evil men vs. Evil Men

[Glorelendil]

All this talk of orcs being beyond redemption is increasing our Eye of Tolwen score. Sooner or later we're bound to attract his attention and have a Revelation episode.

[zedturtle]

As for making the players comfortable with killing them...that's a really tough one.

Aye, there's the rub! I suppose really the answer ought to be - the moment they become "comfortable" killing them, we've left Tolkien's moral vision behind. Or at least the players and characters have become the sorts of people in Middle Earth that Tolkien wouldn't praise. There's a strong sense of "love the sinner, hate the sin" in Tolkien, and the professor himself admitted in one of his letters that he was troubled by the presence of orcs in his own mythology - of creatures truly beyond redemption.

The closest look we got to men fighting men in Tolkien is the Ithilian chapters in Two Towers. And there we see Sam's sympathetic look at the dead soldier from Harad. If I were to put my adventurers in with Faramir's company, I'd say they'd fight to defend their home, but there would still be some sense of chivalry and honor, even though the Haradrim are allies of Sauron. Think of the Illiad - where Greeks fight with courage and implacable will, and yet the narrative pauses to consider the life of the Trojan who would never return to his fine homestead.

So when fighting men, like in Homer, the players should be of a mind to praise their courage and valor and fighting prowess, and grieve their loss, even though the enemy cause is evil. With orcs it is different - there is only relief that the world is rid of their evil.

I think this answer, plus the quote from Faramir in Seosaidh's signature gives us a way to approach this issue.

[bluejay]

I think perhaps that Evil Men have got to a point where they either worship Sauron (or his underlings) or have accepted teachings from him. Certainly this would cover the Hill Men of Rhudaur and the Black Numenoreans. The situation is less clear on the Haradrim and Easterlings but I'm sure it has been suggested in numerous writings.

I agree that the Dunlendings are a strange point (and they've not really been treated particularly well since the Numenoreans sailed back to Middle Earth around 600SA). Of course they did breed with the orcs so that might have damned them as a race.

Great discussion Zed. I think I would have to say that getting the capital E would really be a case of either swearing fealty to Sauron or commiting 'orc-work' in their behaviour.

[Indur Dawndeath]

Do you think that Legolas was able to use his Shadow Bane virtue against the Hillmen?

My answer would be Yes. But not because of Tolkiens description of the Hillmen that served Angmar, but because TOR has described them as having Sorcerous powers.

For me the abilities that require Evil Men, like Bane weapons, will only work on totally corrupted individuals, like the Mouth of Sauron and the Sorceress of Mirkwood. And in the case where a whole culture has degenerated into evil ways, like the Hillmen (according to TOR).
If Mogdred choses to ally himself with the Nazgul Again, then imo he will revert back to being an Evil Man. Right now he is not and his men will not become Evil men until they also accept some kind of Evil gift / power.

It is pretty easy like this.

[Eluadin]

Maybe the difficulty lies in applying a mechanical understanding to a group of people. The mechanics seem better understood at a personal level. That is, the level where free will operates. The Shadow and Stars of TOR provide us a mechanic for the corruption and encroachment of the Shadow over a person's heart, the whittling away of a heroes hope into senseless gibberish. But, the rules don't provide a mechanic for adjudicating the slip of culture into evil-ness. Images of Numenor and onrushing waves come to mind with a shudder.

In the Shadow cast by the fall of Westernesse we might imagine the mechanic: It takes one Will to rule them all from evil into Evil, a mind of metal and cogs, "The Enemy, or those who have become like him, go in for 'machinery' – with destructive and evil effects — because 'magicians', who have become chiefly concerned to use magia for their own power, would do so (do do so). The basic motive for magia – quite apart from any philosophic consideration of how it would work – is immediacy: speed, reduction of labour, and reduction also to a minimum (or vanishing point) of the gap between the idea or desire and the result or effect. But the magia may not be easy to come by, and at any rate if you have command of abundant slave-labour or machinery (often only the same thing concealed), it may be as quick or quick enough to push mountains over, wreck forests, or build pyramids by such means. Of course another factor then comes in, a moral or pathological one: the tyrants lose sight of objects, become cruel, and like smashing, hurting, and defiling as such. It would no doubt be possible to defend poor Lotho's introduction of more efficient mills; but not of Sharkey and Sandyman's use of them" (Letters, 155).

The Shadow works through the domination of many wills, and their enslavement by the Will of Sauron. This as opposed to the free co-operation of individual persons: i.e. the Free Peoples. So, mechanically, as a single person rises in Standing (let's say) and Shadow corrupts to the point where they would attempt to achieve their ends through dominating the will of other people (maybe the madness Gandalf decries Suraman for), you have the fall of a leader. Soon to follow would be the fall of his/her people.

In this way, adjudicate the question based on a person of Standing within the community, their corruptive influence on the community being far-wider in affect the higher the Standing. At some some point, with a high-enough Standing and permanent Shadow marring their nature...you might consider their people now Evil. Might...

[Tolwen]

I agree that the Dunlendings are a strange point (and they've not really been treated particularly well since the Numenoreans sailed back to Middle Earth around 600SA). Of course they did breed with the orcs so that might have damned them as a race.

We do not know for sure of the source of Saruman's mannish stock for his half-orc breeding program, though the Dunlendings are a likely candidate. We do not know however the conditions under which this was done. They could have cooperated on their own, knowing what these unlucky souls would be subjected to, or Saruman did it secretly without knowledge of the Dunlendings. IMO the latter is much more likely, given the overall circumstances. Thus the Dunlendings would not be genuine evil people, but just cleverly manipulated by Saruman.

Due to their long history of strained relations with the Númenóreans and their allies (but nonetheless being men of free will and independence) it is not that unlikely that Saruman just cleverly played on this by portraying himself as someone to "set things right" and get justice for all the misdeeds done to them.

Concerning their fight in the company of orcs: We simply don't know any details on this from Tolkien, but it seems not unreasonable to assume that they deeply despised them as well and tolerated them only due to Saruman's wishes. Perhaps they saw them only as fodder for the most dangerous parts of the assault. Given their later descriptions (see below), this is not too far-fetched IMO.

In that way, the Dunlendings may have been equally betrayed by Saruman, who used his knowledge into cleverly manipulating them. In a way, that would resemble Sam's thoughts on the soldier from Harad which have been mentioned already.

Gamling's remark about the Dunlendings at Helm's Deep is also telling. While Eomer openly dismisses their language as inhuman-like, Gamling has a more differentiated view and shows a certain degree of understanding for their hatred. He also points out that Saruman has "inflamed" their old hatred. This might point more to my above mentioned manipulative scheme of Saruman rather a genuine overall "evilness" in these men (exceptions prove the rule). Later on Erkenbrand (after the battle) supports this as well when he says to the captured Dunlendings that they were "deluded by Saruman".

Overall, we see here a certain difference among the Rohirrim: Those of the eastern parts (like Eomer) were quite condescending towards the Dunlendings, comparing them more or less to wild beasts. Those from the western areas (with a long tradition of neighbourhood to Dunland) like Gamling or Erkenbrand are much more differentiated here.

And yes Glorelendil - my eye caught this. Though there's nothing to add. Orcs are irredeemable by the Children of Ilúvatar and in theory they should be treated as such as well when being fought, but in practice it does not happen due to all the well-known circumstances. Anyway, IMO only the more learned and/or wise of the Eldar or perhaps an extremely knowledgeable Númenórean philosopher would be aware of this. For anyone else, they're nothing more than despisable sword-fodder.

Cheers
Tolwen

[bluejay]

Thanks Tolwen! Useful info.

[Glorelendil]

And yes Glorelendil - my Eye caught this.

Fixed; emphasis added.

[zedturtle]

Maybe the difficulty lies in applying a mechanical understanding to a group of people. The mechanics seem better understood at a personal level. That is, the level where free will operates. The Shadow and Stars of TOR provide us a mechanic for the corruption and encroachment of the Shadow over a person's heart, the whittling away of a heroes hope into senseless gibberish. But, the rules don't provide a mechanic for adjudicating the slip of culture into evil-ness. Images of Numenor and onrushing waves come to mind with a shudder.

Understood. I'm coming to think that a character who takes Evil Men-lore as his enemy lore would not know things about a particular mannish culture but instead would know the ways that Sauron and Morgoth tend to corrupt men's hearts and perhaps might have ways of countering those lies and deceits.

In this way, adjudicate the question based on a person of Standing within the community, their corruptive influence on the community being far-wider in affect the higher the Standing. At some some point, with a high-enough Standing and permanent Shadow marring their nature...you might consider their people now Evil. Might...

Yeah, I guess. My concern is to have a reasonable answer to questions like 'does Shadow Bane apply to Viglar?' and 'what does Evil Men-lore allow me to do?'

[zedturtle]

Due to their long history of strained relations with the Númenóreans and their allies (but nonetheless being men of free will and independence) it is not that unlikely that Saruman just cleverly played on this by portraying himself as someone to "set things right" and get justice for all the misdeeds done to them.

Concerning their fight in the company of orcs: We simply don't know any details on this from Tolkien, but it seems not unreasonable to assume that they deeply despised them as well and tolerated them only due to Saruman's wishes. Perhaps they saw them only as fodder for the most dangerous parts of the assault. Given their later descriptions (see below), this is not too far-fetched IMO.

Maybe. Or maybe he presented them as a 'necessary evil', one that had to be done in order to counter the great evils that Rohan had perpetrated on the Dunlendings. Also, remember the rumours that Rohan traded with Mordor.