| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 03:04:38
|
I think Mr. Byers what you're referring to actually is the appeal of the alien to a character. Cthulhu and the Great Old Ones are compelling creatures because they're incomprehensible, alien, and dispassionate about human affairs. Hannibal Lector's appeal and somewhat of what I think is say...Talos' appeal is that they don't think like normal people.
Talos is destruction incarnate. He's anthromorphized qualities. He exists to destroy and he's important because of that.
Part of what I think Forgotten Realms needs though is more a depiction of why exactly someone goes off to join the Church of Bane from their farming communities or cities of the like. I mean, what does one do that says "Tomorrow, I'm going to become a person who wants to conquer the Earth."
It's an interesting question. Do the gods really not seduce so much as simply offer an alternative?
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
 |
|
|
James P. Davis
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
244 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 07:19:55
|
Wow! All I did was work for eight hours, this thread is growing quite fast...
quote:
Part of what I think Forgotten Realms needs though is more a depiction of why exactly someone goes off to join the Church of Bane from their farming communities or cities of the like. I mean, what does one do that says "Tomorrow, I'm going to become a person who wants to conquer the Earth."
It's an interesting question. Do the gods really not seduce so much as simply offer an alternative?
Interesting and also those who have no allegiance to any god or perhaps only a passing acquaintance. What makes the average Joe (or Jill) look at the world and say, "Hey, this is all screwed up. This place needs a bit more of me in charge"? But I think I'll save most of my ideas on that one for July.
I'll try to be more on topic here...
Personally I always cheer for the villain, especially the ones you love to hate (Archibald in Rob Roy comes to mind, but mostly because I saw it recently). Or Moorcock's Gaynor and Klosterheim (even Elric at certain points). Because the villain, as I believe Richard pointed out before, helps define the hero and, to a certain extent, that goes both ways. I like viewing the hero in light of the villain he faces, as a reflection, but an honest reflection, not just as an opposite.
|
"Everybody is a book of blood; wherever we're opened, we're red."--Clive Barker
FR: RotD2:"Possessions"
Wizards:Bloodwalk
Citadels: The Shield of Weeping Ghosts
Wilds: The Restless Shore
Ed Greenwood Presents Waterdeep: Circle of Skulls (May 2010)
Book trailers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC-ska7ohVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfvFdQ8bLp0 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 10:06:32
|
Charles, to count Malik as a villain is overextending it quite a bit. He is more a puppet than anyone else, plus as a protagonist, although I like Troy Denning's writing quite a lot, he is really weak. We hardly get to know him. Yes, from the first person view we don't have the chance to look into his past, because, after all, if you write about your experiences at a specific point in time as a sort of autobiography, why would you bother to explain your own past? After all it is like a diary. You intermingle your thoughts as they lead to the past but you don't necessarily explain yourself.
It just made me wonder how someone like Malik came to worship Cyric, after all he would be much better suited worshipping Waukeen. Malik isn't very evil as villains go, he is...well, Malik...
That brings me to the question of how the gods of Faerūn, especially the 'evil' ones, get people to worship them in general. I can see how someone bent on vengeance would pray to the god of vengeance (is there such a god on Faerūn?), but he would also worship the goddess of love etc, that's why it is a pantheon after all, but the gods gain power from direct worship, not lipservice.
A deity needs to offer something for the worship. Even if it is merely the promise of success... although then success must eventually come, even if only in bits, lest the worshipper is disappointed and changes the Faith. That in turn makes me wonder how Bane can maintain worshippers in Zenthil Keep if they fail all the time.
In that vein, something that just came to my mind...sorry I just can't help it:
Fzoul: "Gee, Bane, what are we gonna do tonight?"
Bane: "The same thing we do every night, Fzoul, try to take over the world!"
Faith is usually blind, at least in our world, on Faerūn the gods are quite real, and they plot against each other. But the worshippers do not believe blindly, they know their deities are there, so if they pray to them for aid they should better give it. Especially since Ao's decree that the gods must earn their faithful so to speak.
With 'evil' being fought and the setbacks worshippers of gods such as Bane suffer every day, why do they not lose faith?
and now for something completely different...coffee |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
James P. Davis
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
244 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 10:40:39
|
quote:
I can see how someone bent on vengeance would pray to the god of vengeance (is there such a god on Faerūn?)
