Rivendell Preview 1: What's in it?

[Falenthal]

Inclusion of the Ring: Actually, I feel this is one item of power that should not be included in a LoTRs game.

The way I figure it, the Ring will probably not be included to be used as is. I imagine the stats of the Ring should be a way of showing the limit of the Magic Items rules. Nothing in Middle-Earth (in the Third Age) can be more corruptive or be more powerful than the Ring. It's stats will mark the roof.

[Glorelendil]

Inclusion of the Ring: Actually, I feel this is one item of power that should not be included in a LoTRs game.

The way I figure it, the Ring will probably not be included to be used as is. I imagine the stats of the Ring should be a way of showing the limit of the Magic Items rules. Nothing in Middle-Earth (in the Third Age) can be more corruptive or be more powerful than the Ring. It's stats will mark the roof.

Good thing you added "third age". I would have countered with a Silmaril.

[Stormcrow]

Most powerful? I don't know about that. "Magic" items in Tolkien don't exist along a one-dimensional power-scale. The One Ring was created to dominate wills. The Three Rings were created to preserve Middle-earth. The Palantiri were created to communicate and observe over long distances. The Silmarils were created to display the radiance of the Trees. Everything has its purpose; measuring "power levels" may not be meaningful.

The Ring grants its wearer power according to his stature. That is, it enhances what you've already got. A great war hero wearing the Ring will be able to command his armies to complete loyalty and inspire them to greater ability. A hobbit wearing the Ring can't do this; he could, at best, command lesser beings or others already under the influence of the Ring. I would expect the new rules to give the wearer some kind of skill boost, or perhaps an attribute boost.

Naturally, I also expect it to give the wearer lots of shadow points.

[Dunheved]

[ Actually, I feel this is one item of power that should not be included in a LoTRs game.

[
Your reference to the One Ring. I'm gonna roll me a dwarf, take "The Stiff Neck of Dwarves", spend all my Hope, and then go find that ring.

Moria is mine.

What a brilliant debate.
At first I was very 'Tolkien scholar with stiff neck' and would have said '... er Bilbo had the ring from the time of the Battle of Five Armies up to that Party Event, so it would never have surfaced unless there were one or more Sackville-Bagginses within 100 Hobbit yards' . Therefore it is illogical and out-of-canon to have it anywhere before Gollum gets to Mordor, and I would have asked for all reference to Sauron's Ring to be expunged. (Mostly because expunging seems a very academic way of saying 'using a flamethrower'.)

BUT
Once again Elfcrusher has me ROFL: Moria is mine (I've only just seen your pun as well) If I find the One Ring I will send it by the Michel Delving Postal Service to Elfcrusher because now I believe that the one ring is yours.

OMG I've just realised that I've blown your cover - Elfcrusher? I say Necromancer - your Ring lust is showing through!


Seriously a lot of the discussion has been about the merits of having Dunedain & High Elves with enhanced 'powers'. I completely agree about the concerns that Last Alliance style fellowships might bring but would suggest two natural limits (i) any LM who wants to can give these characters a harder time - e.g. Dunedain targetted by Nazgul OR (ii) High Elves that gathered Shadow Points (say) would have to face the Temptation of the West - every Fellowship Phase they would have to actively pass a test if they want to avoid taking one of Cirdan's ships. In this way a High Elf character would realise that if they employ those Noldor traits too often they are hastening their own departure. By restraining themselves they would not use up their attachment to Middle Earth too quickly, but still develop. I'm not too rigid about the detail but I hope the idea is clear enough!

Finally - I am drooling and excited as I read the preview material. What a great game system. Thanks Thanks Thanks C7 & all the design crew.

[watley]

In general I think TOR is a game that requires players & LM to "buy in" to the playstyle and theme, rather than enforcing it through restrictions. Ideally the player and the LM will work together on a character concept. If that breaks down, and either side starts rules-lawyering, I think they're playing the wrong game.

Agreed. The game shouldn't have to have rules in it to solely mitigate 'bad gamers'. It's a waste of time that can be better spent on far cooler things.

