Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: Advancement Confusion

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Re: Re: Natives at 6, news at 11

    Originally posted by Ineti
    You say that like it's such a bad thing.
    Lol, no, no, not a bad thing, it's just I had started out with a different viewpoint and then talked myself right out of it.
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, IA
    Posts
    541
    Quote (Ineti): Lore is just about the most open-ended skill imaginable. There's so much room there to really customize a character and make them unique. So much can be represented.


    Oh I agree that it is, but during character creation the lore skills of a 0-adv character should be considered in respect to very little life experience s/he would have. If a character grew up as a Middle Man with Wits 10 in say Bree, the PC may know Language: Westron +3, Realm (Bree) +3, History (Bree) +3, Race (Men) +3, Group (Rangers of the North)+3... this leaves him with 15 more picks to spend, if you gave the person another +3 ranks for language, that's still 9 picks to spend. In a medieval-esque world, they really aren't going to know a whole lot more about anything else other than that. As a Narrator you would then have to consider what would be proper for a background of the character and what other Lore skills might be applicable, say Lore: Plants (Forest) or History (Barrow-downs) or Realm (Old Forest)... these may be possibilities, but still options are fairly limited.

    As opposed to a blanket cap of 3 for all skills, I might suggest capping all skills at 3, except for a number of "favoured" skills equal to the character's Wits modifier, minimum 1, with a cap of 5 or 6. That may help eat up some of the leftover picks. And there is always the option of allotting Wits x2 instead of x3.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Peterborough, Ontario, Canada.
    Posts
    1,142
    Originally posted by GandalfOfBorg
    As opposed to a blanket cap of 3 for all skills, I might suggest capping all skills at 3, except for a number of "favoured" skills equal to the character's Wits modifier, minimum 1, with a cap of 5 or 6. That may help eat up some of the leftover picks. And there is always the option of allotting Wits x2 instead of x3.
    I think Wits x2 is a more reasonable multiplier for beginning characters. Too often, I've thought that there's no way these "rookie" characters should know this much.

    Maybe if they are an Elf or a Dunadan x3 might be appropriate, I dunno. Elves have so many perks as it is. But then the character's chosen Order would really influence what skills they start with as well.

    Hmm, I'm rambling now and just thinking out loud.

    Good thread, so far! I'm getting lots of ideas and opinions.

    LQ
    Drunken DM and the Speak with Dead spell: "No, I'm not the limed-over skeleton of the abbot, and no this special key in my boney fingers does not open the door to the secret treasury! ... Oh crap."

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    What about a 500 year old Elf who's done a lot of travelling but didn't get into enough adventures to gain an advancement? He or she could have lots of lore skills, but not a lot of high ones.

    How about a Rohirric minstrel who's travelled from Gondor to Bree and back again, yet likewise hasn't seen his share of adventure?

    I'd keep the x3 and encourage players to be creative when coming up with lores.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    176

    Wink

    Okay, I just talked myself into agreeing with Ineti
    Hey, I'm still getting over the shock of Ineti and me instantly coming to agreement on an issue.

    Seriously, this has been a profitable discussion. However, I think it is dancing around a core issue that I have worried about but refused to sink much time into dealing with: put simply, not all abilities and edges are created equal. "Sailor's Eye" is not equal in value to "Swift Strike" even though they cost the same number of picks. "Keen-Nosed" and "Warwise" are both 2-pick edges, even though the latter is a veritable gravy train compared to the former. I have no problem with players stocking up on "color" picks like Sailor's Eye and Keen-Nosed, but it is too tempting for players to min-max the power combinations.

    I'm afraid what really needs to be done to address this issue definitively is for someone to go through the edges and order abilities and suggest alternative power-balanced pick costs. For example, perhaps order abilities should cost 2-5 picks: something like Rope-Craft is worth 2 picks (maybe), whereas Swift Strike possibly should cost 5 picks (certainly the Swift Strike x2 should). I also think something similar may need to be done with the edges. I went through the edges and suggested minor alterations to make them more balanced rather than assigning new costs...but even then many edges are bargains. The problem is that too many edges give major Reaction bonuses for *much* cheaper than raising the Reactions themselves. My response was simply to impose some new requisites here-and-there and to impose specific situations in which the bonuses could be gained (but not in other situations).

    I'm curious if anybody has gone the step beyond me and tried to reclassify the costs of edges and abilities?
    Scottomir's LOTR Game Resources:
    http://www.geocities.com/scott_metz/

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    Originally posted by Scottomir
    I'm curious if anybody has gone the step beyond me and tried to reclassify the costs of edges and abilities?
    You're in luck. Olorwe's LOTR RPG Compendium of rules (available here somewhere...also on Valinor I think) has reclassified edges. I haven't looked at the rules in great detail, but that's something I recall.

    Go check it out if you get a chance.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Parkersburg, WV, USA
    Posts
    22

    Gwaith-i-Mirdain Compendium & Songs

    Olorwe's Gwaith-i-Mirdain Compendium is an amazing piece of work, and I highly recommend it to all gms and players alike. Not only does it have some alternate rules, but they provide a critical system, which makes my day. The old MERP crit charts were the most hysterical piece of literature since Monty Python and the Compendium comes close, just without the...ah...flavourful text descriptions.

    But, a way I found to eat up initial picks at Wits x 3 is to encourage the PCs to choose Lore: Songs, and specialize by grabbing any of the songs used in the Hobbit or LotR (there's a handydandy list in the back of Return of the King, fyi). The current hot pick is Lore: Song (Athelas), which I've had to restrict quite alot, as everybody seems to want to nab it.
    "First, learn to use this," he said, indicating the boy's head. "Then, I'll teach you to use this," indicating the sword.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7
    It seems to me the biggest (and maybe only) beef people have is that characters can be too good at combat. I don't hear anyone complaining that the characters can cook too well, sneak too well, observe too well, or ride too well. So, instead of limiting all skills to 3, most of which aren't a problem for narrators, we could think about re-vamping the combat system.

    Complaints seem to line up like this:
    [list=1][*]It's too easy to hit[*]It's too easy to get extra actions[*]Characters easily outstrip the book characters[*]Characters can easily max out their combat skills[/list=1]

    Some suggestions:
    1. Make Defense 13 + Nimbleness modifier (or whatever number you like + Nimbleness) or maybe just make Defense = Nimbleness, with a minimum of 8 or something. (Althought making Defense = Nimbleness just makes Nimbleness even more attractive to combat types...)

    2. Up the requisites for Swift Strike, get rid of the improvement for Swift Strike, and/or up the penalty for extra actions in combat.

    3. The book characters were more than one-trick ponies. Any character of equal advancements could outstrip them at combat. That happens when book characters are statted out using the same creation and advancement system that PC's use.

    4. Limit combat skills to only 1 rank increase per advancement. This will also help slow down the purchasing of Swift Strike.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Rio de Janeiro, BRAZIL
    Posts
    401
    Ok, since no one raised the subject, I will :

    What if your player characters get +18 on their Armed Combat and have Swift Strike x2? By all means, let them!

    I mean, really. If you use the mook rule, almost any 1-Advancement PC can wade through legions of Orcs. If you don't, it doesn't take all that more effort.

    Key here is to be creative when designing combat challenges. Go for a mix of quality and quantity -- mook rule or not, odds are some Orcs will score some hits. And the lack of swift healing can mean the characters can be in serious trouble.

    In any case, it also pays to design scenarios where combat is not really an option - at least not the most desirable option!
    No matter where you go, there you are.
    <div align="center"><center><table border="1" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="200" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" bordercolor="#000080"><tr><td><center><br><font face=verdana><font color="#000080"><font size="2">I am</font><br><font size=8><font face=symbol>p</font></font><br><br><font size=2>Everyone loves pi</font></font><br><font color="#FFFFFF">_</font></font></td></tr></table></center></div><br><center><font face=verdana><font size=2><a href="http://www.geocities.com/eyecanspy/numberquiz">what number are you?</a></font><font size=1><br><br>this quiz by <a href="http://www.livejournal.com/users/orsa">orsa</a></font></font></center>

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,208
    Originally posted by Captain Novaes
    Key here is to be creative when designing combat challenges. Go for a mix of quality and quantity -- mook rule or not, odds are some Orcs will score some hits. And the lack of swift healing can mean the characters can be in serious trouble.
    Very true. Pit one PC against 20 Orc mooks. The odds are really good that if the PC spends all his actions on attacks, and doesn't do a lot of parries or dodges, some Orcs will manage to get a few hits in, and cause problems.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    80
    Originally posted by Scottomir

    I'm curious if anybody has gone the step beyond me and tried to reclassify the costs of edges and abilities?
    That was one of the things that struck me when I first read the book, the one that I always pointed out was Bold vs. Horsemaster. There is no way that you can think that those as listed in the Core book are balanced. And personlly I don't like having a lot of stuff just stacking on top of each other.

    I did put together a table with all the edges modified to be a bit more balanced. Most I changed the bonus you received and some I change when they were applicable. I left the cost all the same and decide that changing the advantage gained was the approach that worked best for me.

    All of my players just use the spread sheet for picking and adding to edges. We have used it for a year and a half.

    I have a bunch of house rules that I wrote up when we started the campaign. I personally like to have rules that way it is not an arbitrary Narrator/GM response.

    Eventually I will get all my house rules typed up and set in a pdf or something.
    Scott Llewelyn

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    176
    Originally posted by Turin
    I did put together a table with all the edges modified to be a bit more balanced. Most I changed the bonus you received and some I change when they were applicable...Eventually I will get all my house rules typed up and set in a pdf or something.
    It sounds like you and I have similar instincts, Turin. That's exactly what I did with my gaming group. I ended up deleting or revising the nature of the bonus/penalty for something like 25 edges and flaws in order to give them some semblance of game balance. Alas, I fear that something like this is probably also really needed for Order abilities...but I simply haven't had the heart to even begin contemplating such a massive undertaking.

    I'd love to see your document if you ever write it up, to compare with my group's document.
    Scottomir's LOTR Game Resources:
    http://www.geocities.com/scott_metz/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •