forums.cubicle7.co.uk
archive

trystero wrote:
(Mind you, that's very nearly exhausted my understanding of American football...)

Ah - so my analogy of a "stretch play" was probably a bit greek then. (i watch a lot of football, and play a lot of Madden on my PS3).


If you're an NBA guy, then think of it as a pick n roll to get your guy closer to the key (color shaded area nearest the basket).

Robert

I don't disagree with anything that has been said. Well, except for the sports analogies... I don't like football or basketball. The TOR combat rules are fine as is; though a little strange

Beran wrote: I don't like football ...

Meh - no one is perfect, right?

Imho the TOR rules as written work well for archery, are fun to play, are true to Tolkein and are as true to reality as any of the rpg systems I have seen (which is probably no more or less real). Sure, it's not at all like Peter Jackson, WoW or D&D [all of which in my humble opinion are wildly unrealistic] etc. But if something urks a particular LM and his or her group, then just tweak it with a house rule and move on.

I certainly agree with those who say that the rules should not be allowed to overly dictate your party's composition over the players' preferences. That is more likely to stifle the roleplaying element than to foster it. For example the rules would certainly permit would be archers changing stance from round to round to cycle into and out of melee/missile fire if that was really the players' desire.

cheers
Mark

Cawdorthane wrote:Imho the TOR rules as written work well for archery, are fun to play, are true to Tolkein and are as true to reality as any of the rpg systems I have seen (which is probably no more or less real).

QFT. Tactical wargames are so divorced from reality that it is unbelievable if you have done the slightest combat with weapons and aror. At least according to the 2 recreationists in my group. I have heard the same statement made by police and military RPG players regarding modern warfare weapons.

Cawdorthane wrote:Imho the TOR rules as written work well for archery, are fun to play, are true to Tolkein and are as true to reality as any of the rpg systems I have seen (which is probably no more or less real). Sure, it's not at all like Peter Jackson, WoW or D&D [all of which in my humble opinion are wildly unrealistic] etc.

OOC how is the TOR system more realistic then a system like D&D (or a clone)?

It is not. But the fact is that D&D is thousands of leagues from a realistic system, so you can say both are as far away from there as the other one.

Beran wrote:

Cawdorthane wrote:Imho the TOR rules as written work well for archery, are fun to play, are true to Tolkein and are as true to reality as any of the rpg systems I have seen (which is probably no more or less real). Sure, it's not at all like Peter Jackson, WoW or D&D [all of which in my humble opinion are wildly unrealistic] etc.

OOC how is the TOR system more realistic then a system like D&D (or a clone)?

Latest generation of D&D rules (D&D Next) don't have any penalties for loading a crossbow while somebody is attacking you with a halberd. For example. Want more?

My last D&D game was just after 3.0 came out. I was thinking more along the line 2nd edition, not that it was any more realistic.