DnD® comes to Middle-earth®.

[atgxtg]

[quote="zedturtle"

Yep. As mentioned before, I think one of D&D's strength is its flexibility that it has gained over the years by trying to be a little bit of everything for everybody (that doesn't mean I don't like a focused game that excellently delivers its intended playstyle, like TOR).

Over the years, I've run or played in a number of games with D&D engines, everything from 'kill the evil god before he gets real power' to 'subtle politics with the defining scene of the campaign a speech to the IsleRaed.*' which is why I feel there's enough room for a D&D in Middle-earth game.

We'll see soon how exactly we get there. [/quote]

I think that they'd probably have to tone down or eliminate some of th e D&D stuff that doesn't fit the setting to really get the feel for Middle Earth, but it's possible. OGL Ancients tweaked the D&D rules quite a bit, and in some ways the game looked more like RuneQuest than D&D. Which to me was a good thing.

For example, I could see adapting the D&D critical rules to handing piercing blows. A critical hit could require a Fort+armor save to avoid being wounded.

[Er-Murazor]

If they retain the standard Gygaxian D&D Hit Point system, I'll probably scrap that in favor of something closer to Dave Arneson's First Fantasy Campaign (where player character hit points never changed from creation but were determined by d100 roll). To me, Gygaxian D&D is fine for Swords & Sorcery-style gaming, but Middle-Earth is Mythic/Heroic Fantasy where it doesn't fit that PCs have such low abilities to start off but become progressively more powerful to the point there is a massive disparity in power between a 1st lvl and a 20th lvl player of any race/class combination. Middle-Earth is, after all, about being Big Damn Heroes! and how even the smallest and "weakest" can overcome the biggest baddest meanies....

[Glorelendil]

If they retain the standard Gygaxian D&D Hit Point system, I'll probably scrap that in favor of something closer to Dave Arneson's First Fantasy Campaign (where player character hit points never changed from creation but were determined by d100 roll). To me, Gygaxian D&D is fine for Swords & Sorcery-style gaming, but Middle-Earth is Mythic/Heroic Fantasy where it doesn't fit that PCs have such low abilities to start off but become progressively more powerful to the point there is a massive disparity in power between a 1st lvl and a 20th lvl player of any race/class combination. Middle-Earth is, after all, about being Big Damn Heroes! and how even the smallest and "weakest" can overcome the biggest baddest meanies....

I'll agree with you that I have a preference for systems where "high level" and "low level" characters can still adventure together (e.g. Dungeon World). But changing that would be a big departure from D&D, so I don't imagine C7 will tinker with it. After all, those of us who don't like it still have TOR.

[Er-Murazor]

I'll agree with you that I have a preference for systems where "high level" and "low level" characters can still adventure together (e.g. Dungeon World). But changing that would be a big departure from D&D, so I don't imagine C7 will tinker with it.

Quite true. Still, its nice to look back at the roots of D&D and see what might have been. Amazing amount of research that has come to light in the years since both Gary and Dave passed away about the birth of OD&D, back when it was just Blackmoor. Dave's final revisions weren't incorporated into D&D as published and felt that the Hit Point system Gary used was wrong. As I understand it, the d20-style AC System (+/10 as opposed to -/10) was even considered at one point when Advanced Dungeons & Dragons first came along (as a way of distinguishing itself from D&D).

And, failing anything else, like I said, I can just use a system ala First Fantasy Campaign if I run the game. Given how hard it is to get people to play in Middle-Earth, and how easy it is to get people to play D&D, I think this might be a match made in heaven. D&D 5E I have found is pretty fun, though I'm none too fond of the "powers instead of magic items" approach. Color me old fashioned, but by gum I want the chance to make that Sword +1 mine potentially at 1st-2nd Level!

[Glorelendil]

though I'm none too fond of the "powers instead of magic items" approach. Color me old fashioned, but by gum I want the chance to make that Sword +1 mine potentially at 1st-2nd Level!

I suspect that's because you know, with 100% certainty, that you'll get the "powers" that accrue to your class at given levels. You can plan out your whole character build at level 1.

But magic items are bonuses on top of that. You don't have to give up an ASI or a Feat or a new spell slot or whatever to get the magic item. It's just pure gravy.

So if it were possible to get "powers" the same way I think they would be just as cool...if not better, for their permanence...than magic items. Imagine if while adventuring something happens and BLAM all of the sudden you can see through magical darkness or whatever?

[Glorelendil]

For those who haven't noticed, there's now a new sub-forum, sibling to The One Ring Discussion, for Adventures in Middle-earth.

[zedturtle]

For those who haven't noticed, there's now a new sub-forum, sibling to The One Ring Discussion, for Adventures in Middle-earth.

In a strange way, it's very satisfying... it's always bugged me how the forums were "lists of one" to drill down into the TOR forum. But now everything makes sense. Talk about playing the long game.

[Otaku-sempai]

All the fears and predictions of how this would turn out kept reminding me of something:



Mash, mash mash!

I hope that those fears have finally been put (mostly) to rest.