Speculation Eilistraee in 5E, or lack of it. [Archive]

Psyren

2021-12-17, 02:19 PM

I may be missing the point, and I am not super familiar with FR but could they do something like Eilistraee was defeated/dormant/weakened for however long and then the presence of Drizz't and the impact of his actions against evil reinvigorates her/strengthens her to return to her place as a deity?

Would that bend anything too much?

Other than the fact that he doesn't actually worship her you mean? :smalltongue:

I mean, Lolth controls most Drow. Drow are popular. Eilistraee is the goddess that opposes lolth the most.

Nobody wants an actually evil drow, they want to be the only good one, just like everybody else. {Wait, was Syndrome right?} So Eilistraee theoretically should be more popular as an option out. The fact she has a thread right here and most people responding don't have to look up does point to her being popular. {I can't name any of her brothers/sisters.}

Popular things tend to get more lore. So not really that weird people want mention of her.

Eilistraee is popular but it doesn't change the fact that she's specific to one setting. Drow are not, and even Lolth is not. They could certainly change the former but that's how it stands as of now. So I don't know that she needs a ton more lore than she has currently.

It's a cheap tack-on of lore to appeal to the drizzit-clone fanboys.

To reiterate - Eilistraee has nothing to do with Drizz't. She was invented to explain how someone born in Drow society might learn about the surface and other ways of life without having been there. A true Drizz't clone would be a member of their surface raiding parties who grew a conscience like he did.

Dr.Samurai

2021-12-17, 02:26 PM

Other than the fact that he doesn't actually worship her you mean? :smalltongue:
Yeah, I mean... fair point lol.

But I thought she was the goddess of good drow, so I was thinking less that he worships her and brings her back and more that his existence and great deeds (as a good drow) revive her (even though he worships that nature deity).

Just as a way to have your "Drizz't is a poster boy and Eilistraee is a thing" cake and eat it too.

Then again, I think any deity with an unreasonable number of vowels in their name should be removed from the game lore :smallamused:

Scots Dragon

2021-12-17, 02:33 PM

Is there an appeal to loudness fallacy?

This god did not exist for the first 15 years of Forgotten Realms existence (so the first 30ish years of D&D). It's a cheap tack-on of lore to appeal to the drizzit-clone fanboys.

Eilistraee actually precedes the Forgotten Realms' publication as part of AD&D 1e.

Ed Greenwood had the idea for her and Vhaeraun as a pair of feuding twin deities for a while, and adapted them to incorporate them as part of a larger drow pantheon. In addition the youngest of the Seven Sisters was made into her highest ranking priestess.

Also the Forgotten Realms Campaign Set was published in 1987, and the book which explicitly introduced Eilistraee (FOR2 Drow of the Underdark) was published in 1991.

So... four years, not fifteen. And as others have mentioned, she has nothing to do with Drizzt.

Eilistraee is a big deal in the Realms and if you haven't noticed that you just plain haven't been paying any attention.

Wildstag

2021-12-17, 03:26 PM

Eilistraee is a big deal in the Realms and if you haven't noticed that you just plain haven't been paying any attention.

I'll be honest, I think that last part works for basically every discrepancy people have with Drow in D&D. There's a lot more to drow than just Menzoberranzan and Drizz't, and if they haven't noticed, they haven't been paying attention.

Naanomi

2021-12-17, 04:35 PM

She got a few mentions in Planescape products over the years, but she was hardly ever a very centrally important Power overall

Millstone85

2021-12-17, 07:10 PM

Eilistraee is popular but it doesn't change the fact that she's specific to one setting. Drow are not, and even Lolth is not.
She got a few mentions in Planescape products over the years, but she was hardly ever a very centrally important Power overallMToF was, maybe not a Planescape product per say, but certainly one set in the Great Wheel and through multiple worlds of the Material. Its description of the Dark Seldarine could thus be seen as elevating these deities to significant multiworld Powers.

However, WotC's revised approach to the drow (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates) does not bode well for Eilistraee.

This new text replaces a description that confused the culture of Menzoberranzan—a city in the grip of Lolth’s cult in the Forgotten Realms—with drow themselves. The new text more accurately describes the place of drow in the D&D multiverse and correctly situates them among the other branches of the elf family, each of which was shaped by an environment in the earliest days of the multiverse: forests (wood elves), places of ancient magic on the Material Plane (high elves), oceans (sea elves), the Feywild (eladrin), the Shadowfell (shadar-kai), and the Underdark (drow). Drow are united by an ancestral connection to the Underdark, not by worship of Lolth—a god some of them have never heard of.

Indeed, Eilistraee's whole shtick is undoing the drow's "descent", at once moral and literal. But if, beyond Toril, dark elf is just short for underdark elf, then her symbolism only makes sense locally.

Now, maybe she doesn't have to be a moon goddess on every world. In a setting where dark elves have built less sinister underground cities, she could be seen as a protector of the Underdark.

Pex

2021-12-17, 09:06 PM

I use her in my own homebrew gameworld as the goddess of Redemption. Lolth does not exist.

t209

2021-12-17, 10:11 PM

Nude dances aren't really an uncommon theme for nature and moon goddesses. /shrug
Well, it is female only...and male had to become female via magic (it was ritual purposes, but it kinda include transgender since many of them opted to make it permanent) to participate in the dance rather than getting beaten to pulp *cough, Smedman*.
Plus all of them are attractive, and even if they aren't nudist, the lore stated that the priestess is supposed to wear as little as possible (interpret as what you will) in official ceremonies.
Though they did allow males to participate without shapeshifting magic, so naked males included.

There's a pretty decent chunk on her in MToF. Not sure what else you're looking for really, between that and SCAG that's plenty (and more than she got in 3.5 FaP.)
Well, Waterdeep and Mad Mage and Out of the Abyss could use them as plot point or hideouts...at least officially (though at least you can discuss with DM to include that, I mean I did that with my Half Drow Bard who had a Drow priestess mom operating a soup kitchen and shelter in Southern Ward plus if the Mad Mage game hadn't cut short, her plan to visit the promenade in skullport which is not there anymore.).

Psyren

2021-12-17, 10:18 PM

Well, Waterdeep and Mad Mage and Out of the Abyss could use them as plot point or hideouts...at least officially (though at least you can discuss with DM to include that, I mean I did that with my Half Drow Bard who had a Drow priestess mom operating a soup kitchen and shelter in Southern Ward plus if the Mad Mage game hadn't cut short, her plan to visit the promenade in skullport which is not there anymore.).

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm asking what more lore you need on her. Sounds like you have plenty for your concept.

If you truly want additional details I would check out older editions and/or novels, some of it has changed obviously but not much.

t209

2021-12-17, 10:28 PM

Sorry if I wasn't clear. I'm asking what more lore you need on her. Sounds like you have plenty for your concept.

If you truly want additional details I would check out older editions and/or novels, some of it has changed obviously but not much.

Appreciate for clarification.

Irennan

2021-12-18, 07:39 AM

Vhaerun, her brother, and her merged? During 4e. Then she was killed, or thought to have been killed, when possessing an immobilized Qilue, her shared seven sister with Mystra, at the end of the silence of Lolth.

She, along with a bunch of other dieties popped back into existence in 5e when Ao did the second sundering and reversed the effects of the spell plague.

Also, i think its because there are a prodigious number of bools about Drizzt, spanning back to at least the beginning of second edition, so him as the posterboy good drow is more accessible than Elistraee

They entirely retconned those novels, but Ed Greenwood explained how Eilistraee survived thanks to shenaningans with Mystra, if you're interested in an explanation for her return, rather than just "popping back".

Irennan

2021-12-18, 07:40 AM

Wanting Drizzt as the posterboy is why they got rid of her to begin with.

Yeah, this pretty much is the real reason. Even though Eilistraee was restored in 5e, they never made any effort to drop her name and a little info in more mainstream books, like the PHB.

Irennan

2021-12-18, 07:51 AM

Honestly, this has bothered me for a while. I like Elilistraee's lore for the most part, makes for an interesting deity. Nude dances are a bit much, but anything running counter to Lolth is a big plus. Makes for a fun character creation with her existence. Something that can save Drow.

The nude dances do have their role and symbolism, as fanservice-y as they may seem (and I mean, they're just a ritual that followers of Eilistraee do, not their focus).

But really, life in a Lolthite society is based on falsehood and deceit, and spontaneity is taboo. A nude dance in which the drow are free to let out all their emotions in a free-form message for Eilistraee to listen, is the act of laying down the mask and feeling free to just be themselves. Furthermore, in a society of perpetual conflict, where trust is taboo, vulnerability must be hidden. To be free to dance in the nude with others (or while invoking your goddess) is to be free to show one own's vulnerability—it means that vulnerability is sometimes acceptable, forming a bond of trust, and being accepted as a whole. This can be especially helpful to heal, because feeling safe and comfortable in one's own vulnerabilty is essential for victims of trauma (like a lot of drow are in Lolth's society) to feel safe in opening up, break down, do emotional labor on their trauma, and finally begin to rebuild themselves. Meanwhile, though not necessarily related to the nude dances, having a goddess just listen to you letting out all your emotions and conflicts, or simply "telling" your day, reinforces the notion of worth as an individual, unrelatedly to power or whatever other conditions Lolth imposes.

Overall, generally speaking, things like dance (as well as the rhythm of song), learning to synch with others, becoming in touch with your body, all go with the "help drow heal from trauma" concept that I mentioned before, because they're tools used to help cure PTSD. Check "The Body Keeps the Score", a godly book to read on its own, but like, reading it a lot of Eilistraee's rituals suddenly clicked, because former Lolthites are 100% going to be traumatized.

Finally, if you want, you can find the angle of body ownership--since Lolthite society even regulates people's bodies, nude dances can be seen as reveling in the ownership of your own body.

Is there an appeal to loudness fallacy?

This god did not exist for the first 15 years of Forgotten Realms existence (so the first 30ish years of D&D). It's a cheap tack-on of lore to appeal to the drizzit-clone fanboys.

Dude(tte), get your facts straight. Eilistraee was created for Ed Greenwood's original campaign, and she has nothing to do with Drizzt and wannabes. She promotes a very different kind of character.

Well, it is female only...and male had to become female via magic (it was ritual purposes, but it kinda include transgender since many of them opted to make it permanent) to participate in the dance rather than getting beaten to pulp *cough, Smedman*.
Plus all of them are attractive, and even if they aren't nudist, the lore stated that the priestess is supposed to wear as little as possible (interpret as what you will) in official ceremonies.
Though they did allow males to participate without shapeshifting magic, so naked males included.
.

The dances are open to both male and female followers, without the need for males to be shapechanged. The shapechange thing was a first step in the process of Eilistraee overcoming an obstcale posed by her nature and making male priests. Currently, Eilistraee's clergy includes any gender. The changedance is now provided to anyone who wants to transition, both m->f AND f->m, according to what Ed Greenwood (the very same who introduced the changedance, which never appeared in any book btw) recently said when asked.

Priest(esse)s are explicitly said to wear the most practical garb (or whatever they prefer) for any given situation, it's only the religious dances that have to be danced in the nude. This is pretty much the "nude nature dance" trope, but followers of Eilistraee spend the vast majority of their time clothed like everyone else.

Irennan

2021-12-18, 07:58 AM

Indeed, Eilistraee's whole shtick is undoing the drow's "descent", at once moral and literal. But if, beyond Toril, dark elf is just short for underdark elf, then her symbolism only makes sense locally.

Now, maybe she doesn't have to be a moon goddess on every world. In a setting where dark elves have built less sinister underground cities, she could be seen as a protector of the Underdark.

Eilistraee's goal isn't merely to bring the drow back on the sruface. She went wth the drow, she became drow, to help them build their own life and place in the world in times of need. I'm pretty sure that if said place happens to not be on the surface, it'll be perfectly fine. I mean, Eilistraee's original realm is in Ysgard's underground, so, really, you don't need "go back to the surface" to make her character work. She's much more about the people than the place.

According to Ed Greenwood, Eilistraee mostly takes on the aspect of the mother and of the artist, who helps the drow heal from lifelong abuse (which pretty much all Lolth drow receive since their childhood), find a sense of safety and belonging, move forward towards fulfilling themselves. Eilistraee's teachings focus on how to relearn to enjoy life and feel safe in a community and with interdependence, not on "redeem yourself!!!1!" nor on "you *must* live on the surface". Seriously, if you take a look at Eilistraee's rituals, they're all centered on stuff that helps people heal from traumatic experiences, ranging from communal songs and dances to rebuild a sense of synchrony, to the evensong that helps former Lolthites integrate the memories of what they went through as something that it's over, no longer happening (unlike traumatized brains are wired to believe). All of this contributes to teaching the drow that they're safe now, that they can sheathe the "strength to survive" for a bit, and look for things that make them feel fulfilled and happy.
So, even with the new lore about drow, Eilistraee's role in regards to the udadrow is unchanged. She can also still play the role of a moon goddess, since now the Underdark seem to be controlled by Lolth, and safety is easier to be found on the surface, where the other new drow cultures live.

-------------------------------------

The other 2 new drow cultures could open up new roles for Eilistraee, because she has some pretty universal themes to her.
Her main message is about embracing life and nurturing beauty, as well as embracing diversity/tolerace and reaching to all those in need or who are lost, not just drow. In fact, Eilistraee is also known to have a soft spot for marginalized people/outcasts in general.
The thing is, there will always be people who need healing, and Eilistraee will still reach to all people who are marginalized, who are outcasts, who need something to cling to and live for. And that's true even in Aevendrow and Lorendrow cultures. Same thing for trying to find and heal the good and the beauty in the broken, or where few other people would try--basically, the strngth of compassion. It's another message that can reach to many.

Eilistraee is also an empowerer kind of deity. She strives to help her people thrive and fulfill themselves, and she comes to the point of doing that on the level of the single individual. In FR lore, she did that even if that path ends up not being with her specifically (see Liriel Baenre). It's not hard to envision people praying to her.

Then, you have Eilistraee's aspect as a patroness of artists/goddess of beauty and an artist herself, and her penchant for sending artists random bursts of inspiration, just for the fun of it--another niche she could fill in any culture. Finally, if you really want it, Ed Greenwood said that he wanted to make Eilistraee a deity of fertility, though TSR censored that for whatever reason--that angle could still be used (though I doubt WotC would), and you could have Eilistraee worshipped as a more typical moon/fertility goddess in the new cultures.

The point is highlighting the other aspects of Eilistraee, and not just the "savior" thing that she has going on.

Millstone85

2021-12-18, 08:25 AM

Even though Eilistraee was restored in 5e, they never made any effort to drop her name and a little info in more mainstream books, like the PHB.What about all the other members of the Dark Seldarine who didn't get name-dropped in the PHB? Vhaeraun, Selvetarm, Kiaransalee, Zinzerena, Keptolo, Malyk...

I don't think WotC has a problem with Eilistraee in particular. They just thought Lolth was the only drow deity worth mentioning in the first core book. Ghaunadaur made it too, but as a great old one.

Then MToF gave equal treatment to Eilistraee, Vhaeraun and other missing deities.

Eilistraee's teachings focus on how to relearn to enjoy life and feel safe in a community and with interdependence, not on "redeem yourself!!!1!" nor on "you *must* live on the surface".
Also, I mean, Eilistraee's original realm is in Ysgard's underground, so, really, you don't need "go back to the surface" to make her character work. She's infinitely more about the people than the place.Thank you for restoring Eilistraee as one of my favourite drow and deities (eh, Drow & Deities, LOLth).

Irennan

2021-12-18, 08:28 AM

What about all the other members of the Dark Seldarine who didn't get name-dropped in the PHB? Vhaeraun, Selvetarm, Kiaransalee, Zinzerena, Keptolo, Malyk...

I don't think WotC has a problem with Eilistraee in particular. They just thought Lolth was the only drow deity worth mentioning in the first core book. Ghaunadaur made it too, but as a great old one.

Then MToF gave equal treatment to Eilistraee, Vhaeraun and other missing deities.

Yeah, the thing about Eilistraee in the PHB is that her being mentioned in the PHB would have immediately dispelled any doubt about whether the drow are innately evil or not. I also focused on Eilistraee because she's the subject of the thread.

Thank you for restoring Eilistraee as one of my favourite drow and deities (eh, Drow & Deities, LOLth).

This makes me happy :D

Asmotherion

2021-12-18, 08:37 AM

skyth

2021-12-18, 10:36 AM

What's funny is, for all the 'love' for Drittz and how original he was...He wasn't the first officially good Drow.

Ganryu

2021-12-18, 11:10 AM

What about it is "a bit much"? It's a ritualistic aspect of worship that used to be practiced for millenia. Besides that, nudity doesn't have to be sexual, as any friendly nudist will tell you.
I'm the lore guy for my group. Explaining "Yeah, there's a good drow goddess, but loves to just appear nude and dance with her followers in the middle of the night" is a little bit awkward. Makes it seem I like Eilistraee for... cringy reasons.

---------
That said, do love the story of her, and is a good source for character creation. I loooove every single thing in Irennan's post. I like the lore we do have, and would like more. Eilistraee is a great character, and I'd like a bit more underdark campaigns and such in forgotten realms.

Though, bright side of 5e, if it doesn't exist, get to work!

Also, on another note, thought the Drizzt books were underrated, til I read them. Now I think there's so much fun that could be explored with the underdark world and Forgotten Realms in general, and looove every shred I can get. I will still make fun of all drow players... because I've made a few myself and make fun of myself.

"Everyone else is evil, but I am the sole good one."

One of these days, I'll have to just straight run an evil drow and see how my group reacts. :D Will say, that sunlight sensitivity is a pain and a half.

Psyren

2021-12-18, 11:14 AM

Yeah, this pretty much is the real reason. Even though Eilistraee was restored in 5e, they never made any effort to drop her name and a little info in more mainstream books, like the PHB.

The PHB shouldn't have had setting-specific gods in it in the first place, not even FR ones. Their recent errata and Ray Winninger's blog post beneath it (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates) shows that their intent is to make that a much more conscious design choice going forward. Lolth is a special case since she (or at least, drow who believe in her) are present in multiple D&D settings, but even then they make it clear that she hasn't been able to reach all of them.

Irennan

2021-12-18, 11:33 AM

The PHB shouldn't have had setting-specific gods in it in the first place, not even FR ones. Their recent errata and Ray Winninger's blog post beneath it (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates) shows that their intent is to make that a much more conscious design choice going forward. Lolth is a special case since she (or at least, drow who believe in her are present in multiple D&D settings, but even then they make it clear that she hasn't been able to reach all of them.

Considering that PHB mentioned Drizzt and multiple setting-specific characters, as well as deities, I don't see why the same couldn't be true for Eilistraee. On the contrary, I'd say that there's nothing wrong with the PHB giving glimpses into a variety of settings, to pique curiosity and provide inspiration. Like, even the idea of magic working in a certain way, or of certain races existing, already means applying a lore filter to stuff, so making a little jump and mentioning a god as an example doesn't break anything.

Otherwise, you just write a some crunch and be done with it, but that would be impossible with D&D, since D&D currently comes with a huge baggage of tropes and clichés (that's what D&D lore is, frankly) that kinda define the game in the eyes of nearly everyone. Pure crunch is what, say, GURPS does--you can even build races from scratch with that system, though it can be overly crunchy.

Psyren

2021-12-18, 11:36 AM

Considering that PHB mentioned Drizzt and multiple setting-specific characters, as well as deities, I don't see why the same couldn't be true for Eilistraee.

I'm specifically talking about rules text here like the Drow race entry. Illustrative text like sidebars and novel excerpts are fair game to be setting-specific, I have no issues with that - and that is where Drizz't is mentioned in the PHB as is proper.

Irennan

2021-12-18, 11:41 AM

I'm specifically talking about rules text here like the Drow race entry. Illustrative text like sidebars and novel excerpts are fair game to be setting-specific, I have no issues with that - and that is where Drizz't is mentioned in the PHB as is proper.

Fair enough, then I'll say that Eilistraee should have totally been in that sidebar (and that sidebar shouldn't have been "all drow r evulz and sadistic and cruel and a**holes, except muh speshul Drizzt and his clones"). Though, IIRC, we do see names of setting-specific deities dropped in the classes text, as well as in the deity list, so Eilistraee could have appeared there as well.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-18, 05:28 PM

What's funny is, for all the 'love' for Drittz and how original he was...He wasn't the first officially good Drow.

D3 Vault of the Drow had a bunch of 'em.

And then Gary Gygax introduced Leda, the good-aligned clone of Eclavdra.

t209

2021-12-19, 01:40 AM

D3 Vault of the Drow had a bunch of 'em.

And then Gary Gygax introduced Leda, the good-aligned clone of Eclavdra.

So a case of Flanderization and maybe Menzobarrazen being the main focus of Drow then?
Also back then, Drows were like absolutely unknown to surface race and only found out after Giant storyline.

skyth

2021-12-21, 08:23 AM

D3 Vault of the Drow had a bunch of 'em.

And then Gary Gygax introduced Leda, the good-aligned clone of Eclavdra.

I only remember one in D3 (Which is the one I was talking about).

P. G. Macer

2021-12-21, 12:05 PM

Irennan

2021-12-21, 12:12 PM

My hypothesis for why Wizards of the Coast has not embraced Eilistraee in 5e as the answer to their “Drow problem” is that she isn’t family friendly enough for them in what they feel is the current climate of the game, which is to say that they consider her and her followers (or the stereotype of them, at least) too sexual. My main reasoning behind this is that Wizards seems to be trying to expand their market into younger demographics, and a goddess depicted as nude more often than not will raise parents’ hackles, which also seems to fit them sanitizing the DMG in the latest errata by replacing “Brothel” on a random table with “Music hall”.

As was mentioned upthread, the naughtiness of Eilistraee and her faith is somewhat exaggerated in the minds of fans, but in matters such as these, perception matters just as much—if not more than—reality.

The answer is easy: make the nude ritual dances just ritual dances, with no nudity involved, and make Eilistraee appear dressed as a dancer from various cultures. Ez.

I mean, it's prude and quite childish (the nudity=sex association, I mean), but WotC didn't hesitate to change A LOT of stuff, so why would this be a problem? IMHO it's related to RAS having said multiple times that he dislikes Eilistraee, especially because they approved some really questionable scenes from RAS' very recent books (like the one in which a sexual abuse survior is serially ra**d to show just "how evulz" the drow are), which points to them not being actually bothered by sexual stuff. I believe this scene is from a book from just 2 years ago.

P. G. Macer

2021-12-21, 04:10 PM

The answer is easy: make the nude ritual dances just ritual dances, with no nudity involved, and make Eilistraee appear dressed as a dancer from various cultures. Ez.

I mean, it's prude and quite childish (the nudity=sex association, I mean), but WotC didn't hesitate to change A LOT of stuff, so why would this be a problem? IMHO it's related to RAS having said multiple times that he dislikes Eilistraee, especially because they approved some really questionable scenes from RAS' very recent books (like the one in which a sexual abuse survior is serially ra**d to show just "how evulz" the drow are), which points to them not being actually bothered by sexual stuff. I believe this scene is from a book from just 2 years ago.

I was aware of Salvatore’s dislike for Eilistraee, but not aware of the scene in that recent book. I mean, I was already of the opinion that WotC’s recent sensitivity changes to D&D were insincere (Let’s not go into detail about that here), but wow, that’s a doozy, to put it lightly.

Irennan

2021-12-21, 04:21 PM

I mean, it's WotC. They're the same people who greenlit the 3e drow lore about pregnant drow women carrying twins having orgasms when said twins killed each other in the womb. They're dudebros who REALLY love their evil drow, and special Drizzt, and tone-deaf lore. And they're the very people who called Eilistraee an internet meme in 2012, when an author who was working on the 4e Menzo book tried to include Eilistraee in said book.

I have this strong gut feeling that, if things didn't explode in their face, both them and RAS would still be doggedly continuing with their "all drow r evulz except muh speshul Drizzt(&co) and Eilistraee doesn't count" route, despite RAS flaunting how the good drow cultures were always his plan, even though he never gave any hint whatsoever at drow having more than 1 culture in over 30 years of books about the same thing.

Psyren

2021-12-21, 05:19 PM

Again, I'm really not sure what "embracing Eilistraee" is supposed to mean in this context. MToF gave her no more or less prominence than any of the other Seldarine, light or dark. To read some kind of malice or dislike of the character into that strikes me as disingenuous.

I was aware of Salvatore’s dislike for Eilistraee, but not aware of the scene in that recent book. I mean, I was already of the opinion that WotC’s recent sensitivity changes to D&D were insincere (Let’s not go into detail about that here), but wow, that’s a doozy, to put it lightly.

To put it lightly, I think you're conflating the 5e game designers and the novel authors to an unfair degree. Even assuming this third-hand recounting of a novel excerpt devoid of context can be taken at face value, trying to extrapolate conclusions about the game from that is suspect at best.

Irennan

2021-12-21, 05:55 PM

Again, I'm really not sure what "embracing Eilistraee" is supposed to mean in this context. MToF gave her no more or less prominence than any of the other Seldarine, light or dark.

I'm not the OP, but to me all they should have done is dropping a mention in the PHB like we discussed before, so that her knowledge becomes mainstream. Highlighting that the drow have more than one culture, rather than dedicating pages upon pages to "look how well they torture people!". Or giving Eilistraee some role in the recent "drow are no longer evil" upheaval, rather than not even mentioning her. You know, things like that.

To read some kind of malice or dislike of the character into that strikes me as disingenuous. To put it lightly, I think you're conflating the 5e game designers and the novel authors to an unfair degree.

As for the dislike, Salvatore is the one to have expressed it multiple times; WotC is surely biased, though. For example, Perkins replied that the goal of 4e's removal for Eilistraee was to make Drizzt&co more of an inconoclast. There are recent communications that have recently been posted on twitter, that show contempt towards the "nice drow deities", dating back to 2012, when 5e was in the works. Can provide links/screenshots, if you want.

Even assuming this third-hand recounting of a novel excerpt devoid of context can be taken at face value, trying to extrapolate conclusions about the game from that is suspect at best.

I mentioned that content to point out that nude ritual dances are unlikely to be the reason why WotC isn't including Eilistraee more in the recent drow changes. They can't say "we don't want anything sexual", and then publicize novels that indulge in sexual (and even distortedly so, at times) stuff.

Psyren

2021-12-21, 07:14 PM

I'm not the OP, but to me all they should have done is dropping a mention in the PHB like we discussed before, so that her knowledge becomes mainstream. Highlighting that the drow have more than one culture, rather than dedicating pages upon pages to "look how well they torture people!". Or giving Eilistraee some role in the recent "drow are no longer evil" upheaval, rather than not even mentioning her. You know, things like that.

To which again I point out that she's in just one setting while Drow are not, so leaving her out of core doesn't have to be some grand conspiracy. Moreover, saying that Drow need her help to become PCs in every setting is just bad writing.

As for the dislike, Salvatore is the one to have expressed it multiple times; WotC is surely biased, though. For example, Perkins replied that the goal of 4e's removal for Eilistraee was to make Drizzt&co more of an inconoclast. There are recent communications that have recently been posted on twitter, that show contempt towards the "nice drow deities", dating back to 2012, when 5e was in the works. Can provide links/screenshots, if you want.

You don't need to convince me 4e was bad, thanks :smalltongue: but Eilistraee is far from the only deity it ruined, diminished, or did away with. What matters for this subforum is that 5e brought her back.

Irennan

2021-12-21, 07:34 PM

To which again I point out that she's in just one setting while Drow are not, so leaving her out of core doesn't have to be some grand conspiracy.

When your FR is your flagship setting, leaving a deity whose presence brings an entire switch of perspective out of a FR-focused sidebar is indeed meaningful. Since they talked about Drizzt in the drow sidebar, they could have easily also talked about Eilistraee, which has a whole culture tied to her. As a side note, they apparently extended the Dark Seldarine to every setting, including friggin' Krynn--that doesn't have drow.

Moreover, saying that Drow need her help to become PCs in every setting is just bad writing.

Yup, which is why Eilistraee's role isn't that. She doesn't go to drow to make them good (unlike RAS believes, showing to not have even read her lore), Eilistraee empowers the drow to find their path and helps them heal--that's explicitly said. A drow PC doesn't need Eilistraee, though Eilistraee makes for a good deity for adventurers due to her attitude.

Thing is, the drow who follow Eilistraee (aka, who have been inspired by her teachings or found a home in her community) have their own culture and tradition, and mentioning that there's a whole culture, if a minority, who doesn't follow Lolth in that drow sidebar would have made a huge difference. Or heck, even mentioning it in the main text, to say that Lolth doesn't have hegemony over all drow in all worlds.

You don't need to convince me 4e was bad, thanks :smalltongue: but Eilistraee is far from the only deity it ruined, diminished, or did away with. What matters for this subforum is that 5e brought her back.

The point wasn't 4e=bad, more that some key people who directed it still work at WotC, that they are biased against Eilistraee, and that's unlikely to just go poof because we're now in 5e. Especially now that RAS is on the design team as far as drow are concerned. I'll go out on a limb and say that they brought Eilistraee back mostly because things blew up in their faces, so they wanted people to stfu. The exact reason why they're rewriting the drow now--making people stfu (or, on the flipside, gain PR points).

Psyren

2021-12-21, 07:43 PM

When your FR is your flagship setting, leaving a deity whose presence brings an entire switch of perspective out of a FR-focused sidebar is indeed meaningful. Since they talked about Drizzt in the drow sidebar, they could have easily also talked about Eilistraee, which has a whole culture tied to her.

1) Eilistraee is in no way as popular as Drizz't.
2) Anything that moves FR away from being their "flagship setting" is aces in my book. There shouldn't be such a thing in the first place, certainly not in the core books.

And respectfully, I don't actually care about Eilistraee's dogma. She's an okay goddess if that's what you like, but she doesn't exist in Eberron, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Krynn etc. Drow can be good without her.

Naanomi

2021-12-21, 07:51 PM

There shouldn't be such a thing in the first place, certainly not in the core books.
I can't think of an edition of the game that made an effort to be especially setting neutral (although the early edition settings were pretty sparse of course); just the setting of choice tend to shift around (or be created for the edition)

Scots Dragon

2021-12-21, 09:30 PM

2) Anything that moves FR away from being their "flagship setting" is aces in my book. There shouldn't be such a thing in the first place, certainly not in the core books.

A 'flagship setting' that they've released what is at best a joke of a sourcebook for.

Even fourteen years later you're still best off sticking with the 1370s at latest for Forgotten Realms material.

Psyren

2021-12-21, 10:44 PM

I can't think of an edition of the game that made an effort to be especially setting neutral (although the early edition settings were pretty sparse of course); just the setting of choice tend to shift around (or be created for the edition)

Sure but, as I linked earlier, they're trying to get away from a "default setting." That they did it in the past is no longer relevant. (And boy, 4e's "Points of Light" was as generic as they come anyway.)

A 'flagship setting' that they've released what is at best a joke of a sourcebook for.

Even fourteen years later you're still best off sticking with the 1370s at latest for Forgotten Realms material.

I did like some of the developments. (Even some of the ones that weren't just "We're sorry about the Spellplague!")

Scots Dragon

2021-12-22, 05:07 AM

I did like some of the developments. (Even some of the ones that weren't just "We're sorry about the Spellplague!")

It'd be nice if we had some detail (any at all, really) for places that aren't the Sword Coast or bits of Chult.

Millstone85

2021-12-22, 07:05 AM

As a side note, they apparently extended the Dark Seldarine to every setting, including friggin' Krynn--that doesn't have drow.Yes and no. Mostly yes.

The elves of Krynn still know nothing of the Dark Seldarine, or of the regular Seldarine for that matter. However, Krynn is part of the same overarching multiverse as Oerth and Toril, which is why we get in-character notes of Mordenkainen talking about his visits on Krynn.

The hard part is that the elves of Krynn are there described as being bound to relearn their origin and destiny. They were created by Corellon, even if they have forgotten, and those called "dark" might one day follow Lolth under the ground.

The so-called descent of the drow isn't one moment in history, but the result of conflict between godly powers in an era that has become myth to mortals. My investigations indicate it occured in different worlds of the Material Plane at different times. I have even discovered one world, Krynn, where it has yet to come to pass.
On Krynn, Lolth is unknown, as is Corellon, yet elves called "dark" exist in this world. These are elves whom others believe have betrayed their people, but to the eye, they bear none of the physical hallmarks of drow. I wonder if, with so mutable a race as elves, that state is permanent.

In other words, Planescape goes nom nom nom, and FR/Greyhawk is its favourite condiment to put on everything.

But wait! (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates)
The new text more accurately describes the place of drow in the D&D multiverse and correctly situates them among the other branches of the elf family, each of which was shaped by an environment in the earliest days of the multiverse: forests (wood elves), places of ancient magic on the Material Plane (high elves), oceans (sea elves), the Feywild (eladrin), the Shadowfell (shadar-kai), and the Underdark (drow). Drow are united by an ancestral connection to the Underdark, not by worship of Lolth—a god some of them have never heard of.Sooooo, I expect MToF will soon get errata-nuked even harder than VGtM.

Naanomi

2021-12-22, 10:10 AM

They were created by Corellon, even if they have forgotten
Of course, Spelljammer will say that is nonsense... That the Elven Armada long predates Corellon's appearance; and the story that he 'created' all elves is nonsense {actually that is more heavily pushed as the narrative for Moradin than Corellon but same idea}

And we know that not all 'elves' share the same origin of course... Athasian Elves are just mutated uber-halflings after all

druid91

2021-12-22, 10:59 AM

Honestly, I'm still partial to Sshamath as the best Drow city/faction.

Irennan

2021-12-22, 07:44 PM

1) Eilistraee is in no way as popular as Drizz't.

1)Your logic was all about in-universe relevance, not IRL popularity.

2)That's precisely the point, you're not really answering the question in the OP. WotC could have easily let people know: "hey, FR drow have this non-Lolth culture, which mainly worships this other goddess, who is really good for adventurers because she likes to help people fulfill themselves" in that sidebar, AND also talk about Drizzt.

2) Anything that moves FR away from being their "flagship setting" is aces in my book. There shouldn't be such a thing in the first place, certainly not in the core books.

Respectfully, this has nothing to do with the question in the OP.

And respectfully, I don't actually care about Eilistraee's dogma. She's an okay goddess if that's what you like, but she doesn't exist in Eberron, Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Krynn etc. Drow can be good without her.

Also has nothing to do with the question in the thread, but I've already answered to that: the point of Eilistraee isn't to provide a way to make the drow good, that would be **** writing, she has her own themes and her own goals. She doesn't go to the drow and makes them good, she became drow, and went with them to help them build their own life and place in the world in times of need--NOT to make them repent. I'll just quote what I wrote in this thread before:

According to Ed Greenwood, Eilistraee mostly takes on the aspect of the mother and of the artist, who helps the drow heal from lifelong abuse (which pretty much all Lolth drow receive since their childhood), find a sense of safety and belonging, move forward towards fulfilling themselves. Eilistraee's teachings focus on how to relearn to enjoy life and feel safe in a community and with interdependence, not on "redeem yourself!!!1!" nor on "you *must* live on the surface". Seriously, if you take a look at Eilistraee's rituals, they're all centered on stuff that helps people heal from traumatic experiences, ranging from communal songs and dances to rebuild a sense of synchrony, to the evensong that helps former Lolthites integrate the memories of what they went through as something that it's over, no longer happening (unlike traumatized brains are wired to believe). All of this contributes to teaching the drow that they're safe now, that they can sheathe the "strength to survive" for a bit, and look for things that make them feel fulfilled and happy.

Psyren

2021-12-22, 08:46 PM

1)Your logic was all about in-universe relevance, not IRL popularity.

It's both.

In-universe, she's only in one setting. Drow as a race are not.
IRL, Drizz't is popular enough to include in illustrative sidebars in core, much like the Dragonlance crew. Eilistraee is not.

2)That's precisely the point, you're not really answering the question in the OP. WotC could have easily let people know: "hey, FR drow have this non-Lolth culture, which mainly worships this other goddess, who is really good for adventurers because she likes to help people fulfill themselves" in that sidebar, AND also talk about Drizzt.

Why should they make a reference that might pigeonhole good Drow into following one setting-specific faith? Especially one that their most famous example of a good Drow has nothing to do with? :smallconfused:

Respectfully, this has nothing to do with the question in the OP.

I already answered the question in the OP. She's gotten as much exposure as many of the FR gods, the OP's seeming belief that she is being intentionally slighted is imaginary. There is no war in Ba Sing Se/Eurasia.

Millstone85

2021-12-22, 09:10 PM

I think that the new-paradigm drow are going to need at least a couple more non-evil deities to turn to, and that the Seldarine as listed in MToF page 43 contains two great candidates.

Vandria Gilmadrith is an LN goddess of war, grief, justice and vigilance, with the War and Grave domains. According to this wiki (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Vandria_Gilmadrith), she is in fact another child of Corellon and Lolth, i.e. the full-blooded sister of Eilistraee and Vhaeraun.

