The canon evidence seems to suggest that Sulm fell suddenly about -1400 CY with Shattados' donning fo the Scorpion Crown. That event transformed the Bright into a desert IIRC.
As for Solutreans (a) I'd like to see the mitochondrial DNA evidence published in a peer-reviewed journal and (b) there's a big difference between a long range migration by a stone age hunter gatherer culture and a migration of the scale needed to found a settlement capable of producing a monumental structure like an Olman pyramid.
The small group occupying a site constructed by another civilisation works best, IMO.
WS: “The canon evidence seems to suggest that Sulm fell suddenly about -1400 CY with Shattados' donning fo the Scorpion Crown. That event transformed the Bright into a desert IIRC.”
I am not yet saying the date is wrong for the fall, but all I see is a mere suggestion. The canon can be, and has been, read another way. If possible, I prefer not only to harmonize canon, but also fan works. Insofar and Mona has the date at -700, that fan date could very well turn into canon. That date also has very serious implication for the viability, or character of an Olman settlement, large or small, so if the evidence from sources other that LGG and RtT suggests that the more recent date is more compatible then it, IMO, is the better date.
WS: “As for Solutreans (a) I'd like to see the mitochondrial DNA evidence published in a peer-reviewed journal and (b) there's a big difference between a long range migration by a stone age hunter gatherer culture and a migration of the scale needed to found a settlement capable of producing a monumental structure like an Olman pyramid.”
(a) I didn’t know about the lack of peer review, and agree it is needed, but I was sold on the Solutreans before I knew about the DNA evidence and have questions about that evidence anyway. I found the dates and artifacts convincing.
(b) You are entirely right there are major differences. The comparison just jumped into my mind and I used it (i) initially for the purpose of demonstrating that new and strange ideas can nevertheless be true and exciting, which is why I questioned the notion of verisimilitude (ii) as a basis for comparison to inform the Olman site. As you say, technology was different. Also, there was no pre-existing population, there was ice rather than coast along the way, and there was probably a much greater time period. Likely many other important things were different too.
WS: “The small group occupying a site constructed by another civilisation works best, IMO.”
IMO, that very well may be the case. Anything else facially seems illogical and contrary to the accepted norms, I just don’t want to rush to that conclusion on that basis. When I do rush to a conclusion it is because I have a specific notion I want to implement for the setting and I direct my research into justify that. Here, I do not have that, other than harmonization. My desire to hype the Olman does not depend on the size of the settlement. Rather, I want to delay a determination and dig into the details, for example Mona’s Cairn Builder description, and let the chips fall where they may. After all the evidence is in, fancies might be stricken to read it one way or another. Who knows.
BTW, in relation to Mona’s animal headed Cairn builder description (there were other cairn builders), his blog, http://www.superunicorn.com/blogger_archive/erik/2005_02_01_erik_archive.html, has some references. Does anyone have these sources that could provide some details? I picked the animal headed ones from his article as they had pyramids and with the animal heads seemed closest culturally to the Olman. Does anyone know what their source is or have any other thoughts on Cairn Builders that might related to the Olman? Can any one describe the relevant portions of these sources? I am reluctant to say that Olman culture derived from a pseudo-Egyptian culture, but I want to look at the option first, if that is what is out there.
Known Cairns
The Choking City: “A cairn complex has been discovered that is virtually a necropolis, nearly a mile in length. Some of the buried city is comprised of tombs. Much of it, however, appears to be a normal city of people going about their business—but these people were at some point instantaneously petrified, so that they (and all they possessed) were turned to stone.” (From the Ashes Campaign Book, p. 31)
The Sarcophagus of the Red Mummy: (Greyhawk: Gem of the Flanaess, p. 24)
The Silver Metal Cairn: See above.
The Star Cairns :“The four cairns shown on the campaign map are 400 to 500 years old. Each is the burial site of a Suloise wizard.” (From the Ashes Campaign Book, p. 36)
The Stirgenest Cairn (Dungeon #124)
Tomb of Blood Everflowing (Dungeon #114)
Tomb of the Green Lady: “An outcast priest of Wee Jas named Nohrtan brought followers here to protect a cairn he believes is the final resting place of a powerful priestess of Wee Jas.” (Doomgrinder, p. 19)
The Whispering Cairn (Dungeon #124)
I am not yet saying the date is wrong for the fall, but all I see is a mere suggestion. The canon can be, and has been, read another way. If possible, I prefer not only to harmonize canon, but also fan works. Insofar and Mona has the date at -700, that fan date could very well turn into canon. That date also has very serious implication for the viability, or character of an Olman settlement, large or small, so if the evidence from sources other that LGG and RtT suggests that the more recent date is more compatible then it, IMO, is the better date.
Well the LGG is where I got the "no cities in the Bright since 2000 years ago" quote. They seem pretty definate to me given the backstory (Scorpion Crown --> Fall of Sulm). I think Creighton Broadhurst's LGJ articles on the Bright back this view up.
If there were no cities in the Bright in the last 2000 years, that'd seem to nix -700 CY.
Wolfsire wrote:
(a) I didn’t know about the lack of peer review, and agree it is needed, but I was sold on the Solutreans before I knew about the DNA evidence and have questions about that evidence anyway. I found the dates and artifacts convincing.
That said - this Douglas C Wallace seems to be a fairly reputable scientist and expert in the field of mitochondrial genetics. To be sure, though - I'd like a second opinion.
Mitochondrial DNA has the potential to rule out the possibility that the technologies weren't developed independently. While that's unlikely, it's not impossible - and given that one might consider the alternate possibility to be somewhat unlikely, the hypthesis needs something incontrovertable like genetic evidence to back it up.
After reviewing the Dungeon adventure, "Glacial Inferno," in issue 103 at 19-34, I've determined it baseless to consider it canon-esque.
I've never heard of its author Kent Ertman, and despite the fact that Erik Mona was Dungeon's editor at the time, the adventure itself seems to have had its Duchy of Urnst references and its Aztec-esque names and location added without any care for how they fit (or don't) into Greyhawk. It's a fine example of Greyhawk as random name generator. Alternatively, perhaps Erik suggested the Duchy and Abbor-Alz locations to resonate with Creighton's article on the Bright Desert? Someone might ask him at a chat or something...
If one wanted to incorporate the adventure into Greyhawk, I suggest moving it from the Duchy of Urnst and Abbor-Alz to the Drachensgrabs of the Pomarj, the mountains around the Hold of the Sea Princes, or perhaps somewhere in the Headlands between Onnwal and Irongate, the eastern border of Idee, or somewhere else that one would like to site an Olman-esque adventure.
Alternatively, the Olman-esque references might all be changed; they're unnecessary for the plot and could be substituted. Perhaps the instigator was the son of Flan hillmen in the Abbor-Alz.
However, I'm glad we had this conversation. I'd like to hear more about the 700 year difference between the dates reportedly held by Erik and advocated by Paul. Also, I hadn't realized that the Cairn Builders were described as African-esque in appearance. That's surprising!
Thanks for clarifying that bit of canon. I will have to take a hard look at the LGG and consider it in relation to other things; “no cities” is a very strong statement. But there might be other ways of looking at it, particularly along the lines of the “long slide into decadence” and the Shattados’ reason for asking for the Scorpion Crown in the first place.
For example, rather than bringing on the doom at the height of its power when presumably it would need the crown the least to control his subjects, the reason given in RtT which I have just started reading, the “decadence” might have corresponded with a climactic shift , making the place even dryer (only later to be completely and ironically wasted with the crown ) causing a reduction in trade and population shrinking of cities to towns. That could be coupled with a decreasing ability to hold the center as subject tribes/provinces start fighting and the kings, in their decadence, only care about maintaining or even improving their lifestyles. That would be a good reason to ask for the crown. In to this turmoil come the Olman, large or small for waterever reason, at roughtly the same time thing are happening in the south.
I am just speculating now as I look into it. To me, it sound like an interesting possibility and it would certainly play on the overriding theme of the area, the desert, which is nicely juxtaposed with jungle.
I am going to have to wait a whole week or two to get that module.
I think Greyhawk history loves to move civilizations around en masse far too frequently. I will accept the mass migrations of the Suel and Oeridians because I have to, but the Olman moving from Hepmonaland to the Amedio was one migration too many for me.
If we accept that the city at the north end of Matreyus Lake and Tamoachan are the farthest north and west the Olman migrated (per tSB) that seems to give a decent extent for their settlements. I personally don't see any reason for the Olman to leave Hepmonaland in great numbers nor does it seem logical or realistic. To me it seems much more believable if their origin is the islands of the Azure Sea and through over population they spread out to the Amedio and Hepmonaland. Perhaps there were some groups that eventually fled from Hepmonaland when things got bad but not enough to actually populate the Amedio. I am thinking the Mayflower here not some mass exodus utilizing a nonexistant fleet of ships.
As far as the Dungeon 103 adventure, I remember reading it and dismissing the Greyhawk trappings immediately. This isn't the first nor last time a 'Greyhawk' adventure was so far out of whack it really wasn't worth 'retconning'.
I suppose you could say the temple was a Vaati structure that was coopted by some Olman deity worshipping outcasts but I am not sure if it would be worth the effort.
Now if people would like to percolate on something that I would dearly love to have for my campaign how about 'retconning' tSB's Amedio background so that it is actually usable for players to adventure in?
So far the only thing I have managed is a semi-safe trade route along the eastern Hellfurnaces from Sasserine-Cauldron to Xamaclan through dakon held territory. This at least gets the players to a reasonably usable "home base" in the Amedio.
Hi Lassiviren. While it's clear that you dislike mass migrations, I'm unclear about your thoughts on the Olman.
It sounds like you've rejected tSB's explanation that the Olman migrated to the Amedio because their expanding empire was losing the war with the Touv. And it also sounds like you've rejected the various but basically Zindian origins developed in these fora.
Instead, you've suggested:
Quote:
To me it seems much more believable if their origin is the islands of the Azure Sea and through over population they spread out to the Amedio and Hepmonaland. Perhaps there were some groups that eventually fled from Hepmonaland when things got bad but not enough to actually populate the Amedio. I am thinking the Mayflower here not some mass exodus utilizing a nonexistant fleet of ships.
But how would the population of "islands of the Azure Sea" be sufficient to populate either the tSB Olman cities in the Amedio or Hepmonaland? You mentioned Xamaclan, so it sounds like you've retained at least some of the cities it established.
Also, why do you hold that the Olman would lack ships capable of traversing the narrow gap between the Amedio and Hepmonland?
While I don't use the Hepmonaland origin for the Olman, I am a bit puzzled about the dislike of migrations. They were pretty darned common in the real world. All manner of folks poured out of Central Asia to fill up Europe, the middle east, and North Africa. Vandals, Goths, Huns, Celts, Magyars, Avars, Turks, etc. Hawai'i was settled by polynesian migrants. The Indian subcontinent was filled up by migrants and invaders.
Fact is, pretty much everyone moved in from somewhere else. Its just a matter of how far back you want to go to find the change of address.
The ship thing is also not an issue. From Hepmonaland to the Amedio is not very far at all, especially island hopping. The pacific islanders spread across thousands of miles without "a fleet of ships".
After reviewing the Dungeon adventure, "Glacial Inferno," in issue 103 at 19-34, I've determined it baseless to consider it canon-esque.
I've never heard of its author Kent Ertman, and despite the fact that Erik Mona was Dungeon's editor at the time, the adventure itself seems to have had its Duchy of Urnst references and its Aztec-esque names and location added without any care for how they fit (or don't) into Greyhawk. It's a fine example of Greyhawk as random name generator. Alternatively, perhaps Erik suggested the Duchy and Abbor-Alz locations to resonate with Creighton's article on the Bright Desert? Someone might ask him at a chat or something...
No one can dismiss a solid GH reference as not constituting canon and have canon mean anything. Whether one has heard of a published author or not is irrelevant. And there is no Mona litmus test. If a reference is directly to GH, the reference is canon. This is an objective standard. The alternative is personal preference canon-making which will see no common ground, only individually advocated idyosyncratic declarations of canon.
This latter sort of "canon" seems here abouts to be the fashion of the last few months and I find it increasingly irritating. There is a huge difference between having justifiable pride in ones opinions or work and then trying to pass such off as presumptive or implied canon when such is absolutely not the case. Or to alternatively to dismiss canon as a nonsuch because that is the personal preference.
Personal preference is trumping canon at the same time it seeks to cloak itself in the "authority" of canon or non-canon status. I think opinion can and should stand on its own as such. I certainly try to make clear what is my opinion and what I can cite to by book and page number. I don't see this as a bad thing but I'm feeling lonely.
Certainly, the details of Glacial Inferno are in the wind to a more than significant degree. And one can make a claim that those details support this as opposed to that reading. But to declare the adventure, firmly placed in the Flanaess, to not be "canon" goes too far, IMO.
With respect to Glacial inferno, the odd details suggest the Olman. The alternative is to imagine a heretofore unknown agency, with some striking resemblances to the Olman, operating in the region of the Bright Desert and Abbor-Alz. The latter is possible, as is the former, and neither is certain. The only thing certain is that the details, however interpreted, are canon. We can discuss the details or simply declare the references noncanon and then unworthy of much further comment. The last option not only forecloses discussion to a marked degree but renders canon idyosyncratic. I resist this.
Sorry if this comes across as negative but I'm feeling rather negative about how we discuss things at the moment. _________________ GVD
Extremely ancient meaning they moved out of Oerik before contact with any of the known cultures (like the Suel or Oeridians?). Even if they spread out of somewhere like the Zindia option, it would have been a couple thousand years ago at least. That's pretty ancient by most measures. Do you want it even older than that?
Hey GVD, sorry to hear you're feeling negative about talking 'hawk.
I'm often happy to cite but lately have made due with simply referencing texts without a pincite. I've been away from the online GH community for a while, so I've missed a number of recent discussions about canon GH.
I therefore apologize in advance for speaking without knowledge of those discussions.
Nevertheless, I will articulate my understanding of canon GH. First, I eschew any objective test. I do this primarily because I understand the concept of GH canon as somewhat of a joke (an creative act meant to cause humor, excite interest, etc.)
We play on the notion of canon, which as you know, refers to notions of doctrine and dogma, decided by an organized body of people, i.e., a church.
Early in the online GH community's history, the Council of Greyhawk served this role. The council was not exclusive as far as I can tell. While there were infamous flamewars, the online GH community was relatively open. Many folks were interested in delving into the relatively few explicit GH publications and the relatively greater publications that centered GH, mentioned the setting, or were produced by some of its luminary authors (Gygax, Rob, Lakofka, etc.).
For me that period (to simplify) ended before 2000. Thereafter I found relatively few online fora to feature posters who were adequately organized to declare canon with that original mixture of seriousness and levity. Indeed, in the last few years of the 1990s, a number of fans innovated the notion of "GH heresies" and "Alternate Oerths."
Since then many people have articulated their definitions of canon, GVD notably among them. In recent years I've tended to ignore such threads because my definition seems so far from what is discussed, and the subject interests me less than it once did.
You may (or not) recall such a discussion with Tzelios, where we ventured the term paradigm in place of canon, a paradigm being an exemplar that organizes subsequent research, as described famously by Thomas Kuhn regarding the historiography of science (and adapted by many academics thereafter).
While I appreciate the desire for an objective test, I submit that it leads to nonsense. If anyone who mentions GH must be considered part of the GH canon, then our discussions must call the 1983 WoG boxed set, the earlier Folio, the books of Rose Estes, the LGG and FtA, and any adventure published in Dungeon canon.
To me this degrades the meaning of the word. If GVD and others prefer, then I can hold that definition in mind to better understand what such folks are talking about. However, personally, I'll use my own definition, which I've just described and will summarize:
Canon is the corpus of GH-related texts that we, the online community of GH fans, agree it is. Therefore, we'll almost all agree that the Folio, WoG boxed set, and early AD&D modules are canon. A few of us will disagree about FtA era publications and GH'98 products. (tSB has taken a lot of hits.) However, most of us will agree that the LGG and the LGJ articles are canon (I think). Similarly, most of us will agree that the Rose Estes novels are not GH canon. Some will accept apocrypha written by Gygax, Kuntz, Lakofka, and now Iquander (Erik Mona) and Gary Holian) too.
I admit that my definition of canon is not objective. We are the only authority that keeps the subjectivity in check. To me this is beneficial because we infuse the notion of a GH canon with meaning because of our campaigns and the discussions they inform.
I don't really have a figure for it, but if you want one - significantly before about -2,400 CY, when they were found by the "Olman" gods.
Probably before they were truely Olman (culturally). I think the Olman culture developed in Hepmonaland, even if the people who founded that culture were not originally from there.
As to the dismissing of Glacial Inferno or Canon in general - since the days of Castle Greyhawk (brr!) there's always been an evaluation of printed GH material on whether it's consistent with the body of Canon.
A case in point is Fate of Istus' treatment of Hesuel Ilshar. FoI has a farcical story about monks from Kara Tur popping through a dimensional hole to teach the SB how to karate chop. It also presents the city as a series of rectangular compounds.
The Scarlet Brotherood book (for all its perceived flaws) presents a far more interesting, plausible and consistant version of the city and the history of the Scarlet Brotherhood and their chock-socky.
So which one is Canon - or do we try fit them both together?
I think it's generally been decided that while Fate of Istus has many good features, the account of Hesuel Ilshar isn't one of them and that most people would regard the depiction of Hesuel Ilshar in the SB sourcebook as the authoritative Canon.
It's a fact that some printed GH material is just lousy work in terms of setting consistancy. I haven't read GI, but based on what's been reported, it doesn't seem too consistant to me. Therefore in my opinion (and I stress that), I would either not regard it as Canon or find an alternate explaination such as the ones I suggested.
I'm all for trying to accomodate piece of printed GH lore into the backcloth of Canon, but sometimes there just isn't a shoehorn big enough.
I like what Woesinger just said, "I think the Olman culture developed in Hepmonaland, even if the people who founded that culture were not originally from there."
I think that it's a key to helping us develop interesting histories with which to link interesting adventure seeds. For example, I'm not keen on the notion of Zindia at all, but I loved Nellisir's Mhajapour Archipelago, and I like the idea of connecting various folks' prehistory the way you all did with the Oeridians, Baklunish, and Suhfeng when you backtracked the Oeridian migrations.
Something similar might be done regarding the Olman and Zindians and maybe even the Flan...
Oh and while we're on this - I just happened across a reference that I think Wolfsire was trying to beat into my thick skull.
In the LGG apocropha for Sulm there's a rough timeline for the rise and fall of the kingdom:
"Sulm rose to prominance some 2500 years ago in what was then a fertile, if arid basin" (ca -1900 CY)
Sulm is implied as being the first realm in the region, with the others Itar (located in "the small flatlands to the south-east of the desert...on the Sea of Gearnat"), Ronhass (on the shores of the "Bay of Durnak" (Woolly Bay)), Durha (no location given, but the similarity with Durnak suggests a coastal location), Rhugha (north by a process of elimination?), and the nomadic Truun (anyone's guess).
Its suggested that some (and probably a large) part of Itar actually lay east of the eastern Abbor Alz - as "Heriot, the Theonarch of Itar" leads an army "over the Abbor-Alz and into the border lands of his enemy [Sulm]."
After the defeat of Itar, Sulm is decribed as having "reached the geographic limits created by water and hills". If you count the Nesser as a water border, we can assume that it may have formed Itar's (and subsequently Sulm's) eastern border. I know that Creighton Broadhurst place Sennare, the Itari capital on the shores of the Gearnat west of the Abbor-Alz - so to reconcile these facts we can say that the realm of Itar straddled the hills.
After a rest of "centuries", Sulm began its "plodding slide towards decadence" about "2,000 years ago". (ca -1400 CY).
Some seven hundred years after the beginning of its fall, Sulm's last king, Shattados, pleaded with his dark gods", one of which presented him with the Scorpion Crown, which when he donned it, transformed the people of Sulm to man scorpions and turned the irrigated lands to desert. (ca -700 CY)
So Sulm didn't fall suddenly at its height, as I thought and the Bright Lands weren't arid desert until around -700 CY, after the Olman migration to the Amedio. I shall hang my head in Canonical shame.
