| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Kalevala
Acolyte
43 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Jun 2007 : 21:24:33
|
OK, I've just read Shadowdale and Tantras, and I'm bothered by a couple of things that happened/was mentioned in the books. I'm looking for some insight but please keep in mind that I haven't read Waterdeep yet 
1) I don't know much about Storm Silverhand but I was under the impression that she's a good-hearted, just, and intelligent adventurer. Granted, she thought she'd lost a very dear friend, but is it really like her to jump to conclusions and go on a fit of blood-lusted rage and condemn Midnight and Adon with such little evidence? (They were sentenced to death for "killing Elminster")
2) When Myrkul killed "all the assassins in the Realms" to give Bane more power, wouldn't that mean that big names like Artemis Entreri should've been dead since the ToT?
3) What is the "Council of Wizards in Waterdeep" that Elminster mentioned in the end of Tantras? Is it still active? Where can I find more info on the Council?
edit: changed the abbreviation ToB (=typo) to ToT. Dunno what I was thinking about. The Time of Bubbles, maybe? 
|
Edited by - Kalevala on 28 Jun 2007 11:48:09
|
|
|
turox
Learned Scribe
USA
145 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2007 : 22:02:28
|
| Well for questions 1 and 3 I would say read Waterdeep that will answer them for you or at least clear it up some. As for 2 Myrkul can only kill assassins that follow/worship him and I don't think Artemis worshops him. However I don't know much about Artemis. I'm sure some other sage will come along shortly and help fill in what I may have misread or haven't learned yet. |
Turox Antas Dragonslayer -
"People will believe anything they want to believe, or fear to believe."
Wizard's First Rule: Chapter 36, Page #397, US Hard Cover (revealed by Zeddicus Zu'l Zorander).
Explanation by Zeddicus Zu'l Zorander: "People are stupid; given proper motivation, almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People’s heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true. People are stupid; they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so are all the easier to fool."
|
 |
|
|
Reefy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
892 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2007 : 22:54:39
|
1) The portrayal of Storm has been (widely?) criticised before. It doesn't seem in character to me either.
2) Entreri doesn't worship Bhaal and never has. Indeed, he has a deep distrust of the Gods in general.
3) I'm afraid my memory of the books is a little fuzzy, but my guess would be the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors. See any sourcebook on Waterdeep, such as City of Splendors: Waterdeep, or the 2E City of Splendors box set. |
Life is either daring adventure or nothing. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2007 : 22:57:33
|
Part of the point of the ToT was to transition over from 1E to 2E. In 1E, assassin was a separate class. While anyone can kill another person for money, not all killers-for-hire could be considered members of the assassin class.
2E did away with assassins. Thus, to explain the change in-game, all the assassins had to somehow be removed. So they were fed to Bane.
Even though Artemis Entreri has always been called an assassin, I don't believe he has ever actually been statted up as one -- not the 1E class, the 2E kit, or the 3.x PrC. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2007 : 22:57:38
|
Also remember about the assassin thing, that was written into the lore because in 1e the assassin was a core class while it wasn't in 2e, so they had to have a reason to remove it, thus the all assassins were killed. Yes, it read what it meant but later material, especially 3/3.5e material, has since changed that to only those assassins that worshiped him were killed.
Oh and Wooly, Artemis does have 1 level in assassin for his 3e stats. :) |
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 |
Edited by - Kuje on 26 Jun 2007 22:59:31 |
|
|
|
Asgetrion
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1564 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 00:22:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Also remember about the assassin thing, that was written into the lore because in 1e the assassin was a core class while it wasn't in 2e, so they had to have a reason to remove it, thus the all assassins were killed. Yes, it read what it meant but later material, especially 3/3.5e material, has since changed that to only those assassins that worshiped him were killed.
Oh and Wooly, Artemis does have 1 level in assassin for his 3e stats. :)
And 1 ranger level, too, so that he can track his victims!  Seriously, Artemis was probably a tough one to convert to 3rd edition, since he displays a wide range of abilities in the novels, and this should be reflected in his saving throws, base attack bonus and skills. IMHO some of the choices are pretty weird, though, and some skills are way too low (e.g. Intimidate, Gather Information and Open Lock) to portrait him properly. |
"What am I doing today? Ask me tomorrow - I can be sure of giving you the right answer then."
