| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| questing gm |
Posted - 11 Oct 2008 : 05:56:30
It's a short adventure for 2nd levels and interestingly the BBEG is trying to tap into Karsus in the Dire Wood.
I thought with the Karsestone removed, Karsus's remains is a empty stone husk? |
| 23 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 05 Jun 2009 : 01:57:05
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
What is more interesting is that 'grognardise' has come to mean that in the frendch language. "Grognards" (what Napoleon called the infantry of his Old Guard) means "grumblers" and relates to how the soldiers used to always complain about being kept out of the fighting as the Emperor's reserve.
-- George Krashos
Yes, that's interesting too--thanks for sharing it. |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 04 Jun 2009 : 15:18:53
quote:
Originally posted by The Simbul
Markus and/or Asgetrion,
Could you please elaborate or explain, specifically, how the author of this adventure "did not do his research", or how the background for this adventure is somehow utterly contradictory to pre-existing canon.
Specifically, in the context of all of the following pre-established facts:
* The failed deity Karsus died with the fall of Netheril, and he fell into the Dire Wood with the rest his enclave. Therefore any character seeking to tap into the power or knowledge once held by Karsus would likely search there.
* The Karsestone--known as the heart of Karsus--was removed by the Shades in 1371. Generally speaking, the remains of a being will often include more components that simply their heart.
* When deities die they have a tendency to leave behind residual power, which explains why the Githyanki make their cities on the corpses of dead gods; why dead deities like Leira, Bhaal, and Auspenser could be worshiped in 3E; why the Simbul nearly destroyed herself to keep Velsharoon's corpse out of evil hands; and why Karsus was listed as the patron deity for at least one cleric NPC in 2E and as a source of pact magic in 3E.
* It is not explicitly stated that Draigdurroch actually found the corpse of Karsus, but rather it is stated that he suspected he might. What IS stated is that he found a nexus of magical energy that remained beneath the Dire Wood and which he was able to tap into to discover a new warlock pact.
I for one do not consider it unreasonable for any author to assume that the presence of the corpse of a failed deity of magic for thousands of years in a single place would leave behind some residual magical essence, or in this case a nexus of magical energy, specifically when his "heart" was busy continually bleeding liquid "heavy magic" into the ruins and the soil for the vast majority of that time period.
Please note that I have not read not actual adventure -- my comments should reflect that, as I'm not actually *claiming* he/she didn't do proper research (although I *did* instantly believe that the module actually contradicts canon Realmslore). All I said was that if this is the case, it's likely that the designer didn't do proper research.
All in all what you say is true; however, based on what I know of the plots of this adventure and 'Scepter Tower', it looks to me that they're utilizing Realmslore only marginally (and the plot hooks for 'Scepter Tower' nearly made me weep) and consciously locating new FR adventures in "high danger" places (Karse/Dire Wood and Saharelgard) just to show everyone that "look guys, you'll finally get to use these places in 4E FR". And yes, that's my personal opinion and not based on any actual facts. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 04 Jun 2009 : 09:08:31
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
Otherwise, in FRance ( ), a grognardise is a liveliness, a cheerfulness of guardroom, which is only rarely somewhere else. It comes from our emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and his grognards, as his soldiers were named (to be as short as possible).
Is that so? That's interesting--thanks for sharing it.
Indeed Rino. You're welcome my dear... 
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
What is more interesting is that 'grognardise' has come to mean that in the frendch language. "Grognards" (what Napoleon called the infantry of his Old Guard) means "grumblers" and relates to how the soldiers used to always complain about being kept out of the fighting as the Emperor's reserve.
-- George Krashos
Totally Right George. I'd just like to clarify one thing : grognard means "grumblers" and relates to how the French are used to always complain !
Not only Napo's soldiers and not only in the past !
I know what I'm talking about ! Believe me !
But we're going off-topic and Sage is going to get upset !  |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 04 Jun 2009 : 02:57:56
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
Otherwise, in FRance (), a grognardise is a liveliness, a cheerfulness of guardroom, which is only rarely somewhere else. It comes from our emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and his grognards, as his soldiers were named (to be as short as possible).
