PDA

View Full Version : Tolkien-esque magic levels?



GoblinGilmartin
2015-03-02, 04:30 AM
Traditional D&D has always been very high magic. People can throw fireballs several times per day, toss out a few magic missiles, a charm person, and still have time before breakfast. I love D&D wizards, but I feel we're kind of spoiled sometimes in that regard.

In LOTR, magic, while very prevalent and effective, isn't very potent. Galdalf barely does anything truly resembling outright spellcasting, his area of expertise is mostly interacting with various preexisting magics. magically locked doors, getting messages to the eagles, countering Saruman's powers in a one-on-one fight. Galadriel, one of the most powerful magic users, her abilities are mainly used for scrying, communicating telepathically, reading minds, and most of her power comes from the ring of water. Basically, not what I would consider 20th level Magic users. Although I suppose you could go with "They're under an oath or some kind of general lack of aggression that keeps the power levels down". Saruman causes an avalanche once. That was pretty cool.

In Middle Earth, you've got dudes who can turn into bears relatively at will, animals that seem...smarter, and better able to communicate, if not magical. The trees freaking talk to each other, as well as move when no one is looking...

Magic is "weaker" than in D&D, and yet much more ingrained in the fabric of the world, without being taken advantage of. How would one translate this into an RPG experience? I'd love to play a game at a power level close to this.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-02, 04:57 AM
I tend to play low magic campaigns. Though largely along the "spellcasters are overpowered" justification, rather than an actual modification on how magic works.

Personally I'd like to play that kind of game too. It would definitely lean more towards martial characters than mages, as mages would be notably handicapped by the subtly of the magic.

Comet
2015-03-02, 05:28 AM
D&D is very much a genre of its own, where pragmatic strikeforces venture out to either collect riches or fight monsters in a world where magic is an omnipresent and well researched tool.

I'd imagine the One Ring Roleplaying Game is probably pretty Tolkien-esque. I haven't played it, though.

Other games are different in their own way. HeroQuest and Runequest, for example, have a standard world where everyone knows magic but that magic isn't very powerful until you devote your life to a temple. A farmer might know how to whistle a tune that makes his plow slightly keener while an Orlanthi stormlord might know how to fly with the wind, rend hills in half and enthrall an entire town with a single sentence.

GoblinGilmartin
2015-03-02, 05:41 AM
found this on TVTropes.


Somewhat explained in the book and in the Silmarillion. The last time the Valar (gods) fought directly against a powerful evil, Middle-Earth was literally broken and much of the land was drowned beneath the sea. As a Maia (minor god), Gandalf vowed to not use his magical powers to directly interfere in Middle-Earth, letting the inhabitants of Middle-Earth decide their own fate. If you watch carefully, the only times Gandalf uses his powers are to fight another Maia or some force that has magic of its own (Saruman, Balrog, Nazgul), or to do some menial task that doesn't really affect anybody else (light source, fire). Gandalf is meant to be The Obi-Wan, not a Story-Breaker Power.

and I found this somewhere else. slightly out of context


Likewise, Saruman is able to use his closeness to nature to affect the weather, but as he forgets his bond with nature, nature actually turns on him. Treebeard is that much more incensed by Saruman’s destruction because he is a wizard and should know better how to treat the nature around him.

Radagast is the most perfect of Istari in regard to demonstrating closeness to and power in channeling nature for his benefit (though he is less perfect in demonstrating leadership over mankind and academic types of wisdom—leading to his failure).

Could a better way to define something like this be to measure it in how close a wizard is to a particular aspect of nature? Although that would end up resembling D&D cleric magic quite a bit...but the Maiar are technically angels....hmmm...

Although...Another way to see LOTR "Wizards" is that they really aren't meant to be big displays of power. They're meant to be guides of the people, Wise Ones.

chainer1216
2015-03-02, 05:49 AM
There ARE lord of the rings PnP RPGs, I'm currently playing a dwarven craft master/wizard in one.

And with that experience I can tell you at yes, generally the magic is less reality breaking, its not without its flash or potency. My relatively low "level" character can throw lightning bolts around like nothing or easily destroy a castle wall.

Also: it should be noted that gandalf wasn't allowed to directly interfere with events, rather he had to guide people and give them hope. That's how all the colored wizards are supposed to work.

Satinavian
2015-03-02, 05:55 AM
The "wizards" are not traditional wizards and more like halfgods. But Tolkiens lore has a lot of other magic users. Ok, most of them are elves or dwarves, but there are still some humans.

Magic is art and lore that is in principle accessable by normal people. And it is not consideered anything special, not in principle different to any other kind of mastery in arts or lore. The magical property is only inferred by modern readers who know better, what naturally should be possible and what should be impossible and thus has to be unnatural.

GoblinGilmartin
2015-03-02, 06:21 AM
There ARE lord of the rings PnP RPGs, I'm currently playing a dwarven craft master/wizard in one.

And with that experience I can tell you at yes, generally the magic is less reality breaking, its not without its flash or potency. My relatively low "level" character can throw lightning bolts around like nothing or easily destroy a castle wall.

Also: it should be noted that gandalf wasn't allowed to directly interfere with events, rather he had to guide people and give them hope. That's how all the colored wizards are supposed to work.

you mean like the one that classifies Gandalf as a Bard?

http://i.imgur.com/mAmgUnC.png

chainer1216
2015-03-02, 07:02 AM
We use a system called LotR CODA I guess, its 2d6 system. Its based more on the movies but our groups resident LotR lore nerd loves the system.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-02, 07:15 AM
you mean like the one that classifies Gandalf as a Bard?

http://i.imgur.com/mAmgUnC.png

Drop the music and the D&D bard class isn't that bad a fit for Gandalf (decent if not brilliant combat abilities, knowledge of a lot of topics, lots of social skills, and a little bit of magic), even though 'solar with most of it's strength removed is a far better fit.

Xerlith
2015-03-02, 07:41 AM
Drop the music and the D&D bard class isn't that bad a fit for Gandalf (decent if not brilliant combat abilities, knowledge of a lot of topics, lots of social skills, and a little bit of magic), even though 'solar with most of it's strength removed is a far better fit.

I actually find it easiest to display ALL of Gandalf's abilities as a Bard. High Charisma? Check. Inspiring courage in hearts of men? Check. Broad, but approximate knowledge? Check. Minor healing? Check.

I'd peg him as a Divine Bard with Perform (Oratory) and Healing Hymn ACF. He's basically a 10-12ish level Bard (yes, that high).

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-02, 09:10 AM
I actually find it easiest to display ALL of Gandalf's abilities as a Bard. High Charisma? Check. Inspiring courage in hearts of men? Check. Broad, but approximate knowledge? Check. Minor healing? Check.

I'd peg him as a Divine Bard with Perform (Oratory) and Healing Hymn ACF. He's basically a 10-12ish level Bard (yes, that high).

I meant lore wise, game wise I'd stat him as:

Aasimar divine bard 10
STR 12, DEX 13, CON 10, INT 14, WIS 18, CHA 16

Because he really doesn't need anything else. Aasimar makes him an outsider, bard gives him all his skills, and his fire powers come from a custom ring he bought with his WBL. His level might be a bit high, I personally prefer to peg him as about level 8, but that assumes Aragorn is Ranger 1/Paladin 3 (Legolas is Archer Ranger 4, Gimli is fighter 4, Boromir is Fighter 4 who dumped Wisdom, Frodo is rogue 1, Merry is rogue 1, Pippin is rogue 1, and Sam is fighter 1. All have levelled up at least once by Among Hen is finished, and Sam levels up again after he manages to defeat Shelob by pure luck, possibly multiclassing to paladin), which let's him accomplish his deeds while still wanting to run from hordes.

aspekt
2015-03-02, 11:07 AM
Magic is art and lore that is in principle accessable by normal people.

This.

Especially if you read his published letters and the edited collection put together by Christopher Tolkien. You very quickly realize that Tolkien is not using magic in the same sense that the majority of fantasy literature does.

Magic is very much about art and the work of art. You never find, to my knowledge, any act of artistic creation in ME tied to spells or incantations to make it magical. Instead an item is an item of power because it is an act of high creation in imitation of the Creator Illuvatar.

The perversion of this kind of magic can be seen first in Morgoth's attempts to bind Ea, the created order, to his own will at the dawn of creation. It is also seen in particular in the tragedy of the Silmarils. Jewels of extraordinary beauty that their maker grew too covetous of and considered them to be his own. This craving to possess in turn always possesses one. And of course the most famous is the Rings of power and the One Ring.

This can be seen in reverse in the sundering of ME that was mentioned earlier by the OP. The Valar do not themselves sunder the world. It is as the fleets of Numenor in hubris set sail for the West and the home of the Valar that Manwe realizes these things are happening in part because of their failed attempts to govern and guide the races of Arda. Manwe then casts down his crown and beseeches Illuvatar the Creator to intervene. Illuvatar then strikes the fleet and the island of Numenor and forever separates the home of the Valar from Middle Earth.

It is the surrender of the Valar and Maia to the real source of ME and their refusal to claim creation as their own that allows for the intervention of Illuvatar.

As for ME games I have heard that MERP makes great use of the source material and that their maps are some of the best ones made.

However, because it is a game it's low magic approach still allows for supermatural healing regularly and the like.

You might seriously consider looking at the FUDGE ruleset. It is very meta in it's mechanics which means you have the creative freedom to make the game you want for whatever setting you want. In fact the only published setting for FUDGE I know of is a very low magic medieval one based on the Deryni novels by Katherine Kurtz.

Spore
2015-03-02, 12:19 PM
I feel that D&D 3.5 in a low magic setting ranging in e6 levels comes pretty close in what you want.

Kol Korran
2015-03-02, 12:47 PM
I too think that E6 is probably what you are looking for. But I'll add another suggestion. In PF, a new book called "Spheres of Power" was just recently published. I haven't read it, just reviews and excerpts, but from the look of it it focuses casters on narrower and more thematic casting, than the D&D casters do. This both lowers the power level, but also gives said caster a more defined themed focus.

I suggest that if you are using D&D, check out both E6 and Spheres of Power as inspirations to your build of your system.

Another possibility is to use FATE core. I magic can be expressed through stunts to a certain theme. You may want to look into the Toolkit to check some fantasy Extras, that may appeal to you. Shouldn't be difficult to create a low magic system with the FATE rules, if you're willing to work under the system's basic assumptions.

Good Luck!

ReaderAt2046
2015-03-02, 12:57 PM
Traditional D&D has always been very high magic. People can throw fireballs several times per day, toss out a few magic missiles, a charm person, and still have time before breakfast. I love D&D wizards, but I feel we're kind of spoiled sometimes in that regard.

In LOTR, magic, while very prevalent and effective, isn't very potent. Galdalf barely does anything truly resembling outright spellcasting, his area of expertise is mostly interacting with various preexisting magics. magically locked doors, getting messages to the eagles, countering Saruman's powers in a one-on-one fight. Galadriel, one of the most powerful magic users, her abilities are mainly used for scrying, communicating telepathically, reading minds, and most of her power comes from the ring of water. Basically, not what I would consider 20th level Magic users. Although I suppose you could go with "They're under an oath or some kind of general lack of aggression that keeps the power levels down". Saruman causes an avalanche once. That was pretty cool.

In Middle Earth, you've got dudes who can turn into bears relatively at will, animals that seem...smarter, and better able to communicate, if not magical. The trees freaking talk to each other, as well as move when no one is looking...

Magic is "weaker" than in D&D, and yet much more ingrained in the fabric of the world, without being taken advantage of. How would one translate this into an RPG experience? I'd love to play a game at a power level close to this.

Problem is, Tolkien wrote what is known as "soft magic" (basically, the properties and limits of magic are never made clear), which is great for a story but really bad for an RPG. Basically the only way to reproduce this feel in an RPG is to have magic be a background thing only. There are wizards in the world that do things with magic, but the PCs can never be wizards.

endur
2015-03-02, 02:11 PM
As others in this thread have stated, keeping the character levels low and restricting the classes is probably the best way to do this. i.e. e6 or maybe have the only pure casters be bards or have there be role-playing consequences to usage of flashy magic.

Maglubiyet
2015-03-02, 02:30 PM
The Game of Thrones/Song of Ice and Fire world also has a lot of magic, but mostly it's not accessible to the "players". They've got zombies, skeletons, dragons, golems, vampires (maybe), shapeshifters, skinchangers, etc.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-02, 02:51 PM
This.

Especially if you read his published letters and the edited collection put together by Christopher Tolkien. You very quickly realize that Tolkien is not using magic in the same sense that the majority of fantasy literature does.

Magic is very much about art and the work of art. You never find, to my knowledge, any act of artistic creation in ME tied to spells or incantations to make it magical. Instead an item is an item of power because it is an act of high creation in imitation of the Creator Illuvatar.

