Coming next for The One Ring™

[trystero]

Personally, I'm okay with not having playable wizards. I think it's clear that one of the big influences on TOR is Pendragon, which had the best magic system ever published (with only two rules: "Player characters have only very limited access to magic" and "magic can do anything the gamemaster thinks it can do").

I think having full-on PC magicians would take the game in a MERP-like direction, and in this case, at least, that's not a complimentary comparison.

(That said, if C7 puts out a magic supplement in 2015, I'll probably buy it just to see how they handle it. I'm prepared to be proven wrong...)

[Trippy]

Well, the way it's generally handled is that Gandalf is often posed as an in-game avatar of the GM, effectively. In some ways this works - he does tend to come and go in the books, and is often used as a means of exposition and plot facilitation.

On the other hand, I would like to see some supplement addressing the role of playable Wizards sometime, as an option that groups and GMs could choose to use if they want. The various issues of canon and tome could be highlighted along the way.

After all, in the Doctor Who game there is still an option to play Doctor Who!

[PaulButler]

I guess the big question for me is... what about the maps?
Will the new rulebook include both maps of Wilderland? (perforated inside the back cover perhaps?)
What about the new areas covered in Rivendell and Rohan? Will we get separate maps for those areas as well?
The player's map of Wilderland is ever-present in every game that I run. It'd be a shame not to have one for Eriador.

[Glorelendil]

Wizard questions gets back to the Necromancer discussion: if the Council didn't know who the Necromancer was,it means there's somebody other than themselves who is capable of being a "necromancer".

[PaulButler]

Personally, I'm okay with not having playable wizards. I think it's clear that one of the big influences on TOR is Pendragon, which had the best magic system ever published (with only two rules: "Player characters have only very limited access to magic" and "magic can do anything the gamemaster thinks it can do").

I think having full-on PC magicians would take the game in a MERP-like direction, and in this case, at least, that's not a complimentary comparison.

THIS.

[Trippy]

Not THAT?

[trystero]

Elfcrusher, I agree that magic is not restricted to Elves, Wizards, Maiar and Nazgûl: there are also several references to Men practicing "sorcery" (the Mouth of Sauron, for one, and the Witch-king of Angmar, who might have been a sorcerer before becoming a Ringwraith, depending how you read that reference).

However, I don't remember anything hinting that this sort of magic -- call it necromancy, sorcery, or what you will -- is practiced by anyone except servants of the Shadow. And since the game already excludes those as player characters...

[Angelalex242]

The biggest problem with playing a wizard is that there's exactly of 5 of them. No more, no less. 1 of them's evil, one of them's Gandalf, one of them's Radagast, and then there's the Blues.

If you assume the Player wants to take over the role of a Blue (They didn't do anything relevant in the stories anyway, so if a player is going to be an Istari, it should absolutely be a Blue...)

Then you just have to assume the Blues (Being the weakest of the 5 Istari sent over) are essentially 'PC level' and their magic looks like Wood Elf Magic, Broken Spells, and some logical magic based on the sorts of things Saruman, Gandalf, and Radagast do, dumbed down to PC levels.

[Beran]

I might as well throw it out there.

By 'Summer', do you mean the last week of August/first week of September?

I think we need to look at history and compensate of the vagaries of the industry.

The Revised Core book- I think we can expect this fairly early in summer season as most of the work is cleared and already published.

Rivendell- Much the same thing...from what I understand (and hope I'm right) they have been working on this for awhile now and I think we can expect an early summer release. Really since this was originally listed as a 2013 relelase I would have expected an early Spring release, but it is what it is.

The other mentioned releases I have concern for. I think Ruins will probably be a late Autumn or early Q4 release and I really don't expect the Rider of Rohan supplement before early Q1 '15

Not really sure where I except the Adventures Companion to fall.

[Glorelendil]

The biggest problem with playing a wizard is that there's exactly of 5 of them. No more, no less. 1 of them's evil, one of them's Gandalf, one of them's Radagast, and then there's the Blues.

If you assume the Player wants to take over the role of a Blue (They didn't do anything relevant in the stories anyway, so if a player is going to be an Istari, it should absolutely be a Blue...)

Then you just have to assume the Blues (Being the weakest of the 5 Istari sent over) are essentially 'PC level' and their magic looks like Wood Elf Magic, Broken Spells, and some logical magic based on the sorts of things Saruman, Gandalf, and Radagast do, dumbed down to PC levels.

I'm not actually arguing for a "wizard" class...one of the things I love about TOR is the absence of traditional fantasy RPG spellcasting classes (and the absence of Warlords)...but I don't think that 'Istari' and 'Wizard' are synonymous. There's enough magic in Tolkien, and not exclusively used by servants of the Shadow, that if C7 really wanted to justify it they could. True, by the 3rd Age it's pretty rare, but it could be done.