Printable View
the TCG makes use of the word Ulairi for the nazgul and Decipher have been allowed to name the individual wraiths in an unprecedented way. But this word comes from the Silmarillion; therefore what other stuff can Decipher use if they are allowed Ulairi?
Ulairi is the Quenya (I think or one of the other Elvish Lanauges) for Nazgul, and the names after are 2 - 9 in Elvish. And I beleive it was mention in the LotR Books somewhere, probable the appendices.
I have searched the appendices and there is reference to nazgul, black riders and ringwraiths, but there is no reference to Ulairi that i can find. it isnt mentioned in the index. as far as i can tell the wordcomes from a source beyond the license.Quote:
Originally posted by Grimbeorn
Ulairi is the Quenya (I think or one of the other Elvish Lanauges) for Nazgul, and the names after are 2 - 9 in Elvish. And I beleive it was mention in the LotR Books somewhere, probable the appendices.
It's not like they can use absolutely nothing from the Silmarillion; in the Core Book, they mention tharni, I'm rather sure they weren't supposed to, but they did and got away with it.
Also, I thought for sure that Ulairi was in the Lord of the Rings... like maybe Gandalf called them that. Perhaps not. :)
There's a possibility that the TCG has a slightly different license than the RPG. Thus, they (the TCG developers) may be able to use material that the RPG Studio could not.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
the TCG makes use of the word Ulairi for the nazgul and Decipher have been allowed to name the individual wraiths in an unprecedented way. But this word comes from the Silmarillion; therefore what other stuff can Decipher use if they are allowed Ulairi?
Oh, and welcome back, Martin. :)
I think Gandalf referred to the Nazgul as the Ulari in the "of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" section of the Silmarillion.I too tried to track down the source of that word and I'm pretty sure that is where I found it.But since I have loaned that book out I have no way of checking.
Thank you.
Ulairi is indeed in the Silmarillion; my point is that if Decipher can use it then what else can they use. I cannot see them getting a different license for one game than for another. in fact i was uhnder the assumption that there was one license for all products D chose to produce for the LotR and that license didnt include the Silmarillion.
Though the word Ulairi is found in the Silmarillion and is not actually used at any time in the LOTR, I do not think its off-limits to Decipher. They have just decided up to this point not to use the word.
The word Ulairi is the Quenya translation for Nazgul.
The license, from what I've been told, is one and the same for the RPG and CCG. I believe as the RPG product line develops you may see the word Ulairi come into play.
We know that the Tolkien people are very difficult to deal with and get the rights from, surely they would be very hard on anyone who infringed on their IP - no matter how small. After all look how ICE got treated. The point of this isn't just about one word, its about the use of material outside of their license. If they are allowed to use Ulairi, then why not Istari? for example, and so on.Quote:
Originally posted by vgunn
Though the word Ulairi is found in the Silmarillion and is not actually used at any time in the LOTR, I do not think its off-limits to Decipher. They have just decided up to this point not to use the word.
The word Ulairi is the Quenya translation for Nazgul.
The license, from what I've been told, is one and the same for the RPG and CCG. I believe as the RPG product line develops you may see the word Ulairi come into play.
Basically, Martin, it comes down to one simple thing. Approvals. If the folks at TE approve the use of Ulairi, but not the use of Istari, then Decipher can use one, but not the other. What decisions are made in approvals are up to TE and NewLine, and Decipher must abide by their decisions.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
The point of this isn't just about one word, its about the use of material outside of their license. If they are allowed to use Ulairi, then why not Istari? for example, and so on.
obviously you dont want to discuss this; that's sad because the more that decipher can use the better the game will be. discussing magic, for instance, without using the word Istari is limiting indeed. I also dont believe the license lets certain elements of certain book s be used and not others. I would have believed that TE woudl have said yes or no to what they own (silmarillion and the unfinished tales iirc) in their entirety or not at all. still never mind.
Give me a break, Martin! If I didn't want to discuss it, I wouldn't respond at all. You got a response. Just because it's not the answer you want doesn't make it any less valid.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
obviously you dont want to discuss this; that's sad because the more that decipher can use the better the game will be.
I have to disagree. No one has had any problems discussing magic since the game came out last year and the term Istari was not required. If you have problems discussing magic without the term, then that sounds like a limitation you've placed on yourself.Quote:
discussing magic, for instance, without using the word Istari is limiting indeed.
Well, obviously I can't control what you do an do not believe, Martin. However, what happened has happened. Explanations have been offered. Choosing to believe them or not is your call.Quote:
I also dont believe the license lets certain elements of certain book s be used and not others. I would have believed that TE woudl have said yes or no to what they own (silmarillion and the unfinished tales iirc) in their entirety or not at all.
> I have to disagree. No one has had any problems discussing magic since the game came out last year and the term Istari was not required.
I said that discussing magic was limited, not that it couldnt be done. it depends on the nature of the discussion itself. some players may be content to discuss magic on whatever level they are comfortable with, even if it doesnt go into much depth. i however think that a game based on lotr can only benefit from having all available information and that includes, on the subject of magic, the Istari.
> Explanations have been offered. Choosing to believe them or not is your call.
it isnt a question of belief, you yourself said you didnt know whether the license for the rpg was the same as the tcg.
So, I would assume then that you propose:Quote:
Originally posted by kong
i however think that a game based on lotr can only benefit from having all available information and that includes, on the subject of magic, the Istari.
a) the Tolkien Estate change their views on licensing?
b) Decipher break the terms of their licensing arrangement with New Line and Tolkien Enterprises?
c) Decipher give up their very expensive license and cease production of their award-winning game because you don't think they can do the job with what they've got access to?
I can't see any other realities coming into play, but then, reality and your opinions never had much of an acquaintence.
By the way, is there any reason you are so obsessed with this topic that you cross posted it to rpg.net (where you have been repeatedly banned for your bile towards Decipher and other community members), as well as here? Any point other than malice?
>So, I would assume then that you propose:
why would you assume anything?
>b) Decipher break the terms of their licensing arrangement with New Line and Tolkien Enterprises?
from what i have seen thats what has happened. it just depends on whether their tcg license includes the Silmarillion (and why the rpg doesnt) and whether TE give a damn.
>c) Decipher give up their very expensive license and cease production of their award-winning game because you don't think they can do the job with what they've got access to?
this thread doesnt get into that at all and thus i havent said anything of the kind in this discussion,a lthough my feelings regarding Decipher's handling of the game have not changed and I dont hide that fact. it just isnt relevant to this discussion - despite your apparent efforts.
>By the way, is there any reason you are so obsessed with this topic that you cross posted it to rpg.net (where you have been repeatedly banned for your bile towards Decipher and other community members), as well as here? Any point other than malice?
obsessed? no, i dont think that constitutes obsession. however since you disagree with everything i say to the point where you feel qualified to make comments about my sanity i would say you are closer to obsession for posting to threads you clearly disapprove of and dont agree with - and say nothing to prove me wrong and thus further the debate.
and i coudl care less about what the peopel at rpg.net think so your repeated efforts to rattle me aren't very succesful. i have made no secret of my feelings towards the way decipher do business; feelings born of experience and knowledge.
Whoa, it just hit me... Martin? I wasn't into LotR RPG right from the get-go, but bloke will have a long-lasting impression on my memory for a long while to come.:rolleyes:
I'm going to stay off this thread... the poor grammar hurts my eyes! ;) Just joking. :)
Kong,
I still think that at some point the word Ulairi could come into play. Really, with the products thus far, not a great deal of space has been devoted to the Nazgul in general. It is possible that in a sourcebook or suppliment in the future could really go into depth on the Ringwraiths and use the call-names that are found in the CCG.
The license is the same, but it doesn't mean the games are.
There are things I like about the RPG and other things I wish would be changed. The same can be said for the CCG. But, really its too early into the life of the game to determine may or may not actually making it into the line.
I'm sure that you and others have made a number of house rules to establish your individual campaign vision. Thats one of the long known benefits for playing an RPG. The ability to change what you don't like and to run the game as you see fit.
The lack or exclusion of words is just not that big of a deal. I was and always will be more concerned over issues that exist in the actual game system.
Or problems with accuracy in the setting.
bloke -Quote:
and i coudl care less about what the peopel at rpg.net think so your repeated efforts to rattle me aren't very succesful. i have made no secret of my feelings towards the way decipher do business; feelings born of experience and knowledge.
You've never really answered the simple question I've asked you time and again, though, and I think if I could understand your goal I might stay clear of your neverending, incoherent grudge match against some fairly decent people.
Why do you bother? What do you hope to achieve? What, aside from displaying your pathological hatred for Decipher and their game, and exercising your badly-spelled inarticulate rants about it do you hope to accomplish? Positive change? An apology from Decipher? What?
You're continually rude to Doug, who didn't write the game, didn't edit it, and doesn't write for it. Why he lets you post here is a decision beyond my ability to fathom. The main designer of the game, Steve Long, doesn't work at Decipher any more. Neither do many of those involved with the design and production of the RPG, yet you continue to harp on decisions you have no idea about, and licensing arrangements you are even less aware of.
Why do you come back to site after site whenever the LotR RPG is mentioned, even after being banned repeatedly, just to vent your bile once more? I've seen people offer to buy your copy from you to shut your complaints.
Any non-obsessive person would have long-ago walked away from the game and never looked back. Yet you still come slinking back under new aliases again and again. You gain no allies, no converts, nothing. Why bother?
Why continue trolling, which is exactly what you're doing?
What do you gain from this? What enjoyment could you possibly take from being such a pointless stalker?
Though I don't care for his tactics, I have to say I agree with his point, as I think I understand it. I have voiced similar views in the past, I think. If Dec only has the rights to the FOTR, TTT and RotK and The Hobbit and that is it, then won't they come to a point where they will run out of road idea wise?
As to the argument presented here, I m not sure what the point in repeatedly going over a proposed name for a creature that long ago forgot said name is.
FB&WM had descriptions for creatures and items outside Tolkien's works.Quote:
Originally posted by Phantom
Though I don't care for his tactics, I have to say I agree with his point, as I think I understand it. I have voiced similar views in the past, I think. If Dec only has the rights to the FOTR, TTT and RotK and The Hobbit and that is it, then won't they come to a point where they will run out of road idea wise?
I am in the playtest circle for upcoming products, and though I can't describe what I've read and worked on, I can tell you that there is plenty from outside the canon being introduced for the game.
On another thread, vgunn notes that the press release claims that there are 50 new spells coming for the Loremaster/Magician book.
Sourcebooks for Moria, Helm's Deep, Isengard, and Rohan have been announced. Don't you think that these will have more new material in them?
Even though MERP apparently took liberties with what they could cover, they still invented plenty to fill the gaps of what Tolkien didn't bother describing. Decipher will likely be equally inventive when it comes to filling their sourcebooks (though with more attention paid towards the licensed intellectual property).
Middle-earth is a huge place. The game line is less than a year old. It has been admittedly slow, but there is a lot of stuff in the pipeline, and a lot of things to write about. Trust me in this.
And though I do not know for certain if it is the case, a factor which might contribute to the release schedule is the reviews/approval process, which has slowed many licensed games down in the past. Don't know if it's the case here, and Decipher sure shouldn't say so either way, but if I had to guess about why things are taking as much time as they are, I would point a finger at the Tolkien Estate and New Line Cinemas.
1) Didn't notice. I will have to look more closely when next I get the chance.Quote:
Originally posted by Jason Durall
1) FB&WM had descriptions for creatures and items outside Tolkien's works.
2) Sourcebooks for Moria, Helm's Deep, Isengard, and Rohan have been announced. Don't you think that these will have more new material in them?
3) Even though MERP apparently took liberties with what they could cover, they still invented plenty to fill the gaps of what Tolkien didn't bother describing. Decipher will likely be equally inventive when it comes to filling their sourcebooks (though with more attention paid towards the licensed intellectual property).
2) That is my most sincere wish, yes. And I look forward to the Rohan: Home of the Horse Lords.
3) Again this is my hope, but from what I understand from the agreement with TE this isn't the case. However, I know very little about contract law in general, and the agreement in specific so I hope I have misunderstood things.
Please don't take what I have said too critically, I want this franchise to continue as much as anyone.
>Though I don't care for his tactics, I have to say I agree with his point, as I think I understand it. I have voiced similar views in the past, I think. If Dec only has the rights to the FOTR, TTT and RotK and The Hobbit and that is it, then won't they come to a point where they will run out of road idea wise?
