As I noted in my examination of issue #38 of White Dwarf (January 1983), Lewis Pulsipher provided AD&D game statistics for the members of the Fellowship of the Ring. Here they are:
Let's take a brief look at these stats, starting with Gandalf, who is an 8th-level cleric with a slightly modified list of spells. I find that fascinating, especially in light of Gary Gygax's comment in Dragon – can anyone recall the specific issue? – that Gandalf was not a magic-user but a cleric (and a fairly low-level one at that). It's also noteworthy that Pulsipher lists him as a "Man" rather than a Maia.
Aragorn is described as a "ranger-paladin." Whether that's meant to represent a multi/dual class is open to interpretation, since Pulsipher only indicates a single level (7th) for the character. It's an odd, though understandable, way to represent the character, since Aragorn does demonstrate a number of abilities that are akin to those of an AD&D paladin. On the other hand, the ranger class only exists as a way to represent Aragorn as a Dungeons & Dragons character. That Pulsipher didn't think the class adequate to the task is intriguing.
Boromir is just a straight-up fighter, which makes perfect sense. The same is true of Gimli and, aside from his relatively low level, I don't think anyone could find fault with this interpretation. Of course, Legalos (also a fighter) is similarly low level, so there's likely a method to Pulsipher's madness here.
The hobbits are interesting. Only Frodo is a fighter, while Sam, Pippin, and Merry are all thieves. I can see a logic to Sam's being a thief, given his skill at sneaking about. Likewise, Merry makes sense too; he did, after all, help defeat the Witch-King of Angmar with perhaps one of the greatest backstabs in all of fantasy literature. Pippin, though, seems like he ought to be a fighter. He showed considerable skill in battle, eventually defeating a troll. Likewise, he later became Thain of the Shire, a largely military office.
Attempting to provide game statistics for literary characters, as Dragon did in its "Giants in the Earth" series, is always a fraught endeavor. While inspired by literature, D&D was never intended to emulate its specific. The game's character classes (and their abilities) generally have game-specific origins and purposes. Consequently, definitively pronouncing that any literary belongs to a particular class or is of a particular level is never going to be wholly satisfying. That said, I think Lewis Pulsipher did a fair job in this case, especially in light of his goal of using The Lord of the Rings as a way to introduce newcomers to Dungeons & Dragons. I can quibble about the fine details, but not the general direction of his adaptation.
Speculating, I'm thinking "the hands of the king are the hands of a healer" might have been the impetus to get the paladin's Lay on Hands?
ReplyDeleteHaving been introduced to LoTR and D&D at roughly the same time, I recall being quite unhappy when discovering in the appendices that Gandalf was a Maia. He was the character I most wanted to emulate, and here was no less than Tolkien telling me (I felt) that it wasn't possible! So I guess good on Pulsipher for making him a "man."
ReplyDeleteBetter to use B/X to CLASSify them. They are just halflings. :-)
ReplyDeleteIs that a typo for 13 or did they really give poor Boromir a 3 in Wisdom? I know he makes some poor choices, but really, a 3? :-D
ReplyDeleteI know, right? Sure, Boromir wasn't exactly the wisest member of the fellowship, if his decisions are anything to go by (though succumbing to the Ring's temptations isn't something any character is immune to). But 3? Really harsh, Mr. Pulshipher.
DeleteHow it is that Gandalf crashed Khazad-dum with a Staff of Continual Light? And how is justified that Legolas is lower level compared to Boromir?
ReplyDeleteI would need to check Lords of Middle Earth books, but unfortunately those are in my boy room in my parents house. Will come back on this, if I remember.
I suspect it might be more of an attempt to quantify thier "experience" than the skill they demonstrate in the stories. Boromir had literally been at war, killing orcs or mordor, for most of his life. Despite their ages, I don't think Gimli and Legolas had seen that kind of action until the events of LOTR.