Nonetheless, I still think a large-scale Olman settlement in the Abbor-Alz is highly unlikely.
Predictably, Dungeon #103 is not one I have at home, so I can't take a look at "Glacial Inferno." The adventure was a contest winner and one I inherited in my first issue of Dungeon. I remember being dissatisfied by how it fit into Greyhawk, but unable to make many changes due to time. The Abbor-Alz references were there in the original, as were the references to Ellis Lorinar and other Urnst-based NPCs and locations. My memory tells me that I had a "back door" to explain how the temple could have gotten there (without the need to rewrite the whole thing in a couple of days), but I confess that I can't remember what that was or even if I got around to doing it.
It is not a good fit for Greyhawk, despite some pretty hardcore references. Dungeon actually has quite a few of those between about 1998 and 2001 or so, so it's hardly alone in the "almost, but not quite" category. As time went on and we got to issues I had more time to edit and adventures I commissioned and edited, the Greyhawk stuff starts to fit a lot better (at least in my opinion).
My own take is that an Olman migration to the Sulm region is a preposterious notion. Better even to rely upon the old canard of "the temple was teleported here" than to pull a whole race northward by half the map just to accommodate a Dungeon adventure.
As for the Flan kingdoms mentioned in my "Reflections in Silica" apocrypha write-up, almost all of them are placed on the map that accompanies the Creighton Broadhurst's Bright Desert articles in the Living Greyhawk Journal section of Dungeon. I don't remember the issue number off hand.
I have no real dog in the hunt of whether or not there should be coffee in the Amedio, or whether that ruins the setting. I would say my opinion mirrors that of GVD.
I like what Woesinger just said, "I think the Olman culture developed in Hepmonaland, even if the people who founded that culture were not originally from there."
Something similar might be done regarding the Olman and Zindians and maybe even the Flan...
Yes, that is a new thought I'll have to give a lot of consideration to. Its certainly intriguing on its face. It may also address certain issues with the Zindia idea. Namely the back and forth migration that is implied. Hmm.
It sounds like you've rejected tSB's explanation that the Olman migrated to the Amedio because their expanding empire was losing the war with the Touv. And it also sounds like you've rejected the various but basically Zindian origins developed in these fora.
Also, why do you hold that the Olman would lack ships capable of traversing the narrow gap between the Amedio and Hepmonland?
As far as I know there is no example in our own history for mass migrations that we see in Oerth's history. Yes we do have migrations that our said to have occured over 1000's of years when people have been forced by geological reasons to move to other land masses due to changes in climate.
What tSB suggests is that the Touv combined with yuan-ti suddenly appearing forced mass migrations to the Amedio. This is said to occur in a very short span of time so I imagined what is suggested is 100's of Mayflower like trips from Hepmonaland to the Amedio.
I find it much more realistic to imagine the Olman started in the Azure Sea as a Polynesian type society that expanded outward through exploration. Their population explosion came after they colonized the easily arable lands such as Hepmonaland and the razed jungle areas of the Amedio. This also provides a ready reason for why some of them flee to the Amedio (is there a more inhospitable place to start a city?) primarily because there are already Olman settlers there.
I just find it much more believable if the timeline for the Olman's Empire is expanded significantly from what we have now. You basically have them starting a bunch of cities in Hepmonaland and being forced to the Amedio and starting up a bunch more cities and then having those cities fail as well. Just seems to be a very convenient way to have a bunch of lost city type locations all over without a realistic reason for it.
There is a line or two at the beginning of the Hepmonaland section of tSB that says something like "who knows when people first arrived here in ancient history", that does not exclude the extra-hepmonalandian proto-olman concept.
Regarding Mona’s statement “My own take is that an Olman migration to the Sulm region is a preposterious notion. Better even to rely upon the old canard of "the temple was teleported here" than to pull a whole race northward by half the map just to accommodate a Dungeon adventure”, I must note that my working map above, although it does look like a migration map and includes migrations, does not indicate migration to Sulm or “pulling a whole race northward”, but rather merely exploration.
Not yet having read the module yet, I think it is probably more than mere exploration, a colony of as of yet undetermined size, but not a migration in the sense of en mass movement. As I said before, I do not know what number of people would be appropriate. Even my thoughts on “migration” from Hepmonaland to the Amedio are tempered, in that I see it as a partial exodus, some of the population staying and those that moved, moved into an area occupied on the coast at least by the proto-olman, who may at the time due to commerce have turned olman, so to speak, with the introduction of culture. I do not even see the proto-olman as migrating in the sense of picking up roots, but rather expanding into unoccupied lands, rather than leaving the areas, like Polynesians. So, arguable, the olman never migrated at all.
Going back to the dungeon module, I also think the notion that one should do anything “just to accommodate a Dungeon adventure” is the wrong approach. I like to think about harmonizing the different sources in the area. I have looked through Rary the Traitor and Ghost Tower of Inverness and both have some interesting bits that can be played with.
On what is canon, I would welcome a group project to reach some agreed understanding that incorporates the notion of both a bright line objective test and a subjective consensus calculation. I think that is possible, indeed, I think that is what is should be. As a lawyer, I tend to look at it along the lines of something like persuasive authority and statutory and contractual construction, if that means anything to anyone out there. Basically, that would mean that anything that is officially published for the setting (that could include or exclude fan work or novels, but would include modules, sourcebooks, etc.) is canon, but some canon is better than other based upon certain guidelines such as who wrote it, whether it is universally accepted, whether it conflicts (why, and can it be resolved), etc. In light of the fact that CF! got some bad press recently in the forum over at Dragonfood, "Official" Fansite? http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=18715&sid=4c459590a2f9d1ac7e1a0807e1895800, I think it would be worth it to get our act together on that issue.
Mtg thoughts on canon have some valid issues (joke, consensus, authority) and the system, if such it was, may have been right for the time, but I think it is clear that it is not so now.
GVD, I too am sorry that this issue has gotten you down. PM me if you want to talk about it outside the forum. If no one else is interested in writing guidelines, I would not mind working with you to do a joint article on the issue.
Woesinger: “I shall hang my head in Canonical shame.” I sure got a kick out of that. Of course everyone likes to hear they are right, but first it conjured up an image of hanging your head while wearing a dunce cap (conical), and a sarcastic grin, then the very notion of saying it in the context of a canon debate, on the basis on apocropha, while officially published sources could be read the other way (indeed, strongly imply, as you said, the alternative), was just too sweet.
Well, given that the Olman would have been adapted to living in a jungle and that all their crops and domestic animals also be jungle adapted, the Amedio is a much more logical choice than, say the Abbor-Alz, or even the subtropical/warm temperate lands farther north.
So here's my view:
Pre -2400 CY: The forebearers of the Olman spread to Hepmonaland from somewhere - probably Zahind/Hydranian Isles area. They're primitive paleolithic hunter-gatherer types with a now extinct animist religion.
ca -2400 CY: The proto-Olman are discvered by "their" gods (who may or may not have had some connection to one of the Cairn Builder races). This contact begins to spark and shape the development of Olman culture and technology, transforming them slowly from hunter-gatherers to slash and burn cultivators to farmers.
ca. -1900 CY - -1500 CY: The Olman go through their neolithic and bronze ages (perhaps guided by their gods, but definately helped by increased population due to the development of agriculture).
ca -1000 CY: Due to a combination population pressure/internal conflicts and external wars with the Yuan-ti/Touv, Olman settlers cross the narrows to the Amedio, founding cities.
ca -800 CY: The Amedio Olman declare themselves independent of their Hepmonalander cousins.
ca -490 CY: Assassination of Emperor Tloqasikukuatl of Chetanicatla, emperor of the Amedio Olman empire, by priests of Zotzilaha. This helps triggers the collapse of the Amedian Olman. Disaster had already befallen many of the Hepmonalander cities at this time.
On Olman spread, based on some discussions I had with John Baker (author of the first Olman adventure for LG Keoland), I favor some Olman spread as far as the Hool Marsh area, possibly as far as the mouth of the Sheldomar River, but that is it.
I would also put in a reminder that according to SB, the yuan-ti of Hepmonaland are cursed Olman. That should be considered for both races if that origin is to be used.
I would also put in a reminder that according to SB, the yuan-ti of Hepmonaland are cursed Olman. That should be considered for both races if that origin is to be used.
Something that has always bothered me about an article I otherwise love, O-D's Keoish Intelligence Report from the Hold of the Sea Princes, http://www.canonfire.com/cf/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=445, is "H’Thiss Kaa: The most powerful force in the Hools may very well be this vile city of the yuan ti."
I do not know if he made this up, or if he got it from a refrence, perhaps "John Baker (author of the first Olman adventure for LG Keoland)."- (That I do not have ready access and cannot get it without learning 3+E to be tested, if at all, is one of the reasons why I think of LG as not, or as substandard, canon).
I have difficulting seeing a large yuan ti migration into the Hool, but if the presence Olman and/or yuan ti can be justified in canon I think it is worth delving into. I put them, or at least the proto, in Berghof on the basis of North American motifs from C1, it helped to explain things. That, plus mine and several other people's dislike of the Hepmonaland origin.
Terror in the Tropics, an adventure in WGR2, setting yuan ti in the northern Amedio was pretty lame from my persective, but I accept it has canon and can work with it. (In fact the Couatl Antrasz is an article just begging to be written).
Sam, what did you have in mind for the statement I quoted?
I have difficulting seeing a large yuan ti migration into the Hool
Yuan-ti are said to have the ability to transform humans into more of their kind under certain circumstances (under certain conjunctions of the stars, or if they have latent ophidian blood). So it's not necessary for them to migrate in a vast horde to end up with a city outside their usual range. They can also transform into ordinary snakes, which would make them harder to detect.
I do not know if he made this up, or if he got it from a refrence, perhaps "John Baker (author of the first Olman adventure for LG Keoland)."- (That I do not have ready access and cannot get it without learning 3+E to be tested, if at all, is one of the reasons why I think of LG as not, or as substandard, canon).
Given that I was significantly involved in discussing the original concept, although I didn't supervise the final production, I know for sure this is not from John Baker.
