Forum

Reading through the new Ruins of Eriador (5e) Book, I found the box on p31 called "Men of Eriador". It describes 3 new variations on the original Men of Bree culture from the Core Book (Men of Tharbad, Marsh-Folk of Swanfleet, and Fisher-Folk of the Shore). Specifically it says the rules are offered to create a Man from a different part of Eriador and they are based on the Men of Bree culture from p40 of the Core Book.

It seems to me, to incorporate this new rule variant, I should now treat the "Culture" as being Men of Eriador having 4 subcultures, the first one being Men of Bree and the other 3 as listed above.

Obviously, this would be optional, but it feels a lot like the High Elf alternative subculture described on p10 of the Rivendell (5e) supplement that comes with the LM screen; whereby Elven heroes can now be rolled up as either an Elf of Lindon or a High Elf subculture. It gives more variety to players desiring to roll up a new hero from scratch. Plus I like the idea of having additional hooks to take a company back to the homeland of a hero and/or sidekick npc in the group to a different part of Middle-Earth described elsewhere in the Ruins of Eriador book.

thoughts?

It is a good point, no doubt

I think that if you do the way you tell us, it is not going to be a big deal, but it makes more sense that way, because every man os Eriador would be together, for your players to choose. Maybe I'm going to do the same.

As a side note, the Men of Eriador box on page 31 has been updated in the latest pdf version of Ruins of Eriador, and unfortunately differs from the printed version, which had a few other inaccuracies.

In any case, yes, those who own Ruins of Eriador (5e) can for all intents and purposes consider the Men of Eriador a full-fledged culture with 4 subcultures (Men of Bree, Men of Tharbad, Marsh-folk of Swanfleet, and Fisher-folk of the Shore).

Thanks for the heads up on the pdf. Are you able to point us to a list of the other inaccuracies mentioned?