Thread: Hobbit's should be able to be Lore-Masters!

Hobbit's should be able to be Lore-Masters because they only have 4 available classes, which sucks, and they would make awesome Lore-Masters because their pet bears can protect them and Hobbit's are just awesome....AND I want to be a Hobbit Lore-Master cuz I like Hobbit's and I like Lore-Masters!!!

Eh.... if you can point at the lore and give an example that justifies a Hobbit loremaster, I think Turbine will go with it....

Otherwise, not gonna happen.

Even the RKs and Wardens have some lore justification for being what they are.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see more pint sized classes running around (Hobbit captain FTW =), but they need lore justification first.

lore justification???

This whole game is based on the books of J. R. R. Tolkien.

The races, classes, and combinations of race & class are based on specific characters from the books.

I could not possibly disagree more with the OP. It's not lore-appropriate, and I'm sure Turbine wouldn't give it a second thought, so I'm quite glad about that.

From The Lord of the Rings, "Concerning Hobbits":

Hobbits have never, in fact, studied magic of any kind...

Nope. No Hobbit Lore-masters.

Khafar

Originally Posted by Galadhvaethor

lore justification???

Yes. Perhaps you've heard of the books?

Originally Posted by Khafar

From The Lord of the Rings, "Concerning Hobbits":

Hobbits have never, in fact, studied magic of any kind...

Nope. No Hobbit Lore-masters.

Well, that pretty much nips it in the bud, don't it.

Originally Posted by Khafar

From The Lord of the Rings, "Concerning Hobbits":

Hobbits have never, in fact, studied magic of any kind...

Nope. No Hobbit Lore-masters.

Khafar

I guess that rules out my Hobbit Runekeeper.

Now lets talk about a Hobbit Champion, thats what I want. But Warden is close.

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Eh.... if you can point at the lore and give an example that justifies a Hobbit loremaster, I think Turbine will go with it....

Can you point to an example that justifies a Man or an Elf calling lightning down from the sky, conjuring earthquakes, and ordering around sentient races of animals? I seem to have missed those in the text.

Originally Posted by Khafar

From The Lord of the Rings, "Concerning Hobbits":

Hobbits have never, in fact, studied magic of any kind...

Nope. No Hobbit Lore-masters.

Except the justification for Lore-masters in the first place is that what they're doing is not magical at all. It's natural, terrestrial, alchemical, scientific, but not magical. So that has nothing to do with it. There is nothing in the text to say that Hobbits are incapable of mastering the elements.

Originally Posted by Ascus2

I guess that rules out my Hobbit Runekeeper.

I don't see why. The RK is nothing more than an effective scribe and rhetorician. If any race in Middle-earth was meticulous about histories, genealogies, and records, it was Hobbits of the Shire. Hobbits are at least partially justified as RKs by this knowledge. As tenuous as the justification is for the whole RK class, I see no reason why Hobbits should be restricted.

Now lets talk about a Hobbit Champion, thats what I want. But Warden is close.

Warden is nothing like Champion. I play both. But there is also no reasonable justification restricting Hobbits from being Champions either. The reason given years ago was that Hobbits weren't able to wield large two-handed weapons. If that's the case, then they shouldn't be Guardians either. Now, of course every race needed to be able to be the only tank in the game when it launched, so they got Guardians anyway. Now that Hobbits can be Wardens, if the justifications are to remain consistent, either Hobbit Guardians should be removed or Hobbit Champions added.

Originally Posted by gildhur

Can you point to an example that justifies a Man or an Elf calling lightning down from the sky, conjuring earthquakes, and ordering around sentient races of animals? I seem to have missed those in the text.

There's certainly some justification for Men, Elves, and Dwarves using magic, although not those specific things. None at all for Hobbits, though, and a pretty explicit mention against it.

Except the justification for Lore-masters in the first place is that what they're doing is not magical at all.

This is where I insert the appropriate smilie : That was a thin and silly rationale meant to give rhetorical cover for what was obviously magic. Bottom line: gamers like to play magic-users, but they couldn't give them Wizards in this setting. So they provided "lite" versions.

