I've been working on a Tolkien-themed story-game for the past couple of weeks, and I'm writing up procedural text and play advice and so forth.
I'm working on trying to make this a game about telling new stories in the world of Middle-Earth, rather than about retreading the existing novels, movies, etc. Certainly, there's going to be some overlap unless you really make a point of avoiding that, but the point is to use Tolkien's themes and dramatic devices to tell our own stories about honor and justice and loyalty and sacrifice.
That being said, I have a question!
One of the (currently) available options for PCs is that they can be an Istari, one of the wizards of the White Council. I did some digging, and it turns out that the Valar put a ban on wizards trying to rule the Free Peoples; their goal must be to guide, to aid, not to govern. That's why Gandalf doesn't just fix all their problems for them; that's why he uses his mind control powers so sparingly, and so on.
Here's the question: all previous Lord of the Rings games forbidden players from playing Wizards, likely on the grounds that they'd be too powerful. But if that's not so much of a concern, then would playing a Wizard take too much attention away from the struggles and trials of mortal (and Elvish) PCs?
I think it'd be interesting to have the Istari option be available, with some framing in place on how to be responsible to the White Council, the repercussions of abusing one's powers, etc. But it could be like the Jedi and Star Wars - - a lot of the story gets wrapped up in stuff that only really concerns the Jedi, and that's kind of what Star Wars is about. By contrast, the inner lives of Wizards are not at all the focus in Lord of the Rings.