That would be Hoar (revenge, retribution, poetic justice) and how might one go about serving such a god full time? What kind of life might they lead? How do they deal? What does NDA mean? Ouch! I'm getting slapped by those alot lately...  |
"Everybody is a book of blood; wherever we're opened, we're red."--Clive Barker
FR: RotD2:"Possessions"
Wizards:Bloodwalk
Citadels: The Shield of Weeping Ghosts
Wilds: The Restless Shore
Ed Greenwood Presents Waterdeep: Circle of Skulls (May 2010)
Book trailers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC-ska7ohVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfvFdQ8bLp0 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 11:17:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by James P. Davis
quote:
I can see how someone bent on vengeance would pray to the god of vengeance (is there such a god on Faerūn?)
That would be Hoar (revenge, retribution, poetic justice) and how might one go about serving such a god full time? What kind of life might they lead? How do they deal? What does NDA mean? Ouch! I'm getting slapped by those alot lately...
ROFL James, humor aside...well not really...can you worship a NDA? Or do you fear and hate it?
OK, now for the serious part:
I think the issue of the how and why is essential, be it Hoar, Talos or Lolth (why the hell do I always type lolo before finishing with Lolth anyway?), if you worship this or that god you need to have a reason. As RLB mentioned before, no one gets up in the morning saying "Gee, I'm so evil, I guess I should worship Bane." or "Oh, I just smashed my entire collection of precious Shou china, I guess Talos is my god.".
Same as any real-world religion any character of any couleur needs a reason to do something, like Peter Archer said. It would be nice to figure out the reasons as to why someone does worship an 'antisocial' god.
"I used to worship Lathander, until that total eclipse last year." |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
James P. Davis
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
244 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 11:51:11
|
quote:
ROFL James, humor aside...well not really...can you worship a NDA? Or do you fear and hate it?
We hates it! Love the suspense though...Hmmm, maybe it has a frosted side and a nutritious side...
quote:
I think the issue of the how and why is essential, be it Hoar, Talos or Lolth (why the hell do I always type lolo before finishing with Lolth anyway?), if you worship this or that god you need to have a reason. As RLB mentioned before, no one gets up in the morning saying "Gee, I'm so evil, I guess I should worship Bane." or "Oh, I just smashed my entire collection of precious Shou china, I guess Talos is my god.".
Same as any real-world religion any character of any couleur needs a reason to do something, like Peter Archer said. It would be nice to figure out the reasons as to why someone does worship an 'antisocial' god.
I think "Lolo" is the secret truename of Lolth, but moving on...
Reason and purpose. If one has a purpose, a goal, one might fall in with the god that fits the needs of that goal. Easy enough (on the surface anyway). Reason though, reason is the root and can be devoid of purpose in the borderline-type villain/hero character. Reason can become so close to excuse that they're interchangeable. Does one follow a dark god because they believe in the precepts of the faith or do they admit to truly enjoying the deeds they must carry out in the name of that faith? Or both at once? Might the followers of Bane see every defeat as a shot to the core of their belief or as an expected speedbump on the road to inevitable dominion? Personal power or setting the stage for generations of followers to come? I think I wandered somewhere in there...but anyway, I think the anti-social gods and their followers are the most interesting of the bunch, to describe and flesh out how they carry on day-to-day as compared to the local baker or blacksmith. And those without purpose or goal, how their lives steer them toward this faith or that...good stuff. |
"Everybody is a book of blood; wherever we're opened, we're red."--Clive Barker
FR: RotD2:"Possessions"
Wizards:Bloodwalk
Citadels: The Shield of Weeping Ghosts
Wilds: The Restless Shore
Ed Greenwood Presents Waterdeep: Circle of Skulls (May 2010)
Book trailers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jC-ska7ohVk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfvFdQ8bLp0 |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 12:15:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by James P. Davis
Reason and purpose. If one has a purpose, a goal, one might fall in with the god that fits the needs of that goal. Easy enough (on the surface anyway). Reason though, reason is the root and can be devoid of purpose in the borderline-type villain/hero character. Reason can become so close to excuse that they're interchangeable. Does one follow a dark god because they believe in the precepts of the faith or do they admit to truly enjoying the deeds they must carry out in the name of that faith? Or both at once? Might the followers of Bane see every defeat as a shot to the core of their belief or as an expected speedbump on the road to inevitable dominion? Personal power or setting the stage for generations of followers to come? I think I wandered somewhere in there...but anyway, I think the anti-social gods and their followers are the most interesting of the bunch, to describe and flesh out how they carry on day-to-day as compared to the local baker or blacksmith. And those without purpose or goal, how their lives steer them toward this faith or that...good stuff.
