Hi people,

I'd like to know if I'll be able to play the same elf character throughout the 3 core sets, or is he supposed to retire or something like that ??

I'm asking this because character evolution seems kinda limited, in ways like only being able to reach Wisdom 6 and Valour 6 ...

Playing humans seems very cool, with the generations mechanics, having your son or spiritual heir to pick up your sword after you is very neat, but how will it be with elves?

My question in fact goes a little deeper than this, I'm trying to get a hint if there will be high powered characters and NPCs on the next supplements or Francesco intends to keep the game low-powered ?

By the way, the game is a jewel, I'm waiting forward to get my physical copy and some extra dice sets (wondering which colours will be available also).

Francesco and John H are superb artists.

The short answer is we don't know.

The long answer includes:

1. TOR gets quite high powered. PCs with Skills at 6, even if Wisdom and Valour max at 6 are going to be more powerful than the existing protagonists of Lord of the Rings, Gandlaf excepted.

2. Elves will likely retire to Valinor due to Shadow and Hope within the scope of the three sets., even though they are immortal.

3. I don't think any set of the TOR will be allow you to play the most powerful entities of the setting like Beorn, Maiar or Elven Lords. They are pretty much defined in this Age in any case and are not really likely to "adventure".

4. Francesco did mention looking at the issue of powerful PC types like Dunedain Rangers and it may be coupled with an equivalent obligation to help balance them.

But don't you think there should be other things to advance the characters, other than skills, Valour and Wisdom ??

; )

So that after 3 years of real gameplay you could see a huge difference other than skills at 6 ??

There does appear to be a much smaller selection of things to improve, but I don't see that as a hinderance. As roleplayers, most of us are used to systems where you see a massive change in characters and the almost exponential increase in abilities.

Obviously it is too early a stage to see how much difference it would make to have a character as far advance as we will see after 3-4 years of in character time, let alone 10+, but given the setting I don't have an issue personally.

It is possible that later supplements will add further things to buy with experience and advancements but given the slow increase in both, especially experience, it could very easily end up with people feeling a little too stretched, sort of like butter spread over too much bread.

I definately found the party I ran this for on saturday night were expecting to be able to improve their characters immediately after the eperience was awarded.

All that being said, I see no reason why you couldn't, if you chose, make certain things purchasable with either advancements or Experience. For example, you could make signatures or distinctive features purchasable, or possibly even allow people to buy off shadow.

I wouldn't myself but it is up to each group to decide the way they want their game to go. Bear in mind however, that the more you change the system, the further you stray from the balance that the designers structured the game around.

Above all things, enjoy the game.

E

The game is amazing, I've already read the two books and want MOREEEE, lol.

Though I don't know when I'll be able to narrate it, since I've just moved to another city.

The point is kinda liked CODA (even though TOR is way much better and flavorful) and in that system we could see the difference between notable characters, Elrond was level 150, Gil-Galadad level 127, Aragorn level 65, Gandalf level 78, Galadriel level 82 and so on...

Sorry if I'm being boring, but I'm just wondering how we'll be able to portray these awesome NPCs in game terms using TOR.

Many people will agree with me that even though we Loremasters don't plan on using all their traits, as a fan it is amazing to have these characters stated up, don't you think ?

I bet Francesco will come up with something ; )

By the way, I wouldn't change the opportunity of playing a game like TOR which evokes the feeling of ME almost poetically by using Tolkien's own vocabulary for a game that has canon characters stated up.

I'm in love with the dice mechanics, I've never had a game I had to roll 1d12 (except for damage purposes).

You've never played Advanced Heroquest from GW then... :-)

/wolf

I hope they never make more than a passing reference to the major characters in the books, much less stat them out. They should be purely plot devices, not NPCs in the traditional sense.

A PC is mechanically defined by Skills, Valour and Wisdom. As such, they form the should be the core of what is advanced over time. I think we will see a little more in the later sets but I hope we don't see a lot more.

For Elves the issue is going to be that they are suspectible to the Shadow as anyone else despite their longevity. After leaving their Elvish sanctuaries the average adventuring lifespan is unlikely to be that different from one of the other races.

As such, I expect most Elves (like the other PCs) will either be killed , retire wilfully or be overcome by Shadow within a generation of adventuring.

Yeah, like powerful magic items in Tolkien's work, powerful NPCs should remain untouched by the mechanics for the most part. I personally think that the current system can match Aragorn's ascent just fine, but Galadriel, Elrond, Gandalf etc are best left undefined.

To be honest, I agree completely. Though Dnd is not the best of systems, one area it really messed up was statting things like gods and other powerful beings, let alone major heroes.

E

Ha, I completely understand you guys about this one...it's just that...

I liked having stats for let's say Elrond, Galadriel, Saruman.

I think Sauron shouldn't have stats, that's ok, but why not Glóin, Gimli, Legolas, Bilbo?

I'd love to see stats for them!

Although an approach without stats is obviously easier, for many reasons.

I agree. We have seen Beorn, so I do not see any reason why we won't see stats for those NPCs in the future.

The reason we haven't isn't that are ultra vires, but page count. At the moment, there is more important things to cover to get players games going than listing notable NPCs. For example, even though Gloin is in the Marsh Bell he didn't need to be statted for the role he played.

Maybe we could stat these character ourselves in the meantime.

EDIT: as a matter of interest, did MERP or CODA contain stats for the iconic characters in the main rulebook? I am sure CODA didn't.

No, no, CODA only had stats for iconic characters in the supplement Fellowship of the Ring, which was very nice in my opinion (the idea not the rules).

Ruleswise TOR is amazing, if I had to vote for something that amazed me the most it was the stances mechanics. They are lovely and very evocative of ME combat.

If you stat it, they will try to kill it.

"I hit Gloin with my axe!"

But seriously, statted NPCs are a valuable resource for Loremasters to judge how stats scale etc. IIRC, the Decipher LOTR RPGers gained a lot of understanding of the system from seeing how the known characters were statted.

I'd be torn between letting players know when their characters reach a cool milestone, like 'a (Bows) rating as good as Legolas's', and wanting them not to distort their characters just for the bragging rights.
As ever, it would depend on your group...

Cheers,
--Os.

"THREE CALLED SHOTS TO GLOIN's HEAD!"

... any other KOTDT-fans out there?

/wolf