In the thread titled "The Right Way to do D&D Domain Rules," SHARK says:
Quote from: SHARKMy Three Pillars of RPG Campaigns are the following:
FIGHTING: Heroic combat. Lots of fighting, death, blood, and war. People and creatures need to be dying. Pile the bodies up! Unleash the vengeance! Men and women alike, most everyone loves violence. violence is deeply satisfying to the beast lurking under the façade of civilization and polite society.
BOOTY: Lots of SEX. Men and women alike, everyone likes sex. The more, the better. Drown them in all the fine booty they can grab, with both hands. Later on, spouses, families, and kids become important. Otherwise filed under "Romance".
GOLD: Gold, baby. Piles of silver and gold, fine jewels. Crazy detailed toys. Epic, glorious magic items. Give it all out with a lavish hand, like candy.
In all the years I have been playing, these three pillars have kept players engaged, again and again. When a GM is stuck, or uncertain, unload the train of FBG--FIGHTING, BOOTY, and GOLD. It has never failed. It is these three primary elements that make a campaign interesting, dramatic, exciting, and fun. It is important to remember that all three of the pillars are like legs on a table; they are each more or less equally important. These are the three pillars I think that every GM should embrace. Your game and your campaign will always be better off with MORE FBG!
Over the years, I've wondered if Middle Earth role-playing seems a bit.... dry? dull? unexciting? But I've never been able to put my finger on it until SHARK's Three Pillars.
Fighting: In the Jackson films, there are enough personal and group combat scenes to keep my interest, and the mass battle scenes don't disappoint. LOTR scores higher on the fighting scale than Star Trek, but lower than Game of Thrones. I give it 3 out of 4 swords.
Booty: The only two main characters who get any action are Aragorn and Sam, and that's offscreen and only after they are married. Maybe Tauriel and the dwarf guy in the Hobbit movie? Even so, LOTR is pretty much devoid of sex. Even the Ents complain about it. I give it 0 out of 4 hearts.
Gold: If you haven't read "GM of the Rings" reserve a few hours for a hilarious "what if LOTR was more like a D&D game." The players complain about the lack of loot. If we do a quick inventory of LOTR, the party starts with mithril armor, a magic short sword (Sting), a magic longsword (Glamdring), and a cursed ring of invisibility. Later they acquire some magic (?) daggers, elven cloaks, elven rope, elven brooches, and the phial of Galadriel. And zero GP. That's not a whole lot of loot. I give it 1 out of 4 gold coins.
Basically, MERP isn't scoring too well on SHARK's three pillars. Is my assessment unfair? it possible to spice it up, without losing the feel or the themes of Middle Earth?
In fairness, The Hobbit is almost entirely a bunch of different factions trying to acquire or hang onto loot. But yeah Tolkien pretty clearly had a low opinion of material greed as a motivator. When he uses it it's pretty much always for villains (Smaug, Morgoth) or for the tragically misguided (Thorin, the Sons of Feanor).
I haven't played MERP, but I would imagine that part of the necessary player buy-in is accepting that the motivators are different. Tolkien's good guys are chiefly motivated by a desire to protect what they care about from the machinations of evil. His approach to romance is (not trying to be funny) more romantic. Beren and Luthien don't need to bang, because them meeting in a moonlit glade and then going on an epic quest to recover one of the Silmarils is the consummation of their relationship (though they do have children, so you could read between the lines). If you're the GM, you have to sell it to your players on the promise of sweeping adventure and moral satisfaction, rather than blood and boobies.
In fairness to MERP, there are plenty of other games where getting loot and getting laid isn't conventionally a main motivation for players. Call of Cthulhu comes to mind, and you could probably include most other mystery or horror games as well. Spy games, to an extent as well. If you think about James Bond, he always gets the girl, but money simply isn't a concern for him.
Just to clarify, I meant MERP as a shortcut for Middle Earth Role-playing in general, not the game by ICE in particular. It was a section in "Adventures in Middle Earth" (for 5E) on why gold isn't important that prompted this post.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 09:02:53 PM
Booty: The only two main characters who get any action are Aragorn and Sam, and that's offscreen and only after they are married.
I think you may be misremembering LOTR Slash Fiction as part of the actual movies.
I've played MERP on and off since about 1988. It was actually before that, but the guy who ran the game just told us about it and ran B/X in that style because his mom wouldn't let him take the book to school. True story. Lots of lunch time MERP sessions using our regular D&D characters. I also have played The One Ring (exactly once), a few sessions of the D&D 5th edition game (got rid of the books last summer) and a couple games with the Decipher one, I think it's just called Lord of the Rings maybe. I actually liked this but the "art" is pretty much all pics from the movies so yeah, didn't care for that part. Anyway...
Roleplaying in ME, and MERP especially, is pretty brooding and dark. We mostly did a lot of early TA stuff, per the MERP books, so like a thousand years after Sauron was defeated and about the same before the Ring was found or something like that. Plenty of room to do whatever you wanted. We never cared for Fourth Age stuff, as that seemed sort of anti-climatic, and lent itself to too much magic use. SA for the same reason. No idea what a First Age game would have looked like...elves beating the shit out of each other? I dunno. So yeah, mid-TA MERP is just like a gritty ass dungeon crawl that really seems almost useless because no matter what happens, you know eventually the War of the Ring is going to happen. Even if the DM is explicit and says something like, "Okay Sauron is GONE and the Ring was eaten by a dragon so he will never ever come back," it's almost irrelevant. The lore is far, far too overwhelming to ever shake the fatalistic nature of the game world. As least every game I've ever played or ran in ME. It's kind of like an upbeat Warhammer, honestly. That said, we still had lots of fun playing it, but there was never any "we're gonna save the world!" nonsense like you see in even low-level D&D campaigns. Every farm boy in D&D thinks he's going to be Conan and rule his own kingdom. All my MERP characters were just happy to finally get home in one piece with a few new tales for the tavern. Which, I guess fits the genre perfectly.
Basically, it's a totally different style of game, for the most part.
Greetings!
Aglondir! Hey there my friend! I'm glad that you like my three pillars of gaming! As for COC, or mystery games, or anime waifu furries, I can't say what makes those kinds of games tick. My three pillars are tailored for D&D and similar games. Through the years, my players have had zero interest in those other kinds of games. I'm a huge fan of the Middle Earth books and the films as well. However, I also believe that Middle Earth, as a campaign setting for D&D, has honestly only a very limited and narrow appeal. There is probably something to that from how all Middle Earth Commercial Campaigns have ultimately been commercial failures. None of them have ever lasted very long. MERP managed to limp along probably the longest, but its broader appeal was likewise pretty narrow.
For lack of a more verbose explanation, Middle Earth promotes a kind of railroad experience, and even when one divorces themselves from the central plot, the overall theme still only appeals to a few, or specifically when someone is in the mood for a Middle Earth Experience.
We see that everywhere in our society today, and especially so in RPG gaming. Everyone wants to play a sexy beast Teifling, or Dragonborn, or Vampire. Few have any interest in playing in a world of righteous, high-minded, goody-goody Characters.
That is what is at the deep end of your questions, my friend, in my view.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Grognard GM on May 23, 2023, 10:00:38 PM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 09:02:53 PM
Booty: The only two main characters who get any action are Aragorn and Sam, and that's offscreen and only after they are married.
I think you may be misremembering LOTR Slash Fiction as part of the actual movies.
LOL!
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
For me, yes and no.
No, in that, as I've said here before, not in the ME, with hobbits and balrogs and the sheer weight of that particular story on "Middle Earth" with shires and Moria and Rivendell and Ents and so on.
Yes, in that if do your own settings with a mix of heroic myth, more dark ages than middle ages, and some supernatural/fantastical elements that fit the kind of campaign you want to run, then now we are on the right track. Add in your own events and motivated NPCs and so on, likely to lead to that kind of action, even more so. Even better, if what you want to do has a little more or a little less magic, or some different archetypes, or any other of a host of changes--no one is going to get bent out of shape trying to mentally fix all those heptagonal pegs into octagonal holes.
Trying to be "true" to Middle Earth but also be "different" typically leads to deconstructing the story, rarely to good effect. If instead you are true to your different ideas that share some of the sensibilities of Middle Earth, then you have a much better chance of having fun with it.
Nor is this phenomenon unique to Middle Earth role playing.
Then once that is out of the way, add as much or little of Shark's three pillars as seems appropriate. :D
ICE's Middle Earth Roleplaying (MERP) has always been accused of having too much magic and too much treasure. Personally I think it's a little over blown. The introductory adventure does have a troll hoard that's full of goodies but it's protected by half a dozen trolls and a tenth level party would be hard pressed to fight them.
Magic is quite a bit weaker than in D&D but more ubiquitous. Minor items like +10 swords, +1 spell adders, and minor daily spell items are common place. You need to be seventh level to cast Fire Bolt and XP and levels are slow in coming because MERP doesn't have Rolemaster's generous first time x 5 multipliers. A low level Mage had best take some background items because the first level spells are things like boiling a cup of water. And no, you can't boil the water in their skull because you can't see it or touch it.
The single column critical and fumble tables are notoriously silly but get stale quite quickly. Still, you should play it long enough to see some poor soul with a lance polevault 30' and take a D Krush critical. Arms Law for Rolemaster is compatible and provides full page tables.
I am continously telling people that it's very important to declare parries before rolling initiative and have everyone roll and add up their attacks at the same time. Ideally they'll have copies of their weapon tables and be able to tell you how many hits they do and what the critical result was when you come around to them. If it's a bit much adding up the badguys attacks just add the tens. :D
As for gaming in Middle Earth, it depends on how much you want to be scorned by the scholars in the field and told how wrong you are about everything all the time. The setting itself is fine and there's lots of pre-war of the ring history to explore.
Perhaps the point is in defining "Middle Earth roleplaying." What are the defining features?
If it's the setting, that's easy to do and it's as much fun as you make it. If your crowd likes to fight, give them a locale that's dangerous. You may have to come up with more foe variety, but what you read in the books is just the "rolled encounters" that party had. There should be other results on a table.
If your crowd likes social intrigue, set them up in (for instance) Minas Tirith and work out the movers and shakers. You'll need groups and conflicting goals. Just because the novels didn't focus on this aspect doesn't mean it didn't happen. Other times have other urban centers.
Magic is rare and so are spellcasters and overt religiosity. If you don't like that, maybe ME isn't for you. OTOH you can certainly have a variant of ME. Does that spoil things for you?
Exploration is a player favorite? Pick your favorite period and go. Sailing along like Ulysses, island to island. Dwarves tunneling under mountains and finding who knows what in winding passages? The Lewis and Clark of ME can go make contact and map with whatever they can find in a grand adventure.
Why can't any of that happen in ME and fit just fine? JRRT wanted to tell the whole Morgoth / Sauron thing, but that was just his plotline. Make your own, to your own preferences.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 09:02:53 PM
Basically, MERP isn't scoring too well on SHARK's three pillars. Is my assessment unfair? it possible to spice it up, without losing the feel or the themes of Middle Earth?
Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2023, 10:05:35 PM
We see that everywhere in our society today, and especially so in RPG gaming. Everyone wants to play a sexy beast Teifling, or Dragonborn, or Vampire. Few have any interest in playing in a world of righteous, high-minded, goody-goody Characters.
I've been planning out a Middle Earth game using Savage Worlds -- starting with a convention game later this year. Here's the first discussion thread:
https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/a-new-fellowship/
In the test convention game I'm planning, it's an alternate history where the original Fellowship collapses after Moria -- so new characters take up the struggle by different means. It's thus mostly about the PCs heading straight into Mordor. So lots of possible fighting. The booty options are limited to main character romance (i.e. PC/PC like Eowyn/Faramir), though I have a number of women PC options, so that broadens the options. Carrying gold isn't likely going in, but lots of gold potential
SHARK says that few are interested in playing goody-goody characters - but I don't agree. Goody-goody doesn't mean boring. Righteous questing characters can have lots of extreme drama. My current D&D campaign is about agents of a divine patron laying the smackdown on evil -- with plenty of drama and sexual tension along the way.
Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2023, 10:05:35 PM
As for COC, or mystery games, or anime waifu furries, I can't say what makes those kinds of games tick.
I mean, the appeal of mystery games is pretty straightforward. They're for people who like mysteries. The problem I've found is that a lot of people think they like mysteries, but can't be bothered with actually solving them. I've probably told this story elsewhere, but some years ago I agreed to run a Cyberpunk game for a group of players that expressly requested that their PCs should run a detective agency. I spent a considerable amount of time creating involved mysteries, with multiple paths of investigation, suspects, tons of clues, the whole nine yards. What I got in return was a complete lack of any initiative or creative thought from the players and a response of "we don't know what we're supposed to do". Pretty much put me off the whole genre.
Spy games are a similar thing. Personally, I love the whole spy movie spiel. Cover IDs, confidence games, infiltrations, investigations, femme fatales, all of it. But I've always end up being the only one that engaged with it. I've largely even stopped playing that kind of character, because I got sick of being the designated talker in every party.
I'd still like to play Call of Cthulhu with an experienced GM some day. Maybe I've just been playing with the wrong people.
Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2023, 10:05:35 PM
My three pillars are tailored for D&D and similar games. ... However, I also believe that Middle Earth, as a campaign setting for D&D, has honestly only a very limited and narrow appeal. There is probably something to that from how all Middle Earth Commercial Campaigns have ultimately been commercial failures. None of them have ever lasted very long. MERP managed to limp along probably the longest, but its broader appeal was likewise pretty narrow.
For lack of a more verbose explanation, Middle Earth promotes a kind of railroad experience, and even when one divorces themselves from the central plot, the overall theme still only appeals to a few, or specifically when someone is in the mood for a Middle Earth Experience....
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Have to largely agree. While there's a lot you could do in the gaps in Tolkien's material, there's no denying that Middle Earth was crafted to tell a very particular story. I would expect the same to be true of Dune, Game of Thrones, and a lot of other popular IPs. It seems like the settings which have the longest lifespan in roleplaying are ones that are created either expressly for gaming, or for episodic story formats. The Hyborean Age and Star Trek would probably be examples I would cite there.
Quote from: jhkim on May 23, 2023, 11:01:24 PM
SHARK says that few are interested in playing goody-goody characters - but I don't agree. Goody-goody doesn't mean boring. Righteous questing characters can have lots of extreme drama. My current D&D campaign is about agents of a divine patron laying the smackdown on evil -- with plenty of drama and sexual tension along the way.
I find I can reliably get one or two people in a party that are prepared to play heroes, but I always get two or three that are absolutely devoted to playing callous mercenaries. In practice, though, I find the vast majority of people people fall back to playing characters that are morally pretty average. They're basically greedy and self-interested, but they've got the lines they won't cross. I guess that's how most people are in real life, so you could argue its at least realistic, if kind of uninteresting.
Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2023, 10:05:35 PM
Greetings!
Aglondir! Hey there my friend! I'm glad that you like my three pillars of gaming! As for COC, or mystery games, or anime waifu furries, I can't say what makes those kinds of games tick. My three pillars are tailored for D&D and similar games. Through the years, my players have had zero interest in those other kinds of games. I'm a huge fan of the Middle Earth books and the films as well. However, I also believe that Middle Earth, as a campaign setting for D&D, has honestly only a very limited and narrow appeal. There is probably something to that from how all Middle Earth Commercial Campaigns have ultimately been commercial failures. None of them have ever lasted very long. MERP managed to limp along probably the longest, but its broader appeal was likewise pretty narrow.
For lack of a more verbose explanation, Middle Earth promotes a kind of railroad experience, and even when one divorces themselves from the central plot, the overall theme still only appeals to a few, or specifically when someone is in the mood for a Middle Earth Experience.
We see that everywhere in our society today, and especially so in RPG gaming. Everyone wants to play a sexy beast Teifling, or Dragonborn, or Vampire. Few have any interest in playing in a world of righteous, high-minded, goody-goody Characters.
That is what is at the deep end of your questions, my friend, in my view.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
SHARK,
Excellent analysis. Sexy beast Teiflings, Dragonborn, or Vampires... you forgot green-skinned goblin strumpets, LOL!
I love Middle Earth, but perhaps it is something best appreciated in books and movies rather than an RPG setting. I keep revisiting the concept, trying to think of ways to make it work, but it never seems to gain any ground.
Quote from: ForgottenF on May 23, 2023, 09:27:32 PM
In fairness to MERP, there are plenty of other games where getting loot and getting laid isn't conventionally a main motivation for players. Call of Cthulhu comes to mind
Except for Innsmouth... where it smelling like fish isn't a good thing.
Dunwich... same, except everyone has the same last name.
I have quite a few of the old MERP modules / campaigns and I ran a very long campaign that paralleled The Hobbit (Thorin's backup plan in case Gandalf's plan fell through).
It is all going to come down to the the individual region and era. I can imagine a campaign set in Dunland / Isenguard could be rough. Keep in mind that Saruman seemingly 'bred' half orcs.
Also, a Corsairs of Umbar and Harad based campaign could be interesting. There are descendants of 'Black Numenoreans' as well that could be plotting.
I used to play MERP with Rolemaster back in the 90´s. I have to say it did feel more like DnD to me,
could be due to the Rolemaster or the GM though.
One Ring on the other hand captures the feel of Middle Earth way better, though that is just my opinion.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 24, 2023, 01:06:05 AM
Quote from: SHARK on May 23, 2023, 10:05:35 PM
Greetings!
Aglondir! Hey there my friend! I'm glad that you like my three pillars of gaming! As for COC, or mystery games, or anime waifu furries, I can't say what makes those kinds of games tick. My three pillars are tailored for D&D and similar games. Through the years, my players have had zero interest in those other kinds of games. I'm a huge fan of the Middle Earth books and the films as well. However, I also believe that Middle Earth, as a campaign setting for D&D, has honestly only a very limited and narrow appeal. There is probably something to that from how all Middle Earth Commercial Campaigns have ultimately been commercial failures. None of them have ever lasted very long. MERP managed to limp along probably the longest, but its broader appeal was likewise pretty narrow.
For lack of a more verbose explanation, Middle Earth promotes a kind of railroad experience, and even when one divorces themselves from the central plot, the overall theme still only appeals to a few, or specifically when someone is in the mood for a Middle Earth Experience.
We see that everywhere in our society today, and especially so in RPG gaming. Everyone wants to play a sexy beast Teifling, or Dragonborn, or Vampire. Few have any interest in playing in a world of righteous, high-minded, goody-goody Characters.
That is what is at the deep end of your questions, my friend, in my view.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
SHARK,
Excellent analysis. Sexy beast Teiflings, Dragonborn, or Vampires... you forgot green-skinned goblin strumpets, LOL!
I love Middle Earth, but perhaps it is something best appreciated in books and movies rather than an RPG setting. I keep revisiting the concept, trying to think of ways to make it work, but it never seems to gain any ground.
Greetings!
Thank you, Aglondir! Yes, good catch! I forgot about the green-skinned Goblin strumpets! *Laughing* Isn't it just amazing how popular Goblin strumpets are recently? I've been seeing them everywhere! Even normally solid game groups have at least one person that says, "For my new Character, SHARK, can I make a Goblin strumpet? I want her to be just like Kim Kardashian! Whoo-Hoo! Yeah, baby! BRINGIN' ALL THAT BOOTY!" I'm like, Goblins? WTF? I had friend of mine bring up some artwork, and I was blown away! I was like, "Oh, DAYUM! THAT'S why Maria wants her character to be a green-skinned Kim Kardashian Goblin strumpet!" It is definitely a popular thing!
I've had Players that want to be grim Wolf-humanoid Legionnaires, or Minotaur barbarians, or Elephant-women Nature priestesses. And Kardashian Goblin strumpets. And I have a pretty solid group that I heavily screen and curate. Even I have to fight to some extent to restrain the "Crazy Factor" as I call it. *Laughing* And I'm well aware also of what the gamers at my local game stores are into--they want total crazy zoos!
I always have a few stalwarts that like to stick with traditional heroic characters, with the rest always wanting to push the envelope. As for playstyle goes, yeah, ruthless barbarians and greedy, smug mercenaries are common. Pure n high-minded Paladins, goody-goody priests? Not so much. Even the women! The women often tell me, "I don't want to play a goody-goody Nun! I want to play a vicious, sexy Witch with an attitude! And an evil Baboon animal friend that can bite my enemies and chomp chomp on them!" Or some variation like that.
Yes, I know everyone is going to come along and say, "Well, SHARK, I have a party that LOVES playing righteous goody-goody Characters! NYAH NYAH NYAH!" Yeah, OK. Whatever, right? In my experience though, most of the time, with most players, the more high-fantasy, high-moral style of play and themes of a Middle Earth Campaign are generally going to be far less popular, and hence, far more difficult. That is why I generally rely upon my SHARK's Three Pillars of RPG Theory. It ultimately saves me more time, and produces more FUN and less stress, for more people. Because, I am also ultimately a Lawful Good Warlord that embraces the Gygxian Truth of "The Greater Good of the Many outweighs the needs of the Few." ;D
And yes, I also own all of Tolkien's books, all of the films, and also all of Rolemaster and MERP. Trying to get most groups into a Middle Earth Campaign--and actually having consistent level of fun with it, is like trying to get round pegs into a square hole. The sales and commercial data supports my observations and analysis as well. I also like your thoughts on ME being a better medium or fit for boos an movies than RPG's. There is a powerful insight to that, Aglondir. Never forget, though, FBG! ;D My theory will consistently bring more fun, for more people, more consistently--and bring less frustration and stress for you, the GM. ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Treating Middle Earth as a genre or sub-genre, I think it does potentially have plenty of Fighting & Gold. But the complete lack of Booty, of sex as something that exists in-universe, is very striking. The complete lack of organised religion is also very striking. Taken together, I find this creates something very alien to real-world experience, which I think does limit appeal. It's far easier to GM & play in something resembling Westeros or the Hyborean Age.
Quote from: SHARK on May 24, 2023, 03:04:17 AM
I've had Players that want to be grim Wolf-humanoid Legionnaires, or Minotaur barbarians, or Elephant-women Nature priestesses. And Kardashian Goblin strumpets.
While I've never yet had a Goblin Strumpet NPC in my fairly Ed Greenwood themed Forgotten Realms campaign, I have to say I'm now tempted! ;D
NSFW 'Gobblers' comic title page with sexy goblin - https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1A4uqIZlvf0MTxfIh1zpu-7ANYbATcbkwAFpiY7Opgjkhj9Y6vPaMsj908XUEUPb2ebJiUNhZp8p5G-VGe4Vq_sltyjgA64FCu-WZsn3Z5No9GAEy_EXmWJnx-bXUOuAuc_wOl4vTeT7V6ooNWBnBC944GYvFXrvF79NZNLl8gd_8s5lMY1DWBf4tVQ/w419-h640/Goblins!.jpg
Overpriced Kickstarter campaign comic https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/gobblers1/gobblers
One of my favorite campaigns I ever ran was using MERP in the 90s. But we played in the mid Third Age and ran it much like D&D, albeit with an against the Shadow theme. Two of the players were really into Tolkien, but the others just wanted to game. The crits were brutal and they lost a lot of PCs over the years, but we had a blast. There are limitations imposed by the setting, I suppose, but we hewed pretty close to the rules, which cuts down on magic and ICE was pretty creative in coming up with villains who were non-canon (like half troll warlocks, evil elves and such), but kind of worked. In fact, I recently pulled out our old characters and transferred them onto new character sheets in hopes of running a one shot with them later this summer and possibly getting current players into MERP.
We tried TOR 2e and hated its mechanics. In particular it tries too slavishly to emulate the books, making it rather dull and restrictive. You really feel like extras rather than heroes.
FWIW I think that's a limitation of most settings based on well-known books/IPs. How do you strike the balance between kick ass gaming in X and just replaying the book/movie, etc.?
It depends on the campaign and the world, of course. For myself, I really do like campaigns with moral themes and the use of the play space mediated by dice and player decisions to explore them, such that outcomes are not predetermined and that players can make a stand for the principles they choose to embody.
But you do also need to have moment-by-moment and session-by-session engagement, and wealth, sex, and power are great ways to drive that. But different campaigns are about different things. Going full atavistic power-fantasy is a gaming style that a lot of people genuinely enjoy for its own sake, and you don't need to excuse or subvert that. But I also like campaigns that are about different things. For me, "Choosing to do good in a world that is indifferent at best and far more often will ruthlessly exploit my mercy and charity, and seeing if my character can rise above or be swallowed by darkness, from within or without." is My Jam, in most cases, and I'm generally not motivated by getting fictional wealth, no matter how well-described. But just because I'm not super-entertained by acquiring and hoarding wealth doesn't mean that no one is.
Hell, I'd definitely get a blast out of playing the worried accountant character for a team of murderous oversexed loot-crazed dungeon-mad adventurers, who fusses about fencing fist-sized ruby eyes and worries about destabilizing the local economy whenever the party passes through, and thus both feeds the GM possible plot-hooks, gives deeper engagement with the world, and makes the specialness of the other PCs stand out more.
The simple answer is because Middle Earth is not a typical fantasy setting despite it foundational role in D&D and the hobby. Specifically it is about far from Swords & Sorcery one can get for a traditional fantasy setting.
Campaigns in Middle Earth are like campaigns in Call of Cthulu. It is a setting with a specific tone and tenor and a good Middle Earth RPG will reflect that. And for hobbyists it means roleplaying characters in Middle Earth can't be approached with the same attitude you do with most fantasy system. You have to buy into its central premise just to enjoy Call of Cthulu you have to buy into one of its central premises. That you are fighting monsters that will eventually drive your character mad and thus end their adventuring career and perhaps their life.
I use Call of Cthulu as an example because after playing and running the latest round of Middle Earth RPGs (The One Ring and especially Adventures in Middle Earth) I realize that as far as adventuring THE theme of Middle Earth is the struggle to do what right and preserve what good against the shadow of Morgoth and Sauron, the slow decay of time, and passion of free-willed beings.
Because of the existence of an active agent of evil (Morgoth or Sauron), that like Call of Cthulu that this struggle will take it toll and eventually end one's adventuring career.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 10:08:41 PM
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
You forgot Eowyn and Faramir.
Quote from: SHARK on May 24, 2023, 03:04:17 AM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 24, 2023, 01:06:05 AM
I love Middle Earth, but perhaps it is something best appreciated in books and movies rather than an RPG setting. I keep revisiting the concept, trying to think of ways to make it work, but it never seems to gain any ground.
Yes, I know everyone is going to come along and say, "Well, SHARK, I have a party that LOVES playing righteous goody-goody Characters! NYAH NYAH NYAH!" Yeah, OK. Whatever, right? In my experience though, most of the time, with most players, the more high-fantasy, high-moral style of play and themes of a Middle Earth Campaign are generally going to be far less popular, and hence, far more difficult. That is why I generally rely upon my SHARK's Three Pillars of RPG Theory. It ultimately saves me more time, and produces more FUN and less stress, for more people. Because, I am also ultimately a Lawful Good Warlord that embraces the Gygxian Truth of "The Greater Good of the Many outweighs the needs of the Few." ;D
I agree that a style of lots of Fighting+Booty+Gold is probably the most popular style -- just like D&D is the most popular game. But there are lots of players who are happy to play non-D&D games, and there are players who are happy to play different styles even within D&D. Plenty of gamers enjoy Amber or Call of Cthulhu or Warhammer or Star Wars gaming. I don't think that going with what is universally the most popular is always the best route for a particular group of players at a particular time.
I still intend to push forwards with my Savage Worlds Middle Earth plans.
I've only ever tried MERP once, at a con, and it seemed fine to me. In the abstract it also seems like it would work well.
Maybe I'm atypical, but SHARK's FBG isn't what drives me in RPGs. Don't get me wrong - I'll certainly play in such a game and have fun with it, especially if I enjoy the people gaming with me, but it's not the most satisfying mode of play. The B aspect, in particular, is something that's better out of game than in, with the F being the opposite.
The things that drive my enjoyment of RPGs are, in no particular order,
1) Fighting, the whole adrenaline thing
2) Exploration - seeing what's in the world, what's around the corner, what people are like, what cultures are like, etc
3) Puzzle solving - any intellectual challenge - tactical puzzles, detective work, riddles, mechanical puzzles, whatever
4) Method acting - acting according to my character's personality, first person conversation
5) Spy stuff - stealth in the dark, recon, surveillance, big elaborate plans to catch the bad guy, whatever
Given all that, I think MERP would work just fine for me. It is hard to get away from the whole world being built around a single story, and not the one that you're doing, but that's an issue that can be dealt with.
Shark's reasons aren't really all that relevant. MERP included Orcs and Trolls as player characters for a reason.
Player Friendly Campaign seeds for MERP
The white wizard Saruman is taking over the citadel of Orthanc, he's hiring and he needs agents who can handle some delicate interactions with the orcs. He thinks they're not as bad as their hype and would like you to open relations.
The city of Umbar is a dark and dangerous place full of thieves and thugs like you guys. There's a rich shipment of gold coming in from the southern colonies and you want a cut.
Emissaries from Mordor have approached the lord of Dorwinin he's looking for some escorts for his ambassador who can spot a Gondorian ranger in the bushes.
Gorblat and Grogmoth are brothers, they murdered their father but now they both want to be chief and they're both hiring human mercenaries.
There's a dwarven mine near town and lately there's a rumour that they're holding beautiful human girl prisoner. A kindly old peddler woman has hired you to free her.
I did write up a magic system that's about invoking and inciting spirits of creation that would work better for Middle Earth but honestly players really want fireballs.
Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2023, 11:31:10 AM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 10:08:41 PM
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
You forgot Eowyn and Faramir.
I left them out (as well as Galadriel/Celeborn, Tom Bombadil/Goldberry, Beren/Luhtien, et.al.) since we never see the sexual or romantic elements to the relationship. In the movies, we see Aragon and Arwen kiss, and we also see Sam and Rosie get married and have kids. But the rest? They may as well be platonic relationships for all we see. I was tempted to include Tauriel/Kili, but Tolkien didn't write those characters.
Do you remember the early rumors for Amazon's Rings of Power? The initial rumor was it was going to have Game of Thrones-level sex and violence. They must have fired that creative team, since RoP wasn't much different than LOTR in that regard. There's a romance between Arandir and the healer woman, and the dwarf and his wife argue like married couples do. I guess that counts, but it's not GoT by any stretch.
Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2023, 11:31:10 AM
I still intend to push forwards with my Savage Worlds Middle Earth plans.
Look forward to hearing about it!
Quote from: S'mon on May 24, 2023, 03:44:30 AM
Treating Middle Earth as a genre or sub-genre, I think it does potentially have plenty of Fighting & Gold. But the complete lack of Booty, of sex as something that exists in-universe, is very striking. The complete lack of organised religion is also very striking. Taken together, I find this creates something very alien to real-world experience, which I think does limit appeal. It's far easier to GM & play in something resembling Westeros or the Hyborean Age.
I never noticed the lack of organized religion! But you are right. That is very unusual, given the immanent presence of the divine in the natural world of Middle Earth, as well as the meta-elements of (mild) Christian symbolism.
The Hobbits would definitely be into organized religion for the food options alone. Church potluck, Sunday 12:30. Second potluck, Sunday 2:30.
Quote from: Persimmon on May 24, 2023, 07:46:21 AM
FWIW I think that's a limitation of most settings based on well-known books/IPs. How do you strike the balance between kick ass gaming in X and just replaying the book/movie, etc.?
I think The Mandalorian got that mostly right. You focus on the characters as the main protagonists, and use the existing fiction as background lore. Ideally, they should be more interested in the game events than the book/movie stuff, because it involves them directly.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 25, 2023, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2023, 11:31:10 AM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 10:08:41 PM
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
You forgot Eowyn and Faramir.
I left them out (as well as Galadriel/Celeborn, Tom Bombadil/Goldberry, Beren/Luhtien, et.al.) since we never see the sexual or romantic elements to the relationship. In the movies, we see Aragon and Arwen kiss, and we also see Sam and Rosie get married and have kids. But the rest? They may as well be platonic relationships for all we see.
Ah, you're thinking of the movies. In the books, there is a whole chapter focused mostly on the Eowyn/Faramir romance. I think there's more detailed romance than we get with Aragorn/Arwen or Sam/Rosie - though it's still pretty chaste. There's nothing close to sexual in Tolkien's writing that I recall.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 25, 2023, 06:09:01 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on May 24, 2023, 07:46:21 AM
FWIW I think that's a limitation of most settings based on well-known books/IPs. How do you strike the balance between kick ass gaming in X and just replaying the book/movie, etc.?
I think The Mandalorian got that mostly right. You focus on the characters as the main protagonists, and use the existing fiction as background lore. Ideally, they should be more interested in the game events than the book/movie stuff, because it involves them directly.
I think particularly with some settings, there's a problem of being overshadowed by the main events of the original story. This goes for sequels like The Mandalorian as well as RPGs. If you're set before the main world-changing story, then you can't change the main outcome. If you're set after the world-changing story, then it can often seem like undoing the original ending.
The Mandalorian I think does well by being after the original story but smaller-scale so it isn't undoing the Empire's defeat.
Quote from: jhkim on May 26, 2023, 01:40:54 PM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 25, 2023, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2023, 11:31:10 AM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 10:08:41 PM
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
You forgot Eowyn and Faramir.
I left them out (as well as Galadriel/Celeborn, Tom Bombadil/Goldberry, Beren/Luhtien, et.al.) since we never see the sexual or romantic elements to the relationship. In the movies, we see Aragon and Arwen kiss, and we also see Sam and Rosie get married and have kids. But the rest? They may as well be platonic relationships for all we see.
Ah, you're thinking of the movies. In the books, there is a whole chapter focused mostly on the Eowyn/Faramir romance. I think there's more detailed romance than we get with Aragorn/Arwen or Sam/Rosie - though it's still pretty chaste. There's nothing close to sexual in Tolkien's writing that I recall.
I completely forgot about that part. It's been a while.
Quote from: jhkim on May 26, 2023, 01:40:54 PM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 25, 2023, 04:59:15 PM
Quote from: jhkim on May 25, 2023, 11:31:10 AM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 10:08:41 PM
Aragorn and Arwen, and Sam and Rosie.
You forgot Eowyn and Faramir.
I left them out (as well as Galadriel/Celeborn, Tom Bombadil/Goldberry, Beren/Luhtien, et.al.) since we never see the sexual or romantic elements to the relationship. In the movies, we see Aragon and Arwen kiss, and we also see Sam and Rosie get married and have kids. But the rest? They may as well be platonic relationships for all we see.
Ah, you're thinking of the movies. In the books, there is a whole chapter focused mostly on the Eowyn/Faramir romance. I think there's more detailed romance than we get with Aragorn/Arwen or Sam/Rosie - though it's still pretty chaste. There's nothing close to sexual in Tolkien's writing that I recall.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 25, 2023, 06:09:01 PM
Quote from: Persimmon on May 24, 2023, 07:46:21 AM
FWIW I think that's a limitation of most settings based on well-known books/IPs. How do you strike the balance between kick ass gaming in X and just replaying the book/movie, etc.?
I think The Mandalorian got that mostly right. You focus on the characters as the main protagonists, and use the existing fiction as background lore. Ideally, they should be more interested in the game events than the book/movie stuff, because it involves them directly.
I think particularly with some settings, there's a problem of being overshadowed by the main events of the original story. This goes for sequels like The Mandalorian as well as RPGs. If you're set before the main world-changing story, then you can't change the main outcome. If you're set after the world-changing story, then it can often seem like undoing the original ending.
Luckily I've never had this problem, and I've played and GMed in a lot of established settings. I pity the players who are so locked into just the events of the films that they can't have fun in the setting.
Quote
The Mandalorian I think does well by being after the original story but smaller-scale so it isn't undoing the Empire's defeat.
Especially in the first season, where a single scout walker or a single TIE fighter were a big deal. Later episodes fell into the "Bigger is Better" trap though.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 25, 2023, 05:32:22 PM
Quote from: S'mon on May 24, 2023, 03:44:30 AM
...The complete lack of organised religion is also very striking. Taken together, I find this creates something very alien to real-world experience, which I think does limit appeal. It's far easier to GM & play in something resembling Westeros or the Hyborean Age.
I never noticed the lack of organized religion! But you are right. That is very unusual, given the immanent presence of the divine in the natural world of Middle Earth, as well as the meta-elements of (mild) Christian symbolism.
This is also very realistic, considering the conceits of the world. Religions aren't built on faith in ME. God is real, angels are real (Maiar), and people have met them. There is no question of whether Eru was the creator, what he wants from his creation, when he or his angels will intervene (or when you are on your own). All that is known. With certainty. Often from direct experience. So there is no need for imploring prayer or sacrifice, no need for doctrine or denominations, and no need for worship. Once again, Tolkien has a surprisingly well though out approach that fits his setting well.
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 27, 2023, 01:11:22 AM
Luckily I've never had this problem, and I've played and GMed in a lot of established settings. I pity the players who are so locked into just the events of the films that they can't have fun in the setting.
Whenever I see or hear someone write/say "have fun in the setting" I always wonder if what they actually mean is "rewrite the setting".
Quote from: Corolinth on May 27, 2023, 07:52:35 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 27, 2023, 01:11:22 AM
Luckily I've never had this problem, and I've played and GMed in a lot of established settings. I pity the players who are so locked into just the events of the films that they can't have fun in the setting.
Whenever I see or hear someone write/say "have fun in the setting" I always wonder if what they actually mean is "rewrite the setting".
Plot and setting are two different things.
The Aragorn and Arwen thing is a big secret with a reveal at the end of the books with lots of little hints scattered throughout, as is the Rosie and Sam thing that's where he went right before they left the Shire. There's a more complete tale of Aragorn and Arwen's relationship in the Appendicies. Faramir and Eowyn get a whole chapter of classically medival sighing and longing. Go read the chapter on Mimbrate romances in The Belgariad and you'll discover it's exactly the same sort of thing.
The family trees might hint at the existance of some sex but they also might indicate some very busy storks.
Quote from: Corolinth on May 27, 2023, 07:52:35 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 27, 2023, 01:11:22 AM
Luckily I've never had this problem, and I've played and GMed in a lot of established settings. I pity the players who are so locked into just the events of the films that they can't have fun in the setting.
Whenever I see or hear someone write/say "have fun in the setting" I always wonder if what they actually mean is "rewrite the setting".
No, no, "it's BLOW UP THE SETTING!!!"
Honestly though, my main beef with licensed seittings is the "meet/fuck/kill" attitude players seem to take to them.
QuoteThis is also very realistic, considering the conceits of the world. Religions aren't built on faith in ME. God is real, angels are real (Maiar), and people have met them. There is no question of whether Eru was the creator, what he wants from his creation, when he or his angels will intervene (or when you are on your own). All that is known. With certainty. Often from direct experience. So there is no need for imploring prayer or sacrifice, no need for doctrine or denominations, and no need for worship. Once again, Tolkien has a surprisingly well though out approach that fits his setting well.
I'm not really sure that's case. A) the fact that Ainur met Eru, and elves heard his voice in early days - does not have to mean much for later generations. In Old Testament prophets also directly talked with God - does everyone believes it - no they don't. As Sauron showed with Melkoric religion of Numenor this generation-distanced knowledge can be easily twisted or forgotten.
Also direct contact with God does not mean lack of prayer, sacrifice, doctrine or worship. God directly talked to Moses and told him to do all those things. Like what act of worship even has to do with knowledge - worship is no dervied from blind faith, but from worthiness of object of worship (that's why both elves and Numenoreans had very simplistic prayers to Eru).
The reason Tolkien did not want to create more advanced religon is simple - because his world was meant to be ancient past of our world. Eru was meant to be Yahweh.
So as both faith of Moses and revelation of Christ are foundation of organised religion he believed in, and both are dervied from God making foundations to it - he did not want to create any ritualistic organised religion that would be unfounded into direct Revelation. He considered making any pre-Abrahamic true faith to be very problematic.
Quote from: Baron on May 27, 2023, 07:55:01 PM
Quote from: Corolinth on May 27, 2023, 07:52:35 PM
Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 27, 2023, 01:11:22 AM
Luckily I've never had this problem, and I've played and GMed in a lot of established settings. I pity the players who are so locked into just the events of the films that they can't have fun in the setting.
Whenever I see or hear someone write/say "have fun in the setting" I always wonder if what they actually mean is "rewrite the setting".
Plot and setting are two different things.
This is perhaps technically true in the strictest sense. They are "different things", but they aren't orthogonal to one another. History is part of a setting. Philip K. Dick rewrites the plot of World War II and arrives at a completely different setting for The Man in the High Castle.
As much as someone with a clever idea for how to shake things up and really have fun with an established setting might wish otherwise, they actually don't have carte blanche to change whatever they want about the plot of a book or movie and still expect their players are supposed to like it. Especially if Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or some other fandom is ostensibly the selling point. It turns out you can only reimagine so much before fans reject the new thing.
The fundamental problem of using Middle Earth as a game setting whether with D&D, its own system, or another system is that it has an established story and was created for the express purpose of telling that particular story. Letting PC's run around doing what they always do is jarring and just feels wrong for the setting. This is why Middle Earth is best left to the stories it was created for.
I'm actually surprised I don't see anything from Alex Macris in this thread. I seem to remember him posting some game sessions in Middle Earth that I felt would have been awesome to participate in. Maybe I'll reach out and see if he has anything to contribute.
Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 14, 2023, 02:58:01 PM
The fundamental problem of using Middle Earth as a game setting whether with D&D, its own system, or another system is that it has an established story and was created for the express purpose of telling that particular story. Letting PC's run around doing what they always do is jarring and just feels wrong for the setting. This is why Middle Earth is best left to the stories it was created for.
The bolded claim is completely wrong. Tolkien started creating Middle Earth in 1917 as a project for what he called "The Book of Lost Tales" -- which was two decades before he even started the plotline for The Lord of the Rings in 1937. During those two decades, he created vast hoards of unpublished notes and stories about Middle Earth, not to mention writing and publishing The Hobbit -- all long before he had decided on the plot for The Lord of the Rings.
His approach is why his work is a model for role-players. He created the world first, and then created stories to go in it.
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 09:02:53 PM
Over the years, I've wondered if Middle Earth role-playing seems a bit.... dry? dull? unexciting? But I've never been able to put my finger on it until SHARK's Three Pillars.
Yes it is dull. ICE's MERP tries to try and make it fun, and we played it so it felt more like a D&D setting.
If you want a setting that hits high on the fighting, booty and gold, nothing beats a sword and sorcery setting like Hyperborea or Lankhmar.
Quote from: DocJones on June 14, 2023, 04:29:49 PM
Quote from: Aglondir on May 23, 2023, 09:02:53 PM
Over the years, I've wondered if Middle Earth role-playing seems a bit.... dry? dull? unexciting? But I've never been able to put my finger on it until SHARK's Three Pillars.
Yes it is dull. ICE's MERP tries to try and make it fun, and we played it so it felt more like a D&D setting.
If you want a setting that hits high on the fighting, booty and gold, nothing beats a sword and sorcery setting like Hyperborea or Lankhmar.
This is why I think MERP's iteration of Middle Earth is the best pure game of the various RPGs for Middle Earth. They add tons of stuff and choose locations and times that aren't well-known or filled out to set most of their products. So you can have a lot more freedom than in the late Third Age where the other games are set.
Seems to me like a lot of the Middle-earth fiction revolves around travel, or at least The Hobbit and LotR do. The new 5E LotRR and The One Ring both focus on this aspect of the adventure. If you look at the Silmarillion there is a lot more intrigue in court, but that it harder to pull off. My adventures in Middle-earth typically have short quests to defeat monsters and take their stuff, a lot like a D&D game.
Quote from: Mishihari on May 25, 2023, 12:10:44 PM
The things that drive my enjoyment of RPGs are, in no particular order,
1) Fighting, the whole adrenaline thing
2) Exploration - seeing what's in the world, what's around the corner, what people are like, what cultures are like, etc
3) Puzzle solving - any intellectual challenge - tactical puzzles, detective work, riddles, mechanical puzzles, whatever
4) Method acting - acting according to my character's personality, first person conversation
5) Spy stuff - stealth in the dark, recon, surveillance, big elaborate plans to catch the bad guy, whatever
This is a great list, and I think that all of these five ideas fit a Middle-earth campaign.
Quote from: jhkim on June 14, 2023, 03:57:55 PM
The bolded claim is completely wrong. Tolkien started creating Middle Earth in 1917 as a project for what he called "The Book of Lost Tales" -- which was two decades before he even started the plotline for The Lord of the Rings in 1937. During those two decades, he created vast hoards of unpublished notes and stories about Middle Earth, not to mention writing and publishing The Hobbit -- all long before he had decided on the plot for The Lord of the Rings.
His approach is why his work is a model for role-players. He created the world first, and then created stories to go in it.
What does the Book of Lost Tales contain? Stories. The world was designed to tell stories, not for active players to explore and create their own stories. Middle Earth works great for a story game where a particular plotline is developed and the players play through it. This is an entirely different thing from open sandbox play. Tolkien put a lot of effort and love into the setting as a rich backdrop to stories he wanted to tell. With a richly developed setting, that development provided inspiration and structure to stories that he would create. I find that an rpg setting is better being more loosely designed and defined more by the play that takes place within it than established canon lore. This also gives the players more satisfaction that they are an actual influence in the setting. Middle Earth is so well developed and defined that players can feel like they have little to no effect on the setting. I love Middle Earth and the stories set within it but that is different than using it as an rpg setting. I am sure that there are groups that play in the setting and have a great time and there is nothing wrong with that if they can make it work. It just isn't my cup of tea as a play setting.
Quote from: Exploderwizard on June 14, 2023, 10:42:53 PM
Quote from: jhkim on June 14, 2023, 03:57:55 PM
The bolded claim is completely wrong. Tolkien started creating Middle Earth in 1917 as a project for what he called "The Book of Lost Tales" -- which was two decades before he even started the plotline for The Lord of the Rings in 1937. During those two decades, he created vast hoards of unpublished notes and stories about Middle Earth, not to mention writing and publishing The Hobbit -- all long before he had decided on the plot for The Lord of the Rings.
His approach is why his work is a model for role-players. He created the world first, and then created stories to go in it.
What does the Book of Lost Tales contain? Stories. The world was designed to tell stories, not for active players to explore and create their own stories. Middle Earth works great for a story game where a particular plotline is developed and the players play through it. This is an entirely different thing from open sandbox play. Tolkien put a lot of effort and love into the setting as a rich backdrop to stories he wanted to tell.
Tolkien created the world first, and didn't know what stories he would tell in that world. At the time when he created it in 1917, he had an idea of "The Book of Lost Tales" as a title -- but that's it. The title wasn't used until after his death decades later, his son tried to edit together a bunch of his notes into a publication.
How Tolkien worked was to make copious notes about the world, and then later come up with ideas for characters, and then stories with those characters. This isn't exactly like an RPG world, but it was an important predecessor. I'd assert that it's different than a case where the author first has the idea for a story, and then comes up with a world for that specific story.
The Bronte sister's creation of Gondal is another example, and possibly better because it was developed inherently to be collaborative (among the three sisters).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gondal_(fictional_country)
How does MERP compare to The One Ring 2e?
Quote from: Monero on June 15, 2023, 03:48:17 PM
How does MERP compare to The One Ring 2e?
It depends on what you want out of your Middle Earth experience. If you want free-wheeling, deadly action with lots of freedom to explore different times and places in Middle Earth but with fairly loose approaches to canon, then go for MERP. If you want a game that slavishly tries to copy the books and offers little player agency while masquerading as a story/roleplaying game when it's really a glorified roll-playing game, then go for TOR 2e. I will say the production values of TOR 2e are pretty high, but we loathed the intrusive mechanics, about 75% of which could be jettisoned and you'd have a better game. Especially galling are the travel and audience rules where they just have you roll a bunch of dice to predetermine outcomes that should simply be roleplayed. MERP, on the other hand, doesn't do much of anything with roleplaying mechanics, but does require lots of charts and bookkeeping. It's easy enough once you learn the system, but newbies often find it daunting.
Quote from: Persimmon on June 16, 2023, 05:07:21 AM
Quote from: Monero on June 15, 2023, 03:48:17 PM
How does MERP compare to The One Ring 2e?
It depends on what you want out of your Middle Earth experience. If you want free-wheeling, deadly action with lots of freedom to explore different times and places in Middle Earth but with fairly loose approaches to canon, then go for MERP. If you want a game that slavishly tries to copy the books and offers little player agency while masquerading as a story/roleplaying game when it's really a glorified roll-playing game, then go for TOR 2e. I will say the production values of TOR 2e are pretty high, but we loathed the intrusive mechanics, about 75% of which could be jettisoned and you'd have a better game. Especially galling are the travel and audience rules where they just have you roll a bunch of dice to predetermine outcomes that should simply be roleplayed. MERP, on the other hand, doesn't do much of anything with roleplaying mechanics, but does require lots of charts and bookkeeping. It's easy enough once you learn the system, but newbies often find it daunting.
Said it better than I could have...TOR is a great looking game that isn't any fun to play. I got rid of all my stuff last year, MERP is still on the shelf.