> > "Accurate"? The word implies that there *is* a definitive version of
> > events, to which this could be compared? But there isn't, is there?
> > Hence the original question?
>How about this - the backstory that Joerg and I came up
Joerg and _you_? Joerg was telling the tale long before you showed up on the digest.
>with about ten
>years ago will be extremely Gregged by any version that ever gets
>published.
Which invalidates a suggestion about King Owain's death in what way? Nothing about what has come out in print even goes so far as to that the King doesn't die as a heroic failure. So your canonical pronouncement on the topic is way out of line.
>The "King Owain" story is simply outside the parameters of what is
>likely to be in the definitive version of the events, and really
>doesn't fit what we've learned about Heortland in the last few years.
How doesn't it fit? I've had as much exposure to the new learnings of Heortland as much as you have and there's nothing in there that says anything about King Owain or his death.
>Another thing, after Andrin the Zombie King, the later Heortlending
>kings seem a pretty colorless lot.
What later Heortlending kings? We don't even have a single Kings list so there is nothing that can be said about the Kings of Heortland one way or another. The same argument could have been marshalled against the Emperors of Dara Happa before the Fortunate Succession came out yet that didn't stop Greg from packing it with colour.
--Peter Metcalfe
Powered by hypermail