PDA

View Full Version : Are dwarfs are all the same: Not on my watch!



Blightedmarsh
2014-05-12, 11:43 PM
Thinking about dwarfs, their society and culture. I want to build one for my current project that isn't just a Tolkein copy paste job.

The world in which they sit is a kind of elemental hellscape court between fire and ice. Its been adopted by two races of giant evil outsiders as their home plane. Beneath the surface and far older sleep a number of elder evils; essentially lovecraftian great old ones and their minions. All mortal races are imports from other planes.

What I have got so far is that Dwarfs are not struggling or dwindling. Instead when they first arrived they hit the ground running and have thrived. The instinct to dig in served them well (as without specialized magic the surface is death). Rune magic works after a fashion (unlike arcane magic). The elves have become hideously warped undead abominations so humans pretty much look to the dwarfs for "protection".

I am thinking that they practice slavery, are heavily into necromancy and worship a patron giant and or dragon...the setting has no actual gods; or at least no gods any sane being would worship.

Altair_the_Vexed
2014-05-13, 12:00 PM
Yes, this is rather different to other settings / literature on dwarves - but are you suggesting that all dwarves in your setting fit into this one single culture? Doesn't that mean all your dwarves are the same?

I think you need a reason to have monoculture.

Red Fel
2014-05-13, 12:17 PM
So, wait, let me understand.

You dwarves dwell in the caverns beneath a hellscape, which constitutes a battlefield between fire and ice. They work a strange kind of magic, and others rely on them for protection?

Underground dwellers, check. Apocalyptic world, check. Fire and ice giants, check. Mystical craftsmen of the gods, check. Are you familiar with the Svartalfar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svart%C3%A1lfar)?

It's hard to come up with new concepts, and that's not a bad thing. There are certain elements of the dwarf that are simply understood, and while you could change them dramatically, at a certain point it would be absurd to call it a dwarf - it would in no way resemble what we know.

For example, let's say my dwarves are seven feet tall, live in space colonies, practice chemistry and speak only in iambic pentameter, with faint Mandarin accents. I've completely broken with the traditional image of a dwarf in every way - and what I'm left with is a dwarf in name only; it in no way resembles or invokes the image of a dwarf. I may as well call it a smeerp (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/CallARabbitASmeerp).

What I'm saying is, don't be ashamed to borrow a little from Tolkein's tradition, as well as others. Tolkien did it too. Everyone has. There's nothing new in concept; what makes it unique is the execution.

I agree with Altair, also; you've started with "I want my dwarves to be different," and wound up with "all of my dwarves are the same." Is that the intended result? For example, are there dwarves who live on the surface, or are cultists of the Elder Evils, or eat human babies for fun or sustenance? Are there splinter factions? Or are they all subterranean Scottish Viking craftsmen with a fondness for ale and anvils?

Blightedmarsh
2014-05-13, 02:45 PM
Its actually a reference to the TV tropes page;

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OurDwarvesAreAllTheSame

Its about how dwarfs from a great many settings conform to the old standard; something I want to make a break from. Sorry about the confusing title; I thought I was being clever...que facepalm


Some more thoughts I had:

They are not surrounded by the faded glory of distant ancestors; nor are there lots of lost holds. This is because dwarfs haven't been in this world in significant numbers for more than a few hundred years. They don't have faded glories because A) they haven't had the time to fade and B) they don't have the manpower to spare for extravagance. All this means is that dwarfs are a lot less maudlin and more proactive. They really can't rest on their laurels because they haven't finished making them yet.

Their strongholds are just that; strongholds. Forget the vast colonnades, enormous doors and high vaulted ceilings. They build thick, small, bared doors with heavy hinges and big, thick bars. Collapse tunnels, escape tunnels, murder holes, siege cisterns, shooting galleries...the works. The ceilings are low to inconvenience intruders. Most humans have to shuffle and stoop by design; all the better to keep them in their place.

Delwugor
2014-05-13, 02:54 PM
Dwarfs are great to play around with since they are so stereotypical. I like to use, abuse on invert many of the tropes (yep I used that word) so as to make interesting dwarves.

For example my namesake is completely bald and shaves everyday. That's a traditional disgraced dwarf but twist it and it becomes a badge of honor, even if it is a dishonor.
His village was made up of stone-cutters, they work in the mountains but live on the side. Influenced by old Pueblo Indian communities
http://www.smarttinc.com/email/NL-0413/spotlight-0413-2.jpg
Their village was technically a patriarch of the old beards but in practice everyone turned to my character's grandmother for making sure things got done. So they really had a closet matriarchal society.
They were mostly artisans but ferocious fighters because they had to haul and protect their very valuable cargo.
Overly aggressive on the attack which can get into trouble in a real battle, but works well to chase away bandits and other unsavory types on the road.
Yep he carries a big heavy axe, the picture (from a friend) is wrong on that though. It's a BFA that is black, potmarked, heavy, not very sharp and ugly, it's not a show piece but purely designed to kill.

ufo
2014-05-13, 05:04 PM
I agree that the first step in actually diversifying races is getting rid of mono-cultures.

For example, with the slavery and necromancy, your dwarf society seems like a pretty harsh place. Exiles and adventurous souls might found a nomadic culture or whatever.

veti
2014-05-13, 09:19 PM
I've never been comfortable with the racial monocultures that seem to be the default setting of D&D. Why is there no language called "human"? Why don't humans have a "patron deity" or "pantheon" that's exclusive to them?

In my campaigns, there is no such thing as an "dwarven nation" or "dwarvish language" or "dwarf pantheon". There may be half a dozen countries with dwarves as the dominant ethnicity, but their cultures will have more to do with their individual geographies than with a uniform love of beer and burrowing.

Sartharina
2014-05-15, 11:29 AM
I've never been comfortable with the racial monocultures that seem to be the default setting of D&D. Why is there no language called "human"? Why don't humans have a "patron deity" or "pantheon" that's exclusive to them?

In my campaigns, there is no such thing as an "dwarven nation" or "dwarvish language" or "dwarf pantheon". There may be half a dozen countries with dwarves as the dominant ethnicity, but their cultures will have more to do with their individual geographies than with a uniform love of beer and burrowing.Because Races in D&D aren't supposed to be like races in the real world, or variations on human. Demihumans are supposed to be defined forces of nature or philosophy or mythology given roughly humanoid form.

Red Fel
2014-05-15, 11:48 AM
I've never been comfortable with the racial monocultures that seem to be the default setting of D&D. Why is there no language called "human"? Why don't humans have a "patron deity" or "pantheon" that's exclusive to them?

They did have a patron deity. It was a bad idea (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20041203a).

Blightedmarsh
2014-05-15, 03:58 PM
For the monoculture its kind of forgivable if the overall population is really quite small. If the world contained only 6 strongholds none of which is more than 250 years old then a monoculture is forgivable. If you are dealing with 6 people billion over 6 continents then it kind of stretching the suspension of disbelieving.

Now I feel that 6 large strongholds as one settled culture is the way I am going to go. Now I am going to have another older dwarven culture. Primitive nomadic tribes living in caves and canyons; they have been around for a couple of thousand years and are comparatively thin and wiry compered to stronghold dwarves.

Stronghold dwarves are stone cold sober at all times; partly because of their lethal internal politics, partly because of there deadly environment and need for vigilance, partly because they believe they have died and gone to hell but mostly because they lack food the surplus to ferment.

Stronghold dwarves tend to fall somewhere between agnostics and hardline atheists. They know that the gods of the old world exist; they suspect that this world has "gods"; they just wish it didn't. Divine magic in this world dose work; it just rots you from the inside mind, body and soul.

I am thinking that the dwarfs will have a culture based off of ancient greece and etrusca. Limited citizenship, direct democracy and lots of slavery. Possibly mixed with some feudalism with human surf villages.

Clawhound
2014-05-16, 08:48 AM
Hey, I've gone through this exact thing extensively. (By extensively, I mean 220k words.)

If you want your dwarves to be different, then sit down and look at what they do and how they do it. How would dwarves adapt to living in mountains? Lava tubes? The Great Plains? How would those changes affect their culture? What expertises would they develop due to their local resources? What expertises would they lose due to local shortages?

