|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 23, 2014 17:18:02 GMT -6
Anyway, Middle-earth for 5e:
Humans - no change.
Dwarves can be mountain or hill dwarves.
Elves can be High elves (Noldor) or Wood elves (Sindar, Silvan elves).
True half-elves are rare, but pure Dunedain can be treated as half-elves.
Halflings are Hobbits; Baseline = Harfoots, Stouts = Stoors, Lightfoot = Fallohides.
Half-orcs - same, but NPC only. Classes allowed: barbarian, bard, cleric (renamed healer), druid (nature magician), fighter, ranger, rogue, warlock (evil only). Elven magic would be healing or nature-based, so they'd be clerics or druids instead of wizards. Note that clerics are NOT generally priests in this setting, although some may be. Using this system, Gandalf would be a cleric rather than a wizard, but I've seen him written up as a cleric before. I'm not sure if celestials have been detailed in 5e yet. Warlocks practice sorcery and worship Morgoth or Sauron and thus would be evil.
Classes allowed by race:
Humans: Barbarian, bard, druid (Beornings only), fighter, ranger, rogue, warlock
Dwarves: barbarian, fighter, rogue
Elves: bard, cleric/healer, druid, fighter, rogue
Half-elves: bard, cleric/healer, druid, fighter, ranger, rogue, warlock
Halflings: fighter, rogue
Half-orcs: barbarian, fighter, rogue
Monsters:
Orcs: These include goblins and hobgoblins. The D&D monsters correspond to these types of Orc. Goblin - Orcs of the Misty Mountains Hobgoblin - Uruk-hai Orc - Orcs of Mordor
Trolls: Middle-earth trolls correspond to D&D ogres. There are different types of trolls - wood, stone, snow, etc. All turn to stone if exposed to sunlight except for the Olog-hai, who can withstand the sun. Option: treat Olog-hai as hill giants.
Dragons: Most dragons are similar to red dragons, but they may be of any color. Cold drakes do not have a breath weapon; treat as wyverns.
Balrog: Treat as Balor, aka Type VI Demon
Ents: Treants
Great Eagles: Giant Eagles or Rocs
Nazgul: Spectres or Wraiths
More monsters to come.
Keep in mind I got this from only a cursory reading of the PHB. Changes and corrections would be appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by The Semi-Retired Gamer on Aug 24, 2014 14:07:11 GMT -6
I'm digging it! Looking forward to seeing more.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 24, 2014 15:29:02 GMT -6
Glad you enjoyed it. I sent it to my friends who have access to the PHB, but they don't have anything to add. Let me explain my design philosophy here.
I was hoping to add another class option for Hobbits, but nothing seems to fit. Maybe bard or ranger without spells? Maybe druid, albeit a very rare case?
I let Beornings become druids so they could shapechange without having to be werebears.
Pure-blooded Dunedain can be treated as Half-elves, but they should roll on the human height/weight tables, of course. If you want your elves to be taller than regular D&D elves, you can do the same, except have them weigh less.
Spellcasting remains a tricky subject. Normally only elves have that natural ability, but humans may be able to gain it via unnatural, generally evil, means. I know there's a passage in The Hobbit where the Dwarves cast spells on the trolls' treasure, but they could have had Gandalf do it.
Although there aren't any clerics in Middle-earth, clerical magic seemed a better fit than magic-user spells for the setting. Hence, the cleric class can be renamed healer, white wizard, etc. The ability could be natural, just like the sorcerer casts spells. You can make an argument for using the sorcerer class, but use cleric spells and change the draconic bloodline background to elven bloodline.
Again, I don't have the PHB, and I'm just going by memory.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Aug 24, 2014 16:33:29 GMT -6
Hope you don't mind me splitting this into its own thread, by the way. The one on Basic D&D is getting rather long and I didn't want this to get lost somewhere in a long thread of other topics.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 24, 2014 16:44:15 GMT -6
No problem. I probably should have started a new thread.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Aug 24, 2014 16:47:18 GMT -6
I can see playing a ME inspired 5E game where players hack and slash their way through white hand orcs et al. But I don't know how you could actually play in ME type game with 5E. I mean leveling up means killing monsters, that doesn't seem to be Tolkiens theme...supposedly Burning Wheel was designed around ME and even separates wizardly magic from magical elf song.
Middle Earth and 5E is like a middle earth themed monopoly game, yeah it would be cool to rename park place "lothlorien" and what not, but it will only in the most superficial way be Tolkien's work.
I don't mean to say that you can't have ME with d20 (d20 is just a resolution mechanic after all), but what needs radical change is the reward structure of the game. What does tolkien reward? How do characters grow in ME? That is what needs to change.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 24, 2014 17:14:14 GMT -6
Good point. I don't care for the 3e+ rule where xp only depends on defeating monsters, although theoretically you can defeat them by outwitting them rather than killing them. While I never cared for the gp = xp system, I'm starting to see why it was implemented.
Maybe stuff from MERP can be ported over:
There's a lot of travel involved in both Hobbit and LOTR, so maybe xp can be earned by travelling through unfamiliar lands. Maybe 5 xp per mile of unfamiliar territory crossed will be good. 10 xp/mile may allow low level characters to advance too quickly, and 1 xp/mile would be too slow for high level characters.
Spells cast can also give xp for spellcasters. I'm thinking around 10 xp per spell level cast. 2e did something similar.
Combat of course gives xp for defeated foes. Since some classes don't cast spells and can't get xp that way, perhaps multiply their xp award by 1.5 when taking part in a combat. If they defeat their foes in single combat, double the xp instead. Also, give 10 xp per critical hit.
Why not award xp for successful use of skills or special abilities? Maybe 5 xp per successful use is appropriate.
Please feel free to add any ideas to this thread. I look forward to reading them.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 27, 2014 13:45:17 GMT -6
One way of approaching the “Tolkien themes” issue were best articulated here: … people who want a "Middle Earth rpg" … want to go to the locations described in the books -- The Shire, Bree, The Barrow Downs, Rivendell, Moria, Mirkwood, Lake-town, Minas Tirith, The Dead Marshes, etc. -- have them be recognizably the same as they were in the books (and probably meet some of the same characters too), and have adventures there. This was one of the things that made the MERP supplements set a thousand years (or more) before the time of the books seem so lame. For the game to work it really needs to be set in the same time and place as the books, just covering different stuff (and, at least IMO, not making any attempt to match the themes or epic tone of the books -- they're their own thing, the game is about a group of on-the-make adventurers sneaking into Moria after the fellowship has passed through, trying to make off with some treasure before the orcs reorganize, or operating out of the Prancing Pony in Bree and looting the Barrows, and so on -- what Fafhrd & the Gray Mouser would do if they found themselves plopped down in Middle Earth). In other words, just as you can (and many do) play a straight wargame set in Middle-earth without worrying about it reflecting Tolkien themes, arguably you could play a D&D game set in Middle-earth with much the same mindset.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 27, 2014 17:32:12 GMT -6
GW still produces the LOTR wargame, if that's what folks want. D&D can do it too; I've been in my share of hack & slash game that might as well have been wargames. Not that there's anything wrong with that; I do my fair share of wargaming. Mainly modern and SF, since my friends won't play historical games.
MERP's choice of the setting gets mixed reactions. Some really hate it; others like it. I can see why ICE chose it. That way, the PCs can avoid being overshadowed by the characters in the novels. IIRC, Decipher set their Middle-earth game around the time of the War of the Ring, and it didn't do so well.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Aug 27, 2014 17:46:59 GMT -6
Decipher LOTR was overly crunchy (d20-style), aesthetically left much to be desired (no art, only movie stills), and sorely lacking in modules.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 0:29:52 GMT -6
One way of approaching the “Tolkien themes” issue were best articulated here: … people who want a "Middle Earth rpg" … want to go to the locations described in the books -- The Shire, Bree, The Barrow Downs, Rivendell, Moria, Mirkwood, Lake-town, Minas Tirith, The Dead Marshes, etc. -- have them be recognizably the same as they were in the books (and probably meet some of the same characters too), and have adventures there. This was one of the things that made the MERP supplements set a thousand years (or more) before the time of the books seem so lame. For the game to work it really needs to be set in the same time and place as the books, just covering different stuff (and, at least IMO, not making any attempt to match the themes or epic tone of the books -- they're their own thing, the game is about a group of on-the-make adventurers sneaking into Moria after the fellowship has passed through, trying to make off with some treasure before the orcs reorganize, or operating out of the Prancing Pony in Bree and looting the Barrows, and so on -- what Fafhrd & the Gray Mouser would do if they found themselves plopped down in Middle Earth). In other words, just as you can (and many do) play a straight wargame set in Middle-earth without worrying about it reflecting Tolkien themes, arguably you could play a D&D game set in Middle-earth with much the same mindset. I disagree! The MERP time shift was a necessary measure to inhibit metagaming, and to grant DMs some higher degree of creative liberty. Looking on it from the outside, yes, it might diminish the value of the books to purists, but in practical, actual play, it proved an invaluable tweak! ...That said, I agree on setting D&D games in Middle Earth. If I went back there today, I would use some form of D&D anyway, because Rolemaster, no, gracias.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 28, 2014 1:27:58 GMT -6
I agree. There was a lot of stuff going on in Middle-earth at TA 1640. The Great Plague has ravaged many lands. Gondor's power is waning. Rohan is not yet a nation, but Angmar is. Sauron is hiding in Dol Guldur.
