| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
 Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 02:04:28
|
... no, not newly-revealed lore. I quoted Markustay's following post from the "NDA Pile" scroll because I thought it was interesting enough to discuss... and I didn't want to clutter up the "NDA" scroll with speculation... NDAs tend to frown on that sort of thing. 
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
NDA? Its blatantly spelled-out in the Cormyr novel.
Humans are allowed in 'the forest kingdom' so long as an Obarskyr rules.
The thing that is 'NDA' is precisely WHAT would happen if an Obarskyr did not rule. I'm of the opinion that it is some High-Magic 'curse' laid down by the Elves of old - Elves like massacring tens of thousands of people. It's sort of their hobby.
In the words of Ed Greenwood (from the annotated Elminster), "Elves ARE monsters."
I wonder if all the conspiring Obarskyr-hating nobles of Cormyr are aware of this little detail... and part of me thinks that the post-Spellplague Realms might have been far more interesting if we'd had the Obarskyrs lose power in Cormyr along with everything else that hit the fan.
So... Markustay? Anyone else with ideas about this? I'd ask Garen Thal (Brian Cortijo) as well, but he probably knows the NDA'd truth, and wouldn't be able to comment without violating the vault. WotC needs to take a lesson from Oghma... knowledge must be shared in order to be preserved. 
|
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 02:06:18
|
The nobles of Cormyr seem so self-centered and filled with hate for the Obarskyrs that they seem like just the sort of fools to unwitting unleash such horrors on their own people. Seriously, one of the least likable groups of NPCs I've ever seen in the Realms.
And Vangerdahast, in Swords of Eveningstar, mentions in passing how people superstitiously believe if the Obarskyrs failed to rule "The dragons would return in great numbers to hunt humans." IIRC, at least. Maybe that has a hint of truth. Not quite a High Magic curse, nor something that would spare the elves either. |
Edited by - Eladrinstar on 15 Feb 2012 02:10:30 |
 |
|
|
macloud
Acolyte
United Kingdom
2 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 02:11:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In the words of Ed Greenwood (from the annotated Elminster), "Elves ARE monsters."
and in the word of Terry Pratchett:
“Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project glamour.
Elves are enchanting. They weave enchantment.
Elves are terrific. They beget terror.
The thing about words is that meanings can twist just like a snake, and if you want to find snakes look for them behind words that have changed their meaning.
No one ever said elves are nice.
Elves are bad.” |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 02:15:03
|
| Bah, elves are no worse than humans. They've just had more time to make the same mistakes humans will make. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 02:52:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
Bah, elves are no worse than humans. They've just had more time to make the same mistakes humans will make.
(emphasis mine)
Hence, "Elves ARE monsters."  |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 15 Feb 2012 02:53:51 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36912 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 04:32:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
The nobles of Cormyr seem so self-centered and filled with hate for the Obarskyrs that they seem like just the sort of fools to unwitting unleash such horrors on their own people. Seriously, one of the least likable groups of NPCs I've ever seen in the Realms.
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 04:46:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne.
My opinion could be warped by the fact that my main exposure to the Cormyrean nobles comes from The Knights of Myth Drannor. Ed wrote them in those books in such a way that I'm positive they weren't meant to be likable at all. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36912 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 05:04:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne.
My opinion could be warped by the fact that my main exposure to the Cormyrean nobles comes from The Knights of Myth Drannor. Ed wrote them in those books in such a way that I'm positive they weren't meant to be likable at all.
Oh, I'm not defending them.
I'm just saying there's a difference between hating someone regardless of their position, and hating someone only because they fill a position. I'm thinking the hostility the nobles fill towards the Obarskyrs is only because the Obarskyrs are the ones on the throne. If another noble family managed to depose the Obarskyrs, but then continued the Crown policy of not dancing to noble whim, then that enthroned family would receive all of the animosity previously directed at the Obarskyrs. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 05:12:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne.
My opinion could be warped by the fact that my main exposure to the Cormyrean nobles comes from The Knights of Myth Drannor. Ed wrote them in those books in such a way that I'm positive they weren't meant to be likable at all.
You should read Brian Cortijo's "Cormyr Royale: The Royal Court of the Forest Kingdom" in DUNGEON #198 [January 2012]. It ably portrays how the royal divide between the Obarskyr and the nobles works, with the points of view of both sides being offered as comparisons. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2482 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 09:45:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Its blatantly spelled-out in the Cormyr novel.
