| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Lewton
Acolyte
USA
32 Posts |
 Posted - 15 May 2009 : 01:43:37
|
|
Am I the only one that isn't real pleased with the direction of the Realms. I mean, I've been reading the novels since the beginning. I'm just not happy with the newer books. I understand there is always change in things, but since the Year of Blue Fire, is there no ordinary people anymore. Is everyone scar'd or have special powers. The books don't deal with regular people much. What happened to the normal adventures. I continue to buy and read the books, but just don't get the "feel" for them. Maybe it's just me. Just throwing it out there. From one Realms reader to another. Just wondering.
|
|
|
malchor7
Seeker
62 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2009 : 02:04:32
|
No, it's pretty clear you're not the only one who is hesitant about the present direction. You'll see what I mean. 
I think it's easy to get hung up on the changes and decry the 4e Realms as "no longer the Realms," but I think that's because some of the changes have been drastic--i.e. loud and noticeable. I think the "everyone is scarred or has special powers" perception is a function of the designers and authors saying "hey look--we're going to acknowledge these changes." Of *course* there are as many ordinary folks as there ever have been. Generally, there is nothing you could do in the earlier Realms that you can't do in the present Realms.
Sure, the setting has grown and changed, but I personally feel as though the more things have changed, the more they've stayed the same. It's still the same Realms to me, albeit evolved, with some more options.
But that's my opinion. There are a lot of others out there, and I'm sure you'll hear some of them.
Which books are you reading, out of curiosity? For instance, I think Blackstaff Tower is an excellent example of a bunch of pretty regular D&D heroes doing their thing. I thought it was very much an old-school Realms story. Mistshore and Downshadow are the same deal--sure, some people have spellplague powers, but that's really not any different from them just having magic. Which, if you're reading fantasy, you must be at least sort of ok with.
|
 |
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2009 : 14:07:33
|
No, and I do believe in my case it's worsening. I appreciate Brian's tweets updating the GHotR (even though it's not canonical). But most of the time what I read about the PS Realms doesn't grab me like the Grey Box or FRCS used to. Some of the novels are good (Blackstaff Tower, Mistshore), but I am finding hard to justify buying the new novels in this economy and because I don't seem to 'care' about the people and places as I used to. Heck, I even won autographed copies of Bladesong and Corsair and I can't get past the first chapter of the first book (sidenote: These might be going up on eBay soon, or I may just put them in the auction at GenCon).
I'm sure that a big part of it is from my fandom of Pathfinder. Heck, I've had to restructure my budget where I cut out my Netflix and Gamefly accounts, yet I'm still subscribing to the Pathfinder AP (which would be the equivalent of 2.5 novels a month). I love Ed's gift of the Realms, but the further and further we go, the more I feel the WotC product is not what I want in my Realms. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2009 : 15:59:23
|
| To be honest, I have chosen not to buy any of the 4e Realms novels because of how they decided to transition the Realms from 3e. This was a hard choice for me, but when the time came when Blackstaff Tower was released, I just could not make myself buy it. Even though I had previously decided that I was going to buy it. The thing is, they could have used any one of the many transition tactics (the Spellplague, Mystra's deicide [which could have been separate events], the advancing of the timeline, or the return of Abeir [as contrived as I think that is from a name that was added as a prefix to move it to the beginning of an encyclopedia]). Add in that they decided to reuse a race name (dragonborn) and not even make them the same race, or try to come up with a story reason as to why the old race became the new race. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 15 May 2009 : 16:06:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lewton
Am I the only one that isn't real pleased with the direction of the Realms.
Certainly not. The controversy over the new setting has been discussed many times both here and on the WotC boards. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 16 May 2009 : 02:47:32
|
Can you take half the Realms away and replace it with half of another planet and still call it the Realms?
Maybe that's the 'Forgotten' part... :) |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
Thielan
Acolyte
Australia
25 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 07:00:29
|
| I'm with you with not having normal people any more, the thrill comes from relating with the characters, and can we really relate if they all have special powers? Only the better authors have been able to make the characters "human" while still having special powers, like Paul S Kemp with Erevis Cale. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 18:35:21
|
Not to involve myself in the discussion too much, but I found one comment very curious and wanted to respond, if I may . . .
quote:
Originally posted by Thielan
I'm with you with not having normal people any more, the thrill comes from relating with the characters, and can we really relate if they all have special powers?
