| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 17:37:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
The key thing about applying core lore to a setting is that it is an individual gaming groups choice, not a mandate from WotC.
One of the major criticism of 4e FR is the fact that it often blindly ports core lore into the setting without dressing it up at all. If that is indeed non-realms specific lore, then it should be an option not an assumption that it works that way in Realms.
AFAIK, the Corellon/Gruumsh connection is intended to be core lore, not FR, but at your individual table, you can certainly apply it.
I consider it to be a apocryphal story (i.e. something that "could be the case but doesn't have wide acceptance) and a piece of speculation from sages. Until we see it confirmed as true in a Realms sourcebook or novel (and that would be a big deal, probably in a novel specifically dealing with elves and orcs), we should take the concept of Corellon and Gruumsh being brothers with a considerably large grain of salt.
I myself prefer the Corellon and Gruumsh as rivals for Araushnee's affections story myself. 
Cheers
They're hardly mutually exclusive. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
 |
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 18:31:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I consider it to be a apocryphal story (i.e. something that "could be the case but doesn't have wide acceptance) and a piece of speculation from sages. Until we see it confirmed as true in a Realms sourcebook or novel (and that would be a big deal, probably in a novel specifically dealing with elves and orcs), we should take the concept of Corellon and Gruumsh being brothers with a considerably large grain of salt.
I myself prefer the Corellon and Gruumsh as rivals for Araushnee's affections story.
They're hardly mutually exclusive.
Indeed not.
I've posted my own personal take on the Corellon/Gruumsh story in the Arvandor: Core vs. FR thread, for those who are curious. I wouldn't intend to import such a story into the FR, unless of course that's the direction we agree to take.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17038&whichpage=2
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" |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 19:19:10
|
| I read your comment on it in that thread, and I found it an interesting take, despite my wariness of the whole brothers thing. I just think it'd be "sudden lore" if it was applied to the Realms, but that's just my opinion. I'm sure others would find it interesting and think "why did it take so long for this to come out?" lol |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 19:36:10
|
From a development perspective I'd imagine(though claim no actual knowledge) that it's something that's been on the drawing board for a while now; Mark, for one, has claimed to having theorized it years ago.
What I suspect is that the general attitude towards the subject has shifted enough to the point where the developers are comfortable giving the devil(Gruumsh, in this case) his due. As Mark pointed out, Gruumsh is one of the most successful and prolific deities in D&D canon, realms and beyond. But within the realms he's often treated as Corellon's whipping boy or Lolth's puppet. There's long been a stigma regarding orcs and by extension, Gruumsh that being physically strong and unattractive makes one brutish, stupid, evil, and easily manipulated.
What I would like to believe, and this is probably my own bias, is that there's some movement to give more depth to the character as there is real potential for interesting story here if we move past that stigma. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 20:34:07
|
That argument on the point of "character depth" is compelling. To me, no god should be just a cardboard cut out "good guy" or "bad guy," just as no mortal character should be. Granted, the gods are supposed to represent universal forces like justice, war, destruction, etc., but they're still BEINGS possessing free will and self determination. This is the distinction I see between gods and primordials, which are forces of the universe rather than self-actualized beings.
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" |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 21:00:27
|
I actually wouldn't mind seeing a well-thought-through and well-explained story about the fall of a good god to evil, or lawful god to chaos, or redemption of an evil god. I think that they were trying to do this with the blurb about the Tymora/Tyr/Helm soap opera at the end of the Grand History of the Realms. However, whether or not they intended to polish it off, they never did, and it fell short. The changes in personality/alignment Eilistraee underwent after she subsumed Vhaeraun would also have made a good story. Another missed attempt.  Though official coverage of these events under the new Realms administration at WotC is still hope for, I fear that they will continue to be overlooked. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 21:37:00
|
I'd love to give the Tyr/Helm/Tymora story an actual treatment, or continue my Helm story down a dark road. It's just a question of WotC's interest.