The specific concept he mentioned is Tloques-Popolocas's appelation as "Master of the Outsiders" possibly indicating that he ruled over some foreign population, with the thought that maybe that foreign population was on the side of Jeklea Bay or further north.
(You also would have trouble getting this adventure as it is long since retired at this point.)
Quote:
I have difficulting seeing a large yuan ti migration into the Hool, but if the presence Olman and/or yuan ti can be justified in canon I think it is worth delving into. I put them, or at least the proto, in Berghof on the basis of North American motifs from C1, it helped to explain things. That, plus mine and several other people's dislike of the Hepmonaland origin.
Well, I am considering rather small scale, gradual exploration and settlement along the coast, not a major migration for the Olman.
For the yuan-ti, I wasn't considering them swarming north. As it goes, I don't like the SB explanation for the yuan-ti, or the default "cursed humans" explanation for them either. I have been thinking about and developing a significantly different origin for them and the other serpentine races, with the original form of the race being purely serpentine, and the humans having been tainted later. Expanding on what rasgon said, there are established ways for yuan-ti to alter humans, using a venom potion to make them tainted ones or broodguards, and then possibly warping them further, or just breeding them to be more serpentine. An expanded progression could be:
Serpent Blood feat -> Snakeblooded human (Urban Aracana race) -> Tainted One (Broodguard as a dead end) -> Pureblood -> Half-blood (with several variants) -> Abomination -> Anathema
Quote:
Sam, what did you have in mind for the statement I quoted?
This?
"who knows when people first arrived here in ancient history"
I think it is a rather default statement for design that allows for rather general revision or expansion as needed at a later date. It gives a starting point without tying you to it.
Unfortunately, people often overlook or ignore things like that, and want to treat every statement of ancient time as an absolute, rejecting any alternatives.
Indeed, who know when the Olman showed up. Maybe their history is only a thousand years or so. Maybe it is ten thousand years. Rather than try and force a date, just leave it open and see what is best as it is directly developed.
This?
"who knows when people first arrived here in ancient history"
I was not clear, I was refering to the statement you made that I quoted, but you answered it anyways and the alternative response is also appreciated.
IMO, tSB does have some pretty lame stuff, but it is better than any LG stuff, no matter how good that might be, that you cannot get your hands on. There was an effort a while back to try to get public access to retired adventures. Do you know what happended to that and why?
IMO, tSB does have some pretty lame stuff, but it is better than any LG stuff, no matter how good that might be, that you cannot get your hands on. There was an effort a while back to try to get public access to retired adventures. Do you know what happended to that and why?
But you can get your hands on LG stuff. Just check the websites. You just can't get specific adventures.
As for releasing retired adventures, it has gone nowhere, mostly because the efforts to do so have typically degenerated into a combination of WotC bashing and LG bashing. Hardly things to encourage WotC to change their policy.
While I appreciate the desire for an objective test, I submit that it leads to nonsense. If anyone who mentions GH must be considered part of the GH canon, then our discussions must call the 1983 WoG boxed set, the earlier Folio, the books of Rose Estes, the LGG and FtA, and any adventure published in Dungeon canon.
To me . . . Canon is the corpus of GH-related texts that we, the online community of GH fans, agree it is.
Please allow me to offer my apology if I seemed abrupt or worse. I meant no offense to you. And I see where we differ.
I look at canon from the standpoint of a designer, not necessarily a fan. Fan consensus is then intertesting, perhaps persuasive, but not dispositive.
Certainly there are varieties or degrees of "canon." Rose Estes' books, for example, are canon under this broad definition, as are the Gord stories (which ended with Oerth destroyed). How much of them is canon is that matter of degree.
For example, within the otherwise unfunny "Funny" Castle Greyhawk are found a number of hard tidbits that have been accepted as canon, particularly (if memory serves from a Greychat) as relates to Iuz and which are now excepted as canon -people just forget where they came from originally. If we completely disregarded "Funny" Castle Greyhawk, we would throw out the baby with the bath water. And so on.
The same is true is the 3X default products, Rose Estes, the Sagard books, Dungeon Land, Beyond the Magic Mirror etc. They are all canon by degrees. Then Glacial Inferno. It is all in how we engage them and is, IMO, not a zero sum proposition.
I was irritable as it was Ralph Waldo Emerson seeming to ring in my ears - "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds . . ." I find irritating attempts to enshrine personal preference as "canon." If nothing else, it prevents, precludes or discourages discussion of those odd corners of GH as the thumping naysayers emerge to trumpet their opinion as canon, deriding all else. I loose all interest in such loudly puritanical conversations. For example, while I'd like to discuss the canon (broad definition) of the Greyhawk references/asides/correspondences in 3x products, I cannot abide the narrow minded harping, drowning out all else with its droning, that would ensue about how "default 3x GH is not canon by any definition" - invarably what they think and want to see recognized as canon.
I'm not suggesting that this or that be enshrined as "hard" canon but I think it would be interesting to consider the possibilities without immediate and nagging snorts of derision. Its as if having grasped and ostensibly mastered one defination of canon, some are loathe to see anything disturb their smug self-satisfaction, even mere conversation.
I like Tzelios' approach - work with it, don't just ignore it. Otherwise - its hobgoblins. Unfortunately, the hobgoblins appear to have a great deal of support.
To be clear MTG, I do not find you a hobgoblin. A norker, perhaps, but not an above described hobgoblin. _________________ GVD
But you can get your hands on LG stuff. Just check the websites. You just can't get specific adventures.
As for releasing retired adventures, it has gone nowhere, mostly because the efforts to do so have typically degenerated into a combination of WotC bashing and LG bashing. Hardly things to encourage WotC to change their policy.
I can and do check websites, I'm not griping about that, I'm griping about what I cannot get my hands on. I AM thankful that there is some stuff and LG and WotC deserve their props for what they have done. They should take it as high praise, maybe even as an economic opportunity, that I and others want to get their hands on retired adventures
I have no desire to learn or play 3E, but I would fork out a few bucks just for the fluff in KEO3-01 The Tomb of Tloques-Popolocas, COR4-03 Tropical Intrigue, and probably many others.
I have no desire to learn or play 3E, but I would fork out a few bucks just for the fluff in KEO3-01 The Tomb of Tloques-Popolocas, COR4-03 Tropical Intrigue, and probably many others.
I have Tropical Intrigue, I think you are not missing out as much as you think. For the most part the 'fluff' in the LG adventures is rarely worth the trouble. Whether by design or mandate the majority of adventures are designed as site-based "encounter heavy" tournament type modules. Some do have interesting tidbits here and there but other than advancing Greyhawk's timeline and history there is very little in the way of interesting Greyhawk minutiae.
(I understand why they are written this way, but that doesn't mean it isn't disappointing to the Greyhawk lover in me.)
I was irritable as it was Ralph Waldo Emerson seeming to ring in my ears - "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds . . ." I find irritating attempts to enshrine personal preference as "canon."
A foolish consistency?
Like insisting that everything published is automatically canon for every setting forever?
Or perhaps you mean the insistence that elves must only be portrayed in a manner consistent with your personal preference?
I have no desire to learn or play 3E, but I would fork out a few bucks just for the fluff in KEO3-01 The Tomb of Tloques-Popolocas, COR4-03 Tropical Intrigue, and probably many others.
I have Tropical Intrigue, I think you are not missing out as much as you think. For the most part the 'fluff' in the LG adventures is rarely worth the trouble. Whether by design or mandate the majority of adventures are designed as site-based "encounter heavy" tournament type modules. Some do have interesting tidbits here and there but other than advancing Greyhawk's timeline and history there is very little in the way of interesting Greyhawk minutiae.
(I understand why they are written this way, but that doesn't mean it isn't disappointing to the Greyhawk lover in me.)
Pretty much.
The fluff from Tomb of T-P comes down to a couple of NPCs, several now dead, and the plot concept that the Scarlet Brotherhood sponsored a Keoish explorer to look the ruins of Tamoachan for them.
That's . . . about it. The only other thing worth reusing was John's portrayal of the Olman slum of Gradsul, and its wonderful Evil leader.
(For those who were expecting me to rant at Vormaerin, nope. He has presented the situation as it is, including why. I don't jump on people who get it right.
Significantly adding to LG canon above the level of casual NPCs is not an easy task. And given the complaints about what is often added, a good thing.)
Regarding the attempt to open retired LGH modules to public access, I never received a response to the letter I sent (and attached list of the names of interested fans). I have some extra time now and will follow up.
Regarding canon, I'd love to see Wolfsire's proposed article and will be happy to provide constructive feedback on it.
I agree that there is a meaningful difference between how the online community of GH fans might understand the notion of "GH canon" and what a designer interested in publishing official GH material might do. The former group can fully enjoy and explore the play of constituting, disputing, and refining the GH canon.
However, the latter group is not entirely outside of this potential playfulness, and this group too must deal with the ambiguity or contradictions of published texts that mention GH.
For example, I was momentarily stunned when Greg Vaughn, responding to some questions I posed on the Paizo.com fora, told me that the EEG / EEE being Tharizdun was "canon" because Monte Cook said so in RtToEE. I didn't dispute his assertion but it was / is ridiculous to me given that the point was not made by the original modules and that Gary Gygax explicitly refuted it and explained why in his OJ 12 interview by Paul Stormberg.
I'm happy not to accept or reject texts wholesale but instead to play with which parts of a text should (not) be considered part of the GH canon. But for me the notion that anything published that mentions GH is GH canon seems to disintegrate rather than facilitate our ability to talk 'hawk. Thanks to GVD pushing his point, I'm seeing that this expansive definition doesn't have to degrade our ability to talk 'hawk. Indeed when one cites specific texts, then we can begin a collective determination of how (not) (and why) an issue should be (not) considered part of the GH canon. But it's the start of a conversation, not a justified conclusion.
For me the brightline rule of, "That which mentions ye olde Greyhawk or characters, settings, etc. that are derivative of it, may be part of ye venerable GH canon," must be matched with a set of subsidiary rules.