But there is also no reasonable justification restricting Hobbits from being Champions either.

Agreed. I think Hobbits should be able to be Captains too. (Just not LMs or RKs ).

Khafar

Originally Posted by Khafar

This is where I insert the appropriate smilie : That was a thin and silly rationale meant to give rhetorical cover for what was obviously magic. Bottom line: gamers like to play magic-users, but they couldn't give them Wizards in this setting. So they provided "lite" versions.

I agree, but if that's the case then having a further exclusion for any particular race is just that much more absurd. If you admit that the whole rationale for allowing LMs and RKs is a handwave, then the racial restrictions on them is just a more elaborate handwave, so why would you continue to defend it?

More specific as to why there are no Hobbit Lore-masters. This is also from the Prologue, Concerning Hobbits on the next page after Khafar's reference.

A love of learning (other than genealogical lore) was far from general among them, but there remained still a few in the older families who studied their own books, and even gathered reports of old times and distant lands from Elves, Dwarves, and Men. Their own records began only after the settlement of the Shire, and their most ancient legends hardly looked further back than their Wandering Days.

Also from the Prologue is this bit. They do not and did not understand or like machines more complicated than a forge-bellows, a water-mill or a hand-loom, though they were skillful with tools. This would seem to imply that Hobbits would have nothing to do or even any understanding of Alchemy which is the basic premise for the 'Magical effects" of the Lore-master class.

The Hobbits were basically as a people very practical and simple in their ways. While as a rule they all knew their "letters" were mostly just barely literate. They mostly used their reading and writing ability for practical matters of daily life and keeping in touch with family and friends. Think along the lines of an old English Country Squire or Gentleman Farmer. In fact, I would go so far as to say that Bilbo would be considered to be the most "Learned" Hobbit to have ever graced Middle-earth up until the point in Middle-earth history that our characters are presently living.

Originally Posted by gildhur

I agree, but if that's the case then having a further exclusion for any particular race is just that much more absurd. If you admit that the whole rationale for allowing LMs and RKs is a handwave, then the racial restrictions on them is just a more elaborate handwave, so why would you continue to defend it?

Men, elves, and dwarves all have connections with magic. Hobbits are specifically stated to have NO connections with magic.

No Hobbit LMs. Maybe Hobbit Champions, maybe not.


But Dwarf LMs and Dwarf Wardens should be added.

Originally Posted by Almagnus1

Eh.... if you can point at the lore and give an example that justifies a Hobbit loremaster, I think Turbine will go with it....

Well, I'd love to see ANY lore justification for the Class itself...


As for the OP, /signed and good luck but it's not going to happen. Regardless of how arbitrarily the class/race combo were reached, they (Turbine) has not shown any intention of changing it.

IMO, for the next expansion (Isengard), Turbine should make it a priority to finish animations for every race-class combination (yes, EVERY). Then add the ones that weren't originally in the game to the LotRO Store as Premium Classes. This would make them available for people who want to play them, but limit their commonness in-game since you'd have to "purchase" them, and also bring in potentially substantial revenue from new exclusive offerings.

I for one can't wait to play my Elf Captain, Dwarf Lore-master, and Hobbit Champion.

(yes, this post was 110% serious)

Originally Posted by gildhur

(yes, this post was 110% serious)

I Don't care if you were 110% joking lol, I'd pay money for a Dwarf Capt, LM, Warden, and any thing else the game has to offer in terms of classes.

Originally Posted by gildhur

(yes, this post was 110% serious)

And the other 890% was joking?

We all know that elves can do "elf magic," so Elvish LMs are ok. The wizards in Middle Earth, although not men, appeared to folks as men. That's my justification for Men LMs. Not much, but it's all I've got, folks. I don't think that arguments even that bad can be made for dwarves and hobbits.

It all comes down to just how much you want to stretch and bend the lore, which is already mightily stretched and bent thin/crooked for game-play purposes.

Originally Posted by bigsix66

That's my justification for Men LMs.