-- Askarran of Selgaunt, Master Sage, speaking to a curious merchant, Year of the Helm |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 00:25:04
|
| I always thought the "kill all people described by the rules as assassins" thing was stupid, because classes are just supposed to be ways of describing a character--that is, incidental. I see it as an example of putting rules over story. |
"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) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 27 Jun 2007 00:26:25 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 00:36:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Also remember about the assassin thing, that was written into the lore because in 1e the assassin was a core class while it wasn't in 2e, so they had to have a reason to remove it, thus the all assassins were killed. Yes, it read what it meant but later material, especially 3/3.5e material, has since changed that to only those assassins that worshiped him were killed.
Indeed. WotC altered that particular Realmslore tidbit in the FRCS on pg. 264. As it stands now, only the assassins that worshipped Bhaal were killed, not ALL assassins were killed.
I've taken this to mean that only those with the assassin class died (which means any hitherto unstatted character can easily be said to survive the event).
|
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 |
Edited by - The Sage on 27 Jun 2007 00:37:50 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 00:49:40
|
Jim Lowder has said that out-of-character Storm is unreliable narration from the perspective of the POV characters, but I haven't gone back to the book to try to read it in that light.
Since they didn't have a mass death of cavaliers -- that class also being removed in 2E -- one assumes someone thought the assassin deaths were a good idea in their own right. One more mystery of this weird time. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:01:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
I always thought the "kill all people described by the rules as assassins" thing was stupid, because classes are just supposed to be ways of describing a character--that is, incidental. I see it as an example of putting rules over story.
I never really understood this either. Plus, around the time I was reading this as a DM, I was playing through Fate of Istus as a player, desperately trying to "save" various classes from extinction in Greyhawk. Apparently some designers didn't get, at the time, that a class is just a collection of skills represented in the rules that certain characters just happen to have in common . . . |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:10:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Apparently some designers didn't get, at the time, that a class is just a collection of skills represented in the rules that certain characters just happen to have in common . . .
Right, that's exactly how I see it. |
"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) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 27 Jun 2007 01:11:40 |
|
|
|
The Hooded One
Lady Herald of Realmslore
5056 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:41:13
|
The Great Assassin Kill-Off was mandated by TSR management of the time (i.e. staff designers were ordered to do it by their employer), so as to appease "Angry Mothers From Heck" and make the D&D game less "Satanic" and evil (devils went away, demons went away, assassins went away - - by those names, at least, purely so some pulpit-thumper couldn't wave a rulebook and thunder that the game contained them. Which would keep the game out of a lot of markets, or so the thinking went.
Yes, Storm is depicted wrongly (so are Sharantyr, and Mourngrym, and a lot of other folks, too). Sigh.
love to all,
THO |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:54:12
|
| That whole policy is still mysterious, though, because as far as I know, that controversy was, at least in the short commercial term, massively beneficial for D&D. |
|
|
|
The Hooded One
Lady Herald of Realmslore
5056 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:57:52
|
True, it was indeed. However, the management of the time (and here I'm looking right at the top layers, not at the creative folks) were not known for their logic.
There was a REASON a certain female sometime owner of TSR was known as "the Whim Queen."
love,
THO |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 01:59:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
That whole policy is still mysterious, though, because as far as I know, that controversy was, at least in the short commercial term, massively beneficial for D&D.
The other thing that I thought was strange about the whole "sanitizing" policy is that, at least where I lived in the Midwest, the controversy was largely dead by the time 2nd edition came out. Granted, that's highly annecdotal on my part, but even the media seemed to have moved on . . . no more 60 minutes pieces, 700 Club rants, "Mazes and Monsters" made for TV movies . . . |
|
|
|
TobyKikami
Learned Scribe
USA
113 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 15:48:30
|
Yeah, witch-hunting!Storm gave me pause - but not as much as Cyric being referred to repeatedly as part of the "heroes" collective after cutting a bloody swath through the Twisted Tower. I actually kind of liked him in those books, especially stacked up against the general Shadowdale mob mentality depicted therein, but come on.
Side note on the assassin thing - at a book signing, I remember Salvatore explaining he'd argued to higher-ups that Entreri wasn't an assassin per se, just a "fighter/thief that gets paid to kill people." |
Edited by - TobyKikami on 27 Jun 2007 19:07:12 |
|
|
|
Calrond
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2007 : 19:51:55
|
Right, you can be the dictionary definition of an "assassin" without having the first level of Assassin.
Shadowdale and Tantras were actually the first two Realms books I ever read, and I only learned afterward that the characters weren't portrayed correctly (especially Storm and Elminster). Aside from that, I thought the books were pretty good.
But they still pale in comparison to the Shadow of the Avatar Trilogy. That is, IMHO, some of the best Realms writing to date. |
|
|
|
Kalevala
Acolyte
43 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2007 : 11:42:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Reefy
The portrayal of Storm has been (widely?) criticised before. It doesn't seem in character to me either.
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
Yes, Storm is depicted wrongly (so are Sharantyr, and Mourngrym, and a lot of other folks, too). Sigh.
I thought as much. I've also read just two books about Elminster (Making of a Mage and El in Myth Drannor) in which he was still young, but the grumpiness he had going on in these Avatar books really surprised me. Sure, he's old now but I thought he was beyond grumpy at times... more like angry for no reason.
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
thus the all assassins were killed. Yes, it read what it meant but later material, especially 3/3.5e material, has since changed that to only those assassins that worshiped him were killed.
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Indeed. WotC altered that particular Realmslore tidbit in the FRCS on pg. 264. As it stands now, only the assassins that worshipped Bhaal were killed, not ALL assassins were killed.
Well, that cleared that up. Thanks. There really should be a foot note somewhere in the reprinted Avatar books to check FRCS pg. 264 for an updated clarification
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Part of the point of the ToT was to transition over from 1E to 2E. In 1E, assassin was a separate class. While anyone can kill another person for money, not all killers-for-hire could be considered members of the assassin class.
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I've taken this to mean that only those with the assassin class died (which means any hitherto unstatted character can easily be said to survive the event).
quote:
Originally posted by TobyKikami
I remember Salvatore explaining he'd argued to higher-ups that Entreri wasn't an assassin per se, just a "fighter/thief that gets paid to kill people."
If this is indeed true and even part of "the reason" behind some assassins surviving  , then...
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
I always thought the "kill all people described by the rules as assassins" thing was stupid, because classes are just supposed to be ways of describing a character--that is, incidental. I see it as an example of putting rules over story.
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Apparently some designers didn't get, at the time, that a class is just a collection of skills represented in the rules that certain characters just happen to have in common
...Amen to this...
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
The Great Assassin Kill-Off was mandated by TSR management of the time (i.e. staff designers were ordered to do it by their employer), so as to appease "Angry Mothers From Heck" and make the D&D game less "Satanic" and evil (devils went away, demons went away, assassins went away - - by those names, at least, purely so some pulpit-thumper couldn't wave a rulebook and thunder that the game contained them. Which would keep the game out of a lot of markets, or so the thinking went.
...although I do understand the reason (while not neccessarily agreeing with the method). I guess the Realms are just too big for anyone to keep track of all these details, so they have to keep re-writing something every once in a while.
quote:
Originally posted by Reefy
3) I'm afraid my memory of the books is a little fuzzy, but my guess would be the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors. See any sourcebook on Waterdeep, such as City of Splendors: Waterdeep, or the 2E City of Splendors box set.
Yeah, I though of the Watchful Order too, but when you think about it, the Council of Wizards doesn't really sound like what the Watchful Order is about, so I dismissed the idea.
I've read both of those sources through previously, and I don't recall any mention of the Council of Wizards in either one of them.
quote:
Originally posted by TobyKikami
Storm gave me pause - but not as much as Cyric being referred to repeatedly as part of the "heroes" collective after cutting a bloody swath through the Twisted Tower. I actually kind of liked him in those books, especially stacked up against the general Shadowdale mob mentality depicted therein, but come on.
LOL, I really thought so too
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
Aside from that, I thought the books were pretty good.
After all that's said and done, I second that! Although, contrary to many people, I wouldn't recommend them as the first FR books to be read by a new guy. |
|
|
|
Kalevala
Acolyte
43 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2007 : 11:49:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Jim Lowder has said that out-of-character Storm is unreliable narration from the perspective of the POV characters, but I haven't gone back to the book to try to read it in that light.
Meant to ask, what's POV (other than Point of View)? |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2007 : 18:30:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kalevala
Meant to ask, what's POV (other than Point of View)?
Point of view is what I mean. |
|
|
|
Thauramarth
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
729 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2007 : 19:58:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kalevala
3) What is the "Council of Wizards in Waterdeep" that Elminster mentioned in the end of Tantras? Is it still active? Where can I find more info on the Council?
I think that the "Council of Wizards" is not an organization, but rather an impromptu gathering of mages during the Time of Troubles. I.e., there were a number of mages that senses that the Fate of the Realms would be decided in Waterdeep, and head there. There is a snippet of rumor in FRE2 - Tantras (the adventure), whihc states "1. Mages have disappeared-not just from Tantras, but from all across the Reach-and are said to be gathering in Waterdeep." In addition, the heading for Tantras in the Forgotten Realms Adventures hardback indicates that the wizardess Tarntassa "went to Waterdeep in the Time of Troubles".
