long as the internal economy of the game supports this (which I currently have some doubts about), I truly don’t see where the problem lies.

The problem lies in the cheapening of a unique, distinctive mechanic into just another way to frequently modify the dice pool. Which is exactly what I started beating the drum about when I first realized Hope was going to be spent before the roll: the only way to make the new mechanic "work" is to provide a lot more Hope points.

This is a concern I share, but I guess that as Davi wisely said, the drawback of a Magical success may lie in the Eye Awareness rules. I mean, you may use a rifle to kill a mosquito, but a swatter probably causes less collateral damage, right? :D
Also, a Magical success doesn't let you roll additional dice, which may instead be more useful when aiming at scoring more tengwars as possible, rather than simply succeeding.

A. This is assuming that Magical successes get added to the...explicitly optional...Eye Awareness rules. I don't think there's been anything from Francesco suggesting this, has there been? It's just conjecture on the forums.
B. My gut math feel here is that spending Hope purely for the sole purpose of fishing for Tengwars is, in all but the most extreme edge cases, an even worse expenditure than spending it to help you succeed. Let alone in place of a Magical success.
 
User avatar
Michele
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 16:58

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 20:59

Of course, everybody should take whatever options they think are the most fun, but bear in mind that a Virtue that lets you be Inspired in more situations gives you:
- an additional +1d6 in some situations
- and only in situations where you couldn't already be Inspired
- only as often as you are able to spend Hope

If you weigh that against virtues that give you "always on" bonuses or other cool features, it's really quite weak.

Virtue balance may vary, but for most of those that grant Inspired I really wouldn't say that they are weak. If I'm a Hobbit with Heart 6, I can spend 7-8 Hope each adventure (6 for my Heart score, +1/+2 for my share of Fellowship points) and recover it all before the start of the next adventure. Let's say that I can even spend 2-3 additional points per adventure, since I can afford spending more than I can recover while I'm still a rookie with laughable Skills but few or no Shadow points. In a 2-sessions adventure, this means 5 Hope points per session. Being Inspired (with Brave at a Pinch, for example) means +1d6 on each of those rolls. How many times each player rolls per session? 10 times, 15 at most? That means that Brave at Pinch granted me +1d6 on 33% to 50% of my rolls. Any roll - Skills, attacks, Shadow tests, Protection rolls. What other Virtues grant +1d6 on that many rolls? I'd say it's not bad at all.

Um, yes, I do care. Not necessarily because at the table, in the moment, I really want to know whether or not I would have succeeded.* But rather because the thing I care most about in games is "informed but difficult decision-making". In the example you gave above (TN 15, 3 dice) it is twice as likely that you will succeed without spending Hope than it is that Hope will turn a failure into a success.

Alright, but then you're already doing a lot of metagame thinking. Most players just spend their Hope point and rejoice if they succeed, and that's the end of it. At that point, who really cares about what were the odds? My character just avoided certain death by jumping over a chasm with an amazing Athletics roll, why should I keep thinking if it was convenient for me to spend that Hope point? If economic thinking come before in-game thinking, then we're not roleplaying anymore, we're playing a tabletop strategy game.

It's interesting that in your usage example you picked one in which Hope had a very high chance of guaranteeing a success. Quick: would you have spent that point without Inspired?
Or would you spend a point on 2 dice with TN 18, if Inspired? How about 5 dice with TN 21? Decide quick, no math.

Yes, yes, and yes, as long as I deem the action important. As long as I'm not rolling a single die (after spending Hope), I don't need to do the math, only focus on the action. Is important for my character to succeed? Can I afford to fail? How much is at stake? The odds may remain very thin even after I decided to spend Hope, but I would do it anyway because I've decided it's important to try as hard as I can.

And by the way, I used that example simply because it's the most common situation on average, not because it was particularly favourable for my argument. It's quite easy to see that most of the rolls of the game will be made rolling around 3 dice on average, and the game pushes players into spending Hope only when Inspired as much as they can; while TN 15 is simply the average TN among players. So I wasn't making a random example, I was talking about the average game.

Ummm....not sure I count not being able to use it as "failing". If we're going to stretch the definition to mean that "using the other edition's rules, Hope might have resulted in success" then we have to also say that every single time you don't spend Hope in 2e, and fail by an amount equal to or less than your attribute, "Hope failed". Right? Because if you were playing 1e you could then spend a point of Hope.

Your example is totally disconnected from what I'm saying. I'm talking about the 1ed, and the 1ed only; let's say that you failed the roll by 5 points and your Attribute bonus is 4. Hope fails to help you, simply because you can't spend it to turn that failure into a success. You didn't waste it, but it still failed to help you in that particular situation.

The problem lies in the cheapening of a unique, distinctive mechanic into just another way to frequently modify the dice pool. Which is exactly what I started beating the drum about when I first realized Hope was going to be spent before the roll: the only way to make the new mechanic "work" is to provide a lot more Hope points.

But that's simply your opinion. The mechanic would work even with less Hope points available! Of course it would be less sustainable for players, and the game would be much more difficult, but now as in the previous edition, at its core it's simply ad additional resource pool you have. So you use it! None of the new players approaching the game for the first time seem to be complaining about that, and I bet most of them would simply think: "Cool! Hope makes me better at doing things! I think I'll use it." They don't think it's "cheap", "not worth it", "not interesting". And that's exactly what happened at my table: players used it, saw it worked, and used more of it.
It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till.
 
gyrovague
Topic Author
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 22:33

Virtue balance may vary, but for most of those that grant Inspired I really wouldn't say that they are weak. If I'm a Hobbit with Heart 6, I can spend 7-8 Hope each adventure (6 for my Heart score, +1/+2 for my share of Fellowship points) and recover it all before the start of the next adventure. Let's say that I can even spend 2-3 additional points per adventure, since I can afford spending more than I can recover while I'm still a rookie with laughable Skills but few or no Shadow points. In a 2-sessions adventure, this means 5 Hope points per session. Being Inspired (with Brave at a Pinch, for example) means +1d6 on each of those rolls. How many times each player rolls per session? 10 times, 15 at most? That means that Brave at Pinch granted me +1d6 on 33% to 50% of my rolls. Any roll - Skills, attacks, Shadow tests, Protection rolls. What other Virtues grant +1d6 on that many rolls? I'd say it's not bad at all.
Ok, fine, let's use your numbers. We'll ignore the requirement of that virtue, and just assume you're Weary, Wounded, and Miserable for the entire adventure, and assume that every point of Hope you spend is in a situation where you otherwise wouldn't have been Inspired, either from invoking a Distinctive Feature or a Wisdom roll (because Hobbits). Optimal usage of the Virtue.

So that's +1d6 on 5 different rolls, that you wouldn't have otherwise have had, correct?

Now, the chance of a single die convert a failure into a success peaks, as I explained in the first post, has a maximum value of 28%. Since upthread you said you don't want to have to think or calculate when using Hope, I'm going to estimate that you get a rate of return of around 20%.

So the result of that virtue was to turn one single failure into a success over the course of a session. That's if you ONLY spend Hope when you are Weary, Miserable, or Wounded, and it's not a Wisdom roll or a Skill on which you could invoke a Distinctive Feature.

Now, compare that to a Virtue like Sure at the Mark, which lets you make all your ranged attacks Favoured. (Since your 6 Heart means that your Strength is going to be 2, 3, or 4, you are going to need all the help you can get in combat.). Favoured also gives a roughly 20% increased chance to succeed, so it's equivalent to Inspired, but doesn't cost you a Hope point, and works on every single attack roll. Then you still have all 5 points of Hope left to spend on something else (quite possibly with Inspiration).


Alright, but then you're already doing a lot of metagame thinking. Most players just spend their Hope point and rejoice if they succeed, and that's the end of it. At that point, who really cares about what were the odds? My character just avoided certain death by jumping over a chasm with an amazing Athletics roll, why should I keep thinking if it was convenient for me to spend that Hope point? If economic thinking come before in-game thinking, then we're not roleplaying anymore, we're playing a tabletop strategy game.
Ah, the "if you're doing math then you're not a real roleplayer" argument. No response.
Yes, yes, and yes, as long as I deem the action important. As long as I'm not rolling a single die (after spending Hope), I don't need to do the math, only focus on the action. Is important for my character to succeed? Can I afford to fail? How much is at stake? The odds may remain very thin even after I decided to spend Hope, but I would do it anyway because I've decided it's important to try as hard as I can.
Ok, fair enough. I should probably revise down the 20% I used previously.
But that's simply your opinion.
Well, yeah. I've been very careful to say all along that the impact on flavor and fun (although not the math) is just my opinion.
The mechanic would work even with less Hope points available! Of course it would be less sustainable for players, and the game would be much more difficult, but now as in the previous edition, at its core it's simply ad additional resource pool you have. So you use it! None of the new players approaching the game for the first time seem to be complaining about that, and I bet most of them would simply think: "Cool! Hope makes me better at doing things! I think I'll use it." They don't think it's "cheap", "not worth it", "not interesting". And that's exactly what happened at my table: players used it, saw it worked, and used more of it.
That's all fine, except for the part about "the game would be much more difficult" with fewer points of Hope. I think the math shows that Hope actually doesn't affect outcomes very much, it just makes it feel like it does (if you don't do the math). So, no, if you had only half as as much Hope you might fail one additional roll per session. If you have a high Heart score and are playing that the Fellowship pool refreshes every session. I wouldn't call that "making the game much more difficult."
 
User avatar
Michele
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 16:58

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 23:23

Now, the chance of a single die convert a failure into a success peaks, as I explained in the first post, has a maximum value of 28%. Since upthread you said you don't want to have to think or calculate when using Hope, I'm going to estimate that you get a rate of return of around 20%.

So the result of that virtue was to turn one single failure into a success over the course of a session. That's if you ONLY spend Hope when you are Weary, Miserable, or Wounded, and it's not a Wisdom roll or a Skill on which you could invoke a Distinctive Feature.

Now, compare that to a Virtue like Sure at the Mark, which lets you make all your ranged attacks Favoured. (Since your 6 Heart means that your Strength is going to be 2, 3, or 4, you are going to need all the help you can get in combat.). Favoured also gives a roughly 20% increased chance to succeed, so it's equivalent to Inspired, but doesn't cost you a Hope point, and works on every single attack roll. Then you still have all 5 points of Hope left to spend on something else (quite possibly with Inspiration).

Except that if we didn't fight during that session, Sure at the Mark would have been useless, while Brave at a Pinch would have not. :roll:

Also, you're assuming that I have a ranged character, but I may have a melee character instead, so approximately 50% of Hobbit characters wouldn't be interested in that Virtue and prefer Brave at a Pinch anyway.

Ah, the "if you're doing math then you're not a real roleplayer" argument. No response.

Not what I said, and no need to be so touchy about that. "Doing the math" or wanting to know the exact odds of doing things in the game is simply not how many players play, period. The principle is the same as for players making subpar choices or even consciously making the wrong in-game choice to stay in character.

That's all fine, except for the part about "the game would be much more difficult" with fewer points of Hope. I think the math shows that Hope actually doesn't affect outcomes very much, it just makes it feel like it does (if you don't do the math). So, no, if you had only half as as much Hope you might fail one additional roll per session. If you have a high Heart score and are playing that the Fellowship pool refreshes every session. I wouldn't call that "making the game much more difficult."

Alright, then play the game without ever spending Hope points, if you think they're so irrelevant, then let us know how it goes. :roll:
Last edited by Michele on Mon 19 Jul 2021, 23:54, edited 1 time in total.
It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till.
 
Davi
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2021, 04:16

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 23:33

I don't get hope impact being small, if before spending hope you had a 20% chance of success and after you have a 40% chance success you doubled you chance of success, that is huge. If you are inspired you could increase you chance of success 4 times!
 
RichKarp
Posts: 120
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 19:37

Re: The Problem With Hope

Mon 19 Jul 2021, 23:52

Not what I said, and no need to be so touchy about that. "Doing the math" or wanting to know the exact odds of doing things in the game is simply not how many players play, period. The principle is the same as for players making subpar choices or even consciously making the wrong in-game choice to stay in character.

