We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 401
  1. #251
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    Good thing nobody needs a level of evidence that would be enough to state "they were bound to be there" then. And as for "just because", individual level of motivation can be far more than that - though sure, it can be as silly as "just because" for everybody else too.
    Oh sure, because something's merely vanishingly unlikely rather than impossible that means it's totally going to happen and is completely plausible. And 'individual level of motivation'? Sorry, what? Sounds like nothing more than an excuse for having people acting out of character by being there at all. You go on and on about how it could theoretically happen but that doesn't make it any more plausible that some random Dwarf or Elf warrior (note that last, it'd have to be not just any random Elf or Dwarf traveller but someone who'd be up for fighting alongside the Rohirrim) would just happen to be there on just the right day, just wandering blithely through a war-zone.

    And hobbits? As far as the book goes it's just plain daft to suggest that a hobbit would just happen to be there. Obvious lore-break is obvious.

  2. #252
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    On the same basis that you could read it as "more of your race than just you".

    On what basis do you read it exclusively that way, if you do?
    There have been more than enough quotations from JRRTs works to support a reading or 'more than just you', not the least of which is the repeated use of the definite article. Do you have any citations to support the other way to read it?

  3. #253
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    10,510
    It seems to me that this whole debate revolves around whether or not people are willing to accept that having player characters at the Battle of the Hornburg is a lore break or not because, while many people want their characters there, some don't want them there if it breaks lore for that to happen.

    The question I would pose is this: Even if it is a lore break, do you want your characters to be in the battle sufficiently to ignore the lore? If so, then why try to argue that it isn't a lore break?

    We all know that Turbine does things that break the lore to varying degrees, from allowing hordes of Hobbits to roam the landscape, to shrinking the landscape, to swift travel, to flashy magical effects by PCs, to...make your own list. But Turbine doesn't go around making up excuses for those things, and--by and large--neither do the players. So what is it about *this* battle that makes people try to insist that having player characters present somehow *isn't* a lore break, when it so plainly is? Why do people go out of their way to torture the language to wedge what they want into the lore, when the available evidence doesn't support such circumlocitions? And even if someone doesn't think it's a lore break (or thinks it is a trivial one), why argue so vigorously that it isn't? The player characters are going to be in the battle for any player that chooses to do the battle instances. As far as the battles being "end game" content, that's no different from ToO. The only difference between those two being that--apparently--the BB instances are going to be part of the Epic Books...and in that way, those that value *both* lore *and* Turbine's Epic story are on the horns of dilemma.

  4. #254
    Quote Originally Posted by whheydt View Post
    There have been more than enough quotations from JRRTs works to support a reading or 'more than just you', not the least of which is the repeated use of the definite article. Do you have any citations to support the other way to read it?
    No, there were a lot of quotations from Red Book and "peripherals", not a single ex-cathedra citation of a "real" author among them, speaking on that specific topic and with a clear intent to clarify what goes and what does not.

    Even when we forget about pretty standard issues interpretation of quasi-historical source has to account for and methodology it involves, they are not supporting that reading directly, more like not contradicting it. Neither they are directly contradicting the other one, just making it less probable and only for a reason that the first one creates a degree of additional consistency between various pieces of Red Book. But with Red Book being what it is supposed to be, with intent of the authors in general and in particular scene, limitations, bias, repackaging the material over and over again, omitting things that were beyond the scope, artificial conversations-to-describe-what's-there, generalizations (and the list goes on and on) consistency in such secondary or tertiary area is nowhere near something that can be demanded on principle or that could justify the decision which reading is "correct" on its own. Which means we're back with the lack of ex-cathedra statement, while almost every single potentially (and only potentially so far) corroborating evidence is either from the same people responsible for Red Book or attached to it by them.

  5. #255
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Middle-earth
    Posts
    1,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    First of all - thank you. Now I know that at least one more person suffered because of it, pain should always be shared.

    Bolded part says it all. The rest is an easy way to squash Jackson's version with actual "host" arriving in Helm's Deep - but hardly anything that can invalidate relatively small number of PC that can be referenced by LOTRO quests. As for Red Book describing only Rohirrim, we have to remember that it also describes only those Rohirrim that were in any way connected to either their king or, more importantly, Fellowship. We can be also relatively sure that only a few of those who did talk to, help, require a rescue etc from Aragorn & co have been mentioned by name or by any other means. We still have absolutely no idea about any Rohirrim warriors that actually did something worthy of note inside Hornburg - that shows us authors were not interested even in what Rohirrim were doing when fates of Rohan were being decided. After a battle like this, if there was, somehow, lack of great deeds and heroes of Rohan, they would simply be invented to fill the unnatural void. But what happens when Red Book is written about events in more "sophisticated" Gondor? You suddenly get to know even who has been trampled by oliphants.

    Not sure why you decided to add HoMe, seeing how discarded earlier drafts are not exactly a compelling evidence, neither is whatever Chris says. But it still deserves an answer:
    So, according to that version of HoMe, Aragorn was not there either.
    Chris.
    Not even early draft - and again, since when do we need to be among "his men"?
    Eomer came back with 20 men, ones he commanded to go with him either by merit or because they were simply in the range of his voice. Sure, it could be considered unlikely that he came back with 20 men if there was also 300 elves and 200 dwarves defending the keep. Luckily...
    Completely reasonable. It's a missing company, assuming it has slightly more "military" meaning, we are unlikely to be "documented" members of any "regiment".
    He didn't know who was helping Theodred either As for fishing for various versions of a word "man", I hope you do not imply that fortress being "manned" actually means anything. What else could it be, "elved"? It could also be assumed that he gathered men from the forces defeated or drafting all inhabitants he could or both (at least from that piece alone). While it can mena something, what other version would you expect? "and the gathering of such men of Westfold as he could and also one dwarf named Iamnotreallyhere, slayer of dragons and rider of goats"? What respected author would even add that to Red Book? Not sure which is a bigger offense - adding unimportant information or focusing on individual while "men of Rohan" are left as a unrecognizable mass.

    Fords, I know, already mentioned it
    Now we know we didn't meet Grima on the way.

    Yes, we already know what Rohirrim were doing at the time. Appendices show less, not more.
    Bolded to show the only part what matters for the issue at hand, if at all.Bolded part alone shows Gimli, Aragorn and even Legolas were clueless about the exact racial make-up. Imagine standing in front of a thousand people and knowing anything save from the obvious: that Rohirrim were everywhere you could look. Which doesn't change that much, really, as we already have a record of not going with everybody else and still ending up in the same place afterwards.
    Reasonable. Even if we insist our character was defending Fords as well, "they" could be only expecting to find king's men - it was known knew who went there. It's a different thing to say that they knew everything what happened at Fords - and there was no reason to expect those "men" changed into dwarves after defeat.
    Not sure about that one. So we are not riding with the rest, not around the Important Guys, not around at the time, Legolas is still awesomer? Oh, possibilities!
    Hm... so going with your fishing for words like "men", are we supposed to assume that Erkenbrand gathered all men he could and the rest, including a dozen of angry dwarves from a caravan that was crippled by warg-riders , was scattered? If so much depends on using "men" even though generalizations are always common, not using that word should also be considered very meaningful. After all, if we go with the assumption that the authors insist on making a statement about "exclusivity of human presence" everywhere they use "men", they must've had very important reason not to do this in other places. Anyway, Fords already dealt with above.

    Sorry, Ceorl, you are right to correct me, the last host of Eorlingas AND that countryless human, dwarf and elf over there, along with annoying wizard who should be somewhere around. Now, why would it ever occur to me to ommit them, when talking about my awesome host? That would only invite those damned bards to commit lore-breaking.

    See Edoras - the more of them around, the more generalized your observations become.
    We made sure we didn't let anyone else in, checked their genealogy trees and deeds to the land in Westfold at the gates. Otherwise, you can be sure I would mention a small number of random people that were not from Westfold, even though the number of Westfolders surely dwarfs everything else to allow me to make my generalization and get on with the story.
    Um, sure, so now we know that our character was not crucial to the number of defenders required to man the wall and burg. I think we already knew that
    Some men came back during the battle, Frodo. Um, what? They moved fast, I didn't really check. Why are you insisting I have to be sure about their race, you annoying midget? You know I am a king now, so take what I can remember or I can help you make a chapter about that wasteland to the south no one is writing much about for some mysterious reason.

    Apart from "men fishing", yeah, I wouldn't be amused seeing that scene and our character rescuing every NPC from their stupidity. But that's execution alone.
    Er... what? Unless it's Aragorn screaming (most likely), you seriously insist that horse-breeders and hillbillies were able to tell that was the sword, the only sword in history (?) that was shiny, and, at the top of that, they already knew what was its NEW name? If it's not Aragorn, then you just quoted the evidence that even constant corrections were not enough to save books from every absurd.

    No mention of Legolas. He was not there! Or moon made him hopeful. Gimli too then? Aragorn? Getting too convenient now.

    Well, wimps. Not everyone was hardened by riding and running between Rivendell and Delossad.

    Yup, troubling part (though still execution) seeing how jwbarry did mention something about culvert. Or who knows, maybe they were smart enough to have us repair what Gimli "managed" later on?

    Legolas was not a Rider. Boom, lore-break, John, how about fixing it? bolded part as a mockery of "fishing for men".

    So he knows who was with Eomer, since he was, understandably, focused on his leader - and few people around caught his eye as well. In the worst case - he, that one guy, knew of one dwarf in HD. That's not exactly reassuring.

    See Edoras. Also, notice how the only people named were holding a high rank or friends of the authors. Detecting a pattern here? No, go way, don't tell me about thanes, it's depressing enough.

    He sends men of Rohan to inform other men of Rohan. Then he sends his subjects to participate in an assembly they have to participate because they are his subjects. So?Would you require to know that he also told someone else to kill 10 westemnet boars? So we are not riding to Isengard with Theoden. I cna live with that, hopefully so can Turbine. Especially that we can meet him there anyway.
    I think you missed my point with these.
    Remember, we are these incredible super-fighters that slay hordes of Orcs alone, we have giant glowing weapons like Aragorn's (which was constantly being pointed out by soldiers during the battle), enormous over-the-top spikey and colourful armour, we shoot fire from our fingertips and we fart lightning bolts. It's not just the fact we are of a different race that is alien and greatly mistrusted by the Rohirrim (which alone is already extremely noteworthy).
    If we had been at the battle, someone would have noticed us. Someone would have mentioned us for doing all the work alone (again) and being a spectacle because of us making that big light show.
    If there were 12 elite warrior Dwarves present at Helm's Deep that were doing a lot more killing than Gimli, Gimli would not constantly have been called "The Dwarf" by the Rohirrim. Same goes for Legolas and Elves.
    If there had been warriors of our caliber among the Rohirrim, many of those mentions of "Riders of the Mark", or "Aragorn, Eomer and their men" or "Gandalf, Théoden and the Rohirrim" would at some point have distinguished us from Rohirrim. Not everywhere of course, but at least somewhere, since we are the greatest warriors there, easily trumping Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas. 41 Orcs is a record Gimli? Please, I just killed 540 for a simple deed, and the daily repeatable objective in Helm's Deep is killing 100 within 10 minutes or something.
    My point is, we would be the most noteworthy people there, by far. And yet only Théoden, Aragorn, Erkenbrand, Gandalf, Háma, Legolas, Gamling and Gimli are mentioned by name, and only Legolas and Gimli stand out by race and are called "The Elf" and "The Dwarf". To even suggest we could have been there as our characters currently are is ludicrous.



    Um, no, we know of that 1,000 and of Fords. The notion that 1,000 and Erkenbrand encompasses all that happened in that part of the country is extremely weird. Again, it is important if we want to establish that there couldn't have been any other organized forces about. But that's all. Even population movements are not described save from the single detail that a lot ended up in Helm's Deep - and that's kinda more significant than individual level of detail.
    I didn't say that was all that happened in that part of the country. We also know Saruman's army marched through.
    But that is in the end irrelevant, because Erkenbrand and the soldiers he rallied were the only ones who came to the rescue, and we can not be part of them for three reasons:
    - They were soldiers trying to hold the Isen Ford, we are not.
    - We are in the Eastemnet, they are in the Westemnet.
    - According to Turbine we will be participating in the battle long before they arrive.

    We could potentially enter the Hornburg before Théoden gets there if we suspend the notion of time, but even then there are factors working against it.
    - The Garisson is pretty paranoid at this point, raving about Saruman and his spies. When Gandalf rides through the region, many think it's Saruman. They may see us as such spies or disguised Dunlendings since Turbine's NPCs are not know for their intelligence.
    - We would miss more iconic scenes like Théoden riding out from Edoras or Grima's expulsion. I doubt Turbine would let those lie.
    - We'd have to have some reason to go there in the first place without knowing about it. I can't think of any.


    growing wings and being able to visit Lorien, Stangard, Lorien again, then Eastemnet and, most notably, back and forth (!) between Cliving and Ethengels, then Edoras, then Snowbourn again... Just... no. It's not like we shouldn't participate in HD - we shouldn't even make it for the assembly afterwards. Any idea that a timeline restricts us in any way is just surreal at this point. If we do allow for bending the timeline, then bending is still bending no matter whether Helm's Deep or Theodred are involved.
    I prefer no time bending in Epic Quests at all, but it's too late for that. Now I just hope for as little as possible, but even that is too much to hope for.



    Nope, see: Lorien. Already slayer of stuff and hero of whatever.
    We killed what, at most two dozen orcs alongside Legolas & Gimli in the forest. That's somewhat different than the Hornburg, where I'm expecting the usual kill 100 orcs quests. 600 orcs in 30 minutes if you want max reward for this new Objectives system or something.