Well, we know that the Numenorians used magic, and although their lineage is undoubtedly very thin by this time (except for the Dunedain)... it's still there. Also, at the door to Moria, Gandalf said that he once knew all the spells to open a door in the languages of elves, and men, and orcs. And then from outside the lore for this game, there's still the rumors of one of the Blue Wizards in the east teaching some magic to followers there - those would of course be men. Finally, it's at least plausible that some of Grima's "leechcraft" used on Theoden was magic, taught by Saruman. Not merely poisons and such.

As for dwarves... in The Hobbit we see them putting spells over their buried treasure to help keep it safe. And in LotR, mention was made of the magical toys at Bilbo's party, "of real dwarf make". Sure, that could mean "magical" as in "enchanting"... but perhaps not. All it takes is some leeway, and Turbine can go with it. What I don't think they should do is to deliberately violate what the books say (such as Hobbits using magic when it states pretty explicitly that they don't).

Khafar

Originally Posted by Khafar

(such as Hobbits using magic when it states pretty explicitly that they don't).

Khafar

But they're not... no one is.

Borrowing from your own previous post...

This is where I insert the appropriate smilie : That was a thin and silly rationale meant to give rhetorical cover for what was obviously magic. Bottom line: gamers like to play magic-users, but they couldn't give them Wizards in this setting. So they provided "lite" versions.

It's as thin and silly rationale as Turbine Saying Lore masters are inspired by Elrond. They used one of his character's description as a Master of Lore - i.e. someone who collects and safe guards Knowledge, into the Name Lore master, and then add abilities to the class that's hardly indicative of what Elrond Is (or is that was... but he's fictional) and Then apply it to Man (sorry to the other poster but I laughed at the rational "because Gandalf Looked like a Man).


Edit: this brings back a memory of a Closed SoA Beta thread when I got flamed for saying LMs use magic and throw Fire Balls... No, they do not use magic, and they throw ball shaped acorns that are in flames.

Originally Posted by Khafar

From The Lord of the Rings, "Concerning Hobbits":

Hobbits have never, in fact, studied magic of any kind...

Nope. No Hobbit Lore-masters.

Khafar

ANNNNnnnd /endthread

lulz. Speaking of lore appropriateness RK's should be removed completely -_- give the middle finger to anyone who QQ's

I'm going to go all technical cryptic lore wonk on yall with this: Lore-masters are not in the least bit Hobbity. Anyway, if certain race-class combos are going to be prohibited, this is one of the most logical AFAIC.

Now whether there should be such restrictions in the first place though..I think the lore has little to say about that. I could make a case on a lore basis for any combo to be allowed. Or disallowed, including ones currently in the game. After all, these classes are a Turbine creation, not a Tolkien creation.

So I'd say it's not really a lore question at all, but rather a gameplay question. Or rather, a series of gameplay questions.

/unsigned

I've never read anywhere that Hobbits could use magic at all... I can compromise for humans and elves...but hobbits, please no.

Originally Posted by TunnelLord

ANNNNnnnd /endthread

lulz. Speaking of lore appropriateness RK's should be removed completely -_- give the middle finger to anyone who QQ's

Based on lore alone I completelly agree with you. Gameplay, they are quite fun. But yeah, their in there already, so can't really yoink them out now...unfortunately.

Originally Posted by gildhur

I don't see why. The RK is nothing more than an effective scribe and rhetorician. If any race in Middle-earth was meticulous about histories, genealogies, and records, it was Hobbits of the Shire. Hobbits are at least partially justified as RKs by this knowledge. As tenuous as the justification is for the whole RK class, I see no reason why Hobbits should be restricted.

I agree, although the RK does come off as a "magic user" to someone who doesn't know the back story and purpose of an RK. Looking at it from the proper perspective however, hobbits would make excellent RKs. I mean, come on... with all the verbal abuse she gives, I'd daresay that Lobelia SB would probably make the best hobbit RK alive!

Speaking of Lore Justification, I know that no Female Dwarf has even been mentioned in the works of JRR Tokien, but come on...!

Originally Posted by Edrazebakoserol

Speaking of Lore Justification, I know that no Female Dwarf has even been mentioned in the works of JRR Tokien, but come on...!

