Presentation vs design... vs philosophy

pemerton

Legend
Have you read the Adventures in Middle Earth for 5e? I love it; it's the only way I'll play or DM 5e again. I agree completely that 5e as is is not at all appropriate for Middle Earth (way, WAY too much magic, unless you're doing the Silmarillion or something), but Cubicle 7 has done, IMO, a great job at bringing the setting to life under a familiar game system. If you haven't checked it out, I really recommend it. :)
I've heard rumours.

I have The One RIng plus various supplements (I must have got a PDF special deal at some stage), but can't really imagine playing it. It just seems too fiddly. As I posted, I'm using Cortex+ Heroic at the moment for my LotR needs!
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
I would love to play Dr Strange in a MHRP game, but I don't know that I'll ever have that opportunity.
Take the 4e sleep spell make one you resist with each of the Defenses. They are three different binding spells Crimson Bands of Cytorak is Fortitude, I think it was Ribbons of Raggador for the Reflexes Teehee.
 
Last edited:

Charlaquin

Goblin Queen
It's definitely more freeform in its non-combat resolution, but the use of Icon Relationship Dice in this are really allow the game to shine and give player agency in a way I haven't seen in any other system. Having said that, I am definitely working on a skill challenge adjacent system to use in it.

Have you read the Adventures in Middle Earth for 5e? I love it; it's the only way I'll play or DM 5e again. I agree completely that 5e as is is not at all appropriate for Middle Earth (way, WAY too much magic, unless you're doing the Silmarillion or something), but Cubicle 7 has done, IMO, a great job at bringing the setting to life under a familiar game system. If you haven't checked it out, I really recommend it. :)
It’s an excellent supplement for playing in Middke Earth using 5e’s rules, though I think there are some places where it clashes with 5e’s design aesthetics - for example, some of the AiME classes have features that give the player a bit of narrative control, where 5e usually keeps narrative control firmly in the DM’s hands. I have no problem with those sorts of abilities, but they do stick out a bit in a 5e framework. That’s why I think One Ring is ultimately the better system to use for games set in Middle Earth, though AiME is still great to have for DMs who want to run a Middle Earth game but might have a hard time convincing their players to switch systems from D&D.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
Are there any really iconic stories or characters that represent spellcasters that you might want to emulate, in the same vein as those stories you both talk about represent martial characters?
(Not counting actual D&D-based novels.)
That's tough because magic in most stories tends to be so different from D&D magic. On the other hand my first wizard was named after a Piers Anthony character the wizard Trent. My version wasn't quite as cutthroat (he had no desire to rule) but he was definitely neutral out for himself kind of guy.
 

Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
If I can branch into Myth and Legend and find D&D class wizardry I would like to play the Ancient Celts.The Tuatha de Danaan era with Lugh Lamfada and Nuada Silverhand and company had stories that features Healers of grand scale and Sorceror/Druas which are of D&D Caliber their hero class definitely have both the at-wills and rituals down.
 

Arilyn

Hero
I've heard rumours.

I have The One RIng plus various supplements (I must have got a PDF special deal at some stage), but can't really imagine playing it. It just seems too fiddly. As I posted, I'm using Cortex+ Heroic at the moment for my LotR needs!
One Ring plays pretty smooth. But I'm loving your Cortex version too!
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I would actually posit that we have a much more straight-laced, hidebound community today than we did back then. I mean, we actually see posts today where people are all like, "I don't want science fiction in my fantasy!" That's ... odd to me. D&D has always been deeply, deeply weird and drew from a multitude of sources.
As one of those people, D&D drawing from a multitude of sources doesn't change things for me. I enjoy a wide variety of fantasy sources, just as I enjoy a wide variety sci-fi sources. I just don't as a general rule want the two to mix. I play fantasy games to experience fantasy, and sci-fi games to experience sci-fi. Finding one mixed with the other throws me off and isn't what I want in a game. The only exception to that is Star Wars which is blended science fiction and fantasy.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
No, it means the initiative rules are completely borked in the name of efficiency.

Each shurikin should ideally get its own initiative. Just like each attack in a multi-attack sequence should get its own initiative.
Why? They aren't being thrown sequentially. They are literally being thrown three at a time. It's like throwing a handful of rocks. You aren't going to roll initiative for each rock.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Why? They aren't being thrown sequentially. They are literally being thrown three at a time. It's like throwing a handful of rocks. You aren't going to roll initiative for each rock.
If they're all being thrown at the same target I can get behind this; but if they're going for different targets (particularly if those targets aren't standing close together) throwing them three at a time doesn't sound very productive. :)

That, and the issue of the multiple melee attacks or sling/bow/xbow shots still remains.
 

