Forum

After doing some playtesting, I definitely am feeling better about the "concept" of this new system and I see a lot of potential for it. But like pretty much everyone else who has commented on it, I don't like the events table at all. Maybe I'll change my mind when I see the final version and it's a lot more fleshed out and thematic, or see some adventures where they do what they did with 1e and add very specific events thematic to the adventure to dropp in, in place of randomly rolled ones.

So I'm concerned about the event table, I'm concerned about skill dilution (I don't like skills like craft being = to travel specific skills like explore for scouting rolls and player getting to choose every time. How often are you going to improvise fixing a wagon wheel?) I'm also concerned about the lack of any hostile encounters. I realize we don't want D&D random event tables here, but aleast a small chance at hostile combat encounter would be nice. I'm a little concerned about the map being less granular, but that might clear up when I actually see it.

And one last thing.... did anybody else really love the non-mechanical thematic descriptions that used to be written in to "see and experience" along journeys? Maybe that was an AiME and not a TOR thing, but would really love to see that formalized. It's a pretty simple thing to add, literally a blurb describing unique things seen along the path as they travel with the purpose of bringing the world to life and giving it character.

Lot's of potential here but lots of work needed as well.

And one last thing.... did anybody else really love the non-mechanical thematic descriptions that used to be written in to "see and experience" along journeys? Maybe that was an AiME and not a TOR thing, but would really love to see that formalized. It's a pretty simple thing to add, literally a blurb describing unique things seen along the path as they travel with the purpose of bringing the world to life and giving it character.

Lot's of potential here but lots of work needed as well.

Not just an AIME thing...

Thinking more about Journeys, I don't think my idea of "plot hooks" to fill in the 4x7 grid is sufficient to turn Journeys into something more interesting.

If it were, here's how it would work:
1. LM rolls "Short Cut" and "Lookout".
2. LM looks up that cell in the grid, and likes the idea of "Lookout notices an animal picking its way up a steep cliff, indicating a trail not visible from the ground."
3. LM asks for Scan roll; player succeeds. Shortcut found!

In that scenario, just having a description of what the roll signifies doesn't result in any interesting decisions on the player's part. I mean, it may be lovely storytelling, but the player hasn't declared any actions, or weighed any alternatives.

I'm having trouble coming up with specifics, but honestly I'd rather just assume the Lookout does in fact spot something. Then:
1) First make an Awareness or Scan test (as determined by the LM based on the scenario). Each success gives you a bonus die to spend on the rest of this Event.
2) Now make a decision of what to do, based on what you just noticed:
- Wake up your companions (risking more Fatigue for all of them?)
- Deal with it yourself? (risking danger, or even just missed opportunity)
- Ignore it (perhaps also risking danger, or missed opportunity)

So I guess what I want is not a 4x7 grid, but a 56 page book, with 2 pages worth of such scenarios for each grid entry. (EDIT: Of course, that's just for generic events. Good adventures should also have at least some adventure-specific Events, maybe that can be applied to multiple grid entries.)

And I want the Moria supplement.

And a pony.

So I guess what I want is not a 4x7 grid, but a 56 page book, with 2 pages worth of such scenarios for each grid entry. (EDIT: Of course, that's just for generic events. Good adventures should also have at least some adventure-specific Events, maybe that can be applied to multiple grid entries.)

Scenarios are a good idea, and I think it's part of what would be (to me) an ideal solution.

But even more important than premade scenarios would be tools to quickly improvise a Journey event.

If I roll "Shortcut" and "Scout", I want not only some scenarios fitting that result (because when you get that result for more than a couple times, the LM will start running out of scenarios).

I want ideas, hooks, tables... that lets me improvise a cool event.

For example, the LM looks up the hooks suggested and selects "Traces of blood", "A dangerous beast", "Woodsman" and "Help from the locals" to improvise an event where:

The Fellowship's Scout happens across a pool of blood marred by a beast's tracks that lead the Companions to a wounded hunter; a beast feeling threatened by the people's presence attacks them. After the Heroes deal with the beast (either forcing it to flee or outright killing it), they help the hunter back to his village where the wise woman takes care of him. The villagers then show the Fellowship a shortcut across the forest that saves them several days of travel.

