Female dwarves are on the way? :)

[Herwegur]

The one thing I do not like is that you can really tell shes a Female dwarf, but it is what it is. Thought missing the fact others can't tell, now we can, I say the face is fine, but some of the body shape no. just my opinion.

Upon closer consideration, the beta NPC Dís model would benefit from broader shoulders. Given the figure's overall stocky frame, the upper arms appear pinched-in, sticking out from the torso kind of unnaturally. Narrow shoulders are disproportional (no pun intended this time) to the rest of her.

Just because a dwarf character happens to be female, there's honestly no need to assign her the same stereotyped slim shoulders as seen on female human/elf models. (The visual assumption that governs nearly all female NPCs/toons in video games). Not suggesting to make her square-shaped, just at least more even and rectangular: right now she's nearly triangle-shaped and that's too much dystrophy around the shoulder area.

[Marancil]

Agreed! Back in 2005 I suggested that any playable hobbits should be required to stay in the Shire, and that they should have only peaceable classes: crafting, gardening, etc. That would have been more true to the book. To the purists, I'm sorry I didn't fight harder! But I'm not that sorry: if I had, we'd never have gotten Bingo Boffin.

Sad to hear that. Now we see hobbit burglars all over the place.

[maartena]

Agreed! Back in 2005 I suggested that any playable hobbits should be required to stay in the Shire, and that they should have only peaceable classes: crafting, gardening, etc. That would have been more true to the book. To the purists, I'm sorry I didn't fight harder! But I'm not that sorry: if I had, we'd never have gotten Bingo Boffin.

I might not have stuck around if it weren't for hobbitses! I love playing them.... if I could make a hobbit runekeeper, I would!

[Thakalgundian]

Bombur is in the game too. Why don't all my playable dwarves look like Bombur?

MoL

A valid point indeed, who says we need to stick to the current dwarf body type in the first place?
By all means, ensure players have the possibility to have a broader choice of lore-friendly body types (such as Bombur).
I for one would love to be able to create an overweight dwarf, yet sadly the character creation screen doesn't allow it.

I'm guessing this may not be technically possible perhaps (due to emotes and such), which is a different matter altogether.

In short, my points remains the same, if an NPC has a specific body type (be it a female dwarf or overweight one), why not the player of the same race?

[Phantion]

My interpretation of 'abroad' is more in line with the idea of journeying, and Dís isn't journeying. She lives at Raven-hill, a dominion of Erebor (and where its ravens were kept for years and years); you're seeing her at home. If she went to Gondor, I think she'd bundle up a great deal and Tolkien's description would be well-served.



Me too! I should probably be clear that convincing me isn't going to suddenly add this body-type for playable female dwarves, since this is well beyond my call: I'm neither an artist nor able to make that happen. I just love talking about LOTRO.



Agreed! Back in 2005 I suggested that any playable hobbits should be required to stay in the Shire, and that they should have only peaceable classes: crafting, gardening, etc. That would have been more true to the book. To the purists, I'm sorry I didn't fight harder! But I'm not that sorry: if I had, we'd never have gotten Bingo Boffin.



Bombur is in the game too. Why don't all my playable dwarves look like Bombur?

MoL

Oh, I agree that the lore should remain a chief consideration for player-Dwarves!

I guess, and I've talked about this in my "Dwarf Noses" thread too-

The thing that folks appear to be looking for here is for some -more- variety, while I'd add the caveat, in my case, of... even a variety of newer options should still fit the lore in some way.

Bombur's one of a kind, for example, which you've aptly noted- he's exceptionally big, so much they have to carry him everywhere. Dis is also one of a kind as she's the only named female Dwarf, yes.


But I do agree with folks who say there should be some more options here, as after all, it's an avatar-revamp. I respect that you're not on the Art-Team- and thank you so much for your fantastic work- I'm greatly looking forward to the next chapters of the Black Book!

Yet SSG, overall, should still take note- I guess the main things I'd want the Art-Team to know is the following: the lore should allow for some more possibilities, even if, for example, a female Dwarf "abroad" would look pretty much identical to a male Dwarf-

The main thing, at least from what I can see, is that we're stuck with -one- face-mold and one base, overall, body-shape with less distortions- some alterations, yet still overall... stable...