The best part is that the player characters can be great heroes in this period. They'd be secondary characters at best during the War of the Ring.
I actually enjoy Rolemaster. I would run a game with it, but my players didn't like the system when they tried it. Of course, that was over 20 years ago; maybe they'll change their minds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 12:54:37 GMT -6
My main concern about RM, or, later, HARP, is that they're too slow. Players getting into MERP are storyteller nerds. So, the systems I'd play would have to be light on the rules, and heavy on the non-combat interaction - as in, say, TOR (which I hated), or some fan versions of NWoD. D20, in general, as HARP, would be too slow, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 28, 2014 14:53:18 GMT -6
MERP/RM can be pretty slow. The best way to speed it up is to photocopy the tables or put tabs on the pages for easy reference. It saves a lot of page flipping.
Still, RM is faster than the HERO system. If you include options like hit locations, bleeding, etc. combat can drag on for hours.
|
|
|
Post by killianred on Sept 18, 2014 9:31:06 GMT -6
I really like the way Cubicle 7 made their Tolkien based game, "The One Ring". It is set in the time period between Hobbit and LOTR, and is set in places that are recognizable but were not extremely detailed in the books. Middle Earth is a big sandbox! A lot can happen in the world that has no effect on "canon" and people can play orc hackers, dungeon delvers, or whatever type of game they want. Encounters can be big role playing opportunities, and your success in an encounter can depend on your reputation or skill in diplomacy/charm/whatever, as you attempt to get an NPC to talk/listen/help you somehow. Combat can be quick and deadly, unlike the Decipher game where noone died. I think it captures the theme of the books very well
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Sept 18, 2014 12:23:23 GMT -6
A lot of good ideas in here! I really like the idea of 5e warlocks as bound to Sauron. Personally, I'd leave Gandalf out of the mix, in terms of trying to figure out what he "would be", class-and-level-wise. If you accept that (in the world) he's a Maia, then I think it gets confusing to pin figuring out magic in ME based on his (or Sauruman's) perceived abilities in the novels; they're an entirely different order of being.
A campaign I almost got to participate in (it never got off the ground), was going to be set right after the last book, and was going to involve finding out that Beleriand hadn't been lost--instead it had been hidden by a mighty glamour that was waning. Hence we would've been exploring the ruins of the Silmarillion... I still think this is an awesome idea. I was all set to make a dwarf, claiming descent from the dwarves of Nogrod, obsessed with finding Nauglamir...
Oh, and yeah, Burning Wheel would make for awesome ME play...
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 18, 2014 17:14:54 GMT -6
I generally give the characters in the novels a pass if they break the D&D rules. So any special abilities they have that are not covered in D&D or contradict the rules are excused.
If you want to add more D&D monsters to your Middle-earth game, that's okay. Remember that Gandalf said there were older and fouler things than Orcs. Just because the Fellowship or Thorin & Company didn't encounter them, it doesn't mean they don't exist.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Sept 18, 2014 19:11:59 GMT -6
Encounters can be big role playing opportunities, and your success in an encounter can depend on your reputation or skill in diplomacy/charm/whatever, as you attempt to get an NPC to talk/listen/help you somehow. Couldn’t you just roleplay it? How does rolling your reputation score and diplomacy skill make it more of a role playing opportunity?
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 21, 2014 0:14:24 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Sept 24, 2014 12:22:12 GMT -6
Oh, and yeah, Burning Wheel would make for awesome ME play... Elf characters have a "grief" stat, dwarves have "greed" and orcs have "hate". Elf magic is radically different from human sorcery. MERP and all all those other games are just different version of d&d: hack and slash rules using a d100 instead of a d20 or whatever. Burning Wheel gives concrete rules to character beliefs and players succeed by accomplishing beliefs--anyone who truly loves Tolkien will play BW, if you love Jackson's Hobbit movies, you'll use D&D (not judging). All of this hand wringing about wether "gandalf was a 5th level cleric" becomes a silly argument with BW. Personally, I'm done trying to shoe-horn a dungeon crawling skirmish game that is great at what it does into something it's not. I'm not interested trying to square tolkien with D&D and it's offshoots anymore. D&D is about leveling up by killing monsters, BW is about challenging character beliefs. Do you want Boromir's goal to go from level 7 to level 8 by killing orcs or do you want Boromir's goal to use the ring to help save Rohir? It doesn't matter if you add corruption, or tweak wizard spell lists, D&D is still about killing monsters to advance your character. The first 74 pages of BW (hub and spokes) is available for free: HERE.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 24, 2014 16:45:17 GMT -6
Random thought: Would Tunnels & Trolls be good for a Middle-earth game? I haven't played the game, although I've heard a lot about it.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Sept 24, 2014 17:16:25 GMT -6
Tunnels and trolls is just another version of d&d. What does the game give you rules to do? Does it give you rules for killing monsters and leveling up your character? If you're talking about fighting monsters and dungeon crawling in Middle Earth, then T&T of course is great, just like 1e, 0e, or 5e or MERP. Find out what do characters get rewarded for doing? Do you get XP for sparing gollums life despite the fact that your belief is that he should be put to the sword? Do you get XP for not abandoning your friend (the ring bearer) even though all the NPC's want the two of you to stick with the ranger for the whole journey? Do you get XP for realizing that it's more important to defend two little hobbits rather than flee and find the ring bearer? Then, yes, that is a good system to use.