Darahl Tilvenar is an LN god of fire, earth and metalwork, with the Forge and Light domains. According to this wiki (https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Darahl_Firecloak), he is largely estranged from the pantheon, actually prefers the company of dwarven and gnomish deities, and seeks followers even in the Underdark.

Naanomi

2021-12-22, 09:46 PM

I think that the new-paradigm drow are going to need at least a couple more non-evil deities to turn to
To be fair they (like all elves) have the vast number of non-racial deities to choose from who generally accept worshipers of any stripe

PhoenixPhyre

2021-12-22, 10:23 PM

Honestly, if moved most new settings away from racial pantheons generally I'd like it more. Most settings (especially FR) have too many gods sharing the same concept space.

Azuresun

2021-12-23, 07:47 AM

Honestly, if moved most new settings away from racial pantheons generally I'd like it more. Most settings (especially FR) have too many gods sharing the same concept space.

I got a chuckle out of how FR halflings consider Tymora (goddess of luck) to be a halfling goddess who also successfuly tricked humans into worshipping her.

Psyren

2021-12-23, 12:25 PM

Honestly, if moved most new settings away from racial pantheons generally I'd like it more. Most settings (especially FR) have too many gods sharing the same concept space.

This is one thing 4e did that I actually liked. Trimming the fat by saying things like "oh actually, moon goddess Sehanine Moonbow and moon goddess Selune are one and the same, they're just called different names depending on culture."

Some of their consolidations made a lot less sense, like Aerdrie Faenya being Akadi, but I thought the principle was sound.

Irennan

2021-12-26, 09:45 AM

It's both.

In-universe, she's only in one setting. Drow as a race are not.
IRL, Drizz't is popular enough to include in illustrative sidebars in core, much like the Dragonlance crew. Eilistraee is not.

Eilistraee brings an important implication: non-Lolth drow aren't just random outcasts, they also can have a society, they have their history, culture, and so on. That's why a mention of her wouldn't have been out of place, especially given that WotC had made the Realms the default setting for 5e. I mean, even setting that aside, they also neglected to add her to the PHB list of deities that people could choose for their characters, in spite of the fact that said list also had world-specific deities, and in spite of the significance that Eilistraee's inclusion would have had.

Besides, it's a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it? Drizzt&co are popular among whom? People who already play/DM and/or already know the franchise in some way. What about new players--5e had a gigantic influx of players, what about them? Most of them knew nothing about the setting, so that sidebar polarized their early impression of the drow. Dropping a mention of Eilistraee as an example of non-Lolth drow culture (and their conflict with the Lolth culture) would have made a new player's impression of the drow FAR different (and offered a FAR more dynamic scenario) than "all drow are asses, but there's Drizzt and his clones who aren't".

This is why in the end it's likely that the decision came down to the sheer bias that WotC's staff have expressed in the past: they wanted Drizzt as the most special ever, and mentioning a non-evil culture would prevent that. They *didn't want* players to get a more nuanced idea of the drow, because Drizzt is what mattered the most to WotC, even at the expense of worldbuilding and story potential. That's likely most of what there's to this.

Why should they make a reference that might pigeonhole good Drow into following one setting-specific faith? Especially one that their most famous example of a good Drow has nothing to do with? :smallconfused:

Because it wouldn't. It would be an *example* of the fact that there can be more drow cultures than just Lolth, not the only one, and it would in no way imply that all non-Lolth drow have to follow Eilistraee--unless you go out of your way to say that she's the only one, but why would you? They could have said something akin to:

"[insert evil stuff here]
However, not all drow are under Lolth's thumb. Some, like Drizzt do'Urden, are outcasts who wander the world, working to integrate among the people of the surface and to protect them from the Spider Queen's forces. Others have formed different cultures and fight to maintain independance. Among them are the followers of Eilistraee, goddess of moonlight, who strive to reclaim their place in the world, at peace with other races, and to help their kin break free from Lolth's web".

Basically, it would take the sidebar from "drow are all evil. And they all like torture. And they kick puppies. And... And they eat babies! Except Drizzt and his clones, of course. They are awesome" to "there's a large evil drow culture, but there are people like Drizzt who leave that culture, and there are also other cultures like the followers of Eilistraee".

I already answered the question in the OP. She's gotten as much exposure as many of the FR gods, the OP's seeming belief that she is being intentionally slighted is imaginary. There is no war in Ba Sing Se/Eurasia.

But there is. As in, there was/is bias. They outright said it--they had this idea that Drizzt had to be the most special, the rest was just a meme needed to stand down. If this isn't bias, Idk what bias is to you.
Since the poeople who had that idea (like Perkins, Sernett, etc...) still worked on 5e, it's unlikely that the bias just randomly disappeared, it showed up in different ways (see below). Not only that, but with RAS being tasked with revising drow, and with him repeatedly expressing his own bias against Eilistraee, it's also likely that the situation has become "RAS' creations are all that matter, the rest needs to stand down".

In any case, about exposure, it isn't just about the amount of words. We need to frame this in the context of WotC's stance about the drow. First, they doggedly pushed the drow as absolutely evil with non-Lolth drow being a joke, and they went to lengths to hammer you with (really bad) lore about the puppy-kickers, baby-eaters drow (in any product that mentions the drow, you have writeups that repeat this same stuff over and over). As for MtoF, it throws around a lot of words about how evil and sadistic the drow are, but in that context, when it comes to something that can be narratively impactful and that can make a significant difference, i.e. to an alternative culture like Eilistraee's, they mostly tell you that it's hopeless/irrelevant and no one knows about it. Heck, it's possible that in her writeup they spent more words telling you how irrelevant she is, than telling you what she and her people stand for and what they do (and there's mountains of info about that, not like there wasn't enough lore)!

Now that they're trying to give the drow some variety, now that they're talking about how drow can be good, this new context would be a good time to give Eilistraee a bit of relevance--because this is pertinent to her, not to other FR deities. However, they have yet to even mention her. That's the issue with WotC and neglecting Eilistraee--downplaying her in a context where she could have made a large difference (especially in how people saw the drow), and not mentiong her in a context where she totally belongs.

You can--and totally SHOULD--introduce cultures who developed unrelatedly to Eilistraee (though you need to give them a decent narrative, not a joke like RAS' Aevendrow), AND at the same time you can also bring some spotlight to the culture inspired by Eilistraee, as well as to Eilistraee's mission, which continues to hold importance in the context of the Udadrow. Like, helping the (uda)drow break free is huge for Eilistraee, she's certainly VERY relevant when it comes to the fact that the drow can also not be evil (even more so because the first goodly drow nation, Miyeritar, followed Eilistraee AND predated Lolth's culture becoming relevant in Faerun history, and the history surrounding it makes the situation of elves vs drow much more interesting from a narrative perspective). I don't think we need to argue on this latter point.

If you tell me that Eilistraee is FR-only, so are the Aevendrow and the Lorendrow; being setting-specific has nothing to do with this matter. The reason (or at least a relevant part of it) is bias once again--they put RAS in charge of drow design, and he has stated multiple times to have a dislike for Eilistraee.

Psyren

2021-12-26, 05:01 PM

Scots Dragon

2021-12-26, 05:46 PM

If you're determined to see some massive conspiracy against Eilistraee rather than simply admit she's not nearly as popular or relevant as you think she is, I don't know what else to tell you. Contact WotC and air your grievances to them directly.

I don't think they have any more conspiracy against Eilistraee than they have against bits of the Forgotten Realms that aren't Drizzt Do'Urden in general.

And given their handling of the Realms as basically just a dumping ground for repurposed Greyhawk adventures...

Millstone85

2021-12-26, 07:02 PM

To be fair they (like all elves) have the vast number of non-racial deities to choose from who generally accept worshipers of any stripeOr, I suddenly realize, they should now be able to worship the Seldarine like any other elves.

Which could leave Eilistraee "only" as important to dark elves as Shashelas is to sea elves or Rillifane is to wood elves.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-26, 07:45 PM

Or, I suddenly realize, they should now be able to worship the Seldarine like any other elves.

*insert your own astronaut 'always has been' meme here*

AD&D 2e's Demihuman Deities, which was for the Forgotten Realms and included Eilistraee, explicitly mentioned drow worshippers of Corellon Larethian even.

P. G. Macer

2021-12-26, 08:59 PM

If you're determined to see some massive conspiracy against Eilistraee rather than simply admit she's not nearly as popular or relevant as you think she is, I don't know what else to tell you. Contact WotC and air your grievances to them directly.

It doesn’t take a “massive conspiracy” for just one person (Salvatore) who happens to have been invested by WotC with a decent amount of influence on the new lore, to happen to dislike a fictional character and not want to include her.

Wildstag

2021-12-26, 09:15 PM

It doesn’t take a “massive conspiracy” for just one person (Salvatore) who happens to have been invested by WotC with a decent amount of influence on the new lore, to happen to dislike a fictional character and not want to include her.

Given how little his opinion mattered prior to 5e, I'd be willing to bet it's not just "one person". Greenwood and Salvatore were caught unawares irt the Spellplague changes. Given his lack of influence over the setting in 2010, I'd imagine the "less Elistraee" faction would actually have to be a faction.

Psyren

2021-12-26, 09:50 PM

It doesn’t take a “massive conspiracy” for just one person (Salvatore) who happens to have been invested by WotC with a decent amount of influence on the new lore, to happen to dislike a fictional character and not want to include her.

At the risk of repeating myself, how is she treated differently than any of the other Dark Seldarine in 5e? Or almost every other deity not named Mystra or Lolth for that matter?

Like, I would love it if Ilmater had been given more material too - but I don't go around thinking there is a shadowy cabal of Ilmater-haters lurking among the WotC devs. And Salvatore had nothing to do with the PHB beyond WotC lifting a few passages out of his novels (less than a handful to be exact) to stick into a couple of sidebars.

And even if one still believes she is being hated on intentionally somehow, the recommended course of action remains the same:

Contact WotC and air your grievances to them directly.

Irennan

2021-12-27, 06:41 AM

If you're determined to see some massive conspiracy against Eilistraee rather than simply admit she's not nearly as popular or relevant as you think she is, I don't know what else to tell you.

Conspiracy? Damn man, nice hyperbole you got there. I merely pointed at bias as the reason why WotC has been trying to downplay Eilistraee, and said bias exists by admission of the people involved.

Also, sure, Eilistraee is nowhere near popular as Drizzt, I have no problem admitting that (though she is indeed rather popular). That doesn't change that WotC's bias plays a big role in her being downplayed by WotC, and it doesn't bec change my point that refusing to mention her to new players because of popularity leads to a self-fulfilling prophecy, and that her mention would have been beneficial, because it would have helped to offer a more nuanced portrayal of the drow to new players.

Contact WotC and air your grievances to them directly.

Believe it or not, I did, back in 2014/2015. That's how I got Perkins' response about them prioritizing Drizzt over anything else drow, though he said that they wanted to include Eilistraee too in 5e--which they did, and I'm personally fine with them just including her (though I must admit that I'm pissed at RAS' attitude over this whole matter--his claiming credit for being the creator of the FR drow in a recent article, when he created only a narrow part of it, his acting like he's the savior of the drow, when he's the cause for the joke that they have become and has hard pushed the Drizzt&co exceptionalism in his books, and so on). However, my (or anyone's) personal stance doesn't change the reason why Eilistraee is being downplayed.

Irennan

2021-12-27, 06:53 AM

At the risk of repeating myself, how is she treated differently than any of the other Dark Seldarine in 5e? Or almost every other deity not named Mystra or Lolth for that matter?

The answer is in my post that you dismissed:

In any case, about exposure, it isn't just about the amount of words. We need to frame this in the context of WotC's stance about the drow. First, they doggedly pushed the drow as absolutely evil with non-Lolth drow being a joke, and they went to lengths to hammer you with (really bad) lore about the puppy-kickers, baby-eaters drow (in any product that mentions the drow, you have writeups that repeat this same stuff over and over). As for MtoF, it throws around a lot of words about how evil and sadistic the drow are, but in that context, when it comes to something that can be narratively impactful and that can make a significant difference, i.e. to an alternative culture like Eilistraee's, they mostly tell you that it's hopeless/irrelevant and no one knows about it. Heck, it's possible that in her writeup they spent more words telling you how irrelevant she is, than telling you what she and her people stand for and what they do (and there's mountains of info about that, not like there wasn't enough lore)! This is because they *wanted* the drow to be like that, so that Drizzt could retain his special status--aka, bias.

Now that they're trying to give the drow some variety, now that they're talking about how drow can be good, this new context would be a good time to give Eilistraee a bit of relevance--because this is pertinent to her, not to other FR deities. However, they have yet to even mention her. That's the issue with WotC and neglecting Eilistraee--downplaying her in a context where she could have made a large difference (especially in how people saw the drow), and not mentiong her in a context where she totally belongs.

You can--and totally SHOULD--introduce cultures who developed unrelatedly to Eilistraee (though you need to give them a decent narrative, not a joke like RAS' Aevendrow), AND at the same time you can also bring some spotlight to the culture inspired by Eilistraee, as well as to Eilistraee's mission, which continues to hold importance in the context of the Udadrow. Like, helping the (uda)drow break free is huge for Eilistraee, she's certainly VERY relevant when it comes to the fact that the drow can also not be evil (even more so because the first goodly drow nation, Miyeritar, followed Eilistraee AND predated Lolth's culture becoming relevant in Faerun history, and the history surrounding it makes the situation of elves vs drow much more interesting from a narrative perspective). I don't think we need to argue on this latter point.

If you tell me that Eilistraee is FR-only, so are the Aevendrow and the Lorendrow; being setting-specific has nothing to do with this matter. The reason (or at least a relevant part of it) is bias once again--they put RAS in charge of drow design, and he has stated multiple times to have a dislike for Eilistraee.

TL; DR--2 points:

1)Before the current drow revision, half of the MtoF writeup about Eilistraee tells you how hopeless she is and that no one knows her, rather than focusing on what she stands for and how she operates. They even come to question her motivations for choosing to become drow and go with them--which is a key point in her history--suggesting that she did it "because she knew better than staying with the Seldarine" (I know they defaced Vhaeraun too, but that doesn't change anything. Heck, it isn't even surprising in the context of the Drizzt bias--Drizzt has also been presented as an inspiration for drow males, and Vhaeraun likely was in the way of Drizzt's uniqueness in that sense, so WotC turned him into Lolth's male lapdog).

2)During the current drow revision, the context of the material they're currently working on calls for Eilistraee to get more focus, because said context is about the drow having various cultures and faiths. Compare this to a hypothetical situation in which WotC works on material about how the faiths of the Realms help the suffering, and Ilmater doesn't get a spotlight--or even a mention! That would be weird, right?

Irennan

2021-12-27, 07:00 AM

Given how little his opinion mattered prior to 5e, I'd be willing to bet it's not just "one person". Greenwood and Salvatore were caught unawares irt the Spellplague changes. Given his lack of influence over the setting in 2010, I'd imagine the "less Elistraee" faction would actually have to be a faction.

If we're talking about 4e (2010), Perkins said that the reason why they removed the whole Dark Seldarine for that edition was indeed "making Drizzt more special". Which is why I taled about bias (not conspiracies, unlike Psyren suggested).

Brian James, one of the authors of the 4e Menzoberranzan sourcebook, recently posted one of Perkins' emails, showing how adverse to Eilistraee (and to the good drow) WotC was back in 2012: https://twitter.com/brianrjames/status/1471665847735250944

If we're talking 5e and the current situation, RAS is outright in charge of the drow.

MarkVIIIMarc

2021-12-27, 08:57 AM

In a campaign I'm in we had a cleric come in at a lower level. After some poor rolls one of the players made a joke about his diety not being real.

We rolled with the jokes for a dozen sessions I tell you. Eventually at the last session the DM had the player roll a high/low to see if the diety was real and what do u know, this guy's made up diety of unicorns or whatever was.

Then next campaign I am looking for a Drow druid and find Elistraee for a diety. Now my character can not be totally evil, and see how dealing with sunlight in animal shape goes. No one in the campaign had heard of Elistraee and I play it as a bit of a secret cult thing. My DM seems not to care. Maybe someplace she has a few dozen worshippers hiding from the Lolth followers who would no doubt kill em on sight.

Point? Not much really but unless characters are hitting L20 and need more big bad guys, dieties are a bit abstract and up to DM interpretation.

Millstone85

2021-12-27, 09:41 AM

Hmm, no offense, but what I am getting from this is less
dieties are a bit abstract and up to DM interpretation.

and more
My DM seems not to care.

Psyren

2021-12-27, 12:10 PM

If we're talking about 4e (2010), Perkins said that the reason why they removed the whole Dark Seldarine for that edition was indeed "making Drizzt more special". Which is why I taled about bias (not conspiracies, unlike Psyren suggested).

Brian James, one of the authors of the 4e Menzoberranzan sourcebook, recently posted one of Perkins' emails, showing how adverse to Eilistraee (and to the good drow) WotC was back in 2012: https://twitter.com/brianrjames/status/1471665847735250944

First, thanks for the citation. But the operative phrase you used above is "for that edition." I never cared about 4e lore before and I'm certainly not about to start now.

If we're talking 5e and the current situation, RAS is outright in charge of the drow.

I don't see any credit (writing or otherwise) for Salvatore in my PHB or my MToF.

MarkVIIIMarc

2021-12-27, 12:24 PM

Hmm, no offense, but what I am getting from this is less

and more

I think you are correct. Long as it doesn't break his world my DM is pretty passive about who worships who. He did roll with this made up god one of the pc's had even. That DM has a player driven world within his setting thing going on.

Now in Adventure League is there a list of official gods? A a list of what you can do or "how many worshippers" there are of each? That would make the source books really matter.

Sigreid

2021-12-28, 02:28 AM

Well, it is female only...and male had to become female via magic (it was ritual purposes, but it kinda include transgender since many of them opted to make it permanent) to participate in the dance rather than getting beaten to pulp *cough, Smedman*.
Plus all of them are attractive, and even if they aren't nudist, the lore stated that the priestess is supposed to wear as little as possible (interpret as what you will) in official ceremonies.
Though they did allow males to participate without shapeshifting magic, so naked males included.

Well, Waterdeep and Mad Mage and Out of the Abyss could use them as plot point or hideouts...at least officially (though at least you can discuss with DM to include that, I mean I did that with my Half Drow Bard who had a Drow priestess mom operating a soup kitchen and shelter in Southern Ward plus if the Mad Mage game hadn't cut short, her plan to visit the promenade in skullport which is not there anymore.).