OK, so I may be new to these forums and TOR, but with thirty odd years of gaming behind me, I couldn't help but feel the need to chuck in my two cents worth about the high elf/unlock xp/ character restrictions debate.

It is the Loremaster's (or dm/gm/storyteller/head girl) duty to prepare a tale, adventures, plan encounters etc, and improv maniacally in order to tell a solid and heroic tale. He should have the right to veto any character choice made by a player if it doesn't fit into or will ruin the game. Any player who opts for a character beyond the scope of the current story being told is disrespecting the hallowed role of LM, and the work that goes into LM'ing well. The modern gamer conceit of allowing players to control the story in spite of the LM's role is simply a result of too many computer games and a soft social contract. A bit of input is OK, but a player-driven tale is simply pandering.

(Re: computer games - the "rpg", a term I use loosely indeed when referring to computer games, has a very singular and self-centred storyline in which the player is destined to finish the story. Taking that same 'me-me-me' approach into actual imaginative rpgs has created a culture of the LM serving the players, as if he is their little bitch, rather than the players opting for character over power, and story over petty desires.)

I prefer to follow the old-school character creation concept of random creation (anyone remember TRAVELLER?), up to a point, with the player and the LM collaborating on any changes and choices, such as skills, rewards and virtues. So far, my players haven't found an issue with it, the characters thus created have been solid but not silly, and most importantly, are consistent with the theme of Middle-Earth and Tolkien (note, I disallow any movie references from my players, since none of the recent films are true in any sense to Tolkien except names and height. I keep popular idiocy and poor production values away from my games).

Lastly, my solution to bad gamers. If they're already playing, give them a chance, then unceremoniously boot them out of the group if it continues, letting everyone know why and reaffirming your position of control as the LM. Option Two: don't invite them. I have had to be 'rude' to a couple of blokes wanting in on my little game, by saying a blunt NO and explaining why. But, if you want in on my game, I won't have power gamers who want to break the rules (tiny-dick-syndrome), nor any player who won't respect Tolkien or Middle-Earth (since thats where it's set, duh). Players may not like being denied, but it's not all about them. The story comes first.

OK, thats it.

Bring on Rivendell, and bring on the physical copies of these new books. I'm sick of pdfs.

[Glorelendil]

I loved Traveller.

[Rich H]

He should have the right to veto any character choice made by a player if it doesn't fit into or will ruin the game.

Just to be clear, I don't think anyone would disagree with you on this. The subtlety is that such restrictions shouldn't be hard baked into the rules of the game. In other words, let each gaming group apply their own restrictions as to what characters are, or aren't allowed.

[Rich H]

Rich, I like the idea of glossy sheets or mats that can be added to the play area. Or better yet, how about a couple of panels that come with clips to expand the existing screen. That way, they would be the same size and thickness as the Lake-town screen, but with new fabulous art on the back by Jon Hodgson! I am imagining a beautiful painting of the streets of Bree focusing on the Prancing Pony.

If that's not a commission for Jon, then I don't know what is!

[Yusei]

The modern gamer conceit of allowing players to control the story in spite of the LM's role is simply a result of too many computer games and a soft social contract. A bit of input is OK, but a player-driven tale is simply pandering.

That's an old debate, but in my opinion, the all-powerful GM that tells a story that you have to follow is a lot closer to computer games than any player-driver game out there. I like both ways of playing, but while I can't imagine a sandbox Call of Cthulhu game, in my mind TOR is perfect for that. I know the background well enough to be able to improvise, so I can adapt to whatever the players want to do. We'll just agree on the tone beforehands.

OTOH, I usually don't allow playing elves.

[Southron]

I do understand Rocmistro's concerns about the Local Hero being set aside for the more powerful Rangers and Noldor. As for the canon of a group full of Noldor only there are the Wandering Companies. Also for the Rangers, there was the group that defended Sarn Ford and ones who camped at Deadman's Dike. However, there is a bit about Bree being used to seeing Rangers, Elves, Dwarves, and Hobbits, so Bree could be a starting point for a mixed company.

But, it seems there is a in game mechanic that might make the former mentioned characters more challenging.