D&D 5E Which parts of D&D came from Tolkien?

[prosfilaes]

I'm not sure that it does predate Tolkien? The idea that a race could have an alignment, and be an inherently evil (or good) race, seems quite unusual to me. ... Lovecraft does get close to "evil" races...but these are more "alien" than "evil".

To quote Lovecraft:

When, long ago, the gods created Earth
In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were next designed;
Yet were they too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest to Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a N---.

Going less dark places, monsters and demons are "races" of always evil things.

 

[Hriston]

Oh, so not from Weathertop or any of the other many many battles that he fought in?

Legolas and Gimli weren't even at Weathertop.

 

[Shasarak]

Legolas and Gimli weren't even at Weathertop.

Exactly, so how could Aragorn be a Warlord?

 

[Parmandur]

Exactly, so how could Aragorn be a Warlord?

Warlords fight, too, just like 4E Clerics.

 

[Maxperson]

Warlords fight, too, just like 4E Clerics.

Aragorn's ability to inspire is racial, not from any learned ability or class. Dunedain/Numenoreans of the royal line had many gifts from the Elven and Maia blood in their veins.

 

[Parmandur]

Aragorn's ability to inspire is racial, not from any learned ability or class. Dunedain/Numenoreans of the royal line had many gifts from the Elven and Maia blood in their veins.

Doesn't have much bearing on what the 4E designers were thinking about with the Warlord, though.

 

[Lehrbuch]

OD&D was clear that the system was Law/Chaos. This was a different trope than what was used in Tolkien, and was borrowed from Anderson/Moorcock (you also see it, later, in Zelazny).

I agree Law vs Chaos is from Moorcock et al. I was thinking about the inspiration for the Good-Evil axis, which as you say was a later addition. While the second axis was purportedly introduced by Gygax due to a perceived confusion about the earlier Law-Chaos axis (and there seems no reason not to take that story at face value), that doesn't preclude the form of the second axis being inspired by something.

Finally, Tolkien shouldn't take the "credit" (really, blame) for either a good/evil dichotomy, or racial essentialism, both of which far, far, far pre-date him.

True.

Nonetheless, there still seems something about Tolkien's Middle Earth that feels very strongly like the D&D Good-Evil alignment axis. Especially when you consider how Middle Earth's races/species interact and the creation mythologies. Indeed Middle Earth sometimes seems to have a stronger sense of alignment than an actual D&D property like, for example, Dragon Lance.

 

[Maxperson]

Doesn't have much bearing on what the 4E designers were thinking about with the Warlord, though.

What proof do you have about what they were thinking when they made a warlord? It seems to me that modeling a racial ability as a class is a bit of a stretch. Especially when there are many inspirational leaders in history, writing and movies. Trying claim that the designers were thinking about Aragorn when they made warlords seems a bit arrogant to me.

 

[Lehrbuch]

Especially when there are many inspirational leaders in history, writing and movies...

Historical (and fictional) "inspirational military leaders" are hardly anything like a D&D 4E Warlord though.

Also, the idea that a warlord is an "inspirational leader" is very much a D&D invention anyway. Outside of D&D, the connotation of "warlord" is not "inspiring leader" it is more (depending on the scale of their influence) either something like (at small scale) "a particularly powerful/bloodthirsty/successful bandit-leader" or (at large scale) something like "military dictator".

 

[Shasarak]

What proof do you have about what they were thinking when they made a warlord? It seems to me that modeling a racial ability as a class is a bit of a stretch. Especially when there are many inspirational leaders in history, writing and movies. Trying claim that the designers were thinking about Aragorn when they made warlords seems a bit arrogant to me.

The thing that annoys me is the thought that if your character does something "inspiring" then they must be a Warlord. Samwise Gamgee does something inspiring so must be a Warlord. Gandalf does something inspiring so must be a Warlord.

Want your character to say something inspiring? Are you playing a Warlord? So, no you can not.