| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 28 Apr 2009 : 15:44:40
In Evermeet, it is stated that the events in the novel with Kymil happened in 1371 DR. It is also stated that many warriors died in these events, as well as many mages. Yet, barely three years later, they feel secure enough to send an army to help Evereska, and then to go on a crusade to free Myth Drannor. How did they recover so quickly? Or were the losses in Evermeet exaggerated? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 03:50:38
So, here's my take on the 'quickness'. I'm thinking that you're dealing with a lot of 'young elves' that want to retake their parent's best dream to 'make daddy proud' as it were. Evereska and all that showed the elders that they *did* know how to handle themselves, so they used that good press to turn around and go for the gold and get Myth Drannor back. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 May 2009 : 01:25:20
Instead of finding fault with things bcause of Elven nature, just use it.
The Elves lost to begin with because they were totally unprepared, and un-like humans who can react spontaneously to any situation and adapt (and thats built into the racial profile), they opted to retreat and think things through.
The Elves NEED to prepare long in advance for any major undertaking, and thats why they fled. Elves think in terms of decades, not years - which is why The Retreat was just that - a tactical retreat from the field (and their city) until the could better assess the situation and carry out the most effective counter-attack.
And being Elves, that took 500 years! 
|
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 21:34:51
I totally agree, Wooly: Having said that, I was trying to make sense of the whole thing. If it was all about whacking the fey'ri, it doesn't require re-taking MD. Like I said, I was just trying to make sense of the seemingly precipitous actions on the part of a race known for not acting precipitously. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 21:26:04
quote:
Originally posted by Knight of the Gate
As I said, I'm aware that I'm not exactly the foremost authority on the elves in the Realms, but to me this makes a heck of a lot more sense than 'Hey, what was that city we've been pining over for the better part of the last Millenium? Myth Drasomething? Let's go resettle that.' that canon lore gives us. Or maybe not. This IS all off the top of my head.
It was because of the fey'ri that they decided to retake Myth Drannor... And it wasn't as much a crusade to retake the city, as I recall, as it was to stop the fey'ri.
If the elves were so gung ho about retaking a lost city, I don't think they would have picked Myth Drannor, first. They've got other lost cities, particularly Myth Glaurach, which wasn't as populated by nastiness. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 19:02:13
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I dunno... If they had to flee the city, what's going to make them think they suddenly have the forces to retake it a few years later? Considering how long it takes them to make decisions (they didn't Retreat until 600 years after the city fell!), I don't think they would have even seriously contemplated going back to Myth Drannor for a very long time. Had it not been for the attacks of the fey'ri, I don't think the topic of retaking Myth Drannor would have even come up for a couple centuries after 1375.
My idea was that they KNEW that they didn't have the forces to retake the city; Which is why they were planning on an almost millenial scale, and were first concerned with defending Evermeet from a similar attack, and then, having secured a locus from which they could recruit, train, equip, and deploy a force to retake the city, set about doing so, hundreds of years later. What I'm trying to convey is 1) the Elves are capable of (and tend to) plan over vast expanses of time and 2) the Crusade didn't 'just spring up overnight in the wake of several disasters to the elves' but, rather was planned meticulously for almost 600 years. And included in my proposal was the idea that the Retreat wasn't really what it was seen to be by humans- rather, the elves leaving the mainland were heading to Evermeet to a)bolster its defenses or b) join the Crusade.
As I said, I'm aware that I'm not exactly the foremost authority on the elves in the Realms, but to me this makes a heck of a lot more sense than 'Hey, what was that city we've been pining over for the better part of the last Millenium? Myth Drasomething? Let's go resettle that.' that canon lore gives us. Or maybe not. This IS all off the top of my head. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 18:40:14
I dunno... If they had to flee the city, what's going to make them think they suddenly have the forces to retake it a few years later? Considering how long it takes them to make decisions (they didn't Retreat until 600 years after the city fell!), I don't think they would have even seriously contemplated going back to Myth Drannor for a very long time. Had it not been for the attacks of the fey'ri, I don't think the topic of retaking Myth Drannor would have even come up for a couple centuries after 1375. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 17:50:16
This actually ties in neatly with what I'm using IMG (stated above)- if the Crusade really began within a decade or two of the fall of Myth Drannor, then it makes sense that the individual who was most inclined (and best suited) to the task of marshalling the might of the Elves (i.e. Zaor) would also be the one 'destined' to become king, via the 'Moonblade process'.
