WI J.R.R. Tolkien didn't publish the Lord of the Rings

[Count Dearborn]

I had heard that Christopher Tolkien took Gygax & Co. to court, and sued them for copywriter infringment.

Philip Jose Farmer's THREE HEART & THREE LIONS was also an influence to D&D.

 

[Condottiero]

Someone would still come up with fantasy though it could have very different standard conventions and races to the normal.
i.e. No aloof magical elves or barbarous orks, etc...

You still have Poul Anderson's "The Broken Sword"

 

[Jason]

Getting back onto the original question

It's an interesting idea but bit of a problem...

Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings because of the popularity of 'The Hobbit' and it's obvious that at first he wasn't keen on a sequel, quite early on he said he felt he had written all there was to write about hobbits. His first love was always writing about the Elder Days-so we're talking 'Book of Lost Tales' and all that followed-the Elves, Melkor, Undying Lands, etc...

So for a sequel to be written and not published, I think you are going to have to make Tolkien more interested in Hobbits right from the start. Eithe rthat or his publisher goes out of business just before "The Fellowship of the Rings" is published and Tolkien doesn't bother to try getting it published elsewhere.

Jason

First this is my first post Yay!


Back on topic. I really don't know how plausible this is but I was wondering what you guys think a alternate timeline would be like if Tolkien wrote all his works and even shared them with friends and family but they weren't published until the 1970's when his son Chris finds them and has them published. It might be one of those minor changes and I doubt it would change the overall timeline, though if we were to travel to it we would notice differnces in society.

 

[Tyr]

If by "superior" you mean "chanced to have technological dominance at the particular era in which world hegemony was most feasible", then yes. I don't attribute European culture as being the primary cause of this occurrence/.

Nope, I mean by superior it was better due to having a good mix between open and democratic and a strong central government. In the east they were too totalitarian with the government controlling everything. In Africa they were too chaotic with very little control.
Culture elsewhere could have developed differently though as it is European culture (or Germanic to be more exact) is the one which developed the right way.


In WW1 Britain can't be crushed to the extent Germany was. Its just impossible. They can be weakened then defeated in a war or two's time but not wiped out as any sort of power.

If you're talking about my comment about the Allies losing World War 1, a quick French defeat isn't the only way. The United States, in my timeline, joins the Central Powers in 1917.

Well its impossible without ASBs.

 

[Forum Lurker]

Nope, I mean by superior it was better due to having a good mix between open and democratic and a strong central government. In the east they were too totalitarian with the government controlling everything. In Africa they were too chaotic with very little control.
Culture elsewhere could have developed differently though as it is European culture (or Germanic to be more exact) is the one which developed the right way.

Right. This, of course, explains why, aside from the 15th-20th centuries, China had been very considerably ahead of the rest of the world in technological, societal, and governmental sophistication? Why it was the Islamic world, and not the European, which produced the foundations for much of the science and mathematics on which we based most of the technical developments that allowed us to reach near-hegemony? Why it is that the most powerful nations in the world today don't follow the German governmental model, and have surprisingly little to do with German culture in general?

In WW1 Britain can't be crushed to the extent Germany was. Its just impossible. They can be weakened then defeated in a war or two's time but not wiped out as any sort of power.

Well its impossible without ASBs.

What are the premises on which you base this statement? Is the British merchant marine invulnerable to conventional attack? Have I forgotten about the tremendous natural resources of the British Isles which allow them to feed and arm their troops in the absence of imported raw materials? Is Britain's military might on land so formidable that they can launch a hundred fruitless attacks against German defensive positions and have more men left to charge than the Germans have bullets?

 

[Tyr]

Right. This, of course, explains why, aside from the 15th-20th centuries, China had been very considerably ahead of the rest of the world in technological, societal, and governmental sophistication? Why it was the Islamic world, and not the European, which produced the foundations for much of the science and mathematics on which we based most of the technical developments that allowed us to reach near-hegemony? Why it is that the most powerful nations in the world today don't follow the German governmental model, and have surprisingly little to do with German culture in general?

To the Chinese- Because they were relativly stable with their slow controlled progress. This was what made them more powerful then the Europeans though was ultimatly their downfall as they stagnated.
To the muslims - Total BS. I hate it when people say that. The Islamic world was the 'foundation for much of the science and mathematics on which we based most of the technical developments' because it stole its knowledge from the Byzantines who had kept it over from the Greeks and Romans. Also their point at the crossroads between the world.
To German- I didn't say German. I said Germanic. Mainly meaning Britain.

What are the premises on which you base this statement? Is the British merchant marine invulnerable to conventional attack? Have I forgotten about the tremendous natural resources of the British Isles which allow them to feed and arm their troops in the absence of imported raw materials? Is Britain's military might on land so formidable that they can launch a hundred fruitless attacks against German defensive positions and have more men left to charge than the Germans have bulletsp

British naval and industrial might though not the god like force it had been 50 years earlier was still huge and believed to be even better.
The natural geography of Britain makes invasion of it very difficult, especially in the time period in question where naval power ruled supreme.

 

[Tetsu]

In WW1 Britain can't be crushed to the extent Germany was. Its just impossible. They can be weakened then defeated in a war or two's time but not wiped out as any sort of power.

Frankly, that's BS, but it also isn't what I said. I didn't say Britain was defeated to the extent Germany was in my timeline; but it did lose. But that's an argument for a different thread, let's put this one back on topic, shall we?

 

[Forum Lurker]

To the muslims - Total BS. I hate it when people say that. The Islamic world was the 'foundation for much of the science and mathematics on which we based most of the technical developments' because it stole its knowledge from the Byzantines who had kept it over from the Greeks and Romans. Also their point at the crossroads between the world.

