Radagast the Brown

[Ineti]

Here's a little something to get your holiday weekend off to a good start (or just your weekend in general if you don't have a holiday to celebrate)...

Radagast the Brown.

There are two versions of the document. Here's the plain black and white one...

[Ineti]

...and here's the color version.

Comments appreciated but not expected. Enjoy!

[Jason Durall]

Nice work!

It would/will be quite cool to see many of the luminaries from the novels overlooked in the sourcebooks (or outside Decipher's scope) published in such a fashion, from Alatar and Pallando to characters from the Silmarillion or elsewhere.

[Ineti]

Originally posted by Jason Durall
Nice work!

It would/will be quite cool to see many of the luminaries from the novels overlooked in the sourcebooks (or outside Decipher's scope) published in such a fashion, from Alatar and Pallando to characters from the Silmarillion or elsewhere.

Thanks, Jason. I figure more NPCs will be created, either by myself or others. Bring 'em on, I say!

Hmm...Alatar and Pallando....

[Grutos]

Nice. Although, I do have 1 question (and this is in general to the game, Radagast just brings it to the forefront) - Code of Honour = a Flaw?! I just don't get it. How is being honour-bound or honourable a flaw? I've never thought of a Warrior's Code or Chivlary to be a flaw, be it to not harm women, children, or natural animals. Given the state of the Shadow - I'd think that it's an Edge.

[Jason Durall]

Originally posted by Grutos
Nice. Although, I do have 1 question (and this is in general to the game, Radagast just brings it to the forefront) - Code of Honour = a Flaw?! I just don't get it. How is being honour-bound or honourable a flaw? I've never thought of a Warrior's Code or Chivlary to be a flaw, be it to not harm women, children, or natural animals. Given the state of the Shadow - I'd think that it's an Edge.

You could argue it either way, really, but my guess is that the designers chose to call it a flaw because it potentially limits your choice of action, whereas the forces of the Shadow have no such compunction about playing dishonorably.

[Sarge]

Grutos, do you have GURPS? It uses a similar idea called disadvantages, and they have a clear explanation as to why a code of honor is a disadvantage. Basically, it limits the player's choices. A character without a code of honor can do whatever he wants to, but an honorable character won't do certain things, so that puts him at a disadvantage.

For instance, one character in LotR said, "I would not trap even an orc with a lie." (Or words to that effect; feel free to correct if you remember the exact quote.) In game terms, his code of honor has taken away one option that another character would take.

[Grutos]

Explained that way, I can kinda see it. But, I guess I look at it too historical and literal in meaning (spent way too many years researching Medieval Europe and the wars therein and the customs that came out of the wars). We always gamed based on what we could actually do (in terms of combat and discussion - although enough JD, and L-bolts sure did seem to appear).

Again - nicely done. Just my take on what is a flaw v. edge - not a complaint to Jim, but of the system in my view.

[Ineti]

(bump) for any new members who may have missed it.

[Alathriel]

I don't agree with Radagast's spell specialty (Fire, Smoke, Light). I would think someone who lives in the forest, and takes ample time to respect it's ways would not specialize in fire magics. I would understand him using the magics in combat, but for him to focus so much on them seems silly to me. Fire magics are dangerous, they can instantly cause a forest to burn up and harm natural habitats.
Radagast's always seemed to be pretty focused on protecting the natural world, and I'm sure with that focus there came an anxiety not to harm it. =)

[Ineti]

I see your point, but the Fire, Smoke, and Light spell specialty covers much more than just fire. There are enough useful spells in that specialty that I thought it appropriate Radagast have it.

YMMV, of course.

[Jason Durall]

Originally posted by Alathriel
I don't agree with Radagast's spell specialty (Fire, Smoke, Light). I would think someone who lives in the forest, and takes ample time to respect it's ways would not specialize in fire magics. I would understand him using the magics in combat, but for him to focus so much on them seems silly to me. Fire magics are dangerous, they can instantly cause a forest to burn up and harm natural habitats.
Radagast's always seemed to be pretty focused on protecting the natural world, and I'm sure with that focus there came an anxiety not to harm it. =)

On the other hand, fire is also a force of nature, and as such, is a part of the life-cycle of forests.

Regular forest fires (those occurring naturally) are often an integral part of keeping a forest from growing stagnant and filled with old growth.

Perhaps this is why Radagast might not view fire as the enemy, but merely as a element of his domain.

[Ineti]

Oh, hey, I hadn't considered that, Jason. Nice point.

[Alathriel]

I think Gandalf deserves the specialty (Fire, Smoke, Light). Why? Because Tolkien clearly states in the Hobbit that he was skilled at these types of magics, in addition to him using them in the story.
He didn't stress that Radagast was wise in the ways of fireworks and smoke. I see nothing wrong with him having those spells, just not enough reasoning behind giving him a specialty in it. But unfortunately we'll never have an official Decipher Radgast NPC, because they decided he wasn't important enough to be put into the FOTR sourcebook (even though Bill the Pony gets an entry, along with repeated entries for The One Ring and other things).
The idea that fire is a "force of nature" could mean that
Radagast would easily have a specialty in Water and Air magics as well. Why would I not give him those specialities? Because for the brief times Radagast was mentioned Tolkien thought it most important to tell us about his skills with plants, birds, and beasts. Giving him fire speciality is alot more subjective on the author's part than giving him the Beasts specialty.

[Ineti]

Originally posted by Alathriel
But unfortunately we'll never have an official Decipher Radgast NPC, because they decided he wasn't important enough to be put into the FOTR sourcebook

Never say never. Who knows what other supplements are on the way? An important figure like Radagast may yet show up in an official supplement.

Originally posted by Alathriel
Giving him fire speciality is alot more subjective on the author's part than giving him the Beasts specialty.

Very true. When I wrote my version of Radagast, I took a few guesses and added my personal slant to the character. I expected most other folks would have a different view.

I'd be curious to see someone else's rendition of him, but I haven't been able to find another one yet.