| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| creyzi4zb12 |
Posted - 21 Jan 2013 : 01:14:28
Didn't he get killed by Vangerdahast in the Return of the Archiwards?
Why is he back in the fight agains Erevis Cale? |
| 26 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Dennis |
Posted - 31 Jan 2013 : 13:44:23
Heh. It's a shared-setting, so different authors get to "share" a character or two.
As for Telamont's revenge, it's on the works now. We'll have to read The Godborn for the details. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 29 Jan 2013 : 08:19:12
I like Mark's comment about not using others villains. This is the one thing that has driven me most crazy about Realms novels. One person creates a nice, rich character then another author come in and changes him/her or simple uses the rich character as a thing to kill "Kill It!" How about instead of killing off every NPC we learn about, we write a new one to kill? In this way you do not put your work in conflict with peoples ongoing campaigns.
Now, as for Rivalen - I say one of you good writers should make a scene where we get to watch Telemont kill his son, personal vengeance against Rivalen and Shar for killing his wife! The idea that Shar would turn her back on Shade for this treachery does not hold water with me, and I think Telemont wants to very badly and am just waiting for a good story teller to do that plot line justice :D |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 Jan 2013 : 14:18:42
Huh? 
I dislike aspects of certain things. If I wanted to I could tear the Forgotten Realms a new Stlarnhole there is so much I dislike. The same could go for just about everything I've ever read (or seen).
Heres the thing - if I have a big list of stuff I dislike... and I still enjoy the hell out of it... then its worth talking about. It all boils down to the writing, I guess. If you write something that gets 'critical acclaim', but doesn't sell well, then the writing wasn't so great. If you have something where there are some major logic flaws and a wishy-washy plot but it sells well, well that starts to fall into the 'pulp' category. The writing was good-enough to overcome its shortcomings. Those are the books I remember and discuss.
Now if you can achieve both - have a phenomenal plot with almost no logical flaws - then you've reached the 'literature' category. I've rarely read anything that I both enjoyed AND couldn't poke holes in. 'Pulpy' writers can achieve this once in awhile when they really put their heart into it (because the talent is already there). It also becomes very hard to achieve that in a shared-world because the chance of creating continuity gaffs is increased exponentially, and you also have a preset structure you have to shoe-horn you story into (in other words, you have little to no 'elbow room').
This is all IMHO, of course. So I can dislike aspects of a story, and even the over-all point of the story itself (for instance, the very concept of the Shade enclave annoys me), but still enjoy the story for what it is - a good yarn well written.
And BTW, we tend to be FAR more critical when it comes to things we care about - thats just human nature. I have no problem watching SW and enjoying it because all the problems don't matter to me - its just eye-candy. Now, sit down with me during a ST film (or episode) and I will sit there tearing it apart... I may even start frothing at the mouth if its an odd-numbered movie.
And yet... I still watch them, over and over again. |
| creyzi4zb12 |
Posted - 28 Jan 2013 : 13:34:15
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You know what, sometimes you are pleasantly surprised. I avoided RotAW for a decade, and when I finally read it I enjoyed it (despite the subject matter).
So there you go.
And I don't bother talking about books and/or setting I dislike - I find that pointless. I discuss settings and books I do enjoy. So if I critique the hell out of something, its because I am a fan (and spending money on it). I don't waste my breath discussing trash.
Case in point: I pick on RAS more then anyone else, and he is still the ONLY FR author who I have read all of his books. Make of that what you will.
But how can you dislike it if you don't like it? |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 27 Jan 2013 : 18:39:12
quote:
Markustay
You know what, sometimes you are pleasantly surprised. I avoided RotAW for a decade, and when I finally read it I enjoyed it (despite the subject matter).
It's quite possible that you wouldn't have liked this book ten years ago, after all you remember the effort of avoiding it. The book hasn't changed, perhaps your viewpoint has.
The extension of this, of course, is to consider which books you avoid now which may pleasantly surprise you in the future. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 27 Jan 2013 : 18:11:57
You know what, sometimes you are pleasantly surprised. I avoided RotAW for a decade, and when I finally read it I enjoyed it (despite the subject matter).