That's all that you need to be different. Just sit down and actually try to make their lives work in the place where they live.

Here are some traits that I always keep:


Dwarves have a double-overtime work ethic.
Dwarves love good food.
Dwarves have ancestor worship.
Dwarves love gold above all things.
Dwarves hate dragons above all things as dragons want their gold.
Dwarf politics is fairly direct and often violent, though not necessarily lethal.

DM Nate
2014-05-16, 11:42 AM
I love dwarves, but my dwarves usually focus more on the love of practicality, structural engineering prowness, and using their hands. They've also always valued knowledge over gold.

For example, in my current homebrew campaign (http://darkhaunt.wormholes.info/?page_id=207), the dwarves are basically the stereotypical "elves" of the world...the only race that can live for centuries and who see themselves as guardians of ancient lore. They do this by engraving it on the walls of their deepest caverns, which could last for hundreds of thousands of years. (For those who are interested, my elves are the mystic aboriginals of the world.)

Blightedmarsh
2014-05-16, 03:11 PM
Lets run through this then:

Why do they live underground... Because between the evil demon giants, the dragons, the barren wasteland and the aurora that causes sickness, madness and mutation living on the surface is difficult to say the least. Not impossible as the nomadic orcs and settled hobgoblins prove.

Dwarves love gold? not really.... Gold is sacred because it resembles the golden light of the sun. In this sunless world gold looses its mystical symbolism. The two most valuable metals in their world are bronze and iron. A small ingot of either is worth more than a mere human slave; the value of good quality crucible steel is almost incalculable and forms the basis of their economy.

When it comes to weapons and equipment they favor axes, knives and hammers. Swords are right out as they don't really have enough metal to make swords. Whilst they use spears on campaigns strongholds are -by design- to confining to use spears properly. Most weapons have bone hafts and stone heads or obsidian blades; metal is reserved for only the wealthiest (read best) warriors.

When it comes to protection dwarfs focus on light armor and large shields. Now trees don't grow on the surface, the wood must come from the gnarled woods of the nether; the vast elf haunted forest dominating the underdark. These trees are twisted, knotty and the biggest ones protected. Large timbers are hard to acquire and planks all but unheard of. Switches and boughs on the other hand are readily available. For this reason shields are hide bound wicker stressed to a concave shape.

When it comes to body armor you are probably looking at leather laminar, possibly with a few copper scales here and there, often with a silk tabard. Helmets are usually just leather caps, though sometimes they wear silk turbans occasionally with one or more metal bands. An actual steal crown may be worn by a king but it would be the single most valuable item in a stronghold.

They can be a harsh people. They have a focus on clan life; the clan is a family bound by oath and adoption rather than by blood. A stronghold is made up of a distributed network of clan holds. Each hold tries to be more or less self sufficient in the basic essentials. Part and parcel of this is the human sanctuaries that each stronghold lord over. These gather resources and food from the nether to feed the stronghold.

Ravens_cry
2014-05-16, 03:33 PM
My idea for some different Dwarves was that the mountain fortresses are just that, fortresses for times of need.
They don't have the food production or even storage capability for anything like a permanent self-sustaining population.
Most of the dwarves lived in farms and villages surrounding the mountains. This leads to conflict as the dwarves in the mountains consider the village dwarves to be ungrateful bumpkins who don't understand the harsh realities of their lives while the village dwarves consider the mountain dwarves to be greedy thugs who bleed them dry with constant demands for tribute.

Another idea I had was that gnomes were a servitor race to dwarves, second class citizens at best in an unthinking kind of way. Dwarves aren't antagonistically racist to gnomes, active cruelty is rare and discouraged, for the same reason you don't mistreat a tool you own, it's petty for one, but they have ingrained ideas of what a gnome's 'place' is and think of them as background.

Also, they are monotheists who think of all other gods as aspects of one being, in contrast to the gnomes who have thousands of small gods and spirits. The way you tell something is gnome made from dwarven made is that a small alter or shrine will be attached or inscribed on some part of the item for a gnome made item.

Tvtyrant
2014-05-16, 09:26 PM
Thinking about dwarfs, their society and culture. I want to build one for my current project that isn't just a Tolkein copy paste job.