The only thing that changes on the face, even with the revamp, is -still- just the noses per "Face change."

But, the Stout-Axes have different-shaped faces (broader), and there are plenty of them (they are based on the Dourhand head-shape also), and even Longbeard Dwarves, some of them, like Dwalin and others, -also- have different face-sculpts as well, some of which look in some cases -better- (like Dwalin and Gloin and Dori) than player-Dwarf models, though the current Beta 1 revamp is certainly an improvement through a smoothing of the skin.

I guess... the main thing here is- It would be great to see more options- including options favorable to more feminine Dwarves, even if its hard to tell that they are feminine IF they are "abroad" (and that, as you say, is pretty much a huge IF, since female Dwarves generally don't travel; that still doesn't help a player, though, who wants to RP a female Dwarf "at home," be her home in Erebor, or in Ered Luin, or what have you...) So, more beard-options would be great, some longer-beard options, more braided options, etc. I'd also love, for example, a beard that actually flows down long enough to imagine it being tucked-into a belt, even if the belt itself's kind of hard to do- forget the belt (due to all the different armor-textures and shapes, etc.), but the -length- would still be nice to have, a nice, big, long beard that waggles as you walk as it drapes down almost to the ground- that would feel very fun lore-wise.

Also, it would be nice to have some... variety in facial-shapes, just like the other classes have, and I'm not saying "do what Peter Jackson did," as much of that was outright lore-offensive (Kili in the movies practically looked like Aragorn and hardly a Dwarf!). But, I'd say, for example, we ought to have some -younger-looking-Tolkien-Dwarf- faces as well, to give us variety in age, as well as options for some broader faces and other faces of different shapes, who, just like the Stout-Axes and others, still -look like Tolkien Dwarves!!! So, what I mean to say here, is that some Dwarven faces should look "younger" than others while still looking "Dwarvish" in a Tolkienian sense- though I'd leave it to the Art-Team to decide what that would look like. I sure, for example, can tell that -Bori- and -Broin- in Moria are younger, and maybe their faces could sort of come-across as prototypes? There's a lot more, just based on -many- NPC's in-game, that an avatar-revamp of the Dwarves could do.

There's no real reason I can think-of as to why variety-beyond-the-nose-changes would somehow take-away from the lore and such, so long as they still looked "Tolkien-Dwarvish-enough" because its been done elsewhere with plenty of Dwarven NPC's throughout the game.

I'd like to, for example, be able to change more than the nose on my Dwarf's face- and, if possible, I'd want the Art-Team to know that it might be good to separate the "Nose" into a separate set of options, so that players can mix and match noses with face-sculpts. You'd still have plenty of Tolkien-Dwarves that way- still lore viable- and yet, more variety, including for players who RP as female Dwarves, etc., without defying what the lore -says- about female Dwarves (who could still have, say, more youthful-looking faces, while still similar enough for a "male Dwarf" due to a nice, big beard and other such alterations, and looking quite... reasonable lore-wise while also satisfying for the player-base).

In short, please pass the following onto the Art-Team, if possible: Variety is golden! More choices, but still lore-viable and believable- would be a very good thing.

To avoid the problem that occurred with Men and Elves and player-complaints, I'd say, that any new options should be "in addition to" the present options- so, i.e. Art-Team, please don't change the work you've currently done, but add to it- add another ten or so new faces to choose-from ---beyond--- the current faces, and that way, players who still like the current-looks still have 'em, and players who want more choices would have those options too- all of which would be to a great benefit in this revamp.

And thank you MoL for all of your hard-work in bringing the lore to life in this Game and keeping things on-track lore-wise- it's wonderful, fantastic, and one of the most endearing things about this Game- Kudos This is already shaping-up to be a fine, fun update- and I'm greatly looking forward to future builds

[DrOctothorpe]

Bombur is in the game too. Why don't all my playable dwarves look like Bombur?

Now you've done it. We'll be inundated with demands for Bombur-form Dwarves! :-P

[Ariandi]

Now you've done it. We'll be inundated with demands for Bombur-form Dwarves! :-P

That's actually quite brilliant on MoL's part. Use the playerbase to get what he wants.

*waits for hobbies to be created around MoL's non combat hobbit class idea*

[greendarner]

I've always wanted a hobbit champion and a hobbit captain, alas.

For MoL, I loved discovering Bombur, and i sometimes go visit him just because.

My dwarf guardian is female. Y'all just don't notice! Everyone refers to her as "he" and she just goes along with it. And she doesn't wear dresses, because wearing a dress to fight is just stupid.

[tuor66]

Agreed! Back in 2005 I suggested that any playable hobbits should be required to stay in the Shire, and that they should have only peaceable classes: crafting, gardening, etc. That would have been more true to the book. To the purists, I'm sorry I didn't fight harder! But I'm not that sorry: if I had, we'd never have gotten Bingo Boffin.

MoL

Well, to be fair, we could allow travel between Oatbarton, Dwaling, Bree and Staddle.

[Alhvar]

"They are in voice and appearance, and in garb if they must go on a journey, so like to the dwarf-men that the eyes and ears of other peoples cannot tell them apart."

In my view the statement does indicate that there are indeed some differences between dward males and females. If Tolkien meant to say that they are identical, I think he would expressed himself differently.

I however do not understand the argument that since humans can't tell dwarf genders apart, and players are human, then players should not be able to tell dwarf genders apart. Is this not a game? A lot of things our characters can do are things that players (in general cannot do). I have no idea how to study tracks yet I can have a hunter with tracking skills. A lot of players with musican characters have no idea how to play real life instruments. Etc.

I think that ideally there should be differences between male and female models - small enough to not be obvious and just distinct enough for at least experienced dwarf players to be able to tell them apart. It is possibile that the Dis model is 'too much' feminine-looking. I don't know, if I saw someone looking like that on the bus I think I would assume that it was a male.

[Thakalgundian]

Firstly, neither "Bombur" nor Dís would have been physically "unique", and this is not me saying this, but lore:

Why Bombur isn't physically "unique":
From History of Middle-Earth"Corpulence being the only physical disorder they suffered from (they were singularly immune from diseases such as affected Men, and Halflings). In times or great riches many grew very fat, and could not do much (save eat) afterwards."

"MANY GREW VERY FAT". Meaning that, if I (as a RPer) would like to RP a very wealthy dwarf, a fat dwarf would be a very logical and lore-friendly choice, Bombur was not unique here.

So using the argument "Bombur is in the game too. Why don't all my playable dwarves look like Bombur? to reject any changes to the dwarf form or to justify Dís having a clearly female form is not only wrong but opens up a whole new (valid) demand for more dwarf-forms that are lore-friendly. In other words, I love what your doing Mol, but that kinda blew up in your face didn't it

Why Dís isn't physically "unique":
Dís is a dwarf-woman. Yes, she is the only one mentioned in the books, but she isn't the only woman in dwarf society. There is nothing in the books or appendices that says that Dís was different in any form from any of the other dwarf-women. In fact it says (also in HoME): "Thorin's sister Dis is named simply because of the gallant death of her sons Fili and Kili in defence of Thorin II.". So the only thing we know for sure that makes her "unique" is not her physical form, but her historical meaning.

Meaning that if SSG chooses to portray Dís in this manner, by using clear female forms, then I'm fine with that, but then you need to provide the player base the same option (or make a statement that all player character dwarves in this game are in fact "male") - and while you are at it, give us an option to create a fat dwarf too, it's lore-friendly after all

[samuel78]

We are all getting rather het-up here with female dwarfs...
What if the poor dev. that created the female avatar of Dis merely was having a bad day and the post-it note that said
"Don't forget all dwarves look the same!"
Had fallen from his / her Monitor?

[Thakalgundian]

We are all getting rather het-up here with female dwarfs...
What if the poor dev. that created the female avatar of Dis merely was having a bad day and the post-it note that said
"Don't forget all dwarves look the same!"
Had fallen from his / her Monitor?

Hehe, perfectly possible indeed. Poor dev
Still, no worries there, just admit the slip-up, correct it, and move one (instead of providing arguments to justify it).
Again, don't get me wrong please, I'm a real fan of the LOTRO devs. The previous reason for not having a dwarf female form was a valid one. I'm not "het up" at all about this really, but now this just isn't consistent anymore and needs clarifying/rectifying, that's all. That's what these forums are for right? To provide our views if we think something doesn't make sense... hence

[Trendafil]

Grocer Ketill in Noglond seems to be female as well (despite the male name): at least in the German client she is labelled "Krämerin", which is the female version of "Krämer" (grocer)!

