Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JEB" data-source="post: 8332846" data-attributes="member: 10148">While it's true you'll get pushback either way, I think you'd get less pushback from an additive retcon (there were always more than 15 Sorcerer Kings and the others were hidden/forgotten/lost/etc.) than you would a reboot-level retcon (our Sorcerer Kings are different than you remember and they were always so). Plus, the former approach adds a new mystery to the setting (why didn't we know about these Sorcerer Kings already?) and makes it easier for DMs to imagine creating their own Sorcerer Kings (who knows how many more are out there?).Note also that we already know that two Champions of Rajaat were replaced (Manu replaced Myron and Borys replaced Egendo); who's to say there weren't others that failed, or went into hiding, or the like...I also don't think it's the worst thing to introduce "lost" Champions that hunted other races, since it's a way to justify introducing new races into the setting that hadn't been there in previous iterations, they're just similarly rare/hidden/etc. (Clearly those Champions failed in their task, but so did Andropinis, Borys, Oronis, etc...)Of course, there are also other retcons to increase representation among Sorcerer Kings that don't require full-fledged reboots (such as "they could always change their appearance at will" or "they only presented as a man previously" or "this new Sorcerer King somehow stole the power of one of the original 15").</blockquote>

Verification