Page 142 of the GHotR states that Elminster met with Ed in 1357 DR.
There is NO WAY IN HELL he's still alive in 1479!
Maybe time works differently in the Forgotten Realms. ;)
And by the by, shouldn't that read "...wholly evil or shiningly good."
Good. I hated the whole bit about Elminster traveling to Earth to meet "Ed of the Greenwood." It was such a horrible breach of the fourth wall.
Wow. You must have disliked a whole lot of Dragon Magazines then.
Breaching the 4th wall, by the by, hasn't really been an issue for most artists for quite some time. From a personal perspective, I think it can be overdone, but it's hardly some kind of law...
Edit: Pardon me, now that it immediately crosses my mind, I thought I should point it out: What do you suppose Shakespeare's soliloquies were, other than "breaching the 4th wall"?
The plan was to advance the timeline one year for every 2½ years of real-time, but they NEVER stuck to that. So unless the Spellplague also de-syned the planer timelines, Toril no longer lines-up with ANY of the other official settings.
No big, really, since Dragonlance did that like five times over.
The funny thing is that Elminster had a portal to Yellowstone in 1890 AD, so that portal should lead to our Earth around 1997 now, which isn't too far off, and he can visit Ed then (and warn TSR NOT to sell-out to WotC!!!!) :D
EDIT: Let's also get as many people as possible to report this thread so it can be locked and hopefully deleted.
Why?! Is 'censorship' now the norm around here?
A fact is a FACT - Ed would have to be dead with the Realms in 1470, so he can no longer have discussions with Elminster. Why do you find that offensive? If the fact is mentioned in a game source (the GHotR), then it should be an acceptable topic for discussion here.
Nearly ALL the old NPCs are dead, and 'game' Ed was indeed an FR NPC.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
For reference, when needing to make a complaint against a moderator, please use the customer service link.
Customer Service Knowledge Base for all questions. http://wizards.custhelp.com
Good. I hated the whole bit about Elminster traveling to Earth to meet "Ed of the Greenwood." It was such a horrible breach of the fourth wall.
-Agreed. As I have said before, not only is it a break of the fourth wall, but it is one that, in keeping with the hokey idea that Ed Greenwood and Elminster regularly meet, should have dire consequences on Faerûn. When the book was published, the official date was 1,375 DR. AGHotR contained information up to 1,375 DR, and then proceeded to pass it by another ten years, ending in 1,385 DR, and the Spellplague. In 2007, when the book was released (when it was 1,375 DR in Faerûn), had Ed Greenwood and Elminster met up with each other, Ed Greenwood could have given Elminster a copy of the book, giving him access to events that WOULD happen in Faerûn over the course of the next ten years (including the Spellplague, something that was supposed to have come out of left field) that he certainly could have (and, being who he is, would have) done what he could to alter them.
Edit: Pardon me, now that it immediately crosses my mind, I thought I should point it out: What do you suppose Shakespeare's soliloquies were, other than "breaching the 4th wall"?
-In some of them (like Hamlet's most famous, for example), he was simply saying what was on his mind. The audience might have been listening, but he was still talking to himself about life and death, and not the audience.
I just happened to think of this earlier today (morbid as it may be), and I thought I'd share.
The REAL Ed Greenwood is alive and well, but the fact is that the D&D game-version of him - which made an appearance talking to Volo in a Cormyrian tavern - no longer exists in the currently supported edition.
Thats all I'm saying.
Either way I'd never have actually used him as an NPC, but then again, I wouldn't use Elminster either. ;)
Just imagine yourself playing a game of D&D, and the DM suddenly inserts himself into the game as an NPC to give / receive advice from an important NPC in the campaign (perhaps even the villain). The DM also as his fictional NPC self has all the meta knowledge that a person existing within the fictional world would NEVER have otherwise.
It's almost like the "grandfather paradox" equivalent when dealing with time travel. You travel back in time and kill your grandfather, what then happens to you since you should not exist as a result of the event that you created? It is more or less the same thing.
If this were to happen, the only result I could imagine would be the destruction of the Realms space-time continuum and the entire multiverse imploding somewhat like a black hole. When dealing with the Earth like cultures, I just pretend that they came from a fictional alternate Earth.
Frankly, I ignore this bit of lore and it does not exist to me. It just does not exist. I suppose it should be called the Greenwood paradox.
It's like the old Forgotten Realms comics, where they did an expose on the office where they manage the Realms, including designers, gods, powerful mages, computers... That issue didn't just break the fourth wall, it shattered it with dynamite. But that series was gloriously mental anyway. :D
Or, perhaps the bigger problem, if Elminster can do it other more powerful wizards can do it as well. Why can't Larloch travel to our world if Elminster can do it? Why couldn't Elminster's enemies travel to our world, learn what is going to take place in their own, travel back and use it against Elminster? What happens if both Elminster -and- his enemies have pre-knowledge of events about to take place when neither should logically have it?
Sure, it's just a hokey joke. But it's part of canon for better or for worse. It's not like there was a disclaimer involved or anything. It's in the Grand History of the Realms.
It's in the Grand History of the Realms.
-It was "revalidated" in that book (for the first time in the otherwise narrator-less 3e books), which was a shame.
Or, perhaps the bigger problem, if Elminster can do it other more powerful wizards can do it as well. Why can't Larloch travel to our world if Elminster can do it? Why couldn't Elminster's enemies travel to our world, learn what is going to take place in their own, travel back and use it against Elminster? What happens if both Elminster -and- his enemies have pre-knowledge of events about to take place when neither should logically have it?
-Such are the problems with time/space travel, and temporal/spatial anomalies.
;). Now we have to get ready for some DM's to become involved in their "settings" ( I.E Cool World style)Sheesh
;)Oh, and I'm also going to be present for the death of Mystra. I'm going to steal Azuth's staff, and right before Mystra dies, I'm going to yell, "SPOILER ALERT! YOU DIE!" *whack*
:P
So, yeah. That's what I think of the Greenwood Paradox. ;)
Heh, I'm going to travel into the Realm's and equip the Zhents with AK-47's and pass along advanced knowledge of biology so that they can exploit it magically through transmutation to create biological weapons.
-My misreading something led to an even better idea: Equip them with HK-47s...
Oh, and I'm also going to be present for the death of Mystra. I'm going to steal Azuth's staff, and right before Mystra dies, I'm going to yell, "SPOILER ALERT! YOU DIE!" *whack*
:P
So, yeah. That's what I think of the Greenwood Paradox. ;)
-I like the label "The Greenwood Paradox". I shall forever refer to the Forgotten Realms' version of the phenomenon as such.
"Nothing here, just a master and his droid, not planning anything evil, move along."
"Advisement: Evisceration works well. Electrocution and blunt trauma also work well, I understand."
"Explanation: 'Love' is making a shot to a targets knees at 120 kilometers with an aratech sniper rifle with a tri-light scope..."
"Statement: This definition, I am told, is subject to interpretation. Obviously, love is a matter of odds. Not many meatbags could make such a shot, and fewer would derive love from it. Yet for me, love is knowing your target, putting them in your targeting reticle, and together, achieving a singular purpose, against statistically long odds."
"Query: Would you rather be caught with contraband that is *very* illegal or just a little illegal?"
"What's the difference?"
"Answer: About 20 years, master."
"Commentary: It is not possible to destroy the master. It is suggested you run while my blasters warm up, meatbags."
Just thinking about HK-47 is making me want to replay KOTOR 1 & 2 again. :P
Thinking about HK-47 as a sidekick to Fzoul is beyond hilarious.
As to the Greenwood Paradox, yes, I thought it was rather appropriate.
Remember, don't be a hater, be a participator. And no, giving Zhents AK's or HK's doesn't count. ;)
:D
Besides, I think my snide comment about whacking Mystra while shouting "Spoiler Alert" is rather humorous. I am not sure how many walls that breaches. :P
But anyway, my problem with it is more or less the way it is done. I have seen the 4th and 5th Wall breached many times in TV Shows and Movies. The problem I have here is that it is done badly.
I mean, had Elminster had a dialog line in a book that made an off hand comment saying something like, 'Next thing you know, they'd mistaken me for some librarian in a backwater village with some type of generic name like Ed of the Green Wood.' That is a breach done well. Or if you wanted to press it, in a scene in a book Elminster could go in disguise as "El of the Green Wood."
Something along those lines. It's some what campy, somewhat joking, but it doesn't break immersion from the story, lore or setting. It's like if I was playing a D&D game with Ed, and I was DMing and had one of my NPC's say something like, "It could be worse, I could be a librarian." Obviously a joke directed at Ed the player, but used in the context of the setting, the conversation, and such.
So I am not AGAINST breaking the 4th / 5th Wall. I am against doing it badly. ;) (And when you do it badly, it is always horrible and noticeable and ruins the suspension of disbelief.)
And hey, I'm not going to judge you for being a hater. Well, maybe a little, you evil little 3e hater you... :evillaugh
:D
Anyway, you're making a whole pile of assumptions about how time works that aren't warranted: it seems pretty clear that (local) time moves at different rates in different parts of the multiverse and that the relative rates change from (global) time to (global) time. It's also clear that Elminster has portals that lead to different times in our universe - the Yellowstone one and the one to The Ed's study are active simultaneously in Elminsters (local) time. Old El already has time travel - he doesn't need the GOHTR.
In fact, it seems that the chaos of the Spellplague moved time forward in the realms quite a lot - almost 100 years - relative to our world. I'm guessing that the "explosion" of magic accelerated its local time as well as causing it to collide with Abeir's pocket universe.
Why didn't he use the info that he could have gleaned? That's a mystery: maybe he couldn't. Or maybe he did, in an alternative universe. Or maybe the information didn't stick when he came back. Depends on your model of time and causality really.
It's just a little side-joke. I don't think anyone's meant to take it too seriously.
I agree, it's meant to be goofy. I don't mind some goofiness in the Realms.
*laughing at HK-47 (I just got him in the game!)*
And you can be quite sure that Ed has considered the implications mentioned above far more thoroughly than anyone here, but we haven't got to read about them because of TSR and Wizards' variously motivated avoidance of the world-links, and because no one's chanced to ask Ed more lately on REALMS-L or Candlekeep.com.
Use the Spellplague! The portals linking Toril and Earth were warped by the Spellplague, so travel between them has a time jump, one way or the other.
Problem solved, moving along...
:P
Anyway, you're making a whole pile of assumptions about how time works that aren't warranted: it seems pretty clear that (local) time moves at different rates in different parts of the multiverse and that the relative rates change from (global) time to (global) time.
-Until recently, time moved in a fairly constant basis, with one year in the Forgotten Realms for about every year and a half or so here. In the 7+/- years since the debut of the FRCS, the timeline moved from 1,372 DR to 1,375 DR.
Oh c'mon, the Volo's Guides broke those walls almost every other page with the asides at the bottom of the page, technically. The wall has been breached, probably irreparably, for quite some time now really... that was just a small homage to it. :P
-I wouldn't say so, no. The Volo Guides are supposed to be "travel brochures", and in them, when Elminster writes stuff, he isn't as much breaking the fourth wall as he is "correcting" (or, in his case, saying whatever it is that suits his needs) what Volo is saying/claiming. If they said things like, "Blah, blah, blah, blah, but you players don't need to worry about that. Who needs this kind of information, when you have stats?", then yeah, that'd be doing it. He's never said anything like that, as far as I can remember. Most of the time, it's things like, "Volo is greatly exaggerating, here. He says there are six, but I think it's more accurately two." He's talking to his audience, sure, but it's not necessarily, specifically his "D&D audience".
Damned 3e-Haters messing up yet another thread... damn you guys. Especially you Meldread. :P
Remember, don't be a hater, be a participator. And no, giving Zhents AK's or HK's doesn't count. ;)
:D
What if Navy S.E.A.L.S showed up in the Underdark and took on the Drow, who would win?
Anyhow, just to let you all know, all of you are also quite DEAD - at least your D&D selves that lived on the D&D Earth where the D&D Ed Greenwood came from (think Sliders).
WotC has killed us all.
Oh, and I did use myself in a game (of T&T) years ago, quite successfully, and everyone loved it (so much so, that a new god was born, and it became a running joke).
-I wouldn't say so, no. The Volo Guides are supposed to be "travel brochures", and in them, when Elminster writes stuff, he isn't as much breaking the fourth wall as he is "correcting" (or, in his case, saying whatever it is that suits his needs) what Volo is saying/claiming. If they said things like, "Blah, blah, blah, blah, but you players don't need to worry about that. Who needs this kind of information, when you have stats?", then yeah, that'd be doing it. He's never said anything like that, as far as I can remember. Most of the time, it's things like, "Volo is greatly exaggerating, here. He says there are six, but I think it's more accurately two." He's talking to his audience, sure, but it's not necessarily, specifically his "D&D audience".
Well, they do occassionally cut off some of Volo's musings and tell us in no uncertain terms that NPC "X" would translate to this statwise... or that this person gets a +Y to attack, but only in this building. Hells, the back covers of those tell us quite explicitly that this is a "special annotated version" of the actual guidebook, wink, wink, nudge, nudge. So, yeah, I'd say that it was very much talking to his D&D audience, given the basic premise of the books. The preface to Volo's Guide to the North certainly takes a bit of a spear to the wall at the least...
4th wall... 4th edition... too funny. :D
Anyhow, just to let you all know, all of you are also quite DEAD - at least your D&D selves that lived on the D&D Earth where the D&D Ed Greenwood came from (think Sliders).
WotC has killed us all.
Oh, and I did use myself in a game (of T&T) years ago, quite successfully, and everyone loved it (so much so, that a new god was born, and it became a running joke).
-Well, when WotC published the 4e Forgotten Realms stuff, I did die a little inside, so that all works out. That must explain it, then.
That would explain why LK did that video where he was pretending to fight with a light saber. :D
Besides, I never metachlorine I didn't like. ;)
-Well, when WotC published the 4e Forgotten Realms stuff, I did die a little inside, so that all works out. That must explain it, then.
Please, oh please, tell me you all are not turning this into another 4e FR hate thread... Aren't there enough out already?
-...
-Wait a minute! This is about Ed Greenwood, not me!
Please, oh please, tell me you all are not turning this into another 4e FR hate thread... Aren't there enough out already?
Alas, no, most of them got locked, so the strife must find a new home... Bane would be pleased. :evillaugh
:D
Alas, no, most of them got locked, so the strife must find a new home... Bane would be pleased. :evillaugh
:D
I wonder what a Bane smiley would look like...
Please, oh please, tell me you all are not turning this into another 4e FR hate thread... Aren't there enough out already?
-I don't know- you tell me my motives, as you seem to know them better than I, myself, know them.
-Bane emoticon.
-I don't know- you tell me my motives, as you seem to know them better than I, myself, know them.
I don't presume to know the minds of the masses...
-Bane emoticon.
This is ten pounds of pure awesome!
-Bane emoticon.
Oh, those are cute!
The Volo's Guides were written in character by Volo, annotated by Elminster, and written from the perspective that someone from a far away place would be visiting Cormyr (or wherever). They could be reasonably aimed at someone from Kara-Tur.
It would have been completely different if Elminster's Annotations had been like, "And when you're playing D&D you're going to want to remember this, this, and this..."
That's effectively what the Greenwood Paradox is doing, they are giving fictional characters meta-knowledge about things that they should know nothing about. Elminster should not know he is a fictional character in a D&D game, owned by Hasbro and WotC, and his creator's name is Ed Greenwood.
That's effectively what the Greenwood Paradox is doing, they are giving fictional characters meta-knowledge about things that they should know nothing about. Elminster should not know he is a fictional character in a D&D game, owned by Hasbro and WotC, and his creator's name is Ed Greenwood.
-Well, to his perspective, he is quite real, and is only thought of as a fictitious character in the Forgotten Realms by others (ie, us). Again, though, it needlessly complicates things.
I guess it's because when I look at things like that, I always ask myself, "How does that work?" (The same question I ask when I read about an interesting spell / ritual, something odd about a deity, etc.) My mind automatically tries to rationalize and make it "fit." I want stuff to fit together.
Someone else may read that, chuckle, and move on forgetting about it all together. For me, though, I'm trying to make it fit and work logically within the context of established lore. If my thought processes were projected onto a computer, you'd see a big flashing message: "Does not compute!"
That is why, at a gut level, I dislike it. It is breaching the wall in a horrible way that does not work.
What if Navy S.E.A.L.S showed up in the Underdark and took on the Drow, who would win?
Demi Moore's S.E.A.L.S = Glaberezu sacrifices
Charlie Sheen's S.E.A.L.S= New Driders
Steven Segal S.E.A.L.S = A huge can of whoop azz by Segal( but only if he can make the Drow come to their kitchens because "Nobody beats him in a kitchen")
Chuck Norris's Delta Force = Drow extinction( It's freakin Chuck Norris
dude and when he's done (1 hr tops) he will roundhouse kick Toril to make it spin backward a la Superman style and reverse time back to 2e )Thus alleviating MT's morbid thoughts about our gaming selves being deceased
And for those wondering who Ao reports to at the end of ToT. I would duck in 3..2..1..(roundhouse kick approaching)
Sincerely CN
:P
I know that, but if he is visiting the real world, then he has the ability to access that information. It's just... logically - it all just implodes.
Its easy - think Sliders (as I said earlier). The 'Earth' that is mentioned in the D&D products is NOT the RW Earth, and that is canon, BTW, and has been stated numerous times by TSR, WotC, and Ed Greenwood himself.
Also, if you were a fan of 2e's cosmology, our world fits right in there (and if you don't think we live in a Crystal Sphere, then you should read the Chronicles of Amber novels).
Please, oh please, tell me you all are not turning this into another 4e FR hate thread... Aren't there enough out already?
And here I thought this thread was geting rather light-hearted (considering it's ominous start). ;)
I know that, but if he is visiting the real world, then he has the ability to access that information. It's just... logically - it all just implodes.
-He'd know he's real and exists (deduced by Descartes proof of existence), so he'd shrug it off as misinformation, purposefully or unintentional. Perhaps a propaganda campaign run by the TSR people, and adopted later by WotC, to allow them to avid competition when looking for those portals to Faerûn, by passing it off as a fake, made-up world, so that they can tap that market and sell literature about some made-up world called Earth, where...
I wonder what a Bane smiley would look like...
Taken from the mini.By being fictional, Elminster could have never traveled to Earth. :P
(Anyone want to argue that Elminster and the Forgotten Realm's is a real place? :P)
For me, it is just jarring. The wall of separation exists for a reason. It can be fun sometimes to poke holes in it and toy with the reader / viewer, but you can't shatter it completely. That is what the Greenwood Paradox does.
(Anyone want to argue that Elminster and the Forgotten Realm's is a real place? :P)
-Sure.
-The universe is a place that is believed to be infinite, and is constantly expanding. Because it is infinite, there are an infinite amount of possibilities that anything can exists somewhere within it. The odds may be ridiculously slim gauged by our standards, (let's say .000000001^1,00,000...), but by the standards of the infinite universe, there is an infinite probability that such a world does exist. There's, then, an infinite probability that the very same world (somewhere else) sans Elminster exists, an infinite probability that a world exists in which Meldread doesn't exist, but everything else that is currently on Earth does, an infinite probability that a world exists in which I yawned instead of holding it in, and so on.
Edit: @LK - you suck
-Great minds think alike, what can I say?
Recently I have been running a Modern D20 game. I had my players make 17 year old school students as thier PC's.
FYI Big Mistake
one decided to kill his parents, one started robbing everything he could, one actually managed to rob a national guard armory(Good rolls on his part, bad rolls on mine). I may have made a few mistakes running it, well it happens, I then threw them a twist and one of thier NPC friends took them "sliding". I just recently finished watching all 3 seasons and got the idea from there. It was challanging to keep coming up with alternate earths, well, they took the sliding conrol from thier friend, how was the only one that knew how it works, and killed him too.
I may have forgotten to mention that this happens to be a morally challenged group of players, I mean Characters, that did this.
To punish them, after they just started pressing random buttons they slide into the Realms.
of course they drove a 2007 Chevy Siverado with a bed full of military weopons into the portal and when they got to the otherside, the truck died and all the electronics died.
After slaughtering a local farm family and stealing the horses and stuff, they now have a "War Wagon" being pulled by six draft horses.
Needless to say, the realms may be changed forever after these guys get done
just thought I would share this with everyone
It took me 20 minutes of googling to find that thread. ;)
The universe is most definitely not infinite, merely extremely bloody big and boundless. Unless you want to get into parallel universes (probably not infinite either), and external unrelated universes (likely to be too freaking strange to start with).
Are you sure? ;)
Professor Joseph Silk, Head of Astrophysics, Department of Physics, University of Oxford in the UK has said "we don't really know, but the prevailing current view of the expanding universe suggests that it's infinite."
Other researchers suggest it's finite. We don't really know.
Whether this one, or one of the hypothetical ones outside.I got completely the opposite impression from the astrophysics course I was in, and a now-lapsed interest in the field. Most assume the universe we're in is round - finite but unbounded. But last I heard, it might be Poincare Dodecahedron. We might just already live in the Far Realms
So we have a "univers-o-scope" that can let us perceive the entire universe? Why are we even bothering studying physics if we can make an amazing device like that... :P
It's called a telescope.
That said, current technology as it is, we'll never know for sure in our lifetime.
The fact that it is expanding tells us it isn't at an end point yet. It can't go on forever if it is still growing.
Actually, that is one theory - that the universe will continue to expand forever.
I suspects that we're drifting, but...
Actually, that is one theory - that the universe will continue to expand forever.
Exactly, which would prove it is not infinite.
You've never won an argument with '∞ +1'? :D
In fact, I would think that very act of its growing (at an alarming rate) is indicative that it is infinite.
Since there is no 'static point' during which to measure it, it truly does "go on forever".
Potential infinity refers to a procedure that gets closer and closer to, but never quite reaches, an infinite end. For instance, the sequence of numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, ...
gets higher and higher, but it has no end; it never gets to infinity. Infinity is just an indication of a direction -- it's "somewhere off in the distance." Chasing this kind of infinity is like chasing a rainbow or trying to sail to the edge of the world -- you may think you see it in the distance, but when you get to where you thought it was, you see it is still further away. Geometrically, imagine an infinitely long straight line; then "infinity" is off at the "end" of the line. Analogous procedures are given by limits In calculus, whether they use infinity or not. For example, limx to 0 (sin x)/x = 1. This means that when we choose values of x that are closer and closer to zero, but never quite equal to zero, then (sin x)/x gets closer and closer to one.
Completed infinity, or actual infinity, is an infinity that one actually reaches; the process is already done. For instance, let's put braces around that sequence mentioned earlier: { 1, 2, 3, 4, ... }
With this notation, we are indicating the set of all positive integers. This is just one object, a set. But that set has infinitely many members. By that I don't mean that it has a large finite number of members and it keeps getting more members. Rather, I mean that it already has infinitely many members.
Then to take the time to personally explain the difference between the two.
Suffice to say, if something has not reached it's end point, it is not actual infinity. It would be Potential infinity.
Google Potential infinity if you wish to learn more about the difference between the two.
But what I'm talking about is perception.
If I were to suddenly teleport RIGHT NOW to the edge of the universe... a millionth of a second later I would no longer be at the edge of the universe. In fact, no matter how often I teleported, I'd NEVER be at the edge of the universe, beause no matter how fast I did it, the universe would be expanding ahead of me.
Ergo, my perception of the Universe is that it goes on forever, since I can never personally reach it's end.
Oh, I understand the grammatical difference, as well as the scientific one...
But what I'm talking about is perception.
If I were to suddenly teleport RIGHT NOW to the edge of the universe... a millionth of a second later I would no longer be at the edge of the universe. In fact, no matter how often I teleported, I'd NEVER be at the edge of the universe, because no matter how fast I did it, the universe would be expanding ahead of me.
Ergo, my perception of the Universe is that it goes on forever, since I can never personally reach it's end.
Why teleport to a stationary position? If we're being Sci-Fi here, why not teleport to the outer edge of existence, with the capability of traveling at the same speed of expansion?
That way, you'd be at the edge of potential infinity...
:P
There's definately a novel in that... :D
I had one such Imaskari tower called the Pont of Infinity, where you can be anytime, anywhere
Which is way more popular then the "Big Bang Bistro". (line actually taken from the book).
Its got to be out there somewhere between Sigil, the City of Brass, and the World Serpent Inn.
The fact that it is expanding tells us it isn't at an end point yet. It can't go on forever if it is still growing.
That said, current technology as it is, we'll never know for sure in our lifetime.
See, now here it all falls apart for me. The parts we can perceive are expanding, sure, but if it has space to expand into, that's part of the universe too, albeit empty parts. Just because its empty doesn't mean the space isn't there is my point. ;)
See, now here it all falls apart for me. The parts we can perceive are expanding, sure, but if it has space to expand into, that's part of the universe too, albeit empty parts. Just because its empty doesn't mean the space isn't there is my point. ;)
And this is why some things will always defy human comprehension.
Though I do think we can comprehend what we don't know, at least as a concept, even if we don't understand how it all works. But this is starting to sound like semantics to me, so...
I can't stand it myself, but we seek to understand and that causes us to assume *shudder* things until proven otherwise.
It's the prime reason the foundations of science are flawed, but from that we still learn to understand the world around us. It is a very interesting intellectual paradox, IMO.
If it has room for growth, it is not infinite. It would have the potential for being infinite, but by it's nature it would not be.
Not true.
There are different orders of infinity.
Some sets actually can be more infinite than others.
The set of real numbers has a higher order of infinity than the set of rational numbers.
Not true.
There are different orders of infinity.
Some sets actually can be more infinite than others.
The set of real numbers has a higher order of infinity than the set of rational numbers.
They are both already complete. It is set and they are not growing. Something cannot be growing and be infinite. That is impossible.
EDIT: I think you might be confusing the calculations of said numbers and the actuality of them as a whole. Which is the difference between Actual Infinity and Potential Infinity.
They are both already complete. It is set and they are not growing. Something cannot be growing and be infinite. That is impossible.
EDIT: I think you might be confusing the calculations of said numbers and the actuality of them as a whole. Which is the difference between Actual Infinity and Potential Infinity.
The set of rational numbers is infinite. That is actual.
The set of irrational numbers has a higher order of infinity. That is actual.
The set of rational numbers has room for growth because it can be unionized (not exactly the right word but I am talking about a union of sets.) with the set of irrational numbers and it would be larger. It would grow.
The post I responded to said this:
If it has room for growth, it is not infinite. It would have the potential for being infinite, but by it's nature it would not be.
That is the entirety of the post.
It is incorrect.
That post did not say that if it was growing it could not be infinite. It said if it has room for growth it is not infinite. The post was not talking about an incomplete count. It was speaking of a completed one.
The set of rational numbers is complete and infinite.
It can grow by being unified with the set of irrational numbers which would result in the set of real numbers.
My first post is incorrect (due to poor wording, not due to being wrong), the rest of what I was trying to say is not. I didn't intentionally try to contradict myself and I'm sorry if you thought that was so.
EDIT: Hmm... I'm not sure there is a difference... if something has room to grow, how can it be infinite? Can two things that are infinite be different sizes (comparatively) when all is said and done? Is it a measurable quantity that can be seen between two infinites or just a theoretical disposition based on the amount they started with?
Ok, so you responded to my first post (which, I admit, was worded poorly (I didn't see that until you showed me)), seemingly without looking at the rest of what I've posted, in order to explain semantics over the point I was trying to make... why?
My first post is incorrect (due to poor wording, not due to being wrong), the rest of what I was trying to say is not. I didn't intentionally try to contradict myself and I'm sorry if you thought that was so.
EDIT: Hmm... I'm not sure there is a difference... if something has room to grow, how can it be infinite? Can two things that are infinite be different sizes (comparatively) when all is said and done? Is it a measurable quantity that can be seen between two infinites or just a theoretical disposition based on the amount they started with?
I was skimming through some posts, so sorry about the confusion there. You have my apology. (Note: to be clear, that is sincere and not smart...)
About the edit. It has to do with one to one mappings if I remember correctly. I think it goes something like this but my memory may not be working correctly here:
If two sets are the same size, they have the same cardinality. The set X= {1,2,3} has the sime size/cardinality as the set Y={4,5,6}. A one to one mapping can be made each way. The mapping {(1,4), (2,5), (3,6)} is one to one each way.The set X={1,2,3} does not have the same cardinality as the set Y+{4,5,6,7} All of X can be mapped into Y by the function y=f(x+3) which will yield the set {(1,4), (2,5), (3,6)}. However there is no one to one correspondence mapping Y into X. Y has greater cardinality than X.
With the case of rational numbers and integers, such a one to one mapping can be made both ways and therefore they have the same size or cardinality.
This does not work with the comparison of rational and irrational numbers. There can be created a one to one mapping which maps all the rational numbers into the irrational but not the other way around. Therefore, the set of irrational numbers has a larger cardinality. (something is bugging me about using irrational. I think it still works but would be easier to prove if using the comparison of real to rational.
)So, one to one mapping (or perhaps correspondence) each way means same size and cardinality. One to one mapping one way and not the other means that one has a higher order cardinality.
Does that make sense?
Ed Grenwood
May he live forever in our world, as he will in our hearts.
BTW, that means they also killed RAS, Elaine, Schend, etc, etc...
We are all just zombies playing a 'living' RPG.
Hmmmmm... Breathers & Bleeders? Any of you undead-types up for a smashing game of B&B? :D
And as a wise woman once sang "A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down"
Ha now that diddy is stuck in your head
I wonder what Elminster and Ed would have classified Ms. Poppins in their conversation?
Another flaw of ours is our ability to base understanding on ignorance... or, worse yet, fabrications.
I can't stand it myself, but we seek to understand and that causes us to assume *shudder* things until proven otherwise.
It's the prime reason the foundations of science are flawed, but from that we still learn to understand the world around us. It is a very interesting intellectual paradox, IMO.
It all comes from our nature as pattern-seeking creatures. We establish patterns and find them even where they don't actually exist... its kind of what we're hard-wired to do as a species. I'm not sure I see it as a paradox, so much as semi-harmonious conflict (speaking of paradoxes) between intellect and instinct. :D
Personally, I prefer to think of it all as being potentially true, and potentially false... maybe not here, but somewhere, not necessarily in this aspect of existence though. It makes the world much easier to live with when you just close your eyes and know that somewhere, somewhen, people aren't nearly as stupid as they make themselves out to be.
Oh, yes, and somewhere out there Ed Greenwood might just be right... maybe it is all true, just not in this version of reality... just to keep it sort of in-theme and on-topic.
Hey Hey MT you started this thread now sit back and take your medicine.
I really hadn't counted on it turning into a philosophical discussion of the definition of the Infinite.
I wonder what Elminster and Ed would have classified Ms. Poppins in their conversation?
You answer your own question - she is a Wise-woman, which is a Shaman according to the old rules. Her Umbrella is her fetish.
If you use the Witch Class in the 3e DMG, that would probably work as well.
Hmmmm... a Nanny PrC....
Then again... UGH... I'm just picturing being lectured by Fran Drescher...
"Wail of the Nan-shee"
Oh, and I heard Ed Greenwood fancies her (see how I did that right there? :D)
Of course, she's dead too.. we all are....
We are all just zombies playing a 'living' RPG.
Ooooh...
I could go for that.
*Puts on "Thriller"*
Ooooh...
I could go for that.
*Puts on "Thriller"*
The Thriller version covered by Fran?
El and Ed and the uber powerful Larloch and S Tam are falling in line with the rest of the chosen and liches that serve under them and are starting the dance
See, now here it all falls apart for me. The parts we can perceive are expanding, sure, but if it has space to expand into, that's part of the universe too, albeit empty parts. Just because its empty doesn't mean the space isn't there is my point.
No, think of it as creating space as it goes - the space isn't there before it expands, it's being made as it expands.
Now why would that make more sense than the space already being there to expand into? Seems a bit like saying space has no dimension if nothing exists there to give it that dimension... which strikes me as a remarkably stupid thing to say... and a little arrogant. As a physicist once said, the universe is under no obligation to conform to our expectations.
lol, our scientific intelligence is equal measures understanding, arrogance & ignorance.
Beautiful from a distance, scary as hell the closer you get.
For instance, the devices we use to measure everything are based on what our own limited senses can tell us (and we know far more then the five we possess exist), and what few enrgies and phenomena we have already discovered and figured out how to measure.
Which, of course, might not even be 1/1Meg of the information that even a simple rock can generate.
We only know how to measure that which we have figured out, which is very little, and there is so much more beyond us that we will never be able to figure out, simply because our minds and our sensory organs are incapable of dealing with the input.
We are all insignificant grains of sand on an infinite beach, grasping upwards at the robes of god.
In other words... the jokes on us. ;)
which strikes me as a remarkably stupid thing to say... and a little arrogant. As a physicist once said, the universe is under no obligation to conform to our expectations.
Um, you're the one that insists on trying to use common sense to reason about the edge of the universe ...
We only know how to measure that which we have figured out, which is very little, and there is so much more beyond us that we will never be able to figure out, simply because our minds and our sensory organs are incapable of dealing with the input.
So, MT, what you're saying is that you're a fan of the Far Realms?
The stuff in the Far Realms exists right alongside us, but they only notice us if we notice them.
Once again, we are only limitied by our perceptions - there is so much more around us then we can grasp.
There will come a point in time when our science is so far beyond what we can currently comprehend that we would view it as 'magic' (read Jack vance, or Frank Herbert, or any of a dozen others), and at the same time, that culutre would look back at our primitive one and we would appear to be mere cavemen rubbing sticks together to create fire.
Thats why I don't 'believe' in science - the explanations are ALL the 'flavor of the month', and subject to change when the next great breakthough comes down the pipe.
And to bring this back around (although still off-topic) the 'edge' of the Universe is a perfect example of that. In order to keep older ideas about it 'correct', we need to create the concept of the 'megaverse', in which multiple universes exist. Therefore our universe can be finite with an edge, and we can still have things 'beyond it'.
All very convenient and self-serving explanantions for crap we don't understand.
Which is no better then savages that say the "gods are fighting" during a thunder storm. Its all relative.
Hell, for all we know atmospheric phenomena is caused by 'gods' (elemental beings?) that disturb the weather patterns in their passing (from a dimension parallel to ours).
And then the savages would be right and we'd look like idiots. ;)
Edit: Modified the title to keep things on-topic.
Well, that and him =====> :coolcthul
Look what they did with his work.
Whenever a scientists yells "Eureka!", there is a miltary guy standing right behind him saying "How can we make this into a weapon?"
Thus is the shame of man.
Heh, I'm going to travel into the Realm's and equip the Zhents with AK-47's
Well, the 2e FRCS did mention that the laws of physic in realmspace are slightly out of touch with the laws of physics on earth and that's why our technology doesn't work.
PS: Obviouls the same is not true for Oerth (which also has at least one portal to London) since Murlynd is using his two guns (taken from our world's wild west period) just fine (although being a deity he might simply have created magical copies based on the design he saw on our world)
Gunpowder does indeed function normally within Greyspace, but only Smokepowder works (in lieu of Gunpowder) in Realmspsce. Electronics also fail to function in the Realms, but primitive steam-power appears to be acceptable.
I've often theorized how the Weave was not just an interface for magic, but rather a set of rules for Ralmspace itself. Or the Weave could generate an enormous electro-magnetic field, making dimensional magics easier (which includes summonings), but wreaks havoc with electrical devices.
I've also stated how Smokepowder=Black Powder with a dweomer applied to it, which acts a 'protection' from the Weave (allowing the otherwise inert Gunpowder to be functional).
Taking that to its extreme conclusion, I theorize that modern weaponry and machines should work just fine in a dead-magic zone... so they may just have Internet access in Tantras. :P
Hmmmm... I just realized something. If the Weave= a computer-like Interface, then the Spellplague was actually a computer virus.
Thats why I don't 'believe' in science - the explanations are ALL the 'flavor of the month', and subject to change when the next great breakthough comes down the pipe.
You aren't supposed to "believe" in science. It's a not a belief, it's a process. The fact that scientific knowledge is subject to change is why it's not dogma.
You aren't supposed to "believe" in science. It's a not a belief, it's a process. The fact that scientific knowledge is subject to change is why it's not dogma.
Not entirely true. It isn't dogma because it does not require faith. Science is man's understanding of the world around us (and beyond).
It has it's building blocks based off assumptions, but through that we learn (in our own meager way) and come to understand the 'how' of some aspects of our existence.
Not entirely true. It isn't dogma because it does not require faith.
I thought that was basically what I was saying.
I thought that was basically what I was saying.
"The fact that scientific knowledge is subject to change is why it's not dogma" is not entirely true...
It's part of it, but not all.
Sorry, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I just quoted you and added my thoughts to yours. I tend to come off argumentative it seems...
"
Sorry, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I just quoted you and added my thoughts to yours. I tend to come off argumentative it seems...
OK, fine.
Its the elven apologist in you, it can't help but put an aura of evil around your thoughts. :P ;)
Hey now, I'm nothing but smiles and sunshine...
OK, fine.
I forgot to add :embarrass in my last post.
Two
's for Stigger. :D But we have to have 'Faith' that the science we believe in is correct, do we not? In my lifetime, I have seen way too many theories proven false to believe in anything 'concrete'.
Thats why I believe in the ephemeral instead - I don't have to waste my time trying to prove that BS. :P
And Krown, I thought this was something you and I could actually agree on...
The only thing that really matters is having Faith... ;)
Elven Apologists...
Two
We have no need to say sorry to anyone.But we have to have 'Faith' that the science we believe in is correct, do we not? In my lifetime, I have seen way too many theories proven false to believe in anything 'concrete'.
No, Science is based on assumption and 'proof'. There is no need for faith when it comes to science.
Thats why I believe in the ephemeral instead - I don't have to waste my time trying to prove that BS. :P
Say what.
And Krown, I thought this was something you and I could actually agree on...
The only thing that really matters is having Faith... ;)
I agree faith is important, but it isn't the only thing that matters.
Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.
I think Markus is getting at the idea that unless we can test the results ourselves, we are essentially accepting scientific fact 'on faith' when it comes down to it.
It's a little more then that, Stigger. We have to have faith in the measuring devices we are building to be 100% accurate under every conceivable circumstance (which is impossible, since we don't know of every factor that could effect something), we have to have faith that the scientists aren't just using the data that best supports their theory and just ignoring the rest (which I've seen all too often), we have to have faith in our senses, which Mentalists and other charlatans prove to be fallible every single day, etc, etc...
Chaos Theory - just because you get the same result a million times in a row whilst conducting an experiment, doesn't mean thats what will happen every single time. All we can say is 'the most likely scenario is...", and thats it.
- Albert Einstein
In other words, Science can tell you how it should work, Faith covers when it doesn't. ;)
IIRC, none of the spells repeat, and the sphere has billions of miles of surface area, which gives you some idea of just how many spells are out there (perhaps even ones that haven't been 'discoverd' yet).
I have always theorized that this is Mystra's own 'spellbook', and it is through this that she was able to bond her Weave to the Sphere itself.
The Realms are known to have 'more' raw magic then any other known sphere, which indicates to me that the planer barriers in Realmspace are weaker then elsewhere (4e's 'power-sources' taken into account - magical energies come from other planes). Mystra's Weave acts, in part, to re-inforce the Crystal Sphere to keep out much of the damaging energies (and filter them). I call upon canon to back-up this theory - in Elminster in Hell, the Chosen are 'caretakers' of the Weave, and when it is damaged, other planes can 'leak-in'.
When the Weave fell in 1385 DR, I think the spells on the sphere were somehow erased, which caused the Spellplague, hindered Mystra's return, and allowed other planes to merge with parts of Toril (which is actually the sphere's natural state). This is why certain planes have become cotermonious, others have had parts merge (Abeir), and new sources of magical power have become available (they are no longer being 'filtered-out').
I would also go so far as to say that the planer barriers of Abeir-Toril were always somewhat weaker then most spheres (perhaps because Ao had to split the 'Sphere material' in two?), and the creator races (most especially the Batarchi) inter-planer travels weakened it more, and then the Elven Sundering weakened it even further.
This gives us an evolutionary view of the Weave - it started out as a re-inforcement to the weakened sphere, which had to be further added to as the Creators 'made holes' in it, and then had to be patched-up after the Sundering. Perhaps getting 'new Mystras' is part of this evolutionary process, and each time she is re-born, so to is the Weave, which becomes stronger and more pervasive (and thus causing Mystra to get stronger and stronger, rivaling Ao for power near the end).
I think Mystra started out as merely being the caretaker of the Weave (which was actually created by Ao originally), and over time she became more and more powerful as she added to the Weave's functionality (something, perhaps, Ao hadn't forseen).
I think this would explain a lot, and if we borrow from thoughts over on the "Corellon thread", perhaps Corellon wasn't being evil at all - he was working with others to keep Mystra from becoming more powerful then Ao (and this also fits-in with my theory that Mystra was actually a tyrant of magic, spreading mis-information to further enhance her own power-base).
Any thoughts?
At its core, its simply a means of expressing our current understanding of the world, a rational framework by which we can comprehend things around us.
Thus proving my point.
Whats the differenc between us, and the savages that applied their limited knowledge of the universe to understanding it?
Science is today's mythology. ;)
As to the difference between us and those savages... for one, we have made-to-be-mutable system of explanation based on observation and experimentation, rather than pulling stories out of the ether to explain things, actual causes be damned. Its investigative, imperfect as our methods may be, as opposed to the arbitrary explanatory method employed by mythology and religion. Science doesn't want to be taken at face value, and indeed shouldn't be, because that's exactly what makes it superior, it takes what is known and makes it as easy to see as it can.... whereas mythology and religion have to be taken at face value, with perhaps deeper mysteries available only to an elite to interpret and comprehend, with things hidden in metaphor and allusion to reinforce the mystery and appeal.
He pointed out the window of his office and said "see that farm field over there? If I see the cows out, I know it isn't going to rain. If the cows go in, I know it's gonna to rain".
Seriously... He is more accurate then all the 'Doppler Radar' and 'Accu-Weather' experts using satelites.
My point - if the Shaman shakes some chiken bones and says it going to rain, and he's right, and the satelites says it won't rain, and their wrong, why in god's name is our knowledge superior to his?
'Cause we got way-cool machines?
BS is BS, and technology is just today's 'chicken bones'. A guess is just a guess, and no-one Knows whats really going on...
Except me of course... and Bigfoot. ;)
As for Realmspace:
If you read The Annotated Elminster (or the novels that make it up), you will note there are times when Mystra is downright cruel. There are times when she punishes Elminster for no reason, ignores him when he is in trouble, and forces him down certain paths weather he wants to go down them or not (sounds like a tyrant to me).
Also, Ed Greenwood has stated she is more about promoting magic then doing good (notice that Magisters usually had to kill one-another?), and it is a canon fact that she insisted that Elminster train Sammaster, even though Elminster knew it was going to go bad (and she didn't care).
She has always been about promoting her portfolio - the rest of the stuff about her being beneficial to people is just the sugar-coating her clergy puts forth. She supposedly created the Harpers to do good... and yet has followers amongst the Zentarrim and the Red Wizards of Thay.
Mystra is all about Mystra; don't let her and her priesthood fool you.
She's dead because she was getting too powerful, and the other gods conspired to take her down. If Shar is keeping her from being re-born, its only because Ao agreed to it.
Ding-Dong the Tyrant is dead! Long live Shar, the saviour of real magic.
And despite her actions, people said Mystra represented a setting-hampering, overwhelming force leaning too much towards good?
The only god that might actually be truly 'evil' is Cyric, and thats just because he still has too much of his human nature left (note how self-destructive he is: No god would so easily sacrifice his followers that way).
Give him a few centuries and eventually he'll mellow out and get with the program.
Its not about good or evil, Law of Chaos - its about getting the most amount of energy coming your way from worshippers. The whole thing is a big chess (Sava?) game , and mortals are just a combination of pawns and batteries. Gods will say whatever they think mortals want to hear just to get them onboard.
The most accurate radio weatherman in the United States (a 100% accuracy rating for predicting rain) was once asked what's his secret.
He pointed out the window of his office and said "see that farm field over there? If I see the cows out, I know it isn't going to rain. If the cows go in, I know it's gonna to rain".
Seriously... He is more accurate then all the 'Doppler Radar' and 'Accu-Weather' experts using satelites.
My point - if the Shaman shakes some chiken bones and says it going to rain, and he's right, and the satelites says it won't rain, and their wrong, why in god's name is our knowledge superior to his?
So you're saying that because the tools we're developing and using to measure things like the weather can't predict the future for us, that its untrustworthy and should be discarded? That some fool misrepresents something isn't the fault of science, its the fault of the fool. At the moment the data is collected, its generally pretty accurate... but since its not a static system, conditions, and hence the outcome, can change and the prediction becomes inaccurate. Its good for predicting trends and very general conditions, but that's about it... I think you're expecting too much of the methods being used.
I doubt it comes as a suprise to anyone that animals are better at predicting things than humans, since its generally been by observing their behaviour that we've figured out that there are clues that something is about to happen. We're just trying to figure out ways to reproduce mechanically what they can do naturally... that its not as accurate yet is besides the point.
As for Realmspace:
If you read The Annotated Elminster (or the novels that make it up), you will note there are times when Mystra is downright cruel. There are times when she punishes Elminster for no reason, ignores him when he is in trouble, and forces him down certain paths weather he wants to go down them or not (sounds like a tyrant to me).
Also, Ed Greenwood has stated she is more about promoting magic then doing good (notice that Magisters usually had to kill one-another?), and it is a canon fact that she insisted that Elminster train Sammaster, even though Elminster knew it was going to go bad (and she didn't care).
She has always been about promoting her portfolio - the rest of the stuff about her being beneficial to people is just the sugar-coating her clergy puts forth. She supposedly created the Harpers to do good... and yet has followers amongst the Zentarrim and the Red Wizards of Thay.
Mystra is all about Mystra; don't let her and her priesthood fool you.
Doesn't sound like a tyrant to me... a mentor perhaps, a harsh one, but still someone who cares when it comes down to it. So she's cruel at times... life's like that, why should the gods be any different? So she punishes him without apparent reason... I'm sure she does have one, even if its not immediately obvious or necessary from our point of view. She ignores him when he's in trouble... and? Is she supposed to be holding his hand and coddling him the entire time or something? She forces him down certain paths regardless of his feelings... sounds like more than a few teachers I've known.
As to the rest, I say so bloody what? When has she not been about promoting magic over all else, especially with the LN alignment at the time. And I don't think I really need to tell you that she didn't create the Harpers, she just approved of their creation, as did many other deities, and gave aid to them. Good had nothing to do with it, and I'd suspect you already know that, or at least should know that. That some had to suffer for the benefit of the majority was just too damned bad, but that's the breaks... and a nice fit with a LN alignment. :P
She's dead because she was getting too powerful, and the other gods conspired to take her down. If Shar is keeping her from being re-born, its only because Ao agreed to it.
Ding-Dong the Tyrant is dead! Long live Shar, the saviour of real magic.
Please... spare me the rant on the tyranny of Mystra. Next thing we know, you're going to be telling me magic is much more powerful now that she's dead and spellcasters are 'balanced' with everyone else... and that the world would be better if we're all made to feel special. If everyone is, no one is... ;)
Before, only those who Kowtowed to Mystra (by being an Arcane Wizard or Sorceror) could perform magic, but now anyone can.
Anyone can heal now, as well. We know for a canon fact that she had some control over divine magic as well, and with the Weave gone, suddenly everyone can heal, not just priests.
The world is such a better place without her.... control.. of everything.
Tyrant, plain and simple. :P
Its good for predicting trends and very general conditions, but that's about it... I think you're expecting too much of the methods being used.
Actually, I expect no more from 'scientific methods' then I do from a witchdoctor shaking a chicken bone. :D
I met one of those while down in Mexico, and he could cure the common cold. I also worked for an Obi woman (Voodoo) who could cure Asthma. Both were highly successful.
Do I think they knew more then the medical doctors? Of course not! What I do know is that their followers believed in what they were doing, and therefore it worked.
Ergo, it all comes down to faith. Doesn't matter what you believe in, but as long as you truly believe in it, it works for you.
Now I'm getting back into the 'personal reality' topic that got me in trouble the last time. :embarrass
And yes, you are getting back into that personal reality its probably best you kept that way. ;)
Warmachine started as an RPG supplement (Lock & Load, which Eberron totally ripped-off), then became a miniatures game, and then became a full-blown RPG setting (Iron Kingdoms).
Its really a very simple formula - when you have absolutely no clue on what to do, copy what someone else is doing. All big companies do it - its cheaper then hiring talented people. :P
Edit: For instance, did you know that Burger King does not bother to do any market-research on geographic areas? McDonalds spends millions a year on that... and Burger King just builds nearby wherever McDonalds puts up a restaurant.
I learned that in college. Also learned how to shoot a bow. I think thats all I walked away with from that.
My point - if the Shaman shakes some chiken bones and says it going to rain, and he's right...
...then it's a coincidence. It rains sometimes--it is a very common and mundane occurance. It makes sense that if you predict rain enough times, it will eventually appear that you were correct. You have to ignore all the times it you were incorrect.
Just because modern instruments of predicting the weather aren't perfect doesn't mean it's the same as throwing bones.
BS is BS, and technology is just today's 'chicken bones'. A guess is just a guess, and no-one Knows whats really going on...
Well, here you are posting this on the internet, thanks to the technology you are scoffing at. I think you realize it's more reliable than you are making it out to be and not BS, otherwise you wouldn't be using the internet at all. Or a lot of other aspects of modern life (cars, phones, heating and cooling, an abundance of food, etc.).
I'm only discussing this because you keep bringing up this "science/technology is the same thing as shamanism" bit. Stigger's comments are right on by the way.
Ehh, she gave him a sex change for years... I don't know about you, but if a teacher did that to me, I'd be ******.
Stoked? I'm sure.:P
Just because a person has certain... preferences... doesn't mean they would like to be on the other team. Play for the other team, perhaps, but certainly not be on it.
Not everyone who is... that way... is gender confused.
I have several relatives of that persuasion, and have probably been comfortable around it long before it became fashionable (since the 70's, when this was 'looked down upon'). They are men, and glad to be so.
In fact, hard as it may be to believe, South Park has a very good running story-line about Mr. Garrison that addresses exactly this point.
Yes it is SP, but like usual, that dopey toon can be rather poignant.
I find the male form so disgusting I can't even look at myself.
Then again... my form is on the low end of the spectrum at the moment... :embarrass
-Why do nine out of ten discussions somehow end up down this road? It's uncanny...
Because despite WotC's new target audience, most of us here are still adults, and aren't ashamed of bandying about important social issues...
... so long as we find a way to link it to the Realms. :P
One must examine and understand their own world before they can truly appreciate the merits and flaws of another, even if it only exists in the mind's eye.
Actually Stigger, I would suggest that a complete understanding of our own world is impossible. And I am saying that as a scientist.
In the same way as you can appreciate a well made garment without having taken up tailoring, I would suggest that it is possible to begin to grasp the beauty and wonder of a constructed world without having to come to terms with its creation... or ours. ;)
And I didn't say anything so precise as complete understanding, a very basic one will do just fine. But, it never hurts to enter into discussion to broaden ones horizons, examine ones beliefs and knowledge, and generally grow as a person. Obviously LK is opposed to such growth, sadly, and does his best to stamp out such growth in others. Must be that Elven sympathizer in him that wants to keep us shackled and chained in ignorance so we won't question the lies the the elves and their masters in the Seldarine spread. ;)
Didn't I say just that a few pages ago? :P
Pretty much, but I was still in Japan then (;)) and didn't feel I could dredge that one up. Also, I wasn't disagreeing with you really, just agreeing and clarifying it.
But, it never hurts to enter into discussion to broaden ones horizons, examine ones beliefs and knowledge, and generally grow as a person.
All hail this one. I love a good discussion (argument). I have also found that constructed worlds are quite often be best arenas in which to do so.
Obviously LK is opposed to such growth, sadly, and does his best to stamp out such growth in others. Must be that Elven sympathizer in him that wants to keep us shackled and chained in ignorance so we won't question the lies the the elves and their masters in the Seldarine spread. ;)
Hey, I still quite like the elves and the Seldarine... but I like a good argument... but I like the elves... but I like....
I'm so confused!
* The poster assumes no responsibility for any horrible consequences from hugging said species, knives found in backs, poisonings (accidental or intentional), enslavement, or anything else that results from following his questionable advice or suggestions.
Obviously you've a streak of deeply held evil... don't believe the lies, hug* a drow today!
Let me get this straight, you know that I am a scientist and now is the time that you have realised that I have a streak of evil?!
I even have had a goatee on occasion. Need I say more? :evillaugh
That said, and getting back to being able to discuss the nature of constructed worlds... I don't know whether immortals (even imaginary ones) can really be accused of being a tyrant. Most were either created with power or were invested with it, few gods seem to have earned or taken their power. Also tyranny seems to require a degree of understanding and empathy in that you are intentionally ignoring the comfort, needs or rights of those you command. I would make the case that most immortals (at least the ones who have always been immortals) have very little idea about the nature of those forces, and so cannot really be held to their account.
One way I imagine it is if the immortal in question is at the helm of a large ship, the issue orders but have little to no idea of the internal process that go to bring those orders about since they have never been in the crew, only in command.
Though I do agree that most aren't tyrants, even if they're viewed that way. They have larger things to worry about rather than the well being of individuals, which is rather a luxury, whether we choose to view it that way or not.
And yes, I did know you had a streak of evil, hence my drow-hugging suggestion. :P
Which explains so much of our history as a species, since you're describing the chain of command for most militaries historically...
Though I do agree that most aren't tyrants, even if they're viewed that way. They have larger things to worry about rather than the well being of individuals, which is rather a luxury, whether we choose to view it that way or not.
And yes, I did know you had a streak of evil, hence my drow-hugging suggestion. :P
I had thought your knowledge of my evilness was based on my nationality rather than my profession. Not least because if you find the BBEG in most Hollywood offerings they are usually English too!
The well-being of individuals is an interesting dilemma for a deity. On the one hand if their power base is made up of the number (and possibly fervour) of their worshippers then it behoves them to micro-manage as much as possible to stave off a loss in favour and thus power... on the other hand if they do micro-manage then you end up with not a unified faith but a fragmentary association which, if you are not infinite, would end up reaching a critical size at the point where you physically had no more resources to look after them and might not act as a single unit to drive off invasion or insurgency.
The immortals of the Realms seem to not tend to micro-manage but then since we only really have novels (with their self-selected scope) and sourcebooks (rather too hasty on the subject), how can we say?
To me, the real definition of good and evil, all joking aside, for most deities is how casually they're willing to spend the lives of their followers to achieve their goals, whatever those might be. Some are certainly more predisposed by the nature of their portfolios to appear to be more concerned with mortal life, and its concerns, especially the more abstract ones (obviously the inverse holds true as well), but does that mean they really give a crap about mortals outside of the concerns of their portfolio? I'd say no ultimately... just that some had broad enough portfolios that the illusion was given that they do.
Take the original Mystra for example... I really don't think she's blink twice about sacrificing Elminster or anyone else if she felt the cost/benefit ratio was high enough. Same goes for the new one too, just that she probably has a different definition of acceptable losses, which would have likely changed as she grew more into her role and portfolio. Just look towards the old Mystra's grooming of Sammaster... sure he was going to cost a crapload of lives, but look at the advances to metamagic he made... ah well, they were gonna die anyway at some point, silly mortals.
Or just slightly peeved most of the time? :P
So are you a 'mad Scientist'...
Or just slightly peeved most of the time? :P
I choked on my pizza dammit!
So are you a 'mad Scientist'...
Or just slightly peeved most of the time? :P
I would prefer to say disgruntled. But these days I can`t say that, for fear of being accused of having something to do with swine.
Instead I tend to have to go with "mildly discombobulated". Mostly having to do with the fact that the British public seems to want to have scientists around the place, but doesn`t much enjoy the idea of actually paying them... anything.
A great time to be getting into academia, I can tell you.
All nations had them back then (and probably still do, in secret). These are the guys who are supposed to ignore the rules and morals and "think outside the box".
Sometimes you need that, to stimulate technological advancement. War is a many splendid thing. ;)
Their primary responsibility is to their portfolios, not to their worshippers, or even really to their servants.
I had thought, however, that the ToT malarkey (in part) brought about a direct link between worshippers and power level? In which case grand-scale spending of your follower`s lives would be suicidal as well as abhorrent.
That said, I agree with your definition of deific good and evil. The difference between spending lives like water or sacrificing a few only when truly needful and then remembering, officially, those that did (This reminds me of the quest for the Deadric Prince Azura in Oblivion, if anyone else has played it).
I believe Great Britain actually had a military term for 'Mad Scientist' created during WWII - called 'Boffin'.
All nations had them back then (and probably still do, in secret). These are the guys who are supposed to ignore the rules and morals and "think outside the box".
Although the term has now become an insult. I am actually mildly surprised that someone outside the British Isles knows the term, not through any misdirected sense of elitism but mostly because of the few people here who know it, almost none know of its original (and more positive) origin. Although I would suggest that it wasn`t so much about setting morals aside as agreeing to work on war-time projects which I will agree can sometimes have a grey aspect to their morality (J. Robert Oppenheimer anyone?).
As for such people still existing... well, yes. Every country`s worst kept secret.
I am actually mildly surprised that someone outside the British Isles knows the term, not through any misdirected sense of elitism but mostly because of the few people here who know it, almost none know of its original (and more positive) origin. Although I would suggest that it wasn`t so much about setting morals aside as agreeing to work on war-time projects which I will agree can sometimes have a grey aspect to their morality (J. Robert Oppenheimer anyone?).
As for such people still existing... well, yes. Every country`s worst kept secret.
We try to keep them all locked-up in Area 51, though. :P
Anyhow, I've always considered myself an amateur historian FIRST, and a SciFi/Fantasy fan second. Some of the Bizarre inventions coming out of Britain (and other places) during WWII were facinating.
I became good friends (for an unfortunately brief time) with a British Gentleman who fought in WWII. He and his brothers became sort-of celebrities after the war because ALL FOUR survived (and they had fought in different theatres). That man told some incredible stories (including why the Gurkhas were givien the honor of being part of the Queen's Guard), and helped me to remove my 'American Misconceptions'.
What many Americans need to learn is that the history we are taught in our textbooks is written by Americans, and approved for use in schools by the United States Gov't. Anyone who doesn't think we practice propaganda on our own citizens need only take a look at recent history - like how the American correspondents were told not to report any casualties during Operation Desert Storm (that is a fact, and was found-out by people reading and listening to foreign news).
Don't get me wrong - I love my country - but I do know plenty of Amrericans that could use a reality check. ;)
On-Topic
Well, there were enough exceptions to the idea of worshippers versus power level that it wasn't really that accurate of a statement.
I look at it this way - deities are Spheric in nature (no... I don't mean 'round'). Umberlee could have an entire nation's worth of followers 'somewhere else' (I have done just that, with my Beiy'Maar located in the Celestial Sea). For all we know, that massive island north of Anchorome (Braklosia?) could have a culture based around Talos worship.
Also, I said 'Speheric', rather then 'Torillian', because all of these deities are also worshipped on the other worlds of Realmspace.
Another thing - and this is mrely conjecture - I think that when deities emigrate into Realmspace, their former level plays a major role in how powerful a deity is when they fist arrive. A good rule of thumb is two levels lower, with the minimum being a quasi-god (Immortal/ DvR 0). I figure a being gets a 'yearly review' of sorts, and they have that time (one cycle around the primary) to establish themselves.
Otherwise, a god new to the Realms would instantly die for lack of worshippers. It also means that Baal should have died the moment he sacrificed all of his worshippers (not that he actually did that, which is proven in another CK thread).
That gives deities roughly a twelve-month 'grace period' to create worshippers, fix problems within their followings, establish churchs, etc...
Another rule of thumb I apply is "power used Daily". In other words, if Umberlee was once a greater deity who's worship has fallen off, she can maintain her power-level by discharging very little power. If you tyhink in terms of extra-planer beings as nothing more then giant 'power batteries' (or more accurately, Capacitors), which I have postulated before, you can see how this would work.
An ancient being of immense power can last a very long time without worship simply by going 'asleep' (a mortal term for some form of 'Cosmic Stasis').
On the oher hand, a being like Mystra, with all sorts of proxies (Chosen, The Magister, ect), manifestations, and the constant need to maintain the Weave and support her followers must use a tremendous amount of her energy each day. If Mystra lost all of her followers all of a sudden, she would probably dissipate rather quickly (as compared to Loviatar, who really does nothing for anybody).
Ergo why I say that DvR is pure BS, and that a deity's actual power-level is a tenuous thing at best.
Well, there were enough exceptions to the idea of worshippers versus power level that it wasn't really that accurate of a statement. Umberlee never had that many worshippers it seemed, but remained a greater (possibly intermediate, can't recall offhand) power...
Intermediate. But I agree with your point.
It always seemed to me that the elemental powers (Kossuth, Akadi, et. al) weren't especially popular deities to worship within the setting, yet they were all greater powers anyway.As to that stuff of yours MT... well, all I'll say is that you're welcome to your opinion, but its not something I'd buy into. That and I strongly disagree with your take on Loviatar. Personally, I'd make her an intermediate power, if not greater, and more neutral in outlook than evil, just due to her Pain portfolio. Pain is absolutely necessary for the survival of the species, and without it, we would probably be extinct by now... can't recall exactly where I read it, but there was a region in either India or Pakistan (I think it was anyway) where limited genetic stock (isolated valley sort of thing) produced people who lost most of their ability to feel pain due to the vagaries of inbreeding... they're pretty much screwed and don't have much life expectancy because of it, since they can't tell if they're injured or not. Suffice to say, I subscribe to a school of thought that pain is not a negative thing, but something deeply related to self-preservation and survival of the species.
What is Loviatar expending energy on?