Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Moonshade" data-source="post: 3916059" data-attributes="member: 54606">The posts by Green Knight that seem to have impressed the designers can be found <a href="http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14452426&amp;postcount=1232" target="_blank">here</a> and <a href="http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14454486&amp;postcount=1237" target="_blank">here</a> (also, Rich Baker's <a href="http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14458644&amp;postcount=1246" target="_blank">reply</a>). I'm quoting the first in full because I think it will help explain things very well.I agree with everything said in this post but would not have been able to express it as well. Green Knight, thank you for arguing so eloquently in favour of this change! And it's also good to know that designers are willing to listen if they're presented with a respectful but persuasive argument.The whole love triangle was a big mess (the God of Justice screwing up in a major way, the God of Guardians dying a pretty sad death, the Goddess of Good Luck agreeing to an arranged marriage that made her miserable). But since it had been done, all indications seemed to be that Realms fans were going to be stuck with it in 4E. The elevation of Torm saves what can be saved of the story by paying attention to its logical consequences (people's loss of faith in Tyr and his judgment). While I like the big FR pantheon, in this case I think it's better to remove a god than to ignore what the storyline would do to his worshippers in the Realms and his credibility/popularity among players.I always saw Tyr as the worst of the interlopers. The name, the Fenris story; overall he felt much more intrusive than even someone like Silvanus, who's still not one of the first names to come to mind when people think of the Roman pantheon.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Moonshade, post: 3916059, member: 54606"] The posts by Green Knight that seem to have impressed the designers can be found [url=http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14452426&postcount=1232]here[/url] and [url=http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14454486&postcount=1237]here[/url] (also, Rich Baker's [url=http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=14458644&postcount=1246]reply[/url]). I'm quoting the first in full because I think it will help explain things very well. I agree with everything said in this post but would not have been able to express it as well. Green Knight, thank you for arguing so eloquently in favour of this change! And it's also good to know that designers are willing to listen if they're presented with a respectful but persuasive argument. The whole love triangle was a big mess (the God of Justice screwing up in a major way, the God of Guardians dying a pretty sad death, the Goddess of Good Luck agreeing to an arranged marriage that made her miserable). But since it had been done, all indications seemed to be that Realms fans were going to be stuck with it in 4E. The elevation of Torm saves what can be saved of the story by paying attention to its logical consequences (people's loss of faith in Tyr and his judgment). While I like the big FR pantheon, in this case I think it's better to remove a god than to ignore what the storyline would do to his worshippers in the Realms and his credibility/popularity among players. I always saw Tyr as the worst of the interlopers. The name, the Fenris story; overall he felt much more intrusive than even someone like Silvanus, who's still not one of the first names to come to mind when people think of the Roman pantheon. [/QUOTE]

Verification