Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 4947815" data-attributes="member: 2525">For reference, here is the paragraph you are referring to:You asked &quot;Why&quot; he would insert Primordials and the Elemental Chaos when such is not necessary.&nbsp; But, that's not what he said.&nbsp; He speculated as to whether ONE primordial created the world originally, and what happened to that Primordial if that's what happened, and could he use a Primordial to explain the silt sea which DOES NOT MAKE SENSE in the original 2e explanation without some sort of magical explanation added.The original 2e version never explains who created the world, what exactly happened long ago to make it this way, or why the silt sea stays as it is despite the fact that it defies the laws of physics.&nbsp; Yet, the original set does offer up spirits of various elements, that are worshiped, and which do grant magical divine spells.&nbsp; Who are those &quot;spirits&quot; and why are they just elemental spirits and why are they able to grant spells when normally &quot;spirits&quot; cannot grant divine spells?So the &quot;why&quot; is in the text he wrote.&nbsp; The 2e version leaves questions open, and he is considering answering those questions with 4e elements that naturally answer the questions.&nbsp; That's a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.&nbsp; If you look for a train wreck, you will find it.&nbsp; Because if you look at things in a negative light, you can succeed at shoehorning them into a negative.&nbsp; That's true of any remake of any kind.&nbsp; But, if you look for positives, you will find those as well.&nbsp; Me, I am going to wait and see.&nbsp; So far, I am fine with the potential changes mentioned (and again, he's just speculating about things he should in fact speculate about).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 4947815, member: 2525"] For reference, here is the paragraph you are referring to: You asked "Why" he would insert Primordials and the Elemental Chaos when such is not necessary. But, that's not what he said. He speculated as to whether ONE primordial created the world originally, and what happened to that Primordial if that's what happened, and could he use a Primordial to explain the silt sea which DOES NOT MAKE SENSE in the original 2e explanation without some sort of magical explanation added. The original 2e version never explains who created the world, what exactly happened long ago to make it this way, or why the silt sea stays as it is despite the fact that it defies the laws of physics. Yet, the original set does offer up spirits of various elements, that are worshiped, and which do grant magical divine spells. Who are those "spirits" and why are they just elemental spirits and why are they able to grant spells when normally "spirits" cannot grant divine spells? So the "why" is in the text he wrote. The 2e version leaves questions open, and he is considering answering those questions with 4e elements that naturally answer the questions. That's a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. If you look for a train wreck, you will find it. Because if you look at things in a negative light, you can succeed at shoehorning them into a negative. That's true of any remake of any kind. But, if you look for positives, you will find those as well. Me, I am going to wait and see. So far, I am fine with the potential changes mentioned (and again, he's just speculating about things he should in fact speculate about). [/QUOTE]

Verification