D&D 5E Strangely enough, theres very little info about classes in 5e....

[fjw70]

I saw them as Dúnedain. I thought they telegraphed that pretty transparently, too. They were not men of the wood, per se; but rather wardens of human civilization embedded so deep in the farthest forest marches for so many generations that they pick up secrets of the fey and forest. Having full access to arms and armor reinforces this, IMHO.

I saw them a woodsmen since I was unaware of LotR when I played 1e.

 

[fjw70]

???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dúnedain

Surely you mean Rangers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranger_(Middle-earth)

That seems right, but I wouldn't call those guys "Nature Knights" any day of the week. Or knights of any kind. Warriors, sure.

I think by the time of the LotR the rangers of the north were the last of the Dunedain so the terms were used interchangeably, but I am far from a Tolkien scholar.

 

[Halivar]

I saw them a woodsmen since I was unaware of LotR when I played 1e.

You were not incorrect! But the Fighter+ nature of the class indicates that there is far more to them than just that, though.

I think by the time of the LotR the rangers of the north were the last of the Dunedain so the terms were used interchangeably, but I am far from a Tolkien scholar.

You are correct. When I said Dúnedain, I was referring to the Rangers of the North.

 

[pemerton]

AD&D rangers aren't a perfect match for LotR rangers (either of the North, or of Ithilien), however.

For instance, the only time we encounter more than one ranger we encounter them in groups of more than three (eg the rangers led by Halbarad and the sons of Elrond to join Aragorn; the rangers fighting alongside Faramir), whereas AD&D had a rule that no more than 3 rangers could work together at any one time.

 

[variant]

Bards = Colleges
Barbarians = Totems(?)
Clerics = Domains
Druids = Circles
Fighters = Fighting Styles (?)
Monks = Monastic Traditions
Paladins = Oaths
Rangers = Favored Enemies
Rogue = Schemes (?)
Sorcerer = Bloodlines
Warlock = Pacts
Wizards = Schools

Weren't they changing the Ranger subclass categorization?

 

[Nikosandros]

AD&D rangers aren't a perfect match for LotR rangers (either of the North, or of Ithilien), however.

For instance, the only time we encounter more than one ranger we encounter them in groups of more than three (eg the rangers led by Halbarad and the sons of Elrond to join Aragorn; the rangers fighting alongside Faramir), whereas AD&D had a rule that no more than 3 rangers could work together at any one time.

True, there are several differences. I don't recall Aragorn ever casting magic missile, for example.

On the other hand, among all the ranger versions, the 1e one is clearly the most inspired by LotR. Heavy armor, damage bonus against the 'giant class' (basically evil bipeds), access to scrying devices (the Palantir...).

 

[pemerton]

I don't recall Aragorn ever casting magic missile, for example.

I've always assumed that the MU spells are inspired by Denethor's attacks upon Faramir for being a wizard's apprentice. Translated into D&D it does tend to bring out the incongruity between the two approaches to magic and its place in the world.

among all the ranger versions, the 1e one is clearly the most inspired by LotR. Heavy armor, damage bonus against the 'giant class' (basically evil bipeds), access to scrying devices (the Palantir...).

No disagreement there. Though if you want to play Aragorn a paladin is another way of going - the hands of the king are the hands of a healer, Anduril is a holy sword, etc. He's a complex intersection of archetypes.

In AD&D perhaps the best way to model Aragorn would actually be a half-elf cleric/ranger.

 

[Nikosandros]

I've always assumed that the MU spells are inspired by Denethor's attacks upon Faramir for being a wizard's apprentice. Translated into D&D it does tend to bring out the incongruity between the two approaches to magic and its place in the world.

Interesting take. I interpret that passage in LotR as meaning that Denethor accuses his son of following too much the advice of Gandalf and thus being disloyal to his father. I had never thought that there might be an implication that Gandalf might have been training Faramir. It's true though, that Faramir does seem to have some kind of preternatural powers of discernment.

No disagreement there. Though if you want to play Aragorn a paladin is another way of going - the hands of the king are the hands of a healer, Anduril is a holy sword, etc. He's a complex intersection of archetypes.

In AD&D perhaps the best way to model Aragorn would actually be a half-elf cleric/ranger.

Paladin could also work (pre Unearthed Arcana, of course). Why the cleric multi-class? Healing and perhaps the 'turning' of the Nine on Weathertop?

 

[pemerton]

Interesting take. I interpret that passage in LotR as meaning that Denethor accuses his son of following too much the advice of Gandalf and thus being disloyal to his father. I had never thought that there might be an implication that Gandalf might have been training Faramir. It's true though, that Faramir does seem to have some kind of preternatural powers of discernment.

I agree with your interpretation of the passage, but I think the class designer back in the day may have been taking it more literally. And there is perhaps some suggestion that Faramir has his head too much in books and scrolls, and we all know where that leads you to in D&D . . .

Why the cleric multi-class? Healing and perhaps the 'turning' of the Nine on Weathertop?

Yes. It's to try and get some of those paladin-esque powers while also keeping the ranger chassis.

I'll admit half-elf is a bit of a stretch, depending how literal the "half" has to be!