On the Home page, there is a link to the Chronodex by Steve Wilson. The Chronodex introduction indicates it is intended as an accurate reflection of GH dates, a timeline. Appended to the Chronodex are a list of sources from which the entries are drawn.
On first glance, this appears both thorough and useful. On closer examination, I have some concerns.
I will preface my comments by noting that I have not fact checked this document completely for such would take quite awhile. Spot checking leaves me with questions.
1 - Are the dates listed literal from the source documents?
2 - Are the names associated with dates, being historic figures or events, literal from the source documents?
3 - Are the relationships between historic figures and events literal from the source documents?
While some entries are labelled "figured" or "approximate" or similar, the vast majority appear to be literal from the source material. I doubt they are as literal as given and believe that the billing of the Chronodex may be misleading.
It strikes me that, in each of the above three instances, the Chronodex is as much an interpretive document, as not, particularly the farther back in time you go. That is, it is an elaboration on given source references. While in some cases, it is literal, in others, it does not appear to be so.
I am mindful that the Chronology that first appeared in Oerth Journal 1 by the same author was a wonderful interpretive work but was by no means literal.
I have no argument with the present Chronodex, but if it is not a literal listing of dates from source material without interpretation that should be made expressly clear.
Personally, I have no use for a non-literal document, except as it may be interesting as fiction and as one person's interpretation of events.
As an example of a literal document, compare Jason Zavoda's Greyhawkania encycolpedia.
Not meaning to start a fight but the question hangs pregnant over the Chronodex featured so prominently and with an appearance of authority - is it literal? _________________ GVD
I posted a reply to this as a new topic!!!! I didn't see that you'd asked here as well as in the comment sections on the special features link!!!!
I didn't respond in relation to your question about names/places, etc. With regard to all of them, they are literal. I did not make up any of my own material for the GreyChrondex. It's all from published material. See my reply on the board to you for the time issues!
Nobody should get their knickers in too much of a twist over 'literal' vs 'interpretive'. Most modern history is, to a certain extent, interpretive, with different experts proposing different views on the same subject by referring to different source material. In times past, official records were often given a certain amount of spin, depending on who was writing them.
As DMs we want all material to be absolutely spot on, but in the game itself, 'official' histories are unlikely to be all that accurate. My co-DM takes great delight in feeding his players contradictory historical information. He believes that it adds flavour to the campaign and stops them from assuming that information is accurante just because they found it in a book (Pluffet Smedger or not).
Accuracy does matter too much to me, and my players are generally confuesed and looking for answers. The world the characters live in is not the info on demand world. Even a demand at the point of a sword is often not enough... the info isnt available. Talking concretely about something is more of a conceit than a reality.
If the characters can never be absolutely sure of the info, it allows the DM a great deal of flexibility. None of my players are "researchers," they do not go to the source material and try to find what their characters would not otherwise know. They do not sit around and codify the myths, legends, gods, and rulers. They are Roleplaying Adventurers, and want to try to keep the experience clean in that regard.
So, the accuracy of the facts (fictional facts?!?!) is of little regard. It is just where we start our story. As a matter of fact, after 4 years, and being in the mid teen lvls, they have only met three published personalities (the court mage of Keoland, Rary's Brother on brief trip to GH City, and Mordenkained (to get the Key for Castle Maure). The Characters are divorced from the metagame, not as a device or anything else, it is just how their story has played out.
I posted a reply to this as a new topic!!!! I didn't see that you'd asked here as well as in the comment sections on the special features link!!!!
I didn't respond in relation to your question about names/places, etc. With regard to all of them, they are literal. I did not make up any of my own material for the GreyChrondex. It's all from published material. See my reply on the board to you for the time issues!
Oh, great questions by the way!
Steve
Thank you for your response. This makes matters clear. The Chronodex must have been a work of much time and devotion. Thank you for your work!
GVD _________________ GVD
Guest
Tue May 17, 2005 10:39 pm
And how about those fairies?
I posted a reply to this as a new topic!!!! I didn't see that you'd asked here as well as in the comment sections on the special features link!!!!
I didn't respond in relation to your question about names/places, etc. With regard to all of them, they are literal. I did not make up any of my own material for the GreyChrondex. It's all from published material. See my reply on the board to you for the time issues!
Oh, great questions by the way!
Steve
Thank you for your response. This makes matters clear. The Chronodex must have been a work of much time and devotion. Thank you for your work!
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
