| Author |
 Topic  |
|
TheHermit
Seeker
USA
60 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Dec 2011 : 02:27:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
The best of those trios always required a "fourth man" as logistical support/backup.
That would be "the Zeppo" or "the Shemp". (Or if you work with Sam Raimi, "the fake Shemp".) |
- "Glitz & Klax's Potions & Elixirs"/"The Sandmen", Inside Ravens Bluff, The Living City; 1990; TSR, Inc.
- "The Far Guardians' Traveler's Mission", Port of Ravens Bluff; 1991, TSR, Inc.
- "Signs Painted", Polyhedron #70; April, 1992; TSR, Inc.
- Communications Director, Coliseum of Comics, Orlando, FL - http://coliseumofcomics.com/ |
 |
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 29 Dec 2011 : 12:01:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yoss
Hey, if there are 12 princes, chances are that with one or two of their births mom and dad got a little lazy and decided, "well, we already have a Telamont jr, how about we just call this one 'Telemont.'"
None of the princes is a Telamont junior. Being the eldest, perhaps Rivalen was considered to be one. But as it stands, only the High Prince bears that name. And if we compare his sons' personalities, no one is like him. Brennus comes close, save for the fact that he's too "transparent"---one can almost literally read his emotions by simply looking at him, as opposed to Telamont, who often wears his "mask" of impassivity. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2012 : 17:39:36
|
| If a pirate gets captured and thrown in jail, does he have to share his booty? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2012 : 19:37:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If a pirate gets captured and thrown in jail, does he have to share his booty?
I am glad i wasn't drinking anything when i read this because it would have come straight out of my nose! Good one!  |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 04:34:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If a pirate gets captured and thrown in jail, does he have to share his booty?
Jack Sparrow got thrown in jail many times but never shared his booty. Unless when he's forced to. |
Every beginning has an end. |
Edited by - Dennis on 25 Jan 2012 04:35:04 |
|
|
|
Xnella Moonblade-Thann
Learned Scribe
USA
234 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 10:59:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If a pirate gets captured and thrown in jail, does he have to share his booty?
Just read that and nearly lost my laptop to a mis-aimed Orange Juice Spray spell. And no, I don't purposely miscast spells like a famous noble dandy whose family name I share 
I think it depends on the pirate's preference, really. And not all pirates are males. I'm sure the Realms has had its fair share of lasses who became pirates. |
"Sweet water and light laughter until next we meet." - traditional elven farewell
Please forgive any spelling and grammer errors, as my android touch-screen phone has no spellchecker. If I do make a grammer mistake, please let me know and I'll try to fix it.
New laptop, still trying to sort my "scrolls" on its shelves...and when will this cursed thing stop doing things I tell it not to? |
Edited by - Xnella Moonblade-Thann on 18 Feb 2012 11:03:06 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 03:42:12
|
Thanks.... I'll be here all week.
Don't forget to tip your waitresses, and try the veal.
Question: What was the start date of the published Realms? Was it the date of the OGB, or did the Bloodstone modules or the Drizzt novels set it even earlier? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 03:59:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Thanks.... I'll be here all week.
Don't forget to tip your waitresses, and try the veal.
Question: What was the start date of the published Realms? Was it the date of the OGB, or did the Bloodstone modules or the Drizzt novels set it even earlier?
I think it was the OGB... with 1356 DR and 1357 DR. |
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 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 04:04:23
|
Ah, okay. Cool.
Has the 4e timeline been extended at all past the 1479 DR start, thus far? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 04:28:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Ah, okay. Cool.
Has the 4e timeline been extended at all past the 1479 DR start, thus far?
Yes. 1510 DR, Year of the Treasure Abandoned. I vaguely recall one of the new novels was set in 1485. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 06:02:36
|
I may have misspoke - are you saying the timeline was simply extended (like how we had the Roll of Years), or was some event actually taking place in 1510 FR?
I get the impression by your post that the answer I was looking for was the 1485 date, which means the setting is precisely 1 century advanced from the final 3e date.
So, assuming no canon event took place in 1510, that means the entire published history of the setting has taken place from 1356 DR to 1485 DR - a period of 129 years.
Thanks for the info - I am just trying to wrap my mind around something.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 06:40:28
|
| A hint at a thirty year jump for 5E ... can't be ... or can it? |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 14:42:35
|
Well, my third question was going to be "Do any scribes happen to have the dictionary definition of compromise?"
