Maybe as a better idea why not split champion into 2 classes
Beserker: AoE and Melee Dps
And
Champion: Melee Dps and a form of buffing (haven't thought completely through)
Just a suggestion as the berserker could form a more raging beast of a warrior much like a real berserker would (dwarf and man), and the champion who show martial prowess over foes by striking them much like a fencer (elf and man)
Please listen to someone who is, then. When someone talks about a person's 'line' in that context it means those directly descended from him, his lineage. Nothing else. It's also made clear that 'the men of his line' means exactly that (the male line of descent from Beorn) because Tolkien goes on to describe what they were like.
Personally, I would not like to see a Beorning Class/Race.
This is for the simple reason that I (again personally) would find the idea of a shape-shifter running around the Three Farrow Crafting Hall a little too Lore-Bending for me.
Then again, the idea that the PUG of 4 Hobbits and mine last year would have the stones to take on The Red Maid could also be argued as being unreasonable and/or Lore-Breaking.
However, the class has been suggested repeatedly on the forums for at least the past year, and I think credit has to go to the OP for the sheer effort put into the idea. I take my hat off to you, there were enough references and research done there to make at the best a convincing case, and at worst, a bloody entertaining and even informative read. Quick side-note, I am interested to see how PJ tackles the rather comical images that Beorn's table setting/clearing collection of animals always comjures in my mind whenever I read The Hobbit.
Ofcourse, you couldn't add Eagles and Ents and others... That could go more PvMP. This on the other side is a man with the ability to change. The fact that he is a male concearns me less. There are female dwarfs which have beards. Look very manly to me.
I am for more classes, not races too, because of the reason that every time you start over you see a bunch of lore masters or bunch of wardens or... You get the point. If there were more classes the players would be more different, a bigger variety and that is great.
I think I would be among the first who would play this class. Buy eaven.
I know it's rather long (sorry about that) but I would encourage people new to this thread to at least read through the OP before posting. Many of the usual, (and some unusual) questions and concerns are addressed therein. There are extensive primary source quotations from Tolkien's various works regarding the Beornings included in the OP, with bibliographical citations.
As for the argument being once again mentioned about "men of his line" and using this as the basis to say that there wouldn't be enough Beornings to base a class on - there are many flaws in that argument, and they have already been explained in this thread. But here we go again (for those who don't want to read back)
1. What are you defining as the minimum population upon which to have a class in this game?
- As a reference point, keep in mind that:
a) This is a game. And specifically an MMO. There are at any given moment throngs of Hobbits saving the same Lalia; scores of Elves talking with, or rescuing (again), or being attacked by the ever so slow walking Sara Oakheart, who is nonetheless in multiple places in Middle-earth at once; gaggles of Dwarves inside Caras Galadhon, having a private audience with Galadriel and Celeborn... and that poor old Igash has people lining up all day long, day after day, to kill him... again : P
How does this all work? Because an MMO is structured for us to imagine that we are each the only hero, or fellowship of heroes for hundreds of miles around. We are the first and only ones returning Zigilburk to it's rightful owner, and the only people stopping all these unique, named monster individuals from wreaking their havoc on the world.
In the end, in the context of an MMO, we are the only hero like us in existence (even if there are twelve others right beside us). So the question is, how big a population do you need in the books in order to found a single, unique person in a game on them.
Context and Precedent:
b) We can play as Hobbits, of which only Frodo, Sam, Merry and Pippin, were out and about, beyond the borders of the Shire in this War of the Ring (and Bilbo in Riv). Otherwise Tolkien is emphatic in telling us that Hobbits do not like to leave the Shire, and these few Hobbits are behaving very un-Hobbitly : )
That gives us 4 (5) Hobbits to base this character type on, all of whom are named characters we can't even use the names of. None of whom could tank a Balrog : P
c) We can play as Lore-masters and RKs. Though these terms arrise in the books, they are not remotely meant in the ways expressed in our character classes. These are classes based on zero characters. That's a mighty small population.
Aside from angelic beings, (Valar and Maiar = including Gandalf, Sauron, Saruman, Radagast... and Tom Bombadil who is just an enigma of his own, with only speculations about him), nobody shoots lighting, or fireballs, or summons Ents and earthquakes to them out of(?) instantly to stomp someone in the middle of a battle etc... It just doesn't happen. Not by Men, Elf, Dwarf, or certainly Hobbit.
I know we have little tooltip descriptions to try to give some lore-ish explanation to what's going on, but it is a massive stretch, and often really doesn't cut it. Rune Keepers in J.R.R. Tolkien's works are people who are very rare masters who inscribed words into crafted things, like swords and armour, giving them sharper blades that don't dull, or armour that is extra resistant to any damage. This is not something done in a few seconds on a battle field. It is never something described as done during battle as an attack or part of as-it-happens-combat - something comparable to shooting an arrow, or swinging a sword - an "attack". The basis for the characters that don't even have anything much to do with our class, is maybe a handful of individuals mentioned in the history of Middle-earth, total, ever.
Here's a quote from our own Jeffrey Steefel on this issue: "We're slowly trying new things; the addition of the Rune-Keeper in Moria, a straightforward magic using class, is a pretty big step in that respect. It's not something that a pure Tolkien lore person would accept, it just couldn't exist in Middle-Earth. On the other hand, this is an RPG, it must exist.
So, our Middle-Earth needs to diverge slightly from the literary Middle-Earth, and Tolkien enterprises has been okay with that, I think that they're comfortable with us allows us to push those things a little further." http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/th...terview?page=2
2. "men of his line..." most definitely doesn't only mean males. In these things we need to be very careful about what is written in a text, and scrutinize ourselves to make sure we're being honest with that, and not attaching our own interpretations. While it is certainly possible to interpret this use of the word "men" to mean males, we need to take into account that still today we use the words "men" and "man" to mean person - male or female. (Anyone for a 6man run of...) All the more so decades ago when Tolkien was writing this. And we also need to consider how the people of Middle-earth used the word in Middle-earth, in which context this is being said, and they also used it to mean male or female - as in the race of Men. In the absence of Tolkien stating if he meant only males, or was using "men" generally, as is the norm, both possibilities are plausible.
3. * Thankfully, this is not a case of two wrongs don't make a right, or a slippery slope. While some of the examples above were precedents in Lotro of leaving the lore in the dust, more or less, if you take a gander of the OP you can see there is ample information given by Tolkien (source material provided in detail) about the Beornings, and certainly more than enough to solidly found a class for this game on, without departing from the lore. period. The truth is that while Tolkien never tells us in specifics how many Beornings were alive at the end of the Third Age, the things Tolkien did write, lend much more support to there being a large population than otherwise.
a) "...many generations" taking bear's shape itself allows for the possibility of a large population. Let's look at the timeline:
At the time that Bilbo and the Dwarves went on their adventure it was 2941 of the Third Age, and Beorn is already quite old. How do we know this?
Gandalf overheard Beorn saying in his bear form on the Carrock: "The day will come when they will perish and I shall go back" (The Hobbit 119). Beorn is here referring to the Goblins who drove him out of the Misty Mountains. The implication is either that Beorn is saying he lived there prior to the Goblins, which would mean a great many years before, or at least that they got too bold or numerous at some point in the past and he had to leave, which still implies many years, though fewer than the first understanding. This is of course not giving us anything clearly defined, but it does suggest many years, or at least allow for the legitimate possibility.
