Middle Earth D20 Conversion

ColonelHardisson said:

Which rules changes are you speaking of? I know that in my own conversion that the bulk of it is really just a matter of new - or adjusted - character races, done to reflect what Tolkien wrote, and a list of spells not appropriate to Middle Earth, meaning that Tolkien never wrote about anything resembling them.

Click to expand...

To date, I am unsure of all present editions of the racial templates as well as the thumbnails for magic use. I agree on the need for (and use of) level adjustments for the elf kindreds, but the details chafe. The magic use ideas aren't jiving well with me; it's more a matter of saying "Those teleport spells don't exist, and being flashy in the late Third Age allows Sauron to roll a Spot check against your PC." than anything else.

Sure, it really is more of a matter of flavor, but a lot of folk find that the D&D standard doesn't exactly reflect the flavor of Middle Earth. Otherwise, there would be no call for threads like these or sites like the one hosted here at EN World.

Click to expand...

That depends on perceptions and style, not issues of substance. I see it working just fine, as it jives with what I've read in the books. You don't agree, and I'm not sure that I understand why you don't.

If you like using the D&D standard for Middle Earth, that's great. But creating threads and websites that say "Middle Earth d20 should simply use the D&D standard" would be kind of pointless. If you'd like to write an essay on using the D&D standard for Middle Earth, that would be fantastic, though - we'd love to post something like that on the site!

Click to expand...

In due time, as I have more pressing matters at hand, I may well take you up on that offer.

Wolfspider said:

(...snip...)
I, too, would be interested in seeing a list of rule changes that you think are unnecessary. I'm all for keeping things as simple as possible, but I still want to capture the essence of what makes Middle Earth different and special.

Click to expand...

I think that the class changes are too much; IMO, little needs to be done for a Free Peoples game from the First Age through the end of the War of the Ring. Ban Monks, allow Paladins to multiclass freely and tweak Druids to taste; you're ready to roll.

NPC classes shouldn't be considered for PCs or NPCs of their caliber, and anyone who's either a divine being or has been active (more or less) since the First Age ought to be an epic-level character. (Gandalf? Unable to cast 9th level spells? As if!)

Finally, no psionics. Psi and ME do not mix.

Red Baron said:

Hi Pale.

Actually, those "conversion" values are not at all intended to represent the relative value of the coins themselves -- it is simply the number of said coins that might be found in one location if you were, say, translating an older D&D module to be used in M-E.

In AD&D, ep and pp were the rarest coins (i.e., least often found in hoards), and these relate in terms of frequency/rarity, but not monetary value, to tp and gp in my version of the game.

My intention is noted in the subtitle where it says "for altering treasure troves, etc." -- probably the title of that section shouldn't be 'Coinage Equivalencies,' however. That's a bit misleading... Sorry for any confusion.

Click to expand...

No worries. I thought that maybe that's what you were going for, but that it wouldn't hurt to ask in case it WAS a typo. Thanks for the quick clarification on that one and I'm looking forward to seeing more of these conversions!

Corinth said:

That depends on perceptions and style, not issues of substance. I see it working just fine, as it jives with what I've read in the books. You don't agree, and I'm not sure that I understand why you don't.

Click to expand...

Ummm...I don't follow. What are you saying here? If you mean that you don't understand why I disagree with you concerning whether D&D, unaltered, models Middle Earth well, then my only reply can be - that's my perception of it. Does that mean my way (or anyone else's) is the only way? Of course not. All I've done is carefully research this stuff, and present it as closely to what Tolkien wrote - and what I read - as possible. If it doesn't gibe with what you got from the books, so be it.

All I can say is this - I've read the Rings Trilogy well over a dozen times. The Silmarillion I've read 3 or 4. I keep Robert Foster's guidebook at hand all the time. I have gone through and carefully looked at all the instances of magic use in the books. Then, I tried to model what I read in d20/D&D terms.

It's fine if you don't agree with what I, or anyone else, has done. There is no reason to "chafe" at anything - as I have said ad infinitum regarding this site, especially lately, is that there is no right or wrong way to play. If you don't like what is presented, then ignore it. This site is not intended to be the final word on Middle Earth roleplaying. Far from it. There are already a number of different ways to handle Middle Earth d20 given on the site. If someone feels they have a way of doing it that more suits their taste, that's fantastic! Write it up and send it to us! We will post it.

