"in 1st Edition...every DM...assumed that Corellon Larethian put out Gruumsh's eye"?

[Rechan]

I'm pretty sure that, had Baker said "Just about everyone has had a game with elves and dwarves", we'd have people coming out of the woodwork saying "MY HOMEBREW HAS NO ELVES" and take umbrage with the implication they've used elves.

Folks, there are some assumptions that need to be made just for the sake of freaking communication. If not, then what the hell do we have to talk about?

 

[jdrakeh]

I'm pretty sure that, had Baker said "Just about everyone has had a game with elves and dwarves", we'd have people coming out of the woodwork saying "MY HOMEBREW HAS NO ELVES" and take umbrage with the implication they've used elves.

Folks, there are some assumptions that need to be made just for the sake of freaking communication. If not, then what the hell do we have to talk about?

Are you seriously suggesting that we must create and assign negative motives to comments made by WotC reps so that we have something to talk about at ENWorld? I don't buy that at all.

 

[Tewligan]

The error itself says, "I feel comfortable making flat out wrong statements about 1st Ed., because...who even cares about first edition. Its forgotten, irrelevant. I can get stuff totally wrong about 1st Ed. because no-one even cares."

What is wrong with you? It's obvious - well, obvious to anyone who isn't you, apparently - that they almost certainly AREN'T actually comfortable making wrong statements about 1st edition. The author thought that was correct, as so many posters here also thought. Do you REALLY think he just intentionally tried to pass off incorrect information because he just didn't care? Don't you think that it was just an innocent bit of misremembering? He could have just easily used the Iuz/Cuthbert example, sure - but obviously he didn't KNOW the example he used was wrong. That's like if I misremember a detail of dinner with my gf last night - "Tewligan said they had burritos, but it was actually enchiladas - he doesn't care about his girlfriend!" Saying that the example is irrelevant, but then citing it as as example of why they don't care is just overblowing things and being offended solely for the sake of it. Don't be an internet crybaby.

 

[Sanguinemetaldawn]

What is wrong with you? It's obvious - well, obvious to anyone who isn't you, apparently - that they almost certainly AREN'T actually comfortable making wrong statements about 1st edition. The author thought that was correct, as so many posters here also thought. Do you REALLY think he just intentionally tried to pass off incorrect information because he just didn't care?

No, I don't, and I never wrote that.

But I am tired of explaining myself. If you can't understand what I wrote, tough.

 

[jdrakeh]

"Tewligan said they had burritos, but it was actually enchiladas - he doesn't care about his girlfriend!"

Well, obviously, you had sinister motives for saying that you ate burritos instead of enchiladas.

 

[Fifth Element]

Second this is not about an error, as I already said repeatly. It is about an attitude, revealed by the error.

No attitude was revealed by the error. You have inferred an attitude from the error. There is, however, no reason to do so, since there is no evidence of said attitude. You have assumed it. You're reading things that are simply not there.

Melodrama is not about posting. It is about the content of the posts - the "fired as a customer" comments, etc.

 

[Rechan]

Melodrama is not about posting. It is about the content of the posts - the "fired as a customer" comments, etc.

To put it another way, "The attitude of your post is melodramatic."

 

[Mark Hope]

"Gruumsh has an abiding hatred for Corellen Larethian for defeating him in battle. Orc religion denies that Gruumsh lost an eye to Corellen, as their story of 'in the beginning...' demonstrates."
Monster Mythology, page 45

"Gruumsh's avatar appears to be a huge, battle-scared orc in full black plate, with one central eye."
Monster Mythology, page 45

The entry on Corellon Larethian says nothing about him/her shooting out one of Gruumsh's eyes, mentioning only that the race of elves was created during the epic battle between the two deities.

Thanks for that . I actually went and dug out my book so I could post a reference to the thread. Needn't have bothered, heh. Anyway, interesting to see that the story doesn't really appear in 2e either! Although, the phrase that Gruumsh lost "an" eye to Corellon does imply that the author of Monster Mythology saw him as once having had more than one, I suppose (his single eye is still a cyclopean one, though.) Intriguing. And, as pointed out above, by the time we get to 3e's D&DG, the story has become just that: Gruumsh lost his left eye to Corellon.

I don't think that the chap from WotC was deliberately trying to mangle or misrepresent lore from earlier editions, though. While I do think that there has been some cavalier disregard for prior edition lore from the 4e team, I don't think that this that kind of thing. Just some honest forgetfullness.

(However... I did note that Monster Mythology deliberately and wantonly changed the elven origin story! Elves were no longer derived from the blood that Corellon shed when banishing demons like Lolth from the Upperworld. Noooo, according to Monster Mythology, they were born from blood that Corellon shed in battle with Gruumsh. This wild and unfounded retcon has ruined all my memories of the many 2e games I played and I now see that they were stupid, uncool and not at all fun in the least. Whatever else can be said about this topic, I am grateful that it brought this awful, awful misconception on my part to light... )

 

[Piratecat]

Cut the snide insults, gang. It's okay to disagree with someone without being insulting to them. Please work as hard as you can to do so.

 

[Filcher]

Then, in Dragon 62 (reprinted in Unearthed Arcana) Roger Moore adds the story of Corellon trying to shoot out his cyclopean eye, to make him completely blind, but failing.

But the AD&D Deities and Demigods states that arrows fied from Corellon's bow "never miss their target." So he must have hit. Ergo, one less eye.

Seriously though, label me in the "played lots of AD&D and thought Corellon took out Gruumsh's Eye" group. Coulda fooled me.