Especially we have to consider this quote: "Beorn did not show it more than he could help, but really he had begun to get very interested. You see, in the old days he had known the very part of the mountains Gandalf was describing." (The Hobbit: Ch. 7)
What is meant by "in the old days"? Well, again we aren't told in specific unfortunately, but what would the minimum be for Tolkien to refer to as "in the old days"? Would it be 40 years earlier? I certainly can't imagine it being less than 30 years.
It is now 3018 of the Third Age, 77 years later. If we acknowledge that "in the old days" would not mean less than 30 years, (though it could certainly be far more), that would give us a minimum of 107 year. This seems a very conservative estimate to me.
In discussing this topic previously, someone suggested that "in the old days" could mean five or ten years... hmmm? That doesn't seem particularly legitimate to me. (or remotely... but hey : P), but nonetheless there would still be ample time in which to develop a large population, without relying on the above implication that Beorn was already old when Bilbo and the Dwarves came to visit.
At the time of The War of The Ring, a child of Beorn has already gained the title "the Old". Here's the source quote: "...Gloin had much to tell of events in the northern regions of Wilderland. Frodo learned that Grimbeorn the Old, son of Beorn, was now the lord of many sturdy men, and to their land between the Mountains and Mirkwood neither orc nor wolf dared to go. 'lndeed,' said Gloin, `if it were not for the Beornings, the passage from Dale to Rivendell would long ago have become impossible." (The Fellowship of The Ring: Many Meetings)
How old do you have to be, to be named "the Old" in Middle Earth? There is another person in Middle Earth who was given that title. This was Bëor the Old. He got his title, "the Old", because he died at 93 years of age. Again, if we go with a conservative estimate and say that Grimbeorn was given this title at only 80 years of age, and then make another very conservative estimate, and say that Beorn didn't have this child before the age of 15, that still gives us 95 years. However, this would mean Beorn was only 18 when he met Thorin and Co. A little ridiculous, given how he speaks of "the old days" and Gandalf's seemingly old memories of this man. At the least the text legitimately allows for understanding this to mean a fairly old Beorn at that time.
Using these very conservative end figures, and the average 20 year generations, we'd be looking at 6 (or more) generations without a stretch. If they had 5 children per generation, in only six generations that equals 19,531 descendants. If you say there were only four children, it would still come to 5,461 offspring. However if you added only one more generation, (which is arguably more likely), you'd be looking at 21,845, even with the fewer children per generation. This is all speculative, but it serves the purpose of demonstrating a reasonable potential given the known facts.
b) However, this little Beorn-centric timeline, upon which to ascertain a possible population in 3018 T.A. is not the whole picture. Though we don't know the precise number of their population, we are told the Beornings control vast lands, are a formidable force of their own, and even cause Sauron enough concern over them as a threat that they make his short list of "to be destroyed" : ) All these things suggest that they are fairly numerous, or at least that it's possible.
The Beornings are credited alone for keeping the treacherous passage through Mirkwood open, and striking adequate fear in the hearts of Orc and Warg that they rid a massive land area of them. "...to their land between the Mountains and Mirkwood neither orc nor wolf dared to go. 'lndeed,' said Gloin, `if it were not for the Beornings, the passage from Dale to Rivendell would long ago have become impossible." (The Fellowship of The Ring: Many Meetings)
The Beornings are also granted additional lands after this, presumably for their aid lent to Thranduil in defending Mirkwood: "And on the day of the New Year of the Elves. Celeborn and Thranduil met in the midst of the forest; and they renamed Mirkwood Eryn Lasgalen, The Wood of Greenleaves. Thranduil took all the northern region as far as the mountains that rise in the forest for his realm; and Celeborn took the southern wood below the Narrows, and named it East Lórien; all the wide forest between was given to the Beornings and the Woodmen." (The Return of The King; Appendix B)
Frodo, on Amon Hen sees a vision of Sauron's plans to launch an attack against the Beornings: "The Ring was upon him. Then here and there the mist gave way and he saw many visions... everywhere he looked he saw signs of war. The Misty Mountains were crawling like anthills: orcs were issuing out of a thousand holes. Under the boughs of Mirkwood there was deadly strife of Elves and Men and fell beasts. The land of the Beornings was aflame; a cloud was over Moria; smoke rose on the borders of Lórien." (The Fellowship of The Ring; The Breaking of The Fellowship)
For additional source material, see the OP.
So now some people like to argue - but how do we know these "Beornings" Tolkien keeps mentioning aren't just an aggregate of peoples? Well, Tolkien refers to "the Beornings" in a number of places as a people, family/bloodline, and notes their history prior to all this, and their genetic and linguistic relation to other peoples, as well as their particular customs, (which just happen to be very 'bear-friendly').
Gimli asks about the Rohirrim, "What do you know of these horsemen, Aragorn?" And he answers, "...It was in forgotten years long ago the Eorl the Young brought them out of the North, and their kinship is rather with the Bardings of Dale, and with the Beornings of the Wood..." (The Two Towers: The Riders of Rohan) Here we see the Beornings are a people related to the Rohirrim and the Bardings.
"Most of the Men of the northern regions of the West-lands were descended from the Edain of the First Age, or from their close kin. Their languages were, therefore, related to the Adunaic, and some still preserved a likeness to the Common Speech. Of this kind were the peoples of the upper vales of Anduin: the Beornings, and the Woodmen of Western Mirkwood; and further north and east the Men of the Long Lake and of Dale. From the lands between the Gladden and the Carrock came the folk that were known in Gondor as the Rohirrim, Masters of Horses." (The Return of The King: Appendix F) Here we get further information about their relationship to other distinct peoples, and the derivation of their dialect.
"The Eotheod had moved to those regions in the days of King Earnil II from the lands in the vales of Anduin between the Carrock and the Gladden, and they were in origin close akin to the Beornings and the men of the west-eaves of the forest." ( The Return of The King: Appendix A)
In all of these quotes the Beornings are a people, a family, a bloodline - they are not spoken of as an aggregate of various peoples from other families, but as a specific and distinct people - the Beornings. The other Men of nearby regions are also not grouped with them but are given their own separate mention and name. Indeed the precedent and standard in Tolkien's Middle-earth is that names given for a populace refer to a group of people who are kinsmen, not an aggregate of various peoples following a leader from a different clan. Even when there are sometimes a few individuals who are outsiders living amidst another people, the outsider retains the name of their own people. Some examples of other peoples mentioned are the: the Bëorians (family of Bëor the Old), the Haladin (the people of Haleth), the Marachians (the descendants of Marach, also called the House of Hador), the Rohirrim, the Bardings, etc...
And most peoples, if not all, in Middle-earth are distinct, and very parochial. That is, they live quite separately, keeping almost singularly to their own lands; having their own language, culture, and customs, and not being overly accepting of outsiders.
The Beornings, in this regard, are famous for their honey cakes - following from Beorn's love of honey and cream.
"He keeps hives and hives of great fierce bees, and lives most on cream and honey... And such bees! Bilbo had never seen anything like them." (The Hobbit: Ch.7)
Then in The Lord of The Rings Gimli mentions "the honey-cakes of the Beornings", gives them great praise, and says "the Beornings are the best bakers that I know of". (The Fellowship of The Ring: Ch.8)
The interest in cream and honey obviously suggests and lends itself to their being bears part of the time.
Therefore, it is most probable that the people Tolkien refers to as "the Beornings", telling us of their lands, their descent, the origin of their dialect, their predilection for honey, and their participation in the War of The Ring, are a clan of Beorn's kinsman, and not a group of various others peoples being called by Beorn's name.