Um . . . sure? This is *fantasy*, after all, and almost everybody has a special power or deals with special powers on a regular basis. I mean, is it hard to relate to wizards because they cast spells? What about priests who pray to deities and actually perform miracles on a regular basis? Or even fighters demonstrating nigh-supernatural swordsmanship or rogues executing amazing stunts or anyone drinking a simple healing potion? All of that is pretty "special," I think.
I think pretty much most fantasy characters have "special powers," unless you're wanting low-magic fantasy, in which case the Realms is the wrong place to look (for the record, I recommend Martin's Song of Ice and Fire). Otherwise . . . special powers are kind of a standard in the genre.
I guess I'm not really understanding the question. Perhaps you have a different scope/definition of "special powers" than I do?
Did the realms ever have "normal people"? I mean, I'm reading Ed's Knights trilogy right now--whose main characters are about as "normal hero" as you can get--and the heroes all have magical powers, exceptional fighting ability, or acrobatic prowess. Would we call these "normal people"?
Maybe an example of "normal people" in a Realms novel would help?
quote:
Only the better authors have been able to make the characters "human" while still having special powers, like Paul S Kemp with Erevis Cale.
I'm not sure who you'd consider the "better authors," but I think it's worth noting my opinion that whether a character has "special powers" or not (and in Realms fiction, 90% of them do) has nothing to do with whether the author makes them *human* or at least *relate-able*. That's just a question of good writing.
I'm honestly very interested to hear elaboration on these points, for the entirely selfish reason that it might aid me on my quest to become one of the "better authors."
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 18:56:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm honestly very interested to hear elaboration on these points, for the entirely selfish reason that it might aid me on my quest to become one of the "better authors."
Cheers
Ditto everything Erik said.
Wait, I don't mean to say that he needs to be a "better author," he already a very good author. I meant me. (Though, of course, whether as a friend, fan, or colleague I always want artists to be striving to better their work.)
Anyway, just to seek some clarification--does your concern about special powers, Thielan, relate to a concern I've seen some people raise about the fourth edition game (as distinct from the fourth edition Realms setting), which more or less boils down to "everybody's going around shooting beams out their eyes all the time!" Or, more succinctly, "how come everybody has 'spells' now?"
Not that I think they do--the sources and powers are more or less an attempt to provide flavor and color and action to purely mechanical game effects, I think--but I understand where that criticism is coming from.
Now, if you're talking about the latest novels themselves, though, I definitely wanna hear more. Seems to me I'm reading about lots of characters that don't seem any more specially powered than our old favorites. Heck, poor Harp in The Fanged Crown seems a bit less empowered than most! And of course there's Shadowbane. I could totally take that guy.
|
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 19:36:38
|
I myself am assuming his complaint is focusing on people with spellscars and the like -- folks who have special abilities not thru anything they've done or do, but simply are born with them or got them from being in the presence of the Sellplague and its effects.
A warrior can perform feats of extraordinary swordsmanship, as Erik mentioned. But that fighter was once just a scrawny guy who could barely hold a sword -- his strength/agility and training are what makes him what he is now. Wizards have to study and learn their spells. Priests have to pray to and keep faith with their deity. Rogues rely on their dexterity and skills they've either trained for, practiced, or both. Sorcerers may draw on their bloodlines to gain power, but mere possession of that bloodline isn't enough -- they still have to cultivate their abilities.
When you add in things like spellscars, though, you wind up with characters that have extraordinary powers that have just come to them -- they didn't have to practice, or train, or study, or pray. The power is just there. They didn't work for it, and yet they can still do something extraordinary -- and that, for most people, is much harder to swallow than someone who can do incredible things but had to work to be able to do them.
To be fair, such things have existed in the Realms for quite some time... But outside of Chosen, these things are very rare, and usually have little or no effect on gameplay (as with the innate talents described in Volo's Guide to All Things Magical, formerly a suppressed work  , but now available for free on the Wizards downloads page) -- and even those things are often hereditary, not spontaneous. Additionally, characters with these abilities -- save for Shandril, whose power was hereditary -- have been almost entirely absent from Realms fiction. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 19:46:43
|
Hmmm. Okay. I haven't come across a spellscar in the novels I'd personally like to bear. Seems more like a curse than a blessing, in the general run of things.
