Sigh

Not again...

• Comparison to original Macbeth
  • How is it "useless"? It explains the differences between the original and Mabinogi's interpretation on it and gives information about the original context; kill two birds with one stone.
• Race interpretation
  • I thought we resolved this on Talk:Gods: the NPCs have praised Lugh as a God, even though he actually claims to be a human. Also, Tarlach's Record has indeed caused confusion on Lugh being a Milletian, and what's written is to clarify what the book meant.

The Tarlach's record can also be interpreted so that it refers to the players as the knight of light, rather than Lugh. As we are also calleed the Knight of Light in G3 and supposedly when speaking to NPCs with the G3 title on(?). There isn't enough evidence to say Lugh is a god, milletian, or human, if you ask me. But there isn't enough evidence to the contrary to say he cannot be. Just don't include definites like "he is", "he isn't", or failing to mention it at all, if you ask me. (I know you didn't, I should stop doing this. . .)

If you want to draw the line...simply call him a Human with superior power/intellect...his actions echoed throughout the land and his story was told countless times, with many exaggerations. He could very well still be a human of old age, who's gone mad, or cynical if you will. Granted, I don't have enough evidence to support this, but from his looks, he's clearly human. I'm also pretty positive of race stating what he is as of now...rather than what he was in the past. Mabye he's a demigod, hell should I know.

I agree, the lack of mention won't bode well.

I, personally, would have left it at Human for both Lugh and Morgant. They are still human, just with superior strength/intellect. Honestly, it'll end up boiling down to the in-game information.

I think there's too much contradictions to leave it as "Human."

Well it's up to the wiki community to decide...my statement still stands about drawing the line at just Human, regardless of all the books since he is only human. This applies to Morgant too.

While we're on the subject of Tarlach's Record:

“	This book is a collection of data I have gathered over some time, especially from stories told by the Knight of Light, who has, incidentally, returned to Erinn most recently.	„

The part where it says "stories" and "returned to Erinn". It's probably leading to a speculation-wormhole, but

• Has Lugh EVER preached about the Milletian race? Did any Tuatha de Danann NPC know about the Milletians before we shoved the book into Eavan/Aodhan's hands?
• Lugh the Knight of Light didn't return during G3. Morgant, in a way, even said he's gone.

It may refer to the Milletian. Lugh had already vanished. Knight of Light may be referred to as a title, rather than Lugh himself.

Yes, that's my conclusion (and Kapra's I think) as well. But no, its one of those things people on the IRC call "crap". In any case, I've pointed out critical points in the book that may be driving to the player and not Lugh.

It's "crap" because it's still all your speculation and interpretation (plus bad writing evidently). It's this sort of thing that leads to the rubbish we had on Aer's page about her possibly being Macha which was specifically removed by an admin.

Thread:Talk:Morgant/Morgant_=_Human/reply_(7)

You guys have nothing to say to the Macbeth comparison?

I never read MacBeth all the way through ._.

That was one of the aims of the comparison.

There was way too much information with the referencing. I'd just reference it once to bring up the the original, and maybe again somewhere saying that the story in mabi doesn't follow the play exactly.

If people want to read about Macbeth then they can go read Macbeth.

So, kick people out the door?

I'm puzzled as to why you haven't taken out any other Shakespeare similarities or information of things based on the Celtic Myth.

Because you put on Mabiwiki: The Drama whenever I try. The only people that really care that we keep it on the wiki are people like you. If we deleted all the trivia the only people that would really be upset would be the people that wrote it in in the first place and nothing of value would be lost.

Like I said earlier, make small (in word count) references to the Shakespearean counterparts.

ie. "Laertes is based on the Shakespearean character of the same name from the play Hamlet."
VS
list all similarities, then differences

I don't want to read Macbeth, but I don't mind random info about it. Though, I don't think we need the trivia section to be pointlessly long and Lugh's is long enough already.

Considering how loosely based it is for G16...It's hard to tell what's actually from MacBeth. I'm sure there are some super awesome analysis online regarding MacBeth in terms of symbolism and such...I just care not for Shakespearean plays outside of Romeo and Juliet...and maybe Julius Caesar. And Lugh's trivia will need to be trimmed...immensely trimmed.