One of the things that has always intimidated me about running a table top rpg in a world like Middle Earth has involved how the books should determine the direction of the campaign. The good Professor left us with a wonderful world but just how close to canon do you try and keep the setting? While I'm not an advocate for throwing in Ninja Elves armed with light sabers who ride giant eagles I do wonder at what point the Loremaster should inject his or her own creativity into the setting. The rules are so rich and full of flavor I don't want to spoil the experience by creating some that at least doesn't pay homage to the Middle Earth canon.

This thread may help: http://cubicle7.clicdev.com/f/index.php?tr...&showtopic=2376

Don't knock it before you try it!


But somewhat more seriously, it's all group preference. My intent is to stick very closely to canon. This is facilitated by how sparsely detailed Wilderland and its event are in this period (making it perfect for roleplaying).

I think tone is more important than anything else. Does whatever you add/describe "feel" like Tolkien, or does it feel like some other setting?

It's all highly subjective, so there's not really a right or wrong.

Except MAYBE those light saber-wielding Ninja Elves. Maybe.

The good thing i like about LOTR is the massive gaps in geography and chronology

lots open space for you to do your thing while still having the right feel

good luck

As this thread began almost immediately after I posted in another thread, I thought I may have some responsibility for "inspiring" it. Therefore, I'm reposting my "other" post here....

Prof. Tolkien also never mentioned that anyone ever used a restroom ... doesn't mean that they didn't.

I absolutely loathe it when discussions about what is canon and what is not canon spiral out of control when the mindset becomes "the creator did NOT mention something, it can never be". That is ludicrous! Canon should only EVER apply when something CONTRADICTS what has been created by the creator ... period. Just my 2 cents.

And, before this degenerates into statements along the lines of ... "Prof. Tolkien also never mentioned Death Stars ... does that mean they exist?" ... I could accept the presence of a Death Star orbiting Middle-earth as an (odd ... a VERY odd) explanation of the tools used by the gods to destroy Numenor. I could accept that all of the gods are actually orbiting, sentient satellites that enact their will through drones, etc. ... super-science. If I presented any of this for public consumption, I would merely point out that it is a different take on the subject matter that doesn't contradict any writings. It's just in the situations that Prof. Tolkien contradicted himself (or didn't state specifically) that I make a judgement call as to what I want to use. For example, my Balrog has wings ... my Glorfindel is THE Glorfindel who killed a Balrog ... my Dwarven women do NOT have beards.

Ultimately, I am accepting of different interpretations as long as they do NOT contradict the original work. Some, in fact, I find I derive amusement in the speculation. This doesn't mean I would actually use the interpretation.

Note, though, that I do NOT believe any of this to be the actual case ... I prefer my fantasy to stay fantasy and my science-fantasy to stay science-fantasy.

Just so you know, that would make for an epic thread on rpg.net.

Feel free to post it over there, if you want. I am not signed up over there and probably would not as I am enjoying myself too much here to distract myself. BUT, if you DO post it over there, I'd appreciate you linking the thread here so that I could drop by to see it ... upon occasion.

I completely understand and agree with this line of thinking. It used to frustrate me to no end as DM of a Forgotten Realms campaign setting in D&D; cuz there was always backlash from the "purists" who are quick to point out - "That's not really the name of the street in that city" or "That's not the way that temple faces" or "That guy can't possibly be here cuz he's suppose to be somewhere else."

As a DM it was frustrating and I felt too constricted to be able to develop my own stories when you have players like that.

I agree with Thorsgold that keep the flavor of Tolkien in place, and so long as you're not contradicting Tolkien - like having Strider be a woman, I think there's plenty of room for making your own stories and straying a bit from only "canon lore" inclusion.


I'm even including a couple of monster types that would typically be found in the "Monster Manual" of Pathfinder/D&D; that Tolkien never mentioned existed or perhaps called by a different name. But certainly doesn't mean they couldn't have existed.

IMHO, as long as one maintains the feel of the world, that's good enough for me. Heck, if the group agrees to play in an "alternate" Middle-Earth, in which things unfold differently, I'd have no problem with that.

To give an example: my first, and current, character, is a Wood(wo)man of Wilderland, made with the Fairy Heritage Background. The idea that my mother's origins were mysterious intrigued me. The LM (i.e., my brother) and I talked about it, and decided to go a step further: no one knows who my characters' parents are at all. "Dagmar the Foundling" was brought by Radagast to a Woodman family, who raised her as her own. Only as she grew, and she seemed to exhibit a preternatural beauty (represented by the "Fair" Trait) and remarkable awareness of the natural world (represented by the "Natural Watchfulness" Virtue) did people begin to think that maybe her origins were somewhat other-than-human.

Well, as we talked further, my brother and I decided that, secretly, she was a daughter of one of the river-maidens which are mentioned in the LMB. My brother asked, "Can river-maidens have children? I mean, they're spirits of some sort." I immediately said, "Well, Goldberry's mother was the 'River-woman.'" So, we agreed: she's the daughter of a river-maiden. That's her Fairy Heritage. My brother let me take "Swimming" as one of my Specialties, even though it's not normally available to Woodmen, to reflect a natural affinity for the water. It fit the story better, so we monkeyed with the rules a bit. The main point: we took something that is only hinted at in Tolkien, who never really spells out exactly where the River-woman fits into the world of Middle-Earth (my guess is she's a Maiar, but that's another matter), and used it to develop our story. We've enjoyed doing so, it's made for good story-telling, and it fits, imho, the contours of Tolkien's world. So I'm cool with it.

I think it is much the same as playing a Star Wars or Star Trek RPG. Both of those have an ever changing conon and apocrypha of expanded works, at least with Middle Earth it is all the invention of one person.

Think of the task of a LoreMaster in TOR as being like that of an author sitting down to write a new Trek or Star Wars story. They must remain faithful to what has gone before, but still tell a new story. Star Wars is subtitled "From the Adventures of Luke Skywalker", Star Trek is "the voyages of the starship Enterprise", the Hobbit and LotR are Tolkien's translations and editings of the Red Book. Each of these leaves room for other stories from other points of view.

It is even possible that something reported in Tolkien's novels is "wrong". He himself admitted that his visions of Middle Earth and how things fit together were constantly growing and evolving.

Stick as close to canon as you need to for your game to be a satisfying experience for you and your players. Diverge from canon as you need to for your game to provide a satisfying experience for you and your players.

Go not to the Elves for council, for they will say both no and yes.

Back in the 1990s, before the Prequel Trilogy was even a rumour, our gaming group decided to play a Star Wars campaign set during the Clone Wars. The "Clone Wars" were just a name back then. We just had a vague idea that it involved clones and guys wearing armour like Boba Fett's. So, we created our own background. It was loose at first, but became more fleshed out with each session. There was no Jedi council, no Trade Federation, no Count Dukoo. It was just a space opera romp across one of our most beloved fictional universes. Frankly, looking back at that campaign, I enjoyed our version of the Clone Wars far more than anything Lucas has done. About the only exception is when I first saw the trailer for Phantom Menace, and saw Darth Maul's double lightsaber, and thought, "Now, why didn't we think of that?"

You raise some very good points about using canon in TOR.

The Bottom Line: Ultimately, any Loremaster, with the consent of his players, can do anything at all within their personal campaign.

It's All in the Details: While strongly believing the above, I also think that many players (to any Middle-earth campaign regardless of rules system) and Loremasters find themselves in trouble after awhile. Creating their own personal campaign, with deviations from canon, means that it becomes harder and harder to return to the storyline as written by Tolkien. It is in the Loremaster's best interest to thoroughly investigate who does what, when, where and how so they can either continue to deviate accurately, or be able to re-sync their personal campaign into the 'official' storyline.

As an example, lets assume that someone wants to create a Middle-earth where the poor Sackville-Bagginses are actually able to buy Bag End before Bilbo returns from Erebor. Otherwise everything is the same. No big deal right? Totally wrong.

If, in your personal version of Middle-earth, Bilbo got back just after the sale of Bag End was complete and legally binding, then the Sackville-Baggins are the owners. You cannot thereafter use the Tolkien intro to LotR. Neither Bilbo or Frodo can be found at Bag End. Bilbo probably spent quite a bit of the gold trying to regain his lost home and consulting with legal counsel. Additionally, he would have to find new lodgings. So Bilbo may not have adopted Frodo - which means no Sam the gardener - so they never become friends at all. Without Bilbo being just up the Row, and no friend to visit there either, perhaps Sam never heard stories making him yearn for Elves. So if and when some guy named Frodo asked him for assistance with some jewelry, Sam might very well say "You're daft - or drunk - most probably both! Off with you now!"

Okay, with a bit of original thought, you can get around this. Maybe their is Sham, Frodo's Next Best Friend.

But then who is buying up all the property in the Shire? Err, what am I talking about? Well, Lotho of course. You know, the disgruntled Hobbit who buys up land for his silent partner, Saruman and is the primary vector for the tarnishing of the Shire at the end of LotR? Except, perhaps if his mother stopped nagging and wheedling about THE Baggins of Bag End, maybe he could amount to something in his own right without being seduced by evil.

Do you see the point? The implications of any deviation trigger further changes, endlessly. They can be worked around to create points of intersection, and even full merger, but only if you know of the events and work at re-crafting things to make everything work out.

This is, I think, where many players within the setting of Middle-earth find themselves. Forging a path of their own, but wanting one foot on the 'official canon' and another on their own vision. With neither fully developed nor fully enjoyed.

I tend to agree, Garn. I think that it's good to avoid violating canon, as a general rule, unless you go whole hog and say up front it's an alternate universe. When I crafted the background for the character I described above, i.e. the foundling who doesn't realize she's the daughter of a river-maiden, I was very careful about canon. As far as I know, there is nothing in any of Tolkien's writings which would preclude a woman unknowingly being the daughter of a river-maiden, and it makes for good fun, so why not? And it gives the GM good hooks. For instance, if and when he uses the river-maidens in our campaign, will they realize that my character is somehow kin to them? Heck, is one of them her actual mother? And who was her father? I'll let the LM decide all that, and have good fun along the way.

Now, if the LM suddenly said (and I'm sure he won't) that her mother is Goldberry and her father Tom Bombadil, I would object. I'd be like, "Okay, she's supposed to be the child of a river-maiden and a Man. There's no way she could be the daughter of Goldberry and Tom B., as he's not a Man." It's just too far off from canon, imho.