I was really referring to in general, and it's usually more of a get back to/get closer to nature or being liberated from your society imposed limitations or shedding the mask you wear for society reasons than anything else. Likewise, it's not unheard of for it to be part of rituals to strip to symbolically stand naked before your god for judgement.

Irennan

2021-12-30, 01:44 PM

First, thanks for the citation. But the operative phrase you used above is "for that edition." I never cared about 4e lore before and I'm certainly not about to start now.

But those people are the very same who have worked on the PHB, MToF, and so on. That's why my point is that bias remains a relevant reason for downplaying Eilistraee's role in 5e. Not a conspiracy, not spite towards people (though that email was indeed spiteful), just letting your personal bias influence design decisions. Which isn't that rare, tbh.

I don't see any credit (writing or otherwise) for Salvatore in my PHB or my MToF.

I was talking about the current drow revision, which should totally feature Eilistraee among the other new cultures. It's likely (though admittedly only my interpretation) that the OP's question stemmed from all the current talk about the good drow, and the weird lack of mentions of Eilistraee, which is why RAS' bias against Eilistraee is an important factor in her being downplayed once again (and likely even bigger than WotC's bias was in 4e, since the dude flaunts said bias around, as if it was a good thing).

Irennan

2021-12-30, 01:49 PM

I was really referring to in general, and it's usually more of a get back to/get closer to nature or being liberated from your society imposed limitations or shedding the mask you wear for society reasons than anything else. Likewise, it's not unheard of for it to be part of rituals to strip to symbolically stand naked before your god for judgement.

For Eilistraee, yeah, it's mostly about liberation, but also about accepting vulnerability as being sometimes ok--needed to develop acceptance for yourself as a basis for growth (in contrast with the perpetual fear of Lolth's scoeity), and in expressing ownership over your own body (since Lolth's society regulates even that). Eilistraee is said to not act like a judge, she's more of an empowerer than anything else.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-30, 02:22 PM

Brian James, one of the authors of the 4e Menzoberranzan sourcebook, recently posted one of Perkins' emails, showing how adverse to Eilistraee (and to the good drow) WotC was back in 2012: https://twitter.com/brianrjames/status/1471665847735250944

And this is why I don’t even really want a Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting to cover the 1490s any more.

I just don’t trust Wizards of the Coast with the setting.

Psyren

2021-12-30, 06:30 PM

But those people are the very same who have worked on the PHB, MToF, and so on. That's why my point is that bias remains a relevant reason for downplaying Eilistraee's role in 5e. Not a conspiracy, not spite towards people (though that email was indeed spiteful), just letting your personal bias influence design decisions. Which isn't that rare, tbh.

It's irrelevant because their reasons for doing so in 4e (they wanted most Drow to be unambiguously evil in the name of simplifying their lore for newcomers) clearly don't apply to 5e. Remember, 4e alignment as a whole was much more dumbed-down than what we have now, having only one axis.

And lest we forget, they brought back Eilistraee in 5e so this 4e quote matters even less. Whatever you imagine in your head to still be happening, clearly isn't.

I was talking about the current drow revision, which should totally feature Eilistraee among the other new cultures. It's likely (though admittedly only my interpretation) that the OP's question stemmed from all the current talk about the good drow, and the weird lack of mentions of Eilistraee, which is why RAS' bias against Eilistraee is an important factor in her being downplayed once again (and likely even bigger than WotC's bias was in 4e, since the dude flaunts said bias around, as if it was a good thing).

There is no "lack of mention." She's right there in MToF along with the rest of the Dark Seldarine. That's all she needs.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-30, 09:08 PM

There is no "lack of mention." She's right there in MToF along with the rest of the Dark Seldarine. That's all she needs.

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes is hardly a decent source for Eilistraee or her twin.

God what they did to Vhaeraun in that book was a full on crime.

Irennan

2021-12-30, 11:24 PM

It's irrelevant because their reasons for doing so in 4e (they wanted most Drow to be unambiguously evil in the name of simplifying their lore for newcomers) clearly don't apply to 5e. Remember, 4e alignment as a whole was much more dumbed-down than what we have now, having only one axis.

And lest we forget, they brought back Eilistraee in 5e so this 4e quote matters even less. Whatever you imagine in your head to still be happening, clearly isn't.

Their reasons boil down to bias in favor of Drizzt, which still applies in 5e. Also personal bias against Eilistraee, which doesn't change just because the edition changed.

There is no "lack of mention." She's right there in MToF along with the rest of the Dark Seldarine. That's all she needs.

Man, come on, are you for real? Do you even read what I write? I told you countless times that I'm talking about the current revision, which has nothing to do with the MToF. And I also told you how the MToF writeup for Eilistraee is some passive-aggressive crap, that spends more (or at least as much) words telling you that she's irrelevant and hopeless, than it spends telling you what she stands for and how she acts. Also, they even question her motivations for choosing to be drow, which is a key part of her story and appeal.

A mention in MToF is not all she needs, because that's a DM-oriented book that most players won't get. As an adventurer-friendly drow deity, as well as the only good drow deity (which can make a huge difference in how players perceive the drow), I'd say she deserves a place in the PHB deity list (drow only have Lolth atm).

Irennan

2021-12-30, 11:35 PM

God what they did to Vhaeraun in that book was a full on crime.

But what would happen to the idea of precious Drizzt as THE hope for drow males, if Vhaeraun was still himself? We can't have nuance in our setting, because Drizzt and his crew must be the most special out there.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-31, 08:26 AM

But what would happen to the idea of precious Drizzt as THE hope for drow males, if Vhaeraun was still himself? We can't have nuance in our setting, because Drizzt and his crew must be the most special out there.

It's yet one more in a long list of reasons why dialling back to the 1370s and ignoring basically ninety percent of the lead-up to the fourth edition revision is the best bet that Realms fans have.

MarkVIIIMarc

2021-12-31, 10:30 AM

But what would happen to the idea of precious Drizzt as THE hope for drow males, if Vhaeraun was still himself? We can't have nuance in our setting, because Drizzt and his crew must be the most special out there.

If there are only a few thousand Drow and if all D&D stories happen during the same lifetime, a lot.

If there are multiple cities of drow in the world you DM or there are Drow out of communication with others, or he is captured for some time, or your story happens before or after Drizzt, then there is room for multiple "lone" heroes.

Is there room in your world for a secret sect of 20 Eilistraee worshippers in a city of 5k? Perhaps they have a lot of elvin patience and are fighting amongst themselves if Drizzt can help them in revolt?

JackPhoenix

2021-12-31, 10:35 AM

Let's be honest, Drizzt is the only reason drow made it to the PHB at all, so obviously he's mentioned over some semi-obscure minor goddess. There's enough FR-specific crap in the PHB as it is, no need to add even more when the book is *supposed* to be setting-neutral.

Irennan

2021-12-31, 01:39 PM

If there are only a few thousand Drow and if all D&D stories happen during the same lifetime, a lot.

If there are multiple cities of drow in the world you DM or there are Drow out of communication with others, or he is captured for some time, or your story happens before or after Drizzt, then there is room for multiple "lone" heroes.

I wasn't talking about my world, the line you quoted was a mockery of WotC's stance about the drow&Drizzt at the time of writing the MToF.

Is there room in your world for a secret sect of 20 Eilistraee worshippers in a city of 5k? Perhaps they have a lot of elvin patience and are fighting amongst themselves if Drizzt can help them in revolt?

My world doesn't even have drow or elves. It's just humans and "fairies", for the lack of a better term.

Irennan

2021-12-31, 01:43 PM

Let's be honest, Drizzt is the only reason drow made it to the PHB at all,

Drizzt made the drow popular, and that's more than 30 years ago. Now people like drow for different reasons, unrelatedly to Drizzt, and a lot of new players don't even care about Drizzt, given that they were brought in by streams like Critical Role.

The Drizzt exclusivity/exceptionalism also promotes the "good blacks/good other" trope ("your race is sh*t, but you--you're special and ok"), which is quite sh*tty writing.

so obviously he's mentioned over some semi-obscure minor goddess.

I went over this a bunch of times in this thread, I'm tired of giving the same answer over and over. Let's just say that there's obviously room for both, and that Eilistraee is a deity that can make a huge narrative impact because of what her existence implies (the drow are capable of many cultures, rather than being some laughable monoculture race). I even gave an example of what the darkness of the drow sidebar could have been. Also Eilistraee 100% belongs to the list of deities for adventurers in the PHB.

The matter also goes beyond PHB mentions, and WotC's bias is very real and supported by their own words, like the email I linked in this thread.

There's enough FR-specific crap in the PHB as it is, no need to add even more when the book is *supposed* to be setting-neutral.

WotC used FR as their flagship setting for 5e. They even used the FR magic system (the Weave) as the go-to explanation for how magic works. Whether that's the right approach, or something I, you, or anyone else likes, is irrelevant to this thread.

Naanomi

2021-12-31, 01:54 PM

If you are this worked up about the amount of screentime a minor goddess in a single setting gets, I can't imagine how frustrated you must be over the lore changes that actually effected the setting on a large scale (the reorganization of the Inner Planes, Asmodeus's disposition, the origin store and cosmological role of the Yugoloth, the nature of Beholders {and the complete elimination of their creator}, etc)

Scots Dragon

2021-12-31, 02:08 PM

I went over this a bunch of times in this thread, I'm tired of giving the same answer over and over. Let's just say that there's obviously room for both, and that Eilistraee is a deity that can make a huge narrative impact because of what her existence implies (the drow are capable of many cultures, rather than being some laughable monoculture race). I even gave an example of what the darkness of the drow sidebar could have been. Also Eilistraee 100% belongs to the list of deities for adventurers in the PHB.

The matter also goes beyond PHB mentions, and WotC's bias is very real and supported by their own words, like the email I linked in this thread.

It’s notable that there’s also a bunch of PHB references to non-Realms stuff. There’s a whole bunch of Dragonlance and Greyhawk references in there.

Irennan

2021-12-31, 02:13 PM

@Naanomi

Idk if you're talking to me specifically, but in either case, I'm more frustrated about the repetition in this thread than about the lack of mention of Eilistraee in the PHB. I also find WotC's dogged bias and RAS parading as the savior of the drow (when he's the cause for the laughable status of the drow) and talking down/refusing to acknowledge the creations of the people who tried to actually make the drow nuanced (Ed Greenwood, Elaine Cunningham, Eric Boyd, etc...) to be rather disgusting.

In short, Eilistraee means a lot to me, and seeing her getting more spotlight would make me glad, but I'm fine with her being just included and staying in her little room of the setting doing her thing. I'm more bothered by the RW attitudes behind this stuff, than I am about the stuff itself.

As for the massive lore changes, I don't give a flying anymore. D&D lore as a whole is a bit of a joke to me, it's a hodgepodge of random stuff that doesn't follow any unifying theme or criterion. Everything goes and everything can happen because a wizard or a god did it. Also, something doesn't make sense and requires a bit of thinking to solve a problem (example: how does air exchange work in Underdark cities, that are essentially caves)? Screw that, we'll say that a wizard fixed it. That's *not* good worldbuilding, so I can't bring myself to care.

Psyren

2021-12-31, 04:48 PM

Man, come on, are you for real? Do you even read what I write? I told you countless times that I'm talking about the current revision, which has nothing to do with the MToF.

"Nothing to do with?" MToF is a 5e book last time I checked.

And I also told you how the MToF writeup for Eilistraee is some passive-aggressive crap, that spends more (or at least as much) words telling you that she's irrelevant and hopeless, than it spends telling you what she stands for and how she acts. Also, they even question her motivations for choosing to be drow, which is a key part of her story and appeal.

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes is hardly a decent source for Eilistraee or her twin.

Your personal tastes for a given book are up to you and of no interest to me.. The fact is that she was given an entry in this edition, so 4e reasons for excluding her are irrelevant to this subforum.

A mention in MToF is not all she needs, because that's a DM-oriented book that most players won't get. As an adventurer-friendly drow deity, as well as the only good drow deity (which can make a huge difference in how players perceive the drow), I'd say she deserves a place in the PHB deity list (drow only have Lolth atm).

And this is just false. She is very clearly in the player-facing section of the book (among the info on PC races, before the Gith even.) The DM-facing side is the Bestiary, which starts in Chapter 6.

Let's be honest, Drizzt is the only reason drow made it to the PHB at all, so obviously he's mentioned over some semi-obscure minor goddess. There's enough FR-specific crap in the PHB as it is, no need to add even more when the book is *supposed* to be setting-neutral.

This.

Scots Dragon

2021-12-31, 07:56 PM

"Nothing to do with?" MToF is a 5e book last time I checked.

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes was released several years ago now, and the current revision of drow and other elements dates to this year. Hell, the current revision even contradicts Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, such as by having it made clear in the new PHB that Krynn actually does have drow.

Your personal tastes for a given book are up to you and of no interest to me.. The fact is that she was given an entry in this edition, so 4e reasons for excluding her are irrelevant to this subforum.

That is not an accurate depiction of Eilistraee. The only thing less accurate is its depiction of Vhaeraun, who is as close as possible to being the opposite of his actual characterisation and outlook as a character.

Basically the only way I can reconcile it in my head is that it's the Greyhawk view of the deities in question, and not accurate to the Forgotten Realms. It still sucks, though.

Granted, the drow section also has this from Mordenkainen;

I have heard tales of drow who have forsaken the evil ways of their kind. I give these stories no credit, though Elminster himself swears they have validity. Never trust a drow, or the word of an archmage.

I can mention at least four major non-evil or otherwise outright good drow in Greyhawk offhand, and they are not obscure.

Notables include Leda from the Gord the Rogue novels, Tysiln San from the Vale of the Mage, the rebellious Nilonim from D3 Vault of the Drow, and the half-drow Shensen Tesseril from Shackled City.

hamishspence

2021-12-31, 08:01 PM

Notables include Leda from the Gord the Rogue novels, Tysiln San from the Vale of the Mage, the rebellious Nilonim from D3 Vault of the Drow, and the half-drow Shensen Tesseril from Shackled City.

Given that Gygax claimed that the only good drow were insane:

"As I created them, there are absolutely no good Drow save for the insane." Gary Gygax, Gary Gygax Q&A, En World forums, 2007.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/q-a-with-gary-gygax.22566/page-418#post-3859285

that raises some interesting questions about Leda. Was she intended to be Insane Good, Neutral, or Evil but in an "enemy of my enemy is my ally" situation?

Millstone85

2021-12-31, 09:07 PM

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes was released several years ago now, and the current revision of drow and other elements dates to this year. Hell, the current revision even contradicts Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes, such as by having it made clear in the new PHB that Krynn actually does have drow.Indeed, as I said earlier, I expect the next errata of MToF to be a nuke.

The book currently offers a long tale about primal elves and how the Lolth/Corellon conflict defined their modern forms. Said tale ends with:
The elves who most revered Lolth became drow, and the others divided themselves into a multitude of surface-dwelling groups, each worshipping some or all of the Seldarine in their respective enclaves.

Now, if you will excuse my repeated quoting of WotC's stated new direction with the drow:
This new text replaces a description that confused the culture of Menzoberranzan—a city in the grip of Lolth’s cult in the Forgotten Realms—with drow themselves. The new text more accurately describes the place of drow in the D&D multiverse and correctly situates them among the other branches of the elf family, each of which was shaped by an environment in the earliest days of the multiverse: forests (wood elves), places of ancient magic on the Material Plane (high elves), oceans (sea elves), the Feywild (eladrin), the Shadowfell (shadar-kai), and the Underdark (drow). Drow are united by an ancestral connection to the Underdark, not by worship of Lolth—a god some of them have never heard of.

Absolute opposites. So yeah, MToF might as well not exist when it comes to revised 5e drow and their gods.

t209

2021-12-31, 09:46 PM

Given that Gygax claimed that the only good drow were insane:

"As I created them, there are absolutely no good Drow save for the insane." Gary Gygax, Gary Gygax Q&A, En World forums, 2007.

https://www.enworld.org/threads/q-a-with-gary-gygax.22566/page-418#post-3859285

that raises some interesting questions about Leda. Was she intended to be Insane Good, Neutral, or Evil but in an "enemy of my enemy is my ally" situation?
Well, assuming if Gygax is operating on Foucault's philosophy of society using "insanity" as a means of social control.
Namely if the Drow has "deviant habits" (kindness, compassion, and friendship all against Lolth's value of cruelty, ambition, and selfishness), then they would be "insane" according to Lolthian society.
Assuming if he would be familiar with him, but DnD do delve into counter-cultural ideas (along with New Age and New Wave fantasy, Elric being the latter).
Edit: Also lovely to see the widespread dislike of Drizzt at the time.

Irennan

2022-01-01, 12:58 AM

"Nothing to do with?" MToF is a 5e book last time I checked.

Please, reread my previous comments.

Your personal tastes for a given book are up to you and of no interest to me.. The fact is that she was given an entry in this edition, so 4e reasons for excluding her are irrelevant to this subforum.

Except it isn't about personal tastes, but a writeup that does all it can to paint Eilistraee as utterly irrelevant. I explained how, point by point, and that's objective stuff, not anyone's opinion. Also, the bias is real even in 5e, because the last time I chiecked WotC designers were still humans, and humans don't change their taste or opinion just because their customers protested, or because the edition changed. At best, they'll cave in to the protests, but will very likely still hold onto their bias and opinion.

And this is just false. She is very clearly in the player-facing section of the book (among the info on PC races, before the Gith even.) The DM-facing side is the Bestiary, which starts in Chapter 6.

MToF isn't a player oriented book. It has some player options, but--if we want to be generous--a player will only be interested in 50% of the book. How many players will buy the MToF? Very few. In fact, even in 5e, few people are aware of Eilistraee, because players usually don't buy suppelements--especially supplements that are mainly (or half) intended for DMs, like the MToF. The whole recent "evil drow" crisis that blew up in WotC's face came up precisely because WotC either intentionally neglected to mention things like Eilistraee in mainstream books like the PHB, or because they offered laughable writeups like the MToF.

This.

Nice way to entirely dodge the counterpoint to that (twice in a row, btw), but whatever, I guess.

Irennan

2022-01-01, 01:00 AM

MToF might as well not exist when it comes to revised 5e drow and their gods.

Then the SCAG will be the only thing left for that, I guess.

MarkVIIIMarc

2022-01-01, 09:40 AM

I wasn't talking about my world, the line you quoted was a mockery of WotC's stance about the drow&Drizzt at the time of writing the MToF.

My world doesn't even have drow or elves. It's just humans and "fairies", for the lack of a better term.

I think your world is less concerned about what the books say then than the one I DM and the one I play in.

What IS in books is relavent because players want to play Artificers or Tabaxi or whatever.

What is not is totally up to DM choice I gather.

If there is a mention of a god a player can go do some research. Too much of a mention and then the DM is the bad guy if some lore is wiped or something?

So enough of a mention to draw interest but not enough to set too many expectations is best I am thinking.

Millstone85

2022-01-01, 09:55 AM

Then the SCAG will be the only thing left for that, I guess.Hmm, looking at all the things left untouched in the SCAG despite the recent errata, I am no longer sure if they will bother changing MToF.

Irennan

2022-01-01, 10:04 AM

I think your world is less concerned about what the books say then than the one I DM and the one I play in.

You're right, my world has nothing to do with normal D&D assumptions, and even the way "magic" works doesn't really mesh with D&D game mechanics. I find mydelf sometimes using D&D to run it, because a lot of people know and play D&D.

What IS in books is relavent because players want to play Artificers or Tabaxi or whatever.

What is not is totally up to DM choice I gather.

The races you can play also depend on the world, so even that is up to DM choice. That's what session 0 and game descriptions are for.

If there is a mention of a god a player can go do some research. Too much of a mention and then the DM is the bad guy if some lore is wiped or something?

So enough of a mention to draw interest but not enough to set too many expectations is best I am thinking.

Sure, agree. The point is that the PHB doesn't even have a mention, and that's the book that most players have and their first impression of D&D. The books that do include a mention are mostly DM-oriented, and said mention basically amounts to saying that Eilistraee is irrelevant.

In any case, this thread is about why WotC chose to downplay Eilistraee, and a relevant reason they chose that is simple bias, even by their own admission. That's the point I've been making since forever.

Psyren

2022-01-02, 05:08 AM

Please, reread my previous comments.

I have. Not agreeing with your comments doesn't mean I didn't read them.

Except it isn't about personal tastes, but a writeup that does all it can to paint Eilistraee as utterly irrelevant. I explained how, point by point, and that's objective stuff, not anyone's opinion. Also, the bias is real even in 5e, because the last time I chiecked WotC designers were still humans, and humans don't change their taste or opinion just because their customers protested, or because the edition changed. At best, they'll cave in to the protests, but will very likely still hold onto their bias and opinion.

"Customers" are not a monolith. I'm a customer too, and I'm protesting your desire that they include even more FR-specific deity information in the PHB. Especially for a goddess I see as having middling popularity at best.

MToF isn't a player oriented book.

Books are not a binary. There is a player section of MToF and a DM section, just like there is in Tasha's, Xanathar's etc. Eilistraee's writeup in MToF is in the player section of that book.

If you want WotC to publish more information on FR deities in the future, I'm actually not opposed to that - so long as it's kept out of the core books, which should be as setting-agnostic as reasonably possible.

Envyus

2022-01-02, 05:36 PM

Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes is hardly a decent source for Eilistraee or her twin.

God what they did to Vhaeraun in that book was a full on crime.

It seems fine. What's wrong with Vhaeraun.

Also there is not much about Eilistraee being hopeless in MtoF

Most drow know nothing of Eilistraee. Matron mothers of the most powerful houses closely guard the scrolls that chronicle her existence. They retain them for the sake of remaining aware of the enemy they describe: a drow god who would spirit away all of Lolth’s worshipers to the surface world.

The matron mothers warn those who go to the surface on raids to retreat if they can see the moon — practical advice, it would seem. But an equally important reason is that Eilistraee is known to work her wiles under the light of the moon, so that drow are more susceptible to her lure at such times. The matrons also direct the raiders to flee back underground if any of their number hear music they find appealing, such as a parent’s lullaby or the chorus of a rousing song carried on the mind, because Eilistraee’s call to drow who would be free of Lolth’s web is often delivered within dulcet tunes that aren’t of otherworldly origin.

Eilistraee is a god of moonlight, song, dance, and, most important, the rejection of the evil ways of Lolth. Drow who feel like outsiders in their society, who react with disgust to the evils perpetrated by their kind, who come to the surface and fall in love with the stars — these are the ones who might be pleased to hear Eilistraee’s call. If they respond to it by going to the surface and staying there, Eilistraee offers no guarantee of their safety and no promise of acceptance in the world above. But she opens her followers’ hearts to the wonder of the nature in the night, and her songs and signs can show a drow how to persevere in that alien environment.

The scrolls that the matron mothers guard so closely attest that Eilistraee turned against Lolth but knew better than to seek solace among the Seldarine. Her position among the other drow gods remains uncertain, as is the fate of the souls of those who turn to her worship. Drow who are beloved by Eilistraee sometimes appear to vanish when they die, as the body dissolves into pale light and leaves no clue to where the soul has gone.

Scots Dragon

2022-01-02, 08:17 PM

It seems fine. What's wrong with Vhaeraun.

This is how Vhaeraun is described in his introduction in AD&D 2E's Drow of the Underdark, pages 42-43:

Vhaeraun is the god of thievery and the furthering of drow aims, interests, and power on the surface world. He is also the god of drow males opposed to the matriarchy of Lolth, teaching that females are no better than males. He believes that drow should work with other elven races for common advancement — never associating or trading with duergar, svirfneblin, or other dwarven and gnomish races (humans and halflings can be tolerated). Vhaeraun is handsome, even vain, and does not forget slights and deceptions.

Roleplaying Notes: Vhaeraun is proud, sometimes haughty, and bears grudges of legendary length. Any underhanded means and treachery is acceptable to him if it furthers his aims or is done in his service — but if others so treat him or his people, it is a deep sin that cannot go unpunished.

Vhaeaun is an active god, who finds it hard to hold aloof from the doings and needs of worshippers; there is a 15% chance that he will manifest if called on — and if the proper ritual is performed, his avatar is 20% likely to appear.

[...]

Priests of Vhaeraun must encourage, lead, or aid bands of drow and allied chaotic evil creatures in thievery, and instigate plots, intrigues, and events to continually increase drow influence and real power in the surface Realms.

They must manipulate trade, creatures, and intrigues designed to frustrate and lessen powers and plans of drow priestesses (particularly those who serve Lolth), and continually foment rebellion or disobedience among drow males.

Drow thieves in need must be aided (even if female) — healed, bailed out of jail, or forcibly rescued. Drow males oppressed or under attack by drow females must be physically aided, in any circumstances. Cruelties against drow males must be avenged.

[...]

Aims, Credo, and Ethos: the drow must forcibly claim a realm and rightful place on the surface world, and this must be a society of equality between the sexes. The existing drow matriarchies must be smashed, and the warring practices of twisted Lolth done away with, so that the drow are a united people, not a squabbling gaggle of rival houses, clans, and aims.

Let's compare that to Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes;

Vhaeraun stands for the dark elves' superiority over other races and for the primacy of individual drow over other drow. He is a god of arrogance, and thus he condones all acts of avarice, fair and foul alike. Those who take what they want from whom they wish, whether through stealth or bullying, pay homage to Vhaeraun. He is patron to thieves and often the object of prayer before drow embark on a raid.

Among the male gods of the Dark Seldarine, he is as widely recognized and accepted as Keptolo. But Vhaeraun represents a different aspect of drow masculinity: strong, silent, obedient, swift, and deadly. He is thought of as Lolth's favored son, in contrast to Keptolo's role as her beautiful consort.

Due to his high status in the Dark Seldarine (for a male) and because of his arrogance, a few of his worshipers look on him as an advocate of equality between male and female drow. That heresy, when it is expressed openly, is liable to be savagely crushed by the priestesses of Lolth. So most of Vhaeraun's male followers honor him simply by trying to carve out better lives for themselves, and that activity is tolerated. Even so, adherents of Vhaeraun don't appear in public without wearing masks. This practice exists in part because Vhaeraun is never portrayed unmasked, and partly because anonymity is a wise precaution when one challenges the social structure of the drow in even a small way.

To quash any challenge to the matriarchy that Vhaeraun might inspire in his followers, some drow communities preach that he wears a mask to hide the terrible scars from the wounds inflicted on him by Lolth as punishment for his arrogance. His silence, too, is part of his punishment, for his tongue was removed for questioning Lolth's orders. Worshipers of Vhaeraun who believe this dogma sometimes ritually scar and silence themselves as signs of their devotion, and then serve as voiceless, masked bodyguards for the matrons of their house.

That isn't even remotely Vhaeraun.

Irennan

2022-01-03, 12:24 PM

I have. Not agreeing with your comments doesn't mean I didn't read them.

No, you didn't address any of my points about the current drow revision, which has nothing to do with MToF, but that is the part of my comments that you were addressing with your "MToF is 5e" reply.

"Customers" are not a monolith. I'm a customer too, and I'm protesting your desire that they include even more FR-specific deity information in the PHB. Especially for a goddess I see as having middling popularity at best.

Dude, for real, reread. This has nothing to do with what I said. I said that WotC is biased against Eilistraee by their own admission, and the fact that they brought her back due to complaints (aka customers) doesn't change their bias. If they were biased in 4e (and they were by their own admissions), it's nearly impossible that they magically no longer are biased, just because the edition changed. Especially not when you consider that the letter that I quoted is from 2012, when the playtest version of 5e was already in the works, which means that WotC team still held that bias whille working on 5e.

Taking a step back, all of this was to address your point of "the letter was 4e, the bias no longer exists in 5e". Yes, it still exists, because people hardly change when they receive complaints (and there were a lot of complaints from FR fans back in 4e and even when The Sundering and all that stuff were announced for 5e). It's even stronger now that RAS has been put in charge of the drow.

Books are not a binary.

They can very well be.

There is a player section of MToF and a DM section, just like there is in Tasha's, Xanathar's etc. Eilistraee's writeup in MToF is in the player section of that book.

I repeat, the vast majority of players don't buy supplements, they get their primary impression from the PHB. Which is why giving Eilistraee a mention in the little drow sidebar (which is already FR specific), and adding her to the deity list, due to what she represents/implies, would have been totally appropriate. A reason why it didn't happen is that--in WotC's opinion--telling players that the drow aren't a monoculture/mono-faith would have made Drizzt less special. Aka, bias.

If you want WotC to publish more information on FR deities in the future, I'm actually not opposed to that -

I don't want anything, I don't even buy their stuff. I'm just answering to the OP's question: why didn't WotC give Eilistraee more weight, especially--I'll add--in the latest drow revision that has everything to do with her (which I suspect was what caused the OP to ask his question at all, due to the very recent ruckus)? Answer: in significant part bias, by their own admission.

so long as it's kept out of the core books, which should be as setting-agnostic as reasonably possible.

Since WotC made FR their flaghsip/baseline setting for 5e, they seem to disagree with this take. As I said, they even made the Weave the default explanation for how magic works.

I also said that a mention of Eilistraee in the PHB (the drow sidebar, which is FR-specific, and I even gave you an example of what I mean--that you didn't address), or her addition to the deity list in the PHB, would have been appropriate. That's all, I really don't know why it's so hard to accept that.

Irennan

2022-01-03, 12:49 PM

Also there is not much about Eilistraee being hopeless in MtoF

It says Eilistraee's existence is essentially unknown, and that she offers nothing of practical use to the drow (when in truth Eilistraee is known to offer a lot of practical aid to her followers, and support them to thrive in the effort to build a new home for their people). This is the portrayal of a hopeless/irrelevant faith.

It also entirely neglects to mention a key point in her story: as a young goddess, Eilistraee chose to give up on the comfort and safety that she could have had in Arvandor, in order to be drow and stay with them in the times of need--despite having had visions of the hardships that she would meet . The choice she made says a lot about her character. Instead, they say that Eilistraee "knows better than to seek solace among the Seldarine", which implies that she's in the Dark Seldarine just because the Seldarine would reject her.

The writeup also says little to nothing about Eilistraee's M.O., no info that you can actually use as a DM or player ("uhh, songs" really does't help if you want to use Eilistraee in a campaign), and that's not because of lack of info on the matter: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Eilistraee#Activities. With M.O., I mean how Eilistraee and her followers reach to the drow (no, the call thingy is not how they do it, it's just a bonus: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Church_of_Eilistraee#Activities), how they may counter the suppression of information, how they build refuges and pathways, and so on. Instead they say: her songs have info on how to survive, which is something that they added in MToF, and which is really wonky writing, because it's a method that will hardly be remotely successful in actually helping anyone: it only furtehr adds to the idea that Eilistraee is hopeless to ever achieve any meaningful success.

Finally, the writeup spends a lot of its already limited space talking stuff like how the matrons counter Eilistraee, or how Eilistraee's position is "unclear", or how she is unknown and offers little that can be of practical help, thus taking away from the space they could have used talking about what Eilistraee and her followers actually do or stand for.

What's wrong with Vhaeraun.
Vhaeraun's character was portrayed as the exact opposite of what he actually is. Like, on nearly all fronts. He goes from someone who wants to overthrow the matriarchy, to the point of terroristic attacks, to the ideal drow male "switf, obedient, lethal" or whatever they wrote. Lol.

JackPhoenix

2022-01-03, 01:06 PM

That isn't even remotely Vhaeraun.

It's almost as if book presented as being written from a perspective of a character (one from different setting, to boot, planar traveler or not) mentions informations that would be available to said character, rather than objective, unbiased truth. Weird concept, I know.

Irennan

2022-01-03, 01:10 PM

It's almost as if book presented as being written from a perspective of a character (one from different setting, to boot, planar traveler or not) mentions informations that would be available to said character, rather than objective, unbiased truth. Weird concept, I know.

It matters nothing, because Mordenkainen didn't write the book. WotC wrote the book, they chose to provide an unrecognizable portrayal of Vhaeraun, and that's the idea that the reader will get of the deity, because they *bought* the supplement with the goal to have info about its topic, including Vhaeraun. Saying that Mord wrote the book was just flavor. Weird concept, I know.

PS: Even if we approach it from an in-universe perspective, WoTC said that, in oreder to write the book, Mord researched a lot of info from other worlds and from his colleagues--like Elminster--in his travels. It's very weird that he would distort the most basic information, like the fact that Vhaeraun (which is also a GH deity and has been since 3e, btw) is so opposed to Lolth that he tried to kill her, and that his faith is considered as heretical as Eilistraee's by Lolthites.

Even with absence of info on such a basic aspect of the deity, why would Mord go out of his way to make weird assumptions, or come up with just as weird legends and tales about him? I mean, if lack of info was the real problem (one so glaring that even the most basic info was out of Mord's reach), that implies that Mord just used his imagination and asspulled stuff on his readers.

But once again, this is beyond the point. MToF was meant to convey WotC's vision for certain things, not Mord's.

Psyren

2022-01-03, 01:42 PM

it's nearly impossible that they magically no longer are biased, just because the edition changed. Especially not when you consider that the letter that I quoted is from 2012, when the playtest version of 5e was already in the works.

This is all supposition on your part, which I couldn't care less about. What I care about is that the PHB remains as setting-agnostic as possible.

I don't want anything, I don't even buy their stuff.

Which means you're not even a customer of theirs, so expecting them to heed your opinion on their design direction is even less realistic.

Since WotC made FR their flaghsip/baseline setting for 5e, they seem to disagree with this take. As I said, they even made the Weave the default explanation for how magic works.

1) I already provided the much more current designer statement (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates), which you didn't address, that they don't want to position FR as 5e's "default setting" and are actively walking back text that leaves that false impression.

2) Every printed setting has had a "weave" since 3e, it's called the Magic planar trait. PHB 205's sidebar clearly explains that "Weave" is just the FR name for that universal phenomenon. It is not some new thing being added to other settings to make them more FR-like as you claim.

I also said that a mention of Eilistraee in the PHB (the drow sidebar, which is FR-specific, and I even gave you an example of what I mean, that you didn't address--as usual), or her addition to the deity list in the PHB, would have been appropriate. That's all, I really don't know why it's so hard to accept that.

Because the Drow entry and the PHB are just fine without referencing a minor goddess from one setting. There, addressed.

Millstone85

2022-01-03, 01:51 PM

Envyus

2022-01-04, 03:12 PM

This is how Vhaeraun is described in his introduction in AD&D 2E's Drow of the Underdark, pages 42-43:

Let's compare that to Mordenkainen's Tome of Foes;

That isn't even remotely Vhaeraun.

They sound the same other then less rebellious. The last part is even stated as being in universe propaganda from the Church of Lolth to downplay him.

It says Eilistraee's existence is essentially unknown, and that she offers nothing of practical use to the drow (when in truth Eilistraee is known to offer a lot of practical aid to her followers, and support them to thrive in the effort to build a new home for their people). This is the portrayal of a hopeless/irrelevant faith.

She has always been obscure among the drow. That is nothing new. Also it does not say anything about her not offering anything of practical use. Just that she does not guarantee their safety or acceptance on the surface.

Scots Dragon

2022-01-04, 03:32 PM

They sound the same other then less rebellious. The last part is even stated as being in universe propaganda from the Church of Lolth to downplay him.

So the handsome and vain swashbuckler who's extremely active with his worshippers and is by definition a rebel against the system... is now a silent, obedient servant who wears a face-concealing mask and that isn't a significant change?

Irennan

2022-01-04, 03:39 PM

This is all supposition on your part, which I couldn't care less about.

Sorry, you don't seem to know how the mind of an adult human works when it comes to opinions and stuff. It's one of the most adverse-to-change systems ever, especially when opinions and biases are attacked, and even more so when you can't defend--like it happened to the WotC team in this case, when backlash caused a premature end of 4e and of all the stances that they had taken for FR, including regarding Eilistraee&the drow.

It's also why I never expect people to change their mind when I enter a discussion with them on the internet. I mostly write for other readers.

TL; DR: biases don't disappear like magic, that's not how people work. Heck, the very essence of overcoming a bias isn't even erasing it, but constantly double guessing your reactions to the subject of the bias.

What I care about is that the PHB remains as setting-agnostic as possible.

Adding Eilistraee to the deity list or to the already FR-specific sidebar wouldn't change the setting-agnostic quality that you care about.

Which means you're not even a customer of theirs, so expecting them to heed your opinion on their design direction is even less realistic.

Dude, I told you I'm discussing this thread and addressing your points. I obviously don't expect them to listen to me, nor I expect them to change their very explicit bias. I only said that including Eilistraee in the PHB in the ways I mentioned would have been totally appropriate, to answer to your statement that it wouldn't have been.

1) I already provided the much more current designer statement (https://dnd.wizards.com/dndstudioblog/sage-advice-book-updates), which you didn't address, that they don't want to position FR as 5e's "default setting" and are actively walking back text that leaves that false impression.

Because it didn't need addressing--they changed their position, but when 5e was announced, they wanted FR to be default and you know it. Since we are talking why WotC downplayed Eilistraee in 5e, and since this statement is very recent and thus only relevant to a narrow part of 5e, it's of little relevance to the question posed in the OP (or to the time when the PHB was written), which is what I'm trying to discuss and the focus of the thread. If anything, the link that you provide reinforces that the the drow info in the PHB weren't setting-agnostic. WotC said that the PHB drow stuff detailed the MENZOBERRANZAN culture. So, again, why do you consider a mention of Eilistraee in that context (which is the drow sidebar, btw) to be so outlandish?

And since we're on topic of current stances, you keep dodging the elephant in the room, that I've been trying to bring to your attention in so many posts: a point that has little to do with the PHB or the MToF, and that is about WotC's current stance on the drow&Eilistraee.
Eilistraee totally belongs to the current drow revision, that has its main point in: "drow can very well be good and even have good cultures". She belongs to this as much as the new FR-specific cultures that RAS created, especially given that she was at one point the main patroness of a dark elven culture that founded one of the most prosperous elven nations in FR history. However, she has yet to be even mentioned. Why? As I have shown you multiple times, bias (even more so now that RAS is on the team).

2) Every printed setting has had a "weave" since 3e, it's called the Magic planar trait. PHB 205's sidebar clearly explains that "Weave" is just the FR name for that universal phenomenon. It is not some new thing being added to other settings to make them more FR-like as you claim.

You're right on this.

Because the Drow entry and the PHB are just fine without referencing a minor goddess from one setting. There, addressed.

Yeah, sure, mentioning Eilistraee isn't needed, but that means nothing, because nothing is needed. The PHB would be fine without mentioning anything that belongs to any setting, and just giving you crunch and some vague flavor. That's a given.

Let me clarify things up.

For the umpteenth time, my response to your "Eilistraee doesn't belong to the PHB", which I brought up only to answer to that, is that mentioning Eilistraee in the (I repeat, already FR-centered) sidebar and in the deity list would have been appropriate, because it would have helped offer a more nuanced portrayal of the drow, and would have given drow PCs--especially religous ones--a deity to choose that wasn't Lolth. Being adventurer-friendly, Eilistraee would have been a good addition to that list. One of the reasons--and a large one--why she wasn't included is that her presence would have changed people's impression of the drow, and WotC wanted Drizzt to be "the exception".

Now, as far as my understanding goes, you say that bias isn't involved (despite the words from WotC themselves, I must add), and that Eilistraee wasn't mentioned just because "setting-agnostic" and because she's a minor deity. However:

1)Other FR-specific minor deities are included in the PHB (like Valkur), which means that Eilistraee being a minor deity couldn't have been the reason that led WotC to not include her.

2)How would putting a mention of Eilistraee in the already FR-specific drow sidebar (that you're confusing with the drow entry, judging by the line that I quoted), and in the deity list change the setting agnostic nature of the PHB? For the list, it's natural to offer a number of deties from many different settings and for a variety of characters, you can't not have setting-specific stuff there; Eilistraee fits the bill for the drow, that were only given an evil drow option in Lolth. As for the sidebar, like I mentioned, that sidebar is already FR-centered, so a mention of Eilistraee there (and I even gave you examples of how easy it is to mention both Drizzt AND Eilistraee) could have never hurted the setting-agnostic nature of the PHB.
So, keeping the PHB setting-agnostic couldn't have been the main reason why Eilistraee wasn't mentioned. In fact, an important reason was that WoTC wanted to give a very specific impression of the drow, one in which Drizzt is the exceptional exception and the PCs follow in his footsteps, which is once again why I talked about bias.

And yes, I know that sidebar has now been axed, but--again--this thread is about the reasons why WotC downplayed Eilistraee in 5e, which includes the time of writing of the PHB.

With that said, since they entirely axed the drow sidebar in the recent errata, I'd say that no, the portrayal of the drow in the PHB wasn't "just fine"--precisely because it failed to mention alternative drow cultures to Lolth's, like Eilistraee's faith. It offered a portrayal of the drow that was frankly as trivial and one-note as you'd expect a 12yo in his edgelord phase to write. It had 0 nuance and little thought put into it.

(PS: technically, Eilistraee's active in all settings with drow in 5e, and I hope you realize that the power that a character or faction holds in-universe has little to do with narrative relevance).

Irennan

2022-01-04, 03:49 PM

They sound the same other then less rebellious. The last part is even stated as being in universe propaganda from the Church of Lolth to downplay him.

Let's compare the 2 versions of Vhaeraun.

Before 5e: A deity who is one of the sworn enemies of Lolth, who tried to kill her, and who essentially embodies "the revolution will be violent" trope and whose followers engaged in terroristic attacks against the Lolthites (example: the fall of Maerimydra or Ched Nasad).

5e MToF: A deity subservient to Lolth, the ideal drow male (according to Lolth's misandrist ideology), "obedient, swift, lethal", his followers are content to live in the matriarchy and just want a little better lot in life.

Yup, totally the same deity.

She has always been obscure among the drow. That is nothing new. Also it does not say anything about her not offering anything of practical use. Just that she does not guarantee their safety or acceptance on the surface.

It's the same. They say she guarantees no safety or acceptance--aka the most important things that a drow needs on the surface, and that Eilistraee in reality strives to offer--and when they say what she provides, they talk about stuff that has no use and that can't even be used in a campaign in a way that doesn't come off as cheesy and unpractical, like songs with instructions.

All the rest of what I said remains. Also, I repeat, they spend more/the same amount of space telling you how she's countered, than they do telling you what she does and stands for. This obviously downplays Eilistraee.

Marcelinari

2022-01-04, 04:59 PM

Including Eilistraee in the original PHB Drow sidebar would not have been inappropriate, given that it would have been relevant to both the subrace entry and the character creation choices of the player. However, I’m hesitant to say ‘it would have been appropriate to put Eilistraee in that sidebar’, because that implies a level of obligation that I don’t think is warranted. WotC certainly wasn’t in the wrong for omitting Eilistraee from that sidebar - she’s a niche racial goddess for a single subrace from a single setting.

There’s also the possibility that since Eilistraee didn’t warrant design space in the Deities table at the back of the PHB, WotC felt they couldn’t include her in the rest of the book, as it would have left unanswered questions, like ‘What domains does this deity have?’. I don’t know if there are examples of other deities mentioned in the PHB that don’t appear on the deities table.

Irennan

2022-01-04, 05:22 PM

Including However, I’m hesitant to say ‘it would have been appropriate to put Eilistraee in that sidebar’, because that implies a level of obligation that I don’t think is warranted. WotC certainly wasn’t in the wrong for omitting Eilistraee from that sidebar - she’s a niche racial goddess for a single subrace from a single setting.

But the sidebar already had A LOT of focus on FR. Given the narrative impact that Eilistraee has (she implies that there are good drow faith/cultures, rather than just a handful of special dudes that got away from Lolth with their specialness--which amounts to poor worldbuilding issues, like exceptionalism and the very toxic "the good other" trope), and the massive difference her presence can make on the impression of new players, she fits that sidebar to a T.

I mean, it takes nothing to include both Drizzt and Eilistraee, it's literally a 0-effort, 0-cost thing. I came up with this in no time:

Drow sidebar

"[insert evil half of the sidebar here]

However, not all drow are under Lolth's thumb. Some, like Drizzt do'Urden, are outcasts who wander the world, working to integrate among the people of the surface and to protect them from the Spider Queen's forces. Others have formed different cultures and fight to maintain independance. Among them are the followers of Eilistraee, goddess of moonlight, who strive to reclaim their place in the world, at peace with other races, and to help their kin break free from Lolth's web".

Or they could have even made the sidebar not focused on FR, and mentioned the Eberron drow alongside the Eilistraee drow and Drizzt. The thing is, they didn't *want* players to have a more nuanced impression of the drow, they didn't want good drow cultures to exist (see that email that I quoted). They envisioned Drizzt as the most special ever, and good drow PCs to follow in his footsteps. Which is the reason why I talked about bias.

a level of obligation

A lot of things that are appropriate don't get done. Something being "appropriate" and "inappropriate" never stopped anyone who really wanted to do that something. WotC doesn't have any obligation, though they're not free from repercussions and from being confronted with the nature of their design choices (like the recent backlash against the idea of evil races, that led WotC to rethink the drow as a whole). I think that the backlash wouldn't have occured, or would have been much lessened, if not WotC's deliberate choice to not include any mention of Eilistraee and the possibility for non-Lolth drow cultures in that sidebar. Really, repercussions are the only kind of obligations that companies tend to have.

With that said, as far as design goes, the drow as portrayed in that sidebar were poor worldbuilding, and had some... uneasy implications (as I said, the "good other" trope). So yeah, if doing better (in this case, that means mentioning that the drow can form non-evil cultures; Eilistraee is one example, her followers don't need to be the only non-evil drow culture) is an obligation, I'd say that every design team has that obligation.

There’s also the possibility that since Eilistraee didn’t warrant design space in the Deities table at the back of the PHB, WotC felt they couldn’t include her in the rest of the book, as it would have left unanswered questions, like ‘What domains does this deity have?’. I don’t know if there are examples of other deities mentioned in the PHB that don’t appear on the deities table.

I'd argue that adding her to the deity list itself would have been good for the book, as it would have offered a focused option to drow characters that isn't Lolth. Yeah, drow PCs can choose human or other racial deities, but here I'd make the same point I made at the beginning, about drow only having an evil drow option, and the narrative implications of including Eilistraee. It also helps that Eilistraee's an adventurer-friendly deity.

As for domains, she has Life, Light, and Nature, which were already present in the PHB (EDIT: nevermind, I misread this; to answer your point, I think that even mentioning her without providing domains could have made the difference when it came to the portrayal of the drow. But I repeat, I think including her in the deity list would have been good, and that the lack of mentions of her was aimed to give a very specific idea of the drow to new players).

In short, it's an inclusion that would have drastically changed the first impression (which is the most impactful) of the drow for people approaching D&D back then--for the better.

Naanomi

2022-01-04, 06:12 PM

What about the other pantheons? Dwarves and gnomes have a few Evil deities that should get some focus I guess? There is one neutral Yuan-Ti deity in some settings... Luthic barely got any screen time and shows a more domestic side of Orc culture... Are you only concerned about Drow perceptions or should they have spent time exploring these other 'atypical representations' as well?

Irennan

2022-01-04, 06:24 PM

What about the other pantheons? Dwarves and gnomes have a few Evil deities that should get some focus I guess? There is one neutral Yuan-Ti deity in some settings... Luthic barely got any screen time and shows a more domestic side of Orc culture...

Totally agree that Luthic should have been given more attention and prominence. With that said, as for evil deities for different pantheons in the PHB, there's a huge difference. The other races don't have writeups that say that all of the individuals belonging to said race (except a handful of exceptions) are of X alignment, that they are a monoculture and whatever. The presence of Eilistraee for the drow has a significant impact because it means that there can be good drow groups and even faiths or cultures. Meanwhile, the players aren't left under the impressions that, say, dwarves must be really special in order to not be good, or that they can't form non-good factions.

Are you only concerned about Drow perceptions or should they have spent time exploring these other 'atypical representations' as well?

The thread is about Eilistraee specifically, so I talked about her. Let's also be honest: the drow perception has been at the forefront of the recent backlash, becaus people tend to like drow more than orcs, so drow tend to be more talked about than other "evil races", but what's true for the drow also applies to others.

Naanomi

2022-01-04, 06:40 PM

Let's also be honest: the drow perception has been at the forefront of the recent backlash, because people tend to like drow more than orcs
See, if I were of a viewpoint to see problems (in general I am not); I think orcs are way more so... They hit actual 'primitive' stereotypes in ways Drow just... Don't. Drow are still elves and thus still better than you, just a different flavor of it. Even the 'other setting not always evil' Orcs are hitting a lot of 'noble savage's buttons at best a lot of the time

Irennan

2022-01-04, 06:53 PM

See, if I were of a viewpoint to see problems (in general I am not); I think orcs are way more so... They hit actual 'primitive' stereotypes in ways Drow just... Don't. Drow are still elves and thus still better than you, just a different flavor of it. Even the 'other setting not always evil' Orcs are hitting a lot of 'noble savage's buttons at best a lot of the time

Sure, I can only agree with you. My point was just that drow are more talked because people tend to like them more than orcs, not because they need more changes than the orcs.

As far as my personal preference goes, I honestly don't like how D&D does either orcs or drow. Yeah, it may sound strange given all my talking about Eilistraee, but I dislike the drow too. I like Eilistraee as a character, which is why I even commented in this thread, but even with her, the drow as a whole come off as barely salvageable to me. The new drow subraces don't help either, they just shift the problem on top of being amateurish writing with their utopia that runs on "a wizard did it".

I frankly don't believe that WotC or RAS will ever actually try to give a portrayal of races like the drow and orcs that brings interesting conflict to the readers/players/DMs, and that doesn't make use of (often toxic) clichés. They're probably just trying to make people calm down. To be fair to RAS, though, he did try with orcs, and WotC decided to erase that.

Stuff like this is why I gave up on trying to make anything out of the D&D lore a rather short time after I picked D&D up. IMHO, if you have the time and energy, it's better to just start from scratch, without the burdens that the assumptions behind D&D put on narrative (and there are a lot of those).

Wildstag

2022-01-04, 06:58 PM

See, if I were of a viewpoint to see problems (in general I am not); I think orcs are way more so... They hit actual 'primitive' stereotypes in ways Drow just... Don't. Drow are still elves and thus still better than you, just a different flavor of it. Even the 'other setting not always evil' Orcs are hitting a lot of 'noble savage's buttons at best a lot of the time

I'll be honest, I think half the discussion was (seemingly) concerned with mechanics instead of fluff because that's the side they interact with more. The setting descriptions don't matter when people rarely stick to them hard and fast.

P.S. On an unrelated note, the whole "FR isn't the default" technically is wrong in that Adventurers League, the organized play specifically sponsored and organized by WotC, uses Forgotten Realms as its setting exclusively. So the first impression a player has, if pulled in through organized play at a con or a game store or other public event, is through the FR setting. The devs can say whatever they want, but until AL is changed to be setting neutral, their statements don't really hold any water. Presently only two adventures are NOT set in Forgotten Realms.

I don't know the statistics of "how many first time players are introduced through AL", but I'll bet it's neither insignificant or the primary method of introduction.

Scots Dragon

2022-01-04, 09:45 PM

I don't know the statistics of "how many first time players are introduced through AL", but I'll bet it's neither insignificant or the primary method of introduction.

I think the largest introductions are coming through Critical Role and The Adventure Zone.

Naanomi

2022-01-04, 09:50 PM

Adventurers League, the organized play specifically sponsored and organized by WotC, uses Forgotten Realms as its setting exclusively
One of the seasons had Ravnican options; and of course Strahd stuff isn't Realms

t209

2022-01-04, 10:39 PM

The thread is about Eilistraee specifically, so I talked about her. Let's also be honest: the drow perception has been at the forefront of the recent backlash, becaus people tend to like drow more than orcs, so drow tend to be more talked about than other "evil races", but what's true for the drow also applies to others.
Also like Elves, they look humanish...even if you account for classic elongated face (like classic DnD, even Half Elves are human with pointy ears and Elves look like aliens). So they get attraction.
Plus Warcraft since I kinda got confused Dark Elves' lore since I got it from Night Elves (I know they are different but they kinda take dark elves role) and Drizzt being popular (either like him or mock him) back then.

Psyren

2022-01-05, 03:31 PM

Sorry, you don't seem to know how the mind of an adult human works when it comes to opinions and stuff.

You realize that more than one "adult human" works at WotC right? I hope?

Adding Eilistraee to the deity list or to the already FR-specific sidebar wouldn't change the setting-agnostic quality that you care about.

And I still disagree. If anything, I want those core references/sidebars trimmed even further.

Because it didn't need addressing--they changed their position, but when 5e was announced, they wanted FR to be default and you know it.

No, I really don't. And even if you had a designer quote saying they wanted FR to be default (spoiler: you don't), such would be irrelevant because they definitely don't want FR to be seen as the default setting now. And I for one am fully supportive of that direction.

And since we're on topic of current stances, you keep dodging the elephant in the room, that I've been trying to bring to your attention in so many posts: a point that has little to do with the PHB or the MToF, and that is about WotC's current stance on the drow&Eilistraee.
Eilistraee totally belongs to the current drow revision, that has its main point in: "drow can very well be good and even have good cultures". She belongs to this as much as the new FR-specific cultures that RAS created, especially given that she was at one point the main patroness of a dark elven culture that founded one of the most prosperous elven nations in FR history. However, she has yet to be even mentioned. Why?

Because tying good Drow to one setting-specific faith is limiting. If you want your good Drow PC to be the product of Eilistraeeanism, great, go off and do that. But to do so approaches the question from the wrong angle, which is starting from the premise that Drow PCs in every setting come from an evil culture that they need to be rescued or redeemed from (whether by Eilistraee, some other faith, or on their own.) That should either be a detail in that campaign setting's book, or left up to the DM in the case of a customized world - and that is why including language about it in Core is worse than useless, it's actively detrimental.

And it becomes even worse when you think about other such historically-portrayed-evil races, like orcs and kobolds and goblinoids, who don't even have an Eilistraee analogue to begin with. What goes in their sidebar? Do good orcs not need a faith dedicated to rescuing them from perdition? Does that mean that Drow are more inherently evil because they need the leg up, or Orcs are because they don't get one? All the more reason to axe that nonsense from core entirely.

Yeah, sure, mentioning Eilistraee isn't needed, but that means nothing, because nothing is neede. The PHB would be fine without mentioning anything that belongs to any setting, and just giving you crunch and som'e vague flavor. That's a given.

I'm not just saying the PHB would be "fine" without such a sidebar. I'm saying it would be improved. And it's my sincere hope that 5.5 does exactly that, which the recent errata leads me to believe they will.

Let me clarify things up.

For the umpteenth time, my response to your "Eilistraee doesn't belong to the PHB", which I brought up only to answer to that, is that mentioning Eilistraee in the (I repeat, already FR-centered) sidebar and in the deity list would have been appropriate, because it would have helped offer a more nuanced portrayal of the drow, and would have given drow PCs--especially religous ones--a deity to choose that wasn't Lolth. Being adventurer-friendly, Eilistraee would have been a good addition to that list. One of the reasons--and a large one--why she wasn't included is that her presence would have changed people's impression of the drow, and WotC wanted Drizzt to be "the exception".

Now, as far as my understanding goes, you say that bias isn't involved (despite the words from WotC themselves, I must add), and that Eilistraee wasn't mentioned just because "setting-agnostic" and because she's a minor deity. However:

1)Other FR-specific minor deities are included in the PHB (like Valkur), which means that Eilistraee being a minor deity couldn't have been the reason that led WotC to not include her.

2)How would putting a mention of Eilistraee in the already FR-specific drow sidebar (that you're confusing with the drow entry, judging by the line that I quoted), and in the deity list change the setting agnostic nature of the PHB? For the list, it's natural to offer a number of deties from many different settings and for a variety of characters, you can't not have setting-specific stuff there; Eilistraee fits the bill for the drow, that were only given an evil drow option in Lolth. As for the sidebar, like I mentioned, that sidebar is already FR-centered, so a mention of Eilistraee there (and I even gave you examples of how easy it is to mention both Drizzt AND Eilistraee) could have never hurted the setting-agnostic nature of the PHB.
So, keeping the PHB setting-agnostic couldn't have been the main reason why Eilistraee wasn't mentioned. In fact, an important reason was that WoTC wanted to give a very specific impression of the drow, one in which Drizzt is the exceptional exception and the PCs follow in his footsteps, which is once again why I talked about bias.

And yes, I know that sidebar has now been axed, but--again--this thread is about the reasons why WotC downplayed Eilistraee in 5e, which includes the time of writing of the PHB.

With that said, since they entirely axed the drow sidebar in the recent errata, I'd say that no, the portrayal of the drow in the PHB wasn't "just fine"--precisely because it failed to mention alternative drow cultures to Lolth's, like Eilistraee's faith. It offered a portrayal of the drow that was frankly as trivial and one-note as you'd expect a 12yo in his edgelord phase to write. It had 0 nuance and little thought put into it.

(PS: technically, Eilistraee's active in all settings with drow in 5e, and I hope you realize that the power that a character or faction holds in-universe has little to do with narrative relevance).

1) I don't see Valkur in my PHB (At least not in the cleric nor gods of the multiverse sections), and for the record I wouldn't want him there either. But I would also posit that there's a difference in notability between a minor {general} deity and a minor {racial pantheon} deity. I don't see Deep Sashelas either for instance.

2) If you must provide a deity list in the PHB, clearly label the setting it comes from and stick to the major examples, which is what they've done. Though personally, I don't think even that is needed.

Envyus

2022-01-05, 08:09 PM

Wildstag

2022-01-06, 12:57 PM

One of the seasons had Ravnican options; and of course Strahd stuff isn't Realms

I contradicted myself a few sentences later by saying "Presently only two adventures are NOT set in Forgotten Realms."

But yes, there are indeed options that specify alternative settings. The default for AL is Forgotten Realms regardless, and since that's the sponsored organized play option for 5e, it stands to reason the original intent was for that setting to be the standard.

Well, that and all their books that are basically "named NPC from previous edition has book with their peanut gallery comments" are all talking about the Forgotten Realms. If they were sincere about that setting not being the default, they could have just left Mordenkainen to talk about Oerth/Greyhawk.

Naanomi

2022-01-06, 01:16 PM

If they were sincere about that setting not being the default, they could have just left Mordenkainen to talk about Oerth/Greyhawk.
I would suggest that Moedenkainen was done from a Great Wheel/Planescape setting more than anything

Irennan

2022-01-06, 01:29 PM

You realize that more than one "adult human" works at WotC right? I hope?

Just like I hope you realize the people that held that bias are the very same who worked on most of 5e stuff.

And I still disagree. If anything, I want those core references/sidebars trimmed even further.

Sure, disagree all you want, but that's not the subject of this thread or the reason why I said what I said. All I said is that Eilistraee was left out of things like that because WotC had a bias for Drizzt, and wanted to give a portrayal of the drow that painted them as utterly evil except Drizzt and his clones.

No, I really don't. And even if you had a designer quote saying they wanted FR to be default (spoiler: you don't), such would be irrelevant because they definitely don't want FR to be seen as the default setting now. And I for one am fully supportive of that direction.

I support FR to not be default too, for the record. However, the whole launch of 5e was accompanied by this huge FR focus, with AL set in FR, new adventures--including the introductory adventure--set in FR, and the Sundering being the main storyline for 5e at launch. So yeah, FR has been the default assumption for the most part of 5e, no matter how you or I may dislike that.

As for the now, I'd say that--to the purpose of discussing Eilistraee's place in the PHB, which is one facet of the discussion--it's relevant what they wanted back then, not now.

Because tying good Drow to one setting-specific faith is limiting. If you want your good Drow PC to be the product of Eilistraeeanism, great, go off and do that. But to do so approaches the question from the wrong angle, which is starting from the premise that Drow PCs in every setting come from an evil culture that they need to be rescued or redeemed from (whether by Eilistraee, some other faith, or on their own.) That should either be a detail in that campaign setting's book, or left up to the DM in the case of a customized world - and that is why including language about it in Core is worse than useless, it's actively detrimental.

I've already addressed it before, even though you ignored it: https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=25313899&postcount=63

Eilistraee can very well be *one* example of non-Lolth cultures, not the only example, and a relevant option for drow PCs who want a deity. And btw, since the focus was that sidebar, it's FR-focused, which means that its assumption (and the presentation that the PHB gives people) is that most drow are evil and come from a monolithic evil culture in all settings. Also, as I explained, Eilistraee isn't there to go "redeem for your sinzzss!" on the drow, she's much more the healer/empowerer archetype.

This was the root of the problem that led to the current backlash: the PHB presented a very polarized view of the drow, one in which they're nearly all evil, and that was pretty much the Menzoberranzan culture (as they admitted in the link that you provided).

Now, is that sidebar better axed? Yes, sure, I agree. But once again, my point was that at the time of the writing of the PHB, Eilistraee totally belonged to that sidebar, and a big eason why they didn't include her was the Drizzt exceptionalism.

And it becomes even worse when you think about other such historically-portrayed-evil races, like orcs and kobolds and goblinoids, who don't even have an Eilistraee analogue to begin with. What goes in their sidebar? Do good orcs not need a faith dedicated to rescuing them from perdition? Does that mean that Drow are more inherently evil because they need the leg up, or Orcs are because they don't get one? All the more reason to axe that nonsense from core entirely.

1)Those races aren't in the PHB, but yeah, in books like the MM, they should totally get more than one culture or faith (same for the drow, btw). Also, orcs have Luthic as a deity more focused on growth and nurture than piallging and whatever. It's the reason why WotC are reworking them.

2)For the umpeenth time, Eilistraee isn't there to "rescue the drow from perdition", she's there because she chose to be with them in a time when they would be oppressed, abused, and need help not to "redeem themselves", but to heal.

I'm not just saying the PHB would be "fine" without such a sidebar. I'm saying it would be improved. And it's my sincere hope that 5.5 does exactly that, which the recent errata leads me to believe they will.

I agree, but once again, if they have to include such a sidebar, then Eilistraee's inclusion is totally appropriate. Also:

my point was that at the time of the writing of the PHB, Eilistraee totally belonged to that sidebar, and a big eason why they didn't include her was the Drizzt exceptionalism.

That said, I do believe Eilistraee belongs to the deity list for the drow, because 1)she's a good deity for a drow adventurer 2)she's now been made multispheric by WotC, so it wouldn't even be setting-specific entry.

1) I don't see Valkur in my PHB (At least not in the cleric nor gods of the multiverse sections), and for the record I wouldn't want him there either. But I would also posit that there's a difference in notability between a minor {general} deity and a minor {racial pantheon} deity. I don't see Deep Sashelas either for instance.

pp. 62-63. That said, Eilistraee's presence--as I stated countless times and as you keep ignoring--would make a huge difference for what she implies, and because she's a good adventurer deity wioth a drow focus. The drow only get Lolth as a drow option, that's not okay.

2) If you must provide a deity list in the PHB, clearly label the setting it comes from and stick to the major examples, which is what they've done. Though personally, I don't think even that is needed.

A deity list is fine, if even just to give examples of deity. If you want to remove that, you need to remove also most flavor from the races (example: elves shouldn't be stated to be created from Corellon, drow shouldn't be stated to be tied to Lolth, to be traitors, and whatever you have). It should just be crunch and really minimal, really vague flavor. Which IMHO could work, but would be bgad for establishing a brand of sorts.

As for Eilistraee in such a list, see above.

Psyren

2022-01-06, 01:30 PM

I contradicted myself a few sentences later by saying "Presently only two adventures are NOT set in Forgotten Realms."

But yes, there are indeed options that specify alternative settings. The default for AL is Forgotten Realms regardless, and since that's the sponsored organized play option for 5e, it stands to reason the original intent was for that setting to be the standard.

Well, that and all their books that are basically "named NPC from previous edition has book with their peanut gallery comments" are all talking about the Forgotten Realms. If they were sincere about that setting not being the default, they could have just left Mordenkainen to talk about Oerth/Greyhawk.

Issues with your premise:

1) Most popular setting for AL modules, if we even have an objective measure for that, != setting that should be positioned as "default" in the agnostic core books.

2) Mordenkainen - who is himself not even from FR, as a reminder - makes "peanut gallery comments" that touch on Oerth, Greyhawk, Ravenloft and even Eberron in addition to Faerun, so he is not positioning any kind of default either.

3) As I mentioned several times above, "original intent" is utterly useless. What matters is designer intent now, unless somebody has a time machine I'm unaware of.

Now, is that sidebar better axed? Yes, sure, I agree.

I'm glad. Hopefully this saves us both some time.

Irennan

2022-01-06, 01:33 PM

She honestly does not matter that much, she’s obscure in universe. She got the mentions she needs in MToF and that was all that was required. Even if you don’t like how she was portrayed she still was.

Eilistraee matters from a narrative standpoint because of what she implies. That said, I hope you realize that the prominence of a deity in a fictional world is determined by the writers, not by some external force, and that asking why WotC chose to made her that obscure and irrelvant--and to downplay her even fruther via a really bad writeup--was one of the reasons why the OP even opened this thread.

In short, yeah, Eilistraee is painted as being irrelevant in-universe, but why did WotC choose to dowplay her into irrelevance via whatever method? They wanted to paint the drow as utterly evil with Drizzt&clones as the exception.

Irennan

2022-01-06, 01:47 PM

Issues with your premise:

1) Most popular setting for AL modules, if we even have an objective measure for that, != setting that should be positioned as "default" in the agnostic core books.

It's not even just AL, for the first couple years everything was about FR, and everything surrounding the launch of 5e was FR. WotC wanted new people to discover FR, and used FR to build popularity.

Though I give you that I may have conflated WotC marketing and adventures with the PHB. That said, I'd say that more than being setting-agnostic, the core books are multi-setting. I doubt WotC will make anything setting-agnostic, because the settings are part of their brand and marketing.

2) Mordenkainen - who is himself not even from FR, as a reminder - makes "peanut gallery comments" that touch on Oerth, Greyhawk, Ravenloft and even Eberron in addition to Faerun, so he is not positioning any kind of default either.

Mordenkainen doesn't exist IRL, though. WotC wrote that book, not Mordenkainen, and presented the elf lore they provided there as universal, not setting-specific. They even friggin' said that every elf or drow is tied to Corellon or Lolth though they're not aware of it, and even implied that Krynn had friggin' drow. Even now, WotC is dramatically changing all elf and drow lore, and is making it homogeneous for all settings.

3) As I mentioned several times above, "original intent" is utterly useless. What matters is designer intent now, unless somebody has a time machine I'm unaware of.

Man, what the hell, asking the reason why Eilistraee was downplayed across 5e is the whole point of this thread, and that requires taking the past intent in consideration, even more than the VERY recent design choices that could have hardly influenced stuff for most of 5e. We also don't need time machines when we have the words of the very people who worked on 5e.

As for the *now* itself, like I've already explained to you, the current revision of the drow is VERY pertinent to Eilistraee, because it's about non-evil drow factions. The reason why they're neglecting her now (not in the PHB, that was a different facet of the discussion) isn't to keep stuff setting-agnostic (otheriwse why they'd be talking about Aevendrow&Icvewind Dale or Lorendrow&south of Chult), but that RAS is in charge. RAS is biased against Eilistraee. That's all there is to this current debacle, really.

I'm glad. Hopefully this saves us both some time.

It wasn't of much relevance to this thread, but sure, I agree that assumptions like that sidebar don't belong in the PHB.

Naanomi

2022-01-06, 01:56 PM

They even friggin' said that every elf or drow is tied to Corellon or Lolth though they're not aware of it, and even implied that Krynn had friggin' drow. Even now, WotC is dramatically changing all elf and drow lore, and is making it homogeneous for all settings.
I mean that has kind of been the case since the Spelljammer Imperial Elves; though I would argue there are still independent 'elven people's not tied to those Gods (Darksun Elves, for example, are {like most darksun races} mutated proto-halflings)

Psyren

2022-01-06, 01:57 PM

It's not even just AL, for the first couple years everything was about FR, and everything surrounding the launch of 5e was FR. WotC wanted new people to discover FR, and used FR to build popularity.

Though I give you that I may have conflated WotC marketing and adventures with the PHB. That said, I'd say that more than being setting-agnostic, the core books are multi-setting. I doubt WotC will make anything setting-agnostic, because the settings are part of their brand and marketing.

Multi or agnostic, my point is that FR shouldn't be elevated above the others in core. I don't care what they do with AL/APs, though I'm willing to bet that Strahd is actually their most popular AP so far.

Mordenkainen doesn't exist IRL, though. WotC wrote that book, not Mordenkainen,

Wow, really, I'm shocked.

and presented the elf lore they provided there as universal, not setting-specific. They even friggin' said that every elf or drow is tied to Corellon or Lolth though they're not aware of it, and even implied that Krynn had friggin' drow. Even now, WotC is dramatically changing all elf and drow lore, and is making it homogeneous for all settings.

That's not the PHB, so I don't care about that either.

Man, what the hell, asking the reason why Eilistraee was downplayed across 5e is the whole point of this thread, and that requires taking the past intent in consideration, even more than the VERY recent design choices that could have hardly influenced stuff for most of 5e. We also don't need time machines when we have the words of the very people who worked on 5e.

You have their past words for a past edition, and are attempting to make present hay out of that. I clearly can't convince you to stop, so good luck.

Envyus

2022-01-07, 03:37 AM

Eilistraee matters from a narrative standpoint because of what she implies. That said, I hope you realize that the prominence of a deity in a fictional world is determined by the writers, not by some external force, and that asking why WotC chose to made her that obscure and irrelvant--and to downplay her even fruther via a really bad writeup--was one of the reasons why the OP even opened this thread.

In short, yeah, Eilistraee is painted as being irrelevant in-universe, but why did WotC choose to dowplay her into irrelevance via whatever method? They wanted to paint the drow as utterly evil with Drizzt&clones as the exception.

No she was always that way. She was always a very minor deity even before 5e. And I don't think the writeup was bad even if you think so. (Also the OP did not even seem to be aware she was in MToF.)

Drizzt is also simply more important then her. Drizzt is the star of a popular ongoing book series. And even in Universe he's probably more important then her as he's a fairly famous hero. While she is minor Deity with a small following of surface Drow.

The new non evil Drow cultures that have been recently created also don't worship her for a simple reason. They don't like living under Moonlight. One still dwells underground, and the other hidden under dense trees (And underground)

Scots Dragon

2022-01-07, 05:04 AM

No she was always that way. She was always a very minor deity even before 5e. And I don't think the writeup was bad even if you think so. (Also the OP did not even seem to be aware she was in MToF.)

Drizzt is also simply more important then her. Drizzt is the star of a popular ongoing book series. And even in Universe he's probably more important then her as he's a fairly famous hero. While she is minor Deity with a small following of surface Drow.

The new non evil Drow cultures that have been recently created also don't worship her for a simple reason. They don't like living under Moonlight. One still dwells underground, and the other hidden under dense trees (And underground)

Eilistraee has been a big deal in the Forgotten Realms for quite a while. She has major headings in both Faiths & Pantheons and Demihuman Deities, with the former actually treating her as a major enough deity to earn her own full write-up where Deneir, whose lead worshipper got his own quintet of novels by R.A. Salvatore called the Cleric Quintet, was not. And neither were Beshaba, Eldath, Finder Wyvernspur, Milil, Lliira, Loviatar, Sharess or bloody Tiamat. The excerpt with her stat block was considered major enough to be used in marketing preview material on the Wizards of the Coast website, and is available here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20020503a).

Her worshippers have also appeared in several novels of their own. notably with her high priestess being the youngest of the iconic hero group known as the Seven Sisters, Qilué Veladorn, who serves as a major part of the book Silverfall, appears in the Starlight & Shadows trilogy, and had a portion of the Seven Sisters sourcebook given over to her as well as a heading in the Heroes' Lorebook.

Mentions of Eilistraee are super common, with them appearing in various Realms sourcebooks all over the place throughout second and third edition. Several worshippers appear in The City of Ravens Bluff petitioning to be able to set up a shrine in the city, we get details of one of their shrines in Champions of Valour, they are present pretty strongly in the Skullport sourcebook, they're a major part of the original Drow of the Underdark, and they're a prominent part of the third edition adventure Expedition to Undermountain where the Promenade of the Dark Maiden is considered one of the havens where adventurers can find respite.

They also turn up in video games, with Eilistraee's worshippers appearing in Baldur's Gate 2 and Neverwinter Nights, and it's possible to create one of your own in Neverwinter Nights 2.

And this is mostly stuff that I didn't even have to look up.

The idea that Eilistraee is not a big deal is literally only because Wizards of the Coast have spent the past fourteen years deliberately downplaying her. She's a big deal, stop pretending like she isn't.

Millstone85

2022-01-07, 05:54 AM

And even in Universe he's probably more important then her as he's a fairly famous hero. While she is minor Deity with a small following of surface Drow.
The idea that Eilistraee is not a big deal is literally only because Wizards of the Coast have spent the past fourteen years deliberately downplaying herThe funny thing is that, even under MToF's current write-up, she still beats Drizzt. She is described as a minor goddess, but in a pantheon that now spans the Material Plane. Whereas his adventures and fame are a Toril deal.

Envyus

2022-01-07, 11:17 AM

Eilistraee has been a big deal in the Forgotten Realms for quite a while. She has major headings in both Faiths & Pantheons and Demihuman Deities, with the former actually treating her as a major enough deity to earn her own full write-up where Deneir, whose lead worshipper got his own quintet of novels by R.A. Salvatore called the Cleric Quintet, was not. And neither were Beshaba, Eldath, Finder Wyvernspur, Milil, Lliira, Loviatar, Sharess or bloody Tiamat. The excerpt with her stat block was considered major enough to be used in marketing preview material on the Wizards of the Coast website, and is available here (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20020503a).

Her worshippers have also appeared in several novels of their own. notably with her high priestess being the youngest of the iconic hero group known as the Seven Sisters, Qilué Veladorn, who serves as a major part of the book Silverfall, appears in the Starlight & Shadows trilogy, and had a portion of the Seven Sisters sourcebook given over to her as well as a heading in the Heroes' Lorebook.

Mentions of Eilistraee are super common, with them appearing in various Realms sourcebooks all over the place throughout second and third edition. Several worshippers appear in The City of Ravens Bluff petitioning to be able to set up a shrine in the city, we get details of one of their shrines in Champions of Valour, they are present pretty strongly in the Skullport sourcebook, they're a major part of the original Drow of the Underdark, and they're a prominent part of the third edition adventure Expedition to Undermountain where the Promenade of the Dark Maiden is considered one of the havens where adventurers can find respite.

They also turn up in video games, with Eilistraee's worshippers appearing in Baldur's Gate 2 and Neverwinter Nights, and it's possible to create one of your own in Neverwinter Nights 2.

And this is mostly stuff that I didn't even have to look up.

The idea that Eilistraee is not a big deal is literally only because Wizards of the Coast have spent the past fourteen years deliberately downplaying her. She's a big deal, stop pretending like she isn't.

Getting write ups does not make one a big deal. Also 5e did not downplay her, as she has gotten a bunch of mentions like in 3e. 4e is the time that killed her off.

Psyren

2022-01-07, 11:21 AM

Getting write ups does not make one a big deal. Also 5e did not downplay her, as she has gotten a bunch of mentions like in 3e. 4e is the time that killed her off.

I suggest you not bother, the windmills must be tilted at.

Irennan

2022-01-09, 06:44 PM

my point is that FR shouldn't be elevated above the others in core.

And as I discussed, Eilistraee's inclusion in the deity list wouldn't make the PHB any less multi-setting.

Wow, really, I'm shocked.

Apparently, the reminder was needed, since you were tyring to address a real point with an in-universe justification.

That's not the PHB, so I don't care about that either.

You brought it up. If your only goal in this discussion is stating that you want the PHB to be multi-setting, which has little to nothing to do with the discussion (and, as I showed you, the inclusion of Eilistraee as a deity for players to choose in the PHB doesn't make it any less multi-setting), then why are you even participating?

You have their past words for a past edition, and are attempting to make present hay out of that. I clearly can't convince you to stop, so good luck.

And as I explained to you, those words are indicative of their mindset when 5e was in the works, because they were from the very people who worked on the PHB, and written during the deveoping phase of 5e. Denying that won't change anything.

Btw, nice job not addressing (for like the third or fourth time) that the now of the drow is about RAS: RAS is in charge of the current drow (if you missed the recent Dragon+ issues, it's stated there), and he has multiple times expressed a dislike of Eilistraee (based on reasons that show that he didn't even bother to read her lore, at that).

Irennan

2022-01-09, 06:55 PM

No she was always that way. She was always a very minor deity even before 5e.

Nope. Eilistraee has always been a lesser goddess, yes, but not a goddess that almost no one knew about. The FRWiki article that I linke even quotes Ed Greenwood on this:

The Dark Maiden sang her call to all dark elves—from the highest matron mother to the lowest male slave—sending them dreams or visions, showing them a different, better life, and the beauty of the world (especially when they were close to the surface).[11] Lolth was powerless to stop these visions, as too much interference from two goddesses could easily bring a mortal's mind to insanity,[32] and despite her continued efforts to suppress any knowledge of her daughter,[11] the drow definitely came to "feel" the Dark Dancer at some point in their lives, with varying reactions.

While many would either not understand their dreams and emotions, or chose to ignore, disbelieve, or reject them, many others secretly yearned for the goddess and all that she wished for them. In fact, it was not unusual for them—if they thought they could get away with it, without the knowledge of a priestess of Lolth—to choose to spare the life of a worshiper of Eilistraee, decline to tell other drow what they'd seen of their activities, or linger to watch one of their dances rather than breaking it up. That said, despite those feelings, not many drow could find the strength and resources to make the final step and leave their past behind to cleave to Eilistraee on their own.[32][11] Furthermore, the Dark Maiden's efforts were opposed by the power of Lolth and the other evil drow gods, and what she could do was very limited.

Meanwhile, the MToF suggests that guarding some scrolls (which is a stupid way to restrict info btw) is enough to make most drow unaware of Eilistraee. Moreover, Eilistraee is active in providing actual support to the drow who seek a refuge away from Lolth, so she does provide practical help, and has orders dedicated to that, unlike the MToF suggests. This is a VERY different painting than the MToF tries to give you. It's the painting of an underdog who chose to be drow to be with them in the the times of need, and who does stuff to reach her goal--not of a mostly irrelevant faith and of a goddess who doesn't even take a position in respect to the other deities of the Dark Seldarine.

And I don't think the writeup was bad even if you think so. (Also the OP did not even seem to be aware she was in MToF.

I pointed out how the writeup downplays her activities and attacks a major point of her character--her choice to be drow--which isn't just what I think, it's stuff that is right in front of your eyes.

Drizzt is also simply more important then her. Drizzt is the star of a popular ongoing book series. And even in Universe he's probably more important then her as he's a fairly famous hero. While she is minor Deity with a small following of surface Drow.

The new non evil Drow cultures that have been recently created also don't worship her for a simple reason. They don't like living under Moonlight. One still dwells underground, and the other hidden under dense trees (And underground)

How this is relevant in any way escapes me. The point re: the new cultures wasn't that those cultures should worship her (and the excuse of moonlight is weak--Eilistraee is a goddess of a lot of things, and a patroness of arts), but that Eilistraee's culture (as in, the culture inspired by her teachings, that has a long ass-history, starting with a whole prosperous nation) totally belongs to this new drow revision, which is about how drow can form non evil cultures or factions. Yet, they haven't even mentioned her--she's currently being singled out, and that is in large part due to RAS' stated bias against her, because he was put in charge of this rework.
As I said multiple times, and as I'm tired to repeat, she can be mentioned in new material alongside Drizzt and whoever else. This isn't some kind of competition. That's all.

As for the in-universe thingy, that's a side point, but I'll address it. As far as establishing a foothold for drow on the surface and/or helping the drow break free go, she's currently as important as, or even more important than, Drizzt. That's because she actually does stuff to help the drow and works to build relationship with surfacers, which is more than the reputation by hearsay (mostly limited to the Sword Coast and the North at that) that Drizzt has. Especially given that her people have recently even built a temple within Waterdeep, going by Ed Greenwood's latest novel (which WotC has decided to utterly ignore in their Waterdeep and Undermountain material, btw), so they likely get a lot of interaction with the Waterdhavians. Also, since she is dedicated to helping the drow break free from Lolth and heal, given that she has orders dedicated to just that, and being a lesser deity--therefore having at least thousands of followers--she has to make some difference, I believe.

Getting write ups does not make one a big deal.

Yes, it makes her relevant from a narrative perspective. People are more likely to read about her, know about her, and get a different idea of the drow.

-------------------

In-universe importance doesn't have much to do with narrative importance, or with how a character should be featured. If narrative and in-universe importance were the same, then any underdog faction should be neglected in favor of the larger ones. However, underdogs are most often central to a story...

Psyren

2022-01-09, 08:48 PM

And as I discussed, Eilistraee's inclusion in the deity list wouldn't make the PHB any less multi-setting.

And I still disagree.

Apparently, the reminder was needed, since you were tyring to address a real point with an in-universe justification.

You were the one who brought up Mordenkainen's FR references (or rather, WotC's in his fictional voice) as an indication that FR is somehow more prominent in 5e. I countered by pointing out that his sidebars cover multiple settings, not just FR, and that he himself is not even an FR character.

You brought it up. If your only goal in this discussion is stating that you want the PHB to be multi-setting, which has little to nothing to do with the discussion (and, as I showed you, the inclusion of Eilistraee as a deity for players to choose in the PHB doesn't make it any less multi-setting), then why are you even participating?

No, you did. I asked the OP what more they wanted (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25305854&viewfull=1#post25305854) than the MToF references, you replied that she deserves to be in the PHB (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25306486&viewfull=1#post25306486), I disagreed with that stance, and we've been circling the drain wagons ever since.

And as I explained to you, those words are indicative of their mindset when 5e was in the works, because they were from the very people who worked on the PHB, and written during the deveoping phase of 5e. Denying that won't change anything.

Btw, nice job not addressing (for like the third or fourth time) that the now of the drow is about RAS: RAS is in charge of the current drow (if you missed the recent Dragon+ issues, it's stated there), and he has multiple times expressed a dislike of Eilistraee (based on reasons that show that he didn't even bother to read her lore, at that).

I've addressed it multiple times. RAS is not credited in any of my sourcebooks, and those are the books that matter.

And now, for the final time - given that we are clearly at an impasse, I'll refer you to my initial recommendation on this topic (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25314184&viewfull=1#post25314184); you claim to have already done this, so there's really nothing else to do but keep trying. Or not. Either way, I've said my peace.

Scots Dragon

2022-01-09, 08:51 PM

Ideally what we should have is a proper Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book.

But I don't trust Wizards of the Coast to actually give us that, so...

Irennan

2022-01-10, 04:46 PM

And I still disagree.

I've provided you reasons why her inclusion as an option for drow PCs in the deity list wouldn't harm the multi-setting nature of the PHB. You have yet to provide reasons why you think it would.

You were the one who brought up Mordenkainen's FR references (or rather, WotC's in his fictional voice) as an indication that FR is somehow more prominent in 5e. I countered by pointing out that his sidebars cover multiple settings, not just FR, and that he himself is not even an FR character.

No, I brought it up as an indication that Eilistraee is technically now a multi-setting goddess** (to add yet another counterargument to your "she's FR only so she shouldn't even be in the PHB deity list"), because that book provides a drow pantheon for all settings, and specifies when a deity is specific to a setting (Vulkoor). Mord didn't specify anything about Eilistraee. You said that it merely was because of what he--as a character--has access to, to which I replied that such a thing was irrelevant, because WotC wrote that book to convey *their* stance on the topic, not Mord's, to the readers.

I've never brought that book up as an indicator of FR prevalence or whatever. I brought up the various events, adventures, and books released at the beginning of 5e and in the following years all assuming FR as standard, and I even said that, while the WotC's FR-focus in the 5e products was very real, I may have conflated it with the PHB, thus admitting my mistake in that line of thought (which was even a sideline discussion). I don't know where you got that I said that MToF has elements that imply FR prevalence.

(btw, re: bias, no mention of Eilistraee in their drow-focused adventure book either. No mention of the Promenade and of it being reclaimed in Mad Mage. Are you going to tell me doesn't belong there either?)

**Even in 3e, the Greyhawk drow book mentioned her among the plot hooks section.

No, you did. I asked the OP what more they wanted (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25305854&viewfull=1#post25305854) than the MToF references, you replied that she deserves to be in the PHB (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25306486&viewfull=1#post25306486), I disagreed with that stance, and we've been circling the drain wagons ever since.

We're running circles because your only focus is the setting-neutrality of the PHB, not the topic at hand, and you haven't addressed anything that doesn't concern that, "because Eilistraee was mentioned in MToF". You didn't even address the points I made about the downplaying nature of Eilistraee's writeup there.

Heck, you even said that Eilistraee's inclusion in the FR-focused drow sidebar was a no no, because you think that the sidebar shouldn't be there, because your primary focus was the multi-setting nature of the PHB. How is that opionion (that I agree with, btw, but that's irrelevant) even related to this discussion? The reality is that the sidebar has been added, and Eilistraee wasn't included because WotC wanted to protray the drow as an "evil race" with a handful of exceptions following in Drizzt's footstep--aka, bias. Bias that existed at the time of writing of the PHB, regardless of what happens now, because that time is relevant to the OP.

I've addressed it multiple times. RAS is not credited in any of my sourcebooks, and those are the books that matter.

You want to have your cake and eat it too. You say that WotC's past words&stance that are obviously relevant to 5e--spoken around the time of its creation, by the very people who worked on the PHB and on all the subsequent sourcebooks--apparently don't matter, because only the "now" matters. However, when I point out that "the now" of the drow is all about RAS, as you can read in Dragon+ (go check it, seriously), and that he has stated multiple times to be biased against Eilistraee, you say it doesn't matter because only sourcebooks do? Moving the goalposts much?

And now, for the final time - given that we are clearly at an impasse, I'll refer you to my initial recommendation on this topic (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?640409-Eilistraee-in-5E-or-lack-of-it&p=25314184&viewfull=1#post25314184); you claim to have already done this, so there's really nothing else to do but keep trying. Or not. Either way, I've said my peace.

The strawman repeats. Bias=/=conspiracy.

JackPhoenix

2022-01-10, 05:11 PM

You want to have your cake and eat it too. You say that WotC's past words&stance that are obviously relevant to 5e--spoken around the time of its creation, by the very people who worked on it--apparently don't matter, because only the "now" matters. However, when I point out that "the now" of the drow is all about RAS, as you can read in Dragon+ (go check it, seriously), and that he has stated multiple times to be biased against Eilistraee, you say it doesn't matter because only sourcebooks do? Dude, for real?

Yes, for real. External sources are irrelevant. And if you want people to check some article, you should provide more informations where to find it... nobody's going to check dozens of issues to find the one you're talking about.

Irennan

2022-01-10, 05:27 PM

Yes, for real. External sources are irrelevant.

They're very obviously relevant to this discussion, because we're talking about stances and bias, not about in-universe stuff. It's basically the same case as Wikipedia asking for external references for pages about fictional stuff--if you're not discussing the story itself, and we aren't, then what info can you find in the in-universe sources? I thought it went by itself. Also, Dragon+ is a WotC source.

And if you want people to check some article, you should provide more informations where to find it... nobody's going to check dozens of issues to find the one you're talking about.

If you're taking part in a discussion that has much to do with the current doings, and if you point at "the now" as what actually matters, you should check up "the now" first.

Anyway, as for RAS being the one behind the new drow rework, it's here:

“I didn’t create the drow, but I created the drow in the Realms. And the vision I’ve always had for them is where the Wizards Franchise Team is taking them now,” Bob tells Dragon+
https://dnd.dragonmag.com/2021/05/21/in-the-works-template-issue-37-5/content.html

As for Eilistraee clearly not being part of his vision for the drow (for reasons that point out that he never even botherd to read about her--aka "Eilistraee shouldn't be the one that makes the drow good"; that's not how she works), it's been in multiple AMAs, even on twitter discussions, but one link I remember is this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HsaC92khQY

Roughly mid interview, IIRC. He also comes off as feeling "robbed" (so to speak) that Eilistraee brought the existence of a whole non-evil drow faction, because he wanted his characters to be the ones to clarify that drow that aren't Drizzt can also not be evil (even though he did the revisitation of the character he talks about only after 30 books or so, and though pushed the "good other" trope in the meanwhile).

His "I created the FR drow" from the other quote also points towards that: he didn't create the FR drow, not by a long shot--he created Menzo and that's it--but he apparently feels like he did. Aka, that the creations of others don't really matter. Yes, he made the drow popular, but this statement is just wrong.
His revision of the FR drow history (no, I'm not talking about creating 2 new cities, I'm talking about taking everything, from the Seldarine wars to the Crown wars, and ignoring it) also amounts to taking the work of everyone else who contributed, and replacing it with his version (it's in the Dragon+ article next to the one about his commentary).

Scots Dragon

2022-01-13, 05:31 AM

His "I created the FR drow" from the other quote also points towards that: he didn't create the FR drow, not by a long shot--he created Menzo and that's it--but he apparently feels like he did. Aka, that the creations of others don't really matter. Yes, he made the drow popular, but this statement is just wrong.

It's also notable that Ed Greenwood was the one who created Eilistraee and Vhaeraun and Selvetarm, and expanded the drow beyond what was visible in the frame in Menzoberranzan with Drow of the Underdark.

It's also doubly notable that what's visible in the frame in Menzoberranzan is pretty damn similar overall to their depiction in all the way back with Erelhei Cinlu as depicted in D3 Vault of the Drow, and either one can be seen as iconic and emblematic of the drow in general with little real difference. Even down to the general aesthetic of the cityscape.

Other writers also contributed a lot to making the city itself feel alive and vibrant. Elaine Cunningham's Starlight and Shadows, Richard Lee Byers' War of the Spider Queen: Dissolution, and the Menzoberranzan boxed set that Salvatore had co-writers Ed Greenwood, Michael Leger, and Douglas Niles collaborating on. He's actually only credited for the book detailing the eighteen most prominent noble houses of the city, with the actual city details being handled by Greenwood.

R.A. Salvatore seems to have gotten really arrogant and territorial about the drow in his old age.

Irennan

2022-01-13, 10:39 AM

Not to mention Eric Boyd's massive work on expanding the history of the ancient drow nations, or on adding drow cities (like Sshamath) that weren't a hodgepodge of evil stereotypes mashed together and explained away with "Lolth keeps it going, dealwithitlol". But judging from Salvatore's words, to him, the work of Ed, Eric, Elaine and many more, who strove to add nuance and variety and friggin' credibility to the drow over the years, isn't even worth mentioning. All that matters is the small amount of drow lore *he* created--the very same that created the massive backlash that we see now, and that led most people to see the drow as inherently evil save for a handful of exceptions.

He's actually only credited for the book detailing the eighteen most prominent noble houses of the city, with the actual city details being handled by Greenwood.

Yeah, this is the most ironic part. Salvatore didn't even bother to detail the Menzoberranyr or Lolthite *cultures* (he didn't even create Lolth, or her story in FR, or her faith!), he just wrote the houses system (which is a very basic factions system that we see in countless other stories, even though he tries to embellish it by saying that it was inspired by the mafia), and the academy. But when I pointed at the falsehood of this claim by Salvatore (the one about creating the FR drow) elsewhere, I just got called "insane" and the person didn't even bother checking the Menzo boxed set or the Drow of the Underdark book.

R.A. Salvatore seems to have gotten really arrogant and territorial about the drow in his old age.

Honestly, what RAS said is disgusting, because it means either claiming credit for stuff he didn't create, or refusing to acknowledge that other people worked on the drow (and created MUCH more than he did). But his disdain for Eilistraee is old, and he always refused to even acknowledge the existence of variety and reasonableness in the FR drow, while having Drizzt complain again and again about his people. The only difference is that now he has the power to act on his bias, and people tend to show their true colors when they're given power.