Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Editorial The Digital Antiquarian on Interplay's Lord of the Rings RPGs

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Tags: Brian Fargo; Dragon Wars; Interplay; J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, Vol. I; J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, Vol. II: The Two Towers; Jennell Jaquays; The Digital Antiquarian

In the latest chapter of his chronicle of computer roleplaying, the Digital Antiquarian returns to Interplay and sheds light on a relatively unknown era in the company's history. At the end of the 1980s, Brian Fargo made the decision to turn Interplay into a publisher, and thus lost access to the Bard's Tale and Wasteland intellectual properties, which belonged to Electronic Arts. To continue making roleplaying games, they had to come up with some new ones. The first of these was Dragon Wars, a great game that almost nobody played. Combining the fantasy setting and first person exploration of the Bard's Tale games with the skill-based roleplaying of Wasteland, Dragon Wars is fondly remembered today by the few people who did play it.

And then there were the two Lord of the Rings RPGs, J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, Vol. I and J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings, Vol. II: The Two Towers, which not many people played and nobody remembers. That's right, the company that went on to create Planescape: Torment once developed an RPG based on the mother of all fantasy settings, and completely failed to make an impression. How did that happen? The story behind these two games, the first of which was developed at a time when Interplay was on the brink of bankruptcy and was actually intended to save the company, is the main topic of the article. Here's an excerpt:

If a certain technical approach to the CRPG — a certain look and feel, if you will — can be seen as having been born with the first Bard’s Tale and died after Dragon Wars, a certain philosophical approach can be seen just as validly as having been born with Wasteland and still being alive and well at Interplay at the time of The Lord of the Rings. The design of the latter would once again emphasize character skills rather than character class, and much of the game play would once again revolve around applying your party’s suite of skills to the situations encountered. Wasteland‘s approach to experience and leveling up had been fairly traditional; characters increased in power relatively quickly, especially during the early stages of the game, and could become veritable demigods by the end. Dragon Wars, though, had departed from tradition by slowing this process dramatically, and now The Lord of the Rings would eliminate the concept of character level entirely; skills would still increase with use, but only slowly, and only quietly behind the scenes. These mechanical changes would make the game unlike virtually any CRPG that had come before it, to such an extent that some have argued over whether it quite manages to qualify as a CRPG at all. It radically de-emphasizes the character-building aspect of the genre — you don’t get to make your own characters at all, but start out in the Shire with only Frodo and assemble a party over the course of your travels — and with it the tactical min/maxing that is normally such a big part of old-school CRPGs. As I noted in my previous article, Middle-earth isn’t terribly well-suited to traditional RPG mechanics. The choice Interplay made to focus less on mechanics and more on story and exploration feels like a logical response, an attempt to make a game that does embody Tolkien’s ethos.

In addition to the unique challenges of adapting CRPG mechanics to reflect the spirit of Middle-earth, Interplay’s Lord of the Rings game faced all the more typical challenges of adapting a novel to interactive form. To simply walk the player through the events of the book would be uninteresting and, given the amount of texture and exposition that would be lost in the transition from novel to game, would yield far too short of an experience. Interplay’s solution was tackle the novel in terms of geography rather than plot. They created seven large maps for you to progress through, covering the stages of Frodo and company’s journey in the novel: the Shire, the Old Forest, Bree, Rivendell, Moria, Lothlórien, and Dol Guldur. (The last reflects the game’s only complete deviation from the novel; for its climax, it replaces the psychological drama of Boromir’s betrayal of the Fellowship with a more ludically conventional climactic assault on the fortress of the Witch-King of Angmar — the Lord of the Nazgûl — who has abducted Frodo.) Paul Jaquays scattered episodes from the novel over the maps in what seemed the most logical places. Then, he went further, adding all sorts of new content.