[abrahamL]

That's actually quite brilliant on MoL's part. Use the playerbase to get what he wants.

*waits for hobbies to be created around MoL's non combat hobbit class idea*

What is this hobby idea you speak of?

I've wanted a lore archeology type of hobby where we go digging around all of the ruins in ME for deeds, pages to books, housing items and what not along with barter items. I know we sort of get that with deeds but it be cool to get more in depth lore specific rewards and cooler housing items, not to mention maybe rare things that could drop from unearthing stuff from the ground.

[OldMadeOfLions]

Now you've done it. We'll be inundated with demands for Bombur-form Dwarves! :-P

Mission accomplished!

MoL

[Pontin_Finnberry]

I'm Normally against adding Female dwarves, but a Suggestion If SSG wanted to add Female dwarves, if possible to add a feature to where only dwarves can see the female features, and other races can only see a normal dwarf, and same goes for emotes everyone else would see "His" but dwarves would see "Her", In my opinion it would please everyone, and not break the lore, as a dwarf would and should tell the differences where as others can't.

[Thakalgundian]

I'm Normally against adding Female dwarves, but a Suggestion If SSG wanted to add Female dwarves, if possible to add a feature to where only dwarves can see the female features, and other races can only see a normal dwarf, and same goes for emotes everyone else would see "His" but dwarves would see "Her", In my opinion it would please everyone, and not break the lore, as a dwarf would and should tell the differences where as others can't.

Agreed, if possible that would be a great solution.

[Lady_Lethargy]

I'm Normally against adding Female dwarves, but a Suggestion If SSG wanted to add Female dwarves, if possible to add a feature to where only dwarves can see the female features, and other races can only see a normal dwarf, and same goes for emotes everyone else would see "His" but dwarves would see "Her", In my opinion it would please everyone, and not break the lore, as a dwarf would and should tell the differences where as others can't.

That's not a bad solution, but I personally don't want to go that way. It's not as if dwarf women literally look different in the eyes of dwarves as compared to other races; it's just that they know what subtle differences to look for. So I think the differences should be there and present for everyone, but again, subtle. I am 100% on board with everyone else seeing masculine pronouns, though.

[siipperi]

For equality's sake I want man dwarves in this game.

[YamydeAragon]

I'm Normally against adding Female dwarves, but a Suggestion If SSG wanted to add Female dwarves, if possible to add a feature to where only dwarves can see the female features, and other races can only see a normal dwarf, and same goes for emotes everyone else would see "His" but dwarves would see "Her", In my opinion it would please everyone, and not break the lore, as a dwarf would and should tell the differences where as others can't.

Oh that will be neat & fit the lore. Here is my suspiciously femenine dwarf. Is it a lady or a young sir? I know what it will be if i have that option.

[Alhvar]

That's not a bad solution, but I personally don't want to go that way. It's not as if dwarf women literally look different in the eyes of dwarves as compared to other races; it's just that they know what subtle differences to look for. So I think the differences should be there and present for everyone, but again, subtle. I am 100% on board with everyone else seeing masculine pronouns, though.

That is more in line with what I have in mind. Someone mentioned cats in this thread. Cat males and females do, except for their genitals, appear identical to humans. However, they hardly appear identical to themselves. They distinguish themselves with smells etc. They have a much greater sense of smell than we do. I guess most spieces have genders that are distinct at least to themselves. Since there was so little written about dwarves, there is a large room for speculation about dwarves not even being mammals etc. I would however say that egg-laying dwarves with cat-like sense of smell is way more far-fetched than to simply assume that they are like humans in the regards where it was not specified that they are not. Humans rely mainly on sense of vision, and thus it would be reasonable to assume that dwarf genders are also dinstinguished by visual characteristics, however perhaps not the very same characteristics as with humans.

[Pontin_Finnberry]

That's not a bad solution, but I personally don't want to go that way. It's not as if dwarf women literally look different in the eyes of dwarves as compared to other races; it's just that they know what subtle differences to look for. So I think the differences should be there and present for everyone, but again, subtle. I am 100% on board with everyone else seeing masculine pronouns, though.

The point is not everyone (including myself) wants female dwarves, I'm not saying they look different in the eyes of other dwaraves cause of course they do not, Male dwarf has to know what to look for to tell the differences yes! but what i suggested was only an option to make both sides pleased, i can't think of any other way then this mechanic where dwarves can only see them as female. cause some players will want proper female dwarves and not look the same as male.

[Gaming_Gal]

Yes, this post is long. I also don't have the free time right now to edit it better for at least some brevity and conciseness. I've been trying to hold back on some points as this thread wanders into already long ago dead horse whipped territory, but since we're going there again...here's my two bags of copper.

In some other threads posted long ago, I had asked for many of the things that have been most recently asked for again here about text chat and such. Subtle ways to try to keep us all happy but still within lore. I was told it was way too much work and they couldn't possibly set aside dev time for such, it would break too much already in game mechanics, et al.

To give a window of reference for folks curious about a former round of this as well as to be perfectly clear about my own interpretation of the lore:
I read both The Hobbit and LOTR early on in my life. I am not a fan of the PJ movies. I am not a lorist, but what I do know, I know well.

I tried the game, quite excited, during the first open beta weekend before the game live launched. I was really unhappy with many aspects related to the Dwarves, and adventuring Hobbits and female Race of Man folk as well. I was devastated, really, because just the handling of Dwarven matters alone was so poorly thought out in my mind. (No, I'm not getting into all that now.)

I was particularly irritated back then that the only choice at dwarf character was "MALE". Getting rid of that, as silly as it seems, was a step in the right direction. Because of many reasons, the handling of both Dwarf gender, too many short beards being offered over long, what I thought was spectacularly badly handled modeling for the Blue Mountain dwarf areas, etc. etc. I know Dwarves in many worlds where they reside get the short end of the stick, and sadly it seemed this game would be no exception.

To be clear, I had full intentions of playing a female Dwarf exactly as is in lore. I am a role player, which was the bulk of why I came back, to RP all races here. The game limited me so much as to make this completely impossible unless I only wanted to stare at the same interior of a single setting forever (Hall). There was then, as there is now, no location in game (not even current beta) where someone can do that because all areas are open to all races. (More on this later below...)

However, when MoM came out, a friend bought it for me, and I tried to live in this world again. A lot I didn't like they fixed, Moria was a lot closer to what I thought most of the early Dwarf areas should have been, and other non dwarf related things they had fixed made more sense in my mind as well. The game still had many glaring flaws, in particular with lore overall, but it was corrected enough that I could work around what I didn't like to a comfortable point. So I stayed with it, and have only taken breaks from the game when real life prevented my playing time. Yes, I also had accepted they did certain things as they did from the get go because it was easier and gave the game a better chance to make the game being embraced by a a wider audience, in particular with real life female players that might want to adventure in a male dominated world. (That topic is an entire thread of its own.)

It doesn't mean I agree with those choices in full, yet I feel it doesn't mean anyone should push things farther off the cliff than they already are. Unless SSG is willing to do what Turbine was not, and retroactively fix many, many, things just with the Dwarven matters alone, you're just beating a dead horse even more than has already been done. Worse, some of what folks are asking really is just so out of lore it's just sad. Yes, the game can be easier to have fun when you don't have to choose to be strict with the lore, but why keep making this less Middle-earth than it already is? Go play DDO.

Having said that, I should get back to explaining the history of dead horses...

We had some misguided folk then that assumed because other NON LOTR Dwarf depictions showed pink bows in hair, no beards and obvious dresses clinging around hourglass like big and busty curves as opposed to less human mammal forms cloaked in tunics or even something more mumu like (if I am to be generous with the allowance of the latter), that's what a "proper" female dwarf should be all the time in every iteration of dwarves, regardless of the actual world building behind each variant. So in their minds, they should have a right to have that capability here for the blossoming bosomed curvy dwarven lassses with warmly blushed cheeks they were so wanting to build and deck out in lots of delicate "feminine" jewels and bow their beardless heads with very Anglo European minded gender color usage that screams female to them.

