So the up coming new class is Corsair?

[Oldwiley]

Never underestimate what people want: 19th March 2013:

https://forums.lotro.com/forums/newr...eply&p=6720052

Epic Book Volume 17
Part 1

Chapter 1 - An unexpected Grind
Talk with galadriel just before she leaves middle earth.
Reward (15s)

Chapter 2 - The fragments
Return to Mordor and talk to Grindor, emissary of the new king.
Reward (Hat of the the snappy dazzler)

Chapter 3 - The ruins of Mount Doom
Collect ring fragment from lava around Mount Doom.
Reward (3 Post ruin tokens)

Chapter 5 - (instance cd weekly) The dark lords basement.
Enter the hidden dungeon under the ruins of barad dur and collect a ring fragment deconstruction crystal.
Reward (1 token of the smoking badlands armour, 30k legendary xp rune)

Chapter 6 - The crystal maze.
Bring the ring fragments to The maze garden instance at the rear of the now empty garden of galadriel and deconstruct it to get an old earth hammer.
Reward (15s)

Chapter 7 - An unexpectedly long detour
Find someone who knows how far the ring fragments might have showered. Talk to Fred the geologist in Michael Delving.
Reward (A Pirate Hat - cosmetic)

Chapter 8 - Into Umbar
Talk to Humphrey the Pirate in Harad
Reward (Pirate Boots cosmetic)

Chapter 9 - Boars in Harad.
Desert Boars plague Harad, Humphrey has asked you to clear the road of boars. Defeat 30 boars in Harad.
Reward (15s, 15,000xp rune)

Chapter 10 - Umbar!!
The scurvy dogs of umbar have hidden the ring fragments. Investigate the town to uncover their hiding places.
Rewards (ring fragments - 36 unlock 6 by quest hub, a further 30 by the RAID)

Chapter 11 - The Pirates of the Umbarrean. Raid.
Kill 6 trash mobs twice with symbols on their heads, then defeat the Pirate Lord with his parrot pet and octopus on the ship.
Rewards (Remaining fragments)

Chapter 12 - An unexpected twist.
Having destroyed the ring fragments you speak with Tenuous the sage, Tenuous tells you that in Rhun there is a lost temple that holds a dark secret.

Chapter 13 - It is the doom of men that they forget.
New Mob - dementorator. In the temple you find a scrap of parchment that reveals sauron also had a necklace with a bit of his soul in it. Legend tells of a land far to the east of Rhun.
Reward - new armour barter token Armour of the exponential East.

Epic Book Volume 17
Part 2
Coming soon

A pirate called Humphrey? ....... That is absolute genius!


He would be deserving of a great deal of character development.

[Radhruin_EU]

Already pointed out the journey doesn't sound THAT long as you tried to say it was, based on the actual scale of Middle-earth vs real world. Maybe I'll make a more exact comparison someday because makes me curious, but not today.

Hundreds of miles, and at least 250 of those across the no-man's-land of South Gondor which would be far from safe to cross. Oh, and rivers to cross as well. Not exactly a hobbit walking-party

Which isn't as out-of-place no way! as you try to say it is (as long as they're not very significantly dark out of Far Harad, that is). That's based on the game depictions, no less.

With their limitations in terms of different looks, so you're playing games there by limiting it to skin colour. Were it realistic, different ethnicities could be told apart and that guy of yours would just plain look like he was from Harad. Just like you can tell (for example) an RL Berber from an Italian.

We shall see once they delve more into that history

No we won't, the game has *never* allowed for the passage of thousands of years in terms of how things look.

But not more than a thousand years from last conflict, contact and political maneuvers in the region. Tolkien gave us some dates for these massive invasions the size of Alexander's endeavor but smaller scale "real politics" or military encounters would happen all the time, with one side trying to meddle in nearby affairs of the other and take advantage. They were not just sitting there at the border, between contested zone, static and unmovable, for thousands of years. Yes, shocking I now, but a fact a territory was contested means it changed hands, not that it was static and never-ending neutral zone. You could easily have different darker skinned factions out of nearby Harad settled in Harondor or close by and siding with Gondor at different points of history and even be granted a safe place in Gondor itself when things got out of hand (Not to mention earlier in Gondor's history, when it covered much of Middle-earth and made all of Harad its vassals, pretty much, so yes, it's exactly like Rome and Greeks).

And now you're just making up fanfic again, inventing factions to side with Gondor when there's no indication that was ever meant to happen. South Gondor had been contested continually since the time of the KIn-srife when Gondor's control slipped, and they'd never got it back. And the place has a well-defined northern border, the Anduin, which that far down its course was simply huge so it's a profound natural barrier. And as well as that, South Gondor shares borders with South Ithilien and Mordor so just like Ithilien it wouldn't be a safe place for anyone to be; you'd take your life in your hands travelling across it. So far as we know Gondor had no friendly dealings with any of the Haradrim for that thousand-plus years.

That's just you. That Sauron exists doesn't mean some of the most basic rules of political hostility and maneuvers don't apply. Sauron is a propaganda, sure, and the culture was influenced by him, but that doesn't mean it would be cmplete isolation. It's just more like fanatics Christian kingdoms clashing with a nasty Caliphate, it's tense all the time and it could get even tenser with Sauron's influence involved, but it doesn't mean they're just perfectly isolated. In hostility, even the most tense of sides, often use rebel types and dissatisfied groups in the opposing factions to their advantage, loyalties shift and so on. Harondor and its borders/adjacent regions would be a boiling pot just like the Middle-east and the Levant specifically during the Crusades. (Although much smaller scale).

More fanfic, downplaying Sauron's influence. I mean, he's only their king and god and they're only terrified of him, of course they're going to risk his anger by crossing him! No chance at all of anything horrible happening to people who don't do his bidding, no, not at all! Sorry but having an immortal god-king with magical super-powers and extremely scary undead servants makes it just a little bit different from anything real.

Like it worked in history, pretty much

It doesn't work like history. You should know that by now.

You really believe too much in this "every single citizen is a perfect vigilant spy of the state so every guard is immediately informed" Saboteurs of what? A tavern fence? Again, you're blowing it way out of proportions. And of course you're not taking into account some Gondor people can be dark-skinned (which is already the case in game) so you live in your own bubble where a guard is immediately able to tell based on color of their skin and then act like it's bigotry out of Witcher... sure. Also, you can basically take a less travelled route and avoid some of the settlements where it may be more risky. Well, I'm not sure how money works in all places in Tolkien, we were never told, but I guess they could find a way to exchange if they needed (for gold, silver etc).

