Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Products
 Forgotten Realms Novels
 Relentless - R.A. Salvatore [SPOILERS]
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author  Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Tanthalas
Senior Scribe

Portugal
502 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  15:18:17  Show Profile Send Tanthalas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I don't understand why people are complaining that the cocoon changed Entreri overnight. His path to redemption has been going on for years now. Hell, he already was "good" before the cocoon.

The only thing the cocoon did was show him what was expecting him in the afterlife. Entreri still isn't redeemed. If he dies now, that sufferring is still waiting for him. Entreri still needs to use the rest of his life to get the balance back to good.

The thing with Lolth raises a lot of questions. At the end of the previous trilogy, RAS was already suggesting that Lolth was changing to reflect the changes in her followers. I'm not sure this means that Menzoberrazan is going to abandon Lolth, more so when you still have plenty of fanatics in the city. If anything, RAS seems to be laying down the groundwork for a civil war. I think that many of Lolth's followers will simply just stop being Chaotic stupid. Menzoberrazan will still be an agressive city bent on conquest, they'll just stop with the random acts of evil.

quote:
Originally posted by sno4wy
I get what you're saying about the nudity, but it's not like Drizzt has had any problems running through populated places buck-naked before, for instance when Catti and Regis was being carried away by the unicorn in Gauntlgrym, probably half of the dwarves there saw his naked ass streaking through the corridors. Sure, that was an emergency, but the situation in Relentless isn't any less pressing since he'd just found out that he's become a dad, I'd think clothing would be pretty far down the list of priorities in his mind. I saw it as sort of, only if the clothes belonged to him would he have picked them up and put them on as an afterthought, otherwise I don't know that they'd register at all.

I honestly think you're looking way too much into this. I see no reason for Drizzt to refuse to wear Afafrenre's robes and run around naked.

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 21 Aug 2020 15:25:13
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  19:07:22  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The redemption arc for Entreri can't come in the form of him becoming morally virtuous. It can't become in the form of what people usually mean for redemption. He's become what he is due to abuse (his life before the novels was actually worse than Drizzt's from certain aspects for example, because Drizzt had someone who loved and cared after him, Entreri only had sick f***s), so the most important part of the process is actually healing--finding a way to take all that strength that he turned his pain into, and use it to reforge his life free from the shackles of his past. It isn't about repenting or seeing the error of his ways or some other nonsense; it can't happen that way, because it can't happen through just giving up what he built himself on in order to overcome the abuse, but through channeling towards more constructive outlets. Finding his personal truth. Redeeming because morals say so just isn't how people work--that's brainwashing, not redemption.

However, the Hell thing (which made absolutely 0 sense from a lore standpoint btw), is literally finalizing redemption--bringing Entreri's arc to closure--through actual torture inflicted on someone that lived seeing the world as an entirely hostile place and reacting to that for a lot of his life. It's a violence through and through--it's a form of brainwashing--and the result was Entreri being "redeemed" (lol) through fear (in this case, fear of Hell). What the hell indeed. That's... bad, there's no other way of expressing it.

This is also strictly connected to the matter of the various drow who have been stepped upon all their life--they'll never have an epiphany with "OMG! I was so wrong and so evil". No, they'll need to heal and forge their life anew; give themselves a new purpose. New moral systems only come after that long, difficult work (which is why Eilistraee is explicitly stated in sources to be an empoweree, helping people to find their own path, not a "repent for teh evulz you committed!" kind of deity, unlike Smedman's retconned stuff tries to imply).

The Drizzt books take the reverse approach; they go on and on about morality and what's right and what's wrong, but revolutions and changes don't happen that way. They don't happen because of set of beliefs; sets of beliefs are formalized after revolutions. Revolutions happen because of needs and unsatisfaction and anger, often channeled by the "have some, want more" , and while there are underlying principles to many revolutions, they are in the form of very general, intuitive, and universal ideas born out of the needs mentioned above (like freedom, or better quality of life, or just the right to friggin' eat). It's never "we must be good to each other, because it's the right thing to do".

