| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
 Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 05:55:17
|
Does anyone have anymore information on this enigmatic figure?
(My reference is on pg.7 on Volo's Guide to All Things Magical.)
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 08:57:57
|
Unfortunately, very little has bee published on this figure. Rumors abound however, about her identity. Mystra (both old and new), the Simbul, one of the Seven Sisters...even the Lady of Pain, have all been offered up at one time or another as possible sources of the Sorceress in Gray.
The fact that the truth is so nebulous may even suggest that the Sorceress is something beyond what mortal minds can comprehend.
Now although Elminster does say, that the legends surrounding the Sorceress are true, he is quick to deny the possibility that it could be Mystra, or even the Magister. Maybe he himself doesn't even know who or what she/he is.
I prefer to leave her undefined, as it makes the mystery all the more enticing.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
 |
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:08:15
|
| Actually, she's a very good place to insert my namesake. I don't have to change anything, and it should work out very well. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:12:04
|
Good idea.
I was thinking of using her as a formless place holder as well, in case a campaign came up that would necessitate the need for such a figure. Being nebulous by nature, nearly any reason could be crafted for her existence, leaving you able to shape the being to fit in with your overall FR campaign.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:16:22
|
I think it was probably meant to be that way.
Honestly, I looked at the entry on the Sorceress, and was completely shocked. It fits the character in question quite well...in fact the only thing she would possibly change would be to the "Sorceress in Black". Outside of that, everything fits, including Elminster's footnote. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:28:16
|
| What does that mean? |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:50:02
|
Some players in my gaming group (or rather former members) have very little imagination when it comes to these sorts of abstract situations in campaigns. They would have you believe that there is only one way to interpret everything that is presented in sourcebooks, and that is, the way the text is written - with no room for alteration or elaboration.
These were players, who never liked it when I took a campaign (such as FR or PS) away from published material, utilising my own created material to carry the game forward. They would insist that I stop, and take the game back to the 'canon' and 'official' way of playing the setting.
The Blood War sessions in Faerun that I ran last year are a classic example. A major new Tanar'ri offensive was launched, seeking to obtain a foothold in Faerun (for reasons outside the scope of this post). The result was a portion of the North falling under the sway of a Tanar'ri Lord forever changing the political map of Faerun.
I am currently in the process of writing up a series of adventures that will set the party against the Tanar'ri Lord with the hopes of liberating the city and hinterlands that are under his dominion.
Anyway, some of the players involved at the time refused to participate in the game, and therefore held the sessions up, either by refusing to play, or not turning up to gaming sessions (if you remember my discussion about using Ravenloft as a prison plane for some of my players, you'll understand where these players eventually ended up). I ejected them from the game, killing them off in a suprise encounter on the party.
Anyway, some players have no love of creative imagination when it comes to RPG's.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:52:48
|
| That's an odd attitude to have. From what I've read of your posts, I can understand how that would annoy you. It would greatly annoy me. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 09:56:26
|
Exactly.
Creativity and imagination are part of what role-playing is all about.
Needless to say, these same players are also the type more interested in roll-playing rather than role-playing. They also prefer krunch to fluff.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 18 Oct 2003 : 10:01:08
|
| That explains it. If you change something, it might affect their favorite "bah-roken" power combo, and that gets them annoyed. |
|
|
|
Mellomir
Acolyte
Austria
5 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2003 : 14:07:10
|
Sorry to resurrect an old topic, but I've got 2 copper Thumbs I'd like to throw in.
I fully understand both the DM and player point of view when it comes to canon and the Realms.
In a completely homebrew campaign world and as the DM, the only channel for the player to source 'material' and 'flavor' from is me, the DM. Sure, the players will each see the information I provide in slightly different lights but there's still only that single source.
Then there's the Forgotten Realms, a campaign world that has a huge DM, player and even non-player fan base. I could, as a DM, run a Realms campaign in which Cormyr was struck by a meteor and destroyed and it would still be a Realms campaign. However, I shouldn't be surprised that one of my players, a big Cormyr fan, would have his or her level of enjoyment diminished by this (since he or she can no longer visit Suzail, etc.). Sure, an adaptive roleplayer would use this tragedy as a springboard, but as you're fully aware the Realms has produced some very rabid fans (myself included) that don't like to see favorite places destroyed (Tilverton, anyone?).
So, just because a player might get annoyed by 'non-canon' Realms campaigns it doesn't necessarily mean that it's due to a power combo being removed. |
Edited by - Mellomir on 19 Nov 2003 14:08:58 |
|
|
|
Arivia
Great Reader
Canada
2965 Posts |
Posted - 19 Nov 2003 : 22:00:25
|
| I wasn't trying to insinuate that that would be the only reason a player would leave a game. It was simply appropriate, considering the players the Sage mentioned. I've had others leave some of my games for other reasons, but loss of broken power combos seems to be a major reason for roll-players to leave the game. |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 28 Sep 2018 : 04:37:31
|
Master Sage,
I completely agree with you. Hence the fun of working on the enigmatic things that are marked as enigmatic, such as the Phoenix Prophecies [which by the way, I do not mean as a troll referencing the discussion from my post on the subject from earlier today]. The best stuff has to be worked for.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Some players in my gaming group (or rather former members) have very little imagination when it comes to these sorts of abstract situations in campaigns. They would have you believe that there is only one way to interpret everything that is presented in sourcebooks, and that is, the way the text is written - with no room for alteration or elaboration.
These were players, who never liked it when I took a campaign (such as FR or PS) away from published material, utilising my own created material to carry the game forward. They would insist that I stop, and take the game back to the 'canon' and 'official' way of playing the setting.
The Blood War sessions in Faerun that I ran last year are a classic example. A major new Tanar'ri offensive was launched, seeking to obtain a foothold in Faerun (for reasons outside the scope of this post). The result was a portion of the North falling under the sway of a Tanar'ri Lord forever changing the political map of Faerun.
I am currently in the process of writing up a series of adventures that will set the party against the Tanar'ri Lord with the hopes of liberating the city and hinterlands that are under his dominion.
Anyway, some of the players involved at the time refused to participate in the game, and therefore held the sessions up, either by refusing to play, or not turning up to gaming sessions (if you remember my discussion about using Ravenloft as a prison plane for some of my players, you'll understand where these players eventually ended up). I ejected them from the game, killing them off in a suprise encounter on the party.
Anyway, some players have no love of creative imagination when it comes to RPG's.
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
The Sorceress in Gray
