Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

The unique One Ring rules set invites tinkering and secondary creation. Whilst The One Ring works brilliantly as written, we provide this forum for those who want to make their own home-brewed versions of the rules. Note that none of these should be taken as 'official'.
User avatar
Ecorce
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:36 am
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Ecorce » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:02 am

I've printed them.

Give me some time to read and think about it. I've just read them quickly. ;)
Ecorce French TOR community

Thoughts about The One Ring : Les Carnets d'Imladris / Notes from Imladris

User avatar
Falenthal
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 8:46 am
Location: Girona (Spain)
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Falenthal » Sat Aug 05, 2017 11:04 am

Of course! ;)

User avatar
jamesrbrown
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 5:15 am
Location: Gilbert, AZ, USA
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by jamesrbrown » Sat Aug 05, 2017 3:13 pm

If the goal is to bring the number of Travel tests down to one roll for any length of journey, I would suggest using a static amount of Fatigue gain based on the distance travelled and have the quality of the Travel roll reduce the expected amount gained. You can use the formula already in place for calculating the number of rolls required, but replace it with the instances of Fatigue gain instead, i.e., if 1 roll is required, it represents 1 instance of Fatigue gain instead (the amount gained per instance is still determined by the season).

For example, travelling 100 miles on foot (20 miles per day) in Spring requires 1 roll every 5 days in the RAW (4 rolls total). In this system, there would be only 1 roll, but for the purpose of reducing an expected 8 points of Fatigue gain (4 instances of Fatigue gain x 2 points for every instance in Spring).

The quality of Success determines the reduction: Normal success = 2 reduction, Great success = 4 reduction, Extraordinary success = 6 reduction. This could possibly eliminate all Fatigue on short journeys, but on long journeys there would still be some Fatigue gained.

An Eye would still trigger a hazard in the same way.
Please visit my blog, Advancement Points: The One Ring Files, for my TOR Resources

User avatar
Falenthal
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 8:46 am
Location: Girona (Spain)
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Falenthal » Sat Aug 05, 2017 4:54 pm

While I started my rules with that idea in mind, reducing everything to just one roll, what I found is that luck was too important: one bad roll, and even a seasoned Ranger would fail at any journey.

Not that I don't want that to happen, but with 2 or 3 rolls, this bad or good lucks get a bit evened, and the skill of the hero plays a major role.

User avatar
jamesrbrown
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 5:15 am
Location: Gilbert, AZ, USA
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by jamesrbrown » Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:19 pm

That is why it is better to break journeys into several legs. A natural way to break a journey into legs is to group each leg by region type or terrain. So, one leg might be 50 miles through Wild Lands and the next 120 miles will be over easy ground or by river. Each leg would require a travel test. If you did it this way, it becomes possible to produce nearly the same results you get now, but with less rolling and possibly some Fatigue gains for even skilled adventurers.

I am going to test this out soon. It all makes sense. To me, taxing heroes with an appropriate amount of Fatigue gain for a journey they are willing to take, but then allowing them a chance to reduce those gains with skill is fair and makes sense, even if a more skilled hero fails and a less skilled hero succeeds.
Please visit my blog, Advancement Points: The One Ring Files, for my TOR Resources

gsecaur
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 9:09 pm

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by gsecaur » Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:05 am

Falenthal, I've been casting about for an alternate Journey system for my own game, so I was eager to read your thoughts. I was seriously considering implementing Rich H.'s system, but I'm not willing to buy a copy of AiME just for their journey rules (which would be necessary to make Rich's rules work as written).

I want to strip away a lot of the crunch, as there's plenty of it in the game already and our gaming table is straining under the weight! I like the idea of the one-roll Fatigue solution, and I think I will implement that.

As for presentation of Hazards, I want them to be more engaging than the RAW. I think Journeys & Maps did a good job of making them more interesting, but I've been looking at James' Wild Adventure rules and tables, and thinking about running hazards as a teeny, tiny improvised scenario. That way they'll feel more like side quests than simple obstacles to be overcome by rolling a skill test.

As an example, my group is currently playing through "To Journey's End & the Eagles' Eyrie" -- an excellent extrapolation of "The Marsh Bell", Rich, for which I am grateful as one of my players was already familiar with the original scenario -- and we're on the Old Forest Road. I'll use the Mirkwood tables for Wild Adventures, created by poosticks7. Let's say I roll a 6 on the first Feat die (Journeys 6), then a 5 on the second die (Fetid Hole). Depending on how difficult things have been for the party thus far, perhaps this is an optional sub-quest that they may freely ignore -- "Anybody want to go check out that fetid hole? No? Okay, we continue on..." -- or maybe it's unavoidable -- perhaps bats flutter out of the hole and spook the party's pony, and now they have to leave the road to chase the pony through the foul forest. Doing so can engage the entire party, and possibly lead to combat or meeting NPCs or so on, as they go further along.

Of course, the existing Wild Adventure tables may need to be edited down for this purpose -- I can't see how a randomly-generated encounter with King Thranduil would not completely derail the adventure -- and I'll probably want to reduce the likelihood of Combat results or Encounters with named NPCs. The tables as they exist are great for spinning a scenario on the fly, but threaten to disrupt an ongoing story into which they are dropped.

User avatar
jamesrbrown
Posts: 547
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 5:15 am
Location: Gilbert, AZ, USA
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by jamesrbrown » Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:28 am

The following steps can be followed in order to reduce the number of Fatigue tests made during a journey, which will accommodate an even greater narrative style of play. With only one roll for each leg of a journey, the Loremaster can more quickly summarise events. This method also makes it more likely that any hero, even heroes who have a high Travel skill, will gain some Fatigue on long journeys, or journeys in the cold months of the year.

Simple Journey Resolution

1. Set route: Divide the journey into shorter legs according to terrain, region type, mode of travel, or whatever method makes sense.

2. Distance: Find the distance for each leg (10 miles per hex).

3. Terrain: Multiply the distance for each leg by the terrain modifier (see Terrain Difficulty table, page 156).

4. Speed: Divide the modified distance of each leg by the speed of the company (this determines the length of the journey in days; see Speed table, page 168).

5. Fatigue gain: Determine the expected amount of Fatigue gain for each leg of the journey by dividing its length according to the season (round up any remainder).
  • Winter: days/0
  • Spring: days/3
  • Summer: days/4
  • Autumn: days/2
If travelling by boats or ponies, halve the results and round up.

For example, a 10 day trip (200 miles by foot) will increase Fatigue by 10 in Winter, 4 in Spring, 3 in Summer, and 5 in Autumn. If boats or ponies are used for the same trip, companions can expect to gain Fatigue at the rate of 5 in Winter, 2 in Spring, 2 in Summer, and 3 in Autumn.

6. Fatigue test: For each leg of the journey, companions will make one Travel test using a TN according to region type (see Region table, page 158). The purpose of this test is to reduce the expected amount of Fatigue gain for that leg. Reduce the amount based on the quality of success:
  • Ordinary success: 2 reduction
  • Great success: 3 reduction
  • Extraordinary success: 4 reduction, or an amount equal to the hero's basic Heart rating, whichever is higher.
Fatigue gains should be applied immediately before moving on to the next leg of the journey, as well as any hazard episodes triggered by an Eye.
Please visit my blog, Advancement Points: The One Ring Files, for my TOR Resources

User avatar
Falenthal
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 8:46 am
Location: Girona (Spain)
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Falenthal » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:23 am

After reading Ecorce's, gsecaur's and James' thought, I'm very glad that we all seem to be in the same page regarding the Journey's rules from TOR. We all might strive for slightly different mechanics here or there, but I believe we all see some issues with the RAW that are commonplace (for some more than for others):

1) Too many dice-rolling, that interrupts the narrative
1.1) Maybe it could be added, too many calculations to get at the numbers (rolls needed and TN of each one) to solve a travel

2) Hazards deserve more attention, and involve the heroes beyond rolling always the same skill, whatever the confronted situation. Hazards should be used to set the tone (region, season, specific dangers) of the travel.

