| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Sep 2018 : 20:53:00
|
I have a question regarding a possible inconsistency in "FOR4 the Code of the Harpers" Accessory.
Between pages 26 and 33, the book details the First to Fourth (current) centuries of history of the organization. The Third Century details Rundorl Moonsklan's betrayal of the organization with his desire to become the Harper King. However, the timing seems to be off, and this is where the conundrum is for me. I evidence this below.
When reading "The Founding", it is declared that 1022 DR is when Elminster posing as Gochall approached Finder Wyvernspur (and the rest of the 'Wanderers of Espar') to unwittingly, and eventually, become Harper's. The text then immediately moves on to 'The First Century' and the other centuries as well. It is evident that 'The Founding' was only meant as a reference to 1022 DR by the text, and then from there, the Harper's begin a new chapter now having a new "...heart of the organization in the years to come." p24 (FOR4 the Code of the Harpers) As you advance the centuries from there, you have the following timeline:
- Century 1: 1022 - 1122 DR
- Century 2: 1123 - 1223
- Century 3: 1224 - 1324
- Century 4 (Current): 1325 - Current
However, when examining 'The Third Century' on pages 31 - 33, it indicates by the very title that everything would be taking place between the years of 1224 and 1324 DR. Additionally, the text for "The Third Century" is almost exclusively about the 'Harper King', Thavverdasz, Szass Tam, The Keepers of the Secret Hoard, Rundorl, and Senior/Master Harpers who have just returned from the Harpstar Wars. To corroborate this, the 'Grand History of the Realms' indicates that in 1222 DR, the Harper King, at that point Thavverdasz, has been killed. It also states that the Harpstar War has ended.
So, why is it that "The Third Century" is really about things that happened during "The Second Century"?
Thanks!
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
Edited by - cpthero2 on 21 Sep 2018 12:34:29
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6643 Posts |
Posted - 22 Sep 2018 : 20:58:57
|
I think that you have read the "Third Century" entry wrongly. Yes, much of the detail in that section relates to the Harper King, but it is clear that the Harpstar Wars ended and his death occurred in 1222 DR (as per the timeline in the 2E Campaign boxed set which was the first ever mention of Harpstar Wars and the Harper King).
What occurred in the Third Century was simply the last couple of paragraphs of that entry (i.e. the rebuilding of the organisation by Elminster and the other Chosen who had been absent fighting the Malaugrym). I agree, it reads confusingly, but the dates are correct.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
Edited by - George Krashos on 22 Sep 2018 20:59:21 |
 |
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 23 Sep 2018 : 16:19:00
|
Good morning Master Krashos,
Thank you for your input on that. Is it fair to assume, based on your reading as well of the last paragraph, that it is not a well understood point in time of history? It seems that it is limited, with virtually no record, beyond what is listed there on page 33. Of specific note is "...the heir of Aglarond..." which is clearly indicating when the Simbul took the throne in 1320, right before the end of that century as it is in "The Code of the Harpers."
Thanks again for your input.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I think that you have read the "Third Century" entry wrongly. Yes, much of the detail in that section relates to the Harper King, but it is clear that the Harpstar Wars ended and his death occurred in 1222 DR (as per the timeline in the 2E Campaign boxed set which was the first ever mention of Harpstar Wars and the Harper King).
What occurred in the Third Century was simply the last couple of paragraphs of that entry (i.e. the rebuilding of the organisation by Elminster and the other Chosen who had been absent fighting the Malaugrym). I agree, it reads confusingly, but the dates are correct.
-- George Krashos
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6643 Posts |
Posted - 24 Sep 2018 : 02:55:20
|
Well understood? No, because it is relatively undocumented. There are many holes in the massive tapestry that is the history of the Realms. I've done a fair bit of work to fill some of them (people like Steven Schend and Eric Boyd have done a ton more) but it remains a labour of love. Remember, the vaguer the historical narrative is, the more scope there is to tweak it in ways that suit you and your campaign.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 24 Sep 2018 : 02:59:49
|
Master Krashos,
I figured that it wouldn't be well understood, but I figured I'd inquire to ensure.
Thank you for your time. It's greatly appreciated! 
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Well understood? No, because it is relatively undocumented. There are many holes in the massive tapestry that is the history of the Realms. I've done a fair bit of work to fill some of them (people like Steven Schend and Eric Boyd have done a ton more) but it remains a labour of love. Remember, the vaguer the historical narrative is, the more scope there is to tweak it in ways that suit you and your campaign.
-- George Krashos
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Harper History Conflict! FOR4 Code of the Harper
