Forgot your password?
New user?
Comment
Above in this comment thread:
Chatterbox: 2004/11 - 2005/02 » Redwall Abbey » Bwuh? » A point for you sir. » The Long Patrol/Guosim... » I know » Explain?
|
|
|
This site conforms to the following standards:
Well, vermin in abbey = anti-cannon is what it boils down to.
Comment
No...
Posted by: Kevarr at 2005-02-10Please read the article I posted above.
Vermin in Redwall very much does not equal anti-canon. There were vermin in Redwall in the books. Note that they were allowed to stay until they killed/tried to kill one of the other Abbeybeasts. This seems to be the biggest beef folks have with the MU Redwall, when in truth, following Redwall's principles, vermin in Redwall is completely canon, provided they aren't bouncing around murdering or thieving.
What would be non-canon? A Redwall that based its offer of aid, healing, and shelter on species.
Now, if this leads into the 'vermin aren't acting canon!' debate, that horse is so dead and beaten that it's nothing but a pile of rotted, broken bones. The long and the short of it is that the MU isn't going to dictate that you absolutely must play a thieving, murdering, usually stupid thug if you are vermin any more than it is going to insist you play a prancing, selfless, lily-white farmer if you are a woodlander.