Looking for 1st/2nd Ed AD&D stats for Characters

BS? Sorry, i didn't get that... :blush:
EDIT: bullshit? lol

I think the lighting in the movie, was exactly to depict a bit of what Gaear ask. Not all the people that look the movie are experts (or read the books) thus the common image for a wizard it's the classical spell throwing guy. Funny enough, also bearded and with a hat, which it's the generic depiction for a wiz, taken from Tolkien and bastardized.

I like to see stuff like that (the lightning) not exactly as a "cast/deals extra 10d8 damage, but as a momentum that Gandalf takes to focus it's..humm...let's say will or strength, and strike.

:yes:
In the extended version, the witch king (the nazgul) brokes the white staff. I don't remember if that happens in the book, tho.

Yup, he shouts that at the beggining of LotR II :stoned:

A guy in WotC told me once, that Elminster it's depicted red robed and usually cast fire spells because of that (they wanted something different, yet to have a strong resemblance with Gandalf)

 

Omg, finally an interesting, serious discussion ...a bit nerdy, and not that original tho, but still interesting (it's awesome how much the interpretations of LotR seem to change between countries)

Personally, i think that the way Sauron it's depicted it's perfect.
Brutal, ominous and menacing.
It makes the Nazgul fit, as extensions of their power.
Maybe should it had be darker, kind of shadowy, to make it less...defined.

And actually, it rules by strength, IMO. Horror it's just a secondary effect: something so powerful and almighty will cause awe/horror. Add the twisted, evil deeds, and you'll piss and shit your chainmail pants in the opening fight of the movie.

PJ's work it's a masterpiece (okay there are some crappy details). He had to struggle with Tolkien's long and unclear descriptions, all the readers around the world prejudice, and put all that stuff in a visual format. And dammit if he didn't do it well.

Psh...and the Oliphant scene? that's cool, man!
Or when Legolas defeat Gimli in the contest of drinking... :blegh: :jerkin:

 

Someone agrees with us:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/5/28/

Actually, there were two "books" in every book about the 3rd age...except The Hobbit. We'll have to see how that plays out. I hope it's not strictly to keep some cash flow going for him. Each book from LotR could easily have been 3 hours long as a movie. I'd like it better if he'd taken fewer liberties & stayed truer to the story line; but, I guess he had to give Phillipa Boyens gainful employment. Maybe someday he'll film the missing bits & re-edit the lot of it. King Kong was freakin' awesome, and stuck really true to the whole concept. Liberties there were add-ons, not alterations of cannon.

 

Hey L_S, did you see the extended versions?

There you'll see lots and lots of stuff, especially the third movie, which it's almost 5 hours long mg:
You'll see there much more details of the books (the vulture-like stone guardians), some scenes are much more clear, and there are lots of "add ons" , some are crap (like Legolas winning the contest, as i've mentioned), but others are very good IMHO (Saruman's final, thru it's been adapted, but not that bad at all).
Also, in Youtube, you can find a good deal of deleted scenes, not in the DVDs (the scene of Gimli and Legolas counting how many orcs killed it's hilarious, i dunno why he didn't include it in the extended versions)

I didn't liked neither the "omg, Aragorn it's dead" fall from the cliff...but i must admit it worked, i recall all the girls gasping (and even crying, dammit) in the theater.
Yes, in my country, Viggo Mortenssen is really popular...even my mother was drooling for Viggo. :blegh:

The movies are an excellent mix, keeping the interest of the fans, and of those that never seen a book.

Now, if you liked King Kong, that can be arranged in KotB, L_S

 

Yes. They were made to appease fans of the books. I own them, and will doubtless own the hobbit movies once they get made into dvd's.

King Kong is known by another name in DnD...Oonga. Peter Jackson must've played Isle of the Ape , 'cause he sure nailed Skull Island.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isle_of_the_Ape

 

Jackson did ok with my favorite scenes from the books: Galadriel declining Frodo's offer of the One Ring and Eowyn slaying the Witch King. But the best stuff in the movies was definitely the battles.

Has anyone seen Ralph Bakshi's Lord of the Rings (or even Wizards)? I was in Cepheid Variable at Texas A&M when I saw them. We use to show 2 non-first-run movies for a quarter on Thursday nights, and in the spring, host Aggiecon.

 

Hum, it will be cool to make a dvd with all the youtube stuff, and have them along with all the stuff added to the movies.

That's it.
Ted can we have one of those?
L_S, chec the "custom chainmail..." thread, page 16, post #476

In fact, Eowyn should have been thru all the movies. She rocks.
That Miranda Otto... :heart:

I do. And i'mprobably one of the few that actually liked.
The only thing i complaint it's the quality (thru the end, it loses the cartoon style), and Boromir sucks (a viking?? :blegh: ), but it was still a huge effort, and that counts.
Fire and Ice was waaay better, technically speaking.

One of the things i didn't liked in Pj version. Even if the chainmail made frodo invulnerable, that blow (counting the size of the troll, and that Frodo it's against a wall) would have squished inside it, like an orange. Besides, that was one of the most detailed moments/battles of the books...why changing so much? you also have a full description of an orc :no:
A musical of LotR?? Are the songs so catchy as Nimoy's "Bilbo the hobbit"? (or something like that)

 

Yeah, I agree, but You forgot to mention Arnie holding a timber over his shoulder with one hand and a greataxe in other hand while smacking an orc army.

"Where is my dughter??!!! GRRRRR!!!"