This is just a strawman. Ridiculous, they're at war and during wartime civilians are *told* to keep an eye out. They don't know what your man from Harad would be there for - he totally could be a spy, saboteur or assassin as far as anyone would know. People would be nosy and ask questions and one more time, what on earth would he say that wouldn't sound weird or mad? It's not bigotry when a given bunch of people really are known to side with your greatest enemy and some of them have been attacking your shipping and raiding your coasts.

TIL that Gondor's security is, according to you, so non-existent that some Haradrim-looking dude complete with obvious Haradrim accent and manners could just stroll around unchallenged, without anyone batting an eyelid. I've seldom heard anything quite so daft - how on earth could the place have survived all that time if they were so casual?

[TesalionLortus]

With their limitations in terms of different looks, so you're playing games there by limiting it to skin colour. Were it realistic, different ethnicities could be told apart and that guy of yours would just plain look like he was from Harad. Just like you can tell (for example) an RL Berber from an Italian.

This is obviously not what the game is doing with all those darker skinned Gondorians, they're not just plain "Italians" with a little darker complexion as you put it, they're more darker skinned than that, but okay, I'll let you deny the reality of things here.

No we won't, the game has *never* allowed for the passage of thousands of years in terms of how things look.

We won't because... what? If there is one thing where the devs have full flexibility and no resource constraints it's exploring the world, its history and expanding it. Not even sure what you're referring to here, probably to soldier models/armor looking the same between vast periods of time in some instances? But that's something totally different and we all know it's due to asset rehash and limited resources, not due to their intention that the things were always static across thousands of years.

And now you're just making up fanfic again, inventing factions to side with Gondor when there's no indication that was ever meant to happen. South Gondor had been contested continually since the time of the KIn-srife when Gondor's control slipped, and they'd never got it back. And the place has a well-defined northern border, the Anduin, which that far down its course was simply huge so it's a profound natural barrier. And as well as that, South Gondor shares borders with South Ithilien and Mordor so just like Ithilien it wouldn't be a safe place for anyone to be; you'd take your life in your hands travelling across it. So far as we know Gondor had no friendly dealings with any of the Haradrim for that thousand-plus years.

And everything was static across thousand-plus years and sterile, yep, sure. So now you're just being you, with the usual "canon says nothing here across thousand-plus years = there must have been nothing across thousand-plus years, that's the sacred intention!" (as if it mattered to Tolkien to describe every single regional strife, political maneuver or edict ever made, but these things were clearly there as part of the world).

Adaptation and the typical filing-in-the-blanks, as this game has always done, rather than a fanfic. Not that I painted some detailed, perfect image of what might have been, it was just a simple example. But clearly, the devs have room to paint some major regional historical happenings and political maneuvers of the past here.

More fanfic, downplaying Sauron's influence. I mean, he's only their king and god and they're only terrified of him, of course they're going to risk his anger by crossing him! No chance at all of anything horrible happening to people who don't do his bidding, no, not at all! Sorry but having an immortal god-king with magical super-powers and extremely scary undead servants makes it just a little bit different from anything real.

It doesn't work like history. You should know that by now.

It pretty much works like history and the real world, except with Sauron, elves, orcs, and sorcerers thrown into the mix. You speak a lot about Sauron's influence that I'm "downplaying" but what you're effectively proposing by your Sauron's influence is the unrealistic level of control over individuals and inner workings of governments and border security that would only be possible in 20th-21st century by your typical World Order organization or conscious AI overlord, with the modern means of communication and tracking. Sauron, powerful and feared as he is, doesn't have such means. He's got religion, occult, his feared assassin servants and watches as god and overlord over all these vassals (who have their own vassals and their own affairs too). What Sauron is ruling over (other than Mordor) isn't... like North Korea... a Nazgul / local government won't snatch you because their satellite detected you crossed border that one time and brought some spare Gondorian produce with you from nearby Harondor... Like, seriously.

This is just a strawman. Ridiculous, they're at war and during wartime civilians are *told* to keep an eye out. They don't know what your man from Harad would be there for - he totally could be a spy, saboteur or assassin as far as anyone would know. People would be nosy and ask questions and one more time, what on earth would he say that wouldn't sound weird or mad? It's not bigotry when a given bunch of people really are known to side with your greatest enemy and some of them have been attacking your shipping and raiding your coasts.

TIL that Gondor's security is, according to you, so non-existent that some Haradrim-looking dude complete with obvious Haradrim accent and manners could just stroll around unchallenged, without anyone batting an eyelid. I've seldom heard anything quite so daft - how on earth could the place have survived all that time if they were so casual?

But it's not war in a potential intro scenario I was proposing, yet you keep saying war war war. Let's just assume last years have been somewhat neutral, before the beginning of the War of the Ring. Pray tell, what saboteur threat to Gondor is one "possibly out of Harad but can't be sure?" dude (who never did anything suspicious... or never visited a "key infrastructure/garrison area") 1 year in advance before any armies show up? (That they don't know yet will show up because there hven't been any movements yet noticed) Also, pray tell, sticking to the game and the fact there may be some darker skinned Gondorians (of the same shade Haradrim are, or some of the Harondor population may have a lot to do with Harad population immediately at its borders to begin with...) how would that work exactly? There would be a purity expert at every entrance everywhere (and on roads, crossings) to make sure they're not a potential danger, based on race? I really don't get it, what exactly are you saying, how does it work then. Also, as for people being noisy, how exactly if in some settlements you can basically keep your hood and blend in with the crowd? As for avoiding settlements... who is going to be noisy? Animals and boars of Gondor?

[Radhruin_EU]

This is obviously not what the game is doing with all those darker skinned Gondorians, they're not just plain "Italians" with a little darker complexion as you put it, they're more darker skinned than that, but okay, I'll let you deny the reality of things here.

Comprehension, man, I already said that the local (non-Dunedain) Gondorian locals should be shorter and a bit darker-skinned than the Dunedain.

The game's take on this is frankly silly. No sense of the passage of time, given the thousand-plus years that had passed since Gondor had held any part of Harad. That's more than forty generations of common Men.

We won't because... what?

Because the devs never, ever do that.

And everything was static across thousand-plus years and sterile, yep, sure.

Another bad strawman. You don't get to make up your own history to suit yourself. Nothing Tolkien said implied anything like what you suggested.