One can choose to be very stubborn and insist on interpreting everything, all of the ample source material, in some very plastic way where none of this means that Tolkien is describing a population of his skin-changers... that is their prerogative, but there is plenty here that can also legitimately be understood to mean that there's at least "enough" Beornings in Middle-earth for the purposes of a reasonable foundation for a character class in this MMO. (if ever there needed to be an academic debate for such a thing :P)
Last edited by maradakia; Jun 15 2011 at 06:46 PM.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
In human form Beornings might wear medium armour. However their Armour Rating would receive -%, as would Might, Agility, Vitality, and Morale, reducing those to no more than the average for a Minstrel perhaps.
In Bear form any armour worn would be hidden, and they would appear as a powerful upright bear. They would receive a +% to Armour Rating, Might, Agility, Vitality, and Morale such that on average it will be on par with Champions.
Weapons
In human form Beornings would use any one-handed or two-handed weapon, but with a -% to damage.
In Bear form any weapon held would be hidden. The stats of the weapons held would apply, but the bear would appear to attack only with paw blows, teeth, and claw cuts.
Man form
In human form Beornings could be squishy assist healers. Actually, Beornings appear in the video game The Lord of the Rings: War of the Ring, and in this game they can turn into a bear at will and when in human form can heal other units.
Perhaps a small side roll for this class would be to buff their fellows morale regen out of combat. This could be based upon the honey-cakes for which the Beornings are well known.
"He keeps hives and hives of great fierce bees, and lives most on cream and honey... And such bees! Bilbo had never seen anything like them... The drones were bigger than your thumb, a good deal, and the bands of yellow on their deep black bodies shone like fiery gold." (The Hobbit: Ch.7)
"Gimli mentions "the honey-cakes of the Beornings", gives them great praise, and says "the Beornings are the best bakers that I know of". (The Fellowship of The Ring: Ch.8)
"...red earthenware pots of honey, and twice-baked cakes that would keep good a long time, and on a little of which they could march far." (Queer Lodgings)
"
Sorry I messed up my attempt to reply with quotes, but anyways:
I like the idea of a beornings class in theory, but I DO NOT support a class that will simply replace my CAPTAIN!
"Light heals, but with buffs on the side>" Seriously??? Have you even looked at the other classes? Might as well delete all Captains if this is the role the Beornings are going to take.
While not mentioning the ones that don't. If you scan through the thread you'll find the OP didn't tell the whole story: as others have pointed out, it was only Beorn's direct male descendants who were skin-changers, not all of the Beornings, and that's an exceedingly good reason why this is a non-starter. It's right there in The Hobbit: 'the men of his line had the power of taking bear's shape', Tolkien wrote.
In short: it'd be pretty feeble to try to make a class out of the men of one family.
And as the OP pointed out most of the talk supports there being a large enough amount of shape changing Beornings for this to work. I read all of your posts and honestly you weren't able to support your theories that well. There is a 77 year difference between The Hobbit and the start of the war. If we just go with that and say Beorn didn't have children til after The Hobbit and go with a base of 20 years per generation then that's almost 4 generations worth. If we go with an estimate of 3 children per generation that adds up to 81 Beornings of the 4th generation with the total number including Beorn would be 121 and 3 per generation is small when you look back on the middle ages at families in the woods. We can then say of those 40 were men which gave them the shape changing ability. 40 is still enough for there to be a chance that 1 would be abroad to help out considering the nature of the Beornings. The OPs estimate of 5 per generation on the other hand is a closer estimate if you look back on our history for the families that didn't live in the cities at that time. Those families would have as many kids as possible to help out. And I agree that it is more likely that it isn't just 4 generations but 5 or maybe even 6 generations and that increases the amount of Beornings by quite a lot and thus increase chance of finding one abroad. And considering Aragorn used the help of the Beornings once it wouldn't be surprising if he asked a couple to go to Bree to help out the Rangers. You're argument of lack of Beornings at the time of the war just doesn't have as much lore support as the argument of there being a good number of Beornings. And logic supports the good many argument more as well using how families back in the middle ages that didn't live in the cities worked.
You may argue about mortality rate but considering the fact that Beorn was very knowledgeable of herbs and stuff their mortality rates for birth would be low. This can be supported if we look at how the civilizations in our world that had vast knowledge of herbs and stuff survived. Native Americans had low mortality rates until disease from the Europeans came that they had no knowledge or and immunity to came and wiped them out.
Also the math for the OP is wrong. The number calculated based on 5 per generation was only the number of Beornings that were born in that last generation. The way to calculate the total would be (5^(X)+5^(X-1)+...+5^(X-X)) where X is the number of generations and 5 can be replaced with whatever number you want there to be per generation. So using your 5 per 5 generations that you gave in the OP you get a total of 3125+625+125+25+5+1=3906 counting Beorn himself as the start.
Thanks for the math help. My previous figures only gave the number of children in the last generation, but didn't include all the people from Beorn until them. I went back using your math and corrected my results to include them.
I was wary to go off on a math tangent, since I feel it missed the point greatly, which is that:
a) this is a game, and this whole line of arguing seems quite out of place within this context
b) even were one to be quite fastidious and strict about the text, there would still be no departure here in the slightest. The only argument is to insist on inventing an interpretation that at all costs must proclude any reading of these numerous texts even allowing for this possiblity. However this would mean quite obviously distorting the plain and simple meaning of many passages, over and over again... and then insisting that any other interpretation is invalid.
The question isn't, is it possible to find interpretations that dissallow Beornings. J.R.R. Tolkien does not directly detail the Beorning population at the time of the War of The Ring. Things are left rather ambiguous, though with many passages that imply a signifcant populace. As discussed above, this is not a requirement for an MMO character anyhow, not in general, nor based on the precedents in LOTRO. So much of the material avaible to us on the subject suggests a more than adequate foundation for a Beorning character in our game - even going very strictly according to the texts... So the question is, are we willing to acknowledge that, and allow for the legitimcy of that understanding as well.
Beornings in Middle-earth adhere strictly to the writings of J.R.R. Tolkien - they are his invention after all. This isn't a question of lore, this is an argument born out of either not being so familiar with the extent to which Tolkien did write about these characters in particular, and their involvement in the events at the end of the Thirs Age (see OP), and/or simply not being fond of the concept.
For those who just don't fancy this idea, how about just saying "Not for me thanks - not my cup of tea." Not everyone enjoys playing a Warden, but having a class around that you choose not to play as, because it doesn't suit your taste, doesn't spoil the game somehow. And for those who do like them, it adds a lot.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
As for concern about the appearance of Beornings: (there's a section on this in the OP, but for those who don't want to check back there, here's the summary)
a) They would look as they should, as described by Tolkien, and as such, are appropriate.
b) The Beornings are explicitly described as not all being as big or as strong as Beorn.
"... and it is said that for many generations the men of his line had the power of taking bear's shape, and some were grim men and bad, but most were in heart like Beorn, if less in size and strength." (The Hobbit: Ch.18 The Return Journey)
c) They were also, perhaps surprisingly for some, described as relatively ordinary looking Men, if on the tall side, and attractive/noble in appearance, similar to the Rohirrim, to whom they are related.
"... and with the Beornings of the Wood, among whom may still be seen many men tall and fair, as are the Riders of Rohan. At least they will not love the Orcs." (The Two Towers: The Riders of Rohan)
For the purposes of our game, I would think they'd simply look like anyone else of the race of Man, unless Turbine saw fit to add a slighty taller model, but it would only be a small difference. And really, it need not be any different, since we play as Men from Rohan, and from the only pertinent source quotes available regarding Beorning Men, they are supposed to be alike with the latter, in hight and beauty.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
For all the naysayers out there, the OP did give a well thought out, documented suggestion for the game that fits exactly into lore. More than others (including myself) have done in this forum. It has merit and we already know that Turbine IS working on content that will reflect the movies being released in 2012 and 2013 (unless you are one of those people who thinks the world ends next year). Personally I have no problem with the idea and hope Turbine does consider the idea.