Now I'm going back and trying to figure out just how many characters in the latest books have borne spellscars that did them any good...
|
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 20:23:50
|
It's not a matter of whether the Spellscar is more curse than blessing, but the fact that they have it and can do something 'different' when they really need to. I chalk it up to the same as lycanthropy and vampirism. Yes, it's a curse, but I've met a lot of players that would gladly take that curse if it made their character more powerful*.
Even the Eberron Dragonmarks aren't as powerful as the Spellscars. At least in Eberron, the Dragonmark was hereditary, race-specific and required you to take feats and skills to make them more powerful (although I'm sure that will change with the ECS this summer).
*Personally, for me it depends on my character's world-view and alignment. I played a samurai that had become infected by a werewolf. She was planning her suicide if she wasn't cured before the next full moon. I've also had characters that were faithful to Selûne, so lycanthropy wouldn't have been an issue for them. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 20:31:09
|
Wooly, you brought up a very interesting point. I'd like to reply, if I could . . .
I'm replying to the whole thing, but mostly to this point:
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
When you add in things like spellscars, though, you wind up with characters that have extraordinary powers that have just come to them -- they didn't have to practice, or train, or study, or pray. The power is just there. They didn't work for it, and yet they can still do something extraordinary -- and that, for most people, is much harder to swallow than someone who can do incredible things but had to work to be able to do them.
I don't get that impression from the novels or the sourcebooks. Mechanically, characters with spellscars have to take the Student of Plague feat in order to harness their spellscar in a useful way (i.e., through spellscar powers). From there, you take further feats to gain more powers, such it's just like multiclassing (i.e., each of those represents a certain amount of experience, training, or work, just like feats do for any class).
Narrativistically (I'm *sure* that isn't a word, but you know what I mean), the spellscarred characters I've read/written about have needed training as well in order to master their abilities (the 3.5 sorcerer is the nearest applicable comparison). The two scarred characters in Mistshore had to learn to deal with their abilities (the man who had already done so, and mostly just avoided using his main power because he can't control it, and the woman throughout the course of the book)--Jaleigh could talk more to that, but I didn't come away with the impression that they were all of a sudden *empowered*, but rather juiced up with magic that they had to learn (painstakingly) to control.
Now if you'll indulge me while I mention my own writing for a moment . . . (and look away if you're concerned about mild Downshadow spoilers):
[spoilers]
There are three spellscarred characters in Downshadow (or, at least, three who are particularly relevant to the book--I'm not counting Avaereene, who was already a very powerful wizard [CoS 3.5] and was molded by the spellplague):
Shadowbane has an illness similar to CIPA (loss of sensations like pain and temperature; think of the villain from The World is Not Enough) which was not initially caused by the spellplague but *worsened* as a result of contact with active spellplague. Yeah, the scar makes him tough, but at the same time, he almost collapses multiple times, and he expects to have a short lifespan. There is at least one passage in the book where he talks about his grueling struggle against his disease (DS 233-235). He doesn’t do much else with it (like bust out wicked spellplague powers)--mostly, he just tries to live with it. I'd hesitate to call it a "power."
Myrin we know *very* little about, being that she’s an amnesiac and no one seems to know anything about her past. I don’t want to give anything away (as I might want to return to her character one day), but I will say that her past is anything but *easy.* Her personal power is arcane, mostly, and she just has *some* spellplague abilities (albeit powerful ones).
And finally Lady Ilira’s spellscar I again hope to say more about in future books, but she isn't able to control her power (aside from just not touching anyone), making it more a curse than a gift. It's a *plague* for her, and one that doesn't just harm her personally (as with Shadowbane).
The rest of my major and/or supporting characters are unscarred, completely normal Realms heroes/villains (or, at least, as normal as you get in the Realms).
[/spoilers]
All in all, I don’t think spellscars should be perceived as some sort of *spontaneous gift*. I know there was talk way back when the concept was first announced that they were similar to dragonmarks (Eberron), but I don’t see much similarity beyond aesthetic details (maybe, if your mark manifests as a tattoo). Spellscars are a source of power, yes, but only if you’re willing and able to spend the torturous effort to tap into them and learn to use them—much like learning to wield innate sorcery, or mastering wizardry, or even training your muscles. (And I suspect the process is quite painful in some cases--it certainly is in my games/writing.)
And @Ashe:
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
It's not a matter of whether the Spellscar is more curse than blessing, but the fact that they have it and can do something 'different' when they really need to. I chalk it up to the same as lycanthropy and vampirism. Yes, it's a curse, but I've met a lot of players that would gladly take that curse if it made their character more powerful*.
No doubt they would. But it's a multi-classing thing. They aren't as *effective* at the "different" thing they can do, no more than a fighter 5/wizard 5 who finds his spells ineffective can compete with fighter 10 in single combat.
Mechanically, "spellscarred" isn't a template like vampire or lycanthrope: a spellscar is a nasty curse your DM hits you with, and you have to take a feat just to control it, much less actually *use* it.
I don't know if you're familiar with the 4e FRPG, but you have to take one feat [student of the plague] just to know how to *control* your spellscar (and channel it into some minor, useful effect like a speed boost or limited darkvision), then an additional feat per spellscarred power, each of which *replaces* a class power (i.e., you can take the novice power feat to replace one of your class encounter powers with a spellscar encounter power--not an extra power, mind, but a *replacement*). One power per feat (and not bonus powers) represents a substantial investiture and not a terribly good payoff (IMO, multiclassing isn't all that effective in 4e--not that that'll stop me doing it occasionally!).
You can become a spellscar savant as your paragon path, allowing you to take more powers, but if you do that, then you're giving up more powers based on your core class.
From a narrative perspective, it's up to the individual author to show why spellscars aren't all powerful (just another kind of magic). I'm happy with how I did it, though if I'd had the FRPG before deadline, I probably would have had Myrin's wizard spellcasting be more limited (as it is, she's just higher level than she might have otherwise been--like 7th instead of 3rd). And I haven't yet read someone else who made the spellscars seem "all-powerful."
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
Edited by - Erik Scott de Bie on 18 May 2009 20:48:28 |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 20:44:07
|
Well, we still don't know whether Thielan was talking about Spellscars, and whether she or he was even talking about gaming stuff at all (I was the one who brought it up, sorry), but heck, while we're here, right?
Anyway, in game terms, you do have to use feats and so on to realize any mechanical effects from a Spellscar. And with regards to Wooly's concern that "you wind up with characters that have extraordinary powers that have just come to them -- they didn't have to practice, or train, or study, or pray. The power is just there," here's a bit from p. 41 of the FRPG:
quote:
Many creatures have spellscars that don't provide them with special abilities--they're simply disfigured as the result of the Spellplague or its aftermath. In contrast, a spellscarred character, as described here, is someone who has learned how to harness the energy contained in his or her spellscar.
To master a spellscar, you need rigorous mental discipline and the courage to experiment with the energy of the Spellplague and wield it as a tool.
And then there's a bunch of mechanical stuff about how, for game characters, the Spellscar is basically a paragon multi-classing option that lets you swap out (over time) powers from your own class for a few Spellplague related effects. I don't really read "min-max" boards, but from a glance at the headlines I gather that the overall opinion of paragon multi-classing is that it leads to characters who are less powerful than those who don't follow that route.
|
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 20:47:33
|
| Oops! Crossed with Erik! Whom, I notice, did not deny that I could take Shadowbane. |
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 20:53:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
Oops! Crossed with Erik! Whom, I notice, did not deny that I could take Shadowbane.
Tsch. No one could take Shadowbane . . .
Except Rath.
Oh, and Fayne.
Oh and Ilira.
Oh and . . .
(poor Shadowbane!)
Cheers
P.S. Seriously, if you want a book where the hero doesn't always win . . . |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 21:01:46
|
It doesn't matter if the abilities granted by a spellscar are good or not, and it doesn't matter if they have to learn to harness it. The spellscar itself has a spontaneous origin. You can't study to learn how to earn a spellscar, and spellscars aren't the result of some drekkin' powerful ancestor. If you don't have a spellscar, unless you hang out in a plaguechanged area, you're never going to get one. So they are an extraordinary power, even if the power sucks and/or you have to train to use it.
Spellscars simply don't have an origin that works for most people.
I'm really not doing an anti-4E thing, here, either. I'm simply focusing on one published element, and trying to explain how it can bother people. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 18 May 2009 21:03:13 |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 21:15:50
|
Wait, Wooly, now you're confusing me. First you said:
quote:
They didn't work for it, and yet they can still do something extraordinary -- and that, for most people, is much harder to swallow than someone who can do incredible things but had to work to be able to do them.
And now it's:
quote:
...it doesn't matter if they have to learn to harness it.
Which seem to me to run counter to one another.
But even if they don't, well, as Erik outlined and I (inadvertently) echoed, characters simply don't have any powers that they didn't work for, either in fluff terms (the quote from the FRPG, up thread) or in mechanical terms (Erik's summary of paragon tier multi-classing).
No 4E Forgotten Realms game characters, if they're "rolled up" as the rules are written, gain extraordinary powers through a Spellscar that aren't "paid for" in both story terms and mechanical terms.
|
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
Edited by - Christopher_Rowe on 18 May 2009 21:17:37 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 22:06:32
|
You're misreading me. For most characters, they powers and abilities they have are something they had to work for, and that work -- and/or their bloodline -- is the only source of their power.
As I said, anyone can be a priest, or a mage, or a thief, or a warrior. If you have the right bloodline, you can be a sorcerer -- but possession of that bloodline does not automatically grant power.
Spellscars, on the other hand, have no such requirement. Whether or not you can use the power, whether or not the power is a good one to have, the spellscar itself is spontaneous, and not something a person can strive for. That was my original point -- they don't work for the spellscar, but they got it anyway. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 22:20:35
|
| But having a spellscar doesn't necessarily provide any abilities. The text specifically says that many creatures that have them are simply disfigured. So a player choosing to play a character with a Spellscar who does work to gain use of a power through it--with all its inherent disadvantages--is pretty much doing the same as the player choosing to play a sorcerer worked to gain spells through her bloodline. To use your language, the spellscar here is the blood, not the spells. |
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 23:02:12
|
I'm not going to further analyze this point, but I'd like to just state my perspective, as clearly as I can, and then I'll bow out.
Spellscars are a source of magical power. Just like arcane power--just like divine power.
As the rules make quite clear, sometimes they come as the result of being in a plague-scarred area (and there are people who risk their lives in an attempt to get one), sometimes it's hereditary (from an ancestor who had a spellscar), and sometimes it's spontaneous dumb luck (you wander across a patch of spellplague, you're attacked by a spellscarred being, etc).
Once you've got the scar, it's up to you whether you try to use it (and gain the feats to do so) or you just try to do without and bear it.
If anything, spellscars entail MORE responsibility and are tougher on a wielder than other sources of power. Not only do you have to work at using it, but also you have to put up with their curse, not to mention the stigma of having one.
It's like Spider-man, really. He got smacked by dumb luck, bit by a radioactive spider, which gave him new powers. It was up to him whether he learned to use them effectively and whether he strove for good or ill.
And fundamentally, I don't see why that's any harder to buy than "my ancestor was a dragon, so I have sorcery inborn" or "I bound my spirit in a devil pact and now I can cast warlock spells" or "I pray to a god and can heal wounds."
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2009 : 23:45:06
|
The point is that a person in the setting can not choose to have a spellscar. Granted, they can't choose their bloodline, either, but a bloodline is the result of past actions on the part of their ancestors.
If you or I were to find ourselves in the 4E Realms tomorrow, we would be able to choose to be a warrior, or a rogue, or a mage, or a priest. We couldn't just decide to have a spellscar. Even if we decide we want one, and travel to one of the appropriate spots, it's still totally random -- as I understand it, it's not even a guarantee that hanging out in a plaguechanged area will give you one.
That's what sets the spellscars apart: you might have Spider-Man's dumb luck, but there's a larger chance that you won't. Therefore, it is not the same as the abilities gained from classes, and is an extraordinary thing. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 06:03:01
|
| So, wait--you think it's okay for a character to have some advantage because they were born of a certain family, or heck, of a certain race, but not because they worked hard to find some advantage in what's mostly a debilitating condition? |
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 07:22:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
So, wait--you think it's okay for a character to have some advantage because they were born of a certain family, or heck, of a certain race, but not because they worked hard to find some advantage in what's mostly a debilitating condition?
Are you deliberately refusing to see my point? It's not that they work to overcome or harness it, it's that they get this advantage without anyone, anywhere, including them, having done anything to have the scar in the first place. At least with a bloodline, someone in their ancestry chose to get it on with something powerful and to raise the offspring. Spellscars don't even have that.
I'm not arguing this with you any more, until you actually pay attention to what I'm saying.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 15:18:19
|
To swoop back in briefly (I know I said I was out):
I think perhaps you guys are talking past each other? With CR talking about how the spellscars are balanced mechanically (main thrust) and Wooly talking about not being convinced by them from a narrative perspect (main thrust). You're both crossing over into the other's territory at times, but your arguments are, IMO, primarily not on the same field.
Fundamentally, I see it coming down to this: Wooly does not like the abilities one gains from a spellscar because they are fundamentally spontaneous, no matter how much work one has to do to use them. They are not racially inherited or chosen, but rather the accident of fate.
For me, OTOH, that's perfectly fine and makes great sense. To me, fantasy has always had characters who are occasionally godsmacked by fate, or are spontaneously blessed with strange and fantastic powers when they are in the right place at the wrong time (or vice versa), or make some terrible mistake and end up cursed and have to deal.
As I mentioned before, it's a lot like spider-man or (to borrow another superhero example) like the X-men. Spellscarred characters have a "mutation" of sorts (in this case, a disease that has altered them to function differently, rather than a certain gene), and they have to learn and develop their power through rigid mental discipline. Maybe it was inherited, or maybe it was a spontaneous mutation, but whatever the case may be, they have it, they had no *choice* about having it, and they have to deal with it. And that story is compelling to me.
Life occasionally gives you lemons--and it's up to you to make fireballs out of them.
Other points:
I think the rules make it clear that spellscars *can* be inherited (it's only been a century since they first appeared, so we don't really know the long term effects) and *can* be gained either through contact with active plague or just spontaneously at the DM's discretion (so its source can be patterned or seemingly random). So the options are totally open for you as a player.
IMO, a spellscar is a storytelling device like any other and--to me--makes just as much sense as sorcery, warlock-ery, or psionics, or any other sort of innate magic you (for one reason or another) are "blessed" with and have to deal with (though granted, spellscars do seem to seize your life more than the others do). I find spellescars actually *more* compelling (in certain ways) than these other sources of magic--they are more conducive to certain sorts of stories.
But everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, and if it doesn't work for you, it doesn't work.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Richard Lee Byers
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
1814 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 17:34:12
|
I agree with Erik.
For those who may be keeping score, so far, I've got one character with a spellscar: Aoth Fezim. It does give him special abilities, but he had to go through an unpleasant ordeal before he got it under control, so the power wasn't entirely free. And it's not what makes him formidable in a fight. It's his skill as a warmage that does that.
I don't know if I'll create more spellscarred characters. I'm not inherently opposed to it, but there are other aspects of the setting that interest me more. I do think that if you read a pile of 4e Realms novels, and you constantly meet spellscarred characters, you'll be justified in thinking that, as a group, we authors have gone a little overboard with the idea. |
|
|
|
Christopher_Rowe
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
879 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 17:48:04
|
Kudos to Erik for his analysis (and come to think of it, the whole "Radiant Vessel of Thesk" adventure revolves around a character whose the third or fourth in a line of spellscarred). Thanks! And thanks to Richard for his cogent words as well.
Cheers,
Christopher
|
My Realms novel, Sandstorm, is now available for ordering. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 17:52:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers
I do think that if you read a pile of 4e Realms novels, and you constantly meet spellscarred characters, you'll be justified in thinking that, as a group, we authors have gone a little overboard with the idea.
RLB brings up a good point here, though I do hope it doesn't come across that we're flooding the market, as it were.
I think partly it's because it's new, and all of us writing in the 4e Realms have to deal with the spellplague in one way or another (either address it or reject it in our books). Some of us have obviously embraced the concept and explored it in our books (Mistshore and Downshadow are the first ones that spring to mind, though I share Ed's opinion that both can be read and thoroughly enjoyed without caring one whit about the spellplague), while others of us seem to have treated it very little, if at all (such as Steven in Blackstaff Tower--I don't remember spellscars being significant at all in that book).
I suspect that at the moment, it just seems new and thus jarring, and that when the shiny luster fades into the rest of the Realmsian goodness, the concept of spellscars will blend in as just another part of the Realms' broad diversity (like shadow magic, spellfire, etc., etc.), which is part of what makes it so great.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 18:34:05
|
I know that my main objection to it is that it's almost identical in form and function to Eberron's Dragonmarks. I like the idea of Dragonmarks, Warforged and all the stuff that makes Eberron what it is. I don't like that it felt a lot of 'new stuff' introduced into the Realms with 4th Edition feals like them spreading Eberron to other settings.
I appreciate both CR and Wooly's arguments, and the stories I have read with spellscarred characters are well written and show them as vibrant people learning to deal with something beyond their control. However, I just don't feel spellscars belong in the Realms any more than the floating motes or Returned Abeir. I respect those that do like those elements in their Realms, and I'm not asking them to give that up, simply that they respect my likes and dislikes as well. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
LucianBarasu
Fellaren-Krae Co-ordinator
USA
214 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 18:58:47
|
Back on main topic and question,
I think what the OP was getting at, wasn't the spellscar and the nuances of each character portrayed in novels. We're digging too far into it.
I think i know what the Original Poster meant, and I tend to agree.
Like in Eddie's and Elaine's novel, City of Splendors. THe noble kids with their pretty cloaks..didn't have super powers, they did not have uber fighting prowess, they were mere noble teens/youts(cousin vinny)trying to figure out what was going on in the city around them.
Cattie brie. Female. tough from growing up with daddy one-eye. She isn't fantastical. She isn't all powerful. She is a mortal girl with a special bow and quiver (and/or mean sword depending)..
Or even Pikel: Small green bearded dwarf (with supernatural racial abilities, but rarely used) a druid with a club. Yes a spell caster. something we all know and accept in the Forgotten Realms universe as common, but still very much approachable as a character you can relate to.
This is the type of character I am thinking the Original Poster was eluding to. Characters that are easily identifiable and realatable(a word?) anyway you see my point. I think in general, the power"step up" into the 4th edition, while perfectly fine for some, seems to be abundant in every single character written within the "Spell plague years" to date.
No simple blacksmith, who picks up a strange item, that sets off an adventure creating a hero out of a blacksmith.
it's now turned to A hero is born, follow the adventures of heroX, to see him be a hero.
the "human" quality of simple character turned hero is not as evident in 4th edition novels, is the OP's main gripe...
....and I agree. |
Lucian "The Bringer" Barasu
Fellaren Krae Project Co-Ordinator
"Why do you cry?"
"He is Conan, Cimmerian. He won't cry... So I cry for him."
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2009 : 19:25:12
|
@Ashe: Well, *I* for one respect your likes and dislikes, and thank you for sticking by how you feel.
I disagree with you regarding spellscars being identical or even similar to dragonmarks. IMO, the conflation was mostly a result of hype because the concepts *seemed* similar--"mark" and "scar"--but I think when we actually saw the rules and saw the scars in novels, they were totally different. Dragonmarks are a *good* thing to have, denote noble status, and are a result of heredity. Spellscars are a *bad* thing to have, brand you as "less than" your fellows, and are the result of a curse/disease/random fate. Though the mechanics might be superficially similar (i.e., take feats to master your powers), they're otherwise pretty much opposites.
None of that has ANYTHING to do with whether you like them or not. I just don't want it taken as *fact* that the two are one and the same.
I, for one, would never write something that was distinctly Eberron into one of my books just because I thought it was *cool*.
@Lucian (hi LB!): That's a valid point you have there, and I think you captured the OP quite well (did he, Lewton?).
I think we might be too specific even to apply it to 4e FR in particular. There are lots of different kinds of fantasy, from high-powered to low-powered, and FR has always been a high-magic, fairly high-powered setting (Spellfire, anyone?). I don't think dealing with (to borrow the term) superheroes is unique to 4e FR.
That said, there have been lots of very effective, small-scale stories told in the setting, some with people who don't have lots of powers (or at least don't initially). It's a function of what sort of characters you want to read about, and if you want to read about lower-power (as you phrase it, "normal") characters, then more power to you.
As to whether you as a reader can relate to a character, as I said before, that isn't necessarily a function of whether that character just desperately swings a sword around or melts people with beams from her eyes (though if you've got something against high octane magic-users, that's your business). IMO, that's about the writing.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Am I the only one....
