My (Long) Lord of the Rings Core Book Review

[Perrryyy]

Don't know what the game's about (though I can guess), and I'm a horrible narrator / character background writer!

That's the large part of why I've migrated over to the General Chat areas.

[Phantom]

I don't get this. I've had this discussion before with one of my L5R players, he didn't think that system was involved enough either. The best type of mass combat system is the one that can get the job done in a few minutes with a few rolls and good story telling from the GM. Look at the books, the Ent assault on Isengard is pretty much alluded to (there are a few scenes mentioned), the Battle of Helm's Deep was only a few pages long. Now, I haven't read 'Return of the King' all the way thru so I can't talk about the Battles in it. I do suppose that the final battle will be quite large and well written. My point being that even in epics like LotRs the really massive battle are usually distilled down to a few pages, why then do gamers want to spend a whole gaming session pushing minis around the table. If it is so important might I suggest B'Tech and Mechwarrior as your new games of choice.

As an aside, my frined preferred the Pendragon mass combat system, which is a little to envolved, some battles could last up to 20-30mins. All you ned is something that keeps the excitement level up.

Anyway my two Florins worth.

[Greg Davis]

Perry: There's no fault in that...heck, if you were to ask my players, they'd probably say that I'm not the best Gamemaster, either!

Don't misunderstand, I wasn't finding fault with you, but rather I was just trying to gain some level of understanding from your perspective.

On the plus side, if you feel that your Gamemaster skills could use some work (and whose skills, in the end, couldn't?), there's two excellent chapters in the Core Book written for Narrators. Like I say in my review, I've been GMing, DMing and Narrating for over a decade, and I found a ton of useful information in those chapters, and I think that those Narrators who are less experienced will find even more good stuff to take out of them.

Just a thought, of course...



Greg

[Greg Davis]

Phantom: You really hit the proverbial nail on the head there, I think. Most of the complaints that I've seen tend to come from the "it's not detailed enough" or "I'm left trying to figure too much stuff out on my own" camps. To me, if that's the sort of system that people want, then some sort of fusion of tabletop roleplaying and miniature/wargaming, like Battletech, or even Rolemaster (with its myriad charts and tables for pratically every situation) would probably be better.

For me, I've always felt that a battle was an excuse to use the creative license of the Narrator, coupled with the ideas and input of the players, to reach a decent conclusion. Let them come up with some tactics, if they're in charge or in a position to offer opinion, and then compare their tactical roll, accounting for their planning, verses the tactics of the opposing commander. Then I let them play through the battle from their perspective (fights, descriptions of fights, what have you), and I just make the rest up to fit with the way I want the story to go (using the previous rolls as a basis for the outcome).

That's always seemed to work well enough for my players, and I think that the unit battle rules will add just enough of an additional mechanic to make things that much more solid, in terms of the outcome (for instance, which units sustained the most casualties, with units attacked which units, which units need fortification or support, etc).

Tolkien often, it seems, uses battles as a backdrop for character drama and interaction, but not really as the driving focus of the story, and I tend to be the same way. As to why most gamers want the gritty detail and all that, though, I can't really say.

Personally, that's just not my cup of tea....but others cups of tea may, and apparently do, vary.



Greg

[REG]

Originally posted by Perrryyy

I just haven't bought the game. No excuse, but there ya go

EDIT: And yes, Reg, go a head and call me a blasphemer. You know you want to!

Well, I happened to be on the same boat as you are because I'm broke right now. So it'll be a long while before I have sufficient fund (after the bill payments).

That and the fact that we're panicking in Hawaii, what with the threat of a strike by dock workers on the West Coast. I'm hoarding for toilet papers here.

[Chris Landmark]

Originally posted by Perrryyy
I just haven't bought the game. No excuse, but there ya go

I haven't bought it either. Nor have I gone looking for it. I'm waiting for Decipher to mail me a free copy.

No, that is a realistic expectation. I won this contest, see.

The question now is, how many weeks should one wait before one starts complaining about the shipping delay for gratis material? Perhaps I should consult Miss Manners...

-Chris Landmark

[RaconteurX]

A thorough and excellent review, Greg... hard to believe it is your first. I concur with the vast majority of your views, but would like to correct one small error: according to Table 9.14: Combat Actions and Manoeuvres (p. 226), the action cost of a two-weapon/two-handed attack is 1. Sweeps and charges, which bracket the two-weapon attack entry, both cost 2. You erroneously state that a two-weapon/two-handed attack costs 2.

As for the Mass Combat rules, I prefer more dynamic rules which immerse the player-characters in the chaos of battle, such as those found in Green Knight's Pendragon or Chaosium's out-of-print Prince Valiant. Battles in my opinion must be memorable, dangerous affairs... they are, after all, major campaign events. Lord of the Rings should encompass this, in my opinion.

[Greg Davis]

Wow...I can't get away from you, Michael!

I think I answered your question on RPGnet, but if that answer doesn't quite cover what you're looking for, let me know here, and I'll see if I can clarify things better, ok?



Greg