D&D 5E Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)

[pemerton]

Yep, this is why Frodo was never allowed to travel with the likes of Aragorn and Legolas... oh wait, he did

But if you wanted to adapt the LotR into an RPG, the most natural way would be to give Frodo's player lots of meta-abilities to simulate the "protagonist luck" that Frodo enjoys in the story.

In 4e, for instance, he would be a lazy warlord whose presence inspires Aragorn, Boromir etc onto greater combat heights, and whose hit points are interpreted in an almost completely meta-fashion.

My sense is that 3E doesn't have so many meta-options, but maybe that means it's harder to do LotR in that system.

Of course there's nothing to stop you running a 3E game with a 5th level human paladin/ranger, a 5th level dwarf axe fighter, a 5th level elf archer and a bunch of 1st level halfing commoners (plus an aristocrat for Frodo). But I wouldn't expect that party to play much like LotR - eg the 1st level halflings will almost certainly not survive the fight in Moria. In fact Frodo would have virtually no chance of surviving the stabbing on Weathertop, without his player having any meta-resources to deploy.

 

[ImperatorK]

My thoughts are that I'm not sure the game should force everyone to play Aragorn, Legolas, or Gimli

Well, than don't play a game that is about such characters. *shrug*

 

[Imaro]

A novel has relevance to a game... how?
If anything, Frodo would be a DMPC together with Gandalf.

Do I really need to explain the relevance of the Lord of the Rings books and movies to D&D?? Really... It's influenced and is responsible for numerous things in the game... everything from monsters to races in the game was influenced by and/or taken from LotR, and you don't think it has any relevance?? If there's any fantasy media right now that is most likely to set the expectations people (especially new people) have for fantasy roleplaying it's LotR (and possibly The Hobbit, with it's protagonist Bilbo also being quite deficient in the area of combat prowess compared to those he travels with).

No Frodo is not a DMPC (Gandalf I could see, which is why I don't mention him for comparison)... he's got the most important mission of everyone in the fellowship... unless of course this is a DM who just wants the players to sit back and watch him play the game... then I guess Frodo cold be an NPC... Oh, and what about Pippin and Merry?

 

[Mistwell]

Do I really need to explain the relevance of the Lord of the Rings books and movies to D&D?? Really... It's influenced and is responsible for numerous things in the game... everything from monsters to races in the game was influenced by and/or taken from LotR, and you don't think it has any relevance?? If there's any fantasy media right now that is most likely to set the expectations people (especially new people) have for fantasy roleplaying it's LotR (and possibly The Hobbit, with it's protagonist Bilbo also being quite deficient in the area of combat prowess compared to those he travels with).

No Frodo is not a DMPC (Gandalf I could see, which is why I don't mention him for comparison)... he's got the most important mission of everyone in the fellowship... unless of course this is a DM who just wants the players to sit back and watch him play the game... then I guess Frodo cold be an NPC... Oh, and what about Pippin and Merry?

To compensate for Frodo's lack of combat abilities, the DM started his character with a high level magical armor, magic weapon, an artifact-level magic ring that made him invisible even when attacking (but with a flaw built in), and a follower. And even with all that, he was knocked below 1 hp several times and the DM needed to send an NPC to heal him because the party lacked a cleric.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Yeah but he was there for the "Mines of Moria" adventure... and by ImperatorK's logic, along with the other hobbits, Frodo should have never been allowed to set a single foot in that dungeon with the likes of Aragorn, Gimli, Gandalf and Boromir...

On a more serious note, My thoughts are that I'm not sure the game should force everyone to play Aragorn, Legolas, or Gimli when one of the most well known fantasy characters in the world right now... isn't combat proficient in any meaningful way when compared to the companions listed previously... yet he (and the other hobbits) still adventure, are still entertaining, and make meaningful contributions (though rarely through direct combat prowess). I'd rather have a game that allowed a range of combat prowess as opposed to one that tells me what is and isn't a "valid" choice, even if I have to spend a little time playing and mastering the game in order to determine how to create the character I want...