It's also kinda ironic, in that this is born out of condemnation towards the absolutism of religion and dogma, and out of showing how this absolutism corrupts, but it engages in absolutism itself. Why is the set of beliefs that includes "goodness" automatically assumed to be the right one? This is simply accepted; there are no scenes built to explore the reason of it or why it would work, only scenes to show why Lolth's doesn't work anymore. For example, since the drow always seek personal gain, and since that's hardly going away no matter how you put it, this can be a good opportunity to craft scenes to explore selfish altruism and build it into the story, rather than taking it for granted. Since religion is being rejected, that's a good opportunity to explore optimistic nihilism and show why it can work for a whole society, rather than only for the individual. I'm not saying that all books that use common good principles should do this, but for a story that wants to condemn absolutism, embracing a set of moral beliefs as "the right one" a priori feels like betraying one of the core messages.

This comes full circles with the Entreri arc, because his redemption is about raining on him a given moral system, and that system is stated to be absolute by the surrogate of the Christian God--ubiquitous, all-knowing, ever-watching--in-universe (though that kind of drivel has no place in FR).

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 21 Aug 2020 19:33:52
Go to Top of Page

Tanthalas
Senior Scribe

Portugal
502 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  20:41:00  Show Profile Send Tanthalas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Not sure how you continue saying that Entreri is redeemed when if he died at this point the same suffering will be waiting for him.

Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage".
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  21:11:34  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Two reasons.

One, you seem to be conflating narrative redemption with religious redemption. They're absolutely not the same. I was discussing the redemption arc for a character that is a victim of abuse, and that has nothing to do with afterlife and everything to do with personal development (and, as I said, can't come from morality rained from on high, or through brainwashing) which is what prompted my comment. And this is the most important part in this matter--the afterlife doesn't matter in this narrative, we only see Entreri in his life.

Two, he wouldn't suffer that torture anyway. This is FR, not Christianity (and RAS seems to have confused the two things for some weird reason). Nothing says he'd go to a totally crappy afterlife. "Evil" (and at this point he isn't even "evil") doesn't necessarily get a bad afterlife. If he has his own belief (and he has) and if he doesn't openly say "f**k you" to the gods, he's likely to be taken to an afterlife of a deity that aligns with his belief. If RAS (who in his books is so quick to disregard the gods despite writing in FR) so badly wanted to communicate to the readers that Entreri will get a decent afterlife, he could have shown him starting to develop an affinity for some aspects of a certain faith (becoming stronger at the break could be a facet of Ilmater's ideology, and Entreri could display interest towards only that spect of that faith, to make a trivial example).

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 21 Aug 2020 21:12:18
Go to Top of Page

Tanthalas
Senior Scribe

Portugal
502 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  21:31:20  Show Profile Send Tanthalas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
That's hardly Entreri being redeemed.

He still needs to actually live doing good.

Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage".
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2524 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  22:33:56  Show Profile Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I am all for Entreri having a good afterlife--in fact, I want that for him, but I always want to know about that kind of thing, anyway.

The irony here is that Bob has flat out said he doesn't like the FR gods, and I am under the impression, since he grew up Catholic but I don't think he is anymore, that he is bitter about religion in general, and is projecting that bitterness onto all the FR gods. He shows how religion corrupts (Lolth, and the weird decree by Mielikki), but not how it can heal (Eilistraee, Ilmater, etc). I don't care if he's an atheist, Catholic, Muslim, or pagan IRL--the religion of FR is well-established, the gods are real, and the afterlife is a thing (and there are options).

But then, despite this apparent bitterness, he throws in the Christian idea of heaven/hell for Entreri. Were this his own world, or a fantasy setting with a binary reward/punishment system, it would work fine. But it's FR. Show the reward or punishment that awaits Entreri in the afterlife based on future choices he makes, but do it in a way that makes sense for FR.