Interplay understood that reenacting the plot of the novel wasn’t really what players would find most appealing about a CRPG set in Middle-earth. The real appeal was that of simply wandering about in the most beloved landscapes in all of fantasy fiction. For all that the Fellowship was supposed to be on a desperate journey to rid the world of its greatest threat in many generations, with the forces of evil hot on their trail, it wouldn’t do to overemphasize that aspect of the book. Players would want to stop and smell the roses. Jaquays therefore stuffed each of the maps with content, almost all of it optional; there’s very little that you need to do to finish the game. While a player who takes the premise a bit too literally could presumably rush through the maps in a mere handful of hours, the game clearly wants you to linger over its geography, scouring it from end to end to see what you can turn up.

In crafting the maps, and especially in crafting the new content on them, Jaquays was hugely indebted to Iron Crown Enterprises’s Middle-earth Role Playing tabletop RPG and its many source books which filled in the many corners of Middle-earth in even greater detail than Tolkien had managed in his voluminous notes. For legal reasons — Interplay had bought a Fellowship of the Ring novel license, not a Middle-earth Role Playing game license — care had to be taken not to lift anything too blatantly, but anyone familiar with Iron Crown’s game and Interplay’s game can’t help but notice the similarities. The latter’s vision of Middle-earth is almost as indebted to the former as it is to Tolkien himself. One might say that it plays like an interactive version of one of those Iron Crown source books.

Interplay finished development on the game in a mad frenzy, with the company in full crisis mode, trying to get it done in time for the Christmas of 1990. But in the end, they were forced to make the painful decision to miss that deadline, allowing the release date to slip to the beginning of 1991. Then, with it shipping at last, they waited to see whether their bet-the-company game would indeed save their skins. Early results were not encouraging.

Once you got beyond the awful, unwieldy name, J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, Volume 1 seemingly had everything going for it: a developer with heaps of passion and heaps of experience making CRPGs, a state-of-the-art free-scrolling engine with full-screen graphics, and of course a license for the most universally known and beloved series of books in all of fantasy fiction. It ought to have been a sure thing, a guaranteed hit if ever there was one. All of which makes its reception and subsequent reputation all the more surprising. If it wasn’t quite greeted with a collective shrug, Interplay’s first Tolkien game was treated with far more skepticism than its pedigree might lead one to expect.

Some people were doubtful of the very idea of trying to adapt Tolkien, that most holy name in the field of fantasy, into a game in much the same way that some Christians might be doubtful of making Jesus Christ the star of a game. For those concerned above all else with preserving the integrity of the original novel, Interplay’s approach to the task of adaptation could only be aggravating. Paul Jaquays had many talents, but he wasn’t J.R.R. Tolkien, and the divisions between content drawn from the books and new content were never hard to spot. What right had a bunch of game developers to add on to Middle-earth? It’s a question, of course, with no good answer.

But even those who were more accepting of the idea of The Lord of the Rings in game form found a lot of reasons to complain about this particular implementation of the idea. The most immediately obvious issue was the welter of bugs. Bugs in general were becoming a more and more marked problem in the industry as a whole as developers strained to churn out ever bigger games capable of running on an ever more diverse collection of MS-DOS computing hardware. Still, even in comparison to its peers Interplay’s Lord of the Rings game is an outlier, being riddled with quests that can’t be completed, areas that can’t be accessed, dialog that doesn’t make sense. Its one saving grace is the generosity and flexibility that Jaquays baked into the design, which makes it possible to complete the game even though it can sometimes seem like at least half of it is broken in one way or another. A few more months all too obviously should have been appended to the project, even if it was already well behind schedule. Given the state of the game Interplay released in January of 1991, one shudders to think what they had seriously considered rushing to market during the holiday season.

