what is the correct size for trolls? compared to humans

[Alan maguire]

Is there a standerd size for trolls or can a troll be any size you want?

Thanks. 

[Michi]

can a troll be any size you want?

That.

Never met one though...

[Cubs]

According to LOTR (books, not films) they should be only slightly bigger than humans, but very strong and aggressive (though not clever). According to Norse mythology they are usually large aggressive cave-dwelling creatures, like Grendel in the Beowulf poem. Unusually tall people are sometimes known as 'Trollbloods'. Having said that, in Sweden trolls take on a gentler role, as shy nature spirits, often smaller than humans. Most sources agree they are paganistic.

So take your pick!

[Daeothar]

That.

Never met one though...

Not even online? 

[Hobgoblin]

The key quote for Tolkien (which supports what Cubs said) is this:

"But through them there came striding up, roaring like beasts, a great company of hill-trolls out of Gorgoroth. Taller and broader than Men they were, and they were clad only in close-fitting mesh of horny scales, or maybe that was their hideous hide; but they bore round bucklers huge and black and wielded heavy hammers in their knotted hands."

As they are out in sunlight, these, presumably, are the Olog-hai mentioned in the Appendices, where they are described like this:

"But at the End of the Third Age a Troll race not before seen appeared in Southern Mirkwood and in the mountain borders of Mordor. Olog-hai they were called in the Black Speech.
That Sauron bred them none doubted, thought from what stock was not known. Some held that they were not trolls but giant orcs; but the Olog-hai were in fashion of body and mind unlike even the largest of orc-kind, whom they far surpassed in size in power. Trolls they were, but filled with the evil of their master: a fell race, strong, agile, fierce and cunning, but harder than stone. Unlike the older race of the Twilight they could endure the Sun, so long as the will of Sauron held sway over them. They spoke little, and the only tongue they knew was the black-speech of Barad-Dur."

Now, although they "far surpassed in size and power" even the biggest Orcs, remember that the biggest orcs (the Uruk-hai) were significantly smaller than Men - enough for it to make a tactical difference in battle, and enough for Gollum to comment that the Haradrim were "almost as bad as Orcs but much bigger"; Gollum had seen plenty of uruks in his time. And of course the half-orcs are distinguished from the Isengard Orcs by their size: "Man-high, but with goblin faces".

So trolls don't need to be that much bigger than Men to be very much bigger than Orcs. Trolls were obviously significantly bigger than Men, but that "taller and broader" suggests that the difference is nothing like that portrayed in the films. At a guess, I'd say that Tolkien perhaps intended them to be seven or eight feet tall (so trolls would dwarf Men in the way that Men dwarfed Orcs and, er, Dwarves. In The Hobbit, of course, we have his drawing of the Stone Trolls, who don't look gigantic.

Folkloric trolls vary a lot in size - from tiny creatures living in mounds to huge ones living in mountains. But it's worth pointing out that mythological trolls aren't quite so well defined. The term is often applied to giants in Old Norse sources, but also to sorcerers and to uncanny or supernatural creatures in general. There's a flying troll in Hrolf Kraki's Saga, for example, which doesn't seem to be a million miles away from a dragon. And there's a also a giant boar that's described as a troll. I think it's fair to say that trolls really only become a distinct species in folk tales.

[Vermis]

Second one. Even just from 20th-21st century sources, this is a troll. So's this.

In The Hobbit, of course, we have his drawing of the Stone Trolls, who don't look gigantic.

Out of The Hobbit we have another drawing of the stone trolls, who do.

But trolls are like other stock fantasy creatures, IMO. They can have a short list of characteristics within specific stories and settings, but even then there can be a lot of leeway and interpretation.

[Alan maguire]

Thanks ! great info !

seems theres lots of options to choose from...

and like some of you guys said it's fantasy so theres not realy any restrictions ...


just general guidlines based on what is already out there.