There is reference to them. I admittedly had to do some snooping to find it, but I remembered the reference. This is what I found in my snooping:

wikipedia:
Tolkien writes that they breed slowly, for no more than a third of them are female, and not all marry; also, female Dwarves look and sound (and dress, if journeying — which is rare) so alike to Dwarf-males that other folk cannot distinguish them, and thus others wrongly believe Dwarves grow out of stone. Tolkien names only one female, Dís. In The War of the Jewels Tolkien says both males and females have beards
reference.com
A long standing source of interest (and humour) comes from the allusion of Tolkien to female dwarves having beards, like in Nordic Mythology, which was borrowed by other writers. Essentially, Tolkien developed a rational explanation for why female Dwarves are never encountered in the story, by elaborating that female Dwarves never travel abroad, and look so much like Dwarf men that visitors to Dwarf cities cannot immediately spot them. ...

Tolkien writes his Dwarf-women are "in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of the other peoples cannot tell them apart." This, he writes, leads to the belief that dwarves grow out of stone.


So technically, they were referred to, but never officially 'mentioned' characteristically.

Originally Posted by PiperPilot

There is reference to them. I admittedly had to do some snooping to find it, but I remembered the reference. This is what I found in my snooping:

wikipedia:
Tolkien writes that they breed slowly, for no more than a third of them are female, and not all marry; also, female Dwarves look and sound (and dress, if journeying — which is rare) so alike to Dwarf-males that other folk cannot distinguish them, and thus others wrongly believe Dwarves grow out of stone. Tolkien names only one female, Dís. In The War of the Jewels Tolkien says both males and females have beards
reference.com
A long standing source of interest (and humour) comes from the allusion of Tolkien to female dwarves having beards, like in Nordic Mythology, which was borrowed by other writers. Essentially, Tolkien developed a rational explanation for why female Dwarves are never encountered in the story, by elaborating that female Dwarves never travel abroad, and look so much like Dwarf men that visitors to Dwarf cities cannot immediately spot them. ...

Tolkien writes his Dwarf-women are "in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of the other peoples cannot tell them apart." This, he writes, leads to the belief that dwarves grow out of stone.


So technically, they were referred to, but never officially 'mentioned' characteristically.

Or.... you could look at it that Turbine wanted to make a very manly race after making all the elves look like chicks to begin with XD

Granted, there's a total of 2 elves that aren't chicks in the game XD

</sarcasm>

As I believe the lore he is not a magician as such but a scholar a student of books of the former one to know, and in order that it is lore a hobbit is very easy simply if it is fixed lotro in Frodo he is named a scholar between the hobbits is an expert of to know of the elfs, Gandalf is like a species of teacher or counselor of and if it is fixed someone in the tombs calls for Ton reciting what habia learned, also the lamp uses of galadriel and the rope elfica therefore can use articles of magic elfica.Con take Frodo as an example can be allowed without problems and without traumas

Originally Posted by rodin12

Con take Frodo as an example can be allowed without problems and without traumas

LOL NO. Read the books again..

Hobbit race as Loremaster? NO! Its a really bad idea.

Hobbits should stay at home and drink tea.

Well, okay. Hobbits technically shouldn't be able to have any class at all besides Farmer or Cook. No females should be able to play the game at all. Rune-Keeper...&&& is that all about? Lore-Master? More like Lore-Breaker, really....but...

A hobbit lore-master, I could see only if it could have bird companions or something. Didn't Bilbo talk to the thrush in The Hobbit? I can't remember.

Personally, I think they should limit the classes a race can play more. For instance, maybe only hobbits can be burglers, only elves can be wardens, etc. But it's also good to have choices, I suppose. It never bothered me that there were no hobbit lore-masters, but it wouldn't bother me if there were, either. You can't throw lore in peoples' faces when the game breaks lore everywhere you turn anyway, but it also doesn't sit right with me for a hobbit to know magic.

Of course, my hobbit doeasn't leave the Shire. She's a Farmer/Cook and that's all she does. Sometimes she helps the Bounders out a bit, or fetches some spoiled pies for Holly, but most of the time she's happy keeping to herself like a respectable person. ; P

Okay, I'm not going to quote individual posts here. Just some general comments.

