| Author |
 Topic  |
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Jul 2006 : 23:52:17
|
|
I know that the plane of shadow is inherintly evil, and since the Shadow Weave is also evil, are people who tap into these sources for their magic more likely to be evil or become evil? I've never heard of any rules saying that people who tap into shadow slowly turn evil, but it still seems like people who are good would be less inclinded to use shadow magic if they knew or found out about shadow's evil nature.
|
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 00:18:09
|
| I would say yes. But note that Shadow Magic is not inherently evil, as it's been utilized via the Weave for ages. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
 |
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 01:00:54
|
| oh, right... but even then, shadow magic used via the weave taps into the plane of shadow, so I guess it's still the same (kinda) |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 01:20:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
I would say yes. But note that Shadow Magic is not inherently evil, as it's been utilized via the Weave for ages.
Or at least, as long as 3rd Edition has been around. :lol: |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 01:26:46
|
Well, the Curse of the Shadowking used Shadow Magic back in 2E. :)
And, by Shadow Magic, I mean schools drawn from the School of Effect of Shadow - not 3E's version of Shadow Magic.
As to whether ALL Shadow Magic is evil? It's hard to say. In 2E, Shadow Magic trapped the Demiplane of Shadow - which was entirely neutral. That's the Shadow Magic we've seen on Faerun for millennia/centuries. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 02:12:53
|
Cough,
The Shadow Plane even in 3/3.5e is still neutral aligned according to the Manual of the Planes and 3.5e's DMG. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 05:51:22
|
What about in Tome of Magic? I figured that was just an add-on to existing lore, and I read through a little of it (I don't own it, so I can't quote) and I thought it said something about the Plane of Shadow being evil. Anyone got the book? I could check, but I won't make it to Borders again til Thursday  |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 06:08:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by kaeso
What about in Tome of Magic? I figured that was just an add-on to existing lore, and I read through a little of it (I don't own it, so I can't quote) and I thought it said something about the Plane of Shadow being evil. Anyone got the book? I could check, but I won't make it to Borders again til Thursday
TheShadow magic portion starts on page 109 of the tome of magic. I did not see anything pertaining to the shadow plane being evil ( it could lead one to tend to believe that though), but I only studied it for a few moments, to be able to post this. It does however state that all spellcasters tap into shadow magic at some point, the tome referenced this as lesser shadow magic, and gave the darkness spell as an example. It also states that a shadow caster can be of any alignment, rarely good ( yes I know their are many, many Prestige classes now-a-days that reference shadow users, and they all have differing alignment restrictions, but this was just one example ). I will leave the fr canon vs the d20 sourcebook discussion to others.
anyways, hope that was interesting |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 06:29:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Cough,
The Shadow Plane even in 3/3.5e is still neutral aligned according to the Manual of the Planes and 3.5e's DMG.
yes but "mildly" neutral-aligned page 152 3.5E DMG and page 60 in manual of the planes. |
|
|
|
Akryn
Acolyte
Finland
14 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 09:08:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by kaeso
I know that the plane of shadow is inherintly evil, and since the Shadow Weave is also evil, are people who tap into these sources for their magic more likely to be evil or become evil? I've never heard of any rules saying that people who tap into shadow slowly turn evil, but it still seems like people who are good would be less inclinded to use shadow magic if they knew or found out about shadow's evil nature.
In my opinnion i think that it varies pretty much individually, as to the question are they more likely to be evil, i would say in general the majority who wield the SW constantly as their primary source of magic (Shades etc) are more likely to be evilly aligned or just plain evil but im sure that there are "good" people who also utilize the SW without having to fear of "becoming evil". I think gamewise, that shadow magic is perceived as evil by the majority, but then again the people who perceive it as such probably dont really know a damn thing about the nature of the Weave and even less of the SW.
Was Caladorn Caladrien evil? I would say no and i dont think he was turned into the Shadowking because the Shadow Weave twisted him, more likely i think it was the fact that his ancestor had been the King and it kinda runs in the family.. or something like that. Even Caladorn´s kid uses Mighty Shadow magic and i see no hint of evil in him..
