So I'm starting up a new campaign set in Middle Earth, now that my group has finished with its Harn campaign using Burning Wheel.  We discussed what we'd like to do next, and Middle Earth came out on top of general consensus.  (Though there was also a fair interest in classic Traveller.)  

I had not read most of Tolkien's writings outside of The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, but I know that others had. Thus, I wanted to set my campaign in roughly the same period and regions of the books -- perhaps a decade or two before The Hobbit or after Lord of the Rings -- and perhaps ranging into neighboring countries than those covered, but not by much.  I pitched four campaign ideas:

The Traitor Unmasked
This is an alternate storyline set in Rohan shortly after The Hobbit and prior to Lord of the Rings. Some in Rohan are lead to suspect treachery of Saruman. They have no proof, however, and undertake to root out his evil.

All Shall Love Me And Despair
An alternate storyline where Galadriel takes the One Ring that Frodo offers. I'm still pondering the timeline for this, but I think the PCs would start in Gondor -- perhaps several years later.

To the Necromancer's Lair
Prior to Lord of the Rings, a company in Bree are recruited to help root out the remnants of the Necromancer's rule in Mirkwood -- leading to various adventures along the way.

The Festering Evil
A hobbit-centric alternate storyline where Frodo is forced to hide the Ring when the black riders come on him in the Shire, and he disappears. In the months that follow, dark forces swirl around the Shire as forces are drawn there.


Of these, we eventually picked the "All shall love me..." campaign idea.  Several players loved the idea.  One player wasn't comfortable with it because it seemed too far from Tolkien canon, but he said he'd try it.  

Rules System

I was a little stuck for system -- because we tried the Decipher Lord of the Rings RPG a few years ago and hated it.  I'm also pretty ambivalent about MERP based on my RoleMaster experiences.  Left to my own devices, I would have gone with Fantasy HERO, using the 4th edition rules.  However, none of the players seemed too keen on it and one was actively against it.  

So as an alternative, I'm thinking of going with Gold Rush Games' Action! System.  It's derivative of HERO, but with a much simpler core rulebook and everything opened under the OGL, with at least a few supplements.  I've checked out ComStar Games' MagicQuest game, which is the only fantasy genre Action! System game thus far.  If anyone has any Action! System experience or tips, I'd be interested to hear them.

Quote from: jhkim;246958Of these, we eventually picked the "All shall love me..." campaign idea.  Several players loved the idea.  One player wasn't comfortable with it because it seemed too far from Tolkien canon, but he said he'd try it.  

It's not so far from canon. Galadriel had a bit of a history in making poor choices, and was by some interpretations basically serving time in Middle Earth for those poor choices. Turning down the ring was evidence she'd gotten over herself; but it's not so hard to imagine that she could have gotten fed up with the Valar, fed up with being good in general, taken the ring and kicked some tail. Things might not have gone well for Sauron if she had - the stories only hint at what she would have been like in a less passive role.

As I understand Tolkien's thinking, if she'd done this, she would certainly have screwed it up - possibly kicking out Sauron but turning out just as dark. You've chosen the darkest alternate ending possible; Tolkien wasn't kidding, I think, when he had her add "...and despair." It would probably have involved Gandalf taking direct action against her, as opposed to his usual indirect ploys, and it's hard to imagine how that would have looked. You'll get to decide that.

I could see her reign turning into a kind of fascist state in which you WILL behave well, where the standard of good behaviour gets raised inhumanly high (thoughtcrime, etc.) and the penalty for failure would have been death. Justice without mercy, and nowhere to hide.

Quote from: Ikrast;246998As I understand Tolkien's thinking, if she'd done this, she would certainly have screwed it up - possibly kicking out Sauron but turning out just as dark. You've chosen the darkest alternate ending possible; Tolkien wasn't kidding, I think, when he had her add "...and despair." It would probably have involved Gandalf taking direct action against her, as opposed to his usual indirect ploys, and it's hard to imagine how that would have looked. You'll get to decide that.

This seems rather unfair to me.  There was no explained logic that Frodo's quest was likely to succeed.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  The argument that they were essentially giving Sauron's Ring back to him seemed quite compelling.  It seems to me that you are judging Galadriel's alternate choice using the hindsight that the author chose to have Frodo's quest succeed.  

However, my take is that it is not clear.  To be fair to the characters, I will be giving Galadriel's future just as much authorial goodwill as Tolkien gave to Frodo's story.  This doesn't mean that things will be all rosy, any more than they were rosy in the canonical plot.  However, I am not taking the view that any choice different than the plot is inherently a mistake.

Quote from: jhkim;247011This seems rather unfair to me.  There was no explained logic that Frodo's quest was likely to succeed.  Quite the opposite, in fact.  The argument that they were essentially giving Sauron's Ring back to him seemed quite compelling.  It seems to me that you are judging Galadriel's alternate choice using the hindsight that the author chose to have Frodo's quest succeed.  

However, my take is that it is not clear.  To be fair to the characters, I will be giving Galadriel's future just as much authorial goodwill as Tolkien gave to Frodo's story.  This doesn't mean that things will be all rosy, any more than they were rosy in the canonical plot.  However, I am not taking the view that any choice different than the plot is inherently a mistake.

I think Ikrast has it. The ring will work on your evil, your weakness. Galadriels was guilty of pride and pf defying the ban of the Valar (she returned with Faenor and company to Middle Earth). If she took the ring she would most likely go down this path again. In small steps until she defied the Valar again and attempted to create a Valinor on Middle Earth. Scary stuff but rife with adventure.

Now, Frodo, supposedly, could defy the power of the ring as long as he did because he was a hobbit, innocent and good. Now, Galadriel, really, was not that good according to the Silmarillion. She wasn't evil but prideful, considered almost as bad. One of the problems Boromir faced was his pride. Look at Boromir for how Galadriel would act with the ring, only on a more intellectual and powerful step.

However, it is all hypothetical.

Bill

Only one being on Middle Earth could resist the Ring and he was probably either a Valor or the first being to exist on Middle Earth - Either way, far above Sauron.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;247100Only one being on Middle Earth could resist the Ring and he was probably either a Valor or the first being to exist on Middle Earth - Either way, far above Sauron.

It seems to me that Frodo could resist the Ring.  He couldn't entirely be free of its influence -- i.e. he wasn't immune to it, but he could resist it to some degree.  Heck, Gollum wasn't exactly a pleasant person, but he had the Ring for centuries while doing only minor evil.  I don't think the Ring was really trying to stay under a mountain eating fish.  

I'd buy that no one is immune to the Ring's influence, but it seems many could resist it to varying degrees of success.

Quote from: HinterWelt;247053I think Ikrast has it. The ring will work on your evil, your weakness. Galadriels was guilty of pride and pf defying the ban of the Valar (she returned with Faenor and company to Middle Earth). If she took the ring she would most likely go down this path again. In small steps until she defied the Valar again and attempted to create a Valinor on Middle Earth. Scary stuff but rife with adventure.

Now, Frodo, supposedly, could defy the power of the ring as long as he did because he was a hobbit, innocent and good. Now, Galadriel, really, was not that good according to the Silmarillion. She wasn't evil but prideful, considered almost as bad. One of the problems Boromir faced was his pride. Look at Boromir for how Galadriel would act with the ring, only on a more intellectual and powerful step.

As I mentioned in the first post, I'm not interested in Tolkien outside of the Hobbit and LotR.  I read some of the Silmarillion a while ago, found it dull, and gave up on it.  So you'll have to excuse this side of things.  

I don't think that Galadriel's supposed pride makes her tantamount to evil -- which for the most part seems to be in not obeying orders, which I don't feel is terribly bad.  (I'm a Presbyterian rather than a Catholic.  We don't hold with appointed authority, but rather the judgment of the faithful. :-)  So she is not evil, nor is she stupid.  She accepted the Ring from Frodo not as a power-hungry move, but as a move to defeat Sauron and save the people of Middle-Earth.  She intends to destroy the Ring, by keeping it safe while they make a safe passage to Mount Doom.  

Now, it is quite possible that the same thing will happen with her as happened with Isildur and Frodo -- she will be influenced by the Ring into not destroying it.  However, that'll be something to happen in-game.  Also, I think she will have some plans for that.

He couldn't resist it fully, and with the ring, anything less than fully is folly.

Pun intended.

Quote from: jhkim;247104As I mentioned in the first post, I'm not interested in Tolkien outside of the Hobbit and LotR.  I read some of the Silmarillion a while ago, found it dull, and gave up on it.  So you'll have to excuse this side of things.  

I don't think that Galadriel's supposed pride makes her tantamount to evil -- which for the most part seems to be in not obeying orders, which I don't feel is terribly bad.  (I'm a Presbyterian rather than a Catholic.  We don't hold with appointed authority, but rather the judgment of the faithful. :-)  So she is not evil, nor is she stupid.  She accepted the Ring from Frodo not as a power-hungry move, but as a move to defeat Sauron and save the people of Middle-Earth.  She intends to destroy the Ring, by keeping it safe while they make a safe passage to Mount Doom.  

Now, it is quite possible that the same thing will happen with her as happened with Isildur and Frodo -- she will be influenced by the Ring into not destroying it.  However, that'll be something to happen in-game.  Also, I think she will have some plans for that.

I was just trying to give you some information on Galadriel. Most of that, at best is muddled, and comes from other sources that LoTR and the Hobbit.

However, consider this, she and Lothlorien had a reputation. Perhaps ill deserved but real nonetheless. One of fear and mystery, magic and ensorcelment. So, again, its your campaign but just a something to consider in the internal struggle she may face.

Bill

My 2 cents: the whole idea behind the Ring is that ultimately you cannot resist it, full stop, no "but". Isildur was one of the greatest humans of his age, and he fell to it. Gollum fell to it. Gandalf, one of the wisest of all Maiar (oh, since you haven't read the Silmarillion, they're sort of like angels) didn't dare even touch the thing, knowing he would fall to it. Boromir fell to it, and he was certainly a valiant and honourable man up to that point. Saruman never even got close to it, but simply wanting to have a similar one was enough to make him turn evil. Frodo himself, for all his pastoral hobbit innocence, fell to it in the last moment. Rest assured, Galadriel would fall, too.

As you say, she would try to use its power to defeat Sauron militarily, and then throw it into Mount Doom... at least at first. But then, as the campaign started to proceed well, she would just think "Oh, while I'm at it, why don't I use the Ring's power to increase crop yields and reinvigorate desolate areas?", and it would work. Then she would think "Well, there's a bunch of orcs who deserted Sauron's losing armies, and now they're hiding in the mountains preying on villages. Better get them before they do more damage." Then "And what about these human brigands and highwaymen? They gotta go, too.". And then she finds herself saying "Finally we have won, and there's peace... but look! Those folks in Eriador / Rohan / wherever are saying they don't want to be ruled by elves and they don't want to spend money and effort on the reconstruction of distant areas. That's really dangerous, they might openly rebel and cause a lot of problems later on. Let's swat them preventively." And there you have it, she's evil.

There's a scene in the books where the Ring tempts Sam with a vision. It starts with turning Middle Earth into a garden...Progresses into tyranny.

All taken from his own desires.

He had the strength to deny it then...But the Ring can keep on going, forever if nessasary...And it gives its bearer forever.

Of all of the adventure and campaign ideas I have thought of over the years for Middle Earth, I had never considered an alternate history. So I would recommend you go with it, and report back how you got on.

Nothing against the alternate-history part; I just prefer canon over non-canon.

The ring is a symbol of temptation, basically a constant invitation and means to sin. Screw with it, and eventually it takes you down - a very standard Christian view of sinful acts. If your involvement is innocent and unknowing, it can take a long time. But it gets you in the end. Frodo fell, remember, at the very end. Saurman cracked just thinking about the thing. Gandalf wouldn't touch it. The one exception is a creature like Bombadil: if you've got the whole good/evil thing completely worked out, know your place in the scheme of things, and have no ambition to rule, you're immune to the ring.

Creatures with fewer vices and not much pride - the hobbits, and even smeagol, initially - took longer to grind down, and didn't amount to much even when they fell. Smeagol, and arguably Frodo, cracked before they were able to manage anything substantial with the ring.

That's why I figure Gala would have gone straight over the edge, with the thing in her hand. Unlike Frodo and Smeagol, she would have known all the possibilities of that sort of power. She'd have known perfectly well that using it was a bad idea, but there you are, trying to force your way into Mordor, and your troops are dying by the thousands. All you have to do is put on the ring to end the fight. And hell - you're old and wise, right? You can cope. This is a one-shot, special circumstance. Afterward you'll just take it off and destroy it. It's easy. Yeah. Well... right after the mop up battles, anyway. All those orcs and things to root out... yeah, with the ring there'll be no losses on our side; that will save years of hunting and fighting. And you've absolutely got to get Mordor replanted as a fertile land, clean up the barrow wights... You'd need to get the humans on board, of course.. and actually.. Aragorn would be perfect for that. Why should Arwen marry him, anyway? She's just a child. He'll certainly see the advantages of marrying you instead...

Way too much temptation for the likes of Galadriel. But it would take a long time for her to really fall hard, and it would be fun to run adventures in which she got slowly less stable.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;247141There's a scene in the books where the Ring tempts Sam with a vision. It starts with turning Middle Earth into a garden...Progresses into tyranny.

All taken from his own desires.

He had the strength to deny it then...But the Ring can keep on going, forever if nessasary...And it gives its bearer forever.

I don't see that we're disagreeing here.  When you say that Sam had the strength to deny it, I would call that resisting.  I agree that the Ring would eventually drag down anyone -- at first giving them fits of possessiveness of the Ring that they would recover from, and then visions, and over time their personality would start to warp.  

The point is, though, that she doesn't instantly become a bad guy like Saruman or even Denethor.  She did not try to steal the Ring like Smeagol or Boromir, nor did she accept it out of any base motives.  She will be subject to its effects, but they will be subtle and take a long time -- during which the plans to destroy the Ring and Sauron will be proceeding.  

In other words, the campaign won't be her as the obvious bad guy, but rather her as a tenuous figure who will continue to work to destroy the Ring (as Frodo and Sam did) but who will also have impulses and fits from it (as Frodo did at the end).