The world in which they sit is a kind of elemental hellscape court between fire and ice. Its been adopted by two races of giant evil outsiders as their home plane. Beneath the surface and far older sleep a number of elder evils; essentially lovecraftian great old ones and their minions. All mortal races are imports from other planes.

What I have got so far is that Dwarfs are not struggling or dwindling. Instead when they first arrived they hit the ground running and have thrived. The instinct to dig in served them well (as without specialized magic the surface is death). Rune magic works after a fashion (unlike arcane magic). The elves have become hideously warped undead abominations so humans pretty much look to the dwarfs for "protection".

I am thinking that they practice slavery, are heavily into necromancy and worship a patron giant and or dragon...the setting has no actual gods; or at least no gods any sane being would worship.


I made a similar group of dwarves who are devoted to clearing the Underdark of aberrations. As a result they have become extremely hardened and ruthless. In the olden times they raised their own dead up as undead guardians of their underground cities. In modern times they instead trap the souls of their dying into constructs, creating Warforged to fill their armies.

The Dwarf fear of being re-conquered by Mindflayers and other mind-altering aberrations has lead them to create a society where they have completely sublimated their own happiness and freedom as individuals as the price of racial freedom. The older cities are filled with liches, vampires and zombies and as a result have become grim necropolises. The new cities are effectively massive fortresses filled with Warforged, Warforged Titans and Chargers, and ranks of Mountain Plate armored Dwarves.

lunar2
2014-05-17, 02:33 AM
hardship does tend to cause people to band together. in the setting i'm working on, the various races form monocultures because every 500 years, the war between angels and demons comes to a boil, and the devastation essentially hits the reset button on society, doing massive damage to infrastructure, ruining resources, killing off about 2/3 of the population and forcing the rest into hiding. by the time the next celestial battle comes around, society has barely recovered from the damage of the last war, causing a technological and societal stasis, as the world cycles through the same phase of development over and over again. so the races accept their niches, because rebuilding is easier when everyone works together.

the goblins are the merchants and animal trainers. the orcs are the laborers and wilderness experts. the quicklings are the couriers, assassins, thieves, etc. the elves are the scholars. the humans get into a bit of everything. and the dwarves are the miners and craftsmen.

i did drop the obsession with facial hair, the alcoholism, the gruff natures, and the bad scottish accents, though. dwarves have as much variety in appearance as humans, quicklings, and goblins do (elves and orcs have far less variation, but they come from smaller initial populations, haven't been around as long, and don't breed according to appearance, anyway). they don't drink any more than anyone else. being in the tunnels and forges all day, cramped up next to other people means they got used to talking. and i don't do accents.

dwarves do tend to be slightly agoraphobic. specifically, they have trouble sleeping outside, or even in a building. they want dirt over their heads to feel comfortable.

because dwarves evolved as miners and craftspeople under the watch of the dragons, they have a love/hate relationship with dragons, depending on the views of the individual dwarf. some dwarves envy the dragons, who took so much from their ancestors, and in their opinion, forced them to work. other dwarves have a great deal of respect for the dragons, and are grateful for the centuries of guardianship and tutelage. after all, dwarves wouldn't have been able to work as efficiently as they do if they had to constantly deal with the threats the dragons took care of, instead. and it was the dragons who taught the ancient dwarves the smithing and alchemical techniques necessary to create "exceptional items" (think non magical magic items). the tribute paid by the dwarves was merely an appropriate trade for the knowledge and safety their dragon patrons provided.

of course, the truth there is somewhere in between. the dragons didn't give the dwarves' ancestors much choice in the matter, but they only took part of the dwarves product in exchange for protection. and it was actually the dwarves who developed the crafting skill they now have, but it was emulating the dragons' own magic.

and the great thing about threads like this is i just made up the last 3 paragraphs of my setting's history on the spot, so thank you for that. especially the agoraphobia. i don't think i've ever seen dwarves done that way before.