[tnjrp]

As with many a mythological critter, trolls aren't very strictly defined in size or shape. Some of the motifs associated with trolls in folklore may just as well apply to something that is called a giant, a gnome, a goblin, an ogre, a trow or whatever. Check out 4X John Bauer's seminal work in the Scandinavian troll tradition:
https://www.google.fi/search?q=john+bauer+troll&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjTqp294tPJAhWMmBoKHSd3AmoQ_AUIBygB&biw=1095&bih=488

Fantasy authors tend to be more specific obviously and assuming in-game use, so will most likely anyone wanting to put something called a troll in his/her tabletop game or RPG (exceptions may occur obviously). Overall, it's basically "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law".

[Hobgoblin]

Second one. Even just from 20th-21st century sources, this is a troll. So's this.

Out of The Hobbit we have another drawing of the stone trolls, who do.

A very good point! They look to be about three times the height of a dwarf there, so perhaps 12' plus - and that's still very much "taller and broader" than Men (although perhaps bigger than that quote seems to imply). Of course, Tolkien didn't publish the drawing himself, and his conception of trolls might well (as with so much else) have evolved by the time he was writing about the Olog-hai.

But trolls are like other stock fantasy creatures, IMO. They can have a short list of characteristics within specific stories and settings, but even then there can be a lot of leeway and interpretation.

Exactly. Trolls in myth, folklore and sagas range in appearance from beautiful women to monstrous swine, and pretty much everything in between. And in size, they range from tiny to colossal.

As an aside, I think the "standardisation" of imaginary races is a slightly dismal side-effect of (a) Tolkien and (b) gaming. If you look at citations from the OED, a "hobgoblin" might be something tiny  or huge, benign or malign - just the same as a troll.

[Modhail]

The way I play it, "Troll" is a description more akin to a family or genus, rather than a singular species. That way there can be various kinds of trolls, freeing one to use whatever model or models that take their fancy.
Find a furry 8' (to scale) tall Bauer-style troll? Call it a Northern Forest Troll. Find a tiny one? Pigmy Troll. A more reptilian one? River Troll, etc, etc.
Creating (ludicrous) fantasy taxonomy is fun in and of itself... 

[Shieldwolf Miniatures]

Not even online? 

Where is the "exalted" icon...?

 

[Rhoderic]

Do a Google image search for "Trudvang troll" and you should find a couple of images of numerous trolls of radically different sizes all belonging to the same Nordic-style fantasy setting. Some of them are labelled giants, ogres or vättar but it's implied in that setting that such distinctions are somewhat pointless, and ultimately they're all just one big jumble of interbreeding troll-kind.

I'm surprised this topic comes up as often as it does on various miniature wargaming forums. As a Finn and a Swede I grew up with the "amoebic" concept of trolls. It's almost like there's a little bit of culture clash involved when questions about the "correct" size, appearance or physiology of trolls come up. (But of course, I'm aware that the topic of trolls within the specific framework of Tolkien's legendarium is a thing unto itself.)

[Vermis]

...his conception of trolls might well (as with so much else) have evolved by the time he was writing about the Olog-hai.

Indeed!

As an aside, I think the "standardisation" of imaginary races is a slightly dismal side-effect of (a) Tolkien and (b) gaming. If you look at citations from the OED, a "hobgoblin" might be something tiny  or huge, benign or malign - just the same as a troll.

I'm surprised this topic comes up as often as it does on various miniature wargaming forums. As a Finn and a Swede I grew up with the "amoebic" concept of trolls. It's almost like there's a little bit of culture clash involved when questions about the "correct" size, appearance or physiology of trolls come up.

This. Not to turn the subject, but on my own particular obsession with dragons... It's a bit mystifying to me that so many gamers argue about the precise definition, declaring that they should be labelled 'wyverns' and 'drakes' and things, despite the original intent of the designer. Especially when they don't care that a model in question might be the most strangely proportioned, off-balance, carelessly detailed thing they could find.

Find a furry 8' (to scale) tall Bauer-style troll? Call it a Northern Forest Troll. Find a tiny one? Pigmy Troll. A more reptilian one? River Troll, etc, etc.
Creating (ludicrous) fantasy taxonomy is fun in and of itself... 

'Ere! You been looking at my word docs?

[Modhail]

'Ere! You been looking at my word docs?

Me,....what? Nooooh! 
It's just that great minds think alike. And apparently, so do we...