361 réponses à ce sujet

[DaeFaron]

fwubqrt has it right. Okay, I accept the new look at elves despite my objections, but must they be short?



Also, I'll refer to a previous post where I said it would be better if the elves and humans had their towns and clashes with laws and rules and such, without one being dominant over the other.

[hangmans tree]

The concept (DAO) follows more or less loosly d&d elves. Faerun Wild elves for dalish with a little bit of The Witcher Scoia tael resemblance - my association. And I'm not saying its bad or anything.



One thing that all elves lack in my opinion (be it d&d, Tolkien etc) is different mentality, estrangement, strangeness. The standard was layed years ago and almost nothing changes in the aspect. Now it seems even generic (books, movies, games...).

[Lughsan35]

Kalcalan wrote...

Those who think that Tolkien couldn't write wouldn't know good literature if it hit them in the face with a shovel.

Tirigon wrote...

How should LOTR be anti-industrial? Its fantasy (and the very best in my opinion), nothing political!!!

Tolkien wrote that his work was not an allegory because he didn't want people to over simplify its themes and make basic assumptions that would reduce its meaning. It doesn't mean that the Lord of the Rings doesn't have any relevance to the real world. Tolkien didn't write escapist literature.

There are many books which have been written about Tolkien's works and which can help anyone get a better understanding of his work. I'd suggest reading Patrick Curry's book entitled Defending Middle-Earth: Tolkien, Myth and Modernity. It is a good read without being too complex. Looking for a more comprehensive or academic book you should read Tom Shippey's The Road to Middle-Earth. If you want a more complex approach you should definitely consider The Individuated Hobbit: Jung, Tolkien, and the Archetypes of Middle-Earth by Timothy R. O'Neill.

Actually I would know good literature if it hit me, which is why I dislike Tolkien, it simply isn't good literature.  Its good linguistics, good world building and fails every other mark of being good literature.

I wrote a senior thesis in college for english literature that totally deconstructed Tolkien and earned me an A...back in the late 80's.

It fails as social commentary with Thomas Paine's works doing everything he did much more succinctly.

It fails as a comedic work as it is so rarely funny.

It fails as an adventure story as it spends far too much time on asides into unrelated family histories, heraldry of a world he made up, recipes of foods that don't exist, and songs that are *meh* to say the least.

He created an entire language for it! Awesome! and Boring.  But then he was a linguist.

[JackDresden]

th3warr1or wrote...

I enjoy, to an extent the lore and history BioWare has created for Dragon Age. 
Dwarves using swords, and speaking without scottish accents, Elves are shorter than humans, not immortal and overall are the second class citizens while Humans are the masters.

But after awhile, the novelty of the idea wears thin, and I prefer the LoTR style elves(generic high fantasy) ala Legolas and Elrond. I'm fine with the Humans(they didn't change much about it, it's still pretty much the generic fantasy human).

Basically, does anyone else prefer the LoTR elves? Naturally skilled archers, immortal, and tall and graceful creatures.

No I'm totally sick of the generic high fantasy elf. I think Dragon Ages elves are far more interesting, don't worry I think you'll find 1000s of other games & books still willing to help you live the cliche.

[JackDresden]

th3warr1or wrote...

I enjoy, to an extent the lore and history BioWare has created for Dragon Age. 
Dwarves using swords, and speaking without scottish accents, Elves are shorter than humans, not immortal and overall are the second class citizens while Humans are the masters.

But after awhile, the novelty of the idea wears thin, and I prefer the LoTR style elves(generic high fantasy) ala Legolas and Elrond. I'm fine with the Humans(they didn't change much about it, it's still pretty much the generic fantasy human).

Basically, does anyone else prefer the LoTR elves? Naturally skilled archers, immortal, and tall and graceful creatures.

No I'm totally sick of the generic high fantasy elf. I think Dragon Ages elves are far more interesting, don't worry I think you'll find 1000s of other games & books still willing to help you live the cliche.

[MerinTB]

Lughsan35 wrote...
Actually I would know good literature if it hit me, which is why I dislike Tolkien, it simply isn't good literature.  Its good linguistics, good world building and fails every other mark of being good literature.

I wrote a senior thesis in college for english literature that totally deconstructed Tolkien and earned me an A...back in the late 80's.