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" |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 22:49:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
That argument on the point of "character depth" is compelling. To me, no god should be just a cardboard cut out "good guy" or "bad guy," just as no mortal character should be. Granted, the gods are supposed to represent universal forces like justice, war, destruction, etc., but they're still BEINGS possessing free will and self determination. This is the distinction I see between gods and primordials, which are forces of the universe rather than self-actualized beings.
Cheers
I can agree with this. They act very "human", or "demihuman" in this case, sometimes (which is part of why I like stories with gods and find them so interesting). With the Helm/Tyr thing, wasn't there something regarding jealousy of Siamphore (spelling?)in there somewhere? Ilmater was in the equation too, I think. I remember this being in Empryean Odyssey, but I don't remember the triangle.
The gods have different personalities, even the "evil" ones. I am in full agreement with that. This is why some worship Bane, others worship Asmodeus, Cyric, etc. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 00:08:45
|
Sembia: Then & Now
So I hit upon a new idea, or rather, another 'composite' idea. I really don't like the Shades in charge of Sembia. However, I think some folks may get some mileage out of it (if they like the Shades, and/or they want to do a "Free Sembia!" kind of campaign).
Why not split it into North and South? Its not like such things haven't been done (RW) before. I know this is similar to what happened to Unther (and we still don't know what shape Unther will be in in 5e, if any), but I think it could work. It splits rather nicely along the River Arkhen, as illustrated HERE. I was going to name them "occupied Sembia" and "Free Sembia", but then I got to thinking - each side would call the other the reverse.
I figure Cormyr had a heavy hand in freeing southern Sembia, ostensibly putting it back to 'the way it was before', but the reality is, they would have left 'security forces' there. Northern Sembia, on the other hand, would still be under Shade control (maybe a new capital based in Scarsdale). Each side would consider itself 'free', and the other side 'occupied'. The truth is, both are occupied and neither is truly free, but as least southern Sembia can go about its business pretty much as it did in the past (they are just not allowed to raise their own army anymore... similar to what the US did with Germany and Japan).
And now I got a picture in my head of Azoun V saying, "Mr. Telemont, take down this wall!"  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 24 Oct 2012 00:10:59 |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 02:57:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
That argument on the point of "character depth" is compelling. To me, no god should be just a cardboard cut out "good guy" or "bad guy," just as no mortal character should be. Granted, the gods are supposed to represent universal forces like justice, war, destruction, etc., but they're still BEINGS possessing free will and self determination. This is the distinction I see between gods and primordials, which are forces of the universe rather than self-actualized beings.
Cheers
It is possible to achieve character depth without making chaotic evil become merely chaotic misunderstood etc. While characters like Cyric, Bane, Gruumsh, Lolth and Shar etc might occasionally have sympathetic moments, it should always be clear that even with a hug and shoulder to cry on they aren't about to become the deities of peace and love. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 04:21:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Sembia: Then & Now
So I hit upon a new idea, or rather, another 'composite' idea. I really don't like the Shades in charge of Sembia. However, I think some folks may get some mileage out of it (if they like the Shades, and/or they want to do a "Free Sembia!" kind of campaign).
Why not split it into North and South? Its not like such things haven't been done (RW) before. I know this is similar to what happened to Unther (and we still don't know what shape Unther will be in in 5e, if any), but I think it could work. It splits rather nicely along the River Arkhen, as illustrated HERE. I was going to name them "occupied Sembia" and "Free Sembia", but then I got to thinking - each side would call the other the reverse.
I figure Cormyr had a heavy hand in freeing southern Sembia, ostensibly putting it back to 'the way it was before', but the reality is, they would have left 'security forces' there. Northern Sembia, on the other hand, would still be under Shade control (maybe a new capital based in Scarsdale). Each side would consider itself 'free', and the other side 'occupied'. The truth is, both are occupied and neither is truly free, but as least southern Sembia can go about its business pretty much as it did in the past (they are just not allowed to raise their own army anymore... similar to what the US did with Germany and Japan).
And now I got a picture in my head of Azoun V saying, "Mr. Telemont, take down this wall!"
