Magic in Middle-earth

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by blantyr

I tend to agree. Again, I like Morthoron's hierarchy of who might use Art and how much power individuals might have. It is not clear to me that there aren't weaker individuals lower on Morthoron's hierarchy doing very small stuff. However, you don't see examples of shaman or wise women using minor spells in the books. It might be plausible to say if one doesn't have at least X amount of Numenarian or elven blood, that there should be no magic use.

As Eönwë points out, there's also the Drúedain. (btw, it's "Númenórean", not "Numenarian".)

Originally Posted by G55

Yes, but the way I understood blantyr's posts is that Elves, Numenorians, etc have to do something in order to radiate subtle magic. They don't. It just happens that way.

A good point– of course in the examples you give it's ambiguous– intentionally, I think– whether you're seeing merely a strong will, or a power in action. But you're right that it's rare that Tolkien's Elves (or Númenóreans) cast spells, as such. In contrast, blantyr's Elf-character's use of "subtle magic", it seems, requires her to be casting spells all the time, just unobtrusively:

Originally Posted by blantyr

should the brawlers be injured, a nameless elven minstrel might afterwards quietly sing a song to Este. If one didn't understand the Sindarin lyrics, and didn't know that Este has an aspect of healing, they might give all the credit for rapid recovery to the hobbit healer who comes in with aloe and bandages.

On that note– blantyr, both from your own description and from the sample rules and character sheets I've looked at, it's pretty clear that the makers of "Ambarquenta" have had to do a good deal of tweaking, codifying things that were probably never meant to be codified, and making up details out of whole cloth. I'm not saying they're not trying to be as faithful to the original as they could be and still keep the game playable– it's just that a roleplaying system and a novel simply don't operate the same way. For this reason I remain puzzled as to why you apparently believe you can work backwards and apply the rules of AQ to its source.

That said, it sounds like a perfectly good game and one that no doubt would interest many of us here. Again, why don't you just make a thread about it?

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

A good point– of course in the examples you give it's ambiguous– intentionally, I think– whether you're seeing merely a strong will, or a power in action. But you're right that it's rare that Tolkien's Elves (or Númenóreans) cast spells, as such. In contrast, blantyr's Elf-character's use of "subtle magic", it seems, requires her to be casting spells all the time, just unobtrusively:

"All the time" would be an exaggeration. As I said earlier, I thought long and hard and couldn't think of a single example of her singing with intent in an inn. In a public inn, she sings for the enjoyment of those around her. Outside, in the wild, she is more apt to sing songs devoted to one or another of the Valar, to call protection and growth upon the land.

In the Harry Potter books, if one wants to use magic, one almost always waves a wand and speaks a pseudo latin phrase. I think it safe to say that Harry Potter style magic does involve rote spells. Gandalf sometimes waves his staff when using magic. He sometimes speaks words. (Come back Sauruman!) Tom Bombadil seems always to sing, but the words don't seem rote, formal and fixed. He seems to be ad-libbing. In general, it seems safe to suggest that Tolkien's magic is much more free form and flexible than Rowling's.

And yet, if Gandalf or Bombadil does something, there is often beginning and end. There is generally a brief period where Bombadil is waving his hands and the rain doesn't hit him, or when Gandalf's beam of light drives a Nazgul away. What Gandalf does is different than what Harry does, but not all that much different. The word 'spell' doesn't seem to fit quite as well in Middle Earth as in Hogwart's. I'd be interested if someone were to suggest a different word. Off the top of my head, and even after a look at a thesaurus, I haven't one to propose.

Originally Posted by Nerwen

On that note– blantyr, both from your own description and from the sample rules and character sheets I've looked at, it's pretty clear that the makers of "Ambarquenta" have had to do a good deal of tweaking, codifying things that were probably never meant to be codified, and making up details out of whole cloth. I'm not saying they're not trying to be as faithful to the original as they could be and still keep the game playable– it's just that a roleplaying system and a novel simply don't operate the same way. For this reason I remain puzzled as to why you apparently believe you can work backwards and apply the rules of AQ to its source.

I agree with your characterization of AQ.

The source is subtle, ambiguous and sometimes contradictory. The rules are clear and understandable. One might argue that any clear and understandable rule can't possibly accurately portray Tolkien's magic as the magic isn't clear and understandable.

When reading the AQ rules, I'll often think, yes, that rule reflects how Tolkien wrote this scene, that one, and this third one as well, but in this fourth scene it isn't quite right. I'm assuming others contributing here know LotR roughly as well as I, and generally know the First and Second Age writings far better.

I thought to insert clarity into the conversation, even knowing that the clearer one gets, the more likely it is that someone will find an exception that might be held to invalidate the clarity. It seems many do not appreciate this approach. I'm trying to use other approaches when possible.

[Morthoron]

Originally Posted by blantyr

"All the time" would be an exaggeration. As I said earlier, I thought long and hard and couldn't think of a single example of her singing with intent in an inn. In a public inn, she sings for the enjoyment of those around her. Outside, in the wild, she is more apt to sing songs devoted to one or another of the Valar, to call protection and growth upon the land..

Some would question an Elf frequenting an inn in the first place, and an Elvish female even less likely. As far as singing to the Valar, your Elf would have to have some association with Aman (Noldor, or at least Sindarin or a Teleri of Cirdan) to even care about the Valar.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Morthoron

Some would question an Elf frequenting an inn in the first place, and an Elvish female even less likely. As far as singing to the Valar, your Elf would have to have some association with Aman (Noldor, or at least Sindarin or a Teleri of Cirdan) to even care about the Valar.

Does anyone recall a female character in the Prancing Pony at Bree? It might be possible to question a female human or even a female hobbit at an inn in the Shire. Middle Earth is quite territorial and segregated. People don't tend to leave the borders of their own realms very much at all, or mix with any but their own kind. The games in the Barrow Downs forums are far less segregated than the books, and Goldie's home game is no different.

Players want to run exotic characters, and many game master relax Tolkien's strict segregation and let people play the character they want where they want.

The characters in my off line game are a hobbit sheep herder of Breeland, a ranger of the north, an elven woodsman of Lindon, a female elven minstrel of Lindon, a knight of Dol Amroth, a human sheriff of Bree, a healer from Bree who trained in the Houses of Healing in Minas Tirith, a dwarf toy maker and warrior, an exiled rider of Rohan, a human merchant from somewhere south of the Shire but northwest of Dunland, and an exiled female rightful heir of a town and estate in Gondor. (Lady Jewel is played by the game master. She's a walking plot hook, an excuse for a major plot line. Don't blame me.) The group met at a mid summer's fair in Bree. They have been helping Breeland and the rangers handle problems resulting from ruffian's coming up the Greenway.

Is it reasonable that such an eclectic group get together? Not really. We were all required to come up with a back story to justify our character's travels. Goldie is a Sindar of the Tower Hills. She learned of the Valar from her love of music driving her to learn all the old songs. She has travelled with wandering companies between Rivendell and the Havens, learning woods craft in the warm months while singing by the fire in the cold. She joined the player character group as she wants to write songs, not just play them. She finds her kin too protective to allow her to live through incidents that will end up needing to be preserved in song.

All of our back stories are similarly plausible, sort of, almost. Collectively? Likely not. I agree with the game master's decision to allow us to generate the characters we want to play, but it admittedly stretches suspension of disbelief. No one dares complain about the other person's character, though. The whole idea of people in Middle Earth going on adventures is just too outlandish. (The hobbit's wife doesn't understand at all. There is a broad understanding that the hobbit gets a first go an any good jewelry we might run across, as otherwise we might lose our best archer.)

It occurs to me that Lake Town or Dale might be good places for mixed groups.

[Galadriel55]

I don't understand a few things here:

a) Goldie was created for the AQ, that doesn't exactly agree with the Downs. Why are you trying to mix the two?

b) I understand that you talk about Goldie to give a personal example. But AQ? It's one thing to discuss "Magic in ME" and another to talk about "Magic in AQ". In this thread we aren't trying to decide what is the best set of rules regarding magic and canonicity in a RPG.

c) Your point with the whole Goldie thing?


You say that "people want to run exotic characters". Maybe you do, but I personally don't. Plus, how is that relevant?

You are trying to say that a Tolkien RPG would be boring without specific/purposeful/whatever magic in it. But then (IMO) it wouldn't exactly be Tolkien. He didn't create characters like spiderman or the like (meaning that you could have inner abilities on the same scale). If he would have, I'd have only half as much respect for him and his works.

Tolkien's works are filled with magic, but it's not "spiderman magic". You yourself said that it is sbtle - but it's subtler than that. You state that one has to do something to be magical (sing, make something, etc), but he doesn't. One could be magical all the time, without singing.

EDIT: xed with your last post

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by blantyr

"All the time" would be an exaggeration. As I said earlier, I thought long and hard and couldn't think of a single example of her singing with intent in an inn. In a public inn, she sings for the enjoyment of those around her. Outside, in the wild, she is more apt to sing songs devoted to one or another of the Valar, to call protection and growth upon the land.

Elves don't need to sing all the time or do anything such to radiate magic all the time. It just radiates from them because they have it, because it's innate - like light comes from the Sun without any particular effort on the Sun's part.

As with the exapmle of Aragorn, sometimes the "magic" is covered. You seem to view it with an allusion of turning on a flashlight every once in a while. I see it differently - covering the light of the flashlight every once in a while.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Elves don't need to sing all the time or do anything such to radiate magic all the time. It just radiates from them because they have it, because it's innate - like light comes from the Sun without any particular effort on the Sun's part.

As with the example of Aragorn, sometimes the "magic" is covered. You seem to view it with an allusion of turning on a flashlight every once in a while. I see it differently - covering the light of the flashlight every once in a while.

Frodo, wearing the ring on Weathertop, was able to see the Nazgûl clearly. At the ford near Rivendell, when he was starting to fade from the Morgul blade wound, he could see Glorfindel as glowing white, and could see the Nazgûl, but Aragorn and the other hobbits could be seen only dimly. When Frodo first wakes at Rivendell, Gandalf conjectures that the Morgul wound might change Frodo, not for ill, but that those with eyes to see could detect that he was more than just a hobbit. He wouldn't glow as bright as Glorfindel, but something would be there to see.

Ambarquenta defines the spell 'sense power.' Sense power will do the above, allow one to sense those who radiate magic. It also allows one to sense enchanted items or spells in progress. By the AQ character generation rules, any elf inclined to learn could sense power, but very very few dwarves, hobbits or ordinary men could do so. I could see a moderately strict game master saying no hobbit or dwarf could learn spells, including sense power.

I am not claiming AQ as a canon source, but I think they got sense power more or less right. Details could certainly be debated. I am not at all certain that it should be all that easy for an elf to learn to sense power, for example.

Anyway, should Frodo put on the Ring and thus gain the ability to sense power, Glorfindel's power would be obvious, while Aragorn's would not be. Take off the Ring, Frodo would no longer be able to sense their magic power, but could sense their inherent nobility. Glorfindel might still beat out Aragorn somewhat, but not nearly by so much. Aragorn might often subdue his true nobility of spirit, but even so Aragorn might look foul but feel fair to the astute observer. Frodo was a pretty good judge of character, picked up a trace of Aragorn's nobility, but that might well be good old hobbit common sense rather than any occult ability. Sam was still dubious.

In short, I would agree that certain people radiate magical power. I would question whether a typical hobbit, dwarf or human would be able to sense it. Also, while those with magical power will often have some form of noble spirit, the link between nobility and occult power is not a fixed lock. There are many with strong honorable characters who can't use spells.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by blantyr

By the AQ character generation rules, any elf inclined to learn could sense power, but very very few dwarves, hobbits or ordinary men could do so. I could see a moderately strict game master saying no hobbit or dwarf could learn spells, including sense power.

How is "sensing power" a spell? And I doubt that Elves learned that many spells - they learned crafts, nature, they became more skilled at things, but not spells.

Anyway, should Frodo put on the Ring and thus gain the ability to sense power,

But does the Ring give the ability to sense power?

There are many with strong honorable characters who can't use spells.

I don't recall too many that do. There are hardly any instances when actual spells are used - the only ones I remember are Gandalf lighting the fire on Caradhras and when wolves attacked them before Moria.

There is also "mellon", but anyone who knew how to say the word could open the Gates with it. It's not a special ability.

Take off the Ring, Frodo would no longer be able to sense their magic power, but could sense their inherent nobility.

The two are often connected. You might also have noticed that Aragorn was the one with the healing powers, and not Glorfindel. The latter also had some skill in that area, true. But still, Aragorn's hands do wonders with athelas; magic.

Glorfindel faced the Nazgul. Aragorn did that, and in addition he looked in the Palantir. That's not really magic, it's willpower. But it is still magical.

In short, I would agree that certain people radiate magical power.

I'd say that all people do, except that some do more or clearer than others.

I would question whether a typical hobbit, dwarf or human would be able to sense it.

If it's "bright" enough. As an example, reread the little chat Frodo had with Sam about magic and Elves in Lothlorien.

Also, while those with magical power will often have some form of noble spirit, the link between nobility and occult power is not a fixed lock.

No, but such power is often passed on by lineage, as is noble spirit. Not always, but often.

[blantyr]

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

How is "sensing power" a spell? And I doubt that Elves learned that many spells - they learned crafts, nature, they became more skilled at things, but not spells.

As I said a few posts up, 'spell' is a much better word to use in Harry Potter's subcreation, a much poorer word to use in Frodo's. I am very much open to a different word. However, that you do not like the word 'spell' doesn't imply Tom Bombadil can't keep himself dry by waving his arms, or that Gandalf can't repel Nazgul by shooting beams of light from his hand.

When the Fellowship was in Lorien, Galadriel looks into the eyes of each of the Fellowship in turn, and learns something of their motives and intent. AQ has labeled this ability a 'spell'. That you do not like the word 'spell' does not imply that the scene isn't in the book.

Similarly, after the wedding of Eowyn and Faramir, as the Rivendell party and the Lorien parties are about to each go their own way, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond and others looked into each others eyes and communicated directly mind to mind. AQ defines this ability as a spell as well.

Again, I'm open to using a different word for such abilities should you care to nominate one. 'Spell' isn't an ideal choice. However, 'crafts', 'nature', and 'skill' do not seem to be appropriate words either.

I would agree that most elves don't learn very many... whatever you want to call them. In Goldie's off line game, she currently knows four.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

But does the Ring give the ability to sense power?

If I remember Gandalf's description correctly, it allows one to step into a world of spirits. You can see them. They can see you. A Morgul knife does this too. When one is in this world of spirits, Glorfindel radiates magic in much the way you describe, while others in the living realm are much less visible.

Thinking of a counter example, Frodo briefly wears the Ring in the presence of Tom Bombadil. There is no mention of Tom's appearance changing, or of Sam, Merry and Pippin's appearance changing. Tom is clearly very powerful. Does Tom not radiate a magical aura? Is his magic different from Glofindel's? Does the Ring have no power or hold over Tom? Was Tolkien more interested in telling a good tale than keeping his magic system 100% consistent? I don't know. I don't know that anyone knows for certain. If we really wanted to, we could string out such questions indefinitely.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I don't recall too many that do. There are hardly any instances when actual spells are used - the only ones I remember are Gandalf lighting the fire on Caradhras and when wolves attacked them before Moria.

See above.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

There is also "mellon", but anyone who knew how to say the word could open the Gates with it. It's not a special ability.

Agreed. The power would be in the gate, not the speaker. Similarly, one doesn't have to know magic to stab someone with Sting.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

The two are often connected. You might also have noticed that Aragorn was the one with the healing powers, and not Glorfindel. The latter also had some skill in that area, true. But still, Aragorn's hands do wonders with athelas; magic.

I agree Aragorn has (insert some word or another here) regarding healing and also prophecy. As I don't want anyone to try to hurt me, I shall not write an essay on the difference between a talent and a spell. Must resist. Got to resist! Arrrgh! (Pant pant pant.) Sorry. I just can't do it! One is born with talents, but can potentially learn new spells.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

Glorfindel faced the Nazgul. Aragorn did that, and in addition he looked in the Palantir. That's not really magic, it's willpower. But it is still magical.

Agreed. Like the gate at Moria, or a hobbit wielding Sting, the magic is in the Palantír, not the person looking into it. Still, Aragorn had enough willpower to mind wrestle with Sauron, which is pretty darn impressive.

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

I'd say that all people do, except that some do more or clearer than others.

You might be right. Going back to the ford at Rivendell, with Frodo fading from the Morgul wound, he could see Glorfindel clearly while Aragorn, Sam, Merry and Pippin were much less easy to see. Perhaps the ability of wraiths to see those in the land of the living corresponds to the strength of their magical aura?

Originally Posted by Galadriel55

No, but such power is often passed on by lineage, as is noble spirit. Not always, but often.

Agreed.

[Galadriel55]

Originally Posted by blantyr

When the Fellowship was in Lorien, Galadriel looks into the eyes of each of the Fellowship in turn, and learns something of their motives and intent. AQ has labeled this ability a 'spell'. That you do not like the word 'spell' does not imply that the scene isn't in the book.

Well, perhaps it was meant as a different meaning of "spell" - not an incantation, but as in "a spell of rain" or something like that. But I still don't like the word - it sound like the person has to force it, and that it's temporary. I don't want to press this matter further, because I've said all that I have to say about it.

Similarly, after the wedding of Eowyn and Faramir, as the Rivendell party and the Lorien parties are about to each go their own way, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond and others looked into each others eyes and communicated directly mind to mind. AQ defines this ability as a spell as well.

The people you list are high Elves and a Maia. They have these innate abilities.

If I remember Gandalf's description correctly, it allows one to step into a world of spirits. You can see them. They can see you. A Morgul knife does this too. When one is in this world of spirits, Glorfindel radiates magic in much the way you describe, while others in the living realm are much less visible.

You step into a realm of wraiths, not of magic. Glorfindel was clearly seen because he was born in Aman - he's one of the special cases.

Thinking of a counter example, Frodo briefly wears the Ring in the presence of Tom Bombadil. There is no mention of Tom's appearance changing, or of Sam, Merry and Pippin's appearance changing. Tom is clearly very powerful. Does Tom not radiate a magical aura?

Sure he does. Part of his magic and power is that the evilness of the Ring has less strength in hs realm.

Moreover, do you remember how Frodo, and then he other hobbits started singing in imitation of Tom shortly after coming into his house? That is what I'd call the effects of his magical presence/radiance.

Is his magic different from Glofindel's?

Quite. His strength lies in happiness.

[quote]Does the Ring have no power or hold over Tom?[/qote]

Evidently no, seeing as he doesn't become invisible when he puts it on.

Arguably, you could say that it would tempt him, if he could possibly be tempted with anything. However, he's one truly happy and carefree person; he doesn't need or want anything else. He has all that he wants. He's hopelessly uncorruptable.

Plus, he's an enigma that was meant to be left as such. If you put too many details about someone he stops being an enigma.

But that's an entirely different thing altogether.

Was Tolkien more interested in telling a good tale than keeping his magic system 100% consistent? I don't know. I don't know that anyone knows for certain. If we really wanted to, we could string out such questions indefinitely.

100% consistent? I think it is. It's his book, and unlike Rowling he didn't put any specific limitations on "what could be done with magic". There is different magic.

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by blantyr

As I said a few posts up, 'spell' is a much better word to use in Harry Potter's subcreation, a much poorer word to use in Frodo's. I am very much open to a different word. However, that you do not like the word 'spell' doesn't imply Tom Bombadil can't keep himself dry by waving his arms, or that Gandalf can't repel Nazgul by shooting beams of light from his hand.

When the Fellowship was in Lorien, Galadriel looks into the eyes of each of the Fellowship in turn, and learns something of their motives and intent. AQ has labeled this ability a 'spell'. That you do not like the word 'spell' does not imply that the scene isn't in the book.

Similarly, after the wedding of Eowyn and Faramir, as the Rivendell party and the Lorien parties are about to each go their own way, Gandalf, Galadriel, Elrond and others looked into each others eyes and communicated directly mind to mind. AQ defines this ability as a spell as well.

Again, I'm open to using a different word for such abilities should you care to nominate one. 'Spell' isn't an ideal choice. However, 'crafts', 'nature', and 'skill' do not seem to be appropriate words either.

Well, that one's basically mental telepathy (Tolkien did actually lay down rules for how it worked, though the essay in question was unknown until a few years ago). And note that this, and the ability to sense another's power, were already cited by G55 as examples of "subtle magic"!

Now, I can quite understand AQ classing them as "spells" for convenience, and I appreciate that you're just using the word for want of a better. In fact, I believe the only reason anyone is nitpicking about it is that it looks like the word "spell" is causing a bit of a definition-creep in your own mind– as your Elf-character is, apparently habitually, doing something much closer to the traditional definition of "casting a spell":

Originally Posted by blantyr

Outside, in the wild, she is more apt to sing songs devoted to one or another of the Valar, to call protection and growth upon the land.

And let's remember, you cited this as something you feel she needs to be doing, because

Originally Posted by blantyr

Tolkien without magic isn't Tolkien. An elf without the Art isn't really an elf.

Now, again, as a practical consideration, that probably about as subtle as you could make magic use in a game of that type– but again I have to ask, how relevant is it?

EDIT:X'd with G55; terminology error.