Recently with the COVID-19 virus and stay at home orders. I picked up my Baldur's Gate Archer playthrough (over 4 years old, started in BG1). I finally managed to beat Siege of Dragonspear and am pacing along in BG2 (Video game hall of fame worthy) in a non-reload game (unless main dies).

This has got me in a fantasy tabletop mood. I know what I'm going to get with D&D 5th.

A few years ago, the "One Ring" Tolkien based RPG caught my eye. I played a one shot when the game first game out. I remember the Fellowship and Adventures phases of the game. A game store owner who plays the game regularly quoted "It is my favorite RPG ever. Orcs are terrifying."

Does anyone have experience with the One Ring RPG? For the most part, if there is positive feedback for the game I might introduce it to our current gaming group as a possible alternative.

Being a LotR fan before a Star Wars fan, I had to buy it, but couldn't get anyone to play. Honestly, a read through of the rules made it feel very heavy handed and oppressive. They try too hard to shoe-horn your PC's experience into replicating the slow soul-crushing march to Mount Doom (whether or not you're actually going there). There's a mechanic kind of like the Sanity mechanic for Call of Cthulhu which is hard to avoid or get rid of, and it feels like everything in the game revolves around it.

I'm not a fan of rulesets that enforce player and GM behaviour, but some people like that kind of thing.

They did come up with a D&D conversion, but it's ridiculous because they didn't rescale any of the monsters, so Orcs aren't terrifying for very long.

BTW, if you're familiar with D&D5 but want to keep it in a low-fantasy or historical vibe, you can stop at level 6, and allow every 5000XP to be used to buy Feats or an attribute increase. This means Orcs remain a challenge no matter what.

5 touches Deep also is a decent supplement for an immersive 5e/OSR styled experience, which is more about limited player capabilities in favour of making for a grittier experience. It caps at 9th level but is just a more refined rule set then the cluster buggery of spells that I find modern DND to be.

7 hours ago, LordBritish said:

5 touches Deep

Um, googling 5 "touches" deep took me to a porn site...

You mean 5 Torches Deep...

2 hours ago, whafrog said:

Um, googling 5 "touches" deep took me to a porn site...

You mean 5 Torches Deep...

I ended up laughing for a minute straight. Sorry about that? I hadn't even looked at how I spelt it.

Yes, it's Five Torches deep. A pun on middle earth, rather then other innuendo. XD

I've played One Ring a bit, but none of the players really got into the system given how quirky it was.

To that end, we've found that Adventures in Middle-Earth (using 5e d20) to work quite well, as the 5e system is pretty solid and fairly easy to pick up (especially once the PCs don't have to worry about magic). I've played a long-running campaign and run both a short campaign and a couple one-shots, and they all ran pretty well and had a strong Middle-Earth feel to it, though a lot of that is on the shoulders of the GM. And the lack of magic means the setting feels more like the books and movies, though PCs are most definitely not on par on Gandalf, Aragorn, Legolas, or even Boromir and Gimli, especially in the early going.

It's a great system if you get rid of the D&D-mindset. TOR is not about killing monsters, dungeon crawling or looting. It's about making a stand in a world getting darker every day, about keeping up hope in the face of increasing darkness.

Fights are dangerous, even for experienced adventurers - I'm GM for two groups, one having 150+ XP chars and one with 40+ XP. Too many opponents, one good hit and down you go. So tactics are important, but not the "you stand here and I shoot from there" kind, but things like keeping companions safe, rallying them after a trying round to keep them fighting, and intimidate foes to get that critical pause.

Social encounters are equally important, as most adventures involve helping people or getting them to help a common cause. One doesn't last long without friends here.

All that said, TOR is about the books, not the movies. It's a world out of the Sagas, not PJs mixing D&D into Middle-Earth. No plate armour, not Warhammer-dwarfs riding on silly goats, no Jedi-Elves.