It fails as social commentary with Thomas Paine's works doing everything he did much more succinctly.

It fails as a comedic work as it is so rarely funny.

It fails as an adventure story as it spends far too much time on asides into unrelated family histories, heraldry of a world he made up, recipes of foods that don't exist, and songs that are *meh* to say the least.

He created an entire language for it! Awesome! and Boring.  But then he was a linguist.

One cannot argue that Tolkien's LotR novel isn't a classic, it has earned it's place in literary history.
One cannot argue that there isn't a large following for Tolkien's work, even amongst academics.

But ...
one can argue that even a well-read literature professor can have bad taste.

I agree with everything you've said.

Personally, my taste runs more towards the H.P. Lovecraft and Edgar Allen Poe than the Tolkien, but I guess I like some horror in my fantasy more than I like HORRIBLE in my fantasy.
Ok, ok, that could be inflammatory. Sorry.

I recognize that people love Tolkien.
I simply have a real problem understanding why.

Modifié par MerinTB, 09 décembre 2009 - 09:17 .

[Murdario]

the slave thing is a nice touch but thats where to originality ends. im sick of these generic puny effimate weakling elves. they should be helping santa to wrap things up and not attempting to hold a sword. they should stop calling them elfs actually. they are more like leprechauns or something.

[Dahelia]

Murdario wrote...

the slave thing is a nice touch but thats where to originality ends. im sick of these generic puny effimate weakling elves. they should be helping santa to wrap things up and not attempting to hold a sword. they should stop calling them elfs actually. they are more like leprechauns or something.

Wait...the elves in Dragon Age: Origins are little people???

[FlintlockJazz]

Bloody hell, this thread has really gone to hell since I last visited. 

So something isn't defined as good literature, what does that matter when it comes to whether or not you enjoy the story? I don't care if something doesn't meet some guy's preconceived notions of how a book should be written, just whether I like it and can read it. Shakespeare is constantly heralded as the greatest literary writer but you know what? Can't stand it. For the time it may have been great, but then everything else at the time must have been dire in my opinion, and the guy stole wholesale from other works and real life stories as well yet people seem fine with it but not with others doing the same. How it was written or whether it would get an A+ on some analysis is irrelevant to me, I just don't find them an enjoyable read.

Maybe I'm a literary buffoon? Maybe literature should advance with the times? Or maybe what matter is whether they are well written (in that they are understandable and paint the story the writer intends) and entertaining?

Back to main topic, overall I like both types of elves, they fit for the stories they are in and are enjoyable to play for different reasons.

Modifié par FlintlockJazz, 09 décembre 2009 - 10:25 .

[Kalcalan]

Lughsan35 wrote...

Actually I would know good literature if it hit me, which is why I dislike Tolkien, it simply isn't good literature.  Its good linguistics, good world building and fails every other mark of being good literature.

I wrote a senior thesis in college for english literature that totally deconstructed Tolkien and earned me an A...back in the late 80's.

It fails as social commentary with Thomas Paine's works doing everything he did much more succinctly.

It fails as a comedic work as it is so rarely funny.

It fails as an adventure story as it spends far too much time on asides into unrelated family histories, heraldry of a world he made up, recipes of foods that don't exist, and songs that are *meh* to say the least.

He created an entire language for it! Awesome! and Boring.  But then he was a linguist.

If you expect to impress people on a game forum with unsubstantiated claims about a thesis that supposedly got you an A you'd better start using some of these arguments instead of just saying "it fails" over and over.

Let's say that I believe you wrote a thesis on the Lord of the Rings (you would write an entire thesis about a book that you dislike?) then why can't you make a valid point instead of resorting to repetition? Why would anyone even care that you got an A from a teacher in college? We're not in school anymore. As far as I know you could be teaching English literature and you'd still have to come up with some real arguments (instead of comparing Tolkien's works to Thomas Paine's which is a bit like comparing apples and oranges).

Reading what you've posted I can positively state that you didn't understand the Lord of the Rings... The fact that you argue that "it spends far too much time on asides into unrelated family histories,
heraldry of a world he made up, recipes of foods that don't exist, and
songs that are *meh* to say the least" just makes my point. All these things that you criticize (the attention to details and verisimilitude) are the exact things that make it a great example of storytelling in its finest form.

