| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 15 Aug 2025 : 16:57:23
Hopefully this isn't too much of a sore subject to discuss, but I figured I'd wonder on this because it could lead to some discussions on ideas for the LIFE of the MORTAL beings that were Myrkul, Bane, and Bhaal.
So, there's the Wall of the Faithless, and canonically Myrkul made it. It holds the souls of those who didn't worship the gods. Myrkul is also believed to have been a Prince of Murghom during his lifetime.
So Murghom is squarely in Imaskari territory, but the Imaskari had fallen probably two thousand-plus years prior to his arising as a deity. But they were decidedly disrespectful of the gods. They even went so far as to put up a wall to prevent gods from entering the world.
So, the question becomes ... did he have some kind of grudge against the Imaskari? Did he arrive as lord of the realm of the dead to find it was "filled with" faithless Imaskari? Did the circle of greater powers at the time allow the wall to be built BECAUSE the Imaskari had defied gods SOOOO much by erecting a Godswall that may have affected them somehow? Did the circle of greater powers allow the wall to be built because the Imaskari had brought the elder evil known as Pandorym to the world (which may have been known as Entropy the Godswallower)? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 13 Sep 2025 : 12:52:06
You are of course assuming divinities rigidly stick to the rules, which there are numerous instances of that not being the case.
Kelemvor may do so, although he equally has been shown to break them where it felt necessary.
Myrkul almost certainly would have broken the rules as often as possible, mostly because he likely created the rules regarding who was deemed faithless or not, and because there is nobody that would appeal to a higher power on behalf of Ao's priests, and also there is no higher power they could appeal to.
In a god's divine realm he is king, in complete control over everything that happens. It would take a combined effort of multiple greater powers to force Myrkul to do anything he didnt want to in his own divine realm. |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 13 Sep 2025 : 00:48:14
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by Athreeren
To return to the topic, do priests of Ao get condemned as faithless?
Interesting question. From what I remember, nobody was giving them spells so they could hardly be called priests like the "real" ones. In the columns detailing the Cult of Ao I don't think it was specified if they actually rejected the notion of the existence of other gods of if they simply decided to venerate the Overgod above everyone else (which will not make them different from the priests of any other deity).
What is interesting is that the reigning God of the Dead would be hard pressed to judge as Faithless people that profess to have faith in its boss so the question remains of where do these folk end up after dying. I don't think it is something that has been explored ever. Ao seems mostly disinterested in the fate of mortals so I don't picture the Overgod having its own Plane with its one petitioners so what do they do? Reincarnation? Astral/Ethereal wandering? Some kind of undeath? Transformation in outsiders (some flavour of inevitables, perhaps)?
They appear in Neverwinter Nights, in the first expansion (Shadows of Undretide), as a bunch of people that have weird beliefs, with the unifying philosophy that they believed was the superior being, and worshipping the other gods was a waste of time. So, more False than Faithless.
But they are going to be ok, you only get small punishments for slander the gods, the only harsh punishment is if you don't believe in anything. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 14:19:32
quote:
Originally posted by Gary Dallison
My understanding is if they have no patron to collect them then they will first go to kelemvors realm.
Since nobody comes to collect them they would in theory be free to travel the outer planes and eventually come to rest in whatever outer plane best suits their alignment.
In practicality such a delay and wandering would make them prime targets for devils and demons and other outer planar predators that feed on souls.
If the souls are fairly compliant I'm confident they would wait in the queue to be judged. If myrkul was in charge he would almost certainly stick them in the wall, because technically there is nobody coming to claim them. As certainly doesn't care, if he even exists.
Kelemvor might be more forgiving and take them for his own if they agree.
Lol, that's funny, we both came to a roughly comparable idea. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 12:52:47
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by Athreeren
To return to the topic, do priests of Ao get condemned as faithless?
Interesting question. From what I remember, nobody was giving them spells so they could hardly be called priests like the "real" ones. In the columns detailing the Cult of Ao I don't think it was specified if they actually rejected the notion of the existence of other gods of if they simply decided to venerate the Overgod above everyone else (which will not make them different from the priests of any other deity).