I see Beornings as more of a faction to quest with as opposed to a class to actually become. TBH they are about as likely to go south to Rohan/Gondor as the Woses of Ghan-buri-ghan are to go to Eriador to protect Arnor (and they arguably had a larger part in fighting against Sauron during the events of LotR). While they *could* exist as a playable character, and there is lore to support their existance in unknown numbers (though i doubt that men of beorn's lineage who can actually shapeshift is anything more than tribal numbers) I just can't see it.
That's not to say I would be upset if Turbine did it, but I won't be upset if they don't either.
As for the argument being once again mentioned about "men of his line" and using this as the basis to say that there wouldn't be enough Beornings to base a class on - there are many flaws in that argument, and they have already been explained in this thread.
Can we play half-Elves? No, there are only a handful of them.
Can we play Dunedain? No, because there weren't many of them in the North, and that's despite a lot of demand from players.
Can we play Noldor? No, because there weren't that many of them any more and they were more powerful than other Elves.
So should we be able to play skin-changers? No, because they're more powerful than average Men (bigger, stronger), and can do anything they can do besides. Like with Beorn being 'a bit of a magician' as well as being able to turn into a bear.
Where's your supposed precedent gone now, then? The devs allow for scarcity and relative power in deciding what's okay, and they were very quick to say "no" to Beornings, back in the pre-beta days when all these lore questions were unexplored territory. Those who were there at the time may remember just how long ago that was.
Lore says, it's the men of Beorn's line. That's his lineal male descendants, not male Beornings in general (nearly all of whom were perfectly ordinary Northmen), not the womenfolk, just the men. The mistake you're making is a simple one: Tolkien was quite comfortable with keeping things rare and special, so if a some bloke and his male lineage can change into bears, that's quite extraordinary enough. Some things are naturally the territory of NPCs, and in this setting being able to change your shape is way too big a deal to put in the hands of players.
2. "men of his line..." most definitely doesn't only mean males. In these things we need to be very careful about what is written in a text, and scrutinize ourselves to make sure we're being honest with that, and not attaching our own interpretations.
I'm being honest; you're attaching your own interpretation. If you look at the text in context in the passage it's from, it's crystal-clear what he means: that Beorn's sons, and their sons, and so on, could change into bears. Some were grim and bad, we're told, but most were like Beorn had been himself, if not quite so big and strong. It's obvious from that latter comparison that he's talking about the men. Why go to the trouble of saying 'the men of his line' if what you're suggesting were the case? Tolkien meant something quite specific, and you're trying to force your own interpretation on it.
if you take a gander of the OP you can see there is ample information given by Tolkien (source material provided in detail) about the Beornings, and certainly more than enough to solidly found a class for this game on, without departing from the lore. period.
Every time this comes up, we get this, and it always boils down to people failing to comprehend that 'Beornings' means the people who are followers of Beorn (just like Bard and the Bardings, and Eorl and the Eorlingas), not just Beorn's descendants, and that most of them were just ordinary local Northmen whom Beorn had come to rule (as The Hobbit says: that Beorn became the chieftain of a people). Pretty easy to impress people into following you if you can turn into an enormous bear and wreak utter havoc on the battlefield.
a) "...many generations" taking bear's shape itself allows for the possibility of a large population.
There hadn't been 'many generations' between Beorn's day and the War of the Ring; it had only been roughly eighty years. That's several generations, then, not 'many'. Where Tolkien said 'many' was saying that it was many generations before the trait for skin-changing was lost (something that from LOTR's perspective would presumably occur some time in the Fourth Age, as it evidently hadn't happened yet).
As for your crazy numbers, do you seriously imagine Tolkien would have entertained the notion of thousands upon thousands of people who could change into bears? You've shot yourself in the foot, there; you've provided your own reductio ad absurdum against your argument. The numbers can be kept sensible if it's Beorn's only direct male descendants who carry the trait, and it can't be carried down the female line. Tolkien doesn't take what's rare and special and make it commonplace: he keeps it rare and special, because it's more interesting that way.
However, this little Beorn-centric timeline, upon which to ascertain a possible population in 3018 T.A. is not the whole picture. Though we don't know the precise number of their population, we are told the Beornings control vast lands, are a formidable force of their own, and even cause Sauron enough concern over them as a threat that they make his short list of "to be destroyed" : ) All these things suggest that they are fairly numerous, or at least that it's possible.
And again, with the mistaken assumption that all the Beornings were descended from Beorn. Yes, they were a strong and numerous people, but then so were the Rohirrim.
Gimli asks about the Rohirrim, "What do you know of these horsemen, Aragorn?" And he answers, "...It was in forgotten years long ago the Eorl the Young brought them out of the North, and their kinship is rather with the Bardings of Dale, and with the Beornings of the Wood..." (The Two Towers: The Riders of Rohan) Here we see the Beornings are a people related to the Rohirrim and the Bardings.
Yes, they're all Northmen. There were only 'Beornings' after Beorn came along, before that they were more just Northmen, not famous for anything; they'd have been called something else before they started following him. (Just like the Bardings were called something else before Bard, and the Eorlingas were called the Eotheod before Eorl's day).
The Beornings were Northmen of the Vales of Anduin, specifically. There is nothing to say that they were all one people before Beorn came along, as the name 'Beorning' naturally had no currency before that. It's like how before Bard's day, the locals in Esgaroth were former Men of Dale and Lake-men, just as before Beorn came along the locals were simply the Men of the Vales of Anduin. Tolkien doesn't always give a people a specific name all their own, he often goes by place. Men of the White Mountains, Dunlendings and so on. When a suitably famous leader comes along, a people may become named after him, just as the Eotheod became the Eorlingas.
In all of these quotes the Beornings are a people, a family, a bloodline - they are not spoken of as an aggregate of various peoples from other families, but as a specific and distinct people - the Beornings.
What made them distinctive was that they followed Beorn. More than that, we cannot say. And just as the Bardings weren't all descended from Bard and the Eorlingas weren't all descended from Eorl, you can't simply assume that it means that all the Beornings are related to Beorn.
One can choose to be very stubborn and insist on interpreting everything, all of the ample source material, in some very plastic way where none of this means that Tolkien is describing a population of his skin-changers... that is their prerogative, but there is plenty here that can also legitimately be understood to mean that there's at least "enough" Beornings in Middle-earth for the purposes of a reasonable foundation for a character class in this MMO. (if ever there needed to be an academic debate for such a thing :P)
Or one can choose to throw common sense aside and skew everything towards this convenient assumption that northern Middle-earth is awash with people who can change into bears, when everything else about Middle-earth tells us that Tolkien liked to keep things relatively mundane with only a few special individuals being out of the ordinary. That's how myth and legend work: pretty much everybody is ordinary, with a few notable heroes who stand out. It's Tolkienish for a 'Germanic' styled people to have a ruling family whose men can turn into bears, but it's just downright silly to suggest the whole damn people could do it. Everything else aside, the Orcs wouldn't have stood a chance against them if that were true but we know that the fight in the North was far from one-sided: the lands of the Beornings were in flames, we're told. Perfectly explicable if it's mostly ordinary Northmen engaged in a fierce struggle against Orcs, inexplicable why your hypothetical army of skin-changers couldn't all just change into bears and send the Orcs running back to the Misty Mountains.
