Topic: Lord of the Rings Battle Strategy Game

[KTG17]

Anyone playing the Middle Earth GW game? Or the previous edition?

This might come as a shock to some of you, but I had no idea what Lord of the Rings was prior to the 1st Peter Jackson film coming out. And when the fellowship went to the Mines of Moria, I realized where Dungeons and Dragons came from. I was stunned. The Mines of Moria is pretty much my favorite part of the three films. Anyway, I know WFB's roots are in Middle Earth but I have never really taken the time to learn more about it beyond the films. I've now gone down that rabbit hole and are pretty amazed how much there is to explore.

One of the new rulebooks involves 'Battle Companies' which reminds me a lot of Mordheim, which I wasn't expecting. It looks like GW has thrown a lot into this, but I haven't heard about much of a fan following. Anyone into this?

[Rowsdower]

I was first introduced to LOTR when i was 9 or 10. The Hobbit was a compulsory book in primary school [along with Black Beauty, Treasure Island, Tom Sawyer, To kill a mockingbird etc]. It was about that time one of the high schools put on a play [a heavily condensed fifteen minute version].
Not long after that, i started renting [and trying to struggle through] the Ralph Bakshi animated version.

I hate to say it, but i started getting Fellowship fatigue when GW continuously crammed it down our throats and a film magazine i used to subscribe to had what seemed like compulsory blind praise articles for Peter Jackson.

[Syphon]

Play? No, but I have Gondor men out the ayus. Even a limited edition banner bearer.

[KTG17]

I hate to say it, but i started getting Fellowship fatigue when GW continuously crammed it down our throats and a film magazine i used to subscribe to had what seemed like compulsory blind praise articles for Peter Jackson.

Yeah I agree. I didn't even really get into the game much while I was buying the starters, but I too went into fatigue in general. And I hated the Hobbit films. But for some reason LOTR has sparked some interest in me mostly for the characters/events not covered in the films. There is a lot of I have missed out on and I haven't even touched the The Silmarillion. The cool thing about these old books is that there are many audio books on Youtube so I can just play those while doing hobby stuff.

I will say this though, the map of Middle Earth is pretty terrible.

Anyway, I am going to fill out some of the gaps in my old collection here and there, but I like LOTR more for the adventures of the Fellowship, as opposed to battles between the various Good and Evil forces. I really think GW has done some nice work on Middle Earth, as I have just started looking at it after ignoring it, and I am impressed. But I dont want to go down that road. Except for the Battle Companies, I do think warband action in that setting is interesting.

[Rowsdower]

^
My fellowship fatigue aside i think its still incredible that Peter Jackson was able to get the films made and turn a profit with them when so many people in the world at that point hadn't read the books.
I used to enjoy arguing with a friend who was a Tom Bombadil apologist that sticking Tom in the film would have bogged the film down and ruined the pacing.
Ontop of that, i NEVER TIRE of picking on the Hobbit trilogy: modern Hollywood in a nutshell

[Syphon]

I suggest looking for this if you want to know more:

[Fidelis von Sigmaringen]

Got that one. Quite useful indeed.

[commandant]

^
My fellowship fatigue aside i think its still incredible that Peter Jackson was able to get the films made and turn a profit with them when so many people in the world at that point hadn't read the books.
I used to enjoy arguing with a friend who was a Tom Bombadil apologist that sticking Tom in the film would have bogged the film down and ruined the pacing.
Ontop of that, i NEVER TIRE of picking on the Hobbit trilogy: modern Hollywood in a nutshell

Leaving Tom Bombadil out of the movies was a tragedy

[KTG17]

Ok so looking into the newer Middle Earth books I am over it already. The main rulebook contains not a single stat for a character. You have to get the supplements. Now, how is this any different than any other GW model? It isn't, and thats the point. My older books all had stats on all the characters, and I have those.

I cannot emphasize how much I hate this.

One of my favorite GW rulebooks ever is 40k 3rd edition. And its not because of the rules per say, but the army lists in the back of the book. Basic, sure, leaving some units out, yes, but not only enough to start out on, but more importantly, if I wanted to try out another army, I can do so without having to buy another Codex. I know GW makes more money on the sale of Codexes, except they don't make any money off me. And since I don't have the rules, I typically do not buy the minis.

Now I know GW hasn't done this since 4th edition, but for the longest time I bought the newer models to replace the older ones for those older lists, and it was great! Now I have bought codexes to be used to expand starter set armies, but I just have zero interest in buying an additional codex in each addition. So there are some armies I would have loved to try out or build models for (Grey Knights being one of them), but that ship has sailed.

So disgusted with most GW decisions these days. Take Horus Heresy for example. You have to send an additional $140 to get the rules to expand on the armies included in the starter. I know that's cheaper than 18 different legion codexes, but I would have still preferred they use some of the space in that giant rulebook to provide the rules and stats on some basic formations, then use the codexes for new units and other rules. Not giving me any killed any thought I had about getting the game.

AAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

[KTG17]

So since this thread started I have been busy. So back in the day I have the old GW Fellowship of the Ring and Mines of Moria starter sets with a bunch of metal minis, but I never did anything with them, so I got rid of them. Its been lingering like an open wound since.

So I hunted down all the starters Fellowship, Two Towers, Return of the King, Mines of Moria, and the Hobbit Escape from Goblin town, and have been picking up characters here and there. Its amazing how you think you are done collecting and something taps you on the shoulder and says, 'nope'. But I am glad I got these. I had zero interest in the Hobbit starter when it was released, but its not too bad. You could tell there was some LOTR exhaustion at the time since they never followed up with a non-limited version of the box, and only released supplements for the movies after.

Having just finished the book for the first time, I can see how different it is to the movies, and its a shame as I think about all the possibilities they could have done with that starter had they followed the events in the book (I know they are limited to what is in the first film at the time).

And of course the Hobbit starter contains zero point values, although they did release a supplement online that I had printed out in color via laser printer on nice paper and it looks like it came right from GW. Binded it and it looks awesome. I am sure not including it in the starter had to alienate some fans at the time. With it the supplement the starter is a completely different set.

[Rowsdower]

I forgot about this
Years and years ago, a friend of mine bought a box of Uruk-Hi models and was aghast when he discovered their lances had been warped in the packaging. I joked with him that they were for stabbing around corners

[GamesPoet]

This just posted by GW ... some of their previous LotRs figures are being released for sale again ...

 https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/03/16/middle-earth-made-to-order-rangers-of-the-north-clash-with-mordor-orcs/

Have always liked many of the sculpts for this line of their figures.