Day to day activities, eh?
How 'bout this?
A day in the life of Baernoff, Bane-worshipping blacksmith in Zenthil Keep:
Baernoff gets up every morning before sunrise, he cannot suffer the sun to be up before him, this way he curses Lathander. After kicking his cat out of the way, because he can, he uses the red hot poker, left in the fireplace the night before, to wake up his son, after all the boy has to learn the rough trade of a blacksmith early on, and it does not matter that the child is only two years old. The ensuing ruckuss also serves as wake-up-call, quite literally, for his wife. She greets her husband with a healthy slap in the face, delivered by a bedpan.
Baernoff then sets out to fix breakfast. Since he reviles Chauntea almost as much as Lathander the fruit, of course, is rotten. And taken from an already felled tree, which even now is burning in Baernoff's fireplace.
Maybe someone wants to continue Baernoff's day, before we go on with the discussion. Just remember that I meant it as a parody. (if that wasn't apparent.)
Frosted and nutricious NDAs...and I thought I lacked fiber... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
Edited by - Mace Hammerhand on 16 Mar 2006 20:43:24 |
|
|
|
Deverien Valandil
Seeker
73 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 15:43:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
In the X-universe of old there was real racism coming from non-mutants toward their mutated peers, and in the case of Genosha in the comic books you actually did have mutant concentration camps.
Interestingly enough, this is something that is being covered in the X-books right now, and I think many of their current storylines are really doing a good job of muddling and reevaluating the lines between 'right' and 'wrong'.
In a nutshell, a recent event caused the mutant population to plummet to only ~198 powered mutants in the world. Several of the books spinning off from this event cover different perspectives on the crisis, most of which lead readers to question what can be considered good or evil. For example:
-One government agency's duty is to keep the mutants secure, and they choose to do so by rounding up rogue mutants and relocating them in a fashion akin to concentration camps (incidentally, the camps are patrolled by Sentinels). From the govt's POV, it's a safety precaution, and entirely justified given the endangered status of mutants.
-The camp mutants ('The 198'), however, see these actions as a tyrannical attempt to finally squash mutant freedoms. As a result, the mutants are constantly causing trouble, attacking the sentinels, etc. They see it as a fight for their freedom, even though some might consider their actions to border on terrorism.
-The Xmen are, of course, caught in the middle, and because they seem to be sitting on the fence between the two groups, they're essentially on hostile terms with both sides of the conflict, even though they just want to stop the violence.
There are a bunch of other factions involved in the crisis that would also be good examples, but I think you get the picture. You can't just slap a label of 'right' or 'wrong' on something because in most situations, ethics are a matter of humans' subjective judgment. But humans are fallible, which brings into question whether the whole moral system itself is fallible or defunct.
Ok, I need sleep now. |
|
|
|
Richard Lee Byers
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
1814 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 17:25:18
|
I don't the radical reduction in the number of mutants in the Marvel Universe. That's because the core premise of the X-Men canon was that normal people were afraid that the ever-increasing mutant population would supplant them. Now they no longer have that reason to fear mutants, or a reason to pay them any special attention whatsoever. Mutants should just blend in with all the super but non-mutant people like Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, etc.
Which is to say, the themes of tolerance, racism, and evolution that always defined the X-Men books don't make logical sense anymore. |
|
|
|
Deverien Valandil
Seeker
73 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 18:40:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers
That's because the core premise of the X-Men canon was that normal people were afraid that the ever-increasing mutant population would supplant them. Now they no longer have that reason to fear mutants, or a reason to pay them any special attention whatsoever. Mutants should just blend in with all the super but non-mutant people like Spider-Man, the Fantastic Four, etc.
