Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - New Approach to GH Canon?
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    New Approach to GH Canon? [ 1, 2  Next]
    Author Message
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:07 am  
    New Approach to GH Canon?

    I've been thinking about "canon" changing over time with seemingly no rhyme or reason other than the author a) didn't check, b) didn't care or c) thought they had a better idea. If left at that, I think this sort of makes "canon" less that "canonical."

    One approach I've taken it to imagine that all "canon" is being written in and by a "third person" Greyhawk scholar, whose "knowledge" may not be perfect. Thus, if canon sources disagree, it is like two medieval monks, one in Dublin and one in Bucharest, each describing events in Paris. Neither is likely to get it completetly correct to the finest detail.

    Going further along this line, the author's name, following Tzelios' onamastics, can be "fictionalized" along with the GH title they authored. Thus, Sean K. Reynolds, who wrote The Scarlet Brotherhood, could become Skreyn who wrote The Brotherhood of Scarlet.

    The other approach that appeals to me is to give various "canon" statements a "weight" -

    Who said it and what is their GH "standing?"

    Is what they say more or less rationalized?

    Do most "canon" sources agree or disagee?

    What are the implications for the setting, if any?

    Combining these two approaches, I think solves a lot of problems resolving canon conflicts both with the main stream of GH canon and with particular reference to 3E GH canon. It is okay then if canon sources disagree, as such will not impact the integrity of the setting (within limits, of course).

    Thoughts anyone?
    _________________
    GVD
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 876
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 6:02 am  

    That sounds good to me, GVD. I've always "weighted" canon chronologically; that is, EGG's initial work has the highest priority, and the newest fan-written material has the lowest. I have no problem with newer canon where it doesn't contradict older canon, but, in the case of a discrepancy, I generally rule that older is better. Thus, to name a few, my list of canon authors would read something like this:

    1. Gary Gygax
    2. Len Lakofka
    3. Rob Kuntz
    4. Frank Mentzer
    5. Jim Ward
    6. Roger Moore
    7. Zeb Cook
    8. Harold Johnson
    9. Allen Hammack
    10. Lawrence Schick
    11. Doug Niles
    12. Carl Sargent
    13. Sean Reynolds
    14. Bruce Cordell
    15. Erik Mona
    16. Gary Holian


    (Let me know if I missed anyone.) I do like your idea about divergent sources, though. It's just further misinformation for the PC's. Cool
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 6:42 am  

    I agree that older is better, but I can see a justification for newer is better. GVD's idea sound great, but I would give it some kind of name to hedge againt the inevitable arguments about the appropriate way to approach canon. I do not have a suggestion, but I would follow along with Tzelios' onamastics.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1076
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:32 am  
    Yes

    I have been arguing for an "garbled history," methodology for a long time, GVD, but many people dont want to hear it. Their argument generally revolves around spells and Legend Lore in particular, not that my reading of that spell helps them at all.

    Such a tact would add a new layer to the game world, and would greatly simplify the "Canon," text. However, similar arguments have been made with the Bible, and there is always one group that loudly disagrees and claims they know the "Right," interpertation. And "right," in the preceeding sentence can and should be interpreted all the ways it can be interpreted Wink
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 33


    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 11:35 am  

    Just to throw in a couple of coppers, I think there's a pragmatism to accepting newer material as more official.

    If Living Greyhawk establishes something today that conflicts with 1980 Gygax material, subsequent works will likely agree with the recent stuff. We'll just get farther and farther out of sync with current GH if we don't go along.

    And to remove any ambiguity, in my book 'canon' comes only from official sources (TSR & WotC). Non-official fan material (no matter how good) never defines canon.

    Regards all,

    Jack
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 116
    From: New York City

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:30 pm  

    Canon is only as useful as befits our individual homebrew campaigns.

    Like Prata, I'll always give the benefit of the doubt to the Masters; Gygax, Kuntz, etc... However, I read as much material as I can on any given location/NPC/relic/etc..., including everything written here and on other GH websites, and if an idea is particularly plausible (well-thought out material is to be prized above all else, which is a reason I'm a big fan of Maldin's work) or just plain cool, I won't hesitate to use it over an older source.

    As I'm sure is the case with most or all of you who've been running GH campaigns for several years, if you stepped into my Greyhawk, you'd find a well defined, fleshed out world that bears much resemblance to canon material (and owes Gygax an unspeakable debt) - but one that continues to mutate into its own organism, getting further from printed material by the day.

    I can only shake my head in wonder at those who spend sleepless nights worrying about conflicting material in two 'canon' sources, wondering how they will adjudicate the discrepancies. My advice is not to live in fear of parting ways with 'canon' - with a little ingenuity, you can always get back to the center. Once you take it off auto-pilot and start driving yourself, you'll be surprised at how much more fun you (and your players) are having. Cool
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 15, 2002
    Posts: 165
    From: Seattle

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:34 pm  

    I dunno...maybe I'm a bit too on the fence about canon, but I just don't really see the usefulness of quantifying it like this.

    1) Good luck getting everyone to agree to one system.
    2) Can you imagine explaining this to a newbie? "Well, yes, that official GH release DOES say that, but the canonical weight of that is only a 6. It's directly contradicted by this source here, which is clearly an 8. So, there ya go." Whathuh??

    I'd also be worried about alienating those who don't adopt this system, but maybe I'm reading too much into that.
    _________________
    ~basiliv

    I didn't design the world,
    I merely facilitated its creation
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 15, 2002
    Posts: 165
    From: Seattle

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 1:51 pm  

    Ha! btgrover, great example of what I was afraid of!

    I think your misconceptions are very common among those who just reject canon outright. I don't think most of us are as married to it as you seem to believe. While I enjoy sorting through the minutae and "fixing" discrepancies, I'll also throw canon out the window if it suits me. And we've already discussed that I'm a big fan of Maldin's work. Happy

    I think most of us who try to adhere to canon are still totally accepting of those who aren't. I'm definitely not saying canon is better -- it's all a matter of preferences.

    Canon is a great tool if you're writing material for others (say, submitting an article to Canonfire). It's certainly not any sort of hard and fast rule, and non-canonical material is not of any lower quality or less useful in and of itself. But the farther you stray from canon, the more your material will conflict with the home campaigns of other users. This means they'll get a lot less mileage out of your work than if it started with the common ground of canon.
    _________________
    ~basiliv

    I didn't design the world,
    I merely facilitated its creation
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 3:01 pm  

    GVD: “Going further along this line, the author's name, following Tzelios' onamastics, can be "fictionalized" along with the GH title they authored. Thus, Sean K. Reynolds, who wrote The Scarlet Brotherhood, could become Skreyn who wrote The Brotherhood of Scarlet.”

    So GVD, what is going to be the name of the NPC sage that is going to compile and catalogue the discrepancies of the other sages?

    Grey Dammerung, for twilight of Greyhawk would be appropriate. Maybe Glenvin Hammernd, the hammer, in recognition of your ability to force it all together.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 3:36 pm  
    Re: New Approach to GH Canon?

    GVDammerung wrote:
    I've been thinking about "canon" changing over time with seemingly no rhyme or reason other than the author a) didn't check, b) didn't care or c) thought they had a better idea. If left at that, I think this sort of makes "canon" less that "canonical."


    Thank you GVD, thank you man, if I was there I would have kissed your hands. I am just trying to overcome a psychological depression, thank you.

    GVDammerung wrote:
    One approach I've taken it to imagine that all "canon" is being written in and by a "third person" Greyhawk scholar, whose "knowledge" may not be perfect. Thus, if canon sources disagree, it is like two medieval monks, one in Dublin and one in Bucharest, each describing events in Paris. Neither is likely to get it completetly correct to the finest detail.


    You got the point man, you have it!

    GVDammerung wrote:
    Going further along this line, the author's name, following Tzelios' onamastics, can be "fictionalized" along with the GH title they authored. Thus, Sean K. Reynolds, who wrote The Scarlet Brotherhood, could become Skreyn who wrote The Brotherhood of Scarlet.


    Allow me to be strict to that. Reynolds is the Fiend Sage, we got to keep some rules to that. I missed him in my meta-text onomastics, well there is always place for additions. For the title you offer though it is good, in line with Allan Grohe's inovation to translate The Adventure Beggins into On the Beginnings of Adventures.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 3:45 pm  

    DMPrata wrote:
    That sounds good to me, GVD. I've always "weighted" canon chronologically; that is, EGG's initial work has the highest priority, and the newest fan-written material has the lowest. I have no problem with newer canon where it doesn't contradict older canon, but, in the case of a discrepancy, I generally rule that older is better.


    Yeah, that's it, let me pass my depression.

    I would move Mona though higher in your order, due to quality material he delivered.

    DMPrata wrote:
    I do like your idea about divergent sources, though. It's just further misinformation for the PC's. Cool


    Yeah, misinformation for the PCs, that's it.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 3:54 pm  

    jwb3 wrote:
    Just to throw in a couple of coppers, I think there's a pragmatism to accepting newer material as more official.


    Yap, new material is more official, you are pragmatic indeed. However, even Mona puts the heavy weight to old stuff when he compiles his goodness. Search the Gtalk archives and you will see my point.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 116
    From: New York City

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:01 pm  

    Basiliv, I think you misinterpreted my post. My campaign wouldn't exist without canon (my hat is off to the man, besides Gary, whose campaign would). I certainly don't reject it outright, I'm just more willing than most to diverge from it when it suits my purpose. I'm the first in line to give props to the acknowledged masters, and I'd never put myself in their class.

    I guess it comes down to intent. If your goal is to write for publication, as you seem to infer is the big picture, of course you've got to follow the material scripted thus far. My purpose is humbler; I just want to tell my players a compelling story. To that end, I'll use all the weapons at my disposal. I'm sure if the Creators had a time machine, and could read all the thousands of pages of ideas, so many of them brilliant, that came after they laid down the origins of the game, they'd have done many things differently.

    Well - I do have that luxury, and I think it'd be a failing on my part not to pick and choose the best and most clever ideas I've seen, and bind them all together with a healthy dose of my own flavor. (As an aside, turning published material on its head is also the only way I can truly know that my players are sitting on the edge of their seats - they're a wily bunch, and they spend a lot of time at gaming shops).

    If that makes my material unusable for the masses, that's OK. As I said, that was never my intent. I suppose that makes me a scavenger on the Canonfire food chain. Having said that, I've still gotten interested inquires on a semi-regular basis asking for further details on threads and twists I've put forth, and the conversations that ensued have developed a lot of fruit as collaborative efforts, so perhaps it's impossible to contribute nothing when you take part in these conversations.

    I love this discussion board for its potential as a breeding ground for new ideas. I use it to brainstorm, and to shamelessly crib ideas from my fellow DMs. If reconciling canonical inconsistancies is what floats your boat, more power to you, my good man. I respect what you do, and your posts are consistantly strong. Whatever differences we have, at the end of the day we can all unite under one banner - love of GH, and love of the game.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 15, 2002
    Posts: 165
    From: Seattle

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 4:59 pm  

    Heya BT,

    I think we're on the same page now, so no harm no foul.

    You've got some great ideas from what I've seen so far. Don't feel like a scavenger -- you're already contributing a lot more than I was for my first year or so when I was largely in lurker mode on Greytalk. Heck, I'm pretty sure you're contributing more than I am this year, as well.

    ...and thanks for the kudos! Embarassed
    _________________
    ~basiliv

    I didn't design the world,
    I merely facilitated its creation
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 5:36 pm  
    Canon is important...

    If you're writing an article for Canonfire! Otherwise, everyone should be picking and choosing what they want or need from canon. The orchard is full of beautiful fruit, but why overfill your basket? Take what you need and come back later if you must. And disregard fan material in favor of canon? Bah, it's all the same orchard!

    Mind you, I'm firmly in the heretic's camp. I was very slow to accept anything from Sargent. The fact that Gygax had Chelor ready to crush Idee in 578 and Sargent had Chelor still fumbling against Idee in 583 is still a discrepancy I grapple with eight years later.

    Oh, and I use gunpowder too. :p

    ~Scott C.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 15, 2002
    Posts: 165
    From: Seattle

    Send private message
    Wed Jun 29, 2005 7:43 pm  

    Scottenkainen said:

    Quote:
    If you're writing an article for Canonfire! Otherwise, everyone should be picking and choosing what they want or need from canon. The orchard is full of beautiful fruit, but why overfill your basket? Take what you need and come back later if you must. And disregard fan material in favor of canon? Bah, it's all the same orchard!


    Agreed! That was my whole point. This is exactly why I don't understand a need to quantify which canon should take precidence over the others. Canon definitely has its uses, and I probably use it more than most. But I don't understand the need for a ranking system (and the ranking system was the origin point of this thread. See GVD, I remembered! I apologize for hijacking it).
    _________________
    ~basiliv

    I didn't design the world,
    I merely facilitated its creation
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:01 am  

    Rather than ranking chronologically, wouldn't it make sense to rank by internal consistancy?

