Printable View
the TCG makes use of the word Ulairi for the nazgul and Decipher have been allowed to name the individual wraiths in an unprecedented way. But this word comes from the Silmarillion; therefore what other stuff can Decipher use if they are allowed Ulairi?
Ulairi is the Quenya (I think or one of the other Elvish Lanauges) for Nazgul, and the names after are 2 - 9 in Elvish. And I beleive it was mention in the LotR Books somewhere, probable the appendices.
I have searched the appendices and there is reference to nazgul, black riders and ringwraiths, but there is no reference to Ulairi that i can find. it isnt mentioned in the index. as far as i can tell the wordcomes from a source beyond the license.Quote:
Originally posted by Grimbeorn
Ulairi is the Quenya (I think or one of the other Elvish Lanauges) for Nazgul, and the names after are 2 - 9 in Elvish. And I beleive it was mention in the LotR Books somewhere, probable the appendices.
It's not like they can use absolutely nothing from the Silmarillion; in the Core Book, they mention tharni, I'm rather sure they weren't supposed to, but they did and got away with it.
Also, I thought for sure that Ulairi was in the Lord of the Rings... like maybe Gandalf called them that. Perhaps not. :)
There's a possibility that the TCG has a slightly different license than the RPG. Thus, they (the TCG developers) may be able to use material that the RPG Studio could not.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
the TCG makes use of the word Ulairi for the nazgul and Decipher have been allowed to name the individual wraiths in an unprecedented way. But this word comes from the Silmarillion; therefore what other stuff can Decipher use if they are allowed Ulairi?
Oh, and welcome back, Martin. :)
I think Gandalf referred to the Nazgul as the Ulari in the "of the Rings of Power and the Third Age" section of the Silmarillion.I too tried to track down the source of that word and I'm pretty sure that is where I found it.But since I have loaned that book out I have no way of checking.
Thank you.
Ulairi is indeed in the Silmarillion; my point is that if Decipher can use it then what else can they use. I cannot see them getting a different license for one game than for another. in fact i was uhnder the assumption that there was one license for all products D chose to produce for the LotR and that license didnt include the Silmarillion.
Though the word Ulairi is found in the Silmarillion and is not actually used at any time in the LOTR, I do not think its off-limits to Decipher. They have just decided up to this point not to use the word.
The word Ulairi is the Quenya translation for Nazgul.
The license, from what I've been told, is one and the same for the RPG and CCG. I believe as the RPG product line develops you may see the word Ulairi come into play.
We know that the Tolkien people are very difficult to deal with and get the rights from, surely they would be very hard on anyone who infringed on their IP - no matter how small. After all look how ICE got treated. The point of this isn't just about one word, its about the use of material outside of their license. If they are allowed to use Ulairi, then why not Istari? for example, and so on.Quote:
Originally posted by vgunn
Though the word Ulairi is found in the Silmarillion and is not actually used at any time in the LOTR, I do not think its off-limits to Decipher. They have just decided up to this point not to use the word.
The word Ulairi is the Quenya translation for Nazgul.
The license, from what I've been told, is one and the same for the RPG and CCG. I believe as the RPG product line develops you may see the word Ulairi come into play.
Basically, Martin, it comes down to one simple thing. Approvals. If the folks at TE approve the use of Ulairi, but not the use of Istari, then Decipher can use one, but not the other. What decisions are made in approvals are up to TE and NewLine, and Decipher must abide by their decisions.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
The point of this isn't just about one word, its about the use of material outside of their license. If they are allowed to use Ulairi, then why not Istari? for example, and so on.
obviously you dont want to discuss this; that's sad because the more that decipher can use the better the game will be. discussing magic, for instance, without using the word Istari is limiting indeed. I also dont believe the license lets certain elements of certain book s be used and not others. I would have believed that TE woudl have said yes or no to what they own (silmarillion and the unfinished tales iirc) in their entirety or not at all. still never mind.
Give me a break, Martin! If I didn't want to discuss it, I wouldn't respond at all. You got a response. Just because it's not the answer you want doesn't make it any less valid.Quote:
Originally posted by kong
obviously you dont want to discuss this; that's sad because the more that decipher can use the better the game will be.
I have to disagree. No one has had any problems discussing magic since the game came out last year and the term Istari was not required. If you have problems discussing magic without the term, then that sounds like a limitation you've placed on yourself.Quote:
discussing magic, for instance, without using the word Istari is limiting indeed.
Well, obviously I can't control what you do an do not believe, Martin. However, what happened has happened. Explanations have been offered. Choosing to believe them or not is your call.Quote:
I also dont believe the license lets certain elements of certain book s be used and not others. I would have believed that TE woudl have said yes or no to what they own (silmarillion and the unfinished tales iirc) in their entirety or not at all.
> I have to disagree. No one has had any problems discussing magic since the game came out last year and the term Istari was not required.
I said that discussing magic was limited, not that it couldnt be done. it depends on the nature of the discussion itself. some players may be content to discuss magic on whatever level they are comfortable with, even if it doesnt go into much depth. i however think that a game based on lotr can only benefit from having all available information and that includes, on the subject of magic, the Istari.
> Explanations have been offered. Choosing to believe them or not is your call.
it isnt a question of belief, you yourself said you didnt know whether the license for the rpg was the same as the tcg.
So, I would assume then that you propose:Quote:
Originally posted by kong
i however think that a game based on lotr can only benefit from having all available information and that includes, on the subject of magic, the Istari.
a) the Tolkien Estate change their views on licensing?
b) Decipher break the terms of their licensing arrangement with New Line and Tolkien Enterprises?
c) Decipher give up their very expensive license and cease production of their award-winning game because you don't think they can do the job with what they've got access to?
I can't see any other realities coming into play, but then, reality and your opinions never had much of an acquaintence.
By the way, is there any reason you are so obsessed with this topic that you cross posted it to rpg.net (where you have been repeatedly banned for your bile towards Decipher and other community members), as well as here? Any point other than malice?
>So, I would assume then that you propose:
why would you assume anything?
>b) Decipher break the terms of their licensing arrangement with New Line and Tolkien Enterprises?
from what i have seen thats what has happened. it just depends on whether their tcg license includes the Silmarillion (and why the rpg doesnt) and whether TE give a damn.
>c) Decipher give up their very expensive license and cease production of their award-winning game because you don't think they can do the job with what they've got access to?
this thread doesnt get into that at all and thus i havent said anything of the kind in this discussion,a lthough my feelings regarding Decipher's handling of the game have not changed and I dont hide that fact. it just isnt relevant to this discussion - despite your apparent efforts.
>By the way, is there any reason you are so obsessed with this topic that you cross posted it to rpg.net (where you have been repeatedly banned for your bile towards Decipher and other community members), as well as here? Any point other than malice?
obsessed? no, i dont think that constitutes obsession. however since you disagree with everything i say to the point where you feel qualified to make comments about my sanity i would say you are closer to obsession for posting to threads you clearly disapprove of and dont agree with - and say nothing to prove me wrong and thus further the debate.
and i coudl care less about what the peopel at rpg.net think so your repeated efforts to rattle me aren't very succesful. i have made no secret of my feelings towards the way decipher do business; feelings born of experience and knowledge.