It pretty much works like history and the real world

No, it really doesn't. Progress doesn't happen like it does in the real world, even after thousands of years, because Tolkien didn't want it to. Populations don't grow and change like they should. Bree, for example, had had a thousand years - why is it still just a village plus some nearby hamlets, rather than having grown into a small country at least? Or a petty kingdom? Why is the Shire still within its original borders, with the hobbits having been protected for all that time and hence no obvious reason for their population not to have grown? How come the Dunlendings haven't taken over more of Eriador, and are still confined to Dunland? None of that is realistic. So it's all too telling that you've missed all of that, and are trying to work historical ideas into a setting that just doesn't work that way.

I didn't say anything about Sauron controlling individuals. Stop strawmanning. He works by exerting control over a people's ruling caste and he is *meant* to be very good at that. And those people would then use oppressive means of control over their own people both by conventional means and the sorcery that Sauron would teach some among them. All that's necessary is to convince people that the Free Peoples are their enemies and cruelly punish anyone who fraternises with them.

If people in Gondor conveniently ignored your one guy from Harad, who you might know is harmless but they don't and can't, then that implies they'd ignore other guys like that as well and then what's to stop Sauron & Co. sending in people who'd be up to no good? Gondor couldn't afford to let potential enemies just wander in and make themselves at home like that. You're just pleading an exception, as if a player-character should be magically immune from the suspicion that should greet anyone looking and sounding like him who turned up unannounced in Gondor. If it worked like that then I don't know why they'd even bother with all those walls, towers, gates and guards if random Haradrim could just walk in like it's Wendy's.

[istvana]

"Progress doesn't happen like it does in the real world"

Progress is far from inevitable - and the current general Western belief that progress is normal is highly limited in both time and space.

For many centuries in many parts of the world the belief was quite general that progress was neither natural nor desirable. Europe after the fall of Rome - the prevailing view was that our ancestors were far greater than we were and we lived in a fallen world - for reasons known only to God. The Middle Kingdom at various times in its history - things were as they should be and the ideal was for things to remain the same - any change was undesirable.

[k40rne]

Really not if they were used as farm labourers, as miners, or for other literally backbreaking work where they'd be worked to death. Every bit as cruel.

Yes, why I said "mostly." Clearly anyone in the mines & the like had a miserable existence - likely worse than cotton-picking in the American south.

[k40rne]

Never played it >.>

Oh, it was a joke anyway. Let's just say panaceas only exist in Greek mythos.

[k40rne]

About the Barbary vs Colonial slavers debate - I guess there is no point "measuring" cruelty because in the end it all boils down to cultural difference. Other than the obvious - like geographical location/biome, which points towards Berbers - the difference here is that IRL colonial cruelty would be more of a "hidden behind mask of decency/gentleman" and not as wildly witnessed by some of the general citizens of these countries. For Berbers it was more like a cruelty on which their life were practically built and not like they would try to hide it at home putting on a mask of decent respected person. Would need to be confirmed through appropriate history books and research whether such an underlying difference was there - but it's my hunch that it was. And something like this or worse should very much apply to the Corsairs which is why we're saying it should be a cultural thing, with some serious morally black connotations. I think there is nothing European/colonial about the Corsairs. (The devs could even draw a parrarel between Ottoman Empire the Barbary pirates supplied with slaves and the ruling Harad state).

Maybe you should read up more on what happened in the Belgian Congo then & even as late as 1960s Kenya under British Rule & how they treated the Mao Mao.

They had industrialized cruelty & brought it to scale, which could be seen as arguably worse. No one is arguing Barbary Pirates weren't cruel & vicious, but look at Columbus who is still celebrated as heroic in many places & his sadism went well beyond what was accepted in those times, slaughtering a mostly peaceful people in Hispaniola too.

[Radhruin_EU]

"Progress doesn't happen like it does in the real world"

Progress is far from inevitable - and the current general Western belief that progress is normal is highly limited in both time and space.

For many centuries in many parts of the world the belief was quite general that progress was neither natural nor desirable. Europe after the fall of Rome - the prevailing view was that our ancestors were far greater than we were and we lived in a fallen world - for reasons known only to God. The Middle Kingdom at various times in its history - things were as they should be and the ideal was for things to remain the same - any change was undesirable.

It's not set up like history at all, it's a 'legendary' setting of the sort where there's an initial set of knowledge handed down from some higher power (the Valar in this case) brought to mortal lands by some special knowledgeable, skilled and powerful people (the High Elves) and broadly speaking there's decline and loss from there, either at the hands of evil or through hubris, or both. Men get to hit a high-water mark of their own in Numenor, after being blessed by the Valar and with knowledge passed to them by the Elves, but they squander that. The Dunedain kingdoms in Middle-earth start off great based on the skills and knowledge they'd brought with them from Numenor, and then decline or fall. And besides that, technological progress -machinery and industrialisation - is seen as evil (with the Numenoreans having achieved their greatest power while under Sauron's influence). So it's stylised for storytelling purposes, not like anything real.

[k40rne]

Because the devs never, ever do that.


Another bad strawman. You don't get to make up your own history to suit yourself. Nothing Tolkien said implied anything like what you suggested.

Wrong, that's exactly what they will do (and will need to be done) & what Tolkien even wanted to happen according to his Letter to Milton Waldman. He was always evolving his world too, to make it more realistic so most of TesalionLortus's argument here is quite reasonable.

You are essentially reading meta-data & stating nothing can be filled in from there based upon our understanding of history, politics, psychology, sociology & anthropology. I'm pretty sure you'd have argued against making Dunlendings into a variety of separate clans at this point.

[Radhruin_EU]

Wrong, that's exactly what they will do (and will need to be done) & what Tolkien even wanted to happen according to his Letter to Milton Waldman. He was always evolving his world too, to make it more realistic so most of TesalionLortus's argument here is quite reasonable.

You are essentially reading meta-data & stating nothing can be filled in from there based upon our understanding of history, politics, psychology, sociology & anthropology. I'm pretty sure you'd have argued against making Dunlendings into a variety of separate clans at this point.

I was talking to someone here and *they* don't get to just make up their own history as fanfic (especially if it involves ignoring Tolkien when it suits them to). And of course the devs benefit from artistic license but still, their setup does *not* always make sense (it's just what works for a game so it doesn't hold water if looked into in detail). Middle-earth was never 'realistic' in that sense, nor intended to be (being internally consistent and compelling in its detail is not the same as realism) and I've already explained why.

Also you're entirely wrong about what I think about the Dunlendings, I actually came up with the idea of having at least one clan opposed to Saruman *myself* for an RP character background long before the game got that far. And since they're sort-of-Celtic, or course they can be split into clans because that suits them. That's the sort of thing that can happen in the background without affecting what happens in LOTR (I had the idea of that one clan having been massacred by the others who'd sided with Saruman, with the character I was writing the background for having escaped and made their way northwards).

