I HAVE IT!! AT LAST, IT IS MINE!!! MINE, I TELL YOU!! MIIIIIINE!!! (LotR)

[Apok]

Regarding the male dwarves only; oops. Must not have seen that part, but does it really matter? If you want female dwarves in the game, just allow them. As far as corruption checks go, I agree that forcing a character like that is rather bad form but the nice thing is you don't have to DM (or Narrate, to use LotR's terminology) that way. If a player gets offered something he really really wants that might call for a corruption check, let him decide for himself. That's one of the wonderful things about the game is that you, as El Supremo, get to decide which rules stay and which ones go. This isn't World of Synnibar and the player's can't overrule you if you don't follow the book 100%.

I think the reason they put that in there to enforce the concept of "Character based" v "Metagame" thinking. As a DM, I assume that no player wil ever make an in-game decision that will be bad for his character if he knows what the outcome is likely to be. The character's personality, goals and desires rarely enter into the decision making it a Metagame based decision. Those rules are put in place to curttail this kind of behavior. Is it the best way to deal with it? I don't think so, but it's an easy rule to remove, which is good. I reserve Corruption Checks for when the player willingly does something stupid.

 

[Apok]

Just another random thought...

Given the fact that the power of speech and pursuasion is such a major thing in the LotR RPG, you could potentially make the shady figure's "persuasive" ability an opposed check or perhaps a Contest of Wills. If the PC looses, then treat the person's suggestion like a charm spell of sorts.

In D&D, we are so used to dealing with magic as a common thing that we neglect the power of certain skills. We DM's let the PC's persuade our NPC's into doing insane stuff all the time; why not turn the tables a bit? Oh, that's right, because the players are always allowed to make the final decisions for their characters no matter how ridiculous or unrealistic that decision may be. Unless you're dealing in Dominate spells, don't expect the PC's to be "sweet talked" into doing anything.

LotR RPG introduces a new paradigm wherein the simple act of cajolery can influence the mind of a PC without the use of magic. Sound radical? Maybe, but I kinda like it. You say your character "would never do such a thing" ? Prove it. You love those numbers on your character sheet so much, gimme a Willpower check, buddy!

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I think I've explained the mechanic well enough. As I said at the outset, most parts of the whole Corruption mechanic I don't have a problem with. It's the bit where moral decisions are taken away from the player that upsets me. Corruption due to exposure to The One Ring is reasonable and captures the spirit of the books quite well. The same with Sorcery. In the latter case, the player has made a moral decision to expose herself to a corrupting influence. The same generally applies to exposure to The One Ring, though there is scope there for "accidental" exposure.

But I don't like the idea of a GM telling a player that "an unsavoury character is offering you a bribe to spy on your friends, and ... [rolls] ... you accept! Take 2 points of Corruption. From now on you will report any plans your group makes to Shifty Badbreath." If the offer is genuinely tempting, the player should be given the choice of accepting or refusing.

I'm sincerely not trying to be argumentative, but I don't think you've described the mechanic quite well enough. Based on what you write here, as it relates to what you wrote above, it isn't clear how likely it is that the character will be forced to do something the player doesn't want him or her to do. What is the Corruption check rolled against? Arer there further checks made everytime the character does something against his/her nature? That is, would the bribed character you use as an example relay details of his party's actions to Shifty Badbreath automatically time after time for an indefinite period, or would he have opportunities to redeem himself, such as everytime he goes to talk to Shifty? Based on the fact that you mention that characters can reduce their Corruption, I'd guess the latter, which would make it sem more reasonable to me. But I could have - most likely did - guess wrong.

 

[mirzabah]

I'm sincerely not trying to be argumentative

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that you were. For the record, neither was I

but I don't think you've described the mechanic quite well enough. Based on what you write here, as it relates to what you wrote above, it isn't clear how likely it is that the character will be forced to do something the player doesn't want him or her to do. What is the Corruption check rolled against? Arer there further checks made everytime the character does something against his/her nature? That is, would the bribed character you use as an example relay details of his party's actions to Shifty Badbreath automatically time after time for an indefinite period, or would he have opportunities to redeem himself, such as everytime he goes to talk to Shifty? Based on the fact that you mention that characters can reduce their Corruption, I'd guess the latter, which would make it sem more reasonable to me.

It's a Willpower check against a "Target Number" (TN - the CODA nomenclature for DC). The TN for a Mild temptation is in the range 5-8; 9-14 for a Strong temptation, and 15-20 for a Very Strong temptation.

On further examination of the rules, it isn't quite so bad as it seemed at first. Basically it all depends on how badly you roll - LotR has degrees of success and failure. If you fail slightly, you take a point of Corruption, but resist the temptation. Likewise if you fail moderately, except you take 2 points. If you fail disastrously, you take 3 points and succumb. This means that, yes, you would take the money and spy on your buddies, though the GM may allow additional Willpower checks at her discretion to "throw off the corrupting influence". Corruption points are not taken off, but service is returned to normal.

I still don't like it. For one thing:

... a character with Corruption suffers a test result penalty - equal to his Corruption points - to the use of all social skills [except Intimidate] ...

