I've only read the hobbit and fellowship of the ring (found the latter to be too dull to carry on reading the rest), as well as hundreds of marathons watching the entire extended trilogy and falling asleep through most of them lol.
I have no idea who would work as a cleric or druid though. Id do:
Aragorn - Ranger - Neutral Good Legolas - Archer - Lawful Good Gimli - Fighter - Chaotic Good Boromir - Berserker - Lawful Neutral (coz his brain is the weakest and most easily succumbs to the ring). Faramir - Swashbuckler - True Neutral (he's like a fighter, but more stealthy and not as strong as the others IMO). Samwise Gamgee - Halfling fighter - Lawful Good Frodo - Fighter / Thief - Neutral Good Merry / pippin - Thieves - Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral. Gandalf - 3-7 fighter dualed to mage - Neutral Good Galadriel - This could probably be our Cleric? Lawful Good Eowyn - Fighter / Druid Well, would be good aligned, but Druid needs to be TN Tom Bombadill - Bard - Chaotic Neutral Gollum - Stalker - Neutral Evil.
Bilbo would probably be some kind of Fighter / Thief too, but with high Charisma and Wisdom.
haha I know its just that's kind of the joke from the book haha he's supposed to be a skilled burglar but he wasn't really. Gandalf just talked him up . I wasn't trying to say your class assignment was wrong at all just making a joke
I'm not saying my class assignment is right, it is heavily limited by the BG2 classes (Like Boromir and Gimli would actually be Captain / Guardian type classes, but we don't have those in BG).
- Invisibility unlimited charges 4 AC penalty vs undead, 4 saves penalty vs death magic Small chance of summoning a huge evil demon / devil on use that attacks the ringbearer.
Yeah, Lan is definitely way better suited as a kensai than a paladin.
Mat as a wizard slayer makes a lot of sense because of not just the magic resistance but his distrust of anything related to the power (although he's willing to use the spear and the amulet).
Perrin's not a shapeshifter. He's not really a ranger either - although he has the connection with wolves, he trained as a blacksmith and wasn't that much of an outdoorsman (not any more than other people in that setting). What he should really be is a berserker with some kind of summon wolf special ability.
And yeah, Hurin and Juilin are probably the closest you have to a thief in a good party (both could be bounty hunters).
A party based on The Hobbit would be hilarious - one wizard, one halfling thief, and four dwarven fighters.
@Mungri If Sam is a true fighter, than Merry and Pippin are most certainly fighters too (read the books!). And Pippin is definetly not lawful! He can't keep any rule at all:) Ihink both are chaotic goods, Pippin maybe chaotic neutral (read the books, don't judge them solely by the movies!). I think Gimli is better as a Berserker than a simple fighter, though I agree, Boromir's last battle with the orcs makes him perfect for that kit! Faramir would be more neutral good than true neutral I think (again, read the books! in the movies he is quite different). And why would Eowyn be a druid? She has no any magic, she's not even a healer, and beside horses, has no real connection to nature. Otherwise, pretty nice stuff Maybe Gollum could be chaotic, being a bit schizophrenic and stuff Oh, yeah, almost forgot: read the books! Seriously, you are missing out a lot!
My party would be: Aragorn - Ranger (Stalker would be fitting maybe, but not with the armor restriction) Legolas - Archer Gimli - Berserker Merry - Fighter/Thief Pippin - Fighter/Thief Gandalf - Sorcerer (but maybe a Fighter/Mage dual, as you all said, for the sword)
No cleric, but maybe I would put all Aragorn's And Legolas' spell into healing spells after lvl8, though I don't think it would help a lot...
Assigning classes to the Hobbits in LOTR is pretty tough, since the main point of the characters is that they're just regular guys... they don't really have any special skills that make them cut out to be adventurers.
Out of the bunch, Merry is the only one who I think could count as a fighter, because of the confrontation with the witch king.
Frodo, Sam, and Pippin are even tougher.
Back in the Hobbit, Bilbo's role in the party is the burglar, so I think you can safely call him a thief (definitely not a fighter/thief though - he fights with a short sword a few times but it's definitely not his strong point).
Arwen makes a river rise to engulf enemies in hot pursuit of Aragorn and Frodo. So I went with druid for her. Gandalf seems to have some druidic powers as well as being a wizard, but mage seemed clearly most fitting for him overall.
The Two Towers and The Return of the King are slow, plodding and boring. Coming off the Hobbit even the Fellowship of the ring is a bit of a trudge.
Don't get me wrong, they describe a world of infinite fascination and have some memorable scenes. Obviously there are many people out there who read them over and over again, do they just have a really bad memory? (jk)
The writing is much better in LotR, actually. Tolkien's descriptive powers flourish in LotR. He has a talent for writing descriptions in a way that make the fantastic feel like they could be every day normal reality--i.e., such that the world feels like it could easily be real.
The writing style for the Hobbit is whimsical and very folksy, bordering on cutesy. It's told as a hobbit would relate the story. it almost feels like Tolkien is sort of just having a bit of fun. By comparison LotR is a work of serious literature.
I think some readers struggle a bit with the Fellowship of the Ring, because the action (the adventure per se) doesn't really get started until about midway. But if you savor that early part as Tolkien laying the groundwork for the adventure, it can be pleasurable in it's own way even if slow moving to the rest of the tale comparatively.
I'm rereading the Hobbit now (for comparison with the film trilogy, with part 1 to be released next month). I have to say that the Hobbit is a must-read just to see how it clearly provided the blueprint for the creation of D&D. It's all there.
Aragorn is even described as a "ranger" in LotR. Tolkien gave that very name to that sort of "class" of adventurer in his tale (versus wizard, thief, fighter). He basically protects travelers in the wilds and has an intimate knowledge of the wilderness, if I recall correctly.
Nah, I just dont see Aragorn as a Paladin, he will always be a ranger.
He was no meant to live a life as a ranger ... let's just say he has a class change when he ceases to be a lone guy away from his home and walking in the shadows / away from inhabited areas.
Check the books, he also has limited healing powers since he literally has the "lay on hands" abilities, because it is said that all kings had the power to heal others.
It's written black on white.
He fights for his Kingdom / heritage / good / honnor of his lineage / his people
Since then he looks more like a Paladin than a Ranger (who hides and refuse to assume his position).
PS : note that I won't be able to explain properly this point of view since English is not my native language.
Rangers in BG also have limited healing powers with the first 3 druid levels, so that fits the ranger class fine.
Rangers don't care a shit of civilized areas.
I'm fine with his starting class as a ranger.
I just say that later he becomes much more than a simple ranger (he clearly becomes Lawful Good, if he was not already).
Concerning his healing spells, they are more a divine attribute than a nature attribute (when he becomes a King). I don't know if your from Europe or USA, but we know that Kings in Europe were supposed to be the incarnation of god on Earth - literally (this was especially true in France).
He's got his power, his might, his strength, his wisdom from the fact he belongs to the old people of Numenor, who were blessed by the first born (Valar, Maïar, ...).
He is still proficient with bows and swords, and can still use his knowledge about wilderness (great wisdom).
Love the idea - I once made a party for IWD2 based off War of the Spider Queen forgotten realm books. Was so much fun, but really difficult at some stages due to the slow levelling of drow in IWD2. I tried to roleplay them as much as possible and a closely to their characters in the book. Though the drow priestesses obviously had their clerical powers.
I have to agree with @Aasimar069 Seeing as we are trying to make Baldur's gate rules work for LoTR, something that will never work properly! He starts out as a ranger and moves towards more Paladin like qualities by the end.
Seeing classes don't exist in LoTR, you could as easily argue that he isn't a D&D ranger either.
I have to agree with @Aasimar069 Seeing as we are trying to make Baldur's gate rules work for LoTR, something that will never work properly! He starts out as a ranger and moves towards more Paladin like qualities by the end.
Seeing classes don't exist in LoTR, you could as easily argue that he isn't a D&D ranger either.
And in fact that AD&D heavily inspired themselves on the LOTR heritage (along with many other fantasy references), that's why we can still see some similarities in the name / status of the diffrent classes.
By the way : check the different ethnicities for the Halflings ... they do look like the same as the one mentioned in the LotR. :-)
And if memory serves, the early developers of D&D (Gary Gygax and I forget the other fellow's name atm) were told by Tolkien's estate not to use the term "hobbit." So they came up with "halfling" instead.
@Lemernis Halfling is actually used in Fellowship of the Ring, Boromir's "curse you, and all halflings!" comes to mind. I wonder if it predates LoTR, though I'm guessing it's not a Tolkien invention.
Comments
I have no idea who would work as a cleric or druid though. Id do:
Aragorn - Ranger - Neutral Good
Legolas - Archer - Lawful Good
Gimli - Fighter - Chaotic Good
Boromir - Berserker - Lawful Neutral (coz his brain is the weakest and most easily succumbs to the ring).
Faramir - Swashbuckler - True Neutral (he's like a fighter, but more stealthy and not as strong as the others IMO).
Samwise Gamgee - Halfling fighter - Lawful Good
Frodo - Fighter / Thief - Neutral Good
Merry / pippin - Thieves - Chaotic Good or Chaotic Neutral.
Gandalf - 3-7 fighter dualed to mage - Neutral Good
Galadriel - This could probably be our Cleric? Lawful Good
Eowyn - Fighter / Druid Well, would be good aligned, but Druid needs to be TN
Tom Bombadill - Bard - Chaotic Neutral
Gollum - Stalker - Neutral Evil.
Bilbo would probably be some kind of Fighter / Thief too, but with high Charisma and Wisdom.
Cursed item -
- Invisibility unlimited charges
4 AC penalty vs undead, 4 saves penalty vs death magic
Small chance of summoning a huge evil demon / devil on use that attacks the ringbearer.
Mat as a wizard slayer makes a lot of sense because of not just the magic resistance but his distrust of anything related to the power (although he's willing to use the spear and the amulet).
Perrin's not a shapeshifter. He's not really a ranger either - although he has the connection with wolves, he trained as a blacksmith and wasn't that much of an outdoorsman (not any more than other people in that setting). What he should really be is a berserker with some kind of summon wolf special ability.
And yeah, Hurin and Juilin are probably the closest you have to a thief in a good party (both could be bounty hunters).
A party based on The Hobbit would be hilarious - one wizard, one halfling thief, and four dwarven fighters.
My party would be:
Aragorn - Ranger (Stalker would be fitting maybe, but not with the armor restriction)
Legolas - Archer
Gimli - Berserker
Merry - Fighter/Thief
Pippin - Fighter/Thief
Gandalf - Sorcerer (but maybe a Fighter/Mage dual, as you all said, for the sword)
No cleric, but maybe I would put all Aragorn's And Legolas' spell into healing spells after lvl8, though I don't think it would help a lot...
Out of the bunch, Merry is the only one who I think could count as a fighter, because of the confrontation with the witch king.
Frodo, Sam, and Pippin are even tougher.
Back in the Hobbit, Bilbo's role in the party is the burglar, so I think you can safely call him a thief (definitely not a fighter/thief though - he fights with a short sword a few times but it's definitely not his strong point).
Gandalf - mage
Frodo - thief
Gimli - fighter
Legolas - fighter
Aragorn - ranger
Arwen - druid
Arwen makes a river rise to engulf enemies in hot pursuit of Aragorn and Frodo. So I went with druid for her. Gandalf seems to have some druidic powers as well as being a wizard, but mage seemed clearly most fitting for him overall.
The hardest part was coming up with the stats!
Anyway, it was an enjoyable playthrough.
Don't get me wrong, they describe a world of infinite fascination and have some memorable scenes.
Obviously there are many people out there who read them over and over again, do they just have a really bad memory? (jk)
The writing style for the Hobbit is whimsical and very folksy, bordering on cutesy. It's told as a hobbit would relate the story. it almost feels like Tolkien is sort of just having a bit of fun. By comparison LotR is a work of serious literature.
I think some readers struggle a bit with the Fellowship of the Ring, because the action (the adventure per se) doesn't really get started until about midway. But if you savor that early part as Tolkien laying the groundwork for the adventure, it can be pleasurable in it's own way even if slow moving to the rest of the tale comparatively.
I'm rereading the Hobbit now (for comparison with the film trilogy, with part 1 to be released next month). I have to say that the Hobbit is a must-read just to see how it clearly provided the blueprint for the creation of D&D. It's all there.
he lays on hand when he is the king in "The Return of the King".
And he fights for the Good.
So he can be a ranger (lonely because he does not want to fulfill his destiny).
But in the late Return of the King, he clearly accept his heritage, and become a (royal) paladin. He is no longer a lonely ranger walking in the mud.
PS : note that I won't be able to explain properly this point of view since English is not my native language.
He was no meant to live a life as a ranger ... let's just say he has a class change when he ceases to be a lone guy away from his home and walking in the shadows / away from inhabited areas.
Check the books, he also has limited healing powers since he literally has the "lay on hands" abilities, because it is said that all kings had the power to heal others.
It's written black on white.
He fights for his Kingdom / heritage / good / honnor of his lineage / his people
Since then he looks more like a Paladin than a Ranger (who hides and refuse to assume his position).
PS : note that I won't be able to explain properly this point of view since English is not my native language.
I'm fine with his starting class as a ranger.
I just say that later he becomes much more than a simple ranger (he clearly becomes Lawful Good, if he was not already).
Concerning his healing spells, they are more a divine attribute than a nature attribute (when he becomes a King). I don't know if your from Europe or USA, but we know that Kings in Europe were supposed to be the incarnation of god on Earth - literally (this was especially true in France).
He's got his power, his might, his strength, his wisdom from the fact he belongs to the old people of Numenor, who were blessed by the first born (Valar, Maïar, ...).
He is still proficient with bows and swords, and can still use his knowledge about wilderness (great wisdom).
He commands his people (great charisma)
My two cents ;-)
Seeing as we are trying to make Baldur's gate rules work for LoTR, something that will never work properly!
He starts out as a ranger and moves towards more Paladin like qualities by the end.
Seeing classes don't exist in LoTR, you could as easily argue that he isn't a D&D ranger either.
And in fact that AD&D heavily inspired themselves on the LOTR heritage (along with many other fantasy references), that's why we can still see some similarities in the name / status of the diffrent classes.
By the way : check the different ethnicities for the Halflings ... they do look like the same as the one mentioned in the LotR. :-)
I did not know that, thanks. Is that line from the movie, or the book, or both?