Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
37 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

War of the Ring (Second Edition)» Forums » Variants

Subject: Adding a Search action (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes) rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This idea is more a house rule than a variant, serving two purposes. 1) it mitigates the unintended consequences of an action roll producing many more Eyes than the Shadow player desires (typically, when there are 4+ Eyes in the Hunt). These consequences include the Shadow suffering from a lack of actions and the Free Peoples taking advantage by tending to their defenses instead of risking moving the FSP. And 2) the rare case of the Free Peoples going all-out for military victory while leaving the Ringbearers in Rivendell.

Overview: The Search action allows rolling for the Hunt on the Shadow player's turn using excess Eye dice.



Restrictions:

- Safe Haven: The Shadow player may not perform a Search when the Fellowship is in an unconquered Free Peoples City or Stronghold unless the Fellowship progress marker is at 1 or higher.

- No searching in Mordor: Starting with the turn the Fellowship declares in Mordor, revert to the regular rules and add all rolled Eye results to the Hunt Box.

Comments:
- The allocation of Eyes to Searching should be infrequent enough that this should not break the game.
- The option to muster a Nazgul makes this a little more enticing in the early game and eliminates the fiddliness of earlier versions.
- Still need to playtest this, but I'm more inclined to this version now.

This simpler version benefitted from Krieghund's suggestions for a more straightforward approach. Original, much-edited post below:

Quote:
"All his will is bent on it..."

Overview: The Search action allows rolling for the Hunt on the Shadow player's turn using excess Eye dice.

Searching is performed as a regular action (like mustering or playing an event card) by following the steps described in the mock-up card [edited per suggestions and for simplicity].

[Edit: Go to next page of this thread for latest version of this variant idea]14331329


Additional Search rules:

- No bonuses or re-rolls: Searches are unaffected by how many times the Fellowship has moved that turn (only 6s count as successes) and do not benefit from any re-rolls. [No longer operative in latest version]

- Safe Haven: The Shadow player may not perform a Search when the Fellowship is in an unconquered Free Peoples City or Stronghold unless the Fellowship progress marker is at 1 or higher.

- No searching in Mordor: Starting with the turn the Fellowship declares in Mordor, revert to the regular rules and add all rolled Eye results to the Hunt Box.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter K. Hubig
Germany
bei Aschaffenburg
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Your idea describes very well the weak point of the game for me in contrast to the old SPI WotR: the totally random results of the action die roll which might very straight lead to a non-Sauronic strategy bookwise.

The Power points rolled in SPI WotR only changed the amount available each round but did not prevent Sauron from the specific action he desired or force him to an action he NOT desired as your example clearly states. So there for example the number of hunts per round was limited due to the available amount but not the hunt per se. Same goes to all other actions.

In SPI WotR Sauron can always choose the action he needs and wants, purely the amount of how many actions he chooses is variable.
3 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Poulter
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Some great ideas Rafamir. I feel like adding my own two cents, please feel free to ignore.

2. Rather then the Nazguls are at home, why not chamge this to there must be a Nazgul at the fellowship's last know location? Would seem to fit well with the theme of the rule.

I also feel that the rule could be misused to allocate less eyes then required and then just perform searchs instead. So a player could allocate 0/1 and be more then likely to get more say 3 in total. I would say 3 eyes is by no means a disaster and yet they will be allowed to use new searching because of it. Therefore I suggest the following:
Search hunt tiles never reveal the fellowship and/or the new rule can only take place when there are more dice in the hunt box then action dice left at the beginning of the turn (i.e. a really heavy eye roll!).

Randomness in the game gets discussed a lot and I am firmly of the camp that it only adds to the enjoyment of the game and its incredible longevity, as the tactics constantly have to be adjusted through play. If the actions where fixed it would no longer be the same game.

This idea however, is really good. It does not remove the bad roll, but simply gives a player another option to use. Quite often with a lot of eyes around you will not want to be searching the fellowship, you will be wanting to defend, so I think given the right balance it can work well.

2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Thanks for the feedback, guys.

pkh1 wrote:
Your idea describes very well the weak point of the game for me in contrast to the old SPI WotR: the totally random results of the action die roll which might very straight lead to a non-Sauronic strategy bookwise.

Well, Peter, you found me out. I owned Berg's WotR (alas, with the Ralph Bakshi film poster on the box), and I loved the Search card mechanic in that game. But not as much as I love the hidden movement in Ares' WotR.

GamesJart wrote:
I also feel that the rule could be misused to allocate less eyes then required and then just perform searchs instead.

I'm not sure what would constitute misuse. Let's see how a few hypotheticals would play out:

Example 1 (0 Eyes allocated, 3 rolled) wrote:
The house rule would require that I only put one in the Hunt. If the Fellowship moves, I have a 1 in 6 chance of Hunting it successfully (and any subsequent moves will give me a lower target number on one die rather than the regular three), plus two Search actions each with a 1 in 6 chance to succeed.

Conversely, under the regular rules, all three Eyes go into the Hunt. If the Fellowship moves I roll three dice each time, possibly with rerolls, and get no Search actions, and any bonuses for subsequent moves apply to a roll of three dice rather than just one.

Example 2 (1 Eye allocated, 3 rolled) wrote:
In this case, the house rule requires me to add at least one rolled Eye to the Hunt, but I could keep one or two for Search actions. So with a Hunt strength of 2 dice and 2 Search actions, I would get to roll 2 dice at 6 for the Fellowship's first move, and the same odds twice more for the two Search actions.

That's more dice than I would have with 4 Eyes in the Hunt at 6 under the regular rules, but I would have better odds of succeeding if the Fellowship moves a second time or if I had any rerolls.

Example 3 (2 Eyes allocated, 3 rolled) wrote:
This is the sort of case the house rule is especially meant to remedy. It would still leave 4 Eyes in the Hunt, but the last Eye could be kept for a Search action. Let's say my opponent decides not to move the FSP against a four or five Eyes in the Hunt, or rolls no Character dice. With the house rule, I can still Search with four dice at 6.

Playtesting with a few seasoned gamers should tease out any misuse, of course.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Rafamir wrote:
4. If the Search succeeds, add the Eye die used for the Search action to the Hunt box and draw a Hunt tile, resolving it per the normal rules.

Also, I'm considering instead of pulling a Hunt tile, which impacts the make-up of the Hunt pool over time, successful search rolls simply cause a point of Corruption for each success rolled and thus do not reveal the FSP (or impede its movement tempo other than the improved chance of a successful Hunt because the Eye die used to search is added to the Hunt Box if a Search is successful). [Edit: change enacted]
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Poulter
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Rafamir wrote:

Playtesting with a few seasoned gamers should tease out any misuse, of course.


If you see me around, always worth asking.

My main concern on misuse was forcing a recovering FSP out of a stronghold with a reveal when they had no intention of moving, depends on how you are going to apply successful results.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Hansen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
I'm not too keen on the idea of the eyes going in the hunt box after a search action. If you are able to search before the FSP moves, then you are getting an extra search with no penalty for the regular hunt. This might force the FP to move sooner than they normally would.

Otherwise I think it's an interesting idea. I think I'd prefer the 1 corruption idea instead of drawing a tile.
1 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Teamjimby wrote:
I'm not too keen on the idea of the eyes going in the hunt box after a search action. If you are able to search before the FSP moves, then you are getting an extra search with no penalty for the regular hunt. This might force the FP to move sooner than they normally would.

Otherwise I think it's an interesting idea. I think I'd prefer the 1 corruption idea instead of drawing a tile.

Yes, you're right. Adding Eyes from Search actions back into the Hunt Box eliminates the Shadow's opportunity cost somewhat.

Changes I'm considering:
- Search action dice never get added to the Hunt Box
- After a successful search, the Shadow player forfeits any remaining Search actions (limiting the tactic to one successful search per turn)[Edit: instead searches now require moving a Nazgul to the Hunt Box each time, depleting leadership]

By the way, my daughter finds your avatar hilarious.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
GamesJart wrote:
My main concern on misuse was forcing a recovering FSP out of a stronghold with a reveal when they had no intention of moving, depends on how you are going to apply successful results.

If the FSP is healing and not moving, the Safe Haven rule applies and the Shadow cannot Search. If they are moving, they can't be revealed now that I've changed the result from tile draw to 1 point of damage per success rolled.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Hansen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re: Searching for the Ring (a remedy for rolling too many Eyes)
Rafamir wrote:
By the way, my daughter finds your avatar hilarious.

Glad she likes it I didn't actually create it, so I have to give credit where credit is due: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/154070/item/2537821#it...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roy Subs
Scotland
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Love it Raf. My 2 main bugbears with the game are: a) a little too much randomness (in this otherwise amazing game), and b) too much unnecessary added complexity in Expansion 1 (who knows how complex it will get by Expansion 3 at this rate!) with all the mistakes that even very experienced players are making all the time in the LoMe tournament.

I hope the designers read your ideas, reign in the complexity (just a little) and reign in the randomness (just a little) as official changes.

Now, how do we fix things like that 5x Palantir die roll that I had in our last game
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've revised the house rule in the original post and created a card mock-up (pending BGG approval) to summarize the rules for the Shadow player.

 
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is interesting. Another thing that needs to be considered is the use of Elven Rings. I would assume an Elven Ring can be used to change an unused Eye to another result, but what happens when another result is changed to an Eye? Must it still go into the Hunt Box, or can it be made available to be used to Search? Does the Shadow player get a choice?

It could follow the same rules as allocating Eyes after the roll and depend on whether any Eyes were rolled (and how many), but that information would need to be recalled at the time the Elven Ring is used. For example, if there are two Eyes in the Hunt Box, were they both placed, one placed and one rolled, or both rolled. The situation is obvious if there are unused Eyes in the available results, but dependent on memory otherwise (unless the rolled Eyes are marked somehow).
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Excellent question. I think the simplest solution is to make Eyes the one action die result that cannot be changed by an Elven Ring. This is consistent with the original rules and maintains the thematic consideration that Eye results represent to what degree Sauron's will is unavoidably bent on finding the Ring.

And as with the standard rules, you could still use a ring to change another result to an Eye in order to add it to the Hunt Box (but I would avoid allowing it to become a Search action for the fiddly reasons you lay out).


[Edit: I'm reversing myself, after a little more coffee...]
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Krieghund wrote:
This is interesting. Another thing that needs to be considered is the use of Elven Rings. I would assume an Elven Ring can be used to change an unused Eye to another result, but what happens when another result is changed to an Eye? Must it still go into the Hunt Box, or can it be made available to be used to Search? Does the Shadow player get a choice?

I'm going back and forth. I think giving the Shadow player a choice is more interesting, but once the FSP is in Mordor, the Eye would have to go to the Hunt Box.

Krieghund wrote:
It could follow the same rules as allocating Eyes after the roll and depend on whether any Eyes were rolled (and how many), but that information would need to be recalled at the time the Elven Ring is used. For example, if there are two Eyes in the Hunt Box, were they both placed, one placed and one rolled, or both rolled. The situation is obvious if there are unused Eyes in the available results, but dependent on memory otherwise (unless the rolled Eyes are marked somehow).

This gets fiddly. I'm leaning to simply giving the Shadow player the options without having to recall how the number of Eyes in the Hunt came about.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I've got an idea for an interesting twist. Replace the "Conducting a Search" text above with the following:

"As an action, discard all Eye results from your available Action dice to roll for the Hunt. Follow all normal Hunt rules, but use the number of Eye results discarded to determine the Hunt Level rather than the dice in the Hunt Box."

This would allow a single pro-active Hunt during the turn using the normal procedure, which still provides an alternative to passively waiting for the Fellowship to move.
1 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Hansen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Krieghund wrote:
I've got an idea for an interesting twist. Replace the "Conducting a Search" text above with the following:

"As an action, discard all Eye results from your available Action dice to roll for the Hunt. Follow all normal Hunt rules, but use the number of Eye results discarded to determine the Hunt Level rather than the dice in the Hunt Box."

This would allow a single pro-active Hunt during the turn using the normal procedure, which still provides an alternative to passively waiting for the Fellowship to move.

So if you had two eyes in the hunt box and one extra in your action pool, you would roll 2@5? Or would it be 1 die and the target is based on the number of times the FSP has moved so far?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Chapman
United States
Powhatan
Virginia
flag msg tools
Axis & Allies Developer and Playtester; War of the Ring Editor and Playtester
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The latter.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Krieghund wrote:
I've got an idea for an interesting twist. Replace the "Conducting a Search" text above with the following:

"As an action, discard all Eye results from your available Action dice to roll for the Hunt. Follow all normal Hunt rules, but use the number of Eye results discarded to determine the Hunt Level rather than the dice in the Hunt Box."

