Class labels as a mechanical straightjacket in D&D.

icyshadowlord · Post by **icyshadowlord** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:40 pm

Do note of one thing. Not only was Gandalf more experienced than the rest of the crew in LotR (if we wanted to use D&D stats for them, I am sure Gandalf would be AT LEAST three levels higher than the others), but he was also a greater being, something like a demigod of some kind. If Aragorn or Legolas had somehow managed to beat the Balrog, they probably would have died in the process. But unlike Gandalf, they most likely would have stayed dead as well.

talozin · Post by **talozin** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:43 pm

violence in the media wrote:If Gandalf isn't a "wizard," what method of observable distinction are we using to exclude Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Aragorn from the sphere of "capable adversaries of the Balrog"?

Gandalf is a Maia. Gimli, Boromir, Legolas, and Aragorn are not. "Wizard" in the Tolkienverse is just what ignorant mortals call Maiar who look like old dudes.

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:54 pm

violence in the media wrote:If Gandalf isn't a "wizard," what method of observable distinction are we using to exclude Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Aragorn from the sphere of "capable adversaries of the Balrog"?

Actually, this is a great example of the original point of the thread. If the only reason that you can think of for Gandalf being a bad-ass is that he has the word "wizard" attached to him, that's a bad thing. It shouldn't matter if he's called Gandalf the Ranger or Gandalf the Fallen Angel or whatever.

violence in the media · Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:11 pm

hogarth wrote:
violence in the media wrote:If Gandalf isn't a "wizard," what method of observable distinction are we using to exclude Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Aragorn from the sphere of "capable adversaries of the Balrog"?
Actually, this is a great example of the original point of the thread. If the only reason that you can think of for Gandalf being a bad-ass is that he has the word "wizard" attached to him, that's a bad thing. It shouldn't matter if he's called Gandalf the Ranger or Gandalf the Fallen Angel or whatever.

No, I'm saying that's the only distinguishing characteristic that the audience can latch onto for determining that he can fight the Balrog where the other members of the party cannot.

It doesn't matter that the term is "wizard", it's the fact that there is no other identifiable justification for him to be able to take on the Balrog once it's been established that nobody else could fight it.

edit: I'm arguing against your assertion that you could perform a find/replace function of the text, substituting "wizard" with "swordsman", and still have it make sense without the audience going WTF?

hogarth · Post by **hogarth** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:22 pm

violence in the media wrote: edit: I'm arguing against your assertion that you could perform a find/replace function of the text, substituting "wizard" with "swordsman", and still have it make sense without the audience going WTF?

Actually, I suggested one could replace "wizard" with "bad-ass swordsman". If you don't like that adjectival phrase, you could replace it with "swordlord" or something like that instead.

Of course, we'd still have the same arguments about "if Gandalf is such a powerful wizard/swordlord, then why doesn't he ever do anything impressive?", but the plot wouldn't be any different than it was before, IMO.

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:25 pm

hogarth wrote:Actually, this is a great example of the original point of the thread. If the only reason that you can think of for Gandalf being a bad-ass is that he has the word "wizard" attached to him, that's a bad thing. It shouldn't matter if he's called Gandalf the Ranger or Gandalf the Fallen Angel or whatever.

Gandalf is bad-ass, but not because he is a "wizard." (And as one can argue there really are no "wizards" in Tolkien's world as we define the term.) His massive age in years, his massive connections with the "who's who" of the creat creatures of Middle Earth, and his inhuman nature makes him bad-ass, and then it wasn't really until his resurrection that he really became the bad-ass. Gandalf the grey was mostly "imnpressive" (but in a village of Hobbits ... that's bad-ass ... the entire fellowship would be bad-ass in the Shire).

sabs · Post by **sabs** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:26 pm

I always assumed because when ever Gandalf did big magic, Sauron would go.. I sense a disturbance in the pants.

Novembermike · Post by **Novembermike** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:32 pm

violence in the media wrote:If Gandalf isn't a "wizard," what method of observable distinction are we using to exclude Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Aragorn from the sphere of "capable adversaries of the Balrog"?

They weren't badass enough.

If we'd taken some of the old age melee fighters like Feanor or the elf who almost killed a god in a duel except for the god's treachery, that balrog would have gone down in about twenty seconds.

icyshadowlord · Post by **icyshadowlord** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:43 pm

See, it actually IS about levels and not about WHICH levels you have in LotR. Because apparently Fighters (or at least non-casters) could kill gods in duels.

talozin · Post by **talozin** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:48 pm

icyshadowlord wrote:See, it actually IS about levels and not about WHICH levels you have in LotR. Because apparently Fighters (or at least non-casters) could kill gods in duels.

Only if they're elves. Or have artifact swords, if you count Glaurung as a god.

Gods_Trick · Post by **Gods_Trick** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:32 pm

Most of it was about race in LotR. Wizards where embodied Maiar. High Elves were crazy powerful, up to mini-Maiar.

The most impressive person there by the no special Race factor is Aragon, since he will-dueled Sauron with his Palintir and beat him, something that impressed Gandalf.

And even thats a so-so since he was mostly of a Numenian (spelling?) bloodline which were Men+awesome.

The classes in LotR mattered a whole lot less than Race I'd say.

erik · Post by **erik** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:56 pm

I think that can be said wiith the exception of hobbits who are supposed to be the everyday people. Granted that is still race related, but those are the guys who are supposed to be the 'normals' oddly enough.

CCarter · Post by **CCarter** » Tue Mar 29, 2011 11:05 pm

Novembermike wrote:
violence in the media wrote:If Gandalf isn't a "wizard," what method of observable distinction are we using to exclude Legolas, Gimli, Boromir, and Aragorn from the sphere of "capable adversaries of the Balrog"?
They weren't badass enough.

If we'd taken some of the old age melee fighters like Feanor or the elf who almost killed a god in a duel except for the god's treachery, that balrog would have gone down in about twenty seconds.

Some google fu informs me that fighters in LOTR (if the guy here isn't a bard, even...

) have killed Balrogs, though Tolkien changes his mind occasionally on how tough balrogs are supposed to be.

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

Swordslinger · Post by **Swordslinger** » Wed Mar 30, 2011 4:31 pm

CCarter wrote: Some google fu informs me that fighters in LOTR (if the guy here isn't a bard, even... :) ) have killed Balrogs, though Tolkien changes his mind occasionally on how tough balrogs are supposed to be.

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

Must be a change of rules editions on middle earth. 1E balrogs sucked.

Plebian · Post by **Plebian** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:21 am

Swordslinger wrote:
CCarter wrote: Some google fu informs me that fighters in LOTR (if the guy here isn't a bard, even... ) have killed Balrogs, though Tolkien changes his mind occasionally on how tough balrogs are supposed to be.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecthelion_of_the_Fountain
Must be a change of rules editions on middle earth. 1E balrogs sucked.

pffff, Second Age is the best Middle Earth. I bet you're one of those babies that plays Third Age. here's a tip, buddy, Third Age removes everything interesting about the setting and prevents any sort of roleplay. go back to your videogame and rollplaying.

Judging__Eagle · Post by **Judging__Eagle** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 3:49 am

Obviously, Balrogs are shinobi, and are more powerful when presented in fewer numbers. I mean, geez, you gais. Learn2meme.

tzor · Post by **tzor** » Thu Mar 31, 2011 2:44 pm

One important thing to understand about Tolkein, if you really want to understand him (as opposed to the world he created which sort of took on a life of his own) is that the LOTR is the only real work of published canon about his full thoughts on Middle Earth (technically speaking The Hobbit was written before most of his thoughts were completely fleshed out). The other writings were unpublished material that his son later edited and compiled into the Similiarion.

So you get to the question, were certain people less bad ass, or were other people simply more bad ass, in the dawn of time, or was it just a question of ever expending legends by the people of Middle Earth at the time of the War of the Ring. Perhaps it was a combination of the three.