everything he does is well explained if hes a medium level bard. he has tons of lore skills, identifies items and casts some low level spells. He uses courage buffs all the time on his party and tells stories. Gandalf is a bard
>manwe: ok guys so you are powerful angels but we are putting you in old man bodies and sending you to help against an evil angel that has no restrictions on his powers. DON'T use any of your powers for good and DON'T give any useful spoilers. make sure you talk in riddles and try not to be too useful ok. but if you want to go evil (looking at you saruman you sly dog) then yeah you can just go apeshit. sound good?
You can think of them as diplomats. Their job was giving advice and guidance to the people of middleearth, not fight anyone directly or become rulers or generals over the local people.
Gandalf only really uses his powers when dealing with other members of his species who stepped out of line themselves (Balrog, Saruman, Sauron using magic). Of course Gandalf clearly bent the rules as far as he could because he had long since been emotionally involved with the fate of the people of middleearth.
I am tempted to dismantle your argument but lotr was obviously shit writing, which is evident in your defense, I have no motivation to further discuss this garbage.
The Nazgul are a bit of an edge-case.
But even against them he doesn't really use magic in the books. On the weathertop he resorts to regular fire made from bonfires. And unlike in the movies he doesn't actually clash against the Witchking because Aragorn shows up before they can duke it out.
The most he does is add the illusion of riding horses to the elven water magic that drives the nazgul off when the pursue Frodo to Rivendell.
It's not really clear whether Gandalf is allowed to use magic to defend himself when he gets attacked by magic it directly.
>the Istari or Wizards appeared in Middle-earth. It was afterwards said that they came out of the Far West and were messengers sent to contest the power of Sauron, and to unite all those who had the will to resist him; but they were forbidden to match his power with power, or to seek to dominate Elves or Men by force and fear.
in lord of the rings you have a limited amount of power and when you put it in things you don't always get it all back. sauron put his power into the ring and saruman spread his power way too thin and it was why he got fricking wrecked by trees and that israelite who backstabbed him
How did a children's book end up having such a large following among adults (at least adults in the physical age terms)? A far superior tale of heroism for adults was written long before it.
ouroboros is great but not better and it was also started while he was a child. its why everyone has such silly names apparently. tolkien wrote as an adult while having spare time in the trenches during a world war
the french vulgate cycle is very very tolkienesque and he probably lifted quite a lot from it. especially the lancelot stories. full of magical woods and supernatural creatures and quests to strange lands.
rogues are bards ruin the game. a rogues "thing" is in having lots of skill points, which mean other classes cant have tons of skill points or be good at being sneaky or else there is no point to being a rogue.
so a rogues existence means you cant even fricking make a character like conan or aragorn in fricking D&D which was inspired by said characters. even d&d characters themselves can basically never be depicted with a class and always have to multiclass
the only trve classes are >magic user >warrior
everything else is skill/feat/attribute/weapon/armor/playstyle choice
i have spoken. it is known. do not try to reply to me if you think you can disagree with this in any way
I agree that rogues are a scam, but >rogue >low armor >except when you factor in dodge, then they have the same survivability as the warrior class >low damage >except when you factor in sneak attack or crits, then they have the same DPS as the warrior class
rogues are just warriors with a different play style. if you dont have good dex and dont take any feats or whatever that helps your armor, youre not going to be a good low armor twink in battle. they have the same damage as a warrior because its the same class. take master feats or and whatnot to get more
a warrior is a martial class with lots of skill points because they are "street smart" or experienced mercenaries or come out of a fighters school or whatever other background you want them to have. a rouge in this case is just a warrior who choose to wear lighter armor to take advantage of dex or flexibility.
this way you can have a character like conan who spends so much time thieving and back stabbing that he seems more like a rogue than a barbarian warrior in his stories
the only thing classes do is restrict people and martial+magic classes should only be prestige classes that you need great attributes to make viable sort of like how a d&d monk/sorcerer multiclass needs good attribute rolls
He is a metaphor for israelites. he controls an army of nonwhites to destroy the west and his uses his israeli powers to corrupt men and dorfs into wanting power and gold
He is a bard not a wiz and he is equiping a short sword, legit
His race is wizard. D&D fricked everything up.
pretty sure Tolkien didn't create wizards
Yes, and nothing previous said wizards/sorcerers or whathaveyou could not handle a sword.
It is a D&D trope and an attempt at ~~*game balance*~~.
weapon restriction is always aids. you can balance the game around damage amounts based on mastery. what was gygax thinking
>Clerics can't use edged weapons because they are not permitted to shed blood.
>Sure, you bash skulls with a mace!
Take a page from TF2, trying to balance everything will just ruin the game.
b-but I'm pretty sure Tolkien didn't create wizards???
His race is demigod that has to not use magic too much for some reason
He does use magic. His magic is more protection, morale, courage, defensive stuff. When he goes full offense magic, it kills him.
His magic is mostly aura morale boosts to party members. He's more of a paladin/bard than he is a wizard.
I'm not even a dnd fan but even I know he's multiclassing
everything he does is well explained if hes a medium level bard. he has tons of lore skills, identifies items and casts some low level spells. He uses courage buffs all the time on his party and tells stories. Gandalf is a bard
he uses telekinesis, a 5th level wizard spell and Thaumaturgy, a cleric cantrip
he also equips bethesda's skyrim shout that ragdoll you to the next room.
Frick off. Your dnd nonsense is the reason I can't have my wizards casting spells with swords and other weapons in rpgs.
>manwe: ok guys so you are powerful angels but we are putting you in old man bodies and sending you to help against an evil angel that has no restrictions on his powers. DON'T use any of your powers for good and DON'T give any useful spoilers. make sure you talk in riddles and try not to be too useful ok. but if you want to go evil (looking at you saruman you sly dog) then yeah you can just go apeshit. sound good?
You can think of them as diplomats. Their job was giving advice and guidance to the people of middleearth, not fight anyone directly or become rulers or generals over the local people.
Gandalf only really uses his powers when dealing with other members of his species who stepped out of line themselves (Balrog, Saruman, Sauron using magic). Of course Gandalf clearly bent the rules as far as he could because he had long since been emotionally involved with the fate of the people of middleearth.
I am tempted to dismantle your argument but lotr was obviously shit writing, which is evident in your defense, I have no motivation to further discuss this garbage.
if lotr is shit writing, then nothing is good writing.
Convenient
Go write your books George.
Didn't he use them against the Nazgul who were corrupted humans? Or does it not count because it was Saurons magic that corrupted them?
The Nazgul are a bit of an edge-case.
But even against them he doesn't really use magic in the books. On the weathertop he resorts to regular fire made from bonfires. And unlike in the movies he doesn't actually clash against the Witchking because Aragorn shows up before they can duke it out.
The most he does is add the illusion of riding horses to the elven water magic that drives the nazgul off when the pursue Frodo to Rivendell.
It's not really clear whether Gandalf is allowed to use magic to defend himself when he gets attacked by magic it directly.
>the Istari or Wizards appeared in Middle-earth. It was afterwards said that they came out of the Far West and were messengers sent to contest the power of Sauron, and to unite all those who had the will to resist him; but they were forbidden to match his power with power, or to seek to dominate Elves or Men by force and fear.
in lord of the rings you have a limited amount of power and when you put it in things you don't always get it all back. sauron put his power into the ring and saruman spread his power way too thin and it was why he got fricking wrecked by trees and that israelite who backstabbed him
>help these people, be useful
>but don't be so useful that they start rely on you and only you
Seems pretty straightforward.
Have you tried not playing D&D?
Everything is D&D.
never heard of a spellsword before?
>These were smithed in Gondolin, by the high elves. You could not ask for a finer rifle.
"FRICK MAGIC, TIME TO GO TACTICAL"
A nog picked up a lightsaber, anything is possible.
What is a battlemage?
How did a children's book end up having such a large following among adults (at least adults in the physical age terms)? A far superior tale of heroism for adults was written long before it.
it was largely unknown until being discovered by boomer hippies with the brains of children. pretty intuitive
ouroboros is great but not better and it was also started while he was a child. its why everyone has such silly names apparently. tolkien wrote as an adult while having spare time in the trenches during a world war
>silly names
You mean COOL NAMES
is that drawn by ere? i know he has a hardon for Shakespeare but i imagined them looking actually cool
AFAIK he drew those as kid. These are the official illustrations for the book (pretty sure they are, at least).
There was an NES dungeon crawler I played as a kid where you were a wizard and you fought goblins with a sword, I cannot remember the name of it
The Immortal?
Oh yeah
Apparently medieval romance had a big influence on LOTR. Which ones should I read?
the french vulgate cycle is very very tolkienesque and he probably lifted quite a lot from it. especially the lancelot stories. full of magical woods and supernatural creatures and quests to strange lands.
It pissed me off that glamdring doesn't glow in the movies
>wiz class
>equips gun
dnd homosexuals should be killed
he's a wizard 10 eldritch knight 5 loremaster 5 build
rogues are bards ruin the game. a rogues "thing" is in having lots of skill points, which mean other classes cant have tons of skill points or be good at being sneaky or else there is no point to being a rogue.
so a rogues existence means you cant even fricking make a character like conan or aragorn in fricking D&D which was inspired by said characters. even d&d characters themselves can basically never be depicted with a class and always have to multiclass
the only trve classes are
>magic user
>warrior
everything else is skill/feat/attribute/weapon/armor/playstyle choice
i have spoken. it is known. do not try to reply to me if you think you can disagree with this in any way
bump
I agree that rogues are a scam, but
>rogue
>low armor
>except when you factor in dodge, then they have the same survivability as the warrior class
>low damage
>except when you factor in sneak attack or crits, then they have the same DPS as the warrior class
3rd edition was a mistake
rogues are just warriors with a different play style. if you dont have good dex and dont take any feats or whatever that helps your armor, youre not going to be a good low armor twink in battle. they have the same damage as a warrior because its the same class. take master feats or and whatnot to get more
a warrior is a martial class with lots of skill points because they are "street smart" or experienced mercenaries or come out of a fighters school or whatever other background you want them to have. a rouge in this case is just a warrior who choose to wear lighter armor to take advantage of dex or flexibility.
this way you can have a character like conan who spends so much time thieving and back stabbing that he seems more like a rogue than a barbarian warrior in his stories
the only thing classes do is restrict people and martial+magic classes should only be prestige classes that you need great attributes to make viable sort of like how a d&d monk/sorcerer multiclass needs good attribute rolls
Gandalf is a spellsword build.
Literally Spellstrike, dude is a magus.
I love this art style but ai still fricking lose it when I look closely at how much shit this guy crams into his character’s belts.
Spellsword is top tier class. Final Fantasy calls them red mages
>gandalf the red
we were robbed
>He never played wizard profficient with martial weapons
Anon you are so gay Milo Yiannopoulos feels like a topdom around you
>Milo Yiannopoulos
Holy 2016 cringe Batman!
He's a spellsword with a wizard outfit.
its called multiclassing you fricking pleb
He is a metaphor for israelites. he controls an army of nonwhites to destroy the west and his uses his israeli powers to corrupt men and dorfs into wanting power and gold
he's a fighter/mage/cleric
Call me crazy but I actually prefer reading The Hobbit to LOTR. And that Rankin Bass adaptation is pure kino
Dude is how many thousands of years old and you think he ISN’T playing a Gish?
I’m all for fun and variety but the fate of the WORLD is on the line man, you gotta go with what works and he knows wizard/fighter is unstoppable.