For myself, I am mostly interested in running in Eriador. I know it will be awhile before Errantries of the King is released; however, I would like to start thread that will cover ideas on how to convert adventures from one area to another.

For starters, I was thinking for the Marsh Bell perhaps the Midgewater, Old Forest, Chetwood, or the Trollshaws could be a replacement for Mirkwood with Dwarves of the Blue mountains instead of Erebor delivering something somewhere. Maybe to the Angle or Rivendell.

For Words of the Wise, maybe a Ranger sends the characters to find Gildor to help them defend Archet, Combe, Straddle, or Bree?


Thanks,

HN

I would like to see then add magic user to the game. I know the Lord of Ring book didnot talk about then, it was writen in 194o's by than lingist proffoser as than story.

As The One Ring is not trying to resemble Dungeons and Dragons, you won't see any magic-users in the game.

That was a bit of a non-sequitur. I actually thought someone was posting some suggestions.

ASSUMING you're using the same timeline as TOR:

Midgewater marsh would work well. Delivery to Elrond himself to replace the eagle.

Dwarves from Blue Mountains as the protagonist quest bestower, though I'm not sure whom would be important enough for Elrond to take an invite seriously.

Troll in Trollshaws makes sense for the troll encounter - but if the Marsh Bell ruins are in the Midgewater then there may be no reason for the party to continue on to Troll Shaws unless the PCs take up the journey.


Here's an interesting scenario: Bilbo Baggins himself is interested in delivering an invite to Elrond which is to be passed along to his friends on the eastern side of the mountains. Perhaps a little reunion for himself. He uses acquaintances of the 13 dwarves to deliver the message - the dwarves taking a similar route their kinsfolk did 5 years earlier. Something drove them off the road - and into the marsh. (Orc patrol) got lost, and where they succumbed to the bell in one of the ruins of the marsh before finding the path again.

(or the story could be the opposite - Elrond sending a message to Bilbo and travelling the Trollshaws first and then into the marsh; depends on where you want the PCs to originate from).

You can have the marshdwellers, the hangman's tree both still exist in the marsh. Not sure what you'd use as the patrol of elves tracking the party, though.

Maybe this is enough to start thinking.

As The One Ring is not trying to resemble Dungeons and Dragons, you won't see any magic-users in the game

Look you can played than lore friendy game of Lord of The Ring only afew time before people get tire of it. ICE sold Middle Earth game for over 20 year. At least have it as than opion for people who want it. May-be Scholar can learm some spells to fight the darkness like detect magic, healing spells and other just spells as than reward thing.

Thanks for the post SirKicley.

HN

Depending on how much the Dunadan / Rangers play a part in your Eriador focused campaign, you could use them as replacements for the Elven Patrol.

Arriving in Bree, the Party will obtain rooms in the Prancing Pony while performing errands and replacing supplies. As they go about their tasks the Party will have several harmless encounters with a grim looking man - a Ranger. Maybe at the Blacksmith while the Party is replacing a horseshoe. Or some kids, playing at sword-fighting with willow wands, knock into the Ranger. The Ranger simply corrects the kids hand position saying "If you hold your sword like that, you'll get disarmed. Try this." At another the Ranger seems to be peering out from his dark hood at the Party. Basically innocuous stuff unless the Party wishes to read more into it.

(After all, the Rangers are not known to be good until at least halfway through LotR. When Bree starts to realize that the withdrawal of the Rangers has made them vulnerable per Butterburr's comments on the return of the Hobbit party to the Shire.)

After enough encounters for the Party to recognize the Rangers face, allow each group to go its separate ways. However after a couple of days the Party will realize that they are being followed by a smallish party (2-6 members?) of dark, grim looking Men. Perhaps the Rangers come over a hill at sunset or one of the Ranger's has a bit of metal that flashes in the sunlight. Enough to draw attention to their presence while a couple hours travel still separates them.

