I remember seeing lots of Middle Earth RPG stuff back in my earlier gaming days, but never picked any of it up and never knew anybody who did. For some reason, I'm curious now.
How is the game system wise? Do characters take 30 min, 1 hr, 2hr+ to make? Is combat simple enough to handle large battle quickly, or more technical?
How does it do at making Middle Earth into a fun place to run around having adventures?
What do you need to play? If there's multiple starter books/sets, which is the best place to start? What supplements are essential? Nice to have? A waste of paper and money?
I enjoy LOTR and really enjoy the Hobbit- but I'm not a Middle Earth Fanatic, so little differences from "canon" will not be cause for alarm for me.
Just to be clear I'm talking about the older stuff from ICE, not the post movie version LOTR game.
I only ever saw the 1st edition of these rules; the 2nd is said to be better. MERP uses a cut-down version of RoleMaster. It's fairly simplified, but character generation takes a bit longer than, say, AD&D.
There were six classes (Fighter, Scout, Animist, Wizard, Ranger, Bard). Spell lists were cut down to 10 levels. Skill development at character generation was patterned by your cultural background, then your class would govern skill costs. The basic book could bring you to level 10, after which you could port to full RM.
Combat and magic use the critical tables we know and love, but rather than separate attack charts for every weapon vs. every armor type, they are broken down by category (1-H Edged, 1-H Blunt, 2-H, Pole Arm, "Bolt" spells, "Ball" spells, etc.) vs. armor category (None, Soft Leather, Rigid Leather, Chain, Plate).
Task resolution used the standard moving maneuver and static maneuver tables, whose results could be interpreted in a variety of ways. We ended up using the MM table for everything, and it worked just fine.
I rather liked the game when I played it. It did take a bit of getting used to during play, but once you got the hang of the system, it was fairly smooth. But I like RM.
As for supplements, they're gorgeous, very detailed, and sometimes not very Tolkienish. The maps are things of beauty. Many folks will tell you the system isn't the best choice to recreate the novels, and they're right. My group just played a high fantasy game set in a world that happened to look a like ME....
If you're familiar with Tolkien's world, you don't really need any of the supplements (there's decent cultural info on the races in the core book, and a small assortment of monsters), but they're worth it if you can find them cheap (good luck).
I think HenHR nails it. They are excellent books, but aren't very Tolkienish in tone. MERP got me interested, then i moved onto Rolemaster and used the MERP books in that - just as Ken said, we used Middle Earth as a place to adventure.
Ken does a good job of covering the essentials. And I have to say that I loved MERP! It was my main system during the mid-late 1980s. :D
I now see that the system was not necessarily the best one for emulating Tolkien's Middle-earth, but it was a lot of fun as a 'lighter' version of Rolemaster 2e. The 2nd edition included some rules for making the magic system a bit more 'Tolkienesque' -- viz., rules for 'corruption' if PCs used magic for personal gain too much (
a la Saruman), and rules for 'detection' by the forces of Sauron if the PCs used powerful spells. As a patch, it was okay. Overall, I'd say that if you don't care about emulating magic as portrayed by Tolkien -- or are willing to hand-wave certain things -- then the system is serviceable for Middle-earth.
Quote from: KenHR...
As for supplements, they're gorgeous, very detailed, and sometimes not very Tolkienish. The maps are things of beauty...
100 percent agreement here! The Middle-earth campaign modules by ICE were probably the best campaign modules ever produced, in terms of content, adventure ideas, and aesthetics. As Ken mentions, though, fidelity to Tolkien's vision varied widely from product to product.
In addition to the campaign modules (which described regions of Middle-earth, along with a number of adventure outlines), ICE also published some full-blown adventure campaigns. Two ones that are excellent IMO are:
Palantir Quest (set in the early Fourth Age), and
The Kin-Strife (covering Gondor's civil war).
I still like the system, and would even run a Middl-earth campaign with it again (although I would probably rule-out magicians as PCs).
If you're interested in an 'in-print' ruleset that is
very, very similar to old MERP (stripped of the Middle-earth specific references, of course), I recommend ICE's
Rolemaster Express.
Quote from: KenHRMany folks will tell you the system isn't the best choice to recreate the novels, and they're right.
The game wasn't meant to recreate the novels. It was set over 1500 years earlier in the timeline when magic was more common.
Basically it's Rolemaster Lite, with wonderful maps for different era than people think of when Middle Earth comes up.
You'll like the game if you like Rolemaster (the modules cover either the full RM system or the Lite one in the ME RPG). And you'll like their setting work if you don't brain-lock on the War of the Ring era.
D'oh, I'd forgotten about the timeline deal; it's been a long time since I played MERP. Not that we paid any attention to canon, anyway; I was the group's only ME geek (I've read all the History of ME books, Unfinished Tales, etc.).
I only played MERP a few times as a teenager, but my experience leads me to agreeme with everyone else- great for tolkienesque fantasy, not so good for Tolkien.
I don't agree, it's just that MERP does the Hobbit better than Lord of the Rings.
And, you have to make seventh level to cast a fire bolt. That's a lot of experience, most of the spells are very minor non-combat effects. RM magic in general is much weaker than D&D magic.
