Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Biopass]

I was playing Lord of the Rings Online (as a dwarf, of course), and I found a drop. A very interesting drop.

A cracked dwarf-carving.

This shouldn't be unusual, this being a LotR MMO. Dwarves everywhere.

Except... well... it's a carving of an elephant. And the flavor text says "This very old dwarf-carving depicts a scene from an earlier age."

Like a 2d age?

[Still Standing]

Or perhaps the Years of Trees, Lamps, Sun, First Age or Second Age?  Just wishful thinking, more than likely.

[Rowanas]

We will know if it's a reference by the spelling.

Does it say "elephant"? Elephants are included nowhere in the works of Tolkien and its debated whether Mumakil share the land with normal elephants. If it does say elephant and it's not a reference, then it is most certainly incongruous with the rest of the Tolkien mythology.

Oliphaunts and Oliphants are used to refer to Mumakil, but never spelled "elephant".

[Thundrim]

It's just the illustration, so we will probably never know. But it's very proper and Dwarfy!

---

[dragoncurse]

Boatmurdered.

Earlier age = 2D.

Elephants.

I think I don't need to explain further.

[Biopass]

Boatmurdered.

Earlier age = 2D.

Elephants.

I think I don't need to explain further.

Exactly.

Dwarves aren't connected to oliphants in any way in Tolkien. There’s no reason to have a dwarven carving be of an elephant, especially since they live so far away from each other.

http://www.lotro-wiki.com/index.php/Item:Cracked_Dwarf-carving for info/picture.

[dennislp3]

Not surprised really....seems that the influence of Toady and DF is far reaching and well loved...there are references all over (WOW, LoTRO, Starcraft 2, etc)...or maybe we just have a case of connecting dots that don't exist >.> (doubt that's the case)

[monk12]

People make pictures and engravings of things that don't exist all the time. I myself am staring at a Cthulhu plushie on my desk as I type this, and on the wall is a picture of a Pegasus.

That said, from my brief stint in LOTRO it looks like they did their homework very well, so if it was described as an Elephant instead of Oliphaunt then it could well be a shoutout.

Incidentally, dicking around in the Dwarven lands inspired me to put obelisks all over my current map. It's the little touches, y'know?

[thvaz]

Boatmurdered.

Earlier age = 2D.

Elephants.

I think I don't need to explain further.

Exactly.

Dwarves aren't connected to oliphants in any way in Tolkien. There’s no reason to have a dwarven carving be of an elephant, especially since they live so far away from each other.

http://www.lotro-wiki.com/index.php/Item:Cracked_Dwarf-carving for info/picture.

Wait...this link shows what is in the carving is a picture of something that resemble an elephant, it is not saying it is a elephant. It could very well be an oliphaunt.

 

[dennislp3]

They would put an oliphaunt if they meant one. If they have the level of detail of something like this they are not gonna half ass it and put an elephant instead....you cant say they don't know how to draw an oliphaunt.

It would be the equivalent of saying "well we have spent years on a specific product that follows a very well fleshed out world with all the lore it needs to operate and he have tried very hard to be accurate and specific...so next time you add a minor item just do whatever with it, who cares about lore?!"

The biggest indicator for me that it is indeed is an elephant is the tusks....show me a picture of an oliphaunt WITHOUT much larger, curved tusks. The one in the picture shows the tusks of a standard elephant (relatively small and not curved). The one thing that makes oliphaunts distinct is the tusk size/shape (other then there actual size but that cant be represented here)

[jellsprout]

If the description was "This is a masterful engraving of an elephant engraved by an unknown artisan. The item is a masterfully designed image of an elephant." or something similar, I would be convinced. But this evidence is a bit weak.

[Duelmaster409]

Everything in the world is a possible DF reference.

[Jaxicat]

I always figured "oliphaunt" was just what the hobbits called elephants because they were so secluded in the Shire and they were just fairy tales as far as they were concerned.  A word they heard from a traveler long ago which got distorted in the retelling.  The movie took  Sam's imagination as literal. 

[Jar of Jam]

Everything in the world is a possible DF reference.

The world itself is a DF reference.

[Rowanas]

I always figured "oliphaunt" was just what the hobbits called elephants because they were so secluded in the Shire and they were just fairy tales as far as they were concerned.  A word they heard from a traveler long ago which got distorted in the retelling.  The movie took  Sam's imagination as literal.

Nope. THe other works of Tolkien back up the separation of Mumakil and elephants, primarily by the fact that he never even mentions elephants but does specifically say that Oliphaunts and Oliphants refer to Mumakil. It's not just the hobbits being a bit rural