If you want "comedic work" go read Bored with the Rings, that will probably suit your demanding literary tastes and you will probably draw the conclusion that since it is funny it is unquestionably superior to the Lord of the Rings.

MerinTB wrote...

Personally, my taste runs more towards
the H.P. Lovecraft and Edgar Allen Poe than the Tolkien, but I guess I
like some horror in my fantasy more than I like HORRIBLE in my fantasy.

It's Edgar Allan Poe. If you can spell incorrectly your favourite author's name that tells a lot about your attention span.

[Auraad]

It all boils down to this:
Lore in DA:O is very shallow - if you dig too deep, it doesn't make sense. So, if you want to enjoy the game, just DON'T dig ...
Also, elves are tiny fairies - Tolkiens elves were over sized, actually
Still, the Tolkien elves are much deeper, of course - JRR only had to write several books and had years to write them. Bioware "only" had 5 years ... it's impossible to create a whole universe in such a small period of time... so, the result remains: many things in DA:O throw up more questions than be answered.

Modifié par Auraad, 09 décembre 2009 - 11:17 .

[Jonfon_ire]

Auraad wrote...

It all boils down to this:
Lore in DA:O is very shallow - if you dig too deep, it doesn't make sense. So, if you want to enjoy the game, just DON'T dig ...
Also, elves are tiny fairies - Tolkiens elves were over sized, actually
Still, the Tolkien elves are much deeper, of course - JRR only had to write several books and had years to write them. Bioware "only" had 5 years ... it's impossible to create a whole universe in such a small period of time... so, the result remains: many things in DA:O throw up more questions than be answered.

Depends on what you mean by "elves". Tolkiens elves seem to have a lot in common with the Celtic legends of the Tuatha De Danaan. 

That's the problem with folklore, you can't really say "elves are suppose to be tiny winged things" because another culture will have a different version, or often the same culture with have differing versions. There's no definitive answer to what "elves" are, it can differ from story to story.

[ejikvkaske]

The problem with DA:O elves is that they have nothing going for them. They are like humans, except smaller, weaker, uglier and poorer. There isn't anything special about them, nothing that would compel me to play for an elf. In comparison dwarves are at least distinguished by lack of magic.

I would really have liked to see more differences between the races in DA:O, like unique skills or abilities, something more noticeable than +2 to Magic and Willpower.

Modifié par ejikvkaske, 09 décembre 2009 - 12:18 .

[MerinTB]

Kalcalan wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Personally, my taste runs more towards
the H.P. Lovecraft and Edgar Allen Poe than the Tolkien, but I guess I
like some horror in my fantasy more than I like HORRIBLE in my fantasy.

It's Edgar Allan Poe. If you can spell incorrectly your favourite author's name that tells a lot about your attention span.

A - typo
B - it was a joke (horror, horrible - it wasn't even sublte, so I hope you got it and were just )
C - nobody likes pedantry, especially nitpicky pendantry

Rising to the bait (well done), Poe is not a favorite author. I've only read a little of his work.

As for attention span, I could cite examples, but why derail a thread answering an ad hominem as they are meant to derail.

Take your fallacies elsewhere.  This thread is about comparing Tolkien's elves to DAO elves, and thereby perhaps a little bit about DAO and Tolkien, but not about the grammatical and typographical errors of posters NOR about your ability to try and flame people with insults.

Pedantry - like a Tokien prissy-perfect elf.  Looking down on humans and hobbits and dwarves as if superior.

To me, horrible writing.

Modifié par MerinTB, 09 décembre 2009 - 06:21 .

[Basil_Abdef]

ejikvkaske wrote...

The problem with DA:O elves is that they have nothing going for them. They are like humans, except smaller, weaker, uglier and poorer. There isn't anything special about them, nothing that would compel me to play for an elf. In comparison dwarves are at least distinguished by lack of magic.

I would really have liked to see more differences between the races in DA:O, like unique skills or abilities, something more noticeable than +2 to Magic and Willpower.

The whole point is that they're not that different, thus highlighting the extreme racism.  Stop using D&D as a measuring stick.

[Tirigon]

Quote from Kaosgirl:

Tirigon wrote...

