Thread: Request of the end of the restricion of classes to the hobbits

I write this post without spirit of polemic of bothering alone nobody ask for help to be able to take all the classes as the big races, do not want polemic only I ask if someone wants to help leaving his signature in order that a hobbit could be the class that wants like champion, loremaster, rune kepper and cpt

Uhh. Not quite sure what you're saying exactly, but the class restriction is in place for lore-purposes. No race can be every class.

I am interpreting that as a request that all races -- hobbits in particular -- can play every class?

No.

I support the current balance of race/class combinations and limitations. Runekeepers aside, the available combinations make sense in terms of the attributes and history of each race. Some would argue vehemently that there should be at least one *less* class available to hobbits, but I happen to embrace the hobbit guardian.

yess, hobbit champions please

/signed!

Even if they did bypass the lore restrictions, it would mean a lot of work for the devs because they would have to develop the skill animations for Hobbits for the remaining classes. IIRC, that's why we don't have Dwarf Wardens as well - they ran out of time to create the animations for that class/race combo.

Originally Posted by Dodam

yess, hobbit champions please

/signed!

Yes, because hobbits are a race known for making excellent berserkers. They're readily able to go into a bloody rage leaving them with no desire but to kill everything around them. They are so skilled with weapons of war that they can strike half a dozen foes with a single blow. And they are so hardy that they can face even the mightiest of foes without even a shield to protect them, simply taking it on the chin.

No. I'm being sarcastic. None of the above are true. Champion would be a terrible hobbit class, and would be one of the nastier lore violations I've seen people request. Hobbits are neither warlike nor prone to rage, two traits that define a champion.

You may be confusing hobbits with halflings from any number of Tolkien-derived fantasy works. In which case, there's another Turbine MMO that might be more to your tastes.

Originally Posted by Dodam

hobbit champions please

They were available in Alpha.

For that they removed them then they them cannot put again

Hobbit captains are mentioned in lore.

Hmmm, I think the following classes could work for Hobbits based in lore:

Captain - Pippin led the Hobbits in the reclaiming the Shire from Brigands. His deeds seemed very Captain-like to me.


Lore-master - Merry became a master of pipe-weed lore. (Yeah, this is a stretch, but so is an RK being based on Galadriel.)


Champion - Bandobras the Bullroarer Took knocked a goblin's head clean off.


I don't think a Hobbit RK would work by any stretch of the imagination though.

Originally Posted by rodin12

I write this post without spirit of polemic of bothering alone nobody ask for help to be able to take all the classes as the big races, do not want polemic only I ask if someone wants to help leaving his signature in order that a hobbit could be the class that wants like champion, loremaster, rune kepper and cpt

Hobbits have one too many classes as it is (Guardian... full metal hobbits, very silly)

LM, RK - Nope. Hobbits never studied magic of any sort, we're told. They weren't even into lore all that much, except for herbalism and their own interminable genealogies. It's quite enough of a liberty for them be Minstrels.

Captain - who would follow a hobbit, apart from other hobbits?

Champion - hobbits weren't warlike, so being so very into fighting wouldn't be hobbit-like at all.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

Captain - who would follow a hobbit, apart from other hobbits?

Made me think of Return of the King when Merry and Pippin start charging first but are beat by all the men.

Originally Posted by Fendrone

Made me think of Return of the King when Merry and Pippin start charging first but are beat by all the men.

The movie? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, he thinks we're talking about the abomination that was the movie lore.

As usual, Radhruin is right here. Hobbits don't have a strong lore/magic background (much less one that would justify carrying a little staff, invoking the power of the Valar, throwing fireballs, and being followed around by a polar bear... of course, none of the races are justified in any of that, so for all you know Turbine might change their minds, to the wrath of everyone who cares about Lore). Nobody would follow them - they didn't have any great, polarizing leaders. And they weren't warlike, much less berserkers.

Originally Posted by Tekkud

The movie? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, he thinks we're talking about the abomination that was the movie lore.

Uhh... No I wasn't, but nice of you to assume. I read all of Tolkiens books too... It's allowed to like Lord of the Rings and enjoy the movies too.

Originally Posted by Fendrone

Uhh... No I wasn't, but nice of you to assume. I read all of Tolkiens books too... It's allowed to like Lord of the Rings and enjoy the movies too.

Then why did you bring up a scene from the movie when we're talking about canon lore?

Originally Posted by Tekkud

Then why did you bring up a scene from the movie when we're talking about canon lore?

Because it was a light-hearted post from a scene I found funny, and I can post whatever I want.... Perhaps next time I'll stay away from these threads since some people think themselves superior because they know a fantasy world better than anyone else.

Originally Posted by Tekkud

Then why did you bring up a scene from the movie when we're talking about canon lore?

Because he said it reminded him of that scene, that's all. There's another scene from the movies that speaks to the limitations of hobbits, the one where Eomer says he doesn't doubt Merry's courage, just the reach of his arm. For this, it's a fair point even though it's not canon (and maybe not the sort of thing Eomer would say, either) because it's probably very much what many Men would think of hobbits.

"[A]t the top of the Roll in all accounts stand the names of Captains Meriadoc and Peregrin." - The Scouring of the Shire

Argue all you want about the likelihood that Big Folk would follow hobbits into battle, canon text explicitly describes two of the hobbits as "Captains." If that's not a solid argument for allowing hobbits to play captains, then I don't know what could be.

Originally Posted by Wiedman

"[A]t the top of the Roll in all accounts stand the names of Captains Meriadoc and Peregrin." - The Scouring of the Shire

Argue all you want about the likelihood that Big Folk would follow hobbits into battle, canon text explicitly describes two of the hobbits as "Captains." If that's not a solid argument for allowing hobbits to play captains, then I don't know what could be.

It's no argument for having player-character hobbit Captains during the War of the Ring. Merry and Pippin only led hobbits and they didn't fall into that role until very late in the book, either.

You're entitled to your opinion, but don't mistake your opinion for canon lore. Canon lore indisputably supports hobbit captains. You dismiss Elf Captains because they were "only around in the First Age," or some nonsense like that. Now you dismiss hobbit captains because they only appear at the end of the trilogy.

who would follow a hobbit? A wizard, a king, an elf prince, and a dwarf come to mind.... on top of other hobbits.

I can see a hobbit captain, though it seems a little odd.

Whoever said hobbits are not tough, gandalf said they were made of "stern stuff" a few times.

I have no problems with a hobbit champ (makes more sense than a hobbit guard, in my eyes. Champs are undisciplined fighters and the hobbit "style" ... well, its sorta champ like, they are slow to anger but when pressed to fight, they fight with their hearts even if untrained).

The hobbit guard is more of an issue for me: trained in the use of arms and armor, and willing to wear a full suit of mail and wear it properly to get maximum benefits?? Here again a champ makes more sense.... strap the armor on, much good as it does you without any training or conditioning for it.... not much good at all! Yes, the concept was off Sam, but sam was not wearing full plate with a shield either. It was his protective nature that they wanted to model, not his skill at arms.

Loremaster and RK make no sense for a hobbit. Hunter does not either, really --- they may be good at throwing rocks but master archers they are not. Champ and guard are both sort of questionable, and both make equally little sense in some ways and perfect sense in other ways. Captain, I can see that one.

Originally Posted by forusrname

Hunter does not either, really --- they may be good at throwing rocks but master archers they are not.

There were hobbit archers that helped defend Fornost from the Witch King's forces. I think that's what Turbine used as justification.

Originally Posted by Wiedman

You're entitled to your opinion, but don't mistake your opinion for canon lore. Canon lore indisputably supports hobbit captains. You dismiss Elf Captains because they were "only around in the First Age," or some nonsense like that. Now you dismiss hobbit captains because they only appear at the end of the trilogy.

Canon lore supports all of two hobbit captains, and not during the War of the Ring. Fact, not opinion. And besides that, Merry and Pippin weren't your average hobbits any more: they'd having drunk Ent-draughts and grown, among other things. (Again, fact and not opinion). Or do you think player-characters should get that perk, too?

Canon lore also only has them leading hobbits, not anybody and everybody. Once again that's fact, not opinion.

Where opinion comes into is that it'd be ridiculous to have someone less than four feet tall leading full-grown Men into battle. Imagine it in a movie, it'd be laughable. Hobbits were only the size of small children (fact) and so lacked the necessary presence. Hell, they wouldn't even be able to keep up during a charge. They could only feasibly command their own people.

What you're engaged in is selective quotation, deliberately taking something out of context. Wake me up when you can muster a better argument than DERP, IT SAY CAPTAIN IN BOOK.

The fact remains, these games are based off of the books, and in the books there are two hobbits who are explicitly described as captains. You can dismiss that with your childish ad hominems, or you can simply accept that I'm right. Hobbits should be allowed to be captains.

EDIT: You said that I took these quotes out of context. What did you mean by that?

Originally Posted by Wiedman

The fact remains, these games are based off of the books, and in the books there are two hobbits who are explicitly described as captains. You can dismiss that with your childish ad hominems, or you can simply accept that I'm right. Hobbits should be allowed to be captains.