More to the point, if the license does allow for the use of the Silmarillion then why aren;t they using it? IF the license doesn't allow for the S then how come they are allowed to use its content. This isn't jsut about one word, its about the us of material from a source apparently outside of the license.
>As to the argument presented here, I m not sure what the point in repeatedly going over a proposed name for a creature that long ago forgot said name is.
because it isn't just about the Ulairi per se, it is about the use of S material. I would think that given TE's harsh reputation they would come down very hard on anyone breaching their copyright in this way - otherwise what is the point? It doesnt matter how small that breach may be.
>I might stay clear of your neverending, incoherent grudge match against some fairly decent people.
then don't read it.
>You're continually rude to Doug, who didn't write the game, didn't edit it, and doesn't write for it.
im well aware of that and never claimed otherwise. please dont tell me im being rude when i havent been. i can show you rude behaviour if you'd like, and i suspect you do since you continually post these stupid questions designed to provoke.
>Why he lets you post here is a decision beyond my ability to fathom.
then dont worry about it since it is none of your concern.
>The main designer of the game, Steve Long, doesn't work at Decipher any more.
your point?
>Neither do many of those involved with the design and production of the RPG, yet you continue to harp on decisions you have no idea about, and licensing arrangements you are even less aware of.
what decisions would those be? Because someone no longer works for a company is no limit to me discussin thir work on a game i own. its not a very good excuse to make. someone leaving the ship doesnt stop us from saying they have mde mistakes nor does it excuse those mistakes - mistkes you have never been able to justify in place of your attacks on me. i know the license, it has been brought up on boards before, D are not allowed to use the Silmarillion - hence the thread. if you had paid attention you woudl have realised this and not posted ignorant comments about me instead.
>I've seen people offer to buy your copy from you to shut your complaints.
no you havent. you saw people saying they wer going to buy the game, but not from me.
>Why continue trolling, which is exactly what you're doing?
and what do you think this is ?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jason Durall
[B]FB&WM had descriptions for creatures and items outside Tolkien's works.
we are talking about things within tolkin's work, since Middle Earth is his world. I am not sure of the wisdom of turning it into something else possibly in lieu of availability to his work.
>I am in theplaytest circle for upcoming products, and though I can't describe what I've read and worked on, I can tell you that there is plenty from outside the canon being introduced for the game.
and that is preferrabel to stuff in canon. after all i could buy any number of tolkienesue frpg's if i wanted non-canonical middl earth settings.
>Sourcebooks for Moria, Helm's Deep, Isengard, and Rohan have been announced. Don't you think that these will have more new material in them?
the limit still remains the same; anything pertinent to those settings outside of the license is not going to be included (or will it). that is not an ideal situation, and that is the point that was made.
>Even though MERP apparently took liberties with what they could cover, they still invented plenty to fill the gaps of what Tolkien didn't bother describing. Decipher will likely be equally inventive when it comes to filling their sourcebooks (though with more attention paid towards the licensed intellectual property).
expanding the information (and making it clear that it is such) isnt a problem, making stuff up in lieu of established canon is.
>And though I do not know for certain if it is the case, a factor which might contribute to the release schedule is the reviews/approval process, which has slowed many licensed games down in the past. Don't know if it's the case here, and Decipher sure shouldn't say so either way, but if I had to guess about why things are taking as much time as they are, I would point a finger at the Tolkien Estate and New Line Cinemas.
while thats true i think people have been shown more disappointment with quality rather than lateness.
And Doug has answered you repeatedly about the scope of the license, but you imply that he's either lying, uninformed, or unwilling to talk about it.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
More to the point, if the license does allow for the use of the Silmarillion then why aren;t they using it? IF the license doesn't allow for the S then how come they are allowed to use its content. This isn't jsut about one word, its about the us of material from a source apparently outside of the license.
because it isn't just about the Ulairi per se, it is about the use of S material. I would think that given TE's harsh reputation they would come down very hard on anyone breaching their copyright in this way - otherwise what is the point? It doesnt matter how small that breach may be.
The game also used the term "tharni" and later retracted it because it was outside the scope. Apparently it slipped by the license review process, and was later caught. This is likely the case with this term.