@ Kaosgirl: The
elves did, in general, fight the orcs and balrogs better than the
humans did, though the greatest warriors ever were humans, not elves.

Feh to the first.
And
to the second, you prove my point:  elves "cap out" earlier than
humans, in spite of having centuries more experience.  The Best Elf is
lesser than The Best Human.  Why?

Tirigon wrote...
Besides
of that, I already pointed out that Tolkien elves are weaklings
compared to the elves in other stories. In one of my favourite books,
there is a dark elf killing about 100 enemies in less than a minute.
Thats what I would call unrealistically strong, not the tolkien elves.

And
Richard Rahl would still kick his ass without breaking a sweat.  But
what some mary-sue-like character in some random novel can do was
beside the point I was making - offering an explanation for why Elves
aren't *all* strictly superior to the best humanity can offer, in
stories where they're not.
(Also why, as you admitted yourself, the best of the elven race are lesser than the best of the human race.)

Tirigon wrote...
But
I still think that there is no author who ever created a more complex
world, put more effort in developing it and wrote in a style as
historical as Tolkien. After all, you can even study the elven language
invented by Tolkien in some schools now... Which other author ever
managed something like that?

I don't know if he's discounted on grounds of 'collaberation' or not, but I'll offer up Gene Roddenberry anyway.



I dont know about Richard Rahl or Gene Roddenberry, so I can neither agree nor disagree with that. But I can tell you why the best men are better than the best elves: The elves are less than the humans insofar as their fate, and therefore their power too, is determined since the beginning of the world. They can fight it (like Feanor did) but they can never change it, and trying to do so will always end in failure, pain and destruction. The humans, though according to their gifts and talents the weaker and lesser race, arent limited like that. They make their own fate rather than following a divine plan. Therefore they have the possibility to do over-humanly difficult deeds. Elves can never be heroes. They have their gifts, which are more than every human will ever have, but these gifts determine what they can accomplish and what not. They will never do something greater than what is determined for them to do. With humkans however, it is all about there own will. After all, Hurin, the worlds greatest warrior in the Silmarillion, wasnt actually more skillful (rather less) than the elven warriors. But by sheer willpower he kept fighting even when all his allies were dead and he was buried under the bodies of the slain orcs and trolls.
You will find this scheme in the entire Silmarillion: Its always the elves who are the better and more skillful ones, but its the humans who do the heroic deeds. The elves mostly kept waiting and defending until they were finally overwhelmed by treachery or civil war.


Edit: Please, PLEASE tell me how to make those textboxes. I want to be able to quote appropriate ;-(

Modifié par Tirigon, 09 décembre 2009 - 06:43 .

[Hamsterminator]

Well, we all know Elves are reffered to as Santa's little helpers, so clearly they should indeed be small, and likely slaves, as saint Nick himself has 'em. And thats real life!

[grallonsphere]

The Eldar of course - any others are pale reflections.  Tolkien wrote he envisioned the firstborn to be what mankind would have been had they not 'fell from grace' (he was a devout catholic).  Thus greater beauty, strenght, resilience, and immortality of course.  The pointy ear thing was never specified by Tolkien himself.

Who can compare with the grace, beauty and glory of the Calaquendi!?  The closest thing I found to this model were the 'non-men' in the Scot Bakker "Prince of Nothing' trilogy.

As for the 'too much like the 50s'....  Give me a break!




G.

Modifié par grallonsphere, 09 décembre 2009 - 06:59 .

[MerinTB]

Tirigon wrote...

Edit: Please, PLEASE tell me how to make those textboxes. I want to be able to quote appropriate ;-(

Use the Standard Form to reply.

Now, when you have hit "quote" on a person's post that you want to answer, see those "quote" and "/quote" tags with the brackets?  Experiment with them.



Oh, and I much prefer Keebler elves and Rice Krispies elves to Tolkien elves.  I may have said that before, but I don't think I gave my reasoning.

Remember, elf stands for Everybody Loves Fudge!

[Handmade]

Lord of the Rings > Everything but Star Wars, Adam Sandler, and the New Jersey guys who make Clerks and maybe Seth Rogan.



They should make a Lord of the Rings game with this style or RPG, it would be unreal.

[Basil_Abdef]

grallonsphere wrote...