[TesalionLortus]

Maybe you should read up more on what happened in the Belgian Congo then & even as late as 1960s Kenya under British Rule & how they treated the Mao Mao.


They had industrialized cruelty & brought it to scale, which could be seen as arguably worse. No one is arguing Barbary Pirates weren't cruel & vicious, but look at Columbus who is still celebrated as heroic in many places & his sadism went well beyond what was accepted in those times, slaughtering a mostly peaceful people in Hispaniola too.

Yes, clearly, but how is that relevant? As I said, that's "away from home" in the realm of all these colonies. It was kind of this other world on the other side of oblivious morality left back in Europe but in the colonies people did terrible things to enrich themselves under cheap excuses - and enrich their kings and citizenry back at home, but without confronting everyone back at home with the reality of things on daily basis. Corsairs are being publicly cruel basically at home, they don't have colonies, and there is no "civilization" excuse=bigotry either, that's just their "honest trade" and a difference I was referring to

Comprehension, man, I already said that the local (non-Dunedain) Gondorian locals should be shorter and a bit darker-skinned than the Dunedain.

Gondor is a big place. It stretches from one climate zone to the other and at its height covered/ruled over West and South in equal measure. You're talking about that like Gondor was only ever (and still is) that row of White Mountains from Andrath to MT. And you're still ignoring what's actually there in the game right now, with these skin tones.

Because the devs never, ever do that.

I think you missed all the deed logs in CardoSwan or Angle... or all the stuff about Vandassari! That and a lot more.

You don't get to make up your own history to suit yourself. Nothing Tolkien said implied anything like what you suggested.

= what I said:

"canon says nothing here across thousand-plus years = there must have been nothing across thousand-plus years, that's the sacred intention!" (as if it mattered to Tolkien to describe every single regional strife, political maneuver or edict ever made, but these things were clearly there as part of the world).

No, it really doesn't. Progress doesn't happen like it does in the real world, even after thousands of years, because Tolkien didn't want it to. Populations don't grow and change like they should.

As someone already mentioned above - while still happening regarding certain areas, it is not unbelievable that progress in such a historical setting... is far slower than you would typically think of. So it's not unlikely that some of these things would remain like that but it doesn't mean nothing ever changes or never happens across the passage of time where it realistically is ought to be happening.

Bree, for example, had had a thousand years - why is it still just a village plus some nearby hamlets, rather than having grown into a small country at least? Or a petty kingdom? Why is the Shire still within its original borders, with the hobbits having been protected for all that time and hence no obvious reason for their population not to have grown? How come the Dunlendings haven't taken over more of Eriador, and are still confined to Dunland? None of that is realistic. So it's all too telling that you've missed all of that, and are trying to work historical ideas into a setting that just doesn't work that way.

I could think of some examples to make these things plausible, with the most basic one of all: how do you know the Shire of old wasn't a dumpster and that it hadn't actually grown over time? But that's beside the point, what strikes me the most here is you're saying Tolkien was unrealistic and when you're presented with realistic scenarios then you say they aren't realistic.

Also, unless you have some clear-cut evidence of it, I'm pretty sure Tolkien didn't intend for things to be "unrealistic" all across the board or for his world to feel like it's never-changing and static... as you tend to present it as. I would say he cared very much about making the world as real and historical as possible (albeit with fantasy, legendary elements of course). However, it's a natural trap no author can escape, simply life: you're just 1 person and there is only so much you can do, you focus on the parts you want to focus on and that you find the most narratively important but... can't flesh it all out... up to every little detail and fill in every single year with actual historical events that would take place in regional daily life and politics. It got nothing to do with intention, for the most part. Only with time, chosen focus and lifespan of mankind

I didn't say anything about Sauron controlling individuals. Stop strawmanning. He works by exerting control over a people's ruling caste and he is *meant* to be very good at that. And those people would then use oppressive means of control over their own people both by conventional means and the sorcery that Sauron would teach some among them. All that's necessary is to convince people that the Free Peoples are their enemies and cruelly punish anyone who fraternises with them.

I come up with theories of what you mean because you give me nothing of substance/no details, that's all there is to it, so you can stop with these strawmanning accusations all the time, instead give me details. Based on what you said here, which is very general and non-specific, I would still pretty much say what you're effectively suggesting is that these rulers that Sauron controls have absolute, totalitarian control out of 20th 21st century for everything to work out as perfectly and isolated as you suggest. Fraternizes? No, I was merely mentioning a guy who crossed a border one or two times for some reason and then came back home with some leftover Gondorian produce. The guy may not even care about Gondor one bit and glad to go off to war when the time comes, no different than a travelling Jerusalem pilgrim enlisting in the Crusade army to "take it back" once the time came. Fraternizing how exactly? The guy is immediately to be snatched upon his return by the secret police - for that?

If people in Gondor conveniently ignored your one guy from Harad, who you might know is harmless but they don't and can't, then that implies they'd ignore other guys like that as well and then what's to stop Sauron & Co. sending in people who'd be up to no good?
Gondor couldn't afford to let potential enemies just wander in and make themselves at home like that. You're just pleading an exception, as if a player-character should be magically immune from the suspicion that should greet anyone looking and sounding like him who turned up unannounced in Gondor. If it worked like that then I don't know why they'd even bother with all those walls, towers, gates and guards if random Haradrim could just walk in like it's Wendy's.

OK, then I'm sorry but there is nothing I can do to explain that better... if you really don't get the idea there are areas, places, keeps, supply routes and garrisons that need more attention and vigilance than others (and that some just don't need as much attention nor would it possible in practice anyway). Oh, and hey, one random Haradrim, as you put it, doesn't have a bomb on him, and the city/garrison themselves are closely watched, so it's not like they would be able to do actual damage, alone...

[k40rne]

I was talking to someone here and *they* don't get to just make up their own history as fanfic (especially if it involves ignoring Tolkien when it suits them to). And of course the devs benefit from artistic license but still, their setup does *not* always make sense (it's just what works for a game so it doesn't hold water if looked into in detail). Middle-earth was never 'realistic' in that sense, nor intended to be (being internally consistent and compelling in its detail is not the same as realism) and I've already explained why.

You too often use terms like "fanfic" or "whataboutery" or even "straw-man", which amounts to using simplified arguments and avoids having to explain the details of why the other person is wrong in your opion.

What TesalionLortus was doing was no different than what Pierson would be doing, fleshing out a region or series of regions based upon our anthropological understanding of how cultures adapt over time & of course not all are going to behave the same way. So you assuming Near Harad, Far Harad & Umbar would have similar dynamics when dealing with the legacy of Sauron makes little sense. I don't always (or often) agree with TL, but he has made a cogent argument in this situation, whereas you seem to see things as stationary or only in flux, when Tolkien has explicitly stated it.

Also you're entirely wrong about what I think about the Dunlendings, I actually came up with the idea of having at least one clan opposed to Saruman *myself* for an RP character background long before the game got that far. And since they're sort-of-Celtic, or course they can be split into clans because that suits them. That's the sort of thing that can happen in the background without affecting what happens in LOTR (I had the idea of that one clan having been massacred by the others who'd sided with Saruman, with the character I was writing the background for having escaped and made their way northwards).

I was being facetious, but it's good to know you are fine with clans non-homogeneity. I hope you expand that to the tribes of Near Harad & Far Harad too.

[Radhruin_EU]

You too often use terms like "fanfic" or "whataboutery" or even "straw-man", which amounts to using simplified arguments and avoids having to explain the details of why the other person is wrong in your opion.

I said what was wrong with it as well. Making up an unlikely playable character is one thing, inventing a whole extra faction and their history - and changing the apparent history of Gondor in the process - just to manufacture an excuse for why that character could casually stroll into Gondor unnoticed and unremarked is quite another and that's blatant fanfic. Distorting the world around the character so they can be shoehorned in.

As for whataboutism, you brought up the subject of colonial slavery when it had no relevance to what we were talking about, just to try to downplay the Corsairs' use of galley-slaves. And TesalionLortus used repeated strawman arguments - I don't have to just sit there and meekly accept when someone sets up a distorted view of what I said just so they can knock it over, rather than deal with what I actually said.

What TesalionLortus was doing was no different than what Pierson would be doing, fleshing out a region or series of regions based upon our anthropological understanding of how cultures adapt over time & of course not all are going to behave the same way. So you assuming Near Harad, Far Harad & Umbar would have similar dynamics when dealing with the legacy of Sauron makes little sense. I don't always (or often) agree with TL, but he has made a cogent argument in this situation, whereas you seem to see things as stationary or only in flux, when Tolkien has explicitly stated it.

Anthropological understanding of what, exactly? There is no real model for a malign, super-powered supernatural influence that's been at work for millennia. Sauron had been purposely trying to isolate the Free Peoples and keep them embattled, gradually chipping away at them. It's not an even remotely normal situation so simplistic appeals to real-world history etc. don't work.

I was being facetious, but it's good to know you are fine with clans non-homogeneity. I hope you expand that to the tribes of Near Harad & Far Harad too.

Somewhere within Harad? Sure, as it's a big place. Anywhere near the borders with Gondor, where Sauron's influence would have been strongest and most heavily enforced? No.

Besides, you're also not comparing like with like. Saruman didn't have the power Sauron did (especially as he'd been frittering it away), nor was he as skilled or practised at getting Men to do his bidding, nor did he have such terrifying servants. Nobody regarded Saruman as their god. Bit of a difference, yes?

[Radhruin_EU]

Gondor is a big place. It stretches from one climate zone to the other and at its height covered/ruled over West and South in equal measure. You're talking about that like Gondor was only ever (and still is) that row of White Mountains from Andrath to MT. And you're still ignoring what's actually there in the game right now, with these skin tones.

I'm taking issue with the game's contrived take on it, yes, as there's no plausible reason for them to have persisted over so much time and that plainly wasn't what Tolkien had in mind either. Gondor's only been that familiar bit for more than a thousand years, with South Gondor being lost even prior to that. So no, I have NOT been doing that, just pointing out that potential diversity from a thousand-plus years ago would have declined over time as it blended into the population. So you're talking as if it was way more recent that it actually was.

Making up your own history just so you can shoehorn in an improbable player-character from Harad and have them stroll around Gondor without anyone batting an eyelid is simply taking the mickey.

I already explained why realism does not apply. With examples. You can't have that happening generally (since it's how Tolkien set things up) and then suddenly have realistic stuff happening in one place because it's convenient to you.

I could think of some examples to make these things plausible, with the most basic one of all: how do you know the Shire of old wasn't a dumpster and that it hadn't actually grown over time? But that's beside the point, what strikes me the most here is you're saying Tolkien was unrealistic and when you're presented with realistic scenarios then you say they aren't realistic.

Tolkien is visibly unrealistic when it comes to two things in particular: population growth over time and cultural progress (or rather lack of it). I already explained why. As for the Shire, it had been like that for a long time (you can look that up if you like, it's in the prologue to LOTR) and nothing had happened to put any crimp in its population since the Long Winter which had been a long, long time ago. And Bree had been there for far longer - how could it keep staying more or less the same over such a long time? There's a weird sort of stasis to it; the population should gradually have increased, and more villages should have spring up round it (not just three hamlets) since there's no obvious reason why not and a thousand years is a very long time. So no, he doesn't present the world as if it were realistic, it's a device for telling a story - he tries to make it internally consistent.

I come up with theories of what you mean because you give me nothing of substance/no details, that's all there is to it, so you can stop with these strawmanning accusations all the time, instead give me details. Based on what you said here, which is very general and non-specific, I would still pretty much say what you're effectively suggesting is that these rulers that Sauron controls have absolute, totalitarian control out of 20th 21st century for everything to work out as perfectly and isolated as you suggest. Fraternizes? No, I was merely mentioning a guy who crossed a border one or two times for some reason and then came back home with some leftover Gondorian produce. The guy may not even care about Gondor one bit and glad to go off to war when the time comes, no different than a travelling Jerusalem pilgrim enlisting in the Crusade army to "take it back" once the time came. Fraternizing how exactly? The guy is immediately to be snatched upon his return by the secret police - for that?

So you're complaining when I call you out for strawmanning and then you go right ahead and repeat the strawman about "totalitarian control out of 20th 21st century" - you can't have it both ways.

It might not have occurred to you but if Sauron was serious about isolating the Free Peoples - and there's no reason to doubt he was - then the Haradrim would likely have had laws against going there (not that you could just pop across a border in any case - I already told you that it was around 250 miles to cross the no-man's-land of South Gondor to approach Gondor proper, and you'd still be on the wrong side of the Anduin) and that yes, if people found out this guy was just popping over there (minimum 500 mile round trip. lol) then they might well wonder what he was playing at. (And secret police weren't a modern innovation, in any case).