The perversion of this kind of magic can be seen first in Morgoth's attempts to bind Ea, the created order, to his own will at the dawn of creation. It is also seen in particular in the tragedy of the Silmarils. Jewels of extraordinary beauty that their maker grew too covetous of and considered them to be his own. This craving to possess in turn always possesses one. And of course the most famous is the Rings of power and the One Ring. "Evil cannot create, only corrupt" Gandalf says things like this often.

This view on magic likely has its origins in Tolkien's Catholicism. To skirt the idea of magic as wholly evil, he's create a dichotomy. One where good magic is an act of divine creation, then another evil magic is the corruption of existing things. This based on the Catholic metaphysical concept of evil as a privation, rather than a thing in itself.

Remember, there are only five known Wizards in all of Middle Earth. And they are more akin to celestials than simple spell casters.

So given that magic is creative the homebrew for a Tolkienesque would limit spellcasters to Bards and Artificiers, and maybe pact magic Warlocks for the shady side. And it would be heavily based on magical loot.

veti
2015-03-02, 02:54 PM
I think it's a humungous mistake to try to model Middle-earth using D&D rules. It's just not a good fit. Almost any other system of handling magic, including Call of Cthulhu, would work better.

If you try, it leads you into such silliness as the once-popular theory that everyone in the Fellowship is a maximum of about 5th level.

But there are a lot of other game systems out there. To those already mentioned, I'd like to add Fantasy Hero, a system where you can design magic to be as powerful or low-key as you like. (As an example, I once played in a game where every PC was allowed one magical power, which they picked during character generation - mine was Speak With Horses. Otherwise a completely mundane character.)

Flickerdart
2015-03-02, 02:59 PM
The "minor magic" feel is easy in 3.5 - remove all casting, and make a bunch of low-power Incantations (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/magic/incantations.htm). Spellcasters automatically gain knowledge of these as they level (and might be able to learn the ritual for a particular door just by examining it), while non-casters can learn some of the rituals the old-fashioned way if they have the class skills necessary to cast them.

Yes, this is going to be a lot of work for the DM, but it was always going to be - there's no way to have a character whose main use is to interact with the world's lore without having ludicrous tomes worth of it.

Beta Centauri
2015-03-02, 03:08 PM
The magic in Lord of the Rings is not balanced with the mundanity. If magic is in play, you'd better me magical too, or luck out by fitting into a prophecy or hitting some weakness. If you're magic, you can take on a balrog or shapeshift and hold your own against an army.

The only way I see to balance that and make it playable is to restrict it heavily. Gandalf held back his most serious magic until he was desperate. In The Lord of the Rings, this was apparently because he would have wound up signalling Sauron. In The Hobbit, it seemed to be because he didn't really mean to get involved, and he used just enough magic to keep the group (and himself) alive.

Tom Bombadil kept to himself, as did Beorn, Galadriel and the Ents. Magic tended not to walk abroad, or was very secret when it did. I don't see how you'd make a compelling player character like that. Some people might enjoy that, but others might wonder why they can't use their powers, and dislike or distrust any in-game reasons imposed on them.

NPCs, though, are cooperative. If they leave the group, or stay behind, it's somewhat understandable, especially since most people don't want an NPC overshadowing them anyway.

So, if you're playing D&D, just have everyone use relatively low-level martial characters, and pit them against natural creatures, and non-spellcasters. Fights with magical foes should not be direct conflicts, but puzzles solved by applying a key to a lock, and getting lucky. You can't fight the ringwraiths, but fire and some elvish words can ward them off... for now.

Premier
2015-03-02, 03:25 PM
OP: You might want to take a look at Balrogs & Bagginses, which is a "Tolkien tweak" for OD&D. Most of the stuff is about character creation, but it might give you some ideas.

Knaight
2015-03-02, 03:32 PM
Magic is "weaker" than in D&D, and yet much more ingrained in the fabric of the world, without being taken advantage of. How would one translate this into an RPG experience? I'd love to play a game at a power level close to this.

There are a lot of ways to do it. The big thing is that magic is usually in one of two places in LoTR. Either it comes from people practicing an art (usually a craft) extremely well, or it is just there in the world. There are vastly more magical items than magic users, magic places are downright commonplace, and the magic involved is often subtle but can be quite powerful.

So, pick a system which does this. You want fairly little overt magic that people can directly employ, more magical equipment, and more magical places. You likely want to center some of the magical places around the beings that live there, with the clear implication being that they've warped the place simply by their presence. If you just want an RPG in that veneer, there are tons of options. If you want something specifically Tolkenien, I recommend Burning Wheel.

aspekt
2015-03-02, 04:33 PM
As an aside has anyone played/read both The One Ring and the LotR CODA games?

I'm curious as to how they play out and differences/similarities.

CarpeGuitarrem
2015-03-02, 04:42 PM
The One Ring was a great read, I wish I had a group to play it with. But Burning Wheel is most definitely a game I recommend for Tolkienesque play--it is saturated Tolkien through and through, with other influences like Earthsea. The way that the game does Elven and Dwarven magic is just spot-on: subtle but potent, and very magical-feeling.

Gandalf would be a human with Faith magic, most likely.

Urpriest
2015-03-02, 04:46 PM
The One Ring was a great read, I wish I had a group to play it with. But Burning Wheel is most definitely a game I recommend for Tolkienesque play--it is saturated Tolkien through and through, with other influences like Earthsea. The way that the game does Elven and Dwarven magic is just spot-on: subtle but potent, and very magical-feeling.

Gandalf would be a human with Faith magic, most likely.

Was coming to this thread just to say this.

Amaril
2015-03-02, 05:00 PM
Having looked into The One Ring RPG, it looks to me to do a really good job of recreating Tolkien's atmosphere, and just to be a great game in general. Unfortunately, I don't have anyone to actually play it with either.

Maybe we should get a group together on here, now I think about it...

Raimun
2015-03-02, 10:05 PM
Tolkien-esque? You mean Jackson-esque? (Not that there's anything wrong with that)

Have you read the books? Gandalf used spells of fire (and lightning) many times in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. They were pretty flashy. And blasty.

Of course, he did all that other stuff too that the OP mentioned and it was those things that ultimately saved the day. However, the notion that LotR-magic is only "subtle" is the invention of Peter Jackson and co. They removed blasty fire spells that Gandalf was known for.

It's just that magic is not well defined in the books. Gandalf is pretty much never the view point character and he never really tells even some hard and fast rules of how or why his magic works or what limits there are. The other characters don't understand any of this either... or if they do, (like Galadriel or Saruman) they are not telling either.

The magic in Arda can get pretty insane but it's not like even the mightiest hobbits (Frodo and co.) were able to see most of it, let alone understand it. The mightiest feats happened off-page and were only alluded in flash backs (like Gandalf vs. the Ringwraiths at Weathertop. Yes. The other fight at Weathertop. Look it up.) or happened in Silmarillion.

Still, there certainly were blasting spells that were fired.

GoblinGilmartin
2015-03-03, 01:39 AM
Tolkien-esque? You mean Jackson-esque? (Not that there's anything wrong with that)

Have you read the books? Gandalf used spells of fire (and lightning) many times in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. They were pretty flashy. And blasty.

Of course, he did all that other stuff too that the OP mentioned and it was those things that ultimately saved the day. However, the notion that LotR-magic is only "subtle" is the invention of Peter Jackson and co. They removed blasty fire spells that Gandalf was known for.

It's just that magic is not well defined in the books. Gandalf is pretty much never the view point character and he never really tells even some hard and fast rules of how or why his magic works or what limits there are. The other characters don't understand any of this either... or if they do, (like Galadriel or Saruman) they are not telling either.

The magic in Arda can get pretty insane but it's not like even the mightiest hobbits (Frodo and co.) were able to see most of it, let alone understand it. The mightiest feats happened off-page and were only alluded in flash backs (like Gandalf vs. the Ringwraiths at Weathertop. Yes. The other fight at Weathertop. Look it up.) or happened in Silmarillion.

Still, there certainly were blasting spells that were fired.

You got me. My main exposure is through the LOTR movies and the Hobbit novel. I know Gandalf CAN do that stuff, but he usually only uses it against someone else on an equal play level...

ReaderAt2046
2015-03-03, 08:17 AM
"Evil cannot create, only corrupt" Gandalf says things like this often.

This view on magic likely has its origins in Tolkien's Catholicism. To skirt the idea of magic as wholly evil, he's create a dichotomy. One where good magic is an act of divine creation, then another evil magic is the corruption of existing things. This based on the Catholic metaphysical concept of evil as a privation, rather than a thing in itself.

Remember, there are only five known Wizards in all of Middle Earth. And they are more akin to celestials than simple spell casters.

So given that magic is creative the homebrew for a Tolkienesque would limit spellcasters to Bards and Artificiers, and maybe pact magic Warlocks for the shady side. And it would be heavily based on magical loot.

In fact, they literally are Celestials. The Wizards were Maiar (minor angels, essentially) who were given physical form to guide the mortals and to help protect against the most overpowered supernatural evils (Balrogs and the like).

Jayabalard
2015-03-03, 09:18 AM
Traditional D&D has always been very high magic. People can throw fireballs several times per day, toss out a few magic missiles, a charm person, and still have time before breakfast.That was less true in early D&D ... getting to name level (~9th) was a big deal, and replacing those spells was far from insignificant.


In LOTR, magic, while very prevalent and effective, isn't very potent. Galdalf barely does anything truly resembling outright spellcasting, his area of expertise is mostly interacting with various preexisting magics. magically locked doors, getting messages to the eagles, countering Saruman's powers in a one-on-one fight.He's under constraints not to use most of his power on middle earth ... as were all of the Maiar that didn't follow Melkor (eg the Balrog and similar).


Galadriel, one of the most powerful magic users, her abilities are mainly used for scrying, communicating telepathically, reading minds, and most of her power comes from the ring of water. After Gandalf was killed in Moria he "found healing" in Lothlórien.


Magic is "weaker" than in D&D, and yet much more ingrained in the fabric of the world, without being taken advantage of. How would one translate this into an RPG experience? I'd love to play a game at a power level close to this.MERP (middle earth Role playing) doesn't generally handle magic very well. In Tolkein's writings, magic is rare and subtle... in MERP anyone can use it.

The magic system in GURPS is very flexible, and since I'm generally a fan of that system, I'd think it could fit pretty well. If you want an example (http://www.thecabal.org/gurps/rareitems/memagic.html) of someone who's put some thought into it, they're not hard to find.

Necroticplague
2015-03-03, 09:43 AM
The problem with trying to magic work like it appears to in LoTR is that it requires certain actions that don't make a whole ton of sense. In LoTR, magic is freaking everywhere, but very few people are using it. This requires that everyone be either so involved with kind of politics tying their hands or too busy/unable to ever bother studying magic. If magic is incredibly common, then it makes sense that people would actually try and find some way to use it frequently. So having common magic not get turned into all kinds of magic devices only really makes sense if such objects are in the middle of being developed and the key word is 'not yet', and thus doesn't make sense unless the setting is in a very specific time period. It's like if us humans knew that spinning magnets made electricity, but didn't bother to come up with some kind of generator. Sure, the process wasn't instantaneous, but it was at least underway.

Beta Centauri
2015-03-03, 10:29 AM
The problem with trying to magic work like it appears to in LoTR is that it requires certain actions that don't make a whole ton of sense. In LoTR, magic is freaking everywhere, but very few people are using it. This requires that everyone be either so involved with kind of politics tying their hands or too busy/unable to ever bother studying magic. If magic is incredibly common, then it makes sense that people would actually try and find some way to use it frequently. So having common magic not get turned into all kinds of magic devices only really makes sense if such objects are in the middle of being developed and the key word is 'not yet', and thus doesn't make sense unless the setting is in a very specific time period. It's like if us humans knew that spinning magnets made electricity, but didn't bother to come up with some kind of generator. Sure, the process wasn't instantaneous, but it was at least underway. That's right: it doesn't make sense. That's because it's not real. At best, it makes an interesting story, which gives it an advantage over many real stories.

Then again, when asked about their magic cloaks, the elves don't seem to understand. They don't know if the cloaks are "magic," but they are made to the highest degree of quality by elvish craftspeople. The shards of Narsil (at least in the movies) are still sharp, after thousands of years. It's clear that some of what is "magic" is simply normal equipment made to an incredibly high quality.

Tolkien was more than a little anti-progress. The main villains in his stories are those who forge with the heat of volcanoes and cut down forests to make engines of destruction. How he thinks all the white stone for Minas Tirith was quarried and transported without some fairly major ecological damage, I'm not sure.

Anyway, what I quoted reinforces my point: players can't have magic in a Tolkien-esque game, unless they agree to constrain themselves or be constrained for setting reasons. I've actually seen GMs do this with D&D to keep spellcasters under control, setting large risk on the use of the more powerful spells to limit their use. Not the best approach, I feel, but it can be done if the players are bought in.

Necroticplague
2015-03-03, 02:43 PM
That's right: it doesn't make sense. That's because it's not real. At best, it makes an interesting story, which gives it an advantage over many real stories.The fact something isn't real doesn't mean it can't make sense. Tolkien failed to do it, but plenty of other fantasy can, and some does. All you need for something to make sense is a consistent structure. Doesn't matter if the structure is very different from the real world's.

Knaight
2015-03-03, 03:01 PM
The fact something isn't real doesn't mean it can't make sense. Tolkien failed to do it, but plenty of other fantasy can, and some does. All you need for something to make sense is a consistent structure. Doesn't matter if the structure is very different from the real world's.

Tolkien's setting makes plenty of sense. Magic is fading, it's always been something that emerges from great works for most people, and the exceptions generally are consistently extremely old and from a more magical time.

veti
2015-03-03, 03:18 PM
Anyway, what I quoted reinforces my point: players can't have magic in a Tolkien-esque game, unless they agree to constrain themselves or be constrained for setting reasons. I've actually seen GMs do this with D&D to keep spellcasters under control, setting large risk on the use of the more powerful spells to limit their use. Not the best approach, I feel, but it can be done if the players are bought in.

You don't need "risk" - that way lies the insanity of 1e psionics, where literally every time you used an ability, the DM was supposed to roll a random chance of your brain being eaten by an ethereal skeletal platypus. If you played it by the book, it would be unheard of for a psionic character to survive to 2nd level.

What you need is "cost". In D&D terms, you could attach a non-trivial XP cost - like crafting an item - to every spell casting. That'd slow 'em down. Actually "crafting an item" should quite simply take a very, very long time (there's a reason it's mostly done by elves), with no shortcuts.

Knaight
2015-03-03, 03:23 PM
You don't need "risk" - that way lies the insanity of 1e psionics, where literally every time you used an ability, the DM was supposed to roll a random chance of your brain being eaten by an ethereal skeletal platypus. If you played it by the book, it would be unheard of for a psionic character to survive to 2nd level.

What you need is "cost". In D&D terms, you could attach a non-trivial XP cost - like crafting an item - to every spell casting. That'd slow 'em down. Actually "crafting an item" should quite simply take a very, very long time (there's a reason it's mostly done by elves), with no shortcuts.

Both risk and cost have been well implemented by other systems, both work. The trick is keeping things like "your brain being eaten by an ethereal skeletal platypus" out of the risk rules (unless magic is supposed to be near suicidal, Warhammer 40K style).

obryn
2015-03-03, 03:25 PM
Tolkien-esque? You mean Jackson-esque? (Not that there's anything wrong with that)

Have you read the books? Gandalf used spells of fire (and lightning) many times in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. They were pretty flashy. And blasty.
His focus on fire leads to a pretty common belief that Gandalf is mostly just using the ring Narya's powers. :smallsmile: However, he also reads minds and whatnot.

There's also thought that magic in Tolkien ties in with heritage, since most magic dudes are either Elves or Maiar; or else invested into items, mostly created by elves, maiar, and sometimes dwarves. However, the (human) Mouth of Sauron and Witch-King of Angmar are described as a "sorcerors" ... and I don't think we know what that's supposed to mean. And there's tons of 'magical' prophecy/visions as well, alongside talking animals and whatnot.

I would disagree with the "many times" comment. He does some tricky stuff, but he's hardly flinging spells left and right like a D&D Wizard.

Talakeal
2015-03-03, 03:30 PM
Have you read the books? Gandalf used spells of fire (and lightning) many times in both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings. They were pretty flashy. And blasty.



Question: Does Gandalf ever explicitly use lightning?

I had a bet with someone in my gaming group that he did, but skimming through the books I could never actually find any direct instances. Many times it compared his magic to lightning or thunder, but it never actually said that it was electric in nature and that may have just been a metaphor.

Beta Centauri
2015-03-03, 03:49 PM
The fact something isn't real doesn't mean it can't make sense. Tolkien failed to do it, but plenty of other fantasy can, and some does. No it doesn't. It just meets your particular standard for sense. Tolkien meets others' standard for sense, and they've written at length about how and why. Same with Star Wars fans, and Star Trek fans.


All you need for something to make sense is a consistent structure. Doesn't matter if the structure is very different from the real world's. No, all you need is people who enjoy the story enough not to care, or to care so much that they fill in the inconsistencies themselves. It's happening right in this thread: people are willingly devoting their not-insignificant creative powers to cover for the work they love. They're not right, they're not going to convince you, they're just buying in, because they enjoy it. I wanted to watch Star Trek, despite its appalling science, and it was trivially easy for me to ignore the inconsistent technobabble and go along with the story the technobabble was trying to enable. Or I could have demanded that they stay 100% consistent with everything that had come before, even the whackdoodle episodes of the original series, and never had any Star Trek at all.

All it takes is buy in. Give it a try.

veti
2015-03-03, 04:33 PM
Question: Does Gandalf ever explicitly use lightning?

I had a bet with someone in my gaming group that he did, but skimming through the books I could never actually find any direct instances. Many times it compared his magic to lightning or thunder, but it never actually said that it was electric in nature and that may have just been a metaphor.

I think what he does in chapter 4 of The Hobbit is explicit enough. He recounts the scene to Beorn later, but I don't have access to the book at the moment to see whether he actually claims to have used "a flash of lightning".

obryn
2015-03-03, 04:41 PM
Question: Does Gandalf ever explicitly use lightning?

I had a bet with someone in my gaming group that he did, but skimming through the books I could never actually find any direct instances. Many times it compared his magic to lightning or thunder, but it never actually said that it was electric in nature and that may have just been a metaphor.
Here's what the Tolkien wikia (http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_in_Tolkien_Mythology) has to say...


"Actual" magic as seen in fairy tales is rare outside of The Hobbit, which was written in a more childish style than the other stories concerned. In The Hobbit there are speaking purses, magical fireworks, shapeshifting, and speaking animals. While this lighthanded use of magic occurs less in the other works, in The Fellowship of the Ring, Tolkien still writes about how Gandalf uses spells to conjure fire, create light, read Frodo's "mind and memory" after his fall at Rivendell's Ford, add "a few touches" of his own to Elrond's calling of the river through causing some of the waves to take the form of great white horses with shining white riders and boulders to roll and grind, open the doors to Moria, "bless" Sam's pony Bill with "words of guard and guiding", hold the door in the Chamber of Mazarbul (and how the Balrog tries to open the door with its own counterspell) and break the Bridge of Khazad-dûm. Gandalf also says to Frodo that "it has not been hard for me to read your mind and memory", and both Aragorn and Glorfindel are able to tell the severity of Frodo's injury and to a certain degree heal it by mere touch. He also blessed and put "a kind word" on Barliman Butterbur's ale, to provide the kindly man some comfort in the hard times that had befallen Bree before Aragorn reordered his realm.

In The Two Towers, Gandalf first uses magic to disarm Aragorn and Gimli and destroy an arrow Legolas fired at him, and later, in the book, after causing "a flash as if lightning had cloven the roof" to knock Wormtongue to the floor, briefly unconscious at Rohan, he uses his voice to prevent Saruman from retreating to Orthanc, break Saruman's staff, and dismiss him after doing so, setting firmly his supremacy in power and status in the order of the Five Wizards. Gandalf also tells Gimli that Saruman could "look like me in your eyes, if it suited his purpose with you", implying that Saruman can create illusions with his magic.

In The Return of the King, Gandalf uses "a shaft of white light" to drive off the Nazgûl assaulting him. The Witch-king of Angmar is known as a dark sorcerer (and hence many failed to destroy him; even Gandalf the White was wary of his power and was unsure if he could prevail against him), using something resembling a "blasting spell" to force open the gates of Minas Tirith combined with the force of a battering ram.
So no actual lightning, though a lot of stuff like lightning.

Beta Centauri
2015-03-03, 04:51 PM
You don't need "risk" - that way lies the insanity of 1e psionics, where literally every time you used an ability, the DM was supposed to roll a random chance of your brain being eaten by an ethereal skeletal platypus. If you played it by the book, it would be unheard of for a psionic character to survive to 2nd level.

What you need is "cost". In D&D terms, you could attach a non-trivial XP cost - like crafting an item - to every spell casting. That'd slow 'em down. Actually "crafting an item" should quite simply take a very, very long time (there's a reason it's mostly done by elves), with no shortcuts. No, I meant risk. And I definitely didn't mean cost. XP costs are an awful mechanic.

If there was such a risk in 1e psionics, then I don't see why that would lead to a psionic character not surviving to 2nd level. Such a risk would clearly mean that psionics would only be used in emergencies, in which intolerable failure or death was going to occur anyway. And look: those are exactly the circumstances in which Gandalf uses magic. I don't know what risk he feared in The Hobbit (none, really, it's just that the book wasn't about him), but in The Lord of the Rings he makes it clear that he can't be flashy or he'll attract attention to the Fellowship. That's an even more extreme risk than personal death (which he can come back from anyway), and caused him to get really flashy only when facing the Balrog. He did somewhat more after he was separated from Frodo, and was arguably trying deliberately to draw Sauron's attention, but he also spent a lot of time just out of the picture.

In other words, he's an NPC.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-03, 05:11 PM
I think it's a humungous mistake to try to model Middle-earth using D&D rules. It's just not a good fit. Almost any other system of handling magic, including Call of Cthulhu, would work better.

If you try, it leads you into such silliness as the once-popular theory that everyone in the Fellowship is a maximum of about 5th level.

Bit late, but what makes you think that any of the Fellowship apart from Gandalf are higher than 5th level when leaving Rivendell. I can accept them ending the trilogy somewhere in the 6-8 range, but none of them actually do anything that would require a level higher than 5. In my mind their power levels are about the following:

-Rivendell: hobbits level 2, Gandalf level 10, everyone else level 4.
-After Moria: hobbits level 3, everyone else level 5.
-After Amon Hen: Frodo + Sam level 4, Merry + Pippin level 3, Aragorn + Legeolas + Gimli level 6.
-After Helm's Deep: Aragorn + Legolas +Gimli level 7.
-After Shelob: Sam level 5.
-After the story ends: Frodo level 5, Sam level 5, Aragorn level 8, Legolas level 8, Gimli level 8, Merry level 4, Pippin level 4.

However, I subscribe to the theory that they can all be modelled below level 5, and using any system other than D&D would rate their advancement more slowly.

obryn
2015-03-03, 09:34 PM
Bit late, but what makes you think that any of the Fellowship apart from Gandalf are higher than 5th level when leaving Rivendell. I can accept them ending the trilogy somewhere in the 6-8 range, but none of them actually do anything that would require a level higher than 5. In my mind their power levels are about the following:

-Rivendell: hobbits level 2, Gandalf level 10, everyone else level 4.
-After Moria: hobbits level 3, everyone else level 5.
-After Amon Hen: Frodo + Sam level 4, Merry + Pippin level 3, Aragorn + Legeolas + Gimli level 6.
-After Helm's Deep: Aragorn + Legolas +Gimli level 7.
-After Shelob: Sam level 5.
-After the story ends: Frodo level 5, Sam level 5, Aragorn level 8, Legolas level 8, Gimli level 8, Merry level 4, Pippin level 4.

However, I subscribe to the theory that they can all be modelled below level 5, and using any system other than D&D would rate their advancement more slowly.
This is as nonsensical as the first time I came across it.

Let's leave aside the inherent silliness of trying to model any of the characters in D&D terms...

Keep in mind that, at the time of LotR, Aragorn was one of the finest swordsmen of the Third Age and had already campaigned extensively, including captaincy against Umbar. What's more, he fends off five Ringwraiths - the mightiest of Sauron's minions - single-handedly. The dude is one of the baddest badasses in Arda, and stands shoulder to shoulder with actual immortals like the badasses Elrond, Galadriel, and Thranduil. He's said to be up there with the ancient Numenorians, wields the most legendary sword of the age, and is the heir to the entire continent, just about

You can argue and nitpick, but if that's a low level D&D character, the level system is utterly bankrupt.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-03, 09:37 PM
In fact, they literally are Celestials. The Wizards were Maiar (minor angels, essentially) who were given physical form to guide the mortals and to help protect against the most overpowered supernatural evils (Balrogs and the like). Correction. Balrogs are Maiar, just corrupted by Melkor.