    Oh? I was pretty sure questline started in Galtrev, everything before that (Enedwaith) does not end up with the usual "whoa, it's a dragon! go, slay him". So I might be missing something here, but even then it's "rotting in Dunland" issue again.
    There's two up in Thror's coomb.


    Agreed. The point, however, still stands. Unless Frodo was xeroxing everything Elrond had in his library. It's stranbe he wasn't interested in that whole Nazgul business either, it was, after all, much more vivid to him.
    It wasn't just Frodo writing it. At an old age Pippin went to Minas Tirith and worked with Aragorn's scholars on it for revision and corrections.


    Um, yes it does if you expect us to draw the attention in Helm's Deep. Afterwards, it's still a matter of how it fits into a story about Fellowship.
    Why would you expect that deed to draw the attention in the Hornburg (I presume that's what you mean) ? The book wasn't written in the Hornburg. It was written after the events of WoTR, the Rohirrim not knowing some of our deeds at the time doesn't matter.




    Any reliable ones who were expected to a. know what a Nazgul was b. to carry the news forward in that... civilized surroundings? You know, like with Bard who was pretty much surrounded by the only few who still resisted, entire town witnessing a demise of Smaug and immediately associating the deed with the "doer", who also had a talking trush on his side and ended up as a king with a legion of his subject spreading the word?
    Yes, namely ourselves. They may not believe the Rohirric soldier that was present, or Nona, or the adventuring fellowship, that is true. But we have done these sort of things so often with reliable witnesses like Elrond, Gandalf and Galadriel, and with proof to bring back, that no one will question us when we say "Oh yeah and I met another Nazgûl down at the Brown Lands and one again at Rohan's East Wall. Funny story, the first one was actually the one I killed at the top of Dol Guldur. That's one unlucky Nazgûl to keep running into me, right? Anyway, I dealt with it. Again."
    Honestly they can't be all that surprised when we already defeated two Nazgûl before, not to mention the dragons and Maiar we also offed.


    Too bad elves are leaving and by the time their songs are translated (if at all), Frodo seems like your only (?) hope. But while he could certainly write a piece or two about you, it's unlikely to happen before he deals with the most important task and then a need for corrections is not exactly that significant. That story is told, the topic has little to do with its purpose.
    It happens before the fellowship leaves Rivendell, so time enough. And even without a song, you can be sure Elrond wrote it down, that's his job after all. After his parting I can imagine Aragorn's scholars writing a piece.


    That is probably one more reason not to boast about it (it's like stacking controversies: ally of Dunlendings, pretending to "defeat" Saruman, known for talking people into believing whatever he wants? As for Eagles... are they spreading M-E news and legends now?
    No.
    First of all, these particular Dunlendings are fighting against Saruman and this is known by the Rangers and by the Rohirrim in this game.
    Heck, even in the books the Rohirrim are aware Saruman has lied to a number of Dunlending tribes and they spare said Dunlendings after the battle. They don't regard the Dunlendings as evil.
    Secondly, Saruman does not talk people into believing what he wants, Tolkien stresses this greatly in letter 210. He does not have a hypnotic voice, as some seem to think, above everything he uses logic and is simply persuasive. Simple examination of the logic and using reason leads people to reject him, as Gandalf, Aragorn and Théoden do.
    Think cult leader: he doesn't hypnotise people, he's just very persuasive and uses his own special brand of logic that only superficially works but is flawed at the core.



    On the other hand, we know zilch about heroes of Helm's Deep. Unless Erkenbrand showing up and Hama dying fills up the quota... yeah, right. As for the rest, it certainly explains why should we get a song or two after it all ends. But expecting everyone to see our titles floating above our head in Helm's Deep? Not likely. Expecting information to spread out across medieval-ish countries and various languages, with literacy levels somewhere between pathetic and miserable, quickly enough to warrant our place in other stories, despite having less to do with their topic? Not likely either.
    Except they kept contact. The Shire, Rohan, Gondor and the renewed Arnor were all close friends and the Hobbits visited them regularly.
    And here's a bit of speculation on my part: after Rivendell was abandoned by Elrond, Celeborn had to have done something with all of Elrond's books. After all, he wasn't going to stay there forever. Lothlorien was abandoned, so no point going there. What better than to send them to Aragorn's scholars?
    Last edited by BirdofHermes; Aug 10 2013 at 06:33 PM.
    [I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
    [/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
    Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
    The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

  6. #256
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    Oh sure, because something's merely vanishingly unlikely rather than impossible that means it can eventually happen and, in that version, is completely plausible.
    There.

    And 'individual level of motivation'? Sorry, what? Sounds like nothing more than an excuse for having people acting out of character by being there at all.
    Acting out of character is not necessarily the same as acting out of... race? Some things can be considered important enough to defy what socialization left inside ones head or whatever "divine" order of what's plausible and what's not dictates, even if such decision could only be made thanks to individual faults, delusions, misguided sense of justice, compassion etc etc. It is obvious that "don'ts" of "taboo" level should not be treated this way, also because writers are rarely capable of delivering something believable in those extreme cases, but, again, if you are going to tell me that eg. dwarves looking for (something important?) far away break any rule of that importance, you are having issues with scale. There's a lot of space between "female dwarves adventuring" and "it's a bad idea to hang around Moria". "You should not walk into an obvious trap... unless you are Earnur" is an example that is far to the left - and hey, it still works.

    As for the "excuse", you are now trying to interpret the motivations of the other side rather than dealing with what is actually written. Sooner or later you are going to end up with own projections.

    You go on and on about how it could theoretically happen but that doesn't make it any more plausible that some random Dwarf or Elf warrior (note that last, it'd have to be not just any random Elf or Dwarf traveller but someone who'd be up for fighting alongside the Rohirrim) would just happen to be there on just the right day, just wandering blithely through a war-zone.
    First, distances and conditions of the area and of anything around can be easily responsible for being there before it actually becomes a war-zone (which happens pretty quick, considering traveling times). Second, you don't even need a warrior - we are not looking for a replacement of PC that could be present in LOTR instead, merely a factor that could reduce uniqueness of a race, at least that's what my impression was. Whether that PC ends up shooting lightning from his fingertips and fire from his ####... well, I am sure you know what the difference is about then.

    And hobbits? As far as the book goes it's just plain daft to suggest that a hobbit would just happen to be there. Obvious lore-break is obvious.
    Hobbits were retconned years ago. What happens now is not breaking that section of the lore, more like disturbing its corpse with simple consistency.

