Was Gandalf Just A 5th Level Magic User?

This article from Dragon Magazine, back in 1977, is likely very familiar to many of you (feel free to yawn - this item isn't for you!) However, there are many newer fans of D&D who don't even remember Dragon Magazine, let alone issues from nearly 40 years ago. In the article, Bill Seligman posits that Gandalf was merely a 5th level magic-user. Given Cubicle 7's recent announcement about an official Middle Earth setting for D&D, it seems like a nostalgia piece worth revisiting.

Some folks I hear discussing this topic these days take the position that Gandalf is actually a paladin. Certainly "wizards" in Tolkien's works aren't the same magic-missile-throwing folks as in regular D&D; in fact there are only five wizards in the whole of Middle Earth - and at least one of them (the 7th Doctor) is very clearly a druid.

What do you think? Is Gandalf a 5th level magic-user? What about in 5th Edition, given the upcoming Middle Earth release? I'm sure Cubicle 7 will tells for certain this summer, but until then...

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If you use 3.5e maybe E6 is a good approximation of the power curve. Gandalf is epic with 6 levels of wizard.

With DnD 5e i guess you can combine several classes none of which surpass 5th level. Fighter does not fit that well because he does not use armor. But with some strength and universal proficiency bonus it is unnecessary.
So my combination would encompass 5 levels of evoker. Maybe magic adept for thaumaturgy. Maybe a level or two of druid, maybe a bit of lore bard.
The great thing about 5e: Though he can't cast higher level spells than 3rd he is a fabulous fighter, and he can cast a hell of a lot of wizard spells of 3rd and lower levels.

 

[Maxperson]

First of all, he slew a Balrog, not a Balor. And he died doing it.

So did the Balor. The Balor is the D&D version of the Balrog. Gygax patterned it after the Balrog and gave it the power that it has. That means that D&D Gandalf killed a D&D Balor one on one.

Secondly, the 1e Type 6 demon (of which, Balor, was a named individual) that was so obviously inspired by the Tolkien Balrog was an 8+8 HD monster. It needs relatively little boosting on account of race for a 5th or 6th level wizard to match an 8HD outsider. For example, taking Gandalf to be closest to a 1e Agathion would give Gandalf 7+7 HD plus the spellcasting ability, plus clerical ability, plus psionics. He's very much a match for the Type 6 demon entry in the 1e MM with those sort of stats. If anything, Gandalf as an Agathion with 6th level M-U ability might be over powered.

Ahh, so you're admitting that he is not a level 5 wizard, but something much more powerful. In any case, in Middle Earth he was instructed to highly limit his use of his magical powers, so he is more powerful than 6th level as a wizard, and simply didn't show it. When you limit yourself to beneath your potential, what you do show cannot be the most you can do.

The stat blocks I've provided account for pretty much everything Gandalf does on screen and is implied to do off screen (such as in the fight with the Balrog, or the fight against the Ringwraiths on Weathertop). And making Gandalf a relatively low level character explains a lot of things that would otherwise be difficult to explain, such as the fact that the party is in fact threatened at least some by 1 HD orcs.

What Gandalf did is irrelevant. What he did was all done with him intentionally highly limiting himself. That means that since what he showed was about 6th level, he must be much higher than that in reality, but simply did not use his power to the fullest.

And I've also explained the upper end of the power scale here pretty well. With Manwe and Varda as Solars, the rest of the Valar as something like Planatars, Gandalf as an Agathion with 6 extra caster levels fits about right. Sauron is a of the first rank of the Maiar, originally Morgoth's lieutenant, so Gandalf is not so powerful that Sauron is directly threatened even if Gandalf were uncloaked. But conversely, Sauron is not so powerful that his moving mere orcs about makes no sense compared to his personal power, as armies of mooks are quickly annihilated in high level D&D in the way sending mooks against the Justice League is pointless. Sauron might be in 1e terms the equivalent of a fiend lord. Remember, Gothmog - a balrog of largest size - was Sauron's peer. Sauron might be adequately represented in 3e terms something like an 11th level were-wolf ghost sorcerer with the half-fiend templates. In 1e terms, you'd probably stat him up like a fiend lord (something comparable to the 1e Amon stat block would work well).

Sauron was much weaker originally. His increased power that we see in the movies comes from the ring and what it did to him.

Based on what he's shown to do, Gandalf is in no fashion nearly as high of level as characters like Fingolfin, Feanor, or Luthien . Those characters were sufficiently high level that taking on Sauron one on one wasn't out of the question. By making Gandalf merely a 6th level Wizard, you can have Fingolfin or Luthien as say an 18th level character rather than something near 30th level. And you still have room above their heads for the Valar without getting ridiculous.

I agree. Fingolfin and Feanor would be majorly epic level PCs. Luthien was only half-maiar and she didn't have to limit herself. Gandalf did have to limit himself. Also, the Valar are waaaaay above Solars in power. Solars could not have created the universe like the Valar did. Nor could a Solar create an entire race like dwarves. The Valar ARE ridiculous and would be the equivalent to lesser to greater gods depending on which one you are talking about, with Eru being Ao in Toril.

 

[Maxperson]

Yeah, I can buy that he isn't really all that powerful of a wizard in terms of D&D. But ,now please forgive me as I only have knowledge from the movies, the Istari are supposed to be high angels right? So does that mean in his "true" form can he pull off Exalted level shiz? From what I hear about The Silmarillion it had some pretty high magic stuff going on. Including some dragon that used mountains as hand rests.

No, it means in his current form he could pull off exalted level shiz. All the Istari did was take the form of a man. T hey took none of the rest of the limitations, so they still had all of their powers.

 

[Pauper]

The point of the article is to illuminate that Gandalf is considered powerful based on reputation, when the things he actually does in the story aren't terribly powerful by D&D's method of measurement, save for a few exceptions where the abilities used can be attributed to Gandalf's magic items rather than his innate abilities. Gandalf's demonstrated abilities become the baseline we use to establish the power level of entities in Middle Earth. For those who claim that Gandalf goes through the whole epic deliberately using underpowered abilities, I have to ask, isn't there any situation where he'd be inclined to let loose if he could? When his own life is in danger when fighting the balrog? When helping to fight the assault on the gates of Minas Tirith? When his own safety or the safety of those he cares about are on the line, don't you have to assume he's using the best abilities he can?

From there, I'm more inclined to agree with those who say 'a balrog can't be that powerful, since it can barely defeat a 5th level magic-user while dying itself'. Likewise, neither Frodo nor Bilbo have any experience before setting out on their own adventures. Both hobbits rely heavily on the magic sword Sting for their combat prowess, such as it is, rather than any inherent fighting skill.

So basically, JRR Tolkien was a Monty Haul DM.

 

[Celebrim]

Some Orcs?

I take no notice of anything from those movies. I do however agree that 5e's bounded accuracy mechanic and generally lower power level in higher level spellcaster's allows you to up the character levels of the party members while still capturing the zeitgeist of the books. In 5e, Gandalf is perhaps 9th to 11th level. I agree with those that treat him under 5e as a variant Bard, since the Bard's origin in the Kalevala is very much also to be counted as source material for the Tolkien universe. However, in the books (as opposed to the movies), Gandalf is very much more 'wizardly' than 'druidic', as opposed to his cousin Radaghast who seems more druidic than wizardly. Gandalf, as a vassal of Varda and with special gifting for wise words and council, make I think a good Lore Bard in 5e. Obviously, unlike Bombadil, who is much more overtly bardic in his magic and acts very much like a character in the Kalevala, Gandalf doesn't sing to cast his spells but rather uses 'words of power', but that's just the drapes. Mechanically it's a pretty good fit overall, and you could probably tweak the build with a bit of multi-classing.

Fingolfin managed to strike Morgoth seven times before getting crushed by Grond. He was clearly a 20th level EK using action surge. He missed with his 8th attack.

I don't see how that necessarily follows. The text implies that the fight was very lengthy, and that Fingolfin was winning by using a 'fight defensively' strategy to avoid Morgoth's blows and that the fight went on for perhaps hours. Morgoth starts to get the better of it, smashing Fingolfin with Grond three times but is unable to finish him. Finally, the fight is decided when Fingolfin fumbles and fails a reflex save, falling backwards into one of the many pits torn into the earth by Grond's falling. Seeing that his foe is about finished, Morgoth delivers the killing attack with his foot, snapping Fingolfin's neck. However, this draws an attack of opportunity which Fingolfin uses to deliver one final critical hit to Morgoth's heel, permanently maiming Morgoth (who by this point has given up is spirit form in favor of a stronger permanent physical body the better to manipulate the physical world).

I have Gandalf the Grey as a LG Lore Bard 13/ Paladin 2. He levels up as Gandalf the White to 18th level, tacking on 2 more of Bard and 1 more of Paladin.

Aragorn is a NG Spell-less Hunter Ranger 7/ Champion fighter 3 when we first meet him. Boromir is a LN [shield master feat] champion fighter 9. Gimli is also a Champion fighter 7. Legolas is a Rogue 2 [cunning action, expertise in perception and acrobatics], Spell less hunter ranger 5.

All of that is relatively coherent. A rough calculation of Boromir's level could be made by how many orcs he could reasonably be expected to slay. In 1e, he's probably less than 9th level, but not less than 6th. In 5e he could well be higher level, reflecting the space opened up by making Wizards relatively less powerful and the bounded accuracy mechanic.

The Hobbits are all 1st level (rapidly shooting up to 3rd level) Rogue [Thieves]. Merry and Pippin later both MC as Fighters.

I don't feel any of the Hobbits with the exception of Bilbo, who was hired as a 'burglar' and appeared to try to fit into this role, make for good thieves. In 1e terms, Merry and Pippin make better 0th level Cavalier squires than thieves - they certainly have the social background for the class. In 3e terms, they all appear to have NPC classes initially with a non-adventurous background, and all multiclass into fighter or perhaps ranger (or even possibly Bard). They are not particularly known for their stealth, and to the extent that they are good at it, it could easily be explained as a combination of racial ability and magic items (those cloaks of elvenkind). Gollum however is best represented as a Rogue, and probably a quite high level one.

The Balrog of Moria is an up CR'd Balor [huge size]. As a named demon lord (and only 7 in existence), they are expressly more powerful than DnD 'common' Balors.

I believe you have this reversed. In D&D, the original flavor text for the Type 6 demon suggested only a few existed. In Tolkien lore, there appear to have been dozens of Balors at one point - part of the ainur vassal host of Morgoth, probably snared from the fire loving host of Aule. The balrog of moria is presumably of the common variety, as opposed to a balor lord like Gothmog. The balrogs of Tolkien are expressly less potent than the balor of D&D in any of their recent incarnations, and while fantastically more powerful than the party, there is no reason to suppose that the balrog of Moria is a particularly exceptional one of its kind other than having survived the sacking of Thangorodrim, presumably by hiding deep within the earth.

Saurons power is somewhere between fallen Planetar and Deity. CR 30+ Tiamat+ levels of power. And thats his weakened form without the Ring.

I think that's reasonably coherent, except for your last statement. It's clear from the text that without the ring, he's unable to take the CR 30+ form he'd like to take, and is forced to a more ghostly form. This explains in part why Sauron is so cowardly and is mainly able to threaten Middle Earth through his vassals at this point. Tiamat doesn't need an orc army to destroy a city. She just can. Sauron's physical powers are far more limited at this point in Middle Earth's history. I think it would be sufficient to have Sauron in the low 20's to have him capable of daunting pretty much anyone on Middle Earth at the time, with the possible exception of Glorfindel who is probably the highest level character in middle earth other than Sauron. Obviously, with the ring, Sauron recovers his full CR 30+ powers and returns to the potency he had during the first age as Morgoth's chief lieutenant. In 3e or early terms, I think you need only have about 2/3rds that power level. A party of 15th level characters is fully capable of taking on most or all of the fiend lords in 1e, for example.

 

[collin]

Well, a Balor is a Balrog is much the same as saying a Halfling is a Hobbit or a Treant is an Ent. TSR changing the names because they got some nasty letters from some lawyers doesn't really factor in.

And yep, of course the stats changed throughout D&D editions. Which is why you'd need to also change Gandalf's stats through editions.

Very good. I was going to add something along these same lines. After TSR started getting nasty letters from the Tolkien estate, Gygax et al. tried to distance themselves from LotR and The Hobbit as much as possible. I seem to recall an interview with Gygax around this same time (early-to-mid 1980's maybe?) where he tried to distance DnD from the Tolkien mythos by saying something similar to what the author of this article said: that in DnD, Gandalf would only be an x-level wizard and therefore the similarities between DnD and LotR was very minimal.

 

[Celebrim]

So did the Balor. The Balor is the D&D version of the Balrog. Gygax patterned it after the Balrog and gave it the power that it has. That means that D&D Gandalf killed a D&D Balor one on one.

Again, Gygax's Balrog only has 8+8 HD. If we are going by the strict D&D interpretation, Gandalf only needs to have a Staff of the Magi to run the scene - Gandalf does a retributive strike, they both die, the rest is color. Hence, presumably Gandalf need only be a 5th level wizard.

Ahh, so you're admitting that he is not a level 5 wizard, but something much more powerful.

No, not quite. I suggest he's more powerful than a 5th level wizard, but still a 5th level wizard (I prefer 6th, giving him multiple 3rd level spell slots, which I believe can be sustained from the text). I believe that it is somewhat wrong to say that Gandalf is only a 5th level wizard, as he is clearly not of mere mortal race. But, in terms of his arcane abilities, I concur with the original essay that the evidence of the text suggests he can cast no more than 3rd level spells in D&D terms. Thus, as the original essayist points out, he's better treated as a 5th level wizard (or in my opinion a 6th level wizard) than anything of higher level. A 13th level wizard for example, has abilities that vastly exceed anything Gandalf appears capable of, and such a high level would not explain why Gandalf has some of the difficulties he has or why he tries to resolve them how he does.

The stats I suggest for Gandalf means that he is a 6th level wizard, but that he has some other abilities as well. Those other abilities however, while broad, are not significantly beyond what we'd expect of a 6th level character. For example, if we assume Gandalf is a powerful Agathion with the ability to cast 3rd level arcane spells, we have a character with just 7HD with the powers of roughly a 7th level psionic fighter, 7th level cleric, and 6th level wizard combined. That means Gandalf is more than just a 5th level wizard, but does not imply that in any fashion Gandalf is a high level wizard or that he could use higher level spells but is just choosing not to.

In any case, in Middle Earth he was instructed to highly limit his use of his magical powers, so he is more powerful than 6th level as a wizard, and simply didn't show it.

That doesn't follow either. Most of the time Gandalf acts like he's merely a 1st level wizard. When Gandalf occasionally does 'real magic', it's something akin to fireball or lightning bolt. I agree that the text is easiest to explain if Gandalf is more powerful than a human 6th level wizard, but I don't agree that makes Gandalf more than about a 6th level wizard. His other abilities are best explained as either racial abilities, or of the powers of the minor artifact (Narya) that he carries, which I assume are roughly equivalent to a Ring of Elemental Command (Fire) with a couple of bonus abilities and drawbacks. This would mean that Gandalf's highest level spell is a 'Flamestrike', which is again, very much in line with everything we either see Gandalf doing or Gandalf is implied to be able to do off camera.

What Gandalf did is irrelevant. What he did was all done with him intentionally highly limiting himself. That means that since what he showed was about 6th level, he must be much higher than that in reality, but simply did not use his power to the fullest.

Again, that doesn't follow. Gandalf highly limiting himself in the text is Gandalf not showing off that he's actually a 6th level wizard capable of doing things like fireball. Gandalf treats fireball and lightning bolt as things he needs to conceal. Gandalf particularly treats his possession of Narya as something he needs to conceal, and its from Narya that we know he gets most of his command over fire. Most people think of Gandalf as a simple travelling loremaster or even a vagrant. That he's more than a 1st level wizard with a few simple tricks and great fireworks is something he conceals the majority of the time. The Gandalf we see blasting the wolves with fire is Gandalf the Grey uncloaked. There is no evidence in the text that Gandalf can cast 5th or 6th level spells even if he needed to or wanted to, and in particular Saruman has renounced his vows to conceal his power and yet does not appear to be more than a 6th or 7th level wizard. So there is no reason to expect that Gandalf is actually 15th level or anything, but pretending to be 6th level. The text is much more easily explained if Gandalf is 6th level but pretends to be 1st level, and also conceals his racial heritage as an Ainur and his possession of one of the rings of power.

Sauron was much weaker originally. His increased power that we see in the movies comes from the ring and what it did to him.

The movies again...

Sauron Lord of Werewolves was originally Morgoth's chief lieutenant. He was a peer to and senior in rank to Gothmog lord of Balrogs and to Ancalagon the Black, a flame breathing dragon of the largest possible size. Sauron's ring of power that he later forged does greatly increase his CR, but he's already without it more dangerous presumably than a 10HD red dragon. In 1e terms, he's roughly comparable to a Duke of Hell or a Demon Lord. Morgoth's power is presumably comparable to a Lord of Hell or a Demon Prince (Asmodeus, Grazzt, Demogorgon).

I agree. Fingolfin and Feanor would be majorly epic level PCs.

Epic level is variously defined by the different editions. In 1e, anything above name level (9th) could reasonably be described as epic level. Luthein is a high-level bard in 1e terms, probably equivalent to about 17th level. In 3e she is a high level bard with the half-celestial template, possibly 20th level.

Also, the Valar are waaaaay above Solars in power. Solars could not have created the universe like the Valar did.

The Valar did not create the universe. Only Illuvatar was capable of creating the universe. The Valar were made responsible for shaping the universe from the raw material Illuvatar provided, which the text makes clear was an act of labor for them. They simply could not will it into being and presumably spent thousands of years on the task. This is within the power of a Solar.

Nor could a Solar create an entire race like dwarves.

Nor could the Valar for crying out loud! Again, the creation of the dwarves specifically required the intervention of Illuvatar. Aule only shaped them out of stone and was playing with them like dolls using something akin to Animate Object, when Illuvatar caught him. Aule acted very much like a guilty child and confessed that he'd been vain gloriously pretending to be able to create life, something that was well beyond his station and ability. Read the text for crying out loud.

There is just no reason to inflate numbers and stats just for the sake of having big numbers. You only need such numbers as would explain the story. Inflating something up for the sake of shock and awe just requires you to inflate everything else up as well, which creates more problems than it solves. That's the theme of the original essay.

 

[delericho]

Didn't we have this conversation fairly recently?

My own take, then and now, is that Gandalf should be somewhere in the top end of the level scale (probably 17th at the start of LotR, at least in 5e terms; I would go for 13th in 3e or 21st in 4e), but the existing classes actually do a fairly poor job of reflecting that - either the classes make him way too powerful or he's left at a level where he has no chance against the Balrog.

However, my real answer is that I'd prefer the designers of a game to look at the sorts of things the game is trying to model (so probably Conan, Elric, Lankhmar, and LotR for D&D), assign levels to the key characters and creatures, and then build the game accordingly.

 

[delericho]

So, what if C7 ends up doing D&D better than WotC?

It's not really an issue - there's considerably more to D&D than just Tolkien, and indeed Gygax notes in the 1st Ed DMG that Conan, Elric, and Lankhmar were much more significant influences. So I'd fully expect the C7 LotR game to do a better job of modelling Tolkien but I'd equally expect it not to be D&D as we know it.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Gandalf went toe to toe with a Balrog got to think that shows he was a bit more than 5th level