IIRC parts of it were rotoscoped from live-action filming of actors...the mass-troops scenes, etc?

Many of Ralph Bakshi's films featured rotoscoping, sometimes to great effect, other times not so much. One of the best examples of this is his movie Fire and Ice on which he collaborated with the great Frank Frazetta. Nearly the entire movie is rotoscoped and while the story is a bit on the bland side (basic barbarians/sword and sorcery type story), the animation and artwork is fantastic.

The Return of The King was HORRIBLE. The Hobbit I enjoyed as a young'n and also I loved the cartoon LOTR. I own it as a matter of fact. Great film, but a bit slow and weird in spots. Why did they not finish it? :/

Incredible for it's time, since in the pre-internet era, even a bad LOTR adaptation was solid gold.

Oh cool, then I like how the rotoscoping looks, that animation in the trailer looked pretty sweet.

On the other hand, the Bilbo graphic novel is pretty good.

That movie looks pretty cool, never heard of it.
Ralph Bakshi's films haven't aged that well, but i think he gets a lot of undeserved bashing these days. His movies were always very ambitious, and in many ways defined 70s/80s animation. These days everyone is used to CG enhanced anime-style animation, which still doesn't look as realistic as his does at it's best.
I think I grew up on his movies, from the video rental shop down the street.
I also think i probably shouldn't rewatch them now as it's best to just remember them as I saw them through young eyes.

I may not be as wise as Gandalf, but I'd like to think I'd be smart enough to NOT go throwing swords up in the air after winning the battle of Helm's Deep.

Well, the thing to not forget while watching animated LOTR, is that Ralph Bakshi has made this movie with his own vision, his own personnal way of seeing and imagining Tolkien's universe when he was reading the books, and not really as it was "supposed" to be.
But even with that in mind, some details in his movie are more accurate than in Jackson's trilogy.
See the Balrog for example: in comparison with Jackson's trilogy, Bakshi's balrog seems a bit "ridiculous" and not so frightening. But - except the size maybe - Bakshi's balrog is more respectful of Tolkien's desription, more humanoid, as it was intended to be. Jackson's balrog, even if Iove its design, is in fact very classic, very "demonish" and more animal.
First time I saw this animated LOTR, I was so sad to see that Bakshi has not been able to finish it, "finish" in both ways: the story ends at the battle of Helm, but also many scenes made with rotoscoping have not been really "redrawn", but just degraded to look more animated.
I still love this animated movie, but for most people I think it should have been seen before Jackson's trilogy, now it can only suffer of comparison.

don't hurt me this way ever again

That's both awesome and terrifying. thanks, I'm obligated to link that around :)

I think good ol' Nimoy and his crew got "Hobbit" mixed up with "Hippy".

You mean The Hobbit comic? Yeah, it was gorgeous. Same guy that drew A Wizard's Tale or whatever that Busiek book is called.

Yes the comic book that came out to celebrate the centenary (1892-1992).