  7. #257
    Quote Originally Posted by BirdofHermes View Post
    I think you missed my point with these.
    Possibly. I didn't ask for these after all, but they were simply fun to deal with. I don't think I would have bothered otherwise seeing how long it took
    Remember, we are these incredible super-fighters that slay hordes of Orcs alone, we have giant glowing weapons like Aragorn's (which was constantly being pointed out by soldiers during the battle), enormous over-the-top spikey and colourful armour, we shoot fire from our fingertips and we fart lightning bolts. It's not just the fact we are of a different race that is alien and greatly mistrusted by the Rohirrim (which alone is already extremely noteworthy).
    Those people are mistrusting of any of their neighbors, (heck, Eowyn displays a lot of insecurity talking specifically how Rohan woman can compare to ones from Gondor, what do you think such attitude can result in among less educated folk?) and showing garden variety of xenophobia. Just because they have a single story from a completely different time and space about, specifically, dwarves, probably told as a fairy tale for adults by now, it is merely an excuse to be a dick for at least one group "legitimately". The others were wild and dirty, weird, half-animals, mysterious... anyone I have missed? On the other hand, if it's just about "aliens", it's also more shallow and common interest or ad hoc need should be enough in many cases if extreme cases are not involved. When thousands of people are involved, extreme cases are not that loud (and those orcs help a lot too).
    If we had been at the battle, someone would have noticed us. Someone would have mentioned us for doing all the work alone (again) and being a spectacle because of us making that big light show. If there were 12 elite warrior Dwarves present at Helm's Deep that were doing a lot more killing than Gimli, Gimli would not constantly have been called "The Dwarf" by the Rohirrim. Same goes for Legolas and Elves.
    It all sounds reasonable - but there's one thing to consider too: it's a pretty short battle, not a protracted siege when being bored and looking for something interesting to do could actually make sense. It's not an open field battle, where it's all on display either. 12... sure, it's pushing it a LOT, I guess "canonical" version will be a solo encounter of every Big Battle (huh, so there's a reason for THAT design choice? :P ). But one more, among thousands who have fairly static positions during each part of the battle, with limited PoV and quite a lot on their hands? many of "battle" pieces you quoted were a bit incidental. Heck, going by that fragment regarding Eomer and caves alone, knowing that people had not much experience with telling one dwarf from another, you could wonder whether we actually know if "that dwarf" seen with Eomer at a time was indeed Gimli. Obviously silly, but again, that fragment alone? XD

    we are the greatest warriors there, easily trumping Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas. 41 Orcs is a record Gimli? Please, I just killed 540 for a simple deed, and the daily repeatable objective in Helm's Deep is killing 100 within 10 minutes or something.
    My point is, we would be the most noteworthy people there, by far. And yet only Théoden, Aragorn, Erkenbrand, Gandalf, Háma, Legolas, Gamling and Gimli are mentioned by name, and only Legolas and Gimli stand out by race and are called "The Elf" and "The Dwarf". To even suggest we could have been there as our characters currently are is ludicrous.
    So should we try to distinguish between lore-breaking and ludonarrative dissonance? Then again, one flaw can easily function as both...

    - The Garisson is pretty paranoid at this point, raving about Saruman and his spies. When Gandalf rides through the region, many think it's Saruman. They may see us as such spies or disguised Dunlendings since Turbine's NPCs are not know for their intelligence.
    Ha! Imagine being thrown into prison inside Hornburg before the battle. That's a start of the questline few would expect
    - We would miss more iconic scenes like Théoden riding out from Edoras or Grima's expulsion. I doubt Turbine would let those lie.
    - We'd have to have some reason to go there in the first place without knowing about it. I can't think of any.
    Need to rely on our rocket horse again. As for where - there's always "who" instead, now that we spent so much time with our companions and they can have some measure of influence. But don't ask for details, it would probably be sillier than a rocket horse.

    We killed what, at most two dozen orcs alongside Legolas & Gimli in the forest. That's somewhat different than the Hornburg, where I'm expecting the usual kill 100 orcs quests. 600 orcs in 30 minutes if you want max reward for this new Objectives system or something.
    In PC's defense, Lorien was the closest thing for a battle we could get, at least mechanically, in those days. Helm's Deep would seem to be problematic not because being Helm's Deep but because of being the first "proper" battle, possibly save from Cleft. As for implications of us pwnzoring everything on "usual" level, then let's say that Turbine is walking deeper and deeper into that one. At some point it would be, depressingly, more believable to find some contrived reason to have us branded a traitor and hunted down into a "redemption arc" somewhere out of the way, so we get some reset of "awesomeness". Thing is, if we allow that line of reasoning to dictate who "should be in HD", we should not land anywhere near Minas Tirith at all. It's a place where even really minor characters couldn't avoid being described with a fair amount of detail.

    There's two up in Thror's coomb.
    Yes, but they are more concerned with that Gaunt stone. If they are not doing the usual "omg you killed it, so awesome, here's a cookie" victory dance, I refuse to believe they know anything about it Not to mention they were also added in that phasing mode, no idea if I should expect them to disappear along with other earlier incarnations and if yes - then the question is whether it happens at 65 or at 75?

    It wasn't just Frodo writing it. At an old age Pippin went to Minas Tirith and worked with Aragorn's scholars on it for revision and corrections.
    True - I don't really know what happened to Elrond's library to be honest - and your speculation below is something that could fill the gap.
    Why would you expect that deed to draw the attention in the Hornburg (I presume that's what you mean) ? The book wasn't written in the Hornburg. It was written after the events of WoTR, the Rohirrim not knowing some of our deeds at the time doesn't matter.
    Something of a knee-jerk after seeing a lot of suggestions that defenders should totally know what we did. If you are happy with pointing out that what we are going to do will end up as outrageous enough, then you are probably right, possibly with Flight 2.0 mitigating something. Or not.

    Honestly they can't be all that surprised when we already defeated two Nazgûl before, not to mention the dragons and Maiar we also offed.
    It kinda looks like the bigger problem than what our deeds can translate into long after :/

    It happens before the fellowship leaves Rivendell, so time enough. And even without a song, you can be sure Elrond wrote it down, that's his job after all. After his parting I can imagine Aragorn's scholars writing a piece.
    Relevance only then - should we put every deed into one sack or create a separate story that focuses on that strange person instead.

    First of all, these particular Dunlendings are fighting against Saruman and this is known by the Rangers and by the Rohirrim in this game. Heck, even in the books the Rohirrim are aware Saruman has lied to a number of Dunlending tribes and they spare said Dunlendings after the battle. They don't regard the Dunlendings as evil.
    Another case of "bragging then, not later" knee-jerk of mine as above, so fair enough. Similar about Saruman - not what he actually did, more like what he was perceived as - I guess I should have simply written "who could do magic and stuff". But again, not relevant for what happens later on.
    Last edited by Ferthcott; Aug 10 2013 at 07:58 PM.

  8. #258
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    316
    I think it would be funny if a dev put out a fake helm's deep gameplay video that showed Rohirrim with gatling guns mowing down orcs from the walls. I bet that would cause a stir!

  9. #259
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    There.
    Not even slightly, as 'eventually' can hardly apply to a singular event - that one battle - and no, having something madly unlikely happen isn't automatically plausible in that situation because, again, you're forcing it to intersect with a specific event rather than, say, happening to meet a random Elf or Dwarf on some perfectly ordinary day in Rohan when there isn't a battle going on.

    Oh, and you might want to check the new forum rules, as FTFY style posts apparently aren't allowed any more. Just saying.

    Acting out of character is not necessarily the same as acting out of... race?
    It is when the nearest Elves were in the habit of avoiding the company of not just Men but even their own kind (and also had their very own war to fight) and there were no Dwarves living anywhere even close (and the Dwarves also had Sauron problems, big-time). That was the way Sauron had intended it, to keep everyone busy enough that they couldn't form any pesky alliances against him. Having Saruman take out Rohan was meant to be part of that, to isolate Gondor from its closest ally. So, let's have less loose talk about what's 'important', because Helm's Deep wasn't so important to everyone - it was a huge big deal for Men, but only part of the picture.

    Hobbits were retconned years ago. What happens now is not breaking that section of the lore, more like disturbing its corpse with simple consistency.
    Having an ordinary-sized hobbit taking part in a prolonged full-scale battle between Men and Uruk-hai hasn't been made any more likely by that. Particularly as the little fellows wouldn't even be able to see over the battlements. Tolkien only ever gave his hobbits fights they could feasibly survive, not protracted open warfare (if you recall what happened to Merry and Pippin, they each get to do something heroic but then they play no more part in the fighting). The way the game has hobbits being the equals of everybody else always has been and always will be silly, and Helm's Deep is the sort of scenario that really makes the cracks show there.

  10. #260
    Quote Originally Posted by BackAgainAndThere View Post
    I think it would be funny if a dev put out a fake helm's deep gameplay video that showed Rohirrim with gatling guns mowing down orcs from the walls. I bet that would cause a stir!
    Already done, not even lore-breaking


  11. #261
    Quote Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU View Post
    you're forcing it to intersect with a specific event rather than, say, happening to meet a random Elf or Dwarf on some perfectly ordinary day in Rohan when there isn't a battle going on.
    If being around when the battle or war itself started was not planned, then it's as likely (or as unlikely) as "on some perfectly ordinary day", intersecting with that specific event is not that different than intersecting with many others. Again, no assumptions that anyone actually goes there "to fight" or "to help save Rohan in general". Not when such journey would have to begin much earlier.
    Oh, and you might want to check the new forum rules, as FTFY style posts apparently aren't allowed any more. Just saying.
    At the point when it's unlikely more than two people are following that particular exchange while additionally cherry-picking posts, the risk of misrepresentation is negligible - and bad faith is not there either. If it's still considered "damaging", then *shrug*.

    It is when the nearest Elves were in the habit of avoiding the company of not just Men but even their own kind (and also had their very own war to fight) and there were no Dwarves living anywhere even close (and the Dwarves also had Sauron problems, big-time). That was the way Sauron had intended it, to keep everyone busy enough that they couldn't form any pesky alliances against him. Having Saruman take out Rohan was meant to be part of that, to isolate Gondor from its closest ally. So, let's have less loose talk about what's 'important', because Helm's Deep wasn't so important to everyone - it was a huge big deal for Men, but only part of the picture.
    The single flaw about it has been already mentioned: if reason, logic and acting in own interest dictated what actually happened with such consistency, not just from the perspective of a community/country but also including individual level, we wouldn't see anything similar to eg. Earnur. Or Thror losing his "faculties". Or that horse inside Troy. Or 1776, 1812 and so on. Or just go with March of Folly, seeing how it's at least decently written example.

    Having an ordinary-sized hobbit taking part in a prolonged full-scale battle between Men and Uruk-hai hasn't been made any more likely by that. Particularly as the little fellows wouldn't even be able to see over the battlements. Tolkien only ever gave his hobbits fights they could feasibly survive, not protracted open warfare (if you recall what happened to Merry and Pippin, they each get to do something heroic but then they play no more part in the fighting). The way the game has hobbits being the equals of everybody else always has been and always will be silly, and Helm's Deep is the sort of scenario that really makes the cracks show there.
    In case it was not clear enough: I didn't mean Tolkien retconned hobbits by sending them on adventure of the age. Something along the lines of tanking a Balrog.

  12. #262
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    1,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent_Price View Post
    At last! The thread everyone was waiting for. Created to pull of some load from the "20 Questions regarding Big Battles" thread and a few others.

    My personal opinion is that the new Instances (yet to be played) are NOT Lore-Breaking.
    At least not in the ridiculous manner some other features were asked along the way to be implemented (Eagle Mounts, Cable TV in Kinhouses etc).

    And let me explain myself a bit better.

    Most of the characters in LOTRO have participated in a cornucopia of quests, in favor of the Free Peoples. And have done many deeds, and run for many personal errands of members of the fellowship and other known figures (Elrond, Gloin, Dwalin, Arwen and the 2 sons of Elrond etc).
    Now if that character -that did SO many things for all those key-figures of the Third Age- did not exist, or at least Tolkien didn't mention, why is it so bad to have them fight a battle that is SO EPIC?

    This is not a "two wrongs make a right" situation/argument. Not at all. It's just it was happening from day C (for example when you spoke to Frodo at Rivendell). It's pretty unlikely your character wasn't mentioned in any Middle-Earth history book, if he did so much (excluding of course all the raids , from Draigoch, to sending the Witch King back to Minas Morgul. If he vanquished all this evil he should be better known than Theodred for example - IMO).
    The only situation i see that a level 85 would justifiably be unknown, is if he only killed landscape mobs (was a true hunter renegade that did no errands and was always lurking in the shadows avoiding NPCs) or participated in Festivals the whole time (in which case he would be well-known among Hobbits! Huzzzaaaaah!!!).


    Anyway here's a good (I believe) trick that even our poor Dwarves, Elves and Hobbits participate in the battle :

    It is known that among the defenders of Helm's Deep were old men and children.
    It would be great if we could have Aragorn/Legolas/Gimli, you know our old buddies from back in the day, secretly sneak us in and dress in armour, and they'd go on defending us to nosey Rohirrim saying, for dwarves and hobbits "It's just a kid, nothing to see here. Move on - move on!".

    It could totally work for Hobbits. Dwarves are quite more difficult to work around (with the beards and all), but i'm sure we could think something out.
    As for elves, the only problem is the pointy ears. Can be solved easily.


    What do yee think?
    The more I have thought about it... the more I have come to the conclusion that our appearance at Helms Deep wouldn't be completely lore-breaking IF Turbine sets it up correctly. As in, I believe that our involvement should be more supportive than direct involvement. No, we do not get any "camera time". But, by our actions, we are able to contribute in some way.
    Dagranhad - Burglar | Aldgarea - Loremaster | Barathrothir - Hunter | Golladhar - Captain

  13. #263
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by BirdofHermes View Post
    Remember, we are these incredible super-fighters that slay hordes of Orcs alone, we have giant glowing weapons like Aragorn's (which was constantly being pointed out by soldiers during the battle), enormous over-the-top spikey and colourful armour, we shoot fire from our fingertips and we fart lightning bolts. It's not just the fact we are of a different race that is alien and greatly mistrusted by the Rohirrim (which alone is already extremely noteworthy).
    I'm really getting annoyed with the "we're incredible super-fighters" line. I realize we are, compared to what we were, but again, we're still not rising to Aragorn's level, or even Legolas or Gimli or Eomer or, as I've said, Eowyn. And as glowy awesome as our weapons are, they still aren't as awesome as Anduril, or the Cardolan weapons of the hobbits. It still, generally, takes quite a lot of us to take down big baddies, and I don't know about you, but I have to be significantly over-level "hordes" of orcs to be able to wade through more than two or three at a time (without a break or some athelas in between), which Aragorn & crew expressly don't. Please, drop this line of reasoning, it's just really, really bad.