The discussions, if you can call them that, back then were made worse by the "go make me a sammich" real life men and boys that kept making things worse saying that the only place for a Dwarven female was barefoot in the mines, popping out much needed babies while the manly Dwarves provided (then, as now, imposing their own view upon a very different world build). This thread is a cake walk compared to those times, thank goodness.

The almost entirely real life females posting back then didn't give a fig about the lore. A lot of them also played DDO, which is NOT based on LOTR directly, even though Gygax did claim his character models were based on the creatures in Tolkein's world. His claims doesn't make it true no matter how many times it gets repeated. Just because he took a class that Tolkien taught doesn't mean diddly. You can look into that entire drama when the Tolkien estate threatened to sue TSR back in the day. TSR won their suit because for the most part, all the creatures were longstanding folk lore creatures. There's a reason you can't roll a "hobbit" in the pen and paper, but you can have a halfling. The word hobbit was an invention of Tolkien. (And not all halflings are hole dwellers, but that's another fall down a different rabbit hole.)

There are some folks here, with wanting human boobs and curves such, for example, who are but a "light" version of such misguided thinking because they also don't care about the lore. I also suspect they lack imagination. Why else must they impose human attributes upon Dwarven females? Do they lack the ability to embrace Dwarved femininity because it really is so far removed from their human reality? The truth is they only want what they want. Think of them like the folks that pretend they have lightsaber fights outside the Pony. You will never be able to convince them nor talk them down from their high hopes.

The point is not everyone (including myself) wants female dwarves, I'm not saying they look different in the eyes of other dwaraves cause of course they do not, Male dwarf has to know what to look for to tell the differences yes! but what i suggested was only an option to make both sides pleased, i can't think of any other way then this mechanic where dwarves can only see them as female. cause some players will want proper female dwarves and not look the same as male.

But getting back to what you say, Finnberry, I am in complete agreement. There are those that don't want to be "in on the secrets of Dwarves", as it were. Nor should such be forced upon them either. I cherry picked your response because you bring up a very valid point, and I want to support that quite strongly.

Although I see MadeOfLions' points regarding where she is, and how that is different, the problem is they have NEVER used this method before, so of course it's going to get the sort of responses that are here for two reasons:

1. Those that want what they want will use Dis as an excuse to push for what they want, whether what they want is right or not.
2. This is STILL WRONG because too many non Dwarf folk can SEE HER. They have deliberately put her in a spot that any race can freely transverse.

What MadeOfLions is really hoping we assume is they are trying to fix what was long broken. The spirit of intent is good, but the process is still flawed.

Allow me to explain and reinforce some bits to those who may not have considered the following...

Turbine messed up many aspects of the Dwarf race FROM THE START before you leave the Dwarf/Elf intro area/timeline. Yes, there is a history of Dwarf and Elven overlap in areas, but not to that degree nor in that area that was written. Has already been said, Skogrim and the Petty Dwarf spin offs, the Dourhands, are entirely Turbine created, just like the evil Ale Association.

Post intro, look at all the other races that are not only allowed in Thorin's Hall, but the non Dwarf trainers and all the rest there as well. Yes, the bulk of the NPCs there are Dwarves, but there is not one single place that is a Dwarf only area except in painfully specific ways.

They didn't do it, of course, for much the same reason we have so many other lore conflicting nonsense in game. A lot of folks would have cried "UNFAIR!". How dare Turbine make an area ONLY ONE RACE can enter? Lunancy! Hopefully this starts to make some things clear about why things will always be wrong, even if the Estate still allows it for...reasons.

Still, it is what I also asked for back then--which they worked towards with places like Moria yet even that wasn't quite right--was for more Dwarven areas to actually have connections so that a Dwarf can stay within their home territory without being among others (like an underground area between the structures in Thorin's' Hall to the TH Homesteads).

Certain outposts like in the North Downs can sort of be forgiven for being so above ground structurally, even though let's be honest in seeing Othrikar for what it is, a perpetuation of the mistake made with the Thorin's Gate/Hall area. Moria was an improvement, but even then you can only explain it away because they haven't fully taken back that territory yet, and thus the females can go back to what is their way. The small Dwarf quest hub camp in Angmar is a no brainer as is. It's not even a community, just a camp. So that works with the lore just fine. Nogland is even smaller than Othrikar, so same for that. Sadly, Moria and even that one Dwarf library are handled much the same as TH was. Any race can be there all the time. The Dwarf areas up in the Misties are the same. And so on, and so on. This new area is no different in that except for the big fancy entrance, as far as I can tell, it's all below.

Instead, the Dwarf areas we have in game from the start were ridiculously above ground with no interior paths to move from, say, TH to the Silver Deep, as in the TH area of the Blue Mountains. We can't even go to our dwarves homestead from the man Hall itself without leave the mountain. There's not even one long hallway (and I mean hallway, not portal) between. How silly is that? Then we also have Moria, where there is no area set aside that only Dwarves would enter, since the Dwarves have presumably thrown their gates open to any non Dwarf willing to run their errands.

We can't get to Sarnur, we can't to any of the Dwarven outposts that also have stupidly all above ground areas from below within the Blue Mountain area. Not a one.

MoL touched on this with his distinction about "abroad", though I've always seen it as a distinction between "above" rather than abroad, being Dwarf folk prefer being below in the mountains, not perched on top like ravens in trees. It's one of the reasons it was much easier for them to defend the Lonely Mountain because you had the main entrance in, plus the secret door. THAT WAS IT. They didn't have entire outbuildings, as it were, built on the surface.

Yes, the Dwarf folk were known to do business in Dale and the like could have even had shops or what have you there. It's not the same thing. You're trying to impose a modern inter-racial melting pot where none exists. Is it uncomfortable to think about? Perhaps to most modern folks. Still, the world is as Tolkien wrote it. It is not a tale in the modern sense about racial harmony. It's a tale about a white male underdog defying all odds during terrible, terrible times with his trusty white male cook of the same race at his side. Yes, the hobbit's white male allies help him get part of the way there in terms of the traveling party, but their only joined cause was to stop evil from taking us all. The last thing on their minds back then was whether an average adventurer would ever see a female Dwarf as she would be seen in her closed community that was common at that time.

Why the break with Dis in this regard, I simply cannot understand, given they have never followed the model prior, and i have no hope at all they will retro fix what has been long in game. It's simply too large an undertaking for a race that is so often overlooked. I know the argument there is now this is the Age of Man and all that, but then why do elves get so much love? Hobbits get their own sideline, but despite being hole dwellers, they have a longer history of living near to Men folk areas, and you don't have the same gender issues as with Dwarf folk.

So because we have areas where any race can freely go about, it conflicts with the lore because the reason why the females of the race were so rarely seen by other races is because those other races had little reason to be where they are now allowed to roam freely. This is why we keep having this same discussion over and over again. How much broken is too much? How much could be fixed if devs were allowed to?

The ONLY real reason everyone can see Dis is because we already have hundreds if not thousands of Hobbit adventurers, and female Race of Man folk adventuring as well.

That doesn't mean they can just go throw everything out the window.

I wish folks would stop trying to push things further away from the lore than we already have and stop getting back to this dead horse time and again,

[Herwegur]

Post intro, look at all the other races that are not only allowed in Thorin's Hall, but the non Dwarf trainers and all the rest there as well. Yes, the bulk of the NPCs there are Dwarves, but there is not one single place that is a Dwarf only area except in painfully specific ways.

They didn't do it, of course, for much the same reason we have so many other lore conflicting nonsense in game. A lot of folks would have cried "UNFAIR!". How dare Turbine make an area ONLY ONE RACE can enter? Lunancy! Hopefully this starts to make some things clear about why things will always be wrong, even if the Estate still allows it for...reasons.

So because we have areas where any race can freely go about, it conflicts with the lore because the reason why the females of the race were so rarely seen by other races is because those other races had little reason to be where they are now allowed to roam freely. This is why we keep having this same discussion over and over again. How much broken is too much? How much could be fixed if devs were allowed to?

The ONLY real reason everyone can see Dis is because we already have hundreds if not thousands of Hobbit adventurers, and female Race of Man folk adventuring as well.

