And yet, that relativism is the cornerstone of all the books. The different races and species have entirely different names for Foul because they have entirely different outlooks on life and reality. The New Lords couldn't use Kevin's Lore because they had a fundamentally different attitude than the Old Lords. SRD gave each of the Ravers opposing names - one for how they view themselves, and one for how others view them.
This isn't a sematic argument. No one's quibbling about the differences between Worm /
Würd / Weird. The point is that there's apparently no place in the Worm story for the guy Covenant kept running into in the First Chronicles, and whom Linden met in
TWL.
Runes Esmer is caught between violently different ways of life.
Take away the relativism, and there is no TCTC.
Internally conflicted characters are nothing new to SRD and that's not what anyone finds grating.
Instead it's as if we opened up Fatal Revenant and found that now Esmer isn't conflicted and is instead acting exactly like Liand - and worse yet, that the author is acting as if that's how Esmer had always been.
It's the internal inconsistency people object to.
The whole Worm story smacks of revisionism and prequelitis. I think that if SRD had intended to drag the Worm in from the beginning, he never would have been so definite about the conversations TC thought he was having with the old man, about Tamarantha and Mhoram's Creator stories, about the story of the Arch and the Enemy and white gold.
He would have left the door open in the first four books for a different but equal creation story. But I don't think the Worm was ever planned for; it was a jury-rigged hasty addition, and that shows.