Middle Earth vs. the RPG paradigm.

[Kiri]

While it's almost truism that a free-form rpg would be able to handle Middle Earth (since it's essentially a form of multi-author writing), more structured roleplaying games don't do so well in the setting. I haven't seen the game from Decipher, so I can't say if anyone has yet succeeded, but I'll try to lay out what I think the roots of the problem might be.

In a nutshell: Middle Earth is in conflict against basic presumptions of roleplaying games in general and generally fundamental assumptions of the "fantasy" genre of roleplaying games.

First the general:

Roleplaying games tend to presume that all "starting" characters" will be fairly weak (excepting some superhero genre games). If not "weak" in comparison to ordinary people, then at least "weak" in comparison to the real movers and shakers of the world. Thus, while a Vampire(TM) Kindred or a Werewolf(TM) Garou might be able to tear a new hole for the Dallas Cowboys front line without working a sweat, that's not impressive to other Kindred or Garou. So the general scale vs. the baddies is still the same. Furthermore, the games presume that all "starting" characters will have some sort of rough parity in ability. Middle Earth does not presume either of these things. While our friends the Hobbits usually start out with nothing but pluck and wit (and mushrooms), they had companions who were pretty kick-hinie in ability. (I do hear that the Decipher game has gotten around this to some extent.)

Second, all major-market roleplaying games (except for "classic" Traveller) have an "experience" system integral to the game. Part of the point of a game is to get crunchier and tougher characters and to do so specifically from running around doing dangerous things. Middle Earth doesn't do this. Instead, like the majority of its mythical sources, the real badass dudes do most of their ability acquisition off-camera and in the back-story and/or they do so through *practice* and *study* of difficult arts, not by means of trotting about the world. It is true that the Hobbits get quite an education and quite a bit of status from their wanderings, but Bilbo didn't become a master of stealth, he used his natural Hobbity duck-and-stay-alive skills to survive. At the end of it, he had a marvelous tale and the beginnings of a body of knowledge. Likewise, the four Hobbit Companions didn't come back as master anythings. Yes, Frick and Frack got to get some skill with blade or bow, but they didn't rival Aragorn or Legolas at the end of the story. Instead, they had tales and knowledge of other peoples. Masterful skill with weapons only comes from years of work, not from happening to survive a nasty battle.

Now the specific to "fantasy" issues:

The majority of fantasy rpgs presume that the "races" (and we all know which ones) are all available to be played together and all somehow manage to "balance" each other on some sort of individual basis. Middle Earth, on the other hand, makes it clear that Elves have their circles, Dwarves theirs, etc. Likewise, the power and knowledge of the Fair greatly exceeds (by centuries) that of mortals. This, in and of itself, should frighten ordinary men. Essentially, the games have stripped the mystery from all that are not human.

Finally, there is the question of "magic". Magic of rpgs is mechanical (Yes, even Mage is fairly mechanical). Effects are defined, success is based to some extent on random factors. Furthermore, in games that have magic, it is usually very much front-and-center and available to players (notable exception: Pendragon). Middle Earth magic is closer to the source materials. We hear about "necromancers" and the title "witch king" for a Nazgul (which I guess would presume the existence of "witches" whatever they would be), and of course "Wizards" (actually I'd say that "Wysards" would be a better rendering), but in each case we don't see people with a bit o' book larnin' hurling spells around.

So what's my solution? I'll just sit here with a goofy look on my face, because I don't have one. But I think I may have at least defined the problem.

[Scarfair]

Ummm, sure. And this relates to this RP forum...how?

[afro-elf]

Thanks for articulating that. the same thoughts have been floating in the back of my mind waiting to be voiced.


There is( was) a site that had addressed this problem.
It was ME based on a modified Amber system.

Unfortunately, the site seems to be down; however, I do have a copy of it and I will gladly forward it to you if you wish.

I don't know if this will solve your problem but I ask a similar question on the Official Decipher game board and got the following reply:


Magic
Maybe the difference is in subtlety, in LotR, magic is more often then not something one feels without being able to "quite put his finger on it", it is a part of the atmosphere. Exception made of Saruman and Gandalf, although the first uses mostly his voice. Magic is mostly something that affects the spirit (In the pursuit of the orc horde that captured Pippin and Merry, the Three Hunters feel a weariness that is more in the heart than in the limb) or that represents a contest of will. Magic is intrinsically tied to nature and life(stream that makes fall asleep those who fall in it (The Hobbit), storm on Caradhras, the ford of bruinen) rather than "I'll burn them with my fireball! And after that I'll blast their ashes with my lightning bolt, then, to finish the job, I'll summon a storm during a calm, cloudless day to blow what's left of them to separate places in the world.". The latter sort of magic is almost always found in FRPG, to the point where you might wonder why peasants keep getting surprised each time the forest burns down because some stupid mage just used a fireball to finish off a goblin. What is surprising is the fact they don't take the mage to court "Mage Blofatof, you are hereby accused of Magical Abuse and Being Just Plain Dumb, how do you plead?" .

In the movie, this side of magic is unfortunately lost. For example, take Galadriel's explaining what would happen if she took the ring, in the books, the changes evoked are mostly subtle yet terrifying, in the movie, they border on the ridiculous because of their vulgarity.

Wonder
In LotR, the characters meet some things that belongs to legends and wonder about them or face them but still stays on the surface, not piercing the mystery of these wonders. In FRPG, the first thing a player will do when seeing a creature from another age is "Is it hard to fight? How many Exps? I hope we get some good lootz!!!" (Okay, I exaggerate, but if you can consider DnD a roll-playing game, then I hope I can make my points on that assumption, especially since the goal of most FRPGs is to raise in level by killing, killing and maybe a small roleplaying bonus at the end). There is no sense of wonder, only down-to-earth thoughts, maybe a consequence of our scientific and materialistic society, or from the wargaming roots or some RPG. There is also the tales and legends of Middle-Earth which are more than history tales, but are filled with emotions and interesting characters.

Heroism
There is no denying LotR is an epic tale, at the end, you have the impression the tale is really ended and that major changes have happened. In FRPGs, after a session, you're expecting a new tale from the GM to continue on to new quests and adventures. At the end of LotR, with the exception of Aragorn who has a realm to unite, you know peace is coming, that the foolish quest from the beginning has brought new light into the world. Someone said once, I don't remember where, that every act in LotR has reasons for them, Frodo is forced to take the quest, his friends follow him because of their friendship, Aragorn has a throne to gain and another motivation (Hello Arwen!), Gandalf has been sent to Middle-Earth just for that, Legolas and Gimli are threatened by the rise of power of Sauron and their peoples have always fought the dark powers (more so for the elves, but it is also true with dwarves who fought orcs in their caves for eons).

Storytelling
In everyday life, you judge everything by comparing it to what you know. Therefore, if your character has known only heroic quests, they are unlikely to feel thrilled about "another heroic quest", while those with peaceful and mundane background will feel much more heroic for doing the same quest. In LotR, the beginning, criticized as too slow by many, is mundane and slow, so when the heroic quest begins and the peaceful hobbits, who lived their whole lives in a small town, meet armies of thousands and cities of high walls made of stone and having building the heights of hundreds of meters, the reader feels more impressed and has that epic feeling inside him. And I always personally liked the dialogues, long and with a little something that makes them more meaningful. Long texts, in my minds, allow readers or listeners to imagine what is being said without being pulled too quickly into another subject, this is a strength of Tolkien.
In FRPG, there is always a chance that a disruptive player will become bored if you use long texts and dialogues. Maybe even all players will want the discussion to end if it is long, why? I lay again the blame on our society, always quick and shorter deadlines (Will this attract the attention of Steve Long? Just as a test DEADLINE, DEADLINE, DEADLINE). This makes in the collective mind a need of doing things faster and faster, while LotR belongs to more ancient styles of writing, making it original because it is too old.

My feeling is that magic/spells should suit the setting. In M-E, magic is subtle, flavorful, and evocative, and so it should be in the game. In M-E, spellcasters don't toss fireballs around, fly, walk through walls, summon demons, or anything like that, so they can't in the game, either.