And those huge treasure hordes are right out of the hobbit.
Really I could make an arguement for LotR too, a +20 weapon in MERP isn't really a big deal like a +1 sword in D&D. It's more like a sword that's been blessed by a wizard or a village priest.
As for the magic item purchasing table, well okay that's not very Tolkienesque.
KenHR has given the essentials of MERP well.
An important selling point for me was the artwork for the game and the modules. Most was done by Hildebrandt and it really captures the feeling of the Tolkien "landscape" and makes you want to be a part of it.
I loved how you were able to play lesser known Tolkien races - like Lossoths and Variags and half-dwarves (Umli?).
People say it wasn't very Tolkien-esque but I don't see that. The art and writing was, I thought, very evocative of LOTR. Admittedly magic was more common in MERP than it was in the books, but it was nowhere near as powerful or prevalent as in, say, D&D.
That said, if I was running a campaign today, I agree that I wouldn't allow magician-type player characters.
Quote from: jeff37923...
An important selling point for me was the artwork for the game and the modules. Most was done by Hildebrandt and it really captures the feeling of the Tolkien "landscape" and makes you want to be a part of it.
Hildebrandt? :confused:
Do you mean Angus McBride (who did most of the covers) or Pete Fenlon (who did all of the regional maps)?
The Hildebrandt bros. did a lot of Middle-earth art, but none of it for ICE (afaik).
Quote from: noismsI loved how you were able to play lesser known Tolkien races - like Lossoths and Variags and half-dwarves (Umli?).
People say it wasn't very Tolkien-esque but I don't see that...
Well, for one thing, the Umli were an
invention of ICE -- they don't appear
anywhere in Tolkien's writings on Middle-earth.
:p
I
love the modules. But ICE definitely got a little carried away in some places (e.g. the entire 'Ardor' module).
Quote from: AkrasiaWell, for one thing, the Umli were an invention of ICE -- they don't appear anywhere in Tolkien's writings on Middle-earth.
:p
I believe they're mentioned somewhere in the Return of the King. If I recall correctly, they declare for Sauron and lay siege to the Dale. Although it's ages since I last read it. (They might not have had the name Umli in the book, but I believe that's where ICE got the idea from.)
Quote from: noismsI believe they're mentioned somewhere in the Return of the King. If I recall correctly, they declare for Sauron and lay siege to the Dale. Although it's ages since I last read it. (They might not have had the name Umli in the book, but I believe that's where ICE got the idea from.)
I'm
very, very confident that you are
incorrect about this!
(However, feel free to provide some textual references to refute me! )
Quote from: AkrasiaHildebrandt? :confused:
Do you mean Angus McBride (who did most of the covers) or Pete Fenlon (who did all of the regional maps)?
The Hildebrandt bros. did a lot of Middle-earth art, but none of it for ICE (afaik).
Gah! You're right!
Five months of working seven day weeks has killed my brain. Fatigue sucks ass!
Quote from: noismsPeople say it wasn't very Tolkien-esque but I don't see that. The art and writing was, I thought, very evocative of LOTR.
The art and (some) of the writing isn't what was cited as non-Tolkien-ish. It was the game mechanics themselves. The combat system especially, which was much more bloody and gruesome - and in some cases, the combat results were described in a flip, humorous manner - than any combat ever described in the books. Plus the magic just didn't seem to fit the setting - despite being set 1500 years or so before the time of the Hobbit and LotR, it was still the Third Age and magic wasn't very prevalent at all.
That said, many of the sourcebooks (though sometimes, as others have said, the writers came up with stuff that just had no relation to anything Tolkien wrote) were very good, and Angus McBride's covers were spot-on.
Quote from: AkrasiaI'm very, very confident that you are incorrect about this!
(However, feel free to provide some textual references to refute me! )
"...Men of a new sort that we have not met before. Not tall, but broad and grim, bearded like dwarves, wielding great axes. Out of some savage land in the wide East they come, we deem." From somewhere in the middle of ROTK.
That's what I was referring to. Admittedly it's a bit of a stretch to jump from that to the Umli, but when I saw them in the MERP core rule book I immediately thought that was what they were - and I got the impression that this passage was the inspiration, somehow. I'm perfectly happy to acknowledge that I'm wrong though.
Quote from: noisms... Admittedly it's a bit of a stretch to jump from that to the Umli, but when I saw them in the MERP core rule book I immediately thought that was what they were ...
I think that that is a bit of stretch, since that passage describes a tribe of Easterlings (who happened to have beards), whereas the Umli, as described in MERP, lived in the far north, and seem unlikely to have allied themselves with Sauron. The idea of 'half-dwarves' especially seems alien to Middle-earth.
I'm kind of surprised that this even being debated. I always thought that everyone who played MERP knew that the Umli were an ICE invention. I believe that ICE excluded them from their 'Middle-earth glossary' for this reason.
:cool:
Quote from: ColonelHardisson... The combat system especially, which was much more bloody and gruesome ...
I always thought that the combat system was quite appropriate. Middle-earth is a gritty place where combat is dangerous. An orc can kill even Isildur with a lucky shot.