But then I realized I'm better off waiting for 4.5 FR to be released before I make those arguments.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 19 Feb 2012 : 19:53:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I may have misspoke - are you saying the timeline was simply extended (like how we had the Roll of Years), or was some event actually taking place in 1510 FR?
I get the impression by your post that the answer I was looking for was the 1485 date, which means the setting is precisely 1 century advanced from the final 3e date.
So, assuming no canon event took place in 1510, that means the entire published history of the setting has taken place from 1356 DR to 1485 DR - a period of 129 years.
Thanks for the info - I am just trying to wrap my mind around something.
Sorry for the confusion. Though your interpretation is correct, AFAIK. I don't recall any events that occurred in 1510 DR, so perhaps it's a mere extension of the timeline. However, I haven't read all the 4E novels. Most, but not all, so I could be incorrect. I suppose Tyrant and swifty have, so they're free to chime in and clarify that. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8041 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 02:25:42
|
| The Roll of Years does name dates as far as 1600DR. I can't recall any "actual" events occurring later than perhaps 1489DR. Then again, I have little interest in post-Spellplague Realmslore, so my information is likely incomplete. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 02:38:07
|
The names have to follow actual events, right? Why name a year so far into the future where possibilities abound and a divined event might not have actually happened? Are the Seers the ones who name the years? If not, who? And on what basis exactly? |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 03:12:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
The names have to follow actual events, right? Why name a year so far into the future where possibilities abound and a divined event might not have actually happened? Are the Seers the ones who name the years? If not, who? And on what basis exactly?
Alaundo and Augathra's prophecies are cryptic and poetic, not descriptive, and many of them are nothing more than the year names. The idea is not that they definitely refer to large-scale events: sages differ, even after the fact, on what the prophecies refer to. These guys are crazy mystics, not big-man-theory historians, and their visions were not all of the RSE-type events that TSR/WotC has trained some of us to think 'important.' |
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 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 03:17:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
The names have to follow actual events, right? Why name a year so far into the future where possibilities abound and a divined event might not have actually happened? Are the Seers the ones who name the years? If not, who? And on what basis exactly?
The names in the existing Roll of Years were divined by Augathra the Mad and, later, Alaundo. Apparently another purpose of the Spellplague was to prove these worthies wrong, because 1440 is the Year of Azuth's Woe, and to the best of our knowledge, Azuth should be pushing up daisies from 1385 to at least 1479. I'm curious as to what (if anything) was originally intended for this year, but either way, in the canon timeline, it can't possibly have anything to do with The High One. I suppose we'll have to retcon the Roll of Years now too...
Edit: Heh. Looks like I got scooped by The Sage.  |
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 20 Feb 2012 03:19:20 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 03:22:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Alaundo and Augathra's prophecies are cryptic and poetic, not descriptive, and many of them are nothing more than the year names. The idea is not that they definitely refer to large-scale events: sages differ, even after the fact, on what the prophecies refer to. These guys are crazy mystics, not big-man-theory historians, and their visions were not all of the RSE-type events that TSR/WotC has trained some of us to think 'important.'
Still, it's amazing how accurate the year names are in terms of things that happened in that year, for the most part... and you're right, almost none of them are big RSE things... and this is a good thing, a trend that should have been continued from 1357 DR onward.  |
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 20 Feb 2012 03:23:40 |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 03:49:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
The names have to follow actual events, right? Why name a year so far into the future where possibilities abound and a divined event might not have actually happened? Are the Seers the ones who name the years? If not, who? And on what basis exactly?
The names in the existing Roll of Years were divined by Augathra the Mad and, later, Alaundo. Apparently another purpose of the Spellplague was to prove these worthies wrong, because 1440 is the Year of Azuth's Woe, and to the best of our knowledge, Azuth should be pushing up daisies from 1385 to at least 1479. I'm curious as to what (if anything) was originally intended for this year, but either way, in the canon timeline, it can't possibly have anything to do with The High One. I suppose we'll have to retcon the Roll of Years now too...
Edit: Heh. Looks like I got scooped by The Sage.
Divination has its limits.
Besides, Azuth might still live. In the world of D&D, there' no such thing as utterly dead. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 04:00:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Divination has its limits.
