| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| DrizztDoUrden |
Posted - 03 May 2004 : 21:58:59
During the time of troubles Myrkul cast a spell that supposedly killed all assasins, however Artemis Entreri was completely unaffected. Can someone tell me why???
|
| 12 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 29 Sep 2018 : 20:25:36
Seeker DrizztDoUrden,
The nuts and bolts of it are that Bane needed more power to go finish off Torm, so he wiped out the assassins in the world, took their essence' and used it to empower himself.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by DrizztDoUrden
During the time of troubles Myrkul cast a spell that supposedly killed all assasins, however Artemis Entreri was completely unaffected. Can someone tell me why???
|
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 29 Sep 2018 : 20:24:32
Master Rupert,
Here's to hoping that they change that again at some point in time in the future back to the way that it once was in the Realms, and those amazing and in depth explanations.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Sarta
The bigger reason of course was that the Times of Troubles were written to explain the transition from 1st edition to 2nd edition. In second edition there was no assassin class (until much late when they added them as kits). So, they had to explain what happened to all of those assassins running around from 1st edition. Probably not the best solution to the problem, but at least people had some sort of justification.
Sarta
Ah, those long ago and magical days when they actually cared enough to explain changes...
|
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 05 May 2004 : 19:12:21
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Schend
quote:
Originally posted by DDH_101
No, I meant that most of the Shadow Thieves were ALREADY worshipers of Mask. Unless they all secretly worship Bhaal, there's no way they should have died.
While I did not create the Shadow Thieves, I wrote up their large entry in LANDS OF INTRIGUE. That's where I tried to rationalize the "death of all assassins" from the Time of Troubles by linking them to Bhaal worshipers and the Shade Council's domination of the same. I turned the TOT and apparent continuity snafu into a sea-change within the group.
As far as I know (and I've not checked more recent things) and I can only speak from my background, but I don't think I remember the Shadow Thieves EVER having a hard and fast link to worshiping Mask.
After all, the whole incident (i.e. Bhaal & assassins) should tell you one thing: Your job doesn't necessarily define you. You can be an assassin by trade but a wizard by skills. Likewise, you can be a thief without being a thief in class; heck, look at half the merchants of Calimport for that! Thus (and maybe I'm trumped by later information that I'm not recalling or reading), you can be a Shadow Thief without worshiping Mask. You can be a normal thief (class or simply by nature) without worshiping Mask.
In fact, I think the only class where your skills and calling HAVE to be linked to a god is cleric/priest (and maybe paladins).
Of course, I could be wrong by latter sources. I'm just putting my opinion and intent on the table. 
Steven
Yes, I know that there are Shadow Thieves who don't worship Mask or any gods at all. However, doesn't the spell only affect Bhaal's assassins since that was Bane's objective all along? I remember in Tantras about how he said that assassins should be punished because they failed in the tasks he gave them to kill Midnight and her friends. |
| Israfel666 |
Posted - 05 May 2004 : 18:15:31
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Ah, those long ago and magical days when they actually cared enough to explain changes...
On the other side, DrizztDoUrden's question provides an interesting insight into that problem. Are such justifications more dangerous than useful, in the long time? E.g. if they wrote some fluff (probably Ao related) to explain why Toril shifted from the Great Wheel to the Tree, wouldn't there be the risk that Realms readers in 2040 would get confused by the implications ("Why wasn't Raasta the rogue modron, protagonist of well a score of highly successful novels since 2013 and one of the Realms' most beloved characters, affected by the Grand Plane Shift of 1372 DR? That doesn't make much sense..." *my daughter scratches her head*) |
| Steven Schend |
Posted - 05 May 2004 : 17:52:54
quote:
Originally posted by DDH_101
No, I meant that most of the Shadow Thieves were ALREADY worshipers of Mask. Unless they all secretly worship Bhaal, there's no way they should have died.
While I did not create the Shadow Thieves, I wrote up their large entry in LANDS OF INTRIGUE. That's where I tried to rationalize the "death of all assassins" from the Time of Troubles by linking them to Bhaal worshipers and the Shade Council's domination of the same. I turned the TOT and apparent continuity snafu into a sea-change within the group.