Sweet water and light laughter
Go to Top of Page

sno4wy
Learned Scribe

USA
329 Posts

Posted - 21 Aug 2020 :  23:02:21  Show Profile Send sno4wy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Even putting aside the topic of whether he is redeemed or not, it's shittastic and incredibly lazy character development. Entreri is trapped in the cocoon literally as a result of it randomly wandering into his apartment while he was meeting with Regis and Dahlia. Then, later, it's revealed that "Charon" had nothing to do with the demonic plot, it was an anomaly that crossed over during the planar weakening, an anomaly that has zero precedence. It's a lazy plot device that was put in to quickly achieve a goal because RAS doesn't feel like, or doesn't know how to, write proper character development. Entreri's mindset does a complete 180 from his time in the cocoon, and his "revelations" come from "truths" that are heavily inconsistent with FR cosmology lore. It's artificially hammered into place by making an inflated character (Yvonnel) support "facts" to validate things that stand at direct odds to established canon. Then, after all of that, "Charon"/Sharon just disappears. What happened to the little girl that he was possessing? What about all of that build-up that RAS did about how heartbreaking it was to her mother that Sharon was pulled into the demonic plot? RAS seems to have forgotten all about the fact that there was a little girl at all, which doesn't exactly help the whole impression that this was just a contrived, not well-thought out thing to achieve something that the author wants even though it makes little sense. This is the kind of thing that makes most fanfiction terrible, and it's disappointing to see a professional author, especially one with as much experience as RAS, do.

Edited by - sno4wy on 21 Aug 2020 23:03:19
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 22 Aug 2020 :  00:44:22  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas

That's hardly Entreri being redeemed.

He still needs to actually live doing good.



Perhaps I haven't formulated my thoughts clearly enough.

The very idea that forcing a set of moral beliefs from above (and through torture at that!) can make for an even remotely passable character development--let alone any part of a "redemption arc"--is *bad*. That's not development; that's brainwashing. The fact that this "rain of morality from on high" was inflicted on a character who has suffered massive abuse, who has rebuilt himself around a certain set of beliefs, and that is now being forced to give up on the part of his identity that he forged by overcoming that abuse, is a failure at trying to explore how people work, and (quite frankly) a slap across the face of readers who have actually gone through the healing process.

This is the idea from which my previous posts started and that I explained in those.

Also, sno4wy presents another problem: the details pointing at Sharon/Charon being all part of really contrived set up to get Artemis through this, and not a natural development of the story.

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 22 Aug 2020 01:00:00
Go to Top of Page

Tanthalas
Senior Scribe

Portugal
502 Posts

Posted - 22 Aug 2020 :  13:46:44  Show Profile Send Tanthalas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
And again, you're basically using the cocoon to dismiss all of Entreri's character development in the past decade. You're acting like this is a huge change to Entreri's life, but the truth is that he was already acting good before this event.

The only thing that the cocoon showed him was that all the bad he has done in his life still far outweighs the good.

Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage".
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 22 Aug 2020 :  14:27:31  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Don't strawman me, please. I never said that Entreri's whole story boils down to this plot device. I pointed out that the part of the arc that now seems to be the culmination of his development (or what will be an importan part of his development regardless) was handled awfully, from a narrative perspective, from the perspective of respecting of the lore/world, from the perspective of respecting the character, and--perhaps most important--from the perspective of understanding and respecting how abuse affects a person. Seriously, "let's set the redemption in stone by torturing the guy and brainwashing him with fear of hell"? In fact, I very much explicitly said:

quote:

[...]let alone any part of a "redemption arc"[...]



I'm not talking about being "good", I'm talking about all the work that Artemis did being crapped upon with a cheap plot device.

I very much hope that RAS will make Entreri come to his senses and reject this whole "fear of hell" thing, as a part of the theme of rejection of dogma (even though that will be rather disjointed and forced, when it comes to Artemis' story, because he never was a dogma kind of guy and because that isn't the theme of his story--but still better than what we have now) because it was inflicted upon him through sheer violence (and because it makes absolutely no sense in FR). It was friggin' abuse on a person that experienced massive amounts of it, and this is supposed to make him "change"? Seriously, don't you see how shallow and f*cked up that very idea is?