But: At the moment the system has been canceled and a new edition is in the making with a new publisher, Free League of Sweden.

I would second Adventures in Middle-earth, if you're interested in an easy-to-pick up (assuming you've played 5E before) dip into the world of Tolkien.

They did some interesting things (re-calibrated Short/Long Rests, made Exhaustion an important mechanic, removed Alignment and replaced it with Shadow, magic items that grow in power with you, Journey mechanics, etc.), that really help take the D&D out of D&D, and try to capture Tolkien without being too heavy handed.

On 4/19/2020 at 10:13 AM, Sunrider said:

It's a great system if you get rid of the D&D-mindset. TOR is not about killing monsters, dungeon crawling or looting. It's about making a stand in a world getting darker every day, about keeping up hope in the face of increasing darkness.

Fights are dangerous, even for experienced adventurers - I'm GM for two groups, one having 150+ XP chars and one with 40+ XP. Too many opponents, one good hit and down you go. So tactics are important, but not the "you stand here and I shoot from there" kind, but things like keeping companions safe, rallying them after a trying round to keep them fighting, and intimidate foes to get that critical pause.

Social encounters are equally important, as most adventures involve helping people or getting them to help a common cause. One doesn't last long without friends here.

All that said, TOR is about the books, not the movies. It's a world out of the Sagas, not PJs mixing D&D into Middle-Earth. No plate armour, not Warhammer-dwarfs riding on silly goats, no Jedi-Elves.

But: At the moment the system has been canceled and a new edition is in the making with a new publisher, Free League of Sweden.

Exactly.

I love The One Ring to death to be honest, but I've experienced that many people (especially RPG Veterans) have alot of trouble to get the mindset of this game.
All too often people keep wanting to "slay that giant spider that they saw crawling through that tree over there" always having the mindset "the GM put it there, so we can kill it" and even get cranky when they get they asses handed to them because the went after a Giant Spider inside Mirkwood Oo

As Sunrider said, the System just has a very different approach to DnD or other heavily Combat / Loot oriented systems.
But it can be a legendary adventure that your players will talk of even years after, when everyone keeps an open mind and accepts what the system gives.

Fun Fact: The Best experience (and Campaign) in this System I had, was with a group of complete beginners that had never played any rpg before and it was absolutely amazing 😃

I've only played it a bit, and there is a LOT that I like, a lot I'm not so keen on, and a few things I refuse to accept. It's also a difficult game to houserule, so I haven't really taken a stab at it.

I really like the Shadow aspect of it (in theory, anyway). For a lot of Characters, that Shadow is going to build and build, and it will get harder to get rid of. It kind of gives a mechanical reason why Elves aren't too powerful to be in the group. "Yes, I'm a thousand years old, and fought in many battles. I just spent the last 300 years in Thranduil's hall playing music so that I could put those horrors behind me. So excuse me if my archery is a little rusty!"

I also like the Journey rules, though everyone will sort of have to reorient their approach to such things.

I always really enjoyed MERP by ICE. Such a simple, yet fantastic, system It's basically what d20 turned into by the turn of the millennium, except you use a d100 instead of a d20, and there's a few ... more skills.

I never got to test TOR, and now I'm eagerly awaiting new edition by Free League. It always seemed fun to play, but getting around to it ... when you have other games to play and too little time ...

Quote

I've only played it a bit, and there is a LOT that I like, a lot I'm not so keen on, and a few things I refuse to accept. It's also a difficult game to houserule, so I haven't really taken a stab at it.

I am honestly interested in what the things were that you couldn´ t accept.

I haven't played DnD for years (since AD&D) and honestly don't remember that much about it. Played a bit of MERP and GURPS and the old SW D6 system, I think 20+ years ago... Just recently got into RPGs again with EotE and F&D. Really enjoyed it and don't really know why I quit for so many years. Anyway. Huge Tolkien fan... I'm not sure of which one to get into either... AiME, or TOR but they both look good. The only reason I would choose AiME over TOR is because I would then be familiar with with 5E rules in case I ever played another 5E game (a non D&D 5E game-- just not interested in wizards and clerics and pseudo Tolkien rip off stuff...). So if there wasn't much else that uses 5E apart from AiME, I guess I'd just choose TOR.

I bet there will be a fair bit of stuff coming out from Fria Ligan for expansions and what not... especially with the TV show coming.

TOR is hands down the best Middle-Earth based RPG ever. It evokes and recreates the feeling of the books amazingly well.

Sadly, Middle-Earth is not to the taste of my current players’ group, they don’t like worlds of black and white, good vs evil, so we stick to the dark fantasy world of Warhammer.

My group has played it for one long campaign and one short one. I think it's awesome. Character development is fun and balanced. The first long campaign was run out of the some of the pre-made adventures (Lake Town and Mirkwood, don't recall the exact names). Lots of fun.

I came to this thread expecting either stats or an adventure idea for a Star Wars artifact that functioned like the One Ring.

My disappointment is immeasurable 😛 !

Too bad I am working at the moment, otherwise I would be all over that challenge.

Hmm...

The One Force-Ring (not feeling all that creative with names right now) was a Sith artifact that could give the wielder extreme power, but it comes at a cost:
Provides +2 Force Rating (to a maximum of 7), and the basic versions of Move, Enhance, and Sense when used, regardless of the current force abilities (or lack thereof) of the character.
Each character who comes into engaged range of the Ring (but only once per session) must make a Simple Discipline check (with Setback when appropriate) to avoid becoming enthralled by the Ring. Add appropriate Setback for various mental states, but if the character is holding the Ring or otherwise has it on their person, they add an additional Setback.
If the character fails the check, they become enthralled to the Ring, increasing the difficulty of future checks by one. A Triumph can be used to decrease the future difficulty of checks to resist the Ring by 1. Despair can be spent to increase the difficulty by 1.
The first time in a session when the character in possession of the Ring makes a Force Power check, they must make a Discipline check (difficulty contingent on previous results, as discussed) to avoid using the Ring, adding two Setback if they failed a check to the Ring earlier that session.
If the character uses the Ring, they increase the difficulty of future checks to resist the Ring by 1.
For each Force power check made while the character is using the Ring, they suffer 4 Conflict.

To use the Ring, the wielder must slip it onto their finger, costing a Maneuver. Strangely enough, the ring automatically expands and contracts to fit the finger (or substitute appendage in the case of an unusual alien) of the wielder. If left on for too long, the Ring will contract and become firmly fixed to the finger, becoming unremovable without severing the finger.
To remove the Ring,* the character must again make a Discipline check of appropriate difficulty, with a Setback for each encounter they have been wearing it.

*Removing the Ring with the intention of ceasing its use ongoing. In the case of someone who fully intends to continue using it, this check would not be necessary.

Sauron laughs at your limit 7 in force rating

On 4/30/2020 at 10:33 AM, Absol197 said:

I came to this thread expecting either stats or an adventure idea for a Star Wars artifact that functioned like the One Ring.

My disappointment is immeasurable 😛 !

"Well, we have this spaceship, and there's a star that we can reach right above us. I bet we could build a ring cannon pretty easily. Guys, I think we got this!"

On 4/24/2020 at 11:24 AM, dreenan said:

I am honestly interested in what the things were that you couldn´ t accept.

The main thing I remember is all the different weapon skills and how they have no bearing on each other, and how weapons had very specific results for called shots. So if Gimli's axe gets knocked out of his hands and he has to grab an orc scimitar, he's suddenly as unskilled as any Hobbit child. I'm all for specialization, but that should be done with special talents and abilities. No skilled swordsman is going to pick up an axe and say, "What the devil am I supposed to do with this?" I got a lot of pushback in the forums for this position, with people insisting, "It's not a game about fighting!" Well, there's a heck of a lot of rules about fighting, so that don't add up."

And the Called Shot thing. If I'm using an axe, and my enemy doesn't have a shield, I guess I'm just SOL with the cool thing I can do.

Quote

No skilled swordsman is going to pick up an axe and say, "What the devil am I supposed to do with this?"

Well, he most certainly would, because an axe has nothing in common with a sword regarding handling, let alone efficient attacking and defending. Of course he would not be helpless and definitely better as an untrained individual.

But I see where you are coming from, and though I partially agree with the weapon packages issue I can live with it.

Thanks for your answer.

12 hours ago, The Grand Falloon said:

"Well, we have this spaceship, and there's a star that we can reach right above us. I bet we could build a ring cannon pretty easily. Guys, I think we got this!"

The main thing I remember is all the different weapon skills and how they have no bearing on each other, and how weapons had very specific results for called shots. So if Gimli's axe gets knocked out of his hands and he has to grab an orc scimitar, he's suddenly as unskilled as any Hobbit child. I'm all for specialization, but that should be done with special talents and abilities. No skilled swordsman is going to pick up an axe and say, "What the devil am I supposed to do with this?" I got a lot of pushback in the forums for this position, with people insisting, "It's not a game about fighting!" Well, there's a heck of a lot of rules about fighting, so that don't add up."

And the Called Shot thing. If I'm using an axe, and my enemy doesn't have a shield, I guess I'm just SOL with the cool thing I can do.

Yeah those weapon rules would be a deal killer for me. I have experience using melee weapons and more translates between then than doesnt

Quote

I have experience using melee weapons and more translates between then than doesnt

So do I. And between a Sword and an Axe, or like in the example above, among a two-handed axe and a scimitar is a huge difference.

you are right that melee weapons translate to a point i.e. if you are very skilled with a longsword you adapt pretty fast to the langes Messer, Rapier and Dussak.

1 hour ago, dreenan said:

Well, he most certainly would, because an axe has nothing in common with a sword regarding handling, let alone efficient attacking and defending. Of course he would not be helpless and definitely better as an untrained individual.

But I see where you are coming from, and though I partially agree with the weapon packages issue I can live with it.

Thanks for your answer.

No, he really wouldn't.

First off, nobody becomes a master swordsman without picking up a few other weapons from time to time.

Second, hitting someone with an axe and hitting someone with a sword isn't all that different. Yes, they have different balance, different length, and you're not going to do a lot of thrusting with an axe. But for all the elegance people like to give it, in the end it comes down to "swing the sharp part at his head." And the swordsman's swinging muscles are gonna be in pretty dang good shape, so he'll figure it out.

Third, footwork, footwork, footwork. Fighting does not start in the arms, it starts in the feet and extends to the fingers. You have to move to create and exploit split-second openings. When I took fencing in high school, we drilled footwork constantly, and it was excruciating (that was the only "jock year" this nerd ever had. I took fencing and was on the snowboarding and rugby team, and fencing was usually the most exhausting). Watch Mike Tyson and Muhammad Ali in their prime. Sure, they could punch like a freight train, but so could George Foreman. What made them amazing was how fast they would move. If an orc slashes at you, and you've already weaved to his undefended side before his blow lands, your chosen weapon is almost a minor detail.

Yes, I do think there should be room for specialization, but it should be more like, "Well, you're using an axe, so your Swordmaster's Parry ability doesn't apply, but yeah, you have all your usual dice."

Quote

First off, nobody becomes a master swordsman without picking up a few other weapons from time to time.

yes, but most probable not axes and poleaxes

Quote

Second , hitting someone with an axe and hitting someone with a sword isn't all that different.

Well, it is.

in short:

Quote

So do I. And between a Sword and an Axe, or like in the example above, among a two-handed axe and a scimitar is a huge difference.

you are right that melee weapons translate to a point i.e. if you are very skilled with a longsword you adapt pretty fast to the langes Messer, Rapier and Dussak.