Trolls Goblins Giants Elves Dwarves

Dear Rook

i say this out of concern.

you need to get a life.

 

I know, way late in the discussion...but I agree with Morpheus. One author can take snippets from everywhere, and make them mean what he wants them to mean.

Also, GG didn't do ANYTHING to Tolkien. Rook, you say you can't stand "what he did to Tolkien" on the issues of the goblins/orcs. Nothing GG did with D&D did anything to change Middle Earth.

Tolkien's estate objected to GG's use of Hobbits, so he changed the name to Halflings while leaving the description identical. Evidently no one responsible for the estate cared about Orcs.

Now, on to Rangers...The Ranger class as it is in D & D is NOT drawn totally from Tolkien. Where was Aragorn's Animal Companion then? To tell the truth, I find Legolas (who was not called a Ranger, IIRC) to be more D & D Ranger than Aragorn, who WAS called a Ranger. I don't remember Aragorn being a hotshot bowman (though he carried one, I'm pretty sure) OR excelling in Dual Wielding. That was all Legolas. I also believe that Tolkien's Rangers were human?

What GG has done, for fantasy writers in general, is taken from as many fantasy sources and Mythological sources as he could, and put his stamp on it. He has given us a source for imaginative play, with rules and statistics to go by.

 

Pedantic point but Legolas didn't 'dual wield'. He had one long knife.

The Rangers in Tolkien were originally Elvish in the wars against Morgoth. Later on men joined them. The Dunadan of the North then set up a ranger organisation because they were few and had a lot of territory to cover. This then became the focus of their survival when the Kingdom of the North was trashed beyond salvation.

Even Tolkien was plundering things from elsewhere. Check out Beowulf. (After writing the Hobbit, Tolkien decided that he wanted to get away from the existing mythology - in his letters he even regrets using 'wizard', never mind elf, dwarf and goblin.)

Not too fussed about the whole thing to be honest; does it matter unless you are trying to play a game in the Middle Earth setting?

 

Oh, guess I was remembering his knives from the Movies then:
http://www.worldofweapons.net/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=855

As far as the Rangers goes, I didn't know that. I've only read LoTR once, prior to the first movie. I typically have to read two or 3 times to really absorb something.

And no, I don't think it matters either in Faerun, Greyhawk, or Eberon.

 

in LOTR the Rangers are not a class, they are a people (a race), the Dunadan.
there never were Elf rangers or any other kind of race as rangers.
Tolkien even distinquishes the Sons of Elrond from them,by saying they rode with them, as opposed to them also being Rangers.
Wizards were also not a class, there were only 5 ever.

check page 8 and 146 of LOTR.

 

Check the history of the elenriss The star was given to rangers operating out of Minas Tirith (the original one in Beleriand) as well as the guards of the stronghold. Before the Edain joined the Elven wars, these must have been Noldo elves.

Doriath had rangers who operated on the borders of Melian's girdle. These were Sinda elves.

The Rangers of the North was the common name, used by the common folk, for the descendants of the Dunadan of Arnor who did not relocate to Gondor.

Faramir's rangers may or may not have all been Dunadan. (Unlike the Dunadan of the North, Gondor interbred with 'lesser' men.)

Let's not confuse a term for a people and the term for someone who uses knowledge of the wilderness to help his people defend themselves.

re. Wizards. Depends on what you mean by the term. And this is why Tolkien really regretted not using Istari throughout his works when he wanted to specifically refer to the five.

 

i read the Sillmarillion a long time ago, i do not remember any Rangers, please give me chapter and page where he refers to anybody who is not a Numorian as a Ranger.
there were Elves garding the forests, but he never called them Rangers.
i think you are confusing D&D rangers with LOTR Rangers.
i also read Lost Tales, and Unfinished Tales 1 and 2, no Rangers there either.
Tolkien refer to other magic users ie: the Mouth of Sauron but he dosn't give them a title, although he does say the Mouth "learned great sorcery".

Numorians=Dunadain=Rangers
Dunadain of Arnor=Rangers of the North
Dunadain of Gondor=Rangers of the South

 

i went to the local bookstore (i have alot of time on my hands, because i need a life.)
there are no rangers in the Sillmarillion, i repeat, no rangers,none,nada, not human, not Sindar, not Noldar, not Dwarves, and/or Hobbits. none!
no rangers in Lost Tales 1 or 2, again none!
there are rangers in Unfinished Tales, but they're the same ones as in LOTR. the exact same ones (Aragorn and his crew).

so i'll say it again in LOTR Rangers are a race, not a class.
Gygax borrowed them and turned them into the rangers we know and love.
may a god bless his soul.

