| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 12:02:52
|
...omg, why did my post turn into turquoise-blue text like that? :/
My problem with his dwarves? Nearly all of them are comic reliefs and have all the dignity of Jar-Jar Binks. Pikel is possibly the worst of the lot; for kicks and giggles, I did a search for "Oo oi" in the collector's edition of the Cleric Quintet, and 140 instances turned up. If that's not stupid, then I don't know what is. It's some of the most pathetic attempts at humor I've ever had the misfortune of seeing in any fiction. With other dwarves, it's marginally better, but ultimately most of them are slapstick, and badly done slapstick at that.
Moreover, much like his elves, they aren't very distinct characters. Someone's said once that there are no dwarves in fantasy, just one dwarf copy and pasted all over with a few details changed, and in no other fantasy fiction I've seen truer evidence of this.
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I'm also always hesitant to kill characters but it kills all future stories with that character.
Sure, but so? I'm willing to do so when it becomes necessary. Falling in love with one's own characters is often detrimental (Anne Rice is an extreme example of this, with the way she glorifies Lestat to a point of absurdity); you should be ready to put them through the shredder or stretch them on a rack as is needed, no sparing and no mollycoddling. See if they break. See if they die. And if they do, don't try to "rescue" them. |
 |
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 12:19:14
|
Well I think its one of those cases where honestly the Dwarves of Salvatore are described as a people rather than described as a race. One could certainly describe the Drow in the same rather shifty and nasty terms that one could describe the Dwarves to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't mind certainly seeing some Dwarves that are a bit different though. Though I oddly think Pikel is the first oddity of the race and one to really stand out.
Part of the issue sadly is that you don't often give them the dignity of Elves.
quote:
Sure, but so? I'm willing to do so when it becomes necessary. Falling in love with one's own characters is often detrimental (Anne Rice is an extreme example of this, with the way she glorifies Lestat to a point of absurdity); you should be ready to put them through the shredder or stretch them on a rack as is needed, no sparing and no mollycoddling. See if they break. See if they die. And if they do, don't try to "rescue" them.
And if they do and you find out you have a wonderful story about them later on? The loss for the world. While I agree with you in principle, I also tend to think that brutality to ones own characters rarely is a good thing
(Then again, whom am I to speak. I won't even tell you about the things I like seeing happen to novel characters) |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 12:25:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Well I think its one of those cases where honestly the Dwarves of Salvatore are described as a people rather than described as a race. One could certainly describe the Drow in the same rather shifty and nasty terms that one could describe the Dwarves to be perfectly honest. I wouldn't mind certainly seeing some Dwarves that are a bit different though. Though I oddly think Pikel is the first oddity of the race and one to really stand out.
Drow, when written by other people, sometimes have individual personalities. Drow, when written by Salvatore... not so much. There's Jarlaxle and there's Drizzt, but otherwise, they're all clones.
quote:
Part of the issue sadly is that you don't often give them the dignity of Elves.
Exactly. And do you know why? Because they are short and ugly. Hur hur. For the same reason, halflings aren't taken seriously, because they're short and cute. Gnomes are short and eccentric. Isn't it funny? Look at these short people and their little antics, haw haw.
Gods, give me PTerry's dwarves any time. They, despite belonging to a satirical/parody-fantasy setting, manage to have far more dignity than any dwarf in Salvatore's book ever will. And the sad thing is that Salvatore's books take themselves oh, so seriously.
quote:
And if they do and you find out you have a wonderful story about them later on? The loss for the world. While I agree with you in principle, I also tend to think that brutality to ones own characters rarely is a good thing
That depends. Is it wonderful because you think it's wonderful, or because you think it might actually be wonderful for everyone else? I doubt it'll be a loss for the world either way, regardless. For most writers, there are more stories to be told than there is time available. Besides, what if there is a wonderful story because the characters have been brutalized or killed? You can't have the cake and eat it, too. |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 12:31:57
|
I disagree and think the world can and often is a lesser place for lost stories.
And while I agree Viking funerals are wonderful for many characters.
I still think sometimes it just means less, I point to Clarice Starling in the Hannibal Series.
Good points all round though.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 12:39:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I disagree and think the world can and often is a lesser place for lost stories.
Yeah, and what if stories are lost because you keep some characters alive? That's my point. |
|
|
|
Richard Lee Byers
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
1814 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 13:43:01
|
Nonhuman fantasy races tend to have their differences from humans defined not just physically (pointy ears and what have you) but psychologically. You might think this would entail making them really alien but that's difficult and often winds up making them hard for the average reader or gamer to relate to. What it more often means in practice is that members of the imaginary race wind up all sharing certain personality traits in common. ALL elves are tree huggers, ALL dwarves are dour, stubborn, and acquisitive, etc.
And that makes it tough for the writer to have the critters seem like there are significant personality differences among them. I know, I was constantly trying to solve this problem while writing my drow novel.
That, I think, is, from the author's point of view, part of the appeal of what I call Chinese menu fantasy, where the Tolkienesque band of protagonists has one archetypal elf, one archetypal dwarf, etc. It's much easier to make the characterization work. And I'm not denigrating this approach. I wouldn't dare, now that I've done the diverse band of heroes myself in my dragon thingie.
Of course, there's at least one other advantage to this approach, also. Frequently, much of the point of a fantasy is to give the reader the chance to explore an exotic imaginary world, and by giving him extended commerce with characters who represent many of its races and cultures, the writer facilitates this process. |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 14:34:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers
Nonhuman fantasy races tend to have their differences from humans defined not just physically (pointy ears and what have you) but psychologically. You might think this would entail making them really alien but that's difficult and often winds up making them hard for the average reader or gamer to relate to. What it more often means in practice is that members of the imaginary race wind up all sharing certain personality traits in common. ALL elves are tree huggers, ALL dwarves are dour, stubborn, and acquisitive, etc.
Yes. A thousand times, yes. Not only that, the non-humans tend to be nothing more than a summary of a few exaggerated human traits, a fact that, when I think about it carefully, makes my head go boom.
quote:
Of course, there's at least one other advantage to this approach, also. Frequently, much of the point of a fantasy is to give the reader the chance to explore an exotic imaginary world, and by giving him extended commerce with characters who represent many of its races and cultures, the writer facilitates this process.
I've taken a somewhat militant attitude to this: if (the general) you can't write non-humans convincingly, distinctly and have them still be individuals, then don't. I haven't seen anybody complain that Martin doesn't have elves, dwarves and halflings; some people may think imaginary races are essential to fantasy, but I hold that it's perfectly fine for the cast to be all human. Especially when the writer makes it glaringly obvious she has no ability to make them seem other than "hey here are humans in funny suits pastede on yay." With all things being equal (the writer's skill, the setting, etc), humans are often more interesting than the archetypal elf/dwarf/halfling, anyway. |
|
|
|
Feanor
Learned Scribe
100 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 14:40:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
If you ask me, one of Salvatore's (many) problems is that he pulls punches and is never willing to be harsh enough on his primary characters. They're all author's darlings.
In Salvatore's defense, he did kill -- and intend to leave dead -- Wulfgar. It was the fan reaction, and TSR/WotC's reaction to that, that caused him to have to bring Wulfgar back.
As tired as I am of Drizzt, I think that's part of the reason RAS doesn't do anything to his characters: WotC won't let him. I am of the opinion that if given the chance, RAS would drop those characters in a heartbeat and tell other tales.
One of Salvatore's main flaws is not that he does not kill his main characters, but the fact that he makes them win against impossible odds. If someone counts, there are at least 6-7 situations where the companions of the hall could not have, theoretically, won. Ok, I know that someone can be very lucky, once, twice, but how many times you can have such luck ?
This starts to look like cartoons. I bet that Salvatore would make Companions of the Hall win even if they had to confront Asmodeus himself.
And, btw, to insert new characters is not compulsory to kill the old ones : after all, it would be the moment for Wulfgar and Catti-Brie to retire from adventuring and have their own families, Bruenor has a kingdom to rule, so maybe new companions for Drizzt, without exterminating the old ones, would be a nice addition. |
|
|
|
GungHo
Seeker
USA
68 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 18:27:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Oh, I know, which is why I said he doesn't write for charity. Cash cows are cash cows, and if it keeps his pockets filled, more power to him.
Well, part of the rub is that it isn't actually his cow to slaughter, even if he wanted to. It's WotC's cow (as is the Forgotten Realms), and it keeps their pockets filled... they just redistribute some of it Salvatore's way for performing regular "cow maintenance." And, nothing can go on in their farm without their written, in triplicate, consent.
In essence, it doesn't matter how far Greenwood, Salvatore, or Cunningham may want to take a character, because WotC's always going to hold the rope and decide which pasture the cow feeds from. An author can can say, "how about the 'character death' pasture," but they can easily be countermanded with, "no, the grass at 'looked bad but it was only a flesh wound' looks a little greener today, go over there." |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 18:37:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by GungHo
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Oh, I know, which is why I said he doesn't write for charity. Cash cows are cash cows, and if it keeps his pockets filled, more power to him.
Well, part of the rub is that it isn't actually his cow to slaughter, even if he wanted to. It's WotC's cow (as is the Forgotten Realms), and it keeps their pockets filled... they just redistribute some of it Salvatore's way for performing regular "cow maintenance." And, nothing can go on in their farm without their written, in triplicate, consent.
In essence, it doesn't matter how far Greenwood, Salvatore, or Cunningham may want to take a character, because WotC's always going to hold the rope and decide which pasture the cow feeds from. An author can can say, "how about the 'character death' pasture," but they can easily be countermanded with, "no, the grass at 'looked bad but it was only a flesh wound' looks a little greener today, go over there."
So well put, GungHo, so well.
Consent dictated, written, signed in triplicate, submitted for review, edited, lost, found, queried, lost again, then misfiled in a broken cabinet in the abandoned room at the bottom of a flight of stairs marked out of order, hidden behind a locked door bearing a sign that says "beware of the leopard."
And hopefully Douglas A. doesn't mind me borrowing his joke. 
Cheers
|
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2006 : 19:30:51
|
quote:
One of Salvatore's main flaws is not that he does not kill his main characters, but the fact that he makes them win against impossible odds. If someone counts, there are at least 6-7 situations where the companions of the hall could not have, theoretically, won.
For me, only a few of Drizzt's enemies were actually menacing. Matron Baenre, Shimmergloom, Alkar Errtu, Kessel, and Artemis of course. Most of the Pirates, Thieves Guild Leaders, and similiar no names are just ciphers. Give me foes worthy of the enemy and I'll complain about "impossible odds." For me, Drizzt is able to kill a Balor and there's nothing strange about that. He killed one in his first appearence so why shouldn't he be able to do it now? |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
The Hooded One
Lady Herald of Realmslore
5056 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2006 : 04:32:23
|
Charles, this one of yours I can answer:
“You know, I always wonder what Eds original idea for what the Realms would be like in terms of sexual content and violence.”
In Ed’s original Realms, sex, violence, nudity, so-called sexual deviance (S&M, homosexuality, bisexuality, different family groupings than the North American Christian social ‘norm’ . . . and so on) were and are all present.
However, with the exception of the gossipy social climbers (like the ladies seen talking in the early present-day chapters of CORMYR: A NOVEL) in the setting, there was no gasping at such things, no pointing and shouting with alarm.
None of the attention paid to such details, except when plots turned on them, that certain gamers seemed to give them, going on and on about Ed the lecher and nude woodchopping scenes and the like.
Ed was a little astonished at how much TSR (and many American gamers) reacted to the sex, but at the same time seemed to see nothing wrong with graphic, sadistic, and “how-to” violence. Ed was a child of the sixties, and sex was “everywhere but not talked about all that much by non-participants in a particular act or encounter, because, hey, it wasn’t their business.” It was a pre-AIDS world, remember.
And the Realms wasn’t, and isn’t, a Christian modern-world North American setting - - or even, despite the attempts of many to portray or understand it as such, a medieveal or Renaissance historical real-world setting, with magic tacked on.
That isn’t to say issues of jealousy, love gone wrong, sexual competition, moral disapproval, and other “human nature” issues didn’t and don’t feature in the Realms. Ed’s just a lot more casual about such things than the worried-about-angry-mothers-from-Heck publishers (TSR and now WotC) have ever been able to afford to be.
I once asked Ed, in the presence of Peter Archer at GenCon, what an uncensored Ed Greenwood Realms novel would be like, by asking him to compare what he’d be aiming for to a published fantasy author, and he replied: Guy Gavriel Kay in TIGANA or A SONG FOR ARBONNE: present when necessary, used to give us insight into the characters and make them seem more real, but not dwelt upon.
It should always be remembered that Ed has been edited and toned down a lot, but also asked to “sex things up” on more than one occasion, and told “we’re aiming for the twelve-year-old American male, so you can go as far as you like with violence, and give us lots of TITillation, but not much more than titillation.” (yes, that’s a direct quote, but I’ll protect the identity of the TSR staffer who uttered it).
so there you are.
love,
THO
|
|
|
|
Feanor
Learned Scribe
100 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2006 : 07:55:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
quote:
One of Salvatore's main flaws is not that he does not kill his main characters, but the fact that he makes them win against impossible odds. If someone counts, there are at least 6-7 situations where the companions of the hall could not have, theoretically, won.