Last edited by Radhruin_EU; Jun 16 2011 at 05:09 PM.
I collected the textual sources by J.R.R. Tolkien on this subject and they're included for our Devs to see. They can decide for themselves what's within our bounds. As for Middle-earth Enterprises (formerly known as Tolkien Enterprises) who have the rights to these matters, they already gave the okay for playable Beornings in The Lord of The Rings: War of The Ring (Sierra), a game which I have and enjoy - especially the Beornings : )
The simplest, and most straighforward meaning of the texts is repeatedly that there's a notable populaiton of Beornings who are not just followers of Beorn, but rather are his kin.
Yes, it is possible to interpret these things in a way that assumes otherwise (though it seems rather forced to me). That is fine though. Everyone is free to interpret as they wish. Nonetheless, given that the texts can also quite plainly be read to understand there to be a large population of Beorning skin-changers, that is more than enough to rely on.
Given both possible interpretations, this argument has nothing to do with saying that this would be too lore breaking for a character in LOTRO. If you don't favor having Beornings around, just say that. Don't try to argue that the lore contradicts them, when that is plainly not the case.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In response to the argument that we can't allow Beornings because they are too strong or too few... again...
No we can't play as Half-elves, Dunedain, or Noldor, but claiming that it's because there were too few or they were too strong is... speculation at best... unless you happen to be an employee of Turbie who was part of the decision not to include these.
Are the numbers of a given race or class found in the books the consistent precedent for LOTRO characters? NO. In the books there are only 5 Hobbits outside the Shire at this time, none of whom we can even use the name of. Meanwhile, in LOTRO there are thousands of Hobbits, from Forochel to the depths of Moria, to the eaves of Lorien, and the far reaches of Enedwaith.. and they're fighting toe to toe with everything from ancient Dragons to Balrogs, and armies of Orcs. This is unquestionably outside any possiblity based on Tolkien's writing. Not to mention the Elves all over the Shire, and throngs of Dwarves in Lothlorien, and everyone else not at all where they should or could be, or classes in game that are massive departures from the writings of Tolkien, which was even acknowledged openly by Turbine - though that was already evident anyhow. There are only ~50 types of creatures in The Lord of the Rings, and hundreds in LOTRO.
The claim that we should not be able to play as Beorning skin-changers on the basis that they are bigger and stronger than average Men is faulty logic, and textually inaccurate.
The inaccuracy is that Tolkien specifically mentions that Beorn's skin-changing descendents were mostly like Beorn in heart "...if less in size and strength." He also wrote that the Beornings were "...many men tall and fair, as are the Riders of Rohan", seeming to say they were similar in stature and appearance to the Men of Rohan, to whom Tolkien explains, they are related.
The faulty logic is that being potentially some (non-descript) degree stronger than the average Man (though Tolkien never says that about the Beornings in the first place) would prohibit being a character class in this game.
Dwarves are taller and stronger than Hobbits ( a lot stronger). Men are of course taller than Dwarves (though I don't know the comparisson of strength). And though there is variance in earlier versions of the text, in the final version Elves were generally taller than Men, stronger of body, keener of mind, more valorous, higher artisans, more beautiful, and bearers of greater wisdom, not only than the average Man, but more than the pinacle of Men in these regards - the Númenóreans.
"Therefore they grew wise and glorious, and in all things more like to the Firstborn than any other of the kindreds of Men" (Akallabeth) The Númenóreans though approaching the greatness of the Elves, were not ultimately their equals.
We are now millenia after the fall of Númenor, and the gifts of the Dúnedain have diminished with the generations. Therefore if it would be deemed OP to play as a Ranger, all the more so it should be OP to play as the Elves, who surpassed even their ancestors greatness... and of course totally eclicpsing that of the little Hobbits : )
The point here is that, in the first place Tolkien does not state that the Beornings are any stronger than the average Man. He doesn't tell us one way or the other. And in any case, being stronger than Men does not mean being invalvid for a game character based on LOTR, where we play as Elves who are explicitly stated to be greater than the average, and above average Man in these regards. I am certain the developers at Turbine are more than capable of developing a Beorning that is fun, a new and interesting addition, balanced, and appropriate, well founded on the books.
Insisting that the word "men" can only mean males... again... just makes me shake my head. Furthermore, adding the addendum that this is a genetic trait only carried by the male line - not even pased on through mothers is just laughable. I'm not saying this is laughable because it's impossible - sure it's possible. But it is not in the text, and is venturing well into the realm of fan-fiction. Please distinguish imagination and possible interpretations from what is actually stated by Tolkien. We are all free to imagine freely what these things might be... but arguing that something departs from Tolkien's words, by departing radically from them yourself is obviously nonsensical.
And stating this as part of the argument that there would be too small a population, is just a dismassal of the ample primary source material I provided, as well as a basic understanding of MMOs in general.
Stating as though it were a fact that the Beornings were NOT Beorn's kinsmen, but rather some aggregate of followers is again stubbornly misleading. Tolkien doesn't state that anywhere, and that is the bottom line. As I have repeatedly said, we are free to that interpretation, though I provided many passages that do not fit well with such an interpretion... however, we are free to it. BUT that does not define what the text says, but rather how we read it.
Yes, my understanding (with ample solid textual basis) for interpreting the source material as meaning a large population of Beorn's kinsmen, and not some aggregate, is also not a fact stated in the text, but rather is my interpretation.
What is not reasonable is to deny that the text allows for this understanding of it as well. I have researched this thoroughly, and provided all the quotations. There is no reason to argue against having a character in a game, on the basis that while the sources do solidly support such a character, (even at an overly-zealous examination, especially for the purposes of a game!), it is also possible to interpret those quotes to mean that there's a very small population of these characters in the text, and therefore they can't be in this game... this game which has numberous other characters in it which are based on very few, or NO basis at all in the texts.
Calling the math on years, and potential offspring born in that many years absurd is just... ? It is math. The dates we used are factual, and the numbers are carefully calculated. The estimate someone wrote of 80 years would mean Beorn was 3 years old when Thorin and Co. passed through. : P That was in 2941 T.A. and the War of the Ring was in 3018 T.A. My example of 6 generation's time would have Beorn being only 43 years old in The Hobbit, based on 20 year generations. Again, Tolkien does not tell us exactly how old Beorn was at that point. However, the references to "in the old days" and going back to the Mtns, and Gandalf's memories of Beorn, all seem to imply Beorn was ... old. hehe. Though one can say, maybe "in the old days" only meant a few years earlier, one can also legitimately say, it is possible this meant many years earlier. In any case, it doesn't seem even plausible to say Beorn was 3 years old.
I don't know what to say about attempting to dismiss all the quotes where Tolkien discusses the Beorning's relationship to other peoples, (see OP: Beornings: Race of Man, and Many Beornings) which seem to imply, or at least allow for the honest interpretation that the Beornings Tolkien repeatedly refers to are also a people of their own, a race of Men, related to Beorn. And dismissing this by simply stating - the Beornings were not a race, and... neither were any of the other peoples Tolkien lists together with them... /shakeshead. Especially given that throughout Tolkien's writing on Middle-earth, almost without fail, Tolkien consistently describes peoples, not as collections of people with diverse backgrounds going by the name of some leader, but rather as races, familes, houses, and even gives us tons of information on the family trees and histories of these distinct groups. This is consistently true for Elves, Dwarves, Men, and Hobbits.
Trying to refute the possiblity of having Beornings in our game by saying that if there were so many Beornings then the orcs wouldn't have stood a chance. Errr... That is exactly what happened.