 

In the middle of moving house, so will give chapter and verse from Letters once I'm in the new place. For your amusement though, in the early drafts of the LotR there was a hobbit ranger called Trotter! :no:

 

never read Letters, never even heard of it. Tolkien might of played with the idea, but at the end he droped it, so Rangers remained a race. i am going to get his entire collection though, cause my interest in all things Tolkien has been rekindled. aper:

 

His letters are interesting as they shed more light on what was going on in the background which is useful for settling some of the more obscure debates. There's a few good .alt sites which deal with Tolkien too. They tend to be very friendly to people who haven't the inclination or time to read every scrap of paper Tolkien jotted something down upon. I did my MA on Tolkien (albeit from a linguistic perspective) but I'm not quite as bad as some of my friends. It's fun to point out the contradictions in the canon though eg why did the dwarves allow Khazad-dum to be called the Black Pit on the western gate? :evil_laug

 

Just a thought on magic users in LoTR before I head to bed. The Witch-King also used sorcery which hints at the Numenoreans having the ability to use magic (cf construction of Orthanc and the main wall of Minas Tirith).

Tolkien makes a distinction between natural or in balance magic and sorcery or unbalanced magic which corrupts.

Just realised I typed Dunadan and not Dunadain in my previous posts. Good job this isn't a tolkien forum :doh:

@Ted - how about Sauron building Barad Dur without foundations then? Elrond says that the foundations of the tower couldn't be removed/destroyed because they were built using the power of the one ring. Problem is that Sauron started building the place c. 600 years before he made the ring. And as soon as he made the ring, he finishes work on Barad Dur. :Crazy_Lio

 

Still on about this, are we?

Tolkien..."ran-" is the root of the word ranger. It means to wander or stray. This is why Aragorn thought the term derogatory, especially when utilized by unlearned or uncouth folk such as Barliman Butterbur. In fact, he was not wandering about without aim, his purpose was to guard a defenseless folk who were unknowingly keepers of a great evil. "Ranga" is another root, which means to stride....hence the name Strider also bore for Aragorn a certain distaste. He let those who didn't know better think what they would so as to maintain a low profile, and only opposed the enemy openly very late in his quest to restore his throne. Even then his purpose was to draw out the strength of Mordor away from the ringbearer's objective. He lived in the wild for some 70 years seeking out the servants of the enemy, and aiding the efforts of the White Council in the prelude to the War of the Ring. Why, you ask? Elrond said that Arwen could marry a mortal who was no less the King of both the Northern and Southern Kingdoms of the Numenoreans in Middle Earth. He became the greatest warrior among men of the third age as a result. His path was far from a direct one, but he was much more than a mere wanderer.

Gygax...Rangers are a sub-class of fighters who are adept at woodcraft, tracking, scouting, infiltration and spying. Rangers must be of Human or Half-elven stock(1st edition). This was later expanded to include Elves (Unearthed Arcana). Rangers must select in their initial array of weapons a bow or light crossbow, a dagger or knife, spear or hand axe, and a sword of some type. There were many other rules, but weapon specialization was key to their evolution as fighters, as was their ability to slay ALL creatures related to the humanoid and giant kinds.

Clearly, Gygax used Tolkien as a source in the development of his ranger character class. Aragorn was both a warrior skilled in the aforementioned abilities and a member of the race of dispossessed Numenoreans. There are many, many examples of warriors of this type mentioned throughout the works of Tolkien...which makes them 'rangers' in one form or another, or even both. Aragorn never used a bow that I can recall in the LOTR, but that doesn't mean that he didn't know how to use one. In his days as a warrior fighting for Thengel...or when he served Denethor as Thorongil...he probably had ample opportunity to use many different weapons, as Narsil had yet to be reforged. Displaying this weapon openly would have revealed his true identity as the heir of Isildur, and would have made him a target of the servants of Mordor.

As far as 3.5 rangers in D&D go, I doubt that Gygax had much to do with their creation. Animal companions...? How about Beren's friend, Huan the hound, who knew the speach of men and spoke with a human voice thrice during his lifetime.