For me, only a few of Drizzt's enemies were actually menacing. Matron Baenre, Shimmergloom, Alkar Errtu, Kessel, and Artemis of course. Most of the Pirates, Thieves Guild Leaders, and similiar no names are just ciphers. Give me foes worthy of the enemy and I'll complain about "impossible odds." For me, Drizzt is able to kill a Balor and there's nothing strange about that. He killed one in his first appearence so why shouldn't he be able to do it now?
Here they are : the undead Zaknafein do'Urden ; the white dragon Icingdeath ; the dragon Shimmergloom ; Akar Kessel and his hordes ; a whole guild of more than 200 thieves, fighters and mages in The Halfling's Gem ; matron mother Baenre ; Errtu and his minions in Passage to Dawn (is not only a Balor, but also a marilith, a glabrezu and a horde of lesser demons), the taers (saved at the last moment by Revjak and his barbarians), a whole crew of pirates and ogres in Sea of Swords, an army of orcs and giants in "A thousand orcs". There are 10 situations when the companions of the hall were severely outmatched, yet the last moment intervention of a kind of deus ex machina or an enormous amount of luck allowed them to emerge victorious. I understand that such things can happen, but every time ? Are Drizzt&Co Tymora's babies or what ? |
|
|
|
Ethriel
Learned Scribe
USA
272 Posts |
Posted - 05 Apr 2006 : 22:24:46
|
| Did we forget Drizzt did NOT beat Errtu by skill and only won by a Deus Ex Machina? How about Dantrag and the other Baenres? Icingdeath, Obould... |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 00:15:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I hardly count his killing Errtu with his swords a deus es machina.
Why not? It wasn't skill or luck or strategy... It was a simple case of "Ooh, look what this magic sword does!" |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 02:41:01
|
I didn't think it was at all.
The sword gave him an advantage but Drizzt proved he was the greatest swordsman in the Realms by being the one to wield it.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
silvermage
Seeker
77 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 02:41:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ethriel
Did we forget Drizzt did NOT beat Errtu by skill and only won by a Deus Ex Machina? How about Dantrag and the other Baenres? Icingdeath, Obould...
I highly believe Drizzt beat Errtu by skill and confidence. For if Drizzt had the best magical weapon in hand and yet no skill or confidence nor faith to wield it, Drizzt won't be able to able to beat Errtu.
Icingdeath was killed in an unfair duel as he was fighting two instead of one and I call that a one-sided fight.
Drizzt and Obould's fight were a generally fair one, I think Obould was more reliant on his armor to shield himself from death for Drizzt many times nearly got him but end up repelled. So it was more like "who got the best armor or blade?" |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 02:53:15
|
Query: do people consider things like "best swordsman of the [XYZ]" worth anything in characters?
Because, IMO, it's oh so easy to write characters like that, and takes nearly no skill on the author's part. Churning out battle scenes is much easier than writing meaningful character development or showing the hero's stunning intelligence. (For all the reasons I mentioned before.) |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:19:15
|
Yes. I certainly do.
Mostly because I feel its important to establish a great deal of the character's feel and interactions. A blacksmith does smithwork. A swordsman fights. "The Best" swordsman should have a certain fear to his actions from other people and other warriors be afraid of him while also simultaneously he's not going to be afraid to fight most individuals he encounters.
It's certainly not a matter of battle scenes though since even complete klutzs can be involved in endless battle scenes.
However, to be the "Best" in the Realms is to also have a drastic effect on one's character as 'The Best Gunman' has in the Old West dramas.
Hell, Artemis Entrei's entire character was at its best because he was focused on maintaining his skills and his jealousy over the fact that he suddnely wasn't 'The best' and the fact that Drizzt as an elf doesn't have to worry about muscle decay or age is a major bit of characterzation.
Zaknafien had to cope with a lot of challenges himself because he was the best in Menzoberrazan
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
Edited by - Charles Phipps on 06 Apr 2006 03:20:48 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:20:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by silvermage
quote:
Originally posted by Ethriel
Did we forget Drizzt did NOT beat Errtu by skill and only won by a Deus Ex Machina? How about Dantrag and the other Baenres? Icingdeath, Obould...
I highly believe Drizzt beat Errtu by skill and confidence. For if Drizzt had the best magical weapon in hand and yet no skill or confidence nor faith to wield it, Drizzt won't be able to able to beat Errtu.
Icingdeath was killed in an unfair duel as he was fighting two instead of one and I call that a one-sided fight.