(my emphasis)

That's a pretty hefty tax just because somebody made you an offer you could - and did - refuse, but you just happened to fluff the roll. You could argue that the chances of it happening are fairly slim, but I say that the chance shouldn't be there - it's completely unnecessary and just doesn't seem fair.

It also contradicts the books. Two of the most corrupt characters in LotR - Saruman and Wormtongue - are also two of the most charming. Yet, according to Decipher, they should have serious penalties on their social skills. But then, Corruption is a PC thing - NPCs don't have it. I don't like that kind of thinking either *sigh*.

Note also that there is a lopsided-ness to Corruption checks that shows up in other areas of the CODA system. If you fail really badly, you do the bad and gain a lot of Corruption, but if you fail only slightly you just gain 1 Corruption point. On the other hand, the best that can happen is nothing; there's no difference between just barely succeeding and a rip-roaring, feast-upon-the-fatted-calf success - you certainly don't lose any Corruption points or anything symmetrical like that.

 

[Klaus]

Some quick notes on the LotR RPG:

1 - Gorgeous book! Far more desirable than the LotR Visual Companion!

2 - Whenever you get 1000 XP, you get one "Advancement", which is composed of 5 "Advancement Picks". You can spend these picks in things like: +1 to an Order (class) or Race skill (these cost 1 pick each); +1 to a Favored Reaction ("good save") (2 picks); New Order Ability (like a Feat, like Walk Without Trace for a Ranger) (3 picks); +1 to Favored Attribute (like Strength for a Warrior) (4 picks); New Order ("multiclassing") (5 picks). So if your hobbit wants to multiclass from Rogue to Warrior, you spend all five picks to become a warrior (you don't get anything else at the moment), and the next time he gets an Advancement, he can spend the picks as a Warrior (but no longer as a Rogue).

3 - Armor absorbs damage. Leather absorbs 2, chainmail absorbs 5 and Mithril absobs 12 (!!!).

4 - Learning Spells: A member of one of the spellcasting classes (Loremaster, like Celeborn; Magician, like a "conjuror of cheap tricks"; or wizard, like Big G) can spend picks (see "Advancement" above) to learns the Spellcasting order ability (3 picks). Each time the character chooses this ability (which must be the first for Magicians and Wizards), he gets either 2 spell picks (for Loremasters) or 5 spell picks (for the other two classes). The character uses those spell picks to choose spells. For example: Opening-Spell ("Knock") costs 1 spell pick, while Flame of Anor costs 2 picks. Some spells allow you to increase its power by spending more picks in it. This limits the number of spells a character knows.

5 - Casting: A character can cast a spell as many times as desired, provided he can speak, gesture and withsatand weariness (like a Fort save against a DC of, say 14+ spell level, or become fatigued, and so forth). To avoid too much Weariness, the book suggests that spellcasters exercise restraint. Even Gandalf, the most powerful spellcaster in the late Third Age, carried around a sword.

6 - The Lord of the Nazgul has the equivalent of 52 Advancements (about level 20 in D&D terms!). Saruman has 41 advancements (he'd be about 16th level, but an outsider).

7 - The book offers several advice to differ the LotR game from other "fantasy RPGs": Don't hurt the characters (!!!), to keep them from wearing heavy armor: they say that apart from Frodo and Boromir, no other member of the Fellowship got injured in the trilogy. Spellcasters shouldn't cast many spells: let the spells be a support, don't have them blast enemies with Lightning left and right. Avoid extensive planning (like when PCs plan the invasion of a dungeon, y'know).

 

[Wolfspider]

he can spend the picks as a Warrior (but no longer as a Rogue).

What? Once a character as multiclassed, there is no going back to the previous "order"? Please clarify, 'cause this sounds rather...well, stupid.

 

[Apok]

Actually, the multiclassing situation is a little more complicated then that...

By spending 5 Advancement picks one can gain membership in another Order, possibly an Elite Order if he meets the prereqs. If you have multiple orders, you must choose any Two of these orders from which to draw your Order Skills from. Okay, this gets really hard to explain so let me do an example...

Joe the Schmuck belongs to four Orders; Warrior, Magician, Minstrel and Wizard. It only costs him 1 Advancement Pick to increase an Order Skill by 1 point (otherwise it's 2), but which Order does he draw those skills from? The answer; any Two which he must choose and then that choice is set in stone unless you attain another Order OR spend 5 Advancement picks to switch to a different Primary Order. This goes for Order Abilities as well.

So, Joe the Schmuck decides that he's going to choose Warrior and Wizard as his primary Orders. Because of this, he may advance any Warrior or Wizard skill at the cheaper rate (1 pick per rank) and he may select Order Abilities from Warrior and Wizard with Advancement Picks as well. If Joe wanted to grab an Ability from Minstrel (we'll say Voice of Power), he would have to first spend 5 Advancement Picks to switch one of his Primary Orders back to Minstrel, and then wait another advancement to buy the Ability.