So the Council of Wizards would just be a gathering of likeminded mages.
EDIT: erased duplicate replies.
|
Edited by - Thauramarth on 28 Jun 2007 21:23:38 |
|
|
|
Calrond
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 05:25:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kalevala
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
Aside from that, I thought the books were pretty good.
After all that's said and done, I second that! Although, contrary to many people, I wouldn't recommend them as the first FR books to be read by a new guy.
Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't either. I'd either recommend Homeland, Elminster: Making of a Mage, or one of Elaine's books.
Also, I'm not so sure Mystra was portrayed correctly now that I think of it. Surely she knew that she couldn't just sneak past Helm with her in her borrowed body and him still a full deity. And even if she didn't have access to the Planes, she could have given Midnight instructions on how to get to Nirvana (I think Mystra resided in Nirvana then, rather than Dweomerheart, I seem to remember that reference in Shadowdale, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.) and what to do once she got there to find the Tablets of Fate, since that's what Mystra wanted to get back to her home plane for, and Midnight was going to have to travel the Planes anyway to get the second tablet.
Of course, maybe she was portrayed correctly, and we shouldn't expect a fallen deity to be acting rationally. To go from nigh omnipotence to mortal frailty would be a heck of a psychological shock. Still, I just felt like Mystra should have known better. She would have made a better teammate than casualty.
By the way, THO, if you read this, do you have any insight on why TSR decided to kill Mystra and replace her with Midnight? Was it Ed's call or did they do it for dramatic effect to kick off the Avatar Trilogy? I'm stumped on this, but it puts to mind a question I'll post on the Ed thread. |
Edited by - Calrond on 29 Jun 2007 05:34:49 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 05:48:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
By the way, THO, if you read this, do you have any insight on why TSR decided to kill Mystra and replace her with Midnight? Was it Ed's call or did they do it for dramatic effect to kick off the Avatar Trilogy? I'm stumped on this, but it puts to mind a question I'll post on the Ed thread.
There were some changes to spells and spellcasting betwixt 1E and 2E... Killing Mystra was prolly the in-game way of explaining this. Remember, that was the point of the ToT: to give in-game explanations for rule changes. |
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! |
|
|
|
Calrond
Learned Scribe
USA
118 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 06:04:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
By the way, THO, if you read this, do you have any insight on why TSR decided to kill Mystra and replace her with Midnight? Was it Ed's call or did they do it for dramatic effect to kick off the Avatar Trilogy? I'm stumped on this, but it puts to mind a question I'll post on the Ed thread.
There were some changes to spells and spellcasting betwixt 1E and 2E... Killing Mystra was prolly the in-game way of explaining this. Remember, that was the point of the ToT: to give in-game explanations for rule changes.
Good point. It explains how Meleghost Starseer (LE) and Elminster (CG) can legally, by the rules, worship the same goddess with the one-step alignment system in place, even though they were both Mystrans before the Time of Troubles. I wonder if that's the only reason, though. |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 06:33:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
Good point. It explains how Meleghost Starseer (LE) and Elminster (CG) can legally, by the rules, worship the same goddess with the one-step alignment system in place, even though they were both Mystrans before the Time of Troubles. I wonder if that's the only reason, though.
Well, 1) Only divine casters have to be one step, so anything that is not a divine caster is excluded from that rule and 2) there was no one step rule until 3/3.5e. |
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 |
|
|
|
khorne
Master of Realmslore
Finland
1073 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 08:41:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
The Great Assassin Kill-Off was mandated by TSR management of the time (i.e. staff designers were ordered to do it by their employer), so as to appease "Angry Mothers From Heck" and make the D&D game less "Satanic" and evil (devils went away, demons went away, assassins went away - - by those names, at least, purely so some pulpit-thumper couldn't wave a rulebook and thunder that the game contained them. Which would keep the game out of a lot of markets, or so the thinking went.
Yes, Storm is depicted wrongly (so are Sharantyr, and Mourngrym, and a lot of other folks, too). Sigh.
love to all,
THO
Why did TSR submit to those (extremely censored so I don't get banned) mothers in the first place? |
If I were a ranger, I would pick NDA for my favorite enemy |
|
|
|
Kalevala
Acolyte
43 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 18:52:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Point of view is what I mean.
Ah, my mistake 
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
So the Council of Wizards would just be a gathering of likeminded mages.
Makes sense. You're probably right. Thanks for clearing that up!
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
Still, I just felt like Mystra should have known better.
Yeah, that's what I thought too. Of course, your theory of not thinking rationally could explain it (that's how I explained it to myself), but it could also be just the author's dead line. Who knows!
On the topic of first read, I'd probably go with Elaine.
quote:
Originally posted by khorne
Why did TSR submit to those (extremely censored so I don't get banned) mothers in the first place?
I don't know but I'd guess that the heat coming from the media in the States/Canada was pretty substantial. They had to make a business decision under problematic circumstances. Whether that decision was a good or a bad one is anyone's guess, but it sure made things more complex for the gamers.  |
|
|
|
Fillow
Master of Realmslore
France
1608 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2007 : 20:20:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
...
Even though Artemis Entreri has always been called an assassin, I don't believe he has ever actually been statted up as one -- not the 1E class, the 2E kit, or the 3.x PrC.
In Hall of heroes, TSR 9252 (AD&D), Artemis is statted as a Seventh-Level Human Fighter & 11th-Level Assassin
In Villain's Lorebook, TSR 9552 (AD&D), he's statted as an 11th-level thief/15th level fighter |
"Today is a good day to smile",
Fillow Big'n'Book Mahlemiut 'Lead-dog', Son of Garl, Wanderer of the Masked Leaf and Namer of Oghma.
- Fight in the arena and have fun ! : La brute.com
- Feel free to take part to these projects : Post-Spellplague bibliography ; 4E index project ; Taverns and inns of the Realms ; Dogs of the Realms ; Descriptions of places in the novels ; forums, RPG, FR Abbreviations and Acronyms
- Come and have a look at the already asked questions from the Forgotten Realms Trivia Challenge
I am a French FR fan, so please forgive my lapses in English language and do not hesitate to correct me. Thanks a lot. |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2007 : 17:53:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Calrond
Knowing what I know now, I wouldn't either. I'd either recommend Homeland, Elminster: Making of a Mage, or one of Elaine's books.
No doubt, the Avatar books are a bad introduction. You have these specific misportrayals, the fact that in 1989 only Ed Greenwood and Jeff Grubb of published novelists had a good feel for the Realms, the committee-designed weirdnesses of the plot, and a dramatic structure based on upheaval to a world a new reader doesn't yet inherently care about.
quote:
Originally posted by Kalevala
I don't know but I'd guess that the heat coming from the media in the States/Canada was pretty substantial. They had to make a business decision under problematic circumstances.
That's the thing, in 1989 it wasn't, and this doesn't resemble any normal business decision. We're looking at explanations like someone at TSR actually liking the bowdlerization, extreme gutlessness, and Lorraine Williams's nuttiness. |
Edited by - Faraer on 30 Jun 2007 17:59:55 |
|
|
|
Kalevala
Acolyte
43 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jul 2007 : 01:31:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
We're looking at explanations like someone at TSR actually liking the bowdlerization, extreme gutlessness, and Lorraine Williams's nuttiness.
Wow. Nice to know... then again not. Makes me sad somehow. |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 01 Jul 2007 : 01:47:02
|
Yeah, in the United States, there were two big "infamous" events that fed into the anti-D&D craze, the first one being the disappearance of Dallas Egbert III, around which there was a lot of misinformation that got into the press, not the least of which being that the guy may not even have done much D&D playing outside of going to one of the early conventions. The theory on this one was that D&D made him "detached from reality," and so he wandered off from his college. He was eventually found, and he himself didn't seem to ever reference D&D in his reason for disappearing (these events were, rather horribly, fictionalized in the Made for TV movie Mazes and Monsters, but at least it gave Tom Hanks his (unintentional) comedic debut).
The second big event in D&D hysteria had to do with Irving Pulling II, who committed suicide, ostensibly because he play D&D (although, as with most cases, there was a lot more going on in his life besides D&D). This even occurred in 1983, and his mother's lawsuit against the school he went to was in the courts in 1984.
The point being, 1985 was probably the beginning of the lessening of the hysteria against the game. By 1989, when 2nd edition came out and the Avatar Trilogy was written, most of the same people that were claiming that D&D was the bane of humanity had moved on to blaming heavy metal music for all of societies ills.
Sometimes I wonder if every generation has to have its Frederick Wertham.
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Avatar 1&2: Things That Made Me Go Hmm (spoilers)
