|
Post by tkdco2 on Jun 22, 2020 4:37:03 GMT -6
This is a bit of a ramble, but bear with me. I just want to share my thoughts and hope you let me know whether you agree or not.
When I started running my current MERP game, someone on another board asked how closely I'd stick to canon. I responded that the major events will stay in place, but the players would have a lot of leeway.
I know there are people who religiously stick to canon, Middle-earth fans included (But if you think Middle-earth fans are diehards about canon, you should meet the Forgotten Realms crowd!). I get it. People become unhappy when something they truly enjoy gets changed. But Middle-earth doesn't have one single canon. Some people use The Silmarillion as their canon; others prefer the History of Middle-earth series. Keep in mind Tolkien's Legendarium wasn't the only work that was constantly being revised. Look at all the times Star Trek, Star Wars, and even Doctor Who have been retconned. I can tell you a lot of fans were not happy about the changes made.
I've gone on record stating that canon is overrated. I don't think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the aforementioned diehards or to all the changes made in my favorite settings. My solo MERP campaign had elements that deviated from canon significantly, but it didn't break the game. And since it was a solo game, it hardly mattered to anyone else anyway.
Back to the question I was asked. I said I'd give the players some leeway about certain things. I don't have a problem with someone playing a half-elf or a cleric in my Middle-earth game if that's what the player wants to play. The needs of a role player are different from the needs of a reader. A gamer needs to make a world his or her own, or the game may feel limiting to the player. Sometimes that means making changes (aka house rules) to the system. Other times it means changing a few details about the setting to allow things in the game system.
If you're a game master, you need to figure out what you want to keep and what to discard. Once you've done that, you should keep your decisions as consistent as possible. If you change your mind, talk with your group and see how they feel about any suggested changes. In the end, canon is what happens at your game table; everything else is negotiable.
Anyway, these are my thoughts on the matter. I hope you share yours as well.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 23, 2020 11:26:53 GMT -6
To me canon means “the pile of books I’m using as source material.” I don’t think anything’s set in stone. I think that comes from reading more Tolkien, not less. Tolkien added and changed whatever he needed to serve the story. He mined his own material constantly. To feel like a Tolkien story, the game needs to NOT tiptoe inoffensively around, not changing anything. All of his stories involve important individuals and great deeds, and the rise and fall of kingdoms. So that’s my approach. The timeline is negotiable. New kingdoms and potent personalities of any race can exist anywhere on the map (or off it), regardless of whether Tolkien mentioned them.
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jun 23, 2020 15:49:45 GMT -6
I've gone on record stating that canon is overrated. I don't think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the aforementioned diehards or to all the changes made in my favorite settings. My solo MERP campaign had elements that deviated from canon significantly, but it didn't break the game. And since it was a solo game, it hardly mattered to anyone else anyway. Perhaps, but if you drift too far from the "canon" (however you define it) the campaign won't feel much like Middle-earth any more. To me, the value of canon is to set a baseline of what folks should be able to reasonably expect. It doesn't mean that in your campaign Helm's Deep might be overrun by orcs, or that the forces of Sauron burned half of Mirkwood. Those things can happen and it won't destroy the feel of Middle-earth. Now, if you decided that Aragorn and his Rangers are actually ninjas then you have changed the feel by introducing elements that JRRT never put into M-e. Give the Nazgul some lightsabers and Elrond a box of phasers and it becomes something even farther from what folks would expect. I won't say that you can't do this stuff (for example, you could do Middle-earth 2020 where to advance the timeline to today or something like that) but I would warn players in advance.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Jun 23, 2020 23:11:02 GMT -6
I've gone on record stating that canon is overrated. I don't think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the aforementioned diehards or to all the changes made in my favorite settings. My solo MERP campaign had elements that deviated from canon significantly, but it didn't break the game. And since it was a solo game, it hardly mattered to anyone else anyway. Perhaps, but if you drift too far from the "canon" (however you define it) the campaign won't feel much like Middle-earth any more. To me, the value of canon is to set a baseline of what folks should be able to reasonably expect. It doesn't mean that in your campaign Helm's Deep might be overrun by orcs, or that the forces of Sauron burned half of Mirkwood. Those things can happen and it won't destroy the feel of Middle-earth. Now, if you decided that Aragorn and his Rangers are actually ninjas then you have changed the feel by introducing elements that JRRT never put into M-e. Give the Nazgul some lightsabers and Elrond a box of phasers and it becomes something even farther from what folks would expect. I won't say that you can't do this stuff (for example, you could do Middle-earth 2020 where to advance the timeline to today or something like that) but I would warn players in advance. I didn't stray that far from canon for the most part. Okay, my group once met Kirk, Spock, and McCoy, but that was a tongue-in-cheek adventure. In retrospect, my group should have met my FASA Trek characters instead. My main change from canon was that my main character was Elrond's fourth child. He unfortunately met his end after a long and mostly successful adventuring career, but it does explain why he wouldn't have been in the books. His sons are now taking stage 30 years later, but they see themselves as more Mannish than Elvish, since my character married a Dunadan lady. The sons of the other characters are also taking center stage. I thought I had added a link to one of their adventures.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Aug 28, 2020 22:54:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Oct 21, 2020 12:04:21 GMT -6
As for monsters, even official games like LOTRO have creatures invented for the game, such as bog lurkers and cave claws. Barghests appear in English folklore. They don't appear in Tolkien's written works, yet they are present in LOTRO. So you can add a few D&D monsters in your Middle-earth game, within reason. I personally wouldn't add a roper or an otyugh, but a hydra may be a unique type of dragon. Likewise, some nature spirits such as dryads or undines may work if used sparingly.
|
|
|
Post by doublejig2 on Oct 21, 2020 13:28:18 GMT -6
Plenty of grounds for introducing interesting (powerful?) monsters...
"There Are Fell Voices on the Air" - Fellowship of the Ring
“There are many evil and unfriendly things in the world that have little love for those that go on two legs, and yet are not in league with Sauron, but have purposes of their own. Some have been in this world longer than he.” - Fellowship of the Ring
"Far, far below the deepest delving of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he. Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day." - Two Towers
|
|
|
Post by cometaryorbit on Oct 22, 2020 0:24:02 GMT -6
"They are older than he" is extra-interesting as Sauron is a Maia & therefore older than the Earth! Could suggest some sort of Cthulhu-style primeval horror (unless it just means older than Sauron's reign IE dating from the era of Morgoth).
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Oct 22, 2020 1:07:09 GMT -6
They could be creatures that Morgoth created before Sauron was corrupted, which would explain why Sauron didn't know of them.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Oct 22, 2020 10:29:48 GMT -6
Ungoliant is the single most Cthulhuesque entity in Tolkien that comes to mind.
|
|
|
Post by Zenopus on Oct 22, 2020 11:15:51 GMT -6
The Watcher in the Water is pretty Lovecraftian in a nameless horror way. It's got the Cthulhu tentacle thing going on. And there are the Mewlips, which IIRC were in the short MERP monster list: tolkiengateway.net/wiki/The_Mewlips
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Oct 22, 2020 12:07:12 GMT -6
Good call. I’m reminded of Fastitocalon, too. You land on an island and it turns out to be a giant turtle.
Or the description of the fell beast (pterodactyl?) ridden by the Witch-King, so great: “A creature of an older world maybe it was, whose kind, lingering in forgotten mountains cold beneath the Moon, outstayed their day, and in hideous eyrie bred this last untimely brood, apt to evil. And the Dark Lord took it, and nursed it with fell meats, until it grew beyond the measure of all other things that fly; and he gave it to his servant to be his steed.”
I always wanted to imagine Sauron found them lingering ON the moon!
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Oct 22, 2020 13:40:51 GMT -6
My Middle-earth canon is pretty much only The Hobbit. I like to set the Middle-earth campaign a few years after the last page of The Hobbit, not hesitating to use any and all of AD&D's monsters, races, classes, spells, and magic items. Remember:
It just so happened that a halfling, 13 dwarves, and a human magic-user found a ring of invisibility in their quest against a red dragon. It might just as well have been a monk, a human illusionist, a gnome fighter, and a human cleric finding an apparatus of Kwalish in their quest against a flock of achaierai.
(Oh, and the map of Wilderland in The Hobbit covers all the land mass you need.)
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Oct 22, 2020 15:37:26 GMT -6
I would probably use ghouls to represent the Mewlips. It's not clear if they actually are undead creatures, but their behavior corresponds to D&D ghouls. The Fastitocelon is a dragon turtle.
Rhovanion/Wilderland is a good place to adventure, but I prefer Eregion/Hollin. Aside from the MERP products I own, I will use Fonstad's Atlas and Foster's Guide to fill in the gaps.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Oct 22, 2020 22:45:21 GMT -6
I don't actually use the majority of the monsters that are in the D&D game. Orcs, goblins, other humanoids, and animals make regular appearances. I include draconians if I'm running a Dragonlance game. But I've never used a water weird or xorn, and I can't recall ever using a medusa. I would use that last one if I ran a game based on Greek Mythology, but I've never run such a game.
So would my Middle-earth game include stuff from other settings? Perhaps, but I'd make sure there's a good reason for including them. I'd also make them variations of a theme. An Efreeti may be a Balrog, and a T-rex would be a wingless dragon.
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Nov 2, 2020 12:12:39 GMT -6
Plenty of grounds for introducing interesting (powerful?) monsters... "There Are Fell Voices on the Air" - Fellowship of the Ring “There are many evil and unfriendly things in the world that have little love for those that go on two legs, and yet are not in league with Sauron, but have purposes of their own. Some have been in this world longer than he.” - Fellowship of the Ring "Far, far below the deepest delving of the Dwarves, the world is gnawed by nameless things. Even Sauron knows them not. They are older than he. Now I have walked there, but I will bring no report to darken the light of day." - Two Towers Here's a video about these creatures: www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBjypmueZUI
|
|