|
Ok I might really get some toss pots really upset but I thought I should start this thread before I ended up "jacking" someone elses.
Ok one of the biggest wankers I have ever had the misfortune to read about is Drizzt. I really liked the Crystal Shard series and I thought his Trilogy about his early life was great. All of a sudden we have an uber powerful barbarian, ranger, rogue, monkey who everyone swears by. I mean bloody hell, his biggest asset was his novelty and once there were a billion people wanting to play good Drow, that novelty was gone. One other thing I find annoying is the way he has to whine incessantly at the beginning of every chapter of the new books. He can kill a thousand orcs but if he loses one friend its the end of the flaming world.
Another character that I have never had any time for is...ok I know this is going to really turn someone's crank remember this is just my opinion...Elminster. I have never liked god characters that know everything. Every superhero has a weakness and should at least in some way be vulnerable. This guy can suduce a goddess, can hear an ant fart in Kara-Tur, and tell you what said ant has eaten along with the history of teh region it is from. I cant stand know it all characters and I really just cant stand this one.
Keep in mind that this is my opinion. I really dont want to see a lynch mob come into my yard to burn my library. I just want to see what other characters some other players may dispise.
Pretty much almost everyone from the Forgotten Realms should die... especially the above mentioned two...
Similarly, in Eberron, the girl with the mark of death should be off-ed. I don't recall her name because I tossed the book - bleh.
A character's defining trait should not be some cheese ability.
Any character, invention, creation, NPC, god, demigod, plot device of a Dungeon Master that trivializes the actions of the PCs or overshadows the players.
Die a horrible, bloody, painful, excruciating death wherein the seeds of your creation are burnt, exorcised and blessed by at least four religions and then scattered to the four winds.
|
|
I thought that pretty much all Salvatore characters are uber powerful characters that need to be fireballed into oblivion. I understand that it must be really hard to put a character from a novel into game terms. I just hate the fact that my players think that if you run into Drizzt or you are in the same part of the world, you are in the presence of a god. I read his stats, he isnt that great. You read about these characters single handedly taking out orc hordes or killing off a whole family of Drow, then I have my players asking why they cant do that. I guess if you are a barabarian, ranger, ninja turtle, you can do anything. I am going to scream if on more bloody person tells me that Drizzt is the ideal ranger.
Wow...don't quite understood the idea of the thread here....
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Bah. If you're going to rant about a particular fictional character, at least pick on someone controversial. Ragging on Drizzt is like complaining about the second and third Matrix movies. Everyone* loved the Crystal Shard. Everyone* loved the Matrix. Then, when the follow ups failed to deliver, everyone realizes they've been riding the same bandwagon, wants to distance themselves from the fanboys and starts complaining "the Matrix sequels suck, Drizzt was cool before (insert book that you read right when you realized how overexposed Drizzt really is), etc."
As for elmenster - nobody has ever liked him. He's the DMNPC poster child with a double dose of generic bearded wizard.
*Yes, yes, I know you want to respond to my post and say "not me, I hated the Crystal Shard/Matrix from day one, back in 1989/99 before it was cool to hate on the Crystal Shard/Matrix." I don't care and I don't believe you. Find another topic to assert your individuality against the herd mind. In fact, try posting a snotty defense about Drizzt/Matrix to show that you are the uber-rebel that is anti-anti-herd enough to like whatever is being hated on. That'll show em the originality of your thought.
I agree with you, Zealot. I'm not a fan of bland weakness-free adolescent power fantasy characters of any variety. The Seven Sisters in the Forgotten Realms can die in a fire. On Christmas. If there ever came a novel where they were offed one by one, I would applaud. Elminster and Drizzt can suffer the same fate. I don't like Conan for the same reason; if he's smarter than everyone else, more physically powerful than everyone else and is god's gift to women as well, there's nothing interesting about the character. Nothing compelling at all. And it does not surprise me at all that his author (even though his other works were interesting) was an emasculated geek that lived with his mother.
Elric of Melnibone was interesting; whiney, yes, but interesting because he had flaws as well as gifts.
Elminster and Drizzt will never be killed off, however. They make too much money for the company. R.A. Salvatore and Ed Greenwood will die and they'll just keep making books about the characters. Exactly as they did for Conan.
|
Yeah, Elminster sucks. And while Drizzt is cool in print, I would HATE to have him in ANY campaign I was running. He has way too many emotions, which, in my opinion, can't be healthy for you. Some characters that desperately need more press are Salvatore's Jarlaxle Baenre and Artemis Entreri, and also Kyle Hunter's Downer Tarantula. We're past the age of goody-two-shoes heroes.
- The Eldritch Mr. Shiny abides.
Interesting enough, I love the Matrix, and love the Matrix plus sequals. Thanks!
I have never read a forgotten realm novel in my life, I still hate Drizzt, of course that is beside the point because for some reason I hate all of the Forgotten Realms... I must have been one of their many dead and forgotten gods in my other life...
Oh and Eberron is not my favorite either...
I was trying to think of more to add, but beyond everyone in the forgotten realms, I can't think of any... oh maybe Hairy Potter during Book 5 (Order of the Phoenix)... wait, does this have to be D&D-based characters?
Funny, I like Elminster, I like Drizzt, and I've used both in my games. I used their printed stats at the time (the Elminster event was in 2nd edition). Drizzt was being overwhelmed by a sorceror a few levels lower than him; good spell selection can right own any "ranger/barbarian/rogue/monkey" in a hurry. The party, which had a good spread of abilities, swooped in and saved Drizzt in a spectacular show of teamwork and coordination. I had put this chronologically during one of Drizzt's convalescent "maybe I should leave so my freinds dont get hurt" mope journeys. Seeing the PCs overwhelm someone who had previously been trouncing his lonesome drow self made him think about how foolish he was being, and resolve to return to his freinds and face their problems together.
The Elminster event was more of the opposite. I was using a Nishruu, one of those nasty magic devouring mists. It had welled up from the underdark and was causing chaos through Shadowdale as it beelined for Elminster's tower. The PCs chased it, and a few rounds after getting to the tower Elminster ported back from elsewhere, alterted to the intrusion. He was subsequently reduced very few spell slots as it drained his magic in the surprise round (it had swelled in size and strength by feeding off the wards in his tower). The subsequent brawl by the canny PCs tore up a lot of the countryside as they tried to find non-magical ways of hurting it, but in the end they prevailed, going so far as to use wind gust scrolls to keep it out of the tower, as Elminster could do little more than clutch his head and warn them that the magics inside the tower were far more potent than outside, and it must be prevented from getting in.
I think the problem with "cool uber god characters" is the challenge of riding a thin line: a line between appreciation of what said characters have done and gone through to reach the level they are at, and of not overshadowing the PCs with said level. I remember a lot of DMs who intentionally made them even stronger, because they liked the characters too much; they couldn't bear the thought of Drizzt/Elminster/Manshoon/Blackstaff actually being beaten. Similar to how up until Death of Superman, Supes was rarely ever beaten; held off maybe, or set back, but not truly beaten.
Its a fact of life that some people are better at what you do than you are. Maybe not at everything, but no one can be the best at everything. This applies in D&D as well as real life. If it didn't, D&D wouldn't be a party game, it would be one on one, as you wouldn't need allies if you could do everything well.
Well, thats my contribution as apparent and honest devils advocate.
|
|
... and THAT is why I ALWAYS create my OWN iconic NPCs for the PCs to run into... except for the one time the PCs in my home-brew campaign setting had a brief run-in with Downer during an underdark adventure. My tip: just use the stat blocks for iconic book characters. Just make up new names and descriptions for them.
-and that is The Eldritch Mr. Shiny's take on said subject.
Wow...don't quite understood the idea of the thread here....For a brief rundown of the characters, Wikipedia always has the answers.
For a much more in depth analysis of the various strengths and (heh...) weaknesses of these iconic characters, I'd suggest a little reading.
Jee, I know who Drizt Do Urden and Elminster are, just don't know the point of wanting to kill them...looks darn stupid thats all
I'm inclined to concur with The Black Bard, although I've never read any of the books with Elminster. Also, Driz'zt's literature isn't bad, for the right audience. I loved it when I read the first few books, but when I picked up some later on, they seemed terrible. But, then I gave my brother some for Christmas, and he loves them, and is about the same age I was when I read them to begin with (which is adolescent; they work best at that age range, and I don't mean that as an insult).
I speculate that most of the resentment for these uber-characters comes partially from the above mentioned blandness, which is aparent to all, but more from the fanboy mentality that idolizes them and won't shut up about them, which is hardly the fault of the character or the author.
But, that's just me.
Interesting enough, I love the Matrix, and love the Matrix plus sequals. Thanks! I have never read a forgotten realm novel in my life, I still hate Drizzt, of course that is beside the point because for some reason I hate all of the Forgotten Realms... I must have been one of their many dead and forgotten gods in my other life... Oh and Eberron is not my favorite either... I was trying to think of more to add, but beyond everyone in the forgotten realms, I can't think of any... oh maybe Hairy Potter during Book 5 (Order of the Phoenix)... wait, does this have to be D&D-based characters?
Right on, on all counts (well, except I loved "Reloaded," but fell alseep watching the directors play war machine video games for 3 hours in Part III). Thanks, Arcmagik!
|
I think it is a good idea to use NPCs from books, movies or whatever your players' verisimilitude can handle. Players don't often like five pages of back story in a campaign, ESPECIALLY if it's at the beginning. But we all know about Bruenor or Aahz or Liriel or Baylee or whoever. Adding an element from published material brings an immediate, emotional link to all of your players without any background. Just make sure the NPCs don't become DMPCs or overshadow anything of the PCs.
-W. E. Ray
|
|
I was gonna do a piratey/FR thing a few years ago; never happened long story...
One guy I know always plays drow, so my game was going to be about 300 years in the future in FR, in the FR's Caribbean.
Driz'zt was gonna be this ancient, grizzled, one-armed one-legged, one-eyed sword master sensei for the drow guy.
And I had him kinda pegged for dungeon master's spankboy. I assume that since drow are so sensitive to light that the flash of guns going off would blind him, and the loud bang would be hell on his sensitive elven ears. AND, seeing as he's a drow expatriate, soyonara SR--Lolth can do that, I reckon.
I'm really not a TOTAL horror DM, but I do like to goof around sometimes. And, I usually get paid back, so...
|
|
Zipping back to the original idea of characters deserving death--and I know some of you will find my top pick rather ironic--I think that the worst character in a D&D novel is from that series several years ago for which nobody wanted to claim authorship: Shadowdale, Tantras, and Waterdeep. I think that the character most deserving of death is KELEMVOR!
|
|
I speculate that most of the resentment for these uber-characters comes partially from the above mentioned blandness, which is aparent to all, but more from the fanboy mentality that idolizes them and won't shut up about them, which is hardly the fault of the character or the author.
I GMed at a tournament once with six 12-year-olds who all wanted to play twin-scimitar wielding drow rangers. Stupidly, I obliged them. That was one strange party... Still, the main problem with Drizzt isn't that he is super-powerful or that he is bland (though he is both), but rather that R.A. Salvatore has made him sanctimonious and, above all, annoying. Read the Shard omnibus - the Entreri adventures are actually rather fun, while the Drizzt &Co stuff is awful, mostly because Salvatore stuffs it with his gleanings from his Cliff Notes edition of the Nicomanchean Ethics. Cut that out, and Drizzt becomes a viable character again. Bruenor Battlehammer, on the other hand, will never be cool.
As for characters that merit extermination, I'd like to nominate the entire cast of the awesomely terrible Ed Greenwood novel Spellfire, with the spellfire-wielding Shandril Shelessair (sp?) leading the way. The plot is essentially that the Zhentarim and the Cult of the Dragon and all archmages in Faerun tries to kill her, and I was rooting for them all the way. After all, that many archmages can't be wrong.
You read about these characters single handedly taking out orc hordes or killing off a whole family of Drow, then I have my players asking why they cant do that.
Well, why can't they? Surely an 18th level character with appropriate tactic could cut their way through an orcish horde with impunity?
|
My idea for a character that deserves death is ---Manshoon of the Zhentarim (FR for those who might not know). I mean come on, how many clones can one guy have? I think he's been killed more times than Bill Murray in Ground Hog's Day. It gets old after a while. Besides, anyone who is supposed to be that bad ass and then lets some cleric take over the vast network of evil he spent years putting together deserves to die.
|
I love all the Drizz't books and I really enjoy reading any of the Forgotten Realms books. I don't like the Forgotten Realms as a campaign world. Too documented for my taste. I like Greyhawk but not the over documented, "this square mile has 34 deer, 18 raccoons, and a pair of ogres on it", Living Greyhawk timelined to death setting. I like the freeform Greyhawk where these are the regions and they interact with each other THIS way. mentality.
Rambling. Sorry.
I would never use any storybook character in a game, because either I won't do the exact Canon things that they would do or for the whole overshadowing effect that they seem to have. I don't want to be a hero in the realms because I would always feel like "well, if things get bad enough, Elminster, Blackstaff, Drizz't, etc. will swoop in to save the day" because that is their Shtick. They wouldn't allow a world changing event to happen without trying to avert it. That puts my character into a redundant role.
I still love reading about the characters and don't wish for them to DIE, I just don't ever want to see them in my campaign.
I had a DM who was totally frustrated with half-dragon PCs and outlawed them from play. Nobody in his group had ever played one, met one, heard of one EVER. His frustration at the idea of Half-dragons came from different messageboards and articles that he read. He was sick of something that NEVER EVEN HAPPENED IN HIS CAMPAIGN!!! I think a lot of people get influenced by opinions they here without ever even trying out something.
How many people REALLY had a player in their group make a Drizz't clone PC? I never had one in any of mine so I can't say I am really frustrated by people making Drizz't clones unless the 30 threads or so that I have read about the negatives of this have influenced me. I always steal some character ideas from popular media (usually movies). I use voices, attitudes, emotional responses, physical prowess, etc.. How many of you guys have used a Texas Redneck's voice and speech patterns for your low-intelligence Barbarian? I bet more than have seen a Drizz't clone. Perspective people. If you have someone gaming with you who make Drizz't after Drizz't you need to encourage them to be more creative. If you have someone who makes every character talk like Conan(Arnold), you need to encourage them to be more creative, not wish death upon Conan and have a book-burning party.
Just my 2, and if I offended any Texans with the Redneck comment then Good!
FH
I was with you until the Texas comment, Fakey...
All kidding aside, I agree wholeheartedly. I was a bit confused as to the acrimony vented upon these two iconic FR characters, which had only ever existed as bogey-men in my FR campaign.
"Ooooh, better eat yer peas or I'll send Drizz't after you, halfling"
I stopped using Forgotten realms because of the overexposure of the campaign setting, its characters and plots, especially because of the series of video games (BG I&II, IWDI&II, NWN)which mercilessly flaunted the lowest common denominators of the otherwise broad reaching and deeply, thoughtfully developed world.
If it hadn't been for the video games, most of my players, never having cracked an FR novel or Sourcebook, would never have heard of Elminster or Drizzt. But, as Fakey points out, form your own opinions, make your own NPC's, experiment with what works for you. If your players insist on trying to fight Drizzt for his swords, point out that a +1 frost scimitar ain't all that hard to come by. The example of a DM who disallowed half dragons is indicative of the powerful effect of lobbying by minority groups within gaming on messageboards. "This is overpowered, this is broken" Something that works in your campaign with your players may not work in someone else's, and vice versa. Just play it and find out. Nobody in my group objects when I say I need to tone somethign down or eliminate it because most of them can tell that I wouldn't make the decision arbitrarily. Most of you may remember how chapped I was at my spiked chain wielding fighter, but I have simply adjusted (using some of y'all's great suggestions), moved on, and he is back to feeling challenged and I am back to feeling like someone who is doing my job as DM. So I guess what I mean is use Drizzt if you want, and if you don't, when a player says "I want to go steal Drizzt's swords" say "Drizzt who? You mean the demon lord of the pit where cheesy players are sent? OK you can instantly teleport there."
And be nice to Texans. They were born that way and they can't help it. I rather like Texas and its people's attitudes towards hospitality, neighborliness and BBQ are an improvement over the entitlement and rudeness of my "native" Westchester, NY.
That being said, NWN's Deekin deserves to die, but I think they designed him that way *wink*
|
|
And be nice to Texans. They were born that way and they can't help it. I rather like Texas and its people's attitudes towards hospitality, neighborliness and BBQ are an improvement over the entitlement and rudeness of my "native" Westchester, NY.
I agree. Texas can't be all bad if it produced someone like Robert E. Howard. My wife-to-be has an unreasoning hatred of all things Texan, which she contributes to time spent living there. Personally, I wouldn't mind living there. I've got a brother and his family in Houston, and several other folks that I know call the state home.
By the way, I was one of those people who once (and only once)made a Drizzt like character for our Spelljammer campaign. He was a straight fighter who used 2 longswords. He wasn't as self-analyzing as Drizzt though, and he eventually got thrown in jail on the Rock of Bral. His most glorious moment was single-handedly fighting a powerful vampire to a standstill, until the bastard got sucked into Ravenloft.
Bah. If you're going to rant about a particular fictional character, at least pick on someone controversial. Ragging on Drizzt is like complaining about the second and third Matrix movies. Everyone* loved the Crystal Shard. Everyone* loved the Matrix. Then, when the follow ups failed to deliver, everyone realizes they've been riding the same bandwagon, wants to distance themselves from the fanboys and starts complaining "the Matrix sequels suck, Drizzt was cool before (insert book that you read right when you realized how overexposed Drizzt really is), etc."
As for elmenster - nobody has ever liked him. He's the DMNPC poster child with a double dose of generic bearded wizard.
*Yes, yes, I know you want to respond to my post and say "not me, I hated the Crystal Shard/Matrix from day one, back in 1989/99 before it was cool to hate on the Crystal Shard/Matrix." I don't care and I don't believe you. Find another topic to assert your individuality against the herd mind. In fact, try posting a snotty defense about Drizzt/Matrix to show that you are the uber-rebel that is anti-anti-herd enough to like whatever is being hated on. That'll show em the originality of your thought.
Although overall I liked the Icewind Dale trilogy, the Crystal Shard was the WEAKEST of that trilogy. Frankly the second book was better. Had I not read them out of order (I read the second book first) I probably would have let all knowledge of Drizzt and Wulfgar pass me by.
That said, I don't have the intense dislike others seem to have for Drizzt, or even Elminster for that matter. I still rather like the character... and I've resisted every urge to make a drow character. To me drow will always be the bad guys.
Eberron has an interesting twist on them though, and I may yet be persuaded to play a Xendrik drow.
- Ashavan
|
|
How many people REALLY had a player in their group make a Drizz't clone PC? I never had one in any of mine so I can't say I am really frustrated by people making Drizz't clones unless the 30 threads or so that I have read about the negatives of this have influenced me.
I did once have a Drizzt clone PC in one of my games, but only superficially. the new guy insisted on playing as a Drow ranger with two scimitars, but RP'd his character as a sort of Munchkin version of Jack Sparrow from Pirates of the Caribbean. His character got killed by a mummy 30 minutes into the game, convincing him that Drizzt wasn't actually THAT powerful. I haven't had any problems since.
-The Eldritch Mr. Shiny
How many people REALLY had a player in their group make a Drizz't clone PC? .... I always steal some character ideas from popular media...
Sadly, we had such a player -- I think they're quite numerous. In our case it wasn't Drizz't, but Xena; the player would create a Xena-clone, fail to succeed in-game the way the TV character did, and roll up a new character. That would last about one game, at which point he'd return to Xena. I wish I could describe it as inspiration, but there wasn't a shred of originality in his PCs.
It's not so much a flaw with the character, but rather a character flaw in the player. Poor Drizz't is guilty by association :/
Regards,
Jack
|
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
How many people REALLY had a player in their group make a Drizz't clone PC?
Well, it depends on how close to the real deal it needs to be in order to be a "clone."
In my experience, I have PLAYED a good drow (but he was a cleric and used a staff), I have had a player make a dual-wielding drow in another game of mine (but he was evil and used rapiers instead of scimitars), I have had a half-drow who dual-wielded scimitars but he was raised on the surface... so yeah, there have been lots of near-misses but no cookie-cutter copies to date. I think our group is a little better than that.
Just to clarify - What folks here are really voicing displeasure with aren't individual characters...they are really commenting on standard tropes, symbols, personifications, ideals etc. that are found throughout Literature (and, apparently literature). If one dislikes Elmisnter, then why not Merlin? How about all the gods in ancient mythologies? Might as well toss all works by Ovid into the garbage bin, then, right? They perform the same function in those stories as does Elminster, as does the "wise owl" in Grimm's Fairy Tales, as does the fates in MacBeth...and on and on...
If one says: "I dislike the Elminster that knows all and walks arund and makes everyone figure it out on his own..." they are really saying that they dislike that particular iconic figure in general. The wise man, the redeemed sinner, the innocent child, the introvert, the narcissist...etc. Regardless of how you dress or present the individual character, there are a finite number of these kinds of personalities...
As ever,
ACE
And be nice to Texans. They were born that way and they can't help it. I rather like Texas and its people's attitudes towards hospitality, neighborliness and BBQ are an improvement over the entitlement and rudeness of my "native" Westchester, NY.
Fighting generalizations with generalizations is like trying to read in the dark. I spent half my life in Westchester, NY and my experience with people there, and the many other states I've lived, is that it's always a mixed bag. I've met great and terrible people from both Texas and New York. We all know that the real problem state is Rhode Island. They're plotting... oh believe me they're plotting...
Fighting generalizations with generalizations is like trying to read in the dark. I spent half my life in Westchester, NY and my experience with people there, and the many other states I've lived, is that it's always a mixed bag. I've met great and terrible people from both Texas and New York. We all know that the real problem state is Rhode Island. They're plotting... oh believe me they're plotting...
Rhode Island doesn't worry me so much. It has at least one redeemable feature.
Texas doesn't bother me. Mr. Bush does, but not Texas... I mean, I'm a Texan after all.
I live in the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts... and I can say fairly confidently that the people here are not really a mixed bag. They're all crazy. That just makes us all SEEM like a mixed bag.
- Ashavan
I live in the Pioneer Valley of Western Massachusetts... and I can say fairly confidently that the people here are not really a mixed bag. They're all crazy. That just makes us all SEEM like a mixed bag.
- Ashavan
I've lived in Jamaica Plain and Dorchester in Boston, MA.
Chatham, Ma.Newtonville, Ma.
And Ayer, Ma.
But Pioneer Valley? ... that which must not be named...
::hides in the shadows, quivering in terror::
No WONDER, Rhode Island doesn't scare him.
Just to clarify - What folks here are really voicing displeasure with aren't individual characters...they are really commenting on standard tropes, symbols, personifications, ideals etc. that are found throughout Literature (and, apparently literature). If one dislikes Elmisnter, then why not Merlin? ...
I think you're onto something, but I'd like to offer a clarification of my own: these characters are OK in literature, but not in an RPG.
Heroic fantasy (which is what D&D usually is) requires the protagonist (the PCs) to be the heroes. In D&D, the PCs have to be the heroes, even though it's difficult if not impossible to reach Elminister's stature. In the Illiad, Achilles gets to be the hero without stepping on toes -- unless you have a campaign set in Ancient Greece.
There's really no avoiding it, though. Superheroic characters sell fantasy novels, and (in this genre) subsequently entrench themselves as part of the campaign's canon.
On a related note, I think that's part of Greyhawk's notable lack of offensive NPCs; the setting has actually benefitted from commercial failure on fiction shelves. Mordenkainen & company have not repeatedly saved the world more often than the PCs ever could, and were presented in GH canon in fairly non-intrusive ways.
My two cents :)
Jack
Greyhawk fanboy
I heartily agree with, and endorse the original poster's comments.
I know very little about the author and creator of Elminster, and I certainly have never analyzed him personally; but any fictitious depiction of a character's seduction of an ultra powerful being such as a goddess, is both grandiose and revealing, and suggests some shall we say "interesting personality traits" of its author.
I tend to think from a psychological perspective (and since that's what I do for work, I think I'm entitled to my professional opinion) that 'Elminster' and his exploits are a symbolic representation for the sexual frustrations and inadequacies of its author, who, creates the ultimate and unattainable love object which he himself cannot obtain in real life, but his super-character Elminster can. I don't say this to offend anyone, I merely find it very interesting... from a psychological perspective... wouldn't you agree...
There's really no avoiding it, though. Superheroic characters sell fantasy novels, and (in this genre) subsequently entrench themselves as part of the campaign's canon.
Really? What's making the DM use pre-established NPCs at all? Elminster, the Seven Sisters, Drizzt & friends (look - a new cartoon show :P ), Entreri & Jarlaxle, Manshoon - they're great to read about, but as the DM, I'm not beholden to use them in my campaign just because I'm running a game in the Forgotten Realms. The campaign should be about your players and their characters, not somebody else's.
Canon needs to be shot out of a cannon, sometimes. :)
I know very little about the author and creator of Elminster, and I certainly have never analyzed him personally; but any fictitious depiction of a character's seduction of an ultra powerful being such as a goddess, is both grandiose and revealing, and suggests some shall we say "interesting personality traits" of its author.
In fan fiction circles there is a term "Mary Sue" to describe a character which is an idealized version of writer, wish fulfillment who is capable of anything and does everything, so much better than others, established characters (a term originated from Star Trek fan fiction).
A common pitfall for many fan writers and even some established ones...Robert E Howard with his Conan, Kull and whoever stories has a tendency for this direction but somehow he manages to do it more tolerably than Greenwood with Elminster.
When used as side characters, characters like these can become deus ex machinas too easily. Some writers can use that trick effectively, like Euripides who used it to show tragic futility of human existence struggling against fates, and some don't.
And then there is an opposite problem for writers who wish to avoid it...if there are characters like Elminster hanging around in the beginning of the book, why don't they just come and save the day? In a long run trying to answer this question comes more and more contrived when writer has to think of yet another reason why this supercharacter was unavailable at the moment even if still showing around in the beginning and middle. Several superhero comics have had this problem (Phoenix in X-Men, Superman and Flash vs. Batman in JLA)...
Merlin was around in the beginning but then he got conveniently stashed under a big rock. He served his purpose as a mentor/guide but was gone when the story needed to go to the next level.
Oh, and let me mention one character whose overexposure came to be annoying, to me at least...Raistlin. And I do admit that I have played that "I was a weak and bullied kid but now I have come to revenge!" schtick couple of times...
I like Drizzt & Co, mostly becuase I enjoy R A Salvatores writing style, sure the introspective emotional content before each chapter can get a little too much, but I think it defines a big part of Drizzt as a character.
Now Elminster I've never liked, Mr Greenwood's novel just turn my insides into a frustrated knot, all of them not just the Elminster ones, the Spellfire group of novels were terrible and frustrating!
I prefer David Gemmell's characters and stories, I prefer the flawed hero/anti-hero or conincidental hero to, the shinign holy paladin conquers evil everyone lives happily.
It really is all a matter of taste and preference, but I do think a large amoutn of dislike and other negativity towards certain aspects does come from peers and the common denominator as opposed to a truly unbiased opinion.
Oh, and let me mention one character whose overexposure came to be annoying, to me at least...Raistlin.
Agreed. Raistlin was a great character in the early Weis & Hickman novels. However, he shouldn't have featured in any of the other Dragonlance novels, and absolutely should not have featured in anything after the end of the Legends trilogy. His story was done by that point - he didn't need to go on to save the world a couple more times.
The same goes for Tasselhoff, too.
There's really no avoiding it, though. Superheroic characters sell fantasy novels, and (in this genre) subsequently entrench themselves as part of the campaign's canon.
Really? What's making the DM use pre-established NPCs at all? Elminster, the Seven Sisters, Drizzt & friends (look - a new cartoon show :P ), Entreri & Jarlaxle, Manshoon - they're great to read about, but as the DM, I'm not beholden to use them in my campaign just because I'm running a game in the Forgotten Realms. The campaign should be about your players and their characters, not somebody else's...
I meant that the development of such characters was unavoidable. I agree 110% that the influence and appearance of such NPCs in a campaign is completely avoidable.
I DM a Greyhawk game, and the only time a canon NPC has shown up was when we played Return of the Eight, when the party rescued Tenser.
The value of canon is to create a more consistent and interesting setting, not to provide a list of superheroes (and their accomplishments) before which PCs must grovel (which often happens).
In other words, yes, some canon should be shot out of a cannon :)
Regards,
Jack
I know very little about the author and creator of Elminster, and I certainly have never analyzed him personally; but any fictitious depiction of a character's seduction of an ultra powerful being such as a goddess, is both grandiose and revealing, and suggests some shall we say "interesting personality traits" of its author.
I tend to think from a psychological perspective (and since that's what I do for work, I think I'm entitled to my professional opinion) that 'Elminster' and his exploits are a symbolic representation for the sexual frustrations and inadequacies of its author, who, creates the ultimate and unattainable love object which he himself cannot obtain in real life, but his super-character Elminster can. I don't say this to offend anyone, I merely find it very interesting... from a psychological perspective... wouldn't you agree...
Gods lay with women in many mythologies. Why can't Elminster get him some? And being a male of the species, we'd have to figure he'd press an advantage and not just wait around for the goddess to helm the seduction with her gentile transformation into a swan or beam of golden sunlight. It seems quite a stretch to read pathological psychosexual dysfunction into the deconstruction of Elminster's legend. It's only fiction. I've sold G rated stories and I've sold playful sex romps, and everything in between. Does that make me saint or sinner, or just an author?
The other day I related a dark comedy script idea to a woman. She said, "You think up such terrible things." There was no bounce in her voice. I had brought her down. Yet just a month ago she read the first few pages of a juvey lit book I'm writing and she thought it was empowering and inspiring. Does that suggest that I must somehow suffer from multiple personalities? Yes, it's true, I do often wake up in pools of blood that are not my own and hear the trailing voice of my big brother consoling me from outside my room. Mom says I never had a big brother. She must be crazy. Something needs to be done about her... (Mult. personalities... the tooth fairy of any criminal with a penchant for dramatic accents needing an instant alibi)
I could write a man who seduces a goddess and I don't see how that would indicate that I was sexually frustrated or working through issues. What's wrong with wanting to indulge the fantasy of blowing the doors off a goddess? I recall a few lines of saucy German opera that got pretty explicit about such possibilities. Authors open doors that compel the reader. Authors who stay away from certain doors, as many do, have limited themselves.
Deconstruction is an infinity loop once you start... one could prove a case that Cat in the Hat is really a misogynistic warning telling that if girls create stains in their homes (menses) all heck will break loose and the devil (cat) will come to create chaos, a sort of modern equivalent to the old myth of bats getting tangled up in the hair of bimbos.
That said, Ed Greenwood, Elminster's creator, is currently attending court ordered therapy for his deviant sexual problems. He was caught tresspassing while trying to seduce the statue of liberty after hours (patina fetish, tsk tsk). By the time the cops showed up in their boats he had already got the old girl's knickers off, so I guess I don't really have a point.
Deconstruction is an infinity loop once you start... one could prove a case that Cat in the Hat is really a misogynistic warning telling that if girls create stains in their homes (menses) all heck will break loose and the devil (cat) will come to create chaos, a sort of modern equivalent to the old myth of bats getting tangled up in the hair of bimbos.
This is your point (above).
Deconstruction is inherintly something that we all do either consciously or unconsciously every day. However, the usefulness of it as a Literary theory (at least) decreases for every further conclusion that is drawn using the theory. Like many theories, the practicality of applying it breaks down the closer the theorist gets to "prooving" his/her point. Why is this the case? you may ask... Exploding (which is what deconstructing anything does) necessarily reduces the number of common points of reference that individuals bring to potentially agree with the said arguement. Unlike a typical rhetorical arguement, the deconstructionist offers multiple points (up to infinate, as the poster suggests) for others to disagree with the arguement! In short, I've found that pure Deconstructist theory is a poor approach to use for convincing others of an idea, and thus not a useful one.
That's all a digression. Prooving that the Cat in the Hat is anything other than a fun children's tale, while possible, is non-cannonical. What i am suggesting is that no theory that implies that The Cat in the Hat is other than what it is in it's place in the canon (if it has even been set...i don't know) will only be something other than that for a small minority of individuals.
So, what's the use of anything canonnical (as another poster queried above)? It tells us all what common points and shared ideas are the most universal as points of reference to all of us as humans in a community. Canon represents common and universal human experiences. Stories, characters, scenes, quotes, etc. that ascribe meaning and history to a community as touchstones for learning, understanding, conceptualizing, and many similar and real human attributes.
Ok then...carry on with the bashing of Elminster!
As ever,
ACE
And be nice to Texans. They were born that way and they can't help it. I rather like Texas and its people's attitudes towards hospitality, neighborliness and BBQ are an improvement over the entitlement and rudeness of my "native" Westchester, NY.Fighting generalizations with generalizations is like trying to read in the dark. I spent half my life in Westchester, NY and my experience with people there, and the many other states I've lived, is that it's always a mixed bag. I've met great and terrible people from both Texas and New York. We all know that the real problem state is Rhode Island. They're plotting... oh believe me they're plotting...
Well, I can't help but agree. Rhode Island's size and clams are all a front to help them convince everyone they are a harmless little backwater. I think they are in league with Canada.
My statement is a result of having traveled extensively, and before I did, I always argued with people about how New Yorkers weren't really rude. I mean if you live in the tropics your whole life, you are inclined to believe "It's not that hot here"...
After I moved back to NY from Houston, I was practically spit on for trying to hold a door for someone. That's not a generalization. I expected that due to my hispanic heritage and dark skin, people in TX would be bigoted and unwelcoming, but the opposite was true. People took me at face value there in a way they still don't here. I have lived in TX, AZ, CO, NJ, ME and spent months in MN, OK, LA, and on and on. Nobody is as rude as New Yorkers, but I agree that in general (hee hee), generalizations are a bad idea.
Sorry to digress. I have actually enjoyed reading the various comments on this subject, which is why I returned to the thread. The only time I have experienced a player with a burning desire to play a Drizzt Clone or something of the like is when I was on the road with the Ren Fests (I was at Scarborough I think) and this 16 yr old kid we were playing with insisted in making one. We humored him and it wasn't that bad, although it did take away from the suspension of disbelief for the rest of the players.
I think Ace's comments were spot on as well. The characters decried are basically so popular because they appeal to symbolic archetypes, and D&D at its core is basically a symbolic manipulation of archetypal content designed to allow the user access to shared experiences of a mythical nature.
If a good, self-doubting Drow with two scimitars is what you want to do, have at it. Otherwise it is easy to ignore Drizzt and all the other characters mentioned, and simply play your own game, right? I have a Drow Wizard (N) among my players right now and I didn't even think of him in the vein of a Drizzt clone because I just don't think about Drizzt. Plus, Drizzt never fireballed anyone, did he? I doubt the player considered Drizzt for a second when he chose the drow race for his wizzy.
Oh, and let me mention one character whose overexposure came to be annoying, to me at least...Raistlin.Agreed. Raistlin was a great character in the early Weis & Hickman novels. However, he shouldn't have featured in any of the other Dragonlance novels, and absolutely should not have featured in anything after the end of the Legends trilogy. His story was done by that point - he didn't need to go on to save the world a couple more times.
The same goes for Tasselhoff, too.
Raistlin was, for a long time, my favorite fantasy character (as is probable for any 7th grader reading Dragonlance), and the good memories I had of my first read through Chronicles (the real Chronicles, 1-3, not the Chaos War and such) and Legends still makes him one of my favorites.
But I agree that he got to be overused. The story was complete with just Chronicles and Legends. The archetype was filled out, the saga brought to closure. When they start having him save whole villages and stop goddesses and dragons, supposedly before Chronicles ever started, it was annoying. Not only is it out of sync with the world's canon, it's out of sync with the character. He was supposed to be weak and frail, and was already special enough just because of the "aura" that surrounded him and that he had passed the Test at such a young age and under such strange circumstances.
Leaving that vague instilled a sense of mysetery and let the reader fill in the blanks as he did or did not want to do so. That was good! But in pinning it down, it was bound to simply dissappoint a lot of people.
I also liked Raistlin coming back in the Chaos War, though I can't particularly say I liked the Chaos War itself. Three and a half centuries without the gods, and then they come back! ... for 20 years or so, and then they're gone again. And then another 20 years or so and wham! War of Souls! Now they're back again, but Takhisis is dead and Palladine is a mortal. Wow. And people were upset when FC II said Glasya took over the 6th layer! That's got nothing on Dragonlance's cosmic chaos.
But I digress and get more into an explanation of why I stopped reading Dragonlance all together. Like I was saying, having Raistlin come back as a mentor to his nephew wasn't that bad. I rather liked it. But beyond that, I agree. There's nothing wrong with retiring a character when his role is over and the story is done. In fact, it's proper, and trying to keep using him just out of some obsessive attachment only results in what happened to Raistlin: A long line of crappy prequels and cameos of dwindling satisfaction for the reader, until he finally ended his literary career at about the lowest point possible.
Didn't mind it with Tasselhoff so much, since he was designed as comic relief from the start, and there was precedent for his popping up all over the place since the Legends trilogy.
Well, I can't help but agree. Rhode Island's size and clams are all a front to help them convince everyone they are a harmless little backwater. I think they are in league with Canada.
At least some of us can see the conspiracy!
My statement is a result of having traveled extensively, and before I did, I always argued with people about how New Yorkers weren't really rude. I mean if you live in the tropics your whole life, you are inclined to believe "It's not that hot here"...
After I moved back to NY from Houston, I was practically spit on for trying to hold a door for someone. That's not a generalization. I expected that due to my hispanic heritage and dark skin, people in TX would be bigoted and unwelcoming, but the opposite was true. People took me at face value there in a way they still don't here. I have lived in TX, AZ, CO, NJ, ME and spent months in MN, OK, LA, and on and on. Nobody is as rude as New Yorkers, but I agree that in general (hee hee), generalizations are a bad idea.
Well I certainly can't argue with your experience. It is what it is. But you clearly have never met me and mine. We would have held the door and taken you at face value (though with a zero charisma--you must understand that your face is kind of begging for rudeness). I KID CUZ I LOVE!
I moved to NY after living in many other states and I was surprised at how rude everyone wasn't, but then my experience may have differed because I look like I might snap at any moment.
Zero, where, when, and at what age did you live in Westchester? Big county but I wonder if we've ever met.
Deconstruction is an infinity loop once you start... one could prove a case that Cat in the Hat is really a misogynistic warning telling that if girls create stains in their homes (menses) all heck will break loose and the devil (cat) will come to create chaos, a sort of modern equivalent to the old myth of bats getting tangled up in the hair of bimbos.This is your point (above).
Deconstruction is inherintly something that we all do either consciously or unconsciously every day. However, the usefulness of it as a Literary theory (at least) decreases for every further conclusion that is drawn using the theory. Like many theories, the practicality of applying it breaks down the closer the theorist gets to "prooving" his/her point. Why is this the case? you may ask... Exploding (which is what deconstructing anything does) necessarily reduces the number of common points of reference that individuals bring to potentially agree with the said arguement. Unlike a typical rhetorical arguement, the deconstructionist offers multiple points (up to infinate, as the poster suggests) for others to disagree with the arguement! In short, I've found that pure Deconstructist theory is a poor approach to use for convincing others of an idea, and thus not a useful one.
That's all a digression. Prooving that the Cat in the Hat is anything other than a fun children's tale, while possible, is non-cannonical. What i am suggesting is that no theory that implies that The Cat in the Hat is other than what it is in it's place in the canon (if it has even been set...i don't know) will only be something other than that for a small minority of individuals.
So, what's the use of anything canonnical (as another poster queried above)? It tells us all what common points and shared ideas are the most universal as points of reference to all of us as humans in a community. Canon represents common and universal human experiences. Stories, characters, scenes, quotes, etc. that ascribe meaning and...
Very well said. I was more looking to suggest that perhaps Eddie Greenwood wasn't necessarily suffering from deep seeded problems when he penned lusty grey Elminster, but then I remembered the 2 ton pale green panties he keeps as trophy at his beach house and realized I should quit while I'm behind. (or a behind, whichever)
As for the main topic:
This has been quite a revealing thread. I've learned from it. Some people not liking inassailable myth characters in a game where they want to inhabit those mythical roles themselves makes perfect sense. I, however, have never minded the idea that there is always a bigger dog out there, and thus even in a game of fantasy, I'm not particularly bothered by uber NPCS.
I've also learned that to be more tolerant of Zero and not spit on him when he holds doors for me. That is my New Year's resolution.
Well, I can't help but agree. Rhode Island's size and clams are all a front to help them convince everyone they are a harmless little backwater. I think they are in league with Canada.At least some of us can see the conspiracy!
...Zero, where, when, and at what age did you live in Westchester? Big county but I wonder if we've ever met.
I moved to Croton-on-the-Hudson when I was 14 (1986) and lived there until I went to school in Buffalo in '92-'93. I traveled off and on (mostly on) with Ren-Faires from '94 to '00, when I moved to Texas. I moved Back to Croton in '03 and currently reside there, although I am loooking to move to Mt. Kisco or Croton Falls (if you know of any "cheap" apartments), as I work in Croton Falls in a restaurant called Croton Creek Steakhouse and Wine Bar. There were more Crotons in that sentence than a Ceasar Salad. *g* Obviously I don't dislike New York enough to completely ditch it, and as the natives were fond of saying:
"once you sleep by the river which flows both ways, you will always return"
Part of my embitterment comes from being in the service industry, which exposes you to some often dissappointing facets of human nature. Perhaps a more honest statement would be Westchesterites with low blood sugar can be rude as Aich Eee double Hockey Sticks, although that could apply to anyone, anywhere. I wouldn't doubt that we crossed paths somewhere. Whereabouts are you?