So, it looks like this then: Myth Drannor falls- many escape the sack of the city, scattering across the face of Faerun. Many of the survivors flee to Evereska or the Elven Court, but a group of (mainly) Moon and a few Sun elf nobles and High Magi head to Evermeet, convinced that the fall of Myth Drannor is only prologue to an even greater attack on the Tel'Qessir, and that Evermeet must be protected. Their leader is a charismatic young moon-elven noble, and wielder of his family's Moonblade, named Zaor. Within a few decades, this group divides its responsibilities: Zaor (I have no clue when he was crowned) becomes king (?) and concentrates on the defense of Evermeet; should the Crusade fail, Evermeet must not fall- and a second group begins laying plans and gathering support for the eventual retaking of the City of Song. Among the other races on the mainland, over the next 4 centuries, there is talk of 'the Retreat', noting how so very many elves have fled Faerun to Evermeet, and these other races suppose that eventually, the elves will abandon the mainland altogether. In reality, of course, these elves are answering the call of either Zaor (to defend Evermeet) or the Crusade (gathering in Evermeet in preparation for the retaking of Myth Drannor).
Then, as the plan was ready to set in motion, a group of elitist Sun Elves (IMG, the Eldreth Veluthraa, who again, IMG, are under the direction of Malkizid) assassinate Zaor, believing that it is his intent to place one of his children on the Throne of Cormanthor as Coronal of Myth Drannor (or one of his children on the throne of Evermeet, and to take the Crownblade for himself- either one works), a position which they see as belonging to Sun elves. This delays the Crusade by a half-century, while these traitors are smoked out and dealt with, and introduces other complications regarding Amlauril's children and attacks on Evermeet itself, prompting Amlauril to take action not forseen by Zaor.
How's that sound for a start? I know I left out a lot, but that sounds decent to me for a start at a comprehensive retcon. I'm AFB, so I don't know just when Zaor was crowned, or even if he was a survivor of Myth Drannor, but I like the sound of it. This begs a question or 3- when/where/how did Zaor and Amlauril meet? When were they married? How old is their eldest child? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 16:08:16
I'm with Menelvagor on this one (not that it is canon - just my preference is all).
I can definately see the Moonblades tied into 'Elven destiny', and the one survivor who was able to weild the King's Blade would be the "chosen One' to rebuild the Elves strength and return them to the mainland.
Then we had all that unpleasantness, but fate is not so easily thwarted, and the destiny switched to Amluiral (after Zoar had been rebuilding the Elven Military for years and years).
Ergo, even though Zoar died, he stilled fulfilled his destiny (through Amluiral), since he was the one in-charge through most of the 'rebuilding era'.
It works for me. 
When WotC hands us lemons, we should make Lemonade. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 08:30:32
Yes, but the point was, a Moonblade being worthy to be a king's blade. Zaor had that one, which was kind of what led to the whole choose a king thing.
Admittedly, it's rather weak, but that's why we said it was rather off-canon. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 07:18:59
quote:
Originally posted by Menelvagor
Well... it could go both ways. it could be that the Moonblades chose him because he was a survivor of Myth Drannor, and so forth. But he also had much support from the people - because he was a hero, but also maybe because he was from Myth Drannor.
I don't see survival as being all that wonderful a trait... A lot of elves didn't die in Myth Drannor. Only one became king.
And all the moonblades didn't choose him -- only one did. The rest were held by other members of his family. And the gig was, the family with the most moonblades. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 01 May 2009 : 06:49:50
Well... it could go both ways. it could be that the Moonblades chose him because he was a survivor of Myth Drannor, and so forth. But he also had much support from the people - because he was a hero, but also maybe because he was from Myth Drannor. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 22:31:54
quote:
Originally posted by Menelvagor
Why is it off-canon?
B/c Zaor (and thus the house Moonflower) was chosen as 'High King' via the Moonblade process- not because he was a popular survivor of the fall of Myth Drannor- Which is what you seemed to be suggesting- but then I could have just misunderstood your idea, as well... I'm known for being easily confused. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 21:02:27
Why is it off-canon? |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 18:34:46
quote:
Originally posted by Menelvagor
That's a really good idea, actualy. It would explain why Evermeet suddenly had a king, and this king was Zaor - a survivor of Myth Drannor.
You could take it in that direction: but Zaor was 'chosen' via the Moonblade process, rather than by blood or acclaim. I actually prefer your idea, but it's WAY off-canon. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 18:21:38
That's a really good idea, actualy. It would explain why Evermeet suddenly had a king, and this king was Zaor - a survivor of Myth Drannor. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 17:03:33
IMG, I retconned it, saying that the Crusade was begun by survivors of the initial battles, within a decade of the fall of the City of Song. Thus, the Crusade was some 500 years in the planning; that the planning/weapontake/training/muster was all on Evermeet gave the lie to 'The Retreat'- many of the elves who 'Retreated' were in fact mustering on Evermeet in preparation for the retaking of M.D., so one stone>2 birds |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 30 Apr 2009 : 15:55:11
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Although Rich did try to factor that in, the effects of all RSEs have been glossed, and all the big novel- and rules-driven elven events of the post-1357 DR timeline are massively too fast for the pace at which elves act in the Realms, which is well established by the over five hundred years (Campaign Guide to Myth Drannor p. 8) taken to decide on and carry out the Retreat from Cormanthor. Obviously, having elves act at human (or worse, books department) pace eroded their distinct nature and squandered some the setting's hard-earned credibility and mystique.
Right, I totally agree with this. As I (and others) have said before, if Myth Drannor was ever to be reclaimed by elves (or just about any other creature) it should have taken much longer than it did, and it should have been more problematic as well. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 21:35:23
Which is why they probably refer to the event I mentioned. Or the event Ashe mentioned. Or The Creconquering of Myth Drannor. Or the War o fthe SPider Queen...
You get the point. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 20:05:23
quote:
Originally posted by Tyr
Just wondering, do people think it would have been a better event if they did something like the Avatar project and release adventure modules that tied into the storyline?
Modules putting PCs on the periphery of NPCs doing stuff to other NPCs in Myth Drannor would have been as misconceived as the FRE series (and far less worthwhile without those adventures' Realmslore). Modules that really facilitated PCs responding to the opening up of the Inner Sea lands after the elven Retreat would have softened the harm of TSR and Wizards ignoring then reversing that thematic hook (the biggest in the original published Realms) and turning over the remains to their grim RSE treadmill -- but that would be a whole other approach to the Realms than the ones we've had.
The year-names aren't supposed to refer to anything definitively! |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 19:06:44
Oh, by the way, Ashe: maybe the Year of Risen Elfkin refers to an Avariel wizard finding the Artblade, and then trading it with Syrumstar Auglamyr for her Choker and a few *ahem* favors... |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 18:54:12
Not sure. Shadowdale: Scouring of the Land tied in loosely to the Crusade, since your actions (supposedly) have an impact on the outcome. Granted the impact is simply the length of time it takes for the elves succeed, but still... |
| Tyr |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 18:48:38
Just wondering, do people think it would have been a better event if they did something like the Avatar project and release adventure modules that tied into the storyline? |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 18:25:04
What other authors tried to claim it? Unless the whole Drow thing counts? |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 17:21:27
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The problem was a severe lack of communication within the novel dept. - at least two authors tried to use The Year of Risen Elfkin (and I got that straight from an author), and there was a bit of a log-jam in the timeline. We even had Kaanyr Vhok and his Tanarukks doing something similar - immediately marching off to war again right after suffering a defeat elsewhere.
It sort-of became fashionable for the author's to lay claim to the year names (a rant for another time), so we had everyone rushing to use the Elves all at once.
Which is the real reason why we got the century time-jump; to give the author's 'elbow room' to write in.
And this also shows a poor understanding of the setting, since it's been long established that year names don't necessarily refer to anything major.
I speculated a while back that the Year of Risen Elfkin could refer to nothing more than the birth of, or rise to local prominence (as in, a town or city) of a single half-elf.
Hmmm... Year of the Risen Elfkin, same year that the Shadowdale:SotD takes place and a certain half-elven ranger finds the Warblade?
Coincidence? Probably. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 17:07:47
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The problem was a severe lack of communication within the novel dept. - at least two authors tried to use The Year of Risen Elfkin (and I got that straight from an author), and there was a bit of a log-jam in the timeline. We even had Kaanyr Vhok and his Tanarukks doing something similar - immediately marching off to war again right after suffering a defeat elsewhere.
It sort-of became fashionable for the author's to lay claim to the year names (a rant for another time), so we had everyone rushing to use the Elves all at once.
Which is the real reason why we got the century time-jump; to give the author's 'elbow room' to write in.
And this also shows a poor understanding of the setting, since it's been long established that year names don't necessarily refer to anything major.
I speculated a while back that the Year of Risen Elfkin could refer to nothing more than the birth of, or rise to local prominence (as in, a town or city) of a single half-elf. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 16:47:19
The problem was a severe lack of communication within the novel dept. - at least two authors tried to use The Year of Risen Elfkin (and I got that straight from an author), and there was a bit of a log-jam in the timeline. We even had Kaanyr Vhok and his Tanarukks doing something similar - immediately marching off to war again right after suffering a defeat elsewhere.
It sort-of became fashionable for the author's to lay claim to the year names (a rant for another time), so we had everyone rushing to use the Elves all at once.
Which is the real reason why we got the century time-jump; to give the author's 'elbow room' to write in. |
| Menelvagor |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 07:18:32
"Therefore, let's go search for the Holy Grail instead!"
I'm not sure. Even if the losses themselves weren't many dead, I understood many Priests and Mages died. Admittedly, most of the Mages would have been High Magi, magic which doesn't work outside Evermeet, but you'd still think they'd have some problem with finding mages and priests. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 05:28:09
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
ElfLord: "Okay, everyone back onto the ships... we're heading back to the manland..."
Elf Crowd: "WHAT?! But we just got here!"
You forgot the Elflord response to that:
"It is a silly place." |
| Markustay |
Posted - 29 Apr 2009 : 04:47:57
I like the idea of Myth Drannor being reclaimed as well... IN-GAME... by characters!!!
Seriously, talk about toasting one of the most interesting adventuring locales.
Myth Drannor should be re-settled... sometime in the far future... along with Ed's "fortold Doom". Having things hanging over PCs heads is cool, having them taken care of by someone else is not.
To be honest, I feel 4e is MUCH LESS a POL setting then it was before (no fallen Cormanthor, no Anauroch, no 'lost Imaskar', etc, etc...)
I remember when the complaint in 1e was that there was too much 'open space'; now you can't walk a mile without tripping over some 'returned' long-lost kingdom.
What ruins? They're all occupied again. 
Anyhow, I picture the Retreat going something like this....
ElfLord: "Okay, everyone back onto the ships... we're heading back to the manland..."
Elf Crowd: "WHAT?! But we just got here!"
I'm glad that's a series I haven't read, and never intend to (along with the Archwizards one - some pages are better-left unturned).
Then again, maybe in a couple of years when I'm desperate and 'jonesin' from some 3e FR lore. |
| Tyr |
Posted - 28 Apr 2009 : 23:00:36
Aye, the only way that would work is if you viewed it only as structurally a city, so if they had the mose dedicated work crews they could fix all the buildings up in a few years, just there wouldn't be the people to make it a proper city. The five years thing is probably just in there so it could be a city in 4e, though to be fair they do say that large parts of the original city have been reclaimed by the forest in the 4e FRCS. |
|
|