[k40rne]

I said what was wrong with it as well. Making up an unlikely playable character is one thing, inventing a whole extra faction and their history - and changing the apparent history of Gondor in the process - just to manufacture an excuse for why that character could casually stroll into Gondor unnoticed and unremarked is quite another and that's blatant fanfic. Distorting the world around the character so they can be shoehorned in.

It was creating logical conclusions based upon where Tolkien himself would have based those cultures upon, aka extrapolation.

I don't see how it changes Gondor's history, but merely expands upon it. There are quite a few cities we know very little about, it stands to reason when creating a story you can expound upon them. And the kin-strife clearly shows up as affecting Ost Angelbad especially, and I'm sure we'll learn many other places. There will be many different situations going on that don't fit into some nice neat little package, much like the Rohan stories didn't & why wouldn't it include cultures bordering them like Far Harad & Near Harad, that the devs now have a reason to create a more complex backstory for.

As for whataboutism, you brought up the subject of colonial slavery when it had no relevance to what we were talking about, just to try to downplay the Corsairs' use of galley-slaves. And TesalionLortus used repeated strawman arguments - I don't have to just sit there and meekly accept when someone sets up a distorted view of what I said just so they can knock it over, rather than deal with what I actually said.

Someone had claimed Barbary pirate slavery was the epitome of cruelty when it comes to slavery, so I demonstrated that was a silly thing to think when comparing other cultures at the time, including the ones fighting against them (like France and America) that love to be depicted as paragons of benevolence vs the "savages"

Anthropological understanding of what, exactly? There is no real model for a malign, super-powered supernatural influence that's been at work for millennia. Sauron had been purposely trying to isolate the Free Peoples and keep them embattled, gradually chipping away at them. It's not an even remotely normal situation so simplistic appeals to real-world history etc. don't work.

We are talking about human cultures here (in basically the African continent), you have to understand the series of ethnographies you're creating first before you can super-impose the fantastical aspects into it. There is nothing simplistic about it, these things would, presumably, all meld together in a masterful tale, if done right. Try to think of it as layering.

Somewhere within Harad? Sure, as it's a big place. Anywhere near the borders with Gondor, where Sauron's influence would have been strongest and most heavily enforced? No.

Those borders are extremely porous, you wouldn't stop groups trading with each other & mixing just because of some arbitrary border. But it depends on the proximity from one township to anther too.

Besides, you're also not comparing like with like. Saruman didn't have the power Sauron did (especially as he'd been frittering it away), nor was he as skilled or practised at getting Men to do his bidding, nor did he have such terrifying servants. Nobody regarded Saruman as their god. Bit of a difference, yes?

Yes, this also has to be taken into account, I agree, but it doesn't eliminate these migrations & situations TL argued for entirely, it simply makes them more difficult to happen as often.

[Radhruin_EU]

It was creating logical conclusions based upon where Tolkien himself would have based those cultures upon, aka extrapolation.

It was change, not extrapolation, Gondor hadn't ever had friendly relations with the Haradrim, they'd never been friendly at the best of times. And it was treating it as if Sauron would have allowed such obvious cracks in the front he was presenting to Gondor, when there was no hint he ever allowed that to happen (not for peoples in the vicinity of Gondor).

Someone had claimed Barbary pirate slavery was the epitome of cruelty when it comes to slavery, so I demonstrated that was a silly thing to think when comparing other cultures at the time, including the ones fighting against them (like France and America) that love to be depicted as paragons of benevolence vs the "savages"

Not that I recall, just that the use of galley slaves was particularly cruel (and not that it was exclusively so). It's chaining people up in dreadful conditions and working them until they die. It was completely irrelevant to start pointing elsewhere when the point was that these Corsairs are meant to be reminiscent of the real thing, an infamously nasty bunch of pirates.

Those borders are extremely porous, you wouldn't stop groups trading with each other & mixing just because of some arbitrary border. But it depends on the proximity from one township to anther too.

Gondor doesn't directly border Harad at that time, there's the no-man's-land of South Gondor before you get to Harad. The current border was the Anduin, which was a significant natural barrier and so far from arbitrary. So given that, and how Sauron would rule with an iron fist (and it's not very far away from Mordor so it's practically his back yard) it'd certainly be possible to impress upon the locals that they weren't to treat or trade with Gondor (on pain of a gruesome and torturous death if caught).

[TesalionLortus]

inventing a whole extra faction and their history - and changing the apparent history of Gondor in the process

Making up your own history just so you can shoehorn in an improbable player-character from Harad and have them stroll around Gondor without anyone batting an eyelid is simply taking the mickey.

It literally doesn't change anything. It's basically what the game has been doing for XX years and what we expect from it as an adaptation. Expanding.

I'm taking issue with the game's contrived take on it, yes, as there's no plausible reason for them to have persisted over so much time and that plainly wasn't what Tolkien had in mind either. Gondor's only been that familiar bit for more than a thousand years, with South Gondor being lost even prior to that. So no, I have NOT been doing that, just pointing out that potential diversity from a thousand-plus years ago would have declined over time as it blended into the population. So you're talking as if it was way more recent that it actually was.

Did Tolkien ever said what was happening in South Gondor and at its borders / in immediate vicinity for all these years? How battles or politics unfolded? No. That's pretty much sums it all up. There might be more recent reasons for present day diversity from the game (which isn't such a huge one anyway but it's clearly there).

I already explained why realism does not apply. With examples. You can't have that happening generally (since it's how Tolkien set things up) and then suddenly have realistic stuff happening in one place because it's convenient to you.

No, it's not how Tolkien set it up. He was doing both. There is nothing wrong with it and Tolkien himself was doing that. Some things are just very undetailed and THAT'S IT (not his intention to stay "internally consistently unrealistic" - seriously, that's just you), some things are specifically a certain way even if might come across as weird or not well thought through (let's say Shire is in that category then, or Breeland overall, or the orc ending in LOTR) and with everything else he was pretty much trying to create a sense of a real world which may feel realistic, with its deep history, nations, languages and these big wars being waged - but didn't have time nor interest to describe every single smaller-scale event... but that doesn't mean he didn't intend to be realistic. It's something I said once before - you either want to have it 100% one way or the other, in this absolutist way.

And TesalionLortus used repeated strawman arguments - I don't have to just sit there and meekly accept when someone sets up a distorted view of what I said just so they can knock it over, rather than deal with what I actually said.

So you're complaining when I call you out for strawmanning and then you go right ahead and repeat the strawman about "totalitarian control out of 20th 21st century" - you can't have it both ways.

