Otaku-sempai wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:57 am
With AiMe the Heroes have the option (if you let them) of substituting 5e Feats for Virtues when they get a chance to take new Virtues as they level up. And AiMe provides a greater variety of war gear than TOR (and the ability to borrow more from 5e). That said, TOR has added new combat rules in the
Adventurer's Companion that allow for such options as two-weapon fighting. But if you want to introduce additional types of weapons and armor that are not provided in the rules as written (RAW) then you have to do the work for that yourself or search for a home-brew for them that someone has already written.
One thing that worries me about AiMe and those 5th ed rules is,you mentioned being able to bring in things like armor or weapons from 5th ed D&D. I would not want to add things to my setting that are not already in it, to me that would take away from what makes Middle-Earth special to me. Let me open up discussion on the 5th ed rules if anyone wants to discuss this with me. In D&D 5th ed rules, I hated how they did things like allowing Wizards to wear plate ARMOR .... really? Plate Armor for Wizards and STILL be able to cast spells while wearing it?
(nope nope nope nope) not happening in my game, Wizards DO NOT wear heavy armor and still cast spells imo - Wizards are Robe wearing only, I like how the movies had Gandalf wearing robes and using a sword, thats how its doen as a multiclass character, if they train in sword use they still have to not wear armor for spell casting.
5th ed in D&D just did too many things that took away from what made D&D special for us old classic D&Ders and the armor thing is just the tip of the problems ..... I won't go into it more, but the armor thing pretty much sums it up. I am worried these 5th ed rules may do the same thing with AiMe and I want to keep my game classic and true to the movies.
Otaku-sempai wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:57 am
So, I guess you haven't visited the
Cubicle 7 homepage where you can find listings of games and their supplements. The webstore can confirm what is in-print and available.
Yea I was on my cell at the time and was not able to get into the website hard last night.
zedturtle wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:59 pm
(There are a number of fully formed adventures and an outline of an epic 30-year-long campaign — good proof that you can accomplish great deeds whilst staying in familiar territory, canon-wise).
a 30 year adventure? lol holy cow which book is that?
gsecaur wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2017 11:42 pm
You probably can't go wrong with either option. C7 have demonstrated that they will always err on the side of remaining true to the spirit of the lore, though they also introduce plenty of opportunities to break from the canon if you wish to do so. You indicated you were concerned about the ability to run an epic game within the constraints of canon. Although the best known and most beloved campaign in TOR is based on slow decline of the Free Peoples of Wilderland, A) that's not the only campaign you could run, and B) it's still plenty epic!, and C) if you really want to do it, nobody can tell you that in your campaign the PCs can't win the day against the forces of darkness.
Yea I would never break with Canon in this setting, it's too special to me to do something like that with. But the 30 year adventure remark up above has me curious.
ok .... now back to this subject again haha because I am still confused ......
(and i love you guys, you all have been patient with me through this string of a million questions so I give you my heartfelt thanks guys) ok humor me a little, this may be long .....
I have been playing D&D since .... well, since FOREVER. I never went past 2nd edition rules because I did not like how the game got turned into what seemed to me like a computer game on paper. I prefer the classic feel, even in my settings the level cap remained 18. I like how at level one a 1/2 hit dice Kobold could actually kill you in a single swing of a rusty old short sword. I like how the players knew they could actually DIE, unlike the newer rules were at character creation the characters had so many abilities, powers and such they felt like they were walking around like SUPER CHARACTERS, I just don't like that.
I like how in classic D&D Wizards that wanted to be specialist Wizards such as Enchanters, Necromancers and such only got to cast spells from that certain sphere but gained special bonus's in those spheres. I like how a Warrior was a WARRIOR, not some special fancy subclasses like in the newer additions ... thats what we had
"kits" for. Things like Death Saves, Character class powers every level, again Wizards wearing heavy armor still getting to cast spells, Feats .... I mean, seriously .... the newer rules seemed like they took the FEAR away from a character getting killed. To me thats what makes the game special and exciting.
ok let me get off the 5th ed bash hehe .... I prefer to keep it simple, Warriors are Warriors but possibly have a kit to give them more flare, Wizards run around wearing robes for the most part.
I like how the movies kept it simple, Gandalf did not run around casting spells every time you turned around, and the spells he did cast were not super spells, he did cast Fireball once, but you mostly saw him casting shields, open doors ... that type stuff. I also LOVE how in Middle Earth we do not have Wizards, Clerics and Paladins as character classes. The game seems to push more in the direction of melee classes, Rogues, with healing being like an innate form of magic the Elves showed they had but it was not like
(k I cast cure greater wounds and heal you back to full) even with magical healing, the wounded still needed bed rest and such.
In the movies, you saw Magical weapons, armor, rings etc etc but they were not just laying around as much and they were not all godlike either
(no more I have a +5 Longsword of "whatever" that is intelligent and talks to me and can cast spells etc etc) KISS
(Keep it simple stupid) lol thats what I like .......
So, with all that being said I ask you guys .............
Without having read the books, and only watching the movies, why would it be hard for me to run a campaign setting with TOR and still keep the flavor of the movies intact
(since thats what me and my players know LotRs from) because they have so much material in TOW over AiMe. I just don't understand how AiMe is better for movie watchers over TOR because all I am taking from the books and adventures is material, I am the one working up my own setting, so I should be able to maintain the feel of what we got from the movies shouldnt I? oh and I agree about the retarded feats they did in the movies .... the river/barrel thing and they silly crap during the goblin fights beneath the surface but its all in good fun, me personally I would have made that way more believable lol that stuff in the movies got a little .... well it just got a tad too silly at times.
).
