| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Jacinth Greyfox |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 18:24:54
Reading the article about Planar Dragons in the current issue of Dragon Magazine. (issue321). Concordant Dragons are described as "the draconic branch of the Rilmani. They work closely with the auromachs to prevent any one ethos ....acheiving dominance in the universe".
Who (or what) are the rilmani and the auromach, what Wizards publication do they appear in. I would be gratefully if someone could point me in the right direction.
Thanks.
(P.S. i appreciate this isnt strictly Realms Lore however i have notice a fair bit of conversation about the Planes on these boards so i hope this query is okay!).
|
| 28 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 19 Feb 2020 : 04:58:06
Master Rupert,
I can certainly appreciate that perspective.
quote:
One is that even in the real world, ethics are subjective.
I'm really interested in your view on this. Are you implying that ethics are subjective such that they can never be applied to situations in an objective manner?
quote:
The second issue is that anyone who does not live in our world does not have our background.
I completely agree with this. It is inherently a bias that we have in analyzing a culture/society/civilization by our own standards, because that is they are all we know. Though, trying to understand their choices, their anguish in situations, their delight in others, means to try and interpolate our ethics/morals into the situation if for no other reason than to try and juxtapose mine against theirs. Trying to make sense of another persons perspective is to necessarily understand others, in this case, my own. I use that as a rubric to try and make sense of that other perspective. If we don't apply standards, principles, or try to bring objectivity to what I agree would otherwise be a subjective field, then we end up in the same place running in circles not understanding why we, or other people, do things.
quote:
It's easy to sit back and say "oh, this action can never be forgiven; there is no way to reconcile it with modern ethics"
I will agree for some it is easy. I make no such proclamation. Ethics, epistemology, and logic especially are all very difficult, at least for me. If you find it easy, then my hats off to you, Master Rupert. I mean that: it's a heck of a difficult discipline to gain a good hold on.
quote:
but when every single factor that influenced that action is very, very different from anything in the modern world, it means that we're looking at it from a very different perspective.
I am curious about this, and with your declaration I feel you can help shed some great light on this particular discussion.
What are the single factors that you identified, such that you realize that they are each "very, very different from anything in the modern world..."?
I agree with you that we are looking at it from a very different perspective, and in fact, that is the very exciting thing about it. We get to truly look at a fictitious world where a completely different (if I understand you correctly) set of ethics exists. Being able to experience that is fantastic!
I look forward to your response!
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
There are two issue with trying to judge any fictitious entity by our own ethical perspective.
One is that even in the real world, ethics are subjective. Even best friends or families can have disagreements over whether or not a particular action is ethical. Sure, there will be agreement over a large number of things, but on other things, there's going to be just as much disagreement, sometimes revolving around just a single factor.
The second issue is that anyone who does not live in our world does not have our background. They have different religious, cultural, and historical influences in play, and particularly in fantasy settings, those religious influences can be much greater than in the real world. Sometimes even the laws of physics are different, which can also influence how people interact with their world.
It's easy to sit back and say "oh, this action can never be forgiven; there is no way to reconcile it with modern ethics" -- but when every single factor that influenced that action is very, very different from anything in the modern world, it means that we're looking at it from a very different perspective.
The trick is to consider actions in a fictitious world from the perspective of that world. To borrow a famous line, don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Feb 2020 : 04:13:37
There are two issue with trying to judge any fictitious entity by our own ethical perspective.
One is that even in the real world, ethics are subjective. Even best friends or families can have disagreements over whether or not a particular action is ethical. Sure, there will be agreement over a large number of things, but on other things, there's going to be just as much disagreement, sometimes revolving around just a single factor.
The second issue is that anyone who does not live in our world does not have our background. They have different religious, cultural, and historical influences in play, and particularly in fantasy settings, those religious influences can be much greater than in the real world. Sometimes even the laws of physics are different, which can also influence how people interact with their world.
It's easy to sit back and say "oh, this action can never be forgiven; there is no way to reconcile it with modern ethics" -- but when every single factor that influenced that action is very, very different from anything in the modern world, it means that we're looking at it from a very different perspective.
The trick is to consider actions in a fictitious world from the perspective of that world. To borrow a famous line, don't judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree. |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 19 Feb 2020 : 00:20:07
Master Rupert,
I can certainly appreciate your perspective. Though, when I read your statement ending in , "an opinion on something as subjective as ethics", that appears to be designed with the intention of shoehorning (whether intentional or not) the discussion on ethical analysis into an arena where dismissiveness implicitly discounts the inherent value of an ethical argument or evaluation. You certainly did not dismiss my points out of hand, to be clear, but implicitly, it appears that that is a shadow of the point you made. Though, I admit I could have read that point you made in an entirely incorrect way, and if so, extend my apologies for the interpretive follow-up.
I really do feel that ethics is one of most important subjects for humanity to include in our day to day lives. It is the very means by which we can ascertain the differences between why people make the decisions they do, act on them, and produce consequences upon ourselves and others. Surely, there is not a one size fits all ethic for everyone (I am not implying you are saying that, rather, asking in general)? If a one size fits all ethic doesn't work for everyone, then the explicit outcome is that there are differences in how people go about their day, ethically. If that is the case, then it stands to reason there must be explanatory reason for those differences, and ways in which we can make sense of them, or describe them. Once you can describe something and differentiate it from something, you can the make judgments about their suitability. That's the point that people get a little frustrated about the field of ethics, when logically analyzed. It presupposes the likely possibility that they will be judged, and in a manner that is critically analytical, making it quite difficult indeed to continue, logically, arguing for that position.
Now, don't get me wrong, my day job is powerfully predicated on mathematical analysis and so I am steeped in the rigors of quantification practically every day, so I get the value here. I am in no way advocating for opinion giving without facts. In fact, as it pertains to the field of ethics, and philosophy in general, the tool that brings us the necessary analytical cogency to the subjective nature of these high-minded argument is logic. It just so happens I find the utility of such tools, i.e. disjuctive syllogisms, categorical analysis, incorporation of ANOVA with categorical analysis, to bring validity to not only deductive arguments, but premises and general statements people make the one means by which we can take subjectivity to objectivity. Statements can in fact be evaluated, in a non-subjective manner, using mathematics....specifically, Boolean algebra.
We've even had some great discussions recently where I provided arguments including established philosophical theories by philosophers such as Socrates, Plato, Kant, Benthem, and Mill. They've had their ideas academically, and socially evaluated with the rigors of academia that one would hope them to be exposed. I don't argue my own points as if they are founded upon some vast landscape of my own personal intellect: my hubris does not reach quite so high. Rather, I argue with those might people that have come before me, for I find their wisdom to have stood the test of time.
So, to ensure I understand you correctly, Master Rupert, what is your view on ethics being used to evaluate the actions taken by a person, character, group, organization, nation-state, etc.? That way I can discuss your point without assumptions being made.
As always, I greatly appreciate your insights!
Best regards as always,
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Maybe it's just me, but I have an issue with statements that all published lore is wrong because of an opinion -- especially an opinion on something as subjective as ethics.
I have issue with opinions being stated as fact, as it is, but when the opinion is based on an individual's ethics, that becomes more problematic.
When every single bit of published lore says X, that's what I'm going with.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Feb 2020 : 22:36:05
Maybe it's just me, but I have an issue with statements that all published lore is wrong because of an opinion -- especially an opinion on something as subjective as ethics.
I have issue with opinions being stated as fact, as it is, but when the opinion is based on an individual's ethics, that becomes more problematic.
When every single bit of published lore says X, that's what I'm going with. |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 18 Feb 2020 : 21:26:38
Senior Scribe Sarelle,
I was reading through this scroll when I noticed the inclusion and question regarding Silvanus, and neutrality.
That god is far and away not close to neutrality: Emerald Enclave. Here is what I provide to demonstrate.....deontologically, that Silvanus absolutely supports murderous terrorism. He is, depending on how you argue the ethics, i.e. deontology, telelogy, or others, an evil god.
- 717/Year of the Druid's Wrath --Turmish is routed by the druids of the Emerald Enclave. The druids establish themselves in Ilighon, the Chondalwood, and the Winterwood.(GHotR)
- While the church has been accused of horrific actions (such as the cleansing of a startup community in Chondalwood in 1362, which was actually performed by the Emerald Enclave), they are guilty of some horrific actions of their own.(The Vilhon Reach, p.17)
- 1366/The Year of the Staff --A Red Wizard in Turmish dies when his residence is repeatedly struck by lightning bolts during a freak summer storm. The druids of the Emerald Enclave are suspected in the attack.(GHotR)
It is always quite "entertaining" to see how certain gods and their followers are described (oh, they are just fine!), when they are a bunch of terroristic murderers going against a plethora of people that one would think they ally with in light of their stated ethics.
However, when you look some of the gods of nature, Eldath for example.... *cough* they seem to really support the Emerald Enclave, which is weird, because they are terrorists. They are terrorists in how I define their ethics I should be clear. Of course, the Emerald Enclave is going to select an ethic that makes them look the best, haha.
Best regards,
quote:
Originally posted by Sarelle
You'd think so, wouldn't you? The PGtF says: House of Knowledge.
This brings up one of the biggest 3.x FR conundrums, which I hadn't thought to share before:
1. The following deities are listed as having the 'Balance' domain (meaning they campaign for neutrality specifically) - Grumbar, Oghma, Ubtao, Waukeen. Okay - Oghma I get, but Waukeen? And where the hell is Silvanus, Mr. Big Neutrality?
2. Okay. So apparantly Waukeen is big on the neutrality stance. Never heard of that before, but if its a 3.x change, I'm game. I hereby dub her Miss Big Neutrality. Wait - she lives on the extra Good, mildly good AND chaotic-aligned, Brightwater? Scrap that one.
3. Oghma, Mr. Big Neutrality No. 2, resides in the House of Knowledge - which is apparantly a celestial plane, and mildly good-aligned.
4. Rilmani reside in the House of Knowledge. Despite being neutrality personified, they are on a good-aligned celestial plane.
5. The House of nature is a neutral plane. Good. But Lathander, Mr. Big Good, lives there. As do the dually nature/GOOD personifying guardinals. Sort of the things you might expect on the celestial tree (look - nature, tree!). Except for Silvanus lives there. (See below)
6. Except Silvanus is Mr. Big Neutrality.
My head aches. It just goes round and round. And is VERY messed up. Plus I'm a big fan of rilmani (being in my first ever 3.x-bought book the Fiend Folio). And of Silvanus... Okay I'll stop now.
EDIT: In addition, how many times did I use the words 'big', 'good' and 'neutral'?
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 May 2005 : 02:55:14
The 'loths themselves became the means for the revenge of Shar. That puts them in a very powerful position, especially within the planar heirarchy of the Realms.
Should Shar ever achieve final victory though... I wonder whether the "considerations" she has made with the baernaloth will continue to be adhered to...
|
| Gray Richardson |
Posted - 17 May 2005 : 02:42:14
My take on the yugoloths is that they were the brokers that hooked Shar up with her fiendish mercenaries to begin with.
Consider Shar. She was so happy in the first days of creation. There was a perfect balance between light and dark. She exulted in creation with her sister Selune. They made Chauntea and the celestial bodies and filled them with life and they were a happy family.
Then Chauntea conspired with Selune to create the Sun. A sun to banish darkness. It would destroy their perfect balance, and diminish or even destroy Shar. She must have felt so betrayed.
Alone in her anguish, as she sulked in her Shadow realm, her portfolios of loss and hatred began to emerge and fester.
And then one night (for it was always night back then) a roving Baernaloth or Ultraloth (perhaps Kexxon himself)--attracted from across deepest Shadow by the wafting scent of her pain--came knocking at her tower door with a solution for all her woes.
Revenge. Premptive strike. Punishment. WAR he counseled her. And the spark of joy again filled her eyes.
In exchange for certain "considerations" the yugoloth escorted Shar across deep Shadow to another cosmology, guiding her to certain fiendish planes and made her introduction to the most powerful of archdevils, ancient nighthags and demon princes.
Contracts were made, legions of mercenaries were hired. The price she paid was the pledge of territory, a beachhead for the fiends from which to invade this pristine, untainted crystal sphere. And souls. A new source of souls to serve as grist for the ever-churning mill of the Blood War.
Gargauth perhaps was sent by the Baatezu to oversee their Faerunian operation. Many of the Demon Princes sent fiendish avatars of themselves to oversee their own legions.
And in Shar's curious absence, Chauntea and Selune reveled in the prospect of nourishing warmth and new life they would make as they drew their plans to make a sun.
And in the midst of their joyful contemplation, the endless peace was shattered as Shar began her invasion at the head of her armies bearing war, disease, strife, destruction and death in her wake.
Of course there were no names for these concepts back then.
But Oghma was soon to name them.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 17 May 2005 : 01:58:31
I like your theory Gray.
It caps a few important holes in the planar history of the Realms. I especially like the tie-in for the fiendish and celestial armies of Shar and Selune.
I see the yugoloths though, rather than being just the common mercenary soldier for Shar, as more the type to act as a foil for the Rilmani that were to come. Direct challengers to the Balance... Manipulation versus Balance.
|
| Gray Richardson |
Posted - 17 May 2005 : 01:30:07
Rilmani do exist in the Realms. Players Guide to Faerun says they live in the House of Knowledge.
Yes the plane is mildly good aligned and therefor not neutral. So what are the Rilmani doing there you might ask?
My theory is that Oghma brought them with him from the Outlands when he interloped into the FR cosmology. Or perhaps went back and got them shortly after.
Why did he need Rilmani? Well he may have just brought them over as servitors. He had probably picked up quite a retinue of Rilmani over on the Outlands and when he moved to the Great Tree he probably packed up his peeps and brought them over with him.
But I think they might have been brought over for a greater purpose.
Originally there were no angels or demons or devils or yugoloths or archons or eladrins in the cosmology if the Faerunian creation myth is to be believed.
There was just Shar and Selune originally who were very happy in the early days of creation when they created Chauntea and filled the celestial bodies with life.
Then war broke out over whether to create the sun to warm Chauntea. My theory is that Shar imported all the fiendish races as mercenaries to fight in the War of Light and Darkness. And Selune likewise brought in the Archons and Eladrin to fight on her side and the Guardinals to protect Chauntea and the life that Shar was trying to extinguish.
Most likely all these races interloped over (or were invited in) from the neighboring Great Wheel cosmology, which Shar had discovered early on, as her realm is in the Shadow plane and Shadow is connected to Greyhawk's Great wheel.
Now the Myth of Oghma is that he interlopes into the cosmolgy early on from the Great Wheel. Not sure if it is before, during or after the War of Light and Darkness. My guess is that when Shar first started attacking with all her fiendish armies that Selune travelled or sent envoys out beyond the edges of the cosmolgy to seek some aid. I figure she discovered Oghma and sought his knowledge and he agreed to counsel her and hooked her up with her celestial armies imported from the Wheel to combat Shar's fiendish mercenaries.
So suddenly Realmspace is filled with warring Gods and Outsiders. And in desperation Selune tears the essence of magic from her body and hurls it at Shar forming Mystryl. And afterwards, Mystryl soon forges a truce between her warring parents at Cynosure.
Anyway, the Myth of Oghma is that he came into the cosmology and granted names to all these concepts and deities that were newborn in the wake of the War. He may have even been present at the signing of the pact at Cynosure which ended the war. I like to think he was the scribe that recorded the precedings and the treaty.
My guess then is that Oghma brought in the Rilmani to assist specifically with the treaty and as enforcers of the balance. Or if not enforcers then as administrators, facilitators and adjudicators of points and conflicts that arose in the wake of the uneasy truce following the war.
The Rilmani have taken up their place in their sponsor Oghma's House of Knowledge ever since and their function within the Realms cosmology may be still to oversee and administer the details of that ancient truce and maintain the balance between all the outsiders that settled in the planes of the cosmology following the War of Light and Darkness at the dawn of creation. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 16 May 2005 : 21:18:01
quote:
Originally posted by khorne
Limbo doesn`t exist in 3rd edition realms, Outlands and Rilmani have been kicked out the window, as far as I know Gehenna has gone the way of the dinosaurs as well. My gods, WOTC have completely ("beeeeeep") the realms cosmology!!! Why, oh WHY did they have to introduce some stupid tree when the wheel was working perfectly?
Actually Limbo is mentioned in Serpent Kingdoms and we discussed this with Ed. :) |
| khorne |
Posted - 16 May 2005 : 20:24:25
Limbo doesn`t exist in 3rd edition realms, Outlands and Rilmani have been kicked out the window, as far as I know Gehenna has gone the way of the dinosaurs as well. My gods, WOTC have completely ("beeeeeep") the realms cosmology!!! Why, oh WHY did they have to introduce some stupid tree when the wheel was working perfectly? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Jul 2004 : 07:03:35
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
While I'm amused to see The Sage recycle a post of my own...
I apologise for that  . While I was researching an answer for this post, I'd come across your original detailing on the WotC boards (but had saved only the text, not the name of the poster), and since I was feeling lazy, posted your reply here instead. Please don't take offence at this  . Had I saved the details of your username, it would have been posted here as is.
Oh, and I don't dance. My lapse of detailings was merely a result of an attack from the absent-minded demon which stalks these halls on occassion. The Bookwyrm is well aware of what I speak...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 06 Jul 2004 : 05:25:01
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Ah Shemeska... I'll just say that she is not the only 'King of the Crosstrade'...
It's taken from a response made at another forum. I'm simply forgot to "clean-it-up"...
While I'm amused to see The Sage recycle a post of my own...
*tugs on her mortal tool's marrionette strings* "Dance my mortal puppet! Dance!"
*slow, wide Arcanaloth grin*
"See? Even the sages of Toril rely on the wisdom of the sages of Gehenna. Once you get past the Blood War battles, random volcanic eruptions and hungry mezzoloths, we're quite the knowledgeable bunch of jackal-headed scholars and sorcerers."
Use the Rilmani in FR as you like, that's just my own opinion. However I'll preface that with the fact that I blatantly ignore the 3e FR cosmology as needless retroactive revision that doesn't compare in the slightest to what it 'replaced'. *steps off the soapbox*
Though in some respects, it's probably a good thing that the meddling little Rilmani havn't been mentioned in 3e FR like the Slaadi and Githzerai have. Those latter two races have been used and stripped of their native ecology of Limbo. Nuh uh. It don't work that way, it makes a mockery of them. This however is just my own, overblown Yugolothy opinion. 
I like you already. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 06 Jul 2004 : 02:04:37
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Ah Shemeska... I'll just say that she is not the only 'King of the Crosstrade'...
It's taken from a response made at another forum. I'm simply forgot to "clean-it-up"...
While I'm amused to see The Sage recycle a post of my own...
*tugs on her mortal tool's marrionette strings* "Dance my mortal puppet! Dance!"
*slow, wide Arcanaloth grin*
"See? Even the sages of Toril rely on the wisdom of the sages of Gehenna. Once you get past the Blood War battles, random volcanic eruptions and hungry mezzoloths, we're quite the knowledgeable bunch of jackal-headed scholars and sorcerers."
Use the Rilmani in FR as you like, that's just my own opinion. However I'll preface that with the fact that I blatantly ignore the 3e FR cosmology as needless retroactive revision that doesn't compare in the slightest to what it 'replaced'. *steps off the soapbox*
Though in some respects, it's probably a good thing that the meddling little Rilmani havn't been mentioned in 3e FR like the Slaadi and Githzerai have. Those latter two races have been used and stripped of their native ecology of Limbo. Nuh uh. It don't work that way, it makes a mockery of them. This however is just my own, overblown Yugolothy opinion. |
| Sarelle |
Posted - 23 Jun 2004 : 20:09:03
What are your thoughts on my aforementioned conundrum, Sage? I know you, like me, useboth the old nd new cosmologies in the current Realms - but do you also think that the rilmani's placement in the Realms cos. is utterly strange? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 23 Jun 2004 : 14:56:07
Here's a few of my further thoughts about the Rilmani...
Their dedication to balance needs to be explained. It is, to most mortals, the most difficult part to understand about the rilmani. Baatezu want conquest and control, and Tanar'ri want to unleash their wrath and win bloody, gore-splattered victories, and the celestials all follow noble, recognizable goals...all very human/mortal concepts. But to preserve balance? The closest mortals get to that is with druids, and they're only thinking of nature.
The rilmani are very few. So, can they have a lot of impact? Do the other exemplar races wise up to their meddling (say, like the 'loths or the maybe even the guardinals who, as we all know, both have an eye for details)?
Their arrogance is used almost as a shield. Is *this* how they maintain a low-profile? By making everyone think they're more than what they are?
Most importantly of all, are the rilmani amoral? Do they do whatever they can to preserve the balance? I certainly remember one Jemorille, who seemed to have a lot of bad stuff in his past concerning his meddling.
|
| BOZ |
Posted - 21 Jun 2004 : 21:06:12
for the curious, you can find three rilmani converted for 3.5 here: http://www.enworld.org/cc/converted/index.php :) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Jun 2004 : 08:57:10
Ah Shemeska... I'll just say that she is not the only 'King of the Crosstrade'...
It's taken from a response made at another forum. I'm simply forgot to "clean-it-up"...
|
| Arivia |
Posted - 21 Jun 2004 : 08:38:53
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
See what happens when 'planar talk' visits the forums here at Candlekeep. I just can't stop...
Anyway, getting back to what the Rilmani are... they are the true neutral outsider race of the outer planes.
They live in the Outlands, largely around the base of the infinite spire (which Sigil sits atop of). Oddly enough, some say that their magic works at the base itself, or near to the base but not within the innermost ring. Truth or false, who knows.
The Rilmani are largely insular and don't interact much with the other outsider races. Fairly enigmatic. Thats the face they present on the surface and what most believe. Hardly...
The Rilmani believe in an active balance on the planes. In fact, proactive balance. They have agents and infiltrators on most every plane in order to subtley move events and planar politics to ensure that no one group or faction gains too much power over another.
For instance, the Rilmani likely take steps to ensure the Blood War continually rages, and that neither Baatezu or Tanar'ri gains an upper hand. (if aware of it, the Yugoloths probably detest the Rilmani meddling in 'their war', but since they profit by its continuation they for the moment likely ignore it).
Heck there's an Argenach Rilmani that serves, in disguise, as one of the servants of Shemeska The Marauder, an Arcanaloth in Sigil (and my namesake here on the boards) who sits as one of the most powerful people in the city, with contacts and influence among most all the group who call the city home or pass through it regularly. The perfect spy.
[Jemorille the Exile. However he's arguably inept and has a larger ego than Shemeska. He may be there to both spy on her, and keep him from doing too much damage to the rest of the planes. Jemorille 'claimed' to have taught Rajaat the halfling magic upon Athas (Dark Sun). He also claims that The Lady (of Pain) is his own unwilling pawn. Yeah.... no ego there... 
The Rilmani also have agents within the Prime and even a subtype of Rilmani exclusive to the inner planes in order to keep 'balance' there as well when they can.
I hope that helps...
Since when did your name become Shemeska, Sage? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Jun 2004 : 08:34:39
See what happens when 'planar talk' visits the forums here at Candlekeep. I just can't stop...
Anyway, getting back to what the Rilmani are... they are the true neutral outsider race of the outer planes.
They live in the Outlands, largely around the base of the infinite spire (which Sigil sits atop of). Oddly enough, some say that their magic works at the base itself, or near to the base but not within the innermost ring. Truth or false, who knows.
The Rilmani are largely insular and don't interact much with the other outsider races. Fairly enigmatic. Thats the face they present on the surface and what most believe. Hardly...
The Rilmani believe in an active balance on the planes. In fact, proactive balance. They have agents and infiltrators on most every plane in order to subtley move events and planar politics to ensure that no one group or faction gains too much power over another.
For instance, the Rilmani likely take steps to ensure the Blood War continually rages, and that neither Baatezu or Tanar'ri gains an upper hand. (if aware of it, the Yugoloths probably detest the Rilmani meddling in 'their war', but since they profit by its continuation they for the moment likely ignore it).
Heck there's an Argenach Rilmani that serves, in disguise, as one of the servants of Shemeska The Marauder, an Arcanaloth in Sigil who sits as one of the most powerful people in the city, with contacts and influence among most all the group who call the city home or pass through it regularly. The perfect spy.
The Rilmani also have agents within the Prime and even a subtype of Rilmani exclusive to the inner planes in order to keep 'balance' there as well when they can.
I hope that helps...
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Jun 2004 : 08:31:44
quote:
Originally posted by Foxhelm
Here's a question...
Which plane in the FR do the Rilmani live in?
It looks like something like the House of Nature.
Opinions?
The Rilmani are not part of the Realms cosmology. They are exlusively tied to the power of the Outlands. Since there are no Outlands in the Realms cosmology, they do not exist.
Aside from that though, the Rilmani are suspected of being tied (in whatever way) to the Spire of the Outlands. It is believed that they cannot move outside a cosmology without a connection to the Spire.
|
| Sarelle |
Posted - 17 Jun 2004 : 13:24:20
You'd think so, wouldn't you? The PGtF says: House of Knowledge.
This brings up one of the biggest 3.x FR conundrums, which I hadn't thought to share before:
1. The following deities are listed as having the 'Balance' domain (meaning they campaign for neutrality specifically) - Grumbar, Oghma, Ubtao, Waukeen. Okay - Oghma I get, but Waukeen? And where the hell is Silvanus, Mr. Big Neutrality?
2. Okay. So apparantly Waukeen is big on the neutrality stance. Never heard of that before, but if its a 3.x change, I'm game. I hereby dub her Miss Big Neutrality. Wait - she lives on the extra Good, mildly good AND chaotic-aligned, Brightwater? Scrap that one.
3. Oghma, Mr. Big Neutrality No. 2, resides in the House of Knowledge - which is apparantly a celestial plane, and mildly good-aligned.
4. Rilmani reside in the House of Knowledge. Despite being neutrality personified, they are on a good-aligned celestial plane.
5. The House of nature is a neutral plane. Good. But Lathander, Mr. Big Good, lives there. As do the dually nature/GOOD personifying guardinals. Sort of the things you might expect on the celestial tree (look - nature, tree!). Except for Silvanus lives there. (See below)
6. Except Silvanus is Mr. Big Neutrality.
My head aches. It just goes round and round. And is VERY messed up. Plus I'm a big fan of rilmani (being in my first ever 3.x-bought book the Fiend Folio). And of Silvanus... Okay I'll stop now.
EDIT: In addition, how many times did I use the words 'big', 'good' and 'neutral'? |
| Foxhelm |
Posted - 17 Jun 2004 : 04:19:51
Here's a question...
Which plane in the FR do the Rilmani live in?
It looks like something like the House of Nature.
Opinions? |
| Capn Charlie |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 22:38:27
Yes, true. However, ther is a connection, no matter how tenuous, much like as you said Cynosure. However, I meant more that Sigil exists in the reality of the Realms, as there is a connection. If ther eis a connection, I contend that issues of what the Realms are connected to can be an issue that is quite worthy of discussion here.
I mean, if these, what were they, Rilmani, could have some effect upon the realms, at least in theory, so it is a valid line of questioning and speculation. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 20:52:04
quote:
Originally posted by Capn Charlie
Well, the most obvious is Richard Baker's statement concerning the city of Sigil in relation to the realms, and how they are indeed connected. Thus if Sigil is connected to the realms, the spine is, as it is connected to sigil, thus these rilmani are within the the Realms.
Sigil exists as its own plane in FR, like Cynosure, thus the Spire does not exist in FR's planes, it only exists in the Wheel/Ring. Yes I know Sigil also exists at the same time in both places, but in FR it does not exist atop the Spire like it does in the Wheel/Ring. |
| Capn Charlie |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 20:28:27
Well, the most obvious is Richard Baker's statement concerning the city of Sigil in relation to the realms, and how they are indeed connected. Thus if Sigil is connected to the realms, the spine is, as it is connected to sigil, thus these rilmani are within the the Realms.
|
| Tethtoril |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 20:22:36
*cough*
Discussion of the planes with regard to the Realms is fine Jacinth. Perhaps you could find a way to include that in this scroll.?! |
| Kuje |
Posted - 16 Jun 2004 : 18:46:37
quote:
Originally posted by Jacinth Greyfox
Reading the article about Planar Dragons in the current issue of Dragon Magazine. (issue321). Concordant Dragons are described as "the draconic branch of the Rilmani. They work closely with the auromachs to prevent any one ethos ....acheiving dominance in the universe".
Who (or what) are the rilmani and the auromach, what Wizards publication do they appear in. I would be gratefully if someone could point me in the right direction.
Thanks.
The Rilmani are the true neutral beings that live at the base of the Spire in the Outlands. I have no idea if they exist in FR now since FR's planes does not contain the Outlands.
For 3.0 they are in Fiend Folio, but your better off getting 2e Planescape material since they were given a better write up in Planescape. I forgot what sourcebook/box set they were stat'd up in though for 2e. |
|
|