Flickerdart
2015-03-03, 10:10 PM
You can argue and nitpick, but if that's a low level D&D character, the level system is utterly bankrupt.
I take it you've never actually read a high level wizard's spell list. These are guys that casually make new planes and drop dragons on people. Aragorn might be a good swordsman, even the best swordsman, but there's no way he can, for example, jump over a building, cut stone walls in half, or survive a fall from space.

goto124
2015-03-03, 10:26 PM
Can wizards even survive in space, no air and all? I know the answer's yes, but which spell(s) would they use?

obryn
2015-03-03, 10:31 PM
I take it you've never actually read a high level wizard's spell list. These are guys that casually make new planes and drop dragons on people. Aragorn might be a good swordsman, even the best swordsman, but there's no way he can, for example, jump over a building, cut stone walls in half, or survive a fall from space.
... Which illustrates how bad a fit D&D is for Lord of the Rings. (And how absurd D&D's magic level is, given that Gandalf is an immortal being dating back to the Song of Illuvatar.)

Necroticplague
2015-03-03, 10:45 PM
Can wizards even survive in space, no air and all?

DnD ones? Easily.

Satinavian
2015-03-04, 04:07 AM
I take it you've never actually read a high level wizard's spell list. These are guys that casually make new planes and drop dragons on people. Aragorn might be a good swordsman, even the best swordsman, but there's no way he can, for example, jump over a building, cut stone walls in half, or survive a fall from space.And where in D&D can a high-level, core-only Ranger whose sole magic equipment seems to be a sword do these things ?

Yes, high level wizards have a lot of toys not seen in LotR. But the only character possibly modelled as wizard is Gandalf himself and he doesn't use his power anywhere near full capacity outside the one time battling a Balrog (=Balor) one on one.

That is why D&D wizard magic is not a very usefull tool to measure levels of LotR characters.

Milo v3
2015-03-04, 05:06 AM
And where in D&D can a high-level, core-only Ranger whose sole magic equipment seems to be a sword do these things ?


jump over a building, put twenty three ranks into jump be much much much easier with magic speed increasing boots but still.
cut stone walls in half, adamantine sword.
survive a fall from space, the average health for a 20th level ranger is much higher than the average fall damage from space.

goto124
2015-03-04, 05:30 AM
But the real question is what spell lets you breathe in space?

Satinavian
2015-03-04, 05:33 AM
jump over a building, put twenty three ranks into jump be much much much easier with magic speed increasing boots but still.
cut stone walls in half, adamantine sword.
survive a fall from space, the average health for a 20th level ranger is much higher than the average fall damage from space.

- 23 ranks in jump don't let you jump over a house. You might get slightly over 3m, if you are lucky and strong.
- adamantine sword is not a class skill and while Aragorn has a special sword, it's not known for cutting stone
- fall damage per raw "from space" is more than sufficient for the kill.

So yes, a high level Ranger can't do any of those things either per se.

johnbragg
2015-03-04, 05:53 AM
This is as nonsensical as the first time I came across it.

Let's leave aside the inherent silliness of trying to model any of the characters in D&D terms...

Keep in mind that, at the time of LotR, Aragorn was one of the finest swordsmen of the Third Age and had already campaigned extensively, including captaincy against Umbar. What's more, he fends off five Ringwraiths - the mightiest of Sauron's minions - single-handedly. The dude is one of the baddest badasses in Arda, and stands shoulder to shoulder with actual immortals like the badasses Elrond, Galadriel, and Thranduil. He's said to be up there with the ancient Numenorians, wields the most legendary sword of the age, and is the heir to the entire continent, just about

You can argue and nitpick, but if that's a low level D&D character, the level system is utterly bankrupt.

The point of the essay is not that the Fellowship of the Ring are weak. It is that high-level D&D characters are at or above the level of legendary figures like Gilgamesh and Odysseus and Hercules and Thor and Odin.

If you read the essay, you find that using the Ringwraiths--or any LOTR opponent--to measure their power level is an exercise in circular reasoning. What evidence is there that the Ringwraiths are best modeled as CR 4 undead, or Cr 7, or CR 14? Nothing, except for the assumption that Aragorn is level X. That's part of the reason that "Gandalf is a Fifth LEvel Wizard" is part of the genealogy of E6. You could model anything in LOTR much more easily with E6 + 5 or 10 feats much more easily than you can with high-level D&D.

Milo v3
2015-03-04, 05:59 AM
- 23 ranks in jump don't let you jump over a house. You might get slightly over 3m, if you are lucky and strong.
With just +7 strength (which is pretty normal for 20th level), thats a 30, so an average roll would get you 10 meters up and a good roll would get you 12 meters into the air.


- adamantine sword is not a class skill and while Aragorn has a special sword, it's not known for cutting stone
Having 1 Really Really crappy magic item that isn't even adamantine is more sign that he's low level.


fall damage per raw "from space" is more than sufficient for the kill.
Fall damage max's at 20d6. A 20th level rangers get 20d8 HD and then you add their con mod * 20 and there is a ridiculous chance to survive the fall.

Satinavian
2015-03-04, 06:19 AM
With just +7 strength (which is pretty normal for 20th level), thats a 30, so an average roll would get you 10 meters up and a good roll would get you 12 meters into the air.you probably mixed up long jump and high jump.


Having 1 Really Really crappy magic item that isn't even adamantine is more sign that he's low level.Rare magic campaigns are not unheard of. WbL is obviously not a thing there. That is why i did specify the very uncommon equipment in my argument.

Fall damage max's at 20d6. A 20th level rangers get 20d8 HD and then you add their con mod * 20 and there is a ridiculous chance to survive the fall.Ok, i' ll concede this point. Forgot the cap somehow.

Milo v3
2015-03-04, 06:33 AM
you probably mixed up long jump and high jump.
Nope. I made a different mistake. Much worse. Mixed up feet and meters.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 06:49 AM
you probably mixed up long jump and high jump.

Jumping in on this one, long jump DC is equal to feet travelled, and high jump DC is four times feet travelled. Assuming a roll of ten, 23 ranks in jump and +7 strength:

Long jump: 10+23+7=40 feet.
High jump: (10+23+7)/4=10 feet.

Necroticplague
2015-03-04, 07:24 AM
But the real question is what spell lets you breathe in space?

Hey, now you're moving the goalpost! first you only asked if they could survive in space, not breath it! I don't know of the latter, but Delay Death does the latter, as would polymorphing yourself into something that doesn't need to breathe.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 07:40 AM
Hey, now you're moving the goalpost! first you only asked if they could survive in space, not breath it! I don't know of the latter, but Delay Death does the latter, as would polymorphing yourself into something that doesn't need to breathe.

I think high constitution and endure elements will give us enough time to reenter the atmosphere, at which point breathing becomes moot. If we need longer you can get one of these bottles of air and craft a primitive diving mask. Renew your endure elements as needed, maybe from a wand.

New question, assuming our solar system, immunity to the conditions of space and a way to breath, which is the furthest orbit a level 20 wizard with 28 intelligence could reach with a single day's worth of spells? Assume that they arrive at the right time to land on a planet or moon, and have a bag of holding filled with an infinite amount of food. What if we ignore the teleport line? How does this compare to space travel in Tolkien's works.

ReaderAt2046
2015-03-04, 07:45 AM
Correction. Balrogs are Maiar, just corrupted by Melkor.

I never said they weren't. Why the "Correction"?

Milo v3
2015-03-04, 07:52 AM
I think high constitution and endure elements will give us enough time to reenter the atmosphere, at which point breathing becomes moot. If we need longer you can get one of these bottles of air and craft a primitive diving mask. Renew your endure elements as needed, maybe from a wand.

New question, assuming our solar system, immunity to the conditions of space and a way to breath, which is the furthest orbit a level 20 wizard with 28 intelligence could reach with a single day's worth of spells? Assume that they arrive at the right time to land on a planet or moon, and have a bag of holding filled with an infinite amount of food. What if we ignore the teleport line? How does this compare to space travel in Tolkien's works.

Two Planeshifts can take you from one planet to another without much issue

TheCountAlucard
2015-03-04, 08:54 AM
Actually, fall damage may be capped by 20d6, but that's still enough to fairly reliably trigger the "death from massive damage" rules, so Aragorn still won't be cavalierly diving from orbit, regardless of how he got there.

And even if his sword is adamantine, a wall still has hundreds of hit points for a five-foot section. Even assuming he's dumped as much of his WBL as he possibly can into the blade, he's not gonna hack a wall down in one turn (unless we're going into TO levels of optimization, in which case I'm outta here).

Milo v3
2015-03-04, 09:35 AM
Actually, fall damage may be capped by 20d6, but that's still enough to fairly reliably trigger the "death from massive damage" rules, so Aragorn still won't be cavalierly diving from orbit, regardless of how he got there.

Massive damage is just a 15 DC save or die. If a 20th level character can't deal with that, they should already be dead.

TheCountAlucard
2015-03-04, 09:36 AM
Nat 1s happen, dude. You know that as well as I do. Even if he's tough enough to survive, it might still kill him.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 09:47 AM
Two Planeshifts can take you from one planet to another without much issue

A) that's against the spirit of the question and B) we have no evidence that our solar system is connected to other planes of existence, so Plane shift might not work. But it doe still prove the point I was trying to make, that D&D magic allows for stupid feats without tools of any kind.

Can a Planeshift be off in the direction of straight up? If so, welcome to 20d6 falling damage, in a small (<10%) but not insignificant (>1%) amount of attempts

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 11:02 AM
... Which illustrates how bad a fit D&D is for Lord of the Rings. (And how absurd D&D's magic level is, given that Gandalf is an immortal being dating back to the Song of Illuvatar.)
This doesn't follow. Low-level D&D is a perfectly fine fit for LotR characters' abilities. There's nothing wrong with the world's best swordsman being around level 6 if everyone else is lower level than that. Aragorn doesn't need to be level 20 just because you like the number 20.

Satinavian
2015-03-04, 11:22 AM
Aragorn simply doen't have any abilities that give hints of his level. "Best swordsman" is useless, if one does not know the level of everyone else. The closest match you might get with all his minor magic abilities, which are probably in line with level 2 or 3 ranger spells, as far as power is concerned.

I would probably model him somewhere around lv 10.

illyahr
2015-03-04, 11:54 AM
Actually, most of Aragorn's abilities can be summed up as "Rgr2/Ftr1/Pal2." He only needs a couple levels of Ranger to do his tracking thing, and his healing hands is neatly summed up in the Paladin's Lay on Hands ability. In an E6 game, a level 5 character is one of the best.

obryn
2015-03-04, 01:35 PM
This doesn't follow. Low-level D&D is a perfectly fine fit for LotR characters' abilities. There's nothing wrong with the world's best swordsman being around level 6 if everyone else is lower level than that. Aragorn doesn't need to be level 20 just because you like the number 20.
No, but there is plenty wrong with (1) the general idea of assigning a class and level to a character in a book that wasn't written using D&D rules, and (2) the specific idea, once you get past the rather huge first objection, that a dude who's been adventuring for years and is considered the equal of immortals who have been involved in warring against the Shadow for millennia, is a low level D&D character. :smallsmile: If folks want to talk about circular reasoning re: the Nazgul, we can start riiight around there.


Aragorn simply doen't have any abilities that give hints of his level.
That's because he wasn't a D&D character. :smallsmile:


Actually, most of Aragorn's abilities can be summed up as "Rgr2/Ftr1/Pal2." He only needs a couple levels of Ranger to do his tracking thing, and his healing hands is neatly summed up in the Paladin's Lay on Hands ability. In an E6 game, a level 5 character is one of the best.
And this illustrates a further problem, with the assumption that the only abilities you're tracking are spell-like abilities, and further that you're using 3e's weird class/level stuff and pretty much disregarding his reported combat prowess by just lowering the apparent challenge of any enemies he'd face.

I mean, really, we have Aragorn's published stats already, guys!! :smallbiggrin:

http://i.imgur.com/FyW1Fba.jpg

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 01:41 PM
No, but there is plenty wrong with (1) the general idea of assigning a class and level to a character in a book that wasn't written using D&D rules,
People do this all the time. I see nothing wrong with it.


and (2) the specific idea, once you get past the rather huge first objection, that a dude who's been adventuring for years and is considered the equal of immortals who have been involved in warring against the Shadow for millennia, is a low level D&D character. :smallsmile:
Aragorn isn't even remotely the equal of a 1st level characters in, for instance, Exalted. Is this a problem for you too? Should he be max-level in every system that attempts to model him?

TheCountAlucard
2015-03-04, 02:12 PM
Actually, he's pretty on par with a starting Solar Exalt, assuming you don't minmax and don't spend BP on raising his Essence.

Alternatively he could make a good Fire or Earth Aspect Dragon-Blooded.

obryn
2015-03-04, 02:13 PM
People do this all the time. I see nothing wrong with it.

Aragorn isn't even remotely the equal of a 1st level characters in, for instance, Exalted. Is this a problem for you too? Should he be max-level in every system that attempts to model him?
First - There's plenty wrong with it because D&D is a terrible model for fictional characters in novels. Just because people do it all the time doesn't make it sensible; it's like alignment debates.

