A Brief History of Tolkien RPGs

[daddystabz]

I just saw all this and read it all just now. I am starting to play in an online MERP 2e campaign and I am an AVID Tolkien fan, as well as a D&D fan. I have heard of Legends of Middle Earth but have no experience with it.

What do you all think of Legends of Middle Earth, especially in comparison to MERP, Decipher (CODA) LotR, and LotR Unisystem?

 

[jonesy]

Middle Earth suffers from the same problem of all literary fantasy settings (Wheel of Time and Dragonlance included)- there just isn't enough room for the PC's to do anything very interesting- they're completely overshadowed by the plot of the main stories.

You haven't played Dragonlance recently then? The old modules are exactly that. Old. The latest ones by Sovereign Press are fantastic.

The 'main stories' only overshadow the characters if the DM allows them to. And I really don't understand why anyone would expect it to play like that. I don't start a campaign with a fixed idea of how everything is going to go regardless of what the players do.

 

[Aus_Snow]

The One Ring (a box set RPG from Cubicle 7) will be coming out... some time.

If I knew when, I'd be all over it already. As in, pre-ordering.

Haven't tried LoME, but OMG am I keen to see how this puppy turns out.

 

[daddystabz]

I am aware of Cubicle 7's efforts with the One Ring. I got messed over in play testing it with some of my oldest players. However, I read recently an article translated from its original Italian that made me VERY worried that this new Tolkien RPG might have some inherent issues.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I contend there's been a Middle Earth roleplaying game in continuous publication since 1974. It's called D&D. And while it may not have been purpose-designed to strictly play in Middle Earth as Tolkien envisioned it, it is close enough that it is the reason subsequent ME RPGs were not successful. Why play a poor, dedicated one-off when you can use a widely known and flexible game system?

 

[Aus_Snow]

I am aware of Cubicle 7's efforts with the One Ring. I got messed over in play testing it with some of my oldest players. However, I read recently an article translated from its original Italian that made me VERY worried that this new Tolkien RPG might have some inherent issues.

Hm. :/

Is there any more that you can say, and if so, wozzit?

I contend there's been a Middle Earth roleplaying game in continuous publication since 1974. It's called D&D. And while it may not have been purpose-designed to strictly play in Middle Earth as Tolkien envisioned it, it is close enough that it is the reason subsequent ME RPGs were not successful. Why play a poor, dedicated one-off when you can use a widely known and flexible game system?

Um, right. D&D is about as suitable for playing Tolkien as it is for playing Conan.

IOW, not at all. There are some truly flexible systems out there. D&D is not one of them. At least, not to anywhere near the same extent.

D&D is very much its own type of fantasy. No other is like it, and it is like no other. Embracing that, instead of denying it or being unhappy about it, is - I believe - the key to actually enjoying D&D.

 

[daddystabz]

I'm in agreement with Aus_Snow about D&D's inappropriateness for Middle Earth Role-playing.

This thread over at RPG.net links to the article and people describe what it says inside. What do you think based on this info?

"Gentleman of the Rings" - RPGnet Forums

 

[daddystabz]

I just read this over at Cubicle 7's forum in regard to the development stage of The One Ring RPG and I thought you all would be interested to see it here as well:

The Lord of the Rings RPG is still being wrapped up, and the rest of the art commissioned and submitted to us, etc, so it’s development process is coming close to completion and then the actual final editing and layout commences. We’re currently looking at an August 2011 release to tie-ion with Gen Con over in Indianapolis.

 

[Aus_Snow]

This thread over at RPG.net links to the article and people describe what it says inside. What do you think based on this info?

I've not read that thread in its entirety just yet, but here are my feelings about some of the points translated on the first page there (unsure how accurately...) -

* Sophisticated Games liked Francesco Nepitello's work on the LotR boardgame, so they hired him to do a RPG, too, once the licence was free. Cubicle 7 will be publishing, obviously. Not good.

* The physical product MIGHT look something like Warhammer 3. Not good.

* For "doing one thing but one thing well" he cites D&D4 and WHFRP3 as examples. Not good.

* So what is it about? Historical Reconstruction. They went back to the source and researched Tolkien's texts extensively. The game tries to capture his specific stories, themes and characteristics. Good.

* This means the game won't include stuff like long histories of the world, maps of the whole Middle Earth or rules to play High Elves. It is their choice not to go the old way of making a book that has rules on how to "create any character or do anything". The focus is on the human themes of that period in Tolkien's history. Not good.

* These periods will go from after The Hobbit (base book) up to the "finale" at Mt. Doom. (so apparently no Silmarilion material) Not good.

* The game doesn't assume that Frodo or any of the other characters exist. It will be up to the players to tell the story. Maybe the PCs will take on the task of carrying the ring, maybe they won't. Good.

* What's important is the spirit, style and themes of Tolkien's stories. Good.

* All of the game's rules serve this purpose. Good.

* Characters are described by three base stats, taken from Gandalf's speech to Frodo about the trials ahead of him. Not good.

* Game time is hence divided into "seasons". After each adventure comes a period of rest. This will allow a character to develop both heroic traits and family and friendly ties. Not good.

* There will be a class/career system intended to respect Tolkien's tropes. (no point-buy jacks of all trades that don't fit in the world) Good.

* The design team paid a lot of attention to what people actually do at the table and influence player behaviour through game mechanics Good.

* So the point is social dynamics at the table, and not preoccupation with the physics of the world and questions whether a sword does +1 or +2 damage. Not good.

* Pendragon is cited as an influence. Good.


The other points were either vague, ambiguous, irrelevant (to me), or such that I have no definite feelings about them, at this stage.

Really could with more detail, of course, but thanks for linking that. I'll see if the rest of the thread yields anything of value.

 

[daddystabz]

It looks we are seeing it basically the same way so far. I agree with most of your opinions there with just a few caveats. I am a bit worried it will not be the game for me. It seems WAY too limited in scope and too tied to boardgames for my tastes. No option for high elves? Seriously?