Talk:Shadar-kai

Earlier discussion
This article is taken, almost completely, from this book, and it never mentions the Realms in any way. On the contrary, in a Realms specific article in Dragon N° 391 it says that Shadar-kai are a race new to the Faerûn, partially descended from Shadovar and Krinths, or trasformed by Shar ("He called the new race the shadar-kai in the high tongue of ancient Netheril, which means Those of Shadow’s Gift"). So.. I would change or delete (almost) all of the content. Mpj 04:25, March 27, 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice catch. Like a lot of stuff here the change from 3rd to 4th is make things "interesting". If you have Dragon 391 edit this page to reflect the spirit of what is said. Most of this does read like a "cut & paste" However the stuff in the 4th section doesn't look too bad. Hurtzbad 05:58, March 27, 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: above discussion pertains to a now-deleted (for copyright infringement) version of the article. — BadCatMan (talk) 11:08, August 17, 2017 (UTC)

Split?
A tentative split proposal: Shadar-kai in 3rd edition (Fiend Folio and Cormyr: The Tearing of the Weave) and 4th edition (Monster Manual 4th edition and Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide) are very difficult in society (magocracy vs meritocracy; rule by illusionists vs by witches) and personality (bitter and driven to save themselves vs fatalistic and uncaring of their fates) and powers (hide in plain sight vs shadow jaunt), and 4th-edition loses the defining shadow curse in favour of devotion to the Raven Queen. Their origins are also different: an ancient cursed fey race in the former, a mutant variety of human in the latter. Their post-Spellplague creation contradicts their pre-Spellplague appearance in Cormyr: The Tearing of the Weave. (The core 4e version are also distinct from the FR 4e version, further complicating matters.)

So I think an article split might be preferable to trying to explain the differences in the article. However, I don't know if Dragon #391 tries to explain the change and I don't especially want to get elbow-deep into 4e trying to develop the 4e version, so I'll leave the split proposal open for now. Given their popularity in 4th-edition works, I suspect that version will be the primary one going forward. — BadCatMan (talk) 11:08, August 17, 2017 (UTC)