D&D 4E 4e Design and JRR Tolkien

[Puggins]

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. The logic I've heard for this is that the 4e approach is intended to feature the "new fantasy" (read anime and vieo games etc.) that appeals to today's potential gamers. And Tolkien (or arguably other classics) do not? At least to judge by the success of the Lord of the Rings movie franchise, "classic" fantasy has a very real and substantial appeal that is very current. 4e seems to intentionally ignore this in large measure.

With all due respect, no edition of D&D ever printed represents Tolkienesque fantasy.

Sure, there are surface similarities (hobbits, rangers, Balors), but once you get to the hearts of each D&D system, everything goes out the window. Mortal wizards? Priests that gain powers from Gods? Planar Travel? Sorry, Tolkien has left the building.

"Ah, but wait, It's more the spirit of Tokien," you're going to say. Rubbish. Any spirit of Tokien you derive from the older editions is injected by you, the player/DM. The rules may have been inspired by Tolkien's epic (or those of Howard, Lieber, etc.), but they are an original creation, bearing little- if any- resemblance to any fantastic world put to paper.

Will 4e be closer to resembling Tolkien? Probably not, btu it probably won't resemble Anime either. No one knows at this point anyway.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

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.

Well, on the other hand, it is really impossible in 3.5 to model Fafhrd (2nd level bard, 6th level rogue, 12th level fighter?) or the Grey Mouser (3rd level wizard, 10th level rogue, 7th level duelist?)...

The whole "my character is a warlord, but has a significant sprinkling of wizard" idea sounds much better (if the manage to pull it off)

Oh, and lets not forget Conan, "a thief, a reaver, a slayer" according to Howard... Does that mean Rogue/Barbarian/Fighter??

 

[gizmo33]

Also 4e is higher powered - PCs stronger at level one, faster levelling, epic levels included in PHB1. Doesn't that make it closer to the epic action of LotR than previous editions?

"Epic level" DnD is not the same thing as epic IMO. A normal DnD character of medium levels is epic from the perspective of literature. It's hard to judge power levels in literature from a DnD perspective but I don't remember Aragorn laughing and taking quick naps during the fight with the goblins and cave troll in Moria the way a 50th level DnD character would.

In fact, few of the characters given as an example of epic in the DnD rules have powers anything as outrageous as those of DnD. "DnD Epic" is a DnDism, and would otherwise be unrecognizable to people that weren't trying to impress DnD characters to which everyone has become accustomed. People want Aragorn to be 50th level because they think he should be impressive compared to their DnD characters. Not because it makes any sense in comparison to a commoner. IMO DnD does not need "DnD Epic" in order to emulate Epic literature. In fact, I think it makes it harder.

The mentality of "Epic Level DnD" IMO is that it goes to 11.

 

[gizmo33]

Oh, and lets not forget Conan, "a thief, a reaver, a slayer" according to Howard... Does that mean Rogue/Barbarian/Fighter??

Conan seemed to be generally unfamiliar with the finer aspects of thieving in the REH stories I recall. His main claim to being a thief is that he went on "thief adventures" and used his barbarian stealth and climb abilities and good Reflex saves in order to stay alive. Slight of hand, lock picking, diguise, forgery, etc. were not his forte IIRC. I like the idea of multiclassing but I think it can be overdone when trying to simulate literary characters.

 

[Doug McCrae]

"Epic level" DnD is not the same thing as epic IMO.

Yeah, you're right. I was wrong. D&D Epic <> literary epic.

 

[Lord Xtheth]

The only epic level character in the main party in LoTR is Gandalf.... Aragorn is also a possible. The rest of the party was not epic IMHO (in the standard DnD definition). Epic levels do not an "Epic" make.

Are you sure, I only realy recall Gandolf ever casting "light" a 0th level spell... From his staff of the Magi
... wait, then again there MIGHT have been summon monster 3 for the giant eagle (Probly from his staff of the woodlands)

I'm pretty sure hes just a normal guy with a couple staffs

 

[Simplicity]

There's a genuine issue in the fact that 4e seems to be strangely off the path of standard fantasy. D&D 4e seems to be the version where D&D decides to start ignoring the source literature and start eating its own tail. A non-grognard who hears of an elf or a dwarf very likely has some idea of what you're talking about. But an eladrin and a tiefling? Not so much.

As for the original post? Funny only in the irony of the unfunniness.

 

[Green Knight]

The rights to REH's work had been bound up in legalese for a bit, but now that they are clear again, I'd not be too surprised to discover a new Conan film in the works for 2010 or so.

Then this shouldn't come as a surprise to you.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Then this shouldn't come as a surprise to you.

Woot!

And jazzed to hear about the animated Red Nails!

RC

 

[Green Knight]

I'm just waiting for Age of Conan. That game looks like it's gonna kick every variety of ass known to man, and then some!