Dungeon Magazine#130- The Spire of Long Shadows. Top-notch adventure! Kudos to Jesse Decker and everyone else involved in bringing this module to us. A worthy addition to the Age of Worms, IMHO.
Now, then...
My wizard would indeed be honored to meet the man whose name graces several of his spells. The archmage who dwells in Magepoint. The archmage who lairs in The Fortess of Unknown Depths. The archmage whose "all but one clones were destroyed by a treacherous ally."
My wizard would love to thank this man.
But he can't.
Because he's CHANGED HIS $!&@^!* NAME!!!!!!
Obviously, the wrath of Iuz pales before the mighty empire of Wizards of the Coast, who have decreed that nothing Greyhawk (including that very name) may exist within the campaign arcs of Dungeon Magazine. Suggestions for adapting said names and places to other milieus are not acceptable, apparently. Greyhawk and all things Oerthian have got to go!
Come on- we all know that Manzorian is really ******!
Oh, no! They've modified the board censor so that you can't say the T-word!
Seriously, this is ridiculous (for God's sake, even the picture of him in Spire is based directly off the illustration in Return Of The Eight!). Why don't they just strip all the proper names off the spells in the PHB, if they hate the damn setting so much?
Erik, please tell me you fought them on this.
Cymria is in the adventure! How come SHE didn't have to get a name change?
I'm sorry- I know I'm really ranting over trivialities here. But I do and have always loved Greyhawk as my D&D setting of choice (when I'm not going home-brewed). This is just the latest slap in the face. They weren't even allowed to list his name as an alternative option.
:headexplo 
:hoppingma If ya'll excuse me now, my wizard is going to cast Manzorian's Transformation on himself and go medieval on someone.
Happy Gaming.
Why don't they just strip all the proper names off the spells in the PHB, if they hate the damn setting so much?
Don't think they're not planning on it.
Many players recognize GH-specific terms and might subconsciously think that this might prove a hindrance importing it into the Realms, Kalamar or the Known World. Although notes for adapating it for some settings would be nice, like they did with the monster entries in MM3.
There's still a slight possibilty of a vast conspiracy. Or maybe the editor's favorite character was killed in a con adventure mastered by EGG...
Seriously, this is ridiculous (for God's sake, even the picture of him in Spire is based directly off the illustration in Return Of The Eight!). Why don't they just strip all the proper names off the spells in the PHB, if they hate the damn setting so much?
Why do you think they changed the names of those spells reprinted in Spell Compendium?
Seriously, I doubt they hate the setting in itself. They just hate the copyright associating it with EGG...
manzorian. What a friggin joke. WotC owe their existence to EGG. Kind of reminds me of Microsoft taking all of the credit for Apple's innovations without any nod to their competitors.
For our WizO, I'd like to lodge a formal complaint with your bosses and I'd like to know how we can go about directly addressing someone in authority about releasing GH from this tyranny.
I don't want to burst your bubble, but if I'm not mistaken, Dungeon magazine isn't even published by WotC...
True indeed. It's published by Paizo, as is Dragon. Still, the fact remains that WotC can (and I'm sure does) veto any content that falls under any trademark that they currently hold. Anyone who is authorized to publish "official" D&D material must work (or labor, if you will) under these restrictions.
True indeed. It's published by Paizo, as is Dragon. Still, the fact remains that WotC can (and I'm sure does) veto any content that falls under any trademark that they currently hold. Anyone who is authorized to publish "official" D&D material must work (or labor, if you will) under these restrictions.
Thanks for the back up there KV. I sat in on a session with Erik Mona at GenCon and this subject was brought up, believe me. This isn't the first time, either. For example, Paizo is prohibited from calling a certain city in one of their adventures Greyhawk City for this very reason. I cannot believe that WotC actually thinks that this will convince us to buy campaign settings outside of GH.
While I would have vastly preferred to call the "Free City" Greyhawk and Manzorian "Tenser" (oh, and Balakarde "Bucknard," the other change they requested), I do understand their point and was willing to work within those confines rather than redo the outline to make it truly generic.
The whole point of the Age of Worms, for me, was to provide a prototypical D&D experience very much in the classic vein (i.e. Greyhawk) because that's the sort of D&D I'm interested in personally, and it's the kind of D&D that gets the best reaction from our readers.
I'm happy with the compromise. Eberron and Forgotten Realms fans need to change a lot of placenames to make the series fit perfectly in their worlds, but Greyhawk fans need to change three. There are conversion appendices available for all three campaign settings (Greyhawk's basically boils down to "Manzorian is Tenser. The Free City is Greyhawk. Balakarde is Bucknard. Go!") in the Age of Worms Overload PDF and our monthly web supplements (although these are largely for FR and Eberron, since you don't need to make modifications to make the adventures fit within the context of the "core" D&D world).
And that, as they say, is that.
--Erik
Damn them.
Everything since the LGG has been token gestures and broken promises, and even the LGG was short-changed in terms of page count, art quality, hardcover status and proper advertising.
How can anyone involved in making these decisions claim to harbor any love for Dungeons & Dragons at all? This disgraceful policy has "soulless corporate drones" written all over it, and when a game company is no longer by gamers and for gamers, it's no entity worthy of respect or regard from gamers.
If they are so ashamed of Greyhawk that they've made it into "the world that dare not speak its name", why don't they just give it to a third party who will love it and treat it properly and grow its player base? Why just squat greedily on it even while hating it so? It almost seems spiteful.
Damn. Them.
EDIT: I'm sorry, Erik, but although I've said many times that I think you make the best Dungeon ever and although I have been a devoted buyer, I just can't persist with this Adventure Path and I won't be buying any further issues that feature it. Looking at this insult glaring at me from the page just makes me too angry. I don't like being angry. It's a tribute to your ample diplomacy skills that you are able to spin this so inoffensively, but I just can't accept it.
I am still confused as to why so many fans of Greyhawk feel the need to have some sort of "validation" in the form of new material from WotC that their great campaign setting is still great.
People, we have to come to terms with this and accept it: as an official campaign, Greyhawk is DEAD. Heck, two years ago one of the D&D Brand managers referred to it as a "legacy system," along with several other unsupported D&D products.
It lives now only in the hearts and minds and dining room tables of the fans (and I can't think of a better place for it, frankly).
I am still confused as to why so many fans of Greyhawk feel the need to have some sort of "validation" in the form of new material from WotC that their great campaign setting is still great.
Great campaign settings deserve great support, which is not going to be forthcoming from a company that doesn't even allow them to be referred to by name.
Do it right or cough up the license is all I'm saying.
anyhoo...Tenser changing to Manzorian is not much of a stretch. What was the last thing that happened to Tenser in official canon? He was a clone in the form of a blue dretch on the moon in Rot8. After getting home he quit the Circle of Eight effectively. So....why not change his name? Isn't his surname/family Manz? Run with that.
I don't think anyone's going to disagree about that.
But - given some beancounter has decreed it so (lord knows why*, but as Bill Hicks might have said - "I'm sure their motives are pure" ), which would you prefer:
A: An adventure path with all the setting names we know and love that never makes it to print.
OR
B: An adventure path with thinly-veiled references to Greyhawk that's runs in Dungeon over X issues (with all the deadly artwork and the high production value goodness) and will likely make it into delux hardcover - which, BTW, will be the only delux hardcover this year or next with more than forensic traces of Greyhawk material so thinly scattered that it'd take CSI a feature-length episode to find it.
Put that way, I think I can put up with Manzo-whatsit (no matter how dumb it is).
P.
(is for pragmatism)
Ok - so the whole "Setting that dare not speak its name" thing is stupid.
I don't think anyone's going to disagree about that.
But - given some beancounter has decreed it so (lord knows why*, but as Bill Hicks might have said - "I'm sure their motives are pure" ), which would you prefer:
A: An adventure path with all the setting names we know and love that never makes it to print.
OR
B: An adventure path with thinly-veiled references to Greyhawk that's runs in Dungeon over X issues (with all the deadly artwork and the high production value goodness) and will likely make it into delux hardcover - which, BTW, will be the only delux hardcover this year or next with more than forensic traces of Greyhawk material so thinly scattered that it'd take CSI a feature-length episode to find it.
Put that way, I think I can put up with Manzo-whatsit (no matter how dumb it is).
P.
(is for pragmatism)
A.
I'm probably just an idealist, but I like things done either right or not at all.
And I'm REALLY looking forward to moving the action to the Bandit Kingdoms! Getting ready to update my home-made gazeteer to add some more details of alhaster.
Groovy.
The Archmage Resnet anyone? :D
P. (or is that q?)
For single-issue adventures, the magazines are safe to overtly name specific settings and place adventures unabashedly in them, because they are single issue situations (Racing the Snake; Fallen). Even short story arcs do that (Istivin: City of Shadows; Vampires of Waterdeep; Shards of Eberron).
Anyway, I don't think there is any reason to be upset or personally offended about a few contrived and generic names for what is an otherwise well planned and superbly written Adventure Path. I think Mr. Mona et. al. are doing a fantastic job considering the constraints imposed by Wizards of the Coast and the neccesity to give the Age of Worms broad appeal.
Happy Gaming
P.S. For those who just can't be nitpicky enough, Ten-, er, I mean Manzorian should be closer to seventy now, not sixty, if you're in the current year CY :D
I believe that Brand Manager is now a legacy himself....
anyhoo...Tenser changing to Manzorian is not much of a stretch. What was the last thing that happened to Tenser in official canon? He was a clone in the form of a blue dretch on the moon in Rot8. After getting home he quit the Circle of Eight effectively. So....why not change his name? Isn't his surname/family Manz? Run with that.
I liked Erik's diplomatic explanation too (good call Yamo!) and I can appreciate the fact that he's brought it to us in whatever form necessary. I disagree with WotC's handling of the GH name(s). I honest to St. Cuthbert believe that they're afraid to let it go because they think it will come back to bite them in the rear. Imagine the setting that started it all getting dusted off, updated and polished up for an eager core of fans. I would think the response would be impressive.
As for the EGG name play (Resnet, good call Woesinger) I think Mortellan points out nicely here that it was Erik's intention all along by calling him Manzorian. It's pretty funny actually and kind of makes it easier to swallow. BTW Mort, how did you know that Manz was his family name? I've never heard that before.
Thanks for the explanation Erik. I, too, have been miffed (to put it nicely) by the seemingly petty ban on Greyhawk by WoTC. It doesn't change the fact that these ARE Greyhawk adventures, no matter what you do.
Question. I haven't bought Shackled City yet (though plan to when I can scrape together $60). Are any strong Greyhawk references in that supplement that weren't in the original adventures? I know Cauldron was listed on the four-part map.
Also, if Age of Worms becomes a supplement like Shackled City, is it possible that the Greyhawk-specific names, etc. (large area maps maybe?) would be included in it?
Tenser gets a write up in Return of the Eight and possibly also in Vecna Lives (which I always thought should have been called Vecna Kills :P).
Yeah Mortellan - where'd you did up that nugget about Tenser's surname being Manz? Doesn't that tie him to the Count of Cryllor? Tenser might be of Keoish descent? In-ter-esting...
Manzorian. A very simple underwear unknotting fix was suggested on the Paizo AoW boards - Tenser's using Manzorian as an alias. Works for me. Doubly so if he's his surname is actually Manz...
Bucknard...I'm sure he's detailed (at least in stat form) in one or other of the ancient first ed mods (apologies to all you Great Old Ones for calling y'all ancient). ;)
Tenser gets a write up in Return of the Eight and possibly also in Vecna Lives (which I always thought should have been called Vecna Kills :P).
Bucknard disappeared mysteriously in 579 CY. Even though I am a GH's "old one" ("Great Old One" is reserved for far-more illustrious people, such as Grodog), I can't recall seeing his full stats anywhere (Dragon mag. included). Maybe Jason Zavoda will correct me on this point.
Tenser did get a write-up both in WGA4 (Vecna Lives!) and Return of the Eight but you should be aware that the latter is his most recent "canon" appearance (discounting a certain Manzorian.. ) and, as such, offers his most up to date stats (for 2e, that is).
Comparing Ro8 to Dungeon #130, I can see Tenser didn't gain any level since his return to life but 3rd edition has replaced 5 lvls of wizard by 5 lvls of archmage. A logical choice I guess.
9577 The Adventure Begins - Pg. 61
9578 The Player's Guide - Pg. 18
One mentions that he disappeared in 579 (9577) and the other says that he was an influetial character in the Flanaess and made it what it is today(9578).
I hope we get some more juicy bits about Bucknard in "Into the Wormcrawl Fissure." That is an adventure that is yet to come in AOW. Being a new Greyhawk person, I am enjoying and looking forward to more of Greyhawk history unfolding before my eyes.
I wrote a article (located at Canonfire) about Bucknard that included a wee bit of "research"--the result was that there was no "official" stats or treatment of the guy, and little about him in general...other than the Pouch...
I asked EGG about Buckie, here's his response: “Bucknard was an NPC I created out of whole cloth. He was based on a neighbor of mine when I was a lad, a Mr. Bucknall. He had a great garden, an apple tree with five different kinds of apples, and he knew astronomy well, assisted me with my 100 power telescope. He did use a small change purse, and from it he would extract a small coin to give to me now and again” (from ENWorld messageboards)
Also check out:
My epistle:
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=606
Another article about Bucknard by GVD:
http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=613
His fate is also decribed in the recent Paizo "Age of Wyrms Overload" web document.
Rock On
FL
Yeah Mortellan - where'd you did up that nugget about Tenser's surname being Manz? Doesn't that tie him to the Count of Cryllor? Tenser might be of Keoish descent? In-ter-esting...
Well I looked into it and the source of my tidbit is merely a simple case of a Greyhawk Name Confusion spell. Tenser and Mordenkainen (or should that be Kordenmaiden for AoW?) are both from the Wild Coast but virtually nothing is known about Tenser past that. So he -could be- a Manz but I doubt I could get so lucky to guess that. Where I goofed was Mordy is possibly a relative of Zagig who is related to GANZ. Ganz/ Manz i'll stop there I'm feeling a relapse.
Wasn't Tenser supposedly born in Fax?
Yep. In 525 CY, I do believe.
Based on that text, IMC Bucknard was favored by the Rhola of Gradsul and fabricated magic items for prominent NPCs of Keoland. He may have been a teacher at the wizard academy in Niole Dra or perhaps a member of Gradsul's guild of Sea Mages.
I never imagined his relationship to Lashton, Drawmij or Theodain Eriason. Have you?
P.
Well I looked into it and the source of my tidbit is merely a simple case of a Greyhawk Name Confusion spell. Tenser and Mordenkainen (or should that be Kordenmaiden for AoW?) are both from the Wild Coast but virtually nothing is known about Tenser past that. So he -could be- a Manz but I doubt I could get so lucky to guess that. Where I goofed was Mordy is possibly a relative of Zagig who is related to GANZ. Ganz/ Manz i'll stop there I'm feeling a relapse.
Ah - that's a shame. I was having fun imagining some connections with Cryllor.
So Manzorian might not just be an alias - perhaps it's a family name? That said - I like the alias angle...
P.
Originally I was going to make a big deal about Tenser's involvement, and planned to get Wayne Reynolds to paint a cover image featuring the wizard seated in the big throne last seen in "Isle of the Ape." I planned to include a single word as the cover line: "Tenser."
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
So the best laid plans, and all that.
--Erik
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
WotC, let me tell you with all my heart
:headexplo (and I do mean it!)Maybe what they meants was, "We don't want anyone to recognize him because we want gamers to forget about Greyhawk and play Forgotten Realms or Eberron."
Urge to kill rising... rising... :headexplo
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
But... they didn't want you using the name because everyone would think the campaign would be too Greyhawk-specific?
I need an aspirin.
But... they didn't want you using the name because everyone would think the campaign would be too Greyhawk-specific?
I need an aspirin.
Right, no one knows who he is, but he'll make the campaign too much Greyhawk. Oh, and naming the Free City, the Free City of Greyhawk is bad, but suggesting readers change it to Sharn for Eberron campaigns is OK.
I believe there were also stats on Tenser in Living Greyhawk Journal #0.
I'm not sure there was actually. I think that just covered the Circle of Eight at the time (591 CY/post Return of the Eight). Tenser was out of the club by that point. There is a lot of cool info in that article though - well worth checking out.
P.
Read it up here: http://www.wizards.com/rpga/downloads/LGJcircleof8pdf.zip
Bucknard disappeared mysteriously in 579 CY. Even though I am a GH's "old one" ("Great Old One" is reserved for far-more illustrious people, such as Grodog),
Thanks Mortepierre :D
I can't recall seeing his full stats anywhere (Dragon mag. included). Maybe Jason Zavoda will correct me on this point.
That matches my recollection as well: Bucknard was never presented in OD&D or 1e, though I can't speak for 2e; I don't recall stats from 3e, but I think his level may have at least been mentioned in a LGJ sometime??
Manzorian is an adaptation of the name Mazirian from the story "Mazirian the Magician," the first tale in Jack Vance's "The Dying Earth." I was rereading that book (one of my favorites) when the "you can't use Tenser" edict came through.
Originally I was going to make a big deal about Tenser's involvement, and planned to get Wayne Reynolds to paint a cover image featuring the wizard seated in the big throne last seen in "Isle of the Ape." I planned to include a single word as the cover line: "Tenser."
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
So the best laid plans, and all that.
--Erik
It's high time we ended this sort of corporate double speak horse pucky.
We need to organize boys (and girls). There's nothing we can't accomplish if we put our minds to it. I say we start a campaign to free our campaign world. "Free the Free City", "Set Tenser Free", "Let Grandfather Gary's Children Go." We need to hit all the cons and every website and inundate our fellow gamers and let our voices be heard. Make t-shirts, print flyers, mass e-mails, you name it. It can be done, we've only lacked the will.
LET MY GREYHAWK GO!
Maybe what they meants was, "We don't want anyone to recognize him because we want gamers to forget about Greyhawk and play Forgotten Realms or Eberron."
I imagine you are more correct than anyone can possibly imagine, Amaril. You hit the hammer on the head of the nail.
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
WHAT!?!
How absurd.
I suppose if I was to stat him up in 3.5 I would give him some levels as a cleric of Celestian (because of Gary's comments) as well as the Archmage stuff.
It's high time we ended this sort of corporate double speak horse pucky.
We need to organize boys (and girls). There's nothing we can't accomplish if we put our minds to it. I say we start a campaign to free our campaign world. "Free the Free City", "Set Tenser Free", "Let Grandfather Gary's Children Go." We need to hit all the cons and every website and inundate our fellow gamers and let our voices be heard. Make t-shirts, print flyers, mass e-mails, you name it. It can be done, we've only lacked the will.
LET MY GREYHAWK GO!
Now that the price of stamps is rising to 40 cents, that would mean for a low price of 146 dollars we can send them a letter asking for the Freedom of Greyhawk once everyday for a year!
And when they do the math, that is like 5 books they didn't sell because we used the money for Greyhawk...... :lightbulb
I don't know why, but I always imagined Bucknard as an Old Faith bard in 1st edition. As well as having levels in magic-user.
Whoops, actually I was thinking of Keoghtom. Who was an Old Lore bard basically. There I go spouting off again.
And I totally agree about the Spell Compendium - Dungeon AoW - WotC insane commentary.
But we are living in a corprotocracy so what are you gonna do? If they think OGL is the way to go, and stripping everything down into non-IP parts for the masses makes the most money...guess what -- they're correct. At least until they go bankrupt.
WotC's official response was that "no one will know who Tenser is."
Not that I would ever doubt WotC's wisdom, but I personally remember wondering who Tenser and Melf and Bigby were before I bought my GH boxed set back in the 80s. That was part of the initial lure of Greyhawk, finding out who these people were that the spells were named after.
Tenser
EDIT: Ok, this came out right. You nearly had me believe that they really had disabled the name for the Boards... ;)
Bocklin
I was sad to see the Greyhawk names excised from the spells in Spell Compendium. True, they removed all the proper names, but a "hand" spell without Bigby just seems wrong. They are silly spells to begin with, but associating a person with it seemed to make it right. "That wacky Bigby and his hand spells" we could say. Now we just have a spell called "slapping hand". It just seems dumb.
Well, they did the same to the FR spells. So this, at least, is not part of an anti-Greyhawk move (if such a move there is).
Bocklin
Slightly off topic, but WHY does WotC hate Greyhawk so much? They are acting as though Gary Gygax did a heinous act, like he committed embezzlement on their company or something.
1. It's legacy setting with too much history and too many elements based on older rules, unlike Eberron which was designed for everything v3.5 (no need for Eberron cracks; everyone has pretty much expressed their opinions of the setting already).
2. As a legacy setting, Greyhawk has a lot of baggage in regards to controversy over canon. Too many gamers would get mad over the slightest mistake or the most inane nuances, or completely flip their lids over major changes in canon.
3. WotC thought making it the default setting for 3e would have been an easy way of maintaining support without publishing specific Greyhawk supplements, but they realized having skeletal rules might be the better approach so that anyone can use any of the rules in any setting without struggling with converting the context (i.e. - "Knight Protectors of the Great Kingdom" in 3e vs. "Knight Protectors" in v3.5).
4. If Paizo continues publishing Greyhawk material in the context of Greyhawk being a current setting, newer gamers will begin to demand content about this legacy setting (as I did when 3e came about), which is why Paizo uses its "Paizohawk" method of presenting Greyhawk material.
1. It's legacy setting with too much history and too many elements based on older rules, unlike Eberron which was designed for everything v3.5 (no need for Eberron cracks; everyone has pretty much expressed their opinions of the setting already).
What about Forgotten Realms? It was updated to 3.5 and is chalk full of history!
1. It's legacy setting with too much history and too many elements based on older rules, unlike Eberron which was designed for everything v3.5 (no need for Eberron cracks; everyone has pretty much expressed their opinions of the setting already).
What about Forgotten Realms? It was updated to 3.5 and is chalk full of history!
It also has a strong market value that's strongly supported with it's line of novels, and when compared to Greyhawk, it's much younger. FR is the new "old", while Eberron is the new "new".
I actually think the Forgotten Realms suffered a lot more from its conversion than Greyhawk did. FR has a lot more backstory and established canon that needed to be changed.
True, except Greyhawk has setting elements that are tightly connected with much older rules. FR didn't become an official campaign setting until 1987 whereas Greyhawk has been around since 1975.
True, except Greyhawk has setting elements that are tightly connected with much older rules.
Like what? Greyhawk certainly suffered from the lack of assassins and monks in 2e, but I can't think of any essential 1st edition (or pre-1st edition) thing that doesn't have an equivalent in D&D 3.5.
All in all, I think they might think that Greyhawk is a legacy setting, just as a floppy drive is a legacy hardware device. Maybe they see updates to Greyhawk similarly to how computer manufacturers saw LS120 Super Floppy drives, and Eberron is a 1GB USB flash drive.
As much as I hate floppy drives, there are some people who find it useful. I don't agree with it.
Personally, I wish Greyhawk would get a bit more support. I don't care for the Generihawk approach WotC has taken.
2. As a legacy setting, Greyhawk has a lot of baggage in regards to controversy over canon. Too many gamers would get mad over the slightest mistake or the most inane nuances, or completely flip their lids over major changes in canon.
Well, it might be that they so thought, but they are probably now realizing their mistake.
Look at he Boards: the Eberron players are jumping and moaning everytime they spot a discrepancy between any two of the newly published books (and believe me, there are relatively a lot - it's an unbelievable amount for a new setting with just 6/7 source books published so closely to one another).
So, if it is/was their reason to be warry of older settings, they are probably now realising that it was a mistake. ;)
Bocklin
2. As a legacy setting, Greyhawk has a lot of baggage in regards to controversy over canon. Too many gamers would get mad over the slightest mistake or the most inane nuances, or completely flip their lids over major changes in canon.
Really? Because I hear this a lot, but I ultimately doubt it.
If you look closely at the people who "flip their lids" over canon/-non-canon minutea, it seems to be the same half-dozen loudmouths posting on the same half-dozen message boards.
I think reality is closer to thousands and thousands of Greyhawk gamers having a merry old time with their campaigns and a very, very small handful of angry grognards putting-in more time making noise on the Internet than chucking dice at the game table.
The Slavers! supplement was a very good gazeteer but for some reason they redrafted the previously printed stats for Larissa Hunter and Wilbrem Carister. Big deal! Stats were redrafted again in the Hardby gazeteer in Dungeon, where Wilbrem's stats were changed back, and Judge Aleeta's constitution was given an inexplicable boost to avoid her having a penalty (as if a constitution penalty is the ultimate sacrilege) and while we're on the subject. why DO elves have lower consititution scores than pixies and other fairies, but I digress....
At the end of the day the modules and supplements will only ever provide a guide for DMs, whose campaigns will quickly diverge from canon in any event. The moaning highlights the errors, but do they really matter in the grand scheme of things?
I may be dumb but I'm capable of calling the Free City 'Greyhawk' and Manzorian 'Tenser' if I feel the need.
The adventure path rocks.