Vladim Posted August 3, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted August 3, 2022 6 hours ago, thesloth said: I like the idea of one forced March to get into the foothills ahead of the orcs. I think it would be better ground for us if we had to begin setting small ambushes to delay the orcs while Irime moved on ahead. This would be a desperation tactic. But I definitely do not want the orcs ahead of us in the foothills. I would prefer not to forced march anymore than necessary though so the fatigue doesn't pile up. Maybe right at the end we could 'sprint' to safety for a few days. That's definitely doable; perhaps we could have the hunter or the lookout making checks to identify good spots for ambushes, and then on success you could take pot shots at them? Though only Frida is a decent archer... The downside is of course that with this tactic you reveal yourselves to the enemy; in terms of mechanics, failures might make things worse somehow. After arriving at the foothills the idea would be that the scouts would need to continue searching for a path through the mountains that is not watched before reaching your actual destination (the High Pass). Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted August 5, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 5, 2022 It does indeed have some risks. We could hold off on the delaying ambushes until we see how successful our scouts are. If we did conduct some ambushes how much benefit would we gain from a successful attack? Just the dead orcs? I was thinking that one or two successful ambushes in a row might force them to slow down out of caution. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzuki Stumpy Posted August 5, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 5, 2022 If we’re fleeing (or at least travelling with haste) we would have a hard time setting traps or ambushes for the Orcs without giving ourselves away. Probably closest we could get would be a few well-placed arrows in their scouts or stragglers disguised to look as though they came from elsewhere. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladim Posted August 5, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted August 5, 2022 21 minutes ago, thesloth said: If we did conduct some ambushes how much benefit would we gain from a successful attack? Just the dead orcs? I was thinking that one or two successful ambushes in a row might force them to slow down out of caution. Hm... good question! I am not sure, but depending on how many you manage to kill, I might make some kind of morale check to see what the rest of them will do. That, and maybe make hate-draining abilities more easy to use on the rest? I need to read how Hate works in 2nd edition, but I think it is similar to 1st ed. Obviously, the other option would be to split up and try to mislead them, but that also comes with its own risks. Never split the party and all that... Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted August 5, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 5, 2022 7 hours ago, Suzuki Stumpy said: If we’re fleeing (or at least travelling with haste) we would have a hard time setting traps or ambushes for the Orcs without giving ourselves away. Probably closest we could get would be a few well-placed arrows in their scouts or stragglers disguised to look as though they came from elsewhere. Yeah, that's part of the risk element. Can we do enough damage in 3 shots or 4 shots to make the risk worth it? I think looking at the discussion this option might be better if we realize the orcs have picked up our trail and know who is with us. Then we aren't losing anything by revealing ourselves. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladim Posted August 8, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted August 8, 2022 We now have a One Ring dice roller! https://test.myth-weavers.com/index.php?/topic/1295-dev-news-stream/&do=findComment&comment=10381 Thanks to @Eric for implementing it! Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varon777 Posted August 8, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 8, 2022 Ooh that's exciting Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzuki Stumpy Posted August 22, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 22, 2022 FYI, I'll be away from Thursday onwards for around three weeks, so feel free to NPC Thammegil in the meantime. If it comes to combat (assuming we go with the plan currently being discussed), he'll go with the skirmish party to try and bait the orcs, then will circle around behind them to pick them off with arrows while he can, before closing in with sword either once their numbers are thinned sufficiently, or if any of them turn to threaten the skirmish group. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted August 22, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 22, 2022 So the plan as it stands sounds like, "Group One draws some Misty Mountain goblins out of position. Group Two goes into that gap and sets up an ambush. Group One returns, let's the goblins rush past them into the ambush. Group Two springs the ambush. Group One jumps in after Group Two starts." Seems reasonable to me as long as the terrain / vegetation are favorable to us for concealment and cover. Group Two has to find a spot relatively close to the gap in the lines so Group One can find them again. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladim Posted August 22, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted August 22, 2022 I'm good with that plan, it makes sense, though your numbers are really few compared to theirs. I'll have a post today, and after making some skill rolls, we can have this fight scene, and see how TOR2 combat works. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted August 31, 2022 Clone Share Posted August 31, 2022 We had a decent plan but the failure rate is killing us. If we find the battle turning against us we may need to try some sort of disengage tactics. Does TOR 2 have a bunch of those combat options like 1E did? Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladim Posted September 1, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted September 1, 2022 @thesloth Yeah, those TNs are pretty high. I think the assumption of the game designer(s) was that starting companies should make more use of Hope and Traits to add a few more d6s in crucial situations. But the book does have the escape combat task, though it works a bit differently from first edition. It's a little bit more forgiving as it doesn't rely on Athletics, actually, and does not require a Great/Extraordinary success when you are highly outnumbered. Here's what the new rules say: Fly, you fools! Player-heroes facing insurmountable odds and intending to leave the fight have two options: 1. They can first assume a Rearward stance, and then choose to escape when their turn to act comes. No roll is required to do so. The same applies to adversaries who chose to stand back and thus remained unengaged. 2. Otherwise, they can assume a Defensive stance, rolling for their attack normally: If their attack roll is a success, they do not inflict any damage but they manage to leave the battlefield instead. If the attack roll fails, the combatant remains engaged. So, basically working off of weapon skill, though I think Defensive stance penalizes these rolls (minus a d6, I think?) so it could get a bit hairy if those with low Body/low weapon skill get left behind. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted September 3, 2022 Clone Share Posted September 3, 2022 Yeah, but with the Rearward stance option why even go with Defensive. There seems to be no downside to just taking a Rearward stance. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladim Posted September 3, 2022 Author Clone Share Posted September 3, 2022 10 minutes ago, thesloth said: Yeah, but with the Rearward stance option why even go with Defensive. There seems to be no downside to just taking a Rearward stance. I think the same rules as first edition apply, in that you need 2 PCs in melee for each PC in rearward. Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesloth Posted September 3, 2022 Clone Share Posted September 3, 2022 Ahhhh, I see. I had forgotten about that. On a related note, what is the TN for our next set of rolls while we prepare the hillock? Name xDiceName xDiceResult xDiceString xDiceRolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts