Of female characters in RPG's

[BruceVC]

I saw an archaeology program yonks ago that dug up a Late Neolithic village that had been destroyed in a raid. There was evidence that the women had been involved in what was presumably last-ditch fighting (died club in hand, etc.).

It seems plausible that in a tribal context, where you had females who were probably somewhat less sexually dimorphous anyway, and who would do gathering and small-game hunting, so were generally fitter and stronger than modern females, they wouldn't be shy of fighting if things got desperate - there's always a chance that they could just turn the tables in a desperate fight (though sadly, they didn't do so in that particular case).

I don't know if anyone's actually done research on trends in sexual dimorphism across our species over time, but it must surely have been less the further you go back in time. It's probably less in remaining hunter-gatherer contexts today too.

Thank you George, so women can be warriors. I hope everyone reads this post

 

[gurugeorge]

I saw an archaeology program yonks ago that dug up a Late Neolithic village that had been destroyed in a raid. There was evidence that the women had been involved in what was presumably last-ditch fighting (died club in hand, etc.).

It seems plausible that in a tribal context, where you had females who were probably somewhat less sexually dimorphous anyway, and who would do gathering and small-game hunting, so were generally fitter and stronger than modern females, they wouldn't be shy of fighting if things got desperate - there's always a chance that they could just turn the tables in a desperate fight (though sadly, they didn't do so in that particular case).

I don't know if anyone's actually done research on trends in sexual dimorphism across our species over time, but it must surely have been less the further you go back in time. It's probably less in remaining hunter-gatherer contexts today too.

Thank you George, so women can be warriors. I hope everyone reads this post

I would say yes, but rarely, and more in the distant (prehistoric) past than in historical times. (e.g. I'd agree with what someone said above about tales of Amazons, shieldmaidens, etc., being then-contemporary fantasy - albeit they may be based on distant memories of the past.)

Fundamentally, you're always dealing with abundant sperm vs. rarer ova, so that logic is going to creep through to the phenotype, to physical and psychological tendencies, etc., and especially the more so as it's reinforced by culture and religions (which somewhat articulate the unconscious, genetic tendencies). Males are expendable, females are protected.

 

[Brancaleone]

I saw an archaeology program yonks ago that dug up a Late Neolithic village that had been destroyed in a raid. There was evidence that the women had been involved in what was presumably last-ditch fighting (died club in hand, etc.).

It seems plausible that in a tribal context, where you had females who were probably somewhat less sexually dimorphous anyway, and who would do gathering and small-game hunting, so were generally fitter and stronger than modern females, they wouldn't be shy of fighting if things got desperate - there's always a chance that they could just turn the tables in a desperate fight (though sadly, they didn't do so in that particular case).

It is plausible especially within a context in which enslavement is not among the options, and there's only extermination.
Also, the more rudimentary the weapons, the lesser the gap between those who are trained in their use and those who are not.
As always, cases of women actually fighting tend to fall into the "better than nothing" category.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

As for the "warrior woman" tomb that was mentioned earlier, that could be many things.

Possibly, but look at this probability chart. It compares my thought process about what historians say to a random guy's opinion.

Interesting...

You have to prove me that the historians are wrong on this one.

Apart from that I love fantasy games where a woman can be a fighter and thus be part of my party. And she should be tough, otherwise she's useless.

Historians are only propogandists and storytellers.

So how do you know if any history is true if most historians cant be trusted, where do you get your knowledge of history from?

grandmothers on youtube

 

[Brancaleone]

grandmothers on youtube

GRANDMOTHER BECOMES A MILLIONAIRE BY SOLVING ROMAN MYSTERY!!!
HISTORIANS HATE HER!!!
CLICK ON THE LINK BELOW

 

[BruceVC]

I can't count how often something supposedly mistarioos ends up having the most banal explanation. "We don't know how they built that. Using the technology of their time it would have taken years." Oh yeah? Then they built it with the technology of their time and it took years. Problem solved, dumbass.

You right, its similar to the false narrative that says " ancient man could never have built the pyramids. Its too complicated, aliens must have helped"

But Egyptologists have proven that the ancient Egyptians did know how to create these types of structures

 

[Azarkon]

Funnily enough, all those Chinese cultivation settings have better internal logic than average female-empowerment fantasy.

Cultivators are so much far outside of the real of logic that it just doesn't matter. When a dude can punch through a planet, gender differences no longer pay a part. And conversely the "commoners" are worse than ants, so their differences don't matter either.

That's because in general, Asian fantasy settings don't care nearly as much about medieval plausibility and the rules of physics, as Western fantasies do. This is not because their source material was more fantastical - Western mythology is equally fantastical - but because they never had to deal with the war gaming influence that is at the foundation of all Western fantasy systems.

The Greeks believed in men and women with super powers, like the Amazons; the Vikings believed in men and women with super powers, like the shield maidens and valkyries; the pages of Western mythology are full of fantastical figures that don't obey the laws of physics; hell, even Tolkien believed that mortal dudes like Turin Turambar could fuck Morgoth's shit up in a fight because of his "nobility." But come modern fantasy, and what happens? Suddenly the hero is an average medieval peasant boy or girl who can barely swing a sword. Suddenly "low magic" fantasy is all the rage.

Where did this come from? The answer is historical war gaming. Gygax was a medieval war gamer first, a fantasy fan, second. He developed Dungeons and Dragons as an extension of his medieval war gaming system. The rest of the genre followed. These days with the popularity of authors like George R. R. Martin, you can't get away from "low magic" or "historical" fantasy. Only problem is, gender parity was never a feature of history, so we end up with these settings that try to both be "low magic" or "historical" and "politically correct" all at the same time. Sorry but... Doesn't work.

I am all for pointing how monocled the roots of role-playing are. But you don't really have much of a leg to stand on here. D&D can have stuff such as a human fighter bringing down a giant dragon, even if the said fighter started more humbly.

Not surprisingly, the higher level the system goes, the more it breaks down. That wasn't intentional as much as it was Gygax being a victim of his own commercial success - players demanded high level content, and they got them. Dungeons and Dragons as a system is only actually plausible as a medieval combat simulator at the lower levels.

But that doesn't change what I said. You wouldn't have people talking about topics like this if it were established early on that fantasy people and real life people are fundamentally different beings, as in Asian fantasy where it's accepted that fantasy people have special internal energy that make the laws of biology & physics irrelevant.

Ask yourself - why do Western fantasy nerds care so much about whether the world building is internally consistent to medieval Europe, and that weapons, armor, combat physics, etc. are plausibly portrayed? Why do Asian fantasy nerds not give a fuck, by comparison?

 

[Brancaleone]

Ask yourself - why do Western fantasy nerds care so much about whether the world building is internally consistent to medieval Europe, and that weapons, armor, combat physics, etc. are plausibly portrayed? Why do Asian fantasy nerds not give a fuck, by comparison?

Because Western fantasy has far-reaching medieval roots, and in a medieval context there is no room for magic that is not satanic/heretic. And miracles from God/Saints tend not to be of the kind "your muscles swell to triple size, a fiery aura envelopes your body, and you mercilessly slaughter your opponents at distance by projecting force with each punch you strike". So the warrior is just a warrior, who has to rely on armour, phisical prowess and training.

For example, to go back to the first big defining factor of Western fantasy, see how Tolkien uses magic very sparingly, and it either comes from satanic (Sauron)/ fallen figures (Saruman, Nazgul), or from angel-like figures (Istari, high-level elves). Humans bash each other over the head with iron implements, and that's it.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I saw an archaeology program yonks ago that dug up a Late Neolithic village that had been destroyed in a raid. There was evidence that the women had been involved in what was presumably last-ditch fighting (died club in hand, etc.).

It seems plausible that in a tribal context, where you had females who were probably somewhat less sexually dimorphous anyway, and who would do gathering and small-game hunting, so were generally fitter and stronger than modern females, they wouldn't be shy of fighting if things got desperate - there's always a chance that they could just turn the tables in a desperate fight (though sadly, they didn't do so in that particular case).

I don't know if anyone's actually done research on trends in sexual dimorphism across our species over time, but it must surely have been less the further you go back in time. It's probably less in remaining hunter-gatherer contexts today too.

Thank you George, so women can be warriors. I hope everyone reads this post

Tell me you didn't read without telling me you didn't read.

 

[KateMicucci]

Historians are only propogandists and storytellers.

So how do you know if any history is true if most historians cant be trusted, where do you get your knowledge of history from?

Where do the historians?

 

[Alex]

(...)

Ask yourself - why do Western fantasy nerds care so much about whether the world building is internally consistent to medieval Europe, and that weapons, armor, combat physics, etc. are plausibly portrayed?

Because we have good taste.

Why do Asian fantasy nerds not give a fuck, by comparison?

Probably lack of access to good fiction. Manga and anime fried their brains.

 

[Azarkon]

Ask yourself - why do Western fantasy nerds care so much about whether the world building is internally consistent to medieval Europe, and that weapons, armor, combat physics, etc. are plausibly portrayed? Why do Asian fantasy nerds not give a fuck, by comparison?

Because Western fantasy has far-reaching medieval roots, and in a medieval context there is no room for magic that is not satanic/heretic. And miracles from God/Saints tend not to be of the kind "your muscles swell to triple size, a fiery aura envelopes your body, and you mercilessly slaughter your opponents at distance by projecting force with each punch you strike". So the warrior is just a warrior, who has to rely on armour, phisical prowess and training.

For example, to go back to the first big defining factor of Western fantasy, see how Tolkien uses magic very sparingly, and it either comes from satanic (Sauron)/ fallen figures (Saruman, Nazgul), or from angel-like figures (Istari, high-level elves). Humans bash each other over the head with iron implements, and that's it.

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

 

[Brancaleone]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you can see the havoc he wreaks).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

 

[Azarkon]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

 

[Dadd]

Breasts give +2 to strength

 

[Wilian]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

They literally live in two worlds, both spirit and the physical at the same time, are immortal (not just age&disease but they return from their death with new recovered bodies) and their fate is tied to the Ainur and their fate, not Arda. They have keener eyesight and hearing, they are physically stronger and larger (Legolas in the movies was not good elven depiction) and other long-winded assorted things to go through here. They are vastly beyond Men.

 

[Brancaleone]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

"I thought that I saw a white figure that shone and did not grow dim like the others. Was that Glorfindel then?"
"Yes, you saw him for a moment as he is upon the other side: one of the mighty of the Firstborn. He is an Elf-lord of a house of princes."

Elves are the First Children of Ilúvatar, are immortal, don't age, don't need sleep, after their physical form perishes go to the Halls of Mandos, the most powerful of them have celestial-like powers, etc. etc. etc. The Glorfindel that Frodo meets was 're-embodied' after having his physical form 'killed' by a Balrog, just like Gandalf (who is a Maia).

 

[KateMicucci]

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys

You have to really twist and torture the range and extent of "western culture" to make such a statement.

 

[Brancaleone]

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys

You have to really twist and torture the range and extent of "western culture" to make such a statement.

Of course I'm not talking about the contemporary cesspit that goes under the name of "western culture". I'm talking about the only western culture worthy of such name, i.e., the one that was largely shaped by Christianity. Which is what I was referring to when talking about the medieval roots of western fantasy.

 

[KateMicucci]

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys

You have to really twist and torture the range and extent of "western culture" to make such a statement.

Of course I'm not talking about the contemporary cesspit that goes under the name of "western culture". I'm talking about the only western culture worthy of such name, i.e., the one that was largely shaped by Christianity. Which is what I was referring to when talking about the medieval roots of western fantasy.

