A great many ancient elves live in Europe: The Laughing Man himself lives of the coast of France more precisely of the coast of Marseille. Some of them even got together to create Tir Na Nog. So why is it that besides one comment from The Laughing Man on page 92, none of them make any comments concerning the countries they live in?

This is Europe for centuries/millennias the old stomping grounds of the ancients! I find it very strange that they don't have anything more to say....

The well known enmity between Tir Na Nog and Tir Tairngire should at least lead to a few nasty comments from both sides...

Lastly only one comment from Harlequin seems awfully strange when dealing with The Laughing Man, who usually has much more to say!

I can but agree, Harelquin must have been of to Madagascar or someplace

That's what France was missing: the whole Chateau d'If bit!

I agree with you. I'd call that a fault. Blame it on the amount of things e had to think about, and how past some point we only cared about cutting things, not adding things we forgotten. I remember at some point in a draft I had The Laughing Man making a comment as a privilegied spectator of decades of gangs war in Marseille.

The Chateau d'If could have been mentionned, especially to correct the idea that it's a remote isolated place (it's right in front of Marseille, maybe a few hundred meters). On the other hand, there are probably a dozen of places as strange and mysterious in France, we just happen to know out of game that one in particular is very special. The forbidden island would be a prime suspect as soon as the rumor about S-K delta clinic is tossed away. Orange Queen could have for once mocked Harlequin, for living right in Lofwyr's French backyard. And then there should also be agents of Tir Tainrgire Information Secretariat around to search for a trail linking the Rinelle to Marseille.

And I'd just love to have a picture of Harlequin hanging around in Marseille, wearing the shirt of the local football club, sitting at a bar to drink a coffee or a pastis and watch the match...

For me, as a reader, the less IEs/Dragons/etc enter directly into the shadowtalk, the better. A few scattered comments are powerful. When they comment every few pages, it lessens the impact, IMHO. Anybody who remembers when Paranormal Animals of NA came out will probably remember Dunkelzahn's comment at the end. That is burned into my mind still, all these years later. I also liked Ghostwalker's one comment at the end of his section in Dot6W. Because it was one comment in a multitude of chit-chat, which lent it weight. Many of the IE/Dragon's comments since then have lost some of their weight, for me, because the character comments so often. Okay, it would have been cool for LM to have at least one comment on his home. But I'm not all that sad about it.

I haven't read those books, so can't comment on them directly, but that seems like the correct way to handle the uber-powerful NPCs to me.

Got to agree with Prospero there - less is certainly more.

Hmmm, as for LM's single comment, well, let's just say the connotations of the situation left him gobsmacked shall we? (I'm assuming its the one in the UK chapter, although p94 does seem a little too early for it judging on SoE's size - I'll eventually get to it now I've got my copy.)

Oh, and you're dead-on about the Paranimals of NA comment by Dunky. Personally, I also thought the comment by Harly in Paranimals of Europe regarding the wraiths was also a good one liner. Impact is everything.

I don't think anyone's really gotten the proper feel for Harlequin right in many a year, so I don't mind that he doesn't get much use. Besides, unless there's a specific reason to use them, it's just as well that dragons and immortal elves aren't sitting around making lots of posts on Shadowland. It's just a bit silly.

I just read SoE, and I counted 3 comments by Celedyr (two as Script-Diver and one as Stone-Diver, assuming those were all him) and two by the Laughing Man. And, both of the Laughing Man's quotes were roughly him going "really? Hmm."

So not much- I would have liked to see a little more, m'self. I agree that it shouldn't be too much, but they could have afforded a little more. IMHO.

Hmmm, and for the next project how about:

"Aha! Now to tap the arcane powers of this lay with my trusty bequeathed sword - AAARrRRGGHHHH!" Fizzle! Smell of smoking Harley boots and burnt leather jacket?

One down, two Pixie Nations to go...

I noticed Celedyr either doesn't understand what Occam's Razor means, or is just referring to something off-topic completely (or that my puny brain is too puny to comprehend.)

It's your puny brain .

Occam's razor is a "(...)logical principle attributed to the mediaeval philosopher William of Occam (or Ockham). The principle states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed. This principle is often called the principle of parsimony. It underlies all scientific modelling and theory building. It admonishes us to choose from a set of otherwise equivalent models of a given phenomenon the simplest one(...)" or in very simplifed terms "the simplest answer tends to be the correct one."

IIRC in this particular case Celedyr is referring to the fact that the humans posting obviously can get around the idea that the most complex, inconsistent and "unbelievable" answer (ie. that Lofwyr is behind the NEEC) is actually correct, while the application of Occam's logic (ie. the simple answer) is wrong.

Trust a dragon not to think in the simplest terms.

Yeah I'm just not a fan of using Occam's Razor for such mundane affairs. The scientific application for it is really simple and obvious: Eliminate redundancies in your logic. If you have two hypotheses that say exactly the same thing, but one includes extra information, then the extra information is extraneous. Interpreting it as "The simplest explanation tends to be the correct one" isn't really a satisfying summary, as it tends to encourage people to misuse the theory, simply because they can't distinguish between 'simplistic' and 'simplified'. This is the kind of mistake people make when they try to use Occam's razor to prove alien abductions, or the existence of God. Since the posters obviously don't have enough information to form strong hypothesis as to what happened, they can't really eliminate redundancies in their logic.

The scientific principle of Parsimony (aka Principle of Simplicity) is described in the Encyclopaedia Britannica as a "criterion for deciding among scientific theories or explanations according to which one should always choose the simplest explanation of a phenomenon, the one that requires the fewest leaps of logic."

Or maybe Celedyr's pointing out the fact that for all of shadowposters' vaunted insider knowledge they're still puny humans and "don't have enough information to form strong hypothesis as to what happened, they can't really eliminate redundancies in their logic."

Read it as you will, Celedyr still comes off as one clever dracoform.

I guess. He comes off to me more inelegantly snooty than clever, in an "I know something you don't know" way. I mean, of course he's going to know more about it than they do.

But there's nothing that says a dragon has to be elegant, nor that it can't be snooty. I'd imagine snootiness is actually a very draconian trait.

Beyond Chateau D'ife there are numerous mythic sites in western europe missed in the book that are clearly for spaces sake. The Loire valley chateau's, Rhine Castles, New Grange in Ireland, and loads of Roman ruins from Cisalpine Gaul to Hardians' Wall.

Harelquin has changed in recent years, not through bad writing but the character. Before, oh, say 2057 he was a force of chaos, who got his kicks from blowing smoke in the face of other ancients but letting poor mortals into the game, or at least letting them know it was being played.

With the Death of Dunkelzahn he, of all the immortals, seemed to be the one to take up the challenge in the will to take dunkelzahn's self appointed place as the champion for metahumanity. With the "songbird" Dunkelzahn and Harlequin seemed to come to an understanding and mutual respect, hense the final item left to H by Dunkelzahn, Excaliber. The fact he has to find it ihmself it more of a mythic statement than acknowledgement that something is missing from his trove.

Therein, I suppose, lies my disinterest in Harlequin these days. I thought Harlequin was more interesting when he was simply a self-interested eccentric, rather than the savior of humanity. Even in Harlequin's Back, he retained some of that self-centered quality even while he showed a bit deeper character. There was still ambiguity. Likewise, I thought Dunkelzahn was more interesting when he was a curious, gregarious, and vaguely philanthropic dragon, than... well, you know. Even in Dunkelzahn's will, there was an ambiguous and prankster-like nature to the bequests that make you think he wasn't entirely a nice guy. Maybe he was even a bit vindictive. But that ambiguity get overshadowed when we know that hey, they're just saving the world.

Besides, I thought Hestaby was the self-appointed meddling savior of humanity!

Not saying a word. Nope. Completely hush-hush. Nill nada. On the QT...

Might want to rein back the teasing.

Yep, if you can't show anything else, at least show some self-control guys.

We don't know what/who Pendragon is, and unless he's Harequin dressed up...

Well, IIRC, legend sais that Arthur ain't dead, but lies sleeping... so...........

My latin spelling is a little shaky but it's Artoris, Rex Quandum, Rex Futuris usually translated as "Arthur, the once and future king." The legend is that mortally wounded he was carried from the field of Camlan to Avalon, land of the young, to heal and rest.

Less well know is the legend that he waits, until England's darkest hour , and then when England's mother weeps, he shall ride forward upon the field thrice won, thrice lost.

