The Decline of the Lord Of The Rings

[Tymell]

For me, I lost interest in it once they released WotR and started focusing on that. It might be a decent game system, but what drew me to LotR in the first place was the ability to play themed scenario games. And while WotR is very useful if you want to play battles like Pellenor Fields and the Black Gate, it seems mostly to be used to play bland pick-up games of set points values between themeless forces.

Of course, it doesn't have to be played that way, but the element that made the SBG so different is not there.

I'm in this camp too.

I feel it had it's day, a year or two after Return of the King came out it was starting to feel like they were scraping the barrel a bit. The White Dwarf articles felt more and more like they were straining for content, scenarios and settings got repeated, we saw the fifth pose of the same model. Then came WotR, which felt even more like it was trying to force something new out of the system. Like Odin, a large part of my original interest was in the scenarios.

I'd like to emphasise: I think LotR rules and models are both very good, and if anyone else has loved the progression and felt it has gone from strength to strength, then good for you. I'm not attacking fans. I'm just saying how I felt about it.

As to the lack of coverage right now, at first it may have just been not having a lot more they could do. Now I'd say it's saving up for The Hobbit, which will probably be a big shot in the arm for the system.

[smaul]

Originally Posted by Odin View Post
"For me, I lost interest in it once they released WotR and started focusing on that. It might be a decent game system, but what drew me to LotR in the first place was the ability to play themed scenario games. And while WotR is very useful if you want to play battles like Pellenor Fields and the Black Gate, it seems mostly to be used to play bland pick-up games of set points values between themeless forces."

can you elaborate on that?

what is a themelss force?

[Max_Killfactor]

I like WotR rules much better than fantasy 7th edition.

I feel that 8th edition of fantasy kinda stole any momentum WotR had going though. Mainly with the fluid movement and more deadly combat phases.

WotR didn't catch on with my group (I was the only one) and it completely died out at my local store. Haven't seen anyone play or mention WotR in months.

[brain_dead_1st]

I think Odin is refering to stuff like the forgotten kingdoms being a group despite ents rarely meeting hobbits, and fallen realms having black numenorians along side corsairs alongside easterlings and khand. None of which are geographically or fluff wise related that closely.

[HRM]

The reason LoTR is begining to fail is because when GW got the genius plan to start a fantasy based skirmish game they forgot one key detail... THEY HAD ONE! They spent a large amount of money only to compete with a market they already had covered.

I think this is a very important and valid point. When the local GW employees complain about "having" to cater to the LOTR crowd, their main beefs are these:

A) It's not their IP. They're not marketing their own product; they're marketing Chris Tolkien and New Line. The local Gee-Dub manager once said to me, "Can you imagine if we released War Of The Ring to coincide with the theatrical release of ROTK? And had it really, REALLY taken off? There would have been a legitimate chance it would have buried Fantasy." While I personally don't think anything would "bury" Fantasy, it's an interesting theory.

B) No matter what anyone says, it IS heavily dependant on a movie franchise tie-in.

[Whitwort Stormbringer]

I really don't think LotR ever seriously threatened fantasy purchases. Obviously WotR "burying fantasy" is far-fetched, but I think WotR would have been worse off if it was first released right after RotK. There just wasn't enough of a range to support the army sizes that it requires. You'd see nothing but high elves, orcs, goblins, Rohan, Gondor, and Isengard. Those are probably the most popular armies already, but even so that leaves a huge portion of the current plastic range out.

I think it's a lot more likely that established fantasy/40k players avoided LotR just because they didn't have the money to pick up a new system. Those that did probably didn't just go cold turkey on the other GW games, though, and then you can add the non-gamer Tolkien fans that got started on the game as well (of which there are a fair number).

Ultimately, like HRM points out, I think there's only so far that the property can be stretched out after the movies while maintaining its popularity. There are the more dedicated Tolkien fans who keep it going, and certainly some who were introduced later, but there are also a lot of people who saw the movies and then saw the game and thought it was cool, but eventually moved on to something else (or returned to Fantasy/40k). For that reason, and since we know GW have extended the license for a while, I'd expect a temporary surge in popularity after the Hobbit movies come out, but that will eventually fade too.

[Xelee]

A) It's not their IP. They're not marketing their own product; they're marketing Chris Tolkien and New Line. The local Gee-Dub manager once said to me, "Can you imagine if we released War Of The Ring to coincide with the theatrical release of ROTK? And had it really, REALLY taken off? There would have been a legitimate chance it would have buried Fantasy." While I personally don't think anything would "bury" Fantasy, it's an interesting theory.

B) No matter what anyone says, it IS heavily dependant on a movie franchise tie-in.

I agree.

When it was big - it cannibalised exactly the younger first time wargamers that WHFB and 40k are orientated around (despite the long and aged 'tail') and WOTR would have multiplied that effect by offering the same mass battle spectacle. I can just imagine if that had been out when we were all watching ROTK in cinemas.

Now the movies are gone, so have most of those players and LOTR gaming seems to have reverted to its 'core', which is effectively exisiting wargamers who are also Tolkien (but not neccessarily the movies) fans.

This is a pretty stable core though. We keep things like GWs SGs trucking along as well! You could certainly wish for a worse fate than to end up like a SG - with ongoing online support, community ownership and the freedom to mix in models from multiple ranges - since everythig is fan run.

At the moment though, LOTR games are not yet there - since they have a 'future' linked to how they are seen. We know the movies are coming up, we know GW has a license, and the boxes still sit there prominantly on the main store shelves.

[smaul]

WOTR is what got me back into fantasy gaming. I played Warhammer back in the early 90's.

New Movies or not we have a group locally that has grown leaps and bounds over the last 2 months.

None of those guys even knew the hobbit was coming out.

we are up to 8 local players in Fargo.

I hope it grows more when the Hobbit comes out.

[HRM]

WOTR is what got me back into fantasy gaming. I played Warhammer back in the early 90's.

New Movies or not we have a group locally that has grown leaps and bounds over the last 2 months.

None of those guys even knew the hobbit was coming out.

we are up to 8 local players in Fargo.

I hope it grows more when the Hobbit comes out.

This is all great to hear. Keep the faith!

[The Marshel]

the end of the movies hardly helped, but the real killer is lack of support. if gw wanted to they could really turn wotr/sbg into a serious contender with Fantasy and 40K

Play up the who two games in one aspect. relase "army" books for races with both ruleset

Explore the world more and flesh out the races. armies like gondor, harad and Mordor have enough variation to be self sufficient. with recent releases, dwarfs, Rohan and Isengard and Moria are getting but all obviously pair up into nice nemesis forces. the idea of a single book to cover two regularly conflicting races would be a bit of a niche within the GW core systems.

Actually support the range. SBG has been left to die and Wotr is looking shaky with limited coverage already. Lotr has potential as a great introductory engine for wargaming. I began wargaming with SBG and eventually, i felt i enjoyed wargaming so much that i expanded into 40k. I'd have never played 40k prior to playing SBG. It was the combination of a recognizable and popular world that got me into wargaming and subsequently got me to love wargaming.


Update the rules. SBG is overdue. the game is incredibly well balanced but there are aspects that could be improved. archery is a good example. it could be a bit more potent without breaking the game, which would help a lot of good armies deal with the large spear blocks of mordor, isenguard and harad better. speaking of spears, they need to be toned down a little. while not necessary, having spears is a huge advantage and many players i've seen on warseer in better times for LOTR feel spearwalls are unbeatable without your own spearwall. not true, but the point remains, there is room for improvement.

There is plenty GW could do to get LOTR moving, and with the influx of on the fence wargamers it brings in, it'd benefit fantasy and 40k long term if they did support LOTR a bit better





edit: adding a reply to a post

can you elaborate on that?

what is a themelss force?

I cant say for sure, as i didnt post it, but i think what he means is wotr sometimes feels like it lacks the personality of SBG.

you put down like 50 or so models on SBG and have to really think it through. you have jsut a few captains and maybe a named character or two. you can easily make very themed list without shooting yourself in the foot. in fact, legions of middle earth makes it damn hard to make a non fluffy list at all.

now, i'm not saying this is what WOTR is like. clearly it doesnt have to be as it is portrayed by GW, but from the point of view of someone who never play'd it, or only played it a few times, the GW representation is going to be a major influence.

the introductory battle report for wotr can be summarized as "Woar look at all theze minaturs, woar so many, woar now they is fighting hugez battles, Woar 130 just dieded in a turn, woar eomer just pawn 50 guyz lulz wotr iz cool".

It was so big, and so over the top, that you lost all the finer detail of a good 600 point SBG and was just left with the amazing number of deaths and the amazing number of dice you get to roll....wooo....

then there was the galadhrim report, which featured a huge lothlorien army facing the armies of dol goldur, and a balrog..... IIRC this was representative of the whole fall of the necromancer thing. I'm not sure but i dont think a large scale battle was involved there and there defiantly wasn't a balrog.

then there was the blood on the sand thing, the retconned gondor vs harad war. i think that was a what if scenario, but its pretty clear it was just to sell tones of the new evil men figures.

now, i fully understand my self that wotr isnt like this, and doesn't have to be like this, but this is how gw represent wotr to me most of the time, and this isnt what i'm looking for in a lotr based game. it just feels like throwing two big armies at eachother and watching the carnage, rather then acting out the actual wars and skirmishes that shaped middle earth over the war of the ring period. the big armies don't feel personal, just big.

I did really enjoy 1 wotr battle report. the last march of the ents. note that its a very theme based game, with "endless orcs" up against the limited number of ents. I found this story based game much more imersive then the huge armies battles. personally i am interested in wotr battles, based on what i've seen beyond gw where the whole "WOAR WOTR YEAH" vibe isnt a factor, but until i was able to get beyond that vibe, wotr was a very off puting concept

[FarseerBeilTan]

Some good points and opinions here keep it coming!

[mdauben]

SBG & WotR should not have been split the way it was

I think this is a very important point. Splitting LOTR into SBG and WOTR simply fragments the already small fanbase. I suppose GW is trying to address that at this point by simply ignoring SBG, but rather than reuniting the two player factions, that mostly just pisses off the SBG players and drives them away.

[dala_karn]

just wait until the hobbit movie (movies?) come out, it might get people coming back.

[Xelee]

I think this is a very important point. Splitting LOTR into SBG and WOTR simply fragments the already small fanbase. I suppose GW is trying to address that at this point by simply ignoring SBG, but rather than reuniting the two player factions, that mostly just pisses off the SBG players and drives them away.

I don't know about that. All but one of the usual local WOTR players was new to the game with WOTR. To be honest, I don't think the small core of fans for either system really figure in GW's thinking - they want mass sales and turnover.

I'd imagine that much thinking has gone into how they can link WOTR to more events from the Hobbit movies. Doing it the skirmish way is very design studio hour intensive vs figures sold.

[Gatsby]

just wait until the hobbit movie (movies?) come out, it might get people coming back.

That's just going to exacerbate the problem, they're going to get a short term boost yea, but in the end they're just competing against themselves and dragging out the inevitable. And in the end, whats more profitable, an IP that belongs to someone else, or your own already established IP that belongs to you?

Had they pushed Star Wars based BFG or Pirates based Man-O-War at least they aren't competing with a core system (especially Man-O-War, I bet 90% here don't even know what that is!) In addition to long term fan base of Star Wars and the (lasting) popularity of Pirates (and the side market, modelers looking for a nice ship (be it Black Pearl, Star Destroyer, etc) model wouldn't have to look any further.)

[Shadowheart]

Short term my ass. Say the LotR/Hobbit range is still kicking around two years after the Hobbit movies. It'll have been around for fourteen years by then. Fourteen years of people arguing it'll be over soon. That's like if halfway through third edition 40K, we'd had Fantasy players saying this newfangled space stuff would run out of steam any moment.

I don't know if GW is going to give up on such a large and long running product range so easily. But if they do, it's not like it wasn't worth it just because it didn't last forever. A decade and a half (at least) is a very respectable lifespan for a miniature wargame.

Sometimes I just wish the game had been produced by another company, then we'd have seen less misplaced one-on-one comparisons with Warhammer.

Anyway, let's see how the Hobbit movies do, and how GW does with them. If nothing else I'm certainly looking forward to miniature Stephen Fry.

[fracas]

not to be cynical but WotR, as good as the rule is, wasn't imo to draw in new players, especially since mass fantasy wargame is already covered by Warhammer Fantasy Battle. again imo it is more as an upgrade/replacement for SBG, to sell more models to the SBG crowd. it came at a time when SBG sales were getting slow/stagnant and offered something new to stimulate the line.

[Hellfury]

not to be cynical but WotR, as good as the rule is, wasn't imo to draw in new players, especially since mass fantasy wargame is already covered by Warhammer Fantasy Battle. again imo it is more as an upgrade/replacement for SBG, to sell more models to the SBG crowd. it came at a time when SBG sales were getting slow/stagnant and offered something new to stimulate the line.

I don't know about that.After many years of trying to like WHFB and finally giving up due to the utter nonsense the rules offer I turned to WotR and found something worthwhile that GW produced.

It also showed me that SBG was a much better game than it was during its original FotR incarnation.

I mean you could be right of course. But from my perspective it was much different and many in my local group reflect this.

[Whitwort Stormbringer]

Had they pushed Star Wars based BFG or Pirates based Man-O-War at least they aren't competing with a core system (especially Man-O-War, I bet 90% here don't even know what that is!) In addition to long term fan base of Star Wars and the (lasting) popularity of Pirates (and the side market, modelers looking for a nice ship (be it Black Pearl, Star Destroyer, etc) model wouldn't have to look any further.)

Fleet games just aren't as popular as games revolving around individuals. Regardless of the franchise popularity, and the supposed trouble of competing with yourself, a fleet game wouldn't have lasted as long as LotR has. Most people aren't into Star Wars or Pirates for ship to ship combat, they like the characters.

I also just don't think of Pirates fans as the gamer crowd. I mean sure, most people (myself included) enjoy the movies, but I think it's more ephemeral than LotR or Star Wars. LotR has survived, and was probably popular amongst GW gamers in the first place, because it had a pre-existing fanbase that wasn't going to lose interest just because there weren't any more movies coming out. Obviously the fact that there were movies helped a lot, and provided the necessary boost in popularity to make the game possible, but I don't think it could have lasted as long as it has if there were only the movies.

[ForgottenLore]

not to be cynical but WotR, as good as the rule is, wasn't imo to draw in new players,

again imo it is more as an upgrade/replacement for SBG

I don't know about that.

You two are not necessarily contradicting yourselves you know.

I too think WotR was meant as an upgrade to SBG, to get existing players to buy more figs, but what GW MEANT for the game to do and what actually happened don't exactly match.