Lore-master means, basically, somebody who has studied history and legend (they are really the same thing in Middle-earth; stories from thousands of years ago, which would be dubious legends in our world, are alive in the memories of people like Elrond and Glorfindel). The Master of the House of Healing in Gondor is a lore-master, even though (being only a Man) he has mistaken a few elements in the Lore as legends when in fact they are factual (the effects of athelas, e.g.).

Using that definition, I can think of several Hobbit lore-masters in the books. Bilbo. Frodo. Pippin, after the War of the Ring is over. And whoever kept and edited the Red Book of Westmarch.

Middle-earth is a world with very little magic in it. A few people, chiefly Elves like Elrond and Galadriel, have some, though they seem to be uncomfortable with the word.

So here was Turbine, wanting to set up an MMO, and anticipating the huge outcry of "But I wanna be a Mage!" from the player base. They created the Lore-master as a compromise. Is everybody familiar with Clarke's Third Law? It reads:

"ANY SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY IS INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC."

Gandalf, now, has both magic *and* sufficiently advanced technology. The Lore-master's skills are based on those skills of Gandalf's that a person with no magic whatever could learn.

Consider: the first skill an LM gets is Burning Embers, which has been explained as "setting a pine cone afire and throwing it at the target." Note that the animation for BE consists of pulling something out of one's pouch and throwing it.

This is exactly what Gandalf did in The Hobbit, Chapter VI.

He gathered the huge pine-cones from the branches of his tree. Then he set one alight with bright blue fire, and threw it whizzing down among the circle of the wolves. It struck one on the back, and immediately his shaggy coat caught fire, and he was leaping to and fro yelping horribly.

Gandalf, of course, could use magic to set his pine-cones alight. We have to use something else -- POSSIBLY some early form of lucifer matches, since they also are (anachronstically) mentioned in The Hobbit (Chapter V.

After some time he felt for his pipe. It was not broken, and that was something. Then he felt for his pouch, and there was some tobacco in it, and that was something more. Then he felt for matches and he could not find any at all, and that shattered his hopes completely.

My point is that the LM in LotRO is not a magician. He is a practical engineer, chemist, botanist, and zoologist who uses his knowledge of and empathy with the natural world to make his way through it.

I do not think Turbine will, at this late date, modify either the Hobbit race or the Lore-master class to permit the one to train as the other. But there would be a Lore justification if they did.

Changing topic here:

Now, as to the Rune-keeper, there is nothing in LotR to justify him -- not that I can think of offhand, anyway -- but there is in Beowulf, that ancient epic so dear to Tolkien's heart.

When Beowulf has come to Hrothgar's court to help him deal with the monster Grendel, one of Hrothgar's thanes, Unferth, starts jeering at Beowulf, saying he isn't so hot and all those stories about his exploits are probably made up.

The Old English poet uses the phrase, onband beadorune. This means literally "unbound a rune of battle." We would say, more prosaically, that Unferth was "using fighting words." Beowulf, however, does not have self-image problems, and brushes Unferth off.

Tolkien, in his introduction to John R. Clark Hall's translation of Beowulf and the Finnsburg Fragment, says of this phrase,

What exactly is implied is not clear. The expression has an antique air, as if it had descended from an older time to our poet: a suggestion lingers of the spells by which men of wizardry could stir up storms in a clear sky.

Couple this with the theme in Irish legend that the words of a bard were so powerful that, if a bard became angry with a warrior, he could sing a song that would cripple him, raise welts and blisters and birthmarks on his skin, and generally make him incapable of battle or of participation in society.

I think that's where the lore basis for the RK comes from. Flimsy, I grant you, but not nonexistent. I'm rereading the books now for the umpteenth time, and if I find any further basis in Tolkien's own Lore I'll edit this and post it.

Okay... Adopting Turbine's LMs-don't-really-do-*magic* justification... You can HAVE a Hobbit LM. HOWEVER, based on the relevant books, 99+% of ALL Hobbit player characters in the game will not be permitted to go any further from The Shire than Bree.

--W. H. Heydt

Old Used Programmer

Originally Posted by djheydt

Okay, I'm not going to quote individual posts here. Just some general comments.

