u/erk0052

Hey there! I have this edition and this isn't really missing exactly. It's the text treatment for the comic series "Elric: Making of a Sorcerer". The story is important for the overall narrative of Elric but odds are licensing restrictions with the publishing company prevented Gollancz from printing the whole comic series (to say nothing of the poor image quality reprinting it on that paper and at that size). So instead, they reprinted the text Moorcock wrote that ultimately became the story for the comic series.

https://giphy.com/gifs/d9ltR6odFmQsE

Still haven't picked it up but I've heard nothing but good things!

Lol, yeah I'm probably just getting too into the weeds on this one. I just have a player who can tend to bend the rules to their benefit from time to time and who takes advantage of the rest of the party not knowing every facet of the rules, so I have to keep an eye out to ensure things aren't getting out of hand.

True. I just know a lot of what happens in D&D isn't a perfect match for what happens IRL.

But does the Mount have its own turn still? If so, wouldn't that mean it needs to resolve its movement prior to the rider taking their turn?

Gotcha, so there is a way to allow it to work but it eats your Reaction and would prevent a Paladin from Smiting since Smite is a Bonus Action spell feature now.

I think part of the concern I have around this is the player with the mount could effectively just have their mount use Disengage, trigger their Readied attack, and then ride off without ever worrying about an Attack of Opportunity.

Part of the issue is we're all relatively newer players (and newer DM) so we've had to learn the rules as we played. We sort of ran with it because the one guy who has a mount basically told us that's how it worked and no one really questioned it until now.

So the mounted rider PC could ready their single attack but not full attack options? Or would it just be their full attack action (including extra attack and whatever else they can include in the attack action)?

I believe you're correct for any individual's movement, but the mounted part is what's complicating this since mounts have their own initiative and turn (or at least they did in 2014). So the question is can you have your mount move 15 feet, your PC then take their attack action, then have your mount finish their movement. That's where I'm confused.

Yep! Smack in the middle of "Bane of the Black Sword".

I think it's referring to the newer volumes, but "Citadel of Forgotten Myths" takes place more precisely between the short stories 'Kings in Darkness' and 'The Caravan of Forgotten Dreams' which are contained within the Gollancz edition of "Elric: The Revenge of the Rose'". So "Citadel of Forgotten Myths" is a pretty late tale, chronologically speaking.

I could be misremembering this, but I believe in one of the books it's mentioned that law and chaos do not represent good and evil as most people are likely to assume. I think they're supposed to be opposing forces but neither is inherently good or evil. They act in accordance to their nature and any notion or good or evil is something the reader and the characters in that world impose upon them. There are certainly chaotic deities who seem to align more closely to evil and I'm sure if we were to have a better familiarity with the deities of law that we would find the same there too.

And as for the D&D alignment note, I think the forces of law and chaos would simply represent the entire side of law (lawful good/neutral/evil) and chaos (chaotic good/neutral/evil), respectfully.

(Some of this is probably my own interpretation of things, so take it with a grain of salt.)

The first volume contains 'The Dreaming City' and 'While the Gods Laugh' within "The Weird of the White Wolf", and volume two contains the other three stories in "The Bane of the Black Sword". The only thing really missing from those three volumes is the recently published novel "Citadel of Forgotten Myths".

Hope this helps!

'The Revenge of the Rose' might be the weakest of the novels but it's still a pretty worthwhile story if you ask me. I just finished it a few weeks ago and like a few of Moorcock's books it felt a little slow going for a while, but the cast of characters in it and the overall themes are pretty solid.

Solution Verified

Thank you so much for the trade! I really appreciate it!

Sounds good! I'll do the same!

Yeah it's doing the same for me, lol.

Here's my code: VVAVHYFDSZZL

I'm ready whenever you are!

Yeah trading via Home should be fine! I should be available tomorrow before 10:00am or after 4:30pm Pacific if that works.

For whatever reason Reddit only just sent me a message about this, lol. Not sure if the offer still stands but I'm free most weekends and week nights (Pacific Time zone).

I'm currently reading through the Gollancz editions and yeah, the covers are not the best but the content is wonderful! I especially love the introductions to each of the editions, as well as the 'Aspects of Fantasy' essays of Moorcock's at the end of each volume. They add a lot of context to both the importance of the series as well as to the genre as a whole.

Cool! I never knew that was a thing! I just assumed it was like the old school rules like way back in Red/Blue where if it had a nickname you were out of luck. Good to know!