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 22 Aug 2020 15:12:03
Go to Top of Page

sno4wy
Learned Scribe

USA
329 Posts

Posted - 23 Aug 2020 :  00:26:37  Show Profile Send sno4wy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The other problem is, the "truth" of Entreri "acting good" wasn't as a result of good character development. The changes wrought were individually so sudden and illogical that they can hardly be called "character development", unless you define such as sudden changes in the way a character thinks/acts/feels just because the author wants to force them to be something else. The last point in which Entreri held a semblance of congruence was Night of the Hunter. He has a sense of honor that exceeds Drizzt's, but his promise to never forget that Drizzt came back for him and Dahlia has been stretched way too thin. We don't see Entreri for books, and then he reappears during the Rage of Demons arc, which is when these sudden "developments" start happening. He literally just reappears, and then not long thereafter starts doing these "good" things. That can hardly be portrayed as a long history of being good.

Even within the books where he begins this (quite honestly, very short) "history", the sequences are extremely sudden and uncharacteristically jarring. The first instance is Entreri yelling at Yvonnel 2.0 to take him instead of Drizzt for torture questioning, which in addition to being very strange, poses a huge question of why would he do that? He's not stupid, he has nothing to offer her, and where did this sudden burst of loyalty come from? Then, later in the same disaster series that is the Homecoming Trilogy, Entreri willing to sacrifice himself for Drizzt to be cured of the magically-inflicted PTSD is the same level of nonsensical. These contrived and incredibly forced actions ring with about as much logic as RAS making Entreri assert that Drizzt had it harder than he did growing up - yeah, because being sold by the only person you've known to love and then getting raped repeatedly as a child by multiple people is an easier life than having a father who sacrificed himself so you wouldn't lose your moral compass and a panther best friend who is unconditionally loyal to you.

The "redemption" arc has been a shit pile that is the foundation laid in the Homecoming Trilogy that keeps getting shoveled upon. What happens in the span of less than two years, or even one at that, is hardly an argument for a history of "character development". There has been no character development that justifies where he is now. It's all sudden and forced, and Entreri has been forced into the role that's being pushed upon seemingly every character: a fawning support character to the CotH, there to inflate how awesome they are and there to be willing to throw away their lives for the sake of Drizzt Golden Boy Gary Stu Do'Urden because he's so awesome and amazing and you are not valid nor a worthwhile character unless you're willing to die for him.

Is there really a contention of the cocoon being a good plot device? I mean, how does it make sense that showing Entreri what his afterlife will be like makes him clamoring to go into the Abyss to save Drizzt's soul from Lolth? What sense does it make that it made him inconsiderate at best and honestly, downright abusive, by dragging Dahlia into life-threatening situations without having even bothered to talk to her or ask her to do so? I wonder if RAS even realizes the irony of how he's made Entreri into a worse character with his forced "redemption". But then again, the CotH and Drizzt especially, despite how they're supposed to be heroes, are actually pretty asinine.

Edited by - sno4wy on 23 Aug 2020 00:54:48
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 23 Aug 2020 :  01:12:38  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'd skipped the Homecoming stuff, but now I guess that's the reason why people kept claiming that Entreri was the hero in "Hero".

Yes, RAS wrote Artemis and some (many maybe) will say that RAS knows him far better than other people. However, this kind "narrative" really shows callous disrespect for his own character, and the inability to actually put himself in Entreri's shoes when writing.

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/
Go to Top of Page

sno4wy
Learned Scribe

USA
329 Posts

Posted - 23 Aug 2020 :  01:35:01  Show Profile Send sno4wy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

I'd skipped the Homecoming stuff, but now I guess that's the reason why people kept claiming that Entreri was the hero in "Hero".

Yes, RAS wrote Artemis and some (many maybe) will say that RAS knows him far better than other people. However, this kind "narrative" really shows callous disrespect for his own character, and the inability to actually put himself in Entreri's shoes when writing.


