D&D General Drow as in Cow or Drow as in Snow: Where did the Dark Elves Come From?

[Micah Sweet]

That Dökkálfar and Ljósálfar of the Prose Edda aren’t distinct and different subspecies or that Tolkien’s elves are distinct and different species?

In the former, they are quite different. In Tolkien they are the same biologically, however Tolkien applies much significance to lineages and inherited traits and even a Christian inspired level of “original sin” to this familial inheritance.

Again, getting back to my personal opinion on the physical differences between various D&D elves, I of a mind that even the elves themselves have it wrong—to some extent. While there is some extraplanar and deific basis in the differences, it’s not something that happened in the Prime Material in the various “real” D&D worlds but far before that.

I was talking about Tolkien and Dragonlance elves, and how neither are D&D Drow in any particular way.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I was talking about Tolkien and Dragonlance elves, and how neither are D&D Drow in any particular way.

The Kinslaying at Alqualondë of the Falmari by the Faenor-led Noldorian elves while in rebellion against the edict of the Valar is very similar to several drow origins.

Also, the remaining Noldor who, while refusing to slaughter their kin, still remained in defiance of the Valar and left to follow Faenor into self-exile in Middle Earth led by a rather Eilistraee-adjacent Galadriel.

Not to mention the recurring manifestations of chaos and evil in the forms of spiders—evils that predate and are beyond the understanding of even Melkor. Tolkien gets somewhat close to cosmic horror or at least abyssal chaotic elder evils with some of his add-ons that aren’t directly able to be rationalized within his legendarium. That latter point is probably worth a separate discussion honestly.

There are a lot of seemingly similar concepts to be coincidental.

 

[KoolMoDaddy-O]

Because we are discussing the subject of pronunciation and I don't want to start a new thread, I have this serious question:

The word "archangel" is pronounced "ark angel." Therefore should we call archfey "arch fey" ("arch" pronounced like the architectural feature) or more properly "ark fey?" The latter, I think.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

It’s arch-angel. It only sounds like “ark” because the ch is followed by an a.

 

[billd91]

Because we are discussing the subject of pronunciation and I don't want to start a new thread, I have this serious question:

The word "archangel" is pronounced "ark angel." Therefore should we call archfey "arch fey" ("arch" pronounced like the architectural feature) or more properly "ark fey?" The latter, I think.

The rules of pronunciation in English are wide and varied, often depending on the root language than anything particularly sensible. That said, let's consider other arch- constructions. Archvillain isn't ark-villain. Archenemy isn't ark-enemy. There just isn't enough consistency or arch-anything to consider ark-fey the more proper pronunciation of arch-fey.

 

[PHATsakk43]

I prefer to ignore the term archfey to begin with.

Seems like a needless appellation.

Also, it’s a weirdly misinterpreted title as the English is from the Greek prefix αρχ- which translates roughly as ‘chief’ when the Hebrew equivalents of the named archangels of the Old Testament were actually considered the second from the bottom on the angelic (or Elohim) ladder of power and responsibility. In effect, Micheal and the other named “archangels” were effectively low level angels, they just happened to be the highest level of their order that had dealings with mortals.

The -ch in arch- is the Anglicization of the Greek ‘chi’ which is voiced by both the hard-k such as in Christ (Χριστός) and occasionally with the more modern ch-.

Thing is, the hard-k pronunciation is not really correct, as Greek has kappa (κ) which makes this sound. Chi (χ) is actually a different sound. English doesn’t really have the equivalent to my understanding as it’s a more guttural, throaty sound.

​

 

[KoolMoDaddy-O]

The rules of pronunciation in English are wide and varied, often depending on the root language than anything particularly sensible. That said, let's consider other arch- constructions. Archvillain isn't ark-villain. Archenemy isn't ark-enemy. There just isn't enough consistency or arch-anything to consider ark-fey the more proper pronunciation of arch-fey.

This is probably the best answer. At first blush it would seem anything beginning with "arch-" and followed by a vowel (archaeology, archetype, Archimedes, archon) makes it a hard K, but then "archenemy" exists. "Archfiend," which uses the CH, is a closer comparison to "archfey" than "archangel."

Thank you for the Greek lesson, PHATsakk43!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Because we are discussing the subject of pronunciation and I don't want to start a new thread, I have this serious question:

The word "archangel" is pronounced "ark angel." Therefore should we call archfey "arch fey" ("arch" pronounced like the architectural feature) or more properly "ark fey?" The latter, I think.

Agreed. Ark-fey it is!

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I do think any archfey worth worshipping having a pact with would be extremely upset about being lumped into a generic "archfey" category. Maybe they'd be OK with being called "lords and ladies" or the "fair folk" or "the beautiful people" as a collective, but even then, I think most would insist on being discussed by their proper names.

So "Her Grace, Duchess Lunamoth, the Most Honorable Marquess of Honeysuckle, the Right Honorable Countess of Night Terrors."

Yes, every time, even when you're pretty sure they're not listening.

 

[Demetrios1453]

I prefer to ignore the term archfey to begin with.

Seems like a needless appellation.

Also, it’s a weirdly misinterpreted title as the English is from the Greek prefix αρχ- which translates roughly as ‘chief’ when the Hebrew equivalents of the named archangels of the Old Testament were actually considered the second from the bottom on the angelic (or Elohim) ladder of power and responsibility. In effect, Micheal and the other named “archangels” were effectively low level angels, they just happened to be the highest level of their order that had dealings with mortals.

The -ch in arch- is the Anglicization of the Greek ‘chi’ which is voiced by both the hard-k such as in Christ (Χριστός) and occasionally with the more modern ch-.

Thing is, the hard-k pronunciation is not really correct, as Greek has kappa (κ) which makes this sound. Chi (χ) is actually a different sound. English doesn’t really have the equivalent to my understanding as it’s a more guttural, throaty sound.

​

It's like the German "ch", or the Scottish "ch" as in "loch".