PDA

View Full Version : Are People Against Kids/LoTR?



the_gobbo_king
13-01-2010, 02:10
Hey guys,

My question is why LoTR is considred(spelling?) a kids game, and therefore from this question, why is that said as criticism. This cropped up in a thread asking about homebrew rules:


The new game is soooo much better than the last version its not even funny.Are you playing with enough decent opponents?
Its a decent tactical challenge now, whereas before it was the most guns game and:...."I go first, you lose,another game?"

As for 4th ed-it was error strewn and dramatically flawed-but if you liked it then happy christmas.
The game will always have problems but its way better than LoTR which is a childrens game.

That got me a bit annoyed you see, I'm not exactly an adult and my favourite system is actually LoTR. This got me thinking:

1. Why adults gamers seem to have something against kid gamers.
2. Why do some of us use "childrens" to implicate a bad system.
3. Why there tends to be a lack of LoTR players.

This is what I think:

The Adult/Child Theories

Theory I. Wargamers have made sweeping assumptions that child wargamers are a bunch of whiny people who trash talk their way through a game and have a tantrum if you don't let them win. This leaves a majority of the decent kids who are mature and sensible opponents (That often feel the same way, having faced a bad egg or two) don't get a game because adults (who form a bulk of the wargaming society at my FLGS) have made these sterotypes about them. I have had to deal with this many times.

Theory II. Adult wargamers see kids as a pushover in games of anykind and don't think they are worth their time. Not true, like stated above, many kids can actually beat an opponent many times their age, I have seen it done and have done it myself multiple times.

The LoTR Theories

LoTR Theory I. Stated by the manager at my FLGS, maybe LoTR is seen as a game to be played at home, as it is often percieved as a scenario game with no real pitched battle as such and therefore has none of the tactics of Army selection.

LoTR Theory II. LoTR is past its use-by date, it's primetime was when the movies were released and know that there is nothing canon to release it is a lost cause and will be soon relegated to the SG cupboard. Therefore it is not worth trifling with.

LoTR Theory III. LoTR may be seen as a basic wargame that is incredibly simple to master. The oppisite is true, the intricacies of heroic characteristics and heroic actions, the use of cavalry, delaying actions and daring movements are all there to learn. The game is a pushover to learn, but to master it is almost impossible.

There are my theories on two subjects I wanted to get out in the open, tell me what you think, I am all ears. But make sensible arguements please. Dont say "LoTR is stupid", tell me why instead of hurling pointless criticism.

My thoughts are with you.
SW

Wintertooth
13-01-2010, 02:40
I don't have anything against kids who are into wargaming. Many years ago, I was one. But I don't want to play them either. Wargaming is a social pastime. I prefer to socialize with my peers. I can't have a beer and trash-talk my opponent if he's twelve.

LOTR has grown into a pair of great rule-sets that have struggled to get past the initial reception of the first version. The "6! I win!" criticisms were more or less valid for the original Fellowship of the Ring box, which only fueled the resentment of how much attention (and page count) it received in White Dwarf.

Ultimate Life Form
13-01-2010, 03:38
Hey guys,
That got me a bit annoyed you see, I'm not exactly an adult and my favourite system is actually LoTR.


...
...
............................ :rolleyes:

So... could this actually confirm that LoTR is a kids game? :p



1. Why adults gamers seem to have something against kid gamers.


It's not like we have some intrinsic hatred towards kids (at least I don't), it's just that (most) young people have a very different mindset that might make playing them a bit... arduous. I don't know how old you are and I'm sure you feel all grown up, but trust me, I can tell you from experience, you are not. Just an example: Would you play against a hyperactive 5 year old? No? Well, so you see. Why this example is an exaggeration of course, the differences are there, and some people seem to give the kids a miss entirely in order to avoid the bad eggs you mentioned out of fear of having their game (or army or both) ruined.



2. Why do some of us use "childrens" to implicate a bad system.


Well those people have an inferiority complex and feel that they have to prove their masculinity by desperately avoiding anything that could be considered childish. I for example do happily admit that I'm a Pokemon fan. Not because I dig the cute looks or the retarded anime, but because I'm a video game connoisseur and Pokemon games are excellent games with an incredibly deep yet surprisingly simple combat system. I like figuring out the best strategy to beat my opponent...


many kids can actually beat an opponent many times their age, I have seen it done and have done it myself multiple times

Impressive. Of course, it's a dice game in the end and there are bad adult players and good kid players, no doubt. However this might be even more of a problem to the masculinity bunch I mentioned. What do you suppose they would feel when they're beaten by a whippersnapper? How would you feel if you're beaten by the hyperactive 5 year old? :rolleyes:


Dont say "LoTR is stupid"

Too bad, that is my honest opinion. :( (But you said it, not I! :p)
But if you like it, play it. That's really all about it. As for the lack of players that you feel, I have no clue...

Codsticker
13-01-2010, 05:18
Although I have only played LoTR a couple of times I never considered it- or ever heard anyone else refer to it as- "a kids' game". There was a lot of hate directed toward LoTR by some 40K and Fantasy players as they felt that LoTR was money grab by GW that sucked resources, such as space in White Dwarf, from the other two core systems. I suspect that may be at the root of the last sentence in the quote in the first post.

Reinholt
13-01-2010, 05:51
With regard to kids and "theory 2"...

I have never met a kid as good as the adults I play with. This is not to say there are not good players among the kids, but that however good they are, the odds are pretty good they will be much better ten years out if they stick with the hobby.

I think this is the essence of some of the complaints; I routinely dodge games with kids and won't apologize for it. I also routinely dodge games with some of the adults in our shop.

The last game of WotR I played with someone under 18 was over in 2 turns. I don't really like handing someone's ass to them that badly (it's discouraging for them, and just plain mean), but I don't want to have to play a game where I have to pretend to be mildly retarded to make it fair.

So, yes, I concur that not all kids are bad players (and some are quite good), but I genuinely do believe that the really good adults will, on average, beat the really good kids, because those same really good adults are now more experienced version of the really god kids!

And unlike sports, you don't lose your ability slowly as you hit middle age.

Ironmonger
13-01-2010, 07:03
As far as playing against kids (whether it's LotR or 40k or whatever), the ability to communicate both verbally and non-verbally before, during and after a game is a large deciding factor with everyone I've known. A 28 year old can't thrash a 14 year old, and then have them both nip out for a fag and a pint at the Goat Major, talking crushing victory/utter defeat/other topics, before round two. There's a chasm of development within the realm of interpersonal communication between the two where nuances are misconstrued, social mores divergent, and feelings easily hurt, and development in social situations/the game itself damaged.

Bottom line: if you're a youngster and can get a game with a beardy old fart, don't take it personally if/when they trounce you and then leave with their mates. By the same token, if you ARE a beardy ol' fart, be ABSOLUTELY SURE the underage opponent you're about to take on understands who he is playing before agreeing to play!:angel:

kardar233
13-01-2010, 07:13
My problem with LotR is one thing. The entire game can hinge on a single dice roll. That isn't a problem for me, except when it's easy to make it so that that single dice roll can't be made for one reason or another, or is so unlikely that there's little point.

Example: A friend and I were playing a game. I was Evil. I took a whole corps of Black Guard, relying on their strength and defense to see me through, plus a Black Guard Captain, an Easterling Dragon Knight and a Easterling War Priest. He took an even split of Guard of the Fountain Court and Army of the Dead, with Boromir of Gondor and Galadriel with her Mirror. Long story short, battle lines met, Boromir engaged my Captain and he split his forces to hold off mine. I had one chance to pull the game through; if I could call a Heroic Combat with my Dragon Knight then I could sweep across the enemy flank and surround Boromir with my high-fight Knight, possibly taking the win. Except no, Galadriel took the opportunity to Immobilize every Might-bearing character in my army to stop my men from crushing his flank and Boromir cut apart my Captain and rolled along taking the rest of my men with him.

Game set due to one 2+ dice roll.

That's my problem with LotR.

Remoah
13-01-2010, 07:14
I've faced a 12yo kid that had an excellently painted (by himself) and converted army. He knew the rules back to front and was very forgiving to someone like myself who doesnt pay 40k that much... He did win, but he was a good sport about it.

On the other hand, i've seen kids hanging round GW that quite literally bitch and moan if they loose. Or will refuse to play certain armies if they know they wont win (A kid playing Eldar in 4ed springs to mind "Lemmie see ur army list.... uhm, nah, i dont wanna play")

Ive never played LotR, but i've never viewed it as a kids game. I do agree it was a money-grab by GW (but what doesnt constitute a Money Grab by GW these days.) Perhaps its the fact that so many kids became LotR players due to the movies that the impression of it being a Kids Game has stuck.

But id hate to see it relegated to Spesh Games, because i wouldnt be able to get my Wargs for use as cavalry anymore...

lorelorn
13-01-2010, 09:51
My problem with LotR is one thing. The entire game can hinge on a single dice roll. That isn't a problem for me...

Galadriel took the opportunity to Immobilize every Might-bearing character in my army to stop my men from crushing his flank and Boromir cut apart my Captain and rolled along taking the rest of my men with him.

Game set due to one 2+ dice roll.

That's my problem with LotR.

For the people who haven't played LotR the above description is totally false. Immobilise does stop a character doing anything (hence the name) but Galadriel can only target one character per turn, only is she is within 12" and only on a 3+.

So the immobilization as described above must have happened over many turns, and could only have affected one character at a time. All while a hard-fought battle was going on between both sides. No single dice roll, no 2+.

Therefore in the description given above the game was lost not on a single dice roll but over many turns, due to targeted play on his opponent's behalf. So he may have problems with Lord of the Rings, but single dice rolls aren't even the start of those problems. :rolleyes:

McMordain
13-01-2010, 10:43
I voted Lotr theory III. It is easy to learn, easier than 40k (I still have trouble with the wound allocation rule...) and definitely easier then Fantasy. I wouldn't say its impossible to master, but it has more depth than it seems.
Besides the movies making it popular and having easy to learn rules, you can play good games with only one box of warriors. You cannot play a decent game with a box of sm or such...
So parents see it as cheaper than the other to games.
We have 8 lotr player in our FLGS (including me) and five of them is under 15. But I don't have problems with any of them. Maybe I am lucky (or I have more patience:) ). We usually have good games and they don't bitch much when they lose (definitely not more, than the older players). They may have problems with building an army, deciding which model is good for which role or how to use heroes, but this is the part where one can help them with good advices. You have to remember they are kids and act accordingly.

RobC
13-01-2010, 10:45
Kids can play chess. Does that make it a kids' game?

lanrak
13-01-2010, 11:32
Hi all.
Alot of WH and 40k players are anti LoTR for the following reasons...

It apeared to suck alot of attension away from thier prefered game when first introduced.Due to WD coverage.
(Even though a seperate development team was used for LOTR, and 40k and WH had been stagnating proir to the LORT bubble.)

The LOTR rule set is the complete opposite to WH and 40k.
LoTR rule set is clearly defined and intuitve.:evilgrin:

So WH and 40k players may be either jelous of the new rule set written specificaly for LOTR,(40k has NEVER had a rule set written specificaly for it.)
As they wish thier rules were of a similar high quality.

Or foolishly belive the more rules in a system , the better the game.Therfore as LoTR has more striaght forward rules it must be a 'kids game'.
(With the assumption simplicity is a bad thing and Kids need simple games perhaps?)

In the last 20 years we have had a lot of people through the doors of our gameing club.(11 to 67 year olds.)
Gamers of any age are welcome.
Immatue idiots of any age are NOT!

Maturity and intelect are not age specific.;)

TTFN
lanrak.

Chaos and Evil
13-01-2010, 13:05
My question is why LoTR is considred(spelling?) a kids game
Because it is designed primarily for children to play.



So are the other two Core games, incidentally, just they're pitched at slightly older children.

The pestilent 1
13-01-2010, 13:46
Because it is designed primarily for children to play.



So are the other two Core games, incidentally, just they're pitched at slightly older children.

That whine way more.

Chaos and Evil
13-01-2010, 13:51
That whine way more.
They don't call this forum Whineseer for nothing. :p

the_gobbo_king
13-01-2010, 21:06
Hi again,

@Ultimate Lifeform

So... could this actually confirm that LoTR is a kids game?

*Bangs head on table*

It's not like we have some intrinsic hatred towards kids (at least I don't), it's just that (most) young people have a very different mindset that might make playing them a bit... arduous. I don't know how old you are and I'm sure you feel all grown up, but trust me, I can tell you from experience, you are not. Just an example: Would you play against a hyperactive 5 year old? No? Well, so you see. Why this example is an exaggeration of course, the differences are there, and some people seem to give the kids a miss entirely in order to avoid the bad eggs you mentioned out of fear of having their game (or army or both) ruined.

True, but is that making the assumption that all 5yr olds are hyperactive? :p


Well those people have an inferiority complex and feel that they have to prove their masculinity by desperately avoiding anything that could be considered childish. I for example do happily admit that I'm a Pokemon fan. Not because I dig the cute looks or the retarded anime, but because I'm a video game connoisseur and Pokemon games are excellent games with an incredibly deep yet surprisingly simple combat system. I like figuring out the best strategy to beat my opponent...

This is sage stuff this.

Oh and by "don't say LoTR is stupid, I meant in the context why you think it is stupid.

@Reinholt- So your saying that you tend to avoid the younger ones so that you won't discourage them by wiping the floor with them. That's an intresting view. Sometimes I get that feeling too that it isn't fun to continually wipe/or get wiped the floor with someone.

@Ironmonger- This is an intresting point, one that strikes me as being really plausible and is quite true too. It never really entered my mind, because now I think of it there does tend to have that awkwardness around playing someone older than you.

@Remoah- This is the kind of stuff I'm talking about, Remoah, I'm not saying that you have to play the bad eggs, what I'm saying is that sometimes the bad eggs give younger wargamers a bad name and they never go near them again, leaving the good kid gamers out in the cold.

@McMordain- Good choice too, in the sentence "Impossible to master", my English skills deserted me when I was looking for a synonym for hard and I had a blank. Fair Enough with the second part of the post.

@RobC- You put the words in my mouth Rob. ;)

@Lanrak- Sorry, when you started talking about jealousy I imagined LoTR walking down a dark alleyway in a WD magazine and WF and 40k coming out of the shadows to beat it down to 4/5 pages a magazine. Otherwise, that quote down the bottom there is genius stuff.

@Chaos and Evil & Kadar233- That's your opinion on LoTR. I would just like to say I'm fine with that. I know that anything I argue probably won't change that. That's fine with me.


They don't call this forum Whineseer for nothing. :D

Thanks for your incredibly honest opinions (The poll shows my whinings on whineseer are pointless :D)

Thanks again,
TGK,

Grimstonefire
13-01-2010, 21:20
Truth be told I have never had the slightest bit of interest in LOTR or WOTR games. Your adult/ child theories are irrelevant to me. If I played I would try and play against sensible (and decent) players, this is not really dependant on age. I draw the line at about 14 years old though, simply because in my experience the kids I have come across below this age either do not have a good grasp of the rules, attempt to cheat and/ or get distracted too easily.

Theory 2 is not what I see. Those playing WOTR don't really care about the long term do they?

Seeing as I have no interest, Theory 3 is not something I have any thoughts about.

Theory 1 is closest to my feelings; that it takes a lot more work (especially with LOTR) to build character in armies than it does with 40k or warhammer. It's all about character for me, and LOTR/WOTR seems too restrictive for potential. Probably because a lot of the main characters already have established fluff that cannot really be changed.

Infact now I read it again although I voted Theory 1 its not really directly applicable to me.

Ph4lanx
13-01-2010, 23:00
I chose Theory II from your LOTR list, but personally I have no interested in the LOTR tabletop game. I love the books and the films, don't get me wrong, but I just don't like what I see when I step into my local GW and see them playing it.

I play 40k because I like the science-fiction side of things, and am fed up to the teeth of fantasy :) Just my opinion though, of course.

Thud
13-01-2010, 23:53
I don't have anything against kids who are into wargaming. Many years ago, I was one. But I don't want to play them either. Wargaming is a social pastime. I prefer to socialize with my peers. I can't have a beer and trash-talk my opponent if he's twelve.

I agree. I'm an adult, I don't tend to hang out with 12 year olds. It's not because I have something against them, it's because it would be creepy.

CraftworldsRus
14-01-2010, 06:17
I think it is more, at least around me, LOTR Theory 1. Whenever my friends and I feel like a game at the shop, it is always fantasy or 40k. We like the bigger, more epic feel. Lord of the Rings is one of our "Lets sit around the table with some beers and chat about life while we play" games. Almost like cards.

Hena
14-01-2010, 07:43
I must admit that LotR has intrigued me. I remember hearing that it's based on Warmasters rules and that should be a good thing over 40k and fantasy. Eg. rules should then be clear to be understood and the depth in game would be much larger than 40k/fantasy. However it seems to be dominated by the heroes (which I don't like) and that has pushed me away from it. I've come to conclusion that if I'd want fantasy Warmaster would most likely be better choice then.

As far the poll goes. If the above is true then LotR Theory II and III would make sense. Eg. it's better in game and harder to win so they don't want to be beaten by younger player which is more adept with the depth of the game. Also the fact that it was pushed out due to films can't help as then it's seen as "usurper" to the "true games". *shrug*

Bloodknight
14-01-2010, 09:54
I voted theory 1 (Kids) and Theory 3 (LoTR).

That said, I think that LoTR is a pretty elegant system, but I was never inclined to buy stuff for it. I know exactly one guy who plays it and at the time it was released I expected it to go the Specialist Games route (read, mostly wasted money on stuff nobody plays and minis collecting dust) at around 2004-2005. After that didn't happen, I still saw no reason to get into it, although, as I said, the system is good, IMHO. I just don't like the minis enough.


I agree. I'm an adult, I don't tend to hang out with 12 year olds. It's not because I have something against them, it's because it would be creepy.

Yeah, the creepiness is one part, the other part is that in today's paranoid world no way in hell I'd go teaching kids the game because there'll always be some hyperactive parent that makes you sail close to the wind at all times. No thanks. That's also the reason why I won't earn my money by teaching languages to kids when I've got my degree, but adults - preferably courses for male immigrants because that also lets me avoid all that crap with false accusations of sexual assault because somebody didn't get her will. PC ho! /OT rant.

tezdal
16-01-2010, 08:30
as a fantasy and specialist games player I have to say, from what I've seen Lotr/Wotr usually are played by older chaps, havn't seen many kids piddling round with LOTR fig's in a couple years........40k on the other hand, everytime I see it is played by a twelve year old with space marine's, then again the whole concept of 40k seems to be "when I grow up.......Im going to be a space marine".

Occulto
16-01-2010, 09:11
I voted theory 1 (Kids) and Theory 3 (LoTR).

That said, I think that LoTR is a pretty elegant system, but I was never inclined to buy stuff for it. I know exactly one guy who plays it and at the time it was released I expected it to go the Specialist Games route (read, mostly wasted money on stuff nobody plays and minis collecting dust) at around 2004-2005. After that didn't happen, I still saw no reason to get into it, although, as I said, the system is good, IMHO. I just don't like the minis enough.

Same here. Heard good things about it but with all my other stuff on the boil, I just didn't have the time or money. Everyone I knew was in the same boat.

I figured it'd be a flash-in-the-pan game and so didn't bother buying into it, and have never actually regretted not getting into the game.

As for kids, if I want awkward conversation with someone half my age, I can just go to a family BBQ. Gaming's for relaxing and drinking beer.

Gazak Blacktoof
16-01-2010, 10:44
I tink the only reason that we don't play LOTR was that we found bowfire too powerful in the skirmish games we had played. We had a lot of models and time invested in GW's other core games so it was easier for us to make some new rules for the systems we knew or develop new systems than it was to start over from scratch and still have to tweak elements to our liking.

I don't consider LOTR or WOTR any more a kids game than all the other TTWGs I've played- we started playing warhammer, hero quest, etc when we were only 8-10.

the anti santa
16-01-2010, 20:57
I dispute that LOTR is a kids game.

The rules set is very well thought out and a far more elegant skirmish game than 40K. I know it's well thought of outside of the GW bubble by those who've played it too.

In my experience gamers tend to go through 3 phases of GW geekery, at the start "youngbloods" are more likely to play all the games so you do see a lot of kids playing LOTR as well as WHFB and 40K. Once those kids hit their teens they tend to abandon the other games and mostly play 40K, it's these players that tend to see LOTR as being for kids. Long term vets will generally play all sorts of games such as the specialist Gw ones and those of other companies but will often avoid GW stores for a friend's place or local club.

As for why no-one wants to play vs kids. It's because they are les slikely to be fun opponents and more likely to complain or not be very good. Even worse if you lose then you'll look quite silly and if you win then it's not much of an achievement and you risk being seen as a cherrypicker.

As others have stated you have less in common with the younger generation as well. As a gamer over 30 i see 15-18 year olds in the same light as some of you see 10-15 year olds too.

Getifa Ubazza
17-01-2010, 00:09
I've played kids quite often and in most cases, I did not enjoy the game. There have been a couple cases where I've played kids and found them to be more mature than adult gamers, But these were the exception to the rule. Dispite my bad experiences with playing kids, I will never say no to a game with anyone (Child or Adult), unless I know they are no fun to play.

As for LotR, I personally think the rules for the game are brilliant and hope it will lose the stigma of being a kiddies game. Hopefully the kids that play it now, will become the adults of our hobby and LotR will grow with them. The older gamers who continue to look down on it will become the minority, leaving the rest of us to enjoy a really well thought out game, with fun and easy to follow rules.

I'm 36, by the way, so not a kid.

LuciusAR
17-01-2010, 00:36
Firstly LotR is NOT a kids game. Anymore than either of GW's other core games anyway.

I think the idea that it is a Kid's game came primarily from the fact that, what with it being a massive hit film, allot of younger players starting out in the hobby naturally gravitated towards it because of it's familiar imagery.

In terms of the SBG's mechanics however it's anything but childish, it's intuitive, flexible and has a far more logical turn sequence than either 40K of WFB. It's possible to learn the core mechanics within a few turns of your first game. It also isn't bogged down in special rules, has no real balance issues and has never suffered from 'codex creep' despite many supplements.

For example to the casual observer there are no formations in the SBG, on the contrary formations work brilliantly, there are however no rules for them. The natural advantages of formations are represented perfectly well by the core rules. No need for arbitrary modifiers to represent them. That's the sign of a good set of rules IMHO.

I admit that it doesn't work well when larger games are played, say over 1000 points. It just gets bogged down. But that just not what it was designed for, so as criticisms go its no more valid than saying the Mordhiem doesn't work with 100 models per side. That's the very reason the WOTR was introduced and when it comes to the bigger battles it works like a charm.

Of course LOTR may not be your cup of tea and theres nothing wrong with that but actual hatred towards the game itself or it's players is entirely irrational. Of course GW's management made some colossal cockups following LOTR's sucess and didn't invest as wisely as they should have done. But thats no fault of the game itself.

As for WOTR, well I've only played an handful of games so far but I have to say it's excellent. It's faced paced and intuitive, with a real emphasis on maneuver and counter maneuver. There are a few rules queries ATM but considering that the game is in it's first edition I think there is less confusion in WOTR than from your average WFB army book! Space Hulk aside it's the best thing GW brought out last year. Right now it's being played at least as much as WFB at my local club if not more.

Oh and one more minor point, the GW LOTR figures still seem to actually be good VFM, which is more than can be said for their other ranges.

nanktank
17-01-2010, 04:21
I cant say im against LOTR, Im just not for it. I hated to movies when they came out because they ruined my imagination of the books. So the game just doesnt appeal to me, I think however a lot of veterans are against LOTR and kids because of the change in dynamics it brought to GW. Before the LOTR cash cow GW used to be a company run for gamers by gamers, I would argue that the rapid growth brought about by the increased sales from LOTR changed the whole feel of the place. Not neccesarily for the worse but certainly radically different from what it was before.
As for the whole Kid thing, generally im not a fan but only because the Kids in my area are only interested in the latest mega powerful army list and dont really give 2 hoots about the background, however thats the same for a lot of adults as well.

vladsimpaler
17-01-2010, 04:44
Where's yabbadabba? His sig has a quote about LotR that I think is the only thing that I agree with him/her on.

LotR is much better than Warhammer/40k

Agnar the Howler
17-01-2010, 13:28
I'm not sure what LotR is (adults vs kids wise) but it doesn't jump out as being alligned to either one or the other. I've seen kids play it easy and quickly and learn how to do it with ease, but i've also seen adults duke it out and get more excitement from completing more advanced moves and the likes.

As for Adults looking down on kids... well, it's just something to live with. I get talked down to by most of the older gamers at the store and just ignore it. I even got lectured on the Tau by a guy fielding an badly created, illegal Tau list who made silly choices. Not only have I been playing Tau for a year more than him, I also understand how to use the battlesuit armoury >.>

After my first game with this guy, I found out he cheated (from sources here who commented on the battle report) in order to scrape the win he got (even that was through sheer luck, there's not much defence against a doomwheel that msifires 3 times and gains 3 extra D6 of movement in total) and the next time I went in, he started talking to everyone about how I was 'whining and winging' cos I was losing... Not only was that highly untrue but it also meant I left that night with no games a bundle of new excuses to use when i didn't want one, my favourite being "Oh, I don't bother with anything under 2000pts"

So yeah, Theory 1 gets my vote there.

warhammergrimace
17-01-2010, 17:27
I quite like LOTR, its a good system that does tend to get rubbished and not by gamers, the amount of stores I been and the STAFF rubbish the game is quite unreal, it has a bad reputation that is unfounded in my opinion.

As for kids I tend to not play games with them , becasue I mainly game at home with the wife and at a gaming club which is 16 +. Plus when I spend all day teaching kids the last I want to do is game with them in my spare time. Though I'm happy to help out with events aimed at welcoming kids into the hobby through painting workshops, exhibitions and organising trips to shows.

Crazy Harborc
18-01-2010, 01:30
Most/darn near all of, the LoTRs players I know were/are adults. Thats at the shops I went to in the Northwestern part of my area.

I am getting ready to jump into WoTRs in the near future. Seems I got my hands on some "humans" from LoTRs that I use in FoG for "Dark Ages" armies.;)

Col. Frost
18-01-2010, 11:36
LoTR and WoTR has it's fans across all age groups, though most i have seen lately tend to be the older player.

It has plus points over WHFB & 40K, the biggest of which is the cost of getting an army started.

Its only problem lies with the fact that it was an 'of the moment' release. Whilst it still has fans, many people who picked it up originally were swept up in the hype from the movies and now this has died down completely. Some players of WHFB and 40K see this game as a drain on the resources, why does GW insist on releasing content for a 'dead' system that could be better spent on a new Dark Eldar Codex or an updated Tomb Tings Army book for example.

And the whole 'Kids' thing. Believe me, and you will probably think me patronising for saying this (but hey, thats kids for you ;) ), Regardles of how mature you are or may think you are, Kids generally get on adults nerves. There are many exceptions to this rule as always, but why take the risk in finding out that the teenager you are playing may fall into this bracket, or get a major strop on when destroy his favourite character?

Sureshot05
19-01-2010, 17:48
From my experience there is a certain reluctance to get into LotR (or any new miniature game) for a various reasons. Many have been listed above, but a few that have been missed:

- Starting a whole new force. Bulding up an army takes time, money and commitment. In order to get into Lotr or many miniature games this is always a stopping block for a veteran. Myself for example, I was looking at the B5 miniature ship game and am very sorely tempted being both a big fan of the series but also the miniatures, but I really didn't want to start on another project and force given the cost, time and space it takes up!

- Lack of personalisation. For me, this is the biggest issue with Lotr. I find it harder to build a personalised force. My army would just be another Gondor army. For some, this the replication is huge appeal, and I can understand it but it's not for me. My armies in most games are strictly personalised along my own themes and styles (with the exception of my Ultra's who rarely get any attention these days!).

Rulesetwise it is a great little game and has much to teach it's cousins. I've about 6 games of LotR and enjoyed them for the game and it's mechanics, but the above two reasons keep me out of it.

Lord of Worms
20-01-2010, 00:44
Wow. This is gonna be a mouthful so bear with me.

- I personally dislike LotR. Not necessarily as a game per se, just in general. I didn`t really enjoy the books as much as I was `supposed to`, and the movies were well done but not exactly my sort of thing. So you take my natural ambivalence, add the excessive hype and you get me deliberately avoiding anything to do with LoTR.

- Aside from staffers I don`t think I have ever seen an adult playing LoTR. Ever.

- I don`t know whether it`s a well designed game or not, and I don`t really care all that much. Since I don`t like LoTR, and I think both Hobbits and Orcs are equally lame, if I want to play a well designed game I`ll play chess.

-I don`t go to GW stores anymore. There are multiple reasons for this; I dont like playing crappy little 1000 point games, I dont like playing with strangers at the store, I especially dont like playing against kids. I also dont like their poorly designed apocalypse scenarios which involves a room full of kids shoving one another and stepping on my stuff.

Occulto
20-01-2010, 02:13
- Lack of personalisation. For me, this is the biggest issue with Lotr. I find it harder to build a personalised force. My army would just be another Gondor army. For some, this the replication is huge appeal, and I can understand it but it's not for me. My armies in most games are strictly personalised along my own themes and styles (with the exception of my Ultra's who rarely get any attention these days!).

I agree that put me off. It's the same reason historical gaming really doesn't interest me. It's too "paint by numbers" compared to sci-fi/fantasy gaming.

Although I did get a chuckle out of hearing that some guy won a Flames of War tournament with a US army painted as Ultramarines. :p

Sinner_74
20-01-2010, 03:37
Theory 1 is as close to my feelings as I've seen - I'm old (35 feels old at least) and my patience is very thin, especially when dealing with children. It's one of the reasons I never played in the stores, I just couldn't put up with the little kids running around... I'm not saying that I would'nt play against a mature kid, it's just that from what I've seen, they are very few and very far between... And it doesn't help that I like to drink a beer or 2 when I play...

As far as LOTR goes, I've never played it and don't ever plan on playing it. I think some of the models are cool (I just wish they were the same scale as WH40k/WFB) but I think that it's course has been run - it should've died a quiet death after the movies came out on DVD. I've also grown very tired of the hit or miss White Dwarf issues that are 80% LOTR and very little of what I actually collect... That's why I've never gotten a subscription, some of the issues just aren't worth the price...

scarletsquig
20-01-2010, 09:29
The rules system is great, works brilliantly.. for skirmish games, legends of the high seas/ old west are even better, combining a modified version of the LotR rules with the campaign rules from mordhiem.

Despite being historical games, they have a ton of fun extra content in them and are great to play.


On the bright side, at least the new plastic fellbeast has good conversion potential for either a tyranid harpy or a beastmen jabberslythe.

yabbadabba
20-01-2010, 19:00
but I think that it's course has been run - it should've died a quiet death after the movies came out on DVD.Why?


I've also grown very tired of the hit or miss White Dwarf issues that are 80% LOTR and very little of what I actually collect... That's why I've never gotten a subscription, some of the issues just aren't worth the price... WD has been like that before LoTR. WFB, 40K and whatever SG was being released have often dominated WD.

Sinner_74
21-01-2010, 02:00
@yabbadabba - My view is based solely on my personal opinion. As I said, I've never played LOTR and don't forsee myself ever wanting to. I personally don't see the allure of it - it just doesn't interest me. If they want to support it like BFG or Necromunda then I don't see the problem, but to have it occupy the space it does in GWs marketing plan, just doesn't make sense to me... I just see it as a, dare I say it, Specialist Game...

And as far s the White Dwarves go - you're right, but all the other content held my personal interest a bit more...

yabbadabba
21-01-2010, 07:47
@yabbadabba - My view is based solely on my personal opinion. As I said, I've never played LOTR and don't forsee myself ever wanting to. I personally don't see the allure of it - it just doesn't interest me. If they want to support it like BFG or Necromunda then I don't see the problem, but to have it occupy the space it does in GWs marketing plan, just doesn't make sense to me... I just see it as a, dare I say it, Specialist Game...

And as far s the White Dwarves go - you're right, but all the other content held my personal interest a bit more...
Which is fair enough but the sales indicate that LotR deserves to keep its place for now. As for WD it is no longer for veteran hobbyists so I cant see its content breakdown mattering much to anyone on here.

Sinner_74
21-01-2010, 08:40
Which is fair enough but the sales indicate that LotR deserves to keep its place for now. As for WD it is no longer for veteran hobbyists so I cant see its content breakdown mattering much to anyone on here.

Ok, I'll give you that. And I agree about WD - although it does occasionally have some decent painting artcles, I just like reading it because it has pretty pictures...:rolleyes:

Crazy Harborc
22-01-2010, 21:27
The good ol' days. The money not spent on (the catalog called) WD buys me more minies.
In other words I do agree that WD has become of little value. These days there are plenty of "pretty pictures" on the net........It costs less to just use the net too.

yabbadabba
22-01-2010, 21:51
The good ol' days. The money not spent on (the catalog called) WD buys me more minies.
In other words I do agree that WD has become of little value. These days there are plenty of "pretty pictures" on the net........It costs less to just use the net too.
Those "good ol' days" were a very different time. Now GW saves you £whatever by providing something you can get off the net for free.
WD is great for people who buy the toys from toy shops rather than hobby stores, from newsagents as opposed to GW stores, for people who have started in the hobby but have no/little access to hobby support. WD is for people who buy GW stuff in happy ignorance of whats on the web. And there must be enough of them as it keeps selling.
There is enough stuff on the net to keep every vet happy for the rest of their lives - and it is all for free.

So aside from nostalgia, why would you even want WD?

Occulto
23-01-2010, 00:21
So aside from nostalgia, why would you even want WD?

Makes for good reading while sitting on the "Golden Throne." :D

yabbadabba
23-01-2010, 00:48
Makes for good reading while sitting on the "Golden Throne." :D
Try private eye

Lord Malorne
23-01-2010, 00:50
It is considered a kids games as in my area when it came out the regulars played 40k and Fantasy (naturally) and where not inclined (on the most part) to be interested in it, as newer players came along, and as newer players are highly likely to be kids than adults it was seen as a kids game, as kids mostly played it.

Rosstifer
23-01-2010, 02:53
Well all these older gamers complain they can't have a beer whilst gaming with kids but in all honesty I'm 17 and probably drink more beer than half the people on the site. Also, look at it from the kids point of view. When I started, I didn't like playing adults. Too many of them assume you don't know the rules, and spend half the game attempting to cheat. At least now I have facial hair I have some vague degree of respect.

Tae
24-01-2010, 01:39
I voted for LOTR (III) based on the views I've run up against in all the local GWs and associated clubs.

Almost all the 'older' gamers I've talked to about it view LotR SBG as incredibly simplistic. Pre-measuring being oft cited as 'evidence' of this. Personally I just view this as necessitating (sp) a different type of 'skill' (for lack of a more suitable word) but acknowledge that, certainly in this area, I'm somewhat in the minority. Howver I do agree with some of their points - personally I hate using any of the characters from the books - sorry but Legloas didn't get bundled by a bunch of Moria goblins likewise Gandalf didn't get smacked in the fact by a giant bat. SBG with 'generic' characters I don't mind, but I'm not playing with any named ones tyvm,

This does lead to LotR (SBG) developing a somewhat child-orientated reputation which was illustrated at a local tournament last year for all 3 core systems. 40k 200 players, all varying ages (but most 16+), WFB 100 players (almost exclusively 16+), LotR SBG 40 players (excluding myself and about 3 others, almost all under 16).

Whitwort Stormbringer
24-01-2010, 03:01
I've heard all three core games being referred to as children's games, almost always by someone who didn't play them and instead thought that their game, whatever it was, was better for any number of reasons (more realistic, more tactical depth, more mature, less "comic-booky", simply that it wasn't GW, etc.). So really I wouldn't put too much stock in someone else saying so.

On adults not wanting to play with kids:

Being a person who started gaming as a kid, and am now an adult gamer, I can safely say two things about the gaming community on which my opinions have not changed. First is that yes, many kids that are into wargames are annoying. I didn't like playing them when I was a kid, and I don't think I'd like playing them now (although if anything, I have more patience, because I'm more mature than I was back then). The other is that many adult gamers are socially inept, cantankerous, and often lacking in personal hygiene. Similarly, I didn't relish the thought of playing these adults then, and I don't now.

Given these two, I think it's unfortunate that the younger players are the ones willing to play older gamers, whereas many older gamers won't reciprocate. It's a little silly, IMO, of adults to assume that they can't enjoy a tactical wargame against someone on such an arbitrary basis as something like the legality of having a beer with them. And unless your enjoyment of wargaming is conditional upon mutual inebriation, then your underage companion can sip on a soft drink while you have a beer. There's also a lot to be said for knowing yourself, and for picking your opponents based on that. Most adults probably have the accumen to recognize a teenager that's going take the game seriously, and someone they can have a good game with. Saying "I don't play kids" is a cop-out.


Howver I do agree with some of their points - personally I hate using any of the characters from the books - sorry but Legloas didn't get bundled by a bunch of Moria goblins likewise Gandalf didn't get smacked in the fact by a giant bat. SBG with 'generic' characters I don't mind, but I'm not playing with any named ones
Isn't that a problem with using named characters in the other games, too? Sure, there aren't as many of them and they don't get used as often, but they're there, some of them with their entire life's history (including their deaths) written down.

Besides, we can't all be actively taking part in the same fictional universe. For instance, my forest goblin army probably doesn't inhabit the same world as your high elves - not only will the two armies never meet, in a sense they never can meet, because my army has a history based on the games my group has played and the Warhammer world as we've shaped it, which no doubt disagrees with the ways in which other people view the whole thing. Each group has its own world, or else (in the case of one-off games) we're simply playing plausible scenarios, not something that is considered to be a historic event in the warhammer universe. How many of us have had a general die in a game and then retired him, permanently?

Let's face it, whether it's GW or Tolkien that wrote the established background, once we start gaming we're taking it into our own hands and essentially playing an alternate reality.

Same story with historical wargaming - it's not really "historical" if the Confederates win the American Civil War, but it's not really a very interesting game if the Confederate player knows he's going to lose, either.

EDIT: I voted Theory I (kids v. adults) because in my experience that is true of many adult gamers. I think the fact that so many people have voted for option 6 (your ramblings are pointless) only adds support to Theory I.

Crazy Harborc
24-01-2010, 03:32
For myself, I prefer gaming with/against my peers....old farts first, younger matured adults second. I actually know old farts who are in to 40K, WHFB, WAB, FoG, 1644 ECW, LoTRs, WWII (NOT FoW's version). Then there are the old farts and a little younger who are in to just about any set of "published" wargaming rules you could name.

I still know (older now) teens who I guess you can say I helped raise (as wargamers). I admit it....I just do not enjoy real wargaming with children. When my grandchildren and I wargames it's done using Heroscape.;)

DDogwood
24-01-2010, 04:40
Well all these older gamers complain they can't have a beer whilst gaming with kids but in all honesty I'm 17 and probably drink more beer than half the people on the site.

For me, that's kind of the problem. Not only is it not cool to have beers with people who are underage, most young people who drink prefer to drink to excess instead of just having one or two beers. Playing any kind of game with people who are slobbering drunk isn't fun.

That said, I think it's silly to write LotR off as a 'kid's game', especially in comparison to other GW games (which are pretty heavily marketed towards kids). As for people who don't want to play against 'kids', however they are defined, I guess we all have certain types of people we'd rather play against. If some people don't like playing against much younger opponents, then I guess it's their loss.

I'd say that young teenagers are generally less fun to play against than older gamers, but that's a very broad generalization. I've also met plenty of older players who are far less mature than most young people. I'd rather play against someone who's more interested in having a good time than winning at any cost, regardless of the person's age.

Hena
24-01-2010, 09:56
Almost all the 'older' gamers I've talked to about it view LotR SBG as incredibly simplistic. Pre-measuring being oft cited as 'evidence' of this.
This is amusing. I think that pre-measuring adds to the tactical depth of the game as it removes the ability to guess ranges (or measure them using something else to do it, like firing bows with range 24" next to other unit to see if they can reach opponent who is about 8" away :rolleyes:). Instead the game becomes about which can get to better position. Ah well, such is life :).

Sureshot05
24-01-2010, 18:15
I agree that put me off. It's the same reason historical gaming really doesn't interest me. It's too "paint by numbers" compared to sci-fi/fantasy gaming.

Although I did get a chuckle out of hearing that some guy won a Flames of War tournament with a US army painted as Ultramarines. :p

Whilst this response may be late, I have to thank you Occulto for making spray most a of a cup of tea all over my keyboard and monitor. That must have been a great moment. Does raise the idea of whether you could do something LotR though.

yabbadabba
24-01-2010, 19:25
Does raise the idea of whether you could do something LotR though. Your toys, go for it :D

Occulto
25-01-2010, 06:44
Whilst this response may be late, I have to thank you Occulto for making spray most a of a cup of tea all over my keyboard and monitor. That must have been a great moment.

I imagine some muttered outrage and possibly a protest by someone who takes their gaming too seriously. :p


Does raise the idea of whether you could do something LotR though.

Nah, to truly annoy people you'd need to do some kind of Star Wars themed LoTR force.

"Your goblins are all ewok figures?"

Lord of Worms
25-01-2010, 08:59
Nah, to truly annoy people you'd need to do some kind of Star Wars themed LoTR force.

"Your goblins are all ewok figures?"

All of your standard bearers holding advertisement signs.

Jellicoe
26-01-2010, 19:28
Don't really understand the kids connection with LOTR unless it was seen as a means of getting the small ones into the hobby via the film - which I don't think stands up

It did remind me of the perennial issue that kids ruining the adults game theme - i remember reading the letters page of the White Dwarf back in the late 80's when AD&D players were ranting about the fact that Fighting Fantasy was a kids game that was ruining AD&D by dumbing it all down - a certain George Stepanek was quite the highlight of the letters page in this respect.

A similar theme with LOTR although in my case I would suggest that it is a far more complex and elegant game than many give it credit for (and it has the Perry's doing most of the minis)

leadlair
26-01-2010, 22:12
I agree. I'm an adult, I don't tend to hang out with 12 year olds. It's not because I have something against them, it's because it would be creepy.

I have to agree with both of these. Adults just shouldn't be hanging out with 12 year olds. Just doesn't seem right to me.

Other then that I love Lord of the Rings.

yabbadabba
26-01-2010, 22:19
I have to agree with both of these. Adults just shouldn't be hanging out with 12 year olds. Just doesn't seem right to me.
Tell that to the Scout Association :evilgrin:

leadlair
27-01-2010, 00:32
Tell that to the Scout Association :evilgrin:

Yeah for some reason that doesn't bother me...... oh well I will have to live with being a tad of a hypocrit :D

Sorros
27-01-2010, 00:43
Where I game, its not so much of being a kid that is bad, but more like being an annoying 12-or-below year old. Most of the gamers are adults, but there are a few teenagers including myself. We all get along fine and game normally, heck, I win plenty of times and lose plenty of times, its all good fun. I have yet to seen a pattern in those who are older being better than younger, I think its more of a whoever has actually played the game longer. There are plenty of adults who played for a greater duration of time than others, and they're pretty good, and then there are some who just picked up the hobby.

I think its just the stereotypical 10 year olds that whine when they lose and don't understand alot of the technicalities and social standards that give such a bad impression. I know a kid down in the NYC GW, who is like 12 or 13, and is smarter than most of the adults there and a better gamer (and painter). He's very mature, perhaps moreso than other adults.

Also, its a little creepy for adults to hang out with adolescents. Especially when you have to game out in a hallway in a mall...*cough*I get stares sometimes *cough*

Epicenter
27-01-2010, 03:16
The hatred of LotR is borne out of a persistent perception that LotR is "taking resources from":

A. 40k
B. WHFB
C. Specialist Games
D. Any combo of the above

And that those resources could be better put to releasing more Space Marines, Codex: Dumpsterdiving, putting more stuff for WHFB out in general, or reviving Specialist Games.

Example: "LotR is taking up GW's time and resources which should be going to remaking the Squats!"

Everything else is just a generalized slander that's added on top of it. Besides criticism that the movies have been out for years, the rest of the criticism is basically the same of any game you don't play and don't like: The rules are simplistic and only ****** would find challenge in it, it's badly balanced, the models look bad, it costs too much, hardly anyone plays it, that it's played by bratty and immature kids, or graybeards who should have "lives" (or should be in an old people's home). The good news is that the age of the players of LotR is only a side issue they latch onto.

While LotR shoulders the brunt of this from both WHFB and 40k fans, if you get a diehard fan of one or the other after a drink or two and feeling his nerd oats you'll hear them talk about the other game system in the exact same way. You'll hear 40k players talk about how Fantasy releases get in the way of 40k relases and how Fantasy players are a bunch of fat graybeards sometimes and if WHFB didn't exist they'd get their revamped Dark Eldar codex sooner. More often you'll hear WHFB fans talk about how 40k is a simplistic immature game that caters to kids (sound familiar?) and that GW should concentrate on WHFB which is a real wargame that's played by mature and thoughtful wargamers and not just "kiddies."

tu33y
28-01-2010, 09:10
i have this concern that in western society today every man who shows even the faintest interest in children/young people has some kind of innapropriate motive. it can indeed feel creepy asking a young person to play in a club and really, it shouldn't. it is a hobby for all ages (which is why we all try to keep bad language and colourful metaphors down- indeed its in the forum rules) and GCN clubs have strict guidlines and policies for child protection. and many kids like playing older gamers because they look up to them.

however the point that some children will indeed try to cheat, and not just a little but but to the point of sillyness, and may even have a genuine foot-stamping tantrum if they loose or have a pet unit mangled. no one wins there.

as for LotR, the models, the style of gameplay and the whole ethos of the game have no interest for me in any way. i sort of look at it like a non-hobbyist looks at warhammer. it has nothing to do with it being seen as a "childs" game though. i have little interest in fantasy either andmy perception of that is it is a slightly more "adult" game than 40k. the "deus ex machina" element of Magic grinds my gears (as do demon princes and psychic powers in 40k so i avoid them).

but really, are we not on very thin ice calling any of the games we play "kids" games?