Nah, that's because Drizzt explicitly names Entreri as the hero. Which in itself was pretty ironic given that he did it because Entreri assassinated Yarin Frostmantle, who was a corrupt king, but one man being judge, jury and executioner is hardly the kind of thing that Drizzt purports to believe in and/or support. Heck, in the past, he'd given Entreri shit for how Entreri shouldn't get to be judge, jury and executioner by being an assassin. Yet, there he was, naming Entreri as the hero for the exact same action. Typical RAS inconsistency I guess. Or hypocrisy I guess is the more accurate word, because Yarin's assassination was something that Drizzt approves of, versus all of those other assassinations that Drizzt didn't approve of. My biggest problem with Entreri's "redemption", other than how badly it is done, is that it's entirely subjective. It's not so much a true redemption but rather a metamorphosis into a Drizzt-approved thing.

I would only buy that an author knows the characters they've created if they make an effort to put themselves into those characters' shoes. As it is, I don't feel that RAS even knows Drizzt. The discrepancy between what Drizzt is and what he's supposed to be is testament to that.

Edited by - sno4wy on 23 Aug 2020 01:44:47
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 23 Aug 2020 :  02:13:06  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sno4wy
Nah, that's because Drizzt explicitly names Entreri as the hero. Which in itself was pretty ironic given that he did it because Entreri assassinated Yarin Frostmantle, who was a corrupt king, but one man being judge, jury and executioner is hardly the kind of thing that Drizzt purports to believe in and/or support. Heck, in the past, he'd given Entreri shit for how Entreri shouldn't get to be judge, jury and executioner by being an assassin. Yet, there he was, naming Entreri as the hero for the exact same action. Typical RAS inconsistency I guess. Or hypocrisy I guess is the more accurate word, because Yarin's assassination was something that Drizzt approves of, versus all of those other assassinations that Drizzt didn't approve of. My biggest problem with Entreri's "redemption", other than how badly it is done, is that it's entirely subjective. It's not so much a true redemption but rather a metamorphosis into a Drizzt-approved thing.


Yeah, this is in line with the "redemption by morality rained from on-high" thing I was mentioning. "Redemption" by conforming to someone else's (be it a person or a group) expectation of what you should be. Which can't even come close to being "redemption" in terms of story, unless your theme (and your statement on it) is some icky thing like "only conforming to the expectation of others can lead to happiness". Also, it clashes with the condemnation of dogma that seems to be a strong theme here.

quote:
I would only buy that an author knows the characters they've created if they make an effort to put themselves into those characters' shoes.


Precisely. Knowing your character means this.

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 23 Aug 2020 02:13:36
Go to Top of Page

tangelo1023
Acolyte

2 Posts

Posted - 24 Aug 2020 :  18:02:14  Show Profile Send tangelo1023 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I don't know how many people have seen this interview, but there's a great spoiler filled discussion about Relentless with RAS in it. He talks about how he never saw the drow as a "evil species," how Drizzt is not unique in his morality. He also talks about using a unreliable narrator to reconcile big changes in his books to general FR lore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HsaC92khQY&feature=emb_title
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2524 Posts

Posted - 24 Aug 2020 :  18:25:04  Show Profile Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by tangelo1023

I don't know how many people have seen this interview, but there's a great spoiler filled discussion about Relentless with RAS in it. He talks about how he never saw the drow as a "evil species," how Drizzt is not unique in his morality. He also talks about using a unreliable narrator to reconcile big changes in his books to general FR lore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HsaC92khQY&feature=emb_title



Yup, this interview was shared in the other Relentless thread, and the discussions have kind of crossed over to both scrolls.

As I said in the other discussion, Greenwood himself has said that the majority of FR lore is presented through the unreliable narrator (Elminster, Volo, etc), much like real world history. However, in this case, RAS seems to be taking the unreliable narrator to the extreme, using it as an excuse to disregard established lore and do what he wants. Imho, him doing whatever so that he can say "unreliable narrator" if WotC decides to change things is just lazy writing, as he doesn't even bother to fact check. The idea of the "unreliable narrator" only works to a point if you choose to go entirely left field.

Sweet water and light laughter
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3294 Posts

Posted - 24 Aug 2020 :  18:51:52  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by tangelo1023

I don't know how many people have seen this interview, but there's a great spoiler filled discussion about Relentless with RAS in it. He talks about how he never saw the drow as a "evil species," how Drizzt is not unique in his morality. He also talks about using a unreliable narrator to reconcile big changes in his books to general FR lore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HsaC92khQY&feature=emb_title



Let's be real. Drizzt is very much described as the super special drow in all of his books save the latest few. He develops those different morals on his own and is portrayed as unique because of them--he's basically born with them. RAS' version of the drow basically is "overwhemingly evil race, with a handful of exceptions", and it shows from how he handled the worldbuilding.

The worldbuilding of the drow makes no sense without dissent, disillusion, and splinter movements being rampant and starting to develop a LONG time before the present era. Had RAS been so insistent on showing the nuance in the drow, he would have played on that. He would have explored the consequences of such a crappy society, which include people getting fed up of being treated like subhuman sh*tstains. He would have also included different cultures formed over the millennia a long time ago in his representation. He didn't, he always was about Lolth, Lolth, Lolth wanting to get Drizzt, Drizzt hunts, and some more Lolth. And Jarlaxle, but that's not a culture.

When Ed introduced different cultures in Eilitraee&followers, RA--the guy who supposedly had the drow as nuanced from the get go--didn't address them. If his interpretation of the drow had been actually more nuanced, he would have included them (even if only in a few appearances) to show that the drow not only can individually choose, but can also form different cultures. Or, if he didn't want to use Eilistraee, he would have created different cultures on his own (like I mentioned before). Instead, the only way he mentions Eilistraee is as an evil Lolthite pretending to be an Eilistraean (which kinda paints the Eilistraeans as a myth), and the drow has a whole remain a monoculture in his books.

Generally, the rare exception thingy done by RAS is problematic. It allows arguments like "but X race already has free will!!1!" and at the same time it enables a bad general representation of the race, because the rare exceptions have no statistical relevance compared to the "eeeeevil" guys. They're so few to be irrelevant. It also makes no sense. Even rare exceptions, over tens of thousands years, would eventually come to form their own societies. So, where are them? Hunted and killed by the "evil ones"? Setting aside that this doesn't really work, really? That just reinforces the point that the race is overall unredeemably evil, which is what the "rare exceptions" approach was supposedly trying to avoid.

On a related note, his stance about Eilistraee seems to come from ignorance tbh.

He says that he doesn't like Eilistraee because that level of god-coercion for god reasons reduces the “mortals” to puppets. However, Eilistraee's lore is described as doing the opposite of coercing mortals. She's in fact described as goddess who strives to empower her people to make their choices and find their path. She's described as helping and conforting them without being intrusive (as in, for example, helping in practical matters of their everyday lives, scaring aggressors away, etc... without being openly revealing of her intervention). You could see her as watching over mortals in their "journey", and by offering them the tools to travel it themselves and overcome its challenges. This is a valid approach to paint a deity character. In fact, one of the reasons I'm so fond of her is that she subverts most tropes involving gods. Even her choice to forgo all she could have wanted just to be with the drow, since she'd foreseen times of need, fits that. The culture inspired by her is based on nurturing arts and beauty, freedom of expression, and acceptance, and being a nurturing matriarchy, this also makes her a really good foil to Lolth.

One of the ways WotC intentionally crapped all over her lore when they tried to get rid of her was by portraying her as the exact opposite of all this, almost line by line. She came off as very similar to Lolth, which was utter BS. But that's a different matter

So, while it's obvious to not want to turn this into a god vs god issue, Eilistraee's culture doesn't need to be motivated by "I do this because I follow her", it can easily be motivated by "I do this, because I believe it's the right thing to do/it's what leads to happines/etc..." Likewise, following Eilistraee, for a drow, can be motivated by "I follow Eilistraee because she embodies what I believe in" or by more personal reasons related to personal stories; depends on the individual. After all, in the ancient times of FR history, when the first instance of her culture appeared, it wasn't Eilistraee to go around converting people, it was people founding a nation based on ideals associated with her. Eilistraee acted as an empowerer and patroness for that.

In the end, it seems to me that RAS is trying to give himself credit for something he hasn't really worked for, and that authors like Ed Greenwood and Elaine Cunningham put much more effort into. What's irksome is that while RAS gets praises (in this case unwarranted, because of the reasons I described), the people who *actually* worked to add different cultures and real nuance to the drow are ignored, and their work gets WotC's (literal) label of "sorry for our racism".

To all Facebook-using FR fans, you might be interested in checking out this page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/450517575051806/

Edited by - Irennan on 24 Aug 2020 20:49:57
Go to Top of Page

George Krashos
Master of Realmslore

Australia
5954 Posts

Posted - 27 Aug 2020 :  01:20:17  Show Profile Send George Krashos a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Thank you for everyone's input in this thread. It has been enjoyable and thought-provoking. And done in a civil manner. Kudos. I'm waiting to read more ...

-- George Krashos

"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus
Go to Top of Page

jordanz
Senior Scribe

518 Posts

Posted - 11 Sep 2020 :  05:10:59  Show Profile  Visit jordanz's Homepage Send jordanz a Private Message  Reply with Quote
What did you guys think of Pwent being restored from the curse of Vampirism? I dont think I have ever heard of that happening before in the realms. I recall Mystra returning one of her worshipers from Lichdom back to mortality. I would think it would take that level of direct divine intervention to accomplish something like that. Do you guys think Catti-brie and Yvonnel should have been capable of creating that level of magical "de cursing" field?
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
33879 Posts

Posted - 11 Sep 2020 :  05:13:29  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
There's a High Magic spell in Elves of Evermeet that can restore life to the undead.

Since that is canon, then it stands to reason there are other ways to do it.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

Veylandemar
Seeker

19 Posts

Posted - 12 Sep 2020 :  04:23:29  Show Profile Send Veylandemar a Private Message  Reply with Quote
While questionable in its place in canon, Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn (The game, not the novel by Philip Athans) had the Bhaalspawn save their love interest from vampirism, albeit a little bit after killing them and the plot-crucial vampire who turned them.
The events thereof involved a ruined temple of Amaunator, who was regarded as a deceased power at the time due to the game being based off of AD&D 2nd Edition.
Go to Top of Page

sno4wy
Learned Scribe

USA
329 Posts

Posted - 13 Sep 2020 :  00:13:25  Show Profile Send sno4wy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think the problem with curing Pwent's vampirism isn't so much that whether it can be done/has a precedence of being done in the Realms, but rather how it was done. He got cured of his vampirism by going through the field that turned all the driders back into drow, that released all the souls from Entreri's dagger. It was via a ridiculously powerful and apparently cure-all thing.
Go to Top of Page

Tanthalas
Senior Scribe

Portugal
502 Posts

Posted - 18 Sep 2020 :  13:40:18  Show Profile Send Tanthalas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
More like some kind of reversal spell than a cure-all.

Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage".
Go to Top of Page

jordanz
Senior Scribe

518 Posts

Posted - 18 Sep 2020 :  21:21:12  Show Profile  Visit jordanz's Homepage Send jordanz a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sno4wy

I think the problem with curing Pwent's vampirism isn't so much that whether it can be done/has a precedence of being done in the Realms, but rather how it was done. He got cured of his vampirism by going through the field that turned all the driders back into drow, that released all the souls from Entreri's dagger. It was via a ridiculously powerful and apparently cure-all thing.



RightI know high elven magic is powerful but is it that powerful? I believe "Birth" Magic was used to augment the spell so there's that. Was it further augmented by the primordial? or was the spell of divine origin ? If so which God was backing it up?
Go to Top of Page

sno4wy
Learned Scribe

USA
329 Posts

Posted - 22 Sep 2020 :  03:07:17  Show Profile Send sno4wy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by jordanz
RightI know high elven magic is powerful but is it that powerful? I believe "Birth" Magic was used to augment the spell so there's that. Was it further augmented by the primordial? or was the spell of divine origin ? If so which God was backing it up?



Was the "Birth" Magic used to augment Quenthel and Yvonnel 2.0's spell? I thought Catti gave birth after they'd done that, and her magic was used to buff the units on their side? Admittedly, I didn't pay much attention to all of that, it struck me as really deus ex machina and "Birth Magic" being yet another Salvatorism.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3  Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2020 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000