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdofHermes View Post
    My point is, we would be the most noteworthy people there, by far. And yet only Théoden, Aragorn, Erkenbrand, Gandalf, Háma, Legolas, Gamling and Gimli are mentioned by name, and only Legolas and Gimli stand out by race and are called "The Elf" and "The Dwarf". To even suggest we could have been there as our characters currently are is ludicrous.
    No, we would not be the most noteworthy people there. As I pointed out elsewhere--we aren't royal or noble, and unless we do personal, life-saving service to one of the named characters, it's unlikely that we would be deemed worthy of mention in these chronicles, however terrific our deeds.

    Though, I'll point out, Turbine have said that these aren't going to be traditional raids where we're the only ones who can take down one big baddie. Our deeds are going to be less flashy than a typical raid, by their own description.

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdofHermes View Post
    It happens before the fellowship leaves Rivendell, so time enough. And even without a song, you can be sure Elrond wrote it down, that's his job after all. After his parting I can imagine Aragorn's scholars writing a piece.
    Okay, here you go, here's the final, definitive answer.

    Yes, Elrond knows all, is duly impressed, and wrote it all down. In another book. That either sailed off into the West with him, or is moldering in the secret ruins of the Last Homely House, or Minas Tirith. Bilbo, Frodo, Pippin, and Aragorn's scholars were deeply, deeply impressed by our deeds...and decided they deserved their own book and songs...which they left in Aragorn's care...with all the rest of that knowledge that has vanished, or is only dimly recollected or vaguely referenced in other books. As impressive as our deeds have been, they are still sidelights and secondary to the importance of the ring, and Aragorn's return. The role we have played in that is vanishingly small, however many dragons we've slain.

  14. #264
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by Taravith View Post
    Are you kidding? This thread is awesome. What you call wayward arguing I call fun. I wish I had that much fun studying literature in university (unfortunately professors considered LotR beneath them - their loss I say).
    Word up, girl. This is a heck of a lot of fun!

    Quote Originally Posted by Taravith View Post
    Yeah that's where I went "lolwut" when I was reading the interview.

    However I was reading the prologue of his Malazan books yesterday and I think I'm getting a clearer picture of what he meant. I suppose it should be put back into its "historical" context of a time when fantasy books had a very black-and-white, simplistic moral structure laid on a medieval-ish world more inspired by romantic epics than actual historical knowledge. I guess he's saying something like what makes him special is that he wasn't following that Tolkienesque model.
    But as you said, purposefully going where Tolkien hasn't gone before is still using Tolkien as a reference point.

    But it's cool to see that history-as-a-discipline itself had followed the same path that fantasy has since taken - I mean people are still pissed at Herodotus for being too epic-y.
    It's a testament to how fundamental to our psyche and imagination the epic form and stories are, that much of our understanding of the world and creative drive seems to be built upon them.
    Yeah, that's the rough thing, any attempt to say, "but my orks are spelled with a 'k' and they're just misunderstood..." Any time you do that kind of thing, or even say, "My story ain't gonna have no orcs! Ah-ha!" Well... that's still addressing Tolkien in some way. I've got an idea, personally, of how to do epic/heroic/etc. fantasy without engaging with Tolkien positively or negatively to a great extent, but I'll keep it to myself for now. I'm kind of in love with the idea and I don't want to open it up to the sniping of the general forum audience, or that fraction of it that has made it this deep into this thread. But, it has a lot in common with LOTRO's method of storytelling (the cynical criticism of others aside) and certain techniques of history that I grew enamored with in college.

  15. #265
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    Already done, not even lore-breaking
    I cried laughing at this... still got the giggles. thanks for that.
    It's me, just me

  16. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by Taravith View Post
    I love that you're quoting me there when someone was accusing me a couple of pages ago of being a lore-breaking-apologist
    Hey - I know how to give credit where it is due


    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    "You should not walk into an obvious trap... unless you are Earnur"
    LOVE it

  17. #267
    The inclusive POV has some validity (about there being room for other unnamed warriors (even of other races) MAY be overlooked / not noteworthy enough for mention, Red Book only ONE account, etc....)

    While the defenders-of-Lore are exclusive in who was actually at the battle - and their POV (backed up with both actual text and seen in context) is more realistically the correct interpretation ("The Elf" The Dwarf", hobbits only in legend, etc).

    So bottom line:


    Does having ANY of us at the Hornburg break lore? YES (except maybe by two human warrior babes who who at character creation I set them as from - ROHAN )...sorry elves, dwarves, hobbits, even men of Bree, Dale, and Gondor...

    Do I care? NOT ONE BIT.

    Could the game be enjoyable with us players only being told about it as we arrive later to help repair the gate or guard the Dunlending POW's who are burying the dead?
    NOT LIKELY - as human nature (especially as paying customers) demands that if we are immersing ourselves in a beloved story, that we would get to see/experience/participate in the most iconic events/highlights of the story.

    OPTIONS:
    A) Player characters fighting in the battle - break lore
    B) Player characters arrive after the fact - most players would seriously feel cheated (but lore is maintained)
    C) Some sort of session play as an anonymous Rider of Rohan (but not a red-shirt security officer on the USS Enterprise )

    What would you have Turbine do?

    Or this?
    D) Session play as your choice of Fellowship member (EA's "Return of the King").

  18. #268
    Seriously though:

    Does Turbine EVER issue any sort or actual customer satisfaction survey?

    Professionally done, sent to the account-holders' last known emails, questions such as:

    1) What did you like/like most about playing LOTRO?
    2) Did you dislike/dislike most about playing LOTRO?
    3) Why did you stop playing LOTRO?
    4) If reason is because of the game (instead of real life issues) - what made it so bad that you quit?
    5) What would you recommend to correct that?
    6) If this issue was corrected, would you play again?


    In nearly 3 years, I have NEVER seen any comprehensive outreach to players/customers such as this - be it email, phone call, links & announcements upon login, etc....(nor have I really seen any marketing).


    Methinks that a full survey done on a yearly basis would go a long way towards prioritizing, addressing, and fixing issues and concerns, rather than just relying on a very vocal minority(?) on the forums - which only a small minority see these anyway.