Ok, have you heard of Merlin?

 

[Brancaleone]

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys

You have to really twist and torture the range and extent of "western culture" to make such a statement.

Of course I'm not talking about the contemporary cesspit that goes under the name of "western culture". I'm talking about the only western culture worthy of such name, i.e., the one that was largely shaped by Christianity. Which is what I was referring to when talking about the medieval roots of western fantasy.

Ok, have you heard of Merlin?

Do you know the meaning of 'typically'?

 

[Azarkon]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

They literally live in two worlds, both spirit and the physical at the same time, are immortal (not just age&disease but they return from their death with new recovered bodies) and their fate is tied to the Ainur and their fate, not Arda. They have keener eyesight and hearing, they are physically stronger and larger (Legolas in the movies was not good elven depiction) and other long-winded assorted things to go through here. They are vastly beyond Men.

That doesn't make them angelic beings. They were, on average, physically and spiritually stronger than men, but not to the extent of being a higher being. Tolkien literally said this in his letters. This sort of argument also doesn't stand up to scrutiny when considering "great men" like Turin, who slew Glaurung (one of the great dragon lieutenants of Morgoth) by himself, and Tuor, who slew five Balrogs in the Battle of Gondolin.

Face it, Tolkien played loose with the rules. If we used Tolkien's standard, high-level fighters in Dungeons and Dragons are just about right.

 

[Brancaleone]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

They literally live in two worlds, both spirit and the physical at the same time, are immortal (not just age&disease but they return from their death with new recovered bodies) and their fate is tied to the Ainur and their fate, not Arda. They have keener eyesight and hearing, they are physically stronger and larger (Legolas in the movies was not good elven depiction) and other long-winded assorted things to go through here. They are vastly beyond Men.

That doesn't make them angelic beings. They were, on average, physically and spiritually stronger than men, but not to the extent of being a higher being. Tolkien literally said this in his letters. This sort of argument also doesn't stand up to scrutiny when considering "great men" like Turin, who slew Glaurung (one of the great dragon lieutenants of Morgoth), and Tuor, who slew five Balrogs in the Battle of Gondolin. Face it, Tolkien played loose with the rules.

Of course you are right, elves are not higher beings; the are at he same level as men, only gayer and with pointier ears. And Tuor was just your typical man, no special case at all: it's not like he was the embodiment of the voice of Ulmo or anything. And it's not like the 5 Balrog notches on Tuor's belt have maybe something to do with Christopher Tolkien, or the fact that in that early concept they are quite the pushovers (5 killed by Tuor, 3 by Echtelion, and fucking TWO SCORES killed "by the warriors of the king's house").

 

[Azarkon]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

They literally live in two worlds, both spirit and the physical at the same time, are immortal (not just age&disease but they return from their death with new recovered bodies) and their fate is tied to the Ainur and their fate, not Arda. They have keener eyesight and hearing, they are physically stronger and larger (Legolas in the movies was not good elven depiction) and other long-winded assorted things to go through here. They are vastly beyond Men.

That doesn't make them angelic beings. They were, on average, physically and spiritually stronger than men, but not to the extent of being a higher being. Tolkien literally said this in his letters. This sort of argument also doesn't stand up to scrutiny when considering "great men" like Turin, who slew Glaurung (one of the great dragon lieutenants of Morgoth), and Tuor, who slew five Balrogs in the Battle of Gondolin. Face it, Tolkien played loose with the rules.

Of course you are right, elves are not higher beings; the are at he same level as men, only gayer and with pointier ears. And Tuor was just your typical man, no special case at all: it's not like he was the embodiment of the voice of Ulmo or anything. And it's not like the 5 Balrog notches on Tuor's belt have maybe something to do with Christopher Tolkien.

You're talking about a story in which a woman who has never seen battle before, literally kills the most powerful of the Nazgul.

Why is it so hard to accept that Tolkien did not base power levels on combat physics?

There are so many examples of great feats in his works, where an individual hero or a small party takes down hundreds if not thousands of enemies, that even the movies depict it. Tolkien never let medieval combat limits get in the way of an epic story.

 

[Brancaleone]

I mean, I don't think Tolkien is a great example since his characters tend to be capable of ridiculous feats, like Fingolfin (an elf) crippling Morgoth (Satan) and Ecthelion (another elf) killing multiple Balrogs (devils) by himself. Smaug was slain by a single archer, and any "noble" warrior in Tolkien's world can kill dozens of orcs. Tolkien did not abide by medieval realism to the extent that modern authors do.

You are talking respectively about an angelic figure wounding Satan, another angelic figure killing lower devils, an archer accomplishing a purely aiming feat against a weak spot he was given special knowledge of, and high level warriors slaying runts with inferior equipment (Tolkien standard orcs are rather smaller than humans, and when one of them has almost human size, like the one in Moria, you see the trouble he creates).

Magic in western culture is typically something only employed by the bad guys (am I right, ERYFKRAD ?), and that has nothing to do with wargames. What modern/contemporary fantasy and videogames have done is to extend the Gandalf archetype to humans (because magic is cool and opens up more possibilities), and make it a common occurrence. There is a reason why there is only one good wizard in Tolkien (Radagadst is much more of a Konrad Lorenz type, the Blue Istari are MIA), he is not human at all, and even he uses his magic very sparingly.

In this respect, Battle Brothers is a very old fashioned game: there is magic, but only evil guys/non-human beings have access to it. The main characters have to go through obstacles with steel and grit (and the odd suspicious beverage or mushroom).

How are elves angelic beings in Tolkien?

There was never any indication in Tolkien that great men were not capable of the same physical feats as elves.

They literally live in two worlds, both spirit and the physical at the same time, are immortal (not just age&disease but they return from their death with new recovered bodies) and their fate is tied to the Ainur and their fate, not Arda. They have keener eyesight and hearing, they are physically stronger and larger (Legolas in the movies was not good elven depiction) and other long-winded assorted things to go through here. They are vastly beyond Men.

That doesn't make them angelic beings. They were, on average, physically and spiritually stronger than men, but not to the extent of being a higher being. Tolkien literally said this in his letters. This sort of argument also doesn't stand up to scrutiny when considering "great men" like Turin, who slew Glaurung (one of the great dragon lieutenants of Morgoth), and Tuor, who slew five Balrogs in the Battle of Gondolin. Face it, Tolkien played loose with the rules.

Of course you are right, elves are not higher beings; the are at he same level as men, only gayer and with pointier ears. And Tuor was just your typical man, no special case at all: it's not like he was the embodiment of the voice of Ulmo or anything. And it's not like the 5 Balrog notches on Tuor's belt have maybe something to do with Christopher Tolkien.

You're talking about a story in which a woman who has never seen battle before, literally kills the most powerful of the Nazgul.

Why is it so hard to accept that Tolkien did not base power levels on combat physics?

Keep chasing metaphorical cars (or power levels), if it makes you happy. Merry's weapon of course had nothing to do with the Witchking's fall.

If you can focus for a second, you'll realize that my point was that only the most powerful elves (plus a handful of Maiar and even stranger fellows), who have nothing to do with the humans, show anything that could be labelled like magic. And Tolkien largely shaped modern fantasy, with LotR and to a lesser extent The Hobbit, certainly not with unrevised passages from the Fall of Gondolin. And Tolkien background was Christian. And he was a Medievalist. And so on, and so on.

Another big contributor to the genesis of modern fantasy could be called Howard, and even though his setting is pre-medieval and definitely pagan-ish, it does not exactly place magic in the hands of the 'good' guys, all considered.

You could also say that the Thousands and One Nights contributed to shape the more exotic elements in those first authors who would define fantasy, and there as well, magic users are usually the bad guys.

So, to wrap it up, no, the current state of affairs has nothing to do with wargames.