Besides, Azuth might still live. In the world of D&D, there' no such thing as utterly dead.
Especially for deities, as Ed has mentioned before... it just seems interesting to me that the Year of Azuth's Woe falls during the gap when nothing (AFAWK) seems to change regarding deities (particularly the dead Azuth) being alive or dead. |
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 20 Feb 2012 04:04:40 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 04:08:09
|
Except Shar diverged the main timeline down her black chronology, so the further-out we can get from the divergence, the more likely the year-names become meaningless.
IMO, of course.
And yes, somewhere in 3e someone got the bright idea of having an RSE match the year name, EVERY YEAR, and at one point they had two many RSE's for one year, and had to push the date back a year and somehow connect it to that name (something that shouldn't have even been necessary, except they convinced themselves this was an important formula to follow).
So the short answer is, just because a year has a name, that doesn't mean that year has 'happened yet'. I - and probably most fans - do not consider it 'current' until there is something detailed within that year, however minor.
Anyhow, I appreciate all the feedback. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 20 Feb 2012 04:10:23 |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 05:17:45
|
Not Shar. More like Cyric. The mind (Shar) is as good as useless without the hands (Cyric). |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 17:36:56
|
IMHO, she was behind the ToT - it was the necessary point of divergence to create the deity Cyric (note when her Black Chronology begins).
Shar is the ultimate 'shadowy manipulator' - she was also behind Karsus' research, so we have some canonical evidence that in the past she has purposely steered events to generate the precise outcome she wants (in all cases, the death of Mystra).
And for whatever reason, she is always thwarted (even though she 'wins', temporarily).
Cyric - in all senses of the word - is just a tool. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2012 : 03:51:49
|
I'd like to see Shar betrayed by hist most powerful and supposedly most loyal servants---the Shadovar. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2012 : 05:52:34
|
That would be really interesting, but I have no clue how they could make that believable - they are just too connected to her.
Still, cool concept. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2012 : 06:08:33
|
Not all the princes are truly devoted to her. Telamont dared defied her will---once. Brennus called her a bitch goddess and meant it with all his heart. More than half of the princes recognize her usefulness but do not exactly show any sign of devotion. To many of them, she's just part of the means to some selfish ends.
On the other hand, the priests and priestesses of Shar comprise a considerable portion of their empire's army, headed by Rivalen himself. Soon all the Sharrans would have to choose between their city (meaning Telamont) and their goddess. Rivalen once had that dilemma, and came up with a compromise. But I doubt if all the other Sharrans would be that lucky. [Unless they secretly worship Lady Luck as well.] |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2012 : 22:16:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Divination has its limits.
Besides, Azuth might still live. In the world of D&D, there' no such thing as utterly dead.
I was thinking about this one again, in the context of the "unreliable narrator" idea, and it occurred to me that we really know nothing about what happened outside of Toril during the Spellplague. So, my stupid question is, why wouldn't the 5e Realms simply retcon everything god-related about the Spellplague not directly involving Shar, Cyric, and Mystra? The whole thing with Helm and Tyr was silly (although I happen to believe that Tyr is a redundant deity in the Realms, and he should have been the one to die in that scenario), and the idea that anyone would know anything about the fates of Azuth, Savras, and Velsharoon (let alone Mystra, and even that's pushing it in the light of recent novel implications) is ludicrous. Asmodeus could easily have acquired his divinity from someone other than Azuth... although the similarity of the names probably provides a good excuse; we don't want to confuse the new players with deities with similar names now, do we? Okay, that last one is another stupid question; rant over. |
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. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 03 Mar 2012 : 20:31:30
|
I don't have access to the Cormyrian lineage (yet).
Who succeeded Glantharla? Is there any info about her illegitimate son, Roderin? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Mar 2012 : 22:39:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't have access to the Cormyrian lineage (yet).
None of us do... and I expect that state of affairs never to change. If you meant the succession given in the GHotR, that I can help with.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Who succeeded Glantharla? Is there any info about her illegitimate son, Roderin?
Roderin was, in fact, Gantharla's successor, IIRC... let me double check that and get back to you.
Edit: Yep, Roderin was Gantharla's successor and only offspring. He also died without issue; succeeded by Thargreve "the Lesser", son of Boldovar's sister Erthava (who lived in Westgate). |
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 03 Mar 2012 22:43:00 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Stupid question time...
