This message was deleted by the user at 00:27, Tue 30 Aug 2016.

For myself, I will deviate from the prescribed format if I think that my RTJ will flow better as a whole.  I see the RTJ process as a chance to showcase myself as well as my idea, so if my personal writing style or preferences are being retarded by the chosen format, I'm going to deviate in an attempt to improve my chance to show what I've got to offer to a game.  As a corollary, I accept that this means that I might be refused outright by a stickler, and I'm okay with that as I probably wouldn't have been a good fit anyway.

That said, it can be seriously frustrating if a player deviates and doesn't bother to include all the requested information from your original format.  In that scenario, I can certainly understand being frustrated by an RTJ that's purposely ignored your format.

So your answer is self righteousness? Since you walked around the question without answering it. Or, did you fail to read? Lol
Thank you for proving my point....
This message was last edited by the user at 21:25, Mon 29 Aug 2016.

I guess it really depends on how bad the deviation is. For example, if you're doing a 5e game, and you say the PHB is the only source material, I don't think it's unacceptable for someone to suggest the Elemental Evil Player's Companion since it's a free download. However, if they wanted to use something out of the Sword Coast Adventure's Guide, that's a different story since that is obviously something the DM either doesn't have or doesn't want to use.

So, I'm not sure how well I can comment here since I feel like I'm missing a lot of detail, so I'll give two thoughts.

If someone is suggesting something that comes from freely gained source material (free download, SRD site, etc), I don't think it's an unreasonable request. Sure, the rules have been stated, however, it wouldn't be going too far out of anyone's way to at least consider. More than likely, it's just something simple that they either really enjoy, or really want to try.

On the flip side, there are those special snowflakes, that even though you said Human only campaign, still try to submit their uber-homebrewed Half-Dragon Weretiger race and special class that they PROMISE is balanced (even though they wouldn't know balance if a set of scales *cough*-smacked them across the face).

At the end of the day, fun is fun. By that same token, respect a DM's rules.

Well, W0LF0S did answer your question exactly as you asked it. They just didn't answer your second two questions, which didn't sound like explicit "these are the only available options" additions to your original question, but rather "these are two ideas I think might be the answer, are they?"

So, uh. Have you considered that maybe the attitude presented to people is part of the problem? This is supposed to be a friendly place, after all, and going around being insulting to people trying to give you honest answers to what was supposed to be an honest question is sort of the anti-friendly. No idea if you're like that in your games, but you're certainly doing it in public.

Pretty sure W0LF0S answered your question-



-with an explanation of why.

Careful who you accuse of failing to read there . . .

I'd say deviation is annoying as a GM, but really if you can't determine if it's good deviation (they're taking license to show you what you need to be shown to understand their concept) or bad deviation, then it's likely bad deviation

I follow the RTJ as best as I am able. I say that as some RTJs are just very confusing or poorly written. Some times I wonder if a GM who produces such an item really knows what he/she wants. RTJ forms like those might give me pause to consider if I might want to rethink making a RTJ in the first place.

Do I feel that there is a need to deviate from the GMs original format ? Well the first thing that comes to mind is ... "It's NOT my game." If I want to play in this GMs game I need to follow HIS/HER rules !

That said, if I feel there is a need or a want on my part to add additional information that was not called for I might add it as an addendum. Or I might ask if I can expound upon his/her format and explain why the additional information should be added for his/her consideration.

Keep in mind that some RTJ say "DO NOT PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION" ... or "DO NOT SUBMIT FULL AND OR COMPLETE CHARACTER SHEETS FROM OTHER GAMES". Can you imagine that ? Some GMs actually want me to be creative and make a NEW character designed specifically for his/her game ? Blows your mind huh ?

Things like that can be pretty specific. To deliberately go against those things and wonder why you don't get selected for a game begs the question. <rant off>  :)

Okay ... I GM a bit like most here. And I find that about half the players follow directions pretty well. The portion of players that do go against my instruction in my RTJ form really do blow it out of the water with their creativeness. For a western I was running last year I got a character sheet that could have only been for a Sci-Fi game. This guy had a grav-sled on his sheet as well as a plasma rifle. He wanted to know if with a little editing, his character could be inserted into my game ?

Just a little editing huh ? Sure ...

No, it was not an answer, it was an explanation of why they deviate. No where does he address the question..  is it self-righteousness or lack of reading.

In reply to chas0105 (msg # 8):

It's an implied no. Not a firm one, but one that implies the options provided by you aren't complete enough to encompass it, and assumes you were not placing a binary choice.



I spent years studying philosophy and that's the first time I've seen someone use the term "begging the question" correctly. You just made my day, thank you
This message was last edited by the user at 21:40, Mon 29 Aug 2016.

Let's try this again.



That got answered completely and fully. Those other two questions were not addressed because they aren't really questions, they're "did you stop beating your wife?" type false dichotomies. It doesn't have to be one or the other, and the first question you asked isn't one of those two.

Yeah, I now believe the OP is trolling.

I'm confused as to why an explanation and an answer aren't the same thing.

Or are you trying to say that you meant that the only two possible answers are self-righteousness or lack of reading?  If that's what you meant, I disagree that those are the only two answers.

To circle back, I provided my own personal answer to your question based on my disagreement with your posited answers, because I don't presume to speak for the masses and don't believe that those two provided answers could be the only possible explanations for deviation from an RTJ format.  I figured that would be a more useful answer than some general guess as to the attitudes of the thousands of players on RPOL.

I'm so glad it wasn't just me who noticed that. :D

In reply to RosstoFalstaff (msg # 9):

Tips his hat to the man in the corner ... :)

*********************

As to the rest ... I think the prevailing opinion of the respondents is that the question was answered. However I believe that the OP is not happy with the answer he recieved. ... A troll by definition then ? Do we need a troll poll ?

In reply to Nintaku (msg # 13):

Both men !

What's the toll for winning the troll poll?

Like most of the voices here, I think the OP has answered his own question.

If his RTJs similarly offer limited and ill-fitting options, neither of which are deemed sufficient to give a complete reply by the person replying, it is small wonder people 'deviate' from the options offered.

Perhaps the solution is to be less specific rather than more so.

Personally, when I ask for a RTJ I specify nothing. I simply ask the visitor to chat with me about their character concept, and I take it from there. Works for me.

Ok let's be specific. Sample RTJ.
Include the FOLLOWING AND ONLY THE FOLLOWING IN YOUR RTJ.
1. Character name
2. Character Class(es)
3. Future PrC if any
4. Deity
5. A BRIEF 100 word or less physical description.
Now with that rtj, is it in your opinion? Self-righteousness? Or failure to read? That is a bigger factor in getting alot of rtj's that are everything but that?

With that example, I would have to say that's probably the special snowflake self righteousness.

And because I was seriously curious about OP's RTJ format, I went spelunking and found a 3.5 game advertising for players with this as the public RTJ post.


Are you being frustrated by people that submit paragraphs instead of filling in the blanks?  For a play by post style game, I could definitely see some people choosing to go that route since they don't seem to have much of an outlet for showing off their writing ability.

I'll deviate from my earlier position now and presume to speak for others.  I think the real answer might be that they find your format too limiting and don't have enough room to say what they want about their character idea.  Maybe you should include a disclaimer that you aren't looking for players that like to write a lot?

EDIT: Grammar strikes again!

DOUBLE EDIT:  Just noticed OP's post above mine.  That RTJ format is a little different from what you actually have posted.  Your actual public RTJ format seems more forgiving of deviations and only mentions "bonus points" for those that keep things shorter.  I think the issue is that you haven't properly communicated your expectations in your RTJ advertisement, so you're catching the interest of players that you wouldn't otherwise want to attract.
This message was last edited by the user at 22:07, Mon 29 Aug 2016.

The specific example of what's being deviated from is very helpful to making it more of a discussion, and I gotta say, that's pretty straightforward. What are the prospective players doing to deviate from your templates? Writing too much? Not including the information asked for? Including more information than you wanted?

I'm gonna start by assuming they're giving you character backgrounds, since that's the most common thing to include in an RtJ and you don't have a slot for it there.

I've had many instances of what I believe the Op is complaining about.  games where I have put specific limitations in an rtj (pick any class but beguiler, or your characters are starting with no knowledge of the orb of doom) and receive multiple rtjs with exactly what I asked to not be included.  Those pretty much show either an inability or lack of interest in reading an rtj request, or applicants specifically feeling that the rules do not apply to them.  Neither makes for a good application.

Ultimately, though, complaining about it doesn't solve much.  It will still happen, and will still pretty much mean an application is ignored out of frustration.

OUCH! What was that?


This venue for gaming attracts many types of people, but I would think the majority of those here like to write. I wouldn't be surprised that you get wordy, even flowery, RTJs. I know from experience that it can be frustrating to apply for a game you'd really like to play in, and feel like the things asked for in the RTJ are very narrow.

I guess I tend to "fill-in-the-blanks" of the RTJs I apply for, but at the end I add anything else I think might sway the GM to give me a second look. Also, more involved and lengthy RTJ processes have a way of weeding out those who are either more casual or not willing to stick out a game. It can be a great filter.

Honestly though, I don't see why the OP is so upset. If he's that bothered by it, he should just delete those RTJs that don't fit his mold... without reading them! ;-)

Thanks, that helps.
My intention is actually to just get an idea of a person's writing style, while putting a limit as to content. Personally, I gain more insight on a person's gaming and writing style when limiting the amount of nouns, adverbs, adjectives, etc... they may use.
 Now when creating sheets and posts, I absolutely, I encourage long flowerful posts.
To answer questions i have gotten 2 rtj's that followed my request. Of which, I thought was pretty straight forth; however, after hearing responses I can fine tune I suppose, :)
Other responses have been from full character sheets to 1500 + word descriptions.
I get it, With some character concepts, I find my self lost in fleshing him/her out!
But I still follow rtj requirements, and then after dialogue is established I introduce more.
Not that what I do matters. I guess this was prompted by what I see as general societal occurrences I recognise as much as it has to deal with my silly game that I love so.
So I guess I owe someone for an hour psych fee... lol

Was that sarcasm, or is it actually a common practice to carry around the same character from game to game, "shopping" until you can play it to your satisfaction?

I mean, I know that some players will make the same character over and over. I have one friend in our club who played three Pokémon games and created three Psychics with Espeons with the same name. (Although a lot of the other details were changed.) But personally I've always made a character from scratch for every game and would find it quite weird to rehash an old one.

I know some people re-use a character till they can play it for a decent amount of time. As in, if their character is in a game that dies after only a few weeks or months, they may take that same basic concept and try again. I do that sometimes. But the moment it's been in a game for long enough, that concept gets retired.

I myself am one of those players who likes to recreate the same characters in multiple games. That generally only happens until I get to actually play the character once or twice, which can take going through a number of games before finding one that lasts beyond the characters being introduced. What I find weird is players who outright refuse to make the same character more than once, even if they never got a chance to use the character made for a game that died. That's so strange.

I did see one explanation of why a GM wouldn't want a character who was created for another game, though. It apparently  puts up a different set of expectations from the player, assuming they'll get to do the same things or end up growing the same way, telling the same story. Not sure why anyone would want to do that to themselves, but it's apparently happened before.

i take my characters seriously, and they are like my children. lol so, i can empathize with wanting to use them to the intended purpose and satisfaction. i mean, who wouldn't after lovingly hand-crafting them, from concept, to polished up finished result?

I'll admit I've had a couple of characters that I lovingly created and only got to play for one day before the game died, and it still pains me. Unfortunately, those tended to be very specific games rather than "generic D&D", so the characters aren't really reusable. And in games where I could easily use the same character over and over, I've always made new ones. Go figure.

I tend to view the RTJ process as an audition for the GM as much as it is for me, the player.  I know of at least one GM out there that posts great game concepts, but the two or three times I've applied to their games, the process was so convoluted and painful that I avoid their stuff now (and I got through it to play the game, too, so it's not sour grapes talking).

If you ask for exactly X, Y, and Z, I'll give you X, Y, and Z.  I might add some formatting to make it clear that I know how to use the system and maximize readability, but that's about it.

well, of the two games i've participated in so far, i can say that my concept didnt make it into the game without having to be changed a bit... but i still came away satisfied.

With the aid of specific examples, I will modify my response, too. :)

The first example (msg 18) is pretty specific, and allows for very little deviation. You might want to put the word ‘physical’ in bold or capitals, to help prevent an actual failure to read from delivering background details, if you want to exclude them.

The second (msg 20) is less specific. You offer a ‘bonus’ for someone who can use 100 words or less, but you don’t state that someone who uses 1000 words will be rejected. The rest of it is very specific.

Alas, I don’t know what PrC is, so I can’t comment on that.

The problem I see with both of these RTJ templates is that they are so specific that they offer little or no opportunity to shine. From the player’s point of view, you are going to receive perhaps 10 or 20 identical RTJs and which ones you choose is pretty much luck of the draw.

The first example is the worst for this. If one person submits:
Fred, Wizard, god1, red hair and wears a blue robe,
and another person submits:
Joe, Wizard, god2, brown hair and wears a yellow robe,
How on earth do you choose between them? Toss a coin? Roll dice? How do they make their character catch your attention more than the other guy? You’re giving them no opportunity to shine, no opportunity to present you with a witty, lively, must-have character.

And surely you’re shooting yourself in the foot? Suppose you choose ‘blue wizard’, on the basis of your limited RTJ template and then find that the character (or player) is a total waste of space? If you’d allowed more opportunity for ‘deviation’ you’d have caught that a lot earlier.

Also, word limitations are fine if you only want to attract language masters to your game, but many players will hope that if they present a really brilliant idea for your game, that you will give their concept more value than their word count.

I’m not convinced that those player desires classify as either self-righteousness or a failure to read, they simply demonstrate an appreciation of your game concept and a desire to join it despite what they see as a frustratingly restrictive (and potentially self-defeating) RTJ template. Is that wrong of them?

Of course, if you make a specific statement like ‘no evil characters’, and someone presents you with an evil character, they deserve everything they (don’t) get.

So a suggestion might be to ask for the short '10 peso version' up front, and mention that if the characters wish to wax eloquent, then they may tack in onto the end. That way you can get your specifics up front and not miss out on a great player just because he or she wishes to write a novel for a RTJ! ;-)

Prestige class. Almost all (though not all) prestige classes in D&D have both severe mechanical requirements and a heavy lore requirement. You're not just "more powerful Fighter", you're the blessed protector of something or other. So if you want to head towards a PrC in a few levels, it's best the DM knows about it so the story can be adjusted for that.

Thanks Flint_A. :)

D&D has changed somewhat since I played it. Back in the day, we'd have added an I and a K to describe that sort of character.

"Is his character a Paladin?"
"Yeah, I reckon he's a Paladin"
"No, I'm just the Blessed P..."
"He's definitely a Paladin. Right, I'm going to..."

Fade to Black in the interests of a General Certificate...

I don't even bother asking people for character details. I just ask for a writing sample of about a paragraph or two, then a name and general concept. That way I can see what quality of writing the person can do, and also get a feel for what kind of player they are. That's what I've been told works well. Then the person can come up with the character details once they are accepted and we see what the cast looks like.

I agree, it is better to see if the player and GM can get along before wasting their time. Some players have complained about my rtj process before. I do not think they realised I want to know if we will get along before bothering to create a character.
This message was last edited by the user at 17:08, Tue 30 Aug 2016.

I feel like every time I create a new game, I run into new and unexpected problems with applicants.  It's hard to anticipate every complcation.  I've had games where everyone applied to basically be the same character at first (all six applicants the first day asked to be the same class race mix) those are situations where one applicants style might make them shine over others.
Then I've had people with very good writing skills and long and detailed character descriptions apply to be a character that doesn't fit the game at all, often because they didn't bother to read the threads on the game.
So its hard to judge exactly what makes the best rtj approach.  To me, try to give the gm exactly  what they asked for, and then ask if they like more.  Though, to be honest, its been a long time since I applied to play in a game.

This message was deleted by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 19:33, Tue 30 Aug 2016.

I know for me a lot of the time it's hard to see all the rules a GM wants, especially if I'm in a hurry.
Now, yes, that's on me, not them, and so is the fact that normally I have access through my phone. But, I've known GM's (no need for names, we've all had them) that if you didn't cross your T's and dot your i's perfectly the first time, then it was a no go. Period.

That sort of thing never sits well with me either.

In reply to Lord_Johnny (msg # 40):

Well, that kind of GM is probably going to be the same in game, so you don't want to play there anyway, better to find out up front.

Quite honestly RPOL seems to be for people who may not have much time in RL to game.  I have stopped even applying for games that have extensive rtj requirements.  how many times have I spent multiple hours on multiple days to get into a game only to have the gm bail on the game before it even starts.  If I put forth 5-10 hours of effort just to get into the game you best have more commitment to it.

I cant imagine why any gm would expect that much effort for an rtj.

In reply to Brianna (msg # 41):

I couldn't agree more! And thankfully, I haven't run into this a lot here on RPOL, which is why I do appreciate the community more than anticipated. Which is not to say that I anticipated not enjoying it, just that I think I may hAve had a bit of a skewed view of the overall community, whether here or rl, etc.

I do not have a lengthy rtj process, but I have one. Only a few short questions to find out if they are familiar with the system/background. Then one or two questions about the kind of character they are looking to play. Once I did not listen to my gut and let a person in anyway, bad choice. The character did not want to "play nice" and quickly was on the nerves of every other player. Shortly after the game started it fell apart.

To me, the rtj is MY indicator of who is familiar with the setting/system. It allows me to tailor my posts for the players allowing for the "best" understanding.


Say your playing Fallout with a someone who has never played the game before. You mention Ghoul. Someone who is only familiar with D&D will have a different idea of what a Ghoul is vs someone who is only familiar with the Fallout versions.

I was looking at a game the other day that expected a full character sheet (for a moderately complex game) and background before you'd be considered for admittance.  I kind of wanted to play, and I talked to the GM a bit, but I just don't think I have it in me to put that much effort into a maybe.  In a vacuum for what's meant to be a team-based game.  Especially considering I've not seen the GMs that want to have a lot up front having any greater staying power than the ones that don't.

By all means, GMs should do some initial vetting to make sure that they're bringing in players that have similar goals and desires to them, but you can do that with something that takes the player ten minutes to put together instead of several hours.

Agree with this whole-heartedly. I don't ask for a lot in my RTJs, just real simple information about character concept and their gaming experience in a specific format. I also include information about what not to include (e.g., completed character sheets, etc.) and use the RTJ itself as an indicator of whether the player can read and follow basic directions.

I view the RTJ kind of like a job application. It is a screening tool (one of many I use) to help determine which players might be the best candidates to increase odds of the game being successful.

Yeah, that's the same way that I look at it as well when I'm running games here.

My own RTJ process seems to be fairly unique on RPOL, so I think I'll share it.  I do my RTJ process in stages.  The first stage is fairly typical and asks for the basics about a character concept, has a handful of "get to know you" style questions, and asks the applicant to list a handful of different things in order of importance as related to their fun factor.  The second stage requires the person to respond in character to a scenario that I've written so that I can get a better feel for their character idea and their writing.  Last, I ask for more details about the character and provide a primer of questions to help the applicant figure out what sort of details I'm looking to find.  I do an evaluation at each stage of this process and decide whether or not I want to pursue this applicant's admission, so I end up saying no or yes at different points for different applicants.

This process can take up to a week, but I don't think that's a bad thing.  It cuts up the requirements into more bite size chunks that aren't quite so cumbersome at the forefront of things.  It also helps to prove to me and the player that each of us is going to be around for more than a post or two.  I've had many applicants send in stage one and then seemingly vanish from RPOL and never reply to my reply to their first message.  Doing things in stages helps me dodge what I think of as "quick-drops" that apply for the sake of applying and then vanish almost immediately.

I don't run games, here or elsewhere, but if I did, I'd want a writing sample.  Perhaps a short character background, or an paragraph answering a question (to see if they can/do read) but something.

I hate that. I cannot tell you how often people who seemed to enjoy my game just up and vanished. Then later I found them active posting in another game. No explanation.

People have NEVER followed directions IMO.

Peer into the Crystal Mirror of Al-Hazared, and behold, as the dark shrouds of long forgotten events are swept aside like cobwebs in some ancient Stygian tomb, and we look waaaaaaaay back into the misty depths of Time (like sixteen years ago).

See that sprightly, young, fresh-faced GM with his vaguely familiar (and beardless) features, as he uses another site to create an Amber DRPG game, his first foray into the world of online gaming.  Watch as he  puts up an ad requesting  deep, multifaceted, lovingly-crafted charactes, rich in detail and brimming with their own subtle plots and cunning plans.

Observe as he waits a couple of days, then excitedly opened the first RtJ, eager to discover what joys and wonders it contains...

That was it.  Four words.  No punctuation, no upper case "I".

Marvel as, undeterred, he patiently requests more detail.  Feel the thrill of victory which must surely blosson in his breast as, two days later, he gets it...

Weep, weep for that fledgling GM my friends...

True story.

LOL. So why did you invite him to Rpol, Ron? I'm sure that guy's applied to one of my games. ;)

Sometimes I wonder how we summon up the stamina to carry on...

Talking about RTJ's, I often don't actually use the request as an actual request, if that makes sense. IE, most games the only way to send a mail to the GM is through the RTJ.
I usually try to discuss a character concept before I jump into a game. Not because I'm not willing to be flexiblw, but usually I am looking for a game to play a specific character concept, and would rather know if it will fit before filling everything in.

My bad, I put in one liner rtjs and if the idea gets accepted I flesh out the background the next day.  But, if the rtj requests a writing sample, I will do one, I can't say how many gms never reply to my one liner requests, but I do know that I reply to all requests to my games and have been pleasantly surprised by them.

I'm starting to lean towards the request to join simply being about the player and not necessarily about their characters.

My current RTJ:

Welcome welcome! All players are starting at level 1
We are using the 15 point ability purchase system from the pathfinder srd.
Maximum race is 10rp, no custom races or modification.

To join, tell me a few things about yourself:
1: How familiar are you with pathfinder?
2: Which race do you enjoy playing?
3: How often do you post?
4: How often do you expect your fellow players to post?
6: How often do you want the gm to post?
7: (optional) Which other games are you in?
8: Which game system is your favorite and why?
9: How do you feel the GM should handle the rules?

This is a team game, characters are worked on with your fellow players, you will be added to the game under your RPOL name until your character is fleshed out.

In reply to karuoun (msg # 55):

Other than the point buy amount being a little low for my personal taste, I think that that is an amazing RTJ!

It looks like that,  but from experience it makes race choices really matter, each member of the team gets to truly shine because they have to specialize, I really enjoy the lower amount, and my players are having fun with it.

I like seeing how creative they are when their stats don't fix all their challenges for them
This message was last edited by the user at 13:05, Sat 03 Sept 2016.

All we RPOLers who are not "found" in the RPOL Chamber of Lost Souls have been following directions.

There's a difference between RPoL policy and GM policy

I was going to say, I'm not in the lost souls...

Is there? Why?

In reply to icosahedron152 (msg # 61):

The main difference is that while GMs are required to comply with RPoL's rules, they are also free to add as many additional ones as they want, and enforce them within their own game.

In reply to karuoun (msg # 54):

You know, that is not that bad an idea. Half of my rtj is just to help the player get a general idea for a character, and to test the waters and make sure there are no immediate problems. The first time I ran a game, I had noticed it was mainly people who complained about my rtj that I had problems with.

In reply to bigbadron (msg # 62):

I meant why should people think they can ignore GM policy to a greater extent than Rpol Policy?

The consequences of ignoring a single GM's policy is much, much less than ignoring RPOL policy.  I'd imagine that's most of it.

I'm sure you're right - which is what I suspected.

Unfortunately, this indicates that many people follow policy for fear of the consequences rather than respect for the policy...

That's how people work. Otherwise we'd replace cops with teachers and give people lectures when they misbehave.

I know this is going back a ways, but this comment baffles me - not because it's a bad idea, but because 100 words is such a small amount. You can only list facts in and demonstrate an ability to construct a comprehensible sentence in 100 words, pretty much, so there is next to no room for style. I could understand 200, but if I received a character concept only 100 words long, I'd be wary. I want the special snowflakes to preen their feathers in their RTJ. Then I know not to add them to the game.


Sharpe's Tiger @ 109:
Richard Sharpe avoids the tyrannical Sergeant Obadiah Hakeswill and endeavours to rescue a British officer from under the nose of the Tippoo of Mysore.

But in fleeing Hakeswill, Sharpe enters the exotic and dangerous world of the Tippoo. An adventure that will require all of his wits just to stay alive, let alone save the British army from catastrophe.

Soldier, hero, rogue – Sharpe is the man you always want on your side. Born in poverty, he joined the army to escape jail and climbed the ranks by sheer brutal courage. He knows no other family than the regiment of the 95th Rifles whose green jacket he proudly wears.

Magician's Gambit @ 123:
Many thousands of years ago, two prophecies came into being and a moment was fixed, when only one would determine the future. This moment, a clash between the maimed god Torak and the descendant of the Rivan king, is approaching . . .

Garion, was brought up as a farm lad but is now beginning to understand the extent of his part in the prophecy, and working hard to control his sorcerous power. He is travelling towards this meeting in a sinister tower where the evil god lies sleeping. With him is the wise sorcerer Belgarath. And Ce'Nedra - a wilful young princess who refuses to believe in sorcery., but is terrified that Garion will die in the coming confrontation . . .