So, in short, you can actively belong to only Two Orders at any given time, which means you get their Order Skills at 1 point cost and you may pick from their Abilities.

Edit; Typos, damn you!

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

Two quick comments before I run here...

I haven't been able to find the table for recovering from weariness. Is it missing?

While we're on the subject of weariness...

I like the feel of the magic system as presented--weariness check, with the roll becoming more difficult the more spells you attempt to cast in a short period--and I think giving a BONUS of +5 to weariness checks for a "light burden" would be appropriate (as opposed to the modifier being the same as for an average burden). This would also provide a neat meta-game explaination for why spellcasters tend not to wear armour (Or perhaps the recovery rules, whatever they might be, already do this).

 

[Apok]

The recovery of Weariness is covered on pages 248-250.

I also like the idea of a Bonus for being lightly burdened, also. Cool suggestion, Thorvald.

 

[fuindordm]

Really an excellent book--I picked it up last week and was quite impressed. I do have some concerns with it, however. Nothing crippling, these are all things which are easy to fix for any GM worth their salt. I love the spells, the character creation process, the fact that they threw balance out the window (elves are just *better*!), the social skills and the importance of bearing, the orders (I want to play a dwarven craftsman/loremaster!), and almost everything else. The comments below are therefore not to be taken as whining or mudslinging, but a starting point for discussion.

2 - Whenever you get 1000 XP, you get one "Advancement", which is composed of 5 "Advancement Picks". You can spend these picks in things like: +1 to an Order (class) or Race skill (these cost 1 pick each); +1 to a Favored Reaction ("good save") (2 picks); New Order Ability (like a Feat, like Walk Without Trace for a Ranger) (3 picks); +1 to Favored Attribute (like Strength for a Warrior) (4 picks); New Order ("multiclassing") (5 picks).

Starting skills can have up to +6 (on 2d6) ranks, and the rules imply that +12 is the maximum. Each order has about half-a-dozen abilities that can be picked, although some can be picked multiple times. I have the impression that after 10 or so advancements, the players will be casting about for somewhere to go; their key skills and order abilities will be maxed out. You can spend picks on improving your stats as well, but by this time you'll have pretty much acheived your primary character concept I think. Maybe I'm wrong, but my impression is that it would be difficult to sustain a long (say, 2+ years) campaign in LotR.

I know you can always pick up another order, but then all the players start to converge. I don't think it's very LotR-like for Aragorn to start learning magic from Gandalf just because he's mastered the art of being a ranger!

4 - Learning Spells: A member of one of the spellcasting classes (Loremaster, like Celeborn; Magician, like a "conjuror of cheap tricks"; or wizard, like Big G) can spend picks (see "Advancement" above) to learns the Spellcasting order ability (3 picks). Each time the character chooses this ability (which must be the first for Magicians and Wizards), he gets either 2 spell picks (for Loremasters) or 5 spell picks (for the other two classes).

This is very good, but some of the spells beg for more limitations or prerequisites. The only spell that really stands out as a black sheep to me is the Lightning spell, which does a huge amount of damage and has no prerequisites whatsoever. Sure, it's tiring, but even a magician with a few advancements could cast it pretty frequently. The only literary source I can see for this spell is from the Hobbit "I killed a goblin or two with a flash..." (Gandalf to Beorn), and it seems overpowered for the genre.

5 - Casting: A character can cast a spell as many times as desired, provided he can speak, gesture and withsatand weariness (like a Fort save against a DC of, say 14+ spell level, or become fatigued, and so forth). To avoid too much Weariness, the book suggests that spellcasters exercise restraint. Even Gandalf, the most powerful spellcaster in the late Third Age, carried around a sword.

In the books, the main reason Gandalf didn't use magic a lot was because he didn't want to reveal his presence--or so he claimed. Gandalf the White was clearly more powerful and used it when called for, but was such an important figure that he had more pressing duties relating to politics and leadership. I agree with the authors that it's not very genre-like to have the spellcasters throwing around a lot of spells, but I wish they'd supported this tendency with more rules. The Sense Power spell, for example, has a very short range--if they made it a much longer range (miles instead of feet, for example), and everyone knew that the powerful magicians of middle-earth would probably detect your spellcasting, that might be a good way of doing it.

7 - The book offers several advice to differ the LotR game from other "fantasy RPGs": Don't hurt the characters (!!!), to keep them from wearing heavy armor: they say that apart from Frodo and Boromir, no other member of the Fellowship got injured in the trilogy. Spellcasters shouldn't cast many spells: let the spells be a support, don't have them blast enemies with Lightning left and right. Avoid extensive planning (like when PCs plan the invasion of a dungeon, y'know).

While it's true that DMs can really set the tone of a campaign, this advice didn't ring true. The world of Middle-Earth is a dangerous place, and simply telling spellcasters not to use their spells too often because it's out of genre, or the fighters not to wear armour because Aragorn didn't, just feels wrong to me. The illusion of threat is not enough, and pulling all your punches to maintain the atmosphere isn't a good solution.

Finally, I would have liked to see some of the Fellowship statted as well as their enemies.

--Ben