I heartily approve this suggestion. I liked Sembia as it was, but it would be silly to just backtrack everything. But I'd get rid of the Ordulin maelstrom and make it the capital of Northern Sembia. Give the city connections to the plane of Shadow, by all means. But it just being a big whirlpool of shadowstuff feels like an open sore to me, and it's not even useful. It's like Tilverton again.
But anyway, the situation is almost set up like that already, with Urmlaspyr and Daerlun being independent. There would just need to be some escalation of tensions and the fall of Saerloon to the south to set up a nice conflict scenario. And I think both sides would just call themselves "Sembia" (maybe adding the "free" qualifier when they felt like making a point) and claim the whole country. Of course we should also have a "Northern" and "Southern" type denomination, which people from other countries would probably use.
You could even have Selgaunt as a city divided in two. Because that Ronald Reagan quote was just that awesome.
(I'm kidding, don't abuse the cold war analogy, please) |
Never sleep under the jackfruit tree.
Tales of Moonsea - A Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World. Check out our website at http://www.talesofmoonsea.com and our video trailer at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am304WqOAAo&feature=youtu.be, as well as our thread here at Candlekeep: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12955
My campaign thread: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16447 |
Edited by - Mapolq on 24 Oct 2012 04:30:43 |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 05:29:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
That argument on the point of "character depth" is compelling. To me, no god should be just a cardboard cut out "good guy" or "bad guy," just as no mortal character should be. Granted, the gods are supposed to represent universal forces like justice, war, destruction, etc., but they're still BEINGS possessing free will and self determination. This is the distinction I see between gods and primordials, which are forces of the universe rather than self-actualized beings.
Cheers
It is possible to achieve character depth without making chaotic evil become merely chaotic misunderstood etc. While characters like Cyric, Bane, Gruumsh, Lolth and Shar etc might occasionally have sympathetic moments, it should always be clear that even with a hug and shoulder to cry on they aren't about to become the deities of peace and love.
I do agree - I certainly don't want Gruumsh becoming a full on good guy- I think the gods, greater gods, especially, need to be open to a wide range of interpretation in order for them to appeal to the broadest possible swath of mortal followers.
To the humans, Gruumsh may simply be the god of savagery and destruction. But while the orcs certainly acknowledge that, they'd also view him as a god of strength, freedom, and self-reliance.
Its all a matter of perspective. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 06:32:01
|
I'm not proposing making evil gods not evil. I just want them to be interesting evil, not evil-for-evil's sake. They aren't misunderstood (unless you think they aren't evil, in which case you are making a fool mistake)--but they're more complex than "this guy is evil, period."
Kemp and Martin do evil characters exceptionally well. I make my own attempt at doing villains well (and have fielded feedback to that effect), though I won't toot my own horn.
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" |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 06:50:49
|
| Personally, I think Mask and Vhaeraun are awesome "evil" deities, and really, despite their alignment, they aren't THAT evil. Oh yes, they've had their nasty moments, but at least IMO, they're more anti-heroes than outright villains. And as for deities like Shar, Lolth, and Bane, well, they are deities I love to hate. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 16:05:26
|
Mask and Vhaeraun are great examples.
Vhaeraun is active in my current 4e FR campaign, and I'm playing in a game where we're interacting with the heir of Mask, who many members of the party think is irredeemably evil, but generally because he's constantly betraying or manipulating us. My character, however, sides with him occasionally--she believes he can be useful and that there is some good in him. (It also doesn't hurt that he's pretty good in the bed chamber.)
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" |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 16:39:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bladewind
quote:
Yeah, whoever came up with that idea that Gruumsh is a brother of Corellon is a wearer of a mirror mask (if you catch my drift). That just smells like cheese. I'd prefer my orc pantheon and my fey/elf/seldarine pantheon to have nothing in common but hate.
Aye, couldn't have said it better myself (but I missed your drift-- whats a mirror mask?). I don't think fey are that broad a category to allow goblinoid or orcoid races to be included.
____
I like Cyric. His clergy is so fun to roleplay because of the heated reactions of players have them instantly immersed. As his worshippers and clergy are mostly composed of the young, I see his religion as a divine rebelious movement. The many 'gangs' (as most travelling clerics to Cyric organize themselves rarely above the local scale) are a multifaceted source for 'innovative methods of worship', and constant surprizes for both their targets and allies. Cyric has taken over a lot of temples and even remote shrines to other Gods he subsumed, so his temples hold ancient holy sites to former dieties and some might hoard artifects of Bhaal, Myrkul or Leira. So, invading a temple of an assassins brotherhood of Cyric can be seriously scary and awesome to run but with awesome rewards for both DM and the players.
Shar too is a totally insidious diety I love in the Realms. Her portfolios alone are scary enough to carry her weight, but she holds extra gravitas because of the creation tales of Toril. But having her being a tad more engaged in a struggle with Selune would be preferred. We hardly get to see her clergies strategies against Shars darkness.
EDIT: needed a quote because of MT post
The mirror mask was a reference to Leira's followers (goddess of lies). |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 16:44:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Actually, I came up with that a long time ago (but I certainly didn't write that article).
In folklore, 'goblins' (which includes all the goblinoids, orcs, and even some of the smaller giantish species) are the Unseelie version of Elves. Neither is 'good' as humans define it, but rather Seelie fey (the creatures D&D normally refers to as 'fey') are simply not as mean and destructive. Both groups live their lives as hedonists, but the Unseelie (our goblins) don't care who they hurt in the process.
So its not so much 'cheese', as D&D returning to its folklore roots. Its also not the same thing that Tolkien did - his Orcs & goblins were devolved, specially-bred off-shoots of elves. The true (folklore versions) were both branches of a single race - one in which one's outward appearance reflected one's inner spirit. It was more a matter of choice then birth. For instance, the only difference between gnomes and redcaps is that redcaps were nasty little bast... buggers.
In the myths, normally 'solitary' fairies were thought of as the bad (Unseelie) ones, and trooping (social) fairies as 'Seelie', or 'good', but exceptions exist in both courts. Seelie =/= good, nor does Unseelie = bad, although it usually does work out that way (from a mortal PoV) because of their predispositions. Both groups are really neutral in regards to good and evil - for them its more of a law vs chaos thing.
Just like you can have evil elves and good drow, their should be examples of both on the other side of the fence - I cite the Ondonti (fey) Orcs as an example. You step into Orc lands and you get filled full of arrows. You step into wild (wood) elf lands and you get filled full of arrows. Whats the difference, Elves are 'cute'? Is it Hubris? Obould could have given any Gold elf a run for its money in that dept.
Nope, same critters as far as I'm concerned... the Elves just have everyone fooled (ask the Jhaamdathans, or the the folks of Chondath, or Miyeritar, etc, etc). You want to know what to call an honest elf? A drow. 
Ah, in that case we've found something we both disagree on. I see where you're coming from (I was thinking someone with a LotR fetish made up the idea). My thing is just... that was that world. In D&D lore, the two are separate. In fact, it was even specified that they couldn't cross breed in early lore (not something often done). Add to that that there's specifically Seelie and Unseelie faeries and they have no involvement with goblinkind. It might work well in some other campaign world, but I don't think it should be in FR or even in core. Maybe some world with a lot fewer races. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 17:53:37
|
As I said earlier, it was not my intention to introduce a blended fey/orc history into the core canon of the setting. It works for me, and I love to play it up in my games, but it doesn't work for everyone.
I recognize the tradition in D&D to keep things separated, but I think offering the blending angle is helpful for those DMs who like to explore a less black/white setting. I'm a tool-box designer--I like to provide tools to DMs to head whichever direction they want.
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" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 18:34:42
|
In my homebrew world, I've established an evolutionary chain to include all beings, which is how it should be.
At one point, on Earth (depending on your religious views), there was but one type of 'creature', which morphed into millions of species over time.
