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...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

The Dwarves may hate sharing, but to the point of risking extinction? Even when the Fellowship includes one of their own? Even he doesn't get kit.

Still not buying it. The instinct for self-preservation is among the strongest in any living being.

 

[Tony Vargas]

So if we are going to translate into D&D terms we have to make a largely arbitrary decision,TL;DR - The distinction between magical and non-magical doesn't work in Middle-Earth the way it does in D&D.

So, if a Balrog is arbitrarily translated into a Type VI Demon hit only by magical weapons, and Dwarves are arbitrarily translated into short, high-con, guys who can't be magic-users and are very rarely (NPC) clerics, and even then not typically very high level, it's no great stretch to translate a Balgron slaughtering a city full of Dwarves into a Type VI Demon slaughtering a city full of dwarves, largely because they lacked the magical weapons to harm it.

Games like D&D are inspired by a range of fictional sources, and try to model what's in those sources. But, their failure to model an instance of fiction doesn't render them invalid the way a scientific model that fails to fit the facts is rendered invalid. It just makes them kinda bad at modeling that fiction.

 

[Maxperson]

The Dwarves may hate sharing, but to the point of risking extinction?

The answer to that according to the books is yes. 13 dwarves and a hobbit fighting against two armies is pretty clearly, "I'm not going to share, even if it kills us all."

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Individuals may be suicidal, entire species rarely are.

 

[Maxperson]

Individuals may be suicidal, entire species rarely are.

They were typical dwarves.

 

[Khisanth the Ancient]

I think the question of the abundance of magic weapons is irrelevant to Moria vs the Balrog. A Balrog is physically embodied - and a Maia physically embodied is vulnerable to ordinary physical weapons. Saruman was killed by a normal knife/dagger wielded by Grima, a Man of no great 'spiritual strength'.

So I don't think there is any reason to expect that harming a Balrog requires either an exceptional weapon or exceptional 'spiritual strength'. IMO, the reason only high Elves and Gandalf are known to have done it, and the reason they died in the process*, is because you need the 'spiritual strength' to sustain your body long enough to do it.

Saruman wasn't surrounded by an aura of flame.

*Actually, in early texts, Tuor killed some and survived, and I don't think this was ever rejected by Tolkien - but that was when Balrogs were creations of Morgoth rather than Maiar.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

They were typical dwarves.

An intelligent, extremely long-lived species capable of building cities and a strong family-centric culture that is ALSO universally suicidally averse to sharing resources strains credulity.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I think it's silly to use real-world analogues...about technology, sociology, historical progression, or anything else...to insist upon how fictional worlds must work.

That said, I also think it's fair to say that in Tolkien's fictional world, Dwarves are particularly prone to a type of madness that places greed above survival. It is left unsaid by JRRT, but it is consistent narratively to conclude that possession of one of the Seven brought out this tendency.

However, remember that some of Thorin's company were sympathetic to Bilbo:

“And so Bilbo was swung down from the wall, and departed with nothing for all his trouble, except the armour which Thorin had given him already. More than one of the dwarves in their hearts felt shame and pity at his going.”

So not all Dwarves are like that all the time.

 

[Maxperson]

An intelligent, extremely long-lived species capable of building cities and a strong family-centric culture that is ALSO universally suicidally averse to sharing resources strains credulity.

Why? It's not as if they've ever been in this position before, so this sort of flaw would not have ever come up and destroyed them. You're also presuming that they don't stubbornly (like dwarves) believe that they can resist the armies of Sauron by holing up in the lonely mountain or another stronghold. Just because it's suicide doesn't mean they know or believe that it is.

 

[Maxperson]

I think it's silly to use real-world analogues...about technology, sociology, historical progression, or anything else...to insist upon how fictional worlds must work.

That said, I also think it's fair to say that in Tolkien's fictional world, Dwarves are particularly prone to a type of madness that places greed above survival. It is left unsaid by JRRT, but it is consistent narratively to conclude that possession of one of the Seven brought out this tendency.

However, remember that some of Thorin's company were sympathetic to Bilbo:

So not all Dwarves are like that all the time.

And yet they lowered him anyway and didn't try to persuade Thorin. The flaw was in them, even if it was less strong than in Thorin.