As James is also testing, I feel that the way to go is simply to reduce the number of rolls by assigning a certain travel a number of Fatigue points, depending on the factors each LM considers relevant (lenght of the jorney, types of terrain traversed, regions,...) and the season. Then, the Fatigue test will reduce that amount depending of the level of success. That's the basic idea and my (limited) playtestings have shown so far that it works very well with every other TOR mechanic (Traits, high skills granting more 6s and better outcomes, etc.)

Let me add that a rule still in testing that I'm loving so far is to allow a hero to "pass" some or all of his successes to other heroes. It makes for a great fellowship mechanic, where the most skilled (or lucky!) help their companions end up the journey with less Fatigue, at the cost of their own. Introducing the "level of success" factor in the Fatigue tests allows for many improvements in the Journeys.

Let me thank you all for reviving this thread, and adding new ideas to it. I really want to hear from your experiences with the rules and mechanics you all come up with.

User avatar
Falenthal
Posts: 2144
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 8:46 am
Location: Girona (Spain)
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Falenthal » Sun Aug 06, 2017 7:30 am

jamesrbrown wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:28 am

1. Set route: Divide the journey into shorter legs according to terrain, region type, mode of travel, or whatever method makes sense.
That's great to be specifically indicated: "Whatever makes sense". Myself often divide the travels not by the number of hexes (as indicated in my own rules), but in "significant" legs. If the company travels south from Rhosgobel along the nether vales of the Anduin, and at some point enter Mirkwood to reach Dol Guldur, I won't make it a single Journey with a single roll at the vale's TN. I'll make it two different Journeys, of couse, with different TNs and Hazard types. For simplicity, I usually use the number of hexes, but it's not a must.
jamesrbrown wrote:
Sun Aug 06, 2017 4:28 am
3. Terrain: Multiply the distance for each leg by the terrain modifier (see Terrain Difficulty table, page 156).

4. Speed: Divide the modified distance of each leg by the speed of the company (this determines the length of the journey in days; see Speed table, page 168).

5. Fatigue gain: Determine the expected amount of Fatigue gain for each leg of the journey by dividing its length according to the season (round up any remainder).
  • Winter: days/0
  • Spring: days/3
  • Summer: days/4
  • Autumn: days/2
If travelling by boats or ponies, halve the results and round up.

For example, a 10 day trip (200 miles by foot) will increase Fatigue by 10 in Winter, 4 in Spring, 3 in Summer, and 5 in Autumn. If boats or ponies are used for the same trip, companions can expect to gain Fatigue at the rate of 5 in Winter, 2 in Spring, 2 in Summer, and 3 in Autumn.
Too crunchy for me, although it should surely work for many people. I wanted to avoid all this calculations, and having to look at tables, multiplying and dividing, etc.

But I'm all in with the last part, about reducing the Fatigue from a set amount according to the level of success of the Fatigue test.

I'd like to hear more from your tests, James!

User avatar
Ecorce
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:36 am
Contact:

Re: Another "New Journey Rules", inspired by AiMe

Post by Ecorce » Tue Aug 22, 2017 2:23 pm

I was looking for a failure in these modified rules... But finally I cannot find one. :D

I like the idea of rolling once per leg. But it's still too much calculation for me, too.
The main ideas are built. Now we need to fix details... piece of honey cake? Yes! Hmm... No! :lol:

I can't decide, inside of me, if rolling once or many times is better.
I'll have to look at the map, averaging how many hex a leg could count. To make my decision on the number of rolls AND the number of hazards.

Right now, I prefer counting by 12 hex (Fal's version). Feels more confortable to me, and the hexes on the map still remains necessary.
Ecorce French TOR community

Thoughts about The One Ring : Les Carnets d'Imladris / Notes from Imladris

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest