Aragorn was the ranger not Legolas

[Saihung23]

---

Vindictives wrote:
Ok, you calling me a noob when your asking a noob question at
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=39&message.id=37705.

FYI- I said stop whining to the person who is getting annoyed by ppl naming their toons legolas, its just a name. Get over it.

Dahok - Everfrost - Heroe's Fate.

Message Edited by Vindictives on 09-08-2006 12:13 PM

---

I am going to give you props here...pardon me all for derailing this thread to do this....but as you can see this poster has obviously just brought something unique into this thread that he deserves to be pointed out.

You sir have brought what no one else managed to bring your negativity into here...while sure, someone complained about the naming...it didnt degenerate into a big argument...but you saw the glaring lack of flame worthy posts and brought yours....here...let me quote it below so everyone can see how much you have contributed and so succintly...

"Stop whining"

WOW!!  Its amazing....two words that say so much...and can be so infuriating to some and come off as just ignorant to others.

/applaud

Bravo! Wonderful! Your skills are admirable.

and yet....you didnt leave the thread after that post...which is what most people would do if they were annoyed by a subject...you kept watching for a reply to your two word masterpiece....

You waited and responded to another poster with this gem

 

---

Vindictives wrote:
Ok, you calling me a noob when your asking a noob question at
http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=39&message.id=37705.

FYI- I said stop whining to the person who is getting annoyed by ppl naming their toons legolas, its just a name. Get over it.

Dahok - Everfrost - Heroe's Fate.

Message Edited by Vindictives on 09-08-2006 12:13 PM

---

Wow....you should get an award....let me go see if I can find one worthy of you.

[xandez]

---

TaleraRis wrote:

Because the EQ world in general is very very very very heavily based off Dungeons and Dragons. It especially mirrors 3.5 now as the ranger class has two paths: two-hand fighting and archery, whereby they can specialize using certain feats and gain certain bonuses. This sort of duality is very similar to the assassin/ranger dichotomy, without there being a good or evil about it.

---

In DDO the rangers gained inherent two weapon fighting feats and bow feats, so even they kinda utilized the 3.5 rules, the ranger class was more or less like the ranger here in eq2

However, the 2 handed fighting option was available too. Its silly that its not available here (in any form that is, i'd be happy if we were restricted to use 2h swords for example etc...)

Hmm or did you mean two weapon fighting (dual wielding) by two-hand fighting?

++Xan

[TaleraRis]

Yeah, dual-wield. I meant two-weapon fighting-focused feats.

[xandez]

Heh yes, i kinda realized that when i was about to press submit

++Xan

[skytzophren]

Gnomes pwn all!

 

[TimidMou]

One thing that allowing all races to play all classes with barely any difference is that race becomes cosmetic, and its one of the trade offs this game has made. In LotR world, you'd expect any elf to be able to use a bow because thats their culture and similarly any dwarf to be good at using an axe etc. In some worlds like erm TSR you might write a whole story about an exception to the rules like a certain dark elf who decided he'd go his own way and be different...

EQ2 you see essentially an even split among the class types amongst races and there is no story to be told, you see an ogre wizard, that guy like the graphic for an ogre and likes casting spells, end of story.

[Teksun]

That's one of the things I miss from EQ. Only certain races could be certain classes.... oh well...

[Rinio]

Play Vanguard with me! welcome back to class/race combos that make sense! /FLEE!

 

Arwen still pwnz Legolas in the face, with a sodering Iron no less

Message Edited by RinionX on 09-11-2006 09:25 AM

[xandez]

hmm pwns to the face... lol

++Xan

Message Edited by xandez on 09-11-2006 05:31 PM

[Jaqua_Krynn]

Wow I posted this what? a week ago? and people are still arguing over the topic.. It was designed to be a joke.. sorry if the humor fell on deaf ears.. Nice to be flamed tho it was great! Now I will go get out my frosted flakes wear my starwars underoos and pop in the extended version of return of the king!

 

:smileyvery-happy:

[TaleraRis]

---

RinionX wrote:

Play Vanguard with me! welcome back to class/race combos that make sense! /FLEE!

Arwen still pwnz Legolas in the face, with a sodering Iron no less

Message Edited by RinionX on 09-11-2006 09:25 AM

---

The puffed up version in the movies? Arwen was like two lines in the novels. Eowyn got more airtime. Now there's a tough chick, not the Aragorn groupie they turned her into, ugh.

[xandez]

Yep, there was some parts in the movie i didnt like so much. Like how they made Eowyn look.But, good movies thou, in general! ++Xan

[Rinio]

---

TaleraRis wrote:

---

RinionX wrote:

Play Vanguard with me! welcome back to class/race combos that make sense! /FLEE!

 

Arwen still pwnz Legolas in the face, with a sodering Iron no less

Message Edited by RinionX on 09-11-2006 09:25 AM

---

The puffed up version in the movies? Arwen was like two lines in the novels. Eowyn got more airtime. Now there's a tough chick, not the Aragorn groupie they turned her into, ugh.

---

I know i read the book she also was not in the first book while she was in the movie, not my point! she still ownz them =P

[Teksun]

The movies were great. You just have to go in forgetting everything you know about the books Does anyone recognize these names?Arrowroot son of Arrowshirt (also known as Stomper the Stranger)FritoMoxiePepsiGoodgulfSpamBromosilLegola mGimlet

[Rinio]

---

Teksun wrote:
The movies were great. You just have to go in forgetting everything you know about the books

Does anyone recognize these names?

Arrowroot son of Arrowshirt (also known as Stomper the Stranger)
Frito
Moxie
Pepsi
Goodgulf
Spam
Bromosil
Legolam
Gimlet

---

they all look like charicter names from lotr ith extra letters and rearanged if thats what you mean. if not then no idea

[TaleraRis]

Teehee, Bored of the Rings

[Rinio]

bored of the rings? ok lets derail and change subjects...uh.. umm *draws a blank*

so uh...just how long is a frogloks tounge? /wink

[TaleraRis]

It's a book parodying Lord of the Rings.

[Prandtl]

Pity stayed his hand as he starred down at the groveling figure at his feet

"Pity I ran out of bullets" thought [Removed for Content] Baggins

[Skean]

---

Prandtl wrote:

Pity stayed his hand as he starred down at the groveling figure at his feet

"Pity I ran out of bullets" thought [Removed for Content] Baggins

---

The last name's Bu--er, not Baggins, in Bored of the Rings. 

(trying to avoid unwarranted invocation of the badword filter here)

 

[Teksun]

Derail an Aragorn/Legolas thread??? That happened at the first post National Lampoon wrote bored of the rings. GREAT book that you can read in about an hour, LOL.ohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodo hgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodo hgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodohgodo hgodohgodohgodIt's always like that when the rush hit's you...

[Carna]

Tolkein was using the word "Ranger" in the same manner as one might use the word "Warrior"... he used it as a description of a bunch of people engaged in a particular vocation. One wouldn't say that one couldn't apply the word "Warrior" to person X simply because Tolkein applied it to a specific person.

Tolkein didn't invent the word Ranger, nor is it merely a class in RPGs.

There is no doubt that at various points Legolas would have occupied himself as a ranger in the same manner as there is no doubt that at various points Aragorn would have occupied himself as a warrior.... there really is no controversy here.

[Vifarc]

---

Carnagh wrote:

Tolkein was using the word "Ranger" in the same manner as one might use the word "Warrior"... he used it as a description of a bunch of people engaged in a particular vocation. One wouldn't say that one couldn't apply the word "Warrior" to person X simply because Tolkein applied it to a specific person.Tolkein didn't invent the word Ranger, nor is it merely a class in RPGs.There is no doubt that at various points Legolas would have occupied himself as a ranger in the same manner as there is no doubt that at various points Aragorn would have occupied himself as a warrior.... there really is no controversy here.

---

You're right. A Ranger can fight, and a Warrior can sometimes track. But not with the same efficiency.Historically the rangers are fighters trained to go through ennemy lines (see the English in Africa 1942). So not all fighters are rangers.

[Jay]

/grinds teeth

Why must people split hairs on this? WHY is it such a big deal?? Carnagh is right on the mark, IMO; they're just terms that can have a wide variety of application.

[Carna]

---

Vifarc wrote:

---

Carnagh wrote:

Tolkein was using the word "Ranger" in the same manner as one might use the word "Warrior"... he used it as a description of a bunch of people engaged in a particular vocation. One wouldn't say that one couldn't apply the word "Warrior" to person X simply because Tolkein applied it to a specific person.Tolkein didn't invent the word Ranger, nor is it merely a class in RPGs.There is no doubt that at various points Legolas would have occupied himself as a ranger in the same manner as there is no doubt that at various points Aragorn would have occupied himself as a warrior.... there really is no controversy here.

---

You're right. A Ranger can fight, and a Warrior can sometimes track. But not with the same efficiency.
Historically the rangers are fighters trained to go through ennemy lines (see the English in Africa 1942). So not all fighters are rangers.

---

Actually historically rangers were charged with monitoring and defending marchland, moorland, woodland and heath. I'm an Englishman and know my own country's history. Tolkein was an Englishman and I would assert was drawing upon the same historical context when he used the term "ranger". It certainly fits the role of those people he ascribed the term to in his fictions.

Marches are a big deal through much of European history. It's the borderland between kingdoms, often a long way from more central and civilised homelands. Policing, monitoring and controlling the marches was often difficult but understandably important.... It's in such marches that we find Tolkein framing the rangers in Lord of The Rings. He framed them in this setting because, he didn't invent the term, concept or word. He used the terms because rangers are the people you have warding marches.... they're not a class. It's a role.

The term predates the English in Africa in 1942 by quite a large margin and has nothing to do with enemy lines in origin. The closest modern use that parallels it's origin is probably park ranger. The Texas Ranger historically also isn't necessarily a bad example either.

In EQ2 (to at least try and relate this topic to the game) I always fealt that the Brigand should have been the evil counterpart to the Ranger as both would have more closely been occupying the same environments (note, more closely, not exactly). If the Ranger is warding the wilds from evildoers, the Brigand actually is the evildoer preying upon people in the wilds... I feel an oportunity was missed here.

Specifically in relevance to this thread. The reason why Elves are often so readily identified with Rangers is because certainly by the closing of the Third Age in LoTR the picture is painted whereby a sizable portion of Elves are indeed ranging about (many effectiely saying goodbye to Middle Earth). We know from Tolkein's material that his Elves were engaged in warding and watching large regions for the greater powers. There's a very ready connection with how a lot of Elves are portrayed to live and the activity of a ranger. Certainly much of what Legolas was engaged in was exactly that. The result of this is unless defined in a clear role the modern fantasy gamer or reader is likely to slap "Ranger" on most any Elf bumbling about the woods unless clearly labeled "not Ranger"... That includes Legolas.

It has to be said however, that for Aragorn being a ranger wasn't something he happened to be engaged in on occasion it's noted to be his actual vocation.

Personally I think it sells the original vision of Tolkeins Elves short. The chap was deeply religious, a peer with CS Lewis and of the vein of Ian McDonald who predated them both as a Christian fantasist; and I have the hunch he was seeking to portay something more angelic, or certainly people in a state of grace "pre-fall".... which of course has nothing to do with Rangers

[Gailstryd]

^^^^^^^^^

 

<-----loves when british do that.