Lore-master means, basically, somebody who has studied history and legend (they are really the same thing in Middle-earth; stories from thousands of years ago, which would be dubious legends in our world, are alive in the memories of people like Elrond and Glorfindel). The Master of the House of Healing in Gondor is a lore-master, even though (being only a Man) he has mistaken a few elements in the Lore as legends when in fact they are factual (the effects of athelas, e.g.).

Using that definition, I can think of several Hobbit lore-masters in the books. Bilbo. Frodo. Pippin, after the War of the Ring is over. And whoever kept and edited the Red Book of Westmarch.

Middle-earth is a world with very little magic in it. A few people, chiefly Elves like Elrond and Galadriel, have some, though they seem to be uncomfortable with the word.

So here was Turbine, wanting to set up an MMO, and anticipating the huge outcry of "But I wanna be a Mage!" from the player base. They created the Lore-master as a compromise. Is everybody familiar with Clarke's Third Law? It reads:

"ANY SUFFICIENTLY ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY IS INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM MAGIC."

Gandalf, now, has both magic *and* sufficiently advanced technology. The Lore-master's skills are based on those skills of Gandalf's that a person with no magic whatever could learn.

Consider: the first skill an LM gets is Burning Embers, which has been explained as "setting a pine cone afire and throwing it at the target." Note that the animation for BE consists of pulling something out of one's pouch and throwing it.

This is exactly what Gandalf did in The Hobbit, Chapter VI.



Gandalf, of course, could use magic to set his pine-cones alight. We have to use something else -- POSSIBLY some early form of lucifer matches, since they also are (anachronstically) mentioned in The Hobbit (Chapter V.



My point is that the LM in LotRO is not a magician. He is a practical engineer, chemist, botanist, and zoologist who uses his knowledge of and empathy with the natural world to make his way through it.

I do not think Turbine will, at this late date, modify either the Hobbit race or the Lore-master class to permit the one to train as the other. But there would be a Lore justification if they did.

Changing topic here:

Now, as to the Rune-keeper, there is nothing in LotR to justify him -- not that I can think of offhand, anyway -- but there is in Beowulf, that ancient epic so dear to Tolkien's heart.

When Beowulf has come to Hrothgar's court to help him deal with the monster Grendel, one of Hrothgar's thanes, Unferth, starts jeering at Beowulf, saying he isn't so hot and all those stories about his exploits are probably made up.

The Old English poet uses the phrase, onband beadorune. This means literally "unbound a rune of battle." We would say, more prosaically, that Unferth was "using fighting words." Beowulf, however, does not have self-image problems, and brushes Unferth off.

Tolkien, in his introduction to John R. Clark Hall's translation of Beowulf and the Finnsburg Fragment, says of this phrase,



Couple this with the theme in Irish legend that the words of a bard were so powerful that, if a bard became angry with a warrior, he could sing a song that would cripple him, raise welts and blisters and birthmarks on his skin, and generally make him incapable of battle or of participation in society.

I think that's where the lore basis for the RK comes from. Flimsy, I grant you, but not nonexistent. I'm rereading the books now for the umpteenth time, and if I find any further basis in Tolkien's own Lore I'll edit this and post it.

Great reasoning, I'm also a firm believer in Clarke's Third Law.
The Loremaster throws actual pinecones for Burning Embers, as captured by the industrious Kemendin here..

Originally Posted by Elenluin-Menelloth

Great reasoning, I'm also a firm believer in Clarke's Third Law.
The Loremaster throws actual pinecones for Burning Embers, as captured by the industrious Kemendin here..

Oh, that is so delightful.

I really have no objection to this. I wonder if being a Lore Master would grant Hobbits more skill in making pies?

Any change will need more char slots here.

Originally Posted by djheydt

Okay, I'm not going to quote individual posts here. Just some general comments.
...

+1 rep. Could not agree more.

First of all, hobbits have 5 classes, not 4. They have Burglar, Guardian, Hunter, Minstrel and Warden.

Secondly, allow me to summarize your suggestion:
"ZOMG hawbitses shud hav lms cuz dey awesum".