Hi all -
I couldn't really find a good place to post this, so forgive me if this is off topic.
I was just wondering if anyone had heard reports on the possibility of Fantasy Flight creating a Lord of the Rings RPG very much like Warhammer 3rd Edition and the upcoming Star Wars RPG.
I'd be very interested in a product such as this and I daresay many others would should this point of view.
Cheers in advance if you have heard of anything in the pipelines!
dhrocks said:
Hi all -
I couldn't really find a good place to post this, so forgive me if this is off topic.
I was just wondering if anyone had heard reports on the possibility of Fantasy Flight creating a Lord of the Rings RPG very much like Warhammer 3rd Edition and the upcoming Star Wars RPG.
I'd be very interested in a product such as this and I daresay many others would should this point of view.
Cheers in advance if you have heard of anything in the pipelines!
Cubicle 7 are the ones with the RPG license for the Lord of the Rings.
They are producing The One Ring, which (while not perfect) is an excellent game and one of my favorite rpgs.
One ring is a good rule set which some glaring errors(lack of options to make characters different, and some clearly optimmn builds, also hobbits end up being the best in combat).
Rapier said:
One ring is a good rule set which some glaring errors(lack of options to make characters different, and some clearly optimmn builds, also hobbits end up being the best in combat).
I have found the hobbits to be useful in combat (although, more through inspiring than fighting) and they certainly can be serious fighters, but I'm not sure where you're getting "best in combat" from. I recall them doing a whole lot less damage than the Beornings or Dwarves.
Rapier said:
One ring is a good rule set which some glaring errors(lack of options to make characters different, and some clearly optimmn builds, also hobbits end up being the best in combat).
Rapier said:
One ring is a good rule set which some glaring errors(lack of options to make characters different, and some clearly optimmn builds, also hobbits end up being the best in combat).
I have found the hobbits to be useful in combat (although, more through inspiring than fighting) and they certainly can be serious fighters, but I'm not sure where you're getting "best in combat" from. I recall them doing a whole lot less damage than the Beornings or Dwarves.
The problem comes from the way that you can stack parry (and that you take no damage at all when your parry is high).
They don't hit the hardest, but they don't have to expend resources not dying, so the can move into advantagous positons (in terms of stance in combat) so that they never get hit and have better than 1 in 12 odds of hitting.
Rapier said:
The problem comes from the way that you can stack parry (and that you take no damage at all when your parry is high).
They don't hit the hardest, but they don't have to expend resources not dying, so the can move into advantagous positons (in terms of stance in combat) so that they never get hit and have better than 1 in 12 odds of hitting.
Hmm… I dunno. A high Parry will only get you so far. They certainly won't "never" get hit. No matter how high your Parry is, the baddies also get a 1 in 12 chance of hitting you (and the good guys are often out-numbered so the bad guys tend to get more opportunities to roll attacks). Then, when the hobbit does get hit, he's much more likely to take a Wound. And all the while, his low damage output means he's being more of an annoyance than a real threat to the bad guys.
At least that's my take on it. Certainly one can't just dismiss hobbits (or any of the cultures) when it's time to draw the swords, but they didn't come off to me as noticeably better combatants.
I could be wrong, though; I've had a few hobbit players, but thus far none of them have tried to make their characters optimized for combat.
gatharion said:
Rapier said:
The problem comes from the way that you can stack parry (and that you take no damage at all when your parry is high).
They don't hit the hardest, but they don't have to expend resources not dying, so the can move into advantagous positons (in terms of stance in combat) so that they never get hit and have better than 1 in 12 odds of hitting.
Hmm… I dunno. A high Parry will only get you so far. They certainly won't "never" get hit. No matter how high your Parry is, the baddies also get a 1 in 12 chance of hitting you (and the good guys are often out-numbered so the bad guys tend to get more opportunities to roll attacks). Then, when the hobbit does get hit, he's much more likely to take a Wound. And all the while, his low damage output means he's being more of an annoyance than a real threat to the bad guys.
At least that's my take on it. Certainly one can't just dismiss hobbits (or any of the cultures) when it's time to draw the swords, but they didn't come off to me as noticeably better combatants.
I could be wrong, though; I've had a few hobbit players, but thus far none of them have tried to make their characters optimized for combat.
I could also be wrong, since I don't own the books myself. I'm reporting the concesus my gaming group came to (including me) based on playing.
I do know the hobbit is better than an elf in combat (based on seeing how good the hobit was and trying to work out a build that could match it with the elf) . I mean I wasn't playing an optimised elf combat character, but I couldn't see a way of making one that was better than the hobbit. Reliabily only getting hit 1/12 (and the point is the hobbit can get better odds than that to attack the enemy) really made up for it.
Also their special sword is rediculous.