EDIT: You said that I took these quotes out of context. What did you mean by that?

I mean quite simply that you are ignoring the circumstances. There are two hobbits who end up being called Captains some time after the War of the Ring because they led other hobbits, and only other hobbits in a glorified skirmish to throw some scruffy thugs out of the Shire. Oh, and did I mention those two weren't any old hobbits, they'd drunk Ent-draughts and so had grown appreciably taller than hobbits ever normally were (something player-character hobbits aren't).

You seem to think that's carte blanche to have playable hobbit captains during the War of the Ring and leading Men, Elves and Dwarves rather than just hobbits.

Two entirely different contexts. Total non sequitur. That's what I'm dismissing: the spin you're trying to put on that one fact, while you ignore a bunch of other facts that don't suit you.

If there are hobbit captains in the book, then there's no reason to prohibit them from the game. Who cares if they drank ent draught? Who cares that they only led other hobbits? Neither of those facts have anything to do with the fact that the lore supports the existence of hobbit captains.

LotRO hobbits are clearly exceptional hobbits. Typical hobbits smoke pipe-weed and eat seven meals a day. They don't go on many adventures to Bree, much less Isengard. So assuming that exceptional hobbits aren't appropriate lore examples is simply unfounded.

Originally Posted by Tekkud

Then why did you bring up a scene from the movie when we're talking about canon lore?

Individuals who have average to high reading comprehension would have caught the words, "Made me think of" and realized he was pointing out something that that he was reminded of by this discussion. I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to accomplish by mocking and belittling someone for participating in a discussion. His comment was perfectly reasonable and it was out of line to respond with mocking laughter. It doesn't make you cool, just a bully.

Originally Posted by Wiedman

If there are hobbit captains in the book, then there's no reason to prohibit them from the game. Who cares if they drank ent draught? Who cares that they only led other hobbits? Neither of those facts have anything to do with the fact that the lore supports the existence of hobbit captains.

The lore doesn't support the existence of hobbit captains who could lead anyone other than hobbits. No hobbit ever did anything of the sort, and that fact alone is a perfectly good reason not to make them playable in the game. You're clinging desperately onto the one bit of lore you like the sound of, and ignoring anything that doesn't suit. That makes your new-found attachment to lore disingenuous at best.

LotRO hobbits are clearly exceptional hobbits. Typical hobbits smoke pipe-weed and eat seven meals a day. They don't go on many adventures to Bree, much less Isengard. So assuming that exceptional hobbits aren't appropriate lore examples is simply unfounded.

Player-character hobbits are still not supposed to be as exceptional as either Merry or Pippin, and even those two didn't go around leading Men, Elves or Dwarves into battle. You're asking for something that's not even plausible in the game's version of things.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

The lore doesn't support the existence of hobbit captains who could lead anyone other than hobbits. No hobbit ever did anything of the sort, and that fact alone is a perfectly good reason not to make them playable in the game.

You actually think that's a persuasive argument? The lore doesn't support the existence of dwarf minstrels playing bagpipes either. That doesn't mean that they aren't playable in the game.

You're clinging desperately onto the one bit of lore you like the sound of, and ignoring anything that doesn't suit. That makes your new-found attachment to lore disingenuous at best.

I've supported my arguments with evidence from the text. You have not supported your arguments with evidence from the text. What lore could I possibly be ignoring, if you're not providing any evidence? Where do the books say that hobbit captains didn't exist?

Player-character hobbits are still not supposed to be as exceptional as either Merry or Pippin, and even those two didn't go around leading Men, Elves or Dwarves into battle. You're asking for something that's not even plausible in the game's version of things.

Yeah, they totally are as exceptional as Merry and Pippen. They're hobbits going on adventures, that's pretty much the best example of exceptionalism that anybody can think of.

If Boromir is supposed to be the classic example of the Captain, and it certainly seems that way from the game (he's the one who awards you IDOME, after all), then where are the examples of him leading Elves or Dwarves into battle? Elves and Dwarves mostly followed their own kind, just as Men followed each other, and Hobbits followed Hobbit Captains. Leading a multi-racial force is not a requirement to be a Captain, at least not in the canon lore. In other words, it's a baseless and unconvincing argument.

Show me some lore that argues against hobbit captains, or just accept that I'm right.

Originally Posted by Wiedman

You actually think that's a persuasive argument? The lore doesn't support the existence of dwarf minstrels playing bagpipes either. That doesn't mean that they aren't playable in the game.

Lore doesn't support all sorts of things. That doesn't mean just any old thing should therefore be allowed; even Turbine have their limits. Set a long way short of yours, in this case. Being more extreme than Turbine is no recommendation.

I've supported my arguments with evidence from the text. You have not supported your arguments with evidence from the text. What lore could I possibly be ignoring, if you're not providing any evidence? Where do the books say that hobbit captains didn't exist?

Taking things out of context is not 'evidence'. You have produced no evidence whatsoever of hobbits being able to lead Men, Elves or Dwarves into battle. As that's what's required of Captains in the game, you've produced no evidence requiring their playability in that general role. Mere existence of a couple of hobbits who could lead other hobbits into battle doesn't justify anything wider than that.

Yeah, they totally are as exceptional as Merry and Pippen. They're hobbits going on adventures, that's pretty much the best example of exceptionalism that anybody can think of.

Not every hobbit who went on adventures was as exceptional as those two. Gandalf had taken more than a few hobbits off on adventures, including Bilbo's mother in her younger days.

If Boromir is supposed to be the classic example of the Captain, and it certainly seems that way from the game (he's the one who awards you IDOME, after all), then where are the examples of him leading Elves or Dwarves into battle? Elves and Dwarves mostly followed their own kind, just as Men followed each other, and Hobbits followed Hobbit Captains. Leading a multi-racial force is not a requirement to be a Captain, at least not in the canon lore. In other words, it's a baseless and unconvincing argument.

I seem to recall Aragorn leading an Elf and a Dwarf into battle. It just took the right Man for the job. There was no such thing as the right hobbit for the job to be a dauntless leader of Men, even, let alone Elves or Dwarves. Being less than four feet tall might have had something to do with that, not to mention how hobbits were not at all warlike and had no experience of leading anyone into battle. Not even themselves, as there'd been no battle in the Shire within living memory.

Show me some lore that argues against hobbit captains, or just accept that I'm right.

I accept only what you've actually demonstrated, that Merry and Pippin were named as Captains by their fellow hobbits following their exploits during the Scouring of the Shire. After leading hobbits into battle, and only hobbits. The bar on who might be called a 'Captain' was naturally set rather low, in the Shire

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

Player-character hobbits are still not supposed to be as exceptional as either Merry or Pippin, and even those two didn't go around leading Men, Elves or Dwarves into battle. You're asking for something that's not even plausible in the game's version of things.

Originally Posted by Wiedman

Yeah, they totally are as exceptional as Merry and Pippen. They're hobbits going on adventures, that's pretty much the best example of exceptionalism that anybody can think of.

^This. Turbine created this game so that, while we couldn't play the main characters from the Fellowship, we could create our own characters, our own fellowships, and have our own adventures. My Hobbit has slain a Balrog and two dragons, has been carried by an Eagle, liberated Moria, survived the prisons of Isengard, came face to face with the Lieutenant of Dol Guldur and Saruman, and even managed to get Old Sally safely home; and Frieja's only halfway through her adventure.

Our player-character Hobbits are most definitely supposed to be as exceptional as Merry and Pippin.

Originally Posted by Frieja

My Hobbit has slain a Balrog and two dragons

What, all by herself?

Our player-character Hobbits are most definitely supposed to be as exceptional as Merry and Pippin.

'As exceptional as'? If you like, but that's not enough to justify hobbits being able to lead all of Middle-earth into battle. Not their strong point.

I totally agree, we should have Hobbit F-16 pilots! Just because it's not explicitly in the book, it's totally possible!

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

I seem to recall Aragorn leading an Elf and a Dwarf into battle. It just took the right Man for the job. There was no such thing as the right hobbit for the job to be a dauntless leader of Men, even, let alone Elves or Dwarves. Being less than four feet tall might have had something to do with that, not to mention how hobbits were not at all warlike and had no experience of leading anyone into battle. Not even themselves, as there'd been no battle in the Shire within living memory.

So Merry and Pippen aren't good examples because they're "exceptional." But Aragorn, the King, the heir to Elendil, he's your idea of a legitimate example of a Man? Did it ever occur to you that he was able to lead a multi-racial force because he was descended from Luthien, more than because he was a Man? Where do Elves follow or respect any Man that isn't of the line of Elros?

Originally Posted by Wiedman

So Merry and Pippen aren't good examples because they're "exceptional."

Yes, because among other things they end up being of heroic stature by hobbit standards and even then, their captaincy only happens after the War of the Ring, among their own kind.

But Aragorn, the King, the heir to Elendil, he's your idea of a legitimate example of a Man? Did it ever occur to you that he was able to lead a multi-racial force because he was descended from Luthien, more than because he was a Man? Where do Elves follow or respect any Man that isn't of the line of Elros?

From Turbine's point of view, someone has to take up that role and Men are the obvious candidates, it being the Third Age. It's a stretch, but one hell of a lot less than having hobbits doing the same. Besides, if you want to be pedantic then hobbits shouldn't even be playable, much less be Captains.

Originally Posted by Radhruin_EU

Yes, because among other things they end up being of heroic stature by hobbit standards and even then, their captaincy only happens after the War of the Ring, among their own kind.

From Turbine's point of view, someone has to take up that role and Men are the obvious candidates, it being the Third Age. It's a stretch, but one hell of a lot less than having hobbits doing the same. Besides, if you want to be pedantic then hobbits shouldn't even be playable, much less be Captains.

I don't want to be pedantic, and I don't want to tell other people what race they're allowed to be. That's the difference between us; I believe in fun, and you believe in controlling what other people are allowed to do. It's a philosophical difference, and you can pretend it's about lore, but it clearly isn't. I've supported my arguments with evidence from lore. You haven't shown us the lore quote where the hobbits only followed Merry and Pippin because they were big. You expect us to believe that their leadership positions had nothing to do with the traditional authority of the Tooks and Brandybucks, with their flashy southern war gear, or simply people answering Merry's horn call (a very Captain like touch there). No, you've decided, without a shred of evidence from the books, that they were only captains because they were tall.

Why do you think it matters that the Battle of Bywater was a tiny skirmish after Sauron had been defeated? It's still part of the lore that the game is based on. Many people consider it to be a part of the War of the Ring, at least on these three sites.

http://lotr.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_of_Bywater

http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Battle_of_Bywater

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

Originally Posted by Wiedman

I don't want to be pedantic, and I don't want to tell other people what race they're allowed to be. That's the difference between us; I believe in fun, and you believe in controlling what other people are allowed to do.

Nah. You believe in allowing dubious race/class combinations just for the sake of it, and I don't. And oh look, Turbine don't either.

It's a philosophical difference, and you can pretend it's about lore, but it clearly isn't. I've supported my arguments with evidence from lore. You haven't shown us the lore quote where the hobbits only followed Merry and Pippin because they were big.

You haven't shown me any quotes where hobbits lead anybody other than hobbits; nor will you find any. As for Merry and Pippin being taller, are you trying to tell me that nobody noticed, that it had no effect on the hobbits who saw them? Like I said, to other hobbits they'd be of heroic stature; thanks to the Ent-draughts they'd ended up being even taller than Bullroarer had been. That couldn't help but make an impression on people.

You expect us to believe that their leadership positions had nothing to do with the traditional authority of the Tooks and Brandybucks, with their flashy southern war gear, or simply people answering Merry's horn call (a very Captain like touch there). No, you've decided, without a shred of evidence from the books, that they were only captains because they were tall.

And where did I say that? Spare me the strawman argument. The thing is, it's one of those things that makes them truly exceptional and it all adds up. There was no shortage of Tooks and Brandybucks already in the Shire, it was just that none of them could rouse the Shire like Merry and Pippin did. Why did Tolkien even include the idea of them having grown so much taller, otherwise? It's that plus the mail and swords plus having been to war.

Why do you think it matters that the Battle of Bywater was a tiny skirmish after Sauron had been defeated? It's still part of the lore that the game is based on. Many people consider it to be a part of the War of the Ring, at least on these three sites.

It matters because it's a sideshow, the faintest of echoes of the war that had happened elsewhere. It's just hobbits beating up some scruffy rabble, utterly trivial by comparison.

You might as well give up the arguments for Hobbits being allowed to do or be anything other than the limited roles they already have. Because nothing that anyone says will make any difference and don't expect anyone to supply any actual evidence to back up their arguments against expanding anyone's roles, because no-one ever does and they refuse to accept any evidence presented in support of changes either. Let's face it, even if Tolkien himself came on this forum and argued for Hobbits, he would be told it was impermissible because the Lore didn't support it!

Originally Posted by Frieja

Lore-master - Merry became a master of pipe-weed lore. (Yeah, this is a stretch, but so is an RK being based on Galadriel.)

Except that the Rk wasn't based off of Galladriel.

"Rune-keeper
This class is inspired by the master Elf-smith Celebrimbor, whose skill with runes of power was unparalleled."

This excerpt was taken from the lotro.com "Be a hero" section where they detail the races and classes available.

I don't see hobbits being bloodthirsty rage fueled champs, but hobbit cappies I could get behind. Captains lead the battle, lead the charge. You want the short guys in the front row so you can shoot arrows over their heads. As far as men not following hobbits into battle... men will follow anyone into battle, they just want to fight stuff. Men don't really need a leader in battle, just an enemy.