The Eldar of course - any others are pale reflections.  Tolkien wrote he envisioned the firstborn to be what mankind would have been had they not 'fell from grace' (he was a devout catholic).  Thus greater beauty, strenght, resilience, and immortality of course.  The pointy ear thing was never specified by Tolkien himself.

Who can compare with the grace, beauty and glory of the Calaquendi!?  The closest thing I found to this model were the 'non-men' in the Scot Bakker "Prince of Nothing' trilogy.

As for the 'too much like the 50s'....  Give me a break!




G.

Tolkien's elves were most definitely not pointy eared.  I'm curious from where that originated, actually.  His elves were on average superior to humans in just about every physical way with the older (purer?) elf strains more so than others.

[Curlain]

In think the pointed ears with elves did come from him, (in relation to current fantasy elves), as him describing them having leaf-shaped ears, this link explains it  (however it also notes this is far from conclusive, so I think it was kinda assumed from his work, then became fact with later elves)

http://tolkien.slimy...ssays/Ears.html

Modifié par Curlain, 09 décembre 2009 - 07:43 .

[grallonsphere]

Basil_Abdef wrote...


...I'm curious from where that originated, actually.  His elves were on average superior to humans in just about every physical way with the older (purer?) elf strains more so than others.

Regarding the ears no doubt some association between the old fairies legends and his work since in its earlier versions he called the Noldor 'gnomes'.

As for your other comment Tolkien established two major distinctions between the various elven peoples:

- the Eldar (those elves who migrated from Cuivienen following the summons of the Valar)
- the Avari (those elves who refused to migrate) - also called 'the lost ones' or 'the dark ones'

Another split happened amongts the Eldar between those who actually crossed over to Valinor and those who remained in Beleriand.  The first group came to be known as the Calaquendi - 'the elves of light'.  Tolkien wrote these became greater than any other beings since they lived long ages amidst the 'gods' (the Valar).  The second eldarin group became the Sindar - the 'gray elves' or the 'elves of twilight'.  The were comprised mostly of Teleri and under the rule of Thingol and Melian rose alsmot to the heights of the Calaquendi.

Now Tolkien did write that the elves who lingered in Middle-Earth after the Age of Mankind began (alongside those 'Avari' who had never migrated) would in time dwindle, become less, until such time as they would disappear.

I see the DA:O elves as exemples of this - leftovers.




G.

[Kaosgirl]

Auraad wrote...

It all boils down to this:
Lore in DA:O is very shallow - if you dig too deep, it doesn't make sense. So, if you want to enjoy the game, just DON'T dig ...

Honestly, I find that factor quite appropriate to the setting.

[Kalcalan]

MerinTB wrote...



A - typo

B - it was a joke (horror, horrible - it wasn't even sublte, so I hope you got it and were just )

C - nobody likes pedantry, especially nitpicky pendantry

I don't want to nitpick but I do like pendants.

FYI I did get your joke, I didn't mean to upset you, I have no problem with people who say that they don't like Tolkien's writings or that they are not moved by the Lord of the Rings. It's a very personal thing. What I don't like is people who say that it isn't literature or that it is bad literature. There is nothing wrong with expressing an opinion but stating something like this as a fact is very pretentious (and offensive).

Basil_Abdef wrote...

Tolkien's
elves were most definitely not pointy eared.  I'm curious from where
that originated, actually.  His elves were on average superior to
humans in just about every physical way with the older (purer?) elf
strains more so than others.

The pointy ears and the size were borrowed from other traditions and these features were made popular by D&D. It is not surprising that elves in Dragon Age are smaller than humans and have pointed ears as these are defining traits in most RPGs.

The
difference between Elves in Middle Earth has to do with their origins,
i.e. whether or not they were born in Valinor. The Noldor left the Undying
Lands to follow Fëanor after the Silmarils were stolen.

grallonsphere wrote...

Now Tolkien did write that the elves who lingered in Middle-Earth after the Age of Mankind began (alongside those 'Avari' who had never migrated) would in time dwindle, become less, until such time as they would disappear.

I see the DA:O elves as exemples of this - leftovers.

That's a very good point and it fits quite nicely in the Dragon Age setting. Elves that once were immortal and powerful are only shadows of their former glory.

Modifié par Kalcalan, 09 décembre 2009 - 09:11 .