LotR RPG vs. 3e

[buzz]

I was wondering what people here, particularly the folks who run the Middle Earth d20 site, though about the new LotR rpg. I've read reviews and browsed through it many time in my FLGS, but it just looks so much like d20 (and like the modification made to d20 on the MEd20 site), that I can't really see what the point is of getting it. Still, the reviews I've read are all fairly glowing, and claim that it's somehow vastly different from 3e (something I'm just not seeing).

I've also heard some comments that the system as a whole is a little "half-baked," i.e., could have used maybe six months more playtesting (if it got any at all).

If there was already a thread about this, a) I'm sorry, 2) could you point me to it.

 

[MEG Hal]

Got it at GenCon and only got to skim through, we are real busy BUT the magic system is the biggest change when I went through it. Maybe look at the Decipher boards and see what they say, Matt F is a writer on it and I like his work for what its worth.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

I haven't gotten it yet. I have leafed through a copy at a store, and I've seen the samples Decipher put on its website. It actually looks intriguing. The magic system in particular, what I've seen and heard of it, seems quite interesting. Beyond that, I can't say much of anything else until I get the actual book.

 

[mearls]

I've played and done design work on both games. The biggest difference is that ME uses 2d6 v. D&D's d20 to resolve actions. This may seem like a minor difference, but in reality it makes for a much different feel.

With a d20, there's an equal chance of rolling a 1 as there is a 20. If I have a total modifier of +6 versus your total modifier of +3, I only have a slight advantage in an opposed skill check.

With 2d6, the extreme die results (2 and 12) are much, much rarer. Most of the time, you roll a 6, 7, or 8. Thus, a difference of even +1 or +2 between my modifier and your modifier makes a big difference on opposed skill checks.

What this means is that characters who are better at one thing than others are usually much, much better at their specialties than characters who specialize in other areas.

So, while the system is organized in a similar manner, the actual applications of the rules are a fair bit different.

The other key point is the ME's magic system is closely tailored to Midde-earth and has a much different feel than D&D. In ME, a PC wizard is much more likely to be useful for his ability to inspire, lead, and rally others than for his magic. 90% of the time, a wizard can use perhaps one spell per encounter, and even though only 1 or 2 spells are directly useful for harming others.

The rules for fear and inspiration help give the game a distinctly ME feel, while starting characters are generally start heroic. Both of these factors help echo the feel of the novels.

 

[MEG Hal]

OK, I really like Mike Mearls work also...I forgot he was a part of that team also. I read real well, I am looking forward to more work from this team.

 

[JeffB]

Personally I like the LoTR system better than D20. It's a fair amount less "rules intense" which is a big plus for me. ME has always been my fave fantasy setting as well..so that's another plus.

It also put's an emphasis on story, and roleplaying (without being a totally narrative "storytelling" game..not that there is anything wrong with that..just saying it a nice middle ground). The non-physical attributes for heroes are more important than in D&D (though 3E is a big step up form it's predecessor's in that regard)...less flashy but funt to play roles like the craftsman and loremaster order are starting "classes"....

The game is more Epic..and not in the way that 3E handles Epic..I mean Epic stories, plots, and characters, not Epic powers and things to get (nothing wrong with that..just explaining the difference). Not that you cannot do that in D&D either..but LOtR promotes this type of play,and is less "power oriented" in a general sense.

Of couse the Magic system is totally different...it's not flashy, but it's powerful...Very cool...

Mechanics are simple like D20....but there are less underlying rules in most situations than D20.

The book does have some eratta and typos..but so far it doesn't seem nearly as bad as the 3E books were..there is one section where a paragraph looks chopped off because they forgot to change the text color against the background picture...

It's not perfect, but overall I'd give it an 8.5 , maybe even a 9 out of 10. If you like gaming in ME in my opinion it's a no brainer..get the book.....and the systems should be easy enough to convert to D20 if you would go that route.

 

[Bagpuss]

I generally prefer bell curves to straight line probablility I think I will have to check LotR out.

 

[Darkness]

I generally prefer bell curves to straight line probablility I think I will have to check LotR out.

Agreed (which is why I like GURPS so much).

BTW, to anyone who has/knows the ME RPG: Are any of the major characters (whether heroes or antagonists) statted in the book?

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Saruman
The Nazgul
Moria Balrog
Barrow Wights
Worntongue (if I am remembering right)

Are all stated. Don't ever expect to see stats for Sauron. The book straight out says no matter who you are if you ever encounter him directly then you are dead.

Agreed (which is why I like GURPS so much).

BTW, to anyone who has/knows the ME RPG: Are any of the major characters (whether heroes or antagonists) statted in the book?

 

[Razuur]

Both are awesome.

Roughly, you coould convert the material by multiplying any LOTR number by 1.5 to get a D20 value. To convert from D20 to LOTR multiply by 2/3.

DnD is more tactical and scientific and LOTR is more elegant and artistic, IMO.

DnD core uses minatures (which I don't like and don't use) while LOTR is more cinematic.

My homebrew hopefully takes the best from both.

Razuur