Bah. And again, bah. It is true that the foundations of Islamic science were indeed in large part based on Greek scholarship, but they are hardly, as Duhem would suggest, "destitute if all originality." As an example, I'll refer to Ibn al-Haytham's optical synthesis, the first theory of vision which proposed that light was not transmitted as a complete image but as fragments to be compiled into an image; this theory was the basis for Kepler's hypothesis of the retinal image, and entirely original to Islamic science. Equally, much of chemistry and mathematics were developed by the Arabs (though admittedly, the Arabic numeral system was adapted from India); that Europeans used the Arabic names for these (al-Keme and al-Gebra) should be no surprise.

To German- I didn't say German. I said Germanic. Mainly meaning Britain.

I'm afraid I don't understand why you would call British government a product of Germanic culture. At the time of the development of the parliamentary system, and for centuries before and after, Germany was a patchwork of principalities, lacking both the open democracy and the strong centralized government which you tout as the wonders of Western civilization. If you are inclined to call the Angles a Germanic people, and say that Western government is born of them, I will simply note that they also lacked those qualities.

British naval and industrial might though not the god like force it had been 50 years earlier was still huge and believed to be even better.
The natural geography of Britain makes invasion of it very difficult, especially in the time period in question where naval power ruled supreme.

Yes, it is true that Britain would be quite difficult to invade. Invasion is, however, not the only way to force a defeat. Unrestricted submarine warfare against a nation utterly dependent on imports, combined with a defensive continental strategy allowing the English to bleed themselves white on German fortifications, would be enough to bring Britain to sue for peace without landing a single soldier on the Isles.

 

[Mark]

Actually Tolkien wasn't the main inspiration for DnD:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_and_Dragons

As someone who actually played D&D (even having to wait for the supplements to come out), I can attest that Tolkien may not have been a major inspiration for Gygax, but he was for those playing the game. Some of the strangest games we played were when the DM was inspired by non-Tolkien works. We had to work out a whole new logic to the world.

 

[Molobo]

Heh I am a gamer myself and I must confess that Tolkien was always a major turnroff for me when it came to interesting settings.The most original ones-Athas, Planescape are most un-Tolkien like

 

[Forum Lurker]

That's mostly because they were new and original. If Monte Cook's Arcana Unearthed had been the first popular game and campaign setting, we'd all be complaining about the Donaldonesque cliches and those damned annoying giants, and leap on the first person to offer us new, exciting races like elves and halflings.

 

[Tyr]

Bah. And again, bah. It is true that the foundations of Islamic science were indeed in large part based on Greek scholarship, but they are hardly, as Duhem would suggest, "destitute if all originality." As an example, I'll refer to Ibn al-Haytham's optical synthesis, the first theory of vision which proposed that light was not transmitted as a complete image but as fragments to be compiled into an image; this theory was the basis for Kepler's hypothesis of the retinal image, and entirely original to Islamic science. Equally, much of chemistry and mathematics were developed by the Arabs (though admittedly, the Arabic numeral system was adapted from India); that Europeans used the Arabic names for these (al-Keme and al-Gebra) should be no surprise..

There was some original Arab science but this was just building on what the Greeks had done to lend themselves more legitamacy. With how powerful they were at the time they could afford to have people just messing around with chemistry. They did not do anything significant though except (IIRC) the compass. Nothing that could really be called modern science. Somewhat similar to the mongols, just natural development.
Then of course at the time arab culture was a lot more open and forward looking (and so closer to British) then it eventually became.

I'm afraid I don't understand why you would call British government a product of Germanic culture. At the time of the development of the parliamentary system, and for centuries before and after, Germany was a patchwork of principalities, lacking both the open democracy and the strong centralized government which you tout as the wonders of Western civilization. If you are inclined to call the Angles a Germanic people, and say that Western government is born of them, I will simply note that they also lacked those qualities.

I am not calling it a product of Germanic culture. Germany has FA to do with this unless you go back to the first millenium.
I just said Germanic as it sounds less big headed saying north European culture was the best then saying British was the best. The Dutch and scandinavians were similar its just they did not have the same geographical advantage as Britain.

Yes, it is true that Britain would be quite difficult to invade. Invasion is, however, not the only way to force a defeat. Unrestricted submarine warfare against a nation utterly dependent on imports, combined with a defensive continental strategy allowing the English to bleed themselves white on German fortifications, would be enough to bring Britain to sue for peace without landing a single soldier on the Isles.

And why would Britain just run at German fortifications far better then OTL?
Submarines weren't the war winner they would become in WW2. You would need to base them in western France for them to stand a chance in beating Britain and evne then its slim.
Considering if all you said was true through ASB magic then Britain sueing for peace in this situation would just be along the lines of a few bits of Africa and recognition of German rights. Nothing like what happened to Germany.

 

[Dave Howery]

well, as the D&D-uber-geek of this site, I find the idea of a world without LOTR and D&D to be very unhappy. It would mean that the world would be a dark and drab place, filled with unimaginative zombies shuffling along from work to home in their dreary existence, dragging from one day to the next and trying to avoid the insanity.

or maybe not.

 

[Thande]

Don't exaggerate, Dave.

It would be MUCH worse than that...

 

[Molobo]

well, as the D&D-uber-geek of this site, I find the idea of a world without LOTR and D&D to be very unhappy.

You would probably end up playing some Conan-type barbarian and your friend some rogue-like assasin fighting to save a princess from a Mythos monster and its cultists, or using diplomacy to unite some tribes in a war against a neighbouring kingdom.The stuff that made fantasy before Tolkien