"...to their land between the Mountains and Mirkwood neither orc nor wolf dared to go. 'lndeed,' said Gloin, `if it were not for the Beornings, the passage from Dale to Rivendell would long ago have become impossible." (The Fellowship of The Ring: Many Meetings)
"In their day the last goblins were hunted from the Misty Mountains and a new peace came over the edge of the Wild." (The Hobbit: Ch.18 The Return Journey)
N.B. the quote which mentions "the lands of the Beornings were in flames.", is not stating what happened, but rather what was in Sauron's thought and plans, as glimpsed by Frodo on Amon Hen.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
I collected the textual sources by J.R.R. Tolkien on this subject and they're included for our Devs to see. They can decide for themselves what's within our bounds. As for Middle-earth Enterprises (formerly known as Tolkien Enterprises) who have the rights to these matters, they already gave the okay for playable Beornings in The Lord of The Rings: War of The Ring (Sierra), a game which I have and enjoy - especially the Beornings : )
That's an RTS, and RTS adaptations of Middle-earth aren't exactly known for sticking to the books.
The simplest, and most straighforward meaning of the texts is repeatedly that there's a notable populaiton of Beornings who are not just followers of Beorn, but rather are his kin.
There's nothing simple or straightforward about proposing an army of bear-folk. The simplest meaning of what it says (rather than what you want it to say) is that men and men alone, not women, descended directly from Beorn could turn into bears. We know there were other Men living round there before he came along (the ones who used to loose arrows at the Eagles, because they thought they'd steal their sheep) so what's become of them, then? Did this supposed army of bear-folk drive them off? Not very nice, if so. The simplest explanation is that Beorn became the 'great chief' of the local Men and that the Beornings as a people include both them and those who are now their paramount clan, Beorn's son(s) and other family.
I'm going to say it one more time: if it's supposedly so straightforward, why did the devs give us a firm, flat 'No' when this topic was first raised, years back? It was the kind of 'No' we got for half-Elves, Rangers and Noldor.
Don't try to argue that the lore contradicts them, when that is plainly not the case.
What I was saying is that you can't seem to read plain English, with that business of trying to force another meaning onto that passage which mentions 'the men of his line' followed by a description of these men being much like Beorn. Were the women all burly and heavily bearded as well, then? There's no reason to think it means anything other than what it says, with skin-changing being an exclusively male trait.
In response to the argument that we can't allow Beornings because they are too strong or too few... again...
No we can't play as Half-elves, Dunedain, or Noldor, but claiming that it's because there were too few or they were too strong is... speculation at best... unless you happen to be an employee of Turbie who was part of the decision not to include these.
Or that I've been around a long time and I can remember what they said pre-beta. Don't you think people asked, at the time? Of course they did.
Are the numbers of a given race or class found in the books the consistent precedent for LOTRO characters? NO. In the books there are only 5 Hobbits outside the Shire at this time, none of whom we can even use the name of.
Hobbits can't turn into a bear and rip your arms off.
The claim that we should not be able to play as Beorning skin-changers on the basis that they are bigger and stronger than average Men is faulty logic, and textually inaccurate.
Beorn's descendants may have been less in size and strength than him, but as Beorn was such a huge, powerfully-built guy that doesn't imply they were just like your average Joe. I imagine they'd still be big bear-like blokes, reflecting the ability they'd inherited.
The inaccuracy is that Tolkien specifically mentions that Beorn's skin-changing descendents were mostly like Beorn in heart "...if less in size and strength." He also wrote that the Beornings were "...many men tall and fair, as are the Riders of Rohan", seeming to say they were similar in stature and appearance to the Men of Rohan, to whom Tolkien explains, they are related.
...which is not an inaccuracy at all in my view given that most of the Beornings would be Northmen very much like the Rohirrim, with only some of them being big bear-like guys like Beorn. And of course tall and fair, in consequence.
And though there is variance in earlier versions of the text, in the final version Elves were generally taller than Men, stronger of body, keener of mind, more valorous, higher artisans, more beautiful, and bearers of greater wisdom, not only than the average Man, but more than the pinacle of Men in these regards - the Númenóreans.
"Therefore they grew wise and glorious, and in all things more like to the Firstborn than any other of the kindreds of Men" (Akallabeth) The Númenóreans though approaching the greatness of the Elves, were not ultimately their equals.
So why can't we play Noldor, again? Or Dunedain? That's the simple fact that you can't seem to get your head around, that the devs can and do take lore into account.
Furthermore, adding the addendum that this is a genetic trait only carried by the male line - not even pased on through mothers is just laughable. I'm not saying this is laughable because it's impossible - sure it's possible. But it is not in the text, and is venturing well into the realm of fan-fiction. Please distinguish imagination and possible interpretations from what is actually stated by Tolkien.
Nothing less than rank hypocrisy, as you're the one who's trying to read more into it than it in fact says.
'...it is said that for many generations the men of his line had the power of taking bear's shape, and some were grim men and bad, but most were in heart like Beorn, if less in size and strength.'
Why should we imagine that includes women? Is Tolkien known for being an 'equal opportunity' fantasy writer? You're not going with the simplest possible explanation at all, you want something elaborate that will justify what you want: a supposed army of bear-folk, rather than the simpler (but still highly fantastical) idea of a Northern people who are ruled by chiefs who can turn into bears. When something's extra-special like that, Tolkien keeps it scarce. He didn't have an axe to grind about wanting, needing there to be thousands of bear-folk so he could have something he wanted. Quite the reverse.
We are all free to imagine freely what these things might be... but arguing that something departs from Tolkien's words, by departing radically from them yourself is obviously nonsensical.
So, I'm departing radically from what he said because he said 'men' and I'm taking that at face value instead of reading far more into it? It's really quite simple, I disagree profoundly with what you're saying, not the source material.
What is not reasonable is to deny that the text allows for this understanding of it as well. I have researched this thoroughly, and provided all the quotations.
And misread some of them, such as that line about 'many generations'. Anything to make what you want sound better, it seems.
Nothing I have said disagrees in any respect with those quotes or dismisses any of them, in themselves, just the spin you and the OP have tried to put on them. For example, the Men of the Vales of Anduin weren't a diverse lot, they were all ethnic Northmen and so very similar culturally, too. You're trying to pretend I'm saying something different, but that's just a strawman argument. It's perfectly explicable as just some guy who makes a name for himself (albeit for something extraordinary), gains a following among the locals, sires some progeny to carry on the family business (so to speak) and then eventually dies from old age, but his following carry on calling themselves Beornings, the people of Beorn, in his honour. Just like the Eorlingas did, because Eorl was such a hero to them. Just like the Bardings did, because Bard was a hero to them. It's not like I'm suggesting anything unusual, here.
Anyway, your way produces an army of bear-folk who I really can't see having too much trouble with Orcs. But they clearly do, their lands end up going up in flames, so something's not quite right. My way, it's mostly ordinary Northmen so the Orcs give them all kinds of pain and grief, just like the Woodmen of Mirkwood were also having not so very far away.
N.B. the quote which mentions "the lands of the Beornings were in flames.", is not stating what happened, but rather what was in Sauron's thought and plans, as glimpsed by Frodo on Amon Hen.
What he was seeing was what was really happening far away at that moment, like the deadly strife in Mirkwood and smoke rising on the borders of Lorien. That was what the Seat of Seeing was for; that was what he saw before he attracted Sauron's attention by looking into Mordor.
Last edited by Radhruin_EU; Jun 17 2011 at 05:55 PM.
Well done but after all that research you didnt find out beornings are secluded to one area? Sorry mate they cant stretch the lore that far. Anduin i think it was and they were engaged by orcs the whole time. Would be cool but, this is the interpretation of the grandaddy of fantasy's world
All I can say is - read the OP before embarrassing yourself further.
Tolkien defines the lands of the Beornings as a vast territory stretching from Misty Mtns. to Mirkwood. They are credited with keeping the path through Mirkwood open, and later are gifted with a massive tract of land in the middle of Mirkwood. They are a signifcant enough force that they drive out and eradicate orc and warg through this huge region.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
All I can say is - read the OP before embarrassing yourself further.
Tolkien defines the lands of the Beornings as a vast territory stretching from Misty Mtns. to Mirkwood. They are credited with keeping the path through Mirkwood open, and later are gifted with a massive tract of land in the middle of Mirkwood. They are a signifcant enough force that they drive out and eradicate orc and warg through this huge region.
Until the War of the Ring really kicked off, when all of a sudden their lands are said to be 'in flames' so it rather sounds like they had an Orc problem. It wasn't that hard to see off casual raiding by Orcs, who were a rabble if left to themselves, but it was a different story when someone else was in charge of them.
We already went over this... the land of the Beornings was not in flame.
Read the source quotes in the OP and see if you can figure out your own error.
Yes, we did already go over this; you're just ignoring what it says because it doesn't suit your would-be version with its army of indomitable bear-men. Frodo was seeing what was happening far away because that was what the Seat of Seeing was for; it wasn't any vision in Sauron's mind, it was actually going on at that moment. For example, it also showed smoke rising on the borders of Lorien - that was the Orcs attacking in force, something we know actually happened. Deadly strife in Mirkwood, too, something else we know was actually going on.
Read the book and see if you can figure out your own error.
the more I think about this, the more I believe the Beornings would make a better faction than a new race. You certainly could have an instanced raid (small fellowship) where you help defend a village or something. This would definitely fall into line on what Turbine has already down with other factions.
That said...it still was an amazingly researched idea! Thanks for sharing it!
Radhruin, please keep it civil. Describe your point of view without insults or rude interjections. Yes, admittedly, the text is vague and can be taken in several ways, but it is up to the reader to make his own opinion on the topic, especially in this instance. The OP reads it one way, you another.
Is it so hard to respect one another? Lets not be at each other's throats, bordering on closing the thread (I bet), like earlier.
Last edited by Travisimo; Jul 01 2011 at 03:01 PM.
Radhruin, please keep it civil. Describe your point of view without insults or rude interjections. Yes, admittedly, the text is vague and can be taken in several ways, but it is up to the reader to make his own opinion on the topic, especially in this instance. The OP reads it one way, you another.
It's not vague at all, if you actually read it. He's having a vision of the world around him, until he looks at Barad-dûr and the Eye becomes aware of his gaze; that's when he has his close brush with Sauron's will, not when he was just looking round. The description of what he sees isn't what Sauron desires but what truly is, at that point in time: apart from the examples I mentioned before, Minas Tirith is seen in all its glory, 'proud and fair', not ruined and aflame as Sauron planned. So where, exactly, is the OP getting his notion that what Frodo sees there is all in Sauron's mind? The signs of war that Frodo sees are only what was actually happening at that time.
The OP wants his playable Beornings way too badly - he's rejecting anything that might question the way he wants to spin things.
Last edited by Radhruin_EU; Jul 01 2011 at 04:53 PM.
It's not vague at all, if you actually read it. He's having a vision of the world around him, until he looks at Barad-dûr and the Eye becomes aware of his gaze; that's when he has his close brush with Sauron's will, not when he was just looking round. The description of what he sees isn't what Sauron desires but what truly is, at that point in time: apart from the examples I mentioned before, Minas Tirith is seen in all its glory, 'proud and fair', not ruined and aflame as Sauron planned. So where, exactly, is the OP getting his notion that what Frodo sees there is all in Sauron's mind? The signs of war that Frodo sees are only what was actually happening at that time.
I wasn't actually referring to the vision (since in that I agree, though the lands of Beorn burning can also be interpreted different ways, come to think of it), just the entire demeanor.
Last edited by Travisimo; Jul 01 2011 at 05:09 PM.
I wasn't actually referring to the vision (since in that I agree, though the lands of Beorn burning can also be interpreted different ways, come to think of it), just the entire demeanor.
While ignoring the OP's entirely... I've grown a little tired of him pretending that anyone who doesn't see things his way is having trouble reading, when in this particular case he is most definitely reaching.
As for the burning, if there's a war on then the people who are having their lands set afire are generally going to be the ones who are being given a hard time, don't you think?
As for the burning, if there's a war on then the people who are having their lands set afire are generally going to be the ones who are being given a hard time, don't you think?
Haven't you ever heard of the firefighters of Middle-earth? (that should be the new class! :P )
Travisimo: When you said - it can be read in different ways, that is exactly what I've said going back pages and pages. I find it very unpleasant trying to discuss a subject where I have researched extensively for years, wtih someone who is having an emotional debate with me, forcing his opinion as the only possible view, in total disregard for the text, and claming it is the reverse. Really I have to wonder what possesses someone to go to a forum for a game, find probably one of the most well researched and detailed threads around, and makes it their fervent task to bash it and refute it... to what ends? Is it really that important to not have Beornings in a game? Middle-earth Enterprises (formerly known as Tolkien Enterprises) already gave sanction for a game to have a populace of playable Beornings. They are the official gatekeepers of Tolkien's works, and found this agreeable. Why toss insult on my hard efforts here? Just to reject this character for this game?
As for the land of the Beornings being in flame... If you would open the book, The Fellowship of The Ring, to the chapter: The Breaking of The Fellowship, and read it over, you will see that in this case it is not that there are multiple possibilities - the text is clear - this was a vision Frodo had standing on Amon Hen. It was not happening at the time. It was amongst Sauron's plans for the future - Sauron's thought and device. Though it is possible that it did eventually happen, that is not stated or even hinted at in any text, and is the realm of fan-fiction.
As for the Battle of Greenwood the Great, under the eaves of Mirkwood, indeed Sauron did launch an assault there, and was routed, and the Beornings specifically were gifted a massive tract in the midst of that forest thereafter.
The parts of the text that are open to various interpretations are things like: when Tolkien states that the Beornings eradicated the orcs and wargs from the Misty Mtns. to Mirkwood, did he mean a tribe of Beorn's kinsmen who are skin-changers like him, or did he mean an aggregate of men from other peoples who gave Beorn's family their allegiance? And when Tolkien states that there were many generations of Beornings with the power of taking bear's form, how many did he have in mind by the time of the War of The Ring. These things were not answered in specific by Tolkien - all the quotations to rely on are found in the OP - and one who claims in stubborness that there is only one acceptable reading is not allowing for an honest discussion, but is forcing an emotional standpoint onto others. I have repeatedly said - it is 100% fine to read these things differently than I have. Though my very extensive research into this heavily weighs the simplest understanding to the side of these being Beorn's kin, and there being enough of them certainly for the purposes of this game, nonetheless I acknowledge and agree that is it possible to read these things otherwise. I have attempted to explain in careful detail, providing all source material and bibliographical citations, how among various interpretations, it is also possible, with honest, plain, and solid foundation, to read these texts to mean that there were enough Beorning skin-changers around for a character type in LOTRO. Nonetheless, I would not refute for a second someone who said - when looking at such and such a quotation, I tend to imagine this to mean something different than you see in it. That is completely legitimate. I agree even.
I am not saying there were for a certainty many, or for a certainty not many... I am sharing years of research and showing how it also can legitimately be an adequate foundation for a character in our game.