While the Party is thinking Bandits, particularly if you run this as a Hazard, its actually the Rangers who received word to look after the Party once they left town. Now the Rangers are trying to catch up but since it is not a critical, life-threatening situation, the Rangers are moving quickly but are not sprinting. From the Players perspective they're now being chased by Bandits!

Something like this would work especially well with a party made entirely of Hobbits. I think Dwarves might be more likely to know of Rangers or unwilling to run away, preferring to face off against the Bandits. Men of Bree are fifty-fifty.

Excellent! Thanks!

After giving it some thought I think I would do this for MY Eriador set game. It will break with cannon a little but it helps me fill my vision for my game.

The timeframe will be nebulous, so I can alter it more easily. It will simply be late 3rd and perhaps early 4th.

The gap in cannon will be the population.

None would be a striving metropolis but not as empty as Eriador seems to be.

Tharbad is still occupied.

Lond Daer is still occupied

Maybe mixed a village near Sarn Ford.

There is a village/town by the last bridge ( inspired from one of the Tales from the Wilderland adventures)

Maybe an inn by the Ford of Bruinen ( inspired from one of the Tales from the Wilderland adventures)


The Trollshawls, The Chetwood, and the Old Forest substitutes for Mirkwood.

Possibly Rivendell, can be exchanged for the Woodland realms. Or maybe Woodland Hall with Gildor as Lord. To extend the field of play maybe the Grey Havens and the both stretches of the Ered Luin for the Dwarves.

A scholarly colony at Annumnais, and a outpost at Fornost and Weathertop and a town in the Angle for the Rangers.

Maybe slightly increase the population of the 4 Breeland villages.

There are the Hillmen, Dunlandlings, and the fisher folk of Eryn Vorn.

Just written as a thought exercise.

Also, this may all come to naught as C7 has populated Wilderland fairly IMO. The posting are solely thoughts on the subject if the Eriador supplement is not out in time for my needs.

Continuing, I could convert Tales of the Wilderland scenarios by making

Breeland=Laketown
Dale= Tharbad and Lond Daer
Beornings = Hillmen, Dunlandlings, and fisher folk
Rangers= Woodmen

Hoplitenomad,
When do you expect, in real world time, to be starting your campaign in Eriador? (Just wondering if you have enough time to get things resolved.)

I will probably start the end of August or Early September. I know the "Rivendell" supplement is due out in Autumn but that could be the end of November. I may use the fan produced Ranger and High Elves works produced here on the boards.

I do think that playing in Eriador is probably more of an issue with me that the other players in the group.

Obviously you should be able to make Marsh Bell and Words of the Wise work with some alteration (I do not have Tales from Wilderland yet so cannot advise on that one). Depending entirely on the equivalencies made between cultures and s - which is likely to be the biggest problem.

Are you going to try to keep the adventures "as is" with minimal changes accounting only for ? That is, for Marsh Bell, Gloin is still the quest giver, but he's at Bree for some reason? Or will you be swapping Gloin out for a "local dwarf" with a suitable reason to contact Rivendell? (I believe that was the intended adjustment to the adventure.)

At this point, I am not sure. Due to my limited GMing experience, I might just take the easier path and run the games in Wilderland and start tweaking things after have some gaming experience.

I guess changing the stories to put them in Eriador is always possible...
But I'm not sure it's the best idea.

Sure, you can translate Laketown into Bree, Dal guldur into what's left of Angmar.
But still, you'll miss something : the gigantic forest right in the middle of the area (and no, the Old Forest doesn't work, because your players will go around instead of through).

I think the real question would be : why do you want Eriador and not Rhovanion ?
Because it's less described in the book ? Take that as a opportunity to make the players big characters in Rhovanion rather than a weakness (in my games for example, I hope a colony will grow around the Easterly Inn from TfW - at least if my players protect it).
Another problem is, if you set your games in Eriador, it may clash with the canon setting of Errantries of the King when it will be published.

Let's put it another way: I want to play a Galdalf like character. Call it a Maia, or whatever, but there should be scope somewhere for playing a Wizard in Middle Earth. It's like saying you're not allowed to play an Elf.

