FANDOM


Copyright violations Edit

The following text in this article is verbatim from Lords of Darkness, page 162: "If pressed in combat or bored with a situation, Larloch prefers to disappear, either with greater teleport, etherealness, or a custom spell that allows him to walk through walls". From a glance, it appears that there are a lot more violations as well. I'll fix some of it, but we should really re-work this whole page.  SkyeNiTessine (talk · contr) 00:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

A fix to the page would definitely be welcome. Having reviewed the article history and the source material, I don't think the article needs to be deleted and recreated, so a thorough editing should do the trick. Fw190a8 17:09, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Novels with Larloch? Edit

Is anyone familiar with any novels that portray Larloch? I know the Shandril Shessair trilogy quickly portrays him when a Netherese spell-wraith turns its attention to him, but otherwise I've seen nothing at all. I'd like to add him to a fanfic I'm in the process of writing. Gabeth 00:14, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

The short story "Tears So White" in Realms of the Elves includes Larloch and some of his recent maneuverings, it's rather quite interesting! Zerak talk 08:15, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

DnD4 / Spellplaque? Edit

Is Larloch still around after the Spellplaque?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.207.115.148 (talkcontribs) 17:23, 31 December 2008 UTC


It is strongly implied in Elminster Enraged that he is. A watcher "mastered stronger scryings than Manshoon commanded more than two thousand years ago" is mentioned, as well as (likely the same person) controlling "many Manshoons". Additionally, the end of the book foreshadows "'There remains,' Elminster said gravely, 'the matter of Larloch." 99.174.89.58 19:14, December 27, 2012 (UTC)

King of Shadows? Edit

I've played NWN2 from beginning to end (all three games), and I don't recall any mention of Larloch, particularly not in connection with the King of Shadows. What's up with the disambiguation? StarSword 17:52, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

The disambiguation is to resolve the fact that Shadowking and King of Shadows are very similar names. King of Shadows does not redirect here, nor does Larloch redirect to KoS. I fail to see a problem. Shadowking redirects here, rather to King of Shadows, and so I put the disambiguation page to make sure that there was no confusion.
Oddly, my attempt seems to have backfired. Niirfa-sa 06:59, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
I have attempted to make it even clearer with this edit but if it's felt this is going too far, it can be reverted.  Fw190a8 (talk · contr) 13:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Why are there books from Sword of Truth series listed as his works? o_O

HomebrewEdit

As stated by an Unknown User, "This section is the invention of a fan, Jaerom Darkwind, on the ENWorld boards and has no basis in actual lore." and a huge section of this page is copied directly from his webpage: [[1]] and appears to be homebrewed... I suggest deleting the passages. The original page was copied by User:86.154.149.169 in May 29, 2007... so either it is fan made or copied from a sourcebook... any thoughts? Darkwynters (talk) 23:25, November 21, 2012 (UTC)

A few years ago, I made a complete set of canon notes on the character, and none of this is mentioned in them. Unless some stuff appeared in a Dragon/Dungeon Magazine I don't have access to, or in 4th edition lore, I doubt it's canon.
As someone noted above, at least one of the books he supposedly wrote, Book of Inversion and Duplex, is nicked from the Sword of Truth series (http://sot.wikia.com/wiki/Book_of_Inversion_and_Duplex), so I'd call it homebrewed. Unfortunately, Jaerom Darkwind's homebrew writeup has been copied across the net, and here, to the point that some fans have taken it as true. Sigh. I should probably rework this page when I have a chance. -- BadCatMan (talk) 02:06, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

BadCat, cool... I could remove the copied material, but since you know the character better, I'll let you take care of "cleaning" him up :) Darkwynters (talk) 19:26, November 22, 2012 (UTC)

I'll have to re-familiarise myself first. I never ended up actually using him. Okay, in preparation, I've removed some the more obvious copied, non-canon material. -- BadCatMan (talk) 00:48, November 23, 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I've begun rewriting. Much of this was still copied from either that Jaerom Darkwind write-up, or from write-ups in the sourcebooks, and other weird stuff that I can't find a source for, like the telepathic webs and overminds, at least not in obvious places. After pruning it back, there's not much of an article left. So I'll put a plagiarism notice on it for now and will delete and reconstruct when I'm done. -- BadCatMan (talk) 08:09, December 1, 2012 (UTC)
I've deleted the former article and recreated it with clean and accurate material and what I've expanded on so far. It's still a big work in progress, and I have many more sections to work on. This is the most famous Realms thing I've yet worked on. -- BadCatMan (talk) 03:58, December 9, 2012 (UTC)

Finished at last! The Larloch article is completely rehabilitated, cited and accurate. Since I've done all the research, I'll also do some other Larloch-related articles at some other time. — BadCatMan (talk) 14:18, January 30, 2013 (UTC)

Now it's complete. The 4e/Spellplague content I'm getting secondhand from other articles on the wiki, but can't confirm or interpret it myself. I'm really only adding it to be complete. — BadCatMan (talk) 11:40, February 2, 2013 (UTC)

Epic levelsEdit

I just updated Larloch's infobox... epic levels... should we create a category called Inhabitants of epic level... but how would we get the 12th level epic in there... thoughts? - Darkwynters (talk) 17:40, January 20, 2014 (UTC)

Larloch levelEdit

Rather than have a edit war, we should discuss what we want to put in the info box. this candlekeep forum quotes Ed as saying "probably 46 by now" which is judged by another poster as Ed's reaction to the printed level. So, go with "probably" or go with printed sources? And I suppose the year in which he said the remark puts it in a particular edition of D&D. Thoughts anyone? —Moviesign (talk) 23:39, September 4, 2014 (UTC)

Personally, this Candlekeep forum was in 2008... around 4e... if he is now 46th, then this should be on the 4e class line... as for the 26th level, that info is stated in Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast :) - Darkwynters (talk) 23:49, September 4, 2014 (UTC)
Hmm considering 4e came out in june 2008 and the discussion in the link is only april 2008 it is more likely to be earler. After a little google-fu I can tell the original statement by Ed is from the Realms-L Mailing list FAQ and seems to actually predate even 3e here in 1999. So unless we find Ed's original post it will be hard to assign, if we do find it though I would be happy to add it to the infobox...maybe with a note attached.--Eli the Tanner (talk) 00:58, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
I would go ahead and put a note on the 2e or 3e level number, quote what Ed said, and then mention that he was basically telling people "don't go there, his minions alone can wipe the floor with you," or words to that effect ;) —Moviesign (talk) 01:38, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
I have always read of Larloch's level as being 46. Exactly where I read it now unfortunately escapes me but I do recall it as being 2006, 2E and by Ed Greenwood, and therefore IMO canon.MarlonS69 (talk) 10:38, September 5, 2014 (UTC)

(Disclaimer: I wrote this article.) On a policy matter, the cited source for the 2nd-edition level (Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast by Ed Greenwood, 1994) says 26, so that level must remain 26. If there is a different level, a source should be provided for a new set of stats. Information must accurately reflect the source given.

To me, Ed Greenwood isn't gospel (heresy, I know, but he's been wrong before) and I'd take that with a pinch of salt. Level 46 is just plain silly in any edition. The point, I think, is whatever level Larloch is, he's higher than you. :) Anyway, to accept this information, we would need the original source, not a quote or someone's recollections, and the edition to which it applies. Otherwise, the mention of level 46 would be best placed in an Appendix discussion. I'm not against adding the information, it just needs proper referencing. — BadCatMan (talk) 11:21, September 5, 2014 (UTC)

I understand; unfortunately I don't have the source to hand but if/when found I'll be sure to cite it. I also agree that level 46 is obscene, but I took that to be the point of it. I also can't see how, with all of his stated power (and I know 26 is still very powerful indeed!), how he is a lower level than Halaster, Elminster, Selûne etc and more comparable to Khelben. This doesn't seem right, especially as it makes him a lower level to Szass Tam, a 29th level Necromancer, someone to whom he he should be patently more powerful. As we can agree that Ed can sometimes make a mistake, maybe the level quoted in Volo's was one of them? He certainly seems to have changed his mind since then.
As a bit of background, although I have not played for a few years now I am a very experienced DM, having played since 1979(basic) and 1982(AD&D) and was not making an edit on a whim. My knowledge of 3E+ though is very limited.
However, as I cannot cite a source I do understand the amendment, even if I do strongly (and respectfully) feel that it is incorrect in this case.MarlonS69 (talk) 12:02, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your understanding.
It should probably be considered that statements of him being most powerful mage in the Realms or similar are in-universe information, how other NPCs see him. That doesn't directly translate to level, as the rules don't really exist within the setting. For example, Elminster might have more raw magical power (i.e., higher level), but Larloch has more knowledge, more practical experience, the lost magic of Netheril, and an arsenal of backups, contingencies, and spells. What he lacks in level, he more than makes up for in range. Fans tend to put too much stock in level, I find. — BadCatMan (talk) 12:17, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
If you don't mind me saying so, I don't think that's a strong argument, it's just an attempt at explaining your case. For what it's worth I think that level does directly translate to the power of a mage: the power of an individual can take into consideration the other aspects that you mention, but the most poweful mage in the Realms? That has to be a higher level than that. And don't forget that Volo's is mostly set out as in-universe information: it's not a technical piece.
Remember: Just because I don't have the proof to hand doesn't mean I'm wrong. And I'm not a lone voice in this.13:20, September 5, 2014 (UTC)
All I have to say is... 3rd edition started in 2000... so if he is 46th level... it would be that edition and not 2e. - Darkwynters (talk) 22:47, September 5, 2014 (UTC)

Meh. I don't really care what level he is, myself. I've added a note discussing the level 46 thing, which I hope satisfies everyone? — BadCatMan (talk) 12:24, September 6, 2014 (UTC)

Totally cool, my good man :) - Darkwynters (talk) 16:49, September 6, 2014 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.