  19. #269
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by HeirOfNumenor View Post
    The inclusive POV has some validity (about there being room for other unnamed warriors (even of other races) MAY be overlooked / not noteworthy enough for mention, Red Book only ONE account, etc....)
    As a guy who has made an academic study of both history and myth/storytelling, I can assure you that this line of reasoning has a lot of validity. I think it's actually fairly well understood within the field of history now that the stated deeds of kings and princes and such were not the be-all, end-all of noteworthy events, they just had the advantage of being chronicled better and distributed more widely. The "secret contributors of note" thing is a burgeoning genre of historical fiction, as well as the separate study of history in general. The best example I can think of are the Sharpe's Rifles series by Bernard Cornwell (made into a TV series by ITV in the UK, starring Boromir no less... 14 movie-length episodes and he doesn't die once!) Another would be the Cadfael Chronicles, by Ellis Peters.

    Just food for thought.

  20. #270
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    805
    Don't know if its been said before but only skimmed because of the hideous forum colours.


    SPOILER ALERT.....










    I think the horse has already bolted because dwarves, elves, hobbits, and runemages have already been to Edoras ingame and seen the king.

    Ingame the king and his nobility now would not consider Merry to be very special at all as apparently every group that has been coming to Rohan has elf, dwarf, hobbit and runemage mascots.

  21. #271
    Quote Originally Posted by guguzza71 View Post
    I think the horse has already bolted because dwarves, elves, hobbits, and runemages have already been to Edoras ingame and seen the king.
    Well, king himself was having... issues. I wonder if he remembers everyone he exiled or thrown into prison if Wormtongue "loses" some papers

    Ingame the king and his nobility now would not consider Merry to be very special at all as apparently every group that has been coming to Rohan has elf, dwarf, hobbit and runemage mascots.
    If you were Wormtongue, who would you include in a meeting, while planning to "handle" Eomer? Not sure if anyone is going to listen to this kind of people after Gandalf gets everything in order.

    As for random muscle Wormtongue used and everyone who could see us on the road to Edoras and then to the building...

    ...

    I've got nothing :/

  22. #272
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,340
    Quote Originally Posted by daveamongus View Post
    As a guy who has made an academic study of both history and myth/storytelling, I can assure you that this line of reasoning has a lot of validity. I think it's actually fairly well understood within the field of history now that the stated deeds of kings and princes and such were not the be-all, end-all of noteworthy events, they just had the advantage of being chronicled better and distributed more widely. The "secret contributors of note" thing is a burgeoning genre of historical fiction, as well as the separate study of history in general. The best example I can think of are the Sharpe's Rifles series by Bernard Cornwell (made into a TV series by ITV in the UK, starring Boromir no less... 14 movie-length episodes and he doesn't die once!) Another would be the Cadfael Chronicles, by Ellis Peters.

    Just food for thought.
    If we were talking about anything historical in style and content, then sure. But here you're using it as a generalized excuse to try to ram through whatever argument you want to make, which is putting it to the crudest of purposes.

    As for Bernard Cornwell, if you read the author's notes in his books he freely admits to being mildly cheeky with historical details when necessary for dramatic purposes, rather than making any pretence of always writing in the gaps. Mr Cornwell also has the advantage that none of his protagonists are only three foot six, or indeed are anything other than ordinary human beings, and so they have a rather easier time fitting in.

    P.S. Sean Bean as Boromir - "Still Sharpe"

  23. #273
    How did the lore-fundies cope with anything up til now? Angmar was destroyed, and no longer a threat, so SoA "breaks lore." MoM shows a dwarf expedition to Moria years before it was resettled, that "breaks lore." SoM depicts an expedition from Lorien that seems to have been omitted from the Appendix, that "breaks lore." There are dozens of things that "break lore" all the time in the game, from random settlements in the Lonelands and Eregion, to the huge number of hobbits wandering Rhovanion.

    Maybe, they don't though. Just because something contradicts the books doesn't mean that it "breaks lore." The standard ought to be, if Tolkien had originally written this change into the books, would it feel out of place?

    By that standard, there's nothing really wrong with Angmar being restored, or the Iron Garrison trying to reoccupy Moria, or with extra non-humans at Helm's Deep. These changes bend lore, but they don't break it. They are consistent with the internal logic of Middle Earth.

    Widespread magic, friendly orcs, firearms, Eagle-borne paratroopers; these would be out of place. But not every change from the text "breaks" the lore.

    Now, if you want to talk about lore-breaking, how about we go back to RKs and the shockingly wide dispersion of first and second age artifacts?

  24. #274
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    6,340
    Quote Originally Posted by Wiedman View Post
    By that standard, there's nothing really wrong with Angmar being restored, or the Iron Garrison trying to reoccupy Moria, or with extra non-humans at Helm's Deep. These changes bend lore, but they don't break it. They are consistent with the internal logic of Middle Earth.
    No, they're not - you haven't looked at it in enough detail. As written, Angmar's sole purpose was to take out the North-kingdom, and once that was done Sauron put his efforts into bringing down Gondor instead, as well as messing with the Elves via Dol Guldur. There would be no logic to bringing back Angmar because there was no big strategic objective for it in the North - it had done its job successfully. As for Moria, it doesn't fit in with how the Dwarves were under threat of an attack on Dale and Erebor by Mordor and needed everything they had to prepare for that (especially since Dain was afraid that Dale would simply surrender rather than fight). A lot more would have to be different before either of those changes would be consistent. That's why these truly are drastic breaks, rather than bends.

    There's a difference between something being passably Tolkienesque in style (which a reinstated Angmar or attempt to retake Moria could be, in principle) and them fully following Tolkien's scheme of things (which neither can). That's what you've stumbled over there.

    Going back to Helm's Deep, having additional non-humans there would clash with Tolkien's logic as to why they're not there in the first place. The whole situation would have to be different for it to make sense - in the book the Fellowship are presented as utterly exceptional, not a template for groups of adventurers (as LOTRO originally had things prior to the emphasis on soloing). Having multiracial groups of adventurers as a norm is the logic of the typical FRPG, out of place in a Middle-earth setting. Again, a great deal more would have to be different in order to neatly retrofit that - some proper logic for everyone cooperating like that, rather than it clearly ignoring all the differences and mistrust that kept the different peoples apart in the books.

  25. #275
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Middle-earth
    Posts
    1,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferthcott View Post
    Those people are mistrusting of any of their neighbors, (heck, Eowyn displays a lot of insecurity talking specifically how Rohan woman can compare to ones from Gondor, what do you think such attitude can result in among less educated folk?) and showing garden variety of xenophobia. Just because they have a single story from a completely different time and space about, specifically, dwarves, probably told as a fairy tale for adults by now, it is merely an excuse to be a dick for at least one group "legitimately". The others were wild and dirty, weird, half-animals, mysterious... anyone I have missed? On the other hand, if it's just about "aliens", it's also more shallow and common interest or ad hoc need should be enough in many cases if extreme cases are not involved. When thousands of people are involved, extreme cases are not that loud (and those orcs help a lot too).
    If by mysterious half-animals you mean Elves or Hobbits, then sure. Could also be Dunlendings, though ironically they as Rohan's enemies in this war are initially more "accepted" because they are at least human, not some thieving Dwarf, murdering Elf or a Hobbytla.
    But I disagree that if thousands of people are involved, extreme cases are not that loud, at least not in our case. If it were just Hunters or Burglars, maybe even some melee classes, then I can understand that. But we're talking light beams from the sky, Explosions and lightning/frost/fire balls that can be seen for miles around.