Actually, it's like saying you're not allowed to play Sauron or the Balrog...

There are a significant amount of magical effects in the game as-is;

• Birthright gives you a one-use Resurrection effect
• Woeful Foresight gives you limited Clairvoyance
• Night-goer; Astral Projection
• Broken Spells; explicitly spells
• Raven of the Mountains lets you talk to animals
• The Speakers allows you to talk to anything in nature
• Wood-elf Magic; explicitly magical
• Staunching Song; where I come from, songs don't help you recover stamina

So there's 8 Virtues which are quite magical.

But this argument in particular fails another way; Maia are not the only culture missing from the game so far, you may have noticed. In fact, most of the Elves are gone; Elves of Lorien, Rivendell, Lindon, all suspiciously absent. As are Men of Rohan, Gondor, Bree, and Dunedain Rangers. So, in short, there will be many, many options in the final game which are not available to us right now. Whether or not Maia count as a 'Culture' or not is another issue, and the answer is likely to be 'No,' since 1) The Maia have no homeland or any observable Culture (the only Culture that can hold both Saruman and Radagast is 'Guys with very different and very specialized interests') and 2) Powerful magic-users are all accounted for and the game does not encourage you to break with the canon of the books. So, it's not exactly like saying you're not allowed to play as an Elf; it's like saying you're not allowed to replace Galadriel with your character.

It's like saying you are allowed to play any character like those you find in the Fellowship or in the Hobbit's adventuring party. Except Gandalf.

I want to play a Gandalf.

Hack the system and create your rules to play Gandalf, then.

However, I don't think the game should offer the rules to do it. It would clash with the current choices of the game.
And it would be problematic because the powers of Gandalf are never clearly explained, and what Gandalf is supposed to do will change with the loremaster. And sometimes with the player.
I prefer they focus on 'common' adventurers, without a wide power gap with the rest of the characters, than on such a can of worms.

Except it's not, and I explained why. There are literally no other characters "like" Gandalf in Middle-earth except those who are accounted for already. So it would be replacing an existing character with one of your own, or re-writing Middle-earth history to accommodate each new Wizard introduced. This game does not encourage either of those. Decipher's LotR RPG did, but TOR does not, it's very much a fill-in-the-cracks kind of approach to adventuring in Middle-earth. TOR is about creating characters and stories that fit in seemlessly with the events described in the Hobbit and LotR. Thus it is intentionally narrow in scope.

As I've already pointed out, your analogies aren't even making sense in the first place; You actually can't play as Aragorn, Boromir, Legolas, or Gandalf from the Fellowship. So why is Gandalf a crime when Aragorn is not?

So in other words, canon dictates that you cannot play a wizard in The One Ring, despite it being based upon literature where a wizard is a primary character. (By the way, I don't need to be patronised about these arguments, I do know them).

And despite not being able to play as named characters, you are/will be able to play every other character archetype from those books. Except the wizard.

Beyond the canonical arguments, it is a weakness in the game when a substantial number of players actually want to play a wizard and can't. Moreover, it's apparently OK to have a NPC Wizard as a patron (Radagast), but not to actually be allowed to play one. There are other Wizards hinted at in the books, that are not detailed. Whilst they are rare, provision should be made in a supplement down the line that actually allows you to play one.

A game has to make some choices.
They are not a weakness, but well... choices.
Other games about the middle earth have made differents choices (MERP allowed players to play wizards. And give numeric characteristices of Ungoliant. It was a choice, creating a D&D-like game in the middle-earth).

You'll note that, in TOR, you can't play a god (wizard are lesser gods, by the way), you can't play a dragon, you can't play an ent, you can't play an elfe who've seen Valinor.
And I think it wouldn't work actually.
Because those characters are named (there's five wizards, no more, and we know each of them).
And because those characters have to be super-duper powerful. Which would clash with the average level of a PC.

Well, then, don't reply with a simplistic, inaccurate analogy, it comes off more petulant and whiny.

