Did Tolkien create the D&D Ranger?

This is what Old Geezer said on the RPG.net forums some years ago:

Aragorn, yep. Cuz Lord of the Rings had Rangers, and in 1975 or so Lord of the Rings was almost the only fantasy out there.

Rangers first appeared in Strategic Review #2, summer of 1975, written by 18 year old Joe Fischer. (with whom I went to high school)

And regardless of where they went, or what they actually looked like, in 1975 "Ranger" meant "Strider".

Click to expand...

Old Geezer played in Gary's group and also in Dave's group later. He answers quite a few questions like this fairly regularly.

pemerton said:

I'm not sure I agree: I think this sort of character could be done in D&D.

For instance, in 4e you would start as warlord with paladin multi-class, or vice versa; take a background and/or theme that gives you Nature and/or Perception; take the Knight Commander paragon path (to lead your troops) and then take the Legendary Sovereign Epic Destiny (to rule wisely in your twilight years).

The details would, of course, be contingent upon how play actually turns out, but that's true for any desired PC destiny.

Click to expand...

The problem I have is that the hero-king archetype is, almost without fail, someone extraordinarily "special" who has some combination of unusual lineage, divine blessing, indwelling spirit of leadership, or some other "I'm different!" flag. Aragorn happens to have all three (he's one of the few remaining Dunedain, last of the line of kings, of royal blood from several lines including the line of half-elves through Elrond's brother; he has a clear divine right to rule; and his charisma and leadership qualities are well-attested in how he handles the reunited kingdom). The kind of narrative required for this is special. You could--possibly--achieve it in 13A, what with the One Unique Thing idea and the flexible backgrounds, but I genuinely don't think you can get it in D&D without having your DM explicitly backing you up.

A Paladin/Warlord certainly comes close, but it's still not "I bear the blood of kings" and "I am the ultimate protagonist of this era," which Aragorn totally has. (As I said before, in the hands of anyone else, Aragorn *would* be the protagonist--he's not because Tolkien specifically wanted to say something about the purpose and strength of the "nobody" common folk, that they could also quite easily be the hinge upon which destiny swings.) The Pally/Lord doesn't inherently cover the origination elements, at least IMO, and those are fundamentally important. After all, (Greek) heroes are never nobodies, they always come from some god(dess) coming down and getting their sex on.

Dan_T_Head said:

I don't think Tolkein invented the Ranger. In fact, I would argue that this idea of the lonely ranger, living apart from civilization but protecting it from the dangers of the wild unknown, is actually an American invention. Certainly it makes more sense in the context of the American West.

Click to expand...

The OED does list a number of usages of the word "ranger" that are distinctly American.

Did Tolkien like westerns?

The word isn't the thing. The archetype is, whatever name it's referred to by. Gygax used a word he was familiar with, but there are a hundred other words he might have chosen.

EzekielRaiden said:

The problem I have is that the hero-king archetype is, almost without fail, someone extraordinarily "special" who has some combination of unusual lineage, divine blessing, indwelling spirit of leadership, or some other "I'm different!" flag.

<snip>

The kind of narrative required for this is special. You could--possibly--achieve it in 13A, what with the One Unique Thing idea and the flexible backgrounds, but I genuinely don't think you can get it in D&D without having your DM explicitly backing you up.

A Paladin/Warlord certainly comes close, but it's still not "I bear the blood of kings" and "I am the ultimate protagonist of this era," which Aragorn totally has.

Click to expand...

I don't dispute the necessary background elements. But I don't see why they create a problem, and I don't see anything especially distinctive to D&D.

I don't see how a player can do anything with respect to PC background, other than the most generic thing ("My PC grew up as a street urchin") without the GM's backing, in the sense of the GM respecting the player-authored backstory and incorporating it into the gameworld. D&D rulebooks generally don't have as much to say about this as some other systems (for an exception, look at the "Hermit" background in the 5e PHB), but there is nothing about D&D that gets in the way here. And even in systems with more overt backstory authorship mechanisms (eg One Unique Thing in 13th Age) the GM still has to be on board.

But if the GM is on board, there are no problems at all that I can see. D&D doesn't particularly lack the resources, either on the mechanical side or the story side, to give expression to the idea of a PC being the protagonist of his/her era. Especially not in 4e, which in fact has a whole host of PC build elements to support this (like the paragon path and epic destiny I already mentioned).

We played the Neverwinter Campaign not too long ago and one of the players took the Son of Alagondar (sic) theme/background. As the campaign progressed, when we found the Crown of Neverwinter, it was revealed that he was indeed the heir to the crown. This really worked for us because from the beginning we had been teasing him about it but when it was confirmed the characters then shifted their tone to one of respectful deference and earned loyalty.

It is one thing for someone to proclaim, "Hey I'm the heir to the throne" on day one. In that case most players simply ignore, ridicule, or harass the upstart. But when it happens as part of the continuing episodes of play, it is part of the story of the game. Things that are really happening to the characters. It is way more palatable.

It is possible to work this into a game, all the players have to be willing to follow the lead of that particular backstory element at the appropriate time.

Dan_T_Head said:

I don't think Tolkein invented the Ranger. In fact, I would argue that this idea of the lonely ranger, living apart from civilization but protecting it from the dangers of the wild unknown, is actually an American invention. Certainly it makes more sense in the context of the American West.

James Fennimore Cooper invented the archetype with his novel THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS. It's reappeared constantly since then and is the basis for about half of the superheroes in pop-culture today. Aragon fits the pattern, although his is a distinctly British take.

Click to expand...

Tolkien was reportedly a fan of the works of James Fennimore Cooper, and Hawkeye was probably a big influence on Aragorn's development as a character. However, I would suggest that Hawkeye is only one of many influences, and I don't see a lot of particular features of the Ranger class, other than those dealing with woodcraft, that would suggest a strong connection to Hawkeye. The multiple borrowings from the abilities and exploits of Aragorn, on the other hand, are hard to ignore. It seems to me that Aragorn represents a specific crystallization of disparate elements from multiple literary sources which resonated particularly well with the tone of early D&D. No matter what his predecessors looked like, I think it's Aragorn who is being represented by the 1E and earlier Ranger. I can't speak for 2E and on, emphasis on the bow as a weapon, for example, is obviously a departure from both Aragorn and the 1E Ranger, but we still find many elements of the original even in the 5E version of the class.

D'karr said:

We played the Neverwinter Campaign not too long ago and one of the players took the Son of Alagondar (sic) theme/background. As the campaign progressed, when we found the Crown of Neverwinter, it was revealed that he was indeed the heir to the crown. This really worked for us because from the beginning we had been teasing him about it but when it was confirmed the characters then shifted their tone to one of respectful deference and earned loyalty.

It is one thing for someone to proclaim, "Hey I'm the heir to the throne" on day one. In that case most players simply ignore, ridicule, or harass the upstart. But when it happens as part of the continuing episodes of play, it is part of the story of the game. Things that are really happening to the characters. It is way more palatable.

It is possible to work this into a game, all the players have to be willing to follow the lead of that particular backstory element at the appropriate time.

Click to expand...

The choice by one of my players of that same theme ended up becoming the driving force of my (soon-to-finish) Neverwinter campaign. Oddly enough, he chose it despite playing a barbarian so it's resulted in something of a Conan-esque vibe. (BTW, I think the theme is Neverwinter Noble.)

It is worth noting that the level 5 class title in Fischer's ranger is "Pathfinder", which just so happens to be one of the many aliases of Cooper's protagonist. It seems that having an alias is another trait that Hawkeye and Strider have in common, which strengthens the argument that Tolkien's ranger is a type of the character invented by Cooper. Of course this doesn't mean that the D&D Ranger isn't a type of Aragorn.

pemerton said:

I don't dispute the necessary background elements. But I don't see why they create a problem, and I don't see anything especially distinctive to D&D.

I don't see how a player can do anything with respect to PC background, other than the most generic thing ("My PC grew up as a street urchin") without the GM's backing, in the sense of the GM respecting the player-authored backstory and incorporating it into the gameworld. D&D rulebooks generally don't have as much to say about this as some other systems (for an exception, look at the "Hermit" background in the 5e PHB), but there is nothing about D&D that gets in the way here. And even in systems with more overt backstory authorship mechanisms (eg One Unique Thing in 13th Age) the GM still has to be on board.

But if the GM is on board, there are no problems at all that I can see. D&D doesn't particularly lack the resources, either on the mechanical side or the story side, to give expression to the idea of a PC being the protagonist of his/her era. Especially not in 4e, which in fact has a whole host of PC build elements to support this (like the paragon path and epic destiny I already mentioned).

Click to expand...

Well, I'm focusing more on OD&D/AD&D (whichever it was that actually *had* a ranger). To the best of my knowledge, that's a game where "background" didn't exist at all, and thus the hero-king archetype is effectively impossible.

I also think you're forcing a dichotomy when there's really a spectrum. It's not just "does the DM accept PC backgrounds, yes/no?" It's always more complex than that. Some DMs may not accept anything more than mercenary or mercenary-like backgrounds. Others want players to draft complete, long-form backstories covering much of the characters' lives prior to Session 1. Most fall in the vast space between. But the hero-king archetype is one that requires a very high degree of DM buy-in, and is difficult to keep while having an impartial referee; furthermore, unless it's planned very carefully, this has a high risk of making one PC the "star of the campaign." The hero-king is, by its nature, a narrative-warping, "I am the most important person in the world" type figure; everyone else becomes supporting characters (mentor, best friend, longtime rival, love interest) or enemies. And that's where the degree of DM buy-in seems beyond what D&D players, and the D&D game of Gygax's day, could accept. An entire class built around that concept just wouldn't work. You could--*maybe*--sell it as being akin to the "play a dragon" idea: that is, you start off as a "young dragon" or a "noble scion," and only REALLY become THE hero-king after you've earned it through adventuring...but the key part there is *becoming.* Aragorn doesn't have to do a damned thing to "become" the hero-king; he already IS the hero-king, and it shapes every aspect of his life.