DM Nate
2014-05-17, 04:54 AM
In one of my last games, I played a dwarf who was mildly agoraphobic. He was used to hunting aberrations in the underdark. Dwarves to me were like burrowing animals...they felt safer with a strong roof over their heads. Made out of a hundred feet of stone, that is.

Also, you may consider making them expert mountaineers and parkour enthusiasts. After all, when you're hanging from cavern cliff walls all day by rope, you get very good at moving from point A to B while not having your feet directly on the ground. My character would keep his spiked chains on his belt where he could reach them (Quick Draw feat) and spend most of the time traveling with a good length of rope and a grappling hook already in his hands, for a running start.

Beowulf DW
2014-05-17, 08:04 AM
I always figured that Dwarves are all the same because Tolkien got it right with one try.:smalltongue:

The Oni
2014-05-17, 09:49 AM
In one of my last games, I played a dwarf who was mildly agoraphobic. He was used to hunting aberrations in the underdark. Dwarves to me were like burrowing animals...they felt safer with a strong roof over their heads. Made out of a hundred feet of stone, that is.

I always thought that was kind of a cool concept. Dwarves who are genuinely scared as hell of big open spaces because wot if yeh just fell upwards one day?! Thar'd be nothin' to catch yeh, lad!

Ravens_cry
2014-05-17, 09:53 AM
I always figured that Dwarves are all the same because Tolkien got it right with one try.:smalltongue:
Well, even some elements of Tolkien's dwarves have not made it to the present conception. For example, Tolkien's dwarves were amazing toy makers, and they could be quite eloquent at times, such as when provoked by their ideas of beauty, like Gimli's heartfelt adoration of the Glittering caves.

DM Nate
2014-05-17, 10:05 AM
wot if yeh just fell upwards one day?! Thar'd be nothin' to catch yeh, lad!

*shivers* :smalleek:

Ravens_cry
2014-05-17, 10:50 AM
*shivers* :smalleek:
I will just leave this link (http://xkcd.com/1115/) here.

Coidzor
2014-05-17, 03:43 PM
Well, that cinches it, I need to start playing Dwarf Fortress again.

toapat
2014-05-18, 12:56 AM
Well, even some elements of Tolkien's dwarves have not made it to the present conception. For example, Tolkien's dwarves were amazing toy makers, and they could be quite eloquent at times, such as when provoked by their ideas of beauty, like Gimli's heartfelt adoration of the Glittering caves.

the fact that dwarves are only really two steps removed from Tolkien at the absolute worst (DF's dorf) its pretty self-evident in the strength of the concept. The concept itself is more pliable then elves or orcs. personally im trying to come up with a name for dwarves when you dont have humans anywhere in the plans (See: Unwritten thesis stating why humans suck in fantasy) for the material im working on slowly.

Personally however, the idea of dwarven miners hunting for legendary ores doesnt actually make sense when you consider the original Tolkien Dwarves were moreso artists then smiths. To them, Smiths would be recognized but not really respected because their work would be primarily designed for function rather then to be beautiful. To us, Gimli is a bearded warrior, to other dwarves, Gimli is a sculptor. To us, his axe is an axe, to him, its a paintbrush or a chisel.

Ravens_cry
2014-05-18, 01:17 AM
I think Tolkien's dwarves would be able to make even a smith's hammer beautiful, masterful in its fulfilment of its function. It would have everything it needed to preform its function, not one thing more and not one thing less, practically Platonic in its execution. That, to Tolkien, was what distinguished good from evil, the act of creation. While his goblins might make clever devices, they made no beautiful ones, and his greatest evils were not capable of true creation at all, merely twisting what was already made.

Bulhakov
2014-05-18, 06:46 AM
Ever heard of Earthdawn?

It's quite similar to your setting - every few thousand years the magic levels sky rocket and the world is invaded by various "horrors" and the surface is inhabitable, so everyone hides out for a few centuries in dwarven giant underground city-shelters until magic levels fall enough for people to venture back outside. Civilization lives on thanks to the dwarves and they are the predominant race.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LGj6mPdTLDo/UF1ShUvRqtI/AAAAAAAABNk/orcMl229O3Q/s1600/Earthdawn+Throal.jpg

Vedhin
2014-05-18, 07:36 AM
It is obviously time to promote the Chainmail setting. Quoting tvtropes here, the Chainmail dwarves "deposed their king, abandoned faith in their god, and become communist factory workers and miners. The Dwarves would have dressed like something out of a 30s era Soviet propaganda poster and built mecha golems."

They also have firearms.

toapat
2014-05-18, 07:41 AM
I think Tolkien's dwarves would be able to make even a smith's hammer beautiful, masterful in its fulfilment of its function. It would have everything it needed to preform its function, not one thing more and not one thing less, practically Platonic in its execution. That, to Tolkien, was what distinguished good from evil, the act of creation. While his goblins might make clever devices, they made no beautiful ones, and his greatest evils were not capable of true creation at all, merely twisting what was already made.

the way im looking at it is with a suit of fullplate, beyond adding spikes in a few choice locations, there is very little that could be done to decorate them without compromising the function without modern auto-body paint, modern etching tools, or aluminum iodization. Gold Leaf seems like the goto for decorating them for the era but its gaurenteed that it would come off in combat.

Sartharina
2014-05-18, 07:48 AM
It is obviously time to promote the Chainmail setting. Quoting tvtropes here, the Chainmail dwarves "deposed their king, abandoned faith in their god, and become communist factory workers and miners. The Dwarves would have dressed like something out of a 30s era Soviet propaganda poster and built mecha golems."

They also have firearms.... These guys remind me of the Dredge from Guild Wars.

toapat
2014-05-18, 07:50 AM
... These guys remind me of the Dredge from Guild Wars.

probably because they were designed as Communist Dwarves

Blightedmarsh
2014-05-18, 11:09 AM
I have come across earthdawn and its horrors before; but only in the context of shadowrun. I have decided this is not a post apocalyptic world, nor one in the grips of an ongoing Apocalypse, nor one waiting on an impending apocalypse.

Instead the surface of the world has been colonized by the hordes of hell long before mortal life walked here. They think its their world and we are the interlopers...they're wrong. The whole world is the body of an outer god (read: lovecraftian eldritch abomination) and we along with the daemons are mere parasites infesting its skin.

This is not a world in the grips of a daemonic Apocalypse; instead it is a sleeping doom, a nameless god and devourer of worlds. Dwarfs delve deep to escape the ravages of the surface but unknowing they dwell in the belly of the beast.

Coidzor
2014-05-18, 10:25 PM
the fact that dwarves are only really two steps removed from Tolkien at the absolute worst (DF's dorf) its pretty self-evident in the strength of the concept. The concept itself is more pliable then elves or orcs. personally im trying to come up with a name for dwarves when you dont have humans anywhere in the plans (See: Unwritten thesis stating why humans suck in fantasy) for the material im working on slowly.

Personally however, the idea of dwarven miners hunting for legendary ores doesnt actually make sense when you consider the original Tolkien Dwarves were moreso artists then smiths. To them, Smiths would be recognized but not really respected because their work would be primarily designed for function rather then to be beautiful. To us, Gimli is a bearded warrior, to other dwarves, Gimli is a sculptor. To us, his axe is an axe, to him, its a paintbrush or a chisel.

Not sure why you think a warlike race that prides itself on its arms and armor and is the envy of the civilized world for such goods wouldn't respect the people who craft said arms and armor. Especially when they so often have had a need of it.

Sartharina
2014-05-18, 11:06 PM
Not sure why you think a warlike race that prides itself on its arms and armor and is the envy of the civilized world for such goods wouldn't respect the people who craft said arms and armor. Especially when they so often have had a need of it.Tolkein's dwarves weren't a warlike race, and they prided themselves on ALL their craftsmanship, not just arms and armor.

toapat
2014-05-18, 11:50 PM
Not sure why you think a warlike race that prides itself on its arms and armor and is the envy of the civilized world for such goods wouldn't respect the people who craft said arms and armor. Especially when they so often have had a need of it.

i wasnt talking about Vanilla Dwarves, i was talking about Tolkien Dwarves.

to us in the modern day, adding durable and non-detrimental flourishes to fullplate is easy (Electronic Etching, Aluminum Iodization), back then it wasnt as such. a groove carved in a breastplate? Thats a point of failure. Gold Leaf? Wont hold up to any riggors whatsoever. if you want to add enough thickness that engraving into the armor wont be significantly detrimental the weight increases so far as to render the armor too heavy to use. A dwarven Armorsmith would be a wealthy merchant but have virtually no respect among dwarves for his primary craft.

Toolsmiths would probably get more respect because there is so much space to work with that can be decorated. carved handles, engraved heads, the entire grip assembly of a sword.

Blightedmarsh
2014-05-18, 11:51 PM
Aside from the Hobits and the Ents I can't think of a single race in middle earth that isn't warlike. War and battle is equated with heroism and glory. Isn't it telling that Thorin Oakensheild chooses to go by a name earned in battle rather than skill or craft?

Coidzor
2014-05-19, 12:38 AM
i wasnt talking about Vanilla Dwarves, i was talking about Tolkien Dwarves.

So was I. :smalltongue:

You said that Tolkien's Dwarves wouldn't respect armor and weapon smiths because they couldn't make armor and swords and hammers and war masks pretty enough. I was responding to this assertion you made. I find it to be completely out of sync with Tolkien's works and world.

That is to say, I call shenanigans.


Tolkein's dwarves weren't a warlike race, and they prided themselves on ALL their craftsmanship, not just arms and armor.

Read what I was responding to & revisit the context of the statements. :smalltongue:

toapat
2014-05-19, 01:24 AM
So was I. :smalltongue:

You said that Tolkien's Dwarves wouldn't respect armor and weapon smiths because they couldn't make armor and swords and hammers and war masks pretty enough. I was responding to this assertion you made. I find it to be completely out of sync with Tolkien's works and world.

That is to say, I call shenanigans.

And tolkien wrote the LotR books from the perspective of the least interesting characters. Hes not perfect. the matter of fact is, Decorative armor is something we can do now because we have modern equipment and SCIENCE! to do it with. Dwarves? Dont. Yes everyone is warlike. But then again everything that evolved on this planet that isnt one type of ant from south america is warlike.

Coidzor
2014-05-19, 01:34 AM
And tolkien wrote the LotR books from the perspective of the least interesting characters. Hes not perfect. the matter of fact is, Decorative armor is something we can do now because we have modern equipment and SCIENCE! to do it with. Dwarves? Dont. Yes everyone is warlike. But then again everything that evolved on this planet that isnt one type of ant from south america is warlike.

I can't even fathom what you think you're replying to here.

The existence of decorative armor has nothing to do with this, save for your flawed assertion that the only way dwarves could have any respect at all for the craft of making arms and armor would be if it was prettified. Which would require making them into some kind of short, bearded version of flanderized elves of all things. Their valuing of the arts of war is mostly pertinent for reinforcing how your position doesn't jive with Tolkien's Dwarves as we know them.

Mr. Mask
2014-05-19, 01:49 AM
toapat: Umm... to start with, writing from the perspective of a less interesting protagonist than the other main characters, that is a writing technique which few would dispute as bad. It can help to draw a contrast, while helping the reader to relate to the protagonist who isn't a great warrior king. Despite your insistence, I wouldn't say Frodo or Bilbo were uninteresting characters.

You should go to the Real Weapons and Armour discussion thread. There has been decorative armour since ancient times. From feathered helmets to engraved armour and swords, to elegantly carved pommels and emblazoned coats of arms. This didn't require modern day equipment or, "science," - which doesn't mean glass test tubes and rockets, but the process of experimentation and learning, something that has been around almost forever - but for armourers to associate their craft with art. The modern day is actually where you get problems in finding any artistic weaponry or armour, so I'm not sure what brought you to the idea this is a new concept.

For peaceful creatures, look up the Indus Valley Civilization. There are also a lot of animals I wouldn't classify as warlike, so I'm not sure why you isolate the case of a certain species of South American ant.

As for lack of respect for weapon and armour smiths, I have trouble thinking of an old society that didn't hold them in some regard--whether their tools were pretty or not. Not all weapon and armour smiths were committed armourers, some were normal blacksmiths until war came about. Even common smiths would have a respectable place in the community.