Niallism
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 13:56

Re: Sharing useful items

Sat 23 Oct 2021, 02:45

I already realised part of chargen will be 'tell me when this doesn't work for its skill'. Now I also know to ask 'And what stops you from sharing it?' as appropriate.

I can think of ideas like 'Only I really get the knack of using it' and 'It is the only thing I have of my da's'.

I do like the consequences of failure approach, but I'll want some narrative to support that increased risk.
 
a2le
Topic Author
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri 03 Jul 2020, 19:11

Re: Sharing useful items

Wed 27 Oct 2021, 22:34

For example: may Alice use her coil of rope to get an athletic bonus to climb down a cliff, and then Bob do the same?
As a Loremaster I would say no. Alice "trusts" that rope as it's her useful item. She knows where it came from, who made it, and that it is a good, solid piece of rope. Bob on the other hand will be gingerly climbing down worried it might snap at any minute or that he might lose his grip.
That's an interesting point that adds a bit of spice to the scene, however, why Frodo shouldn't have trusted Sam's rope? He knew that the elves had given to him/them as a "useful item".
"'Your rope might prove useful again, Sam,’ he said" [tTT, Ch. 1, "The Taming of Smeagol"]
and
"‘Ropes indeed!’ answered an Elf from the boats. ‘Never travel far without a rope! And one that is long and strong and light. Such are these. They may be a help in many needs.’" [LotR, FotR, B.2, Ch.8 "Farewell to Lorien"]

So, "they may be a help", he didn't say "they may be a help for you", implying that they may be useful for whoever will use it. Or, at least, that's my interpretation.
Last edited by a2le on Thu 28 Oct 2021, 11:49, edited 1 time in total.
 
gyrovague
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: Sharing useful items

Thu 28 Oct 2021, 05:46

For me, this reinforces the need for some kind of gating mechanism to useful items. I’m not suggesting that “X times per adventure” is the right answer, but let’s use that as an example:

1) The player has less incentive to design/choose an item that will be useful most frequently, and instead is free to be creative and thematic.

2) If they want to share it, no problem: that just consumes uses.
 
Dunheved
Posts: 494
Joined: Wed 11 Mar 2020, 02:07
Location: UK

Re: Sharing useful items

Thu 28 Oct 2021, 08:59

For me, this reinforces the need for some kind of gating mechanism to useful items.
2) If they want to share it, no problem: that just consumes uses.
+1:
Sharing is very 'Fellowship', so OP is correct to suggest this idea. But if everyone can use any useful item, the party will often negate any risk or challenge to a task / test completely.

Possible Limits to lending, LM can choose from:
1. Only your fellowship focus can be lent a Useful Item. " its a family heirloom, yet I trust you to look after it"
2. If a borrower uses an item they must roll equal or less than their Wisdom rating to avoid breaking or losing the item while it is being used. " I know how to use that too"
3. After being lent out once, a Useful Item cannot be re-used until following the next Fellowship Phase (or next Yule FP at LM choice) "Sorry, I bent the blade, but I think it can be fixed. Let me pay for repairs at the next town we come to that has a good Metalsmith. ( OR When we get back home, your Gaffer will fix it.)"
 
User avatar
HunterGreen
Posts: 183
Joined: Fri 12 Jun 2020, 14:59

Re: Sharing useful items

Thu 28 Oct 2021, 13:11

That's an interesting point that adds a bit of spice to the scene, however, why Frodo shouldn't have trusted Sam's rope? He knew that the elves had given to him/them as a "useful item".
"'Your rope might prove useful again, Sam,’ he said" [tTT, Ch. 1, "The Taming of Smeagol"]
and
"‘Ropes indeed!’ answered an Elf from the boats. ‘Never travel far without a rope! And one that is long and strong and light. Such are these. They may be a help in many needs.’" [LotR, FotR, B.2, Ch.8 "Farewell to Lorien"]

So, "they may be a help", he didn't say "they may be a help for you", implying that they may be useful for whoever will use it. Or, at least, that's my interpretation.

The question isn't whether Frodo can use Sam's rope, it's whether Frodo gets +1d when he uses Sam's rope. I find it surprising there's so much debate about this, though one sentence in the rules would have made it a lot clearer, admittedly. If everyone in the company can use everyone else's Useful Items and gain the corresponding bonus die, it's trivial for a company to game this so that everyone gets a Useful Item bonus die on almost every action all the time, which basically just means you threw away the value of Useful Items, part of the value of Standard of Living, and you just dropped all the TNs. The only sustainable interpretation is that everyone can share items (when appropriate) but only the owner gets the bonus die when using the item. But I feel sure that people will create overly complex answers that add a layer of bureaucracy so they can allow sharing and then rein in the resulting inflation problem partially, instead of just taking the simple answer.
TOR/AiME Discord: https://discord.me/theonering
Narvi, the TOR bot for Discord: https://bitbucket.org/HawthornThistleberry/narvi/
 
Asgo
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 12:18

Re: Sharing useful items

Thu 28 Oct 2021, 13:29

... The only sustainable interpretation is that everyone can share items (when appropriate) but only the owner gets the bonus die when using the item. But I feel sure that people will create overly complex answers that add a layer of bureaucracy so they can allow sharing and then rein in the resulting inflation problem partially, instead of just taking the simple answer.
hehe so true.

my two cents to this, the way useful items are defined they are barely "items", they are character boni based on standard of living with a random/narrative descriptive item as a reminder.
Given this abstracted nature, sure sharing them narratively where appropriate is a no brainer, but the bonus belongs to the character more than the item.
Think of it the climbing bonus of a coil of rope is more about your character thinking ahead and putting a focus on challenges where that skill comes in handy than about the actual piece of rope and its inherent characteristics.
 
gyrovague
Posts: 591
Joined: Tue 28 Apr 2020, 16:52

Re: Sharing useful items

Thu 28 Oct 2021, 19:16

The question isn't whether Frodo can use Sam's rope, it's whether Frodo gets +1d when he uses Sam's rope. I find it surprising there's so much debate about this, though one sentence in the rules would have made it a lot clearer, admittedly. If everyone in the company can use everyone else's Useful Items and gain the corresponding bonus die, it's trivial for a company to game this so that everyone gets a Useful Item bonus die on almost every action all the time, which basically just means you threw away the value of Useful Items, part of the value of Standard of Living, and you just dropped all the TNs. The only sustainable interpretation is that everyone can share items (when appropriate) but only the owner gets the bonus die when using the item. But I feel sure that people will create overly complex answers that add a layer of bureaucracy so they can allow sharing and then rein in the resulting inflation problem partially, instead of just taking the simple answer.
I agree that's the only "sustainable interpretation" given RAW. But it does require a fair bit of hand-waving. The only real answer to "but why can't I?" is "because it's the rules." Beyond that the LM and player(s) will have to concoct a rationalization, such as the examples offered in this thread. E.g., "I don't share it", "It takes practice to get the hang of it", "It's really more of an emotional benefit, like a security blanket", "It fits my hand perfectly", etc.

I mean, it's really the same thing with magical item "attunement" in D&D. It exists for purely gamist reasons, and knowing that, we accept it. But at least there you have the "because magic" quasi-explanation. Useful Items are not magical, they are just...useful. So there's no in-game explanation (such as Attunement) to rationalize the mechanic.

This makes me ponder that there's a parallel to the difference between "narrate-then-roll" and "roll-then-narrate", which is how I would often explain 1e. That is, in D&D you might say, "I use my backstab ability" and get a bonus when you roll, whereas in TOR you would roll some Tengwars and choose to narrate them as a backstab.

Likewise, there is (in my mind) a difference between rules that have no basis other than 'balance' (used broadly) and must be rationalized with narration, and rules that have an in-game explanation.

So in general I'm ok with players/LM needing to come up with their own narrative explanations for rules. E.g., martial abilities with limited uses have been criticized as being...oh god can I remember this invented term...oh, right, "dissociative mechanics". Meaning a rule such as "You can use your whirlwind attack 1/day" is somehow immersion-breaking because if a warrior can whirlwind once, why can't they do it twice? But I, for one, am totally comfortable with narrating this limitation: "Well, positioning has to be just right, and that rarely happens. In fact, it tends to happen no more than about once per day. Funny coincidence, huh?"

The thing about Useful Items is that there isn't any such restriction: it is contingent upon the LM/player not only to come up with reasons why a Useful Item cannot be used, but also what the limit is. It's yet another case where I admire gamers who can put the narrative over self-interest to impose such limits on themselves, but I ask myself why it's necessary to require that.

As an illustration, let's theorize another mechanic: every time you use a Useful Item there is a chance (derived from the skill roll itself, or because of a separate roll) that you cannot use it for the rest of that Adventure Phase. (I might go with once per adventure, unless you roll at least one Tengwar) There's no explanation for *why* this happens...so some folks might call it "dissociative"...but that invites the narration: "Sometimes the head comes off the hammer, and I need a workshop to fix it." "When it gets dirty it's no longer as impressive." "Aye, it's the family curse at work. I'll need a full day in the kitchen to break it." Whatever.

What you gain is:
1) As I said upthread, there's less incentive to pick an item that is most frequently useful
2) You can share the item (you could even increase the chance of it "breaking" when somebody else uses it)
3) There's no need for debate/negotiation/disgruntlement over when, or in what situations, the item can(not) be used.
 
Sebastian
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu 01 Oct 2020, 04:58

Re: Sharing useful items

Fri 29 Oct 2021, 13:14

Honestly I didn't find anything in the 2e rules, that doesn't allow to share useful items. Maybe read it wrongly. I also don't see a reason, why they shouldn't be shared, if it fits. Quite often it doesn't. But here are some examples, where I would allow the use:

- A Hero with a good rope binds it at a tree and helps the whole company climb down a cliff.
- A Healing Potion, while the Hero carrying it is knocked out, but the Fellowship knows, he has it and revives him with it.
- Hunting Traps, the injured Hunter of the group would usually use to lay an ambush against some Orcs could be used under his supervision.
- Old Maps: The dwarf with Old Maps of Eriador has to stay on the road and help out a friend, he gives the Maps away, so that his Companions will find the way back more easily.

Of course you could come up with some items, that only work for one Hero. But more often than not I simply see no reason (ingame and balance-wise) not to share them. In any case it's a great opportunity to roleplay.
 
Asgo
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 12:18

Re: Sharing useful items

Fri 29 Oct 2021, 13:59

Honestly I didn't find anything in the 2e rules, that doesn't allow to share useful items. Maybe read it wrongly. I also don't see a reason, why they shouldn't be shared, if it fits. Quite often it doesn't. But here are some examples, where I would allow the use:
...
technically you are correct, I don't think anywhere in the text it necessarily links ownership to usage of an useful item.

and this
and the Lore master deems that this should grant the hero an advantage
basically puts the degree of restrictiveness of the usage ( in terms of occasions where it is applicable) into the LM's hand.
So how game breaking the sharing is, is less about the sharing but about the use itself.
in a starting party of 4 chars with an average of 2 useful items you could spread your 8 items across 8 skills.
How much impact that has depends on the restrictiveness ranging from something like:
- treat item description just as flavor and use it for any test of that skill (making the bonus in 44% of any skill type roll applicable)
- to very specific: "20 feet of rope" only for occasions where 20 feet are enough and feasible
- with variations in between in style of "you have rope? sure you can use it for climbing checks no matter of the specific geometry"

Both of the non total abstract uses reduce the occurrences of general use (sharing or not) notably, how far depends on the LM - although he might make himself unpopular if he is too restrictive with such an abstract definition and people have never a chance to use it. :)

PS: if you want to base usage restrictions on the description of the item, the list of examples actually show a wide range of specific vs general.
with the SONG/HEALING examples almost always applicable to a test of that sort,while climbing with rope is a comparably specific ATHLETICS instance and the SCAN and TRAVEL instances somewhere in between.
 
Niallism
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue 29 Jun 2021, 13:56

Re: Sharing useful items

Fri 29 Oct 2021, 14:22

Honestly I didn't find anything in the 2e rules, that doesn't allow to share useful items. Maybe read it wrongly. I also don't see a reason, why they shouldn't be shared, if it fits. Quite often it doesn't. But here are some examples, where I would allow the use:

- A Hero with a good rope binds it at a tree and helps the whole company climb down a cliff.
- A Healing Potion, while the Hero carrying it is knocked out, but the Fellowship knows, he has it and revives him with it.
- Hunting Traps, the injured Hunter of the group would usually use to lay an ambush against some Orcs could be used under his supervision.
- Old Maps: The dwarf with Old Maps of Eriador has to stay on the road and help out a friend, he gives the Maps away, so that his Companions will find the way back more easily.

Of course you could come up with some items, that only work for one Hero. But more often than not I simply see no reason (ingame and balance-wise) not to share them. In any case it's a great opportunity to roleplay.
The balance issue is very very clear. If they can be shared, then it is a massive help to all the party. If the party is big, they can share all the items, giving bonuses to all skills, potentially.

And balance affects the narrative and RP. Players would be more likely to create an item that can be shared, making useful items more boring.

But the answer is very easy - just ask the player to tell you why it can't be shared all the time. Sometimes sharing is maybe fine. Equally ask the player in what situations it can't be used, or which might be risky for the item.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests