Why would that be the case? Rancor has Ur-Gothoz's name written on it in great big mystic runes. Ur-Gothoz says your patron can give out its own mystic weapons if it wants.
Why would it NOT be the case? Magic is malleable. Rancor might just be a magical sword in Dorn's hands, but in Sarevok's it could possibly be used as a focus for summoning Ur-Gothoz himself. That's all speculation of course, but if standard fantasy tropes about magic are indeed valid arguments, then mine is no less than yours.
Yes, and in DnD, that kind of thing is up to the DM. The DM has ruled that the +1 bonus only applies to Dorn. However, you can be your own DM in BG by using mods.
The thing about Rancor though is it will almost certainly be back, more powerful, and with more plot, in BG2EE.
It may well turn out that Ur-Gothoz is actually imprisoned inside Rancor, and is stealing souls in order to escape. Or there are many other potential plot developments in Dorn's BG2EE story arc that could involve Rancor.
I happen to like the current implementation of Rancor very much. It is very close to the original PnP properties for the Holy Avenger.
Hm I'd say it is the other way around. His world is derived from earlier books (like Grimm) and on Old Norse, Germanic and Celtic mythology. Everything, like for example Middle-Earth (Midgard) the Elves, Dwarves (dvergar), the Ainur (Aesir & Vanir) is directly based upon other similar sources with the same or similar entities.
Right, but all literature is at least partially derivative. He took all those disparate elements and fit them together in a single world that is more or less cohesive. That takes planning and creativity. On the other hand, he wrote The Silmarillion to establish all of the finer setting details and background in the LOTR universe, which is kind of cheating in fiction writing. Though, to be fair, he never published it himself. Still, it's important in writing that if you're going to talk about "the flame of Udun," you should probably clue your writer in to what the hell that even means within the confines of the same work, and not rely on your fictional encyclopedia to do it for you. The LOTR trilogy is full of stuff like that, as well as EXCRUCIATING detail about what exactly Samwise has packed onto his mule.
That's exactly what it is MEANT to be. Tolkien felt that the Norman conquest had devistated Saxon literature, so he set out to try and recreate (largely for himself) what it would have become had the Normans not won the battle of Hastings. Tolkien always saw himself as an academic. He never set out to be a novelist, and only completed LotR for publication because he was pestered to do so by the publisher. Much of the Silmarillion, and other background stuff, was written BEFORE LotR, and never intended for publication. He wasn't worried that his readership didn't know what Udun was, or many of the other words from his invented languages, just as it doesn't matter that my friends don't know that my name translates into "little very dear one" in a mixture of Latin and Gaelic. A tendancy to overexplain things that in real life people wouldn't know or care about is a failing of much modern fantasy.
Hm I'd say it is the other way around. His world is derived from earlier books (like Grimm) and on Old Norse, Germanic and Celtic mythology. Everything, like for example Middle-Earth (Midgard) the Elves, Dwarves (dvergar), the Ainur (Aesir & Vanir) is directly based upon other similar sources with the same or similar entities.
Right, but all literature is at least partially derivative. He took all those disparate elements and fit them together in a single world that is more or less cohesive. That takes planning and creativity. On the other hand, he wrote The Silmarillion to establish all of the finer setting details and background in the LOTR universe, which is kind of cheating in fiction writing. Though, to be fair, he never published it himself. Still, it's important in writing that if you're going to talk about "the flame of Udun," you should probably clue your writer in to what the hell that even means within the confines of the same work, and not rely on your fictional encyclopedia to do it for you. The LOTR trilogy is full of stuff like that, as well as EXCRUCIATING detail about what exactly Samwise has packed onto his mule.
That's exactly what it is MEANT to be. Tolkien felt that the Norman conquest had devistated Saxon literature, so he set out to try and recreate (largely for himself) what it would have become had the Normans not won the battle of Hastings. Tolkien always saw himself as an academic. He never set out to be a novelist, and only completed LotR for publication because he was pestered to do so by the publisher. Much of the Silmarillion, and other background stuff, was written BEFORE LotR, and never intended for publication. He wasn't worried that his readership didn't know what Udun was, or many of the other words from his invented languages, just as it doesn't matter that my friends don't know that my name translates into "little very dear one" in a mixture of Latin and Gaelic. A tendancy to overexplain things that in real life people wouldn't know or care about is a failing of much modern fantasy.
That seems exactly right from what I've read of tolkeins life and literature, he thought British mythology had become impoverished king arthur and ...... Nothing else. and was trying to redress the balance. Frankly in my personal opinion he did a bang up job of doing it as well, everyone who reads mythology as a sword and sorcery epic skips the dull bits. As much as it would annoy the high Anglican tolkein you have to skip a lot of filler to get to the left handed slaying of the Moabite king by ehud in the book of judges for instance ..
He wasn't trying to write baldurs gate he had much grander ambitions
Meh, the Rancor is just a +1 sword that can become +2 temporarily. It's not like a really special sword, since you can find +2 and +3 swords.
I wouldn't mind if it became a Dorn or Blackguard only item. Or even better, how about that effect only works if the other character is a Blackguard? Makes more sense if it's class/alignment specific than character-specific, like Carsormyr.
@Schneidend The Sword of Chaos +2 is depowered when Sarevok's soul is severed from the material plane. Even though the power isn't gone entirely, it's diminished.
Rancor+1,+2 is based on the pact between Ur'Gothoz and Dorn; that Dorn may keep his powers so long as he continues to repay his patron with the blood of his enemies. The pact is not made between CHARNAME and Ur'Gothoz, so the conditions of the pact don't apply to him/her. If Ur'Gothoz and CHARNAME were to make a pact however, the pact could be for different reasons entirely. Perhaps Ur'Gothoz would like CHARNAME to become the next Lord of Murder and the innate abilities he learns are a result of his patron fiend giving him the tools to eliminate his competition (Sarevok)? Nevertheless, that pact does not barter Rancor into it, so Rancor's abilities are not unlocked for him.
Think about it like a geas. Dorn is bound by a geas to shed blood with Rancor. He can do so with other weapons, but doing so would ultimately lead to Dorn's abilities withering away. Further, in order to encourage Dorn to achieve his goal, Rancor is enchanted so that Dorn can kill faster once the blade tastes blood in his hands. It's a win/win for Ur'Gothoz and Dorn because Dorn becomes powerful enough to achieve vengeance, and Ur'Gothoz gets to claim more souls.
CHARNAME is also bound by a geas, but his geas is with a different patron so CHARNAME's goals would be different. Let's say CHARNAME's pact/geas is with/comes from Bhaal's soul. Bhaal sends CHARNAME forth to do his bidding (i.e., sacrifice souls so that he may resurrect). In exchange, CHARNAME is granted powers from within his dreams based on how well he can 'hide' his intentions (hiding his intentions well = high rep = divine magic, hiding them poorly = low rep = arcane magic). We can reason the divine magic by saying if Bhaal is the Lord of Murder, then Bhaal is capable of preventing murder as well by providing his spawn/disciples with the tools they need to survive. we can reason the arcane magic because it's all necromancy, spells that involve manipulation of the force of death.
Edit: and the ability to bring this thread back to life. I don't really pay attention to what I post on so early in the morning @_@
Finally, we could argue that while magic is malleable, certain spells that are tied to the fate of a soul cannot be altered except by the Wish spell, and only in limited forms. Since Dorn's fate could be higher than death, using spells to alter the conditions of Rancor's existence could prove to change Dorn's fate, which is apparently a big no-no in Faerun. If Rancor were meant to come into your hands and work as they do in Dorn's, then at the appropriate time, a spell would allow for that. Of course, Dorn's permanent death would end his pact with Ur'Gothoz, depowering Rancor as the Sword of Chaos was depowered for Sarevok, and his temporary death would only result in Rancor being held in a state of magical equilibrium until Dorn was resurrected to use it again.
Bilbo Baggins can't use the One Ring to rule Middle Earth either.
A little devil's advocate here: I'm not entirely brushed up on my Tolkein, but I was always under the impression that Bilbo, Frodo, and briefly Sam were highly resistant of the Ring's influences. Had they lost the ring to an evil person, or even a more easily-swayed individual like Boromir, invisibility would have been the least of our worries. I don't think it's a fair comparison.
Actually I think it is a pretty fair comparison; see below.
The point about the One Ring is that Sauron forged it himself and imbued part of his own spirit into the Ring as he did so - Tolkien is quite specific about this, Sauron's spirit resides (partly) in the Ring. That's why the Ring is always seeking to return to its true master, and why its major powers are only available when it is worn by Sauron himself, re-uniting his spirit. Anyone else wearing it just gets the invisibility, which is merely a minor side-effect of its real powers ... and gradual corruption by the presence of Sauron's spirit. As his spirit gradually takes over the ring-wearer's will, Sauron can unlock a portion of the ring's power for the victim, which the victim initially thinks he is exercising by his own will ... but he eventually turns into a ring-wraith, wholly dominated by Sauron.
The potential RP analogy with Rancor is that Ur-Gothoz may have deliberately connected the sword to Dorn's spirit, or indeed used part of Dorn's spirit in its manufacture ... which may in turn explain why Dorn's CON stat is a little lower than you might have hoped. If so, I reckon Dorn got a pretty bad deal - the Spider's Bane is a significantly better sword for Dorn. (But of course, getting shafted when dealing with demons is pretty standard!)
I am no Tolkien expert but in the LOTR books Gandalf and Galadriel both refuse the ring while talking about how the power of the ring in their hands would threatent the world and Sauron himself fears that Aragorn has the ring and will use it against him (as others refer to it being usable against Soron such as Denethor). If invisibility was it only power and all other powers were unlocked by Sauron, then the ring would be pretty useless against Sauron and he would be thrilled to see it in the hands of Aragorn, Gandolf, etc.
Again, I am not someone with deep immersion into this but it seems like there is more to the ring than invisibility and corruption (which certainly are part of it).
At a bare minimum, the ring clearly extends the life of the wearer.
Bilbo Baggins can't use the One Ring to rule Middle Earth either.
A little devil's advocate here: I'm not entirely brushed up on my Tolkein, but I was always under the impression that Bilbo, Frodo, and briefly Sam were highly resistant of the Ring's influences. Had they lost the ring to an evil person, or even a more easily-swayed individual like Boromir, invisibility would have been the least of our worries. I don't think it's a fair comparison.
Actually I think it is a pretty fair comparison; see below.
The point about the One Ring is that Sauron forged it himself and imbued part of his own spirit into the Ring as he did so - Tolkien is quite specific about this, Sauron's spirit resides (partly) in the Ring. That's why the Ring is always seeking to return to its true master, and why its major powers are only available when it is worn by Sauron himself, re-uniting his spirit. Anyone else wearing it just gets the invisibility, which is merely a minor side-effect of its real powers ... and gradual corruption by the presence of Sauron's spirit. As his spirit gradually takes over the ring-wearer's will, Sauron can unlock a portion of the ring's power for the victim, which the victim initially thinks he is exercising by his own will ... but he eventually turns into a ring-wraith, wholly dominated by Sauron.
The potential RP analogy with Rancor is that Ur-Gothoz may have deliberately connected the sword to Dorn's spirit, or indeed used part of Dorn's spirit in its manufacture ... which may in turn explain why Dorn's CON stat is a little lower than you might have hoped. If so, I reckon Dorn got a pretty bad deal - the Spider's Bane is a significantly better sword for Dorn. (But of course, getting shafted when dealing with demons is pretty standard!)
I am no Tolkien expert but in the LOTR books Gandalf and Galadriel both refuse the ring while talking about how the power of the ring in their hands would threatent the world and Sauron himself fears that Aragorn has the ring and will use it against him (as others refer to it being usable against Soron such as Denethor). If invisibility was it only power and all other powers were unlocked by Sauron, then the ring would be pretty useless against Sauron and he would be thrilled to see it in the hands of Aragorn, Gandolf, etc.
Again, I am not someone with deep immersion into this but it seems like there is more to the ring than invisibility and corruption (which certainly are part of it).
At a bare minimum, the ring clearly extends the life of the wearer.
Invisiblity and life extension are properties of all Rings of Power (most notably, the Nine).
The One Ring bestows power acording to the stature of it's user. So, whilst it mearly makes Bilbo into a more effective burglar, Frodo is able to use it to percive, to a degree, the mind of those who wear the Three, as well as bend Gollum to his will. However, because it contains part of the essence of Sauron, anyone who attempts to use the full power of the ring will, in a fashion, become Sauron.
It's not a particulalry good comparison to Dorn's sword, as the reason it works differently for different users is different. But it does serve as an example of how magic differs from technology, in that it works differently for different users. The Elder Wand and the Hammer of Thor are other good examples, seen in recient movies.
Comments
The thing about Rancor though is it will almost certainly be back, more powerful, and with more plot, in BG2EE.
It may well turn out that Ur-Gothoz is actually imprisoned inside Rancor, and is stealing souls in order to escape. Or there are many other potential plot developments in Dorn's BG2EE story arc that could involve Rancor.
I happen to like the current implementation of Rancor very much. It is very close to the original PnP properties for the Holy Avenger.
Doesn't the Holy Avenger function as a +1 normally, but in a Paladin's hands got all sorts of extra powers?
He wasn't trying to write baldurs gate he had much grander ambitions
I wouldn't mind if it became a Dorn or Blackguard only item. Or even better, how about that effect only works if the other character is a Blackguard? Makes more sense if it's class/alignment specific than character-specific, like Carsormyr.
The Sword of Chaos +2 is depowered when Sarevok's soul is severed from the material plane. Even though the power isn't gone entirely, it's diminished.
Rancor+1,+2 is based on the pact between Ur'Gothoz and Dorn; that Dorn may keep his powers so long as he continues to repay his patron with the blood of his enemies. The pact is not made between CHARNAME and Ur'Gothoz, so the conditions of the pact don't apply to him/her. If Ur'Gothoz and CHARNAME were to make a pact however, the pact could be for different reasons entirely. Perhaps Ur'Gothoz would like CHARNAME to become the next Lord of Murder and the innate abilities he learns are a result of his patron fiend giving him the tools to eliminate his competition (Sarevok)? Nevertheless, that pact does not barter Rancor into it, so Rancor's abilities are not unlocked for him.
Think about it like a geas. Dorn is bound by a geas to shed blood with Rancor. He can do so with other weapons, but doing so would ultimately lead to Dorn's abilities withering away. Further, in order to encourage Dorn to achieve his goal, Rancor is enchanted so that Dorn can kill faster once the blade tastes blood in his hands. It's a win/win for Ur'Gothoz and Dorn because Dorn becomes powerful enough to achieve vengeance, and Ur'Gothoz gets to claim more souls.
CHARNAME is also bound by a geas, but his geas is with a different patron so CHARNAME's goals would be different. Let's say CHARNAME's pact/geas is with/comes from Bhaal's soul. Bhaal sends CHARNAME forth to do his bidding (i.e., sacrifice souls so that he may resurrect). In exchange, CHARNAME is granted powers from within his dreams based on how well he can 'hide' his intentions (hiding his intentions well = high rep = divine magic, hiding them poorly = low rep = arcane magic). We can reason the divine magic by saying if Bhaal is the Lord of Murder, then Bhaal is capable of preventing murder as well by providing his spawn/disciples with the tools they need to survive. we can reason the arcane magic because it's all necromancy, spells that involve manipulation of the force of death.
Edit: and the ability to bring this thread back to life. I don't really pay attention to what I post on so early in the morning @_@
Finally, we could argue that while magic is malleable, certain spells that are tied to the fate of a soul cannot be altered except by the Wish spell, and only in limited forms. Since Dorn's fate could be higher than death, using spells to alter the conditions of Rancor's existence could prove to change Dorn's fate, which is apparently a big no-no in Faerun. If Rancor were meant to come into your hands and work as they do in Dorn's, then at the appropriate time, a spell would allow for that. Of course, Dorn's permanent death would end his pact with Ur'Gothoz, depowering Rancor as the Sword of Chaos was depowered for Sarevok, and his temporary death would only result in Rancor being held in a state of magical equilibrium until Dorn was resurrected to use it again.
Again, I am not someone with deep immersion into this but it seems like there is more to the ring than invisibility and corruption (which certainly are part of it).
At a bare minimum, the ring clearly extends the life of the wearer.
The One Ring bestows power acording to the stature of it's user. So, whilst it mearly makes Bilbo into a more effective burglar, Frodo is able to use it to percive, to a degree, the mind of those who wear the Three, as well as bend Gollum to his will. However, because it contains part of the essence of Sauron, anyone who attempts to use the full power of the ring will, in a fashion, become Sauron.
It's not a particulalry good comparison to Dorn's sword, as the reason it works differently for different users is different. But it does serve as an example of how magic differs from technology, in that it works differently for different users. The Elder Wand and the Hammer of Thor are other good examples, seen in recient movies.