As far as I know (and I've not checked more recent things) and I can only speak from my background, but I don't think I remember the Shadow Thieves EVER having a hard and fast link to worshiping Mask.
After all, the whole incident (i.e. Bhaal & assassins) should tell you one thing: Your job doesn't necessarily define you. You can be an assassin by trade but a wizard by skills. Likewise, you can be a thief without being a thief in class; heck, look at half the merchants of Calimport for that! Thus (and maybe I'm trumped by later information that I'm not recalling or reading), you can be a Shadow Thief without worshiping Mask. You can be a normal thief (class or simply by nature) without worshiping Mask.
In fact, I think the only class where your skills and calling HAVE to be linked to a god is cleric/priest (and maybe paladins).
Of course, I could be wrong by latter sources. I'm just putting my opinion and intent on the table.
Steven
|
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 04 May 2004 : 19:53:01
No, I meant that most of the Shadow Thieves were ALREADY worshipers of Mask. Unless they all secretly worship Bhaal, there's no way they should have died. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 May 2004 : 07:08:36
quote:
Originally posted by DDH_101
I think Sarta is right. The original Avatar trilogy was written like in the 80's (I think) and it was still 1st and 2nd edition back then. However, they reprinted the series and added Prince of Lies and Crucible to it and there was some editing done to the story.
My reason just came from the fact that every assassin that died had some connection with Bhaal and because Artemis Entreri has said that he won't worship a god. But the one thing that puzzles me was that like half of the Shadow Thieves died during the Times of Trouble, but most of the organization are worshipers of Mask...
The Avatar trilogy came out in 1989. I have the original printing of the novels.
The intent of the Avatar crisis was to change the Realms from 1st edition to 2nd edition. Even though the changes weren't all that big, save for losing a few classes, they still made a huge event to explain it all. I will refrain from ranting about how we got no explanations for everything that's changed with 3rd edition...
As for the Shadow Thief thing... Well, all the Bhaal worshippers died, followed by the Big B himself. It stands to reason that the survivors would turn to Mask... |
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 04 May 2004 : 06:20:25
I think Sarta is right. The original Avatar trilogy was written like in the 80's (I think) and it was still 1st and 2nd edition back then. However, they reprinted the series and added Prince of Lies and Crucible to it and there was some editing done to the story.
My reason just came from the fact that every assassin that died had some connection with Bhaal and because Artemis Entreri has said that he won't worship a god. But the one thing that puzzles me was that like half of the Shadow Thieves died during the Times of Trouble, but most of the organization are worshipers of Mask... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 04 May 2004 : 03:14:57
quote:
Originally posted by Sarta
The bigger reason of course was that the Times of Troubles were written to explain the transition from 1st edition to 2nd edition. In second edition there was no assassin class (until much late when they added them as kits). So, they had to explain what happened to all of those assassins running around from 1st edition. Probably not the best solution to the problem, but at least people had some sort of justification.
Sarta
Ah, those long ago and magical days when they actually cared enough to explain changes... |
| Sarta |
Posted - 04 May 2004 : 01:26:16
The bigger reason of course was that the Times of Troubles were written to explain the transition from 1st edition to 2nd edition. In second edition there was no assassin class (until much late when they added them as kits). So, they had to explain what happened to all of those assassins running around from 1st edition. Probably not the best solution to the problem, but at least people had some sort of justification.
Sarta |
| Fireheart |
Posted - 03 May 2004 : 22:18:51
The reason I have heard given is that while Artemis kills for hire he is not an assasin per say (aka doesn't belong to a guild, no class levels).
~Fireheart
edit: I like DDH_101's reason...that's one I haven't heard and makes much more sense! Thanks. |
| DDH_101 |
Posted - 03 May 2004 : 22:17:54
The spell only affects worshipers of Bhaal. Since most of his worshipers are assassins, most of Faerun's assassins died. However, since Artemis Entreri does not follow any god, he wasn't affected. |
|
|
