D&D 4E 4e Design and JRR Tolkien

[tenkar]

Does anyone believe they were epic in terms of D&D levels? Aragorn usually gets pegged around 6th level.

Well, Gandalf is a servant of a godlike being... he is more then man and his power is more then just that of a wizard. As for Aragorn if any of the party is highly skilled besides Gandalf it would be him.

In any case, my point is that Epic levels do not make "Epic" adventures

 

[Shroomy]

I'm getting slightly more of a S&S vibe from 4e than high fantasy, but you should probably be able to do both.

 

[I'm A Banana]

....so we're saying 4e is bad?

....because it might serve kids who like big swords and shieldsurfing elves?

....over "classic" Tolkienesque heroes like dagger-wielding hairy-footed bi-curious sneak-theives?

....even though D&D is "supposed to" serve Tolkeinesque heroes over more modernly concieved ones?

...and that 4e, because it embraces modern fantasy heroics, is ignoring what people want?

....as demonstrated purely by the income of the LotR movies, which specifically downplayed a lot of Tolkein's more boring secions (or at least padded them with pretty scenery)?

I'm chalkin' this one up to "I don't understand kids these days with their rock and roll music," and saying that, after 8 years of getting this stuff for 3e's behavior, I'd hope that the grognards for the next edition would at least play a new tune. And as for the humor ...

 

[Banshee16]

I don't think I was able to finish reading the damn thing myself. Shame. Great source material with about the same taste as the paper it was printed on.

And WotC's D&D rulebooks are more flavourful? In most cases, the 3E rulebooks were the most boring, dry books out of any of the editions of D&D, IMO. I've heard other people also mention that they had trouble staying awake reading some of them....and I tend to agree.

Decipher's game had problems, but I just never felt that boring rulebooks were one of those problems..

Banshee

 

[Doug McCrae]

An analysis of GVDammerung's argument:

1) Lord of the Rings is old and popular.
2) This proves that all old fantasy is popular.
3) Therefore if D&D remains old it will be popular.

I believe statement 2 is the problem here.

 

[LEHaskell]

Ahhh, so, you think 4e will be more a return to 1e? But without the Lankmahr and Vancian references. Got it!

 

[mhacdebhandia]

Lord of the Rings (The three films taken together) is the most popular and critically acclaimed fantasy film of all time without exception. It is what? A few years old?

Yet, here we have 4e presenting the classic fantasy game in a less than classic fashion, either in the sense of the traditions of the game itself and in the sense of the style of the game.

But that's good, because Tolkien sucks.

 

[Reaper Steve]

And Soylent Green is people!

 

[Exen Trik]

Is this a thread about how much 4e is influenced by Tolkien or a thread about how 4e is not very influenced by Tolkien???

Yes.

 

[GAAAHHH]

Lord of the Rings is popular but other D&D fantasy isn't. I don't see a resurgence of interest in REH, Leiber or Vance at the moment.

The other huge fantasy success story right now is Harry Potter. So by your logic D&D should try to emulate that while excising Conan, Fafhrd and Cugel the Clever. Hey, no barbarians in the PHB, maybe that's what they are doing.

Maybe if Cugel exercised more....