papernanax.blogg.se - Wiki the talos principle

Lolth subsumed the aspects of Zinzerena and Moander, so both deities - while technically part of Lolth - are viewed as being other than Lolth by their followers, and thus merit separate treatments. There are several good parallel examples. Separate articles for 3rd and 4th edition Talos would be senseless, since the only difference (in the Talos aspect) is game statistics, and this wiki isn't supposed to include game statistics. Both have a considerable amount (not merely "one paragraph") of lore built around them, and I worry that a combined article would be overly long and chaotic, and necessitate the editor to make assumptions about exactly how they sync together that aren't necessarily reflected in the canon (for example: which aspect came first? Is Talos an interloper god or a Realms native?). I think Gruumsh and Talos are distinct enough aspects of the deity that they merit separate articles. History should be included, as should 4e information. Zerak talk 18:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC) I agree with Zerak and Niirfa-sa. Either move this artcile to Talos (3rd edition), or create a Talos (4th edition) page instead. People will still use the wiki to look up info on 3rd edition. Niirfa-sa 06:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC) I'm opposed to merging/revamping such big changes from 3ed-4ed. Shall we start a vote? So far we have 1 for merge, 2 against. Frankly, it's a little surprising that Talos wasn't chosen as the canonical name but my guess is that the developers wanted a strong orcish pantheon to counterbalance the fey one.Īlso, Drizzt is still alive. Gruumsh is simply focused around orcs, while Talos is more of a take-all god. To a 4E person he is less then nothing, an aspect of an orc god? The greater god Talos has nothing to do with Gruumsh, and it's hard to how they are related. Same way only a 1/2/3E person will care about Talos, as he is a greater god. To a 4E person, Drizzt was a drow ranger that did some stuff 120 years ago, and died years past. Sure, you can read the history, but that has nothing to do with the Realms of the 1400's. But 4E all the stuff is 100 years out of date. When a 1E,2E or 3E person comes to the Wiki, all the information in an article can be used.

This is a serious question, not whining.

Whining about it isn't going to help anyone. However, just like 3e and 2e retconned certain things considered canon, so has 4e, and the wiki should reflect that. Drizzt still left the Underdark to become a ranger of Mielikki. Elminster still became the Chosen of Mystra and became a famed archmage living in Shadowdale. However, canon is canon, and that includes not just new 4e material but old OD&D, AD&D, 2e, 3e, and 3.5 material as well.

I'm not a "4e person." I enjoyed 3e and 3.5 as well.

After all the 5,000 some articles here are useless to the 4E person. I wonder why you 4E people did not just make your own Wiki.

I guess canon=something you like, right?.

Maybe like the spells you can put a little 4E box way at the bottom of the page that says 'Oh yea in 4E they said and did this and that'. The classic Realms has nothing to do with the new, cool, hip, easy realms. I know they put out a D&D like game and some of the books even say Forgotten Realms on them, but they have no relation. You might be able to fill up one paragraph of lore about Gruumsh, and it's not like we will see any 4E lore. Talos is a major, greater power with tons and tons of Realmslore that covers several editions. I think it would be wrong to merge the articles. Since Talos and Gruumsh are the same god, would anybody object if the information here were simply moved to Gruumsh and Talos redirected to Gruumsh#Talos Aspect? Niirfa-sa 09:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)