Post originally by KC at 2003-04-25 09:53:36
Converted from Phorums BB System
Can you explain this statement a bit more?
"There is a lot more choices in character creation for a LotR character than in D&D. This ends up making a character more rich and detailed, a real pleasure over its D20 counterpart."
What kinds of choices? Are there classes? Or more variations in skills?
Post originally by Aura at 2003-04-25 10:28:03
Converted from Phorums BB System
This certainly is a long review, considering that it says practically nothing about the game or the system.
Synopsis: "There's this game based in Middle Earth, and it's different from D&D, and you lose combat ability as you lose hit points. Oh, and magic is more subtle."
I give your review a 3 for Style, but 1 for Substance.
Post originally by larsdangly at 2003-04-25 12:06:56
Converted from Phorums BB System
This is a fine (if a bit breezy) review, but it should be pointed out that a sizable minority of people posting to the LOTR message board were very unhappy with the game system once they took it for a spin. I thought this was a fantastic game when I first picked it up based on the visuals, generally good writing, and excellent game design choices for elements of character design, magic and task resolution. However, the system suffers from some terribly inept weaknesses that most critics have attributed to poor playtesting and negligent management. An experienced gamer could fine-tune the mechanics of combat, task resolution, damage+injuries, armor, etc. so that it worked well and was enjoyable to play. The problem is, you would have to fix or nudge nearly EVERYTHING. Your reference to the errata sheet is correct, but does not capture the scope of the problem; most of the weaknesses and play imbalances intrinsic to the combat system would require the sort of re-tooling the game designers are not willing to do. One of the more symptomatic bits of evidence about how Decipher views this game was that purchasers initially howled when they found the simple errors and imbalances in weapon damage and armor tables. The designers swore they would fix them, but then the errata and game-masters screen came out with the same mistakes! This game could have been excellent, but as it stands is simply an over-priced marketing tool. Whatever one thinks of D+D and its recent spin-offs, it is a game system that has nearly 30 years of experience in play-balance and functional mechanics behind it. It would have made a better foundation for a LOTR setting for that reason. I have run several campaigns set in middle earth using the excellent ICE modules (now out of print) and either GURPs, The Fantasy Trip, or D+D as the game system (I regard character law as almost un-playable). These sessions rocked; I recommend any or all of them as alternatives to Deciphers game.
Post originally by James A Beggs at 2003-04-25 12:09:07
Converted from Phorums BB System
Sure!
character stats are generated rolling 2d6, and you have 6 of them. They are named differently, but you can take a pretty good guess of what they are.
Then, you select your race - and for all races except Dwarves, a subrace. These grant you attribute changes and special abilities. Again no surprises here.
Then, you get 6 "picks" for buying racial skills and racial edges.
Racial skills are skills you learned while growing up, and edges are innate advantages. These are limited by your race in what edges and skills you can spend your picks on. Skills are purchased by rank #, 1 pick per 1 rank, while edges are generally one pick just grants you the edge - although some edges have more levels.
Then, you get your Wits stat x3 for purchasing Lores and Languages - knowledges skills, and other foreign tongues you speak. I like this - Lores and Languages often suffer in most games because they are considered a waste by many players; this way, you get some of these for free and dont spend "precious points" on "non essential" skills.
(BTW - your character can purchase up to 6 ranks in any one skill by the end of character creation).
You can also select 1 flaw to get a 7th point - the list of flaws are also restrained by your race.
Then, you select your order.
Orders are basically character classes. You get 15 points to purchase ranks in skills, but no higher than 3 ranks; then you get 5 more points to spend on your order skills again, and this time you can increase them higher than 3 ranks (But again, no higher than 6).
Then you get one Edge for free, and this time it can be any edge you want; and you can select up to 3 flaws to get up to 3 more edges.
And finally, you get 5 more picks to spend on anything you desire, including raising stats, reactions (saving throws), initiative, etc.
The reason this process makes charactes more interesting and robust is for a couple reasons.
The first is, you end up getting a pretty thick list of skills - you get more than in D20 anyway, because of the way skill points are handled. So where in D20, you will have, oh, 4 skills, there is a good chance you will have more skills in this game.
Particularly since combat abilities are based off of skills and reactions, rather than a Base Attack Bonus built into the character class. For instance, Armed Combat is used for, well, any armed hand to hand combat - and you have to take it for each weapon type (Swords, Axes, etc).
There is a lot of different choices too, so it broadens the base a lot.
Secondly is Edges and Flaws - what D&D would call Feats (minus the flaws). Edges do a lot of things that feats would do, but they also do things unavailabe to feats.
For example, the Horde Edge. Horde means that you start out wealthier than you otherwise would - and the more times you take it, the richer you are.
Or the Rank Edge (start as a noble), the Command Edge (have a small body of people who follow your commands), etc.
And the flaws you can take to give you more points - and give you some more meat for your character, which is unavailable to D&D characters.
For instance, the Grasping Flaw, which requires you to spend a Courage point to avoid letting greed overwhelm you when you see treasure; or the Dark Secret flaw (you have an, uhm, Dark Secret).
Don't get me wrong - as I said in my review, this isn't a revolutionary system, and it reads a lot like D&D would; but what it offers in character generation is a greater array of choices in defining your character.
Post originally by James A Beggs at 2003-04-25 12:19:25
Converted from Phorums BB System
Thanks for the flame, Aura. Nice to know we can all discuss things in a mature fashion without hurling insults, eh?
I rate you a 3 for your cutting edge insults, and a 2 on your maturity level.
Before I continue, though, I also want to point out that, while my review MAY have been bad - I have given reviews people have considered outstanding in the past, but I'm certainly not perfect (check out my review on Godlike, for example).
However, my purpose was not to explain the mechanical differences, but the FLAVOR differences between the systems. I had thought that was self-evident. Sorry you were too slow to miss that point. Considering I was trying to cover a lot of ground and still had a long review, and considering that there are a number of other reviewers who have already gone into the mechanical aspects of the game, I felt it was not necessary.
Post originally by Cedric Chin at 2003-04-25 12:25:04
Converted from Phorums BB System
Didn't get the impression about flavor. You need to set up your thesis within the first section of your review. Closest I can find to a thesis in your introduction is "I wanted to find something different".
Cedric.
aka. Washu! ^O^
*****
"I enjoy 3rd Edition D&D, but I like playing other games too - and I often grow weary of the hardcore D&Der's "One Game System To Rule Them All" mentality.
So, I am always on the lookout for alternative games to play. I generally try to find just one, or perhaps two, games in a genre and stick with it.
I'm still looking for that "perfect" fantasy game - for a time, I judged it to be Ars Magica, but it proved frustratingly hard to get players for that. I ran Palladium Fantasy sometimes, particularly as an alternative to 2nd edition D&D.
I felt 3rd edition was better - but I still found myself wanting... well, wanting something different.
I don't think that the Lord of the Rings RPG is the perfect solution, but I DO think its a better one.
Post originally by access.denied at 2003-04-25 12:28:25
Converted from Phorums BB System
From what I heard, this is supposed to be a big sticking point vis a vis D&D3e.
Not that I think it's important, but it seems many people playing D&D insist on having characters with equal utility to the party... many people have said that e.g. elves in Decipher LotR are hugely overpowered.
As I said, I don't much care for game balance, but it seems like a big issue in positioning the game against D&D
Post originally by James A Beggs at 2003-04-25 12:31:10
Converted from Phorums BB System
Hi there!
I admit the review was breezy; I was trying to discuss flavor rather than mechanics, a point that was missed - and perhaps that style of review is not appropriate here at RPG.Net.
I agree there are some problems with the game system. However, we have had a good time playing it thus far. It is irritating they didn't fix the problem even in their game screen that came later, which I find amazingly incompetent....
But I DO like it more than D&D.
D&D has had the advantage of 30 years of refinement, as you say. CODA is certainly not perfect. But it offers some great items that lends itself to more cinematic, heroic style roleplaying.
For example, you are capable of the heroic, sword-swinging combats of the movies, taking on scores of orcs at once, even as beginning characters. Meanwhile, at much higher levels, you dont become the godlike, unstoppable killing machines that you do at 20th level.
Example:
An LotR character with 20 advancements vs a 20th level D&D character, each facing, oh, 40 orcs.
In the most likely scenario, the D&D character will probably not even be touched. The LotR character is going to be in trouble.
And thats my point. No doubt, I won't argue for a second that LotR doesn't have its problems - and being a young system, I'm not surprised.
But D&D gets unrealistic at its highest levels. Orcs should still be a threat in any "real world" application, and yet in the vast majority of the cases, if you set By-The-Book orcs against 20th level D&D characters, your players are going to laugh at you.
I will say this: LotR has some definite cleaning up to do. It has mistakes, and it has its problems.
But I find it does great what it was intended to do - cinematic level heroic adventuring.
I am curious though... aside from the fact that it is terribly abusable by munchkins, what did you see as its terrible weaknesses?
Post originally by Johnny McKenna at 2003-04-25 12:43:54
Converted from Phorums BB System
Actually, this sounds a lot like D&D's 2nd edition "Player's Option" line. This version sounds more detailed and formula-heavy, but there are many similarities. This was a great idea for D&D so that not every elf mage character was exactly alike. However, I don't think it was very popular becuase of its complexity, and it was abandoned after a few sourcebooks.
The character creation system sounds needlessly complex and detailed. While I applaud the game for trying to encourage people to create detailed characters, it doesn't need to require a download from the web site to understand. What I do in my D&D games is require each character to write a history. Based on that, I may give them a few bonuses or skills related to events in their background.
Linear Mode