I wish folks would stop trying to push things further away from the lore than we already have and stop getting back to this dead horse time and again,

I appreciate your enthusiasm for source material and adherence to sub-created lore-world consistency, and I therefore mean no disrespect or knock whatsoever to the detailed post only partially quoted above. The rich tapestry of multidimensional resonances of Middle Earth history notwithstanding, Lord of the Rings Online remains a MMO game first and foremost - it is the very medium through which it exists. In other words, by the virtue of the massively multiplayer aspect of this creative platform, it has to take into account being accessible and available to a great range of players, and of course find proactive and imaginative ways to balance this multiplayer accessibility with the creative endeavor of bringing Middle Earth itself to life.

As SSG is a business, it is in their best interests to extend the life of their product by making it attractive to a wide customer base while at the same time maintaining the product's integrity to ensure it remains attractive without isolating too large a contingent of their patrons. By stating all this I only mean to remind that decisions governing what is and isn't included in the game, and how things are implemented, necessarily remain first and foremost business decisions mindful of strategic marketing and customer retention.

I am by no means trying to downplay the incredible creativity on part of Lotro developers, I know it is indeed a labor of love - and as a player I feel it so strongly too. I mean only that meticulous devotion to Middle Earth lore, as can be implemented in a massively multiplayer game platform, inevitably comes ever hand in hand with certain compromises dictated by the very nature of that platform.

In other words, had LotrO been implemented in utterly strict adherence to a literal interpretation of LotR + appendices as canon, without allowing for creatiev deviations, it would be either unplayable as an MMO, or have an appearance of some restricted browser game (Hobbit Farmville in the Shire, Dwarf Dungeon crawling in Moria, chess in Rivendell or whatever, you get the idea). I mean, it would still be fun for lore nerds who only ever wanna roleplay races in their respective areas, but it would resemble Second Life instead of action/adventure RPG with questing, toon progression, raids etc. The mere gameplay mechanics and dynamics of the MMO "genre" of action/adventure demand thinking outside the box and being more inclusive when it comes to interpreting "lore" for this platform.

I've seen so much criticism from lore purists directed at LotrO, yet so much of said critique fails to take into account that LotrO is not a personal fanfic and not a purely aesthetic creation, neither is it fan art - it is an MMO product and cannot realistically be expected to measure to standards reserved for fandom-generated private art.

Yes, any race can enter Thorin's Hall. Any race can enter the Shire, and Caras Galadhon, and Aragorn's bedroom or whatever. But to be outraged by this? The solution is really very simple, yet it too often gets lore purists' panties in a twist when it's mentioned : If one doesn't like it, just don't do it... it's really that simple. Someone doesn't like other races visiting an iconic/restrictive area, so don't bring own alts of other races there. Someone doesn't like hobbit adventurers, so roll only hobbit Shire-dwellers. Someone doesn't like elves running around Bree, so don't bring your elf to run around Bree. If Dis the dwarf lady is too visible... don't let her be seen by non-dwarf alts when bringing them through that area.

It really boggles my mind why so many lore purists (in general, over many years) keep insisting that just because they find something "lore breaking" or offensive it should be removed or erased from game entirely, to prevent others from doing it too. I mean, it's one thing to have personal preferences for lore-immersion, but to actually get bothered by other players for using it and seeking some kinda control over it... Strikes me too much as acting like the game belongs to them alone. Whereas it remains simply what it is, a MMO platform, and thus by necessity accommodating other players' needs and entertainment purposes - even when they dare not to be as deeply into the lore as some others. There's a place in game for everyone... but just because some feature is "lore breaking" doesn't mean players should be prevented from visiting any iconic story location on their favorite character, or seeing iconic historical figures on any character they choose to play.

I say all of the above as someone who does play immersively in full story-mode in adherence to the inner consistency and integrity of Middle Earth history and cultural developments. And I sincerely appreciate the ongoing efforts on behalf of devs to keep fleshing out these various aspects of the rich heritage and keep LotrO an immersive and inclusive experience that accommodates many playstyles while retaining a very respectful, careful, and sensitive approach to Tolkien IP (the best I have encountered in any mass entertainment media).

So again, it's not a direct reply to Gaming_Gal, just taking this opportunity to put the LotrO lore talk in perspective for discussion's sake. And maybe to encourage not to take game-related "lore breaks" so offensively seriously - everyone has freedom to enjoy what they like