It doesn't really make sense (in earlier editions) that Orcs and Elves can interbreed, because both can breed with humans (humans can apparently breed with anything), and elves are a fey race and fey can breed with practically anything, as can goblinoids. If I were to play it by the rules, I would say an elf and an orc can have a child, but the child would be a mule (incapable of reproducing). That would be about as far as I would take the original rules on that point.
And even if you were to use the RAW (from earlier editions), according to evolution dogs and cats have to have had a common ancestor, yet they can't interbreed (I'd argue that point as well, but thats fodder for a different site). So yes, creatures with a common ancestor some 35+K years ago may not be able to interbreed. The rule does not invalidate the fact they may be related.
Look at some of the worst 'hot spots' in RW histroy; Ireland, the Middle east, even civil War America. North and South this, East and West that - the most volatile of situations is when people of the same ethnic group disagree. To me, it makes perfect sense that the goblinoids and fey had a schism in the distant past, because of how much the hatred is ingrained in their racial memories. You really can't hate someone that deeply unless it is personal.
I am not trying to change your mind, Slevas - everyone should run the game (and world) precisely how they want, and NOT follow the dictates of anyone else (listen, and then formulate your own ideas). On the other hand, how cool is it that that 'legend' in the article spun things so that Gruumsh was the real hero, and Corellon was a lazy, frivolous git?  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 20:56:57
|
| My thoughts are if they want to make Gruumsh more interesting.... do something with his clergy. Do something with his followers. Don't make him Corellon's brother, because really that just gets us back to telling the stories of the gods that we're all saying should be a bit more mysterious. What's next? Siamorphe was really Tyr's daughter and he was raping her, so that's why she left to go to Sune's house? There's useful "stories with the god" and then there's just clutter. We already knew that Corellon and Gruumsh don't like each other. Why does it need to turn into a family issue whenever no past lore links them. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 21:02:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In my homebrew world, I've established an evolutionary chain to include all beings, which is how it should be.
At one point, on Earth (depending on your religious views), there was but one type of 'creature', which morphed into millions of species over time.
It doesn't really make sense (in earlier editions) that Orcs and Elves can interbreed, because both can breed with humans (humans can apparently breed with anything), and elves are a fey race and fey can breed with practically anything, as can goblinoids. If I were to play it by the rules, I would say an elf and an orc can have a child, but the child would be a mule (incapable of reproducing). That would be about as far as I would take the original rules on that point.
And even if you were to use the RAW (from earlier editions), according to evolution dogs and cats have to have had a common ancestor, yet they can't interbreed (I'd argue that point as well, but thats fodder for a different site). So yes, creatures with a common ancestor some 35+K years ago may not be able to interbreed. The rule does not invalidate the fact they may be related.
Look at some of the worst 'hot spots' in RW histroy; Ireland, the Middle east, even civil War America. North and South this, East and West that - the most volatile of situations is when people of the same ethnic group disagree. To me, it makes perfect sense that the goblinoids and fey had a schism in the distant past, because of how much the hatred is ingrained in their racial memories. You really can't hate someone that deeply unless it is personal.
I am not trying to change your mind, Slevas - everyone should run the game (and world) precisely how they want, and NOT follow the dictates of anyone else (listen, and then formulate your own ideas). On the other hand, how cool is it that that 'legend' in the article spun things so that Gruumsh was the real hero, and Corellon was a lazy, frivolous git?
Yeah, its just one of those points where both of us do disagree (which seems unusual, because the two of us have said a lot of the same stuff lately). What I would point out though is that your basing your idea on evolution. I would point out an entirely different view. The gods made their races. Though evolution probably has some involvement over time in the worlds, in these fantasy worlds.... my feeling is that we should let that little piece go when it comes to everyone being related in some form. With interplanar travel, gods creating races, creator races creating new races, and just magic morphing beings..... there's a lot that can explain this mass conglomeration besides evolution. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 21:30:41
|
Ahhhh...
Then we actually disagree on a very basic precept (and I have to say your view is closer to the canonical view).
In my homebrew material (on my own HB world), I give everything a scientific explanation. A lot of this spills over into my (non-canonical) FR musings. I prefer to think of the myths about the racial creations as mere folklore, based very loosely on some ancient incidents. For instance, the Eladrin (elves) are "of Corellon's blood", which has been misinterpreted through time and religious rhetoric.
When you go back that far in time, which is pre-sundering, then elves and orcs as we know them didn't even exist, whether you go with evolution or not. Even if the Corellon myths are 100% accurate, it means there were no elves before he ascended. What that means is that whatever take you want to follow - Creationism or Evolution - the two groups would not have existed in any (recognizable) form. Thus, you can't say Corellon is an elf and Gruumsh is an Orc, because they predate those concepts. They were both something else (and I guess Archfey) before they became patron deities.
So you can say whatever you want as to their real origins, or their relationship to one-another, but neither started out an elf or an orc, especially if you go with the myths. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12189 Posts |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 23:44:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Ahhhh...
Then we actually disagree on a very basic precept (and I have to say your view is closer to the canonical view).
In my homebrew material (on my own HB world), I give everything a scientific explanation. A lot of this spills over into my (non-canonical) FR musings. I prefer to think of the myths about the racial creations as mere folklore, based very loosely on some ancient incidents. For instance, the Eladrin (elves) are "of Corellon's blood", which has been misinterpreted through time and religious rhetoric.
When you go back that far in time, which is pre-sundering, then elves and orcs as we know them didn't even exist, whether you go with evolution or not. Even if the Corellon myths are 100% accurate, it means there were no elves before he ascended. What that means is that whatever take you want to follow - Creationism or Evolution - the two groups would not have existed in any (recognizable) form. Thus, you can't say Corellon is an elf and Gruumsh is an Orc, because they predate those concepts. They were both something else (and I guess Archfey) before they became patron deities.
So you can say whatever you want as to their real origins, or their relationship to one-another, but neither started out an elf or an orc, especially if you go with the myths.
Yes, I very much go with the idea that Corellon wasn't an "elf". He's a deity who created beings that "look like" possibly some other fey beings. Now, whether he also created the other fey races, or his Seldarine pantheon is separate from the "Seelie" fey court... those are kind of debatable. I stick more to the idea there that Corellon and his Seldarine are a "rogue" group of the fey and that there are other "fey" deities that serve the more varied but less numerous types of "fey".
We have canonical lore that many of the elves that came here came from "Faerie", but we also have some lore (which I'll trust other sages to find, as I've heard them quote it) that there were more feral types of elves already in Faerun before those elves showed up. So, I'd imagine that Corellon or someone from the Seldarine was here to create those "elves".
On the other hand, we have orcs. I know we have orcs from prior to Gruumsh's arrival with the Orcgate (the northern mountain orcs), and I believe somewhere its stated that they came through interplanar travel just like the grey orcs with the orcgate. So, in both instances, I believe they were interlopers. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 06:09:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Mask and Vhaeraun are great examples.
Vhaeraun is active in my current 4e FR campaign, and I'm playing in a game where we're interacting with the heir of Mask, who many members of the party think is irredeemably evil, but generally because he's constantly betraying or manipulating us. My character, however, sides with him occasionally--she believes he can be useful and that there is some good in him. (It also doesn't hurt that he's pretty good in the bed chamber.)
Cheers
That sounds like an awesome campaign! |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 19:20:39
|
The conversation about the relationship among elves, fey, and orcs is an interesting one. Here are a couple of (non-Realmsian) concepts:
1) Norse mythology: "Dark elves" are underground smiths, kinda similar to our concept of dwarves, and a proto-vision of drow.
2) Beowulf: AFAIK, the first mention of "orcs" comes from Beowulf, where they are mentioned as a monster that Beowulf the hero has encountered/tricked/vanquished. This mention comes in the same breath as what we translates as "elves" or "fey" creatures. It depends a lot on your translation, but it's something that intrigued/boggled scholars, i.e., "what is the author of the story talking about?"
3) Tolkien: The professor's interpretation of Beowulf's "orcs" is to make them related to elves, as MT has discussed--twisted off-shoots of elves, but from the same progenitors. And as elves and fey are sort of interchangeable in Tolkien's world, that makes orcs a kind of fey too--a twisted dark fey, but fey of a sort.