No one wants you not to be able to play Sam or frodo...but don't tell me zorro or dashing swordman have to suck becuse you want to... Make options for BOTH and spell it out



Try this... Let there be options that say "hey this is not good for peoe worried about survival"

You get your character I get mine, and new ayers get to pick
Without any gotcha

 

[GMforPowergamers]

To compensate for Frodo's lack of combat abilities, the DM started his character with a high level magical armor, magic weapon, an artifact-level magic ring that made him invisible even when attacking (but with a flaw built in), and a follower. And even with all that, he was knocked below 1 hp several times and the DM needed to send an NPC to heal him because the party lacked a cleric.

Yea and he had plot shield

 

[Imaro]

But if you wanted to adapt the LotR into an RPG, the most natural way would be to give Frodo's player lots of meta-abilities to simulate the "protagonist luck" that Frodo enjoys in the story.

Well honestly if I wanted to recreate LotR I would play The One Ring rpg... however that doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to base a character of Frodo or Bilbo in D&D, especially as seeing how popular the current movies are as far as fantasy media goes (Which was my point).

This is the most "natural" way for you... for others the most natural way is to just accept that Frodo isn't good in combat... and the character should reflect that without meta abilities to "fix" something they don't see as wrong... Some may even enjoy the challenge of keeping a character like Frodo or Bilbo alive... without the help of meta abilities...

In 4e, for instance, he would be a lazy warlord whose presence inspires Aragorn, Boromir etc onto greater combat heights, and whose hit points are interpreted in an almost completely meta-fashion.

If that's your interpretation of Frodo cool, but I disagree... A warlord is proficient with numerous weapons, armor and even shields. Is Frodo ever shown to be proficient with a wide range of weapons, armors or shields? The problem is that the Warlord is still a combat proficient class, even if he is a lazy lord.

My sense is that 3E doesn't have so many meta-options, but maybe that means it's harder to do LotR in that system.

Of course there's nothing to stop you running a 3E game with a 5th level human paladin/ranger, a 5th level dwarf axe fighter, a 5th level elf archer and a bunch of 1st level halfing commoners (plus an aristocrat for Frodo). But I wouldn't expect that party to play much like LotR - eg the 1st level halflings will almost certainly not survive the fight in Moria. In fact Frodo would have virtually no chance of surviving the stabbing on Weathertop, without his player having any meta-resources to deploy.

And if i were trying to play LotR as opposed to making a character inspired by it you would have a point, but I'm not trying to do a re-enactment...

 

[Derren]

No one wants you not to be able to play Sam or frodo...but don't tell me zorro or dashing swordman have to suck becuse you want to... Make options for BOTH and spell it out

Actually thats what you and Mistwell are saying the whole time, that every character must be good in combat, because thats the only important part of D&D, which automatically excludes characters like Frodo.

As GMforPowergamers points out, in 3E "swashbuckling rogue" and 3d6+7 19-20/x2 are the same thing. The latter is the mechanical expression of the former.

No, this is completely and utterly wrong. A swashbuckler is, if you want the iconic image, someone using light armor, a finesse weapon like a rapier and having a more carefree attitude. It is in no way tied to how many D6 you roll for damage.

Even non-dungeon crawls have a lot of combat. That's the nature of a game who's rules are 90% combat.

Not, thats the nature of your game. Not mine, and not the ones of many other people who do not like forced combat characters.

 

[Imaro]

No one wants you not to be able to play Sam or frodo...but don't tell me zorro or dashing swordman have to suck becuse you want to... Make options for BOTH and spell it out



Try this... Let there be options that say "hey this is not good for peoe worried about survival"

You get your character I get mine, and new ayers get to pick
Without any gotcha

Whose arguing against this... I'm not, but if you tell me combat prowess has to be baked into every class at a certain level no matter what... well you gopt your options didn't you, but mine aren't possible.

 

[herrozerro]

I am curious, what class would any of you put Frodo into?