And about Exalted - nope, that would be even sillier. Exalted would be a worse system than even D&D is, here.

Context is important, if you're going to engage in this fool's errand in the first place. That context is the character's history and place in the world, along with an understanding that the character's capabilities can't fit neatly into a class-and-level-shaped box.

If your argument that a dude who's literally been adventuring for most mortals' lifetimes is only marginally better at fighting Uruk-hai than a just-off-the-farm hobbit, that's fine, I suppose, but yeah, I think it's ridiculous. And when said dude is considered the equal of elves and humans who faced down Sauron himself, I'll grin even more.

illyahr
2015-03-04, 02:19 PM
If your argument that a dude who's literally been adventuring for most mortals' lifetimes is only marginally better at fighting Uruk-hai than a just-off-the-farm hobbit, that's fine, I suppose, but yeah, I think it's ridiculous. And when said dude is considered the equal of elves and humans who faced down Sauron himself, I'll grin even more.

Facing someone has nothing to do with ability. If you mean how he looked into the Palantir, remember that he only barely took control of it from Sauron. I'd call that a Nat 20.

You claim that context is important but you continuously claim that the context we put out is unimportant. You then respond with a stat sheet that, for me at least, makes absolutely no contextual sense as the format in question is unfamiliar.

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 02:21 PM
If your argument that a dude who's literally been adventuring for most mortals' lifetimes is only marginally better at fighting Uruk-hai than a just-off-the-farm hobbit, that's fine...
It isn't, but good job pretending that it is so you can be outraged about it.

A just-off-the-farm hobbit is a 1st level commoner with 10s and 11s across the board, 2 hit points, and club proficiency. Aragorn as a 6th level character could cut through them all day and not break a sweat, as could the Uruks that he fights.

obryn
2015-03-04, 02:31 PM
Facing someone has nothing to do with ability. If you mean how he looked into the Palantir, remember that he only barely took control of it from Sauron. I'd call that a Nat 20.

You claim that context is important but you continuously claim that the context we put out is unimportant. You then respond with a stat sheet that, for me at least, makes absolutely no contextual sense as the format in question is unfamiliar.
The stat sheet was a joke, from the 1980's ICE games MERP and Rolemaster. :smallsmile: It's almost like I'm not taking this seriously!

The world-context - scale - is hugely important. How much better at fighting Uruk-hai is 1 Aragorn vs. 1 Hobbit? I mean, Samwise had some issues against a single Orc. Aragorn waded into them.

And I'm not talking about the palantir - though any time "sounds like a nat 20" comes up in these weird exercises, it rings as disingenuous. I'm talking about how everyone in the setting talks about Aragorn. True heir to Isildur (even Elros), etc. Heck; he speaks to Elrond as an equal, and Elrond's history and fight against the Shadow goes back to the First Age.

obryn
2015-03-04, 02:34 PM
It isn't, but good job pretending that it is so you can be outraged about it.

A just-off-the-farm hobbit is a 1st level commoner with 10s and 11s across the board, 2 hit points, and club proficiency. Aragorn as a 6th level character could cut through them all day and not break a sweat, as could the Uruks that he fights.
I'm not outraged, I'm baffled and chuckling. This is an alignment debate, with all the weight and import that entails. :smallsmile:

If you have a 1-6 scale, you've capped how much better the very best can be than the very worst, based on the minimum the system allows. (And when we're talking 3e rules with fighter types, that's pretty limiting!!)

illyahr
2015-03-04, 03:26 PM
I'm not outraged, I'm baffled and chuckling. This is an alignment debate, with all the weight and import that entails. :smallsmile:

If you have a 1-6 scale, you've capped how much better the very best can be than the very worst, based on the minimum the system allows. (And when we're talking 3e rules with fighter types, that's pretty limiting!!)

Ah, now I realize what the core of the misunderstanding is. :smallsmile:

In an E6 game, stat progression stops at level 6 but the character can still gain more power. The level cap just means you don't gain any more class abilities and your BAB/Saves/Skill points don't increase. You can still use earned XP to "buy" feats and, if your DM allows it, Attribute upgrades. Aragorn might have stopped leveling at 6 but could still have gotten stronger by buying combat feats.

Due to the strange way that skill progression works, a RL Olympic long jumper would only need a modifier of +12 or so to be competitive since your check result is applied in feet and the current world long jump record is 29 feet. You could get +3 from STR +3 from skill focus and +2 from the Acrobatic feat so you would only need 4 ranks. A Ftr1 could break the current record on a roll of 16 or better.

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 03:32 PM
If you have a 1-6 scale, you've capped how much better the very best can be than the very worst, based on the minimum the system allows. (And when we're talking 3e rules with fighter types, that's pretty limiting!!)
You're completely misrepresenting the scale.

A 1st level commoner fresh off the farm is not a "1" in the same way that a 1st level fighter (with a respectable stat array, equipment, skills, feats, weapon & armor proficiencies, etc) is a "1". And once you get higher in level, the disparity between characters of the same HD only increases - Aragorn has a legendary sword, a legendary bloodline, and a bunch of other things going for him. He doesn't need to be epic level to be completely out of a peasant's league.

veti
2015-03-04, 03:37 PM
Actually, most of Aragorn's abilities can be summed up as "Rgr2/Ftr1/Pal2." He only needs a couple levels of Ranger to do his tracking thing, and his healing hands is neatly summed up in the Paladin's Lay on Hands ability. In an E6 game, a level 5 character is one of the best.

It's reasonable to assume that the abilities we see him use, are only a subset of those he has.

But more importantly: a 5th-level Aragorn just doesn't make sense given the character's backstory. How has he survived for, like, 60 years in the wilderness, fighting orcs and trolls and wargs on a daily basis, and accumulated only enough XP to reach... level 5? He should have passed that point 59 years ago.

On-page, we see the Fellowship defeat encounters whose CR should be way beyond "Impossible" to a party of the level being described here - the orcs and troll in Moria before the balrog shows up, the uruk-hai on Amon Hen, the Nazgul on Weathertop. If they really are that low-level - and it's true, there's no solid proof they're not - then what that proves, quite conclusively to my mind, is that D&D classes and levels are an utterly inadequate way of describing these characters.

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 03:51 PM
It's reasonable to assume that the abilities we see him use, are only a subset of those he has.

But more importantly: a 5th-level Aragorn just doesn't make sense given the character's backstory. How has he survived for, like, 60 years in the wilderness, fighting orcs and trolls and wargs on a daily basis, and accumulated only enough XP to reach... level 5? He should have passed that point 59 years ago.
He's an NPC, and doesn't follow the PC model for gaining levels. He just has 5 levels.


On-page, we see the Fellowship defeat encounters whose CR should be way beyond "Impossible" to a party of the level being described here - the orcs and troll in Moria before the balrog shows up, the uruk-hai on Amon Hen, the Nazgul on Weathertop. If they really are that low-level - and it's true, there's no solid proof they're not - then what that proves, quite conclusively to my mind, is that D&D classes and levels are an utterly inadequate way of describing these characters.
A well-built 6th level ranger should have relatively little problem with a troll and a couple of orcs. As for the Nazgul, what level would they even be? And don't say "they're servants of Sauron so they should be super high level because Sauron is super high level" because really, Sauron is not that powerful compared to D&D's high level shenanigans.

obryn
2015-03-04, 04:10 PM
Ah, now I realize what the core of the misunderstanding is. :smallsmile:

In an E6 game, stat progression stops at level 6 but the character can still gain more power. The level cap just means you don't gain any more class abilities and your BAB/Saves/Skill points don't increase. You can still use earned XP to "buy" feats and, if your DM allows it, Attribute upgrades. Aragorn might have stopped leveling at 6 but could still have gotten stronger by buying combat feats.
I know how E6 works. I'm saying that 3e in general - and E6 in specific - woefully misrepresent LotR characters.


You're completely misrepresenting the scale.

A 1st level commoner fresh off the farm is not a "1" in the same way that a 1st level fighter (with a respectable stat array, equipment, skills, feats, weapon & armor proficiencies, etc) is a "1". And once you get higher in level, the disparity between characters of the same HD only increases - Aragorn has a legendary sword, a legendary bloodline, and a bunch of other things going for him. He doesn't need to be epic level to be completely out of a peasant's league.
The fighty sorts sure do increase much more linearly than the casty sorts. It's called LFQW for a reason. :smallbiggrin:


As for the Nazgul, what level would they even be? And don't say "they're servants of Sauron so they should be super high level because Sauron is super high level" because really, Sauron is not that powerful compared to D&D's high level shenanigans.
Well, we start with how he was one of the most powerful of the Maiar. And how, in the Second Age, he forged the One Ring. And how he single-handedly killed the legendary Gil-Galad and Elendil. If you're defining "D&D's high level shenanigans" as the "weird wizard show" then you're missing the entire point of the setting.

(All of this falls apart I might add when you realize that, under D&D rules, it was impossible for Isildur to cut off Sauron's finger, since amputation is not a result of hit point loss. :smalltongue:)

illyahr
2015-03-04, 04:12 PM
because really, Sauron is not that powerful compared to D&D's high level shenanigans.

This. Sauron, at full power, was taken down when a Fighter confirmed a critical hit with the fragments of a magical sword.

Oh, just FYI: Uruk-hai literally means "half-orc."


Well, we start with how he was one of the most powerful of the Maiar. And how, in the Second Age, he forged the One Ring. And how he single-handedly killed the legendary Gil-Galad and Elendil. If you're defining "D&D's high level shenanigans" as the "weird wizard show" then you're missing the entire point of the setting.

Templating and the Forge Ring feat. It makes the math easier to conclude that they were all the same level. He takes out Elendil and Gil-Galad, then Isildur finished off the last of his HP.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-04, 04:15 PM
.(All of this falls apart I might add when you realize that, under D&D rules, it was impossible for Isildur to cut off Sauron's finger, since amputation is not a result of hit point loss. :smalltongue:) Again people, correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that be a sunder?

Or Narsil has some special type of vorpal, but for fingers...

obryn
2015-03-04, 04:18 PM
This. Sauron, at full power, was taken down when a Fighter confirmed a critical hit with the fragments of a magical sword.
...
Templating and the Forge Ring feat. It makes the math easier to conclude that they were all the same level. He takes out Elendil and Gil-Galad, then Isildur finished off the last of his HP.


Again people, correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't that be a sunder?

Or Narsil has some special type of vorpal, but for fingers...
You know how crazy this looks if you're not thinking novels operate using 3.5 rules, right?

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 04:28 PM
The fighty sorts sure do increase much more linearly than the casty sorts. It's called LFQW for a reason. :smallbiggrin:
Sure. So?


Well, we start with how he was one of the most powerful of the Maiar. And how, in the Second Age, he forged the One Ring. And how he single-handedly killed the legendary Gil-Galad and Elendil. If you're defining "D&D's high level shenanigans" as the "weird wizard show" then you're missing the entire point of the setting.

(All of this falls apart I might add when you realize that, under D&D rules, it was impossible for Isildur to cut off Sauron's finger, since amputation is not a result of hit point loss. :smalltongue:)
"He was the most powerful of some guys" is a relative, not an absolute, measure of power. Same goes for killing a guy, legendary or otherwise. Is "made a magic item" his greatest feat?

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 04:34 PM
Well, we start with how he was one of the most powerful of the Maiar.

And if the second most power Maiar is the equivalent of a lantern archon, than it doesn't matter if I'm a hound archon or a solar, I'm the most powerful Maiar. This is useless in and of itself.


And how, in the Second Age, he forged the One Ring.

Forge Ring (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#forgeRing) is a twelfth level feat, so obviously Sauron needs to be that level to forge the ring, but the other requirements for creating an Artefact of Ultimate Doom aren't outlined. We can use this to set a minimum level for Sauron, but this means that any discussion of the Ringwraitsh as entities with more than 11 levels are pointless, because at that point they may be as powerful as Sauron. Conclusion: Sauron is level 12+, and Ringwraiths are between level 5 and 11. No, I do not think this is a good measure of abilities for either side, I think that Sauron at least should have a divine rank or two. But the point is this tells us the minimum character level to represent Sauron if a player wishes to play him.


And how he single-handedly killed the legendary Gil-Galad and Elendil.

If they are both level 10 then they are an appropriate challenge for our level 12 Sauron. Can you please give your logic for why they are higher than 7th level? (which would put them at 'stronger than is possible' assuming we are using E6)


If you're defining "D&D's high level shenanigans" as the "weird wizard show" then you're missing the entire point of the setting.

(All of this falls apart I might add when you realize that, under D&D rules, it was impossible for Isildur to cut off Sauron's finger, since amputation is not a result of hit point loss. :smalltongue:)

How certain is the order of events? I don't think the book specifies, it just says that they defeated Sauron. I think that the 'Sauron died because his finger was cut off' thing is from the films only.

