| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| jordanz |
Posted - 28 Apr 2011 : 23:15:00
Seems like there were many notable events the took place before the first mortal breathed in the realms.
Just to name a few:
The Creation of the baernoloths and the the respective champions of Good, Law, Chaos, and Neutrality
"The battle of Pesh"
"The Intervention of the Celestials"
All of these events inspire a ton of curiosity from me. For example, have the Good, Neutral,Chaotic, and Lawful versions of the baernoloths ever been identified? Also would it be safe to assume whomever those races were, they spawned the first Celestials, Modrons, Slaadi etc - races that seem to embody there respective planes concepts of Good Law Choas and Nuetrality.....
What exactly happened during "The Intervention of the Celestials", would love to hear the details f that conflict.
Like wise for the Battle of Pesh and other events like it....
How do you guys feel about this? Do you actully prefer that things be kept "cloudy" so that you can form your own interpetation or would you actually like to have some of this stuff fleshed out?
|
| 17 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Quale |
Posted - 06 May 2011 : 21:48:09
quote:
Originally posted by jordanz
Seems like there were many notable events the took place before the first mortal breathed in the realms.
The Creation of the baernoloths and the the respective champions of Good, Law, Chaos, and Neutrality
All of these events inspire a ton of curiosity from me. For example, have the Good, Neutral,Chaotic, and Lawful versions of the baernoloths ever been identified? Also would it be safe to assume whomever those races were, they spawned the first Celestials, Modrons, Slaadi etc - races that seem to embody there respective planes concepts of Good Law Choas and Nuetrality.....
I think that these events did not take place before the first mortals, cause it's their belief that created the planes and gods. It's just that time is very different in the Astral, e.g. what seems like an eternity in Baator makes for a few thousands years in the Prime, and Asmodeus is a product of civilized belief. Zoomorphic outsiders like should be older, then some truly alien outsiders like obyriths, and the most ancient would be simple like mortai.
No matter how much is fleshed out the past will always be ambiguous, tough I'm not a fan of giving such information to the pcs until they are aware enough of its immensity and how they are fortunate to know it. Detailing the history before the Creator Races would diminish a lot of what makes them special. Also fleshing out parts of ancient civilizations that can't survive as material culture or in some way is useless.
In the outer planes I doubt the baernaloths represent primal evil, going with the theme of the Waste's first layer it's possible there were some virus-like creatures, closer to altraloths. In Abyss there's the obyriths, Baator has Ancient Baatorians, Acheron hassitors, Limbo Ssendam, Mechanus aphanacts, Outlands kamarel. The upper planes have priminals (fan-stuff), mortai, elder titans, Jazirian and an unkown power in Chronias. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 05 May 2011 : 17:54:06
quote:
Originally posted by Paj
Best example I can think of for this was the Planescape Boxed Set: Hellbound, The Blood War. It had 2 sourcebooks, The Dark of the War, which was what actually happened and for the DM only, and the Chant of the War (think thats what it was called) which was for the players and had all sorts of rumours and falsehoods in.
-Don't have that one, but that's pretty cool. I concur, I wish more sourcebooks went in that direction. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 05 May 2011 : 17:00:55
quote:
Originally posted by Knight of the Gate
While I completely understand the opposing viewpoint, I vastly prefer (as a DM) to *know* what happened; barring that, I like to have options. i.e. 'Everyone knows' that *this* happened, while sages and 'the Wise' know the 'real truth' of the matter.
This is actually my preference as well. Basically, I like (or "liked," I have had trouble stirring interest in post-Spellplague lore) to devour every bit of lore I can possibly get my hands on, and not have what really happen obfuscated from the legends that surround it. Maybe that just comes from first being a reader of Realms novels, and then eventually approaching it as a setting for games. |
| MalariaMoon |
Posted - 05 May 2011 : 16:58:03
Personally I like seeing this stuff expanded - the more lore I get the happier I am. For me it only expands story ideas rather than hindering them - I enjoying threading my narratives through the existing histories. Perhaps the further back you go into Realms 'prehistory', the more difficult it is to tie into a modern campaign, but nonetheless it's all worthwhile.
I particularly enjoyed discovering Grsy Richardson's interpretation of the Avian Creator races (their exact name escapes me at present, but it involves a lot of 'a's and 'e's'), which I discovered a month or so ago on this very site. I was able to incorporate elements of that lore into my current campaign set in 1353 DR! |
| Paj |
Posted - 05 May 2011 : 16:25:01
quote:
I'd have every sourcebook written twice; once in the Greenwoodian 'fallible or misleading narrator' style, and another in a more straightforward 'this is what happened, when' style, to be able to use both the truth and popular consensus on an event.
Best example I can think of for this was the Planescape Boxed Set: Hellbound, The Blood War. It had 2 sourcebooks, The Dark of the War, which was what actually happened and for the DM only, and the Chant of the War (think thats what it was called) which was for the players and had all sorts of rumours and falsehoods in.
Unfortunately it would be a massive undertaking to do something like that, an undrtaking I think that WotC would not consider economically viable.
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 04 May 2011 : 07:37:25
But you see, that's where the problem often comes in. The infallible sometimes fall victim to fallibility. |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 04 May 2011 : 06:53:28
While I completely understand the opposing viewpoint, I vastly prefer (as a DM) to *know* what happened; barring that, I like to have options. i.e. 'Everyone knows' that *this* happened, while sages and 'the Wise' know the 'real truth' of the matter. Ideally, I'd have every sourcebook written twice; once in the Greenwoodian 'fallible or misleading narrator' style, and another in a more straightforward 'this is what happened, when' style, to be able to use both the truth and popular consensus on an event. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 03 May 2011 : 06:04:09
One comment on history in RPGs.
I adore conflicting accounts of history, biased sources, and unreliable historical witnesses. However I only like this sort of hazy history when it's done on purpose. I really truly dislike when it happens because of someone being unaware of the source material, that's just sloppy writing. But I'm a freak when it comes to in-game continuity (says the person who did a multiple keyword search through every single Paizo product pdf prior to working on one project...). |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 03 May 2011 : 06:00:56
quote:
Originally posted by Maruluthu Mistrivvin
The battle of Pesh happened in Greyhawk, I don't see how could the pcs find any remains of it
The Intervention of the Celestials, is that when Asmodeus rebelled?
Nope. It was the first major intervention of the celestials in the Blood War (the archons at least). It ended it utter disaster, with something like less than a hundred survivors from an army orders of magnitude larger that first descended into the Gray Waste. What happened was that when the archons intervened, the fiends temporarily stopped fighting one another and turned upon the celestials. Not good.
Since that event, the upper planes as a whole have studiously avoided any direct and/or large scale intervention into the Blood War (the gods also learned a lesson on interfering, but that was a different event or series of events).
See the lower planes timeline in 'Hellbound: The Blood War' |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 May 2011 : 05:43:46
quote:
Originally posted by Azuth
‘Tis true that many things important happened before the rise of mortals. The Dawn Catyclysm comes to mind as one such event.
Actually, though we don't have an official date* for the Dawn Cataclysm, it most certainly did not happen before the rise of mortals -- if Azuth was the first Magister, and we know he was Magister before or around the time of the DC, then mortals were most certainly around.
*(And I say official date, because I dislike the "outside of time" argument and feel they've narrowed it down to a pretty specific timeframe) |
| Azuth |
Posted - 03 May 2011 : 03:04:22
‘Tis true that many things important happened before the rise of mortals. The Dawn Catyclysm comes to mind as one such event. The creator story of the Realms has already been told, with Ao being such an immense power that he willed himself into being out of chaos, and subsequently created the deities, et cetera. The gaps that exist are there on purpose, as I understand it. Ed seems to enjoy giving DMs as much freedom as he can. Although he no longer controls all aspects of the Realms published, reading through the "So Saeth Ed" scrolls sheds a lot of light onto the Realms history and why or why not things have been revealed.
I personally like the balance that exists today. I don't mind a bit more detail now and again, but I'll be honest in my bias and say that I don't give it much credit if it didn't come from Ed. (This wasn't true in the 2E/3E timeline, where I felt Ed was more present in the development, even if he didn't always "win.")
|
| Marc |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 22:14:14
The battle of Pesh happened in Greyhawk, I don't see how could the pcs find any remains of it
The Intervention of the Celestials, is that when Asmodeus rebelled? |
| Dennis |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 11:14:56
Even those so-called omniscient are inconsistent at times. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 07:45:25
I tend to prefer the oldest tomes for early histories, though they sometimes need to be translated from High Gygaxian into Auld Thorass, lol. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 06:25:12
-If things are going to be written from the omniscient third (3e sourcebooks that are sans-narrator, and are just detailing things as they are), I don't want history to be ambiguous, cloudy, hazy, or anything else like that. If things are written from a non-omniscient POV, as from, say, the hand of Elminster, or some sage writing the novel (Evermeet: Island of the Elves, for example)/sourcebook (basically any 2e product), then I have no problem.
-In general, I like historical things being ambiguous, cloudy, hazy, unsure, lies, or whatever else, in certain circumstances. A book like TGHotR that is just supposed to be a timeline, pure and simple (except in the little story blurbs contained throughout), I want all my information, accurate. A book like Elminster's Ecologies, I don't mind the biases, question marks, omissions, conjecture, and so on, because it's supposedly written by Elminster himself- it'd be impossible for him to be wholly omniscient. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 04:56:19
"Cloudy" is good. Heh, even the inconsistencies of the scribes'/historians' records are good. Makes you wonder what really happened. |
| Wenin |
Posted - 29 Apr 2011 : 00:38:02
"prehistory" is relative.
People have played games in many of the eras for the realms.
More is always better. Ignore what you don't like. |
|
|