What is interesting is that the reigning God of the Dead would be hard pressed to judge as Faithless people that profess to have faith in its boss so the question remains of where do these folk end up after dying. I don't think it is something that has been explored ever. Ao seems mostly disinterested in the fate of mortals so I don't picture the Overgod having its own Plane with its one petitioners so what do they do? Reincarnation? Astral/Ethereal wandering? Some kind of undeath? Transformation in outsiders (some flavour of inevitables, perhaps)?
Yes, it is a good question. I wouldn't have it that they be treated as faithless by Kelemvor (or any other god of the dead), and partly I'd think that might be because they'd be afraid to offend their boss. However, we also must consider the fact that MOST people don't adhere to ONLY one god, because its a polytheistic culture.
So, how about this? They appear before Kelemvor, who judges them to be free spirits who shall be confined to his realm, but they may use some form of magical scrying pool, etc... to contact the servitors of other gods on a periodic basis and request that they be transported to another afterlife? However, like a prison, they have limited time/resources to do this, so they must make this "worth the effort" to the servitors of other gods and convince them that they can live in harmony with said realm. Meanwhile, perhaps they must live on the outskirts of his city, outside of his protections, and their souls are open prey for beings such as demons, devils, night hags, primordial spirit eaters like Kezef, Chupoclops,Dendar, etc... |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 08:46:28
My understanding is if they have no patron to collect them then they will first go to kelemvors realm.
Since nobody comes to collect them they would in theory be free to travel the outer planes and eventually come to rest in whatever outer plane best suits their alignment.
In practicality such a delay and wandering would make them prime targets for devils and demons and other outer planar predators that feed on souls.
If the souls are fairly compliant I'm confident they would wait in the queue to be judged. If myrkul was in charge he would almost certainly stick them in the wall, because technically there is nobody coming to claim them. As certainly doesn't care, if he even exists.
Kelemvor might be more forgiving and take them for his own if they agree. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 08:34:08
quote:
Originally posted by Athreeren
To return to the topic, do priests of Ao get condemned as faithless?
Interesting question. From what I remember, nobody was giving them spells so they could hardly be called priests like the "real" ones. In the columns detailing the Cult of Ao I don't think it was specified if they actually rejected the notion of the existence of other gods of if they simply decided to venerate the Overgod above everyone else (which will not make them different from the priests of any other deity).
What is interesting is that the reigning God of the Dead would be hard pressed to judge as Faithless people that profess to have faith in its boss so the question remains of where do these folk end up after dying. I don't think it is something that has been explored ever. Ao seems mostly disinterested in the fate of mortals so I don't picture the Overgod having its own Plane with its one petitioners so what do they do? Reincarnation? Astral/Ethereal wandering? Some kind of undeath? Transformation in outsiders (some flavour of inevitables, perhaps)? |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 07:21:38
Sod WoTC canon. The old designers of realmslore past provide a much better development of canon than WoTC ever has.
It is a great feeling when after many years of musing you get to provide an input (no matter how small) to something the designers of yesteryear are working on. Even better when you finally see a version of one of your ideas appear in another's publication.
If you stick to the rules for canon - nothing is set in stone, it can change and develop and twist, no reference should ever be ignored even if it is clearly a mistake someone made, and the simplest explanation that covers all references is often the correct explanation - then your ideas are more likely to get noticed by others.
And if you are lucky, then maybe you will get to shape canon for the next generation of realmslore nerds. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 12 Sep 2025 : 01:32:40
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
sleyvas, you need to understand that sometimes creators simply make mistakes (i.e., they plain forget or reference the wrong material); other times, creators make changes based on their then-present milieu (or, in certain instances, corporate pressure). Not all discrepancies can be attributed to careful, artistic and objective thought isolated from prevailing sensibilities. Here is another shocker: creators sometimes lie when asked "Why?".
You can tucker yourself out arranging documents, photographs and strings on the corkboard if you wish, but, at the end of the day, there is always the possibility an official outcome you have elected to examine is the result of an unpalatable, unsatisfying or unremarkable origin.
Wow... you assume that I don't understand that. Sorry, the sound you just heard was me controlling my laughter. The FUN for some of us is in playing with such.
Then, by all means...continue with the tuckering; do not expect every result to be "canon".
We don't. As people that don't WORK for WotC, we know that at any time anything we write or develop can disappear at any time. Still, sometimes something we write gets adopted. Sometimes it gets adopted with a twist or a reference. Sometimes it gets adapted to something else (i.e. the idea is stolen and reused). This is why so often I note that I offer up my ideas freely for others to use, develop, etc...
In a similar vein, I look at other people's works here ... and I'll take Gary Dallison as an example .... he, like me, floats a lot of ideas. Not all of them are good (again, much like me), but sometimes he hits upon something that I find I REALLY REALLY like. Sometimes he reads my ideas and he gives me a twist that I hadn't foreseen. I can say that for a lot of people here the fun of being here is to help them develop their own ideas further, because sometimes you NEED a sounding board to give your stuff a twist (I adore putting twists on AJA's NPC's, and Seethyr's works on Anchorome, Maztica, and Lopango I feel have all been made the better by our passing ideas). |
| Azar |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 21:49:09
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
sleyvas, you need to understand that sometimes creators simply make mistakes (i.e., they plain forget or reference the wrong material); other times, creators make changes based on their then-present milieu (or, in certain instances, corporate pressure). Not all discrepancies can be attributed to careful, artistic and objective thought isolated from prevailing sensibilities. Here is another shocker: creators sometimes lie when asked "Why?".
You can tucker yourself out arranging documents, photographs and strings on the corkboard if you wish, but, at the end of the day, there is always the possibility an official outcome you have elected to examine is the result of an unpalatable, unsatisfying or unremarkable origin.
Wow... you assume that I don't understand that. Sorry, the sound you just heard was me controlling my laughter. The FUN for some of us is in playing with such.
Then, by all means...continue with the tuckering; do not expect every result to be "canon". |
| Athreeren |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 21:46:54
To return to the topic, do priests of Ao get condemned as faithless? |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 20:44:01
Girdle of Masculinity/Femininity... |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 13:26:07
quote:
Originally posted by Gary Dallison
From such mistakes come the opportunity for more and sometimes better lore.
You would be surprised how much realmslore has been created because a previous designer made a mistake and the likes of Eric or George use that for inspiration to create something even more wonderful and nuanced.
Yes it is sometimes a headache, but in the end it is usually worth it.
And Gary and I don't always agree, but in this statement, we do. Everyone has their own tastes. Perhaps some of the fun of running a campaign in the realms is building on some of these ideas. You may in a later campaign throw away the idea entirely. For instance, one realms campaign I ran and my players loved. I had the players START during the preceding years leading into the bloodstone wars and up through the time of troubles. They were always on the outskirts of what Gareth and his company were doing, rarely interacting with them, but hearing news of them. Then the schtick I went with was that during the time of troubles, when all "gods" were kicked out of the heavens..... so were any demon/devil lords that could grant divine spells. So, yes, ORCUS was an avatar beneath Damara (he inhabited a duergar body), and my players ended up having to slay him in his mortal avatar form. My twist on this was that this was whenh Gareth and company were invading Orcus' realm in the outer planes, and they found his wand unattended. My players were even aided by drow worshipping Kiaransalee.
Now, would I do this again or consider this canon now? Nope, but it was fun for the time. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 13:17:28
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
sleyvas, you need to understand that sometimes creators simply make mistakes (i.e., they plain forget or reference the wrong material); other times, creators make changes based on their then-present milieu (or, in certain instances, corporate pressure). Not all discrepancies can be attributed to careful, artistic and objective thought isolated from prevailing sensibilities. Here is another shocker: creators sometimes lie when asked "Why?".
You can tucker yourself out arranging documents, photographs and strings on the corkboard if you wish, but, at the end of the day, there is always the possibility an official outcome you have elected to examine is the result of an unpalatable, unsatisfying or unremarkable origin.
Wow... you assume that I don't understand that. Sorry, the sound you just heard was me controlling my laughter. The FUN for some of us is in playing with such. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 11 Sep 2025 : 13:13:55
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'd go for option A, myself. All we know about male Rilaunyr is that he was a paladin with a warship. We don't have levels or stats or know which deity he worshipped.
I don't see it being unlikely that a child would follow in his footsteps, and she could have spent a considerable amount of time as an adventurer before succeeding her father.
And actually, though NPCs generally don't level up quickly, we all know that in-game, a PC can easily go from just starting off to 13th level in just a handful of years, if that long.
I think A is the simplest solution. Sure, you can go for a magical sex change or something, but I think that's a needless complication.
Exactly, everyone has their preferred method, and a key to this is to look at the region, fit it to that... and don't overuse that method.
For instance, some of the more outlandish methods for the above that I didn't mention
Willing body swap. Rilaunyr lay dying and someone who respected, loved, or simply NEEDED him to protect others willingly gave up their body for him.
Reincarnation into a new body.
Unwilling body swap. Rilaunyr was facing some evil foe. They had built an IMPENETRABLE defense against him.... until he pulled the body swap trick that put him behind the defenses.
I could probably come up with a half dozen more. Some people will prefer the simplest method. Some the more outlandish. But either way, if it gets overused, it becomes dull. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 20:15:51
From such mistakes come the opportunity for more and sometimes better lore.
You would be surprised how much realmslore has been created because a previous designer made a mistake and the likes of Eric or George use that for inspiration to create something even more wonderful and nuanced.
Yes it is sometimes a headache, but in the end it is usually worth it. |
| Azar |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 15:19:52
sleyvas, you need to understand that sometimes creators simply make mistakes (i.e., they plain forget or reference the wrong material); other times, creators make changes based on their then-present milieu (or, in certain instances, corporate pressure). Not all discrepancies can be attributed to careful, artistic and objective thought isolated from prevailing sensibilities. Here is another shocker: creators sometimes lie when asked "Why?".
You can tucker yourself out arranging documents, photographs and strings on the corkboard if you wish, but, at the end of the day, there is always the possibility an official outcome you have elected to examine is the result of an unpalatable, unsatisfying or unremarkable origin. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 15:16:27
Time travel and all that...
It is easier, for me, to just play with the originally printed material and then add what best "fits" for my game.
Hells, in my world, Faerun is attached to Greyhawk as well as several other campaign settings all on the same ball o' rock. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 15:08:50
The rule i learned from Eric and George is that nothing canon should ever be ignored. If it can be explained somehow, then it should be. Even seemingly conflicting statements can be explained with a bit (or sometimes a lot of imagination).
So if Impiltur is destroyed in 726 DR, but it still exists in 1358 DR, then an explanation is needed as to how this can occur.
There are very few instances that i have ever encountered that couldnt be explained somehow (and that includes the some of the seven sisters being involved in events that occurred before they were born.
So, when in doubt, do what Eric and George do, and make all the statements correct, if at all possible. And that is how you end up with 3 Impilturs, 5 Fallen Kingdoms, and 2 Anaurias |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 14:52:27
I'd go for option A, myself. All we know about male Rilaunyr is that he was a paladin with a warship. We don't have levels or stats or know which deity he worshipped.
I don't see it being unlikely that a child would follow in his footsteps, and she could have spent a considerable amount of time as an adventurer before succeeding her father.
And actually, though NPCs generally don't level up quickly, we all know that in-game, a PC can easily go from just starting off to 13th level in just a handful of years, if that long.
I think A is the simplest solution. Sure, you can go for a magical sex change or something, but I think that's a needless complication. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 13:21:04
quote:
Originally posted by Gary Dallison
Not that it is or ever has been slavishly set in stone. Anything can change in canon and has done repeatedly, but it's about the explanation as to why it was once A but is now B that is important, because without that explanation your canon becomes meaningless sludge as it is now tmwith WoTC canon.
This statement is by far the main thing I think people need to realize, and its been the most effective and time honored tradition of the best of the writers to try and "adjust" the lore to fit around prior things and/or conflate two things together in order to "spin" the outcome in a way that is different from what people would have previously thought. Its especially interesting when its done to fix a n accident in the lore.
For instance, at one point, I thought George had made a weird change, only to find out that it had been a prior author and he had simply copied from them in their Impiltur article. So, we discussed it and came up with one of several plausible directions for this.
From Bloodstone Lands
Now in dry dock at Sarshel, Rilaunyr's Warship was once known as the scourge of the Easting Reach. Swift and strong, it patrolled the length of the Reach and out into the Sea of Fallen Stars.
In the heyday of the Impilturian port city, the ship protected merchant vessels putting into or out of Sarshel. Then the shipments of bloodstone bars stopped flowing down from Damara, and Sarshel's importance waned. The Lord Rilaunyr could see how the winds were blowing, and brought his pride into dry-dock for refurbishing.
Rilaunyr longs to get back to sea. He hopes that the flow of bloodstone will soon resume, and restore his city to its former prominence.
then from Unapproachable East in 3e, they suddenly changed Rilaunyr into a female
Sarshel was one of the four city-states that united to form the nation of Impiltur beneath the banner of the great war-captain Imphras almost 300 years ago. The city serves as Impiltur’s gateway to the East and the North. It is governed by two of Impiltur’s Twelve Companions, Lords Rilaunyr (LG female human Pal13) and Silaunbrar (LG male half-elf Pal12).
So... do you just bitch and complain that people have it wrong, or do you say that one side is right moving forward, OR do you take the two sides and find an alternative that makes BOTH right.
So, in this instance, I see several options
A) the female is a kin of the prior Rilaunyr (probably a daughter) who has usurped the father's place (assuming he died). This is a possibility, but not one I favor, simply because of the already high levels that the daughter would have achieved in the exact same class. However, given we don't know his or her age, it could easily work and is simple and cuts to the point.
B) The Admiral of Sarshel's fleet is a transexual who had dressed as a man (or vice versa). This one some may like, but really isn't my cup of tea for Impiltur. I stress here FOR IMPILTUR. It could work someplace else... for instance, I could see this working for some nearby cities in the vast or Sembia or Westgate, etc....
C) Incorporate magic into it. This is what I think of as the best option, especially since the later lore also makes Rilaunyr a paladin of Sune. There could be a good story around this, but my personal take would be that Rilaunyr was previously a paladin of another deity. He then had some magical occurrence that changed him into a female, and for whatever reason, he couldn't get changed back. He had a crisis of faith as a follow up repercussion, and it was a follower of Sune that helped him, and he converted to the worship as a paladin of Sune. Now, what's the story here? Did Rilaunyr's wife get killed? Was his crisis of faith because his wife couldn't accept that she was now married to a woman? Was the follower of Sune that helped convert him male? Female? Did Rilaunyr fall in love with that follower of Sune? Was there some scandal in Sarshel's social ladder? Was the gender change that happened to Rilaunyr done willingly or against his will? Did it involve some sacrifice they had to do in order to stop something horrible? Were demons and/or devils involved (i.e. was there some pact he had to take to get them to change his gender so that he could do something that only a female could do)?
This third option is how I like to see my canon issues dealt with. It opens up story options, and let's face it, that's what we're all interested in to some degree... hearing stories. We still haven't answered all the story questions around this in the above, but rather left them quite open .... and thus DM's can have fun putting their own twist on things.
|
| Azar |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 11:33:59
Ayrik has a point. Ultimately, canon only absolutely matters in two instances: trivia and employment (even then, there is no guarantee an employer - especially one who acquires an IP from the owner - is going to respect the concept of "canon"). No secret police is going to bust down any doors to arrest folk for their tabletop gaming preferences.
Gary Dallison is also correct. Without consistency, there is no bedrock...no footing. The Forgotten Realms becomes a generic fantasy setting without character. What does it mean to be faithless in The Realms? How is an elf perceived by humanity? Can most pastoral folk safely walk miles from their ancestral home or is danger behind every tree? Is salt just as rare there as it is on Earth? Are most places "magic integrated" or is magic consolidated in the hands of few talented individuals? On and on the questions come. Not all decrees need be followed, but if something is pulled from source material, it should fit - eventually - into the world as it is depicted.
My philosophy (in case anyone cares) is to stick with a TSR edition campaign setting (first or second) and integrate further content as necessary; there is far too much supplementary material for any one Dungeon Master to take into account and not all of it is of high quality...or even merely "decent". To Wizards of the Coast, canon only factors into any internal discussion insofar as it impacts profit or perception (weep for Slut Street); I see no reason to bind myself to their corporate philosophy. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 10 Sep 2025 : 09:14:26
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
... snip ...
Well, as Gary said, "canon" provides a baseline for consistency so that everyone talking about it knows what they are talking about or at least can gather the information quickly. Sometimes people do adhere too much to it and that feels constricting but some form of "official ruling" is needed to make random people able to have a conversation starting from the same base.
And distinguishing between canon and you own home games is also important, because otherwise you would have people arguing they killed Elminster, are the new Mystra, married Drizzt, conquered Cormyr, etc...
Any of those things happen in your games? Sure, go ahead and have fun. But that's not the status quo of the Forgotten Realms (TM) and you will find a scarcity of people having the exact same events happening in their games.
Now, going back to the Wall, the question of canonicity is important bacause, pardon my exageration, there has been a trend of wailing against it as "canonical catholicism forced on the players" while we have extremely little canon on it to go by. We know it is there and its purpose, we know who put it there (but not when) and that's basically it.
So if in your games you want to ignore it or tear it down or do whatever, obviously you are very welcome to do it. If you want to orchestrate an epic adventure during which the players find out the entire pantheon are just evil sociopaths living to make people miserable, more power to you.
But that's not the canon of the Forgotten Realms. That's not the baseline truth shared by everyone stepping into the setting. That's why it is important to keep canon in mind, whether we like it or not. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 09 Sep 2025 : 17:25:16
Canon is about providing a consistent baseline of the setting so that we can all build from the same starting point.
What happens in your game is up to you, but if you said to randomers, you were running a game set in the dalelands in 1373 DR, with no changes, everyone would know what you are talking about and what to expect.
Unfortunately WoTC do not understand that consistency is important for a believable setting, and think they can do what they want and change their mind. All they have actually achieved is undermining the usefulness of their own products.
For designers canon has a much more important role, as it provides the very building blocks that you need to design anything new.
Not that it is or ever has been slavishly set in stone. Anything can change in canon and has done repeatedly, but it's about the explanation as to why it was once A but is now B that is important, because without that explanation your canon becomes meaningless sludge as it is now tmwith WoTC canon.
|
| Ayrik |
Posted - 09 Sep 2025 : 15:10:15
But why are people so slavishly adherent (and argumentive) about canon?
"Canon" is all about treating the thing as a property, about who legally owns the property, about what they decide to build on that property.
I personally view "canon" as something that Wizbro's lawyers should argue about, not as something their customers should think about.
For example, I happen to very much like Planescape: Torment - a CRPG which happened to create the narrative engine used in BG3 - and I consider it "canon" in terms of "it's real" and "it happened" in my Planescape game, regardless of its official "canon" status or what Wizbro or anyone else should happen to say about it. If those entities are not playing at the same table as me then their opinions on what happens at that gaming table aren't important.
And I happen to dislike the Wall very much - indeed, I happen to dislike almost all 4E lore, along with all subsequent lore which was tainted by it - so I wouldn't consider it relevant in my game, regardless what the official or popular "canon" positions might be.
If I don't like the "canon" then I don't buy the "canon", I don't read the book, I don't play the game, I don't really care about it at all. (And I don't feel qualified to say anything about it if I haven't bothered to try it, lol).
If I think something else should be "canon", or rather I think it belongs in my game, then I make it part of my game. Who cares what it is and where it came from. Isn't this the true Gygaxian spirit the "canon" tries to make us forget?
I personally don't think it's my place to tell other people what they should like and how they should play their games. If they happen to hate Planescape: Torment, love the Wall, and love 4E+ then good for them, I hope they have fun with their games even if I also happen to think they're mainstream chumps with noxious tastes. I have better things to do with my time than argue about a "canon" which doesn't even matter to me. I have, I admit, a rather low opinion of others who seem to stubbornly fixate on the entire matter of "canon" for no reason other than sheer obdurance and juvenile internet trolling - I won't waste more time with them and I recommend others do the same. Let's get back to talking about the Wall? |
| Zeromaru X |
Posted - 08 Sep 2025 : 19:16:18
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
it cannot be ignored either
Why not? Says who?
Well, you can ignore it if you want. But then you'll have an incomplete information to build your stuff, and the possibility that your stuff gets invalidated as soon as the writers decide to take into account that info what you were ignoring. That is an issue if you are here talking about official stuff instead of homebrewing.
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
The canonicity of BG1 and BG2 stands...
Ed Greenwood once said that all videogames are canonical in the sense that at least one of the many outcomes will always be canon for the published version of the Realms. In the case of BG1 and BG2, they already mentioned which version they consider canon, as you point out, but this happens with all games.
Which implies that stuff that doesn't have branching options and always happens regardless of player choices, is canon by default (like the information given in in-game books, or the fact that Dagult Neverember went broke after using all of his personal fortune to help rebuild Neverwinter, as revealed in the Neverwinter MMO).
|
| Athreeren |
Posted - 07 Sep 2025 : 22:18:01
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Canonicity of modern stuff like BG3 is uncertain as, if I remember correctly, the official stance has become "we decide what canon is and can change our decision if it suits us for the next product".
BG3 is already having some level of canonicity in that Karlach will be in Heroes of Faerûn, and Astarion is getting his own "book of". I expect the game to get canonised at the same level as the rest of the series: by acknowledging the ending where the fewest things happen as canon. No new gods, no mass death, no vampire ascendant. Maybe an alliance between some githyanki and githzerai, because after having reminded people that Vlaakith exists, WOTC could want to do something interesting with her. But most likely they won't. |
| Gary Dallison |
Posted - 07 Sep 2025 : 11:19:04
Haven't played the module much, but my understanding is it involves an artifact, so we are talking god tier magic pretty much.
Nothing is indestructible, and artifacts are usually the way to go if you want to destroy something said to be indestructible.
So while it is possible to destroy the wall of the faithless, it should be so difficult as to be almost impossible. Certainly it hasn't been destroyed because no sourcebook or novel (that I know of) has referenced its destruction).
So possible yes, almost impossible, also yes. |
| Azar |
Posted - 07 Sep 2025 : 10:52:40
Let us simplify matters: "It is canon if it is profitable." is the driving principle. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 07 Sep 2025 : 10:12:24
quote:
Originally posted by Azar
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
it cannot be ignored either
Why not? Says who?
I don't think this discussion gains anything with confrontational tones.
The canonicity of BG1 and BG2 stands only as long as the PC is assumed to be Abdel Adrian and follows the novels with Jaheira, Imoen, Khalid and the rest of the vanilla good party. A few events from the games are referenced in the official Grand History (Sarevok's plan and death, Irenicus' plots, Saradush's siege).
The only NwN games event referenced in other lore is the Wailing Plague, with no follow up on the game plot.
Given the wide ranging effects of the NwN games, the fact they are not referenced anywhere else leads me to believe they are not considered canon in the pre-Spellplague era. Canonicity of modern stuff like BG3 is uncertain as, if I remember correctly, the official stance has become "we decide what canon is and can change our decision if it suits us for the next product".
Even if the events of NwN: Mask of the Betrayer are considered canon, I would not call the PC of the game a mere "mortal" as by the end of the game they have extreme "plot-device" powers ranging from completely dominating dead souls (you can order One-of-Many to eat itself) to literally eating the souls of gods (in the evil ending you supposedly do that before being put down by the entire pantheon banding together). So I wouldn't use the actions of the PC of NwN: MotB as a reference for what mortals can do, as they come in very unique and plot-driven flavour. |
| Azar |
Posted - 07 Sep 2025 : 05:50:40
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
it cannot be ignored either
Why not? Says who? |
|
|