Drizzt and Obould's fight were a generally fair one, I think Obould was more reliant on his armor to shield himself from death for Drizzt many times nearly got him but end up repelled. So it was more like "who got the best armor or blade?"
If Drizzt hadn't been holding a magical sword that neutralized magical fire, he'd've been dead. There was no skill involved; his actions were the desparate actions of one who already knows he has lost the fight.
The fight against Icingdeath was one-sided... in the dragon's favor. Just about any fight with a dragon is already tilted in the dragon's favor, because most adventurers aren't huge winged spellcasting critters with seriously long lifespans and good spellcasting abilities. Had it not been for the very conveniently placed icicle and a lucky hit, The Crystal Shard would have been a short story instead of the start of a franchise.
About Obould... I'm not done with the Two Swords yet, but I'm having a bit of a hard time with the concept of Obould. We've seen the companions walk thru just about any challenge and take down anything that opposed them, and now they can't even scratch an orc? The Hamster doesn't buy that. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:21:57
|
quote:
If Drizzt hadn't been holding a magical sword that neutralized magical fire, he'd've been dead. There was no skill involved; his actions were the desparate actions of one who already knows he has lost the fight.
Its' not like Errtu was an Elemental Wooley. Errtu is a BALOR. He has a whip. The fight was him vs. a Balor, one who just didn't have the 'insta kill' ability of flame to aid him.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:22:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I didn't think it was at all.
The sword gave him an advantage but Drizzt proved he was the greatest swordsman in the Realms by being the one to wield it.
Any yahoo could have weilded the sword. The fact that Drizzt found it and got lucky in a later encounter, because of it, proves nothing.
If he was so great, why did he need the magic of the sword to defeat Errtu?
Oh, and we know by Ed's words that Drizzt is not the greatest swordsman in the Realms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:28:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Winterfox
Query: do people consider things like "best swordsman of the [XYZ]" worth anything in characters?
Not I. Any min-maxer can build an awesome spellslinger or tank. But that's all they are: stats. I couldn't care less if a character is or isn't the best at something, so long as he/she is an interesting character. And the ability to kill something handily is rarely an interesting aspect.
Best swordsman is a measure of skill. It says nothing about the person wielding the blade. We don't know their hopes, their fears, their dreams or their quirks. All we know is that they have a single skill they can utilize. People aren't defined by skills. Skills don't tell me who someone is.
I want someone whose personality is interesting and makes me want to learn more about that person. Any fool can swing a sword; I'm more interested in why they do it and what they do when they're not swinging the sword. That's where -- and who -- the character is. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 03:31:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
quote:
If Drizzt hadn't been holding a magical sword that neutralized magical fire, he'd've been dead. There was no skill involved; his actions were the desparate actions of one who already knows he has lost the fight.
Its' not like Errtu was an Elemental Wooley. Errtu is a BALOR. He has a whip. The fight was him vs. a Balor, one who just didn't have the 'insta kill' ability of flame to aid him.
And had Drizzt not been weilding Icingdeath, he'd be dead now. Skill didn't save him -- he was already defeated. Magic saved him -- unexpected magic saved him from an otherwise certain death. That's pretty close to the definition of a deus ex machina, to me. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 04:19:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I don't see how that's the case.
He'd lose if the magical advantages weren't evened out. I don't see how that's a difference.
I'm slow sometimes, but your question of how he would lose if the magical advantages were even, is exactly that. magical advantages  . I would agree with Wooly on this one, Drizzt has had several close calls and this fight was one of them, in my opinion. Drizzt would have lost this one, without his magical blade. |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 05:35:10
|
Yes, your point?
I'm missing something.
What I'm trying to say that if Drizzt was unskilled and not 'The best' he still would have died even with the magical blade.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 05:45:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Yes, your point?
I'm missing something.
What I'm trying to say that if Drizzt was unskilled and not 'The best' he still would have died even with the magical blade.
but he is not the best, according to ED. Sorry, if I am missing your point here. In this particular fight, Drizzt won, by having THAT particular blade. (disclaimer) I am a huge Drizzt fan 
As far as "if" he was unskilled and not the best (which he isn't), of course, you would be correct. |
Edited by - scererar on 06 Apr 2006 05:48:10 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1419 Posts |
Posted - 06 Apr 2006 : 05:47:19
|
Oh really? Who does Ed say is the best and could you direct me to wear? I'd love to see.
(not disputing, I'm interested)
yes.
But it was a miniscule benefit compared to his skill.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Heroes in Novels
Topic Locked
