This isn't so much a rant as it is a ramble, but bear with me. I just want to share my thoughts and hope you let me know whether you agree or not.
When I started running my current MERP game, someone on another board asked how closely I'd stick to canon. I responded that the major events will stay in place, but the players would have a lot of leeway.
I know there are people who religiously stick to canon, Middle-earth fans included (But if you think Middle-earth fans are diehards about canon, you should meet the Forgotten Realms crowd!). I get it. People become unhappy when something they truly enjoy gets changed. But Middle-earth doesn't have one single canon. Some people use The Silmarillion as their canon; others prefer the History of Middle-earth series. Keep in mind Tolkien's Legendarium wasn't the only work that was constantly being revised. Look at all the times Star Trek, Star Wars, and even Doctor Who have been retconned. I can tell you a lot of fans were not happy about the changes made.
I've gone on record stating that canon is overrated. I don't think it's just a knee-jerk reaction to the aforementioned diehards or to all the changes made in my favorite settings. My solo MERP campaign had elements that deviated from canon significantly, but it didn't break the game. And since it was a solo game, it hardly mattered to anyone else anyway.
Back to the question I was asked. I said I'd give the players some leeway about certain things. I don't have a problem with someone playing a half-elf or a cleric in my Middle-earth game if that's what the player wants to play. The needs of a role player are different from the needs of a reader. A gamer needs to make a world his or her own, or the game may feel limiting to the player. Sometimes that means making changes (aka house rules) to the system. Other times it means changing a few details about the setting to allow things in the game system.
If you're a game master, you need to figure out what you want to keep and what to discard. Once you've done that, you should keep your decisions as consistent as possible. If you change your mind, talk with your group and see how they feel about any suggested changes. In the end, canon is what happens at your game table; everything else is negotiable.
Anyway, these are my thoughts on the matter. I hope you share yours as well.
Additional Notes
This is just a random assortment of information. It's just meant to flesh out a few details, but I'm still rambling. Feel free to skip over this part.
MERP's default setting is T. A. 1640. Why is that? Not a lot was written about that period between 1640, when Minas Anor (Minas Tirith) became Gondor's capital, and 1810, when King Telumehtar conquers the Haven of Umbar. For rpg purposes, that gives players and game masters a lot of freedom to shape their games. The War of the Ring won't happen for another 1400 or so years, so the players won't worry about their characters being overshadowed by the Fellowship of the Ring. Likewise, game masters can develop their ideas without having to worry too much about canon.
Critics sometimes deride MERP for its magic system, which is based on Rolemaster. They also dislike the fact that several professions/classes can cast spells. While there is a need for a healer in a game, some critics dislike the Animist class, which is analogous to a cleric. “There are no clerics in Middle-earth” is an argument I've read on a few game forums.
Other Middle-earth games also have their own touches. The Lord of the Rings Online MMO created the Dourhand Dwarves and the Blue Crag Goblins, among others. They also have original story lines so players can develop their characters.
D&D in all its incarnations has been adapted to the Middle-earth setting long before the Adventures in Middle-earth rule book came out. Many people have described D&D in Middle-earth as fitting a square peg in a round hole. While there is some truth in that claim, that hasn't stopped people, myself included, from trying to fit the two. People love D&D, and people love Middle-earth. While some games are better suited, not everyone wants to learn a new game system.
The original D&D game had several elements related to Middle-earth. Hobbits, Balrogs, Ents, and Nazgul were all included in the game until the Tolkien Estate threatened to sue TSR for copyright infringement. This forced several name changes in the game. Hobbits became halflings. Ents became treants. Nazgul became specters, although wraiths were also in the game. Balrogs became Type VI Demons. Balor (a figure in Irish mythology) was included as an example; it later became the name of that type of demon. Years later, TSR was offered the chance to produce a Middle-earth setting for D&D. However, Lorraine Williams, the CEO at the time, was more interested in publishing novels than games. Since TSR was not allowed to publish novels set in Middle-earth, Ms. Williams turned down the offer.
You make some good points. Tolkien was not a Gamemaster, and his Middle-earth can be just the starting point for your campaign--which might favor an earthier approach. than Tolkien might have approved of. You might not have any place for brothels or assassins' guilds in your Middle-earth game; however, you might not have any issues with having gambling halls in such places as Lake-town, Dale, Pelargir or the lower levels of Minas Tirith--perhaps run by a local crime-lord.
I myself prefer Francesco Nepitello's approach in The One Ring versus the stance taken in MERP. Adventures in Middle-earth makes it easy to split the difference if one is fairly liberal in playing with the game mechanics. Home-brewed Middle-earth campaigns have certainly been known to take liberties with Tolkien's canon.
MERP fleshed out a lot of details of several areas, and its maps are unmatched. ICE took the trouble of hiring people who knew Tolkien lore, including at least one Tolkien scholar.
Not familiar with the One Ring. How did approach Middle-earth compared to MERP?
The default setting for TOR (and Adventures in Middle-earth for D&D 5E) is Wilderland five years after the Battle of Five Armies, when the reconstruction of Dale and the new Lake-town is completed. King Bard has issued a call for adventurers to help secure the North. The upcoming revision from Free League Publishing might update the default setting to almost 25 years after the defeat of Smaug (the year 2965 or maybe 2966), shifting much of the focus to Gondor and the surrounding lands; at least that was the plan when Cubicle 7 was working on the second edition.
Just a thought, but sticking to much to the story will make a stale game, if you dont let players make decitions (it is a carefull balance what decitions limit and not in games) then the player has no agency and will get bored because he is not playing a game he is looking at a movie, and while it could be a good movie it wouldnt be an engaging game. Before anyone says linear stories can be engaging games.
I agree. Players hate being railroaded, as do I. You need to take the players' styles into account. While a Middle-earth game would ideally have players who are familiar with the books, many groups are more interested in fighting orcs and finding treasure than in participating in epic quests.
The reason I prefer the MERP approach is that while the default setting was TA 1640, it can be changed to other periods. MERP has suggestions for playing in a given location at different times.
Also, MERP allows you to play Noldor and Sindar characters. I know TOR expanded the setting to allow them, but that was in a separate book. MERP allowed you to play one from the get go.
I can't deny I was intrigued by the games put out by Decipher and Cubicle 7. But nowadays I don't have the time or patience to learn new systems, especially if I play only occasionally. Same deal with the cost of the books. If I get to use them a lot, I'd be willing to spend the cash. If they're just going to sit on the shelf indefinitely, I'll just stick with the games I already know and spend my money on something else.
I did have some issues with how fast-and-loose ICE played it with Tolkien's legendarium, a prime example being cultures that would not have existed in T.A. 1640 (Beornings* and Rohirrim being prime examples). Some other cultures/races didn't easily work well as PCs (Woses; Orcs; Uruk-hai; Half-orcs; Trolls; Variags; the completely made-up Umli). And the magic system was a bit robust for Tolkien's Middle-earth.
* Beorn's original people doubtless existed, but they would not have called themselves Beornings (unless they had had a previous leader by that name). It's also a big assumption to assume that Shape-changers were always a part of their culture.
MERP sometimes described the folks as Beijabar, but I don't know if that's canon or the game designers made that up. The Rohirrim were called the Eothraim.
I think I can say with some confidence that the terms 'Beijabar' and 'Eothraim' were coined specifically for MERP. Tolkien never outlined the history of Beorn's original folk beyond what he wrote in The Hobbit. The Beornings of the late Third Age were the Men of the Anduin Vales who made Beorn their chieftain after the events of the Battle of Five Armies. Other than those of Boern's bloodline, none of them likely had any special 'magical' abilities.
Tolkien did not write very much about those Northmen of Rhovanion who were the direct ancestors of the Éothéod. I've struggled, myself with the question of what they might have called themselves. I've considered Emnetthéod(('plains-folk') or Garsthéod ('grass-people') for my home-brew for TOR. Or maybe all the Northmen would have been collectively called just that (Northmen) unless one is discussing individual clans.
To add to what I've posted before. I did come up with a timeline for Peter Jackson's films for anyone who might want to run a game in his version of Middle-earth. You can find it here: A Tale of Years for Peter Jackson's Middle-earth.
It largely comes down to what we know from the films:
Jackson greatly altered the 17-year gap between Bilbo's farewell party and Frodo's departure from the Shire. Jackson's Council of Elrond presumably took place on October 25, 3001, not in 3018.
Jackson place Bilbo's birthday party in the year 3000 (Third Age), placing the Quest of Erebor and the Battle of Five Armies in 2940 (3000 - 60 years).
The last sighting of Smaug was 60 years before the Unexpected Party.
I like to think of Jackson's movies as his D&D game set in Middle-earth. Not a bad thing, but I would do it differently. YMMV.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, my game was definitely not canon. My main character was Elrond's 4th child, who fell in battle after a long and illustrious career. While that hurt, it was a fitting way to end the campaign, and it provides an explanation why he wasn't in the trilogy. His sons are now taking center stage.
One MERP product you can use with TOR and AiME is the Halls of the Elven-King sourcebook, part of the Fortresses of Middle-earth series from ICE. Mostly system-neutral, most of its content is fleshing out the halls of Thranduil, along with a few adventure hooks. It is set after the Quest for Erebor, so it can be used with TOR and Aime with no problem.
There is one difference from the movies; note that this product came out decades before the films. Thranduil's wife is very much alive in this work. Her name is Arhendhiril, and she is related to Thingol via his brother Elmo. However, she only appears in a single paragraph and can be omitted entirely.
I have The Halls of the Elven-king. In fact, I referenced it just a few days ago, specifically to mention Lady Arhendhiril. However, if I want to explore Thranduil's Halls in either TOR or AiMe, I've also got The Heart of the Wild for TOR. Thranduil's queen is not an NPC in it, but it does credit the Elvenking with having more than one son.
Who are his other sons?
HotW doesn't get into that much detail, though only Legolas is canon to the legendarium (though Tolkien never clarified whether Thranduil might have had other children). Describing the Elvenking's apartments, the text notes: "Thranduil lives in these rooms when he is in the palace. When he is off hunting, he usually leaves one of his sons as seneschal." The implication is that Thranduil has two or more sons, and perhaps one or more daughters.
My MERP characters once encountered Kirk, Spock, an McCoy. In retrospect, I should have used my own Starfleet characters, since I also played the Star Trek rpg by FASA.
I scanned the Great Hall and modified the image a bit with Paint. Then I saved the image on Tabletop Simulator and added a few other items I had saved. I couldn't find a miniature for Thranduil, so I made a 2D miniature of him (Tabletop Simulator allows you to do stuff like that). I've used it in a game.
Here's a screenshot.
I just watched a fan-made film about Sir Percival. It reminded me that the Arthurian legends -- medieval and modern versions alike -- have different versions of events, some even contradictory. Same goes with different myths from around the world. As Tolkien was trying to create a mythology for England, we should treat it as such. Canon doesn't make a lot of sense in this context. Only The Hobbit and LOTR truly qualify, since they were published during Tolkien's lifetime. That means if you're a Game Master running a Middle-earth campaign, don't worry about canon too much. Just pick the version you like and stick with it.
Even official Middle-earth games have added creatures that don't appear in Tolkien's writings. Here are a few of them.
Barghests
Bog Lurkers
Cave Claws
The first one comes from English folklore; the others were made for this game.
By this reasoning, you can add a few D&D creatures within reason. Don't include mind flayers, otyughs or ropers. But a hydra may be a unique type of dragon, and nature spirits such as dryads or undines would work.
Indeed. MERP had its own additions, as does The One Ring. The TOR supplement The Heart of the Wild, for example, introduces Basilisks, Grim Hawks and Wood-wights (a variation of the Barrow-wights).
Basilisks
Called Sarnlug by the Elves, and Fágwyrm by the Northmen, these lizards are said to be cast-offs from the Enemy’s earliest attempts to make dragons. Most Basilisks are as large as boars, but they can grow much bigger. Their yellowish bellies drag on the ground as they waddle through the forest’s underbrush.
Grim Hawks
Grim Hawks eat fish and smaller birds, as well as the worms and other insects that they dig out of the mud with their wickedly sharp curved beaks. They also eat carrion by placing one clawed foot on the corpse and tearing the flesh with their beaks. A hungry Grim Hawk can be brave enough to attack an armed man (and a flock may surround a group of men). The River-folk hunt Grim Hawks using arrows and stones; the birds taste terrible, but their beaks and claws are prized as decorations.
Wood-wights
During the long centuries of the rule of the Necromancer, many evil spirits issued from Dol Guldur. Some found their way into the burial places of the Northmen, others inhabited the corpses of lost travellers and victims of the Spiders. Those who have seen Wood-wights and lived to tell the tale speak fearfully of shambling horrors composed of bones, leaf mould and fallen tree branches, and skulls that leered out of the darkness.
Cool! I can probably use those.
Salamanders are also present in LOTRO; they can be used as wingless dragons.
I have been thinking about using other D&D monsters to use as variants of the ones already present in Middle-earth. An efreeti could be a fire demon not quite as powerful as a Balrog. A hydra would be a unique dragon that was an experiment of Morgoth or Sauron. It would be the only one of its kind.
Bugbears can be really tough Uruk-hai, the elite soldiers even among their kind. The Witch King of Angmar may be a lich, while the other Nazgul are death knights.
For a Balrog, I'm not sure why you wouldn't just substitute a Balor, since that demon is rather obviously based on the Balrog.
@Andrew Laubacher That's exactly what I do, but I'm thinking of adding a bit of variety, especially when running for a group that wouldn't stand a chance against a Balrog.
@eldariontkd Okay, I see what you were saying.. Yeah, an efreeti could work as a somewhat lower-level monster.
The Nazgul are a bit tough to match as written: material but still invisible in their unclothed state.
Here are a couple of Nazgul write-ups.
I found this a long time ago, but I forgot about it for a while. I rediscovered it on the Wayback Machine.
There's another write-up in this thread.