> >And how do these reasons negate that flaw that his magic doesn't work
> >outside the vincinity of Pavis? "Lord Pavis, you should allow me to use
> >magic far beyond the city of Pavis because I am foolishly in love with
> >Otta" is the equivalent of saying "God, you should allow me to use magic
> >while being in grave breach of my vows of monasticism because of my
> >foolish love for Otta".
>Uh, Peter, check back. I've never argued that he could use his abilities
>outside of Pavis as magic. I agree with you.
Sure doesn't look like it. I was criticizing the statement to the effect that heroes can invent weak excuses (i.e. the aforementioned "foolish love") to get around the ban.
>My point was that, given that
>this is how the setting is that we should come up with other ways to make
>the character valid.
What's wrong with abandoning his worship of Pavis since he thinks Pan -Heortling nationalism is a far greater cause than the City to whom he has previously devoted himself to? A more realistic proposition than most things advanced so far.
>Your response was that no such character should be allowed because cannon
>made it so that they couldn't use their magic outside of the city.
Wrong. If you are going to rewrite history then find someone else to deceive. My response was to a specific statement by flynn that you have omitted.
>Responding to the idea that perhaps bending the restriction would be a way
>out of the problem.
Wrong again. I responded to the statements that the restriction was "not overly player friendly" and that nobody would play a Pavis cultist in Sartar in such circumstances.
>Then a separate debate started up about whether or not such could be
>reasonably rationalized, or whether or not YGMV is viable here...all not at
>all pertinent to the original question.
In other words, having misrepresented the original question you try and find some way of mischaracterizing the subsequent debate but are confronted with the problem that I agreed that HGMV.
>If your
>response is that you can't without altering canon, or having some other
>reason to go, consider your point made.
So having just revised the debate, you are still uncertain as to what I actually said. So why the pointlessly aggravating thread revisionism?
>But my point is that little about this has helped the original poster.
What more help does he need? I've already conceded HGMV.
--Peter Metcalfe
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 6/7/04
Powered by hypermail