Evidently, Mr. Vaughn has such a "canon of construction" as the latest text is definitive. I blanche at this one because it smacks too much of computer software and when articulated (which is rare, usually it's an implied presumption) almost never is justified over the concept of precedence (stare decisis), the common law doctrine that earlier judicial rulings control or are persuasive in settling contemporary disputes in that jurisdiction.
And to me stare decisis / precedence is compelling because, as I noted earlier, the entire notion of constructing or disputing canon derives from historical religious (church) practices. Using old sources to settle current disputes, or calling Cook's tract cooky (perhaps even heretical) is funny precisely because it plays on the historical practices after which we (vaguely) have patterned our collectivity.
However, for me a blatant contradiction in GH canon, like the contradictory statements about the EEG and Tharizdun being (not) separate of Gygax and Cook, is ultimately okay because it provides diverse GH fans with opportunities and some justifications on how to relate (or not) those deities when running their campaigns.
A foolish consistency?
Like insisting that everything published is automatically canon for every setting forever?
Or perhaps you mean the insistence that elves must only be portrayed in a manner consistent with your personal preference?
No. Again.
Canon, IMO, admits of degrees but by those degrees remains canon. Everything is not equal but reference to the setting is given acknowledgement. I resist only a black/white/canon/not canon method of proceeding that ignores direct GH references.
That elves as ancient beings is a fantasy trope or classic (cliche, if you wish to be prejorative) has nothing to do with my personal preferences. I only achnowledge this and then find it appropriate for GH, a classic in its own right, in the pantheon of (A)D&D settings. But anon. _________________ GVD
I'm happy not to accept or reject texts wholesale but instead to play with which parts of a text should (not) be considered part of the GH canon. But for me the notion that anything published that mentions GH is GH canon seems to disintegrate rather than facilitate our ability to talk 'hawk. Thanks to GVD pushing his point, I'm seeing that this expansive definition doesn't have to degrade our ability to talk 'hawk. Indeed when one cites specific texts, then we can begin a collective determination of how (not) (and why) an issue should be (not) considered part of the GH canon. But it's the start of a conversation, not a justified conclusion.
For me the brightline rule of, "That which mentions ye olde Greyhawk or characters, settings, etc. that are derivative of it, may be part of ye venerable GH canon," must be matched with a set of subsidiary rules.
Exactly! Thank you! The key word in your brightline articulation is "may" and I agree. Those subsidiary rules would be the "degrees" I keep referring to.
For example, while we might pull much useful or interesting from the Gord novels, few will want to accept that Oerth was destroyed in Gord's time. There is also the whole "New Infinities" matter. So? Acknowledge all within a broad GH canon and then, by degrees , imagine the possibilities. Eventually, a consensus will emerge. But we will have preremptorially excluded nothing and, most importantly for CF, we will have had the discussion - an open conversation exploring the possibilities.
I resist foreclosing possibilities, especially without discussion, and wish to acknowledge a GH reference for a GH reference, leaving its evaluation to a discussion, not an out of hand rejection precluding discussion or denigrating such.
Canon, IMO, admits of degrees but by those degrees remains canon. Everything is not equal but reference to the setting is given acknowledgement. I resist only a black/white/canon/not canon method of proceeding that ignores direct GH references.
Either something is used or something is not used. If you half-use something then the remained has been redacted and no longer applies. If you want to have dozens of contradictory statements you certainly can, but it will eventually make the setting impossible to use.
Let's see, do we write this next campaign setting book with the GH Wars having happened, or with the GH Wars having not happened?
Quote:
That elves as ancient beings is a fantasy trope or classic (cliche, if you wish to be prejorative) has nothing to do with my personal preferences. I only achnowledge this and then find it appropriate for GH, a classic in its own right, in the pantheon of (A)D&D settings. But anon.
Actually it has everything to do with your personal preference. It leads you to declare that "ancient" is defined as "predating humanity by tens of thousands of years," something that has no basis other than your declaration, along with other forced statements. Elves are quite sufficiently ancient if they have a history the same length as that of humans, and other races. The last I checked, anything that happened over 2,000 years ago is pretty well ancient.
Either something is used or something is not used. If you half-use something then the remained has been redacted and no longer applies. If you want to have dozens of contradictory statements you certainly can, but it will eventually make the setting impossible to use.
Let's see, do we write this next campaign setting book with the GH Wars having happened, or with the GH Wars having not happened?
This is my disconnect with much of what you say. You like absolutes it seems. You state them so absolutely it is as if you cannot imagine anything but absolutes. I am shades of gray, looking toward an outcome that is optimally likely to appeal to players. I am a relitivist.
To take your example, GH has within it sufficient modalities that a new GH setting could see the GH wars as never having happened, being at the same time consistent with those modalities and a subset of canon and yet inconsistent with the canon of FtA. Greyhawk is wonderfully flexible in this way, compared I'll say by way of example to the Birthright setting, which I found consistent but plodding in its consistency. I like GH's inconsistencites, its vagaries, its equal openness to multiple possibilities - spaceships, cowboys, Alice in Wonderland, gods from outer space etc. You seem to find anything of the sort annoying.
Samwise wrote:
Actually it has everything to do with your personal preference. It leads you to declare that "ancient" is defined as "predating humanity by tens of thousands of years," something that has no basis other than your declaration, along with other forced statements. Elves are quite sufficiently ancient if they have a history the same length as that of humans, and other races. The last I checked, anything that happened over 2,000 years ago is pretty well ancient.
Only in human terms. If you consider lifetimes, 2000 years may not be the lifetime of a single elf. I resist consigning elven history to son-father-grandfather-greatgrandfather. As noted, supra, it seems overly confining and contrary to the fantasy trope, understanding that elven civilization will seem hard pressed (or believable) to have significantly developed to fit the fantasy trope within a span of son-father-grandfather-greatgrandfather or less. In (A)D&D this is further complicated by consideration of the Sundering or the Elf/Drow split, IMO.
The fantasy trope has nothing to do with personal preference as it is a trope. My thought as to how to hold to that fantasy trope is guided by the nature of the trope, not personal preference. If there is any personal preference, it is my thinking that the fantasy trope is superior to any alternative I have heard articulated. _________________ GVD
This is my disconnect with much of what you say. You like absolutes it seems. You state them so absolutely it is as if you cannot imagine anything but absolutes. I am shades of gray, looking toward an outcome that is optimally likely to appeal to players. I am a relitivist.
Oh please. You demand just as many, if not more, absolutes, starting with your insistence on a single method of presenting elves with absolutely no tolerance for any variation. Until you get over that I see no reason to take your complaints about a preference for having canon contradictions resolved.
And I will reject your claim of looking to appeal to players. You are not the sole source of material that people will enjoy using.
Quote:
Only in human terms. If you consider lifetimes, 2000 years may not be the lifetime of a single elf. I resist consigning elven history to son-father-grandfather-greatgrandfather.
How many ways is this wrong?
First, as I noted, the lifetime of a single elf is 350 to 750 years. So we have a minimum of 2 complete lifetime here, and possibly more than 5. At an average of 550 years, we have nearly four complete lifespans.
Second, lifespan is not the same as a generation. Elves are, again as I noted, adults at 100 years. The means we have at least 15 generation in play over 2000 years. So there would be no consigning it to anything like a mere four lifetimes.
Third, since it seems to have escaped your consideration completely, by having so few complete lifetimes having passed, elves gain a very significant connection to those "primordial" times. Indeed, humans can not conceive of anything 6,000 years ago, as it is simply too many generations and lifespans in the past. An elf however can. An elf can look at a mere 55 generations, the equivalent of perhaps 900 years to a human, the time to the founding of Keoland, and it is not mere legend to him, but the stories the eldest elves heard when they were youths from people who heard them a mere half dozen steps removed from those who experienced them. Imagine a human considering a story a mere 6 lifetimes removed. But that pales in comparsion to personal experience. An elderly elf remembers his grandfather telling him about the Flanaess before the Oeridians and Suloise came. An elderly human is lucky to remember his grandfather telling him of the Flanaess before Iuz was freed from Castle Greyhawk, and virtually none can recall the time of Tavish the Great, or when the Great Kingdom still ruled the Viceroyalty of Ferrond, or even the Viceroyalty of Nyrond.
As noted, supra, it seems overly confining and contrary to the fantasy trope, understanding that elven civilization will seem hard pressed (or believable) to have significantly developed to fit the fantasy trope within a span of son-father-grandfather-greatgrandfather or less. In (A)D&D this is further complicated by consideration of the Sundering or the Elf/Drow split, IMO.
Quote:
The fantasy trope has nothing to do with personal preference as it is a trope. My thought as to how to hold to that fantasy trope is guided by the nature of the trope, not personal preference. If there is any personal preference, it is my thinking that the fantasy trope is superior to any alternative I have heard articulated.
No, it has everything to do with personal preference. I have articulated a dramatically different way of employing that trope, and several people have responded favorably. You not only refuse to consider it, you refuse to acknowledge it as the same trope, just as you refuse to acknowlege Birthright as using the same, indeed a more radical version than you prefer, of that trope. That leaves it as purely personal preference on your part.
Oh please. You demand just as many, if not more, absolutes, starting with your insistence on a single method of presenting elves with absolutely no tolerance for any variation. . . . And I will reject your claim of looking to appeal to players. You are not the sole source of material that people will enjoy using.
I have made no such sweeping insistance. I have advocated for elves predating humans by 10 to 20 generation rather than 3 to 4 or fewer. I have not gotten into details by subrace or even generally beyond the predating issue. And I have acknowledged that there are alternate readings, one's I simply don't accept. You are reading into my posts.
And I'm certainly not the "sole source of material that people will enjoy using." That's coming completely out of left field as I have never said or intimated such a thing. I have advocated for I think would have broader acceptance but that is starkly different than claiming _I'm_ the "sole source of material that people will enjoy using." Accuse me of something I've actually done for a change.
Samwise wrote:
First, as I noted, the lifetime of a single elf is 350 to 750 years.
I don't have my books in front of me but that was not the lifespan of an elf in 1E or 2e. There is then room to discuss that lifespan. Thisis especially so as CF is supposed to be edition free.
