| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Grince, Sword of Ambiguity

Page history last edited by Tim 15 years, 12 months ago

Back to the 100 Swords of Sepathok

<< Knife of Great Annoying Papercuts | R'll'b'gsw'd >>

Grince, Sword of Ambiguity

Maybe it was Sword of Uncertainty

Sword of Unknowing?

Confusion possibly

Grince, the fabled Sword of Ambiguity, was a legendary katana (or maybe claymore) wielded by either King Becky of the Lowlands or the Weezil-Lord Gronkthnar. It glows bright green and/or emits a loud keening wail when unsheathed, although it's also possible that it just looks like an ordinary sword. Or perhaps a shoe. Inscribed upon one side was a legendary prophecy written in the Old Tongue of the Hierarchs, or a bawdy limerick, or something. Maybe.

It is believed likely that Grince is one of the 100 Swords of Sepathok, a "weapon of ambiguous quality" having been named among them. However, equally viable readings of the passage in question would have "Grince" as the name of an assistant of Gragnakas, or very possibly a Dwarven sexual epithet or type of sandwich. If Grince was a Sword of Sepathok, this in no way aids in determining whether or not Grince was actually a sword, as the existence of such Swords of Sepathok such as the Crimson Cloth and The Longhandled Chisel attests.

Grince had the fantastic power of being able to slay any color of Dyemon with the slightest blow, although maybe it was just green Dyemons. And maybe it only slew Furniture instead, whatever. Also, it either got really really powerful or really really weak during the full moon, depending on who you ask. It may or may not have been responsible for the slaying of the dragoling Ygspytur the Really Uncomprehensibly Bad. It may also have been used to do that thing, to that guy, the one dating that chick? mentioned in that book about the place.

Thus, King Becky of the Lowlands had the Weezil-Lord Gronkthnar for dinner as payment for the insult given at the dwarfball match. The Weezil-Lord arrived wearing the The Spiked Casque of Antagonism and a pink handkerchief, the customary signifier of a feud. This angered the King anew, and though there were many guests present, he entered the Great Hall, and slew the guest with the Sword of Ambiguity. Raising his claymore in triumph, the victor picked up the katana as the trophy of his vengence. The one unsheathed glowing bright green, emiting a loud, keening wail, the other just an ordinary sword. ~Excerpt from Cannibal or Dinner Host? The nature of the Feud
Not all the 100 Swords of Sepathok were actually swords. Are we sure this one is?
From the research I've done on the subject, I have not been able to determine if it is in fact a sword. None of the texts are specific enough regarding Grince. Also, I found at least one text hinting that Weezil-Lord Gronkthnar was King Becky's rogue cocktail table. This seems to be inconsistent with some of the other accounts however, so it is not yet clear.
Should Grince even be listed as a Sword of Sepathok? There was an "weapon of ambiguous quality" forged among them, but was it actually named in that passage?
I'm not sure if it was named in the passage, I've only done research on the weapon's involvement in the feud between King Becky and the Weezil-Lord. It is clear that it was involved in the feud, although its role is uncertain
Personally, I'm not even sure it was called Grince. I mean, there were a lot of sounds made in that passage. I think perhaps Sepathok had a cold and sneezed. Or maybe it was a typo. The author could have intended it be written "Frince" or "Gronce." But I do know in The Great Alphabetical Listing Of Weapons that "Grince" was not mentioned (or at least not under the G's, I haven't read any further. And I do recall Maxwell's Blade of Treachery being listed under the C's, so the validity of that passage is unclear.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.