Is that so? That's interesting--thanks for sharing it.
What is more interesting is that 'grognardise' has come to mean that in the frendch language. "Grognards" (what Napoleon called the infantry of his Old Guard) means "grumblers" and relates to how the soldiers used to always complain about being kept out of the fighting as the Emperor's reserve.
-- George Krashos
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 04 Jun 2009 : 02:39:50
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Entitlement to what, though, Mark? That phrase too gets thrown around without getting into substance.
In other words, there were a large number of FR fans (I have no idea about the percentages involved) that acted like "If you don't know the setting, then you shouldn't be playing in it".
I have actually met people like this (although I avoid playing with them... especially since I make sweeping changes). That is why I say I agree that the feelings of entitlement were there - I've seen them in action, and it ain't pretty.
RPGers who are 'full of themselves' are an ugly lot. I don't mind people knowing more then me (when it comes to FR, most do), but I do not like it when the 'lord it over' others, and act superior because of their knowledge.
The problem is, its hard to be helpful, sometimes, because people think you are coping that attitude. In fact, early on when I first started hanging around the WotC boards, I thought Old Sage was just such a person (I don't know if he remembers that... hopefully not...)
I eventually learned that many of the people I thought were "know it alls" were actually very helpful, and were only trying to share their love of the Realms with others. Unfortunately, people don't like to feel stupid, and sometimes our own prolific knowledge of the setting illicits these feelings of inadequacey among new fans, whether we are trying to create that effect or not.
Ergo, the "Feelings of Entitlement" can be applied to both people who feel like you have to be 'good enugh' to play in FR (and yes, those types do exist), and also to people who accidently engender this attitude out of love for the setting.
Like I said, I think its more the 'fault' (god... I hate using that word...) of the new players who felt 'belittled' by other people's knowlede, then anything done on purpose, athough there was some purposeful 'belittling' going on as well. In fact, it could have been a very small minority who tried to act superior with their knowledge, but that unfortunately lead to the widespread misconception that all FR players were 'Grognards' and thought they were too good for everyone else.
When a new player met someone who was just trying to be helpful with a few character suggestions, it could have been taken completely out-of-context, because they were looking for just such a person to come along and tell them "how to do it right".
So you see? Its a matter of perception, which is exactly what the designers were trying to say. It doesn't matter whether the 'feelings of entitlement' were real or not - people thought they were real, and therefore weren't willing to give FR a try.
THAT is the problem I applauded the designers for attempting to address. The problem was real, whether the contributing factors were or not. However, I didn't think they were going to solve it by wiping the slate clean and re-setting everyone's Realms-knowledge to zero. 
To me that amounts to the same thing as killing someone in order to cure their illness. Sure, the disease is gone... but so is the patient. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 04 Jun 2009 : 01:05:55
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
Otherwise, in FRance (), a grognardise is a liveliness, a cheerfulness of guardroom, which is only rarely somewhere else. It comes from our emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and his grognards, as his soldiers were named (to be as short as possible).
Is that so? That's interesting--thanks for sharing it. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 22:59:15
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
Grognardise is one person's (Ubbergeek's ?) word invention to refer to the act of irrationally clinging to established precepts and refusing to shift with the game designers.
Maybe that's what he meant -- as Rinonalyrna said, he never made such a claim, let alone argued for it. It was just a standing insult.
Entitlement to what, though, Mark? That phrase too gets thrown around without getting into substance. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 21:20:39
quote:
Originally posted by The Simbul
Markus and/or Asgetrion,
Could you please elaborate or explain, specifically, how the author of this adventure "did not do his research", or how the background for this adventure is somehow utterly contradictory to pre-existing canon.
DANG!
How the hell did I get caugt-up in this? 
I haven't even seen that adventure, and only heard about it in this thread. ALL of my replies were aimed at the OP from that point of view. All I ever meant was "things change, don't worry about it".
The OP stated that it was contradictory, and I was merely going with his assumption. I haven't seen this module, nor do I wish to.
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
What the hell is 'grognardise'? What feelings of entitlement?