4) D&D: Elves and orcs are two separate races bound together by implacable hatred. Elves are related to fey, depending on edition: earlier in the game, they were sort of distant cousins, but as time progressed they became a pseudo-mortal race of fey. I myself enjoy the ambiguity about orcs' origins, wherein they are kind of blended back to their mythic roots.
5) Pathfinder: I was surprised to discover that (as one of the editors assured me while I was writing "Proper Villains" for the setting) that elves in Golarion are NOT related to fey. This is probably because it was so deeply ingrained in my consciousness that elves came from fey backgrounds (from all those years of D&D), but it's an interesting take on it.
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" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36963 Posts |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 21:17:40
|
| I'm reading Lord of the Rings right now, and it seems that he also tends to use orc and goblin interchangably -- at least in the section where Merry and Pippin had been captured. |
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! |
|
|
|
Lord Bane
Senior Scribe
Germany
479 Posts |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 21:52:56
|
| Might be because Goblins and Orcs are both in the service of Sauron? |
The driving force in the multiverse is evil, for it forces good to act. |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 23:28:25
|
| In Tolkien's work, orcs and goblins were more or less the same thing; orc generally referred to larger varieties where as goblin referred to smaller(though, the general consensus is that they weren't as small as d&d goblins), sneakier varieties. Uruks were a special blend of orcs mixed with men(whether through breeding or some sort of magical melding is unclear) that were capable of withstanding the sunlight without injury or discomfort; some were close enough to human appearance that they could blend in in human taverns and only be thought of as ugly. Then again, Tolkien never really described orcs as being monstrous- ugly and deformed, yes, but there wasn't anything to suggest that they might as inhuman as most depictions of them. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36963 Posts |
Posted - 27 Oct 2012 : 04:57:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
Might be because Goblins and Orcs are both in the service of Sauron?
At least in the part where Merry and Pippin were captured, the words were used interchangably for one named orc. |
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! |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 27 Oct 2012 : 10:52:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
Might be because Goblins and Orcs are both in the service of Sauron?
At least in the part where Merry and Pippin were captured, the words were used interchangably for one named orc.
“There is probably nothing quite as confussing as the topic of Goblins and orcs in my fathers work” (Peoples of Middle Earth 126).
“The reason for this is that in much of the subsequent publications of the works for the Lord of the Rings, many of the explanatory sections regarding these beings were left out. For instance the difference for the term Goblin as a species title, and Goblin as a generic title to describe those orcs and Goblins that lived in the Mysty Mountains, from the Hobbit. The survivers of which were found mostly in Saruman’s service. Another part that adds to the confusion is that all of them were refered to by others as the catch all of Goblins, even if they were orcs. One can think of this then under the square and rectangle issue of geometry, all orcs are goblins, but not all goblins are orcs; at least according to the other groups, humans, elves, etc.” (Peoples of middle earth 128-129).
“To understand this then there are four distinct groups: Goblins, which were originally elves and transformed by Sauron and his master, which are by far the most numerous of the group; there are orcs, which were the further transformation of the goblins by Sauron, in all the ages, making them only slightly less numerous than the goblins; there are the Uruk-hai, originally created by Sauron from orcs, and later the first groups created by Saruman in his experimentation that eventually developed the last group, the orcmen, or half orcs… the greatest level of confussion arises therefore in that most of the interaction with these groups is seen from the view of the central characters, which is where the orc/goblin comes interchangeably, and the reader can become easily confused and might think that the distinction is not that important. Unfortunately, my father thought that the reader had access to the whole lengthy description on the topic given by Saruman after the capture of Gandalf, which was removed from the Fellowship, shortly after the original publication. One of many sections of highly useful, if somewhat long winded sections removed” (Peoples of middle earth, 202-204).
Hope this helps with the matter, now I need to get back to working on Thayan stuff for the titles scroll. Be back when I get finished, don’t know how long that’ll be.
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e) THE SEQUEL
