Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - The Sacking of Lord Robilar's Estate???
    Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion
    The Sacking of Lord Robilar's Estate???
    Author Message
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 21, 2003
    Posts: 165


    Send private message
    Fri May 15, 2009 7:56 pm  
    The Sacking of Lord Robilar's Estate???

    So, I was reading through Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk and I saw a passage concerning Lord Robilar and the aftermath of the freeing of Iuz from his prison there in CY 570:

    "His [Robilar's] old friend Mordenkainen arrived with a secret tip to an adventure to end all adventures - the release and destruction of Iuz the Evil. After the gambit failed, word of Lord Robilar's role in the demon-god's release spread quickly. Local magistrates sacked his castle west of Greyhawk, scattering his dragons and exiling him from the city."

    My question is how did this happen so "quickly?"...Did Robilar go about bragging about how he failed?...Iuz's domain, IIRC, only included the Lands on the northern shore of Lake Whyestil, the other half of his "kingdom" having been taken by the Hierarchs of the Horned Society, is far from Greyhawk and, at that point, not much of a threat...Why would the city turn on him after what he did concerning Sir Bluto Sans Pite and the River of Blood Murders?...How did word get to said magistrates and who exactly traveled the day it would take to get to his estate?...

    I would be interested in any canon sources or fan supposition on the subject...

    Kwint
    Forum Moderator

    Joined: Feb 26, 2004
    Posts: 2590
    From: Ullinois

    Send private message
    Fri May 15, 2009 9:24 pm  

    That is a good topic. I read Expedition too and I vaguely recall the quote you posted, but now tat I think of it I always assumed his lands were sacked after the Rary incident not the Iuz incident which I also assumed was some covert affair. Hmm.

    What you insinuate about the timing though is key. The most obvious culprit must be the man who orchestrated the event to begin with:
    Mordenkainen!
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Fri May 15, 2009 9:35 pm  

    Well, I'm only taking guesses here, but these are a few of my ideas:

    First, I don't think they were exactly alone when they tried to release Iuz. And I am fairly certain that even Mordenkainen would've talked about it ... if nothing else, than to the Circle (or was it Citadel back then?) of Eight. (Mortellan, you twerp!! You posted while I was typing this!!) An age-old demigod had been released up on the face of the Oerth, and he was likely to be bent on vengeance. I don't think that the physical geographical location of Iuz's Empire would be a real concern to the nobility/gentry of the CoG. It was more about the (alleged) atrociously evil act of freeing the godling. Not so much the failure of his gambit, but the (supposedly accidental?) success of letting Iuz out.

    I would think that the nobility/gentry would also seize upon the political opening to act against Robilar, not out of existing history with him, but simply out of opportunism. Think of it in modern terms ... when a politician has something bad happen in his career, other politicians swarm over the potential downfall with a "mob mentality". They jump on the band wagon of defaming and decrying whatever was said or done. They don't want to be the one to be seen as being in the other politician's camp. And medieval politics weren't so different.

    As far as canon sources go, I am going to give one that certainly supports Mortellan's theory (and mine, as well):
    The Adventure Begins wrote:
    ... the estate of Lord Robilar, who betrayed the city and the Circle of Eight in 584 CY by allying with the archmage Rary. Robilar's manor was burned and his lands are becoming wilderness few go here for any reason, though it is said the dungeons below the manor were sealed without being explored.


    Now, I can't say that there wern't 14-odd years in between the Iuz incident, and the sacking of the estate post-Rary-incident, but that certainly would allow for both a.) a reason to do it, and b.) plenty of time to get it done! I'm mostly kidding, but it would explain it.

    Icarus
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Fri May 15, 2009 11:52 pm  

    In Temple of Elemental Evil, Gygax said that in his original campaign, Robilar's estate was sacked not for the Iuz incident, but for freeing Zuggtmoy from the Temple of Elemental Evil. Dragon #37 backs up this version of events. This makes more sense to me; while Iuz's capture was something done by a small group of adventurers a century ago, Zuggtmoy's incarceration was the cumulation of a major international effort, and I can see why people found reversing that to be annoying. Then, because Tenser had led the assault against his stronghold, Robilar has more personal motivation for leading the assault on the Fortress of Unknown Depths later on.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: May 12, 2005
    Posts: 933
    From: Woonsocket, RI, USA

    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 4:25 am  

    rasgon wrote:
    In Temple of Elemental Evil, Gygax said that in his original campaign, Robilar's estate was sacked not for the Iuz incident, but for freeing Zuggtmoy from the Temple of Elemental Evil. Dragon #37 backs up this version of events. This makes more sense to me; while Iuz's capture was something done by a small group of adventurers a century ago, Zuggtmoy's incarceration was the cumulation of a major international effort, and I can see why people found reversing that to be annoying. Then, because Tenser had led the assault against his stronghold, Robilar has more personal motivation for leading the assault on the Fortress of Unknown Depths later on.


    The problem is that this event comes from Gygax's home campaign and is not necessarily Greyhawk canon (similar to Robilar's successful completion of Tomb of Horrors). I suspect the writers of EttRoG were trying to find a way to reference the sacking of Robilar's estate in Gygax's campaign without invalidating T1–4 at the same time.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 4:54 am  

    Yes, the EtGR explanation of the sacking of Robilar's castle makes no sense, as Mordy and others were a part of that failure too. They probably would have had their lairs sacked too, if not for the fact that the people who were doing the sacking had just been sacked.


    Mordy is just lucky that way I guess.Laughing
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 6:50 am  

    DMPrata wrote:
    The problem is that this event comes from Gygax's home campaign and is not necessarily Greyhawk canon (similar to Robilar's successful completion of Tomb of Horrors).


    The Temple of Elemental Evil notes that this is only the way it happened in Gygax's home game, but "From the Sorcerer's Scroll" in Dragon #37 recounts the events as fact without such equivocation.

    Personally, I think it makes more sense, given the whole of the canon, if things happened the way they're described in the introduction to T1-4 and in "From the Sorcerer's Scroll." I don't think it invalidates T1-4 to assume this; it would contradict home games where someone else (or no one) freed Zuggtmoy, but home games are always going to contradict the official canon.

    I don't think it's ever stated as fact anywhere that Robilar was the first to complete the Tome of Horrors in the official timeline in the way his loosing of the Fungus Queen is stated as fact, although personally I assume he was (at least, the first in the modern era). Acererak's tomb has seen many, many adventurers go through it; some even escaped alive, and Robilar might well have been one of them.

    Note that there are actually three different explanations for why Robilar's castle was sacked. This article says it was for his part in Rary's betrayal after the Greyhawk Wars.
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 10:55 am  
    Three Options for the Ranksack of Robilar

    Well, this is quite the conundrum, isn't it? I hadn't realized that there would be a contradiction like this. It is ultimately a fairly minor detail, that changes little, but, if a campaign depended on the fact, a DM would have to decide for himself.

    One thing to think about is how popular common knowledge often confuses the facts. It is quite possible that these three versions are the product of something akin to playing a game of "telephone" when we were kids. By the time the story gets around to the end of the line, the story gets all horsed up.

    The essential facts of the situation, common to all three versions, seem to be thus:
      Robilar committed a horrible act, for which he was reviled.
      He was forced to make a strategic withdrawl from his estate.
      His estate was ransacked and burned by forces of good.

    Now, whether those events involved the Freeing of Iuz (cy570), Freeing of Zuggtmoy (cy575), or the betrayal of the Circle of Eight along with Rary (cy584), is up for discussion. I for one, can see how commoners (and some educated folk) might not know exactly which it was for. After all, the events in question are all 15 to 29 years ago. (I would hazard a guess that there are some out there who don't remember the political elections of 1980 - 1994 all that well, for example.) The only real problem that could arise, as I see it (as I stated before), is if this minutiae was a basis for a campaign and the date became of great import.

    On more of a side note, since Rasgon confirmed my quote from The Adventure Begins with his link to the WotC site, I thought I would confirm his reference to freeing Zuggtmoy with a reference to an article in the Oerth Journal #7 by Rob Kuntz himself (the original player of Robilar).
    Robert J. Kuntz, in "Robilar Remembered: Lord Robilar & co. wrote:
    Alerted by the "freeing" of the demoness, a Force of Good rushed to the temple complex in an attempt to recapture the demoness and to punish her liberators. Tenser and his associates arrived, with Burne, Rufus, Otis and a great force of elves, paladins and unicorns. Upon seeing the destructionof her temple complex and the gathering Force of Good,
    Zuggtmoy departed in great haste. Robilar and Otto fled back to his castle, with the Force of Good in hot pursuit. The druid Jaroo, in falcon form, followed Robilar and Otto over 200 miles back to Robilar's castle. After they were informed of his whereabouts, the good war party eventually rallied outside of Robilar's castle. Robilar and Otto abandoned the castle and it fell to the Forces of Good.


    I almost chuckle when I say this, but, there's also the possibility that a DM could say that Robilar has been in and out of the graces of the City of Greyhawk on more than one occasion and that his estate has been overrun on three separate occasions. I think this lends toward a slightly more humorous approach, with Robilar constantly being a Lord then not a Lord, Shocked but it definitely solves the conundrum. <mischievous and impish little grin>

    Good times to be had by all!!
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 21, 2003
    Posts: 165


    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 10:19 pm  

    Well fellers, thanks for the info...I'm glad to see that there are several options from canon sources to use...

    I'll most likely go with the Greyhawk Wars as it seems to make the most sense for my campaign...I personally see the ToEE and the Iuz release as too remote a threat, whereas the siding with Rary and the events at the pact signing, as well as the sacking of an Oligarch's home and a Landholding Archmage's castle, as a good reason to sack a traitor's estate, the crimes having been committed in the City and Domain of Greyhawk...

    As for minutia and its importance, well, that's what makes this site so interesting and the discussions and reading/lurking worthwhile...

    Kwint
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Sat May 16, 2009 10:41 pm  
    Most likely resolution for ransacking Robilar

    Well, Kwint -

    I would have to agree that, for me, that is the one that makes the most sense. Most all of the canon sources agree recently (until EttRoGH); including Greyhawk Wars, The Adventure Begins, Rary the Traitor, and Return of the Eight, which all specifically mention the sacking of the estate.

    This was a great discussion for an interesting topic! Thanks Kwint! Happy

    Icarus
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun May 17, 2009 1:45 am  

    Of course there's the whole point of Robilar only having freed Zuggy IN GARY'S OWN CAMPAIGN, and yet somebody thought that meant it was going to happen that way regardless of anybody else playing the published Temple of Elemental Evil module themselves and so wrote it into canon sources anyways. So much for keeping things open for general play and not making things a bit too much about about infamous NPCs in the background of Greyhawk. That doesn't sound like any other campaign world we know, now does it? Wink
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Sun May 17, 2009 7:03 am  

    Cebrion wrote:
    Of course there's the whole point of Robilar only having freed Zuggy IN GARY'S OWN CAMPAIGN, and yet somebody thought that meant it was going to happen that way regardless of anybody else playing the published Temple of Elemental Evil module themselves and so wrote it into canon sources anyways.


    What source is that mentioned in, other than Gary Gygax's own Dragon article?

    Quote:
    So much for keeping things open for general play and not making things a bit too much about about infamous NPCs in the background of Greyhawk.


    Everyone's campaign is and should be different; that doesn't mean it isn't useful to have a "canonical version" of events. It is useful for those who develop shared content, whether fan-created or official. It's also useful to develop interesting NPCs for those who don't have retired or current PCs developed for those roles. So having a default timeline is a good thing.

    I don't see how saying "freed by unknown adventurers" is better than attributing things to a specific NPC. In both cases, the individual DM can change things to personalize them, but in the latter case there's a common default for those with no strong alternatives in mind (because they didn't play the original module with the same group). As such, the named NPC route is more useful.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon May 18, 2009 3:01 am  

    [quote=&quot;rasgon&quot;]What source is that mentioned in, other than Gary Gygax's own Dragon article?[/quote]
    T1-4 itself, page 28, under the &quot;World of Greyhawk Setting&quot; heading. the &quot;All of this happened on another world from yours&quot; bit is the most important part of the reference. If authors muddy canon too much with things like Robilar in T1-4 and similar stuff and the products aren't for use in your World of Greyhawk at all, but another World of Greyhawk. Not exactly the best tact to take when writing something for everyones' Greyhawk.

    Leaving it open serves a few useful purposes. One, Zuggtmoy isn't going to be released by everyone who goes through the adventure so it is not such a good idea to establish ongoing canon based on that occurring. Two, no famous/infamous NPC need be named so that we don't have to worry about inconsistencies in canon, and later authors cannot then screw it up lest they do so purposely. That's two strikes against, and this just involves Robilar so far. Then there's the whole Thrommel and Lareth issues.
    It is not necessary to include Robilar in any T1-4 canon, and such characters ought not to be integral to any adventure canon in the way that Robilar has been made to be regarding a few things, especially when it is in the telling of that character's version of going through the adventure that is about to be played. Latching on to that for canon was simply a bad idea as it has no relevance to anyone's personal campaigns and an ongoing canonical story arc. A few tied in references like this one tend to snowball and lead to other issues, as is evident with the advancing time line and later material mentioning Robilar(and others) that is based on adventures turning out a certain way. Basically, stay away from things that will lead an example such as &quot;If adventure X turned out his way for you, forthcoming material regarding it will be fully relevant to your game. If the events of adventure X turned out another way for you, forthcoming material will be mostly irrelevant to your game(but we hope you buy it anyways and not complain about it).&quot;
    It really isn't useful to have a storyline nailed down canonically when you are writing for a game setting that is built upon the adventures of wholly separate groups of players. You leave most things open for everyone to fill in themselves. Surely this can be tough to balance and needs to be well thought out before writing something like this in. Robilar joining with Rary and taking down members of the Circle of Eight and creating a new empire in the Bright Desert(whether one cares for that or not) works because those events weren't based around an adventure where those events may or may not happen. That is the right way of developing canon; not basing it on events that arbitrarily will or will not happen across the entire customer base. Besides, I think it is better to further develop the setting before advancing the time line anyways. That avoids most of these sorts of continuity problems altogether. Increase the size of the sandbox and let the kids have some time to play in it before advancing them to the next grade level so to speak. Wink
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Wed May 20, 2009 9:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Adept Greytalker

    Joined: Oct 07, 2008
    Posts: 409


    Send private message
    Mon May 18, 2009 8:05 am  
    T1-4 Text

    Gary says somewhere in T1-4 that while his player characters did x, y, and z, he was editing the module with the idea that he would back up the timeline so other players would encounter what his players did and there might be of course other outcomes or paths they might take than his own players took in his game.
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Mon May 18, 2009 10:17 am  

    Cebrion wrote:
    T1-4 itself, page 28, under the "World of Greyhawk Setting" heading.


    No, that's not what I'm asking. I'm asking what source other than the Dragon article wrote it into canon. T1-4 didn't write it into canon, because, as you noted, the story there is clearly described as occurring in Gygax's campaign only. Dragon #37, perhaps arguably, did write it into canon, but it did so before T1-4 was even published.

    The reason I'm asking is that you wrote: "yet somebody thought that meant it was going to happen that way regardless of anybody else playing the published Temple of Elemental Evil module themselves and so wrote it into canon sources anyways." I'm wondering who "somebody" is.

    Quote:
    If authors muddy canon too much with things like Robilar in T1-4 and similar stuff and the products aren't for use in your World of Greyhawk at all, but another World of Greyhawk


    What authors would those be? That's the reason for my question.

    Quote:
    Not exactly the best tact to take when writing something for everyones' Greyhawk.


    You're going to have to explain better why this is even a problem. What adventures or supplements have been published that the identity of Zuggtmoy's liberator, or even the question of whether or not she was liberated at all, renders harder to use? I can't think of any. Have you ever been forced to throw down a module in disgust because in your campaign Zuggtmoy was freed by Fistil Fisticuffs instead of Robilar of Greyhawk? Has any adventure's plotline depended on the fact that Zuggtmoy is roaming around free?

    If not, then what exactly are you complaining about?

    Quote:
    Two, no famous/infamous NPC need be named so that we don't have to worry about inconsistencies in canon, and later authors cannot then screw it up lest they do so purposely.


    Whenever anything is introduced into the canon, there's a chance later authors might accidentally change it. This isn't unique to NPCs. Obviously, it isn't desirable for designers to avoid naming everything, and it would seem odd to single NPCs out as a particularly undesirable thing to name.

    Quote:
    Then there's the whole Thrommel and Lareth issues.


    I thought this thread was specifically about Robilar, not an excuse for a generalized rant against all timeline advancements (which I'm somewhat sympathetic to). I'm still not sure (yes, not since a few minutes ago when I started typing this post) what problem naming Robilar as Zuggtmoy's liberator has caused. I think the problem with Thrommel is that the question of his liberation was so central to the ongoing history of the Flanaess that the whole Thrommel subplot rendered it impossible to advance the history of the Kingdom of Furyondy without resolving it one way or the other. Whether or not the timeline should ever have been advanced is one matter; whether such an important event should have been left so much to chance is another question that comes from a different perspective. I don't pretend to have any answers here - it depends on individual game style. This is a real problem for groups that attempt to use both the original Temple of Elemental Evil and sourcebooks that depend on a certain version of history in the same campaign. One solution, I think, is to not attempt to use T1-4 in the same campaign; that is, end the campaign after the PCs complete T1-4 (and whatever else they do before the campaign is done), and start a new one with new characters and a new continuity in which you use the timeline from later supplements. Another solution is to use The Marklands and other books that assume Thrommel was not rescued, but change them a bit to suit your preferences. An alternate history starting from his marriage to Lady Jolene would be interesting. I don't think The Marklands would be rendered useless, though you wouldn't be able to use it "straight out of the box."

    In any event, that's immaterial to the question of whether naming Robilar would have been a problem, if indeed anyone other than Gygax (in 1980) has even done it.

    Quote:
    It is not necessary to include Robilar in any T1-4 canon


    No, but it's useful. More useful than creating no canon for games set at a later date. Assuming people want to set their games in 585 or 591, and that they want to buy sourcebooks and adventurers set in those dates, it's better to say "In 579, Robilar sacked the Temple of Elemental Evil, accidentally freeing the demoness Zuggtmoy" than it is to say "In 579, something may have happened, or it may not have, and it may or may not have been anyone's fault."

    Overly specific canon is better than no canon, is what I'm saying. People don't buy sourcebooks because they're hoping for vagueness. Presenting a specific NPC who characters can go to because he has information they need, or because they've been tasked with bringing him to justice, or any number of possible reasons to put NPCs in a game rather than just having the game be "the adventures of the player characters and the nameless, uninteresting mooks who offer no plot hooks whatsoever."

    If you can't use that specific NPC as written because you've already established a different continuity, too bad for you. Use the NPC in a different way, strip some of the detail from that NPC and apply it to a different NPC, or ignore that part of the book and move on. Nobody can write for "everybody's Greyhawk" because there's no version of Greyhawk that can possibly suit everybody.

    I feel like I'm arguing several different, somewhat incompatible things, so I'll try to recap.

    First, I think you may be complaining about a problem - published sourcebooks being too specific about what Robilar did in the Temple - that doesn't actually exist. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

    Second, I'm arguing that if this "problem" actually did exist, it wouldn't be a bad thing. It would, in fact, be better than the alternative.

    What I'm not arguing is that advancing the timeline is necessarily a good thing. I'd be happy if the published campaign was still set in 576, actually. But if it is going to advance, I'd much rather it was advanced by actual names and personalities.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 1:18 am  

    Holy crap! I actually remembered correctly where I read some oddball fact! I'm going to take a personal moment here, as this doesn't happen all that often. Don't worry. I'll surely screw three things up to balance this out. Laughing Okay. The canon reference comes form The Greyhawk Players Guide(by Anne Brown), p. 26 :

    Lord Robilar

    A powerful but unstable warrior, Lord Robilar is treacherous, untrustworthy and a liar. He is responsible for the freeing the archfiend Zuggtmoy from imprisonment,...


    Anne Brown may have written it, or just compiled it from a previous source, but it is established canon- horribly so to my mind. Of course nobody needs to adhere to it, or any other specific canon facts that contradict their own campaign events, but it it is in there.


    Still, you let enough of this stuff slide in over time and you get a bunch of adventures that have already been played out as it regards the campaign setting as whole. Yes, you too can play those adventures, but to make use of much of the adventure relevant information in the campaign setting you have to alter everything having to do with how your adventures have turned out if they didn't turn out in the prescribed way. That just cuts down on the overall usefulness of said campaign setting information to the customer base as whole(not a smart thing to do). Or you take things out the players' hands and just railroad them to the forgone conclusion, but that is not the most satisfying thing to do to one's players. Surely this can all be circumvented to various degrees, but it is annoying to see it over and over again.

    This is of course exactly the same thing that many folks harp on the Forgotten Realms about. Well, here's the wake up call. It's in Greyhawk too(Robilar, Warnes Starcoat, etc. etc.), it's not as rare as one may think, and yes, I'll tear into Greyhawk authors for it too. Razz So no, I don't think it is a good thing to refer to named characters as having completed events for which there are published adventures, even if a DM wishes to set their campaign at a later date. The campaign setting book could just state Ten years later, a group of stalwart adventurers brought down the resurgent Temple of Elemental Evil, breaking Iuz's influence over the area. That leaves things such that the blanks can pretty much be filled by literally anyone to suit their own campaign. Peripheral references usually work just fine though, but the Robilar-Zuggtmoy thing is not a peripheral reference in the way that merely finding one of Robilar's shields in one of the Nodes is.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Wed May 20, 2009 1:59 am; edited 1 time in total
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 1:58 am  
    NPC Specific mod results

    There is little or no difference if the mod or adventure names an NPC as having completed it, or having some vague nameless reference like "a stalwart band of adventurers saved the world in CY ..." The same chagnes you're talking about still have to be made, either way.

    The only other option is to leave published mods out of canon history altogether, and I, for one, find that a ridiculously far fetched option.

    Given the choice between having to make up some cockamamie story of the group that "saved the world" or using an NPC's name, I would rather spend my time coming up with interesting things for the PCs to do instead of coming up with the details of an unnamed group. If there is a generic "adventuring party" that goes unnamed, it makes it more difficult for DMs to use that part of history, because the PCs are inevitably going to ask, "who saved the world the last time this happened?"

    And besides, The chance of the PCs being the same ones as those who actually *did* "save the world", is little anyway, so why not have a little continuity in the storylone, and actually name the person who did it?

    Icarus
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3835
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 2:14 am  

    That is simply not true, and no cockamamie story is needed.

    ***************Temple of Elemental Evil SPOILER ALERT*********************
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    *
    There is quite difference between saying a stalwart band of adventurers brought the place down compared to giving details of the consequences, let alone who accomplished them. Was Zuggtmoy freed? Was the Golden Skull destroyed and the Temple implode? Did the Skull survive and is now out there? Does Iuz have the Skull? Did certain villains get away? Was Thrommel rescued?

    All of those very important campaign setting consequences are left perfectly vague by what I wrote, and it only assumes that at some point T1-4 was adventured in by...adventurers. The problem is of course further compounded by assumed results presented in The Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil. This goes to telling people how to having their adventurers turn out. The campaign setting isn't really theirs when they go through the adventures or read the campaign setting material based around them- they are just visiting.

    Not overly advancing the timeline significantly avoids most of these things, but the campaign setting info shouldn't be about Rochambeauxing the existant adventurers. Wink
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Wed May 20, 2009 9:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 01, 2007
    Posts: 699
    From: On a Cape on the East Coast

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 6:15 am  
    Once again about Robilar

    Once again, either way, whether a DM uses a named NPC or a generic unnamed group, details are going to have to made applicable to his personal campaign. This is true with any published adventure ever written. A DM has to make it his own and be creative. He will have to change the names to that of his own NPCs, or his PCs or whatever. It will have to be changed either way. It's a moot point whether, in this example, it was Robilar or Joe Player.

    The only other possibility is to not include mod or adventure synopsis in canon history. And I, for one, find that preposterous. At some point, we have to assume something happened. Named NPC or not. It's not going to simply be left out.

    However... clearly, this has gotten *way* off topic from the original post. This thread isn't about whether or not NPC's should be named, it's about when Robilar's estate was sacked. And the entry in The Player's Guide about Zuggtmoy and Robilar doesn't even mention whether his estate was sacked or not.

    But then, my moderator voice isn't purple.

    Icarus
    _________________
    Owner and Lead Admin: https://greyhawkonline.com<div>Editor-in-Chief of the Oerth Journal: https://greyhawkonline.com/oerthjournal</div><div>Visit my professional art gallery: https://wkristophnolen.daportfolio.com</div>
    GreySage

    Joined: Aug 03, 2001
    Posts: 3310
    From: Michigan

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 1:16 pm  

    I guess it's just a matter of personal preference. I would much rather see named NPCs giving the world a shared history that we can use if we desire. It's far more potentially useful than the (for me, boring and generic) alternative that provides no story hooks to build on.

    I'll add that for me one of the joys of using a shared setting, particularly this one, is the shared body of lore that connects it to the very dawn of the D&D game. The idea that the PCs are adventuring in the same dungeons that Gary Gygax's PCs went through in the 1970s, perhaps in somewhat different form, is a powerful one for me, so I very much like the idea of including original PCs or tournament characters and their deeds as official parts of the setting. It's one of the reasons to play Greyhawk as opposed to, say, Eberron; the greater history associated with it. This need not be played as a "all bow to Robilar, who is more awesome than your character will ever be!" moment; there's no reason to treat with reverence characters who were often greedy and flawed, and I think it's fun for each group to riff off the original ideas and invent their own altered takes on the characters and situations. But I like that they exist and are part of the world.

    Thanks for finding the Anne Brown reference, by the way, Cebrion.
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 1477
    From: Wichita, KS, USA

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 7:13 pm  
    Re: Three Options for the Ranksack of Robilar

    rasgon wrote:
    In Temple of Elemental Evil, Gygax said that in his original campaign, Robilar's estate was sacked not for the Iuz incident, but for freeing Zuggtmoy from the Temple of Elemental Evil. Dragon #37 backs up this version of events.


    Quite true. RJK has recounted the Fall of Robilar in various places (PPP boards and DF, I think), and the accounts basically state that Gary wrecked Robilar's Castle for ruining/spoiling the ToEE adventure/playtest, via DM fiat. Tim Kask's druid Jaroo supposedly followed Robilar home to the Castle, and then the forces of good descended upon it, and Robilar was forced to abandon it or die, so abandon it he did.

    rasgon wrote:
    Then, because Tenser had led the assault against his stronghold, Robilar has more personal motivation for leading the assault on the Fortress of Unknown Depths later on.


    That's a nice tie-in, Rip!

    Icarus wrote:
    The essential facts of the situation, common to all three versions, seem to be thus:
      Robilar committed a horrible act, for which he was reviled.
      He was forced to make a strategic withdrawl from his estate.
      His estate was ransacked and burned by forces of good.

    Now, whether those events involved the Freeing of Iuz (cy570), Freeing of Zuggtmoy (cy575), or the betrayal of the Circle of Eight along with Rary (cy584), is up for discussion.


    What's particularly nice about your analysis Icarus is that you've shown how it's possible to tie the events together based on what campaign era you're playing in:

    - pre-Wars game = tie it to freeing Iuz, or to freeing Tzuggtmoy (or both!)
    - GH Wars game = tie it to Rary's betrayal
    - post-GH Wars game = tie it to the clone-gone-awry stuff in EttRoG

    Robert J. Kuntz, in "Robilar Remembered: Lord Robilar & co. wrote:
    Alerted by the "freeing" of the demoness, a Force of Good rushed to the temple complex in an attempt to recapture the demoness and to punish her liberators. Tenser and his associates arrived, with Burne, Rufus, Otis and a great force of elves, paladins and unicorns. Upon seeing the destructionof her temple complex and the gathering Force of Good,
    Zuggtmoy departed in great haste. Robilar and Otto fled back to his castle, with the Force of Good in hot pursuit. The druid Jaroo, in falcon form, followed Robilar and Otto over 200 miles back to Robilar's castle. After they were informed of his whereabouts, the good war party eventually rallied outside of Robilar's castle. Robilar and Otto abandoned the castle and it fell to the Forces of Good.


    Thanks for posting that, I'd forgotten about that account, and it squares with the versions Rob has mentioned online.

    Icarus wrote:
    I almost chuckle when I say this, but, there's also the possibility that a DM could say that Robilar has been in and out of the graces of the City of Greyhawk on more than one occasion and that his estate has been overrun on three separate occasions. I think this lends toward a slightly more humorous approach, with Robilar constantly being a Lord then not a Lord, Shocked but it definitely solves the conundrum. <mischievous and impish little grin>


    LOL. That's a take on the character I hadn't considered---perhaps one to use in conjunction with WG7 ;)
    _________________
    Allan Grohe (grodog@gmail.com)
    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/greyhawk.html
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 1477
    From: Wichita, KS, USA

    Send private message
    Wed May 20, 2009 7:17 pm  

    Cebrion wrote:
    rasgon wrote:
    What source is that mentioned in, other than Gary Gygax's own Dragon article?

    T1-4 itself, page 28, under the &quot;World of Greyhawk Setting&quot; heading. the &quot;All of this happened on another world from yours&quot; bit is the most important part of the reference. If authors muddy canon too much with things like Robilar in T1-4 and similar stuff and the products aren't for use in your World of Greyhawk at all, but another World of Greyhawk. Not exactly the best tact to take when writing something for everyones' Greyhawk.

    This isn't the only time Original GH campaign events have intruded upon published modules: the connection between S4 and WG6 is another such instance, wherein Drenlza is mentioned as having been successfully slain. Ditto for Lareth's support from Lolth and the &quot;sharp check&quot; dealt to her.

    Cebrion wrote:
    Leaving it open serves a few useful purposes. One, Zuggtmoy isn't going to be released by everyone who goes through the adventure so it is not such a good idea to establish ongoing canon based on that occurring.

    I agree completely, of course: open's better, but the historical notes are fun to read about :D
    _________________
    Allan Grohe (grodog@gmail.com)
    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/greyhawk.html
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> World of Greyhawk Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.30 Seconds