[...] It all adds up to something of a noble failure — a game which, despite the best intentions of everyone involved, just isn’t as magical as it ought to have been. The game sold in moderate numbers on the strength of the license, but, its commercial prospects damaged as much by missing the Christmas buying season as by the lukewarm reviews, it never became the major hit Interplay so desperately needed. That disappointment may very well have marked the end of Interplay, if not for a stroke of good fortune from a most unexpected quarter.
Sounds a bit familiar, doesn't it? What saved Interplay in the end was Castles, a SimCity-style castle simulator by Quicksilver Software that they published, which turned out to be a surprise hit. Despite their own game's failure, they tried again with 1992's The Two Towers, but it was just as underwhelming as its predecessor, and the plans for a complete Lord of the Rings RPG trilogy were abandoned. Interplay would live on to fight another day, but wouldn't return to the roleplaying genre until 1995's Stonekeep.
 
Unwanted

Wonderdog

Neckbeard Shitlord's alt
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,477
Of all those games I probably enjoyed battle chess the most. Dragon wars was quite good and castles was not bad, but the lotr game (if I think of the right one) was really truly crap. Like playing a whole rpg as a level one retard. Just unbearable. If I wanted that I would just stay in real life, son.

edit: and man there are some serious cucks who comment on his articles :shudder:
 

Dragon

Augur
Joined
Aug 1, 2003
Messages
101
Location
Toulouse, France
Vol. I was an excellent game, more so for the ambiance than RPG system of course. Replayed it a couple years ago with a good walkthrough and good dos-box graphics upscalling, had a blast. Far shorter than I remembered from my youth, as such things usually are. Loved the music also (grab the PC CD-ROM version of the game), and the texts, and the exploration...
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
lol check this out - the Digital Antiquarian calls out Rebecca Heineman's bullshit in the comments:

Speaking of Dragon Wars and how it could have been Bard’s Tale IV, here is programmer Rebecca “Burger” Heineman (no, I’m not using her previous name) on the issue:

‘[It was] the Bard’s Tale IV until three months before we shipped it! […] They [EA] said, “Oh, you want to use the name? Publish through us.” Push came to shove, and that’s when Brian [Fargo] came to me and said, “Okay, we’re calling it Dragon Wars.” I looked him dead in the eye and said, “You do know there’s no dragons in the story?” “Well, it’s Dragon Wars now.”

So I had to come up with, at the last minute, a story that had a dragon in it, and put little quips every now and then that said there were dragon wars in the past. But since the game was only a month or two away from shipping, I couldn’t re-do the actual ending of the game to make a battle of the dragons. So, it’s a running joke that we shipped a game called Dragon Wars with hardly any dragons in it.’

source: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6243/the_burger_speaks_an_interview_.php

Yeah…

Unfortunately, it’s very hard to credit her recollections based on the hard evidence. Heaps of design documents and correspondence relating to Dragon Wars are to be found in the Strong Museum’s collection; it’s probably the best documented of all Interplay games there. They show that the game was for some time referred to simply as “Project X.” By February of 1989, it had picked up the name Crown of Olwin, and then became Dragon War and finally Dragon Wars by June of 1989. There’s no consideration given anywhere to releasing it as Bard’s Tale IV. Interplay seems to have recognized that that ship had sailed as soon as they cut ties with Electronic Arts.

Similarly, it’s very hard to credit this notion that she would have “come up with a story” anywhere for the game. I have the final design document, as submitted by Paul Ryan O’Connor on June 11, 1989. It spans several hundred pages of meticulous detail, describing every area of the game, dragons included. While I confess I haven’t checked this document against the finished game exhaustively, everywhere I have checked the two match up perfectly or nearly perfectly (there’s an occasional editing of O’Connor’s text, presumably simply for reasons of space). There’s no sign of any creative freelancing by Rebecca Heinemann, who was the programmer responsible for implementing O’Connor’s design.

Similar issues unfortunately dog her account of The Bard’s Tale; everyone but her, along with lots of documents in the Strong archive, attribute the first two of those games almost entirely to Michael Cranford.

I have no wish to cause pain to Rebecca Heinemann, who I understand has had a rough go of it in her earlier life in lots of ways. I’m sincerely thrilled to see her happy and comfortable in her skin at last. And I’m willing to give her the benefit of the doubt in so far as I assume she’s describing things as she genuinely remembers them, without consciously meaning to deceive. But still, the problem with claiming credit for things she didn’t do is of course that in doing so she steals credit from others. I’ll chalk it up as one more reason to approach interviews and other first-hand accounts with a skeptical eye and leave it at that.
 
Unwanted

Wonderdog

Neckbeard Shitlord's alt
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,477
Digital Antiquarian seems to be kind of a retard though, and does not seem to ever really have any idea what the fuck he is talking about. I am not sure how he assembles these articles but he always has lots of glaring flaws and missing information and grandiose claims that are either unverifiable or just wrong.

In this case I remember the whole heineman affair from before, and it's massively overblown. S/he was only talking about the CODING in bard's tale 1 + 2, and having played the Apple II GS version I can say it's a lot different (and way better than) the IBM version, which had shitty graphics and music, no animation, crappy controls and so on. Fartgo came out and attacked her at some point but I don't think he even knew what s/he had been saying in the first place in another interview, his comments did not really sink up with what she said, just o the question put to him by matt barton which obviously seemed like a surprise. So it's not even a case of he said she said but of two different incompetents using hearsay and misquotes and secondary sources to lead to a situation that is just a lot of hot air.

As for the name of bard's tale 4, who the fuck knows, but again now we have yet ANOTHER thing pinned on her just because of some other bullshit because some fucking idiot can't really research anything worth a fuck, and does not even bother to go directly to either of the possible sources to get some direct info but is just commenting on yet some other shit from some other interview on one of the shittiest sites out there.

I tend to believe her though, there all the reasons not to are things that have been pulled out of thin air. And of course they can't call something Bard's Tale 4 on paper unless they actually have the rights to it, but that could either have been their intention or just been something fartgo dreamed up to spur the developers on because they figured they would be rich and famous from making the next installment of the huge (for the time) series. I have had people I worked for do all kinds of shit like that so it would not surprise me.
 
Self-Ejected

Sacred82

Self-Ejected
Dumbfuck
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,957
Location
Free Village
I agree, Burger would definitely be the kind of person to work her ass off as a youngster with no recognition or thanks due to her severe autism.

"All documents attribute the games almost entirely to Michael Cranford" well no shit bruh
 

LeStryfe79

President Spartacus
Joined
Nov 25, 2008
Messages
7,503
Location
Codex 2012 Serpent in the Staglands Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong
I loved that game for some reason. Mostly for the music I'm guessing.
 
Unwanted

Wonderdog

Neckbeard Shitlord's alt
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,477
I agree, Burger would definitely be the kind of person to work her ass off as a youngster with no recognition or thanks due to her severe autism.

"All documents attribute the games almost entirely to Michael Cranford" well no shit bruh

Specifically she said that for bards tale one and two she rewrote everything in a new language which made it much easier to port, which is what she was hired to do.

Fargo is not a technical guy and neither is matt barton so they don't understand even what is being talked about. This is pretty typical of how 'porting' goes, and would probably especially be the case back then with simple code bases and no cross platform APIs in existence.

Barton seemed to take this to mean that she was the one who did everything on BT 1+2 which is not what she was trying to claim. Now it has just continued to snowball from there.
 

sstacks

Arcane
Joined
Jan 30, 2014
Messages
1,151
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
997
Location
Dreams, where I'm a viking.
Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera
Digital Antiquarian seems to be kind of a retard though, and does not seem to ever really have any idea what the fuck he is talking about. I am not sure how he assembles these articles but he always has lots of glaring flaws and missing information and grandiose claims that are either unverifiable or just wrong.

Do you have any examples (beyond your disagreement with him over Rebecca Heinman)? This is a pretty broad criticism, so I'm not sure of the extent to which you're using hyperbole, but his articles generally seem very well researched to me. He is doing a hybrid of history and criticism, so by nature there will be unverifiable claims, but the factual statements themselves seem supported. He seems to have a somewhat casual attitude towards playing genres that are not interactive fiction, but he never claims otherwise. So while I think this negatively impacts his game criticism sometimes, it's not a result of shoddy research.

As for the Heinman/Bards Tale 4 claims claims, she made a factual statement that was on its face fairly implausible. The Digital Antiquarian describes a series of documents from the development process that contradict it. There are multiple scenarios in which she might reasonably believe that her statement was true, but that does not change the fact that it was likely false. At the same time, it is a war story, so a certain amount of truth fudging for the sake of entertainment is to be expected. So perhaps the tone of pained seriousness to his debunking was a bit excessive.

As for the Bards Tale/Cranford stuff, I don't know enough about what she said to evaluate those claims. However, I would not be shocked if the vast majority of people with an opinion are going off half-cocked without actually listening to or understanding her original claims. People love having opinions, yet hate doing fact-finding.
 
Unwanted

Wonderdog

Neckbeard Shitlord's alt
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,477
Do you have any examples (beyond your disagreement with him over Rebecca Heinman)? This is a pretty broad criticism, so I'm not sure of the extent to which you're using hyperbole, but his articles generally seem very well researched to me. He is doing a hybrid of history and criticism, so by nature there will be unverifiable claims, but the factual statements themselves seem supported. He seems to have a somewhat casual attitude towards playing genres that are not interactive fiction, but he never claims otherwise. So while I think this negatively impacts his game criticism sometimes, it's not a result of shoddy research.
Just go read his fucking blog. There are corrections all over the place. He also made some claims about dungeon master that are pure bullshit and wound up in wikipedia with that guy as a source. I spent a couple hours looking into correcting some of them but I did not give a shit to keep going.

If you actually played all the games he is talking about and read magazines from back then it's very clear. I suspect he just reads a bunch of reviews from old magazines and pastes them together, and comes up with some awful results at times.

As for the Heinman/Bards Tale 4 claims claims, she made a factual statement that was on its face fairly implausible.
So you're a retard too, then. It's not implausible in the least, the only reason he is doubtful is because she 'lied' before, which is ironic since he is the one who constantly has to have his shit corrected and he makes broad sweeping generalizations that are pretty ridiculous that don't seem to come from any first hand knowledge at all.

It's very obvious he has a few favorite games he played like dungeon master, and a whole lot of games he never played at all and makes some very bad statements about.

The Digital Antiquarian describes a series of documents from the development process that contradict it.
Which, if you are a FUCKING IDIOT, you would think means something. I already said why it doesn't.

If you want more knowledge than what's on the fucking box, you have to trust the developers a little. If you don't then why the fuck even interview them?

There are multiple scenarios in which she might reasonably believe that her statement was true, but that does not change the fact that it was likely false.
What pure bullshit. You have no fucking idea about anything that goes on in these games other then what people actually say. There's lots of things that lots of devs have said that I suspect are pure bullshit, but I don't come out and call them all liars just because they may be stretching the truth or outright lying unless there is good reason to do so.

At the same time, it is a war story, so a certain amount of truth fudging for the sake of entertainment is to be expected. So perhaps the tone of pained seriousness to his debunking was a bit excessive.

As for the Bards Tale/Cranford stuff, I don't know enough about what she said to evaluate those claims. However, I would not be shocked if the vast majority of people with an opinion are going off half-cocked without actually listening to or understanding her original claims. People love having opinions, yet hate doing fact-finding.

Go fuck yourself then. What the fuck does your opinion matter? You can have your uninformed opinion that has zero source and has no professional expertise behind it, but who the fuck cares?
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
997
Location
Dreams, where I'm a viking.
Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera
Do you have any examples (beyond your disagreement with him over Rebecca Heinman)? This is a pretty broad criticism, so I'm not sure of the extent to which you're using hyperbole, but his articles generally seem very well researched to me. He is doing a hybrid of history and criticism, so by nature there will be unverifiable claims, but the factual statements themselves seem supported. He seems to have a somewhat casual attitude towards playing genres that are not interactive fiction, but he never claims otherwise. So while I think this negatively impacts his game criticism sometimes, it's not a result of shoddy research.
Just go read his fucking blog. There are corrections all over the place. He also made some claims about dungeon master that are pure bullshit and wound up in wikipedia with that guy as a source. I spent a couple hours looking into correcting some of them but I did not give a shit to keep going.

If you actually played all the games he is talking about and read magazines from back then it's very clear. I suspect he just reads a bunch of reviews from old magazines and pastes them together, and comes up with some awful results at times.

As for the Heinman/Bards Tale 4 claims claims, she made a factual statement that was on its face fairly implausible.
So you're a retard too, then. It's not implausible in the least, the only reason he is doubtful is because she 'lied' before, which is ironic since he is the one who constantly has to have his shit corrected and he makes broad sweeping generalizations that are pretty ridiculous that don't seem to come from any first hand knowledge at all.

It's very obvious he has a few favorite games he played like dungeon master, and a whole lot of games he never played at all and makes some very bad statements about.

The Digital Antiquarian describes a series of documents from the development process that contradict it.
Which, if you are a FUCKING IDIOT, you would think means something. I already said why it doesn't.

If you want more knowledge than what's on the fucking box, you have to trust the developers a little. If you don't then why the fuck even interview them?

There are multiple scenarios in which she might reasonably believe that her statement was true, but that does not change the fact that it was likely false.
What pure bullshit. You have no fucking idea about anything that goes on in these games other then what people actually say. There's lots of things that lots of devs have said that I suspect are pure bullshit, but I don't come out and call them all liars just because they may be stretching the truth or outright lying unless there is good reason to do so.

At the same time, it is a war story, so a certain amount of truth fudging for the sake of entertainment is to be expected. So perhaps the tone of pained seriousness to his debunking was a bit excessive.

As for the Bards Tale/Cranford stuff, I don't know enough about what she said to evaluate those claims. However, I would not be shocked if the vast majority of people with an opinion are going off half-cocked without actually listening to or understanding her original claims. People love having opinions, yet hate doing fact-finding.

Go fuck yourself then. What the fuck does your opinion matter? You can have your uninformed opinion that has zero source and has no professional expertise behind it, but who the fuck cares?

I asked for specific examples, you didn't give any. Then you ended by disagreeing with the part of my comment that agreed with you. 10/10.
 

Zakhad

Savant
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
284
Location
Gurtex
A teacher at my school installed LOTR1 on a classroom 386 PC with a photocopied manual for the copy protection and secretly played it after kids had gone home (but I hung around and saw him so I discovered it). Had no manual so didn't even know how to save the game, and played during lunchtime cos no-one else cared enough about games (especially this kind of game) to try. so kept playing the first section over and over with no internet to look for guides, no manual, no walkthrough, nothing. No mouse support either, so only discovered how to save after clicking "O" by accident one day. Should have mashed the keyboard before that but this was literally the first PC game I'd played except like, commander Keen at a friend's house, so it just never occurred to me. Eventually got my own copy once we got a computer at home (a magical 486). Still have the boxed version of the sequel which I made my parents buy me. Clocked both of them multiple times. Magic.

Damn, I still love those games, fond-ass memories.
:love:
 
Unwanted

Wonderdog

Neckbeard Shitlord's alt
Joined
May 2, 2017
Messages
1,477
I asked for specific examples, you didn't give any. Then you ended by disagreeing with the part of my comment that agreed with you. 10/10.

Yes I did, dickhead. Go read what he wrote about dungeon master yourself or you can go fuck yourself.

If you don't read the guy's blog and don't have first hand experience with the games he talks about, you have no business to be talking either, shit for brains.
 

Dorateen

Arcane
Joined
Aug 30, 2012
Messages
4,333
Location
The Crystal Mist Mountains
I half expected the Digital Aquarium guy to claim how he really enjoyed "The Fellowship of the Ring", but the other books were written by Tolkien to be "just good enough".

Without even realizing that Professor Tolkien composed The Lord of the Rings as one continuous volume, and it was the publisher who divided it into a trilogy.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom