|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 5:50PM
#501
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2008
|
Completely wrong. The burden of proof is on the proposer. You have claimed there are exceptions to the *specified* lore that Kelemvor is against "ALL Undead". You have been singularily unable to come up with any canon statement that Revenants are an exception to this. In terms of FR Lore and Writ, the statement "ALL Undead" is equivalent to the real world laws of physics. And just like the laws of physics, there are no exceptions.
Come off it. The whole thread people have claimed that becuase I stick to the Lore I am mentally ill (and worse).
I'd just like to point out that the laws of physics do have exceptions, they are the things we don't know about yet or don't fully understand. Particle or Wave, one or the ohter, oh crap light is both now what. Expanding universe, not enough energy, what the heck energy in empty space, dark matter! woot, new discovery, exception to the rule etc.
Even the laws of physics are not immutable, because we don't know everything there is to know to make sure the "laws" are right, just like Kelemvor's views, a PC is NOT Kelemvor, therefore knowing everything about his views would not be possible, Exceptions can exist.
Blah blah blah
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 5:57PM
#502
|
Date Joined:
Feb 16, 2008
|
They have been trying to get you to understand that you are no more right then they are. And truthfully, the only one who is right is WotC as they own the setting and are the "GM" for the LFR campaign. So whatever they say is FR is FR.
I'm going to respond because you have utterly misread the situation.
(WOTC) have said REPEATEDLY via the pre-existing canon official lore that the position I hold is the 100% correct one. It is written down in black and white. Kelemvor does not tolerate ANY undead whatsoever. I have given repeated multiple extracts from WOTC's own products that confirm and reiterate this, but yet my...interlocuturs on this board still insist that black is white.
As I said to Gomez earlier, which part of "ALL undead" do they (and he) NOT understand?
Their position has been wrong from the get go, and they do NOT have the grace to admit that they have NO factual basis for ANY of their arguments whatsoever. All their arguments boil down to the kumbya argument, which utterly stinks as an argument.
I repeat, I am merely repeating WOTC's own position on this subject.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 5:59PM
#503
|
Date Joined:
Feb 16, 2008
|
I'd just like to point out that the laws of physics do have exceptions, they are the things we don't know about yet or don't fully understand. Particle or Wave, one or the ohter, oh crap light is both now what. Expanding universe, not enough energy, what the heck energy in empty space, dark matter! woot, new discovery, exception to the rule etc.
They are NOT exceptions. And the wave/particle nature of light is NOT an exception either, it is merely a consequence of quantum mechanics.
Even the laws of physics are not immutable, because we don't know everything there is to know to make sure the "laws" are right, just like Kelemvor's views, a PC is NOT Kelemvor, therefore knowing everything about his views would not be possible, Exceptions can exist.
The lore is quite clear: Kelemvor wishes to destroy ALL undead, no exceptions.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 7:05PM
#504
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2008
|
They are NOT exceptions. And the wave/particle nature of light is NOT an exception either, it is merely a consequence of quantum mechanics.
The lore is quite clear: Kelemvor wishes to destroy ALL undead, no exceptions.
Exception, consequence etc, who cares, until it was understood better it broke the "laws".
The lore is actually quite clear you are correct about that, however the "no exceptions" part that you spout off every post you make is YOUR addition to the lore, the words no exception are not in the lore, those are your words.
Lastly, You do not speak for Wotc, you can't repeat their position when they have not weighed in on the discussion. Since Revenants were not in the lore when prior statements of lore were made it cannot be determined if the prior lore would stay the same in light of new ideas. That is how things work, if you can't see that so be it, but don't except everyone else to bend to your way of thinking when you are in an obvious minority.
And for someone who was done with a thread, you sure have posted a lot since that point.
Blah blah blah
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 7:14PM
#505
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
I'm going to respond because you have utterly misread the situation.
(WOTC) have said REPEATEDLY via the pre-existing canon official lore that the position I hold is the 100% correct one. It is written down in black and white. Kelemvor does not tolerate ANY undead whatsoever. I have given repeated multiple extracts from WOTC's own products that confirm and reiterate this, but yet my...interlocuturs on this board still insist that black is white.
As I said to Gomez earlier, which part of "ALL undead" do they (and he) NOT understand?
Their position has been wrong from the get go, and they do NOT have the grace to admit that they have NO factual basis for ANY of their arguments whatsoever. All their arguments boil down to the kumbya argument, which utterly stinks as an argument.
I repeat, I am merely repeating WOTC's own position on this subject.
and i think that perhaps you have utterly misread the situation as well.
no one is saying that at the moment there are some undead that kelemvor is okay with all the time.
what they are saying is that there is nothing saying that every follower of kelemvor is going to react to everything exactly the same. that there is room within the lore to play a follower of kelemvor whose personal views may vary in some degree from the dogma of the church. that there is room in the campaign for followers of kelemvor who do not default to slaying a revenant.
they are not saying that this is your character, or that your character necessarily needs to change to be this. they are saying that there is room within the realms and the lore for such a character to exist. your posts seem to intimate that you feel that this is not the case, but you seem to skirt around saying it directly.
so, straightforward and simple: do you think that there is room in the campaign (without a sidebar directly spelling out exactly how they fit into the realms) for a player to choose to play a follower of kelemvor (say, a cleric, paladin, invoker, or avenger), not try to kill another player character who is a revenant, and in fact adventure alongside of him, and still consider themselves to be abiding by the lore?
if not, why not?
