Tacticslion
2023-06-12, 07:16 PM
I'm going to use spoilers in this first post, but don't really expect people to continue doing so past this one. Please be aware if you're interested in avoiding spoilers!
(I'm also in a different forum where there's a raging debate about what does and doesn't count as a spoiler; if I act in over-caution - sorry; if I make a mistake: sorry.)
The main question, and the one that I'm most keen on learning, is if (prior to 3e) any of the Swords of Answering other than Fragarach was ever given clear statistics (which gem was which, what alignment it relates to, etc.), or if it was just said that "there are other lesser swords of different alignments; also they each have a different gem." Anyone know?
Now to the more spoilery parts and questions related.
So, Fragarach is the original sword of Answering, but reading through
Temple of Elemental Evil
(a major adventure) you have
a LG paladin lord devoted to a lawful good religion who wields a sword that says it automatically attacks lawful people who hold it, but is loyal to him above all others.
So that's weird. Was this just an error? Intentional? One of those weird things no one can ever know?
The other thing is that in said adventure, the PCs
can possibly earn (more-or-less after the adventure*, as an apparent reward from the lawful good religions) the privilege of the sword Scather. Now, as I said, I don't know any of the alignments prior to 3e, but in 3e Scather is said to be NE and in 5e it's LE and has a garnet. Regardless of which of the two it's "supposed" to be, that seems like a very odd reward for adventurers (and seems like the opposite of what they'd want to do with a weapon like that). Again, is that supposed to be what it's alignment was?
If so, is there something in particular that makes it make more sense that they would deliver such an item to the adventurers?
(I've heard that there were a lot of last minute changes that means much of the adventure should just be rewritten, though I've avoided doing so; I have so far retained all the mentions of "Lolth" despite suggestions to the contrary, for example. I am curious how much of that is true, though.)
(I'm also in a different forum where there's a raging debate about what does and doesn't count as a spoiler; if I act in over-caution - sorry; if I make a mistake: sorry.)
The main question, and the one that I'm most keen on learning, is if (prior to 3e) any of the Swords of Answering other than Fragarach was ever given clear statistics (which gem was which, what alignment it relates to, etc.), or if it was just said that "there are other lesser swords of different alignments; also they each have a different gem." Anyone know?
Now to the more spoilery parts and questions related.
So, Fragarach is the original sword of Answering, but reading through
Temple of Elemental Evil
(a major adventure) you have
a LG paladin lord devoted to a lawful good religion who wields a sword that says it automatically attacks lawful people who hold it, but is loyal to him above all others.
So that's weird. Was this just an error? Intentional? One of those weird things no one can ever know?
The other thing is that in said adventure, the PCs
can possibly earn (more-or-less after the adventure*, as an apparent reward from the lawful good religions) the privilege of the sword Scather. Now, as I said, I don't know any of the alignments prior to 3e, but in 3e Scather is said to be NE and in 5e it's LE and has a garnet. Regardless of which of the two it's "supposed" to be, that seems like a very odd reward for adventurers (and seems like the opposite of what they'd want to do with a weapon like that). Again, is that supposed to be what it's alignment was?
If so, is there something in particular that makes it make more sense that they would deliver such an item to the adventurers?
(I've heard that there were a lot of last minute changes that means much of the adventure should just be rewritten, though I've avoided doing so; I have so far retained all the mentions of "Lolth" despite suggestions to the contrary, for example. I am curious how much of that is true, though.)