In short.. I think its individual but usually the SW and its users are perceived as evil..
just my penny again. |
|
|
|
warlockco
Master of Realmslore
USA
1695 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2006 : 09:35:47
|
The Plane of Shadow and Shadow Magic itself are not evil.
Most inhabitants of the Plane of Shadow are evil, and alot of undead seem to draw power from it (instead of the Negative Energy Plane for some reason, as of 3E).
Just most users of Shadow Magic are evil.
The Shadow Weave is "evil" but mainly because the Goddess that governs it is evil.
The Plane of Shadow and Shadow Magic are as evil as a load gun would be. What is evil, is the way people use it or interact with it. |
News of the Weird
D20 System Reference Document
D20 Modern System Reference Document
|
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 01:54:07
|
Hmmm, I know there was "shadow magic" before 3E, but the Shadow Weave didn't exist, mechanically, before then. Is there more than one kind of Shadow magic, or was the "old" shadow magic retconned as using the shadow weave?
Or do I just have my foot in my mouth, here? |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 04:17:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Hmmm, I know there was "shadow magic" before 3E, but the Shadow Weave didn't exist, mechanically, before then. Is there more than one kind of Shadow magic, or was the "old" shadow magic retconned as using the shadow weave?
Or do I just have my foot in my mouth, here?
Shadow Magic draws from the Weave, but manipulates the stuff of the Plane of Shadow.
The Shadow Weave is the dark spots in the Weave. It can, but doesn't necessarily, include Shadow Magic.
They're two different beasts. At least, that's always been my understanding. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 04:21:35
|
| That clarifies it for me...thanks. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 05:39:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Hmmm, I know there was "shadow magic" before 3E, but the Shadow Weave didn't exist, mechanically, before then. Is there more than one kind of Shadow magic, or was the "old" shadow magic retconned as using the shadow weave?
Or do I just have my foot in my mouth, here?
Shadow Magic draws from the Weave, but manipulates the stuff of the Plane of Shadow.
The Shadow Weave is the dark spots in the Weave. It can, but doesn't necessarily, include Shadow Magic.
They're two different beasts. At least, that's always been my understanding.
Exactly, since the spells in the PHB that have the shadow school/descriptor can drew on either weaves. This is the same as how it was in 2e and do remember that Rich introduced the Shadow Weave in 2e because of the Shadow Stone novel. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 06:20:49
|
| right, tome of magic described this as lesser shadow magic |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 19:16:11
|
| Since the plane of shadow is neutral, but is a kind of favorite of evil magic users, how would a good person justify using shadow magic? It's usually used in sneaky, underhanded ways, which seems like it would turn off a lot of 'good' people. Also, the overall dimness of the plane itself makes it somewhat... depressing, which would seem to make it more appealing to 'evil' people. So to a good character, would it be a kind of 'the ends can justify the means' sort of situation? Or am I thinking of this all wrong? |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
Edited by - kaeso on 18 Jul 2006 19:17:51 |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 19:23:33
|
I am sure a lot of Svirfneblin use it.
Sneaky does not mean evil, otherwise all Rogues would be evil, and all Illusionists.
Sorry, but I think you're making certain assumptions about alignments that just aren't true... Those kind of personality traits do not make one more or less evil or good. :) |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jul 2006 : 23:25:32
|
Agreed--I don't see anything inherently evil about shadow (or the color black, for that matter). Shadow is simply:
An area that is not or is only partially irradiated or illuminated because of the interception of radiation by an opaque object between the area and the source of radiation. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 00:09:19
|
| Taking into account quantum theory, it is! Very nice. Approved by Dan. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 00:14:36
|
I think the reason that a lot of evil things come from the plane of shadows is that a lot of those things wandered in from "normal" places, and became twisted because of the lack of light. Its not that the plane itself is evil (it doesn't even have a moderate evil trait according to the rules, and actually has a moderate neutral trait), but because creatures used to light are driven mad or altered when they arrive here, they tend to be evil after they adapt to living there.
Shar just used the "gaps" that already existed in the Weave and made them the Shadow Weave, and made herself the conduit. This doesn't mean that "raw material" of the shadow weave is evil, just the way Shar presents it. |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 01:29:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
I think the reason that a lot of evil things come from the plane of shadows is that a lot of those things wandered in from "normal" places, and became twisted because of the lack of light. Its not that the plane itself is evil (it doesn't even have a moderate evil trait according to the rules, and actually has a moderate neutral trait), but because creatures used to light are driven mad or altered when they arrive here, they tend to be evil after they adapt to living there.
Shar just used the "gaps" that already existed in the Weave and made them the Shadow Weave, and made herself the conduit. This doesn't mean that "raw material" of the shadow weave is evil, just the way Shar presents it.
ooooooooooooh. Ok, that makes sense. |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 01:43:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Taking into account quantum theory, it is! Very nice. Approved by Dan.
*grins* I agree that being "sneaky" isn't inherently evil either. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 03:54:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Taking into account quantum theory, it is! Very nice. Approved by Dan.
*grins* I agree that being "sneaky" isn't inherently evil either.
Oh I know. It's just something that evil characters are much more prone to, and I guess I'm trying to figure out why that is. Not that specifically, but why evil is more likely to choose shadow than good. Of course, KnightErrantJR answered that (thanks again). |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 05:54:13
|
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20060303a&page=5
Hehe I read through this... most important was the part on Negative Energy. I have much to learn. |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
Kalin Agrivar
Senior Scribe
Canada
956 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 14:42:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Shar just used the "gaps" that already existed in the Weave and made them the Shadow Weave, and made her self the conduit. This doesn't mean that "raw material" of the shadow weave is evil, just the way Shar presents it.
I'm not sure I agree with that as the "gaps" aren't really "raw material" like the weave is...it's like the Weave is "matter" and the gaps "anti-matter", that’s why the two types of magic don't mix well.
Using art as a metaphor, the Weave is one big painting and in the painting there is negative and positive space. If the Weave is the positive space then the negative space has been termed “the Shadow Weave”. The Shadow Weave is all the space that the actual drawing does not take up. But remember in art you if you can reverse the concept of negative/positive space (make the “drawing” negative space and the negative space the “new” drawing) then so you can with of the Weave. Thus the Shadow Weave should be just as powerful as the Weave.
The problem of if it’s evil lies in two factors, one involving that the Weave is supposed to be a mix of the energy of life energy and “reality” and second, like you said, Shar is the “conduit” of the Shadow Weave:
One is that the Shadow Weave is “negative” space, which implies that, like matter/anti-matter, it is the opposite and if mixed would destroy/eliminate/erase each other (which is exactly how the Sharn Wall was breached). If the Weave is made up of the forces of life/reality and the Shadow Weave is its opposite then logically the Shadow Weave is the forces of death/entropy (like the planes of positive/negative energy). And like the argument that is the negative energy plane actually evil, so then so does the argument is the Shadow Weave evil.
In the spirit of all D&D products of all editions, entropy, destruction and death is evil and so must be the Shadow Weave be evil (personally I don’t think entropy and death are evil but a part of the natural cycle, but that’s my opinion). The whole “up with necromancy, darkness and destruction” thing the Shadow Weave has going on supports this.
The second factor is Shar being not just the patron of the Shadow Weave but its conduit. For some reason Shar was able to “hang on” to the Shadow Weave when she and Selune tore themselves apart and created Mystryl. Logically Mystryl should have had a “negative” sibling (now there is an idea! Shar has imprisoned Mystryl’s sister/brother for eons and has siphoned her/his powers to control the Shadow Weave!  ) than Shar having the whole Shadow Weave to herself.
My first question is then Mystryl/Mystra/Midnight also the conduit of the Weave? The canon supports this as a yes with the example of when Karsus took Mystryl’s power and she “killed” herself and magic “turned off” in the Realms. The second question is why hasn’t she used the Shadow Weave long ago against Selune? I think Ao put a leash on her for that and only now can she use it as the new Mystra is leaning so towards the good moral pole now. Third then is wouldn’t Shar have “chosen” like Mystra does to limit her strength? I think she will soon, if Ao allows her to use the Shadow Weave. And finally as the conduit, does Shar’s bias (other portfolios) taint the Shadow Weave? I think yes it does, making the Shadow Weave even more evil (which means if Mystra becomes truly neutral good does the Weave become positively aligned?). The “up with necromancy, darkness and destruction” thing may also be due to Shar’s influence.