    If someone back in the beyond wrote something that's completely off base in terms of the rest of the publish material (and I'm thinking some of the canon gaffes in the old Kuntz and Gygax Dragon article - King Dunstan of Nyrond in 577 CY anyone?), then it should be weighted or ranked or whatever less than something that's more recent and more consistant.

    As for why Chelor didn't crush Idee in 578 - it's simple - he was a fool. :) :)

    Instead of giving Reynard command, he wanted to enhance his own standing by leading the campaign himself, with the ignominious conseqeunces that followed.

    Or so some old soak in a Zelradton tap house told me... :)



    P.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 33


    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 4:26 am  

    Tzelios wrote:
    Yap, new material is more official, you are pragmatic indeed. However, even Mona puts the heavy weight to old stuff when he compiles his goodness. Search the Gtalk archives and you will see my point.

    I have to respond to this :)

    You are right, Tzelios -- Mona does give older stuff appropriate weight. But Erik Mona (and some or all of his colleagues at Dungeon), IMHO, are champions of the Greyhawk we all came to know and love.

    And yes, what he compiles is goodness. A far cry from a couple of the revisionist authors GH has had to suffer (I've wished a couple had been bludgeoned for their contribution).

    I'm about to start DMing the new Adventure Path campaign in Dungeon, Age of Worms. For those who aren't familiar with it, the campaign (the second of 12 installments hasn't hit bookstands yet) is dyed-in-the-wool Greyhawk, under the thinnest veneer of generic-ness to keep the evil overlords at WotC happy. Clearly the product of someone who loves and cherishes EGG's Greyhawk.

    Regards all,

    Jack
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:23 am  
    Ah...

    I see where I swiped Jim's point about canon and Canonfire, but we are only in agreement along one axis of thought here.

    One axis is whether or not personal campaigns should adhere to canon, but the other axis is about which end of the publishing timeline should generally take precedent over the other. On that second axis, I'm in with DMPrata and Old School Greyhawk.

    And Chelor may have been a fool, but he was a fool with HUGE numbers behind him! Who did Idee have defending them? Henry V?

    ~Scott C.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:59 am  

    GDV mentioned two approaches. One was to address the canon discrepancies in character (IC) and the other was to give them weight. I did not see anyone objecting the former. As to the latter, there are good points one all sides. Newer is better, older is better and it does not matter IMC.

    I think the arguments as to weight are a wash when you consider canon IC. Sage ABC can take one side and Sage XYZ could take another, while the DM is always free to ignore or incorporate anything. IC canon analysis as a system appears to perfect.

    GDV: “Combining these two approaches, I think solves a lot of problems resolving canon conflicts …”

    Perhaps, Tzelios' and GDV, or others, could generate a supplement to the onamastics and/or a few examples of sages disagreeing hitting upon some of the more important discrepancies so we can see how it works. Are there a couple of Grey Sages out there who are in disagreement about any particular issue?
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:17 am  
    To clarify a clarification

    I wasn't attempting to introduce anything new to this thread so much as to point out that there are multiple issues here that cross-over but do not necessarily run parallel. I can agree with one poster on judicious use of canon and at the same time disagree with his priorities in assigning canon. Both seem to be matters of opinion.

    I did not comment at all on the third issue here, in-character use of discrepancies in Greyhawk canon, but another poster has already clarified the two ends of that axis -- divination supporting absolute facts vs. subjection interpretation of both divinations and known facts. Only the later supports the in-game scholastics that Tzelios has so ably popularized.

    ~Scott C.
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 116
    From: New York City

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 10:46 am  

    As long as all of you canon experts are gathered together here, let me ask - I've seen several historical timelines of Greyhawk (most on GH websites), and several of them (predictably) have inconsistancies. Has anyone ever put together a "Master Timeline" that chronicles the major historical events of GH?

    This is something I'd have use for, and have done to a general extent myself, but if anyone has gone into depth I'd love to see what they put together.

    Don't mean to hijack the thread, perhaps you could PM me if you've got something that would help.

    Shamelessly stealing as always,
    BTG Cool
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 21, 2003
    Posts: 158


    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:48 am  

    btgrover wrote:
    As long as all of you canon experts are gathered together here, let me ask - I've seen several historical timelines of Greyhawk (most on GH websites), and several of them (predictably) have inconsistancies. Has anyone ever put together a "Master Timeline" that chronicles the major historical events of GH?


    Try the GREYChrondex on the left side of this site (under Special Features)...It's got events and when and where they occured as well as the source for the occurence...I've recently edited and amended it on my desktop and was thinking about sending it in for updating, but not quite sure how to go about doing that...I suppose I should contact Steve Wilson (the creator of said timeline) first...Anyway, the GREYChrondex is THE "canon" timeline...
    Kwint
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 13, 2002
    Posts: 1076
    From: Orlane, Gran March

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:21 pm  
    Grey Chronodex

    Hey there, I think the GreyChronodex is available here on Canonfire, and it is an admirable attempt at just that.

    As to canon, and canon related issues. To me, the only time Canon becomes an issue, is when one is working on a project for this or similiar communities... a group of people who are familiar with the various works of Greyhawk. In our Gran March Gazzatteer we are diligently trying to stay within the bounds of written canon, whenever possible. When it is not, or the canon is so confused/obtuse/unusable/incongruent, we go outside of Canon, and note it in a footnote. But even more, we try to make the incongruent congruent by working it through.

    A case in point is that Gran March is a Feudal Monarchy, as listed in the LGG. Well, it has not king, no lifetime ruler or ruling family. Best I can tell it conforms, on it's face, to no definition of monarchy in general use.

    It has Barons, and a nobility (ill defined) but no seeming state of Land Tenure, or Feudal Obligation. Rather, the obligation seems to be to the Army, and this very obligation as described violates most feudalistic arraingments.

    So, in our project we have worked to have it both ways. Using a variety of definitions of Feudalism (defined in different ways in every western european country in just about every century) we have come up with complex society which has a distinct feudal flavor.

    In the Countryside, the Baronies, the people operate on a Feudal system of contracts and obligations. They do this because a) it is tradition, and b) the people are prosperous and happy in this scenerio. They have been happy enough to not change anything but the apponted commandant in 5 to 6 hundred years.

    However, we have not been able to resolve the Monarchy title, and thus it will be a Monarchy only in that there is Fealty pledged to Keoland. The Commandant is not a monarch and effectively, the nation is not a monarchy. But in name and internal convention, it is. "Gods save the King and Commandant!" are sentiments heard in GM, and they may talk of the King as members of the British Commonwealth talk of the Queen.

    That is as close as we can come to Canon on the subject, and I think it made the whole thing more interesting. But it was an awful lot of work to get there from the Canon on the subject.

    However, GVD originally raised two methods of interpreting Canon, and I would get back to that.

    The first method he suggests is the inaccurate nature of historical writing and historic interpretation: this seems the simple out needed to make all canon Canon. Any conflicts can be assigned to confusion. This works infinitely well within a home campaign, and should work for any professional works sanctioned by WOTC, provided they avoid the sins that GVD mentioned... ingnorance and lack of concern. (is Races of Destiny an example of this?). There is no assurance of this, but that is another debate.

    Assigning weight is something that seems significantly more problematic than the transmission theory. Then things that conflict get caught up not only in preference, but also in mine over yours, this one over that one... creating camps instead of interpreters.
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 1424
    From: Wichita, KS, USA

    Send private message
    Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:26 pm  
    Re: New Approach to GH Canon?

    Tzelios wrote:
    Thank you GVD, thank you man, if I was there I would have kissed your hands. I am just trying to overcome a psychological depression, thank you.


    Tzelios---I'm sorry to hear you've been down. Anything we can do to help? (Other than helping Rob and Gary get Castle Zagyg out the door faster ;) ).

    GVDammerung wrote:
    One approach I've taken it to imagine that all "canon" is being written in and by a "third person" Greyhawk scholar, whose "knowledge" may not be perfect. Thus, if canon sources disagree, it is like two medieval monks, one in Dublin and one in Bucharest, each describing events in Paris. Neither is likely to get it completetly correct to the finest detail.


    I like it! The truth lies between all of the written accounts. Canon, like history, is written by the winner/acquirer rather than the loser/outsed original source....

    Tzelios wrote:
    Allow me to be strict to that. Reynolds is the Fiend Sage, we got to keep some rules to that. I missed him in my meta-text onomastics, well there is always place for additions. For the title you offer though it is good, in line with Allan Grohe's inovation to translate The Adventure Beggins into On the Beginnings of Adventures.


    I don't know how innovative it was, I was just playing with the names and titles like the various GH anagrams encourage....
    _________________
    Allan Grohe (grodog@gmail.com)
    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/greyhawk.html
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:22 am  
    Re: Ah...

    Scottenkainen wrote:

    And Chelor may have been a fool, but he was a fool with HUGE numbers behind him! Who did Idee have defending them? Henry V?


    Once more into the breach, dear friends, or block up the pass with our Ideean dead. :D

    A big army is not necessarily a good thing, especially with medieval logistics. You've got to consider forage, water, baggage trains (which if you believe the Official History of the Greyhawk Wars are of epic size in Imperial Aerdi armies of that time) and roads that turn to mud quagmires in rain. Also - the narrows between Ahlissa and Idee would negate the Ahlissan's advantages in numbers, especially since the hills on either side are crawling with hostile forces (Reynard's efforts in the Hollow Highlnads notwithstanding). Throw in a duff commander, a line of probably dwur designed fortifications, skilled guerilla raiders (olve) and stalwart defenders (dwur) on the other side and you've got a lot of potential for getting bogged down.

    Plus Zelradton is awfully close to the edge of the Iron Hills, so Chelor would have had to leave substantial forces along that frontier to protect his lines of supply and prevent Holgi sallying out of the hills behind him (catching the Provincials between the Ideeans and allies to the south and the dwur to the north), or worse still, assailing Zelradton directly (dwur siege engineers will make a nasty mess of your capital city!).

    That's my rationale anyhoo - YMMV.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:42 am  

    grodog wrote:
    Tzelios---I'm sorry to hear you've been down. Anything we can do to help? (Other than helping Rob and Gary get Castle Zagyg out the door faster ;) ).


    You did it already:) I am going to compete in this postfest contest. I would like to negotiate my submission after the contest to be redirected to the Gods & Followers topic.

    grodog wrote:

    GVDammerung wrote:
    One approach I've taken it to imagine that all "canon" is being written in and by a "third person" Greyhawk scholar, whose "knowledge" may not be perfect. Thus, if canon sources disagree, it is like two medieval monks, one in Dublin and one in Bucharest, each describing events in Paris. Neither is likely to get it completetly correct to the finest detail.


    I like it! The truth lies between all of the written accounts. Canon, like history, is written by the winner/acquirer rather than the loser/outsed original source....


    Precisely! The second weight approach GVD mentioned is out of discussion, since we are not the IP holders. The first approach is again out of question for the same reason, but since truth lies between all written accounts canon or not, the thread should be retitled as a New Approach to Truth.

    For my home campaign and when I write (which also serves my home campaign), I use all sources. But for me a source is also an interview of Gygax or Kuntz. There is no good reason to consider as sources only the printed word or official text. Past civilizations kept track of oral word as well, and in some cases it was valued more than the written word. But there is another argument also: when you study in the school, to interpret a writer you consider his interviews as well. I will do it that way, as professionally as possible, accuse me for academicism. Then I have my own weight system applied to the written and oral sources. This weight system is very similar to the one suggested by DMPrata (like Scottenkainen I declare old-school, but to be new or old school is not the point, the next phrases clarify why this is so). A chronological weight system is also used by the philosophers when they seek the meaning of the words, they go back to the etymology of the words (similar weight system I believe is followed by any serious investigator of Greyhawk, say Erik Mona). Then, I put everything down as an in-character text as if written inside Greyhawk; this adds flavor plus attests the unavoidable subjectivity. Greyhawk Meta-Text Onomastics is an aid for such an endeavor. At the end, my approach is not my approach indeed. Rather it is the Monatic (related to Monaism, per Gary Holian) approach liberated from the bounds of any IP considerations. So even though I cannot claim that the outcome is canon (since I am not IP owner), I can indeed claim that the outcome is Potentially Canon, since I dis no canon source (the canon source exists inside Greyhawk through Greyahwk Meta-Text Onomastics and is subject to critique).

    As we discuss Meta-Text Onomastics, I warn you that there are some errors in the article. However, the article is mainly a collection of meta-text translations I aggregated from canon texts. One such error is the Jim Ward - Drawmij correspondence. Although the anagrammatism is a valid Gygax anagrammatism per Grohe's research, it refers to the ocean not to the wizard. Since an ocean cannot write, I would prefer that Jim Ward's texts are written by Bombadil, Ward's wizard PC.