Y'know, I could go through and justify most of what I've done with direct quotes from the books - and, if you read back through this thread, you'll see that I've already done that in some cases. On the older threads from last year, I used direct quotation quite a bit. My point is that I'm not arbitrarily doing stuff, whether it's in regards to Elven abilities or magic use.

Still, in the end, we may simply come away from the books with different views. That's fine. Matter of fact, that's pretty much why this site exists, and why we solicit new material, especially material that differs from what is already there.

Corinth said:

Finally, no psionics. Psi and ME do not mix.

Click to expand...

One could look at the instances where the Elves communicate mind-to-mind (look back over the last few pages; there is a direct quotation from LotR regarding this) and the struggle between Aragorn and Sauron, or Denethor and sauron, or even the struggle between Saruman and Sauron (and Saruman's ultimate domination by Sauron) via the Palantirs, and see where psionics may well fit.

Also, can you cite, directly from the text, where Gandalf used anything like a 9th level spell? I'm not being argumentative; it would help us all to know all instances of magic use in the books. The Istari - of which Gandalf is one - were sent to Middle Earth with strict rules regarding how they could oppose Sauron. They could only use the absolute minimum of power necessary to get the job done. I concede that Gandalf could be a wizard or sorcerer that can use 9th level spells, but I never saw evidence of it in the books. The spell list I chose for Gandalf in my write-up was based on what he actually used, and what seemed logical that he could use, based on what he was shown to use in the books. No more and no less. But, my way, as always, is certainly not the only way. We could always use more character write-ups from differing viewpoints.

grodog said:

Col H---

I went to take a quick look at your new site for the ME conversion, but it wouldn't load in NS 4.79 beyond the the top banner.

I thought you might like to know

Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll let Palcadon know. I've been having a bit of momentary trouble with it when it first loads in MIE.

This thread is getting unwieldy, so I'm going to start a fresh one, and ask thfor this one to be closed and archived.

Re: Re: Greetings and "Aeglos" conversion

GruTheWanderer said:

Hi Mjollnir,

I'm glad you're enjoying the new conversion site. Please share more ideas with us.

Regarding "Aeglos", I'm not sure why it has to have such a high enhancement bonus. Even if it is an artifact, +5 should be the maximum (such as the Sword of Kas or the Mace of Cuthbert in the DMG). Counting in the special abilities makes it equivalent to a +10 weapon on DMG weapons chart (pg 184). That would be more than enough power for any High King of the Elves.

How would you use this weapon in a campaign? I can't imagine anyone lower than 20th level owning such a weapon. How was it used in MERP?

Out of curiousity, what did you enjoy the most about MERP. I never played it, but I'd like to hear stories.

Derek

Click to expand...

Hello, Gru
Well, as I post in my message the +15 bonus might look over-powerful, but what do you think of the original +88 in the ICE version (about a +18 in the d20 system). Anyway, my point of view is the following one: "Aeglos" is not supposed to be used by any player, so no problem :-D Besides, I consider ME a campaign with a very high magical tecnology. Adventurers could get with some effort some mithril enchanted blades (probably a +4 bonus), but some very high level personalities could wield more ancient and hence more powerful weapons made with galvorn alloys or even an improved enchantment of mithril alloys. It is sure that Sauron himself has weapons of more than +5 enchantment bonus (at least, I consider it), as well as the Witch King, Fëanor, Celebrimbor, Fingolfin, Morgoth, the Balrogs,etc. A world so poor in creatures (compared to other D&D campaigns must have a poweful magic and I think that we all believe that magic in ME is woundrous,i.e. a "Palantir" is not a simple crystal ball)

Just my opinion, but I would stick with the D&D standard of nothing being over +5; any pluses above that, I would convert over to other abilities the weapon could have, as detailed in the DMG. You'll still wind up with a really powerful weapon.

Oh, and could we switch the discussion over to this thread?

http://www.enworld.org/messageboards/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5962

Orcs & Uruk Hai

Just saw the site, looks really neat! One thing I noticed under races, though: Wouldn't it make sense to remove the Light Sensitivity quality from the Uruk-Hai(Orcs) and put it on the normal Orcs (Goblins)? It seems that it would reflect one of the reasons the Uruk Hai were created in the first place. Just a thought. The conversion looks EXTREMELY COOL so far!