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 19, 2009 - 8:05PM
#506
|
Date Joined:
Mar 29, 2001
|
I for one am not specifically upset at anything being included in the newRealms.
But if you're going to put something in, PUT IT IN, don't just make a generic version of it that has no relation to the Realms, say it's legal for the Realms, and refuse to even at least put in a brief adaption sidebar on how they are supposed to fit in the Realms.
"It's up to the DM" is NOT an acceptable answer when the DM changes every four hours.
-karma
LFR Characters:
Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard
Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard
Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 20, 2009 - 2:48AM
#507
|
Date Joined:
Feb 16, 2008
|
I for one am not specifically upset at anything being included in the newRealms.
But if you're going to put something in, PUT IT IN, don't just make a generic version of it that has no relation to the Realms, say it's legal for the Realms, and refuse to even at least put in a brief adaption sidebar on how they are supposed to fit in the Realms.
"It's up to the DM" is NOT an acceptable answer when the DM changes every four hours.
-karma
This.
All it requires is for there to be a brief adapation sidebar on how they fit it (and there even was an excellent suggestion upthread on doing it via Jergal).
matblack76, there is no room because the canon tells us it cannot be. If the Canon changes so that Kelemvorites are not constrained by their deity to kill all undead, then of course there will be room. But until then, they are disobeying a direct order from their deity and thus if they *do* adventure alongside one of these undead, they lose all their divine powers.
ibixat, you are making things up. No exceptions have been noted. Next you'll be arguing that Waterdeep is actually a port city on the Sea of Fallen Stars (hey, it could be an exception!), Sune is the Goddess of Tyrann (hey, it could be an exception!), Ched Nasad is a Dwarven City (hey, it could be an exception!), Conan was a female (hey, it could be an exception!) and that the Miskatonic University is actually on the banks of the Seine.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 20, 2009 - 4:03AM
#508
|
Date Joined:
Oct 19, 2008
|
matblack76, there is no room because the canon tells us it cannot be. If the Canon changes so that Kelemvorites are not constrained by their deity to kill all undead, then of course there will be room. But until then, they are disobeying a direct order from their deity and thus if they *do* adventure alongside one of these undead, they lose all their divine powers.
Or you know, they won't. Since deities do not directly grant the powers of divine characters in 4e. No matter what choices your character makes there is no risk of losing your abilities because you don't follow the dogma of the church. Unless you want to make an exception to the written rules.
ibixat, you are making things up. No exceptions have been noted. Next you'll be arguing that Waterdeep is actually a port city on the Sea of Fallen Stars (hey, it could be an exception!), Sune is the Goddess of Tyrann (hey, it could be an exception!), Ched Nasad is a Dwarven City (hey, it could be an exception!), Conan was a female (hey, it could be an exception!) and that the Miskatonic University is actually on the banks of the Seine.
No exceptions have been noted, and the phrase "no exceptions" that you are so fond of was also never stated. I've made nothing up, unlike you at this point (hey, see above for another thing you made up that isn't a 4e concept). You can't accept that your interpretation is not the same as a lot of other peoples and cry and moan that we are wrong and tell us that we are wrong. People have agreed to just disagree with you and you still can't do even that you just insist they are wrong.
I'll offer it again, we'll agree to just disagree on this, I won't say you're wrong, but I will say I don't think you're right either.
Blah blah blah
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 20, 2009 - 4:53AM
#509
|
|
|
But if you're going to put something in, PUT IT IN, don't just make a generic version of it that has no relation to the Realms, say it's legal for the Realms, and refuse to even at least put in a brief adaption sidebar on how they are supposed to fit in the Realms.
I still fail to see anything about the revenant race that fails to fit right into the FR as written. Yes, the rules term of "revenant" refering to a specific full fledged player race is new to the realms, however there are already so many different types of sentient free willed undead that the revenants are just completly drowned in the crowd. They could have allowed any other sentient realmsian undead as a player race and it would cause exactly the same problems.
matblack76, there is no room because the canon tells us it cannot be.
The room would be to play a kelemvorite who's a sinner and knows it.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Jun 20, 2009 - 5:43AM
#510
|
Date Joined:
May 11, 2005
|
Next you'll be arguing that Waterdeep is actually a port city on the Sea of Fallen Stars (hey, it could be an exception!)
That's not an exception, so it is a bogus example.
An exception occurs when an otherwise totalitarian rules does not apply. Exceptions are typically not described because of that - normally you give the totaliotarion rule and deal with exceptions when they pop up. Hence, just because there is onyl a totalitarian rule doesn't mean there are no exceptions. Unless the rule specifically says 'no exceptions', and even then you'll find that that is often a rule just ment to be broken later.
An exception doesn't break canon.
Anyway, in the game, whether there are or are no exceptions to a rule is up to the DM. In this case, you are of the opinion that there are not. I am of the opinion that there are (or that there must be if we want a pleasant play experience).
Note that I don't care at all about your PC. If you don't play that's a fine solution, as others have stated. I do worry about you as a DM, and how you will behave if someone sits down with a revenant PC and the NPCs in the adventrue are Kelemvorites.
Finally, just to be clear, I do wish there were gudielines in how to integrate new races in the campaign (not the world setting, but the campaign where we do not control who or what will sit down at the table and play).
I believe that woudl be helpful.
But I don't think it will happen any time soon. So it is up to us to add interpretations or individual backgrounds, and make it work as players and DMs.
Gomez
|
|
|