Rather than repeat that over and over again, as if that was an undeniable fact confirmed by some committee of strawmans, maybe just answer some of my questions to move this discussion along. I don't get it. I asked you some specific questions to try to understand what you even imagine is happening exactly, at the ground level (not general terms), in some of these general situations you try to tell me exist (and frame as clear-cut canon, even though it can be disputed).

then the Haradrim would likely have had laws against going there (not that you could just pop across a border in any case

if people found out this guy was just popping over there (minimum 500 mile round trip. lol) then they might well wonder what he was playing at. (And secret police weren't a modern innovation, in any case).

Which is still just a very general way of putting it, especially that you would want some raiders or bandits from nearby regions going there to make their life worse, even in times of cease fire, and you wouldn't exactly want them discouraged from doing that. Plus, again, you can tell me that they had every crazy terror law out of North Korea - it still doesn't mean anything if you can't tell me how exactly was that supposed to work at ground level in more ancient/medieval-ish setting (where magic doesn't exactly do any tracking either). Secret police isn't modern but it's efficiency is certainly better and more widespread in modern times. Back then you would mostly focus your efforts in specific areas or countering specific groups, in specific places and with key infrastructure in mind, not on every single individual at every single backyard place no matter of what significance - that is literally a modern advancement in this area, that this level of control has become possible.

[VanguardIV]

It literally doesn't change anything. It's basically what the game has been doing for XX years and what we expect from it as an adaptation. Expanding.

Did Tolkien ever said what was happening in South Gondor and at its borders / in immediate vicinity for all these years? How battles or politics unfolded? No. That's pretty much sums it all up. There might be more recent reasons for present day diversity from the game (which isn't such a huge one anyway but it's clearly there).

No, it's not how Tolkien set it up. He was doing both. There is nothing wrong with it and Tolkien himself was doing that. Some things are just very undetailed and THAT'S IT (not his intention to stay "internally consistently unrealistic" - seriously, that's just you), some things are specifically a certain way even if might come across as weird or not well thought through (let's say Shire is in that category then, or Breeland overall, or the orc ending in LOTR) and with everything else he was pretty much trying to create a sense of a real world which may feel realistic, with its deep history, nations, languages and these big wars being waged - but didn't have time nor interest to describe every single smaller-scale event... but that doesn't mean he didn't intend to be realistic. It's something I said once before - you either want to have it 100% one way or the other, in this absolutist way.

Rather than repeat that over and over again, as if that was an undeniable fact confirmed by some committee of strawmans, maybe just answer some of my questions to move this discussion along. I don't get it. I asked you some specific questions to try to understand what you even imagine is happening exactly, at the ground level (not general terms), in some of these general situations you try to tell me exist (and frame as clear-cut canon, even though it can be disputed).

Which is still just a very general way of putting it, especially that you would want some raiders or bandits from nearby regions going there to make their life worse, even in times of cease fire, and you wouldn't exactly want them discouraged from doing that. Plus, again, you can tell me that they had every crazy terror law out of North Korea - it still doesn't mean anything if you can't tell me how exactly was that supposed to work at ground level in more ancient/medieval-ish setting (where magic doesn't exactly do any tracking either). Secret police isn't modern but it's efficiency is certainly better and more widespread in modern times. Back then you would mostly focus your efforts in specific areas or countering specific groups, in specific places and with key infrastructure in mind, not on every single individual at every single backyard place no matter of what significance - that is literally a modern advancement in this area, that this level of control has become possible.

It's commendable that you're still replying. But I really wouldn't bother, as far as I can tell he's not really going to ever debate at the same level as you. Cause you make alot of good points which, frankly, the game has enough examples of in the past to justify most of or any changes they plan to do.

The game sidesteps alot of stuff when it wants too, like Beornings being in the Last Alliance, and now the new race-class combos (I can only guess how it annoyed lore purists) whether for gameplay or story reasons.

But I'd give it a rest. He'll just keep dragging the convo into his version of the game rather than acknowledging the current state of the game.

[Arnenna]

It literally doesn't change anything. It's basically what the game has been doing for XX years and what we expect from it as an adaptation. Expanding.

Did Tolkien ever said what was happening in South Gondor and at its borders / in immediate vicinity for all these years? How battles or politics unfolded? No. That's pretty much sums it all up. There might be more recent reasons for present day diversity from the game (which isn't such a huge one anyway but it's clearly there).

No, it's not how Tolkien set it up. He was doing both. There is nothing wrong with it and Tolkien himself was doing that. Some things are just very undetailed and THAT'S IT (not his intention to stay "internally consistently unrealistic" - seriously, that's just you), some things are specifically a certain way even if might come across as weird or not well thought through (let's say Shire is in that category then, or Breeland overall, or the orc ending in LOTR) and with everything else he was pretty much trying to create a sense of a real world which may feel realistic, with its deep history, nations, languages and these big wars being waged - but didn't have time nor interest to describe every single smaller-scale event... but that doesn't mean he didn't intend to be realistic. It's something I said once before - you either want to have it 100% one way or the other, in this absolutist way.

Have to agree here. I totally get it when a writer puts pen to paper in absolutes, exact and concise detail - that straying from that is not something that should happen, and when reading a book, a reader usually won't imagine anything other than the concise detail.

But where writers skip details or absolutes, that opens up the readers mind to explore. Imagination kicks in and what unfolds can be entirely different from one reader to the next. Many different outcomes are possible.

That's the beauty of a book, over a film or game.

In my own head, I don't see Corsairs running around Middle-earth mixing with Free Peoples from the writing. I could possibly see a seafarer take on a life on land in my head, but not in the game for some reason. What other readers imagine could, and probably will, differ.

[fealegwe2]

isn't this thread meant to be about a new class in a game called LOTRO?

[k40rne]

It was change, not extrapolation, Gondor hadn't ever had friendly relations with the Haradrim, they'd never been friendly at the best of times. And it was treating it as if Sauron would have allowed such obvious cracks in the front he was presenting to Gondor, when there was no hint he ever allowed that to happen (not for peoples in the vicinity of Gondor).

Do you consider people from Far Harad also Haradrim, because I don't. It'd seem to me they are talking about Near Harad only.

Also, Elessar himself has created diplomatic missions to attempt to make peace with Harad. You're telling me this never happened before in the history of Gondor? Where does it state that explicitly?

Not that I recall, just that the use of galley slaves was particularly cruel (and not that it was exclusively so). It's chaining people up in dreadful conditions and working them until they die. It was completely irrelevant to start pointing elsewhere when the point was that these Corsairs are meant to be reminiscent of the real thing, an infamously nasty bunch of pirates.