I've been using the expresion 'Grognards' since the 70's, and back-then it was usually applied to 'oldsters' who knew WAY too much about military history (and in my case, liked to play wargames, usually using miniatures, but counters were exceptable). Grognards can argue for hours about specific make-ups of units during certain historic battles, down to naming every soldier in the unit and what gear he carried that day.
I suppose that original usage (as applied to gaming) came from Napoleon's Grognards (thanks for that bit, BTW), which is apt, because miniatures-wargaming first came about in the form of Napoleonics (a particular, well-loved era for Grognards).
'Grognardise' is the phenomena of a gamer who would rather discuss the minutia of a setting ad-nauseum over actually playing in that setting, and has been known to ruin gaming sessions ("I can't play in this mess! Everyone knows Elminster only wears blue underwear on Tuesdays! Gah! I'm outta here...")
Yes... exaggerated, but thats how the designers saw it, and thats why we got FR4.0. 
I never said I agreed with the designers either - I think they took a good idea and took it way too far, creating a very bad 'disconnect' for may of the setting's existing fans. Feelings of entitlement existed, because I have seen it with my own eyes at least four different LGS's, and it was off-putting to some new players. I only agreed with the fact that the problem needed to be addressed, NOT the way in which they addressed it.
I appear to be caught between a rock and a hard place.
Apologies all around to anyone and everyone who took offense. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 20:47:08
Indeed Rinonalyrna, I found this description :
Grognardise represents a person who likes how a previous edition did something and complains about how it works in the current/future edition.
Grognardise is one person's (Ubbergeek's ?) word invention to refer to the act of irrationally clinging to established precepts and refusing to shift with the game designers.
Otherwise, in FRance (), a grognardise is a liveliness, a cheerfulness of guardroom, which is only rarely somewhere else. It comes from our emperor Napoleon Bonaparte and his grognards, as his soldiers were named (to be as short as possible). |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 19:44:35
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
What the hell is 'grognardise'?
I dunno. Paradise for grognards? Merchandise for grognards?
The "word" originated with the poster Ubbergeek* (mainly on the WotC boards), and I don't think he ever explained exactly what he meant by it. Everyone was just supposed to know, apparently.
*Or at least, he is the first, and usually the only person I've ever seen use it. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 08:32:35
I'm afraid I've set fire with my simple initial question.
oops  |
| The Simbul |
Posted - 03 Jun 2009 : 05:42:35
Markus and/or Asgetrion,
Could you please elaborate or explain, specifically, how the author of this adventure "did not do his research", or how the background for this adventure is somehow utterly contradictory to pre-existing canon.
Specifically, in the context of all of the following pre-established facts:
* The failed deity Karsus died with the fall of Netheril, and he fell into the Dire Wood with the rest his enclave. Therefore any character seeking to tap into the power or knowledge once held by Karsus would likely search there.
* The Karsestone--known as the heart of Karsus--was removed by the Shades in 1371. Generally speaking, the remains of a being will often include more components that simply their heart.
* When deities die they have a tendency to leave behind residual power, which explains why the Githyanki make their cities on the corpses of dead gods; why dead deities like Leira, Bhaal, and Auspenser could be worshiped in 3E; why the Simbul nearly destroyed herself to keep Velsharoon's corpse out of evil hands; and why Karsus was listed as the patron deity for at least one cleric NPC in 2E and as a source of pact magic in 3E.
* It is not explicitly stated that Draigdurroch actually found the corpse of Karsus, but rather it is stated that he suspected he might. What IS stated is that he found a nexus of magical energy that remained beneath the Dire Wood and which he was able to tap into to discover a new warlock pact.
I for one do not consider it unreasonable for any author to assume that the presence of the corpse of a failed deity of magic for thousands of years in a single place would leave behind some residual magical essence, or in this case a nexus of magical energy, specifically when his "heart" was busy continually bleeding liquid "heavy magic" into the ruins and the soil for the vast majority of that time period. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 19:28:42
For ever capping a worthwhile human endeavour because a few people think they need to know everything and feel bad when they don't is conceptual absurdity -- it only makes sense with a subordinate one.
What the hell is 'grognardise'? What feelings of entitlement? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 19:19:08
For you and Ed, perhaps...
but you're both freelancers, and not employees of WotC.
In every case where it suited them to do so, they steam-rolled over existing canon to present some new idea. That makes canon much more malleable then it ever was in past editions, wherin the in-house team tried to respectfully adhere to prior lore.
If you notice, I was trying to keep that post as neutral as possible - I even went as far as to say it "not a bad idea conceptually".
I understand 100% why the 're-boot over retcon' approach was taken with the new setting, and applaud the reasons behind it (to eliminate the grognardise/feelings of entitlement).
That doesn't mean I have to like it.
Anyway, to keep this on-topic, all I was really saying to the OP is "Don't let it bother you... things have changed"; Thats all. |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 18:29:59
Just because you keep posting it over and over doesn't make it true Markus 
Pre-4e canon is still respected in everything I write and I'm sure it's true for other designers/authors as well.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I've been driving this point home for months now over at the WotC forums, an most of the 'old-timers' there have come to agree with me. Pre-4e canon doesn't really exist anymore, because it is ignored whenever it becomes inconvenient.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 15:43:14
quote:
Originally posted by Asgetrion
Or, more likely, the author didn't do his homework...
This.
I've noted a complete ignoring (or perhaps ignorance?) of pre-4e canon for anything created for 4e. If the old lore works, fine, but if it doesn't for the new concept, then just ignore it and plow on.
I've been driving this point home for months now over at the WotC forums, and most of the 'old-timers' there have come to agree with me. Pre-4e canon doesn't really exist anymore, because it is ignored whenever it becomes inconvenient.
Add this to the 'lore-light' approach of 4e, and you can see my point - there really is no such thing as canon anymore. This was part of the 4e team's design philoshophy - to 'disarm' the grognards and put beginners on the same level as long-time fans. Not a bad idea conceptually, but it does make the setting rather wishy-washy now.
And to bring this back-around to the topic - older lore should be ignored because it no longer matters to the folks that matter; the WotC designers. If that adventure disagrees with earlier canon, then that earlier canon should be considered incorrect. Other things about Karsus have been changed recently, so that makes everything else we know about him suspect. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 14:45:03
Thanks to both of you Patrakis and the Simbul for these technical and realms-related explanations. |
| The Simbul |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 06:05:43
The Karsestone is the heart of Karsus. The site of Karse itself consists of the remains of the rest of his body.
Moreover there were Shades dwelling in the ruins of Karse in 1374 DR, some two years after the Karsestone was "lost", thus it would seem the place had some intrisic value or power. They were driven off by attacks from the Daemonfey, and they conceivably had far too many things going on in that timeframe to send reinforcements or retake the site. |
| Patrakis |
Posted - 02 Jun 2009 : 01:39:33
I would look at page 304 of the PHB 4E for that answer. Endure elements is described there.
Pat |
| Fillow |
Posted - 31 May 2009 : 20:58:19
If any scribe found (as I did) an interest in this adventure, I would need few explanation about this sentence : quote:
The PCs might also think to cast the Endure Elements ritual on themselves, or ask either Lady Moonfire or Curuvar the Brazen to cast it for them
It's in the JOURNEY TO THE POWER part, page 7.
What is the Endure Elements ritual ? |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 16 Oct 2008 : 23:45:15
quote:
Originally posted by questing gm
It's a short adventure for 2nd levels and interestingly the BBEG is trying to tap into Karsus in the Dire Wood.
I thought with the Karsestone removed, Karsus's remains is a empty stone husk?
Maybe the Spellplague "charged" Karsus once again? Or, more likely, the author didn't do his homework... |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 14 Oct 2008 : 16:25:35
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
I lost all interest in the adventure when I saw "By Mystra's lost spell."
On the other hand, I find that guy (Curuvar the Brazen) to be such a funny character that I've "stolen" him for my Realms.  |
| Pandora |
Posted - 11 Oct 2008 : 09:53:21
Does it have to work? Sometimes trying is just enough and fear of anothers success is enough to make people act. |
|
|
