How good is the LoR for an RPG?

[Capt. Anderson]

Our group is about to start with LofR or D&D 3.5, which do you recommend and why?

[Helegond]

It all depends on you style of gameplay.

I do play both, so I can speak about them equally.

LotR is much more storytelling, and interpretation. The game rewards you for being your character, and being heroic in Middle-Earth.

As such, is a complicated system with many, many rules. Like anyone else, of course. But you will need much more outside help (erratas and such) than D&D.

D&D, on it's part, is a fast-paced fantasy hack&Slash game. Yes, you can roleplay a lot, and you can create heroic characters. But you're not much rewarded for that (of course, it changes from GM to GM).

Simple and fast learning rules, with many helping sites, and sourcebooks that expand your gaming experience. Also, many, MANY adventures ready to play. Wich the LotR is missing (as KingOfRohan - Ben Hur here - can say).

So, what do you want? Profund stories, and deep detailed characters, of fast paced Diablo action?

Men, I do love both...

And, as say a friend of mine (and great GM) there isn't bad systems. There's bad GMs...

Cheers,

Helegond

[Ineti]

I'm not buying 3.5, so I can't speak for that. However, I can compare LOTR to D&D 3.0 if you'd like.

I like LOTR. It's an easy, flexible system that's quick to learn and play. The Narrator has a lot of work to do, but that's true for any game.

The character advancement system in LOTR is, IMO, much better than the one in D&D. Much more flexible and not tied so much to a set progression as in D&D. Two LOTR warriors with 5 advancements each could, statistically, be much more varied than two D&D 5th level fighters.

LOTR is much more geared toward heroic roleplaying. You play a good guy and do good guy things, which fits the setting of Middle-earth.

In D&D, you could do anything you want, from being a good guy to being the most evil person in the world.


Really depends on what you want out of a game, I guess.

[Razuur]

D20 is Science.

Coda is art.

They both have their strengths and weaknesses.

D20 is very rules based and tactical, yet not tied to a setting.

Coda is very cinematic and free flowing, yet strongly tied to Tolkien.

Depends what you are looking for.

Razuur

[aelius]

I purchased LOTR simply to get a set of CODA mideval rules. with only minor tinkering they will fit any sword and sorcery setting.
I much prefer CODA to D20 because of the flexability in character development. You can advance your charcter however you wish instead of along the path programmed for your class.
To my mind that makes CODA far superior to D20.

[Ra'an]

Personally i like the good balance that D20 has. Every class has its advantages and disadvantages and in the end all are generally equal. Any problems you face are usually fixable with a small house rule.

CODA is much more character driven. I have noticed how flexable advancements are, and considering most heros take the warrior order that is a good thing, as well as neccessary.

In the end its your personal style that should dictate your decisions.

[Ineti]

Originally posted by Ra'an
and considering most heros take the warrior order that is a good thing, as well as neccessary.

Really? Interesting. I'm about to start a Fourth Age campaign, and I thought more folks would take warrior, but the players surprised me. I have a barbarian, a craftsman, a loremaster, a warrior, and a minstrel. Very nice mix.