Would everyone be happy if magic was allowed, but only if you spent a point of Hope to 'cast' anything? When you run out of Hope, there's always Hate to draw on.

Evening, I think it would depend more on what sort of magic was allowed rather than whether it was or not. As it is many people, myself included, feel that magic is already allowed to an extent.

Read my comment near the top of the page.

Believe me that consideration has been around my head too.

Really? I do think that the presence of Elves does cause a bit trouble when it coms to the age of the character and thus experience level compared to lesser lived groups. But, not to allow them at all, what fun would there be in that? This is Tolkien you have to be able to play elves.

IMHO two pivotal parts of spell-casting rules (if one wants them at all) would be the need to design the spells sufficiently low-powered as well as integrating them into the overall feel. They must be learnable as a matter of lore though and not by default "closed" as cultural abilities.
The second one is -again IMHO - the conscious abstinence of a "Mage" (or similarly called) character class/calling/profession etc. In principle everyone can learn such spells - if given the opportunity and necessary time. Due to its nature as an object of study, "Loremaster" or similarly scholarly character types would benefit the most from their scholarly background and have some advantages in learning. Beyond that, everyone may learn such "spells". Here it is not the rule-focussed absence of learnable spell magic that limits the number of people with such abilities, but the overall lack of opportunity to acquire these spells. There should be no obvious "mage colleges" or similar institutions where young people may find a career if they have no talent as carpenters
The supposed loose organizations should be much more informal and themselves interested in keeping a low profile to avoid detection. Almost all of the normal population would not recognize them if they see them, and likewise they are keen not to display their powers in public. Along these lines, the vast majority of spell users would learn and study these matters as an end in itself rather than use it for their benefit (e.g. acquiring political power or accumulating wealth).

Yet superstition and folk lore knows "spells users" in a way that such people (even if you may not know whom is one) are supposed to have powers like transforming you into a toad. This might be viewed as a grain of truth, i.e. the existence of people with such abilities - even if you don't know anything specific about them.

All this applies only to "good" spellcasters among the Free People of course. In Sauron's sphere of influence, things are likely to be handled a bit different. In addition, the end of the Third Age where TOR is set, has already experienced a drastic loss of ancient lore (and spells very likely among them). Games set in earlier times, when all of the Kingdoms in Exile existed - or were even very powerful and flourishing - more of such lore existed. Such lore is also much more likely to be found (and to higher "levels") among the "developed" people (with the Númenóreans as the primary example) rather than the more rustic Northmen for example (Rohirrim, Woodmen, Dalemen etc. included).

The existence of professional "Mage" character careers through game rules (either PH or LM characters) is something that should be avoided IMO.

Cheers
Tolwen

In regards to elven player heroes....

I can relate to the reservations some have, I have some reservations about elven characters for 2 reasons.

The First is that I feel that Tolkien writes elves up as having superior natural aptitudes and abilities in most realms to other races. They are the stealthiest, have the best vision and hearing, are faster, more agile, nimbler, wiser, craftier, can survive great harm, are immune to disease and resistant to cold, can see in the night, etc... Add to that the value of having relative youth and health after hundreds of years of training and experience?

However in TOR if we consider a Mirkwood elf character compared to a Barding or whatever else they seem to be relatively balanced. (surprisingly) Numerically all cultures get the same total attribute points and the skills as well seem very balanced.

I explain this balance to myself in my game in this way:
The human, or hobbit player heroes are more well trained, more experienced, or more talented than many of their brethren, while elf player heroes may be more average or even rather inexperienced compared to their brethren.

Second problem which I don't have an easy solution to: How do you role-play an elf? Some people play elves as humans that have pointy ears.... I'm exaggerating a bit.... but to play a character that has lived a long time and who expects to live a lot longer should be viewed as a serious role playing challenge. I don't feel elves should act the same way as humans but I find it hard to describe to players how they should be different.... except to say wiser maybe? Most of the tricks I use when playing an elderly human do not apply when playing an elf.... I can't use the crutch of a strained voice or crooked body posturing.... Basically my standing solution so far is to somewhat discourage inexperienced role players from such a role, and impress on anyone who wants to play an elf that it's more then being long lived and having long ears etc.... but to make sure they understand that it is intended to be a real role playing challenge!

Anyway I decided to allow it if reluctantly and under condition of mutual understandings.

"Second problem which I don't have an easy solution to: How do you role-play an elf? Some people play elves as humans that have pointy ears."

I agree with part of this point. That being that you do need to be a good roleplayer to play an elf with what you are given. Because, in TOR they are exactly what you describe above...long lived humans with pointy ears. Their attributes are the same as every other race, they get the same amount of skill points...they don't even get any of the special attributes(ie night vison) that you list above. Elves should be unbalanced point wise, though not overly so.

"The human, or hobbit player heroes are more well trained, more experienced, or more talented than many of their brethren, while elf player heroes may be more average or even rather inexperienced compared to their brethren."

Yeah, like the elf has been held back in Ranger School for 60-70 years.

I've always assumed that Elves were rather like Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemount High... too much partying. Once the elf settles down and applies themself, they graduate.

HA! Now, that is an image.

The Hobbit and LotR are written from a Hobbit perspective, and from that perspective, Elves are strange, magical creatures. Even Gandalf seems more human, and as such easier to understand, than elves.

If you play an elf character, it is no longer mysterious, because you are in its mind. I agree that you can roleplay it so well that it will remain strange in the eyes of the other players, but not in your eyes. You will lose some of the sense of wonder that was in the books.

That's not to say one cannot play elven characters in Middle Earth. A game set in the First or Second Age would be perfect for elves, because elves are protagonists in the Silmarillon and other texts about those times. Those games would be more epic, and less about mysterious fairy ladies in a forest. Same world, different feeling.

Yes, that's my feeling. So I'm bit reluctant when players pick elves. They have to have a good reason, and hopefully there's not more than one. (Legolas is a player character for sure, with the best roleplayer behind).

And... well, elves are above the 'human' average. But The One Ring is a game, not a book simulator. So, as it has been told, Elves of Mirkwood are well balanced with respect to other cultures.

I think we see from the Silmarillion et al, that elves can be rash, make bad decisions, trust the wrong people, etc etc.

Elves in ToR are faster/smarter/better than humans. This is reflected in their higher Body and Wits attributes.

Unfortunately, as is reflected in the novels, being faster/smarter/better isn't everything it takes to be a true hero. Ergo, Heart.

I think ToR does a great job of reflecting the themes of Tolkien's writings in the small details, such as this.

Yusei and fbnaulin I guess we have to agree to disagree on this point. I have played elves in Tolkien before and have not lost any of the wonder that I have for them or the world in general. And, don't think yo could properly make Elves of the 1st or 2nd Age using TOR as they definetly would not be powerful enough, these eras were when Elven culture was at its most powerful.

Oh great, I keep thinking about ordering pizza for history class

Seriously though, IMHO, ToR does a great job of balancing Wood-elves with everyone else.

That said, however, I have some reservations about running a certain adventure in TfW - I don't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't received it or played it.

I agree with their write-up about making her unique (focusing on her memories of the past, etc.), but it's still a test for anyone's role-playing skills to play her correctly. It makes me wonder how on earth I'll present other Noldor or Sindar in their future supplements to give these LM characters their justice

It's just as possible to play old elves as it is to write them.

Don't think "how would an 8000 year old being act?" Think "how did Tolkien write 8000 year old beings acting?" THAT is how to play elves.

I'm going to throw a stick in the works here and say that I created an elf NPC for a campaign I'm running with two of my friends. The idea is that he has a bit of a past and has spent a hundred years or so roaming Middle Earth slaying servants of shadow. Before I actually introduced him all I knew was that he would be elusive. As it happened I ended up playing him fairly arrogant to start with, the way many people think of elves, before revealing his arrogance is a way of not having to deal with people. This rapid development of his character was entirely unintentional, but I felt it seemed sufficiently elf-like, and my players enjoyed it too

Do not forget the many examples in The Lord of the Rings that we can all glean from. Legolas was a major part of the Company. His actions and interests go a long way to help our understanding of what an Elf might be like to play in TOR. A quieter character can also reflect wisdom. In The Fellowship of the Ring I see this distinction between Boromir and Legolas. Boromir gave speeches and opinions often, while Legolas was modest (except when he sang the song of the maiden Nimrodel).

So, an Elf player-hero may actually be easier to play in regards to dialogue. Although he will need some knowledge of history (parts he may have forgotten) and an occasional song (which can be taken from the source material).

Doc, Beleg, James,

Thank you for your insightful ideas. I've been mulling over your advice & I don't feel as completely overwhelmed as I did the other day.

The uniqueness of Elves of any culture/background, but especially the Noldor & Sindar, just calls out for really delving into their roles.

Let's face it, this game is a blast

I think that the TOR magic as inate to certain races - it's about time Dwarves are seen as the magical race that they are in the Professor source material and which clearly inspired him. Powerful magic wielding characters are appropriate only as NPC and mainly as servents of the enemy. Where the LOTR game is useful is in it's summary of the kinds of powers they might wield as the effect of they're Dreadful spells.

Picturing an elf played by a young Sean Penn. He still has the straggly blonde hair, but also has elf ears.

A delivery person arrives at his class bearing lembas.

Elves (young or otherwise) played by Sean Penn or mirroring Spicoli is, in my opinion, totally misunderstanding what elves are all about. Just had to add that, sorry.

In any case, add my voice to the list of those who say, as much as I respect Xex's desire and right to play TOR however he wants, I would really like to communicate to the game designers that I prefer they not use their time and resources expanding out a robust magic system for this game. There are many many many things that need to get done before that.

Great post. Not emotional. Your criteria being "What would fit the books and material produced by Tolkein?"
That, to me, makes sense.
This is a game of playing in his world.
That was C7's goal.
You you want to produce something "optional", and leave it at that, then we have the choice to buy or not to buy.
I would choose not to buy, along with you.
I like my games to make sense, both system structure and feel.
To add something that I didn't read about in the books, and see in the movies, would taint the great enjoyment I have had so far reading the rules.
I have some questions, but for the most part, I agree with C7's system.
My only adjustment would have been in the flow of the rules in the books, not the rules themselves.

I was reminded of this earlier today while watching an article on youtube about rpgs. What powers/spells does canon show Gandalf using? I can only think of when he caused himself to be more impsoing in Bag End, the multiple use of a light spell, and the Shield and Breaking spell he used at the Bridge of Khazad Dum. Is there any other, canon, mention of an Istari using magic? Perhaps we are over estimating the use of magic in Tolkien's world.

I believe that when first trying to cross the mountains they were attacked by wargs (in the book only) and Gandalf made the fire leap up and burn and scare the wargs away.

I believe this might have had to do with the elven ring he possessed that was associated with fire.... but I'm not sure. I would tend to explain the flaming pines cones the same way....

I believe that When Gandalf and the 4 others left the undieing lands at behest of the Valar, they were put into human form and bound to these forms and that this restricted their use of power very significantly.

I would also sometimes wonder however if Gandalf's excellent timing sometimes is more than just coincidence, or if he knows things other do not, sees things mortals do not... his arrival "just in time" saving the dwarves from the 3 stone trolls is a good example, which is explained, but still.... Also his arrival at helm's deep (at least in the movie) coincided exactly with dawn's first rays dazzling all the Uruk-Hai... chance? Again I don't remember how that went down in the book if different... sorry....

One thing that always interested me; even Gandalf doesn't seem able to conjure fire out of thin air (and even mocks Legolas about it); he can only ignite something that will burn, make fire leap from tree to tree, intensify the flames of a burning fire etc.

As for use of aggressive magic, I can recall Gandlaf showing off in the front porch of goblin town and in the goblin king's court, in the pines where the wargs trapped them and at the border of Hollin in Fellowship. I'm sure I'm forgetting at least one...

Descriptions of his fire magic in The Hobbit often include "a smell of sulfur" or something like that, leading to suggest that he does carry "magical ingredients" to fuel some of his spells. Why would pine cones be preferable to lumps of sulfur; I cannot tell...

Narya, the Ring of Fire was inspirational, not pyromantic.

You can see the affects during the siege of Gondor. The text says Gandalf would inspire the Gondorians as he went through the city, but after his passing the men's hearts would once again grow grim.

For got about the Pine cones, obviously some spell. But, still not a huge grimoire here.

The timing could be put down to some magic ability, or could be a "character" trait.

I don';t know if it's completely relevant but what does Saruman do? I remember him doing some feats of magic in the movie but am not sure if they belong to the original source material. also is the confrontation between Galdalf and Saruman described in the book?

In the movie Saruman hits Gandalf with a Fire ball. But, in the books the only spell occurance I seem to remember is Gandalf forcing Saruman to show himself, and breaking Sarumans staff at a distance. I could be wrong, however.

While a new poster to these boards, I've been following here for the better part of a year. Additionally, I've played Decipher's "Lord of the Rings" rpg, MERP, read the Hobbit and LotR almost yearly for over 30 years, and read Unfinished Tales/HoME/Letter/etc. I was also a regular contributor in the Fanzine Hall of Fire (the Decipher game mag).

So, while new here, I'm not completely ignorant of Tolkien and magic.

First, let me echo what many have said: C7's take on the game and cultural subtle magic are spot on.

Second, there are basically three types of magic: Wizardry, Lore, and Sorcery. Wizardry is innate power of will, only available to the Istari, Maia, High Elves, and some other entities (ie: Tom Bombadil).

Lore is the ability to weave the subtle magic of Middle-earth into objects, and is the most common type of 'magic'. Examples include: The Swords of Westernesse, Palantir, the Hollin door of Moria, the walking sticks of the men of the White Mountains, with the virtue of finding and returning, Ammon Hen and it's Farseeing, Dwarf doors, Elven blades, Elven cloaks, etc.

Sorcery is what mortals tap in to, to mimic Wizardry. They access the corruption and taint of Morgoth, imbued in Middle-earth, and gain power.

There is some overlap in the three types, and much depends on motive.

As far as 'Wizardry', only the wise and powerful have access to that type of magic. No player in The One Ring can be an Istari or Maia. While some might want to play a Noldo Elf, the fact is that by the end of the Third Age, the youngest Elves with even half-Noldo lineage are nearly 3000 years old. The number of Elves with pure-blood or majority lineage Noldo blood are nearly gone. That is one of the main reasons that Arwen is called the Evenstar. She is of the last generation of Noldo Elves. Any Elves born after the beginning of the Third Age are so diluted in bloodline as to no longer be Noldo. Therefore, great 'magic-users' such as Galadriel and Elrond are not available as player-characters.

As far as 'Lore' goes, most of the lore in Middle-earth is lost by the Third Age. The Dwarves speak about how they can no longer craft as well as their fore-fathers (hense only 'Broken Spells'). The Men of Numenor have been beaten down to nearly extinction (in the North) or to common men (in Gondor). The Elves possess Lore, and that is reflected in their 'Elf-magic' virtues.

Sorcery is covered under 'Dreadful Spells', and obviously should not be desired by heroes.

I would, however, like to see some form of Elf-magic virtue, to account for Elves being able to craft and weave magic into objects (Elven boats, for example). Something on the order of "A craft test completed with a great success or better embeds the subtle magic of Middle-earth into the object, granting a Trait or small bonus to tests (+1 or +2)". That way, if an Elf builds a boat (craft or Woodwright) and gets a great success or better, the boat might grant the user the Boating Trait for free, for example.

It would be nice to see an inclusive list (similar to Decipher's list, which Tom Davie did for TOR) of spells for NPC's and for Dreadful spells, so as to create NPC's with. Then we'd all be on the same page. There are some similarites between TOR and Decipher in spell names/descriptions (Holding-spell comes to mind, and Sorcery spells in Decipher are called 'dreadful spells'), so it is not a reach to use those as a starting point.

I have decided on my own to plagerize Decipher's spells for NPC and Adversary use. Loremaster characters/adversaries can spend a point of Hope (a point of Hate for Adverrsaries) to activate Wizardry or Dreadful Spells. Spell Groups include Fire, Beasts, Air & Water, General Spells, Lore, and Dreadful Spells. I'll get it posted when I get it complete.

Thror II: Where does Beorn's ability to turn into a bear and speak with animals fit in, in your opinion? Wizardry (innate?) or Lore? I ask because Beornings have powers which sort of mimick Beorn a little.... something I've never been able to make heads or tails out of. What IS Beorn? Radagast's illegitimate child with a bear? A human who has Become a host to a forest spirit? A man empowered by a maiar? It seems his powers are innate but a point is made to distinguish what he is from a wizard.

Back to magical things wizards can do.... the breaking of staves is definitely magic. I wonder if they can only break staves of other wizards or if they can break other objects.... It has been too long since I read the lord of the rings books and my memories have become overly influenced by the movies. I'm actually re reading the hobbit for the purpose of refreshing myself on things relevant to wilderland at the moment.

I therefore can not remember how this scene goes down in the books, but when Gandalf confront Theoden, does he use his magic to break the hold Saruman has on Thweoden?

Also was the state Theoden was in when the Heroes arrive due to Saruman's magic or was it due to Wormtongue's doing? Was Wormtongue poisoning him, or using lore, or just words?

The remote offspring of Tom Bombadil, of course !
And nothing says Beron ability is magical. In the classical culture, werewolves are not seen as magicians.

It's not explicitly said.

In the books, Wormtongue attacks Theoden through words.
However, nothing says it was only through words.

Weel, it's pretty much why I dislike magicians in the middle-earth.
Middle-earth is intrinsically magical. However, there's no spells. I don't think anywhere in the books, we have spells, spellbooks, magicians-in-learning.
Gandalf use magic because he's a magical being, it's part of what he is, not a skill he learnt.

Dalraida,
I would perhaps argue that last point. If Gandalf is a magical being and his magical ability is inherent, then his statement at the West Gate of Moria - about having forgotten various words of opening - doesn't make sense. It would mean that he had, effectively, lost a portion of his being.

Empasis added.

The more time spent in human form, the more human-like they become? Susceptible to things like memory loss or poor recollection, or corruption. I think I read somewhere about the Istari aging, but very slowly (Unfinished Tales?). Or it could be that, in years past, the spells of opening were in common use and now Gandalf needs to think a while to recall what might have been in use at the time.

It seems to me that the magical ability comes from the strength of the spirit and that mere mortals shouldn't aspire to the powers of the Elves or Wizards. Those that do are hungry for quick power and open themselves to the influence of the Enemy.

I would say this is not a spell in the RPG meaning of the term.

The door may be magical, since it opens as one say one specific word, and this word is the spell. However, anyone is able to open the door with the right word, without being a magician or having power.

Of course, it's my vision of the Middle-Earth, I won't be mad if someone use magicians in their game (or even cast fireballs at Sauron ).

I like the interpretation that Beorn is under some sort of Geas; he seems to have not only powers but restrictions (isolation, diet of honey etc). I'm not sure how explicit it is in Tolkien's work, but he appears like an ancient figure who will age and die between the Battle of Five Armies and the War of the Ring. Was his longevity terminated because he broke his isolation, or kill the orc chieftain Bolg, or one that allowed the other? The Loremaster book has a nice paragraph about that (don't have the book with me for page reference).

For me, the question is more "under who's geas?"

As long as it doesn't break canon (and I don't think Tolkien ever wrote more about Beorn), I'd rather have Beorn's death be part of a campaign, rather than having it be consequences of what we read in "The Hobbit". We have very few "big" NPCs that can die without breaking canon, and that makes them very important plot devices

The West Gate of Moria was created out of Lore. Dwarves and Elves worked together to make those doors, and carved/engraved the moon-letters on them. The doors were magical in that there was no lock (they could be easily pushed open from the inside), but only speaking the password (the spell) would open the door from outside. It can be strongly implied through Gandalf's words that that type of door was very common in earlier days, and that there were typical activation words known in the languages of Men, Elves, Dwarves, and Orcs. Even Gandalf, could not open it by force, without the correct spell (maybe he could have, but it would have been a flagarent use of power that he avoided, and would have probably alerted all within 100 leagues of their ).

Gandalf breaking Saruman's staff was an exhibition of his own Wizardry, his own innate power as a Maia and Istari. It also was a narrative device to show that Saruman had been stripped of his power by the Valar, and replaced by Gandalf.

Beorn is a question, in Tolkien's works. He never explained him, and I believe even said he was unsure about him. In TOR parlance, I would call what he has a Cultural gift, based on his lineage. Remember, even Aragorn's healing powers were due to the fact that he himself had distant Elf and even Maiar blood in him.

it is not said if Beorn's son Grimbeorn had this abiltity or not, or if other men of his tribe did. The C7 explanation of a possible Geas is as good an explanation as any. I might allow a Beorning character who has all the Beorning Virtues to aquire such a Geas, with the stated and impiled limitations of Beorn.

Reference Saruman/Theoden/Grima and the spell placed on Theoden: i don't remember it being clear if Grima was influencing Theoden himself, or if Saruman was doing so through Grima, or if Saruman had already subjegated Theoden, and Grima was just 'driving' the crushed spirit of Theoden. Your view on this will probably influence your view on magicians in the game. Was Grima a magician of sorts? or was Saruman the power behind Theodens fall? Did Saruman just overpower Theoden, making him suceptable to Grima's very powerful (but normal) words?