In it's history England has seen some very dark days and always seems to find some champion, clkimbing up from the muck of inbred graduates of public schools to lead the people with brilliant leadership- Alfred the Great(@ 840CE), Sir Francis Drake(1588), Lord Nelson (1805), Winston Spenser Leonard Churchill (1940).
Compared with those dark days, 2063 is nothing like so as to invoke that power.

Unless there is something serious coming down the pike that makes Darke look like a cub scout jamboree I would find it a let down to be something that bad. My best guesses at this time are:
(1) a pretender/activist trying to invoke that cleaner image, of royalty away from the LP's office.

(2) The true heir to the house of Windsor, since it is possible to dispute the current heir, who has now grown to adulthood. But Britain hasn't fought for the throne since 1746.

and the wildest guess
(3) Pendragon is not just the name of Arthur, but it is more closely associated with his father, Uther, who took the name Pendragon tying into the legend of the sleeping dragons beneth Vortigern's castle that threw it down. This pendragon could be the precursor of him who is to come. Keep and eye on the Welsh wildlands and more importantly Cornwall.

Some contend that the surname Pendragon taken by Uther and passed on to Arthur came from pen (head or main) and drawgawn (leader) from Old Welsh. Which would fit in nicely with certain myths about the High King.

The inscription was Hic jacet Arthurus, rex quondum, rex futurus. (Here lies Arthur, king that was, king that will be.) on a marker on Glastonbury, where Arthur and Guinevere were supposed to be buried together. The connection of Glastonbury-with-Avalon, you understand, may be responsible for some of the confusion.

Another myth (one of many) holds that Arthur sleeps in a cave in near Snowdon in Wales.

One myth gives that, following the death of Arthur at Camlann, Mordred's forces pursued Arthur's to Lyonesse, where the ghost of Merlin appeared and sank the land, killing Mordred's army.

Rereading Tom Dowd's "Post Mortem" short story from your site, AH, I started having questions on the symbolic behind Excalibur, and what it truly meant to our friend Harlequin. After all, it is a symbol of authority, meaning that the one possessing it has the right to rule.....

The fact that the Pendragon is claiming to be wielding it seems logical from the point of view of some mundane person, but seems completely out of place from someone among the powerplayers of the world. I would doubt any of them would claim that knowing one Harlequin, troublemaker supreme, would come knocking at their door with Big D's will in one hand, a sword in the other, and a maddening grin on his face.

AH you gave the full latin quote, last night i didn't want to go digging up my Geoffrey Ashe so went from memory, and while you're correct in the direct translation, like I said, it usually comes down to "the once and future king"(and I'm feeling smug that my infamously bad spelling was correct on the latin.)

Avalon was long associated with Glastonbury Tor which was an island in a swamp/lake centuries past. The "Tomb" found at Glastonbury Abbey was suspect, being found just when the abbey needed money. I do not believe the relects survived.

Instead of focusing on Camlan maybe we've got hold of the wrong end of the stick. look at the begining of the myth cycle.
Remember Uther Pendragon, by some stories, weilded Excaliber before Arthur and it was he who set it into the stone. Historically Britain was in the last days of the Roman empire, invaded by barbarians, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes who captured the low lying ground in the south east but were finally halted by an alliance of surviving Britains, led by a high king/General/Shogun at Baden Hill. A generation later the now christianized Angles and Saxons started up again and drove the Britains into the last strong holds of Wales, Cornwall and across the sea to Brittany, France. Britain, the Roman name, now became the land of the angles, angleland, England. The same was Gaul became the land of the Franks, France.

Wales has a strong Arthur motiff because the Britains were driven there, the Welsh name for Wales is -Cumru- but there was not a great historicalk tie to the Arthur stories before then. Artoris/Arthur is generally accepted as being a Cornishman.

To get back into the myths, It is said England/Britain is only right when the true king is upon the throne and when he is not, the land suffers. this is well set in the english mind set. Recently a 50 year old book gained new popularity under a shortened title, but its full and proper title is:
The Downfall of the Lord of the Rings and the Return of the King.
Clearly the return of the true king is the equally important part of the story.

In English history you see this in the Death of William Rufus (about 1090), The time of the Lord Protector Cromwell (1646-1666 I think) HINT HINT HINT and in Henry V how the king, from the start demands to be assured that he has the right to his claim to start the war, and before Agincourt preys to God not for victory, as much as the confirmation that he has acted as a good king in his right and is absolved of any sins of his father. If he is rightwise king then he will be victorious.

Harlequin in dress up would be another option. He's powerful enough to avoid the LP's office, and it would fit his old and new styles to start a grass roots movement.

Nice to see some research going into this... while I hope the P. remains a mystery for a while longer it's nice to see I a lot of my research references cropping up.

Just clarifying a bit, Snow Fox, no diss to your scholarship. 'Sides, I cheated: my copy of an Arthurian encyclopia is just steps away.

The only known appearence of the sword Excalibur (unless the Pendragon wields it) was during Harlequin's Back. Now, we know that physical objects can be translated to the astral and then to the metaplanes; so it could theoretically work in reverse...unless the metaplanar aspect of Excalibur was just a symbol.

But what kind of symbol? The crusading against "Evil" and Corruption? The symbol of authority that it gives it's wielder (and there we could argue on whom this authority would be applied) ? or something else that I have not found yet?

The sword is not only an important power symbol, but an important magical symbol too. Many magical traditions have ritual swords or knifes, as it gives "power over God's creation". Maybe P is a very strong mage, who uses Excalibur as a symbol because it's the only "sword who can be at his level".

Still, I've just thought of this theory, so it might contradict certain points of the myth since I haven't thought over it too much.

Excaliber crosses several ines here for symbolism:

In ancient law only nobles could carry a swrod/weapon, so it is a sign of rulership.

In magical traditions a blade is used to direct power.

Lastly in British lore, that one sword is supposed to be THE ultimate designator of rulership.

Then again we can argue wether it is really excalibur he wields or just a claim to further his own ends. I would guess the later.

Well, dinnae leave out that Exaclibur has become the de facto archetype for magic swords in Western culture. Archetypes are symbols, and if enough people believe in them, symbols have power.

This is especially interesting if considering the Earthdawn take on named objects. OTOH, because of ED, it's difficult to have 2 different swords with the same powers and the same Name. Pattern objects are quite unique.

Regarding Harlequin and Dunkelzahn bequeathing him Excalibur... We know from the Great Dragon's will and the Post Mortem story that Harlequin = Richard Lionheart. This means that Harlequin was King of Great Britain. Following simple logic, since he hasn't died or officially abdicated, he still is the rightful King.

That is my theory on Dunkelzahn's note to Harlequin - a symbolical 'reclaim the throne'.

As for Pendragon - I don't have SoE yet, so no guesses there.

I'm still hoping for 'Harlequin, part 3' though, so I'd like it very much if all the things around excalibur, the throne, harlequin, pendragon, etc amalgamated into a new published mini-campaign of, say, 9 runs?

Ahhh, but we wall have seen that disney movie (and others like one with Clark Gable, and another with Kevin Costner) showing that John "Lackland" was an evil man that did not deserve the realm

Anyway, i'm as well hoping to see more of our beloved painted man in the future. And I am as well disapointed by SOE due to his "lack" of presence (I mean 2 comments? that is so short )

More Pendragon ideas because they're fun...

The Pendragon could be a fairy - the shadowtalk could be describing both Glamour and Fading (especially on the uncatchable front).

Due to the psycho-active nature of mana, he could be a spontaneously generated spirit - literally the Spirit of the Revolution.

That could also go for the sword (I don't think it was explicitly said to be Excalibur) and the person may be just a vehicle for it. Or an astral construct, alchera style, as described in Target: Awakened Lands.

He could be a clone or gengineered construct. Didn't Transys do something like that before? Caer Leon is sometimes connected to the Arthurian stories. Perhaps Universal Omnitech did it this time instead, although why would they want to? This is an old Star Trek: The Next Generation plot, however (with fewer Klingons).

Maybe he's a robot - Deus' latest plot. It would explain the lack of success in magical tracking (they're looking for a living being), his access to information and even his oratorical skill could be based on sub-sonic technology (mentioned in NAN1, I think) and Deus' incredible knowledge of psychology.

I like the Windsor theory. I don't think its true but it is amusing. King Charles may have predicted problems and retreated to a mystic organisation that would raise his son to be The Pendragon. It might not even be completely out of character for him, although perhaps originally designed to defeat the threat of nanotechnology.

Maybe it's just a shared persona used by a cabal of revolutionaries....or a complicated LPO trick designed to give the revolution a focus so they can crush or control it at their leisure (or to justify new powers).

Advanced Persona Fix chip in the style of Dreamchipper?!