| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Hymn |
Posted - 05 Jun 2004 : 21:30:44
During my endless toil over scrolls conserning the Imaskar Empire I have now came to another little problem.
This time conserning the Seven Imaskaricana:
I have found two sources describing these ancient creations but they differe quiet much from eachother.
The first is from Dragon # 281 (thnx Mumadar for providing the info) where in Robert Sullivan writes about the seven masks or "The Seven Imaskarcana.
The second source is from the Underdark accessory where in describe is Steven E Schend's Third Imaskaricana.
Now my question is, all respect to the writers, which one would superseed. I know it is the latest published but would this apply to all masks to one mask or is the tome just another, making them the eight Imaskarcana. Which then contradicts the two sinc they state that they are either masks or tomes.
I am confused. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 30 Sep 2018 : 17:48:56
Senior Scribe Hymn,
Did this thread move anywhere else and get expanded upon at all? I'd be very interested to see what happened as of this point.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Hymn
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Oh, and just to confuse you further, Steven Schend had this to say about the Seven Imaskarna back in 1999:
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Schend
Thanks for the posting, George; I vaguely recall writing that, but I'll be darned if I can remember where I published/posted/said that. Email or on the FR list at the time?
I found it lurking around on the Realms L archive. Think it was an original post there.
|
| Hymn |
Posted - 07 Jun 2004 : 00:42:27
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Oh, and just to confuse you further, Steven Schend had this to say about the Seven Imaskarna back in 1999:
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Schend
Thanks for the posting, George; I vaguely recall writing that, but I'll be darned if I can remember where I published/posted/said that. Email or on the FR list at the time?
I found it lurking around on the Realms L archive. Think it was an original post there. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 19:24:33
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Schend
Of course, leaving more doors open than closed was always the tantamount rule under which Ed and Jeff and Eric and I operated. 
Steven
Nah, really? I'd not noticed that!  |
| Steven Schend |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 18:56:37
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Oh, and just to confuse you further, Steven Schend had this to say about the Seven Imaskarna back in 1999:
Thanks for the posting, George; I vaguely recall writing that, but I'll be darned if I can remember where I published/posted/said that. Email or on the FR list at the time?
Of course, it also serves to open tons of options for GMs, but it leaves the door too wide open to declare anything canonical at the same time. Of course, leaving more doors open than closed was always the tantamount rule under which Ed and Jeff and Eric and I operated.
Steven |
| Hymn |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 13:46:16
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Not true anymore now that Deep Imaskari has reappeared
quote:
Originally posted by Sarta
Actually, before Underdark it was made clear in Unapproachable East that some of the Raumathari still remember the Imaskari language, or at least how to read and write it.
Sarta
And actually there are mentionings of a secret Imaskar empire in the Horde box set. Wouldn't be suprised if it can be found earlier as well. |
| Hymn |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 13:40:19
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Not to put a fine point on it, but unless something is actually published in a product with the WotC and FR logos on it, it can't really be considered as official or 'canon' - that is, in the sense that the version given is 'right' and unchangeable/set in stone. Hence all FR Dragon articles, no matter their author, source or FR-utility are ignorable and changeable until the information in them is published in an 'official' product. As such, the Seven Imaskarna masks article (whilst a good one) has now been superseded by the 3E take on the Seven Imaskarna.
That's not to say that the Dragon article has been totally invalidated and should be ignored as if it didn't exist - far from it! What you have to do now, is reconcile that article with the 3E take on the Seven Imaskarna. It might be as simple as saying that the masks in question were catalogued and detailed in the tome "Beneath the Amethyst Sands: A Treatise on the Wonders of Lost Imaskar" by the notorious sage and loremaster Ilmethaat of Semphar, a self-proclaimed 'expert' on Imaskar, but noted by other reputable sages to be shoddy in his research and scholarship and not above 'gilding the lily' when it comes to selling books. As such, his information is tenuously rooted in fact (and likely trading on the term "the Seven Imaskarna") to lend legitimacy to his contentions. But, any reasonable explanation will do.
Hmm, thnx for the pointers and clearing this up. I really like the masks article since it in fact details more then the tome published in
Underdark.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Oh, and just to confuse you further, Steven Schend had this to say about the Seven Imaskarna back in 1999:
"While their contents and forms are much disputed, the Seven Imaskarcana are
inarguably seven great stores of knowledge about magic, thus the name.
Some contend that the arcana collectively contain the knowledge of the
Imaskari/Raurinese sorcerer-kings (or whatever their title may be, for each
sage coins titles anew with each writing).
Many have theorized that the Seven Imaskarcana provide total understanding
and much lost lore on each school of magic save Necromancy. While this
supposes the existence of an eighth or further Imaskarcana, the few who
entered the Plains of Purple Dust to prove this theory have never returned
to add to the lore.
Many others have supposed that they each held the history of an age of
Raurin, and the end of the Seventh Imaskari Age led to its destruction and
the birth of the Old Empires.
Still others suppose that each of the Seven holds innumerable secrets of
magic, though they correspond to the humans, elves, dwarves, halflings,
gnomes, dragons, and a seemingly lost race of aquatic creatures.
All of these theories above suggest that the Imaskarcana were massive
great-tomes bound in slate covers lined with blue dragon's skin, though the
makeup of the pages was said to be vellum, the skin of humans or elves or
even tanar'ri, or even crystal that was given the flexibility of paper
without the weaknesses. Only a few sages think of these artifacts
otherwise, though there are an isolated few from Thay who so dare.
The strangest suggestion, made by one Thamaultadh of Tyraturos, implies
that the Seven Imaskarcana are not items or storehouses of lore so much as
they are great menhirs of stone embedded with great magics and now lost in
the Great Desert of Raurin. His theories, contained only in his notebooks
(now safely ensconsed in Candlekeep after 480 years), suggest that the
Imaskarcana projected a magical barrier around the Imaskari lands,
protecting it from invasion by magical forces. He further supposed this was
why the genies of Calim and Memnon settled Calimshan rather than the Inner
Sea. The Seven lay in the western sands of the desert and were all that
remained of a series of 28 menhirs that bordered the Imaskari's claimed
lands.
Thamaultadh's own apprentice and seventh son refuted his father's strange
theory with one equally bizarre: The Seven Imaskarcana are neither books
nor menhirs, though they could conceivably be both stores of knowledge and
magical defenses of the Imaskar lands. Synnaros of the Twelve Tomes
proposed that the Seven Imaskarcana were, in fact, seven massive but
identical statues placed in various places now buried within the borders of
the Raurin Desert. These golem-like statues appeared as sages sitting with
an open tome upon their laps. Should folk uncover or find one of the
Imaskarcana, they could ask questions of it, and it would provide any
knowledge that it held.
Elminster's surprisingly close-mouthed about the truth of the matter, so he
either doesn't know the answer or simply enjoys dribbling enough lore to
whet the appetite without fully sating it. He did smirk about Synnaros'
theory, and said
"I have seen one of these giant stone sages of Imaskar, aye. Whether it be
one of Seven or an Imaskarcana at all is for someone of more rarified
interest than mine own. Of course, ye can only get answers out of it if ye
know the tongue of the Imaskari, for it only recognizes that tongue. There
be only one Faerunian living or dead who might teach it to ye, and he's
hardly one to welcome ye for a lesson while he wanders about the
Underhalls......"
-- George Krashos
O yeah I have read this before, was about the first tibits I found on the Imaskarcana. Made me go nuts |
| Sarta |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 10:41:36
quote:
Originally posted by Dargoth
Not true anymore now that Deep Imaskari has reappeared
Actually, before Underdark it was made clear in Unapproachable East that some of the Raumathari still remember the Imaskari language, or at least how to read and write it.
Sarta |
| Dargoth |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 08:42:06
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
"I have seen one of these giant stone sages of Imaskar, aye. Whether it be one of Seven or an Imaskarcana at all is for someone of more rarified interest than mine own. Of course, ye can only get answers out of it if ye know the tongue of the Imaskari, for it only recognizes that tongue. There be only one Faerunian living or dead who might teach it to ye, and he's hardly one to welcome ye for a lesson while he wanders about the Underhalls......"
-- George Krashos
Not true anymore now that Deep Imaskari has reappeared |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 06 Jun 2004 : 07:42:30
Not to put a fine point on it, but unless something is actually published in a product with the WotC and FR logos on it, it can't really be considered as official or 'canon' - that is, in the sense that the version given is 'right' and unchangeable/set in stone. Hence all FR Dragon articles, no matter their author, source or FR-utility are ignorable and changeable until the information in them is published in an 'official' product. As such, the Seven Imaskarna masks article (whilst a good one) has now been superseded by the 3E take on the Seven Imaskarna.
That's not to say that the Dragon article has been totally invalidated and should be ignored as if it didn't exist - far from it! What you have to do now, is reconcile that article with the 3E take on the Seven Imaskarna. It might be as simple as saying that the masks in question were catalogued and detailed in the tome "Beneath the Amethyst Sands: A Treatise on the Wonders of Lost Imaskar" by the notorious sage and loremaster Ilmethaat of Semphar, a self-proclaimed 'expert' on Imaskar, but noted by other reputable sages to be shoddy in his research and scholarship and not above 'gilding the lily' when it comes to selling books. As such, his information is tenuously rooted in fact (and likely trading on the term "the Seven Imaskarna") to lend legitimacy to his contentions. But, any reasonable explanation will do.
Oh, and just to confuse you further, Steven Schend had this to say about the Seven Imaskarna back in 1999:
"While their contents and forms are much disputed, the Seven Imaskarcana are
inarguably seven great stores of knowledge about magic, thus the name.
Some contend that the arcana collectively contain the knowledge of the
Imaskari/Raurinese sorcerer-kings (or whatever their title may be, for each
sage coins titles anew with each writing).
Many have theorized that the Seven Imaskarcana provide total understanding
and much lost lore on each school of magic save Necromancy. While this
supposes the existence of an eighth or further Imaskarcana, the few who
entered the Plains of Purple Dust to prove this theory have never returned
to add to the lore.
Many others have supposed that they each held the history of an age of
Raurin, and the end of the Seventh Imaskari Age led to its destruction and
the birth of the Old Empires.
Still others suppose that each of the Seven holds innumerable secrets of
magic, though they correspond to the humans, elves, dwarves, halflings,
gnomes, dragons, and a seemingly lost race of aquatic creatures.
All of these theories above suggest that the Imaskarcana were massive
great-tomes bound in slate covers lined with blue dragon's skin, though the
makeup of the pages was said to be vellum, the skin of humans or elves or
even tanar'ri, or even crystal that was given the flexibility of paper
without the weaknesses. Only a few sages think of these artifacts
otherwise, though there are an isolated few from Thay who so dare.
The strangest suggestion, made by one Thamaultadh of Tyraturos, implies
that the Seven Imaskarcana are not items or storehouses of lore so much as
they are great menhirs of stone embedded with great magics and now lost in
the Great Desert of Raurin. His theories, contained only in his notebooks
(now safely ensconsed in Candlekeep after 480 years), suggest that the
Imaskarcana projected a magical barrier around the Imaskari lands,
protecting it from invasion by magical forces. He further supposed this was
why the genies of Calim and Memnon settled Calimshan rather than the Inner
Sea. The Seven lay in the western sands of the desert and were all that
remained of a series of 28 menhirs that bordered the Imaskari's claimed
lands.
Thamaultadh's own apprentice and seventh son refuted his father's strange
theory with one equally bizarre: The Seven Imaskarcana are neither books
nor menhirs, though they could conceivably be both stores of knowledge and
magical defenses of the Imaskar lands. Synnaros of the Twelve Tomes
proposed that the Seven Imaskarcana were, in fact, seven massive but
identical statues placed in various places now buried within the borders of
the Raurin Desert. These golem-like statues appeared as sages sitting with
an open tome upon their laps. Should folk uncover or find one of the
Imaskarcana, they could ask questions of it, and it would provide any
knowledge that it held.
Elminster's surprisingly close-mouthed about the truth of the matter, so he
either doesn't know the answer or simply enjoys dribbling enough lore to
whet the appetite without fully sating it. He did smirk about Synnaros'
theory, and said
"I have seen one of these giant stone sages of Imaskar, aye. Whether it be
one of Seven or an Imaskarcana at all is for someone of more rarified
interest than mine own. Of course, ye can only get answers out of it if ye
know the tongue of the Imaskari, for it only recognizes that tongue. There
be only one Faerunian living or dead who might teach it to ye, and he's
hardly one to welcome ye for a lesson while he wanders about the
Underhalls......"
-- George Krashos
|
|
|
