Gith's Sharp-Edged Codex

You can obtain the mags from eBay for a few dollars. The Dungeon is the most helpful, because it is bound with an issue of Polyhedron which is basically chock full of in-depth details about 3E githyanki and their culture. You can get the PDF version of Guide to the Astral Plane for $5 at www.rpgnow.com. .

Most of the published material does not say anything about the making of silver swords other than to say that their manufacture is a secret that the githyanki guard jealously. The 2E Guide to the Astral Planeonly states that the githyanki use "a silvery metal that is only found on the corpses of powers". The "corpses of powers" are a feature of the Astral plane. So silver swords could potentially go back as far as the githyanki migration to the Astral.

Now, remember that the technology described in the Circle of Zerthimon would not necessarily be representative of the technology of those who composed the work at a later date. As you say, it is a historical document, and that means it was written after the fact. As far as I know there are no hard information about exactly how long afterward it was written down.

However, since The Circle of Zerthimon mentions the division of the githyanki and githzerai, we do know at least that it could not have been composed prior to that conflict. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that it was composed sometime after the migrations of the two peoples to their respective planes, which happened shortly after these events. If so, the githyanki could reasonably have possessed the technology to make silver swords at that point.

I feel I should stress that the article that you are building from is fan content, and the author has apparently created the whole "gish-as-parallel-with-zerth" concept entirely from scratch. Both the 2E and 3E materials talk routinely about the gish, but they never suggest that they are anything other than simply versatile individuals who focus on both combat and magic/psionic skills. In my opinion, the Circle of Zerthimon does not seem to contradict the published materials, and it simply provides some "flavor" regarding the githzerai as described in those sources. However, the article about gish is purposefully deviating from the published sources and redefining a big category of githyanki warriors in an entirely new way. When building fan content on top of such fan content, you may find it more and more difficult to make your content agree with the published sources.

The assumption that the githyanki acquired the technology of silver swords just after the split is what I outlined above. However, it could have been even before the split. I don't have the sources in front of me, but the general idea is that the githyanki and githzerai split, and then the githyanki migrated permanently to the Astral. The exact degree of overlap (if any) is unknown. There is brief mention of the githyanki taking over illithid strongholds on the astral, so perhaps there were large githyanki settlements on the astral even before the zerai/yanki split . It is even conceivable that the silver swords were somehow acquired and used during the post-revolt war against the illithids, although nothing specific is stated one way or the other. So silver swords may indeed predate Two Skies.

Regardless, there is plenty of room for the assumption that silver swords would be as old as the Circle of Zerthimon.

As far as the githzerai having silver swords -- they do. Githzerai occasionally possess silver swords, and at least one 2E source states that githzerai can indeed *make* silver swords, if memory serves. That being the case, not all silver swords possessed by githzerai would be stolen from githyanki. One could assume that the githzerai stole the knowledge of how to make the swords from the githyanki at some point in the past, but then there is really no way to know exactly when that might have happened. Perhaps the knowledge of how to make silver swords was obtained by the githzerai very early, but their ability to create the swords has always been severely limited by their very limited access to the special Astral metals required for the swords. It is logical to assume that the githyanki long ago secured all known sources of that metal, considering the central role silver swords have in their society.

This is true, but it was a bad idea, and rightfully retconned in 3e (and, really, in Planescape: Torment before that). It doesn't make sense for githzerai to make silver swords, which are most useful in attacking beings invading the Astral Plane. They're not effective, except as "normal" magical swords, against the githyanki themselves, who will almost never have silver cords to sever. Githzerai have no reason to make them (as well as little access to the proper materials). If they have any of them, it's likely because they stole them from the githyanki in order to keep them out of githyanki hands.

Far more useful and appropriate to the githzerai are karach blades, or simply unarmed combat.

After a quick look through the primary 2e sources (PSMC1, Planes of Chaos, Planewalker's Handbook), I didn't see any assertation of that nature. The PSMC1 claims that silver swords have powerful religious value to the githzerai, which is unlikely enough that it should be ignored and never discussed again (which is what happened in subsequent official sources). Read "karach blades" instead, or even ancient iron weapons wielded by heroes of Zerthimon's rebellion.

Silver swords are iconic githyanki weapons. Giving them to githzerai dilutes that and makes no sense. Keep them out of Limbo, I say. The tortured rationalization required to get them in githzerai hands (in any numbers) does more harm than good.

That makes perfect sense to me. There might even be some room there for expansion of that idea, and that may lead to more ideas about the wisdom contained in the Codex of Swords. Why is that faction of gish different from other gish? Is it an historical or philosophical difference, or perhaps both? Why, exactly, is the codex about swords/blades instead of something else?

Well, no, not according to the WOTC (and older TSR) materials. Higher githyanki of all (sword-wielding) classes have historically wielded silver swords in 1E, 2E and 3E. For example, in the MM4 a regular githyanki captain wields a silver sword. Knights do indeed use the most powerful silver swords, but that only makes sense, since they occupy the most prestigious position in githyanki society. You are correct, knights did not exist prior to the Lich Queen. But that has nothing to do with the githyanki using silver swords as such.

In fact, the article on githyanki in Dungeon 100 ("Knights of the Lich-Queen") observes that the most powerful silver swords (as described in the 3E MM) must predate the Lich-Queen. They were forged when githyanki could achieve epic levels, and thereby forge these epic weapons on occasion. As far as I can tell, this makes perfect sense considering the rules. Making a +5 vorpal weapon with the additional enhancements defined for these specific swords/artifacts would not be possible given the level restrictions the Lich-Queen had in place. So if my understanding of all this is correct, the most powerful silver swords must have been crafted before the Lich Queen absorbed the most powerful githyanki, and that craft presumably had been in use for quite some time even at that point. Which, with all due respect, is almost the opposite of your assertion above.

As I've explained, there is no contradiction at all with the source material if you describe the development of Rhys' "gish" and the development of silver swords in conjunction, and binding the two together in a "Codex of Swords" or “Sharp-Edged Codex” made of blades seems an obvious choice. And as described above, some of your assumptions about the history of silver swords may actually be inaccurate. I see no way in which this detracts from the interesting history of the githyanki. In fact, it literally couldn’t be more appropriate, considering the sheer volume of space devoted to silver swords in basically every description of githyanki in any source. There’s no way to avoid it -- githyanki and their silver swords are basically synonymous, so that is the obvious angle to take here.

But OK, let's take the other approach for a minute. Let’s assume that you decide take the most conservative approach, perhaps saying that all silver swords were created very late, perhaps in the period just prior to the Lich Queen’s ascension to the throne, and that they therefore occur too late for your Codex.

What are you left with that belongs in something called the “Codex of Swords” or “Sharp-Edged Codex”?

You’ve chosen the metaphor of the sword. Considering that you have stated that you want to stick with a very, very early githyanki timeframe, you would be writing something almost as relevant to the githyanki as the githzerai (all the "people of Gith"), since the two were very similar at that time. You would probably start with something resembling a variation on of the sword-oriented parts of the Circle of Zerthimon ("Scripture of Steel", etc.), but only after stripping out two large components that make the Circle so appealing -- the historical references describing the githzerai perspective on Two Skies, and the powerful allegory of how that sequence of early githzerai historal events mirrors the philosophical sequence of development of the mind of a modern githzerai sage.

This, to a large extent, describes what you have above. It's interesting, but lacking in punch or relevantce to the githyanki in particular. The beauty of the Unbroken Circle of Zerthimon is that even though it was written long ago, it still tells you a lot about the githzerai *today*. The further you dig, the less relevant this becomes to anyone other than the githzerai. You seem to be saying that your goal is to create something similar and parallel to the Circle but geared toward the githyanki. If you can find those new angles that would make this thing similarly powerful and githyanki-oriented, then I think you’d have a great starting place for something that really does stand up to the Circle of Zerthimon.

And if you can come up with an equally interesting alternate approach that doesn't involve silver swords, then you’re a creative person indeed. But I honestly don't see anything coming remotely close to the appeal of silver swords considering that swords and blades are the theme of this particular piece. Rejecting silver swords out of hand is, in my opinion, a lost opportunity.

And as far as being hesitant to resolve mysteries -- that's one of the reasons this forum is here. If you do wish to preserve the mystique of the githyanki, you just need to add several new mysteries for each one you illuminate. It's part of the creative process.

Well then, let me make a slight correction: the "original" reference to karach says nothing about it being used by githzerai. Yes, there is one other reference to one particular githzerai (among the many dozens mentioned in various sources) making "weapons" out of the material. My mistake.

However, my original point is still completely valid. There is apparently NO reference to githzerai karach blades as such, much less any reference to them playing a significant role in githzerai (or zerth) society, in the official materials. That plot device was indeed invented whole cloth for PS:T, as I stated. Something you have still failed to admit, ripvanwormer, although your entire concept rests on it.

As far as the rest of your rant -- you are welcome to whatever opinion you like, but you are NOT welcome to whatever facts you like. I'm getting sick and tired of you starting a flame war every time someone simply points out how drastically far your bizarre and poorly-supported ideas deviate from the existing official material. This is the *third* thread in a row in this forum where you've done this same exact thing. You KNOW that your idea contradicts published sources, but yet you will apparently defend it ENDLESSLY when people point out that fact. You make no distinction between people offering alternate *opinions* and people simply observing the *facts* regarding what does and does not fit within publsihed material from among the things you say. This seems to be a chronic problem.

Please try to find ways in which you can POSITIVELY contribute to the discussion. I'll point it out again - your personal theories about githzerai zerth blades offer NO assistance to the original author of this thread whatsoever regarding his questions about githyanki. You've literally gone off on a tangent, and you are clearly intent on beating that tangent TO DEATH until everyone agrees with you. That fact should give you pause for consideration, but apparently it doesn't register. By persisting at such pointless "debates", you accomplish nothing other than scaring off other people who might like to join into the discussion. You've stated your alternate theory here, now move on with your life. Please show some consideration for others.

My apologies to the original poster.

Making something that stands up to the Unbroken Circle is no small task. But perhaps you're making things too hard on yourself.

Remember that the githzerai are the ones who are known for being extremely brief and to the point. Githyanki are occasionally terse (i.e. commands in battle), but they also have a deep love for the elaborate in their craftsmanship and art. So one could expect something as special as the Codex to be much more wordy and flowery than the Unbroken Circle for this reason, perhaps being more of a narrative rather than a string blow-by-blow recounting of the events and their explicit meaning as we see in the Circle. Perhaps the primary mystery of the Codex is in how to distill the precise (and perhaps somewhat convoluted and complicated) philisophical ideas from the greater, less specific narrative structure. Basically, I would assume the Codex would be much *less* literal than the Circle for this reason.

In some ways, the nature of the Unbroken Circle also makes your task harder. Basically, the Unbroken Circle "used up" most of the relevant subject material, even that which seems to be a poor fit, leaving precious little room for a second parallel document. In my opinion, the whole focus on swords and the Scripture of Steel always seemed a little irrelevant to what the githzerai ultimately became. Mostly, it was just relevant to the shared history of the rebellion. To completely avoid overlap, you basically have to restrict yourself to the githyanki after the split, and there's very little info on what they were like at that point. We know a little bit about what they were before that, and what they were later, but not much in between.

However, I'd urge you to not to get discouraged. Consider that there is a whole lot of room for expansion here, lots of room for creativity. Even in Rhys' article, very little is said about the actual content of the Codex, so it's almost a blank canvas. Every artist knows that a blank canvas can be intimidating. Don't be afraid to be creative and add brand new angles, much like Rhys did. Provided that you can discover how and where you are deviating from previous materials, you can do so purposefully and strategically to open up new doors. And if it's unclear how well something fits with the source materials, just ask. There are any number of people in this forum who are familiar with the source material. As long as you stick to the *spirit* of the existing info on githyanki, you should be fine.

I hope that in some small way our discussion of this has helped you to analyze and reevaluate the aspects that could logically be relevant to the Codex, hopefully contributing to making the Codex more engaging. I think it would be interesting to hear some of the other regulars' opinions as well.

I apologize, then, but I don't see how it was an option in this case. Invisig0th was giving you advice that I thought was misguided, and I explained why. My intention wasn't to start a long debate on the issue, though I was probably naive on that point.

ripvanwormer,

In case there is any confusion on your part, I have no interest in wasting time rebutting your endless stream of point-by-point ramblings about your confused reinterpretations of my posts. I have no interest in discussing anything with you, whatsoever. I shall not be feeding you, troll. So please feel free to post what you want, but do not expect one shred of cooperation or respect from me. I may point out your errors, but I will not waste time debating you. You are persona non grata. Three strikes, you're out.

So take your predictable, relentless attempts at fueling an argument, such as the most recent one above, and stuff 'em. Your assertions are indeed full of holes, but I won't be encouraging you by detailing them. You're wasting your time, as well as the time of everyone else who would like to read this thread to find out about the original post. I'm asking you one more time, please cease trying to provoke me, because I have no interest in playing your game.

I hope I've made myself clear. If you have any further concerns, please send a private message instead of continuing to spam this thread with your attempts at provokation.