Flickerdart
2015-03-04, 04:38 PM
No, I do not think this is a good measure of abilities for either side, I think that Sauron at least should have a divine rank or two.
Why can't Sauron be level 12 (or lower, if he has CL boosters or Forge Ring as a bonus feat, or brought the Ring into being with some alternative ability such as wish) and still have one or two divine ranks?

obryn
2015-03-04, 04:45 PM
And if the second most power Maiar is the equivalent of a lantern archon, than it doesn't matter if I'm a hound archon or a solar, I'm the most powerful Maiar. This is useless in and of itself.
Again, only if you're ignoring the clues the actual text gives you as far as power scales go. Really, check the Silmarillion; it's amazing. Much more compelling than Lord of the Rings itself, with much better characterization.


If they are both level 10 then they are an appropriate challenge for our level 12 Sauron. Can you please give your logic for why they are higher than 7th level? (which would put them at 'stronger than is possible' assuming we are using E6)
...really? As I've said, I think 3e's power scales are a really terrible fit.


How certain is the order of events? I don't think the book specifies, it just says that they defeated Sauron. I think that the 'Sauron died because his finger was cut off' thing is from the films only.
That's the actual way Sauron was defeated, per every source. I believe it's covered both in the Silmarillion - in the last bit "On the Rings of Power and the Third Age" - and either the appendices or the Council of Elrond in LotR. The latter explains how the ring went from Sauron to Isildur to Smeagol.

Talakeal
2015-03-04, 04:53 PM
It's reasonable to assume that the abilities we see him use, are only a subset of those he has.

But more importantly: a 5th-level Aragorn just doesn't make sense given the character's backstory. How has he survived for, like, 60 years in the wilderness, fighting orcs and trolls and wargs on a daily basis, and accumulated only enough XP to reach... level 5? He should have passed that point 59 years ago.

On-page, we see the Fellowship defeat encounters whose CR should be way beyond "Impossible" to a party of the level being described here - the orcs and troll in Moria before the balrog shows up, the uruk-hai on Amon Hen, the Nazgul on Weathertop. If they really are that low-level - and it's true, there's no solid proof they're not - then what that proves, quite conclusively to my mind, is that D&D classes and levels are an utterly inadequate way of describing these characters.

D&D has a pretty fast rate of advancement. You could ask the same questions about real life people, why after decades in a profession, even a combat profession, they are still more or less still regular people rather than the demigods that are mid level D&D characters.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 05:12 PM
Why can't Sauron be level 12 (or lower, if he has CL boosters or Forge Ring as a bonus feat, or brought the Ring into being with some alternative ability such as wish) and still have one or two divine ranks?

Sorry for the confusion, I did not mean to imply there was a level requirement for divine ranks, I meant that Sauron is level 12 (assuming modelled as a PC), and has a couple of divine ranks.


Again, only if you're ignoring the clues the actual text gives you as far as power scales go. Really, check the Silmarillion; it's amazing. Much more compelling than Lord of the Rings itself, with much better characterization.

I did. IT was far dryer than Lord of the Rings, and I only managed to get two thirds of the way through the latter. My point was that you said that Sauron was 'one of the most powerful Maiar', which is meaningless without me actually having a clue as to the power level of a Maiar (I got far enough into the Silmarillion to know that they make stuff, and then put it down because it was boring and I had to return it to the library). For all I know a Maiar could be as strong as the average hobbit, can I please get some background here? (Don't say 'read the Silmarillion', one man's amazing is another mans dry and boring)


...really? As I've said, I think 3e's power scales are a really terrible fit.

Not actually denying that, but the thread started on D&D and so I'm defaulting to it (also, I don't have the time to try and give them all GURPS stats, but I wouldn't be surprised if Gandalf only hit three or four hundred character points). In fact, I'm arguing for low-level characters for precisely this reason.


That's the actual way Sauron was defeated, per every source. I believe it's covered both in the Silmarillion - in the last bit "On the Rings of Power and the Third Age" - and either the appendices or the Council of Elrond in LotR. The latter explains how the ring went from Sauron to Isildur to Smeagol.

Can I get quotes, or at least page numbers? You seem to have an idea of where it's specified, so it'll save time on both ends (I have no problem believing that it happened, I questioned as I'm unsure if it was specified).

GoblinGilmartin
2015-03-04, 05:15 PM
♫♩ I didn't mean to staaart a war!♫♩

Exegesis
2015-03-04, 08:15 PM
Analysis: 4e does LOTR well.

If you want to model Lord of the Rings with D&D, a balrog has to be a balor. In 4e that's a level 27 elite brute. Gandalf returning as the White would be his gaining an epic destiny, placing him beforehand as a deva (they're angels bound to mortal forms, a perfect fit) wizard 20 with the paragon path Istari; hybrid him with invoker if you desire. Since his fire ring would give him resistance (immunity?) to the balor's flame whip and damaging aura, and he's free to burn all his dailies, this could happen--especially if there's a long fall down Durin's chasm which Gandalf averts with Feather Fall, but the demon suffers.

So why are there so few bangs?

There actually aren't. In the Hobbit, Gandalf is wise not to engage the trolls directly: unless he could bring them all down in one shot, Bilbo might have been killed. It's a hostage situation. And at that point in G's career it's not certain he could beat three trolls anyway, if they were more than basic level 9 ones. In the goblin caves he cast a lightning spell, and who knows how many he goblins he cut through later--the plot point is that the midgets were carried off, which is plausible if there are tons of goblins getting between Gandalf and them and Gandalf can't risk friendly fire (once again). Then Gandalf rescues the dwarves singlehandedly. Then they're pursued by a dozens of worgs, who are each level 9. That's indeed a life-threatening situation.

Lord of the Rings brings the restriction mentioned in the second post of this thread that G can only use his powers against similar beings, whether as a revised law of the universe or a specific let's be covert thing to avoid detection. His uses there are reasonable. And nowhere do I know of it being said that G was not throwing fireballs and chaos vortexes at the Morannon.

Obviously Aragorn's frontal assault is pointless as a way of diverting Sauron's land army from Orodruin, since one squad of orcs would do to stop the hobbits. It was obviously a way of specifically diverting Sauron's air force so that Gandalf and the eagles could zoom in and airlift the hobbits for aerial package delivery. It just turned out that Sauron was dumber than could be guessed. An alternate version would see the hobbits dashing for their lives from the golem sentinels Sauron has guarding the Cracks of Doom, only to be swept up by the giant eagles and flown over the caldera. But Gollum clutched onto the same eagle bearing Frodo, and their wrestling match proceeds on eagle back.

So that's Gandalf. Orcs are upper heroic tier, placing the warriors of the fellowship around that level. Aragorn the half-elf ranger (marauder style) certainly achieves a paragon path by the end. Elf archery ranger, dwarf slayer, human fighter, Sam is an inspiring warlord, Frodo is less than nothing, the cousins are whatever. What do you call it. People.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-04, 08:24 PM
I did. IT was far dryer than Lord of the Rings, and I only managed to get two thirds of the way through the latter. My point was that you said that Sauron was 'one of the most powerful Maiar', which is meaningless without me actually having a clue as to the power level of a Maiar (I got far enough into the Silmarillion to know that they make stuff, and then put it down because it was boring and I had to return it to the library). For all I know a Maiar could be as strong as the average hobbit, can I please get some background here? (Don't say 'read the Silmarillion', one man's amazing is another mans dry and boring) Celestial, more or less. Or demons (Sauron, Balrogs, eventually Saruman) depending on whose side they're on.

You are acquainted with Gandalf, yes? Gandalf is a Wizard, or Istari. The Istari are an order of Maiar. Gandalf is, initially, one of the weakest.

Sauron, though, is more than a Maiar, he is a Maiar who inherited the powers of his Vala (read: demigod) master, Morgoth.

veti
2015-03-04, 08:36 PM
D&D has a pretty fast rate of advancement. You could ask the same questions about real life people, why after decades in a profession, even a combat profession, they are still more or less still regular people rather than the demigods that are mid level D&D characters.

Well, yes. If someone suggested modelling real life people as D&D characters, I probably would ask that question.

But I haven't seen anyone doing that. Not in this thread, anyway.

Seriously, if "D&D has a pretty fast rate of advancement", but Middle-earth doesn't, then that's just another reason why the two are not a good fit.

Premier
2015-03-04, 08:43 PM
Oh, just FYI: Uruk-hai literally means "half-orc."


No, it does not. Please don't spread misinformation.

In the Black Speech, "Uruk-hai" (http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/u/urukhai.html) literally means "orc-people", and is more specifically used to describe the large soldier-orcs that appeared in the late Third Age. Also, at no point does Tolkien suggest that they were created by crossbreeding with humans. While he does make references to orc-like men, those are a different thing (and are NOT explicitly described as crossbreeds, either), and the notion of Uruk-hai being half-men was invented by Peter Jackson for the films.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 08:48 PM
Celestial, more or less. Or demons (Sauron, Balrogs, eventually Saruman) depending on whose side they're on.

To make this clear, I know what Maiar are, I was trying to make a point. What I don't know is if they are on the level of Tolkien elves, Superman, or Cthulhu (in ascending order of power). I'm suspecting somewhere between the first two.


You are acquainted with Gandalf, yes? Gandalf is a Wizard, or Istari. The Istari are an order of Maiar. Gandalf is, initially, one of the weakest.

I've also heard people say that Gandalf was one of the stronger Istari but deferred to Saruman. I have this argument with people in real life all the time. I know the broad strokes of the lore (through reading threads like this), just not the details to be able to say stuff like 'Gandalf could beat the witch king in a fight.' Could I get a clarification on that one by the way?


Sauron, though, is more than a Maiar, he is a Maiar who inherited the powers of his Vala (read: demigod) master, Morgoth.

Do you mind giving a reference for that? First time I've heard it, I just want to be sure it isn't a crazy fan theory.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-04, 09:10 PM
To make this clear, I know what Maiar are, I was trying to make a point. What I don't know is if they are on the level of Tolkien elves, Superman, or Cthulhu (in ascending order of power). I'm suspecting somewhere between the first two. The books use the term "the Wise" to designated a rather undefinited group of wisemen in Middle Earth. The group, however, does include the Istari as well as the most powerful among the elves, like Elrond, Galadriel, and potentially Cirdan (whom are all ringbearers, mind you). The Elves often seem to defer to Gandalf, so I'd guess you're right.


I've also heard people say that Gandalf was one of the stronger Istari but deferred to Saruman. I have this argument with people in real life all the time. I know the broad strokes of the lore (through reading threads like this), just not the details to be able to say stuff like 'Gandalf could beat the witch king in a fight.' Could I get a clarification on that one by the way? Honestly, not sure. Guess I assumed the color of each Wizard designated a rank in addition to the Valar of their origin. Hence Gandalf getting a wardrobe change. He usurps Saurman's position as the White after Saruman's betrayal.

But maybe Gandalf was. Though how Saruman trapped him in Isengard then is beyond me.


Do you mind giving a reference for that? First time I've heard it, I just want to be sure it isn't a crazy fan theory.
The Valar Melkor is the "Satan" of Middle Earth. Once the most powerful of the Valar, he became the first Dark Lord, Morgoth, and he corrupts Sauron, who was a Maiar of the Valar Aule the Smith, as his lieutenant.

When he is originally defeated, Sauron takes up his mantle, becoming the second Dark Lord. His death marks the end of the First Age and the beginning of the Second.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Melkor

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-04, 09:38 PM
The books use the term "the Wise" to designated a rather undefinited group of wisemen in Middle Earth. The group, however, does include the Istari as well as the most powerful among the elves, like Elrond, Galadriel, and potentially Cirdan (whom are all ringbearers, mind you). The Elves often seem to defer to Gandalf, so I'd guess you're right.

Honestly, not sure. Guess I assumed the color of each Wizard designated a rank in addition to the Valar of their origin. Hence Gandalf getting a wardrobe change. He usurps Saurman's position as the White after Saruman's betrayal.

But maybe Gandalf was. Though how Saruman trapped him in Isengard then is beyond me.

There are two ways it could have happened: 1) Saruman was able to use more of his powers due to no longer being good (unlikely), or 2) their powers are roughly equal, but Gandalf was caught of guard (If Saruman had a power of 100 and Gandalf 103 I could see this changing easily). The way I understand it, Saruman and Gandalf were the strongest of the Istari and approximately equals when on Middle Earth, and Gandalf decided he didn't want to lead. Because of their relatively equal power Saruman managed to trap Gandalf. Story goes here, Gandalf comes back with his colour change, having been explicitly told 'no, you take Saruman's place' and allowed to use a little more of his power just so he's more powerful than Saruman. He removes Saruman from office, but doesn't take his place, either because he doesn't want to or because he doesn't have the time. In my mind the point here is that Saruman tried to lead as a ruler, and was removed from office, whereas his replacement just tried to help people and lead by example.

Also, Gandalf doesn't have to be stronger than Saruman, my reading of him being the grey wizard is that he's second in power, not as pure as white, but moreso than brown or blue.


The Valar Melkor is the "Satan" of Middle Earth. Once the most powerful of the Valar, he became the first Dark Lord, Morgoth, and he corrupts Sauron, who was a Maiar of the Valar Aule the Smith, as his lieutenant.

When he is originally defeated, Sauron takes up his mantle, becoming the second Dark Lord. His death marks the end of the First Age and the beginning of the Second.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Melkor

I know Sauron took up Morgoth's mantle, but from what I heard Morgoth was already rather weak from making all of the world his one ring. Sauron never took his power, he was just dangerous because nobody of his power level appeared on the other side allowed to use their full power.

aspekt
2015-03-04, 11:47 PM
I kind of asked this before but I feel it may have been glossed over.

Has anyone here played one or more of the ME TRPGs that have come out?

If so would you mind sharing your experiences with the game mechanics and how they compared to other TRPGs or even one of the other ME TRPGs.

Aside from my own interest I think it pertinent to the discussion to see how other systems have handled various aspects of ME.

Knaight
2015-03-04, 11:57 PM
I've done a bit with Burning Wheel, which is basically a ME game (it's not an official licensed property, but it's obviously Tolkenien). It's a very solid system, with a great deal to recommend it. It's also an extremely crunchy game, which isn't something that tends to mesh with my GM style, so I haven't actually GMed it at all.

obryn
2015-03-05, 12:14 AM
I did. IT was far dryer than Lord of the Rings, and I only managed to get two thirds of the way through the latter. My point was that you said that Sauron was 'one of the most powerful Maiar', which is meaningless without me actually having a clue as to the power level of a Maiar (I got far enough into the Silmarillion to know that they make stuff, and then put it down because it was boring and I had to return it to the library). For all I know a Maiar could be as strong as the average hobbit, can I please get some background here? (Don't say 'read the Silmarillion', one man's amazing is another mans dry and boring)
The first few times I started it, I stalled out early on - like, before they got done cataloging all the Valar. But once I actually got into the meat of it, with the kinslaying, Feanor and his brothers, etc.... Man, I was engrossed. The characters in it - elves and men both - are a lot more flawed and compelling, IMO, than LotR.

As for the Maiar, well, we have the Balrogs and we have seen them in action. They weren't the mightiest of Maiar, but were among the mightiest who served Morgoth.

The main issue, as I said before, is one of scale. If Gandalf - a Maiar - is 'level 5' then what does 'level 1' even mean in D&D terms? It's wacky. The 'power levels' of beings in LotR and Silmarillion vary incredibly wildly, and don't conform neatly to how D&D manages them.


Can I get quotes, or at least page numbers? You seem to have an idea of where it's specified, so it'll save time on both ends (I have no problem believing that it happened, I questioned as I'm unsure if it was specified).
You know it's more ambiguous than I'd remembered. The Jackson version matches up fairly well, but instead of a desperate swipe it's a vengeful severing.


But at the last the siege was so strait that Sauron himself came forth; and he wrestled with Gil-galad and Elendil, and they both were slain, and the sword of Elendil broke under him as he fell. But Sauron also was thrown down, and with the hilt-shard of Narsil Isildur cut the Ruling Ring from the hand of Sauron and took it for his own. Then Sauron was for that time vanquished, and he forsook his body, and his spirit fled far away and hid in waste places; and he took no visible shape again for many long years.
....
The Ruling Ring passed out of the knowledge even of the Wise in that age; yet it was not unmade. For Isildur would not surrender it to Elrond and Círdan who stood by. They counselled him to cast it into the fire of Orodruin nigh at hand, in which it had been forged, so that it should perish, and the power of Sauron be for ever diminished, and he should remain only as a shadow of malice in the wilderness. But Isildur refused this counsel, saying: ‘This I will have as weregild for my father’s death, and my brother’s. Was it not I that dealt the Enemy his death-blow?’ And the Ring that he held seemed to him exceedingly fair to look on; and he would not suffer it to be destroyed.

So Sauron was 'thrown down' - but not dead - and Isildur chopped off his finger before he could recover, which was believed to be Sauron's 'death blow.'

obryn
2015-03-05, 12:21 AM
I kind of asked this before but I feel it may have been glossed over.

Has anyone here played one or more of the ME TRPGs that have come out?

If so would you mind sharing your experiences with the game mechanics and how they compared to other TRPGs or even one of the other ME TRPGs.

Aside from my own interest I think it pertinent to the discussion to see how other systems have handled various aspects of ME.
MERP - the ICE 80's game - is basically Rolemaster Lite and is ... well, it's Rolemaster if you know what that entails. It's very crunchy, and it's dramatically unsuitable for a Middle Earth game - almost as ill-fitting as D&D, in this case. Magic is D&D-flashy, though rather more limited at low levels, and critical hits are a huge deal.

What it has going for it is a more comprehensive skill system, so there's different ways of measuring potency.

Most MERP supplements are actually Rolemaster supplements, and you have bizarre stuff like Galadriel getting statted up as an Astrologer (which, yes, is a Rolemaster class).

The best thing about MERP are the maps. Holy crap, those maps. (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9qwm-rNX9YEX0hUYkZDdzY1Tjg&authuser=0) MERP had the best fantasy cartography of all time, IMO.

aspekt
2015-03-05, 12:23 AM
I've done a bit with Burning Wheel, which is basically a ME game (it's not an official licensed property, but it's obviously Tolkenien). It's a very solid system, with a great deal to recommend it. It's also an extremely crunchy game, which isn't something that tends to mesh with my GM style, so I haven't actually GMed it at all.

Ya I paged through a copy in a store once. It seemed to pack a lot of crunch into as small a space as possible. I'm not opposed to running a game like that, just kind of overwhelming when looking at it.

A couple of others mentioned earlier that One Ring looked solid. But they gave no specifics. I know that MERP was Rolemaster which is apparently a game for math tutors ;) from what I've heard at least.

BootStrapTommy
2015-03-05, 12:57 AM
The best thing about MERP are the maps. Holy crap, those maps. (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B9qwm-rNX9YEX0hUYkZDdzY1Tjg&authuser=0) MERP had the best fantasy cartography of all time, IMO. I love maps.

Personally I've always wanted to try out the newer One Ring Roleplaying game, but I'm perpetually broke and can afford the books.
Anyone have experience with that?

All my groups none d20 roleplaying experiences ultimately fail. Even GURPS, which I love. But I feel like none of them could resist LotR is TTRPG form.

Kami2awa
2015-03-05, 08:55 AM
Silmarillion explained in 3 minutes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXxU01IgoxU

LOTR background mythology 4 minute summary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLxeoRCcZHfd6dVWFDis_X6HLdYlb_TE0t&v=YxgsxaFWWHQ

Jayabalard
2015-03-05, 02:43 PM
This doesn't follow. Low-level D&D is a perfectly fine fit for LotR characters' abilities.He ran for 3 days straight. The non-lethal damage from hustling doubles every hour. It's simply not possible for a 5th level D&D character to do that.

It doesn't model Aragorn's tracking ability very well.

They went in single file, running like hounds on a strong scent, and an eager light was in their eyes. Nearly due west the broad swath of the marching Orcs tramped its ugly slot; the sweet grass of Rohan had been bruised and blackened as they passed. Presently Aragorn gave a cry and turned aside. "Stay!" he shouted. "Do not follow me yet!" He ran quickly to the right, away from the main trail; for he had seen footprints that went that way, branching off from the others, the marks of small unshod feet.He spotted pippin's footprints, while on the run. That's a DC 18 check (+1 for small hobbits, +2 for being 2 days behind, 15 DC base for normal ground), at -20 due to "running like a hound".

There are other issues... but the bottom line is that Aragorn is modeled by low level D&D only if you hand wave away all of the things that can't be, which is a pretty circular argument


Aragorn doesn't need to be level 20 just because you like the number 20.Quite true. Likewise, Aragorn doesn't need to be level 5 just because someone likes level 5.

Flickerdart
2015-03-05, 05:07 PM
He ran for 3 days straight. The non-lethal damage from hustling doubles every hour. It's simply not possible for a 5th level D&D character to do that.
It's not possible for anyone to do that - you're not allowed to run overland, period.

Also, a dog can't actually run while tracking - they only have a +5 Survival when tracking by scent. They could manage it at normal speed -5 penalty, but then you don't get to hold the -20 penalty above your head while pointing to it and ululating wildly, so there's that.

Jayabalard
2015-03-05, 07:01 PM
It's not possible for anyone to do that - you're not allowed to run overland, period.Sure you can; overland running is done by hustling (that's how long distance running works in D&D).

Any character that can take 2^78 damage can "run" for 80 hours straight like Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas did.

They ran for about 80 hours non-stop, except 2 fairly short rest breaks. A 5th level character can't do that. Ergo: Aragorn, Gimli, and Legolas cannot actually be modeled as 5th level characters.


Also, a dog can't actually run while trackingAragorn can. The text is "running like hounds on a strong scent" which would be something like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFx4MNfDiwY

veti
2015-03-05, 09:44 PM
He ran for 3 days straight. The non-lethal damage from hustling doubles every hour. It's simply not possible for a 5th level D&D character to do that.


Or a 50th-level one, for that matter. Or a 500th-level one, or a 50,000th level one, absent some kind of restorative magic.

But putting in two rest breaks makes all the difference. 2^23 is only 8,388,608 HP. I guess you could have that many at a mere level quarter-million or thereabouts.

However, given that there exist real people who can run for 24 hours or more non-stop, I think something may be broken in the rules there.

Satinavian
2015-03-06, 03:29 AM
I always assumed, his "running" was modelled by longstrider or similar spells/abilities which allow faster and longer movement than a normal human should be able to achieve. It was noticed as an achievement in the books after all and thus was not really normal.

illyahr
2015-03-06, 10:22 AM
Or he could be doing a forced march. Otherwise, Gimli wouldn't be able to keep up. The orcs were frequently stopping for one reason or another so a forced march would have them catch up eventually. That has a Fortitude save to avoid the nonlethal damage. Rangers get Endurance so he has a bonus on this save.

Flickerdart
2015-03-06, 10:31 AM
Or a 50th-level one, for that matter. Or a 500th-level one, or a 50,000th level one, absent some kind of restorative magic.

But putting in two rest breaks makes all the difference. 2^23 is only 8,388,608 HP. I guess you could have that many at a mere level quarter-million or thereabouts.

However, given that there exist real people who can run for 24 hours or more non-stop, I think something may be broken in the rules there.

Well, now we've settled it - because of that one scene, Aragorn must be level 250,000, meaning that he fights level 200,000 or so Uruk-hai.

illyahr
2015-03-06, 10:44 AM
No, it does not. Please don't spread misinformation.

In the Black Speech, "Uruk-hai" (http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/u/urukhai.html) literally means "orc-people", and is more specifically used to describe the large soldier-orcs that appeared in the late Third Age. Also, at no point does Tolkien suggest that they were created by crossbreeding with humans. While he does make references to orc-like men, those are a different thing (and are NOT explicitly described as crossbreeds, either), and the notion of Uruk-hai being half-men was invented by Peter Jackson for the films.

Actually, the original direct translation was "orc-men." Orcs only use the word "man," or any equivalent word in other languages, when referring to humans so it followed that they were "orc-humans" or half-orcs.

johnbragg
2015-03-06, 06:47 PM
D&D has a pretty fast rate of advancement. You could ask the same questions about real life people, why after decades in a profession, even a combat profession, they are still more or less still regular people rather than the demigods that are mid level D&D characters.

Ooh, ooh, I know, I know.

XP needed to level increases. Encounter CR stays the same.

Let's tweak the math a bit to make a CR 1 encounter worth 100 xp at level 1. You get some CR 2 or 3 encounters, you get some CR <1, let's say they balance out.

So 10 encounters puts you at level 2. 20 more encounters to get to level 3. 30 more to get to level 4. 40 more to get to level 5. Level 6 is 50 more than that, a total of 150 encounters.

(I'm using 10 encounters instead of 13.333 because it makes the math easily comprehensible.)

That sort of math puts the Seal Team 6's and British SAS of the world at around level 3-6 or so.

See also http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2 where I got most of the idea.

EDIT: This also models a lot of real-world professions. There's a often a noticeable difference in performance based on experience between a rookie lawyer/teacher/etc and a 3rd or 5th year. Between a 5 year, 10 year, 20 year veteran, not nearly as noticeable a difference. Steep learning curve at the beginning, then it flattens out.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-06, 08:29 PM
Ooh, ooh, I know, I know.