Ok, it wasn't you that said that. I think it was TL, now that I think of it as well as a few others.

Gondor doesn't directly border Harad at that time, there's the no-man's-land of South Gondor before you get to Harad. The current border was the Anduin, which was a significant natural barrier and so far from arbitrary. So given that, and how Sauron would rule with an iron fist (and it's not very far away from Mordor so it's practically his back yard) it'd certainly be possible to impress upon the locals that they weren't to treat or trade with Gondor (on pain of a gruesome and torturous death if caught).

Harondor is technically South Gondor, so it does border Near Harad. The Harnen is the natural border between them. Mordor still has the Ered Lithui that has only 2 main passes we know, both of which are far in the north, so you're saying he controls these regions primarily with flying beasts or encamped armies?

[k40rne]

Which is still just a very general way of putting it, especially that you would want some raiders or bandits from nearby regions going there to make their life worse, even in times of cease fire, and you wouldn't exactly want them discouraged from doing that. Plus, again, you can tell me that they had every crazy terror law out of North Korea - it still doesn't mean anything if you can't tell me how exactly was that supposed to work at ground level in more ancient/medieval-ish setting (where magic doesn't exactly do any tracking either). Secret police isn't modern but it's efficiency is certainly better and more widespread in modern times. Back then you would mostly focus your efforts in specific areas or countering specific groups, in specific places and with key infrastructure in mind, not on every single individual at every single backyard place no matter of what significance - that is literally a modern advancement in this area, that this level of control has become possible.

Even in todays world, with modern technology, it still isn't possible to control such vast, porous borders, even with people just walking across or basic smuggling.
you'd have to have dedicated satellites, drones covering all ground & teams of men on the ground ready to apprehend anyone they find. The expense would be enormous & certainly not cost-effective.

Secret police will make the general population afraid, but won't do much to stop a motivated smuggler, Gondorians are hardly immune to bribery.

[TesalionLortus]

Even in todays world, with modern technology, it still isn't possible to control such vast, porous borders, even with people just walking across or basic smuggling.
you'd have to have dedicated satellites, drones covering all ground & teams of men on the ground ready to apprehend anyone they find. The expense would be enormous & certainly not cost-effective.

Secret police will make the general population afraid, but won't do much to stop a motivated smuggler, Gondorians are hardly immune to bribery.

Well yes, and even if you were very dedicated with invigilation and spies to keep eyes on people (even if we ignore all the costs), it doesn't exactly solve the identification problem. In today's world you can pretty much direct your actions in pursue of a single "offender" if the system in place detects something suspicious - say, a guy from North Korea didn't show up for work, gone missing, the ID number etc, and they would also have agreements, say with China, to deport back any such persons and when you're back the nightmare would await you, and then there would be a threat of punishing the entire family for the crimes of individual if it was found out they were missing which is likely that the government could find out.

In Sauron's vassal states? How exactly any of that would be possible? And they're not even uniformly governed state but a bunch of different kingdoms, at times at war with each other, other times (which would be ideal for Sauron in times of his planned campaigns) unified under a single or two political entities, like an Empire or Confederacy, but each smaller entity with some of their own governance and rules no doubt, so it makes it all even more difficult.

[Radhruin_EU]

It literally doesn't change anything. It's basically what the game has been doing for XX years and what we expect from it as an adaptation. Expanding.

When MoL or whoever writes it, then that's the game doing its thing. When you do it, that's not the same and you claiming to be doing what the game does really doesn't cut it. They're not the ones trying to come up with a rationale for playable Haradrim.

Did Tolkien ever said what was happening in South Gondor and at its borders / in immediate vicinity for all these years? How battles or politics unfolded? No. That's pretty much sums it all up. There might be more recent reasons for present day diversity from the game (which isn't such a huge one anyway but it's clearly there).

The place is 'debatable'. Like Ithilien, which it borders onto. Nobody owns it, it's indefensible and so it's not safe to live there. Gondor's the other side of the Anduin, which that far down its course would be a huge Danube-like river. South Gondor is basically a buffer zone. You might reasonably expect a certain amount of skirmishing, like maybe there were some Rangers of Harondor akin to those in Ithilien, keeping tabs on what the Haradrim are up to and pushing back if they try to set up shop there.

The problem I had with what you said was that it involved a faction of Haradrim being friendly with Gondor when it's a given that there'd never been friendship. As for the diversity I don't think it's for any real reason other than "it's a game".

No, it's not how Tolkien set it up. He was doing both. There is nothing wrong with it and Tolkien himself was doing that. Some things are just very undetailed and THAT'S IT (not his intention to stay "internally consistently unrealistic" - seriously, that's just you), some things are specifically a certain way even if might come across as weird or not well thought through (let's say Shire is in that category then, or Breeland overall, or the orc ending in LOTR) and with everything else he was pretty much trying to create a sense of a real world which may feel realistic, with its deep history, nations, languages and these big wars being waged - but didn't have time nor interest to describe every single smaller-scale event... but that doesn't mean he didn't intend to be realistic. It's something I said once before - you either want to have it 100% one way or the other, in this absolutist way.

He's providing a sense of a living world but it's really just an impression; he was all about languages and history of the 'kings and battles' variety but he wasn't into politics. That becomes obvious if you compare it with novels that try to create realistic societies. Mundane details are realistic because that's compelling but there are a host of behind-the-scenes things that are glossed over or weirdly absent. Some places are believable: Rohan or Dunland, for example, because they're patterned after real societies but the Shire and Bree are weird. But the main thing is how relatively static things stay even over really long periods of time; that suits the story's needs but it isn't realistic.

Which is still just a very general way of putting it, especially that you would want some raiders or bandits from nearby regions going there to make their life worse, even in times of cease fire, and you wouldn't exactly want them discouraged from doing that. Plus, again, you can tell me that they had every crazy terror law out of North Korea - it still doesn't mean anything if you can't tell me how exactly was that supposed to work at ground level in more ancient/medieval-ish setting (where magic doesn't exactly do any tracking either). Secret police isn't modern but it's efficiency is certainly better and more widespread in modern times. Back then you would mostly focus your efforts in specific areas or countering specific groups, in specific places and with key infrastructure in mind, not on every single individual at every single backyard place no matter of what significance - that is literally a modern advancement in this area, that this level of control has become possible.

It's not that hard, you have networks of informers and a crafty spymaster to run the show (much like Varys does in GoT), and that's something that crops up time and again in history. Ancient Rome would be a particular case in point. If you want something more Harad-flavoured, then the Ottoman Empire had plenty of spies and informers as well.