Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 10:34 AM	So many people seem to have an issue with, or simply outright hate this character. I am well aware there are others people hate equally, but for now I would like to focus on this one in particular. Why? Because I am curious as to what it is people hate about him. I see a well developed, interestingly flawed, human turned god, who doesn't IMO deserve the flack that he seems to be getting. There are as I said many other whom I think take to much unwarranted flack as well, however they are not in this thread, so I would prefer discussion on them be held at bay, unless it directly pertains to the topic. So that is the short intro, I'll leave the rest to those so inclined to share their honest, and respectful opinions. Please use quotes from sources as much as possible, so that I might better evaluate where this hate is derived. -RW p.s. This is for biased hate towards the character in RL only, not for the hate one feels for a well developed villain.
Stigger 11-13-07, 10:50 AM	For me it was the havoc he unleashed on Zhentil Keep... felt more like a divine temper tantrum than anything else to me. It just killed any positive feelings I had for him... we don't see Lathander wiping out the undead of Shoonach, or Selune raining havoc on Calimport to strike at Shar's worshippers there... had it been Talos, I could have lived with it much better, since that is kinda his thing to begin with, but it just felt really... cheesy coming from Cyric, given his portfolio, and has colored my views of him ever since.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 11:35 AM	Lathander had his Dawn cataclysm, which to me seems more a temper tantrum than anything Cyric has done before or since. That said, part of Cyrics character is that he IS a whiny spoiled brat, who had everything and then shot himself in the foot so to speak. It wasn't just random, it is his story, and I daresay a might more developed than some of the other characters that creep onto the pages from time to time. Also, Cyrics actions may have lead to the destruction of Zhentil Keep, but he didn't actually destroy it himself. Through a combination of him reading the Cyrinishad -- and thus going mad from his own delusions--, and other gods working actively against him, namely Mystra, Oghma and Mask, Zhentil Keep fell to the army he had assembled. If you will remember, Cyric had the army March on his fortress in an attempt to turn the entire populace to him for worship. He then planned on showing up personally, to "save" them from the imminent destruction. It would have worked had Ohgma not put the "True Life" into the hands of Fzoul, and had Mystra not stripped him of his power prior to that. Additionally, had Mask not betrayed him and released Kelemvor in his moment of weakness -- While preforming the ancient ritual -- Cyric would not have lost control of the realm of the dead. It was the meddling of others that lead to the loss, so honestly, your hate for him seems misplaced if that remains the only contended reason. Nothing he did was foolish, or silly. He acted as a selfish evil mortal turned god is expected to. And, given the opposition he faced, what transpired was not beyond the realm of reason. -RW p.s. I am assuming you did read the novel, and weren't just arguing from the source books of the time.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 11:53 AM	Why? Because I am curious as to what it is people hate about him. Probably because he was once WotC's favorite villain (now it's Shar!) and therefore he is perceived as having had--and still having--special authorial protection and/or advantage-by-author-fiat.
AlphaShard 11-13-07, 12:45 PM	For me it's one of those characters that you love to hate, it is in fact fun to despise him. I don't want him removed from the story far from it, as stated he was well developed. I just hate the thing he became and morn the person he used to be. He is frankly a better villain then Bane/Mrykl/Bhaal ever were as they stir no passionate feelings about what so ever. I think as well it is more that I hate what was done in the Crucible book, how they killed off too many NPC characters like Rina, Gwydion, and Adon. So I do have a personal hatred for a character that was used more then the characters I actually DO enjoy.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 12:48 PM	Perception and reality are often two different things though. I don't see this favouritism anyone speaks of, be it for Cyric, Shar, or Mystra. Thus I was/ am asking for quotes, and/ or cited sources so that I might see things as others do. Otherwise one might conclude that the arguments being made are nothing more than biased dislike, with no ground. And, if this is the case, then they are unneeded on the forums. I'm willing to listen to anything with merit, but to date I have seen nothing on any of those complained about beyond personal opinion. More often than not, I see people complaining about someone, or something that if read into is carefully, and intelligently explained. All that needs doing is reading, and perhaps a lot of the bitterness can be avoided. This isn't always the case, but in general it is. Now should someone come to me and point out "In so-and-so novel, Cyric uses Ao to wipe his Arse", maybe then I'll see where the hatred is coming from, as that is an impossibility unless someone fudges the BG in favour of him. ;) -RW p.s. So far so good, but I'll include these "p.s.'s" every so often to make sure that hostility levels remain low. I'm not trying to hit nerves, I am trying to get to the bottom of complaints, or get them off the board entirely. ;) :)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 01:16 PM	Perception and reality are often two different things though. Of course, but why people hate anything (especially a certain character) is all about perception. I don't see this favouritism anyone speaks of, be it for Cyric, Shar, or Mystra. Thus I was/ am asking for quotes, and/ or cited sources so that I might see things as others do. Otherwise one might conclude that the arguments being made are nothing more than biased dislike, with no ground. And, if this is the case, then they are unneeded on the forums. Like I said, your entire question is already based on people's opinions about a character (Cyric) so I'm not sure what people are supposed to argue. Are we supposed to prove that it's a FACT that Cyric shouldn't be liked? I can't do that, and I don't want to do that.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 01:18 PM	For me it's one of those characters that you love to hate, it is in fact fun to despise him. I don't want him removed from the story far from it, as stated he was well developed. I just hate the thing he became and morn the person he used to be. He is frankly a better villain then Bane/Mrykl/Bhaal ever were as they stir no passionate feelings about what so ever. I think as well it is more that I hate what was done in the Crucible book, how they killed off too many NPC characters like Rina, Gwydion, and Adon. So I do have a personal hatred for a character that was used more then the characters I actually DO enjoy. Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that you Hate him, because he beat people you liked? That would be a poor reason indeed if that was the case. If you're saying you hate from the standpoint of being a great villain, that is one thing, but if you are suggesting you hate him as a character outside of the novels for the above mentioned reason, I must say it is a poor opinion indeed. To clarify a bit, I "hate" Eric Scott DeBie's elf character Fox at Twilight in the novel/ Shortstory. But out of the story I think she is well developed, and interesting. I'd not avoid reading about her because she did something to annoy me in the book. I makes a character all the better if you relate, or despise them for their actions. in DnD, that is good RP. Separating the IC from the OOC is what I think some people are having difficulty doing, and that annoys me. You can hate what Cyric has done as a reader immersed in a story, and standing behind your preferred character, but to bring that hatred out of the fantasy world with you is silly, and immature IMO. BTW, "you" is the grand you, referring to the general populace, and not you specifically. ;) -RW
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 01:26 PM	Ok, correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying that you Hate him, because he beat people you liked? That would be a poor reason indeed if that was the case. But it's just a fictional character. Is it a big deal if people hate him for "silly" reasons? Hating or loving any character usually has more to do with emotion and "silly reasons" than logic, I believe.
Stigger 11-13-07, 02:14 PM	Logic, Reason, and Sense have little place in how people feel about a person, place, or thing... a quick look at the history of American politics should be proof enough of that. Most people say that JFK was a great guy who was working towards peace, and yet he was one of the biggest hawks of the age and one of the best friends the military ever had, but it's amazing how much people will ignore the facts of the matter, even when presented with proof, and cling to their beliefs regardless of what you show them. That's going to be particularly true of religion, even if its only fictional religion. ;)
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 02:22 PM	There are many reasons why I dislike Cyric as a fictional creation for a RPG setting. Mind you if it was just a series of novels I'll probably not care as much. 1) He is the Mary Sue character of the Realms. If you have noticed I have been refering to him as a GDPC( meaning game designer Player character) because he has recieved the most author and game designer fiat. The biggest example of this is the fact that he gets imprisoned after killing Mystra...and we all know that won't hold up since Mr.Baker as said they want to continue his story. 2) Personaly I think Mystra/Midnight was a better character of the flawded human turned goddess learning what it is meant to be a goddess(which she was). Yet they killed her off to continue the stories of Cyric. 3) He kills Leira and Mystra offstage...Leira death angers me mostly because they should've left that open...but they didn't. Mystra death bothers me because I think she was a more interesting character. Also I liked a CN goddess of deception and illusions then a NE(or CE one). Because it gives the taint of evil to PCs who live by trickery. 4) He shouldn't be a greater god anymore. Sorry but I just don't get him (especialy after loosing what he has portfolio wise) being a greater god. 5) I thought Bane, Myrkul, and Bhaal were great evil gods...myself. They definitly are alot more interesting then Cyric. 6) While this actualy has very little to do with Cyric himself he changed something about the gods in the FR that I hate. Before Cyric came along the gods mostly acted though their followers, Even the Dawn cataclysm was based on the crusade of Lathenders followers(it used to be what it was entirely till they um...rewrote it). To me this is a terrible thing to do to a RPG setting. 7) There is also the fact that he reminds of every character who is evil (or neutral but that is just because the DM doesn't allow evil characters) played by a player for the only purpose of screwing over the other players. I.E. he is a very bad example on how to play a evil PC. 8) He just negated every action of every PC who just went though the current module arc of Cormyr..and those others. Making those modules useless to play though. Now I'll preference this by saying alot of this mostly personal feelings...which is what the question is about. While you can like him and I don't begrudge you into doing so. This is a matter of personal taste...there is no right answear. If your goal is to find out why I don't like him that is fine. But I really don't want to debate this issue as I don't think it would resolve anything. On a side note I don't think Cyric should be killed off...heck I haven't in my game. Leira really did trick him and Mask in my game, Bane followers crushed Darkhold, taking back Strife from Cyric. Cyric is now a very interesting intermediate deity of maddness and fear in my game.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 02:29 PM	Of course, but why people hate anything (especially a certain character) is all about perception. Perception based on lack of information, doesn't justify blind hatred. All it does is attempt to condone ignorance with sloth. Many people hate Hitler, and will refuse to discuss him on grounds of his actions. I think that there is a fascinating character behind the history, but that can only be found if you leave your initial perceptions behind and look at the reality before you. Like I said, your entire question is already based on people's opinions about a character (Cyric) so I'm not sure what people are supposed to argue. Are we supposed to prove that it's a FACT that Cyric shouldn't be liked? I can't do that, and I don't want to do that. I want to see if there is merit behind the words that "Cyric is this", or "Cyric is that". If there are legitimate reasons people think that the only reason he is alive is due to some secret love WotC has for him, then I'd like to see proof of it. Otherwise, I grow tired of time and again coming online to read something along the lines of "That is funny it is exactly that reason why I am against 4th edition is because of the Mary Sue characters like Cyric......... Cyric has recieved more author fiat then any character in the FR novel lines combined.". Sometimes the statements are worse, and not even properly articulated. The chosen, and Mystra both have a similar anti-fan following, and I'd like to see it all quelled. Why? Because it is pointless. All it is, is flaming of the imaginary characters based on biased opinions formed around actions in one novel, or small blurbs in one of the many Sources. People can read the facts and then complain, or they can listen to those who know the facts and form different opinions at that time. However, if all they want to do is rag on the characters, then I personally don't want to read it, and I'm sure others feel the same. Again, not trying to raise ire, I just want to see whether or not all the hate is legitimate. Thus far the answer is what I expected, and that is no. So then I'll tack on the question of, what does one hope to achieve by complaining about nothing? Do you think wizards will come door to door, and customize each and every source book to the opinions of the individual? "I'm sorry, you hate Cyric? Well let us just erase him, and put in 'happy mc fruffy', the lovable pink cloud that does nothing but dance in the sun all day for you" *commence childish giggling and clapping* :P Until that unlikely day rolls around Wizards will only be looking at legitimate complaints. There are many, but I don't envy them having to sift through the rest of the shite to find it. Maybe we could help them for once, before they do something for us. Perhaps if we made life easy on them, our cries for logical change would be heard over the embittered uneducated din of "I HATE CYRIC". -RW
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 02:30 PM	Logic, Reason, and Sense have little place in how people feel about a person, place, or thing... a quick look at the history of American politics should be proof enough of that. Most people say that JFK was a great guy who was working towards peace, and yet he was one of the biggest hawks of the age and one of the best friends the military ever had, but it's amazing how much people will ignore the facts of the matter, even when presented with proof, and cling to their beliefs regardless of what you show them. That's going to be particularly true of religion, even if its only fictional religion. ;) I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that we don't have to let it. ;) We are for the most part a calm and respectful community, so I see no reason to have such off the wall comments persist. :) -RW
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 03:05 PM	Perception based on lack of information, doesn't justify blind hatred. All it does is attempt to condone ignorance with sloth. Many people hate Hitler, and will refuse to discuss him on grounds of his actions. I think that there is a fascinating character behind the history, but that can only be found if you leave your initial perceptions behind and look at the reality before you. The reason pewople hate Cyric is not because of his actions so much as the way he is written. Otherwise, I grow tired of time and again coming online to read something along the lines of "That is funny it is exactly that reason why I am against 4th edition is because of the Mary Sue characters like Cyric......... Cyric has recieved more author fiat then any character in the FR novel lines combined.". Sometimes the statements are worse, and not even properly articulated. As the person you quoted above...can you prove he isn't a Mary Sue? Or has recieved author fiat or designer fiat over anybody else? Just because it is groundless about Mystra or the 7 Sisters(which it is) doesn't mean it is not true for Cyric. Also it is your opinion he is well written and developed...me I think he is a lousy villian who recieves more attention in the Realms because the design staff likes him. Also if you are not suposed to base opinions off soucebooks(which reflect the novels) what are we suppose to reflect our opinions off of? The novels? But the soucebooks are in line to the soucebooks(actualy that is reversed which is also a big problem). Anyway I know I said I didn't want to hear a arguement against my reasoning but I found myself somewhat interested in what you have to say about them.
