Basilisks in Middle-earth

Adventure in the world of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings. Learn more at our website: http://www.cubicle7.co.uk/our-games/the-one-ring/
User avatar
Arthadan
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:37 pm

Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Arthadan » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:14 pm

Hello all,

I have been wanting to write about this for some time. First I would like to say that I think the game is great and I really do enjoy the new vision of Middle-earth, enriched in details but respecful with the books.

That said, I was surprised by this nasty fellow, the basilisk. Tolkien was picking beyond words about names and he deliberatedly stayed away from anything related to Greek/Roman mythology. There are no unicorns, centaurs, satyrs, hydras and so on in Middle-earth because his original idea was to create a rich mythology for the English people (he deemed that the few scattered surviving legends were not enough).

I know the Basilisks concept evolved during the Middle Ages from their original Greek origin, but they never made it to the Nordic legends as far as I know. Besides, in the game they do not have the stone-turning vision which is what defines a Basilisk (or do they? those statues near the Old Forest Road...). My point is that there is no need to use a name with Greek resonances in Middle-earth and the more suitable Elven name makes it unnecesary. However the creature concept is perfectly fine.

Yeah, I know I'm picky and grumpy. :P

User avatar
Mim
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Mim » Tue Feb 04, 2014 11:29 pm

Yes, they took me by surprise & I was initially put off for the same reasons, however, I rather like the idea now that I've had a chance to mull them over. I hope they add some further borderline nasties on down the road. Nothing extreme, mind, but a rare departure to spice things up may work from time to time :)

User avatar
Jez
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 1:57 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Jez » Wed Feb 05, 2014 1:59 am

slap an sindarin name on them and she'll be right:

tirigonrhaw for ex.

User avatar
fbnaulin
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 8:13 pm
Location: Santiago, Chile
Contact:

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by fbnaulin » Wed Feb 05, 2014 10:48 am

Arthadan wrote:Yeah, I know I'm picky and grumpy. :P
No way, this is an interesting topic.
Recreatividad is my blog in spanish, I write about roleplaying games, specially The One Ring, Mouse Guard, Diaspora and Prince Valiant. You can find custom characters sheets there.

User avatar
Mytholder
Posts: 188
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 11:05 am
Location: Cork, Ireland
Contact:

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Mytholder » Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:35 am

Monsters in Tolkien are absurdly hard. I wrote the Basilisks, and I'm not 100% happy with them by any means.

I do feel that the 'monster palette' of Middle-Earth has to be expanded for the roleplaying game; otherwise, you're fighting orcs, wolves, dragons, spiders and evil spirits, along with orcs on wolves, evil spirits in the shape of wolves, evil spirits in the shape of spiders, really big orc-like things, really big spirits, and maybe the occasional evil tree/pterodactyl/rare alpine octopus. Trying to find the middle ground between rehashing Tolkien's monsters and turning the game into D&D is undeniably challenging. (There may be fertile ground in exploring English myth more, but most of the monsters there are either fairies, silly to modern eyes, or yet more dragons or dogs).

Making up a new name has equally big pitfalls. Grim-hawks, in the same book, work because they're a variation on a real concept. Hawks are really, and these fantastic ones are especially nasty, or grim. I could have called the basilisks, say, 'forest crawlers', but that says absolutely nothing about them and doesn't conjure an image for the players. It's got no resonance. Using an Elvish name works a little better, but then you've got to explain why there's no Common name for the creature. 'Basilisk' at least has some mythological heft behind it.

I suppose ideally, the thing to do would be to delve into the entomology of the word, and work out how 'king-lizard' (basileus) would have evolved through Old, Middle and Modern English if basilisks were a thing that one could meet in real life, but I'm not Tolkien and I'm not a professor of philology, nor am I going to become one in the near future. (It's hard to imagine a career more esoteric and precarious than 'freelance rpg designer', but 'philologist' may qualify).

tl;dr: I quite agree, but it's a hard problem without a good solution.
Gareth Hanrahan
Line Developer - Laundry Files

User avatar
Mim
Posts: 648
Joined: Thu May 09, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Mim » Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:42 pm

Gareth: Thank you for explaining your reasoning behind creating the Basilisks for Middle-earth. I for one appreciate reading how you co-author these books for us, & I hope you'll continue to explain your thinking from time to time.

BTW, I also wasn't too keen on your including Basilisks when I first read their entry, but I've since warmed to them for the same reasons you state - just how many times can you throw Orcs, Wargs, etc., at your players before you loose the wonder of gaming in Middle-earth? ;)

Speaking of which, for anyone reading this & wondering the same thing, take a look at Issues 15 & 16 of the Hall of Fire webzine. IMHO, Ms. Balsley did a brilliant job in explaining how to convert monsters. She focused on D&D, but her articles provide guidelines for any game or mythology. The keys are to maintain the creatures' wonder (or horror :o ), corruption, & rarity. They should fit your game to a tee, depending upon how closely you follow canon.

http://halloffire.org/2005/page/2/

Elmoth
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Elmoth » Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:00 pm

What I have trhown my players in ME:

1. Orcs & Goblins
2. Big orcs & goblins & Uruk hai
3. Wolves & wargs
4. trolls
5. Giants (here, they ran)
6. Lurker in the water (here they ran too, but not fast enough)
7. Eagles (yep, they were being stupid with the nests)
8. Barrow wights
9. Ucorns
10. One Nazgul (were unable to run)
11. Natural animals. Boar and bears have proven specially problematic to overconfident characters.
12. Dwarves (for resources)
13. Elves (for trespassing)
14. Humans
15. Even more humans


The last category has proven an endless source of fun for us. Humans being more prone to vary their allegiance makes for great enemies. Cardolan, Rudahur and Arthedain, the dunlendings, rohan vs the easterners, gondor vs umbar... ther eis plenty of human on human conflict. And human on human is always rife with allegiance conflict. Making the payers work for the shadow unawares (no control on who their leader is alligened with) has proven lots of fun for us.

I do not think there are so few potential enemies, only that you need to vary their motivations. For us, if it is always black and white it stops being interesting quite fast.

I still agree that a few more opponents are always welcome, in any case.

User avatar
Rocmistro
Posts: 778
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 12:24 am
Location: Albany, NY

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Rocmistro » Wed Feb 05, 2014 7:45 pm

Gareth, I too, appreciate you taking the time to outline your thoughts, and I also agree with some of my peers that I originally raised a hairy eyebrow at basilisks, but in not too long I settled into the idea well enough.

What I like/prefer and think works well enough, without going too far outside the Tolkien palette, is introducing as many different flavors of {stock monster} as you think the system can handle. So for example, what the writers have started with respect to x variety of Orcs is good, and they should feel free to continue that with human adversaries, wolven adversaries, spirit based adversaries, and so on and so forth.

I also think you can exploit the Tolkien precedent for "one-off" style monsters, whether it's Shelob, or "the" Werewolf, or "the" Watcher in the Water, etc. It works partly because it's self-limiting the palette's expansion by not daring to suggest there is an entire race of these things, but rather just one or two un-recorded abominations that linger from too much exposure to Sauron/Morgoth/darkness, or what have you.

I'm a Beastman player in WHFB, so I have tons of their miniatures, and am easily inspired by them as bad guys (plus I have a never ending supply for use in tactical miniature-style combat). So I had an adventure with my players involving a single minotaur that guarded a mountain pass who required a game of riddles to get through, and of course failure meant he would eat them! At first I wasn't thrilled with myself for using "Minotaurs" in Middle-earth but my players liked it and spent a lot of time discussing whether he was a single exception or represented an entire race (I never game them an answer :-) ). It doesn't seem too far off the Tolkien-track; Morgoth perverted Elves/Men to Orcs, Trolls from Ents, Fell beasts from Great Eagles, why not "minotaurs" (Bull-Giants, if you will) from the natural animals of Arda? After all, could you not see this kind of language in the Silmarillion:

Now in those days, Melkor sent evil spirits and other Maia that had given over to him their service to lie with the beasts of Arda, and to yoke unto them, and in their wicked deprivations, those beasts gave birth to abominations; half man and half beast. But as with all things outside the thought of Illuvatar, these plans came to ruin, and the offspring that came about from such unions were terrible and willful, having the heads and feet of beasts, unable to be controlled by Melkor, and they pursued their own rages and desires into the dark corners of Arda, never to be seen from again.

A bit apocryphal, but I think it works :-)

That being said, guard yourself against Gygaxian pulp. The minute you start getting into "alien" things; Illithid and Beholders and nonsense like that, then you have "left the path of wisdom".

So, long story short, +1 here for Basilisks.

Could
Rignuth: Barding Wordweaver Wanderer in Southron Loremaster's game.
Amroth Ol'Hir: High Elf Vengeful Kin Slayer in Zedturtle's game.
Jakk O'Malli: Dwarven Orator Treasure-Hunter in Hermes Serpent's game.

User avatar
Arthadan
Posts: 251
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:37 pm

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Arthadan » Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:00 pm

Gareth, thank you very much for your response. I guess if the Basilisks are ancient cretures they could have an Elvish name alone (Sindarin was the lingua franca in the Second Age, before the comming of the Númenóreans).

But unlike balrogs, these creatures are common ones (at least in Mirkwood) so it makes sense they have name in the local tongues. Since they are dragon prototypes, I think something like lizard snake could do (in the real world we have "bird snakes", "chicken snakes", "Gray cat snakes" and so on). But then the aspect would have to change: thin long body with short legs (maybe six).

As a gift, here you are a new creature from the most obscure lore which hasn't made it yet to any Middle-earth RPG:
[Author's footnote] Boldog (...) is a name that occurs many times in the tales of the War. But it is possible that Boldog was not a personal name, and either a title, or else the name of a kind of creature: the Orc-formed Maiar, only less formidable than the Balrogs
History of Middle-Earth vol. X - Morgoth's Ring
Now, this opens many interesting possibilities. Incarnated Maiar can interbreed (i.e. Lúthien). So same as Wargs are quite likely the offspring of First Age werewolves with wolves, we could have some Maiar-blooded Orcs. Some of them even could be able to use Sorcery due to their Maiar origin...

Elmoth
Posts: 384
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Basilisks in Middle-earth

Post by Elmoth » Wed Feb 05, 2014 8:41 pm

Quite a sensible approach to The Necromancer here: it could be a powerful porc able to wield sorcery. Nothing warranting the intervention of the White Council (so this is why they dod not intervene), but a dangerous foe none the less. Sorcerers in ME can have maiar origin (or ancestors) for sure. It sounds sensible to me :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests