|
Post by Scott on May 31, 2009 11:48:07 GMT -5
Were they already trapped in the dark star prison? I seem to remember that being part of Gary's conclusion for the GD series if the PCs played it right.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 31, 2009 11:51:43 GMT -5
Well, that could be and he might have just decided " it is so" after he left TSR...
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 31, 2009 11:53:15 GMT -5
... he did, however, say that they had been banished from their place of origin, but where that was and to where I guess is a mystery. Maybe Gary hadn't even decided for sure. ^__^
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 31, 2009 11:59:09 GMT -5
Both ideas certainly fit Gary's style.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 31, 2009 12:06:11 GMT -5
I wish I was more organized. I've lost so much Gary-lore just from being such a disorganized mess.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 31, 2009 12:45:32 GMT -5
My thoughts are that the EEG concept, like so many EGG concepts, evolved over time. I think there was one, and then it became three. In Gary’s right up for Dorgha Turgu (spelling?) he wrote “Swayed by the evil counsel of Vilp-akf'cho Rentaq, that alien thing which is called the Elder Elemental God”. That doesn’t exclude there being three, but, to me, it implies there is one. I thought that the three beings in the drow temple were not three separate EEGs, but just monstrous servants, shoggoth type beings.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 31, 2009 15:02:07 GMT -5
In pinning down Greyhawk style retrospectively I've cared about EEG but in play I looked at it as if it was window dressing and just carried on. At the time I guess that I had no idea the D&D game was going to "stop" being D&D that had no new content. Heres something else about EEG thats on my mind. The EEG implied as a fake god circa ARTIFACT OF EVIL/TEMPLE OF ELEMENTAL EVIL is another angle that (ever since that EEG article) has been neglected. The introduction of Eclavdra in the novel implies that the her G3 "EEG cult" and the T1 "TOEE" are one and the same because Iuz now controls "at least a quarter of the nighted drow". This still gives me a headache.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 31, 2009 15:27:19 GMT -5
I looked up the quotes I was semi-remembering. I had it backwards. The EEG was already banished to a dark star. The PCs actions could have brought him back.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Jun 1, 2009 10:17:53 GMT -5
Back to the original drive... Thrommel returning. Did anybody return him in play of TOEE yet? The end of the thankfully short (but not short enough) 1983 version history of the Flanaess rephrases his loss as chief reason that Greyhawk (read: D&D) is in the state that its in as "D&D" then TOEE comes along and gives a chance to throw him back thats one of the factors (from my view) that makes TOEE give off a half-baked vibe. The 1983 reiteration of his disappearance being key to the current state of affairs means "D&D" needs him to be gone. Lets look at the development of this character. 1980 He can be purple-skinned for all we know but he was the ruler of Veluna (a Welsh parallel). 1983 Same story but more emphasis on his loss in the history. 1985 If you don't fillet him you'll be a Furyondian Idol. 1986 The novel AOE describes Fur & Vel as still allied but the borderland betwixt the realms is described as a road that is safe passage for evil. The TOEE venture is described by Iuz as a thing of the past and he's done with it. 199-something Gygax insinuates SB just to drive the message that WOG would have been better off in his care, etc. So if you bring him back should you screw something else up to replace "Le Mort"'s...AHEM...Thrommel's fisher king schtick? What if his brother "Yrneh" (a play on Henry the VIII and Mr Gygax)should marry the princess but end up getting a divorce that is against the "rulings in matters spiritual" of the archcleric?
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 1, 2009 10:43:20 GMT -5
The 80/83 info was foreshadowing/setting up the Temple adventure and the possibility of the PCs rescuing Thrommel. I can’t see it being anything else.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Jun 1, 2009 11:22:22 GMT -5
Gary's designs are all over the place but that whole angle just might have been a sign to say now that GH is in your hands keep in mind that there are forces at work that will always cause strife so there will never be "peace", i.e. save Thrommel today lose something else tomorrow, etc.
Honestly? I mean reallllly honestly?
I still think its a Mentzer job in my guts though. The rescue, that is. Something about it has a funk, its the swords, that has Mentzer's spoor all over it (remember the way he wrote Basic to Immortals? With all the legendary weapons instead of new weapons?). I can just imagine him bringing up the rescue as a tie-in then Gary "okaying" it.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 1, 2009 11:30:06 GMT -5
It's all EGG. He was in Gary's playtest just like in the published version.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Jun 1, 2009 12:27:14 GMT -5
As a light Tsojcanth gag sure (i.e. here he goes again! Kaboom! in their face..), I can agree with that. That reeks of Gary. But I think Gary might have had him die regardless without the tiny chance and the fleshing out of that minute chance is all Frank's doing. [glow=red,2,300]"And look who is at the ceremony of all new Velondi! Why, its your old henchman Zonkers, who even though the party successfully fled from Zugttmoy they ran into her repeatedly in the random encounters 30 times and he eventually got "basidirond-ed" into cutting off his own head, is back alive standing behind the future Plar-chess-ogyn-oness of Veluna (or rather Voll or Vell we're not sure yet) as she doles out medals. And look they've given him a new helmet as well! Beep-Bloop-Blopp-Bloop-Bleep!!!"[/glow]
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 1, 2009 13:36:42 GMT -5
???? I'm not seeing what you're seeing. That was written and playtested before the WoG setting was released. T1 was written as an introduction to the setting. They were written in conjunction with each other; Thrommel was written into the history so you would have some background information if you found him in the Temple.
|
|
|
Post by Merkholz on Jun 1, 2009 14:09:51 GMT -5
I'm sure Gygax decided to let each DM decide how the events played out in the respective campaign but rescuing the rich and the mighty is a fantasy trope I'm sure was appreciated by Gary.
I just realized the humour in that the heroes rescue the Prince and not the Princess!
M
|
|
|
Post by grodog on Jun 1, 2009 16:19:19 GMT -5
I wish I was more organized. I've lost so much Gary-lore just from being such a disorganized mess. Right there with you, Scott: I need to sit down and mine my conversations with Rob over the years, to cull out useful info for later reuse, at some point....
|
|
Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 1, 2009 18:05:08 GMT -5
1986 The novel AOE describes Fur & Vel as still allied but the borderland betwixt the realms is described as a road that is safe passage for evil. The TOEE venture is described by Iuz as a thing of the past and he's done with it. In AoE, ToEE is not exactly “in the past”. Maybe for Iuz, but Zuggtmoy is still imprisoned there, and nothing has happened other than “an occasional group of adventurous explorers seeking forgotten treasure.” Chapter 21 describes a race to Zuggtmoy between an unspecified good army of “archclerics” and “fighters” and “a magic-user or two” versus Iggwilv aided by Mordenkainen. Iggwilv wins and frees Zuggtmoy, of course. But no mention of Thrommel. The ambiguity of who led the good army is curious. I always took it to mean Tenser, but since Tenser plays a role in the book there is no reason he should be anonymous here. Also, Tenser has no motivation here, the way he has in the Robilar scenario. Plus, it repeatedly stresses that the army is led by clerics, not by the “magic-user or two”. I think the implication is that the “occasional group of adventurous explorers seeking forgotten treasure” had freed Thrommel, and he and Hazen then led an army back there to destroy Zuggtmoy. But Gygax doesn’t mention Thrommel by name because it’s not important to contradict anyone’s campaign. Or do you read it differently? What was Mordenkainen’s angle here and what was his involvement, exactly?
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on Jun 1, 2009 20:46:22 GMT -5
The cult does seem dead to me in this book compared to the module's Iuz presence and she just happens to still be there. Heres the entirety from AoE: *Thrommel?
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on Jun 1, 2009 22:41:09 GMT -5
I think that you need to make the difference between "Elemental Evil" which indeed was a ploy by Iuz/Zuggtmoy and the "Elder Elemental God(s)", which might have represented a bit of irony on Gary's part, should the party actually make it to that final missing level and release the beastie. If this was done, it was assumed that the EEG and Zuggtmoy would go "elsewhere" to battle, while the party finished looting the joint. I don't know that the whole Iuz/St. Cuthbert battle would have been necessary in that case, as the EEG could probably take them both on. Gary stated several times that the Temple was built over the old EEG shrine because it allowed Iuz and Zuggtmoy to draw on some eldritch power.
|
|
Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on Jun 2, 2009 0:30:52 GMT -5
Battle of Emridy Meadows
“The PCs” and St. Cuthbert? Or is this still about Emridy Meadows, and in this timeline he just lost interest in the ToEE after it was razed and Zuggtmoy imprisoned?
|
|