    It all sounds reasonable - but there's one thing to consider too: it's a pretty short battle, not a protracted siege when being bored and looking for something interesting to do could actually make sense. It's not an open field battle, where it's all on display either. 12... sure, it's pushing it a LOT, I guess "canonical" version will be a solo encounter of every Big Battle (huh, so there's a reason for THAT design choice? :P ). But one more, among thousands who have fairly static positions during each part of the battle, with limited PoV and quite a lot on their hands? many of "battle" pieces you quoted were a bit incidental. Heck, going by that fragment regarding Eomer and caves alone, knowing that people had not much experience with telling one dwarf from another, you could wonder whether we actually know if "that dwarf" seen with Eomer at a time was indeed Gimli. Obviously silly, but again, that fragment alone? XD
    I agree with the short battle. But as for static position, that seems to not be the case the way Turbine described it. Apparently groups are supposed to split up at various times and do their own number of objectives at different locations.
    And no, obviously not that fragment alone.



    In PC's defense, Lorien was the closest thing for a battle we could get, at least mechanically, in those days. Helm's Deep would seem to be problematic not because being Helm's Deep but because of being the first "proper" battle, possibly save from Cleft. As for implications of us pwnzoring everything on "usual" level, then let's say that Turbine is walking deeper and deeper into that one. At some point it would be, depressingly, more believable to find some contrived reason to have us branded a traitor and hunted down into a "redemption arc" somewhere out of the way, so we get some reset of "awesomeness". Thing is, if we allow that line of reasoning to dictate who "should be in HD", we should not land anywhere near Minas Tirith at all. It's a place where even really minor characters couldn't avoid being described with a fair amount of detail.
    Oh no, we have had far bigger fights than in the Lorien Gimli&Legolas. Many skirmishes and instances require to kill waves of 10+.
    Which is why I think our roles should be severely turned down.



    Yes, but they are more concerned with that Gaunt stone. If they are not doing the usual "omg you killed it, so awesome, here's a cookie" victory dance, I refuse to believe they know anything about it Not to mention they were also added in that phasing mode, no idea if I should expect them to disappear along with other earlier incarnations and if yes - then the question is whether it happens at 65 or at 75?
    Oh I forgot about those. No I actually meant the ones up in the library with the 2 Dwarves. They're the ones who decipher the map to Draigoch's Lair and the crazy one gives you the ominous warning about the dragon when searching for gold.



    True - I don't really know what happened to Elrond's library to be honest - and your speculation below is something that could fill the gap.
    Would be a waste letting it rot.



    Something of a knee-jerk after seeing a lot of suggestions that defenders should totally know what we did. If you are happy with pointing out that what we are going to do will end up as outrageous enough, then you are probably right, possibly with Flight 2.0 mitigating something. Or not.
    Not them, the ones who later wrote the books/songs about us. I don't care a toss what the soldiers at the Hornburg know about us at the time.



    It kinda looks like the bigger problem than what our deeds can translate into long after :/
    Well, nothing apparently. Which is silly since we are the greatest heroes of the Third Age if you go by deeds. The only things we haven't had a chance to defeat are Durin's Bane and Smaug. And the things we haven't defeated YET are the Witch-king and Sauron. Give it time.



    Relevance only then - should we put every deed into one sack or create a separate story that focuses on that strange person instead.
    I have no idea.





    Quote Originally Posted by daveamongus View Post
    I'm really getting annoyed with the "we're incredible super-fighters" line. I realize we are, compared to what we were, but again, we're still not rising to Aragorn's level, or even Legolas or Gimli or Eomer or, as I've said, Eowyn.
    Oh but we have. We've killed a lot more than they, and we have defeated stronger opponents. I mean, please, they had trouble with one Moria troll as a fellowship. They couldn't even touch a Balrog.
    Only Eowyn will eventually do a noteworthy feat (with the help of magic), but as explained before that can be attributed to Inspiration buffs.


    And as glowy awesome as our weapons are, they still aren't as awesome as Anduril, or the Cardolan weapons of the hobbits. It still, generally, takes quite a lot of us to take down big baddies, and I don't know about you, but I have to be significantly over-level "hordes" of orcs to be able to wade through more than two or three at a time (without a break or some athelas in between), which Aragorn & crew expressly don't. Please, drop this line of reasoning, it's just really, really bad.
    You may not be able to, but we do. Hell I can take on 10+ on-level orcs on many classes.
    And indeed, Aragorn & crew do not wade through two or three at a time. I can't think of any situation in the books where they did. I think Boromir tried though.
    Also, why are Anduril or the Cardolan weapons not as awesome as ours? You haven't even seen the damage on it yet. Aragorn may prove to have a stupidly low DPS, we don't know yet.




    No, we would not be the most noteworthy people there. As I pointed out elsewhere--we aren't royal or noble, and unless we do personal, life-saving service to one of the named characters, it's unlikely that we would be deemed worthy of mention in these chronicles, however terrific our deeds.
    Oh you mean like...Gamling?
    Honestly, that's just a really bad argument. People were noted not just for being royal or noble, but for their deeds as well, and their interaction with fellowship members (which we have done from day 1 in Rivendell).





    How did the lore-fundies cope with anything up til now? Angmar was destroyed, and no longer a threat, so SoA "breaks lore." MoM shows a dwarf expedition to Moria years before it was resettled, that "breaks lore." SoM depicts an expedition from Lorien that seems to have been omitted from the Appendix, that "breaks lore." There are dozens of things that "break lore" all the time in the game, from random settlements in the Lonelands and Eregion, to the huge number of hobbits wandering Rhovanion.

    Maybe, they don't though. Just because something contradicts the books doesn't mean that it "breaks lore." The standard ought to be, if Tolkien had originally written this change into the books, would it feel out of place?

    By that standard, there's nothing really wrong with Angmar being restored, or the Iron Garrison trying to reoccupy Moria, or with extra non-humans at Helm's Deep. These changes bend lore, but they don't break it. They are consistent with the internal logic of Middle Earth.

    Widespread magic, friendly orcs, firearms, Eagle-borne paratroopers; these would be out of place. But not every change from the text "breaks" the lore.

    Now, if you want to talk about lore-breaking, how about we go back to RKs and the shockingly wide dispersion of first and second age artifacts?
    We protested the ones you mentioned as well (except early Angmar, since it was excused for being defeated before it actually did something noteworthy). But since they're here to stay now, protests against them have quieted down. The Battle of the Hornburg is still something that can be salvaged by giving us a less important role or something.
    [I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
    [/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
    Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
    The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

 

 
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload