GameBanshee Forums

Gandalf was given the elven ring of fire by the elf guy in the Gray Havens. Forgot the name.

Boromir is a fighter. He's not wild or crazy. He lives in a city. Leather armor is for travellers because you can't wear plate mail for such long distance.

Wearing leather armor does not mean one is a ranger or barbarian.

Aragorn just a plain ranger. I don't believe Aragorn had great stealth, but was stealthy like any ranger. He should be human but could be called half-elf. He has a tiny bit of elven blood in him and related to Elrond. The Numenorians were descended from Elros, Elrond's brother.
But there were 25 or so Numenor kings, and the 15 or so kings of Gondor and Arnor.
So that's 40/45 generations down the line from Elros to Aragorn.

Frodo- fighter/thief
Pippin- thief
Sam- fighter/thief
Merry- fighter or maybe fighter/thief. He seemed more of a fighter than the other hobbits. A bit more adventurous being a Brandybuck.

Gandalf- a lesser god. Really can't be put in. He's way more powerful than you realize.

Legolas- archer. Nothing else to say about him.

Gimli- fighter. None of Durin's folk are beserkers. Closest possibly in Dain because he's a fierce warrior and one of the best. Gimli was just a regular warrior.

Bombadil- druid/bard.

Elrond- fighter. He's wise doesn't mean he's a wizard.

It wouldnt be fare to put bombidil in the party becaue his power was limited to a certain area and In that area he was unstoppable so.....

About Gandalf, surely he was very mighty, but considering Saruman, much stronger than Gandalf, gets killed by a mere human one might think...

A lesser istari. im surprised he had a chance against a balrog, even if it was a weak one...

Boromir, what i ment was that he, while not a barbarian, works as a barbarian in ways of HP and way of life. He did take all them arrows, and he was definitly not a calm guy..
Maybe he cant be put in a single class, but he should definitly have some sort of rage ability.

Bilbo was no bard. He was definetely a thief. It is repeated time and again in the book written by humself.

I agree w/Bruce, Bilbo was "the burgler" and all that, so its logical for him to be a theif. BUT, I can also see arguments for he bard-i-ness, seeing as how the tells great stories, and never used any particular thief skill like traps, or picking locks or anything.

Gimli, youve convinced me, he is a vanilla fighter

Boromir, I like the barbarian abilities because they suit what he could do, but he is not a barbarian in lifestyle.

Aragorn, doesn't strike me as a straight ranger. He was very stealthy, as humans go, and, well, guys help. I still think he was a stalker until someone says otherwise.

Gandalf, is a f/m of insane power, 30/60 give or take.

Legolas, like I said, the kit from TDD, you can check out their site if you want to read more, but basically, the can shoot arrows even at point blank range.

Merry, strikes me a low level thief dualled to a fighter. I'm aware the Infinty engine doesnt let halflings dual.

Pippin, same as Merry, though he remained a thief for longer.

Samwise, well, theres good old same, I like beserker with very poor stats.

I think Aragorn is a straight ranger aswell but I would make him a stalker in bg2 cause he needs to be something special.
Give Frodo the white dragon scale. Very light and strong as a dragonscale...
How about their stats?
Frodo
str 10
dex 18
con 18 ( he does withstand the ring really well and con helps save vs spells for halflings)
int 12 (smarter than average)
wis 11
cha 15 (he is a leader)

Aragorn
str 18/50
dex 18
con 18
int 13
wis 11
cha 17

Boromir
str 18/00
dex 17
con 18
int 11
wis 10
cha 15
(kinda like sarevok)

Gimli
str 18/76
dex 15
con 19
int 8
wis 8
cha 8(15 for dwarves)

Legolas
str 16
dex 21 (he just doesn't miss)
con 16
int 11
wis 13
cha 11

Gandalf
str 17 (he is getting old)
dex 15
con 17
int 19
wis 17
cha 17 (likeable chap, good stats but come on)
what do you say?

[ 01-05-2002: Message edited by: Bruce Lee ]

Frodo
str 6
dex 16
con 12
int 12
wis 16 Willpower overcomes the ring not save vs spells
cha 12

Aragorn
str 18/50
dex 14
con 15
int 11
wis 16
cha 17

Boromir
str 18/80
dex 13
con 16
int 13
wis 8
cha 12

Gimli
str 18/60
dex 15
con 19
int 10
wis 12
cha 10

Legolas
str 6
dex 21 (he just doesn't miss)
con 9
int 12
wis 14
cha 16

Gandalf
str 15
dex 12
con 14
int 23
wis 21
cha 14

Originally posted by Bruce Lee:
<STRONG>what do you say?</STRONG>

I'm bored, shoot me.

[ 01-06-2002: Message edited by: Gandalfgal The Talking Variant ]

Just throwing my $.02 in... as it happens, there is a perfect version (statwise) of Gandalf in BG2- Elminster, who seems to be Ed Greenwood's version of Gandalf (pointy hat that's slightly bent, pipe, huge levels in just about every class, might as well be a demigod seeing as he has several Powers who intervene on his behalf at a CONSTANT basis....)
Of course, IIRC, Elminster is a F/T/C/M (although not necessarily in that order)...he's def. triple or quadruple classed at any rate. So just change him to F/M and up the mage level.

I like Bruce's stats, they make sense. Good stuff all. Keep it coming. Alas, I start school soon and follow a policy NOT TO TOUCH any games until the weekends. Otherwise my marks plummit. That was off topic however

Sorry Fable

and back to LOTR. It would be interesting if someone made a mod for this.

Ummm... why have people been calling gimli, Gremli?

Hmm, Bruce Lee, you seem to have made the stats from the movie, not the book.. dunno, just thought this.. Well, Gandalf may be old, and is surely not that strong, but his Int should probably be at least 25 (probably above normal limitations) as well as a great Wis. Dunno about Con, but he surely has a lot of bonus hp. well, i cant see him in a team, as he would be far too powerful, Irenicus wouldnt stand a chance, and the balrog resembles Demogorgon in a way..

Boromir seemed very strong, but his Dex at 18 seems a bit too high... he probably killed most foes before they reached him, i can ee him at an inhuman strength of 19 or more, but his dex no more than 16..

aragorns charisma shouldnt be so high, the hobs are scared of him. Well, maybe it should raise when they realise he is a king, much like Anomens wis.

Legolas at str 16? he is an elf, and no special strong one either, why more than 10? but the dex is probably inhuman, 21 is a good one.. Gimli is a great fighte, but those stats were good, maybe a bigger strength.. Frodo, thats a tough one, but considering he is a hob he can withstand the ring very well, however, not too great as you can read in the last book.. no better than Bilbo or perhaps any other hob. its more that he dares to do this adventure, where many would not.. But as i said, he fails his mission werent it for Sam and Smeagol. (Bilbo was a much stronger ringbearer in my oppinion, but was too damaged)

I know I based my stats on the movie... saw it last week and read the book ten years ago. But hey you are probably right but then again I tried to transfer their stats to bg2 and make them as special in faerun as the are in middle-earth.

Legolas is pretty strong, as he runs just as hard and fast as Aragorn and Gimli, which is based on strength. Gandalf at one point was a fighter, and age doesn't really seem to have much of a bearing on him. He doesnt show any signs of slowing down ever as far as i can recall.
And yes, i was thinking of cutting him from the group, because he would be too powerful. It'd be insane. He could wrap the game in a matter of days. Maybe drop sam also, seeing as how he doesnt fit into any class, then i could add Merry and Pippin.
Aragorn charisma is still going to be high, no matter how good a leader he is, your going to be scared if a ranger grabs you from a bar..

So itll look like this
Aragorn'
Gimli (Not Gremli!!)
Legolas
Froda
Merry
Pippin.

Hm, since when was stamina based on strength? Constitution is the thing, and add to that elves are very lightfooted, just look at legolas not sinking into the snow..

Originally posted by sigurd:
<STRONG>Hm, since when was stamina based on strength? Constitution is the thing, and add to that elves are very lightfooted, just look at legolas not sinking into the snow..</STRONG>

Stamina has always been based on strength.

REally? seems odd, just look at all them runners in olympic games.. they are thin.. and not too strong.. im talking about the ones that run a long way

Elminster, who seems to be Ed Greenwood's version of Gandalf (pointy hat that's slightly bent, pipe, huge levels in just about every class, might as well be a demigod seeing as he has several Powers who intervene on his behalf at a CONSTANT basis....)

This is an area where I agree with Tolkien. You'll note that all his wizards (Gandalf, Radagast, Saruman) have few spells, and very limited powers. This makes the ultimate evil, Sauron, that much larger and formidable. By contrast, AD&D gives power to players out the adventuring wazoo--so much so, that the final battle with Irenicus is rather dull. It becomes a case of My Magic is Bigger than Your Magic, rather than strategy, tactics, and luck.

Just my POV. It's the one area in which I prefer BG1 to BG2: your party members gain levels slowly, and don't find wondrous weapons everywhere.

@ Knight Errand: About your fellowship party - have you found any appropriate pictures and soundsets?
If so, I would be interested in a link. I've only managed to get good ones of Legolas and Elrond (which isn't in your party) - and that's portraits only.

-Sylvanerian

[ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: Silvanerian ]

Originally posted by sigurd:
<STRONG>REally? seems odd, just look at all them runners in olympic games.. they are thin.. and not too strong.. im talking about the ones that run a long way</STRONG>

Yeah well there are different kinds of strength. Stamina is part of strength in d&d.

Nope, I have not got any portraits or sound thingy's for anyone. I hadn't thought about sounds, but that would be cool. Pictures however, I would like to find. But I have finals coming, and am not really in the mood to track em down.