    Please know that, to whomever wants to pursue the meta-text in-character approach, it would be my pleasure to offer advice or review of an article prior to submission, since correctnes is not always so obvious.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:48 am  

    I agree the fictive author/onamastics approach is probably the most practical. I think one consequence, and a healthy one, of such an approach is that - just because it says so in print does not mean it has to be taken as gospel the next time something is printed, but can be more flexibly interpreted. This is, I think, particularly useful in GH where so many authors with varying degrees of fidelity to prior GH works have added their own spin to things.

    Rather than declare something "not canon," I'd prefer to flexibly interpret the work as perhaps having been "less than completely accurate - as it turns out." Perhaps, there is no better example of this is than Rose Estes.

    What was Estes' _real_ sin?

    (1) That her writing was sometimes puriently juvenile? So is EGG's in places and at times - some of his dialog is laughably, Mystery Science Theatre bad.

    (2) That she dared take down Iuz? I suspect this to be the true genesis of Mona's fanboy rantings more than anything else. As it turns out, Estes' banishment of Iuz to the Etheral Plane may presage developments coming out of Living Greyhawk that may see "print" as "canon" before all is said and done.

    While Estes is no prize, I think declaring anything "non-canon" at whim or for supposed cause sets a bad prescedent. Better to say, I think, "Not all accounts are necessarily reliable; it is 'rumoured that' . . ."

    This would also work in reverse. Rob Kuntz's Zayne/Xaene series can be brought back into more of the mainstream of Greyhawk thought. The published "Ovar" can be understood more fully to have been a "mispelling" of Ivid, "Zayne" a "mispelled" Xaene etc.

    A couple of notes on GH author's "secret identities" -

    Sean K. Reynolds has identified himself as the mage Skreyn (his AOL signon) in the Bonds of Magic: Skreyn's Resister title. So, I think Skreyn would be another onamastic pseudonym for SKR.

    Jim Ward has identified himself with the mage Drawmij in print. At least twice if memory serves. Once in Greyhawk Adventures. Once in Dragon Magazine (I don't have the issue handy). He has also identified himself with Drawmij in person. If he was not the original Drawmij (what a coincidence that), I think he has adopted the pseudonym.

    WARNING ::Mini-Rant::

    On the subject of Jim Ward, I'd like to say that I find him to be one of the more overlooked GH contributors and one of the more intriguing. Having had the opportunity to speak with him on occasion, I find him very thoughtful, open to discussion (even when there is a critical assessment of what he is or has been up to) and pleasant - which can't always be said for all the "Old Guard." :/ From Metamorphosis Alpha and Gamma World to Greyhawk, Jim Ward has demonstrated a "think outside the box" design philosophy that is not always credited for being as revolutionary, at the time, as it was. His ideas may not have been universally winners but he was always willing to stretch the bounds of game design. I'd contrast this sharply with some GH authors who are so constipated in their conservative, hide-bound view of "canon" as THEY see it that you can almost hear the squeek when an idea manages to emerge from between their ears that hasn't been "documented" before, usually by them. Jim Ward, IMO, was a pioneer in that he was anything but conservative and his example, IMO, paved the way for others to "think different." Were I to suddenly come into the D&D IP, Jim Ward would be one of the first people I'd call. Underrated guy, IMO. Call me a "Drawmij" fan, then. Smile

    ::end Mini-rant::
    _________________
    GVD
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:04 am  

    GVDammerung wrote:
    Sean K. Reynolds has identified himself as the mage Skreyn (his AOL signon) in the Bonds of Magic: Skreyn's Resister title. So, I think Skreyn would be another onamastic pseudonym for SKR.


    I did not know that GVD, thanks. Still, I believe that the fact that he signs as the Fiend Sage in the LGJ's is a stronger alias.

    GVDammerung wrote:
    Jim Ward has identified himself with the mage Drawmij in print. At least twice if memory serves. Once in Greyhawk Adventures. Once in Dragon Magazine (I don't have the issue handy). He has also identified himself with Drawmij in person. If he was not the original Drawmij (what a coincidence that), I think he has adopted the pseudonym.


    Then the Meta-Text Onomastics article is correct in that respect. I will check your input.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:29 am  

    Tzelios wrote:

    I did not know that GVD, thanks. Still, I believe that the fact that he signs as the Fiend Sage in the LGJ's is a stronger alias.


    True - but other individuals have also used that alias (though they might have been some lesser minions with ideas above their station, banished for their presumption to the thankless task of building sandcastles at the bottom of the Bay of Gates for all eternity). :P
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 01, 2005 7:35 am  

    Woesinger wrote:
    Tzelios wrote:

    I did not know that GVD, thanks. Still, I believe that the fact that he signs as the Fiend Sage in the LGJ's is a stronger alias.


    True - but other individuals have also used that alias (though they might have been some lesser minions with ideas above their station, banished for their presumption to the thankless task of building sandcastles at the bottom of the Bay of Gates for all eternity). :P


    Lol.

    I actually prefer Skreyn as The Fiend Sage is more a title than a name.
    _________________
    GVD
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:44 am  

    GVDammerung wrote:
    I actually prefer Skreyn as The Fiend Sage is more a title than a name.


    Even in that case that you view it as a title, it is still the canonic metanymic alias of Reynolds, since it appears in a published text of the IP holder. Talking about weights, it is absurd to prefer an electronic signom above a published name or title.

    What I know is that the Fiend Sage is the pen name of a very specific demonic advisor of Drax whose real name we fail to know. His real name may be Skreyn, but you got to do research to support that. For example, it would suffice if there is evidence in the AOL boards that Skreyn is a fiend.

    But even if you do that research and prove that the real name of the Fiend Sage is Skreyn, most people won't recognize your proposed Skreyn alias, since most people know that Reynolds signs as the Fiend Sage (since only the old guard following the AOL boards may have noticed such a correspondence).

    Moreover, the point behind the Fiend Sage name is the mystery carried by the Fiend Sage pseudonym. And the point behind the Meta-Text Onomastics is that you keep it as simple as possible, since by its nature the subject is complicated.

    As to the Jim Ward - Drawmij translation, I agree with you. As you said Greyhawk Adventures proves that.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:09 am  

    Tzelios wrote:
    Moreover, the point behind the Fiend Sage name is the mystery carried by the Fiend Sage pseudonym.


    But a lot more importantly, the point behind the Fiend Sage alias is the volition of the Fiend Sage not to want to reveal his true name, like most demons and devils do.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 26, 2001
    Posts: 171
    From: Pittsburgh

    Send private message
    Sat Jul 02, 2005 8:46 am  

    GVDammerung wrote:
    Jim Ward has identified himself with the mage Drawmij in print. At least twice if memory serves. Once in Greyhawk Adventures. Once in Dragon Magazine (I don't have the issue handy). He has also identified himself with Drawmij in person. If he was not the original Drawmij (what a coincidence that), I think he has adopted the pseudonym.

    Some Jim Ward/Drawmij trivia:
    The name Drawmij was made up entirely for publication, so there really was no 'original' Drawmij. Jim's character was a magic-user named Bombadil, obviously not a name to use for publication. Bombadil/Drawmij had a stronghold on the bank of the Neen.
    Bombadil was killed and his stronghold destroyed by the forces of the Dark Druids in the Gnarley. Rob picked up a d6 and said on a 1-3, the whole thing was a bad dream. The result was a 1. One of the two bad dreams of the original Greyhawk campaign. Isn't Drawmij MIA in the current official setting? Perhaps one oof the conflicting rumors about him is that he was killed by the Dark Druids.
    The other bad dream happened to Robilar when he was but 3rd level. He was adventuring alone, and allowed himself to be trapped by 3 wights. He was dead for sure when EGG's wife at the time barged in and started ranting. Gary picked up the d6, 1-3 bad dream, 4-6 Robilar was dead. You can guess what the result was.
    Scott
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:03 am  

    [quote="GVDammerung"]
    Woesinger wrote:
    Tzelios wrote:

    I did not know that GVD, thanks. Still, I believe that the fact that he signs as the Fiend Sage in the LGJ's is a stronger alias.


    I actually prefer Skreyn as The Fiend Sage is more a title than a name.


    If you review The Adventure Begins, you will discover that the name Skreyn has already been assigned to some minor NPC in the City of Greyhawk, so if you are going to assign SKR a meta-text personage, that name might not be the most advantageous.

    That said, I personally dislike the idea of giving authors meta-text names, I mean really dislike. First, to me, it smells vaguely of author worship. Second, it always ends up favoring the "official" authors over the work of fans, who often have contributions to the flavor of my campaign that are just as valid, if not more so, than those of the pros.

    I don't mind the idea of messy cannon and contradicting histories at all, but I would avoid assigning a meta-text personage to every published author. IMO, the benefit isn't worth the damage such things do to suspension of disbelief in the setting.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 12:11 am  

    ScottG wrote:

    Bombadil was killed and his stronghold destroyed by the forces of the Dark Druids in the Gnarley. Rob picked up a d6 and said on a 1-3, the whole thing was a bad dream. The result was a 1. One of the two bad dreams of the original Greyhawk campaign.


    Yet another example of why, IMO, Rob's opinions on canon have little weight in the discussions of current fans. How can we assign any real validity to his remembrance of the "true" setting when presented with things like this and his proposed "clones gone wild" fix for Robilar suggest, or perhaps even prove that no codified plan for canon existed. Carl, Roger, Sean, Erik and Gary (Holian) (and others) might not always give us the best material, but at least they stick to it once it's there.


    Quote:
    Isn't Drawmij MIA in the current official setting?


    No, Drawmij is alive and well as a member of the Circle of 8, who resides in an undersea fortress in the Azure Sea and has a close alliance with the Sea Mages of Gradsul as well.
    [/quote]
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:10 am  

    chatdemon wrote:
    That said, I personally dislike the idea of giving authors meta-text names, I mean really dislike. First, to me, it smells vaguely of author worship. Second, it always ends up favoring the "official" authors over the work of fans, who often have contributions to the flavor of my campaign that are just as valid, if not more so, than those of the pros.


    Then show me a way, me Tzelios, to write a flavor text inside Greyhawk (with all the subjectivity carried by the fact that I am not allowed to write canon) and at the same time refer to the works of other people, being them employees of the IP holder or not.

    It all depends on where you are putting the weight, official authors or otherwise, it is all up to you. Let me explain better..

    The Meta-Text Onomastics approach does not limit you to refer only to canon works. For example in my articles I have used the name of Marc-Tizoc's PC (scholar Culhan Re) after asking for his permission. Another example is my use of the metanymic translation for Nathan Irving which is Nellisir Avanson (you told me that Rich and I thank you). When I wrote the Lost Suss City articles I wanted to refer to Nell's work in canonfire! and this was the only way. By the way I also provided hyperlink to his article. I did the same for Steve Wilson's article on the Lost Suss City, I referred to him as Finhobar Aodin since his canonfire! article was signed by the bard Aodin - again I provided a hyperlink to his work. Neither Nell's nor Wilson's works were canon, so I do not see your point?? Also, I did credit the maximum their work, since I built on them. Because of the fact I built on Wilson's Silver Hall I also asked his permission (and blessings) to do that. To get his permission (and blessings) I provided him with a draft of my work.

    [Talking about hyperlinks, most of the canonfire! writers are self indulgent and never refer to the works of other. Even when they do it they do not do it in a proper way, i.e. by providing a hyperlink. I am the only one that I hypelink other member's works. And to tell the truth no one asked my permission or even opinion when she built on my work.]

    At the end, it is all a matter of taste. My personal favorite articles are Mona's LGJ#4 article on the Great Library, and Grohe's canonfire! article on the Crook of Rao. Both articles are written in that style, I mean inside Greyhawk, in the meta-textual in-character style.

    So I am immersed into Greyhawk, in order for my opinion to be more valuable. By the fact that I do not work for the IP holder my opinion has not the value of canon. So I try to prove that I am alive inside Greyhawk. Whoever does this gets a better footing inside Greyhawk. This is what I strive for. May be this is the dream of other Greyhawk fans as well.

    chatdemon wrote:
    I don't mind the idea of messy cannon and contradicting histories at all, but I would avoid assigning a meta-text personage to every published author. IMO, the benefit isn't worth the damage such things do to suspension of disbelief in the setting.


    Exactly the opposite! By doing Meta-Text Onomastics writting you fill the gaps and discontinuities are eliminated. It is the most creative way for the amateur to write.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:22 am  

    chatdemon wrote:
    Yet another example of why, IMO, Rob's opinions on canon have little weight in the discussions of current fans. How can we assign any real validity to his remembrance of the "true" setting when presented with things like this and his proposed "clones gone wild" fix for Robilar suggest, or perhaps even prove that no codified plan for canon existed. Carl, Roger, Sean, Erik and Gary (Holian) (and others) might not always give us the best material, but at least they stick to it once it's there.