Do you think they have access to stuff from The Silmarillion and just don't want to tell anyone?
Again, what is your point here? What point are you trying to make?
Asking you to contribute meaningfully to a message forum, or to provide a point to your embittered rants is trolling? That is certainly a new definition of the term.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
>Why continue trolling, which is exactly what you're doing?
and what do you think this is ?
Why do you come here?
What do you want from Decipher, or any of the folk on this board?
You say you don't care what the people of rpg.net think of you, yet you go back again and again, despite being banned. Why?
And in case you're wondering, I will continue to question your motives and call you on your trollish behavior as long as you frequent communities I enjoy being a part of, communities you have been disciplined in, warned to behave in, and banned repeatedly from.
So, I will throw it back at you. If you don't like the criticism I level at your incoherent, badly-spelled, vitriolic and misguided stalking of Decipher and a RPG I enjoy, then don't read it.
___________________________
And if any moderators are reading this, I firmly encourage them to ban martin. These are not public forums, and participation is voluntary and a privilege. He has demonstrated time and again his unwillingness to behave civily, or to provide any meaningful discussion other than level his tired and pointless criticisms, towards no specific end. He has stated that he does not feel that the game is playable, nor does he seem particulary interested in purchasing further LotR products. Why exactly does he come here, then, if not to be a troll?
[QUOTE]Originally posted by kong
[B]Well, if you are not sure, then it must be a bad idea.Quote:
Originally posted by Jason Durall
we are talking about things within tolkin's work, since Middle Earth is his world. I am not sure of the wisdom of turning it into something else possibly in lieu of availability to his work.
Perhaps you should do so. Midnight is very nice, from what I hear. You might find it "preferrabel."Quote:
and that is preferrabel to stuff in canon. after all i could buy any number of tolkienesue frpg's if i wanted non-canonical middl earth settings.
So this is the point of all your rants? That it "is not an ideal situation"? Your insight is amazing.Quote:
the limit still remains the same; anything pertinent to those settings outside of the license is not going to be included (or will it). that is not an ideal situation, and that is the point that was made.
A problem for who? You?Quote:
expanding the information (and making it clear that it is such) isnt a problem, making stuff up in lieu of established canon is.
Somehow, I think the rest of us will endure.
While your support is greatly appreciated, Jason, I wouldn't waste your breath. Martin has been given numerous chances to mend his behavior on multiple message boards and shows no sign of even the slightest change. The more you argue with him, the more determined he becomes. Trust me, though, the situation will be handled. :)
EDIT: Nothing constructive to add.
>And Doug has answered you repeatedly about the scope of the license, but you imply that he's either lying, uninformed, or unwilling to talk about it.
i have made no such implication and your efforts to smear me with continued trolling only make you look the fool. clearl;y you have nothing to add to this thread except to tell me im psychotic or obsessed (which, if even remotely true wouldntbe your concern or business). i have rpeatedly told you to ignore me and yet here you are again with the same tired old rubbish making more of a nuisance of yourself than i ever could. you coudl have chosen to say something insifghtful and relevant to the subject but no you want to misrepresent me, time and again. and to respond to your latest attempt at a cowardly slur i will tell you that doug never spoke with authority about the license and so a definitive answer has not been given - none of which addresses the point itself which im not going to belabour.
Here is what doug said: "There's a possibility that the TCG has a slightly different license than the RPG."
OK? good, moving on...
>The game also used the term "tharni" and later retracted it because it was outside the scope.
now you begin to orbit the point i'm making. if decipher had to retract that it shows that TE are concerend with every detail of their license and copyright regardless how small. logically then one woudl assume that if decipher cant use the word tharni in small doses in an rpg, they surely couldnt get away with ulairi over and over again, emblazoned on a variety of ccg cards which have a far greater profile. thus to my mind the question still remains, perhaps you would like to have a go at answering. No? thought not.
>Apparently it slipped by the license review process, and was later caught. This is likely the case with this term.
Ulairi has been used since the tcg first came out as nazgul were in the first set - and it isnt easily missed.
>Asking you to contribute meaningfully to a message forum, or to provide a point to your embittered rants is trolling? That is certainly a new definition of the term.
you obviously are unaware of your own hypocrisy and the meaning of the term trolling. Let me explain: i started a thread in a forum for the lotr rpg about the lotr rpg, you have chosen to respond with messages telling me how mad i am and contributing nothing to the thread. that is trolling; its that simple. if you dont like the thread, fine dont read it - its easy to do, just scroll on by, but since the threaed pertains to the game it is relevant and you im afraid have absolutely no credible argument to tell me i am trolling when you are in fact guilty of that more than i.
and if you find my posts so 'embittered' and ranting, by all means avoid them. can you not even do that? No, you continually choose to get your knickers in a twist over somethign you could easily avoid. you are obviously the kind of person who complains about terrible tv shows, but refuses to switch them off instead of watching them. that is screwy logic.
this isnt a rant, you cannot provide a single example of this threaed being nothing more than a rant, and you have nothing to provide that pertains to the thread, a thread i have expolained and justified. if its not to your satisfaction, tough - dont read it. how many times would you like me to say that? once should be enough, but clearly it isnt.
>Why do you come here?
thats my choice and my business, if my irrational thought processes are that bothersome you can always not read them.
>What do you want from Decipher, or any of the folk on this board?
not asking stupid questions designed to provoke would be a start but i doubt it will happen.
>You say you don't care what the people of rpg.net think of
you, yet you go back again and again, despite being banned. Why?
why do you think? i want to post a message, its that simple! there is no evil genius at work tryng to plot his revenge against the master spy! sory to disappoint you.
if people dont like what i have to say then they can tell me why or they can ignore me, its their choice and i dont care which so long as they arent stupid about it. you are being stupid about it.
>And in case you're wondering, I will continue to question your motives and call you on your trollish behavior as long as you frequent communities I enjoy being a part of, communities you have been disciplined in, warned to behave in, and banned repeatedly from.
well youre going to be wasting your time then, hope you enjoy continually posting the same stupid pointless messages and turning relevant discussions you otherwise have no interest in into battles. good thinking. still its your choice.
>So, I will throw it back at you. If you don't like the criticism I level at your incoherent, badly-spelled, vitriolic and misguided stalking of Decipher and a RPG I enjoy, then don't read it.
your logic is beyond coherency. turning my argument around doesnt actually work, it just falls flat on its face.
>Well, if you are not sure, then it must be a bad idea.
it is indeed a bad idea. dilutiong middle earth to sell more product will do nothing but harm the game's credibility and any potential longevity it might have. including out of canon elements because of the limits of the license is likewise a foolish idea.
>Perhaps you should do so. Midnight is very nice, from what I hear. You might find it "preferrabel."
why would i want to buy a fantasy game based on tolkien's work if it clearly isnt. where is the logic there?
>A problem for who? You?
correct, as well as others i suspect as it is likely that if one person thinks a certain way about something there will be others, and its not as if i am the only person disappointed with this game. but i never claimed i was speakng for anyone else.
> Doug Burke While your support is greatly appreciated, Jason, I wouldn't waste your breath. Martin has been given numerous chances to mend his behavior on multiple message boards and shows no sign of even the slightest change. The more you argue with him, the more determined he becomes. Trust me, though, the situation will be handled.
sigh, and here is the perversity of it: doug has just said what i have been saying all along: if you dont like what i have to say - ignore it!
One last thing I will mention without adding to the flame-fest is that IMO this game need quality over quantity more than anything elese.
Meaning: They [Decipher] could have the rights to every little thing that Professor Tolkien wrote on Middle-Earth and it would make little difference if the products were sub-par.
Listen, I'm one that thinks the less suppliments they produce the better. Most people have such a strong personal vision and attachment to ME that its impossible to please everyone.
ICE was great on certain stuff, but really went off the deep-end on some others.
Give me a well-done Core Book and a complete sourcebook and beastiary for LOTR and thats all you need, really. Let the fans and the official website offer up optional, rules, characters, and adventure ideas.
Sorry, no. Missed my point entirely while simultaneously providing the last nail. ::Shrug::Quote:
Originally posted by kong
>i have made no such implication and your efforts to smear me with continued trolling only make you look the fool. *SNIP!* sigh, and here is the perversity of it: doug has just said what i have been saying all along: if you dont like what i have to say - ignore it!