I'm not talking about MERP - something that got ICE introuble as well.

LotR isn't a suitable rpg setting, it's a story and everything within is based around the quest to destroy the ring and fight Sauron. Beyond that there is absolutely nothing. It isn't the Silmarillion.

Beyond that LotR was broken and sorely lacking in details.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonLike I said, I actually ran the game for a few months. I didn't just sit and read part of it and pronounce it broken. And I'm saying it isn't any of the things you say it is.

The whole "LotR isn't ME" argument is meaningless. They used all the background available in the trilogy, which is a hell of a lot more  information to work with than most games based on a given property have to work with.

It's not meaningless in the slightest! Good grief! They couldn't use the vast majroity of information about the setting. I'd say that was considerably important.

And the rules were broken, notoriously so.

Quote from: signoftheserpentAnd the rules were broken, notoriously so.

Give examples, please.

Maybe you're right and some rules are broken, but I'd like to hear what rules you consider broken, and why.

Quote from: signoftheserpentIt's not meaningless in the slightest! Good grief!

of course it is.

Quote from: signoftheserpentThey couldn't use the vast majroity of information about the setting. I'd say that was considerably important.

If by "vast majority" you mean the Silmarillion or the various compilations of notes Tolkien's son released, all I can say is that the Lord of the Rings stood on its own for decades without that stuff and people felt it was pretty damned detailed. If you mean something else...I just don't see it. The info in the original trilogy, as well as the appendices in the Return of the King, consist of a helluva lot of material. What the hell are you looking for? Dental records? Produce some examples of what they couldn't use.

Quote from: signoftheserpentAnd the rules were broken, notoriously so.

"Notoriously so" amongst those who never actually played or ran the game. Again, I ran it. It wasn't broken. The errata cleared up some concerns, but the game was nowhere near broken. And like Claudius says above - cite specific examples. Otherwise it simply looks like you're talking through your hat.

Quote from: ClaudiusGive examples, please.

Maybe you're right and some rules are broken, but I'd like to hear what rules you consider broken, and why.

I can tell you that the 2d6 mechanic doesn't give enough spread, as compared to, say, a d20, for chance to play a big part in task resolution. But in actual play it didn't seem broken in the least. Others may point to the "death spiral" which begins once a character or monster drops into a lower wound or fatigue level, but that's not really something anyone would consider broken, since there have been plenty of games which use the same principle. It'd be like claiming hit points are "broken" simply because some don't like them.

Quote from: ClaudiusGive examples, please.

Maybe you're right and some rules are broken, but I'd like to hear what rules you consider broken, and why.

off the top of my head? i can't remember. I do recall the mass combat rules being completely useless. There were other combat issues as well as lots of printing errors. The message boards at decipher at the time were ablaze, go check their archives.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonof course it is.



If by "vast majority" you mean the Silmarillion or the various compilations of notes Tolkien's son released, all I can say is that the Lord of the Rings stood on its own for decades without that stuff and people felt it was pretty damned detailed. If you mean something else...I just don't see it. The info in the original trilogy, as well as the appendices in the Return of the King, consist of a helluva lot of material. What the hell are you looking for? Dental records? Produce some examples of what they couldn't use.





"Notoriously so" amongst those who never actually played or ran the game. Again, I ran it. It wasn't broken. The errata cleared up some concerns, but the game was nowhere near broken. And like Claudius says above - cite specific examples. Otherwise it simply looks like you're talking through your hat.

YOu may well have ran it, doiesn't mean the rules were not in error.

And LotR had indeed stood on its own for decades - as a story. Stories don't make game settings and the setting of lord of the rings is the story.

I don't care for people's opinions on the work inherited by Tolkien' descendants, but any middle earth game cannot succed if the designers only has access to a fraction of the setting material - such as the lord of the rings.

Quote from: signoftheserpentI don't care for people's opinions on the work inherited by Tolkien' descendants, but any middle earth game cannot succed if the designers only has access to a fraction of the setting material - such as the lord of the rings.

IIRC correctly ICE were doing well until Tolkien Enterprises put the boot in. They did have a great deal more freedom than Decipher did, though. I seem to recall one of the sourcebooks (Lords of Middle Earth?) statting the Valar and Maiar, including Melkor/Morgoth.

something D were never allowed to do.

There were some broken rules in the beginning and the LOTR rulebook had some bad editing at time but it was fixed by erratta and the mass combat was fixed in the supplement Helm's Deep.

Is it a perfect game, no, but not more broken than a lot of games that come out these days. It is pretty well fixed with a few house rules and if you want epic let the movies using the mook rules that are included with the game all is well. then of course I have found few games that do not need a houerule or two to play.

I personally found it to be pretty decent set of rules and much better the MERP for LOTR style play. Just because the company could not do certain things does not keep the players from using different eras. Source material can be taken directly from the books let alone the game books.

Decipher blew it themselves. They had the opportunity to do well and by not getting stuff out on time and bad marketing caused the game to suffer. The game itself is pretty good as far as rpg go.

how utterly disingenuous.

So there are other broken games as well.

Hold on while i light the fireworks of joy!

:rolleyes:

D blew it by limiting themselves with a useless license. Anyone would have known that, after Return of the King, the game would no longer be popular. The same thing happened to the tcg.

Quote from: signoftheserpenthow utterly disingenuous.

So there are other broken games as well.

Hold on while i light the fireworks of joy!

:rolleyes:

D blew it by limiting themselves with a useless license. Anyone would have known that, after Return of the King, the game would no longer be popular. The same thing happened to the tcg.

I have not found an rpg yet that does not have some boneheaded or broken rule. what I was saying that CODA was no different but then no worse than any other rpg system out there. As far as new systems are concerned it actually was better than most except that the layout which was not the greatest made it harder to understand.

I agree that popularity of the game would decline after the movies but decipher never took advantage of that popularity to gain and make a large fanbase for the game. Their support was horrible and it cost them a lot of players, not the game itself. If they had had done their job rights I believe the rpg would had done much better and still would be viable though much scalled back from when the movies were out.

Quote from: 1717 FusilAs far as new systems are concerned it actually was better than most except that the layout which was not the greatest made it harder to understand.

I think the layout of the book was fine, really, the problem was chargen. Chargen is a complete mess, it looks more complex than it really is.