Something like that...

For example, the LM looks up the hooks suggested and selects "Traces of blood", "A dangerous beast", "Woodsman" and "Help from the locals" to improvise an event where:

The Fellowship's Scout happens across a pool of blood marred by a beast's tracks that lead the Companions to a wounded hunter; a beast feeling threatened by the people's presence attacks them. After the Heroes deal with the beast (either forcing it to flee or outright killing it), they help the hunter back to his village where the wise woman takes care of him. The villagers then show the Fellowship a shortcut across the forest that saves them several days of travel.

In theory I like that sort of thing, with it's promise of being able to generate some exponentially large number of variations, but in practice I think it's prohibitively hard to simultaneously accomplish the two goals of
a) Large combinatorial space
b) The results actually save the LM time

By the way, what I didn't mention in my last post is that by having Events + Target lead to a Scenario, rather than a single die roll, it still makes it possible for some Events to lead to combat (as was mentioned upthread). That is, in one scenario the worst case outcome of an Ill Choices + Lookout event might just be the Shadow point, but in another scenario the worst case outcome might be the Shadow point and combat. Or maybe it's one or the other: you can avoid combat, but thereby gain Shadow. E.g., you can sneak off and not alert the orcs, but they obviously have a captive.

In theory I like that sort of thing, with it's promise of being able to generate some exponentially large number of variations, but in practice I think it's prohibitively hard to simultaneously accomplish the two goals of
a) Large combinatorial space
b) The results actually save the LM time

That's why I would still implement premade scenarios with my proposition. I think both solutions are insufficient by themselves, because one (scenario) is a finite ressource while the other (toolkit) is harder on the LM.

When having to use a Journey event, depending on the circumstances, the LM might use either one, or even some combination of the two.

By the way, what I didn't mention in my last post is that by having Events + Target lead to a Scenario, rather than a single die roll, it still makes it possible for some Events to lead to combat (as was mentioned upthread). That is, in one scenario the worst case outcome of an Ill Choices + Lookout event might just be the Shadow point, but in another scenario the worst case outcome might be the Shadow point and combat. Or maybe it's one or the other: you can avoid combat, but thereby gain Shadow. E.g., you can sneak off and not alert the orcs, but they obviously have a captive.

Good point.

That's why I would still implement premade scenarios with my proposition. I think both solutions are insufficient by themselves, because one (scenario) is a finite ressource while the other (toolkit) is harder on the LM.

When having to use a Journey event, depending on the circumstances, the LM might use either one, or even some combination of the two.

Agreed. Or use the tables before the session (or while writing the adventure) just to get the juices flowing.

Honestly, I think you could fix that encounter table a bit by swapping out 1. (Everybody gain shadow) to (Dangerous Meeting).

I really don’t understand why so many potential shadow points should be gained a long a Journey. There should atleast be a chance to run into a raiding party or a or pack of wild wolves. Honestly, the consequences are a bit lame. Either gain/lose days (something you almost never care about) or gain shadow/lose hope. I guess there is one wound option so atleast there is that.

I'm assuming they are saving Dangerous Meetings for the Perilous Areas of the map. If they aren't then it will certainly be something to add to my home brew stuff.

I'm assuming they are saving Dangerous Meetings for the Perilous Areas of the map. If they aren't then it will certainly be something to add to my home brew stuff.

Yeah... I hear that. I just don't want to be constantly narrating how the hunter made a mistake and missed the deer, now he some reason gained a point of shadow over it. 1e had all kinds of consequences from weariness, miserable, enemies, more wound options, etc. The 1e table seems way more interesting (though I note it had not positive events).

The 2e table is basically what happens when 1e and AiME journey rules have a baby. The jury is really out there on whether it's good or not. Personally, I'm a bigger fan of AiME's more fixed event table (roll a 2, the hunter has to find food, roll a 4, the scout has to roll to find a new path... etc.)