Yes, the same way D&D dictates that you cannot play a Dragon even though it's in the name and is one of the iconic pieces of the setting.

Is there something inherently wrong with an intentionally narrow focus? The themes of this game revolve around seamlessly telling stories which all happen in the background of the canon, and letting people create and play Wizards would remove all hope of actually achieving that play experience.

This is a decent argument, stick with it. I think you would love this game.

Again, the same way you'll be allowed to have a Vanyar as a patron in Lorien, but not play as one because there is not actually a Culture of them present, yes.

OK, I can agree with you on this; I think they should eventually make full rules for Vanyar and Wizards in some strange sourcebook about changing the fundamentals of the setting. But, obviously, it would completely break the feel of the game to do so. The game wins a lot of points with a lot of fans by reverencing the setting and helping you tell stories that fit in it as-is, instead of requiring a re-write of the source material just to shoe-horn players' individual demands in. The game would lose a lot of its charm and a lot of its appeal if it changed that. I'd rather they concentrate on what they've got going instead of worrying about the shortage of games with spellcasters in them in the market today.

Out of curiosity, which specific abilities of Gandalf's are you missing? Also, let me recommend this issue of Other Minds magazine, which contains pretty much any magic in the Hobbit or LotR in the same format that other magic in TOR is used.

And you are coming across as pompous and arrogant. Conversation over.

Stubba is coming across as pompous and arrogant? You've walked into these forums and started an argument because this game hasn't been something it was never, ever going to try to be and never marketed itself as. It fills a legitimate niche in the market, and you're whining because you don't happen to be in that niche. Stubba's been way more polite than you deserve.

Hoplitenomad,

Using the existing adventures without having to substantially modify them is probably the best way for you to go. At least until you feel more comfortable with TOR's mechanics and setting. Look at this as an extended sample. Try the game mechanics out, explore Wilderland and the available cultures. Along the way determine what the players like and dislike about the game.

Afterwords you could create a custom adventure which moves the Company into Eriador. Progressing toward whatever changes the players prefer without feeling overwhelmed by all of the work required. All the prior gaming sessions will make writing any new material or changes to existing mechanics a lot easier; you will have memorized the rules and will not need to flip through the books constantly.

Additionally, this allows time for SG/C7 to publish new, relevant material as well. Once Rivendell is published, that alone would give you official versions of the three biggest cultures in Eriador to play: Hobbits, Dunedain / Rangers, Elves of Rivendell. Right there half of your work is done. Leaving you to create Men of Bree and Dwarves of Ered Luin (which are kind of mandatory). You could create any other cultures as needed, but you would have an entire set of playable cultures without too much extra work.

As I recall, that would only leave Elves of Lindon, Gwaithurim (a good, pre-Dunlending, Gray Man culture. Split due to Numenoreans' deforestation), the Dunlendings themselves (but, half the Gwaithurim material is probably copied here - they've got the same origins after all), Druadan / Woses (in the wooded, mountainous valleys of the Misty Mountains northwest of Isengard) and whatever you decide to do for Tharbad and Lond Daer.

Gentlemen,
While I personally would also like to play a mage character, I'm aware that doing so will require either adapting existing material or creating a whole new mechanism to make this possible. Alternately, I can wait until SG/C7 publishes a magic system of their own - if ever.

It is your personal campaign do whatever meets your story needs and seems best for you and your gaming group.

If you are not in the same gaming group, your expectations of the play style are not in conflict. So why argue?

I'd just like to say I agree with Garn here. This is the first argument I've seen on these forums, and I'm shocked.
TrippyHippy
I understand you want to play a magic user. I have a friend in my gaming sessions in the same boat. But for starters, magic has been discussed at length elsewhere on these forums, and this thread is not exactly related to magic. Also, the magic ideas come up with by various members of the community are actually really good, and I intend to implement them to some extent for my friend. However, merely complaining on this thread that you 'want to play a Gandalf' is pointless. If you want it that badly, why don't you come up with a way to play him yourself? That, or just go and play on a Lord of the Rings video game. There really are many ways you can use magic in TOR, so it's somewhat disheartening to see you arguing so pointlessly

Beleg

Actually, we could argue on one point : should Cubicle publish a sourcebook on how to play a maia. Because the time and energy spent on this book wouldn't be used for an other (and imo more interesting) book ?
The discussion may serve as a feedback from the customers.

I would rather see Cubicle 7 focus on other books rather than detailing how to play one of the 5 maia. That's a far too limited scope, for a far too limited audience.

I apologize, I don't mean to argue. It was late and I probably shouldn't have been replying. In my defence, I also offered the Decipher LotR RPG and the OM article on magic to help him out, as those things answer his concerns. He came off as a little rude, and I responded likewise. Again, shame on me.

I'm Loremastering a campaign set in the Fourth Age, and, after some plot contrivances, one of the Blue Wizards has returned from the East and has taught a handful of mortal wizards, who in turn have taken on an apprentice or two, and people can begin to pick up some of this, if they prove themselves worthy to the proper people and spend a Fellowship phase where they are. It's been a great deal of fun to expand further just beyond the canon and have a nice, open Tale of Years with which I can do whatever I want, including make my player-heroes the primary protagonists in their own world-saving quest.

That being said, I don't know if Maiar would ever be a good Culture to include. Vanyar I would love, because a First Age game sounds like a lot of fun, so long as there's a way for the party to take down a Balrog. The thing with Maiar is that there just isn't a Culture to go along with them. I guess technically there's no one Culture of Vanyar, either, so you'd have to make Elves of Turgon or whatever, so C7 will likely be unable to do anything like that given their restrictions on material. It'll be up to the homebrew community, I suppose.

While TH casually suggested making Maia a playable race, I think his real desire is to play a magic-user in Middle-earth, which doesn't necessitate making Maiar.

Hi, guys.

Gandalf, probably more even than Merlin, is the father of all magic-using characters in Fantasy Roleplaying. ("... Discuss." )
But, specifically, the role Gandalf plays in LotR is not really that of a PC, because the other characters -- the 'narrative characters', and hence the reader -- never really know what knowledge and inferences Gandalf's working with when he makes his decisions. That makes it hard for a reader to decide how a Gandalf-like character should act.

TOR also doesn't have rules for Patrons who travel about, but there are always issues and tensions about PCs accompanying someone massively more powerful than them. I expect some rules or guidance will be published in due course, at least when Gandalf does start to cross the paths of the heroes of Wilderland. But my guess is that it will be along the lines demonstrated in Words of the Wise, where Radagast's involvement in the Battle of Woodland Hall is essentially off-camera as far as the PCs are concerned, affecting them as a fun and flavoursome side-effect triggered arbitrarily when a Fate Die comes up with the G-rune.

The topic of PC magic has been hotly debated for a long time -- especially for Mannish magicians, as "the other Wizards hinted at in the books" would presumably have to be. Assuming that Gandalf, Radagast and Saruman are inaccessible as Patron-level figures, and the same would be true of a surviving Blue Wizard if a loremaster chose to introduce one, it requires a bit of selective reading of Tolkien's extra-canonical notes on wizards to justify PC-level lesser wizards. In my previous MERP games I've advocated taking exactly that line, in the knowledge that it's going a bit off-piste, because I especially enjoyed engaging with and exploring the magic of Middle-earth.
I say it's been hotly debated... But I couldn't point anyone to a specific FAQ resource or essay covering the subject. Let me speak for Tolwen, Issachar and myself to say that Other Minds magazine would very much welcome such a piece if someone wanted to tackle it!

But I'm currently more impressed with the line on PC magic taken by TOR. And most other commentators also seem to welcome it too. So I'm inclined to play TOR as presented, and not be in any hurry to force it into the mould I was accustomed to in previous games -- with the option to revise my position after going with this for a while.

Cheers,
--Os.

As a favor, can the topic move back to the original track of this thread and have PC magic move to one of the other threads where it is already a topic.

Thanx!