This would allow a single pro-active Hunt during the turn using the normal procedure, which still provides an alternative to passively waiting for the Fellowship to move.

Your suggestion is a good deal simpler and gives the Shadow player more control over balancing Hunt and Search options. And the Search may be even more devastating if it comes at the end of the turn rather than the beginning if the Fellowship decided to move once or twice. My reservations are that it would end up depleting the Hunt pool faster and impact FP behavior more (per Jim's comment on my early draft).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
kevin long
United States
Portland
OR
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
devil Doesn't address not rolling any eyes when only allowed to allocate one to the hunt. Where is the compensation to the Free peeps when they don't roll any character die on the Mordor track? Your suggestion needs fair testing but i wish a simpler solution comes into place instead of something convoluted - though your rule may add fun decision making like the rest of the game's mechanics, so maybe it is a great solution.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
treece keenes wrote:
devil Doesn't address not rolling any eyes when only allowed to allocate one to the hunt. Where is the compensation to the Free peeps when they don't roll any character die on the Mordor track? Your suggestion needs fair testing but i wish a simpler solution comes into place instead of something convoluted - though your rule may add fun decision making like the rest of the game's mechanics, so maybe it is a great solution.

You are correct, it does not address a lack of Eyes, or a lack of Character dice for the Fellowship to move/hide in Mordor. (The game does remedy the latter somewhat with Elven rings and "There Is Another Way" event card, which can be worth saving for use with an event die in Mordor.)

For my playtest with friends, I've edited down the text to this:

Quote:
The Ring draws them. Use a Search action die to move one Nazgûl from any region on the board to the Hunt Box and roll for the Hunt, ignoring any modifiers or re-rolls. For every 6 you roll, the Fellowship suffers a point of Hunt damage that must be resolved in the usual fashion.

You may use a Dark Ring to change a Search action die to another result, and vice versa.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Hansen
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting. So the Nazgul would stay in the hunt box until you move them with a C die? And if you search several times before using a C die, you might have all of your Nazgul in the hunt box?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Another good catch! I hadn't considered whether a C or Nazgul event card would get a Nazgul out of the Hunt Box. I'm inclined to say no, the ringwraith is busy scanning the landscape for Hobbits and won't be available until it has reported back to the Dark Tower.

Sending them to the Hunt Box, then reporting back to Barad-Dur, was meant as a balancing function to create an opportunity cost for conducting a Search. Any Nazgul Sauron has sent out to search are not available to lead armies until you use a C die or play a move-the-Nazgul event. Early in the game before the first battles, this is not a huge cost, and if the Shadow player musters a few more Nazgul, it won't seem like a big drain. In the rare case that you have multiple Search actions available, you'll have to weigh whether it's worth it to pull leadership away from armies.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Some dude
Netherlands
Groningen
There dismay took them, for at the gate was a guard of whom no tidings had yet gone forth.
flag msg tools
Swiftly the wolf grew, until he could creep into no den, but lay huge and hungry before the feet of Morgoth. There the fire and anguish of hell entered into him, and he became filled with a devouring spirit, tormented, terrible, and strong.
badge
Then swiftly all his inwards were filled with a flame of anguish, and the Silmaril seared his accursed flesh. Howling he led before them, and the walls of the valley of the Gate echoes with the clamour of his torment.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You don't need to move the Nazgul. You can just use the ones that are in Barad-Dur. Or am I missing something?

I think this rule would encourage 'fixing' the Hunt by the Shadow player by only putting one eye in the Hunt Pool in order to get search actions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Raf B
United States
Oakland
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Anfauglir wrote:
You don't need to move the Nazgul. You can just use the ones that are in Barad-Dur. Or am I missing something?

I think this rule would encourage 'fixing' the Hunt by the Shadow player by only putting one eye in the Hunt Pool in order to get search actions.

See The Ring draws them in my post before last. To search, a Nazgul goes off board to the Hunt Box.

As for 'fixing' the Hunt unreasonably, it remains to be tested. In my game this weekend there were very few opportunities for this rule to come into play. The Shadow was content to have 3 Eyes in the Hunt after allocating one, but he was playing a balanced game, not an all-out military blitz. The Search option really only kicks in when the Shadow is getting many more eyes than desired.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.