I think we’re just debating if Hope should matter more than 20% of the time and if it only matter infrequently, is that aligned with the designers intent of Hope as an important resource? I’m not quite sure what staying in-character / deliberately poor decision-making has to do with the argument.

Alright, then play the game without spending Hope points, if you think they're so irrelevant, then let us know how it goes. :roll:

If you’re not actively trying to be rude, I can see how gyrovague might think so based on dismissive comments like these. They already said exactly how they’d spent their Hope more productively instead: via magical results and to activate special qualities or virtues to ensure better mileage. The discussion here was whether Hope has the same value and/or evoked the themes as it did in 1e, and if not what to do about it. Being snarky about it doesn’t make your argument stronger.
 
gyrovague
Topic Author
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: The Problem With Hope

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 00:06

I don't get hope impact being small, if before spending hope you had a 20% chance of success and after you have a 40% chance success you doubled you chance of success, that is huge. If you are inspired you could increase you chance of success 4 times!
And if you had 0% chance of success and now it's 1.3%, you've got INFINITE improvement! For one point of Hope!

That's why I measure it as the incremental increase, not a ratio.
 
gyrovague
Topic Author
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: The Problem With Hope

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 00:09

Except that if we didn't fight during that session, Sure at the Mark would have been useless, while Brave at a Pinch would have not.
So, wait a sec, I show how the virtue sucks even if you assume Miserable/Weary/Wounded 100% of the time, and you respond by saying, "What if the session doesn't have any combat?"

Ok, fine, so average this out over the whole adventure, not just one session. Or lets just say you NEVER have combat, to keep things simple. Now most of your rolls will be Skills, not combat, so you'll get to use your Distinctive Features more often, further devaluing Brave in a Pinch.

Next?
 
Davi
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon 15 Feb 2021, 04:16

Re: The Problem With Hope

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 00:24

I don't get hope impact being small, if before spending hope you had a 20% chance of success and after you have a 40% chance success you doubled you chance of success, that is huge. If you are inspired you could increase you chance of success 4 times!
And if you had 0% chance of success and now it's 1.3%, you've got INFINITE improvement! For one point of Hope!

That's why I measure it as the incremental increase, not a ratio.
It is impossible to have a 0% chance on TOR, still, 1,3% chance is huge over 0%. Like, if you received a doctor visit and he said you have 100% chance of living through a disease and a 98,7% chance, you would definitely feel the difference :-), luckily we don't have to worry about this kind of odds in game.
 
User avatar
Michele
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 16:58

Re: The Problem With Hope

Tue 20 Jul 2021, 00:35

I think we’re just debating if Hope should matter more than 20% of the time and if it only matter infrequently, is that aligned with the designers intent of Hope as an important resource? I’m not quite sure what staying in-character / deliberately poor decision-making has to do with the argument.

Except it doesn't matter only 20% of the times. During play, you'll spend Hope while Inspired more often than not, so most of the times you get +2d, not just +1d. Getting +2d on a roll has an impact that is far from being statistically irrelevant. Just to make some examples:

- Going from rolling 1d against TN 14 to rolling 3d agains the same TN increases the chance of success from 14% to 70% (+56%).
- Going from rolling 2d against TN 16 to rolling 4d agains the same TN increases the chance of success from 26% to 78% (+52%).
- Going from rolling 3d against TN 18 to rolling 5d against the same TN increases the chance of success from 38% to 85% (+47%).

All of these numbers don't exactly show that "Hope actually doesn't affect outcomes very much", but even then, I just don't think that numbers should be the main driver in decision-making, especially when roleplaying, but of course that's just my opinion.

The discussion here was whether Hope has the same value and/or evoked the themes as it did in 1e, and if not what to do about it. Being snarky about it doesn’t make your argument stronger.

I'm sorry, I thought that just a bit earlier we were debating if Hope should matter more than 20% of the time (and it actually does)? I was only debunking that assumption. As I said, I won't enter into the debate about whether Hope is equally evocative or well represented as in 1e, since I simply find that matter too subjective.
It is not our part to master all the tides of the world, but to do what is in us for the succour of those years wherein we are set, uprooting the evil in the fields that we know, so that those who live after may have clean earth to till.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests