| Author |
 Topic  |
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:17:03
|
To be fair to Mielikki, the orcs are 99.99% evil, and their gods actually irritated the Lords of the Nine enough for the entire pantheon to be punted off Baator.
Also, a big problem with how the gods are portrayed stems from the Avatar series and its sequels, where everyone's a moron. The best portrayal of a Forgotten Realms deity I've seen comes from the Obsidian Entertainment game Mask of the Betrayer; compare the novel Kelemvor to his game counterpart, and compare the batty Myrkul of the books to the coldly amused Lord of Bones in the game.
|
 |
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:26:24
|
| Has Myrkul been portrayed in the books since he was reduced to a dead power, outside of Mask of the Betrayer? It's possible that death had quite the impact on the God of the Dead. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
Edited by - Lyiat on 19 Oct 2014 06:26:49 |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 06:37:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lyiat
Has Myrkul been portrayed in the books since he was reduced to a dead power, outside of Mask of the Betrayer? It's possible that death had quite the impact on the God of the Dead.
MotB portrays Myrkul closer to his F&A description than the novel did. The entire vibe coming off him is that of someone who views his death as an irony and has accepted it. He ruthlessly tears down Kaelyn, for example, but is pretty chill with Gann (acknowledging that to Gann, believing in the gods would be no better than a death on his Wall). |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 07:11:45
|
| Yes, but that's what I'm saying. Has he been shown in the books as a Dead Power? Or are all of his novel appearances before he was 'killed', so to speak? I'm saying that the reason he acts so differently in MotB is because the experience of death may have massively warped his personality. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1477 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 07:19:26
|
Myrkul has had no novel appearances after the Avatar series.
And let's be fair, the Avatar series went out of they way to portray the gods as being all kinds of incompetent children. Just look at Mystra 1. |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 07:21:21
|
| Not debating that. I really should go back and read all those books. I haven't gotten the chance to read much of the novels beyond anything Salvatore wrote. And one strange series about a Psion in a Yaun-Ti city that I liked. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 10:08:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by LordofBones
To be fair to Mielikki, the orcs are 99.99% evil, and their gods actually irritated the Lords of the Nine enough for the entire pantheon to be punted off Baator.
Yeah, but the point is that (especially considering that she has a drow follower), that's not a nice or open minded thing to say... |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 10:25:30
|
| But, in the Realms, it's true. Evil races are indeed evil. Sure, there might be the rare exception, but those are quite literally the exception that proves the rule. The fact that there are only a tiny handful of 'good greenskins' only reinforces the fact that it is an evil, deplorable race with no real redeeming factors. Mielikki is a Goddess and probably the closest thing there is to an authority on goblinoids outside of Corellon and Gruumsh. Mielikki would also likely say the same general thing about drow, illithids, aboleths, and giants. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 10:35:05
|
| People have a choice, no matter of the race (some evil races are not ''physiologically/innately'' so, rather conditioned into certain behaviours. Many drow proved that, or -before 5e- Many Arrows for the orcs). Saying that they don't is not an open minded attitude (which is the original point I was answering to), and it could even be offensive towards the ones of them who do choose differently (like one of her followers). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 19 Oct 2014 10:40:01 |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 10:48:39
|
| Applying real world morality to a fantasy world is a fallacy. Racism is inherent in the Realms; the races have defining traits that predispose them to specific alignments and behaviors. This is not a debatable point. Orcs are an amalgamation of all the negative traits of a human being. They are innately savage, bloodthrusty, violent, murderous, and so on. This makes them an evil race, as a generalization. It is not incorrect to say so, it's a fact. It takes concentrated effort and work to overcome that natural evil, making good goblinoids and other examples incredibly, incredibly rare. For them, the default is evil, with the choice being making the effort to become good. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 11:02:35
|
Oversimplifying is a fallacy as well, one which removes depth from the fantasy world, at that. As I said, there are significant cases that prove that even ''ebil''races can choose and form different kind of communities (pre-5e Many Arrows for the orcs, Eilistraeens and -to an extent- Vhaerunites for the drow). Some of those may not be ''good'', but it is logical to assume that the vast majority of humans/elves/dwarves isn't ''good'' either, rather neutral.
On a side note (and this is just an observation, I know that Orcs are now innately evil as of 5e canon), if you give general precedence to racial/magic traits over choice/environment and context (to the point that the former trumps the latter short of huge ''imbalance'' between their influence), then I guess it is safe to assume that conventionally ''good'' races are mostly such because of that and not of personal decision, same as the evil guys. At that point, then both evil and good are stripped of their actual value and become very boring parodies.
But really, all I was saying is that when Mielikki states that 100% of orcs and goblins are absoultely, unredeemably ''evil'' (excluding in this way the possibility of choice) and that it is therefore ok to go exterminate them, that's a close minded attitude, and one that can be perceived as offensive towards people who try to make a different choice, including Drizzt. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 19 Oct 2014 11:29:49 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 14:37:09
|
| As tends to happen. I would very much like to see a Realm author's opinion on D&D game mechanics and how they relate to character design for their novels. I'm sure there are some things they have to keep consistent for WotC to give a concept the greenlight, surely. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 14:51:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Perhaps I should have said "in contrast" instead of "however" but however works just fine. I meant unique skillset to imply something that might not be feasible using the ruleset; this is okay in a novel, but not in the game.
If something "sounds reasonable" within a novel, it's just a question of whether the given ruleset is too clunky to model something (or simply doesn't have obvious expansion yet).
Example: dual classing for nonhumans and two-weapon fighting in AD&D1 and AD&D2 "bare bones". The second problem was fixed in 2e later, via trivial patch of "styles are WP, too".
quote:
At least not until/unless we have a game system where you can write your own skills/abilities as long as you can justify them in your character's history.
For most part, that's just a matter of detail level. Usually it's not necessary. What skillset is so "unique" it needs a custom write-up just for this character beyond the above?
Also, limited capability to this end exists long ago: Lore[whatever], Survival[wherever], Language[whoever] neither need to, nor can be, nor actually were defined for every possible parameter, thus to some degree rules did allow trivial adaptatons "as needed". Same deal was with weapon proficiencies and their groups: adding a custom weapon or style to the list is trivial.
Which, yes, leads us to the next point: when styles are WP, there's no reason why GM won't let a PC warrior develop one - with requirements and review, much like spell research.
Also, this subset/superset mechanics can go much further - if generalized and integrated with synergetic bonuses. So there would be overlapping groups.
quote:
In a novel, it really doesn't matter if a spellcaster can deal damage faster than a fighter, but that issue seems to matter a lot to the roleplayers who QQ that wizards are overpowered.
This may be how it's sometimes formulated for internet foodfights, but this isn't how the question really stands. The real questions include "should they?" and "on what levels?"
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
The required ingredients of every character are ability scores and class and race and feats and backgrounds and all the stuff that's in the rule books.
The items listed are examples of facets of the game. I wasn't suggesting that I'm operating under the delusion that each element is present in all editions of the ruleset. My bad, if this was somehow unclear.
You're still missing my point: those elements are interchangeable. Some are good for this or that purpose, some aren't, but that's it. Those are just tools. When they are not, "durr-clang" happens. 
I mock feats simply because feats were a contrived and clumsy step back, but there are other elements that obviously can be implemented in different ways - e.g. whether Endurance should be a skill or not, how well "favored enemy" feature can be implemented via mechanisms not tied to a class such as WP (suppose a gladiator just have a knack for working against Retiarus type?), "sub-abilities" from PO...
quote:
Your example would be frustrating, too, but it doesn't prove mine false.
It does show how "balancing" things on a strange premise that every combination "must" have the same nnumber of spherical horsepowers in vacuum (which actually is guesstimated by gut feel anyway) ends up in adjustments that are quite obviously stupid.
If half-orcs generally make better barbarians than gnomes, while gnomes make better illusionists - why they "must" not?
Also, it's quite obvious that barbarians and illusionists can become more or less useful in different situation. Which is why excessive attempts at power-balance usually roll toward the lowest common denominator: hack'n'slash. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 14:54:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I think we're drifting rather far from the original topic...
Yes, my apologies for that. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Barastir
Master of Realmslore
Brazil
1600 Posts |
Posted - 19 Oct 2014 : 23:02:32
|
| I've always considered, in 2e, that Drizzt in Menzoberranzan was a anger but didn't know it until he found Montolio. He was a great warrior with two weapons, a superb tracker and good in stealth at the underdark. All thouight he was a warrior, or a fighterqthief, but then he had his rapport with Guen (at first, seen as just a magical item). When he came to the surface he discovered his other ranger abilities. And back then, he could be of a berserking class kit, even being a ranger, IIRC (no need to be a barbarian). But yes, his stats in the sourcebooks were not written that way. It always goes as the DM understands it, IMHO. |
"Goodness is not a natural state, but must be
fought for to be attained and maintained.
Lead by example.
Let your deeds speak your intentions.
Goodness radiated from the heart."
The Paladin's Virtues, excerpt from the "Quentin's Monograph"
(by Ed Greenwood) |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 00:58:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
But really, all I was saying is that when Mielikki states that 100% of orcs and goblins are absoultely, unredeemably ''evil'' (excluding in this way the possibility of choice) and that it is therefore ok to go exterminate them, that's a close minded attitude, and one that can be perceived as offensive towards people who try to make a different choice, including Drizzt.
Not only that, when Drizzt brought up the example of Nojheim, Catti-Brie's retort was that maybe he had some goodly race blood in him to explain his apparent non-evilness. I could barely believe what I was reading...
This whole deal with Mielikki condemning all goblinoids as irredeemably evil was just stupid and made all those races completely uninteresting now. Very bad choice to force upon the Realms. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
Edited by - Tanthalas on 20 Oct 2014 00:59:03 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 01:28:10
|
I'd be curious to see him statted up for 5E. If he was 16th level prior to the Spellplague, I'd imagine he's somewhere in the 18 to 22 range now.
In regards to no spells (except darkness and faerie fire), I'd say he's more of an archer (now) and animal companion (Guen) focus. He's good, but he's not great. Unless your using that old 15% chance + or - 1% per level difference insta-kill mechanic from his 2E Menzo box write-up.
|
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 01:50:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Idk, RAS has just had Mielikki saying something along the lines of ''all greenskins are evulz, no exception, go and exterminate 'em all''. That sounds quite the contrary of open minded and quite an indirect slap to drow who choose different paths, including Drizzt...
She's a goddess. She doesn't have to profess ignorance and give anyone the benefit of the doubt, if she knows what she's talking about. If she knows it, then it's perfectly appropriate for her to go ahead and say it, political correctness be damned.
We equivocate and wring our hands over the question of the ultimate nature of orcs, because we certainly don't know.
But here is a major Realms author indicating that a Realms deity--who has not heretofore been known to be a liar--knows that the orcs are bad, bad, bad.
I don't see what's not open-minded about her putting into words what so many other Realms lorebooks have already said before.
I get that trying to be open-minded means trying to avoid unreasonable judgmentalism or prejudice.
But this doesn't seem to be a case of judging before the evidence has come in. This seems to be a judgment based very closely on the evidence as it has been collected and presented to date. Orcs are evil.
We can try to be open-minded all we want, but I still don't see how we can reach a different conclusion about orcs. We'd just be rationalizing what we already know about them, or engaging in apologetics.
But that's beside the point I was trying to make about Mielikki. She seems to be setting aside the strict followership rituals demanded by so many other Realmsian deities, and settling for the essence of Drizzt as a good person. That seems to be enough for her, even though it apparently isn't for most Realmsian gods. That appears to make her exceptional, much like her favored drow ranger. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 20 Oct 2014 02:00:21 |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 01:59:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
This whole deal with Mielikki condemning all goblinoids as irredeemably evil was just stupid and made all those races completely uninteresting now. Very bad choice to force upon the Realms.
What if it shows that Mielikki is just as flawed and prone to mistaken modes of thinking as us lowly mortals? What if it shows that even a goodly god can make a mistake, and is making a huge one right now?
Doesn't that at least hold open the possibility that those races could still be interesting (as in, alignment-diverse?)
Doesn't it make the gods seem a little interesting, too, in that even a well-intentioned goddess can sink to the same kind of short-sighted beliefs that the mortal races can and do? It's not just the evil gods who do this; the otherwise goods ones do it too, apparently.
Maybe the stress and anxiety over the Sundering brings out the worst in some gods? Maybe it drives them to oversimplify things, in order to create a false sense of security and stability about their place in the multiverse?
Maybe Mielikki would hold a different, more nuanced, opinion about orckind if she didn't have the Sundering on her mind? |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 02:26:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
This whole deal with Mielikki condemning all goblinoids as irredeemably evil was just stupid and made all those races completely uninteresting now. Very bad choice to force upon the Realms.
What if it shows that Mielikki is just as flawed and prone to mistaken modes of thinking as us lowly mortals? What if it shows that even a goodly god can make a mistake, and is making a huge one right now?
Doesn't that at least hold open the possibility that those races could still be interesting (as in, alignment-diverse?)
Doesn't it make the gods seem a little interesting, too, in that even a well-intentioned goddess can sink to the same kind of short-sighted beliefs that the mortal races can and do? It's not just the evil gods who do this; the otherwise goods ones do it too, apparently.
Maybe the stress and anxiety over the Sundering brings out the worst in some gods? Maybe it drives them to oversimplify things, in order to create a false sense of security and stability about their place in the multiverse?
Maybe Mielikki would hold a different, more nuanced, opinion about orckind if she didn't have the Sundering on her mind?
Thta's what I meant when I said that she was being close minded. She was making a mistake in automatically excluding any chance of choice on the orcs' side, which also wasn't very nice towards people who, like Drizzt and others, fight for their choices. To be fair, IMO Mielikki's words have probably been used as a device to justify/explain/state the changes that WotC had in mind for the orcs. On the issue of being satisfied with her followers being good persons (as long as the area of influence of the deity is concerned), I highly doubt that Mielikki is that special tbh. AFAIK deities like Selune, or Eilistraee, or some elven gods would do the same...
Nonetheless, as Wooly said, this is getting way off topic. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 20 Oct 2014 02:38:20 |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 19:22:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
What if it shows that Mielikki is just as flawed and prone to mistaken modes of thinking as us lowly mortals? What if it shows that even a goodly god can make a mistake, and is making a huge one right now?
The gods of the FR being flawed and capable of mistakes is something that we've known about for a very long time.
I simply can't ignore the real world side of things here. It seems obvious to me that it was decided that the Many-Arrows kingdom is to be wiped off for 5E. So Salvatore needed a plot device to justify having Drizzt participate in this war and by having Mielikki label goblinoids as irredeemably evil, Salvatore doesn't have to deal with pesky issues about non-combatants getting driven away from their homes by the Heroes. I really hope we get to see Catti-Brie slaugtering baby orcs though.
Regardless, Rise of the King finally arrived in the mail today. Lets see how these issues are handled. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 20 Oct 2014 : 23:00:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
What if it shows that Mielikki is just as flawed and prone to mistaken modes of thinking as us lowly mortals? What if it shows that even a goodly god can make a mistake, and is making a huge one right now?
Not flawed... limited.
Think about Crucible of Cyric and what we know of divine abilities. Perhaps if she sees a good orc who isn't dead, she will say so. But she doesn't exactly sit and scry for orcs in faraway places, obviously. Yup, on Zakhara no one bothers to see much of difference, Amn has a community with lots of orcs and half-orcs coexisting with humans and halflings well enough (even if as second class citizenry), there are those gray orcs... and how much any of them intersects with Mielikki's servants, immediate vicinity of her shrines, etc? Right...
Here we have it: an uninterested and remote intermediate power gets to have a blind spot over a big and fairly trivial subject which is open to a human commoner (as in, typical 1-HD herder or quill-pusher) who just happened to have interest in the right area. And this is something that needs to be remembered, especially in context of various divinations of "ask someone" type (commune, contact other plane, etc). |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 06:13:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
The gods of the FR being flawed and capable of mistakes is something that we've known about for a very long time.
I'm not familiar with the foibles of other goodly gods being so openly put on display, like this. I thought they were generally put in a better light than this?
quote:
I simply can't ignore the real world side of things here. It seems obvious to me that it was decided that the Many-Arrows kingdom is to be wiped off for 5E.
In all fairness, the 4E FRCG announced that the dwarves had left the Silver Marches/Luruar confederation, and the orcs of Many-Arrows orcs had become the enemies of the North once again. This conflict appears to have been in the works for quite some time.
quote:
So Salvatore needed a plot device to justify having Drizzt participate in this war and by having Mielikki label goblinoids as irredeemably evil, Salvatore doesn't have to deal with pesky issues about non-combatants getting driven away from their homes by the Heroes. I really hope we get to see Catti-Brie slaugtering baby orcs though.
I still don't know what Mielikki really thinks. I only know what Catti-brie has told us that she thinks.
And Cat just basically went through a very religious experience.
Being anti-religion, I don't generally tend to trust religious experiences--all passion and excitement, with little or no reason.
The stress of the Sundering upon Mielikki combined with the extreme passion of defying death through Iruladoon and then reincarnation lead me to be leery of Catti-brie's report. I hate orcs, but even I am being cautious about the risk of an unreliable narrator, here.
If orcs are as evil as I think they are, then I really don't have much issue with her or anyone else killing their babies. Infant-like proportions don't undo their fate/destiny/nature as evil killing machines. I don't flinch at killing spiders or snakes, either--especially if their folks kill my family and friends, and then encroach onto my territory and creep through my front door. If I then find some of their babies on my territory or inside my front door, too, you won't find me going all mushy and weak in the knees. They're still predatory vermin. A wolf in sheep's clothing is still a wolf. And a predator with doe eyes and baby-sized proportions is still a predator.
I can't help but feel that more liberal or idealistic-minded Realmsians (and readers) have erred by allowing themselves to believe that orcs are anything but what we've always been taught that they were. I get idealism, but we shouldn't let it overrule our common sense. Orcs are monsters. Call them a "race", if you want, but they're still a monstrous race. Put lipstick on a pig, and it's still a pig. Appease an orc horde that wants to slow down and take a breather, and it's still an orc horde that killed your people and stole your land before taking that breather.
I guess I'm still more concerned with the "broken" proponents of the idea of goodly orcs than I am with any supposedly broken drow ranger.
According to all sources I've seen, Mielikki has consistently sworn opposition to orckind. And it looks like Drizzt is gearing up to follow that example, again. (He has basically strayed therefrom, over the last several mini-series, by going soft on orcs.) So, an apparent lack of magic spells aside, I would say that it sounds like Drizzt is on his way to becoming a little less "broken", and little more classically ranger-like. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 06:25:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
Not flawed... limited.
Think about Crucible of Cyric and what we know of divine abilities. Perhaps if she sees a good orc who isn't dead, she will say so. But she doesn't exactly sit and scry for orcs in faraway places, obviously.
If Many-Arrows was ever peopled by goodly orcs, then she would never need to scry very far off to find them. She should've been able to find them right there in the North, a long time ago.
That she apparently hasn't found them either makes her blind and/or prejudiced (i.e., flawed), or it makes Many-Arrows orcs not as goodly as all the hopeful Realmsians and readers have been wanting to believe.
quote:
Yup, on Zakhara no one bothers to see much of difference, Amn has a community with lots of orcs and half-orcs coexisting with humans and halflings well enough (even if as second class citizenry), there are those gray orcs... and how much any of them intersects with Mielikki's servants, immediate vicinity of her shrines, etc? Right...
Here we have it: an uninterested and remote intermediate power gets to have a blind spot over a big and fairly trivial subject which is open to a human commoner (as in, typical 1-HD herder or quill-pusher) who just happened to have interest in the right area. And this is something that needs to be remembered, especially in context of various divinations of "ask someone" type (commune, contact other plane, etc).
I really don't get what you just said, there. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 07:01:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Thta's what I meant when I said that she was being close minded. She was making a mistake in automatically excluding any chance of choice on the orcs' side, which also wasn't very nice towards people who, like Drizzt and others, fight for their choices.
If she has observed them not really having a choice, but rather an innate evil nature for whatever reason, then she's not being close-minded. She's just stating a logical conclusion based on observed facts.
What it sounds like many people are doing is that they are holding out hope for different observations about orcs in order to justify their hoped-for preformed conclusion that some orcs are actually goodly. This is despite all that we've taught about the orc race in the past.
There is such a thing as being too open-minded--that is, being so "open-minded" that your brain falls out. When you disregard available facts in the hope (or "chance", your word) of some other hoped-for facts yet to come, then you're not really being reasonable.
And the person who does abide by the unpleasant facts that are presently available is not the one being unreasonable.
"Automatically excluding any chance of choice on the orcs' side"? What does that even mean?
Whether god or mortal, Realmsians should have had ample opportunity to directly observe these alleged goodly orcs at some point in the Toril's long history, and we should have access to verifiable documentation of such observations. Where is such documentation?
There doesn't appear to be anything "automatic" about pronouncing orcs as evil, here. It's a conclusion based on millenia of observations.
I'm sure there have been many people who have hoped for observations to the contrary--that is, direct observations of goodly orcs. But the fact that Mielikki is going off of the observations already collected does not mean that she is excluding the chance of some alternative observations in the future. It only means that she is going off of what has been available in the past and what is available now. And that is the most reasonable thing to do.
If we disregard available past and present observations, and always hold out for hoped-for future observations, then we'll never allow ourselves to form any conclusions or many any decisions, whatsoever. And that is definitely not reasonable.
quote:
To be fair, IMO Mielikki's words have probably been used as a device to justify/explain/state the changes that WotC had in mind for the orcs.
Like I mentioned, the 4E FRCG makes it appear that WOTC has been planning this for some time, now.
And it is pretty darn consistent with D&D orc lore from the last several decades. So it's not exactly like WOTC or RAS just pulled this line of Mielikki's out of their collective arses.
I would say that it is the group of those who would have us ignore the lore on orcs, and the lore about Mielikki's personality and causes, that are the ones who are really "broken", here, much moreso than Drizzt as a ranger--or Mielikki as a born-again orc-hater.
quote:
On the issue of being satisfied with her followers being good persons (as long as the area of influence of the deity is concerned), I highly doubt that Mielikki is that special tbh. AFAIK deities like Selune, or Eilistraee, or some elven gods would do the same...
Why do you think there is so much talk of Kelemvor and the Wall of the Faithless whenever talk of Drizzt's agnosticism arises, then? If so many Realmsian gods are so laid-back as you claim, then shouldn't tales of the Wall really lose their bite and dreadfulness? Shouldn't they be treated as obsolete fairy tales? I mean, if the gods are so easy-going and breezy as that?
quote:
Nonetheless, as Wooly said, this is getting way off topic.
Is it, though? Is Drizzt really "broken", if RAS picks and chooses which of the classic ranger skills set Drizzt gets to play with; and if the gods themselves are so open-minded as to select as Chosen even those mortals who don't display all of the gods' preferred behaviors? To me, the range of what is considered functional and operable (as opposed to broken) is wider, I guess. So that makes these subjects all related. Mielikki doesn't consider Drizzt to be so broken as to prevent her from deeming him a Chosen or at least "favored", so I don't consider Drizzt to be so lacking in his skills set as to deem him broken as a ranger.
I will concede that he is rather "limited", as a ranger, though.  |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 07:25:03
|
| The statement is more that 5e broke him as a Ranger rather than Drizzt being a bad one. WotC redefined what a ranger is intended to be so that Drizzt doesn't particularly fit that description anymore. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 07:35:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lyiat
The statement is more that 5e broke him as a Ranger rather than Drizzt being a bad one. WotC redefined what a ranger is intended to be so that Drizzt doesn't particularly fit that description anymore.
Aha. Yeah, well even though I don't play the game, even I know that the game rules/crunch have tended to be rather fickle and ever-changing. Tomayto, tomahto...
Drizzt travels the road looking for adventure. He ranges. So he's still a "ranger", in my book--even if not in THE book.
And in the eyes of some of the readers out there, Drizzt ranges from "poor" to "fair" as a character, so I guess even with them, he ranges. So there's always that, too! |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
|
|
|
Lyiat
Seeker
91 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 07:40:11
|
| I'll admit that Drizzt is a ranger, small r. He wanders around and protects people from evil. However, as a Ranger, large R, WotC kinda flipped him over. The word ranger on it's own fits him, but the 5e class called Ranger doesn't. |
"Stand and deliver, that my hamster might have a better look at you." ~ Minsc |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 21 Oct 2014 : 09:40:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Thta's what I meant when I said that she was being close minded. She was making a mistake in automatically excluding any chance of choice on the orcs' side, which also wasn't very nice towards people who, like Drizzt and others, fight for their choices.
If she has observed them not really having a choice, but rather an innate evil nature for whatever reason, then she's not being close-minded. She's just stating a logical conclusion based on observed facts.
What it sounds like many people are doing is that they are holding out hope for different observations about orcs in order to justify their hoped-for preformed conclusion that some orcs are actually goodly. This is despite all that we've taught about the orc race in the past.
There is such a thing as being too open-minded--that is, being so "open-minded" that your brain falls out. When you disregard available facts in the hope (or "chance", your word) of some other hoped-for facts yet to come, then you're not really being reasonable.
And the person who does abide by the unpleasant facts that are presently available is not the one being unreasonable.
"Automatically excluding any chance of choice on the orcs' side"? What does that even mean?
Whether god or mortal, Realmsians should have had ample opportunity to directly observe these alleged goodly orcs at some point in the Toril's long history, and we should have access to verifiable documentation of such observations. Where is such documentation?
There doesn't appear to be anything "automatic" about pronouncing orcs as evil, here. It's a conclusion based on millenia of observations.
I'm sure there have been many people who have hoped for observations to the contrary--that is, direct observations of goodly orcs. But the fact that Mielikki is going off of the observations already collected does not mean that she is excluding the chance of some alternative observations in the future. It only means that she is going off of what has been available in the past and what is available now. And that is the most reasonable thing to do.
If we disregard available past and present observations, and always hold out for hoped-for future observations, then we'll never allow ourselves to form any conclusions or many any decisions, whatsoever. And that is definitely not reasonable.
quote:
To be fair, IMO Mielikki's words have probably been used as a device to justify/explain/state the changes that WotC had in mind for the orcs.
Like I mentioned, the 4E FRCG makes it appear that WOTC has been planning this for some time, now.
And it is pretty darn consistent with D&D orc lore from the last several decades. So it's not exactly like WOTC or RAS just pulled this line of Mielikki's out of their collective arses.
I would say that it is the group of those who would have us ignore the lore on orcs, and the lore about Mielikki's personality and causes, that are the ones who are really "broken", here, much moreso than Drizzt as a ranger--or Mielikki as a born-again orc-hater.
What I was referring to is not just Many Arrows, but also what it is said in the 5e PHB about races like orcs, described as ''created to be evil''. About the ''documented facts'', there's that one case of that goblin, who was handwaved as having ''goodly'' blood (whatever the hell this means) by Cattie-Brie. Furthermore, the fact that ''goodly'' or -you know- orcs who are not ''good'' but don't spot a ''me smash you'' attitude either, haven't been reported in fiction doesn't automatically exclude their presence. That one case proves that there's a possibility of choice, difficult but present, and Mielikki should have acknowledged it -with the due caution, ofc- in order to be described as open minded in that situation.
As you said, tha fact that even gods make mistakes, ''the Sundering'' and so on probably influenced her and made her look rather close minded, when it came to that statement.
However, I can see your point. Maybe she purposefully implied that greenskins cannot choose not because she actually believes so, rather because -considering the very small number of them that manage to make a different choice- she didn't want her followers to be endangered by potential acts of mercy, or something along those lines.
Nonetheless, I said this before, from the standpoint of the depth of the setting and story, if you give general precedence to racial/magic traits over choice/environment and context (to the point that the former trumps the latter short of huge ''imbalance'' between their influence), then I guess it is safe to assume that conventionally ''good'' races are mostly such because of that and not of personal decision, same as the evil guys. At that point, then both evil and good are stripped of their actual value and become very boring parodies.
quote:
quote:
On the issue of being satisfied with her followers being good persons (as long as the area of influence of the deity is concerned), I highly doubt that Mielikki is that special tbh. AFAIK deities like Selune, or Eilistraee, or some elven gods would do the same...
Why do you think there is so much talk of Kelemvor and the Wall of the Faithless whenever talk of Drizzt's agnosticism arises, then? If so many Realmsian gods are so laid-back as you claim, then shouldn't tales of the Wall really lose their bite and dreadfulness? Shouldn't they be treated as obsolete fairy tales? I mean, if the gods are so easy-going and breezy as that?
That stuff is so heavily exaggerated by people AFAIK. It's not even mentioned in the 4e FR IIRC. Furthermore, tales of the Wall are kind of spooky fairy tales, since -as Ed said- most people don't even know about the it. Most of them simply acknowledge the existence of gods (something that you can see) and simply pray to them for aid/favor in something specific to their area of influence. Really, the (non clerics-paladins) people who dedicate their whole life and efforts to please a deity are very rare in the Realms.
I really doubt that it is mere lipservice that ''feeds'' deities (that would be very lame and would feel rather off to the concept that deities embodies beliefs, TBH), but living according to certain principles. Gods will likely claim the souls of mortals who lived in a certain way that is close to their beliefs -for example, as xaeyruudh said, I think that if for whatever reason Drizzt renounced to Mielikki, after his passing Eilistraee would welcome him in her realm anyway-. And, since FR deities cover a very wide spectrum of principles (unless people tie their hands by living a life without ideals, or by saying ''screw you all'' and leading a sort of crusade against all gods -thus making the criteria for the Wall kick in), someone will always have a place for a mortal soul in their realm.
Also, you can expect most god(desse)s who value freedom, like the ones that I mentioned, to have a rather ''free form'' relation with their followers and be satisfied with them being ''good people'' (especially as long as their area of influence is concerned) and to not come down in their life and tell them how they should behave or to demand to be glorified (especially they won't tell them ''do as I say and pray to me or go to the Wall''). It's the tyrannical, often evil/full of themselves gods that demand people to conform to their rigid schemes.
quote:
quote:
Nonetheless, as Wooly said, this is getting way off topic.
Is it, though? Is Drizzt really "broken", if RAS picks and chooses which of the classic ranger skills set Drizzt gets to play with; and if the gods themselves are so open-minded as to select as Chosen even those mortals who don't display all of the gods' preferred behaviors? To me, the range of what is considered functional and operable (as opposed to broken) is wider, I guess. So that makes these subjects all related. Mielikki doesn't consider Drizzt to be so broken as to prevent her from deeming him a Chosen or at least "favored", so I don't consider Drizzt to be so lacking in his skills set as to deem him broken as a ranger.
I will concede that he is rather "limited", as a ranger, though.
I believe that it has been stated before that chosen are selected by the gods because of the potential that they see in them, rather than because of their religiousness. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 21 Oct 2014 10:33:04 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
The case of the broken Drizzt
Topic Locked