P.S. As to idea for what this might look like as a Class - I dedicated a seciton for some suggestions about that in the OP. Those are just a sketch of ideas. I am confident however, that our Devs at Tubrine could come up with something unique, interesting, fun, and appropriately balanced.
Feel free to take the time to think up some creative ideas for this of your own, and share them too.
History became legend, and legend became myth, and some things that should not have been forgotten were lost...
As for the land of the Beornings being in flame... If you would open the book, The Fellowship of The Ring, to the chapter: The Breaking of The Fellowship, and read it over, you will see that in this case it is not that there are multiple possibilities - the text is clear - this was a vision Frodo had standing on Amon Hen. It was not happening at the time. It was amongst Sauron's plans for the future - Sauron's thought and device.
There you go again. The Seat of Seeing had nothing to do with Sauron, so how could it be showing anyone his thought and intent? He didn't have a hand in its making, and it's not a palantir. Frodo sees things that were happening at that time but not things that have yet to come to pass, like the siege of Minas Tirith; he sees Minas Tirith's splendour, which was certainly no intent of Sauron's. Reading on, he then came into contact with Sauron's will when he looked towards Barad-dûr, and the Eye felt his gaze. You're misrepresenting that passage because you don't want to have any doubt cast on your supposed mighty army of bear-men.
As for the Battle of Greenwood the Great, under the eaves of Mirkwood, indeed Sauron did launch an assault there, and was routed, and the Beornings specifically were gifted a massive tract in the midst of that forest thereafter.
There was a great deal more to the fighting in Mirkwood than just one assault, as you should know full well. There was 'long battle under the trees and great ruin of fire', we're told. As for those woodlands, they weren't solely granted to the Beornings but the Woodmen as well; none of that narrative supports your would-be army of bear-folk, just an eventual victory in which the Beornings played a part.
The parts of the text that are open to various interpretations are things like: when Tolkien states that the Beornings eradicated the orcs and wargs from the Misty Mtns. to Mirkwood, did he mean a tribe of Beorn's kinsmen who are skin-changers like him, or did he mean an aggregate of men from other peoples who gave Beorn's family their allegiance?
We're told that Beorn became the great chief of a sturdy people, not that he'd fathered a new people. He's shown as solitary, initially, but for his animal friends and servants. Gandalf quotes him as saying "The day will come when they shall perish and I shall go back"; no talk of 'we', no hint of any others like him. The local people were Northmen, hence with kinship to the Rohirrim, the Men of Dale and the Woodmen as described; we know that men from far and wide already knew of him, and that Beorn invited them to feast with him. The reasonable conclusion is that the locals decided to take him as their leader; after all, he'd done a mighty deed by killing Bolg and routing the Goblins.
Now, that in turn would explain how the Beornings could claim that whole land: otherwise, it would require Beorn and his kin to have forcibly dispossessed the locals of their lands and that wouldn't have been nice at all. Tolkien doesn't present them as bloodthirsty, land-hungry conquerors, does he? On the contrary, he says that they tended to be like Beorn himself had been, in temperament if not in size and strength. So therefore, it can reasonably be concluded that the locals chose to follow Beorn and took to calling themselves Beornings in his honour.
And when Tolkien states that there were many generations of Beornings with the power of taking bear's form, how many did he have in mind by the time of the War of The Ring.
You don't get many generations in eighty or so years. A plausible result would be a largish extended family of Beorn's kinsmen by the time of the War of the Ring. Not hundreds, not thousands, and as only the men directly descended from him, his line, could take bear's-shape that would prune down the potential number of skin-changers considerably. Which would be fine, from an unbiased perspective: in story-telling terms, it's quite colourful enough to have a sturdy Northern people ruled over by men who can change into bears. The only fault in that reading is of course that it doesn't justify what you want in game, so naturally you're none too keen on it.
In your interpretation, on the other hand, you have systematically skewed your arguments towards your prejudged conclusion, that there have to be many skin-changers. You started from there and worked backwards. You were far too quick to reject as 'speculative conjecture' the idea that Beorn became a great chief among the local Men, and you tried to pretend that this 'aggregate' (as you called it) would not agree with Tolkien's description of them despite the fact it would, given that we know the locals were Northmen. Where did Beorn's wife come from, if not from among the local Men?
You've also taken no account of how Men are portrayed in LOTR, and more generally in Tolkien's work. With only a few individual exceptions, they're like us: mundane, possessed of no magic; even the Dunedain, once extraordinary, had declined to the point where they were scarce different from others (as Faramir tells Frodo). Against this background, having a comparatively small number of Men who could change into bears would be extraordinary in itself; having an army of them would be bizarre, a sudden excursion into a wilder school of fantasy. There isn't even anything like that in The Silmarillion, as there Tolkien had decided to confine the power of shape-changing to the Ainur. Given that, it seems highly unlikely that he could really have been thinking of Beorn being the progenitor of a whole army of bear-people; such a thing would stick out like a sore thumb, it would be the only example of anything like that anywhere in his works and further it would be in the Third Age, a time which was far less fantastical than those which had preceded it.
In short: yours is by far the wilder conjecture. It's based on a prejudged conclusion and it fails to explain how the Beornings came to possess their wide lands when those were already inhabited by Men.
I agree with this thread that Beornlings should be added to the game, maybe not now, but at some point. Although having some Beornlings doesnt brake lore, i dont think having hundreds of them running around is a good idea. to make it more limited, put in requirements of things as well as 1000 tp. maybe have a requirement be to do some bear deeds? in short: Beornlings should be included, but be limited.
I totally agree with you. The Beroning class (or sub-race) would be awesome. I also have a few suggestions that would make this class ,in my opinion, very good.
The role of this class, in bear form, would be a crowd control, tanking, and off dpsing. This way the class would be different from the many dpsing classes such as the lore-master. In human form, as said before, could be a squishy healer. All of these roles could be buffed with certain traits. (crowd control and dpsing in the same trait line)
Skills in bear form would be mainly debuffs with little dpsing element and a few dpsing skills. This would improve fellowships by being able to draw agro and debuff while squishy nukers can attack. I aslo agree with the concept of animal allies which would also help draw agro. Human form would have the basic squishy healing skills.
Overall, I think it's a great idea built up with other great ideas to form an awesome class which turbine will hopefully make into a class.
P.S I'm thinking of an idea of traveling faster for this class please tell me your ideas.
....This way the class would be different from the many dpsing classes such as the lore-master.....
LM is not a true DPS class...while you can trait to be able to DPS...LM is very much a support/CC class
Originally Posted by djheydt
Holy Valar, is someone beating this dead horse yet again?
HAHA, it does keep popping up, doesn't it?
"You cannot pass," he said. … "I am a Servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. You cannot pass." The Fellowship of the Ring II 5: "The Bridge of Khazad-dûm"
Sorry, I meant to say that it should do damage comparable to the LM.
ooooh, ok that makes sense
"You cannot pass," he said. … "I am a Servant of the Secret Fire, wielder of the flame of Anor. The dark fire will not avail you, flame of Udûn. You cannot pass." The Fellowship of the Ring II 5: "The Bridge of Khazad-dûm"
I think we have enough classes as it is. I was happy RoI didn't come with any new ones.
Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
Civ II rules after all these years......
Junior Member Online status:
Reputation:
Grand Member Online status:
Originally Posted by VincentVanPort
Junior Member Online status:
Re: New Class: Beorning
Poster of Note Online status:
Poster of Note Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Senior Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Century Member Online status:
Re: New Class: Beorning
Re: New Class: Beorning
Grand Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Member Online status:
Grand Member Online status:
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