    The clone suggestion of Kuntz is, contrary to at that time current established customs, a major innovation. His solution shows how published lore can be integrated with real lore. Again it is the Monatic approach taking into account non-canon but clearly Greyhawk related sources as well, such as the home campaign of the creators of Greyhawk.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:44 am  

    Tzelios wrote:


    chatdemon wrote:
    I don't mind the idea of messy cannon and contradicting histories at all, but I would avoid assigning a meta-text personage to every published author. IMO, the benefit isn't worth the damage such things do to suspension of disbelief in the setting.


    Exactly the opposite! By doing Meta-Text Onomastics writting you fill the gaps and discontinuities are eliminated. It is the most creative way for the amateur to write.


    Let me explain this "exactly the opposite" better.. You disbelieve in a setting full of inconsistencies. If you do GMTO, inconsistencies vanish and it is easier to believe in the setting. This is exactly what the official designers try to do, to eliminate inconsistencies so that the setting is more bilievable and easier to purchase by the customers. You must thank me Rich for the good I do, the reality that I promote continuity and strengthen the setting;)
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 4:58 am  

    Tzelios wrote:
    The clone suggestion of Kuntz is, contrary to at that time current established customs, a major innovation.


    That's one word for it alright. :)

    Tzelios wrote:

    His solution shows how published lore can be integrated with real lore. Again it is the Monatic approach taking into account non-canon but clearly Greyhawk related sources as well, such as the home campaign of the creators of Greyhawk.


    Emmmm...real lore? I'm not sure what you mean by that.
    Rob Kuntz has clearly made a very significant contribution to Greyhawk's creation and evolution, for which he deserves some respect. However, that's not to say that we have to take everything he says or writes as scripture. IMO, the Robilar clone idea is poorly conceived and, tbbh, hokey. It ignores a whole slew of canon development in FtA and afterward to amend a personal "slight" and should be filed under the same heading as anyone else's heretical home campaign GH innovations (fine at home, but not in published canon). A lot of people have put a lot of work into trying to make published GH canon as internally consistant as possible. GG or RK might have have the first ever GH home campaign, but that doesn't exempt them from a quality control check on the material they add to GH canon.

    Just because RK has his signature on the foundation stones doesn't give him a right to lop off the upper storeys and add on ugly extensions.

    My two euros.

    P.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 5:20 am  

    By real Robilar I mean the true Robilar who is not a clone of published Robilar.

    What is the problem if there is a clone of Robilar, named Robilar also? The clone suggestion of Kuntz does not discredit official material at all, I mean it does not render official material erroneous. Things on Robilar, clone Robilar, are just as written in official sources. Kuntz suggested that there is another Robilar, the true Robilar, that did other things than the things mentioned in official sources. It is impossible to claim that the clone is Kuntz's PC, since Kuntz's PC is the prototype. Therefore, I stick to my view that Kuntz's clone suggestion is major innovation for the game.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:05 am  

    I'd suggest that not resorting to a hokey and convoluted explanation just to exonerate a character's actions in canon just because their PC "wouldn't act that way" (though the PC is arguably different to the canon NPC - just as the version of King Lynwerd in my home campaign is different to the canon Lynwerd) would be much more innovative. :)

    Why not make Robilar a complex character with valid reasons for doing what he did, rather than being a black and white Evil Twin Skippy? RK has said Robilar would never betray Mordenkainen and he must therefore be an evil clone. Thing is - he didn't. He helped Rary kill Tenser and Otiluke - which is not the same thing, however it might appear.

    How about we assume that Robilar would never betray Mordy. Then clearly he was (and perhaps still is) acting on Mordy's orders. Isn't more innovative to imagine why Mordy wanted Tenser and Otiluke dead (Erik Mona suggests a very good reason in LGJ 0...)? No more black and white - but nice interesting shades of grey - which as we're told time and time again is what sets Greyhawk apart from That Other Setting.
    That's innovation, IMO.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:15 am  

    Frankly, those original players should not have used their personal characters as direct parts of the published world if they are going to have issues with other people using them. Obviously, the published Robilar is not Kuntz's PC. Its not even a PC. Its an NPC based on his character.

    I have no idea what you mean by saying the clone idea is a major innovation. Clones are certainly already part of the core game mechanics and featured in various Circle of Eight related products. If you mean "innovation" only in the lesser sense of "a change", then I agree. Its a major change; a bad one IMHO. I think its a bad idea for a number of reasons. 1) As far as I can tell, its only point is to allow Kuntz to retain control over a character who he gave up rights to by making it part of TSR's IP. 2) It means there is a "real" Robilar out there doing things and, apparently, not caring that a fake Robilar is besmirching his name. 3) Having yet more cloning in the canon further undermines the idea that anything 'real' happens to the big name individuals and sets a bad example for how high end characters interact with the game world.

    As for meta texting, that's fine for making references in "In character" articles to other published works. However, I get the impression that this proposal involves pushing that application to a wider scope of activities. In that sense, I certainly agree with Chatdemon that making an explicit link between authors and in game characters, especially active characters, is not a good idea. Authors can easily write about a much wider range of topics than it is realistic for these NPCs to necessarily have knowledge of. This can lead to conflicts between the IC character and the OOC author's work.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 6:44 am  

    Canon is a collection of events, a set whose elements are events. The Gygax-Kuntz campaign is again a set whose elements are events. The two sets may intersect or may be disjoint. A superset of events that encompasses the two sets without creating conflict should have larger appeal than each of the two sets separately, hence greater value. If you can understand this truth, then Kuntz's clone innovation is immediate.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 26, 2001
    Posts: 171
    From: Pittsburgh

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:14 am  

    The clone idea isn't breaking any new ground, but every explaination for every event doesn't have to be, and it is a world where clones do exist, and they do have the potential to go off the hook, so it works.
    Innovative or cheesey, Rob was looking for a way to be able to write more about Robilar for the setting in a way that he prefers, but until he writes any such material, it isn't even an issue.
    Scott
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:12 pm  

    Umm, Tzelios, the Gygax-Kuntz campaign was not even run, for the most part, in the World of Greyhawk as we know it. The geography, deities, and even the timeline/history were quite different. The published WoG materials were deliberately altered and reworked specifically to create a disconnect between the "events" of the campaign and the published material.

    I don't see the value in trying to undo that. More importantly, the clone "solution" creates more problems than it solves. Particularly since, as far as I can tell, the only "problem" it solves is that Mr. Kuntz doesn't like the Rary the Traitor storyline.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:32 am  

    Tzelios wrote:
    Canon is a collection of events, a set whose elements are events. The Gygax-Kuntz campaign is again a set whose elements are events. The two sets may intersect or may be disjoint. A superset of events that encompasses the two sets without creating conflict should have larger appeal than each of the two sets separately, hence greater value. If you can understand this truth, then Kuntz's clone innovation is immediate.


    Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    At the end of the day, the G-K home campaign is just that - a home campaign. It might be the home campaign of the creators of the setting, but that shouldn't give it any more weight than your home game, mine or anyone elses. Doubly so, if the creators seem intent on short circuiting published canon for personal ends.

    So - no, I'm afraid I don't see the innovation in trying to mould canon in this way. It strikes me as being like Cinderella's ugly sisters cutting off their toes to fit the glass slipper, and that's a very old fairy tale. :)
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 19, 2003
    Posts: 116
    From: New York City

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 6:49 am  

    I'm assuming you guys are referencing something Kuntz published in... Dungeon magazine? Not sure what else he's put out for public viewing lately - surely not the Castle GH material I've been waiting two years for... :)
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 9:55 am  

    Nah, the Robilar's clone scenario came from public comments Rob made following the release of the first Maure Castle article in Dungeon last year, regarding projects he'd like to tackle if given the opportunity. As I think you can see here, reactions to his proposed "corrections" to Robilar in canon were met with mixed reactions.

    If you poke around the WotC Greyhawk forum, you'll probably find the archived comments.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 17


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:43 am  

    Vormaerin wrote:
    Frankly, those original players should not have used their personal characters as direct parts of the published world if they are going to have issues with other people using them. Obviously, the published Robilar is not Kuntz's PC. Its not even a PC. Its an NPC based on his character.


    A distinction without a difference

    Vormaerin wrote:
    I have no idea what you mean by saying the clone idea is a major innovation. Clones are certainly already part of the core game mechanics and featured in various Circle of Eight related products. If you mean "innovation" only in the lesser sense of "a change", then I agree. Its a major change; a bad one IMHO. I think its a bad idea for a number of reasons. 1) As far as I can tell, its only point is to allow Kuntz to retain control over a character who he gave up rights to by making it part of TSR's IP. 2) It means there is a "real" Robilar out there doing things and, apparently, not caring that a fake Robilar is besmirching his name. 3) Having yet more cloning in the canon further undermines the idea that anything 'real' happens to the big name individuals and sets a bad example for how high end characters interact with the game world.


    I like the idea of Kuntz trying to undo the damage Lorraine Williams and others did to something he helped create. Look what Paramount has done to Star Trek. If Gene Roddenberry were alive and had the chance, he'd want to do what Kuntz is doing. Too bad Gygax wasn't able to keep the rights to what he and his collaborators created the way George Lucas did with Star Wars and Indiana Jones.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:39 pm  

    Elfdart wrote:

    I like the idea of Kuntz trying to undo the damage Lorraine Williams and others did to something he helped create.


    RIGHT...

    Lorraine most likely had NO creative input, period. That's just business, she was managing the company, not rewriting greyhawk.

    Also, a often overlooked fact: Gygax hired Lorraine and placed her in charge of the company.

    The discrepancy in the stories of gh NPCs and thei characters of the original players began with Rogue's Gallery, which was published LONG before Lorraine came around. Gygax, Kuntz and the rest refused to provide the "real" stats and stories, so Blume did what he could with the product. You reap what you sow.

    I am not opposed to trying to adapt Robilar's story into something closer to whatever Rob's version is, and in fact when the debate was raging on WotC forums, I offered a much more original and detailed "fix". Rather than consider the ideas of people like me, Rob stubbornly stuck to his "ITS ROBILARS EVIL CLONE"

    Edited by Duicarthan, 07/07/05
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:21 pm  

    There is a distinction between someone's PC and an NPC based on it. The NPC is not under that person's direct control any longer; rather, it is part of the overall canon and able to be used by other individuals. As has clearly happened with nearly all the characters.

    As I said before, Gary made a quite clear separation between his campaign and the published Greyhawk. Including, as chatdemon mentions, the Rogues' Gallery listing of characters. Its clearly "wrong" as reference to Gary's campaign. It is and was official material for the published world (albeit dated systems wise).

    I'm really not sure what sort of "damage" you think is being corrected. The inconsistencies and publishing mistakes have plagued Greyhawk since it was first published. The quality of the storylines has varied quite considerably as well. Q1 doesn't follow from the GD series storyline at all, for instance.

    Anyway, the solution proposed (evil clone) creates more damage than it repairs, imho.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 1:40 pm  
    Well...

    >Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses >events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    Yes.

    Granted, it would be impossible to incorporate everyone's take on Greytalk as soon as the first inconsistency came up. I've tried it -- a few years back I submitted a timeline to Greytalk that included not just canon material but as many major events from fan material as I could squeeze in. Everyone's campaign is enriched by borrowing from the broadest possible variety of sources, even though assembling all those sources was too much for one (or at least this) man.

    Plenty of good thoughts in this thread, though. "Woesinger" (you're Paul, right?) has even inspired me. As soon as I find the time, I'm doing a timeline for Ahlissa that incorporates some of his ideas for how Chelor was stalled in Idee...
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 26, 2001
    Posts: 171
    From: Pittsburgh

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:06 pm  

    Rob did provide accurate stats for Robilar for the Rogues Gallery. It was Gary and Ernie that refused.
    Scott
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:09 pm  

    chatdemon wrote:
    That said, I personally dislike the idea of giving authors meta-text names, I mean really dislike. First, to me, it smells vaguely of author worship. Second, it always ends up favoring the "official" authors over the work of fans, who often have contributions to the flavor of my campaign that are just as valid, if not more so, than those of the pros.


    For me, it is more than anything else a shorthand way of dealing with a published work - usually one with which I disagree.

    For example, I've got loaded to CF a tripartite reexamination of The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan - Tamoachan Revisited - wherein I contrast the author's voice with that of "Skreyn," author of "The Brotherhood of Scarlet." At the same time, to be able to speak to the original account of Tamoachan, I've created the "Sonjohn and Leason Expedition," referring, of course to Johnson and Leason who wrote the Hidden Shrine.

    I agree the meta-text references can be overdone but I find them useful when trying to argue sources "in character." Freed from that restriction, I'd see much less use of meta-text references - as I am in my "Author's Notes" of the Tamoachan Revisited articles wherein I point out more bluntly that Reynolds simply did not read Tamoachan before describing the Olman in The Scarlet Brotherhood or was too dense to pick up on the "red/black" imagery and what meaning that would have for the Olman, as they are a "red" race as described by Reynolds himself, while the Touv are a "black" race, again, as described by Reynolds.

    I certainly agree about "author worship." GH has too much of that already.

    Your point about fan works is equally well taken. I think fan works are becoming more and more well regarded. CF preserves these works for reference. Many are as good or better than anything "pros," who will go unnamed, have ever done. There has begun to be more cross-referencing of one fan work to another. If CF stays around for 10 years, continues to expand, perhaps archiving some LG materials when the LG sunsets, and GH does not see republication - I think the line between "published canon" and "fan canon" will be very much thinner.

    I look to the imminent publication of The Gran March Project as a likely example of the shape "fan canon" may eventually take. When complete, I believe there will be no appreciable difference in quality between The Gran March Project and the best of original material in d20 PDFs you can buy online at various places. When fans create professional quality material of a scope equal to professional qualty PDFs sold as d20 supplements, the line between "fan canon" and "published canon" all but vanishes, thee remaining only the "IP holder" distinction that may then begin to erode.

    Another example, warming to the topic :), is the Oerth Journal. Increasingly professional in its appearence and already sophisticated in its content, The OJ might have alredy pushed further the boundaries of "fan canon" were is not for a publication schedule only kindly referred to as eratic. Where the OJ to be published quarterly, I believe it would again blur the distinction between "fan canon" and "published canon" in our present worold where PDFs publish "official" d20 material, or at least as "official" as it gets.

    In this last instance, we can look at Keith Baker's "Dragonshards" articles for Wotc. These are free PDF's from Wotc that further expand the world of Eberron, creating Eberron canon through nothing more than a PDF.

    The pieces are coming together to perhaps create an entirely new world of game support. CF is, if not at the leading edge, then in the vanguard of such a movement.

    To attempt to draw myself back toward your point, "author worship" is entirely out of place where everyone is or can be an author in an increasingly respected PDF/online supported environment. We are not fully there yet, but the necessary pieces to the puzzle are drawing together.

    For IP holders, I think, these currents pose both a danger and an opportunity. The danger is obvious if fan created materials supplant any real need for "published" materials. However, so long as such is confined to "out of print worlds," the danger is lessened and the opportunity is there to support the game in a more general sense, notwithstanding that online materials do not preclude printed materials, if a market is judged to have "suddenly" been detected.

    I think we are living in interesting times.
    _________________
    GVD
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:46 am  
    Re: Well...

    Scottenkainen wrote:
    >Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    Yes.

    Granted, it would be impossible to incorporate everyone's take on Greytalk as soon as the first inconsistency came up.


    I think that's a noble idea in theory, but impossible to work in practice.

    How do you resolve, for example, the fact that Riftcrag has fallen into the Rift Canyon in my home campaign (an unfortunate incident involving a Horn of Blasting and a fault line Happy) and someone else's campaign where the PCs might be based there? IMC Greyhawk, the Directing Oligarchy was strung up in the streets by the followers of a Pholtine uprising. The city itself was partially sacked by the armies of the Mak, aided it seems by Lord Robilar, before being relieved by a Furyondian army. IMC, Rauxes never fell and Duke Szeffrin was killed in combat with King Lynwerd, Duke Oberend (who died in the attempt) and the PCs after a desperate and heroic cavalry charge before the walls of Womtham that seems to have left the flower of Nyrondese nobility dead on the field, but shattered the hosts of Almor.

    There's just too many visions, too many heresies and too many Oerths to try and reconcile them all with published canon. Let the heresies be heresies and canon be canon. At the gaming table, the DM has complete creative control (well, at last until he adds PCs to the equation, because they never what you expect them to), but if you're writing for published canon, you should make a supreme effort to be consistant with what's gone before, I think.

    Scottenkainen wrote:

    Plenty of good thoughts in this thread, though. "Woesinger" (you're Paul, right?) has even inspired me. As soon as I find the time, I'm doing a timeline for Ahlissa that incorporates some of his ideas for how Chelor was stalled in Idee...


    ::Bows::
    Glad to be of service, sir. :)

    Paul
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:43 am  

    chatdemon wrote:
    I am not opposed to trying to adapt Robilar's story into something closer to whatever Rob's version is, and in fact when the debate was raging on WotC forums, I offered a much more original and detailed "fix".


    Would you enlighten us on your brilliant idea, maybe in a separate thread?

    chatdemon wrote:
    Rather than consider the ideas of people like me,


    You are quite an asset for the Greyhawk community Rich, truly! Yet overconfident I consider.

    chatdemon wrote:
    Rob stubbornly stuck to his "ITS ROBILARS EVIL CLONE"


    But let me tell you, compared to Kuntz you are like a grain compared to a mountain, I do not know if there is an English proverb for that, I am not a native speaker.


    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:48 am  

    GVD speaks some truths. You always improve, keep on doing that .
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:54 am  
    Re: Well...

    Scottenkainen wrote:
    >Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses >events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    Yes.

    Granted, it would be impossible to incorporate everyone's take on Greytalk as soon as the first inconsistency came up. I've tried it -- a few years back I submitted a timeline to Greytalk that included not just canon material but as many major events from fan material as I could squeeze in. Everyone's campaign is enriched by borrowing from the broadest possible variety of sources, even though assembling all those sources was too much for one (or at least this) man.


    Precisely, it is hard to do it, but it is worth doing it, for the good of the setting.

    Amen.

    Scottenkainen wrote:
    Plenty of good thoughts in this thread, though. "Woesinger" (you're Paul, right?) has even inspired me. As soon as I find the time, I'm doing a timeline for Ahlissa that incorporates some of his ideas for how Chelor was stalled in Idee...


    Good luck!
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:42 am  

    Talking about this New Approach to Canon or the Superset Approach (a.k.a. Greyhawk Meta-Text Onomastics Aprroach, GMTO for short), an example of it is in the just released OJ16, the last article of the issue, by Scarlatos and Casper, entitled "The Temple of Elemental Evil, from the Rise of Iuz to His Release":

    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/canonfire/OJ_16.pdf

    Please redirect any thoughts on it at the OJ homepage:

    http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=2
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:57 am  
    Re: Well...

    Woesinger wrote:
    Scottenkainen wrote:
    >Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    Yes.

    Granted, it would be impossible to incorporate everyone's take on Greytalk as soon as the first inconsistency came up.


    I think that's a noble idea in theory, but impossible to work in practice.


    Start with the major events of the major campaigns, the rest events (actually the bulk of the events) are alternate Oerths until a broader superset is found.

    However, GMTO/superset text should first suggest solutions for continuity problems in canon text. Once continuity problems are solved the setting is strengthened. Then, the approach should try to inclose other interesting non-canon sources (but tightly related to Greyhawk; to have been written by the creators of the setting is a strong consideration criterion), in order for these non-canon-sources to be usable together with canon material without introducing any conflict. The fan is the winner, he has more sources on his disposal, consistent with each other. Instead of philosophizing on this very demanding subject of the GMTO/superset approach, try another example of the approach:

    http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=547

    The above links to the Greyhawk Content of the Coloring Album. It is useful that I cite it, since it is tightly related to the fresh OJ16 Elemental Evil article. Please redirect any discussion through comments in the above article, so that the reader of the article can relate your thoughts and adequately make his own understanding on the efficiency of the approach.
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:01 am  

    Tzelios wrote:


    Would you enlighten us on your brilliant idea, maybe in a separate thread?


    Sure, here it is, reposted from WotC's Greyhawk forum, 6-17-04:

    Here's my theory on Rary/Robilar/Mordenkainen and the 'treachery', for those interested:

    Rary and Mordenkainen masterminded the whole charade. They realized a bit too late the inconvenience of allowing Tenser to bring Jallarzi on board, creating a definite goodly faction in the circle. Being hardened archmages and students of world affairs and politics, they realized that sometimes the ends justify the means. That means getting your hands dirty now and then. A plan was concocted to allow them to keep the circle intact and productive while at the same time letting them pursue the dirtier side of their agendas.

    Mordy, being better known, trusted and loved by the rest of the circle (due mainly to Rary's long absences from Greyhawk City tending to his own affairs and agenda in Ket) would remain in direct contact and cooperation with the Circle, while Rary would pursue his tasks behind the scenes.

    The intent of the treachery was not to eliminate Tenser and Otiluke, but to ambush the anticipated Scarlet Brotherhood spies and assassins at the treaty signing during a fake public ceremony, while the real ceremony was being held in secret at an undisclosed location in the city.

    The problem was the early, unexpected arrival of Robilar and Tasha (she of the uncontrollable hideous laughter spell), both close allies of Otto. Robilar and Otto had grown past their master/servant relationship, but were still close allies. Tasha, nearing the end of her apprenticeship with Otto, was quite smitten with Robilar and his epic tales of derring do. Robilar and Tasha were on errand for Otto, believe it or not simply arriving to confer with the merchants tasked with catering the ceremony (which Robilar, Tasha and Otto, as well as Tenser and Otiluke, all thought to be the real ceremony. Only Rary, Mordy and Bigby knew the true arrangement.)

    Robilar arrived shortly before Tasha, and was passing the time waiting for her and the merchants chatting about news of the wars with Tenser and Otiluke, who were there overseeing the security for the ceremony and, or so they thought, awaiting the arrival of Rary, Mordy, Bigby and the delegates.

    A word must be given here to the wards Rary had placed to thwart the scarlet sign. Deadly and intricately woven magics were put in place that would be triggered by anyone consciously thinking of the Scarlet Brotherhood upon their arrival to the function.

    Tasha, who, like Otto, considers Chathold her home (despite the fact she's actually from Hardby, but that's neither here nor there in this tale) triggered the wards. Upon seeing Otto, who was decked out in his finest garb for the event, including a prominent emblem of Chathold upon his cloak, Tasha's mind raced bitterly to the downfall of that doomed city, which she blames heavily on SB puppetteered corruption of the government there. The last thing she remembered seeing before the magical strike laid her low was the inscribed ward upon the frame of the doorway, including the sigil of Rary.

    Boom!

    When the dust cleared, Tasha was badly wounded, Tenser and Otiluke dead, and Rary accused, by Tasha's report and the accounts of witnesses who "saw the archmage placing odd magics upon the building early that day" Robilar, thanks to his usual collection of magic and trinkets to protect him, suffered only minor injuries, easily tended by local clerics that day.

    Rary, scornful of the corrupt watchmen of Greyhawk city, ignored the charges and proceeded with his plan to leave the city to pursue some mysterious study in his retreat in the Bright Desert, where he and Mordy had been secretly building a force of loyal supporters for reasons known only to them.

    Robilar, still loyal to Rary at this point, assuming, rightly, that Rary was falsely accused, accepted a mission from Rary to go to Tenser's Keep and retrieve some sensitive documents and materials, including things related to the Crook of Rao. Rary was doing this because he and Mordy were unsure of Tenser's precautions taken to activate his clones or otherwise prepare for an untimely death, not due to any real malice against Tenser, however, Tenser's clones , in the confusion, mistook Robilar for a looter and attacked him. Due to the lack of preparation of the clones for such quick activation, they were all relatively weak, and easily dispatched by Robilar, who was confident that Rary and Mordy would rectify the situation and allow for Tenser's safe return.

    Robilar then journeyed to Hardby, where he hooked up with Rary to journey to the Bright Desert hideaway. In route to Hardby, however, he heard news of Tasha's injuries, Otiluke's death and Tenser's seeming death. He and Rary argued about the turn of events but Rary assured him things were proceeding for the benefit of the greater cause, and Robilar grudgingly dropped it. He didn't forget his fallen friends however, and as the years have passed, his resentment and desire to right the wrongs of that day have grown.

    In addition, Robilar's subsequent attempts to contact Tasha have been met with cold contempt. She truly believes that Rary betrayed the Circle and blames him for Otilukes death and her own wounds, which haunt her to this day in the form of nightmares and a pronounced limp. Given Robilar's decision to accompany Rary on his mission in the desert. Tasha understandably assumes he is party to Rary's treason.

    OTOH, Tasha is also very bitter and angry with Mordy and Otto and the rest of the circle for their lack of reaction to Rary's actions. She has since returned to Hardby to rally support and enlist mercenaries for a venture into Chathold.

    Robilar is slowly but surely reaching the end of his patience with Rary, and this could certainly be the time he defects.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:06 am  

    Tzelios wrote:


    But let me tell you, compared to Kuntz you are like a grain compared to a mountain, I do not know if there is an English proverb for that, I am not a native speaker.


    I beg to differ.

    Look at my last post. Compare it to Rob's "the REAL robilar.

    Then, if you care to read the thread I'm referring to on wotc forums, you'll see that Rob claims to have spearheaded the letter writing drive on AOL's greyhawk folder that evidently got greyhawk revived in 98. WRONG. That was my dear friend Nitescreed, not Rob. Unless, of course, Rob IS Nitescreed...

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:11 am  

    Tzelios wrote:

    It is funny that while nobody in this board offends Greyhawk fans for following your doctrine, you keep offending fans that follow the doctrine of the creators of Greyhawk.


    I don't begrudge anyone for appreciating the work of Rob or Gary. I like Gary's work on Greyhawk. I just don't think it's the be all end all.

    I do begrudge Rob and his handful of fanboys. One of whom is present in this thread, who has in the past stated quite clearly that Canonfire and its authors and members were a pile of crap and a blight on GH. One who has banned me from his Greyhawk forum for posting a link to material on Canonfire. Need I go on?

    If these idiots want respect from me, they need to show a little respect to the people who kept the setting alive.

    It's a very telling fact that Rob, even when he was asking CF to host his work and advertise his forum, since he presumably couldn't afford his own hosting, NEVER EVEN REGISTERED AN ACCOUNT HERE!

    Rob has no love for those of us who don't rally to the "real" greyhawk banner.

    If I'm the badguy for pointing that out, so be it.

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:19 am  

    ScottG wrote:
    Rob did provide accurate stats for Robilar for the Rogues Gallery. It was Gary and Ernie that refused.
    Scott



    Well, that proves it then!

    Robilar was ruined solely by the top secret meetings that Lorraine held in the basement of TSR because she couldn't stand the idea that Rob or Gary would have a legacy!

    Someone call WotC and Paizo and inform them of this revelation, I'm sure they'll gladly begin to ignore anything published for greyhawk after 1985 and line up to shower praise on Rob, Gary and fanboys like you for pointing out this gross injustice.

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:45 am  

    A link to the thread in question, on WotC forum:

    http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=244619&page=1&pp=30
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:44 am  

    chatdemon wrote:
    Tzelios wrote:


    But let me tell you, compared to Kuntz you are like a grain compared to a mountain, I do not know if there is an English proverb for that, I am not a native speaker.


    I beg to differ.


    Thanks for the prompt answer.

    I've just packed my things for vacation. I promise to read it carefully as long as I reach my vacation destination, which is in 2 to 3 days.

    Till then, please check my case study suggestion on GMTO/superset approach I prompted, i.e. Greyhawk Content of the Coloring Album plus the OJ16 Elemental Evil article.

    Cheers till then, live in piece,

    tz:)
    _________________
    "It is easier to milk a cow that stands still." Tzeliobas-Aristomenes, General Cleaning, Greyhawk Construction Company.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:24 am  

    chatdemon wrote:
    A link to the thread in question, on WotC forum:

    http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=244619&page=1&pp=30


    This being before my time, I found this thread fascinating. I wish I had been around to participate - or maybe not.

    I take it as telling that no adventure has ever materialized in the aftermatch or is even spoken of anymore.
    _________________
    GVD
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:23 am  

    Tzelios wrote:


    But let me tell you, compared to Kuntz you are like a grain compared to a mountain, I do not know if there is an English proverb for that, I am not a native speaker.


    chatdemon wrote:

    chatdemon. I beg to differ.


    Tzelios,

    With all due respect, I agree with Chatdemon and I think your comment goes too far.

    Published GH authors obviously perform an invaluable service both in terms of promoting GH by giving GH something to promote by adding to "canon" with what they write. Without published authors, there would be no canon as we presently understand that phrase.

    Fans, however, are not simply grains of sand at the feet of these "giants."

    Greyhawk is a game. Games need players. TSR walked away from Greyhawk. Wotc walked away from Greyhawk. Hasbro has walked away from Greyhawk, not as absolutely but Charles Ryan has made it very clear that Greyhawk does not fit Wotc' plans beyond the "default" and however long Living Greyhawk can keep moving forward.

    Greyhawk FANS have kept Greyhawk going. In the breach, when there has been no published Greyhawk and by giving Greyhawk fans a place to congregate and share when Greyhawk materials have been published.

    Once, supporting Greyhawk meant keeping up a chatter on message boards or mailing lists and sharing ideas, but such was largely ephemeral. Canonfire changed that dynamic by providing for - 1) message boards, 2) preserved creative creations, 3) regular chats, 4) archived "fanzines" etc. Canonfire marks a revolution in the "fan experience." And it was done by fans, for fans. Sometimes IN SPITE of the IP holders and with the sneers of various "pros."

    Among those fans, Chatdemon has been one of the most active. He has an active presence on message boards. He has contributed his time and talents to the administration of Canonfire. He has currently made the most contributions to the topic/articles area of Canonfire, and whether he is ever passed in that category by CSL, myself or anyone else, he will remain the person who most substantially kept Canonfire going in that regard from its inception.

    Are these contributions to be deemed mere "grains?" Is he to be kicked to the curb because RKuntz comes out of self-imposed years of exile from any meaningful game design? Better question. Is he to be kicked to the curb anytime ANY published author touches upon Greyhawk, long absence or not? Are any of us?

    I think not.

    The game has changed. The internet and fan sites like Canonfire have changed the game. There would be no Greyhawk to write about, nowhere to talk about it and nowhere to share and exchange our creative efforts without FAN sites like Canonfire and Chatdemon is one of those responsible for making Canonfire happen and prosper. He is not a "grain."

    Fan is not a dirty word. Active fan is something to be commended. One can be active is any number of ways. Perhaps, Chatdemon is more active than others. But ANY activity, even reading as a lurker, should not be disparaged. Particularly, not just because some published person wanders by.

    If we wish to look purely at Chatdemon's creative efforts versus Mr. Kuntz', the principle difference is that Mr. Kuntz has been published and Chatdemon, to my knowledge, has not. Mr. Kuntz has then created more "canon" materials. That is it. But that is not all there is to being a Greyhawker or supporting Greyhawkerdom, not any more. It is easy enough to see "publication" as the be all to end all because it is most visible and enjoys full IP protection/authorization, but working to keep a message board active, to keep a website going and to put your own creative work, however unpublished, out there for people to read and take potshots at or praise is not inconsiderable.

    Publication does not necessarily equal creativity. Publication does not necessarily indicate superior design skills or knowledge. Publication indicates the desire and will to keep going until you get published - creativity, superior design, skill or knowledge are hopefully there in some measure but are not guaranteed to be there.

    As I posted earlier, the day is fast approaching when the very definition of "publication" will change. PDF publishing already heralds the change. So, do sites like Canonfire. The IP holders grip on their IP will not change but how they allow their IP to be dealt with may very well. The "bad old days" when TSR would have closed Canonfire in a second are history. While electronic publication of derivative works do not yet have equal dignity with printed materials, I think that day is coming. In my mind, it may be as simple as electronic publication meeting professional standards and having a scope akin to what would see print. I have not seen the finished product yet but I think The Gran March Project may very well be a harbringer of things to come. It is people like AncedMath, Ivormac and Chatdemon et al. who will have the will to see these kind of opportunities develop. We are not there yet but it would not be well to ignore the possibilities. And I should mention the Oerth Journal as well as another example of a harbringer of change, if only it was published more regularly.

    In such a not so far distant world, Xart Attack by Chatdemon may be THE word on the subject from which other authors deviate on that subject only with good cause or explaination. Already we see something of this in the negative fan reaction to Mr. Kuntz' proposed Robilar adventure and its then failure to emerge. The fans spoke and I would argue preempted Kuntz moving foreward as he had thought to do. The power of the internet.

    Concluding, Mr. Kuntz deserves his plaudits. So does Chatdemon. To call him a "grain" is to devalue his notable contributions and those of others similarly situated. It is to enshrine the published author when print publication is no longer the whole story. In that broader story, Chatdemon has earned more than to be called a "grain."

    I'm not mad or anything. Smile I just want to be clear on the issue. Print publication is no sinecure - of anything other than the fact of publication. It is a way some people can put down others, usually because they cannot engage the issue any other way so it is then easier to say - "I'm published; you are not; so my opinion, knowledge etc. is obviously superior to yours." BAH! It avoids the issue cheaply; it does not engage it.

    No offense and IMO Happy

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    GVD
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 11, 2003
    Posts: 143
    From: The Nexus

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:33 am  
    Re: Well...

    Woesinger wrote:
    Scottenkainen wrote:
    >Should we then try to create a superset of events that encompasses events in all home campaigns and those in canon? :)

    Yes.

    Granted, it would be impossible to incorporate everyone's take on Greytalk as soon as the first inconsistency came up.


    I think that's a noble idea in theory, but impossible to work in practice.<snip>

    There's just too many visions, too many heresies and too many Oerths to try and reconcile them all with published canon. Let the heresies be heresies and canon be canon. At the gaming table, the DM has complete creative control (well, at last until he adds PCs to the equation, because they never what you expect them to), but if you're writing for published canon, you should make a supreme effort to be consistant with what's gone before, I think.



    l


    Can you say, Crisis on Infinate Oerths?

    You're right, it would be impossible to reconcile all the various home grown Oerths. IMC, Stewernt never rebelled against King Archbold, Lynwerd is now Emperor, and Iuz is hiding in the Howling Hills after his plot to create a Midnight like world failed.

    Besides, organizing all the homegrown campaigns would take away the freedoms of GMs to create them in the first place. Canon, IMHO, is only published, in print GH material. While I do wish the authors would sometimes be a little better informed, or at least explain reasoning for changes in a sidebar.

    Though a rambling adventure through variants Oerths could be fun :)

    Theala
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:47 am  

    GVD, thanks for the compliments, but I want to make clear that despite the tone of my ranting, I'm not fishing for compliments. Nor am I attempting to disparage ALL of Rob's work. He had his hands in forming Greyhawk, and has had some interesting material over the years. Now, I don't particularly like Rob, that I'll admit, and I dislike some of his ideas and material immensely, notably his ideas for fixing Robilar. The main thing that gets me fired up when I see what I feel is undue praise for an author solely because they are published, or are an old timer, or whatever. Many other fans who don't have such resumes deserve equal credit. You, Jared, Samwise and the other regular CF authors for example. And all the folks who keep this forum and others like it going deserve a nod too.

    I will praise material and actions, not resumes, and I fully admit to having a short temper and being prone to ranting when I feel the BS is getting thick. As I said in the WotC thread from last year that I linked to, I'd just like to see everyone come down to earth and be honest, and show everyone who keeps GH and GH fandom vibrant some respect.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 1:53 pm  
    Or is it?

    >There's just too many visions, too many heresies and too many Oerths to try and reconcile them all with published canon. Let the heresies be heresies and canon be canon. At the gaming table, the DM has complete creative control (well, at last until he adds PCs to the equation, because they never what you expect them to), but if you're writing for published canon, you should make a supreme effort to be consistant with what's gone before, I think.<

    Reconcile all the heresies in their entirety? Certainly not. Acknowledge them? Definitely possible. For instance, I can't use two of Paul's campaign events, the collapse of Riftcrag into the Rift Canyon, or the hanging of the Directing Oligarchy...but if I knew when those events occured, I could add to my timeline an oerthquake that shook Riftcrag and a failed plot to assassinate the oligarchy of Greyhawk.

    If I were planning a new campaign (Rift Canyon, Greyhawk, or anywhere really), I would first read all the relevant canon material and would undoubtedly still find it skimpy. Then I would reach out to fan material, fleshing it out with outright borrowings, references, or subtler allusions to that material. If I was writing an article (as I have done), I would start out the same way. The only different tact I would follow with an article would be gaining permission first (I had always assumed that everyone contributed fan material with the intent of having others build on it, only being shocked from that assumption by Eric/Montand's refusal to let me build on his Sud Graufult work).

    ~Scott C.


    Last edited by Scottenkainen on Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 12, 2001
    Posts: 188
    From: Hanover Park

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:09 pm  
    And this...

    >But let me tell you, compared to Kuntz you are like a grain compared to a mountain, I do not know if there is an English proverb for that, I am not a native speaker.<

    The terms Tzelios might have been groping for are more likely "mountain" and "molehill", which sums up Rich's peculiar style of ranting fairly well. The very act of trying to tear Kuntz down acknowledges Kuntz to be a "mountain" for many people. True, Rich has made lasting contributions to the Greyhawk fan community and his explanation for Rary and Robilar's "treachery", which I've first read here, is the best I've seen yet. But what holds Rich back from "mountain-dom" is not only his lack of publication (seen as legitimizing by most of fandom), but his off-putting attitude and harsh words towards others.

    ~Scott C.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:26 pm  
    Re: And this...

    chatdemon wrote:
    The main thing that gets me fired up when I see what I feel is undue praise for an author solely because they are published, or are an old timer, or whatever. . . . I will praise material and actions, not resumes,


    Scottenkainen wrote:
    But what holds Rich back from "mountain-dom" is not only his lack of publication (seen as legitimizing by most of fandom), ~Scott C.


    I'd like to relate a personal anecdote. This happened just recently. Last week as a matter of fact.

    I decided that I was going to open an EN World account, its free afterall, and make a post. I wanted to say "me too" essentially in response to another's post. So, I did.

    Then this fellow comes on and makes a counterpoint to something I had written, which he backs up by saying he is "the Dude." I respond and he says, "No. See. I am The Dude." I try to split the baby, giving him credit where he makes a point but refusing to acknowledge "dude-hood" as the basis for anything more than a personal opinion.

    Ooops. My bad. Now, The Dude is pissed at me.

    Don't I get it? He is THE DUDE! What part about his being THE DUDE and my not being THE DUDE do I not understand? Obviously, his "dude-hood" renders his opinion superior because, well, he is _THE DUDE!_ Why can't I see that and accept his opinion as necessarily more informed and superior?

    Oookay. This is getting a bit surreal.

    See. I've never heard of Mr. Dude and I have ooodles and ooodles of gaming stuff collected over any number of years. So, I go look him up on the internet. Sure enough. There he is. And here is his gaming resume. Seems Mr. Dude runs Peepot PDF Games that has published almost nothing and Mr. Dude for all of his "dudeness" in "THE INDUSTRY" has managed to write one book, which I actually happen to own, which is not D&D and which basically sucked (except for one really cool map) and was never heard from again. But this thin resume confers quintessential "dudeness," making him The Dude and me, The Dud. Ouch. Well, shut my mouth!

    "DUDENESS." This is where I get off. When someone who has gotten themself published sees that as ennoblement of themself and their opinions from that point forward because of the fact of "PUBLICATION." Publication deserves plaudits for what it is but it does not confer a superluminal superiority for ever and ever thereafter.

    This ain't the army. Publication is not an increase in "rank." And one gamer, with very few exceptions, cannot "pull rank" on another because one is published and one is not. Yet, because we acknowledge "canon," we get confused, I think, and give a greater measure of regard, not just to canon, but the canon author thereafter. The first is fine, I think. The latter is fanboy hero worship that sees the worshipful fanboy but his brain in neutral whenever THE DUDE speaks.

    Of course, THE DUDE thinks this is precisely as it ought to be, as do his most vocal adherants. And upon being published, the prior worshipful fanboy gleefully relishes his own "dudehood" and a vicious cycle is perpetuated.

    While my first reaction to "dudes" is confusion, followed by an exteme desire to slap them silly until they cry for their momma, stepping back from the heat of the moment - I feel saddened and tired.

    All I'm worth is to be a fanboy? And I better know my "place" and mind my "betters?" What I have to look forward to, in the alternative, is being "published" so I can lord it over the "dudeless," by becoming a "dude?" Thanks but no thanks. I'd rather walk away.

    Thankfully, Greyhawkerdom seems to have fewer self-proclaimed "Dudes," who make a point of being "dudes." I can think of only four off the top of my head.

    Respect the canon. Respect the canon writer only if what they say makes sense, even if they had never been "published." Don't be a "dude."
    _________________
    GVD
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:37 pm  
    Re: And this...

    Scottenkainen wrote:
    The very act of trying to tear Kuntz down acknowledges Kuntz to be a "mountain" for many people


    I've tried to explain that it's not so much tearing Rob down and dismissing all of his work as it is demanding he be forthright about his comments on the game and setting he's once again writing for, and having little patience for the irrational loyalty some fans have to him. That Rob tolerates no criticism of his ideas, even when presented by folks far more diplomatic than I, is the basis of my dislike for him.

    For the record, I've read neither of the recent Maure Castle revisited articles, and have never attacked the content of either. My issue was with the proposal for Robilar..

    Quote:
    Rich has made lasting contributions to the Greyhawk fan community and his explanation for Rary and Robilar's "treachery", which I've first read here, is the best I've seen yet.


    Thanks for the compliments Smile

    Quote:
    But what holds Rich back from "mountain-dom" is not only his lack of publication (seen as legitimizing by most of fandom), but his off-putting attitude and harsh words towards others.


    I fully admit to this flaw, and have attempted to tone it down overall. I just have a few buttons that, once pushed, lead me into irrational ranting.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 17


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:38 pm  

    chatdemon wrote:
    A link to the thread in question, on WotC forum:

    http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=244619&page=1&pp=30


    Are you proud of your actions on that thread?

    In point of fact, TSR did a number of petty things to Gygax and the others from 1985- bankruptcy. Pushing Greyhawk to the back burner, then vandalizing it was part of that.

    Instead of trying to form a cohesive whole (canon) out of such disparate sources, why not start over? Everyone can start from the same foundation, but those who like From the Ashes can follow that line, while those who prefer Old School can do likewise and you won't have to worry about Kuntz's version of Robilar stepping on your toes. Then the old schoolers won't have to worry about Greyhawk Wars and Rary the Traitor, which are for this Greyhawk fan what the Star Wars Holiday Special was to Star Wars.

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:48 pm  

    Elfdart wrote:


    Are you proud of your actions on that thread?


    Not particularly, but I stand by everything I said.

    Are you proud of the behavior of Rob Kuntz on that thread?

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:53 pm  

    Elfdart wrote:

    Instead of trying to form a cohesive whole (canon) out of such disparate sources, why not start over? Everyone can start from the same foundation, but those who like From the Ashes can follow that line, while those who prefer Old School can do likewise and you won't have to worry about Kuntz's version of Robilar stepping on your toes. Then the old schoolers won't have to worry about Greyhawk Wars and Rary the Traitor, which are for this Greyhawk fan what the Star Wars Holiday Special was to Star Wars.


    Unfortunately for you, and Rob and Gary and a very small faction of other fans, Greyhawk moved on, and a lot of us accepted it or made the best of it. You cannot undo 20 years of development since Rob and Gary were removed from the equation. It just cannot be done, and it would serve the community far better if Rob would admit that (It is obvious he has accepted it, since he's settled into writing for Dungeon) and quit fueling the pipe dreams of nostalgic fans.

    Do I miss the glory days of Basic D&D, AD&D 1e and Gygax style Greyhawk? Sure I do, but I also realize those are in the past. The game and setting have moved along, and I've moved with it.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 19, 2005
    Posts: 17


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:12 pm  

    Elfdart wrote:

    I like the idea of Kuntz trying to undo the damage Lorraine Williams and others did to something he helped create.


    chatdemon wrote:

    RIGHT....


    It sure is.

    [quote="chatdemon"]Lorraine most likely had NO creative input, period. That's just business, she was managing the company, not rewriting greyhawk. quote]

    Williams' contempt for loyal fans of the game and setting are well-documented.

    chatdemon wrote:
    Also, a often overlooked fact: Gygax hired Lorraine and placed her in charge of the company.


    Williams bought controlling interest in the company.

    chatdemon wrote:
    I am not opposed to trying to adapt Robilar's story into something closer to whatever Rob's version is, and in fact when the debate was raging on WotC forums, I offered a much more original and detailed "fix". Rather than consider the ideas of people like me, Rob stubbornly stuck to his "ITS ROBILARS EVIL CLONE".


    I'm no Kuntz worshipper, but I think he does a better job with his character than you do. The clone story actually shows Rary the Traitor more respect than it deserves. He would have been justified in pouring the RtT story down the drain of Bobby Ewing's shower. If anything, Kuntz went out of his way to accomodate the new story line, except where Robilar was made into Rary's patsy. I would have preferred it if he simply said "None of that Rary the Traitor nonsense ever happened.".

    Edited by Duicarthan 07/07/05
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 8:33 pm  

    Lorraine Williams caused a number of problems for TSR due to poor management. It is one of the reasons TSR was in a position to be gobbled up by WotC and then Hasbro. However, that has little to do with ruining Greyhawk unless you simply declare that Greyhawk was ruined when Gary left the company. That's arguable, though there was plenty of dubious material being put out before LW was around.

    ScottG did not prove the statement false, except in the narrow sense that *one* of the parties mentioned should not have been included in the list. While Robilar's stats in there may have been accurate, it remains true that the Rogues' Gallery and similar products consistently and intentionally diverged from the private campaigns of Mssrs. Gygax and Kuntz.

    If you don't like Rary the Traitor, you don't have to use it. Quite simple, really. But a bad fix, which the clone story is, is worse than no fix at all.
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 487
    From: Cooke City, MT, USA

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:19 pm  

    Elfdart wrote:
    If anything, Kuntz went out of his way to accomodate the new story line, except where Robilar was made into Rary's patsy. I would have preferred it if he simply said "None of that Rary the Traitor nonsense ever happened.".


    Perhaps fact and evidence don't exist whereever you are from, but here, they do, allow me to quote the good Mr Kuntz:

    From http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=244619&page=1&pp=30

    Rob Kuntz wrote:
    It is part of Greyhawk lore, but it is only canon depending on who adopts it. I for one do not, as the basis for its adaptation is soley dependant on the work I performed on the PC as my character and no other. I am canon when it comes to the original Robilar. Now, one can change it to suit needs, but to say that is canon afterwards, specifically when it breaks from a pre-established order as created and governed by its originator, is not worthy of me even commenting on.


    Rob Kuntz wrote:
    I dislike the story tremendously for those facts already stated.


    Rob Kuntz wrote:
    I find that story loathsome


    Rob Kuntz wrote:
    If someone else wishes to write his history over again and again, fine by me, I just won't have a part in it.


    Rob Kuntz wrote:
    Listen everyone. I hate RtT and will not write around/in/out-of-it.


    I rest my case. You are wrong. No need to apologize, I understand that in your haste to criticize me and defend the good Mr Kuntz, mistakes can be made.
    _________________
    What would Raxivort do?<br />
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2004
    Posts: 666


    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:00 pm  

    Well, I utterly disagree with Rob when he claims to retain authority over a character that he consciously put in the public domain (well, made part of TSR IP anyway). He had no obligation to do so. He could have kept Robilar out of the published material if he so wished. Then he wouldn't have this problem.
    Mad Archmage of the Oerth Journal

    Joined: Dec 09, 2002
    Posts: 342
    From: Ohio

    Send private message
    Wed Jul 06, 2005 10:20 pm  

    Locking down this thread. Its reached far beyond its original intent and has become a flamefest. =/

    Lets keep it positive guys. =)
    _________________
    Cheerz,
    -Rick "Duicarthan" Miller
    Editor-in-Chief, Oerth Journal
    http://www.oerthjournal.com http://www.greyhawkonline.com/duicarthan
    CF Admin

    Joined: Aug 29, 2002
    Posts: 178
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 07, 2005 6:08 pm  

    Ok folks, after a bit of trimming this thread is back open. I think it had some good points and despite the attacks and flames it deserves to keep moving, as long as its in a positive direction.
    One thing I want to say though, while not everyone will agree with everyone else all the time, I think people need to read the rules of the road on safe and happy posting here:http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=FAQ&myfaq=yes&id_cat=1&categories=Canonfire%21%3Cp%3E
    In paticular this section: "Personal attacks, direct insults and harassment towards members will be edited or the entire thread entirely deleted, pending further action by the Canonfire! staff. Treat each other with respect and remember you are dealing with real people at the other end."

    That said lets move on to something positive in relation to this threads content.
    _________________
    Canonfire Community Supporter and Forum Justicar
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:19 am  

    Okay then. Smile

    There has been some good reaction to the idea of "fictionalizing" or "characterizing" a given GH product to make reference to it - imagining that all "canon" is being written in and by a "third person" Greyhawk scholar, whose "knowledge" may not be perfect.

    Thus, if canon sources disagree, it is like two medieval monks, one in Dublin and one in Bucharest, each describing events in Paris. Neither is likely to get it completetly correct to the finest detail.

    At last night's chat, there was also some concern about how far to take this thought. Like everything else, I guess it could be overdone.

    To me, however, this is an easy and neat way to work around troublesome canon.

    If canon conflicts? "Fictionalize" the author using Tzelios' meta-text onamastics and the conflict can be lessened or made to disappear.

    If canon is "problematic," even if it is "certain?" "Fictionalize" the author using Tzelios' meta-text onamastics and the conflict can be lessened or made to disappear.

    We have seen this done notably in the case of Rose Estes and "funny" Castle Greyhawk already - in canon. So, I don't think this is a "novel" approach.

    I am suggesting expanding the principle.

    Other thoughts?
    _________________
    GVD
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Fri Jul 08, 2005 9:40 am  

    Perhaps I would take it farther than you would, GVD, but I would put the author discussing the work of the conflicting sages in character too, at least in articles, although the utility would be the same in the forums. That puts it further into context thereby creating more useful setting fluffy bits and recognizes the weighing function for what it is, a subjective analysis, rather than the proclamation of a Dude. No matter how well it is reasoned, a ‘Hawker will disagree with the argument, but it hard to disagree with inserting an NPC into the setting whose opinions might or might not be valid.

    So, the monk in London says the monk in Bucharest knows better then monk in Dublin. Even though he presents a well reasoned argument, the monk in London is prejudiced against the monk in Dublin for various reasons.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 05, 2004
    Posts: 1446


    Send private message
    Mon Jul 11, 2005 12:39 pm  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    No matter how well it is reasoned, a ‘Hawker will disagree with the argument, but it hard to disagree with inserting an NPC into the setting whose opinions might or might not be valid.


    I like this thought. I think this kind of rethinking of canon can go a long ways to avoiding "digging in the heels" arguments that don't produce much. Herein, differing views can be expounded with equal plausibility, allowing choice without the caveat, "but of course you are free to violate canon in your own game." Wink Canon becomes more open to imagination and creativity, rather than a hinderance.
    _________________
    GVD
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:07 am  

    Well, I applied this idea in my postfest holiday topic submission, “Berceuse, the Song of Osprem”. The conflict that I addressed in character is that the northern barbarians do not see Osprem as the husband of Procan, while that is how she is seen around the southern seas.

    I do not know of anything formally canon on that specific topic. I do know that it is canon that these are both deities, Suloise and Oeridian respectively, and that the barbarians are almost pure Suel, while in the south the cultures have mixed substantially. Given that, and the supposed late arrival of Osprem, I would find it hard to accept that the situation would be otherwise: that is to say that there is this schism in belief. Insofar as gods are real in GH, something has to be wrong.

    So, I guess if anything I wrote does conflict with canon, the piece can still be used, in whole or in part, one way or another, with the inaccuracies attributable to the imperfect knowledge of the Fruztii sage-seer Volf Wandering Eye, rather than the author Wolfsire just not knowing what he is writing about. Who knows, it comes to me as I am writing this, maybe Volf is actually a pawn, knowingly or not, of the Scarlet Brotherhood.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 876
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 10:53 am  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    Well, I applied this idea in my postfest holiday topic submission, “Berceuse, the Song of Osprem”. The conflict that I addressed in character is that the northern barbarians do not see Osprem as the husband of Procan, while that is how she is seen around the southern seas.

    I do not know of anything formally canon on that specific topic. I do know that it is canon that these are both deities, Suloise and Oeridian respectively, and that the barbarians are almost pure Suel, while in the south the cultures have mixed substantially. Given that, and the supposed late arrival of Osprem, I would find it hard to accept that the situation would be otherwise: that is to say that there is this schism in belief. Insofar as gods are real in GH, something has to be wrong.

    So, I guess if anything I wrote does conflict with canon, the piece can still be used, in whole or in part, one way or another, with the inaccuracies attributable to the imperfect knowledge of the Fruztii sage-seer Volf Wandering Eye, rather than the author Wolfsire just not knowing what he is writing about. Who knows, it comes to me as I am writing this, maybe Volf is actually a pawn, knowingly or not, of the Scarlet Brotherhood.


    Well, first of all, I don't blame the northern barbarians for not accepting that Osprem is the husband of Procan. Laughing

    Seriously, that relationship is news to me, especially since she has a son (Akwamon) by Xerbo. Now that I look at it, though, Len Lakofka's original write-up of Osprem in DRAGON® mentions that she is on "only fair terms" with Xerbo. Perhaps gods get divorced too? (I'd hate to have been in the courthouse on that day! Shocked )
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:49 am  

    “Osprem is the husband of Procan.” Embarassed Sorry about that and thanks DMPrata for the information on Akwamon. It is new to me, but now that I have it, I have found a few sources.

    At http://216.10.17.109/codex/greyhawk/religion/akwamom.htm citing at the bottom of the page By Lenard Lakofka, © TSR and Wizards of the Coast it says: “Akwamon is the son of Xerbo and Osprem and is in close harmony with both.” At http://216.10.17.109/codex/greyhawk/religion/lendore.htm citing at the bottom on the page: “© 1998 TSR Hobbies and Wizards of the Coast” it says “Lendor begets Osprem and Xerbo”

    These are new to me. When I did an internet search for sources, I did not find them but rather: http://www.cmc.net/~rtaylor/greyhawk/gods/xerbo2.html and http://www.onnwal.org.uk/OG-C6.html, which have Osprem as the wife of Procan and the daughter of Xerbo.

    It looks like I might have canon wrong, based upon the mistakes of others, unless there are conflicting canon sources or there is more to the story. I would not be surprised if that is the case as the Lakofka site starts with: “Akwamon was, alas, LEFT OUT, of the Suel Pantheon though he was meant to be there!”

    I am not going change my post as I like the concept of conflicting conceptions of divine relationships. That is very realistic. Also, the conflict is secondary as window dressing around the holiday of Berceuse.

    However, I may very well incorporate Akwamon into my campaign as progeny of Osprem and Xerbo. Yuck! That too would not be unrealistic for mythology. That storm giant could very well fit into the barbarian conception and it would not be inaccurate to say that Lendor begat Osprem, if she were his granddaughter. Are you aware of anything else on this?

    FYI while there is more to it, what I wrote for the postfest was: “While not universally accepted, at this late date following the Migrations of the Suel and Oerid, it is widely and falsely believed where these bloodlines have mixed that our beneficent Suloise goddess Osprem is the wife of the seemingly uncaring Oeridian god Procan. Procan, it is said, in addition to Osprem’s protective father, Xerbo, as you know, is the source of storms.”
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 876
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:44 pm  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    “Osprem is the husband of Procan.” Embarassed Sorry about that and thanks DMPrata for the information on Akwamon. It is new to me, but now that I have it, I have found a few sources.

    At http://216.10.17.109/codex/greyhawk/religion/akwamom.htm citing at the bottom of the page By Lenard Lakofka, © TSR and Wizards of the Coast it says: “Akwamon is the son of Xerbo and Osprem and is in close harmony with both.” At http://216.10.17.109/codex/greyhawk/religion/lendore.htm citing at the bottom on the page: “© 1998 TSR Hobbies and Wizards of the Coast” it says “Lendor begets Osprem and Xerbo”

    These are new to me. When I did an internet search for sources, I did not find them but rather: http://www.cmc.net/~rtaylor/greyhawk/gods/xerbo2.html and http://www.onnwal.org.uk/OG-C6.html, which have Osprem as the wife of Procan and the daughter of Xerbo.

    It looks like I might have canon wrong, based upon the mistakes of others, unless there are conflicting canon sources or there is more to the story. I would not be surprised if that is the case as the Lakofka site starts with: “Akwamon was, alas, LEFT OUT, of the Suel Pantheon though he was meant to be there!”

    I am not going change my post as I like the concept of conflicting conceptions of divine relationships. That is very realistic. Also, the conflict is secondary as window dressing around the holiday of Berceuse.

    However, I may very well incorporate Akwamon into my campaign as progeny of Osprem and Xerbo. Yuck! That too would not be unrealistic for mythology. That storm giant could very well fit into the barbarian conception and it would not be inaccurate to say that Lendor begat Osprem, if she were his granddaughter. Are you aware of anything else on this?

    FYI while there is more to it, what I wrote for the postfest was: “While not universally accepted, at this late date following the Migrations of the Suel and Oerid, it is widely and falsely believed where these bloodlines have mixed that our beneficent Suloise goddess Osprem is the wife of the seemingly uncaring Oeridian god Procan. Procan, it is said, in addition to Osprem’s protective father, Xerbo, as you know, is the source of storms.”


    Well, it sounds to me as if Xerbo and Osprem are brother and sister. So they had a kid together? What's the big deal? They're gods, after all. Laughing Given that, I suppose it is possible that Osprem is wed to Procan, but I wouldn't accept anything on the Suel gods that didn't come from Len Lakofka himself. Word is he's been lurking over at Dragonsfoot. If we can ever convince him to do a Q&A, I know I'll have a bunch of questions for him!
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:28 pm  

    Along those lines, Russ Taylor, who had Xerbo as the father, cited to Dragon #90, Gods of the Suel Pantheon and Len Lakofka's Greytalk posts on the Suel Pantheon although the citations were not specific to any statement. I'll have to double check #90, I could not find the answer with a GT search.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 876
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:33 pm  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    Along those lines, Russ Taylor, who had Xerbo as the father, cited to Dragon #90, Gods of the Suel Pantheon and Len Lakofka's Greytalk posts on the Suel Pantheon although the citations were not specific to any statement. I'll have to double check #90, I could not find the answer with a GT search.


    It may be in Greytalk, but I have DRAGON® #90 in front of me now, and neither Xerbo's nor Osprem's entries mention anything about paternity.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Thu Jul 14, 2005 4:14 pm  

    Also, I know there was nothing about it in L2, Assassin's Knot his other major work on Osprem. Maybe he never wrote much on the subject.

    If someone else knows about the issue, I would be glad to hear about it. Interestingly, although I could not find anything attributable to Leomund (that is the only name I know he appeared under), I did find a few others who reached the same father daughter conclusion at GT.

    The narrow issue is pretty much off topic (not that it is getting in the way of the thread) Wink , but it is illustrative and I will bring it back around by saying that the sage-seer Volf cannot have canon wrong because he is a non-canon character, anything he say inaccurate can be attributed to his flaws and/or intentions. (You can laugh at me, through the PC).

    Thanks again.
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Sep 14, 2002
    Posts: 180
    From: Patra, Greece

    Send private message
    Mon Jul 18, 2005 5:44 am  

    Girls, Guys, and rest,

    Why don't we check this case study I proposed, in order to case investigate the strengths of the approach?

    Try the Elemental Evil article of the recently released OJ16. The article overcomes all incosintencies of the T1-4 module plus more, go check it out and lets see if the approach works.

    Chiou (chao in Stylianic),

    tz
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 11, 2001
    Posts: 634


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 19, 2005 8:41 am  

    Wolfsire wrote:
    “Osprem is the husband of Procan.”
    FYI while there is more to it, what I wrote for the postfest was: “While not universally accepted, at this late date following the Migrations of the Suel and Oerid, it is widely and falsely believed where these bloodlines have mixed that our beneficent Suloise goddess Osprem is the wife of the seemingly uncaring Oeridian god Procan. Procan, it is said, in addition to Osprem’s protective father, Xerbo, as you know, is the source of storms.”


    In LG Onnwal, we had it as a common regional belief among the mixed Oeridian/Suel seafarers of Onnwal that Osprem was Procan's wife and could sooth her husband's wrath with her singing. It kinda makes sense in Onnwal, where Suel settlers were conquered by the Aerdi (with the resultant mingling of cultures and myths). The Scarlet Brotherhood, of course, regard that tale as a foul heresy and will cheerfully execute/reducate anyone professing it (depending on their bloodlines).

    On a slightly different topic, Akwamon always sounded sorta goofy to me (Aquaman?). Smile

    P.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 19, 2005 11:39 am  

    Woesinger, you are right, that is a goofy name. I had not tried to sound it out yet. I used the beliefs of LG Onnwal as one of my sources. I have the same opinion as to why and what others in GH think. It was a Fruztii saying the belief was false.

    Tzelios, I looking forward to reading the example in OJ 16, but I have not caught up on my reading yet.
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 19, 2005 4:06 pm  

    Tzelios, that was an interesting piece on the Temple and Iuz. It covers a portion of GH that I know very little about, and so I cannot say anything about how the article addresses inconsistencies. However, I very much liked your utilization of Tzeliobas, to set the stage. It was colorful, and that is very important, but more than that the portion on “General Cleaner”, got me wondering about Tzeliobas’s motivations and what impact it might have on the accuracy of the report.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 876
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Tue Jul 19, 2005 6:25 pm  

    Woesinger wrote:
    On a slightly different topic, Akwamon always sounded sorta goofy to me (Aquaman?). Smile

    P.


    Well, you could always go with ok-WA-mon instead of OK-wuh-man. Wink
    Grandmaster Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 23, 2004
    Posts: 1212


    Send private message
    Tue Jul 26, 2005 6:46 am  

    BUMP

    Tzelios wrote:

    "Girls, Guys, and rest,

    Why don't we check this case study I proposed, in order to case investigate the strengths of the approach?

    Try the Elemental Evil article of the recently released OJ16. The article overcomes all incosintencies of the T1-4 module plus more, go check it out and lets see if the approach works.

    Chiou (chao in Stylianic),

    tz"

    I felt I should give this a bump as it may have been lost in my rambling.
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    [ 1, 2  Next]
    Page 1 of 2

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.56 Seconds