XP needed to level increases. Encounter CR stays the same.

Let's tweak the math a bit to make a CR 1 encounter worth 100 xp at level 1. You get some CR 2 or 3 encounters, you get some CR <1, let's say they balance out.

So 10 encounters puts you at level 2. 20 more encounters to get to level 3. 30 more to get to level 4. 40 more to get to level 5. Level 6 is 50 more than that, a total of 150 encounters.

(I'm using 10 encounters instead of 13.333 because it makes the math easily comprehensible.)

That sort of math puts the Seal Team 6's and British SAS of the world at around level 3-6 or so.

See also http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/587/roleplaying-games/dd-calibrating-your-expectations-2 where I got most of the idea.

EDIT: This also models a lot of real-world professions. There's a often a noticeable difference in performance based on experience between a rookie lawyer/teacher/etc and a 3rd or 5th year. Between a 5 year, 10 year, 20 year veteran, not nearly as noticeable a difference. Steep learning curve at the beginning, then it flattens out.

Next from Onyx Path: Classroom, the Teaching :smalltongue:

This is actually really interesting, but remember that most people aren't fighting 3-5 encounters per day (suggested number for D&D 3.5), which means that if we assume that a soldier sees combat once a month (to pick a random number, I have no idea how often any serviceman sees actual combat, whether as an average or in wartime), then the average D&D character is earning XP at roughly (30*4=)120 times as fast as a soldier, which means that by the time our soldier reaches level 2, the D&D character will have had 1200 combats, or 120000 XP, enough to place him at level 16 (probably level less if he remembers to sell his loot occasionally). This is assuming that all our combat are against those same orcs we were fighting at level 1, and the XP values for encounters do not change as we level.

No, I am not going to work out a version with the 15 minute adventuring day.

Flickerdart
2015-03-06, 09:37 PM
EDIT: This also models a lot of real-world professions. There's a often a noticeable difference in performance based on experience between a rookie lawyer/teacher/etc and a 3rd or 5th year. Between a 5 year, 10 year, 20 year veteran, not nearly as noticeable a difference. Steep learning curve at the beginning, then it flattens out.
Actually, if you look at the way skills accrue, it's about the same way already - from level 1 to 6 you only about double your total skill check if you're trying to get the highest possible result.

aspekt
2015-03-06, 09:46 PM
I love maps.

Personally I've always wanted to try out the newer One Ring Roleplaying game, but I'm perpetually broke and can afford the books.
Anyone have experience with that?

All my groups none d20 roleplaying experiences ultimately fail. Even GURPS, which I love. But I feel like none of them could resist LotR is TTRPG form.

Then you would love the MERPS modules with the maps still intact. Sadly, it is out of print and typical prices for complete modules are exorbitant.

I love maps too. I have laminated my Faerun map and plan on laminating most of my large rpg maps.

Tolkien adored maps as well. But you probably knew that.

YossarianLives
2015-03-06, 10:43 PM
I love maps.

Personally I've always wanted to try out the newer One Ring Roleplaying game, but I'm perpetually broke and can afford the books.
Anyone have experience with that?

All my groups none d20 roleplaying experiences ultimately fail. Even GURPS, which I love. But I feel like none of them could resist LotR is TTRPG form.
I've never played the One Ring RPG but I'll be getting my new copy in a couple days.

I'm so excited. :smallbiggrin:

Premier
2015-03-08, 11:04 AM
Actually, the original direct translation was "orc-men." Orcs only use the word "man," or any equivalent word in other languages, when referring to humans so it followed that they were "orc-humans" or half-orcs.

Please provide a citation that supports this. You insist on making this claim, but there's nothing in the novel or its appendices to support it, I am not aware of any books edited by Christopher Tolkien that would support it, and in fact various sources such as this one (http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Category:Black_Speech_words) directly contradict it. If you insist on standing by this claim, I have to ask you to provide evidence.

illyahr
2015-03-08, 07:34 PM
Please provide a citation that supports this. You insist on making this claim, but there's nothing in the novel or its appendices to support it, I am not aware of any books edited by Christopher Tolkien that would support it, and in fact various sources such as this one (http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Category:Black_Speech_words) directly contradict it. If you insist on standing by this claim, I have to ask you to provide evidence.

Are you really getting this worked up over a difference in revisions? Uruk-hai are half-orcs for the same reason that Han shot first. In the original printings, the Uruk-hai were only used by Saruman. Treebeard guessed that Saruman was cross breeding orcs and men (http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Half-orcs) to create a creature larger and more cunning that your standard orcs. In later revisions, distinctions were made between Uruk-hai and half-orcs, Uruk-hai being the ones that Saruman made and half-orcs being the ones that bred true. So, yes, they are the same thing just in different generations of breeding.

Can we move on, please?

GreatWyrmGold
2015-03-08, 07:35 PM
If this debate is a war, I'm about to apply third-party carpet bombing.


Magic is "weaker" than in D&D, and yet much more ingrained in the fabric of the world, without being taken advantage of. How would one translate this into an RPG experience? I'd love to play a game at a power level close to this.
It's almost as if it was carefully integrated into the world by a man who spent more time on worldbuilding than writing the actual story.


...You can argue and nitpick, but if that's a low level D&D character, the level system is utterly bankrupt.
Lots of people make that assumption, simply because it only takes a few levels before your average character starts drifting from the realm of above-average, to near the human maximum, to superhuman. Hit points alone mean that low-level fighters are routinely taking abuse well above what normal people can, especially if you compare the numbers but it works without doing so.
Let's take a concrete example. Your typical 1st-level human fighter, dwarf monk, or half-orc barbarian would have a pretty good chance of defeating a typical soldier or guard (1st-level warrior) on his own, in a fair fight. A typical 1st-level rogue would be at a disadvantage in a fair fight, but has skills that make unfair fights easy to arrange and very deadly. Put all four together and they'll usually be able to defeat a roughly equal number of guards, with a bit of difficulty, which is good because it means they can break out of prison. Fast forward to level 2. Even the rogue has a decent shot in a (relatively) fair fight, with guards being doomed if she decides to pull off a sneak attack. In battle, they can take guards on one-to-one with ease. By fifth level, they'd have the same level of ease being outnumbered 3:1, and could take on a couple dozen guards with ease. By 10th level, you're reaching the point where armies of normal people aren't so much an insurmountable foe as a painful obstacle, magic or no magic.


Nat 1s happen, dude. You know that as well as I do. Even if he's tough enough to survive, it might still kill him.
A 95% to survive falling from orbit relatively unscathed is about as impressive as a 100% chance, bud.


It's reasonable to assume that the abilities we see him use, are only a subset of those he has.
Is it? It's reasonable, I suppose, to extrapolate directly from what we see—ie, we see Spider-Man lift a 1-ton car, he can probably lift a 1-ton rock. But beyond that?


But more importantly: a 5th-level Aragorn just doesn't make sense given the character's backstory. How has he survived for, like, 60 years in the wilderness, fighting orcs and trolls and wargs on a daily basis, and accumulated only enough XP to reach... level 5? He should have passed that point 59 years ago.
And his power level should be in the hundreds, minimum.
No one worth talking to is suggesting that LotR characters not only follow the same rules as D&D characters, but also advance at the same rate. Mostly, they're saying that Character X is roughly equivalent to Build Y because of Z.


You know how crazy this looks if you're not thinking novels operate using 3.5 rules, right?
It looks like they're trying to figure out how novels might work out in 3.5 rules, so they can compare the characters in those novels to characters in 3.5. If that's crazy, then so is everything on this forum and most of the stuff on the Internet.


♫♩ I didn't mean to staaart a war!♫♩
Congratulations! That's one more way you're not like Hitler.


Actually, he's pretty on par with a starting Solar Exalt, assuming you don't minmax and don't spend BP on raising his Essence.
Alternatively he could make a good Fire or Earth Aspect Dragon-Blooded.
Either Aragorn is way more powerful than I thought, or Exalted characters much, much less.


...There are other issues... but the bottom line is that Aragorn is modeled by low level D&D only if you hand wave away all of the things that can't be, which is a pretty circular argument.
For sake of argument, let's assume that someone wants to roughly model Aragorn in D&D terms. (You need to do so roughly, because 90% of fiction violates D&D rules, and those of any other sane system, at some point or another, whether for dramatic effect, realism, or what-have-you.) If we don't want to do that, this debate is pointless, including all posts that don't basically just say "This debate is stupid. LotR doesn't follow D&D rules."
With that assumption, which is easier to explain: That Aragorn is an epic-level or near-epic-level ranger who happens to lack animal companion, spells, and the deific combat ability of a 20th-level character, or that he is a low-level ranger who used luck, drama, and a bit of whining at/lying to the DM to manage incredible feats?


Ooh, ooh, I know, I know...
Nice.


Back to the original question, I'd suggest not using D&D. It's balanced around the assumption that the party will have access to fireballs, cure spells, and enchanted everything. If you want a round campaign, don't use a square system. If you want magic to be so intimately integrated with the setting, build the setting from the laws of physics up. This will probably require building the campaign around GURPS or a similarly modular system.

Premier
2015-03-08, 09:21 PM
Can we move on, please?

No, we cannot move on. Again, provide citations. So far all you have done is assert, that is, say things in an authoritative tone of voice, and hope people will be swayed by the tone regardless of the content of your claims. But assertion is not proof or evidence. It doesn't matter how authoritatively you state your claim, if that claim is incorrect, your presentation or repetition isn't going to change that.


Are you really getting this worked up over a difference in revisions? Uruk-hai are half-orcs for the same reason that Han shot first.

As far as lore (rather than literary history) is concerned, the thing that matters is the ultima manus, the last edition of the book that the author has seen. And in that one, "Uruk-hai" means "orc-folk" and not "orc-men", they're a stronger version of orc, created (as per the appendix) centuries before Saruman turned (so there's no way he could have created them), and there's nothing suggesting they're half-men.

If there's some now-obscure version of the novel from, say, the fifites, in which these details are clearly and overtly different, that's an interesting piece of trivia, and feel free to share more details about it. But those bits of trivia are not part of the "world lore" in the same way (to carry further your Han Solo parallel) Luke Skywalker is NOT called "Luke Starkiller", and stormtroopers don't have shields and laser swords, either, even though that's what the first drafts say.


In later revisions, distinctions were made between Uruk-hai and half-orcs, Uruk-hai being the ones that Saruman made and half-orcs being the ones that bred true.

I'm not sure what some 50s or 60s editions might say, but as far "later" editions are concerned, Uruk-hai were NOT created by Saruman. Again, the appendices of the very same later editions you're alluding to make it clear that Uruk-hai existed in Mordor centuries before Saruman settled in Orthanc.

PS: Oh, and the very same link you shared about Half-Orcs leads to a site which clearly separates them from both Uruks and Uruk-hai. Even your own link is contradicting your claim.

Anonymouswizard
2015-03-08, 09:59 PM
As far as lore (rather than literary history) is concerned, the thing that matters is the ultima manus, the last edition of the book that the author has seen.

Citation please? I really want to know where this is from, because it's certainly an extreme view (the only thing that can matter is the last edition the author worked on? What id something left out of that edition is explained in an earlier edition?), unless you mean that the latest source takes precedence, which is a view I agree with to a cautious extent. I don't actually know enough about the lore to argue the point, but am interested in the reason behind this statement.


If there's some now-obscure version of the novel from, say, the fifites, in which these details are clearly and overtly different, that's an interesting piece of trivia, and feel free to share more details about it. But those bits of trivia are not part of the "world lore" in the same way (to carry further your Han Solo parallel) Luke Skywalker is NOT called "Luke Starkiller", and stormtroopers don't have shields and laser swords, either, even though that's what the first drafts say.

The Starkiller and stormtrooper example would be closer to arguing that Aragorn marrying Eowyn is 'world lore', which I have heard was in several manuscripts, but was changed before release. This is more like changing Anakin's look in Return of the Jedi to be closer to be like the prequel trilogy (but then why does he look so young? Shouldn't he look like the old man he is?).

No more points here, have fun debating :smallsmile: (plus can you cite these appendices please? Either quotes or as good a location as possible, it'll make your arguments better, you are also guilty of asserting here, although I may have missed an earlier citation, I am going to follow this argument to be sure EDIT: sorry, you did provide evidence, but I'm too tired to work out if they are direct from the books right now)

illyahr
2015-03-08, 10:24 PM
This is more like changing Anakin's look in Return of the Jedi to be closer to be like the prequel trilogy (but then way does he look so young? Shouldn't he look like the old man he is?).


This was my point exactly, thank you. It wasn't that one was right or one was wrong, it was that both, after a fashion, are correct. I was unaware that the in-lore definition had changed as I only had an early copy of the books. I still refer to them as half-orcs as that's what they are in the edition I read.