Which is to say, the themes of tolerance, racism, and evolution that always defined the X-Men books don't make logical sense anymore.
Well, supposedly Marvel is going to touch on something like that in their next 'big' event, the Marvel Civil War. Something about a government Superhuman Registration Act, which is essentially the same deal as the Mutant Registry, except it now includes all superheroes, mutant and non-mutant alike. |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 18:41:09
|
I tend to think that Malik is in fact a very good villain. We pretty much know the entire life of Malik surprisingly by the time that he appears. He's a merchant, he worships Cyric, he's close to the Cyric worshipping Pasha. Then we watch as the man is sent on his surprising journey of self discovery and masochism. Let's face it, for all his cowardice and bluster he still kills Gwydion (a 20th level Paldin), Rinda, and successfully saves his God from Judgement.
Why does Malik worship Cyric? Because he believes lies, intrigue, and illusions are better for his business than merely worshipping wealth. It's also the faith of the Pasha whom feels the same thing.
As we saw in Prince of Lies, many times evil gods control regions and enforce the worship of the God down onto the peasantry. Joe Smithy worships Bane because Bane is the Lord of the Universe, All Other Gods are False, and if he doesn't then he'll be killed by the Inquisitors. Not all of the gods of Faerun are particularly polytheistic in their approach.
Re: X-men
I'm actually somewhat happy about the reduction of the mutants. The X-men are still feared and hated, in no small part because of what people like Magneto and the like did. However, there's a much more urgent theme of hiding and trying to pass oneself off as a mutant or keeping one's nature secret. Plus, mutants have to live amongst humanity now since there's no longer room to have large groups of them.
It may be that humans have to fear mutants eventually emerging again in great numbers in a few generations. Or perhaps now mutants and humans will need to learn to live together. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
PaulSKemp
Forgotten Realms Author
808 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 19:00:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Deverien Valandil
[quote]You can't just slap a label of 'right' or 'wrong' on something because in most situations, ethics are a matter of humans' subjective judgment.
That, of course, presupposes the answer to the question that underlies this entire thread -- namely, whether morality can be/is objective or subjective. The question has been debated since at least the time of Plato and we're not likely to resolve it here.
IMO, the fundamental problem with your statement, and with subjective morality generally, is that it reduces to an absurdity. Example: Bob the Sharran says: Human sacrifice is good because it pleases me and my goddess to perform it. Jon the Lathanderite says: Human sacrifice is bad because all human life is sacrosanct. A subjectivist has no basis upon which to argue that one of those statements is true and the other false. They are both accurate statements of the speaker's subjective belief and as such, each has as much validity as the other in the subjectivist paradigm. And it matters not at all if lots of people in some cultural/political group believe A and one man believes B. The lone man's belief has as much moral force as that of the group because neither has any standard to which to appeal to prove that one is right and the other wrong. The lack of a standard is the gaping hole in subjectivism.
At the end of the day, a true, intellectually honest subjectivist must admit either (i) that morality is defined primarily by happenstance (where and when you live) and coercion (good is defined in part by those with the power to impose their views on others, either in the form of majority rule or brute force or otherwise) and that any one moral stance is just as "good" as any other, or (ii) that subjectivism is a failure as a moral theory.
In my experience, most folks who purport to be subjectivists really are not. They believe there is some objective moral core from which objective moral principles can be derived (though there is ample disagreement about where that core is found, e.g., in applied Reason, in a holy book, in the Categorical Imperative, whatever). Their subjectivism creeps in at the fringes, around the objective moral core.
In my view, the fundamental question is not is one act or another moral or immoral. That's to have the discussion at one remove. The first question to be answered is: what, if anything, is the moral standard that we will apply? |
Edited by - PaulSKemp on 16 Mar 2006 20:01:32 |
|
|
|
Xysma
Master of Realmslore
USA
1089 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 19:57:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by PaulSKemp
quote:
Originally posted by Deverien Valandil
[quote]You can't just slap a label of 'right' or 'wrong' on something because in most situations, ethics are a matter of humans' subjective judgment.
That, of course, presupposes the answer to the question that underlies this entire thread -- namely, whether morality can be/is objective or subjective. The question has been debated since at least the time of Plato and we're not likely to resolve it here.
IMO, the fundamental problem with your statement, and with subjective morality generally, is that it reduces to an absurdity. Example: Bob the Sharran says: Human sacrifice is good because it pleases me and my goddess to perform it. Jon the Lathanderite says: Human sacrifice is bad because all human life is sacrosanct. A subjectivist has no basis upon which to argue that one of those statements is true and the other false. They are both accurate statements of the speaker's subjective belief and as such, each has as much validity as the other in the subjectivist paradigm. And it matters not at all if lots of people in some cultural/political group believe A and one man believes B. The lone man's belief has as much moral force as that of the group because neither has any standard to which to appeal to prove that one is right and the other wrong. The lack of a standard is the gaping hole in subjectivism.
At the end of the day, a true, intellectually honest subjectivist must admit either (i) that morality is defined primarily by happenstance (where and when you live) and coercion (good is defined in part by those with the power to impose their views on others, either in the form of majority rule or brute force or otherwise) and that any one moral stance is just as "good" as any other, or (ii) that subjectivism is a failure as a moral theory.
In my experience, most folks who purport to be subjectivists really are not. They believe there is some objective moral core from which objective moral principles can be derived (though there is ample disagreement about where that core is found, e.g., in applied Reason, in a holy book, in the Categorical Imperative, whatever). They're subjectivism creeps in at the fringes, around the objective moral core.
In my view, the fundamental question is not is one act or another moral or immoral. That's to have the discussion at one remove. The first question to be answered is: what, if anything, is the moral standard that we will apply?
Well put, I agree. I have an ongoing argument with a friend of mine about this, my question is how can you be evil if you don't know you're evil? By whose standard are you evil? It's all cultural, the dominant majority within a society determines what is evil and what is not. |
War to slay, not to fight long and glorious.
Aermhar of the Tangletrees
Year of the Hooded Falcon
Xysma's Gallery
Guide to the Tomes and Tales of the Realms download from Candlekeep
Anthologies and Tales Overviews
Check out my custom action figures, hand-painted miniatures, gaming products, and other stuff on eBay.
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 20:16:34
|
Wow. Paul, you just have a way of putting things. So. Well. 
Partly since I feel bad about my role in hijacking the thread (though the conversation is brilliant, and I think it should continue), and partly since I'm interested in this other aspect, I propose another line of conversation, to pull things to the Realms and keep it firmly grounded.
To Wit:
What "villains" have you read about (or would LIKE to read about) in the Realms who have really intrigued you? Why?
I, for one, really liked reading about Cyric -- getting to understand his point of view. The scope was huge -- basically, in Avatar, he goes from a weak, envious sort of stinker into one of the lords of frickin' darkness. Now THAT's a ride.
Also, what villains do people want to see more of? I'm always interested in how people see the Realms evolving.
Cheers all! |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 20:40:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Wow. Paul, you just have a way of putting things. So. Well.
Partly since I feel bad about my role in hijacking the thread (though the conversation is brilliant, and I think it should continue), and partly since I'm interested in this other aspect, I propose another line of conversation, to pull things to the Realms and keep it firmly grounded.
Sounds like a good plan...if any idea actually bears fruit, please mention us in the novel...somehow, us wise and witty scribes of candlekeep
And I do agree, finding a definition of evil etc is well...evil. We could go on and on, Paul, I salute you
quote:
To Wit:
What "villains" have you read about (or would LIKE to read about) in the Realms who have really intrigued you? Why?
I, for one, really liked reading about Cyric -- getting to understand his point of view. The scope was huge -- basically, in Avatar, he goes from a weak, envious sort of stinker into one of the lords of frickin' darkness. Now THAT's a ride.
Also, what villains do people want to see more of? I'm always interested in how people see the Realms evolving.
Cheers all!
Who is Wit? Maybe this is a sorta in-thingy I don't get cuz English is not my native tongue...as for villains...well, I'll do some serious thinking on that one and will give you my second best idea, the best one I'm gonna stow away for later use, sounds fair?  |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
Edited by - Mace Hammerhand on 16 Mar 2006 20:43:58 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 21:07:50
|
"To Wit" is an out-dated phrase that basically means "To Sum up" or "To put simply." I was using it rather loosely, as a means of introducing my suggestion (more appropriate would have been "To Explain"). I think it might come from the "brevity is the soul of wit" beatitude.
But I digress.
Not to mention that I could be totally wrong.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Richard Lee Byers
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
1814 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 21:32:32
|
I don't know if it makes me a subjectivist, but I think moral principles are ideas, inventions akin to the wheel and the pulley. They're concepts we've created, not fundamental aspects of reality that the universe inherently upholds or enforces.
That doesn't mean they have no utility, or that they don't have any sort of validity. It does mean that they're likely to have their limitations and imperfections, just like our other inventions. We shouldn't be entirely surprised when we apply them logically to a particularly thorny situation and find that they yield what seems to be a crazy or unacceptably harsh judgment. |
|
|
|
Beezy
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 21:46:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Wow. Paul, you just have a way of putting things. So. Well.
Partly since I feel bad about my role in hijacking the thread (though the conversation is brilliant, and I think it should continue), and partly since I'm interested in this other aspect, I propose another line of conversation, to pull things to the Realms and keep it firmly grounded.
To Wit:
What "villains" have you read about (or would LIKE to read about) in the Realms who have really intrigued you? Why?
I, for one, really liked reading about Cyric -- getting to understand his point of view. The scope was huge -- basically, in Avatar, he goes from a weak, envious sort of stinker into one of the lords of frickin' darkness. Now THAT's a ride.
Also, what villains do people want to see more of? I'm always interested in how people see the Realms evolving.
Cheers all!
I also enjoyed watching the change in Cyric. I will try and think of some good villians and explanations for why. |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 22:13:42
|
For me, I didn't like the Avatar Trilogy (no offense to Troy). Cyric there was a crafty, nasty, and cruel fellow but the story had no sympathy for him surprisingly and I didn't much care for Midnight or Kelemvor when he seemed to make a better protagionist. That was gone by Prince of Lies andThe Crucible where Cyric was all round Dark Lord.
Malik is another favorite villain because he's one of the few ones that win and also is likeable despite being an utter scumbag.
I also like Artemis because I don't believe he's redeemed and he does make an excellent foil. I just wish he could have honestly beaten Drizzt once or twice.
Kinmen Nimsen is also up there because well...He's a racist politician. That's a fairly unique trait for the storylines.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 23:03:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
For me, I didn't like the Avatar Trilogy (no offense to Troy). Cyric there was a crafty, nasty, and cruel fellow but the story had no sympathy for him surprisingly and I didn't much care for Midnight or Kelemvor when he seemed to make a better protagionist. That was gone by Prince of Lies andThe Crucible where Cyric was all round Dark Lord.
Malik is another favorite villain because he's one of the few ones that win and also is likeable despite being an utter scumbag.
I also like Artemis because I don't believe he's redeemed and he does make an excellent foil. I just wish he could have honestly beaten Drizzt once or twice.
Kinmen Nimsen is also up there because well...He's a racist politician. That's a fairly unique trait for the storylines.
Who is Kinmen Nymesin?
Do you mean Kymil Nimesin? If so yea he is a nasty fellow, but not what I am looking for in a villain.
Troy wasn't solely responsible for Avatar, IMO Troy saved Avatar with Waterdeep.
Oh and if I may be so bold to ask you not to spell all them novel titles in bold anymore, too much boldness, you know... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 23:07:22
|
| And to digress for a moment to the new X-Universe... I quite reading x-titles shortly after that whole techno-virus thingy around ...um... Uncanny 314 or so... what Marvel did with the retrofitting for new readers and a new audience...a shame so much good good stuff wasted |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 23:07:42
|
Yeah, I screwed up the name there. I meant Kymil Nimesin.
Why exactly isn't he what you're looking for in a villain? I don't think that there's really any cases of 'admirable evil' in Forgotten Realms because really most of them are just deplorable scumbags. The Return of the Archwizards showed nothing majestic about the Shades for example, they were petty and vile brutes. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 23:19:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by PaulSKemp
That, of course, presupposes the answer to the question that underlies this entire thread -- namely, whether morality can be/is objective or subjective. The question has been debated since at least the time of Plato and we're not likely to resolve it here.
*snip lots of text*
In my view, the fundamental question is not is one act or another moral or immoral. That's to have the discussion at one remove. The first question to be answered is: what, if anything, is the moral standard that we will apply?
I agree, Paul. Problem with applying a generic moral standard is that probably not two people can agree on that.
In the FR it's even worse. If Balance as decreed by Ao is the moral standard it's a sort of anything goes situation. What is Balance in the Realms? If it really is a metaphor to the proverbial scales then some things went majorly wrong. Unless of course, Myth Drannor's destruction and the banishment of the drow to the underdark was for the sake of balance. If that was the case, why didn't the gods intervene when Liriel Baenre used the Windwalker to retain her drow magic on the surface and thus accidentally for all drow. (This is so far the only explanation why drow do not lose their abilities now when too long in the sun...hmmm...maybe Lolth developed a new sunscreen also.
Maybe to discuss the moral standard issue correctly, we need to define who set the standard for Toril and what that standard is.
I know this gets pretty muddled because the many myths claim different things...
Too much thinking, too little sleep...brain hurts |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 16 Mar 2006 : 23:24:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Yeah, I screwed up the name there. I meant Kymil Nimesin.
Why exactly isn't he what you're looking for in a villain? I don't think that there's really any cases of 'admirable evil' in Forgotten Realms because really most of them are just deplorable scumbags. The Return of the Archwizards showed nothing majestic about the Shades for example, they were petty and vile brutes.
I would like to see a villain's development. Not the average Joe-stab'em'in'da'back, but an actual believable person. Kymil Nimesin didn't give any from my POV valid reason for trying to take out King Zaor's family. Especially if you consider that it was the bloody gods who decreed that Evermeet's King would be of Moon elven descent.
If it (the book) had given me a proper reason, any reason aside from the haughty gold elf, Nimesin would have made a much better and much more believable villain. Even if it is just hurt pride because Amaluril (I hope I spelled that right) dumped him on a date. Even if he was bred into this role, hell is he such a daft chap to not see through the web of deceit and lies? |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 00:39:04
|
quote:
I would like to see a villain's development. Not the average Joe-stab'em'in'da'back, but an actual believable person. Kymil Nimesin didn't give any from my POV valid reason for trying to take out King Zaor's family. Especially if you consider that it was the bloody gods who decreed that Evermeet's King would be of Moon elven descent.
If it (the book) had given me a proper reason, any reason aside from the haughty gold elf, Nimesin would have made a much better and much more believable villain. Even if it is just hurt pride because Amaluril (I hope I spelled that right) dumped him on a date. Even if he was bred into this role, hell is he such a daft chap to not see through the web of deceit and lies?
Weird, in Kymil Nimesin's case, I thought it was the most believable of villains out there. He hated the Moon Elves and the dynasty because his family was Number 2# in the Realms of Evermeet (I can't imagine they're number 99# now) because there was a monarchy and they used to be heads of a Council. He had also been raised to utterly hate the Moon Elves as a race, just like any other bigot.
I also find that religious people can be pretty self-justifying (spoken as a religious man) when they want something so I assumed that he just ignored the whole moon blade business. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Beezy
Learned Scribe
USA
280 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 05:48:51
|
For villians I liked Zelia from the house of Serpents trilogy. She had some interesting powers I had previously not read about. Also she was a very clever villian who always seemed to be a few steps ahead of Arvin and other characters in the book. I can't say too much about her without giving away some important plot info.
I liked Artemis a great deal at first but then I realized he was just the dark version of Drizzt. Now in the sellsword books I would not even call him a villian anymore because he is too watered down.
I had another one earlier but it slipped my mind. |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 06:15:56
|
I don't get that Artemis is watered down.
He's becoming a more rounded character but he's hardly CG if you catch my drift.
I point out that all of his companions ended up dead.
|
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 08:26:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
Weird, in Kymil Nimesin's case, I thought it was the most believable of villains out there. He hated the Moon Elves and the dynasty because his family was Number 2# in the Realms of Evermeet (I can't imagine they're number 99# now) because there was a monarchy and they used to be heads of a Council. He had also been raised to utterly hate the Moon Elves as a race, just like any other bigot.
I also find that religious people can be pretty self-justifying (spoken as a religious man) when they want something so I assumed that he just ignored the whole moon blade business.
Obviously Nimesin is intelligent, otherwise he wouldn't have been almost successful at taking over Evermeet. My gripe with it is basically tat it is clichee. From how I understand the story I thought that he was born after Zaor became king.
I know we wanted to leave the real world out of it, butI can't help it in this case. There were enough children in the Third Reich who were indoctrinated in so called Napolas, these schools, in addition to the HJ were the places that bred hate on a daily basis. After 1945 these people became adults, eventually, and if what you say is believable then all of these would have plotted to get the Third Reich back, and they would have continued to breed hatred into their children etc. My parents' generation turned out just fine, and the tensions you now have here in Germany originates from the discontent with the overall situation. Intelligent and ambitious people do not follow a cause for the cause's sake but they manipulate the cause to their own ends. There are no brainiac neo-nazi-grunts.
Maybe you now understand why I think Nimesin unbelievable. He didn't want anything for himself. He was willing to sacrifice his own culture, make deals with the devil (Lolth) to bring Evermeet down. If he did this out of love for Evermeet he wouldn't have sacrificed so many of his kinsmen. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Winterfox
Senior Scribe
895 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 11:11:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
I don't get that Artemis is watered down.
He's becoming a more rounded character but he's hardly CG if you catch my drift.
Perhaps because he now "stutters" and "shrieks"? And "makes love," of course. Personally, I find the personality-altering flute hilarious: an incredibly lazy plot contrivance. Wow, what a way to write gradual, believable character development and deal with the character's psyche properly... except not. (I know, I know. Believable character development and psychological exploration in a Salvatore novel? Anyone asking for either is looking in the wrong place.)
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Maybe you now understand why I think Nimesin unbelievable. He didn't want anything for himself. He was willing to sacrifice his own culture, make deals with the devil (Lolth) to bring Evermeet down. If he did this out of love for Evermeet he wouldn't have sacrificed so many of his kinsmen.
I dunno, I don't find that so unbelievable. It's like a snowball: at one point someone like him may lose sight of what he originally tried to do -- his actions become more and more extreme, and if sacrificing lives and making deal with Lolth will do it for him, then why not? It's not a logical, rational thing, just passion-filled. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 17 Mar 2006 : 11:29:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
Maybe you now understand why I think Nimesin unbelievable. He didn't want anything for himself. He was willing to sacrifice his own culture, make deals with the devil (Lolth) to bring Evermeet down. If he did this out of love for Evermeet he wouldn't have sacrificed so many of his kinsmen.
I dunno, I don't find that so unbelievable. It's like a snowball: at one point someone like him may lose sight of what he originally tried to do -- his actions become more and more extreme, and if sacrificing lives and making deal with Lolth will do it for him, then why not? It's not a logical, rational thing, just passion-filled.
[/quote]
Why does he want a system reinstated he never experienced? Why does he hate with an irrational passion a people whom have never done him wrong? And he didn't lose sight of his goal, either. He knows what he wants... but that concept is flawed. If that were true all descendants of former Nazis would be Nazis themselves, and that would include me, and I most difinitely am not.
Even if he was taught to hate he would still have his own eyes to see and his own brain to think.
Maybe you can't imagine what it's be like to live with a past such as we Germans have. There always is the question why this, why that.
My original intent was to bring about a discussion on what makes a villain more believable. His reasons for being whom he is. Kymil Nimesin never had any wants so to speak, he lived in wealth and splendor. He never experienced the 'glory' of the elven council, he only heard about it.
Yet, here he is, at Amlaruil's court, or at that time Zaor's, and he sees the glory and nobility of the royal house, he sees no wrongs being purposefully done to any gold, moon, green or I-don't-know-what-color elf. Yet he hates them with a passion that does not make sense, in the psychological make-up. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Villains in Novels