So there you go.
And I don't bother talking about books and/or setting I dislike - I find that pointless. I discuss settings and books I do enjoy. So if I critique the hell out of something, its because I am a fan (and spending money on it). I don't waste my breath discussing trash.
Case in point: I pick on RAS more then anyone else, and he is still the ONLY FR author who I have read all of his books. Make of that what you will. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 27 Jan 2013 : 12:09:26
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I just have to get past my aversion to anything with 'shadow' in the title.
Ooo. That wouldn't be easy. That's like me trying to get past my aversion to everything with 'elf' in the title. Which, in this case, probably means never. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 26 Jan 2013 : 21:09:44
I did read Return of the Archwizards, and the only things I can really recall were all about Melegaunt. That was precisely what my comment was aimed at - I HAD read the series, and still can't picture who we are talking about... the Princes made no impression on me beyond being 'bad guys'.
That series of novels was mentioned by the OP - I am sorry; from now on I will ask YOU what is relevant and what is not (and everyone else here should to). 
BTW - I don't like or use Manshoon either - I have my own set of villains. I don't need to rely on authors to do my thinking for me (because using novel plots and characters leads to a lot of the kinds of problems non-fans often complain about). My favorite part of the Realms is The Realms - if you are trying to bait me, you'll have to trash the entire setting, not just a single facet of it.
I do plan to read the rest of Paul Kemp's books because I think he is a fantastic author, and has far more potential then many folk realize. I just have to get past my aversion to anything with 'shadow' in the title. |
| The Hidden Lord |
Posted - 26 Jan 2013 : 19:44:28
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The other princes I can't even tell apart - they are just your stereotypical hand-rubbing, moustache-twirling 'baddies' with no depth what-so-ever. (IMO)
As for the subject matter of this thread... I just realized I don't even know who Rivalen is (which shows just how little any of them stood apart).
Rivalen (and the Shade at large) is one of the most fascinating characters in the entire Forgotten Realms canon; he is far more interesting than 'the cockroach' Manshoon, and the organization he heads.
(It helps if you actually read those novels/sourcebooks/etc. dedicated to a particular facet of the Realms before you form an opinion on them.) |
| Dennis |
Posted - 26 Jan 2013 : 11:05:06
Heh, if you want more depth of the Shadovar princes, read PSK's Twilight War Trilogy.
I also hated to see Melegaunt go. Even though he's the weakest among the princes, his charm, cleverness, and subtle manipulative attitude made him stand out... |
| Markustay |
Posted - 24 Jan 2013 : 13:37:48
Not a big fan of the Shades, but I did like Melegaunt. If they are going to be doing lotsa 'rezzing' for 5e, he should be near the top of that list.
Melegaunt was what I would term 'realistic evil' - he had his own agenda, and would stop at nothing to accomplish it, but he tried to do so in the least most damaging way to those around him (and even tried to help others, when it didn't interfere with his plans). He was certainly an opportunist, and a bit of a 'showman', but he didn't go out of his way to hurt others.
The other princes I can't even tell apart - they are just your stereotypical hand-rubbing, moustache-twirling 'baddies' with no depth what-so-ever. (IMO)
Telemont I am on the fence about - he had depth, but lost it somewhere along the way. As soon as 'spite' rears its head in a character, then I think that detracts from their intelligence. I am not saying it shouldn't be there at all, I am just saying it shouldn't interfere with well-laid plans (in other words, the other princes I felt acted 'petty', and Telemont did not at first, but then slowly went that route).
As for the subject matter of this thread... I just realized I don't even know who Rivalen is (which shows just how little any of them stood apart). |
| Dennis |
Posted - 24 Jan 2013 : 08:10:52
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
Hadhrune is still alive in Twilight War Trilogy, as for Melegaunt and Escanor if anyone has read the 4e Forgotten Realms Campaign guide, they detail about the 12 princes of Shade who are all alive and well apparently...
I'm well aware of that. But shortly after the events in Shadowrealm, he's dead. As to why they haven't resurrected him, perhaps Thauranil is right... |
| Thauranil |
Posted - 24 Jan 2013 : 07:21:26
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Good point. But it begs the question: Why haven't they resurrected Escanor, Melegaunt, and Hadhrune as well?
Possibly because they are less than devout Shar might have refused to resurrect them. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 24 Jan 2013 : 04:57:43
Hadhrune is still alive in Twilight War Trilogy, as for Melegaunt and Escanor if anyone has read the 4e Forgotten Realms Campaign guide, they detail about the 12 princes of Shade who are all alive and well apparently... |
| _Jarlaxle_ |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 14:29:56
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Good point. But it begs the question: Why haven't they resurrected Escanor, Melegaunt, and Hadhrune as well?
Well your guess is as good as mine. Thats the problem imho when such options are available and no excuse why they haven't been used is provied by canon material. You have to come up with your own satisfactory explanation even if we all know why out of the lore it wasn't used (it destroys the story). |
| Dennis |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 13:33:01
A rather pessimistic way of looking at things. Just look at the bright side: At least Paul is using Rivalen to his full potential. Unlike poor Pharaun. Killed and resurrected, only to be killed again in the most horrible of ways. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 13:13:34
Once again, this helps support my argument that canon is jut a very ephemeral concept. There really is no such thing - it can be changed with one sweep of a pen.
Without any sort of 'continuity cop' there is no continuity - each writer writes in their own little mirror-universe. Hell, if they can shoe-horn in an entire planet no one ever knew about, then where, precisely, is 'the line'?
Micro-rant over.  |
| Dennis |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 13:10:32
Good point. But it begs the question: Why haven't they resurrected Escanor, Melegaunt, and Hadhrune as well? |
| Thauranil |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 12:53:50
He certainly has enough allies amongst the clergy of Shar to make that a feasible explanation. |
| _Jarlaxle_ |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 12:34:39
Even if it wasn't Shar directly we should not forget that though resurrecting someone is rarley used in novels it is a normal spell in D&D which higher level cerlics have access too.
So it shouldn't be very difficult to find someone in shade enclave to cast it on Rivalen. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 23 Jan 2013 : 10:28:00
True, he wasn't around in The Sorcerer. Recuperating, likely. Or heck, for all we know, Shar "resurrected" him. He's her Nightseer, in the first place---a recipient of many boons. |
| creyzi4zb12 |
Posted - 22 Jan 2013 : 09:55:48
Hmm..It could also be indicated that he did survive Vangy's attacks, and was there during the battle between the seven sisters and the 10 princes at Shade.
It was also stated in book 3 of RotA that there were 10 princes remaining...which could imply that 3 of the princes were already dead. And Rivalen was not one of them.
- The square chinned one
- Escanor
- Melegaunt.= |
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Jan 2013 : 13:35:49
Oh, typing in haste could do that. Sorry. You're right, it's Escanor whose heart was hit by false-silverfire. But the point remains: if Telamont could effortlessly remove the phaerimm's false but still potent silverfire, then restoring Rivalen from Vangy's attacks would be way easier in comparison. |
| creyzi4zb12 |
Posted - 21 Jan 2013 : 12:36:46
I thought that was Escanor? |
| Dennis |
Posted - 21 Jan 2013 : 07:04:16
It's been discussed in the not so distant past. Likely his contingencies involved teleporting back to Shade the moment he realized Vangy was gaining the upper hand, and left in the battle scene his shadow-self or simulcrum, which Vangy destroyed. Or The Most High "repaired"/healed him. He once removed the silvefire-replica of the phaerimm out from Rivalen's heart; healing him from Vangy's destructive spells would be way easier. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 21 Jan 2013 : 05:11:33
Personally i dont know how he came back, though i "heard" some scribes "say" that he was resurrected by the Most High. Either that or he had contingencies to return back to Shade or that was a simulacrum or some other magic that allowed himself to be there. |