Humans are allowed in 'the forest kingdom' so long as an Obarskyr rules.
The thing that is 'NDA' is precisely WHAT would happen if an Obarskyr did not rule. I'm of the opinion that it is some High-Magic 'curse' laid down by the Elves of old - Elves like massacring tens of thousands of people. It's sort of their hobby.
I wonder if all the conspiring Obarskyr-hating nobles of Cormyr are aware of this little detail...
I doubt Obarskyrs are aware, beside the painfully obvious anomalies.
Thought along the same lines, but on a much more practical side - them being superhumanly charismatic (which is not limited to Cormyr at all).
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In the words of Ed Greenwood (from the annotated Elminster), "Elves ARE monsters."
One of the really good phrases from The Order of the Stick - "...My entry lies between Elemental and Ethereal Filcher." |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 11:06:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
And Vangerdahast, in Swords of Eveningstar, mentions in passing how people superstitiously believe if the Obarskyrs failed to rule "The dragons would return in great numbers to hunt humans." IIRC, at least.
Yes in Elminster must die some noble also thinks about this saying. But he doesn't really take it serios, so I guess it is commonly believed to be some old spoky story. |
Edited by - _Jarlaxle_ on 15 Feb 2012 11:06:35 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 18:18:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
And Vangerdahast, in Swords of Eveningstar, mentions in passing how people superstitiously believe if the Obarskyrs failed to rule "The dragons would return in great numbers to hunt humans." IIRC, at least. Maybe that has a hint of truth. Not quite a High Magic curse, nor something that would spare the elves either.
Hrm... I wonder if this is connected in any way with Vangey's intended transformation in a draconic direction... this sounds like "ask Ed"... with the inevitable "NDA" answer... or a simple "no"...
Edit: Jarlaxle: Wizards, particularly Elminster and Vangerdahast, often mention deadly-serious facts with a tone of wry amusement... it allows them to talk about things that would cause a panic if people thought they were being serious. Just a thought... |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 15 Feb 2012 18:20:38 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 02:07:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
The nobles of Cormyr seem so self-centered and filled with hate for the Obarskyrs that they seem like just the sort of fools to unwitting unleash such horrors on their own people. Seriously, one of the least likable groups of NPCs I've ever seen in the Realms.
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne.
But the big question is, would there be a throne to restore the Obarskyrs to if it somehow ended up in someone else's possession? The idea of a flight of dragons descending on Cormyr in the absence of an Obarskyr ruler might not leave much left to rule, even if there is an Obarskyr heir to claim the throne. Even if the dragon scenario is a myth, it is entirely likely that the elves of Cormyr (likely reinforced by Cormanthyr, Evereska, and possibly other elven realms) would rise up and throw the humans out, and I'm not convinced that the humans would be able to stop them... elven high magic is not to be taken lightly, and I have no doubt that the elves would use it to remove humans that have violated their tenancy agreement. Elves are scary landlords...  |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36912 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:10:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
The nobles of Cormyr seem so self-centered and filled with hate for the Obarskyrs that they seem like just the sort of fools to unwitting unleash such horrors on their own people. Seriously, one of the least likable groups of NPCs I've ever seen in the Realms.
I'm not convinced the nobles hate the Obarskyrs, as such... I think it's more of the Obarskyrs keep the nobles from doing whatever they want, and thus are hated for that -- if someone else took over and continued that routine, the nobility would likely rally around the deposed Obarskyrs as the best chance to get someone dependent on them on the throne.
But the big question is, would there be a throne to restore the Obarskyrs to if it somehow ended up in someone else's possession? The idea of a flight of dragons descending on Cormyr in the absence of an Obarskyr ruler might not leave much left to rule, even if there is an Obarskyr heir to claim the throne. Even if the dragon scenario is a myth, it is entirely likely that the elves of Cormyr (likely reinforced by Cormanthyr, Evereska, and possibly other elven realms) would rise up and throw the humans out, and I'm not convinced that the humans would be able to stop them... elven high magic is not to be taken lightly, and I have no doubt that the elves would use it to remove humans that have violated their tenancy agreement. Elves are scary landlords...
Oh, on that part, I don't know, though I do like the idea that there is some mystical connection between the Obarskyrs and the Forest Kingdom. I'm just saying that it might not be individual Obarskyrs that are disliked, as much as it is the power weilded by the Crown.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 17 Feb 2012 04:11:49 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 06:03:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
... though I do like the idea that there is some mystical connection between the Obarskyrs and the Forest Kingdom.
How specific a connection, though?
I don't want to assume it's anything like Strahd's "I am the land," for example. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 14:51:49
|
Just to interject for a moment (and no, not to answer the burning curiosity displayed here): why would anyone really want a definitive answer to this question?
If it's for game purposes, then the answer is whatever works best for your game. Should you decide to off the Obarskyrs--or depose them, with a lost heir waiting in the wings somewhere--then you should make the answer be whatever will create the most interesting and entertaining tale for your players.
If it's for fiction purposes, then the answer removes all suspense; even if the War Wizards and the Royal Magician and the Crown and the various nobles think the answer is "yes" or "no" or "maybe," you would know the answer. The only thing worse than a truly omniscient narrator is a completely omniscient audience, which is only useful when telling a tragedy.
For me, the more interesting question is not whether or not there is some mystical connection between Cormyr and its ruling family, but what the nature of such connection, if it exists, must truly be. Is it dragons and goblinkin ravaging the countryside, or the predictable infighting among nobles seeking to supplant the Obarskyrs, or a true rending of the earth and towns and villages being swallowed by the Underdark, or the wilting of the King's Forest, or....
Carry on.
EDIT: Corrected a spelling/grammar issue. |
Edited by - Garen Thal on 17 Feb 2012 15:23:52 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 15:18:21
|
{Applause}
A(n RPG) setting without mystery is.... well... 4e.
Thats why 'bare bones' didn't work. We need those 'skeletons in the closet'. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 16:26:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
A(n RPG) setting without mystery is.... well... 4e.
Why yes of course this must be true!
After all, it's not as though this mystery of Cormyr's heritage extends into the post-Spellplague Realms. It certainly wasn't mentioned in the first few paragraphs in the very first Backdrop article about the Realms post-Spellplague.
...oh, wait.
As for myself, of course I'm burning to know the definitive answer.
However I'll happily accept "NDA" for an answer, so long as a few hints, winks and nudges towards the "truth" come along every few months.
Good Realmslore that inspires curiosity and wonder is better than any direct answer, IMNSHO. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 17 Feb 2012 16:30:42 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36912 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 18:40:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
... though I do like the idea that there is some mystical connection between the Obarskyrs and the Forest Kingdom.
How specific a connection, though?
I don't want to assume it's anything like Strahd's "I am the land," for example.
Oh, nothing that overt... I'm going to agree with Garen, but personally I would expect that without an Obarskyr around, the land would slowly grow more hostile to human habitation: rapid growth of forests (in particular, reclaiming much farmland), increased wild animal/monster depredation, etc. Nothing damaging to the land, just damaging to those who like clear-cutting forests and tossing up cities. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 19:03:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
...but personally I would expect that without an Obarskyr around, the land would slowly grow more hostile to human habitation: rapid growth of forests (in particular, reclaiming much farmland), increased wild animal/monster depredation, etc. Nothing damaging to the land, just damaging to those who like clear-cutting forests and tossing up cities.
That's a really interesting take and one I hadn't considered before.
I wonder if this gradual transition would be assisted by any divine servants of nature deities?
Northern Cormyr was once all forest and noted for the presence of many unicorns. I could see the unicorns appearing and charging across open fields. In their wake, saplings grow to the height of a man within a season. A few years later: new forest.
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 00:01:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
{Applause}
A(n RPG) setting without mystery is.... well... 4e.
Thats why 'bare bones' didn't work. We need those 'skeletons in the closet'.
Except that 4E didn't take any skeletons out of closets; it just threw out the closets without looking inside, or dug up new skeletons from somewhere else. And, to be fair, that started well before the Spellplague; remember the Lords Who Sleep? And then there's the full story of the Harper Schism... and Manshoon's Clone Wars. And I'm sure there are other examples I could come up with. Anyway, I agree with Mark on this; I would just appreciate a few more hints so I could puzzle things out, at least to a consistent explanation that I'm happy with. But right now, I'm going for food so my brain will work better... I really want my old-lore hard copies. Reading from a computer screen (even LCD) makes my eyes hurt, and I refuse (for budgetary reasons) to print documents that I already own in hard copy. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 18 Feb 2012 00:02:01 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 01:15:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
After all, it's not as though this mystery of Cormyr's heritage extends into the post-Spellplague Realms. It certainly wasn't mentioned in the first few paragraphs in the very first Backdrop article about the Realms post-Spellplague.
...oh, wait.
True, the setting did keep a few mysteries from EARLIER EDITIONS - they must have missed those when they were 'cleaning house'.
And yes, the new approach to lore (on the DDi) - the stuff that has come out since 5e has been in the works - YES, I applaud THAT. Giving more detail to the things ED GREENWOOD created is way to go - I doubt anyone here would disagree with that.
5e definitely seems to be on the right track.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
As for myself, of course I'm burning to know the definitive answer.
It works better for game purposes to just leave it a mystery. In the words of Ed Greenwood, "for ever plothook or loose-end you tie-up, create three new ones" (or something very close to that). What that means is, if we discover a new piece to the puzzle, it should leave us with even more questions.
The Realms might be a pretty boring place without all those intrigues Ed layered it with.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
However I'll happily accept "NDA" for an answer, so long as a few hints, winks and nudges towards the "truth" come along every few months.
Good Realmslore that inspires curiosity and wonder is better than any direct answer, IMNSHO.
100% AGREE |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 18 Feb 2012 01:17:06 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 03:56:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
True, the setting did keep a few mysteries from EARLIER EDITIONS - they must have missed those when they were 'cleaning house'.
Actually, the Realms kept all but a few of its mysteries despite the Spellplague. The (4E) designers were very clear that all that came before is still a part of the Realms and its history.
While the post-Spellplague Realms may have been designed to downplay the nuances of the setting, all the little particulars are still there.
Every new edition (of the D&D rules) brings with it changes to the Realms, but the mysteries (if that's the word we want to use for all the things we still don't know about the Realms) remain and are carried forward.
(And Markus, we're using the internet. There's no need to SHOUT for me to "hear" you. )
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And yes, the new approach to lore (on the DDi) - the stuff that has come out since 5e has been in the works - YES, I applaud THAT. Giving more detail to the things ED GREENWOOD created is way to go - I doubt anyone here would disagree with that.
I would disagree with that--and not for the sake of contrariness!--only because I think the Realms owes its greatness to a large number of people besides Ed.
I consider Ed to be the father of the Realms, but so much of it has since been created whole cloth by other people.
Whether it's Jeff Grubb adding to the lore of Cormyr, R.A. Salvatore giving us Menzoberranzan and the Underdark or Matt James treating us to our first taste of Akanul, it's the quality of work that makes it stand out.
I don't think any of us can say for sure how long 5E has been in the works, but I'm willing to bet that Backdrop: Cormyr and any number of Ed's long-running Eye on the Realms articles were in the works before WotC decided 5E needed to happen.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In the words of Ed Greenwood, "for ever plothook or loose-end you tie-up, create three new ones" (or something very close to that). What that means is, if we discover a new piece to the puzzle, it should leave us with even more questions.
I think you put this better than I did when I talked about winks and hints earlier in the scroll. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 04:22:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
True, the setting did keep a few mysteries from EARLIER EDITIONS - they must have missed those when they were 'cleaning house'.
And yes, the new approach to lore (on the DDi) - the stuff that has come out since 5e has been in the works - YES, I applaud THAT. Giving more detail to the things ED GREENWOOD created is way to go - I doubt anyone here would disagree with that.
5e definitely seems to be on the right track.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
As for myself, of course I'm burning to know the definitive answer.
It works better for game purposes to just leave it a mystery. In the words of Ed Greenwood, "for ever plothook or loose-end you tie-up, create three new ones" (or something very close to that). What that means is, if we discover a new piece to the puzzle, it should leave us with even more questions.
The Realms might be a pretty boring place without all those intrigues Ed layered it with.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
However I'll happily accept "NDA" for an answer, so long as a few hints, winks and nudges towards the "truth" come along every few months.
Good Realmslore that inspires curiosity and wonder is better than any direct answer, IMNSHO.
100% AGREE
And yes, I'll have to agree with you both on this... as much as my overly logical brain demands answers, doing the detective work of finding them is 90% of the fun of the Realms for me. I just wish I had the 1e-2e chunk of my FR library (including all my older Dragon magazines) to help with that detective work. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Pulled out of the NDA Pile...