selunatic2397 11-13-07, 03:10 PM	Probably because he was once WotC's favorite villain (now it's Shar!) and therefore he is perceived as having had--and still having--special authorial protection and/or advantage-by-author-fiat. This pretty much echos my sentiments to cyric...plus I ran the time of troubles trilogy of modules when they came out... I had a wagon load of feces dumpled on me by my players for the end result of that ...to wit giving a hack ftr thief the portfolios of three gods and then two more later on... I will hate him til the end of my life...the game designer pet character from hell.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 03:13 PM	There are many reasons why I dislike Cyric as a fictional creation for a RPG setting. Mind you if it was just a series of novels I'll probably not care as much. 1) He is the Mary Sue character of the Realms. If you have noticed I have been refering to him as a GDPC( meaning game designer Player character) because he has recieved the most author and game designer fiat. The biggest example of this is the fact that he gets imprisoned after killing Mystra...and we all know that won't hold up since Mr.Baker as said they want to continue his story. That doesn't make him a Mary Sue, it makes him a good Antagonist. Just because they choose -- rightfully given his portfolios-- to use him as a plot hook for a couple novels --lets be realistic, there are how many novels? and how many does he actually show up in? The percentage isn't even worth noting-- doesn't make him a favourite of the authors or the game designers. You don't however have to be a genius to see the potential he has. Many other gods do as well, but their strictures often keep them from making any frontline headway. You then unfortunately have a choice to make. Either change what the others stand for, and give them a chance in the limelight at the loss of what it is you like about them, or keep them standing for what they always have, and leaving little room to write with for and entire novel. 2) Personaly I think Mystra/Midnight was a better character of the flawded human turned goddess learning what it is meant to be a goddess(which she was). Yet they killed her off to continue the stories of Cyric. First they were both mortal, and in Life Cyric was definitely the more emotionally unstable one. Once Mystra realized she could either be a dictator, or a benevolent ruler, and picked the latter, her story potential ran awfully thin. The problem with the gods when writing comes into play, are Ao's decrees and the Portfolios they must work within. Still, personal preference doesn't make the character bad, it means you have sided with one you like better. So, no merit here for WotC to try and change something. 3) He kills Leira and Mystra offstage...Leira death angers me mostly because they should've left that open...but they didn't. What had she done? By her own write-up she wanted no gain in power, and was content to sit idly by and do nothing. She didn't make moves to gain worshipers, nor did she by canon sport any "Chosen" through which she worked on the prime. Did she have story potential? Perhaps. Were they wrong in killing her? Thats up to the individual. Would I like to see a story of her, perhaps outlining how Cyric defeated her? Absolutely. Being dead doesn't limit ones ability to appear in a good story centered around them. Look at Bhaal after all. ;) Mystra death bothers me because I think she was a more interesting character. Also I liked a CN goddess of deception and illusions then a NE(or CE one). Because it gives the taint of evil to PCs who live by trickery. Again, personal preferance, and nothing by which Wizards could say "Oh yeah, he has a point". Perhaps I think the entire pantheon should be TN. I mean who says that the dawn is good? What makes Shadow evil? The truth is the gods are as much individuals as any PC you play in a campaign. Would you be happy if your DM told you who and how to play? If everytime you sat down, you were handed a sheet with a true neutral half-elf, sporting bloodlines traceable to all species capable of mating, and 1 level in all the base classes, would it get old quickly? I think so. So there shouldn't be similar demands made of characters that aren't your own. Sure in this case the god of Trickery might be evil. Next time they might be LG. The story might change, but that doesn't mean an Evil person still couldn't pray to the new god. Mystra is NG, yet she has Evil clerics. 4) He shouldn't be a greater god anymore. Sorry but I just don't get him (especialy after loosing what he has portfolio wise) being a greater god. Bane went from dead, to a greater overnight. And stated he has something like 75 levels. Thats more levels than any other god Stated. Does he deserve the status more than Cyric? Cyric has 5 or 6 portfolios that I can think of off the top of my head. Compared to others with one or two, how do you justify the loss of 1 meriting the loss of greater status? Not understanding him should mean you try to find out more, not shun and claim hatred for him. 5) I thought Bane, Myrkul, and Bhaal were great evil gods...myself. They definitly are alot more interesting then Cyric. I think the three are very interesting too. Perhaps in time we'll see a resurfacing of them for a story or two. But that doesn't cheapen in any way what Cyric is. Sure he may be Whinier than the pervious god of Murder, but one must look at the story here, not compare. After all look at the gods of the dead. Jergal, Myrkul, Cyric, and now Kelemvor. All are very different, yet all IMO are equally perfect for the position. Based on personal preference, I liked Myrkul and Cyric on the bone throne, But I don't begrudge anyone the choice to replace Cyric with Kelemvor. Honestly, I see that move as a way of weakening Cyric, yet people still think he is too powerful. Short of demotion back to Mortal I don't think most people will be happy. 6) While this actualy has very little to do with Cyric himself he changed something about the gods in the FR that I hate. Before Cyric came along the gods mostly acted though their followers, Even the Dawn cataclysm was based on the crusade of Lathenders followers(it used to be what it was entirely till they um...rewrote it). To me this is a terrible thing to do to a RPG setting. Actually before the ToT's, the gods where whimsical, and used their followers. Cyric wasn't the catalyst for this change, merely a product of it. Before the Gods could intervene as they saw fit, now they are bound to keep their distance or suffer the penalties for doing otherwise. Both are intriguing systems, and I don't prefer one to the other. 7) There is also the fact that he reminds of every character who is evil (or neutral but that is just because the DM doesn't allow evil characters) played by a player for the only purpose of screwing over the other players. I.E. he is a very bad example on how to play a evil PC. How so? There is no stereotypical way to play evil. People often do, which is fine, but that doesn't mean all Evil has to act the same. Libris Mortis has a prime example in a cute little halfling that likes to bake various things for friends. Truth is she is an evil lich bent on killing for her own gain. The happy halfling facade is a cover. That IMO is damn good story, but also an excellent example of how not evil must come across as such. 8) He just negated every action of every PC who just went though the current module arc of Cormyr..and those others. Making those modules useless to play though. Why are they useless? Often people might spend a great deal of time doing something, only to end up farther behind than when they began. For example, I should be working right now. Instead I am posting this lengthy reply. Just because my work isn't getting done though, doesn't mean that I have wasted my time here, nor come out empty handed. Sometimes the journey is the real reward. Honestly I'd rather have a dozen good RP sessions, seeing perhaps 100gp for it all, than one combat session that leaves me 10 000 gp richer. Now I'll preference this by saying alot of this mostly personal feelings...which is what the question is about. While you can like him and I don't begrudge you into doing so. This is a matter of personal taste...there is no right answear. If your goal is to find out why I don't like him that is fine. But I really don't want to debate this issue as I don't think it would resolve anything. It shouldn't be though, and that is what the question is about. I want to see legitimate reasons that Cyric is as bad as people claim, yet no one here is proving anything of the sort. I am not surprised or disappointed, but I hope this has shed some light on all the responses people have made. You hate him for personal reasons, nothing more. Until you have real reasons, why do others need to hear anything about them? You aren't making life hard for WoTC, you are making life hard on fellow members. They are the ones who have to deal with it day in and day out. And they are the ones who create threads asking why. As long as people complain about something without merit, the things with merit will go unheard. Or worse, people outside of this community will be listened to instead. On a side note I don't think Cyric should be killed off...heck I haven't in my game. Leira really did trick him and Mask in my game, Bane followers crushed Darkhold, taking back Strife from Cyric. Cyric is now a very interesting intermediate deity of maddness and fear in my game. All of which is fine. Nothing demands anyone use Canon, so it is open to change in your own campaign. That said, personal preference should never dictate the flow, and thus far for the most part I don't think it has. Some things may not make sense to us, even after looking at the facts, and it is those things that we should get excited about. -RW p.s. This is to long to proof, and I need to work. Excuse the errors please. ;)
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 03:31 PM	The reason pewople hate Cyric is not because of his actions so much as the way he is written. But how he is written isn't his fault. That is the fault of the author. Jean Rabe should never have been allowed to write the novel Red Magic, nor include Szass Tam. She missed the mark entirely with him IMO, and in the opinion of several others who have since read it. That said, her short story featuring him did an excellent job of portraying his character, so I am not ruling her out as a competent writer. The point is however who they are, and how they are written are/ should be two very different things. I hate how Tam was portrayed in Red Magic, but I don't hate Tam. As the person you quoted above...can you prove he isn't a Mary Sue? Or has recieved author fiat or designer fiat over anybody else? Just because it is groundless about Mystra or the 7 Sisters(which it is) doesn't mean it is not true for Cyric. I can't say one way or another for sure what the designers are thinking. I can say that I don't see any favourtism happening. If you work with a girl named Molly, and a guy named Dan, and Dan works down the hall, and Molly right next to you, does seeing Molly more mean she is the bosses favourite? No, it just means that you're not seeing Dan as much as you see molly. Just because Cyric makes for good writing material, doesn't mean anyone likes or hates any of the gods more than any of the others. Also it is your opinion he is well written and developed...me I think he is a lousy villian who recieves more attention in the Realms because the design staff likes him. How is he a lowsy villain though? Saying he is doesn't make it so. I can say Lathander is an inbred farmer, with the head of a sheep brought into the gene pool several generations back. Being more or less creative with the comment won't make it any more true. Truth comes from the written material. ALL of the written material. And I never said he was well written. Well developed yes. A character can be interesting on paper, but in practice they might flop simply for the style in which they were portrayed. Also if you are not suposed to base opinions off soucebooks(which reflect the novels) what are we suppose to reflect our opinions off of? The novels? But the soucebooks are in line to the soucebooks(actualy that is reversed which is also a big problem). I'm not saying don't base an opinion off a source. I am saying base the opinion off of all material available to you. And then, keep the anger at the the character in the material where it belongs, if that anger stems solely from one character beating your favourite character. Raise anger only if something legitimately odd is taking place. Anyway I know I said I didn't want to hear a arguement against my reasoning but I found myself somewhat interested in what you have to say about them. Reply I have. Now I hope it it all legible as I am rushing. :P -RW
Inexorable 11-13-07, 04:03 PM	There is no problem with Cyric, your thread has so far shown that. People dislike him because he is a new antagonist of characters they like and he has had success unlike many other inept villains. It amuses me how people say they prefer the dark three, taking into account that they had absolutely no success in any way... "Yea we like those three evil guys that failed in everything they did and always lost to the good guys" This thread is appreciated by me Red Wizard, as Cyric is probably my favorite character in the realms, but I hope your expectations for answers are in check. Also funny, Shar is having some success now so she is a Mary Sue... not taking into account that elminster is the biggest mary sue (larry/gary stu) ever created in the realms. I mean, isn't the definition of being a mary sue according to wikipedia: "Mary Sue, sometimes shortened simply to Sue, is a pejorative term used to describe a fictional character, either male or female (male characters are often dubbed "Garry Stu" or some other rhyming male name), that exhibits some or most of the clichés common to much fan fiction. Such characters were originally labeled "Mary Sues" because they were portrayed in overly idealized ways, lacked noteworthy or realistic flaws, and primarily functioned as wish-fullfillment fantasies for their authors, often very young and unsophisticated." Bold part for those who love to tout the mary sue reference in regards to any one other then elminster.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 04:07 PM	That doesn't make him a Mary Sue, it makes him a good Antagonist. Just because they choose -- rightfully given his portfolios-- to use him as a plot hook for a couple novels --lets be realistic, there are how many novels? and how many does he actually show up in? The percentage isn't even worth noting-- doesn't make him a favourite of the authors or the game designers. To me he did nothing in the Avartars series to earn those porfolios(or after words.) But here are two examples. 1) Why didn't the greater gods just kill him instead of putting him in a prison that he'll be free from by the time 4th edition roles around? Because they fiat something so they couldn't because of their interest in new stories about him. He should have died. 2)And he did nothing to earn those portfolios. He gets to do things that should be very hard...like how in the heck did he and Mask conor Leira? That is just promoting one character at the expense of another. And lastly it is your opinion that he is a good character You don't however have to be a genius to see the potential he has. Many other gods do as well, but their strictures often keep them from making any frontline headway. You then unfortunately have a choice to make. Either change what the others stand for, and give them a chance in the limelight at the loss of what it is you like about them, or keep them standing for what they always have, and leaving little room to write with for and entire novel. Again that is wrong...they just never write stories that deal with the other gods. First they were both mortal, and in Life Cyric was definitely the more emotionally unstable one. Once Mystra realized she could either be a dictator, or a benevolent ruler, and picked the latter, her story potential ran awfully thin. The problem with the gods when writing comes into play, are Ao's decrees and the Portfolios they must work within. Actualy her first goal was to be a benvolent dicator. She grwew into her role as the up holder of the balance anmd the weave. Cyric on the other hand is still the same character and hasn't developed at all. Still, personal preference doesn't make the character bad, it means you have sided with one you like better. So, no merit here for WotC to try and change something. It is also your preference that you like Cyric...your point? Can you prove that he is a good character? What had she done? By her own write-up she wanted no gain in power, and was content to sit idly by and do nothing. She didn't make moves to gain worshipers, nor did she by canon sport any "Chosen" through which she worked on the prime. Actualy she could be doing alot. See I always treated soucebooks as well not the whole truth especialy the ones that Players see. Unfortunaly now we as DMs no longer have the room to decide these thing on our own...well atleast without making the soucebooks more and more useless. Also she did have a chosen...or how would we know...I atleast hope that a choosen of the goddess of illusions and deception can keep a low profile. Did she have story potential? Perhaps. Were they wrong in killing her? Thats up to the individual. Would I like to see a story of her, perhaps outlining how Cyric defeated her? Absolutely. Being dead doesn't limit ones ability to appear in a good story centered around them. Look at Bhaal after all. ;) Actualy I don't want solid answears to these things. DMs should be the ones who decide if Cyric and Mask really killed Leira. This is also a RPG setting after all. Again, personal preferance, and nothing by which Wizards could say "Oh yeah, he has a point". Actualy they actions of late seem to me that they did this with all of those complaints about Mystra and the 7 Sisters... Perhaps I think the entire pantheon should be TN. I mean who says that the dawn is good? What makes Shadow evil? The truth is the gods are as much individuals as any PC you play in a campaign. Would you be happy if your DM told you who and how to play? If everytime you sat down, you were handed a sheet with a true neutral half-elf, sporting bloodlines traceable to all species capable of mating, and 1 level in all the base classes, would it get old quickly? I think so. So there shouldn't be similar demands made of characters that aren't your own. Sure in this case the god of Trickery might be evil. Next time they might be LG. The story might change, but that doesn't mean an Evil person still couldn't pray to the new god. Um what are you talking about? Therer are thing out there that are inherently evil...like said murder, undead, wanton destruction, lawyers(j/k). Then there are thinga that good like joy, healing, crops. Then there are things that could be either or like deception, illusions, fighting, etc. I just don't see the need to penalize character concepts because the god representing them is evil. Mystra is NG, yet she has Evil clerics. Actualy she is NG but moving to either TN or LN. Heck in my game(which the nonsense with the spellweave won't happen she will become LN because that is the way her story was going before they decided to just end it. Bane went from dead, to a greater overnight. And stated he has something like 75 levels. Thats more levels than any other god Stated. Does he deserve the status more than Cyric? Cyric has 5 or 6 portfolios that I can think of off the top of my head. Compared to others with one or two, how do you justify the loss of 1 meriting the loss of greater status? Not understanding him should mean you try to find out more, not shun and claim hatred for him. I actualy know a great deal about him...lets look at those portfolios he has... Let see...Murder( mmm it is a small group who would pray to him), Lies, Intrigue, Deception, and Illusions.(you know the gods who had these before were either intermediate(like Leira) or didn't drop much by loosing them(like Mask) so why do they give him such a big boost? I mean personaly he is a lesser at best. Also why should making him a lesser deity make any less of a threat? I think the three are very interesting too. Perhaps in time we'll see a resurfacing of them for a story or two. But that doesn't cheapen in any way what Cyric is. Sure it does because he didn't earn it. He didn'y kill Bane, he Didn't kill Myrkul. He did kill Bhaal with Masks help...and it wasn't even particulary stealthy kill it was a straight combat. What Midnight show that said she deserved it? She didn't want it. Sure he may be Whinier than the pervious god of Murder, but one must look at the story here, not compare. After all look at the gods of the dead. Jergal, Myrkul, Cyric, and now Kelemvor. All are very different, yet all IMO are equally perfect for the position. Based on personal preference, I liked Myrkul and Cyric on the bone throne, But I don't begrudge anyone the choice to replace Cyric with Kelemvor. Honestly, I see that move as a way of weakening Cyric, yet people still think he is too powerful. So why is reading a story about a whinner a good thing? He is somebody who I wouldn't to deal with in life why do I want to deal with him as a character in books and in a RPG setting in which he always wins. Doesn developed(I mean he is basicaly the same character from the Avartar series...except his power has increased(which I don't consider growth) Short of demotion back to Mortal I don't think most people will be happy. No I think just making a lesser god of Maddness would be just fine. Actually before the ToT's, the gods where whimsical, and used their followers. Cyric wasn't the catalyst for this change, merely a product of it. Before the Gods could intervene as they saw fit, now they are bound to keep their distance or suffer the penalties for doing otherwise. Both are intriguing systems, and I don't prefer one to the other. Actualy, sigh, there is nothing in canon to support that ther gods were whimiscal or used their followers before the first chapter in Shadowdale said so. How so? There is no stereotypical way to play evil. People often do, which is fine, but that doesn't mean all Evil has to act the same. Libris Mortis has a prime example in a cute little halfling that likes to bake various things for friends. Truth is she is an evil lich bent on killing for her own gain. The happy halfling facade is a cover. That IMO is damn good story, but also an excellent example of how not evil must come across as such. Um...you fail to see my point Cyric is the poster child for bad players. Why are they useless? Often people might spend a great deal of time doing something, only to end up farther behind than when they began. Sometimes the journey is the real reward. Honestly I'd rather have a dozen good RP sessions, seeing perhaps 100gp for it all, than one combat session that leaves me 10 000 gp richer. Except in real life I deal with spending my life doing something that ends up useless. I read novels and play RPG to get away from that. It is esacapism. Also I wouldn't care that much if the players did get freeze screened and railroaded into actions though out these modules. It shouldn't be though, and that is what the question is about. I want to see legitimate reasons that Cyric is as bad as people claim, yet no one here is proving anything of the sort. I am not surprised or disappointed, but I hope this has shed some light on all the responses people have made. You hate him for personal reasons, nothing more. Until you have real reasons, why do others need to hear anything about them? Ok can you reveal real reason why he is a good character? You assume because I dislike him I don't have reasons? You aren't making life hard for WoTC, you are making life hard on fellow members. They are the ones who have to deal with it day in and day out. And they are the ones who create threads asking why. As long as people complain about something without merit, the things with merit will go unheard. Or worse, people outside of this community will be listened to instead. Again they already have listen to those who said Mystra and the 7 Sisters are broken and ruin the world(which not what I said about Cyric by the way I just think he should have a lesser impact then what he does) All of which is fine. Nothing demands anyone use Canon, so it is open to change in your own campaign. That said, personal preference should never dictate the flow, and thus far for the most part I don't think it has. In my opinion from reading Mr.Baker's resaponse and just the way those novels work out the game designers personal preference are directing the flow. Personaly I think this is bad for bussiness. p.s. This is to long to proof, and I need to work. Excuse the errors please. ;) That is alright errors happen. So can you give fact on why you think Cyric is a great character?
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 04:13 PM	There is no problem with Cyric, your thread has so far shown that. People dislike him because he is a new antagonist of characters they like and he has had success unlike many other inept villains. It amuses me how people say they prefer the dark three, taking into account that they had absolutely no success in any way... "Yea we like those three evil guys that failed in everything they did and always lost to the good guys" Again the same mistake crops up...Cyric is written as the protagonist in all books that he appears in. Get your literary terms right. Also what do you mean they have failed? Bane owns the Moonsea area right now...and is starting on the Lake of Steam. He has also kept Elminster and Storm in a defensive position in shadowdale for how long? Myrkul...just point to the rather large list of liches and other intelligent undead around the world. Bhaal...how many murders were his worshippers responsible for? Also without the intervention of Chauntea he would be owning the Moonsheas... You know having good just hold off evil is not winning.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 04:28 PM	I'll answer all of this when I arrive home, but for now I just want to say I don't think he is a great character. And if I think he is a good character, that is personal preference based on what I have seen. I'll no more convince you to like him, than you will me to hate him. But that wasn't the point of the thread now was it? ;) I don't want people to start or stop liking any aspect of the Realms, I just want people to stop complaining about one thing or another based on personal preference. You like Lathander, and hate Cyric? fine. I like Cyric and hate Lathander? Fine. But if we want to discuss why they are bad characters, we shouldn't be saying something simple like "Oh he is a Mary Sue, so he is stupid". Kids in elementary school concoct more sound arguments. I am not getting on a soap box yelling that Cyric is the best, or that Thay should rule -- in more than jest anyway ;) -- So why should the rest be submitted to hearing that someone they may think of as their favourite character, is somehow not worth while, or doesn't belong in the setting. Ultimately that is what it is becoming. Someone you hate, someone else likes. If you don't want to hear why you fav character is bad, why tell others theirs are? Seems childish doesn't it? There is no fact one way or the other to prove or disprove a characters worth. But because of that there is also no reason to see arguments either way crop up. Sooooo, lets keep things Canon and opinions formed around that. In a manner such as "I think this, because ______ stated this". No more "I hate Mystra because she is too powerful", or "The chosen ruin the game for my PC's". It's all rubbish based on personal preference, and thus pointless to see on these forums. -RW
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 04:31 PM	You know having good just hold off evil is not winning. No, but always seeing good triumph often feels like evil never wins. All we have to do is look around, and we can plainly see that is not the case. Even if the sources show Evil winning, when one only reads novels with the good guys being the best it can get tiring. It belittles the victory, if the victory is guaranteed before opening the cover. -RW
Inexorable 11-13-07, 04:46 PM	Again the same mistake crops up...Cyric is written as the protagonist in all books that he appears in. Get your literary terms right. Also what do you mean they have failed? Bane owns the Moonsea area right now...and is starting on the Lake of Steam. He has also kept Elminster and Storm in a defensive position in shadowdale for how long? Myrkul...just point to the rather large list of liches and other intelligent undead around the world. Bhaal...how many murders were his worshippers responsible for? Also without the intervention of Chauntea he would be owning the Moonsheas... You know having good just hold off evil is not winning. I didn't use the term in regards to a novel. : antagonist Main Entry: an·tag·o·nist Listen to the pronunciation of antagonist Pronunciation: \-nist\ Function: noun Date: 1575 1: one that contends with or opposes another : adversary, opponent Is Cyric an antagonist of mystra? Yes he is, whether he is the protagonist or not of a novel. As for the dark three... please, they have had no where near the success of Cyric, before or during the time of troubles. They were pathetic evil deities that were thankfully put out of their misery. Here is a huge example: It was their idea to steal the tablets of fate from Ao that resulted in them being killed. Although I did like myrkul more than the other two but bane and bhaal are laughingstocks in regards on how to be an evil deity.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:30 PM	Perception based on lack of information, doesn't justify blind hatred. All it does is attempt to condone ignorance with sloth. But come on, like I said, this is just a fictional character. If someone has "blind hatred" towards a fictional character, who really cares? I want to see if there is merit behind the words that "Cyric is this", or "Cyric is that". If there are legitimate reasons people think that the only reason he is alive is due to some secret love WotC has for him, then I'd like to see proof of it. I thought your question was more about why people hate him. The people who hate Cyric will continue hating him whether or not you've deemed their hatred legitimate.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:40 PM	You hate him for personal reasons, nothing more. Until you have real reasons, why do others need to hear anything about them? Personal reasons, are real reasons, as far as I'm concerned. By the way, I don't consider myself someone who vehemently hates Cyric. I simply disagree with the rationale you are using. You aren't making life hard for WoTC, you are making life hard on fellow members. They are the ones who have to deal with it day in and day out. And they are the ones who create threads asking why. Again...when I first posted to this thread, I thought the point was for people to shed some light on why Cyric is disliked, not a challenge to come up with arguments to present to WotC to make Cyric bite the big one. Again, I'm personally not interested in such a thing. No one in this thread is going to budge. No one will convince you to start hating Cyric (and as I said, I wouldn't want to!), and the people who hate him probably aren't going to be swayed by your reasoning. We can pretend that emotions shouldn't matter, but the truth is emotion has everything to do with what we like and dislike (as Stigger pointed out).
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:42 PM	You aren't making life hard for WoTC, you are making life hard on fellow members. They are the ones who have to deal with it day in and day out. And they are the ones who create threads asking why. While I agree that some topics can be exhaustive, I will point out that if posting at this forum becomes an activity that "makes one's life harder", then it would probably be best to leave and not post here anymore.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:46 PM	But how he is written isn't his fault. That is the fault of the author. ... The point is however who they are, and how they are written are/ should be two very different things. Yes and no. Sometimes established characters are portrayed badly, and that's especially a problem in a shared world. But a character is how they are written, and that may be all the reader knows of the character, in which case any reaction the reader might have (positive or negative) is perfectly legitimate.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:49 PM	People dislike him because he is a new antagonist of characters they like and he has had success unlike many other inept villains. It amuses me how people say they prefer the dark three, taking into account that they had absolutely no success in any way... "Yea we like those three evil guys that failed in everything they did and always lost to the good guys" Well, they couldn't be complete failures at everything they ever did, or why would they have reigned for so long? Also funny, Shar is having some success now so she is a Mary Sue... not taking into account that elminster is the biggest mary sue (larry/gary stu) ever created in the realms. ... Bold part for those who love to tout the mary sue reference in regards to any one other then elminster. So where's YOUR proof of that? You just made a bunch of statements without backing them up in any way.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 05:53 PM	As for the dark three... please, they have had no where near the success of Cyric, before or during the time of troubles. They were pathetic evil deities that were thankfully put out of their misery. . Even though they ruled about 1000 years or so (give or take) and Cyric has only been around since 1358 DR. That's not to say Cyric might not have equal success, but again...if the Dark Three were such "pathetic failures", doesn't it follow that their reigns would have been much shorter?
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 06:00 PM	But come on, like I said, this is just a fictional character. If someone has "blind hatred" towards a fictional character, who really cares? Like I said, I don't care who or what you hate. I just grow tired of hearing about it. Saying it again and again only annoys those you post with, and doesn't do anything to change your problems. People say "Oh wizards doesn't want to listen to us, and get rid of the problems, like Cyric". Well here is the chance to state where that problem lies. And it is evident that the problem is with the fan and not the lore. So now that this has been established, why keep saying it? I thought your question was more about why people hate him. The people who hate Cyric will continue hating him whether or not you've deemed their hatred legitimate. My question was rhetorical I suppose. I knew the answer, but posed the question to confirm it. I don't want to change their opinions on Cyric, I want them to realize that the hate they feel isn't caused by the setting being flawed, but by the flawed position they take. How is their position Flawed? Because they are creating a biased opinion by hating that which opposes what they like. Were I to take a similar position, I'd constantly Rag on the Simbul and Aglarond, complaining how powerful she is, and putting her down without cause at every turn. I however do not. I like the Simbul as much as I like Szass Tam. I'll often be caught defending the Red Wizards however because of the blind dislike people hold for them. "Ah, lets just wipe out Thay, I don't like them" "They are nothing to the Simbul, if she wanted to she could wipe them all out by herself". This isn't fact, but some cling to it as such. I'll defend both sides of the coin because that is what an UNBIASED person should do. What I want is an unbiased forum. Yes there are a lot of people who will remain Biased, but if the majority change, then the rest will follow suit or leave. -RW
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 06:03 PM	Like I said, I don't care who or what you hate. I just grow tired of hearing about it. Saying it again and again only annoys those you post with, and doesn't do anything to change your problems. People say "Oh wizards doesn't want to listen to us, and get rid of the problems, like Cyric". Well here is the chance to state where that problem lies. And it is evident that the problem is with the fan and not the lore. So now that this has been established, why keep saying it? Okay, why are you asking ME this after I just told you I'm not a passionate hater of Cyric? I never said I wanted him removed from the setting. How is their position Flawed? Because they are creating a biased opinion by hating that which opposes what they like. While that's true in some cases, I doubt it's true in every single case. What I want is an unbiased forum. Yes there are a lot of people who will remain Biased, but if the majority change, then the rest will follow suit or leave. Everyone is biased whether they admit to it or not.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 06:15 PM	Personal reasons, are real reasons, as far as I'm concerned. By the way, I don't consider myself someone who vehemently hates Cyric. I simply disagree with the rationale you are using. They are real to you, but illogical for the debate. Thus I call them "Not real" reasons. A real reason would draw upon lore to defend the argument. That is not the case. I am seeing here, what I see time and again. Blind hate, with only personal preference to back it up. Would You defend me if I said that I hate All black people because they were black? What would that have to do with anything? That's not a real reason at all, it is an argument for the sake of arguing. Now If I said I hated them for work ethic, personality, or origin, while still being for the most part ludicrous, it would be backed by views taken from observation. That would be where others would leap in and say, "That isn't so, because ______", and I would then revise my view from there. No logical, or legitimate debate can stem from the argument "because". "Because" will only force the opponent to quit, which isn't really a victory. (Not in my books any way) Again...when I first posted to this thread, I thought the point was for people to shed some light on why Cyric is disliked, not a challenge to come up with arguments to present to WotC to make Cyric bite the big one. Again, I'm personally not interested in such a thing. The thread was for those who hate him without cause. Personal opinion isn't legitimate cause to bash anything or anyone, at any time. Fact is the point from which debates should stem. Heck, challenging fact can often change it, but that still requires that one begin there. I appreciate people trying to tell me why they hate him, but as I have established I was more curious in the validity of the remarks. There is no Validity to be had there. SO that means stop commenting on it. No one in this thread is going to budge. No one will convince you to start hating Cyric (and as I said, I wouldn't want to!), and the people who hate him probably aren't going to be swayed by your reasoning. We can pretend that emotions shouldn't matter, but the truth is emotion has everything to do with what we like and dislike (as Stigger pointed out). The point is once more that I am NOT trying to change opinions on characters. I am trying to prevent personal opinions from leaking into the threads. Look at "ExtinctionBeta". His hardheaded ignorant attitude angered many. That attitude is rampant in this thread, yet civility is being maintained. His PERSONAL opinion was that all Drow should die, and that they sucked for no better reason than he hated them. I leapt to the defense of the Drow, not out of some deeply seeded love for them, but out of the wish to open his eyes to the bigger picture. That didn't happen, which is fine, but I think we can all agree his mentality was not wanted. Why then do we accept the same mentality, just because it is put across with more civility? Why allow hurt feelings, or risen ire just because the person isn't intending to hurt? That isn't what this place is meant to be for. It is meant for discussion of the material presented, and in some cases interpreting the areas that area vague. Saying "I hate so-and-so just because" is doing nothing to help, but everything to hinder. -RW
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 06:17 PM	While I agree that some topics can be exhaustive, I will point out that if posting at this forum becomes an activity that "makes one's life harder", then it would probably be best to leave and not post here anymore. Why would giving up be an option? Why not try to actively fix the problem? I dislike seeing these remarks, but that doesn't mean I hate the people behind them, or the place they are posted in. I just think that the community could be made better without them. -RW
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 06:21 PM	Okay, why are you asking ME this after I just told you I'm not a passionate hater of Cyric? I never said I wanted him removed from the setting. The "you" is almost never meant as a direct "you'. ;) I mean the generalize "You", as in everyone i'm addressing. While that's true in some cases, I doubt it's true in every single case. In this thread it has proved true time and again. And I don't see anyone else coming out to argue to the contrary. ;) Everyone is biased whether they admit to it or not. That's true. Often we become biased based on the facts presented to us. But that shouldn't mean that change can transpire. If I am presented with sound evidence to the contrary on a point I make, I'll often concede, or re-evaluate based on the circumstance. No one wants to re-evaluate here, and so the process seems moot. -RW
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 06:24 PM	Yes and no. Sometimes established characters are portrayed badly, and that's especially a problem in a shared world. But a character is how they are written, and that may be all the reader knows of the character, in which case any reaction the reader might have (positive or negative) is perfectly legitimate. I agree that a characters actions become canonized when published/ finalized, however the quality of the writing shouldn't effect the opinion one forms towards the character. Again I reference Jean Rabe, and Red Magic. Had I formed my opinion of all Red Wizards from that novel, I could very well hate them now. That would be Biased of me to only look at that source however, and thus I would hope others would try to show me additional pieces to the contrary. -RW
Inexorable 11-13-07, 06:38 PM	Well, they couldn't be complete failures at everything they ever did, or why would they have reigned for so long? So where's YOUR proof of that? You just made a bunch of statements without backing them up in any way. I was stating an opinion and you want me to justify it with proof? Fine, be prepared to do the same. Here is why I think elminster is a mary sue: I don't really follow Mr. Greenwood's writings so a lot of this is based on what I have read on various message boards. Mr. Greenwood meeting elminster when he travels to earth, which goes hand in hand with many who claim or think that they are the same person. His character being an iconic character, one of the most well known and one of the greatest spellcasters ever. Obviously elminster is a problem for the writers/designers and others which is why mystra and the others are being done away with but because he is a mary sue, he and drizzt remain while all the other perceived troubling npcs get the axe. Also take into account elminster's sexual prowess and him constantly being desired by females, or so I've heard. Of course such is always dismissed as "faerun has different morals then the real world", which in and of itself strikes me as wish fulfillment on the creator's part. So, if all the above I stated is accurate, does that strike you as an "author's wish fulfillment fantasy" at all? It positively reeks of one to me. Seeing as how you started this whole proof thing, where is your proof that Shar is one? Or that Cyric was/is one? Because they had some success and killed off some characters you were fond of? Why don't you justify your own opinions as well. And as for the dark three: So, your reasoning for the dark three not being failures is because they have existed for a fairly long time? Alright, if you feel that way, fine, but I don't concur. Their actions, during their existence are not noteworthy in any way that I have read beyond just that existing, at least as far as I know. If there is something significant they have done then what is it? Because, seriously, I cannot think of one thing they did that was successful on a grand scale.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 06:59 PM	I didn't use the term in regards to a novel. Reading comprehension isn't your strong point it would seem. Let me help you out: antagonist Main Entry: an·tag·o·nist Listen to the pronunciation of antagonist Pronunciation: \-nist\ Function: noun Date: 1575 1: one that contends with or opposes another : adversary, opponent Don't attempt to correct me when its not warranted. Is Cyric an antagonist of mystra? Yes he is, whether he is the protagonist or not of a novel. Pick up a dictionary before you attempt to correct anyone. You might want define the word you are using better as I am surew I would find the defination for antagonist that was being used in this thread berfore you posted. Maybe you should read a thread before you post to it. So you want a competent antagonist...using you defination of the word Mystra could be called Cyric's antagonist. And by her dying that way she did she was a incompetent antagonist. So how does just switching competency level change the problem you see? Heck he seemed very competent to me half the time... 1) He killed Leira 2) He got off at his trail. 3)He made it so Mystra couldn't stop him from using magic. 4)He stole from the god of thieves It used to be a interesting match vs competent gods...suddenly one got really uncompetent and this a good thing? I don't know but I perfer both sides being competent. As for the dark three... please, they have had no where near the success of Cyric, before or during the time of troubles. They were pathetic evil deities that were thankfully put out of their misery. Here is a huge example: It was their idea to steal the tablets of fate from Ao that resulted in them being killed. Can you fail any worse than that? Although I did like myrkul more than the other two but bane and bhaal are laughingstocks in regards on how to be an evil deity. Actualy the whole ToT thing was just really dumb in my opinion. But as RW has said their action shouldn't be taken into account by how it is writen. Also can you give a example how they were a laughing stock/ Just because Cyric get more exposure doesn't meen they did nothing. It is funny even with his successes he has lost in say over undead...(which Myrkul never did till they killed him off in a terrible story.) Bane came back by upsurping his son and pretty much took The Zhentarim away from Cyric except for a small holdout that continue to exists due to author fiat. And well Bhall atleast did something other then continue his personal venndete's. And all Bhaal and Myrkul almost came back also. Maybe you should try playing D&D in the FR besides just reading the novels. Or if you already do I am sorry that your DM can't challenge you.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 07:14 PM	I was stating an opinion and you want me to justify it with proof? Fine, be prepared to do the same. Here is why I think elminster is a mary sue: I don't really follow Mr. Greenwood's writings so a lot of this is based on what I have read on various message boards. Mr. Greenwood meeting elminster when he travels to earth, which goes hand in hand with many who claim or think that they are the same person. His character being an iconic character, one of the most well known and one of the greatest spellcasters ever. Obviously elminster is a problem for the writers/designers and others which is why mystra and the others are being done away with but because he is a mary sue, he and drizzt remain while all the other perceived troubling npcs get the axe. Also take into account elminster's sexual prowess and him constantly being desired by females, or so I've heard. Of course such is always dismissed as "faerun has different morals then the real world", which in and of itself strikes me as wish fulfillment on the creator's part. So, if all the above I stated is accurate, does that strike you as an "author's wish fulfillment fantasy" at all? It positively reeks of one to me. Seeing how you didn't bother to actualy read anything for this opinion it is completely thrown out the window. I think I am seeing Red Wizards point in this thread. And as for the dark three: So, your reasoning for the dark three not being failures is because they have existed for a fairly long time? Alright, if you feel that way, fine, but I don't concur. Their actions, during their existence are not noteworthy in any way that I have read beyond just that existing, at least as far as I know. If there is something significant they have done then what is it? Because, seriously, I cannot think of one thing they did that was successful on a grand scale. Um just because they(WotC) have not written about doesn't mean they have a huge successes...heck I pointed out a alot that is covered by canon. Yet you dimiss it because it hasn't been novilized.
Stigger 11-13-07, 07:21 PM	So much for a polite and congenial discussion... ah well.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 07:28 PM	I'll answer all of this when I arrive home, but for now I just want to say I don't think he is a great character. And if I think he is a good character, that is personal preference based on what I have seen. I'll no more convince you to like him, than you will me to hate him. But that wasn't the point of the thread now was it? ;) I don't want people to start or stop liking any aspect of the Realms, I just want people to stop complaining about one thing or another based on personal preference. You like Lathander, and hate Cyric? fine. I like Cyric and hate Lathander? Fine. But if we want to discuss why they are bad characters, we shouldn't be saying something simple like "Oh he is a Mary Sue, so he is stupid". Kids in elementary school concoct more sound arguments. I am not getting on a soap box yelling that Cyric is the best, or that Thay should rule -- in more than jest anyway ;) -- So why should the rest be submitted to hearing that someone they may think of as their favourite character, is somehow not worth while, or doesn't belong in the setting. Ultimately that is what it is becoming. Someone you hate, someone else likes. If you don't want to hear why you fav character is bad, why tell others theirs are? Seems childish doesn't it? There is no fact one way or the other to prove or disprove a characters worth. But because of that there is also no reason to see arguments either way crop up. Sooooo, lets keep things Canon and opinions formed around that. In a manner such as "I think this, because ______ stated this". No more "I hate Mystra because she is too powerful", or "The chosen ruin the game for my PC's". It's all rubbish based on personal preference, and thus pointless to see on these forums. -RW I think I understand the point of this thread better now. And I agree with you in mosat regards. Though I'll say this every personal dislike of the character is from canon souces. While their are a personal oppinion involved it isn't a uneducated one. In truth I never liked Cyric as a character...personal opinion. But I would never dream of calling for his death because while I don't like him as written I understand that others might and wouldn't want to see him destroyed because then they would loose something. And also as I have stated I have changed the character for my Realms campaign so I can like him. Also my response to of my disliking Cyric that you quoted was in response to somebodt saying hey look they are cleaning up the Mary Sue problem...which in truth they not because I think any character who shows up in a FR novel(not written by Douglas Niles he kills alot of characters) could be called a Mary Sue that is the nature of novels. So I get your point...and I usualy reframe doing what you accuse me of doing except when someone else does first with characters I like. Heck I made a similar point with the Kill Drizzt thread(though I made a mistake and did it with subtility). All I got to say is I wished you started this thread a few years ago when people started calling for the heads of Mystra and the 7 Sisters. Also I admit I am not happy about Cyric right now because he is going to be rubbed in my face by WotC atleast thoughout 4th edition from what Mr.Baker has said. But any I agree with you though I think you should really start overlooking people posting their opinions on things...it is a message board and people do have the right to express their opinion...as you have the right not to read it.
Charles Phipps 11-13-07, 08:24 PM	Actually, Red Wizard, as the biggest Cyric user on these boards; I'll argue that the problem is with Wizards of the Coast's portrayal of the Dark Sun as opposed to what the character is supposed to be. Here's what Richard Baker said about the Dark Sun. As far as how I see Cyric... I guess I see him as a bit of a tool, to be honest. I think Shar provided the real brainpower behind the plot to do in Mystra, and found the perfect accomplice in Cyric. Now, maybe Cyric's clever enough to *let* Shar think he can be manipulated, and he's really playing a deeper game with a longer view--but somehow I don't really think so. I think Cyric is still in his "spoiled brat" phase of deity-hood, and hasn't really learned to think like a deity yet. So overall Shar gets what she wants (no Mystra) and Cyric's the guy who takes the fall (imprisoned in his home plane). We've got a couple of novels on the way in another author's series that may shed some more light on this, and other divine imbroglios. I meant "tool" in both senses of the word, I think... Cyric is some ways is the ultimate munchkin. I can almost see him shouting "pwned u!" when he takes down Mystra. Maybe I'm not giving him much credit, but I think it's kinda interesting that there's a major deity who has no respect for/sense of "the rules" for how deities should act. Cyric might grow into a Loki someday when he starts learning to delay self-gratification and take the long view. But for now, he's far more petty and dangerous than a greater deity really has a right to be. I mean, WHAT THE HELL!? This is the kind of attitude that the Designers are taking towards a GREATER GOD of the setting? I love Richard Baker's work but this is the guy whose supposed to be the No. 1 God of Evil (and No. 3 at the worst). He's the God of Illusions, Lies, Intrigue, and Murder. This man should be the most subtle and brilliant schemer in the plains. At the very worst, he should be a brilliant and nightmarish Loki-like Trickster bringing chaos and misery across the planes. Cyric is decidedly not a person to be taken lightly. A plot by Cyric should be layers within layers with doom as a result to anyone who challenges him just like ANY Greater God's schemes should be damn well difficult to foil. The problem is endemic to all levels of Cyric's treatment with the characterization of Prince of Lies being exaggerated and misinformed. The original Cyric was extremely intelligent, dangerous, and cunning. He was also a much more worthy candidate for Midnight's affections than Kelemvor. The irony is that he's treated like a Fool yet gets the successes he SHOULD be getting, which only become incomprehensible. He defeated Leira fair and square because he's BRILLIANT. Same with the destruction of Helm, he arranged it because he's THAT good. Geebus, it's like Cyric is Cobra Commander. Give him a Blue Hood and act like he's the biggest idiot in the world yet he still manages to run the world's most successful terrorist organization.
Red_Wizard 11-13-07, 10:33 PM	Ok, a couple of things to say to this. What is wrong with how he is portrayed there, or anywhere else? I get the same impression from him most of the time that Rich gives there. At other times he seems to be the calm, and collected greater deity many expect him to be. For me personally, I see that as the inner conflict between the man, and the essences he inherited. Mystra gained the Weave, and with it the memories of two long lived women before her, to help guide her along the way. Her portfolios regarding magic are both straightforward, and "in-sync" with one another. Alternatively Cyric has gained what? The abilities of three mortals turned gods, each of whom showed/ show more than a few motes of insanity, and sporting portfolios that in places contradict one another. For example being the god of Murder, and the god of death seems beneficial, save for the fact Bhaal saw murder as a way to control death and Tyranny, and Myrkul saw Death as a way to steal power from Bane and Bhaal. Two similar portfolios, used directly to oppose one another. Not to mention it was Myrkul who slew Bhaals followers for Bane during the ToT. That has to leave it's mark. Alone I'm sure he has conflicting memories of how his portfolios should be used, and then you go and strip him of the portfolio of Death, just as he begins to use it to help himself, and add another of a less obvious nature. And lets not forget that he also took Illusion from Leira, a goddess who showed no motivation for self improvement. So you have two portfolios looking to gain power through death and destruction, and then an additional two coming in suggesting that he take a quieter approach, perhaps doing nothing at all. Lastly, to stir the pot, you add his reading of the Cyrinishad, coupled with a sudden switch back to sanity via reading the "True life". Nothing to mess with his mind there. :P All together, keeping in mind Cyric wasn't entirely in control of his mental faculties in life, and you're not left with a very sound mind, even as a god. When you think about portfolios now, where does it say that a god knows how to put those portfolios to use? They gain power from them, and they must abide by the guidelines set forth by them, but it doesn't say that by becoming a god one simply "Knows" the ins and outs of their station. Cyric may on paper may a brilliantly calculating being, but in reality, he could be something far from it. Cyric is very much a kid in a candy store, grabbing what he can, and opting to test the taste later. IMO anyway. The second real point I wish to make here, and I'm not sure if your post was meant to discredit this, so bear with me, is that despite having given quotes, much of what you said was opinion on what you thought Cyric should be. Granted it isn't saying that someone else is "stupid" or the like, and for that I'm grateful, but I hope that there wasn't meant to be a point in there to aid or refute what I was saying, and somehow I missed it. -RW
Charles Phipps 11-13-07, 11:38 PM	FYI- Cyric didn't gain Bane, Bhaal, or Myrkul's memories. Just like Bane didn't get Jergals. The second real point I wish to make here, and I'm not sure if your post was meant to discredit this, so bear with me, is that despite having given quotes, much of what you said was opinion on what you thought Cyric should be. Granted it isn't saying that someone else is "stupid" or the like, and for that I'm grateful, but I hope that there wasn't meant to be a point in there to aid or refute what I was saying, and somehow I missed it. That's a point Red Wizard, what Cyric SHOULD be is mythic and powerful because he's a God. If someone portrayed Lathander as Beavis and Tyr as Butthead then I'd be able to complain that it's bad writing. I complain because a God like Cyric should be treated with a certain amount of gravitas that the designers do not give him. Either he's competent enough to do what canon says he's accomplished or he's insane/a child in which there's no way he can. It undercuts the character's respect if you treat him like he's an idiot that nevertheless can outsmart everyone else. I don't think Shar is anywhere approaching as smart as the designers think and find it annoying that people believe that she should be that higher than Bane or Cyric.
Stigger 11-14-07, 02:05 AM	Well, from the sound of it, the Devs were kinda trying to undercut him... success in spite of oneself isn't unheard of, even on that sort of magnitude.
Red_Wizard 11-14-07, 09:16 AM	But any I agree with you though I think you should really start overlooking people posting their opinions on things...it is a message board and people do have the right to express their opinion...as you have the right not to read it. I'm not against opinions here, only opinions without ground. Speculation on something where the lore leaves off is fine, if not encouraged. In that situation, opinions are needed. But those opinions should be based upon the factual lore, not on ones preference of who or what is better than anything else. We all know we are different, and like different things, so why stoop to putting down something that another likes? -RW
Red_Wizard 11-14-07, 09:28 AM	FYI- Cyric didn't gain Bane, Bhaal, or Myrkul's memories. Just like Bane didn't get Jergals. They have never stated as such either way, to which I'll point out that I have never suggested they did. However, given that Mystra retains the memories of her predecessors, one could speculate that in truth the memories of the past are retained, and perhaps even influence the views of the present. That's a point Red Wizard, what Cyric SHOULD be is mythic and powerful because he's a God. Why should he be? Isn't it obvious by now that people in positions of power don't often have the intelligence to use that power properly? I say it is flavour that he is a Greater deity without a clue. You say it is bad development, and so we both have personal opinions. Neither will convince the other, and so we are left with my point. If someone portrayed Lathander as Beavis and Tyr as Butthead then I'd be able to complain that it's bad writing. YOU'D complain. You'd being the key word here. Others would like nothing more to see certain NPC's, or gods as stuttering idiots, all so that their golden character can "win". I complain because a God like Cyric should be treated with a certain amount of gravitas that the designers do not give him. Personal, and not mandatory. Either he's competent enough to do what canon says he's accomplished or he's insane/a child in which there's no way he can. Are you suggesting that a person can't fail and succeed, or garner success accidentally? Cyric might plan for something "ingenious" that is quite obvious to all those around him. If they don't take him seriously, he isn't stopped, and then BAM, he claims a victory. It undercuts the character's respect if you treat him like he's an idiot that nevertheless can outsmart everyone else. I don't think Shar is anywhere approaching as smart as the designers think and find it annoying that people believe that she should be that higher than Bane or Cyric. As one of the two creator goddesses I have to disagree. As a greater, many of her stats are lower than those of an intermediate Lolth. IMO, that is just pathetic. She is an ancient evil, will to wait millennium to see her goals reach fruition, and yet Bane is stated better in every possible way. By storyline, I think Shar is underpowered in stats. You evidently think otherwise. Why, I'm not sure as in this case, lore backs up what I am saying, but I am content to call my view personal opinion, and be done with it. So, ultimately all we have done here, is shown you like Cyric, and think he should be better just because. You see mistakes, I do not, and we are left where I hope to avoid in the future. However, civility remains here, so something can be salvaged and I think taken away to be reflected upon. :) -RW
Suin Bahhar 11-14-07, 09:31 AM	The portfolios Cyric holds make him a useful tool for DM's (no not in the way mr Baker meant :)). A fledgling insane greater god has so much story potential even as a tool (as mr Baker meant it :)). This is why I like the realms in the first place (the ToT was a real pull for me). The strong connection of the mortals with the divine. Cyric symbolizes this the most by being a mortal holding the divine spark and wantonly wanting more at all costs.
WizO_Crosis 11-14-07, 02:18 PM	Just as a general reminder, please remember to keep all posts courteous and respectful toward others. Anything else will be fed to the postatog. Thanks. :) :w:
Inexorable 11-14-07, 02:58 PM	Just as a general reminder, please remember to keep all posts courteous and respectful toward others. Anything else will be fed to the postatog. Thanks. :) :w: I see... so you delete my post but someone can be patronizing and pretentious towards me and thats just fine? Whatever. Here, let me sum it up... to the poster johnkretzer You are incorrect on many if not all of your posts in regards to the things I have posted but the moderators of these forums will not allow me to demonstrate them to you. Please in the future if you see one of my posts do not respond to it and I shall do the same in regards to yours. thanks
johnkretzer 11-14-07, 03:36 PM	I'm not against opinions here, only opinions without ground. Speculation on something where the lore leaves off is fine, if not encouraged. In that situation, opinions are needed. But those opinions should be based upon the factual lore, not on ones preference of who or what is better than anything else. We all know we are different, and like different things, so why stoop to putting down something that another likes? -RW 1) My opinions do have grounds...nothing I have said went against canon. From the canon I drew my preference and opinion. 2) Your critiera is strange....you want us to judge a character but how? I mean all you have is how and what they write about him...so what are we suppose to judge characters on if not that? 3) Also instead of targeting this thread at us who disliked Cyric(which in general as not been that big) as a more general statement of people stooping to but down any character. Mystra, the 7 Sisters, and the rest of the choosen have been under more attacks that are unfounded then Cyric. Heck even R. Baker said they were perceptions and not realities yet it was enough for them to get rid of them. Just saying you should have used a different way of doing what you did. I agree...though you have not yet answeared me on one thing... You started this thread because of something I said...that statement was in response by someone doing what you say I am doing. Yet you are only attacking one side of this...and most Cyric attackers aren't as vehement in their attacks as those who attacked Mystra, etc. And those people seemed to just have gotten theirt way. Also please not I have never called for Cyric's removal....I just don't like the character.
johnkretzer 11-14-07, 03:36 PM	I see... so you delete my post but someone can be patronizing and pretentious towards me and thats just fine? Whatever. Here, let me sum it up... to the poster johnkretzer You are incorrect on many if not all of your posts in regards to the things I have posted but the moderators of these forums will not allow me to demonstrate them to you. Please in the future if you see one of my posts do not respond to it and I shall do the same in regards to yours. thanks PM me your response. Though I agree me remarks towards you were short and rude for that I apologize. And agree it should be removed.
Charles Phipps 11-14-07, 03:44 PM	Why should he be? Isn't it obvious by now that people in positions of power don't often have the intelligence to use that power properly? Because his stats say that he is. I say it is flavour that he is a Greater deity without a clue. You say it is bad development, and so we both have personal opinions. Neither will convince the other, and so we are left with my point. Actually, the events reflect that he has a clue. His portfolios mandate he has a clue. Just like the Orchish God of Stupidity is mandated to be an idiot and Oghma is mandated to be wise as well as knowledgable. YOU'D complain. You'd being the key word here. Others would like nothing more to see certain NPC's, or gods as stuttering idiots, all so that their golden character can "win". And it would still be bad writing as a matter of fact. Personal, and not mandatory. in your opinion. As a consumer, I have a right to criticize. Are you suggesting that a person can't fail and succeed, or garner success accidentally? Cyric might plan for something "ingenious" that is quite obvious to all those around him. If they don't take him seriously, he isn't stopped, and then BAM, he claims a victory. I'm not even going to dignify that with a response. The books have repeatedly brought home that Cyric is supposed to be a genius and a schemer, the problem is that they never show it. As one of the two creator goddesses I have to disagree. As a greater, many of her stats are lower than those of an intermediate Lolth. IMO, that is just pathetic. She is an ancient evil, will to wait millennium to see her goals reach fruition, and yet Bane is stated better in every possible way. Exactly, Shar should reflect the fact that she's not nearly as powerful as people think she is. By storyline, I think Shar is underpowered in stats. You evidently think otherwise. Why, I'm not sure as in this case, lore backs up what I am saying, but I am content to call my view personal opinion, and be done with it. I'd have no problem with Shar being statted as more powerful, however, the fact remains that Bane and Cyric are both gods. They are nearly as strong as Shar because they are BETTER than 999,999,999,999 people in the universe at Everything. Why? Because they're Gods. More importantly, they're extremely powerful AMONGST THE GODS. So, ultimately all we have done here, is shown you like Cyric, and think he should be better just because. Actually, I think you've conclusively proven you don't have an argument. You've abundantly stated that you don't believe Cyric should reflect his stats or that the writing should accurately portray the man who carries out the plans carried out in canon. Your personal opinions don't matter versus the facts. Which is, ironically, your main argument. You see mistakes, I do not Which is why you're breaking canon. and we are left where I hope to avoid in the future. However, civility remains here, so something can be salvaged and I think taken away to be reflected upon. :) -RW Civility? This is the internet friend. If we're not passionate then no one cares. :-) You make a point but your issue regarding Cyric is flat out contradictory for a large amount of stated out lore. The original Cyric wasn't even Chaotic Evil I point out.
Red_Wizard 11-14-07, 04:24 PM	Because his stats say that he is. And his written lore says he isn't. You want to look at one side of the canon material, I choose to see both. *Shrugs* Actually, the events reflect that he has a clue. His portfolios mandate he has a clue. Just like the Orchish God of Stupidity is mandated to be an idiot and Oghma is mandated to be wise as well as knowledgable. This really isn't an argument to what I was saying, but ok. I suggest that perhaps the portfolios govern, and influence, but do not enforce what it is they stand for. Being the god of knowledge therefore doesn't necessarily make you smart. You can tap that power if you choose, and gain access to it, but who is to say if Cyric has found out how to properly tap all his abilities. And it would still be bad writing as a matter of fact. Again, not the point I was making. What I was saying is that your personal opinion is influencing your perception of what is wrong with Cyric. Granted bad writing might play a major part as I have stated before, but I will also point out if Cyric was winning, even with bad writing, you would most likely be more inclined to ignore it, than let it annoy you. in your opinion. As a consumer, I have a right to criticize. Never said you didn't have the right. Just said that it won't be listened to, and will more likely than not annoy those around you, if your complaints are baseless. It's similar to the boy who cried wolf, only rather than telling the same lie again and again, your are calling for something to happen, while offering nothing as a reason for the change. I'm not even going to dignify that with a response. The books have repeatedly brought home that Cyric is supposed to be a genius and a schemer, the problem is that they never show it. You won't dignify a valid remark? Perhaps I should reconsider responding to you at all. Then again, that might lead to you believing you have won some small victory here, and as most know, I don't like losing ;). That said, I will point out that the novels showing him as a brilliant schemer have all been HIS opinion of himself. Never has another looked on in awe at his brilliance, and even when he wins, few take notice of his accomplishments. Exactly, Shar should reflect the fact that she's not nearly as powerful as people think she is. YOU feel that the characters should reflect their stats. Personally I think that the stats should better reflect the character. Larloch by his stats is far weaker than any story makes him out to be. Often I'll look at a stat block, after having encountered the character, and simply shake my head in disappointment and disgust. Bane is a prime example of this. By his stats, the entire pantheon should answer directly to him. I'd have no problem with Shar being statted as more powerful, however, the fact remains that Bane and Cyric are both gods. They are nearly as strong as Shar because they are BETTER than 999,999,999,999 people in the universe at Everything. I know they are both gods. And thus I judge them against other gods as they are portrayed. That said, their stories and their stats contradict themselves, and in such cases I, as I know many others, feel that story should always be favoured over stats. Why? The story spawns the character, not their mechanical writeup. Granted a stat block could spawn a story, but then you should see the story follow quite closely that which the stats have set out for it. But this is my personal opinion VS. yours. I am a roleplayer, and thus favour the roles/ the stories. You evidently are a lover of mechanics. That is fine, but you must acknowledge that that is your opinion. Ultimately it is irrelevant, as again I opt for personal opinion without backing to remain unheard. I don't have the patience to sit and back all of what I say up, so I am willing to concede it be left alone. ;) Why? Because they're Gods. More importantly, they're extremely powerful AMONGST THE GODS. By the stats absolutely. Look at the entire package though, not simply one aspect of it. Actually, I think you've conclusively proven you don't have an argument. You've abundantly stated that you don't believe Cyric should reflect his stats or that the writing should accurately portray the man who carries out the plans carried out in canon. I have said nothing of the sort. In fact I think Cyric should reflect his stats, but I also think he should be stated for the man he is portrayed as. The stats are not the man, and the man came first. The mechanics are for a game, and the character is a story. Otherwise he wouldn't be called Cyric, his name would be significantly longer, encompassing all the numbers in F&P. ;) Maybe you play DnD differently, but I adventure for the tale. The numbers and dice simply make the story possible and fair. Your personal opinions don't matter versus the facts. Which is, ironically, your main argument. I know they do not. But you are not stating facts, you are arguing opinion. The sooner you realize this, the better we will all be. Which is why you're breaking canon. Not at all, but if you think so, you're welcome to your opinion. I am in truth looking carefully at both sides for my answer, I just choose to favour that which makes the most sense for the lore. That in turn is backed up by the fact that the lore came before the numbers, and thus should trump in all matters. IMO ;) Civility? This is the internet friend. If we're not passionate then no one cares. :-) One can remain civil, while still being passionate. You make a point but your issue regarding Cyric is flat out contradictory for a large amount of stated out lore. The original Cyric wasn't even Chaotic Evil I point out. What he was as a mortal is irrelevant. He went from LE to CE by his stats. However his history speaks of an instability of the mind that stats cannot properly reflect. His delusions were only magnified in the creating of the Cyrinishad. So I assure you, i do not contradict, overlook, or omit any portion of the lore at any time. I simply see things in a different, and I daresay broader light. Personal opinion, and the world turns. ;) -RW
buzzard 11-14-07, 04:59 PM	Often I'll look at a stat block, after having encountered the character, and simply shake my head in disappointment and disgust. Bane is a prime example of this. By his stats, the entire pantheon should answer directly to him. Actually by stats the entire pantheon should answer directly either to Chauntea or Shar (especially Shar) Your probably ignoring Shar's 20 Outsider HD (which are not as visible as the class levels, look below the bolded class levels for the entire hd of every deity). Some examples: Bane: Fighter 15/Blackguard 10/Cleric 10/Wizard 10/Rogue 20 = 65 HD (no outsider hd since he's an ascended mortal) Mystra: Wizard 20/Loremaster 10/Archmage 5/Cleric 20 = 55 (had less time than Bane as a deity -and as a mortal too- so that means less experience) Chauntea: Druid 20/Cleric 20/Ranger 8/20 Outsider = 68 (very old deity, makes sense) Selūne: Wizard 20/Cleric 20/Bard 9/20 Outsider = 69 (one of the first two deities, she has a lot of experience) Shar: Rogue 10/Shadowdancer 10/Assassin 10/Sorcerer 9/Shadow Adept 10/Outsider 20 (as much as Selūne, which makes sense since both are the oldest deities). Now, why do I say that everyone should answer to Chauntea or Shar? Because class levels and hit dice are not everything in a deities arsenal, this is were divine rank and salient divine abilities come into play. Chauntea as the highest ranked deity in the entire pantheon is immune to everyone else's spells, big combat advantage, however Shar is much more optimized for combat with her SDA's. She's the highest ranked deity with supreme initiative (she goes always first in any battle in the entire forgotten realms setting) and she has the most powerful Mass Divine Blast (which can only be resisted with a Divine Shield), she can shoot 90 blasts that do 384 points of damage each for a total of 34560 points of damage (the deities with the highest hit points are in the 900/1200 range), the highest damage output in the entire FR setting, not even Chauntea's divine shield can help her survive Shar's onslaught. If you pit any deity against Shar, the Lady of Loss wins practically 100% of the time.
johnkretzer 11-14-07, 05:23 PM	she has the most powerful Mass Divine Blast (which can only be resisted with a Divine Shield), she can shoot 90 blasts that do 384 points of damage each for a total of 34560 points of damage (the deities with the highest hit points are in the 900/1200 range), the highest damage output in the entire FR setting,. You do realize mass effects can't repeat targets...I.E. each invidual creature can only be targeted once by this effect per use. It still follows the rules of mass effects...also I really don't care if it doesn't directly say this it just makes sense. It is obvious to anybody who read it this was the intent behind it. And if you insist that your interpertation is correct...thewn why haven't Shar destroyed everything yet?
Storm_Silverhand 11-14-07, 05:31 PM	Heya, Red Wizard, I really have to ask: What is the point of this thread? You're asking people why they don't like Cyric, and then are not accepting the reasons they give because they're "just opinion". People have irrational opinions and feelings all the time, it's part of what makes us all human. You really aren't going to get an answer, and your attitude is rubbing me up the wrong way (especially since I feel you're belittling people's personal opinions... but it's early and I had a late night, so grumpiness might be colouring my thoughts here). As for me, I never really hated Cyric. I hated him because I was supposed to hate him. Now, however, I hate him because he killed Mystra, and in doing so killed the Realms for me. Yes, it's a personal opinion, but it's also fact in my case.
buzzard 11-14-07, 05:38 PM	You do realize mass effects can't repeat targets...I.E. each invidual creature can only be targeted once by this effect per use. As you said so yourself, the text doesn't directly say this and the rules do so in other cases (the Firebrand spell for example, it explicitly states that 2 or more different flames launched by the spell can't damage the same target) It still follows the rules of mass effects...also I really don't care if it doesn't directly say this it just makes sense. It is obvious to anybody who read it this was the intent behind it. And I don't care that you don't care because your personal interpretation is not what matters but the text Let's analyze the text: This ability works like the Divine Blast ability, except that the deity can specify up to five targets per rank, no two of which can be more than one mile apart per rank, or an area. The area can be a cone, burst, spread, or cylinder. A cone can be up to 100 feet long per rank. A burst or spread can have a radius of up to 50 feet per rank. A cylinder can have a radius of up to 50 feet per rank and a height of up to 10 feet per rank. The deity chooses the attack’s exact form and dimensions. The text says up to five targets per rank but it never says that the same object is not subject to being targeted twice or more times, it only says that there a distance limit between targets. And like I said, Firebrand for example states that it can't damage twice the same target (it's not the case with Mass Divine Blast). It would work like the Twin Spell feat (only that it hits the same target more than twice) and Salient Divine Abilities are described as being more powerful even than epic feats, so I don't see why it couldn't hit more than once the same target especially when the text doesn't explicitly states so. And logic is also on my side (let's ignore the rules for now), the deity is able to create a beam that he/she targets as he/she likes, why couldn't he/she do it with multiple beams? what prohibits the deity to select the same target? A Mass Divine Blast is not like a spell with everything preprogrammed, the deity chooses the form of the attack unlike a spell. But let's suppose i'm wrong. It doesn't matter, because Shar can still summon 20 avatars and guess what, all of them have supreme initiative (the only thing faster than Shar's avatars is Cyric himself -and not his avatars- and he can't make enough damage to defeat Shar) and mass divine blast, it changes nothing for Shar, she still comes up on top. And if you insist that your interpertation is correct...thewn why haven't Shar destroyed everything yet? For the same reason that nor Mystra nor Chauntea destroy weaker evil deities than them, because it makes for very poor storytelling, and until the Spellplague a deity was supposed to be immune on his very own plane.
Charles Phipps 11-14-07, 05:43 PM	And his written lore says he isn't. You want to look at one side of the canon material, I choose to see both. *Shrugs* No, you're ignoring two thirds of the lore to focus on one. This really isn't an argument to what I was saying, but ok. Yes, it kinda is. Cyric is God of intrigue. He's a master of it. Being the god of knowledge therefore doesn't necessarily make you smart. I disagree. What I was saying is that your personal opinion is influencing your perception of what is wrong with Cyric. Opinions are made of the mind interacting with fact. You cannot think about anything without an opinion on it. Even unbiased factual data is formed by opinion unless in pure mathmatics. Cyric, FACTUALLY, badly reflects his stats. Granted bad writing might play a major part as I have stated before, but I will also point out if Cyric was winning, even with bad writing, you would most likely be more inclined to ignore it, than let it annoy you. What exactly are you saying here? Never said you didn't have the right. Just said that it won't be listened to, and will more likely than not annoy those around you, if your complaints are baseless. Your presentation that Cyric is perfect the way he is, despite the contradictions, is baseless but you're getting attention. It's similar to the boy who cried wolf, only rather than telling the same lie again and again, your are calling for something to happen, while offering nothing as a reason for the change. Are you actually reading my posts? I've given several reasons, including canon sources, why. Frankly, Red Wizard, your argument has been shredded and you're pretending that it hasn't been. You won't dignify a valid remark? Perhaps I should reconsider responding to you at all. At this point, RW you have shown no interest in actually discussing Cyric or responding to my points. While I'm sure there's a breakdown in communication, at this point, I'm not sure I want to continue since we seem to be talking at two ends. My point is that Cyric is a very poorly written God that isn't getting appropriate respect or attention or being realistically portrayed. This is backed up by non-negotiable facts about his character, stats, deeds and role in the pantheon. There's pretty much no argument you can forward against this. That said, I will point out that the novels showing him as a brilliant schemer have all been HIS opinion of himself. There's been five books about him. Avatar had him as a brilliant schemer and most of his plots that were done while sane were quite successful. YOU feel that the characters should reflect their stats. Is that even an argument? That's like saying "I feel people should not be able to fly under their own power according to physics." Why? The story spawns the character, not their mechanical writeup. Except, this is D&D and Cyric was spawned as a mechanical write-up that had a story attached to him. A way of simplying the Gods of evil as part of 2E's changes. But this is my personal opinion VS. yours. I am a roleplayer, and thus favour the roles/ the stories. You evidently are a lover of mechanics. At this point, you've argued that Cyric should be a dumbass irregardless of storytelling opportunities destroyed by such. So I'm not sure what you exactly think is being supported by this. That is fine, but you must acknowledge that that is your opinion. Ultimately it is irrelevant, as again I opt for personal opinion without backing to remain unheard. Do you have any facts to justify your argument or are you going to simply forward your groundless claims about Cyric without any mechanical backing or roleplaying points. At this point, all I can get from your argument is "I think dumbass Cyric is cool" AND THAT'S YOUR OPINION. That in turn is backed up by the fact that the lore came before the numbers, and thus should trump in all matters. Except, for the fact you're wrong. Furthermore, Cyric's status as a Dumbass was only in one book before being completely cured.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-14-07, 07:32 PM	Heya, Red Wizard, I really have to ask: What is the point of this thread? You're asking people why they don't like Cyric, and then are not accepting the reasons they give because they're "just opinion". People have irrational opinions and feelings all the time, it's part of what makes us all human. You really aren't going to get an answer, and your attitude is rubbing me up the wrong way (especially since I feel you're belittling people's personal opinions... but it's early and I had a late night, so grumpiness might be colouring my thoughts here). I agree...I like you, RW, but I don't like the way this thread turned out.
Charles Phipps 11-14-07, 07:43 PM	Yeah, I agree. I made my own. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14334924#post14334924
Vasyek 11-14-07, 07:45 PM	And his written lore says he isn't. You want to look at one side of the canon material, I choose to see both. *Shrugs* His written lore says that he is flawed, it does not portray him as clueless by any means short of selective emphasis. Particularly from 1369 on, given the lessons he supposedly learned from the Cyrinishad debacle. I suggest that perhaps the portfolios govern, and influence, but do not enforce what it is they stand for. Being the god of knowledge therefore doesn't necessarily make you smart. It certainly makes you incredibly knowledgable, however. By the same token, however smart Cyric is or isn't, he should essentially grasp the ins and outs of most if not every trick in the book as far as cons and conspiracies go. You can tap that power if you choose, and gain access to it, but who is to say if Cyric has found out how to properly tap all his abilities. For Mystra's death to make any sense, he'd have to have managed to properly tap into the Intrigue/Deception aspects of his portfolio. Shar having and being able to pick up all the slack on the scheming/concealment end of things in their kill Mystra project would be fairly resounding as support for the Mary Sue allegations that we see being leveled against her lately. She's damn good, I've no doubt, but keeping an impending threat to Mystra's life and the stability, or rather continued existence, of the Weave off her/her allies' radar while keeping her pet clueless madman in line/cleaning up any of his messes that would tip Mystra off is taking it a bit far. A plot between the goddess of secrets and the god of murder/illusion/intrigue taking their victim and by extension the pantheon by surprise sounds fairly believable, at least to me, but only operating under the assumption that both parties are able to meaningfully contribute to the effort of keeping their scheme hidden. It's similar to the boy who cried wolf, only rather than telling the same lie again and again, your are calling for something to happen, while offering nothing as a reason for the change. By way of reasons, there are the storylines a Cyric-the-loopy-dunce paradigm chokes off as Phipps has mentioned, and there is the matter of suspending disbelief. You appeal to the precedent of thriving incompetents in other areas/times/etc., but there are a slew of problems raised in applying it to gods and for decades (possibly even a century) on end. The most glaring of them is that it essentially drags all the other gods down to his level if after all that's happened and all he's done, they remain incapable of considering him as a threat. Seriously, offing Leira should've been at least a fair hint that he can make the wrong sort of waves, and if that didn't stick, then there's Mystra's near defeat in Pandemonium after his ability to wield magic had been sealed off, which a fair number of other gods were likely aware of as or after it occurred, what the Cyrinishad reduced Mask to, his dim the stars of Ao trick, driving the patron of Mystra's church mad, as well as getting him to renounce his goddess/kill himself, and destroying the love between Mystra and Kelemvor to make them leery as well. Guess it's a good thing source doesn't agree with you that other gods write Cyric off as a mere joke. That said, I will point out that the novels showing him as a brilliant schemer have all been HIS opinion of himself. There is, however, the question of whether any of the scheming in either Prince of Lies or Crucible could be described as brilliant. Relative to the machinations of others within those novels, he was holding his own even in the midst of defeat: he convinced Gond to supplement his lack of magic for a time, he managed to dupe the Leirans en masse into believing that a suspect as unlikely as Kelemvor was responsible for the death of their goddess, he not only saw through Mask's attempt to implicate Mystra in the temporary resealing of Kezef but deduced the actual suspect with ease, he was fully aware of the True Life counter-project in spite of Mystra/Oghma/Mask's greatest efforts to conceal it, there's the matter of the various mortals he goads to heresy and self-destruction (a practice of his that is implied to be both habitual and largely successful in both Prince of Lies and deity sourcebooks), the implicit accomplishment of not only surviving his greatest missteps for as long as he has in spite of the many brilliant and ruthless entities that are around to exploit them but weathering their fallout with minimal loss in power, and his exploitation of Mystra and Kelemvor's idealism, both in the sense of placing them on trial as well and in the sense of using its consequences to ultimately further his aims even in the depths of his madness. Never has another looked on in awe at his brilliance, Never has another god looked on in awe at the brilliance of Shar, Mask, or Oghma either insofar as I'm aware. Others have, however, been quite wary and even fearful of them and what they might devise at various points in time and the same applies to Cyric. and even when he wins, few take notice of his accomplishments. Mask sure as hell has. The Circle of the Twelve had no choice but to do the same at the beginning of the trial and again near the end when they almost launched into an all-out godswar for fear of being enslaved by the Cyrinishad. Talos, Shar, and Loviatar considered him formidable enough even in his madness to be worth currying his favor by way of contributing soldiers from their ranks to the (ill-fated) assault on Candlekeep. And outside of the pantheon, there's the twenty thousand or so mortals that have taken notice of his accomplishments and deemed them a sound basis for converting to his worship, as well as the countless others who simply fear and despise him on the basis of his accomplishments.
ORC_Wyvern 11-14-07, 08:12 PM	A gentle reminder, dear members, Debate opinions/issues, not people. Also, unless they violate the CoC, people are permitted to post in these forums any opinion that they like, whether or not other people find those opinions "logical" or "reasonable", which actually can be very subjective terms. Keep it nice and easy. Thanks, WizO Ginger
Red_Wizard 11-14-07, 09:02 PM	Heya, Red Wizard, I really have to ask: What is the point of this thread? You're asking people why they don't like Cyric, and then are not accepting the reasons they give because they're "just opinion". People have irrational opinions and feelings all the time, it's part of what makes us all human. You really aren't going to get an answer, and your attitude is rubbing me up the wrong way (especially since I feel you're belittling people's personal opinions... but it's early and I had a late night, so grumpiness might be colouring my thoughts here). As for me, I never really hated Cyric. I hated him because I was supposed to hate him. Now, however, I hate him because he killed Mystra, and in doing so killed the Realms for me. Yes, it's a personal opinion, but it's also fact in my case. Well to be honest I had hoped that the point was quite clear here, but evidently it is not. Needless to say I got the answer I was looking for, and it is the one that was expected. To clarify a final time, what I was looking for was valid reason for the complaints. I picked Cyric as the focus, but evidently should have left it broad. My hope was that people would see the -- for lack of a better word-- foolishness that stems from arguing with personal opinion, over basing your argument logically in the lore. I Wasn't looking to challenge people, I wasn't looking to discuss lore, I wasn't looking to change minds. I simply hoped that shedding light on the inherent problem here, would help make the community friendlier. I erred, though I can't say i'm sorry I tried. Hopefully some will take away from this, and in the future when "I hate ______" shows up, there will be a blurb accompanying it from a source to back up the idea. Truthfully I highly doubt that, but I can pretend none-the-less. In any regards, I shall wander along to new and more interesting things I suppose. Sorry storm if you took this the wrong way, and to you Rino, as it wasn't meant as anything more than a abit of light. -RW
GreenKnight 11-14-07, 11:13 PM	Um...you fail to see my point Cyric is the poster child for bad players. In my old gaming group, one of the players was an unapologetic infighter. He'd constantly try to gank other players in the middle of a game, or steal from them, or generally prove to be disruptive. He'd constantly try to screw over other players, even at the expense of the game. It should come as no surprise that he absolutely loved Cyric. Anyway, my reasons for not liking Cyric are as follows: 1) They killed off three perfectly good evil gods (Bane, Myrkul, and Bhaal), and replaced them with just one guy. And then they killed off Leira, to boot. For most of 2nd edition, it felt as if Cyric was the only evil god. Yeah, you also had two other evil Greater Gods in Shar and Talos, but they were barely noticeable. Not to mention that there was no longer a LE Greater God in the Realms. Just two NE ones and a CE one (And then two CE ones and a NE one). Thankfully with 3E they brought back Bane and they've been pushing Shar. It's been nice having a bit more variety as far as evil Greater Gods goes. I still want Myrkul back, though. 2) I had more reasons, but I've lost interest in listing them all. I'm fine with Cyric existing in the Realms, but what I don't like is A) Cyric being cast as The Ultimate Evil, and B) Cyric killing Mystra. That's an absolute detestable turn of events. Beyond that, if I had my way, I'd do the following: - I'd keep Cyric as a Greater God with the Portfolios of Srife, Lies, Intrigue, Deception, and Illusion - Bhaal would be resurrected as a LE Lesser God and servant of Bane, stealing the Portfolio of Murder away from Cyric - Myrkul would be resurrected as a NE Greater God, with the Portfolios of Wasting, Decay, Corruption, Parasites, Old Age, Dusk, and Exhaustion. He'd also reclaim the Portfolio of Fall from Mielikki, and possibly also lay claim to the Portfolios of Necromancy, and the Undead (And he may not have to kill Velsharoon to do it. I may be misremembering it, but I believe that two gods within a single pantheon can share the same Portfolios so long as one of them is a Demipower. And Velsharoon is a Demipower. So Myrkul could potentially claim those Portfolios without actually having to lay a finger on Velsharoon). Another possibility is for Myrkul to not claim those Portfolios, but rather to press Velsharoon into his service, elevating him to a Lesser God. Essentially making him the counterpart to the likes of Bhaal and Torm. That'd certainly be a better solution then overburdening Myrkul with a plethora of Portfolios. And Velsharoon's NE, too, so I'm liking that idea more and more. So long as Cyric isn't the end-all and be-all of evil gods, I'm happy.
Mirtek 11-16-07, 04:38 PM	Also what do you mean they have failed? That they have simply failed in 90% of all the times they ever attempted to do anything. Bane owns the Moonsea area right now...and is starting on the Lake of Steam. He has also kept Elminster and Storm in a defensive position in shadowdale for how long? Of course, that's ignoring the "deus ex machina" of having Bane returning as a greater power when he should (at best) have been an intermediate power and that all this should have been completly impossible for Fzoul and the Zhentarim unless he actually discovered the decanter of endless soldiers because otherwise there is simply no way the Zhents could field all these armies after all their loses and a recent rage of dragons. What else did Bane do? Tried to steal magic several times -> failed every time (unlike Cyric who got his foot in the door by claiming the mantle of illusions). Tried to steal war -> failed Tried to steal some cities -> failed (and he behaved like a spoiled 3-year old in the novels) Myrkul...just point to the rather large list of liches and other intelligent undead around the world. Which actually shows that Myrkul did a really bad job. Kelemvor is currently cleaning up the mess. Bhaal...how many murders were his worshippers responsible for? Also without the intervention of Chauntea he would be owning the Moonsheas... Yet Bhaal failed at the moonshaes (couldn't even keep a demigoddess dead). Failed so badly that he suffered wounds that he could never recover from. Bhaal was misserable and dying even before the ToT, some other evil power (most likely Mask) would have slain him eventually even if the ToT had never happened. Cyric: Murdererd Leira Created the Cyrinishad Claimed portfolios from Mask Caused strife that destroyed the lover of two greater powers (Spurned Helm and Tyr into a deadly duell) (Murdered Mystra) Anytime one of Cyric's plans failed it was because he was opposed by several fellow deities (even after reading his Cyrinishad his real plan with Zhentil Keep would have worked if not for two GGs and a LG working against him, although reading the book would still not have been a good move) This man should be the most subtle and brilliant schemer in the plains. Note that Cyric (IIRC) also has the highest Int score :)
johnkretzer 11-16-07, 05:14 PM	That they have simply failed in 90% of all the times they ever attempted to do anything. Of course, that's ignoring the "deus ex machina" of having Bane returning as a greater power when he should (at best) have been an intermediate power and that all this should have been completly impossible for Fzoul and the Zhentarim unless he actually discovered the decanter of endless soldiers because otherwise there is simply no way the Zhents could field all these armies after all their loses and a recent rage of dragons. I disagree that he shouldn't be a greater power as I think Tyranny does have a greater following... I do agree with you that their armies are stretch pretty thin...though I thought some cities just recognized their rule without armed forces...which is why I thought the events in the Shadowdale(the second one) were unbelievable. What else did Bane do? Tried to steal magic several times -> failed every time (unlike Cyric who got his foot in the door by claiming the mantle of illusions). Tried to steal war -> failed Tried to steal some cities -> failed (and he behaved like a spoiled 3-year old in the novels) Um we really don't know the events surrounding these actions...so we don't know how he failed. Which actually shows that Myrkul did a really bad job. Kelemvor is currently cleaning up the mess. Considering that Myrkul is a evil god of the dead and the Kelemvor isn't I would think they would have very different goals and different criteria for success. Personaly I like Kelemvor as the god of dead better...but that doesn't mean Mrykul was a unsuccessful evil god. Yet Bhaal failed at the moonshaes (couldn't even keep a demigoddess dead). Failed so badly that he suffered wounds that he could never recover from. Bhaal was misserable and dying even before the ToT, some other evil power (most likely Mask) would have slain him eventually even if the ToT had never happened. Yeah I would agree that Bhaal isn't the most successful god ever...though which demigoddess are you talking about? Cyric: Murdererd Leira Created the Cyrinishad Claimed portfolios from Mask Caused strife that destroyed the lover of two greater powers (Spurned Helm and Tyr into a deadly duell) (Murdered Mystra) The problem with these success is that they were to me atleast pretty much author fiat. I just don't like them. Or things like the Cyrinishad was not really what I would call a rousing success...and when he fails he also acts like a three year old... Note that Cyric (IIRC) also has the highest Int score :) Cyric as a Int of 40. Azuth(Int:50), Gond(Int:40), Lolth(Int:41), Mystra(Int:45), Oghma(Int:40), Waukeen(Int:40), Denier(no official stats but I think it is reasonable to assume that the god of knowledge should have pretty high int is reasonable assumption) and other gods who we don't have the stats for. Also with a Wisdom of 24 he is one of the lowest gods in wisdom.
GreenKnight 11-17-07, 02:13 AM	What else did Bane do? Tried to steal magic several times -> failed every time (unlike Cyric who got his foot in the door by claiming the mantle of illusions). Tried to steal war -> failed Tried to steal some cities -> failed (and he behaved like a spoiled 3-year old in the novels) Cyric: Murdererd Leira Created the Cyrinishad Claimed portfolios from Mask Caused strife that destroyed the lover of two greater powers (Spurned Helm and Tyr into a deadly duell) (Murdered Mystra) You realize that the same kind of list you did with Bane can be applied to Cyric, right? Hell, let's look at your list of Cyric's accomplishments. Cyric: Murdererd Leira He did this with the help of Mask. Mask, who later managed to trick Cyric and burn him pretty bad. Mask, an Intermediate God, managed to pull the wool over Cyric's eyes pretty good. Created the Cyrinishad And he was dumb enough to read it, making him insane. Not my definition of a triumph, as his resulting insanity resulted in him getting put on trial and nearly getting annihilated by the other gods. Claimed portfolios from Mask Only because Mask had to burn off some of his godly power in order to shed the effects of the Cyrinishad. And in return for the Portfolio of Intrigue, Cyric lost the Portfolios of Death and the Dead and got booted out of the Fugue Plane, and gained a powerful new enemy in the form of Kelemvor. I'd call that a net loss. Caused strife that destroyed the lover of two greater powers He broke up Mystra and Kelemvor. Whoop de doo. He also succeeded in destroying his greater center of worship in the Realms, Zhentil Keep, losing all those worshippers. That event likely also directly led to the rebirth of Bane, as many of his surviving worshippers there converted to the worship of Iyachtu Xvim. So now he's got ANOTHER powerful enemy, and what used to be an asset in his camp is now a threat to his power on Faerun. But hey, so long as Kelemvor's no longer boning Mystra... (Spurned Helm and Tyr into a deadly duell) I call this and Mystra's murder a net loss, too. He certainly didn't get away with it, as he's been imprisoned for 1,000 years. (Murdered Mystra) With the help of Shar. First Mask helps him with Bhaal and Leira, and now Shar with Mystra. Has Cyric ever managed to kill another god on his own? And with his luck, odds are good that Shar will end up screwing him over the way Mask did. Cyric's history is replete with instance where he moves two steps forward and five steps back. And yeah, Cyric behaved like a spoiled 3-year-old in the novels, too. At least Bane never hurled childish insults at other gods, like calling Tempus 'Slowhammer'.
Mirtek 11-17-07, 06:59 AM	I disagree that he shouldn't be a greater power as I think Tyranny does have a greater following... Not really. Also in this case Xvim should have been a greater power. I do agree with you that their armies are stretch pretty thin... The main problem is that there armies got slaughtered by the thousands. And not only recently, but they suffered these shocking loses for decase after decade. There simply could not be so many recurits left to spit out army after army. Um we really don't know the events surrounding these actions...so we don't know how he failed. That's true, but the point is that he failed. Bane may have been a very, very impressive mortal, but since his divine ascension his record only consists of failure after failure. Considering that Myrkul is a evil god of the dead and the Kelemvor isn't I would think they would have very different goals and different criteria for success. Personaly I like Kelemvor as the god of dead better...but that doesn't mean Mrykul was a unsuccessful evil god. Well, maybe not unsuccessful but also not grand. He just did the business as usual and never did anything extraordinary during his reign. So yes, he wasn't bad and making sure everything runs smoothly is fullfilling your job, but he did never try to excell beyond and above his call of duty. Yeah I would agree that Bhaal isn't the most successful god ever...though which demigoddess are you talking about? The Earthmother. During the first Moonshae triology she wasn't merely an aspect of Chauntea but an independent demigoddess in her own right. She was murdered by Bhaal but he did such a bad job that she managed to ressurrect herself. The problem with these success is that they were to me atleast pretty much author fiat. In the end anything is author fiat. Cyric's success and failure, Bane's success and failure, Mask's success and failure -> everything is author fiat. If Paul had written Erevis and Riven as Cyricist then the boards would be crawling with Cyric fans just now. He made them Maskarians and thus Mask is enjoying the popularity boost instead. All depends on the author. I just don't like them. Or things like the Cyrinishad was not really what I would call a rousing success...and when he fails he also acts like a three year old... Well, the Cyrinishad worked perfectly, worked even better than thought possible. However yes, it was stupid to read it himself. Even if he couldn't know what would happen if he himself reads the book, the risk was just to high and completly unnecessary to take. His plan would have still worked (if not for the interferences of two GGs and one LG - as opposed to Mask who fell from intermediate to lesser power because of his own stupid plan without anyone interfering just because his whole plan was flawed from the start) but even after all would have worked as planed, the madness would have been a thron in his side. Cyric as a Int of 40. Azuth(Int:50), Gond(Int:40), Lolth(Int:41), Mystra(Int:45), Oghma(Int:40), Waukeen(Int:40), Denier(no official stats but I think it is reasonable to assume that the god of knowledge should have pretty high int is reasonable assumption) and other gods who we don't have the stats for. My bad. Anyway, he has higher Int than Shar, Bane and Mask. Also with a Wisdom of 24 he is one of the lowest gods in wisdom. Good point. You realize that the same kind of list you did with Bane can be applied to Cyric, right? You realize that there is the huge difference that Cyric did actually succeed? Whether with or without help, Cyric won quite a few victories to go along with his loses. Bane however has only failures in any of his grand plans since his divine ascension. He did this with the help of Mask. Mask, who later managed to trick Cyric and burn him pretty bad. Mask, an Intermediate God, managed to pull the wool over Cyric's eyes pretty good. Which makes Leira none the less dead and floating through the Astral Plane. Also Mask first and foremost burned himself. Oh, he managed to lure a single priest aways from Cyric, a priest that did never like Cyric to begin with and Cyric kept more as a form of personal amusement. Mask made himself fall from intermediate to lesser power before anyone even started to act against him, just because of the enormous error in his own plan. After Cyric got angry at him Cyric made him fall from lesser to demipower and from this point all Mask could do was to run for his life. And he was dumb enough to read it, making him insane. Not my definition of a triumph, as his resulting insanity resulted in him getting put on trial and nearly getting annihilated by the other gods. The point is that he did successfully create it and it worked even better than intended. I admit that reading it was a stupid idea, but even that would not have thwarted his plan if not for a coalition of deities working against him. Also the trial was a masterpiece of Cyric, as he nearly made it errupt in an all out pantheon war and even forcing Tyr and Torm to fight by his side (other powers of strife should watch, take notes and learn). At least Bane never hurled childish insults at other gods, like calling Tempus 'Slowhammer'. You haven't read the Pools of [...] novels, have you? Bane not only behaves worse than Cyric ever did but it's made all the worse by how Tyr is portrayed as the smiling wise guy who watches the blubbering child and get's him to do what he wants the child to do without the child ever realizing what happened. Only because Mask had to burn off some of his godly power in order to shed the effects of the Cyrinishad. And in return for the Portfolio of Intrigue, Cyric lost the Portfolios of Death and the Dead and got booted out of the Fugue Plane, and gained a powerful new enemy in the form of Kelemvor. I'd call that a net loss. You should check your bookkeeping. He lost a responsibility that required him to waste a lot of time he could otherwise spend plotting how to advance his other portfolios and also got a new one that helps him to plot how to advance his other portfolios even better. Poor Mask merely lost two stratas of divine power and got absolutely nothing. He broke up Mystra and Kelemvor. Whoop de doo.[/quote9 You know, this is his job as a power of lies, intrigue and strife. Well, maybe Mask was content to sow strife between some little children so that one stole the lollipop of the other. But Cyric rather spread strife between two greater powers. [quote=GreenKnight;14356640]He also succeeded in destroying his greater center of worship in the Realms, Zhentil Keep, losing all those worshippers. However that was never his intend. That was the result of two GGs and a LG actively working against him, if Cyric would have been able to follow through with his plane not a single brick in the Keep's walls would have been damaged. Anyway, Cyric is still as strong as ever, as opposed to the failures of Bane and Bhaal which left the first dead and the second in a state of a slow misserbale death that was mercifully ended by the ToT (or would have been mercifully ended by some other evil power even if there had never been a ToT) ]I call this Call it whatever you want. More impressive and elaborate than anything annother power of lies, strife, intrigue and murder has ever accomplished on Toril. He certainly didn't get away with it, as he's been imprisoned for 1,000 years. So the power of murder murdered two deities and got house arrest? Cyric is most likely still lying on the floor laughing. Has Cyric ever managed to kill another god on his own? At least he is a deity of murder who has actually killed annother deities during his reign.
selunatic2397 11-17-07, 11:40 AM	House Arrest??? You do realize that with one of the devs saying that there are lots of cyric stories left that he'd love to write that his "House Arrest" is a total joke and won't even last past the first chapter of the 4ED Realms sourcebooks???
Stigger 11-17-07, 12:17 PM	One of the devs said that? Missed that somewhere... not that I'm surprised in the slightest by it mind you...
Toedoe 11-17-07, 01:06 PM	One of the devs said that? Missed that somewhere... not that I'm surprised in the slightest by it mind you... A quote from Rich on the ask a authors/designers thread 10/05/07 1. It's an appropriate (if grim) finish to the story of Cyric's betrayal begun in the Time of Troubles series. Time to move on and tell new stories about Cyric. [Quote snipped for length] and here http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?whichpage=18&TOPIC_ID=1896&#199979 on 10-Nov-07 he said Originally posted by RichardBaker [br]I don't really know yet, to be honest. The Grand History blurb is about as much as I know for sure. I think Chris Sims is writing the deity material for the 4e Campaign Guide, and he'll be taking the first crack at those details. Off the top of my head, I think it's a light house arrest, and Cyric can keep up on things pretty well through his intermediaries (proxies, dark angels, whatever). But I'm waiting to see what Chris comes up with.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-17-07, 09:29 PM	By the way, has it been confirmed for a fact that Cyric caused the duel between Tyr and Helm? I know it's likely, and that Cyric has been suspected of causing that problem, but until we know for sure, how can we give Cyric credit for that?
johnkretzer 11-17-07, 09:31 PM	By the way, has it been confirmed for a fact that Cyric caused the duel between Tyr and Helm? I know it's likely, and that Cyric has been suspected of causing that problem, but until we know for sure, how can we give Cyric credit for that? Yeah it makes much more sense if it was Beshaba.
Sir_Shadow 11-19-07, 10:34 PM	I don't like Cyric and most of the evil gods for that matter (that have been in novels) because you look at how they're written in the FR Campaign Book, and its nothing like how they are portrayed (to me) in the novels. Most of the Authors seem to go the way Salvatore does (IE I don't really care about canon and continuity I'm going to write it my way just like the other 50 guys did) Look at the Evil Overlord list (funny stuff) and thats Cyric as written in the books. He's a Bond villian. He's the guy that wants to rule the world and his plan to do it is building a giant magnet to make the moon crash into the earth. As its been mentioned already, he just needs to put on a blue helmet and face mask and he's Cobra commander. He's Skeletor. A huy who's built up as being the greatest danger to wthe world yet you look at what he actually does and it doesnt match. He should be one way, but instead e're shown him doing the literary equivilent of going to Waterdeep and taking a lollipop from a baby then kicking a puppy. He's to comical to be taken seriously.
Stigger 11-20-07, 08:11 AM	Hmmm... thanks Toedoe. Knew that already, but missed the new stories bit in there somewhere. Feh, typical.
AlphaShard 11-20-07, 10:53 AM	I think my problem with Cyric is his loss of humanity, it died when he became a God. Through the Avatar series he becomes less and less "human" and more just a pscyhotic radom force of nature. To me he is no longer interesting to read about because he as previously mentioned has no where left to go. I read the part about more stories for him and I felt like "What stories?" He honestly reminds me of the kind of characters that want to destroy the whole world just because they can. I found Cyric interesting back when I thought he had a thing for Mystra, now he's killed her what else is there for him to do? There is just nothing left for me to empathize with him on and feel sympathic for. He's like a rabid dog that needs to be put down.