DeleteI happen to have them on the shelf nearby:
DeleteGandalf: Lv 40 Maia (Istari) Mage (MERP)/Magician (RM)
Aragorn: Lv 36 Dunadan Ranger
Boromir: Lv 20 Dunadan Warrior/Fighter
Legolas: Lv 8 Sindar Elf Warrior/Fighter
Gimli: Lv 8 Dwarf Warrior/Fighter
Frodo: Lv 12 Hobbit Scout/Rogue
Samwise Lv 9 Hobbit Scout/Thief
Merry: Lv 9 Hobbit Scout/Rogue
Pippin: Lv 9 Hobbit Scout/Thief
I'd note that Rolemaster sets 'Lord' level at 20 and caps out at 50, so I'd recommend dividing those levels in half to get their AD&D equivalents.
To be fair, Aragorn specifically has a lay on hands ability because of his background. It wouldn't be a standard ranger thing. Having it be a class ability at all is probably not a great idea - it's just a thing Aragorn can do.
ReplyDeleteIt tells you a lot about D&D that the game relies somewhat heavily on clerics to keep people from dying and has lots of wizards, yet LOTR's wizard is actually a cleric who has a literal angel, and he's the only magic using PC. For something that started out with so many fighting men, the magic's gotten dialed up a LOT.
Maybe Pulsipher was giving the characters low to middle levels to allow for their growth in the trilogy. Also, Saruman handled Gandalf in "Fellowship" pretty much the way you'd expect an eighth level wizard to go down when set against the power of Sauron.
ReplyDeleteAs I recall. Gimli and Legolas get into an orc killing competition where they each get about 20 orcs in a single battle. 4th level is a little too low for that - I think they'd need to be 7th or 8th to pull that off. I'd also put Sam at higher level than Frodo & use a halfling class. That said, the levels aren't too unreasonable.
ReplyDeleteBig fan of these exercises. They don't need to be "exact" fits, just plausible interpretations. In this case, Pulsipher's interpretations demonstrate just how flexible the early edition character classes were and by extension the lack of need for more classes. Glad to see a cleric without a mace!
ReplyDeleteNow I find myself singing 'Frodo Was a 2nd-Level Fighter' to the tune of 'Jerry Was a Race Car Driver' by Primus.
ReplyDeleteDragon Magazine (March 1977) ran Gandalf Was a Fifth Level Magic-User by Bill Seligman, so these efforts are nothing new...
ReplyDeleteThat one I remember, but I have a dim recollection of Gygax dismissively stating in one of his "Sorcerer's Scroll" columns that Gandalf was, on the basis of the magic we see him use, only a low-level cleric. The same article also describes the One Ring as merely a ring of invisibility, albeit with a nasty curse upon it ...
DeleteGiving Merry a charisma of 7 is just mean and not at all consistent with the books.
ReplyDeleteOne can quibble about stats, levels, classes, etc., but where I think this gets right is that the LOTR characters are at the D&D "sweet spot" for adventuring-- the 3ish to 8ish level.
ReplyDeleteThis is refreshing compared to many licensed games, which often make the mistake of making the main characters of the license vastly overpowered compared not only to beginning characters, but to what PCs could ever hope to achieve. I think the fear is that PCs will murderhobo Elrond and steal his stuff, or that a stray blaster shot might take out Darth Vader. It's a misguided attempt to keep the in-universe "story" intact, but instead removes a lot of agency from the players. All the above IMHO, of course.
I concur with Mark and am happy to see restraint in assigning levels. Peter Jackson's films have presumably elevated these characters to the stratosphere in the eyes of many viewers (especially Legolas) but let's remember that a level 1 fighter represents a veteran...
ReplyDeleteWhoa, that's so scientific.
ReplyDeleteI always considered Gandalf to be an 11th level Druid, advancing to 12th level after defeating the balrog and becoming Gandalf the White, a full Druid instead of just an Initiate. His magic seemed more druidic than priestly or wizardly to me. None of the 3 choices are perfect, but Druid feels closest. 2e might have some sort of specialty priest with a nature focus that could possibly be better.
ReplyDeleteSting's orc detection glow is limited to within 30'?
ReplyDeleteTo quote Ripley, "That can't be, that's inside the room!"