On the other hand, I believe that it is strongly implied that that orc's "lucky" shot was nothing to do with luck and everything to do with the Ring deciding that it was time to find a new wearer.
Quote from: WarthurOn the other hand, I believe that it is strongly implied that that orc's "lucky" shot was nothing to do with luck and everything to do with the Ring deciding that it was time to find a new wearer.
Well, it was only an example. Bard scoring a critical hit on Smaug is another.
My overall point is that I've always thought of Middle-earth as a place where combat is pretty harsh. Even the Fellowship worries about orcs and trolls as serious threats (in the books at least).
Bard had an arrow of dragon slaying with a right of blood vengance on it. The arrow had truely come from the forges of the king under the mountain into his hands for the fated purpose of striking Smaug dead.
Okay, another example: an orc chieftainin Moria manages to do over Aragorn and Boromir and stab Frodo with a spear before being dispatched. A single orc.
Akrasia is right - LOTR combat is harsh, and the critical hit tables do a good job of emulating that.
Quote from: David JohansenBard had an arrow of dragon slaying with a right of blood vengance on it. The arrow had truely come from the forges of the king under the mountain into his hands for the fated purpose of striking Smaug dead.
Is there any textual support for that interpretation?
I know that the 'black arrow' that Bard used to kill Smaug was in some sense special. That much is clear in the Hobbit. But I didn't think that it had "the fated purpose of striking Smaug dead"!
Quote from: AkrasiaI always thought that the combat system was quite appropriate. Middle-earth is a gritty place where combat is dangerous. An orc can kill even Isildur with a lucky shot.
Cite a single passage Tolkien ever wrote that was as bloody and gruesome as those combat charts. You can't, because there aren't any. The whole point of a game like this is to simulate the author's world, since that is what draws people to the game in the first place. A game should be in keeping with what the original source material was like, or there is no point in its existence.
Quote from: ColonelHardissonCite a single passage Tolkien ever wrote that was as bloody and gruesome as those combat charts. You can't ...
Yes I can! :)
QuoteThen even as he thought these things the first assault crashed into them. The orcs hindered by the mires that lay before the hills halted and poured their arrows into the defending ranks. But through them there came striding up, roaring like beasts, a great company of hill-trolls out of the Gorgoroth. Taller and broader than Men they were, and they were clad only in close-fitting mesh of horny scales, or maybe that was their hideous hide; but they bore round bucklers huge and black and wielded heavy hammers in their knotted hands. Reckless they came into the pools and waded across, bellowing as they came. Like a storm they broke upon the line of the men of Gondor, and beat upon helm and head, and arm and shield, as smiths hewing the hot bending iron. At Pippin's side Beregond was stunned and over-borne, and he fell; and the great troll-chief that smote him down bent over him, reaching out a clutching claw; for these fell creatures would bite the throats of those that they threw down.
Then Pippin stabbed upwards, and the written blade of Westerness pierced through the hide and went deep into the vitals of the troll, and his black blood came gushing out. He toppled forward and came crashing down like a falling rock, burying those beneath him. Blackness and stench and crushing pain came upon Pippin, and his mind fell away into a great darkness.
From the end of "The Black Gate Opens" in
The Return of the King. I found that passage in less than two minutes. I'm sure I could find lots more like it if I spent more time.
:cool:
Yeah, but find a passage where someone stumbles over that damned turtle! :)
Seriously, I never thought MERP's combat system was too much to play ME. A lot of blood and broken bones were implied in the books (as Akrasia's cite shows), and much as Tolkien was a part of my childhood, I'd rather have the fun crit charts and stuff when I'm at the table rather than some overwrought purple prose. Go do Elvish calligraphy and debate the root of the word mellon on your own time, thanks... :)
There's also Merry cutting off the arms of the orcs that tried to seize him and Pippin at the parting of the fellowship. Really though, the fighting is a lot harder on the orcs and trolls than it is on our heroes.
Could have something to do with our heroes being the main characters of a book...
Quote from: AkrasiaYes I can! :)
From the end of "The Black Gate Opens" in The Return of the King. I found that passage in less than two minutes. I'm sure I could find lots more like it if I spent more time.
:cool:
A blessing upon you, Akrasia! :worship:
:respect:
Quote from: KenHRYeah, but find a passage where someone stumbles over that damned turtle! :)
...
Volume 7 of 'The History of Middle-Earth', page 274, footnote 5.
Quote from: ClaudiusA blessing upon you, Akrasia! :worship:
...
Merci! :)
Quote from: AkrasiaVolume 7 of 'The History of Middle-Earth', page 274, footnote 5.
No, if you read that entry carefully, Christopher Tolkien notes that the word "turtle" is conjectural, as the word exists only as an erasure of an early draft in pencil, subsequently written over in ink and then heavily edited at a later time, probably after massive changes to the status of turtles in the mythology had been contemplated by his father. Subsequent drafts B, C, and F don't mention turtles, though D does have a passage regarding the "invisible testudines" employed by the ancient pukel-men to trip up the unwary; however, this is only found in a long discursive passage about the derivation of the Sindarin word for broccoli, and its significance is unclear.