I understand that it was called Shadow Weave as it was a “shadow” of the Weave (which I don’t really agree with, it’s the reflection more than the shadow) and because of Shar’s influence (goddess of darkness and shadow) but the term “Shadow Weave” should have been named the “Anti-Weave”.
I’ll get off the podium now
 |
Kalin Xorell El'Agrivar
- High Mage of the Arcane Assembly
- Lore Keeper of the Vault of Ancestors
- 3rd Son of the Lord of the Stand |
|
|
|
kaeso
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 19:07:08
|
quote:
The problem of if it’s evil lies in two factors, one involving that the Weave is supposed to be a mix of the energy of life energy and “reality” and second, like you said, Shar is the “conduit” of the Shadow Weave
I was under the impression that Shar had created the Shadow Weave while managing to keep herself separate from it. So, is she the Shadow Weave just as Mystra IS the Weave?
quote:
The second question is why hasn’t she used the Shadow Weave long ago against Selune?
I think because Selune has a lot of buddies, and with Mystra on her side she is much more powerful than she appears. Also, I think that kind of fighting could possibly make Ao more than a little angry.
quote:
And finally as the conduit, does Shar’s bias (other portfolios) taint the Shadow Weave? I think yes it does, making the Shadow Weave even more evil (which means if Mystra becomes truly neutral good does the Weave become positively aligned?). The “up with necromancy, darkness and destruction” thing may also be due to Shar’s influence.
I'm still not sure Shar is the conduit of the Shadow Weave, but whether or not she is, I don't doubt that she definitely has a bias regarding the alignment of the Shadow Weave itself. For Mystra, I think it's a little different- since the Weave is so much more popular, I think Ao doesn't give her a choice but to keep pretty neutral about what kinds of people can use the Weave.
Overall, awesome ideas! Does anyone have answers to these from authentic sources? |
Great literature is escapist, but it changes you, and you come back to your world with new eyes. D&D is the first game that's ever done that for me.
-Sumana Harihareswara |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 19:16:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
The second factor is Shar being not just the patron of the Shadow Weave but its conduit. For some reason Shar was able to “hang on” to the Shadow Weave when she and Selune tore themselves apart and created Mystryl. Logically Mystryl should have had a “negative” sibling (now there is an idea! Shar has imprisoned Mystryl’s sister/brother for eons and has siphoned her/his powers to control the Shadow Weave! ) than Shar having the whole Shadow Weave to herself.
She didn't hold onto it. She later created the Shadow Weave in the dark spaces in the Weave. That's why it's called the Shadow Weave -- because it is a shadow.
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
My first question is then Mystryl/Mystra/Midnight also the conduit of the Weave? The canon supports this as a yes with the example of when Karsus took Mystryl’s power and she “killed” herself and magic “turned off” in the Realms. The second question is why hasn’t she used the Shadow Weave long ago against Selune? I think Ao put a leash on her for that and only now can she use it as the new Mystra is leaning so towards the good moral pole now. Third then is wouldn’t Shar have “chosen” like Mystra does to limit her strength? I think she will soon, if Ao allows her to use the Shadow Weave. And finally as the conduit, does Shar’s bias (other portfolios) taint the Shadow Weave? I think yes it does, making the Shadow Weave even more evil (which means if Mystra becomes truly neutral good does the Weave become positively aligned?). The “up with necromancy, darkness and destruction” thing may also be due to Shar’s influence.
The Shadow Weave is not as powerful as the Weave. Further, the Weave is used orders of magnitude more -- so the use gives Mystra more power, helping keep her the most powerful deity of the Realms. That's why she has Chosen -- as both a balance and a back-up plan.
Shar created the Shadow Weave. It is her toy. It's not a weapon, it's just a way for her to get more power.
quote:
Originally posted by kalin agrivar
I understand that it was called Shadow Weave as it was a “shadow” of the Weave (which I don’t really agree with, it’s the reflection more than the shadow) and because of Shar’s influence (goddess of darkness and shadow) but the term “Shadow Weave” should have been named the “Anti-Weave”.
If it was a reflection, it wouldn't be weaker, and it would be subject to the same problems the Weave has in wild and dead magic areas. As this is not the case, the Shadow Weave is, as has been written, a shadow of the Weave. |
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
36782 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 19:19:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by kaeso
quote:
The problem of if it’s evil lies in two factors, one involving that the Weave is supposed to be a mix of the energy of life energy and “reality” and second, like you said, Shar is the “conduit” of the Shadow Weave
I was under the impression that Shar had created the Shadow Weave while managing to keep herself separate from it. So, is she the Shadow Weave just as Mystra IS the Weave?
I'd say not. The original Mystryl was magic, and her predecessors have been, too. The Shadow Weave, on the other hand, is an artificial creation. So I'd say that it's just another portfolio for Shar. |
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! |
|
|
|
Kalin Agrivar
Senior Scribe
Canada
956 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 19:51:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
She didn't hold onto it. She later created the Shadow Weave in the dark spaces in the Weave. That's why it's called the Shadow Weave -- because it is a shadow.
Logically would the Shadow Weave have been created the moment the Weave was formed? You can weave a blanket without making the holes...so in that way if Selune and Shar “made” Mystryl and the Weave, then so to did they make the Shadow Weave
And I still like the idea better that it’s a reflection, and exact opposite (like a picture); a shadow of a blanket would be dark outline with holes of light, not the holes in the weave of the blanket
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The Shadow Weave is not as powerful as the Weave. Further, the Weave is used orders of magnitude more -- so the use gives Mystra more power, helping keep her the most powerful deity of the Realms. That's why she has Chosen -- as both a balance and a back-up plan.
Shar created the Shadow Weave. It is her toy. It's not a weapon, it's just a way for her to get more power.
That’s true, the canon says the Shadow Weave is not as powerful as the Weave...at the moment.
The problem is no one has really discussed the true nature of the Weave or Shadow Weave. If the Shadow Weave can’t create or use light then logically the Weave shouldn’t be able to destroy or use darkness. And the “destruction” and “creation” statements are arguable when you are referring to scientific theory (matter cannot be created or destroyed).
If the Shadow Weave was as powerful as the Weave then Shar would require Chosen like Mystra’s Chosen, more-so since she is evil (and would destroy the universe)
And I really don’t think she “created” the Shadow Weave, it makes no sense.
I still think Ao has something to do with both of the Weaves and keeping the Balance
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert If it was a reflection, it wouldn't be weaker, and it would be subject to the same problems the Weave has in wild and dead magic areas. As this is not the case, the Shadow Weave is, as has been written, a shadow of the Weave.
I agree with that. Was it ever mentioned before 3.0? I think the Shadow Weave as an idea thrown into Forgotten Realms 3.0 as a new idea to help make the Realms darker (no pun intended) , one of a few ideas they had for the “new Realms”. I think no one has actually really fleshed out the whole Shadow Weave thing nor it’s implications to the canon
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'd say not. The original Mystryl was magic, and her predecessors have been, too. The Shadow Weave, on the other hand, is an artificial creation. So I'd say that it's just another portfolio for Shar.
This once goes back again to “did Shar actually make the Shadow Weave” question again. IF she didn’t then is she just the custodian? I really like my idea of there is an “anti-Mystra” for the Shadow Weave...or more logically Mystra should have control over both Weaves...the negative and positive space...
Nice discussion
|
Kalin Xorell El'Agrivar
- High Mage of the Arcane Assembly
- Lore Keeper of the Vault of Ancestors
- 3rd Son of the Lord of the Stand |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jul 2006 : 19:56:05
|
| The Shadow Weave was introduced in the very-late 2E novel The Shadowstone, by Rich Baker. It was meant to be a Cerilia novel, but that setting tanked. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Shadow Users... good or evil?