Cap'n Kobold

Adventurer
Just wizards?.... the Earthsea Trilogy has nice magic.
Though I am thinking that is still an Ars Magica or the Mage the Ascension
That's tough because magic in most stories tends to be so different from D&D magic. On the other hand my first wizard was named after a Piers Anthony character the wizard Trent. My version wasn't quite as cutthroat (he had no desire to rule) but he was definitely neutral out for himself kind of guy.
It is a bit of an issue with standard D&D that heroes like the Grey Mouser, pretty much all the protagonists of Lord of the Rings and even Conan are very mundane, low-tier heroes in D&D terms.
When you think of them in a D&D party, matched up in capability with D&D spellcasters, they tend to fall rather short.
 

Oofta

Title? I don't need no stinkin' title.
It is a bit of an issue with standard D&D that heroes like the Grey Mouser, pretty much all the protagonists of Lord of the Rings and even Conan are very mundane, low-tier heroes in D&D terms.
When you think of them in a D&D party, matched up in capability with D&D spellcasters, they tend to fall rather short.
True, but I enjoy playing those "very mundane" PCs now and then. Just because they can't do magic doesn't make them less fun to play for me.
 
I have no idea how many people will get this reference (I grew up in my early years, 9-13, as a skater).

I wonder if there is an aspect of Rodney Mullen vs Mark Gonzales in Street Skating pioneering. During my youth, Rodney Mullen (an absolute freak of a talent...really without comparison) was roundly decried as "not a Street Skater" while Mark Gonzales was the "god of Street Skating". This was because of a few things:

1) Rodney was an incredibly technical skater who didn't embrace the overarching counter-culture zeitgeist of skating (not because he was antagonistic to it, but because he was an introverted loner because of several reasons related to his early years). He also used a smaller board which was associated with "Freestyle" skating (later he used a normal sized board and easily pulled off the savant level innovation he did on the Freestyle board...and actually revolutionized the actual skateboard itself). Because of these things, the Street Skating community not only didn't accept him, they roundly rejected him (and tried to diminish his skill). I was right in the middle of this. I remember it vividly.

Thankfully, this is no longer the case, as Rodney Mullen is right where he should be now; the Mount Rushmore of Skating.

2) Mark Gonazles was a pioneer of Street Skating in all of the classical ways. He was a entrenched in the counterculture and his skating was pretty much "all art" and freakishly creative and skillful. He also used the standard sized board in his Street Skating. Because of these three things; culture, style, mechanics, he was roundly loved and praised as the God of Street Skating for that period (while Rodney was roundly decried). He's still on the Mount Rushmore of Skating (where he belongs).


Seems like an interesting analogue with a fair amount of overlap.
 
It is a bit of an issue with standard D&D that heroes like the Grey Mouser, pretty much all the protagonists of Lord of the Rings and even Conan are very mundane, low-tier heroes in D&D terms.
When you think of them in a D&D party, matched up in capability with D&D spellcasters, they tend to fall rather short.
The Grey Mouser would be what? About 5th or 6th Level? I don't see any reason to put him higher. That puts him at about the scale of a wizard with one fireball - that doesn't seem too out of sync to me.

Conan would be higher probably more around 8 or 9 - he's getting into superhuman territory. But he still has trouble with sorcery in the books but of course he gets through a lot because he has very good saving throws so probably feels workable in AD&D, just less so from 3E on.

I never really knowwhat to make of the criticism that D&D magic is not like magic in fantasy novels. Magic in fantasy novels is generally not like magic in fantasy novels (as in they're in no way consistent with each other). It has to stab at something. (And actually with traditional D&D you can do an awful lot just by curating the spell lists.).
 
Last edited:

lowkey13

I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.
The Grey Mouser would be what? About 5th or 6th Level? I don't see any reason to put him higher. That puts him at about the scale of a wizard with one fireball - that doesn't seem too out of sync to me.
In the original Deities and Demigods, he was listed as:
F: 11
MU: 3
Th: 15

S: 16
I: 18
W; 14
D: 19
C: 17
CH: 18

So, I think that you'd put him a touch higher on the 5e scale. Then again, it's all pretty arbitrary.


EDIT- Which is to say, no matter what edition you use, mapping literary fantasy characters to D&D has always been an inexact science at best. And pulling stuff out of your posterior at worse.
 

Advertisement

Top