If you get rewarded for how many ogres you kill in a session, it's D&D flavored ME, not ME.
(I just realized that Burning Wheel is a great system for Dragonlance ironically...Tanis, raistlin, Caramon...Kitara...all those great character dramas have nothing to do with killing monsters in dungeons.)
|
|
|
Post by verhaden on Sept 25, 2014 5:15:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Sept 25, 2014 10:16:42 GMT -6
...which explains why it was so frustrating to try and play through the modules. BW Dragonlance is an awesome, awesome idea!
|
|
|
Post by Porphyre on Sept 25, 2014 10:33:04 GMT -6
If you get rewarded for how many ogres you kill in a session, it's D&D flavored ME, not ME. That is the main reason I eventually gave up playing MERP
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 25, 2014 14:25:29 GMT -6
Just give XP for accomplishing tasks other than combat. I've already given several examples. You can also give XP for completing a quest, solving riddles (a must if you have a Hobbit character or two), creating special items, etc. You can always downplay the combat. Reduce the normal XP awards if you think they're too much.
That said, there is a fair amount of combat in LOTR and in the Silmarillion. Even the Hobbit had a skirmish with spiders and goblins (mostly offscreen in the book), as well as a battle. So you can't entirely get away from it. Just let the adventure focus on other tasks, and it should play well.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Sept 25, 2014 20:01:15 GMT -6
anyone who truly loves Tolkien will play BW, if you love Jackson's Hobbit movies, you'll use D&D (not judging). Hmm, I truly love Tolkien, and have never even seen the Jackson Hobbit movies. D&D is what I know and love, so I’ll stick with it. I don’t need a whole new RPG just to change how XP works, or whatever.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 25, 2014 21:22:19 GMT -6
anyone who truly loves Tolkien will play BW, if you love Jackson's Hobbit movies, you'll use D&D (not judging). Hmm, I truly love Tolkien, and have never even seen the Jackson Hobbit movies. D&D is what I know and love, so I’ll stick with it. I don’t need a whole new RPG just to change how XP works, or whatever. This. Especially since we old-school adherents prefer the "rules as guidelines" approach. Make whatever changes you need to make, then run with it. The system doesn't matter. I can also run a Middle-earth campaign using the Hero system or GURPS. I wrote a few racial templates for Big Eyes, Small Mouth based on the Middle-earth races. I never got to playtest them, however. One group used Runequest. Falconer: Very belated kudos on your work on OD&D Middle-earth; I enjoyed reading it. Your idea of using the druid class for Beornings is why I let them be the only humans who could take that class.
|
|
|
Post by cooper on Sept 25, 2014 21:51:54 GMT -6
anyone who truly loves Tolkien will play BW, if you love Jackson's Hobbit movies, you'll use D&D (not judging). Hmm, I truly love Tolkien, and have never even seen the Jackson Hobbit movies. D&D is what I know and love, so I’ll stick with it. I don’t need a whole new RPG just to change how XP works, or whatever. Fair enough, but it's not just changing how XP works...say you're gandalf in Rivendell and you are standing there amongst the company and elrond and you are making your case why the hobbit-Frodo, should be the one to take the ring to mordor. How does this play out? In 3e+ you roll a diplomacy check or whatever...one lousy dice and none of the grand drama, in 0e? You just role-play it out without d&d at all--sure its a d&d game your in, but this verbal battle is not actually being played with the d&d rules...you could be using monopoly to resolve your combat for all anyone knows. What burning wheel does is give you a complex social combat mechanic that bolsters your actual role-playing and then rewards your character for your role-playing. It's pretty incredible. Luke Crane the author gives a special thank you to JRR tolkien in his opening pages (even though the game is system neutral), which is much more than Gygax ever did!
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Sept 25, 2014 21:55:25 GMT -6
Different strokes for different folks. You like what you like.
|
|