Samwise wrote:
No, it has everything to do with personal preference. I have articulated a dramatically different way of employing that trope, and several people have responded favorably. You not only refuse to consider it, you refuse to acknowledge it as the same trope, just as you refuse to acknowlege Birthright as using the same, indeed a more radical version than you prefer, of that trope. That leaves it as purely personal preference on your part.
The trope is what it is or it would not be a trope (a cliche as you have previously it). "I saved the trope by killing the trope!" Riiiight. The trope is ancient elves so you have employed the trope to advocate for not or less ancient elves but ones roughly contemporaneous with humanity. Riiiight. Love is hate. War is peace. Riiight.
Your determination to find an personal agenda on my part continues, obviously, but you are on a snipe hunt. There is no agenda. I have noted the trope. All you have done is suggest departing from it without more and, yes, some people like that idea. I suspect more would not but I have no way to put it to a vote. So, I rely on the trope having become a trope for a reason. If someone could present a compelling version of contemporaneous to human elves, I'd be all ears. I have not heard it other than the basic articulation of the idea. Sorry. _________________ GVD
I have made no such sweeping insistance. I have advocated for elves predating humans by 10 to 20 generation rather than 3 to 4 or fewer. I have not gotten into details by subrace or even generally beyond the predating issue. And I have acknowledged that there are alternate readings, one's I simply don't accept. You are reading into my posts.
A nice attempt to beg the question as to whether elves have to predate humans at all. Unfortunately, I don't accept even that.
Elves and humans appeared on the Oerth at about the same time. (= less than a century)
Quote:
And I'm certainly not the "sole source of material that people will enjoy using." That's coming completely out of left field as I have never said or intimated such a thing. I have advocated for I think would have broader acceptance but that is starkly different than claiming _I'm_ the "sole source of material that people will enjoy using." Accuse me of something I've actually done for a change.
Oh, please. You have do better than such weak sophistries.
You have mentioned "traction," "broader acceptance," directed me to go play Eberron, and made reference to what is the standard for the trope. You are indeed setting yourself up as the arbiter, if not absolute source, of all things "mainstream" and acceptable.
Quote:
I don't have my books in front of me but that was not the lifespan of an elf in 1E or 2e. There is then room to discuss that lifespan. Thisis especially so as CF is supposed to be edition free.
No there isn't.
You have demanded that more recent sources supersede older sources, I can demand the same.
You have insisted that 3.5 sources be mandatory canon for GH because of other references in those books, I can insist on the same.
This is yet another example of your selective presentation and double standard in what must be accepted and what can be dismissed. The elves of Races of the Wild have a lifespan according to the PHB 3.5. That is 350 + 4d% years.
Quote:
The trope is what it is or it would not be a trope (a cliche as you have previously it). "I saved the trope by killing the trope!" Riiiight. The trope is ancient elves so you have employed the trope to advocate for not or less ancient elves but ones roughly contemporaneous with humanity. Riiiight. Love is hate. War is peace. Riiight.
A cliche is a trope that has rotted. So indeed, by killing your cliche I am saving the trope.
As for the trope about elves being contemporaneous with humans, if in fact you knew more about the trope, you would realize that is precisely what they are. Elves in the classic trope are, invariably, a race that existed in an area before newcomers migrated in. As they were defeated and fled to more distant areas, they were given a legendary status as elves rather than humans. Likewise the elven aversion to iron has long been considered to derive from the conflict between iron-age migrants and stone- or bronze-age aborigines.
In this context, it would be significantly more appropriate for the elves of the Flanaess to be a relic population of Flan rather than a separate race. But of course, that would again be the trope rather than your cliche.
Quote:
Your determination to find an personal agenda on my part continues, obviously, but you are on a snipe hunt. There is no agenda. I have noted the trope. All you have done is suggest departing from it without more and, yes, some people like that idea. I suspect more would not but I have no way to put it to a vote. So, I rely on the trope having become a trope for a reason. If someone could present a compelling version of contemporaneous to human elves, I'd be all ears. I have not heard it other than the basic articulation of the idea. Sorry.
I have presented a compelling reason. Your rejection is insufficient. Sorry.
As for your agenda, you have made it clear that you do in fact have one, and that it is based exclusively on your personal preference. That you refuse to acknowledge your own statements declaring such is something you need to reconcile yourself to.
I think an understanding of canon WOULD be useful when writing for the setting, but unfortunately we, the online community, will never agree
on a definition.
I note that several (well, at least two) people in this discussion are lawyers. People can argue law, but ultimately law is settled because there is a hierarchical AUTHORITY that decides it. GH Canon has no such authority. I would be willing to submit to the authority of the copyright holder, and accept their definition or pronouncement over what is canon. Unfortunately, WotC has shown no interest in assuming this authority and have, as I see it, abdicated this power.
Thus, each one of us has our own personal view of what is canon, whether we have explicitly created a definition or not. Trying to write a definition of canon is similar to what trying to argue law would be if the court system had no hierarchy, if every local district was free to interpret law as it saw fit, with no oversight from above.
In my own personal works, as best exemplfied by my OJ piece, I take the following approach: I cite everything I can, and note whether or not I agree with what has been published before. The reader will make of it what they will. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
Well stated kirt, since there is no final judge, although some would gladly install themselves. Even when D&D first came out, fans argued with Gyrax and company about what GH really was, then the edition wars began later.
Consensus is the key, does the majority of fans feel they can live with it, not love, simply accept, this is the source of defacto canon allowing players to function within the gameworld without the reinvention of it because of personal views, no FtA simply means that GH has become from that point on a home created game going forward for example.
Is there flaws, errors, absolutely but if enough fans can justify the changes and live within the gameworld, it is continually built upon becoming canon.
This, I think, would be ultimately more useful than an exquisately redacted definition of canon.
A list, by product or a group of products, referenced with some
"canonicity quotiant" tallying how many of us support the concept of the work as canon. Categories such as Unanimous, Supermajority, Majority, Disputed, and Reviled, or some such. _________________ My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
This, I think, would be ultimately more useful than an exquisately redacted definition of canon.
When the "show of hands" that will be determine what is accepted as canon, and what can be decried as non-canon, runs sufficiently contrary in enough instances to what is individually precieved as canon, the individuals being "outvoted" will hhave less reason to look on Canonfire as anything other than a clique of Greyhawk fans, not a gathering place for all GH fans.
This is why I look for a definition that is easily specific but allows for maximum flexibility -
1) A GH reference is a GH reference;
2) GH references should be evaluated or given "weight" (when read in the context of all GH references).
Canon is then easily and broadly defined as the universe of all GH references. But within the superset there are "weighted" subsets.
The result is, rather than arguing what is or is not canon, the discussion will focus on how to weigh or evaluate a particular GH reference. _________________ GVD
As I said in the related thread, I find this definition of canon very different from the one that I've heretofore held.
The whole point of Chuch canon is to define the faith. Playing with GH canon is then about playfully defining the standard works that the supermajority of GH fans use. Likely this task becomes more difficult as the years go on. In 1994, folks had mostly to worry about FtA -- with relatively few people questioning Unearthed Arcana (at least in my estimation).
Today, as the other poster noted, there are large segments of the online GH community that cluster around CF!, Dragonsfoot, WotC, Harvester's Heroes, various LGH boards and groups, ENWorld, etc.
I used to be more concerned about this apparent fragmentation, but really, one's community tends to be self-selected, especially regarding virtual communities. Therefore, I don't worry about not having a CF! definition of canon because I don't care at all whether someone on Dragonsfoot dislikes CF! for that reason. (Note, I have nothing against anyone at DF.) From what I've heard about the DF community, it's unlikely that they'd care about CF! lacking a definition of canon because their main criticism involves us accepting post-Gygax material.
If the CF! community can produce a useful set of definitions regarding canon, however, it could benefit other segments of the online GH community. That could be cool...
As I said in the related thread, I find this definition of canon very different from the one that I've heretofore held.
The whole point of Chuch canon is to define the faith. Playing with GH canon is then about playfully defining the standard works that the supermajority of GH fans use. Likely this task becomes more difficult as the years go on. In 1994, folks had mostly to worry about FtA -- with relatively few people questioning Unearthed Arcana (at least in my estimation).
Today, as the other poster noted, there are large segments of the online GH community that cluster around CF!, Dragonsfoot, WotC, Harvester's Heroes, various LGH boards and groups, ENWorld, etc.
I used to be more concerned about this apparent fragmentation, but really, one's community tends to be self-selected, especially regarding virtual communities. Therefore, I don't worry about not having a CF! definition of canon because I don't care at all whether someone on Dragonsfoot dislikes CF! for that reason. (Note, I have nothing against anyone at DF.) From what I've heard about the DF community, it's unlikely that they'd care about CF! lacking a definition of canon because their main criticism involves us accepting post-Gygax material.
If the CF! community can produce a useful set of definitions regarding canon, however, it could benefit other segments of the online GH community. That could be cool...
And if you happend not to be in the supermajority of a particular community? You are in the wrong spot? Best move along? _________________ GVD
No, you just ignore what you don't like and do your own thing. There is still reason to be part of the community, as there are doubtless ideas that you would accept in circulation.
And if you happend not to be in the supermajority of a particular community? You are in the wrong spot? Best move along?
I would hope not. Remember, for me, "Playing with GH canon is then about playfully defining the standard works that the supermajority of GH fans use." Emphasis added.
What I love greatly about talking 'hawk is when folks adopt the sagely role and advocate for particular interpretations of Greyhawk -- sharing their creative work with the community. To me, the entire notion of canon for our community originated in a kind of play. It may have not, but that's how I first encountered it -- encountering a "debate" in the Greyhawk folder on AOL about the meaning of the Suel-vocca name for the Scarlet Brotherhood, with much weight being given to different translations of the word, xia, perhaps meaning, red, blood, or tear (the verb, not the noun).
I've never met someone who was against FtA or the LGG but have met such online. If I gamed with such a person, I imagine I would enjoy her / his WoG-era vision of Greyhawk because I've visited many "Alternate Oerths."
Relatedly, I've engaged in more than a couple flamewars over the years (though perhaps relatively few), and there are posters on GreyTalk, for example, whose works I appreciate less because they ill-used me. Nevertheless, I remain in that and other fora and attempt to appreciate and enjoy all the creative works shared online.
If it's for your campaign then you're the boss of that and no one can tell you otherwise. Just say - "this is how I do it IMC" and that ends the arguement.
If you're just throwing out ideas on the forums, well don't be surprised if people disagree with you. These are discussion forums after all. If the discussion reaches a stalemate, agree to disagree and move on.
If it's for a Canonfire or OJ article, then I doubt anyone here's going to reject an entertaining heresy (doesn't mean they won't disagree with you, but is that such a bad thing?).
If it's for publication - then it'll depend on the editor. Erik Mona (who seems to be the only game in town as regards getting GH published in any sort of official way) tends to be a stickler for Canon - so you can argue the ins and outs of it with him.
What's wrong with heresy? Nothing.
It just isn't Canon. But Canon only really matters if you're talking about publication. If you've any ambitions in that regard, then you'd do well to try to be as consistant as possible with the core GH Canon - which at the very least is Team GH '98 + LG Gaz.
Canon is important to publications as it maintains the internal consistancy of the setting and internal consistancy is what Canon is all about - maintaining a common baseline that everyone can relate to and then improvise from. Some people like to make up stuff that's consistant with Canon. Others - like CSL -for example - like to march to a different drum. It doesn't make one piece of development any better than the other.
Let's just call a heresy a heresy and get on with talking about GREYHAWK, for Ah Pook's sweet sake!
Woesinger, I agree with your spirit 100%. Heresy’s are fine. Heresy’s are other than canon. So what was canon again? Just joking. If you want to answer that question, I would appreciate it if you did it over in the Broadside forum, rather than here, but that is of course your choice.
I am over hear right now to let you know that I received and read through Glacial Inferno last night. There are some problems with the module, but I found nothing to indicate it should be moved to a different GH location or rejected as canon, or labeled inferior canon.
More to the point, however, I did not find anything that supports the notion that the Olman migrated, even in a small population at any time, to the Abbor-Alz. As I read it, two or three Olman, none of which are gods (although one has a similar persona), found a house size pyramid in a volcanic cave, expanded it somewhat and set up shop. There are others there, human and demihuman with Olman names, but there is reason to believe the names were given later. The module offers very little to add to our understanding of the Olman except perhaps use of the prefix “Xel-” before a name as titular, perhaps meaning apprentice or inferior.
In Rary there was a Skull Staff of Hepmonaland, but in that it was coupled with an item named for Zeif, there is implied a post cataclysmic introduction. The Ghost Tower of Inverness has an ape, introduced temporally pre-Sulm and pre-Olman, equated with the meaningless word, suggesting a possible name, “IXAM” (sounding Olman as is ixitxachitl). But the wizard Galap-Dreidel who created the tower had control over time. Such power over time, IMO, is the only reason to argue an Olman connection to the area, particularly as it is a power of the god Huehueteotl, but that is thin and has nothing to do with Glacial Inferno.
In short, I have found nothing to support Olman migration north.
I am over hear right now to let you know that I received and read through Glacial Inferno last night. There are some problems with the module, but I found nothing to indicate it should be moved to a different GH location or rejected as canon, or labeled inferior canon.
More to the point, however, I did not find anything that supports the notion that the Olman migrated, even in a small population at any time, to the Abbor-Alz. As I read it, two or three Olman, none of which are gods (although one has a similar persona), found a house size pyramid in a volcanic cave, expanded it somewhat and set up shop. There are others there, human and demihuman with Olman names, but there is reason to believe the names were given later. The module offers very little to add to our understanding of the Olman except perhaps use of the prefix “Xel-” before a name as titular, perhaps meaning apprentice or inferior.
. . .
In short, I have found nothing to support Olman migration north.
I can't disagree on any solid basis, expect to note the Olman oddiments. What propells my thought more generally, is the article Rune Skulls of the Abbor-Alz - inscribed dinosaur bones found in rock stratum. It seems that several oddities occur in the neighborhood of the Abbor-Alz and Bright Desert. I like oddities, prefering to indulge them as often as not. _________________ GVD
I like oddities, prefering to indulge them as often as not.
Me too. I was a little disappointed. I was already conceiving notions of connecting the ion stones mentioned in Rary, the soul gem from the Ghost Tower and my own crystiline Celistial Quipu to the heavens above, but ... who knows. There are other diamonds in the rough
I like oddities, prefering to indulge them as often as not.
Me too. I was a little disappointed. I was already conceiving notions of connecting the ion stones mentioned in Rary, the soul gem from the Ghost Tower and my own crystiline Celistial Quipu to the heavens above, but ... who knows. There are other diamonds in the rough
I never really considered how to explain an Olman presence in the Abbor-Alz or Bright Desert beyond - well it looks like they were here at some point. I'm not sure the connection you suggest is a bad one.
Riffing here from the top of my head - as I read your post the first thing I thought for some reason was - Star Gate. Perhaps the Olman temple from Glacial Inferno, if we can call it that, can have a more dignified version of Mona's suggestion that it teleported there. We know the Olman have a connection with Centeral American myth and, pardon the expression, "gods from outer space." Could the "alien gods" have use portal magic/technology ala a Celestial Gate? Could this have been one such site?
Or, going with your crystaline thought, could this have been a mining operation of some sort? Looking for rare crystals needed by the alien gods or for a Celestial Gate or otherwise?
And this makes me think psionics for some reason. I guess the crystal connection.
Anyway. Explaining the oddities is half the fun. _________________ GVD
GVD: “Could the "alien gods" have use portal magic/technology ala a Celestial Gate? Could this have been one such site? Or, going with your crystaline thought, could this have been a mining operation of some sort? Looking for rare crystals needed by the alien gods or for a Celestial Gate or otherwise? … Anyway. Explaining the oddities is half the fun.”
I agree, but IMO, looking at the text, those are not the things that call for explaining:
“Some years ago, [Huhueteotl] discovered the flaming caverns that became his permanent home in the burning heart of a nearly extinct underground volcano in the Abbor-Alz. At the time the caves contained nothing more than a massive [not really] pyramid dedicated to a forgotten deity at the center of a vast [not really] lake of flame. … He proceeded to expand the complex …. Besides acquiring ever more powerful magic and allies, Huhuenteotl has no real purpose in life. So occasionally he invents one. He recently decided to lay claim to the Duchy of Urnst… His second move was to retrieve a dangerously powerful artifact called the frozen soul.
The Olman gods have not been forgotten, so as Woesinger suggests, one of the Cairn builder peoples would have likely been the original inhabitants. That might be fun to follow up on.
Huueteotl did mine the ice crystal called frozen soul, from a nearby glacier. But that is planar-elemental, rather than outer space prime material. So again, that could be something to dig into, but not from the Olman aspect.
Although the text notes that he was crazy and lucky to have survived as long as he did, it is silent as to why he was in the area in the first place. With this off personality, he probably fled north. Maybe he knew of the frozen soul, maybe he heard about the falling star that was the soul gem. Perhaps he heard about other falling stars (which could be from space ships) that burst in the sky to fall as ion stones. Regardless, as he was a mage, rather than a cleric, and given his personality quirks, I do not think he is very representative of the Olman, and ultimately, IMO, if not for one thing, not a very interesting character to develop. That one thing has to do with his followers. How did this crazy guy get a halfling, half-orc and elf to have olman names? Not to mention a follower of the Shalm with an Olman name. The easy answer, and perhaps sensible one, is that he just gave them. But what is they all came from Hepmonaland?
Okay. Taking a sort of Keraptis/Event Horizon riff, what if there was something in the temple that possessed the person who became H? But imperfectly. None of the people are then necessarily Olman and the mental control is not perfectly Olman but sort of. That could take care of the immediate details but would leave the origin of the original Olman pyramid up for grabs. My thought is not so much of the need to explain H and his digging but the presence of the pyramid he found. This way the pyramid could become a lingering threat, even after the adventure is concluded? _________________ GVD
Hit the wrong button earlier. Continuing. This could be fine. Are you thinking Olman from Hepmonaland or something else?
I was thinking what if H's followers, the halfling, 1/2 orc and elves, came from Hepmonaland. I guess that could be the Amedio. But as I said, it is more likely, IMO, that he, together with the one or two that came with him (also identified in the mod as "outsider native") converted locals.
As for H turing into in part H the god, I got the impression that he was like that before he ever found the site. There was no mention of a name change or reference to the god's time portfolio. In the module, he is actually no longer H but has been transformed into a Bozak "for meddling with godly powers."
Perhaps he shows up acting like a wanna be olman god and gets punished by the forgotten god from the pyramid building cairn builders (a mona recognized subset), or maybe by H the god for putting an ice artifact in a volcano. The former seem more plausable- his temple is being defiled- but the latter could be used as a stepping stone for putting the fire in the belly of the Olman revival, especially as I (on no authority but symbolism) have designated H the god as leading that revival in the article Barbacoa.
That is a notion I could get behind, but right now it seems too thin. I would want to back it up by more canon. Well, that H the man was crazy and in the north could be part of it. Actually, there is a bit of canon that I have been holding back on. In Baltron's beacon there is a notation that the cult of the black flame is arising again in the southern jungles. That was supposed to make it in Barbacoa, but IIRC did not, as a front of Mic the death god (compare with idol in Baltron). That could be an effort of H the god and/or Mic, and H the man was driven north as a heritic only to be destroyed for utilizing the white ice. It is a thought. Sounding better.
Huhueteotl the heretic hotfoots it to the hills from Hucannea and the hallowed hearths of Huehueteotl.
In the mod Huhueteotl is pronounced who-HWEY-tee-o-tul.
In Aztec (at least according to the sites I have seen) Huehueteotl is pronounced we-we-tE-O-tl. That is why I joked about about the "Flaming Reptile" being known by his friends as Oui! Oui! Shamelessly over the top. And there are more along those alternative line in Barbabcoa. If I had thought about it at the time, I could have mentioned ABBA-Alz.
"Some years ago, [Huhueteotl] discovered the flaming caverns that became his permanent home in the burning heart of a nearly extinct underground volcano in the Abbor-Alz. At the time the caves contained nothing more than a massive [not really] pyramid dedicated to a forgotten deity at the center of a vast [not really] lake of flame. … He proceeded to expand the complex …. Besides acquiring ever more powerful magic and allies, Huhuenteotl has no real purpose in life. So occasionally he invents one. He recently decided to lay claim to the Duchy of Urnst… His second move was to retrieve a dangerously powerful artifact called the frozen soul.
The reason I said earlier that the entire module can likely be eschewed (should not be considered canon, or should not be given much weight as canon) focuses on the fact that besides the names, there's no reason for us to be thinking of the Olman at all.
"Besides acquiring ever more powerful magic and allies, Huhuenteotl has no real purpose in life. So occasionally he invents one. He recently decided to lay claim to the Duchy of Urnst …" galled me especially and comes across as very sloppy module writing.
Villains should have motivations because these help move the adventure. This module doesn't develop its backstory sufficiently, i.e., what was written as background really doesn't matter to the adventure itself.
While we could, and you've already posited some interesting ideas, speculate on the strangely Olman-esque names of the villain's henchmen, if I used this adventure, I'd prefer simply to change the names. Not every step pyramid is Olman. The Flan or others, e.g., the Cairn Builders, seem to have created may such structures.
Also, just because a module author could name Duke Karll Lorinar and create a new NPC cousin doesn't mean that the module should be weighted as canon.
besides the names, there's no reason for us to be thinking of the Olman at all.
There is more. The word "Olman" never appears. But 2 or 3 of the NPC are designeated "outsider (native)." A facial image on the map (green as a reptile) looks distinctly like this image of Huehueteotl.
Those three things convince me that it is Olman. With the definition of canon that I am working on, it looks to me like the conclusion should be that those three things are canon, but the conclusion that they are olman is strongly support apocrypha (non-canon consistant with canon). Yeah, they might be something else, but it is not likely.
As to the merits of the adventure, that is an entirely different matter. Also IMO it could use some development to give it some legitimacy. But, IMO, that is more fun than a legitimate and well founded heresy (non-canon inconsistant with canon). YMMV, but I get my rocks off reconciling canon.
Quote:
Villains should have motivations because these help move the adventure. This module doesn't develop its backstory sufficiently, i.e., what was written as background really doesn't matter to the adventure itself.
While we could, and you've already posited some interesting ideas, speculate on the strangely Olman-esque names of the villain's henchmen .... Not every step pyramid is Olman. The Flan or others, e.g., the Cairn Builders, seem to have created may such structures.
I agree. I don't think the pyramid is Olman, but cairn builder. With the reference in the module that it belonged to a lost god and the existance of pyramid building cairn builders in the area (which I will presume to be canon), that is, IMO, well supported apocrypha. I also think the speculation on the backstory should be founded on other canon or other well founded apocrypha, which is why I turned to Baltrons. If you want, decide for yourself if the few "serious" parts of Barbarcoa relating to how the Olman people and gods re-establish themselves are reasonably well founded, apocrypha or heresy.
We forward in this generation, triumphantly. Wont you help to sing, these songs of freedom?
There is more. The word "Olman" never appears. But 2 or 3 of the NPC are designeated "outsider (native)." A facial image on the map (green as a reptile) looks distinctly like this image of Huehueteotl.
Good points, but if the author knew to cite Duke Karll Lorinar, he also could have named the Olman. Remember the cartographer is a different person--an employee or freelancer of Dungeon. The Huehueteotl-esque image is relatively easy to bite (copy).
Note, at this point my criticism has more to do with a profound distaste for how the Olman have been treated since C1. I don't blame that module's authors. They were doing their thing without likely thinking about GH per se. However, both REM and SKR disserved us by merely mimicking the module and mixing in a few more "precolumbian" Central American gods.
Wolfsire wrote:
Those three things convince me that it is Olman. With the definition of canon that I am working on, it looks to me like the conclusion should be that those three things are canon, but the conclusion that they are olman is strongly support apocrypha (non-canon consistant with canon). Yeah, they might be something else, but it is not likely.
The idea of a sorcerer (or high priest) being named after the worshipped god resonates with the knowledge "we've" gleaned via archaeology and precolumbian anthropology. Nevertheless, a map icon is not direct proof of the Olman. Rather, it's direct proof of biting on Central American gods. (Note I don't contest and in fact agree on Wolfsire's definition of apocrypha.
Wolfsire wrote:
As to the merits of the adventure, that is an entirely different matter. Also IMO it could use some development to give it some legitimacy. But, IMO, that is more fun than a legitimate and well founded heresy (non-canon inconsistant with canon). YMMV, but I get my rocks off reconciling canon.
While I agree that the merits of the adventure can be distinguished from the canonicity (or weight to be ascribed to its canon), the "merit" is relevant to the question of canon (weight). Consider an earlier Dungeon adventure regarding druids in the Celadon Forest. At the point it holds that gnolls are part of the Celadon circle of the Old Faith, I question seriously whether the entire adventure should be considered "canon" (or weighted as canon beyond a non-Gygax GH novel or a poorly adapted RPGA module like Puppets).
Similarly, I'm surprised to hear GH fans consider Dungeon adventures authored by non-officially sanctioned GH authors to be canon. Put another way, I ascribe more canon weight to most everything published by the Oerth Journal than to this kind of Dungeon adventure.
I'm missing the "Barbarcoa" reference completely. Please advise. I searched this website for the word and found nada.
As to the merits of the adventure, that is an entirely different matter. Also IMO it could use some development to give it some legitimacy. But, IMO, that is more fun than a legitimate and well founded heresy (non-canon inconsistant with canon). YMMV, but I get my rocks off reconciling canon.
While I agree that the merits of the adventure can be distinguished from the canonicity (or weight to be ascribed to its canon), the "merit" is relevant to the question of canon (weight). Consider an earlier Dungeon adventure regarding druids in the Celadon Forest. At the point it holds that gnolls are part of the Celadon circle of the Old Faith, I question seriously whether the entire adventure should be considered "canon" (or weighted as canon beyond a non-Gygax GH novel or a poorly adapted RPGA module like Puppets).
Similarly, I'm surprised to hear GH fans consider Dungeon adventures authored by non-officially sanctioned GH authors to be canon. Put another way, I ascribe more canon weight to most everything published by the Oerth Journal than to this kind of Dungeon adventure.
I'm missing the "Barbarcoa" reference completely. Please advise. I searched this website for the word and found nada.
I am still working on the issue of what is canon and how to weigh it. So I will have more to say and discuss on that later. I will leave it for now at (1) I agree with the spirit of what you have written and (2) "Dungeon adventures authored by non-officially sanctioned GH authors" is not something I can accept. I do not know the specific details of what it takes to get into Dungeon or the contractual relationship between WotC, Pizaro and the authors, but I would bet my dice, most of them ;-), that it is "officially sanction." I think of it as a sub-lease.
It was intented as a joke with grains of seriousness in the plot in an effort to spur interest in the Olman and suggest a route for their revival. Hopefully you will find it better than Castle Greyhawk but I have my doubts whether I accomplished either of my objectives with it for everyone else. It still makes me laugh and I like the revival rout, and that is enough for me.
Consider an earlier Dungeon adventure regarding druids in the Celadon Forest. At the point it holds that gnolls are part of the Celadon circle of the Old Faith
That attitude is not unique to that adventure. The "modern" conception of druids is that they are a multi racial, multi diety band of brothers that all recognize each other's validity, even though some are neutral good and others are neutral evil. Its explicitly stated in the PHB write up on druids (both 3.0 and 3.5)
"Few from among the brutal humanoids are inducted into druidic society, though gnolls have a fair contigent of evil druids among them. Gnoll druids are accepted, though perhaps not welcomed, by druids of other races."
Lizardmen (who, admittedly, are neutral) are also frequently druids. I think its their favored class nowadays.
Regarding Vormaerin's notes, I think I agree with him in disliking the "modern trend."
Regarding, "officially sanctioned," Wolfsire, I had in mind the definition of canon we're beginning to set -- where authenticity derives not merely from being published by the IP's legal owner but also requires the intent to add to (further) the GH setting.
Dungeon's mandate seems clearly to publish official D&D adventures, not official GH adventures. Adventures notated as being "of GH" are published relatively less frequently.
Regarding Barbakoa, Alligator Accession, I like it -- fairly funny for one relaxing under the taxing summer sun...
Regarding, "officially sanctioned," Wolfsire, I had in mind the definition of canon we're beginning to set -- where authenticity derives not merely from being published by the IP's legal owner but also requires the intent to add to (further) the GH setting.
mtg, I understand. I have about 5 pages of a write-up (too long) and notes on about 100 pages of forum print outs yet to be incorporated (way too long). When I can distill that down to 1-2 pages plus however many other pages for footnote I think applicable, I will post a draft. On this issue in particular, it will be my opinion that Dungeon mods designed for GH are canon, but because Dungeon itself is not intended to futher the GH setting, it is not as valuable, all other things being equal. I could have a narrower definition, but I wanted it reasonably broad. If you want a preview, PM me and let me know, but I don't want a forum debate at this time. I want to get a draft first.
This is yours correct, written as Tizoc: "“The riddle of [Canonfire!’s] name refers to the sense that fans of the setting are in a ‘post-canon’ era where it makes more sense to ignite canon, gaining inspiration to create one’s Alternate Oerth – rather than to engage in meticulous hermeneutics, purportedly the result of careful deductive and inductive logics.”- very nice
Yeah that's me. Tizoc is my middle name, handle as an admin here on CF! and at Wizard's boards, and part of my name on the Paizo board (which I rarely visit).
Although the recent heatwave left Oakland about twenty degrees cooler than California's great Central Valley--Sacramento is my hometown--the days were hot enough for our small non-air-conditioned apartment!
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
) causing a reduction in trade and population shrinking of cities to towns. That could be coupled with a decreasing ability to hold the center as subject tribes/provinces start fighting and the kings, in their decadence, only care about maintaining or even improving their lifestyles. That would be a good reason to ask for the crown. In to this turmoil come the Olman, large or small for waterever reason, at roughtly the same time thing are happening in the south.
There was an effort a while back to try to get public access to retired adventures. Do you know what happended to that and why?
The key word in your brightline articulation is "may" and I agree. Those subsidiary rules would be the "degrees" I keep referring to.
