| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Markustay |
Posted - 13 Nov 2013 : 16:45:32
So here's my thinking - they really have no intention for doing 'support for all eras'. If they are counting some light 'background material' in products, well, FR has always had that, and a LOT better then anything I've seen of late. I haven't seen any product actually set in the past (as in, pre-4e era). The other thing we've seen is a bunch of undated material, but once again, I don't think that really counts (because we could have always done that as well - we didn't need their permission). If I wanted to adapt un-canon lore (apocryphal in this case, because it is canon, but undated canon), I could farm other settings for stuff.
So, since I am pretty certain we are NOT getting what a lot of us here were hoping for (a true compromise), I am thinking that there may yet be something worth salvaging - the 'back & forth' story. Elaine proved to be a master of this, with her Evermeet novel, and Ed (with others) have done this as well, in the Cormyr novels, and elsewhere.
What I think could work are stories set in two different time periods, with characters in both, that somehow 'interact through time' (either directly or indirectly). The final outcome of one story effects the other. Like I said, this has been done in FR aplenty, but I think if nearly everything was written in this manner, it could help to save The Realms moving forward.
So if you write a story about a tiefling in the 1480's - and it really doesn't matter how good the story is - tying it to events in the past (and detailing those events) would help me decide to buy such books. The current crop of stories need to be 'anchored', and I don't feel as if they are. They are just floating in some sort of post-Spellplague limbo, that most of us know very little about (or care to).
I had thought that pulling characters out of the past might work, but I can see now this is very comic-bookish, and a lot of us are already offended by how much it's occurring. We need those old characters, but we need them in their own timeline - cross-over (what I call 'back & forth') stories are the way to go, IMHO.
If we see Khelben in a novel, lets see him back in the 1300's, working on some 'clandestine plan' that will see fruition some time a century later... when the other half of the story is happening. I want cause & effect, not Michael Bay-ish, super-Sundering, laser light shows. You want to grow a garden, you have to tend to the roots as well; you can't just take care of what you see in front of you. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Nov 2013 : 14:24:40
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
quote:
The first time I ever heard Ed say--in no uncertain terms, mind--"the Realms must change" was in person at GenCon, when he introduced the Spellplague to those in attendance at a Realms seminar.
This actually disturbs me to no end. Ed is on record (in a widely watched interview) as saying he was upset with the changes, and yet, he towed the company line at the time. I know he didn't have much choice but it still bothers me. How are we to know the same isn't happening now? My optimism just became more cautious. 
How are we sure the same isn't happening now? Well, when he told me he was excited about what was coming, it was unprompted, and it was in a private email exchange between he and I. Unless a WotC person was literally looking over his shoulder at the time, he had no reason at all to toe the company line. And he has, on prior occasions, said things that did not toe the company line. So I am quite confident that when he told me he was excited, that he meant it.
Now, for his quote at the time of the Spellplague -- saying the Realms had to change is not endorsing it being blown up. I can say my hairstyle needs to change, and simply get a haircut -- I don't have to shave it all off. It is my belief -- and I *think* he has stated it elsewhere -- that Ed stayed aboard during the 4E era because he otherwise wouldn't have had any ability to steer things in the setting.
To use another analogy, when it becomes obvious your ship is about to hit an iceberg, you can take your hands off the wheel entirely and let the ship be destroyed, or you can frantically steer off to one side, in hopes of controlling the impact, keeping the ship afloat, and getting past that obstacle. Please note that this is just an analogy, and not a comment on any edition. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 16 Nov 2013 : 13:53:32
Okay, on that note I am going solely by my own personal experience with the novels - EVERYONE I knew that read FR novels (a number somewhere around 30) NO LONGER READ THEM, including myself. To be perfectly honest, many of those folk 'outgrew' D&D and FR before 4e even reared its head, and thats a big part of it (and skewing my results, so to speak). However, part of the reason at least a few them quit reading in the first place was this whole 'escalation' thing that was going on, with 'bigger & badder' RSE's every few months. That is a completely different problem then the one I am trying to resolve with this thread subject (and one that I hope also gets addressed, because they have promised that The Sundering will be the 'last hurrah' for the RSE's).
I am also friends with many of the authors (not 'best buds' by any stretch of the imagination - more like Facebook/internet friends, but I DO talk to them). In fact, after some of the harsh things I have said, I sometimes wonder why they stay friends with me - I realize being blunt can be pretty damn insulting, and I am sorry... I AM from NY. 
And through the things they've said (directly, and indirectly, through blogs and posts on forums), it seems that WotC is much more 'picky' of late with what they want to publish, and in some cases, published authors have even been down-graded to a straight-to-Ebook' format. Now, we all know what it means when movies go 'straight to video', and I get the feeling that this is the case with Ebooks as well. Sadly, this seems like a strike against the authors, but its more of a 'sign of the times'. Whats happening in the publishing industry is the same thing happening in the Toy & Game industry, and just about all forms of retail (I have personally seen it at Home depot and Walmart) - large corporations no longer want to sell 'okay-selling products', they only want best-sellers. In retail they have this arbitrary stupid system called 'shelf real-estate' to determine if a product is worth still carrying (each shelf has to make a certain amount per month). This is most ludicrous and unrealistic thing I have every seen in business - companies only want to selling 'winners'. Well, goodie for them - thats what everyone wants, but it just doesn't happen. You should see the hell I go through when I try to get parts for something at Home Depot! My point is, not everyone can be a RAS, and they need to understand that - a shared-world can't revolve around one author all the time.
Okay, enough side-tangent business 101. We all know corporate muckity-mucks live in Asgard and sip Nectar and fly around in their private jets... and have no clue what the real world is like.
So part of the problem with the books (including sourcebooks here) is that they ONLY want to publish (in hard-copy) 'winners', so they look at what has sold in the past (both authors and subject-matter) and decide, "Yeah! More of THAT!" What that does is leave us with a never-ending cycle of regurgitated crap, whether it be Drizzt or Waterdeep, and we will never see anything new, because they can't bank on it.
So what does all of that have to do with the novel line? I think we are all aware of some 'smelly' novels that made it past the editor in the past, and like it or not, they are now part of our 'canon'. Hit-or-miss, we had to accept it all, and that was because they weren't so particular about what was published. Now they ARE, which means far less books are getting published then were in the 1e/2e/3e era, and far less books means far less income from the novel dept. It isn't just us not buying them, its also them not printing them. The big problem with that is that they really have nothing to base any of that on, other then one or two guy's opinions about what they think fans will like. Sometimes a novel they think would be bad could turn into the greatest hit - we need those 'smelly' novels to weed-out the good from the bad. You just can't do that ahead of time - its insane that they think you can.
And thats what I base my "the novel sales are sagging' commentary on. Personal observations, snippets said here and there by people who actually know whats going on, and by being 50 years old living in the very heart of 'the rat-race' (NY) and knowing precisely how everything works, and how these types of decisions are made (and sadly, why they fail). Its a self-defeating, downward spiral. Companies CAN'T decide what fans are going to like - its IMPOSSIBLE! They think they can, but they can't. For a good example of this, read the story behind J.K. Rowling getting her first Harry Potter novel published - if it wasn't for a little girl who just happen to be in the right place at the right time, we would never have gotten that series of books - she just kept getting turned down (because idiot publishing houses looked at it and said, "this will never sell").
They have to stop selling us what they want, and sell us what WE want. The catch-22 is that we won't know what we want until they hit upon it, and given the current way things are done - only choosing things that have sold well before - that CAN'T happen. Focusing on one era moving forward is putting all their eggs in one basket - a basket that I think is pretty-patched up and could break again at any moment. If they spread the stories around - either by doing multi-era stories like I suggested in this thread, or by doing stories set 'all over the place' (time-wise) - then I think they will cover more ground with the fans, and have a better chance of success.
@SirUrza - stories don't have to be about the 'big guns' of the setting. Many of us have been clamoring for novels set around major historic events, like some of the wars of the past. Every novel doesn't have to be about Khelben or Elminster or Drizzt, I just want them to use FR's rich history, not just put it on a shelf and keep grinding forward. Hell, one of the best FR books ever written (if not THE best) is Elaine's Evermeet novel, and that covered a time-span of 30K+ years! I think more like that would be unbelievably awesome. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 16 Nov 2013 : 10:33:55
(Warning: preachy wall of text follows. Ye've been duly warned.)
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
This actually disturbs me to no end. Ed is on record (in a widely watched interview) as saying he was upset with the changes, and yet, he towed the company line at the time. I know he didn't have much choice but it still bothers me. How are we to know the same isn't happening now?
Well it is happening now.
How can it not?
Consider: TSR, and later WotC, have always been in control.
I suppose you could say that during this time Ed has always toed the line too. This even though TSR and (of course) WotC made several decisions that (as I understand it), were Ed in charge, he wouldn't have made.
But that's not a mark against him.
On the contrary, it's a feather in his cap.
Think about that for a second. Happy or unhappy, for almost thirty years now he's stuck with it.
Mistakes and errors and contradictory information finding its way into sourcebooks and novels...no problem, he stuck with it.
Editors having to chop his stories because of TSR's restrictive code of ethics...he stuck with it.
Personal and family illnesses...he stuck with it.
When they dropped the Spellplague idea (well, bomb) on him, he stuck with it.
Even after quite a few people said "no thanks" to the post-Spellplague Realms and went on to give an emphatic "No!" to nearly every single new Realmslore product he (and others) have produced, he stuck with it.
And because he did, consider what's come out of it: we've gotten a lot of good Realmslore lately and been given a chance (through the Forging the Realms articles and Elminster's Forgotten Realms) to learn even more about the Realms as he first envisioned it.
Because Ed had the persistence and patience to wait for WotC to come around (tip of the hat to Bob Salvatore) we have the opportunity to reap the rewards, provided we're smart enough to stick around for it and wait to see what they do first before passing judgment.
So if we get multi-era novels like Markus is asking for, well that's great.
But if not, that's OK too, because the time of the 1300s has past and whether or not I have fun isn't contingent on WotC producing products for that small slice of time.
I choose to follow Ed's example, because he's proven that persistence pays off.
I'm sticking with the Realms.  |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 16 Nov 2013 : 08:15:02
quote:
The first time I ever heard Ed say--in no uncertain terms, mind--"the Realms must change" was in person at GenCon, when he introduced the Spellplague to those in attendance at a Realms seminar.
This actually disturbs me to no end. Ed is on record (in a widely watched interview) as saying he was upset with the changes, and yet, he towed the company line at the time. I know he didn't have much choice but it still bothers me. How are we to know the same isn't happening now? My optimism just became more cautious. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 16 Nov 2013 : 06:52:58
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
Uhm, i don't know if i should post this,
In my experience, if you're not sure then it's better not to post.
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Something, mind, that Ed has said must change.
That's what makes it alive.
Please refrain from giving biased meanings to Ed's words (snip).
Funny you should say that.
The first time I ever heard Ed say--in no uncertain terms, mind--"the Realms must change" was in person at GenCon, when he introduced the Spellplague to those in attendance at a Realms seminar.
Since then that concept has been repeated in Forging the Realms articles and demonstrated in "Ed Greenwood Presents: Elminster's Forgotten Realms".
The information I gave isn't biased. It's factual.
#########
I'm confused by the assertion that the novel lines "aren't popular."
WotC has been producing 4E Realms novels at a pretty steady pace. They even ponied up the money to turn current and prior novels into audio books.
The one thing WotC has done consistently is follow the money.
How does it follow that they novels aren't popular? |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 17:06:57
Apologies to all for my part in derailing the conversation earlier in this thread.
On topic. I am very skeptical that the novel line can successfully join the two Realms' eras. Markus' idea of writing novels is likely the best route to take, but none of the possible routes are ideal. IMO, we should have some novels that cater to all. That is, some novels written strictly in the pre-4e era (and maybe in pre-2e and 3e as well) with other novels written in the 4e and 5e eras IN ADDITION to those novels that move back and forth (such as the Cormyr and Evermeet novels). That way, everyone gets a little something of their preferance. But I don't see that happening...so, in the end, Markus' idea holds the most merit (and the most likely rode to take if WotC wants the novel line to continue to be successful).
As to characters. Although I think The Companions was one of RAS's best books (top 5 for me along with the first two Dark Elf novels and the first two Crystal Shard novels), too many characters being 'preserved' from earlier editions requires too much suspension of belief, even for a high-fantasy setting. I don't have a huge problem with it...but it will get tiresome for many readers if it's over done. I'm okay with some characters being 'rewritten' as descendants but, again, too much of it will get tiresome (I'm not sure if that's even been done TBH...I'm just saying it could be problematic).
I do want to see an new Azoun who is a 'mirror image' of Azoun IV because I really like that guy. I would like to see the types of antics he got into when he was younger and see first hand how he was molded into the king he became (since Vangy is still around I see this as doable).
I also want the Chosen back (all of them, but especially Khelben) and I don't care how tiresome 'preserving' them would be...at least they are immortal (or close to it).
There is so much more I could write that I would likely derail the conversation again (like all of the nuked lands...that one really gets me blood boiling) so I wont go there. All of this leads to the internal tug-o-war I do with the setting these days. I long for the original feel of the Realms and yet I have to realize the unlikelihood of its return (mostly because so much was nuked). So, I remain cautious in my optimism. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 16:56:50
While Markustay idea of dual timelines for novels was catchy, I said originally it was a limited format.
I don't expect "new" stories set in the past. I doubt we'll see Elaine come back and finish her tales of Arilyn and Danilo. How the Drizzt and Elminster novels were written pretty much leaves little to the imagination for new stories set in the past that don't amount too anything but filler. And to be honest, I think having novels written about whole new character set in the past will just confuse people.
But that said, there are characters and "time" write additional and/or final adventures.
Do I see that happening, absolutely not.
As far as the supplements go, I've said my peace about them. If The North box set is more useful to me then the Realms Next supplement for The North (assuming they make one) then I'll by another box set to keep them from disintegrating from use. |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 15:51:54
The problem I see with the idea of pre-4e era support, novel-wise, is one of an almost nihilistic futility. Almost. For me, it wouldn't matter, since the Spellplague is still there. It's why prequels tend not to work very well. You know what eventually happens, so any attempt to create suspense is more or less wasted.
Sure, homebrewing solves that well enough in a game, you can ignore it as you please....but the novels can't do that. The Spellplague/4e Realms will happen. They have to follow published canon.
That's my thoughts on it anyway. I'm sure others feel similarly. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 14:02:43
@Diffan - I will probably run D&D using the 5e rules when they come out, unless I can't find anyone willing to play them (that happened to me with 4e... which was no problem, really, since I didn't want to run it anyway). I have always been an 'early adopter' of the newest rules, and enjoy teaching young people the game; using an 'old edition' to do that is counter-productive. Fortunately, in the case of 3e, Paizo made sure it didn't become an 'old edition'. It is still current, and people still enjoy using it.
Hopefully 5e rules will be 'good enough', and enough time will have passed since 3e's release that people are actually ready for another version this time. I hope so - I don't want to run Pathfinder, I want to run D&D. So long as 5e looks and feels like (pre-4e) D&D, then that will happen.
But this thread was not supposed to be another 'bash 4e' thread, and certainly NOT a 'bash 5e' thread - it was supposed to be a discussion about what kind of books I think would help 'heal the wound' that separates the split fanbase. I want to enjoy Realms fiction, but I don't want to read about this 'new era' I feel is STILL being rammed down our throats. When they announced 'support for all eras' I was one of the first to start singing their praises... but what I've seen - undated articles, old edition reprints, and some new adventures with very generalized, non-specific fluff - isn't what I signed up for... thats 4e all over again, with a nod to the old editions, but no true support.
___________________________________________________________________________________
My idea for this thread was for authors to write stories for the rest of us - the ones that really have no interest in the post-1400's world. If a 3rd to half of a book did 'flashbacks' to earlier times, and showcased people I DO care about, then I would find them worth purchasing... and maybe, JUST MAYBE, I will also start to become interested in those new characters.
Bringing some of those old characters forward in time is just a 'bandaid', IMHO. Its jarring, and its not what I want at all. If the novels continue to ONLY be about the Spellplague era, then people will continue not to read them. The new fans - the people who came onboard in 4e - are almost entirely gamer-only. Its the 'old guard' that reads the novels, and yet, they haven't wrapped their minds around that at all. They are targeting their novels at a fanbase who doesn't want to read them, for the most part. The very few 4e FR players I know (my bro-in-law's son and his friends) don't read FR novels, and have no intention of ever doing so. Its rather simple, if you want to hit a target, you have to know what you are aiming at. The current crop of novels are being written for a non-existent group of (novel) fans, and for some bizarre reason the WotC guys haven't figured that out yet.
In fact, that might be the perfect solution - have the gaming material continue forward in the post-apocalyptic Realms, and write novels in the 1e/2e/3e Realms. Of course, they will never do that... which is a shame, because it would work. To me, reading a post-1400's book is like reading a graphic novel about a car-wreck that killed your whole family; why the heck would anyone ever want to do THAT? Thats just picking at a fresh scab. |
| Firestorm |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 12:30:35
There was a reason I did not jump on the spell plague train. Yes I disliked the idea of the time jump and killing characters but I was excited to see how some authors handled it.
Truthfully, when you ran a campaign in halruaa and another mulhrohand with that pantheon, and suddenly both areas get nuked, I just do not see how they will fix it for me. I had 2 friends with characters they built over years suddenly decided they don't want to do this anymore.
Are they going to un-nuke halruaa and bring back horus-re/set?
Globally, they decimated a lot of places people had invested time in. Elaine Cunningham from what I recall, felt like her king's councillors trilogy was now moot.,etc
|
| Diffan |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 10:47:13
Like Wooley, I can only form opinions on what the designers have said and done. From a purely mechanics standpoint it does appear that they are trying to bring back that 'old school' feeling. Whether or not that attitude will transfer over to their campaign setting design is anyone's guess by it does look like they're trying to bring back a particular crowed. So far I've been pleased with most of the post-spellplague realms so I can only hope they continue on that track. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 10:29:20
Don't know why but the order of the quotes is messed up in the above post of mine.
Well it seems to still make sense, hope no one gets confused. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 10:25:18
Uhm, i don't know if i should post this, i'll leave up to the mods to nuke this post of mine if it sounds too harsh or confrontational or something.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I find it odd that people repeatedly extol the virtues of Realms history but lament the current (changed) face of the Realms and loss of characters, when the Realms, going back in time, both geographically and in terms of characters, was vastly different from a geological perspective and saw the rise and fall of legions of interesting characters, of whom we've been introduced to only the least fraction.
This seems like you saying "Hey we ignored a thousand characters, we can ignore a hundred more" ... and unless you didn't notice, more than half the questions in Ed's and other authors/designers threads are about "who was X?" "what's become of Y?" ecc ... , all firmly anchored in the past. Because those past characters shaped the Realms and understanding them better meant understanding the 1300s better.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
If all of Realms history is a loaf of bread, the mid to late 1300s era is one very tiny slice. There's a whole lot of loaf left, going backward and forward.
There is no going foward now that the histories of Amn and Calimshan have been trashed: hordes of genasi? in the only land of Faerun with the laws (and the means to enforce such laws) that restrict planar contacts, teleportations and elemental magics? Laws that were there since the end of the ONE AND ONLY Era of Skyfire (as in 7500 years ago)? Or we want to talk about Amn, a land of trade and commerce that lost half it's territory (9/10 if you count New Amn) and it's biggest source of income (New Amn), a land were secrecy was of utmost importance and now we have the ruling council with houses sponsored by the Shadow Thieves and the Cowled Wizards (both clandestine organizations) with the Cowled Wizard sponsored one that did not exist before (house Selemchant?!? REALLY??!? because reading previous lore was hard ...)?
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I see comments about how the vast number of characters and their stories are "all gone," and I'm left wondering if the people who make these statements even bother to read anything Realms related these days.
I've collected names from about 80% of Ed's Eye on the Realms articles and two of his last three Elminster novels. Do you know how many unique names that sums up to?
About 650*. Not a small number, that, and it includes a ton of interesting people and their stories, some of whom have been around since before the 1300s and have always been a part of the Realms (including cabals, secret groups of monsters, you name it) but that never saw the light of day until now.
So what? How many of those are inextricably connected to the Spellplague and the 1400s? We ha wild talents ("spellscars") before, we had a host of interesting organizations and cults before, we had Jimmy the Smith and Jhonny the Watchman before, saying that you found another one hunderd War Wizard names is not much different than me presenting one hundred one-session NPCs to my players (i'm sure Ed knows off the top of his head the genealogies of HIS NPCs and their stories and their families' stories magnitudes better than what i can ever possibly do for even a single NPC but that doesn't make Named War Wizard n° 356 that appears to yell "Duck!" at Caladnei before being blasted to ashes any more important than any smith, watchman, butcher or bandit without a name).
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
But strangely, to some fans these characters and groups don't count, even though they very much would had they been introduced in prior books (pre-4E Realms).
And here's the catch, i bet that almost every name on your list culd be ported to the 1300s without having to nuke the Realms from orbit with the Spellplague (that's exactly what i'm doing with a lot of "Eye on the Realms" events/characters/organizations). So what's better? Having an interesting organization inside an interesting context full of other interesting organizations anchored on solid geographical and historical facts or having interesting organizations with half (and i'm being generous) the interactions and connections and rivalries?
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Lastly, much of the work Ed has done of late has centered on describing the Realms as it's always been, up and down the centuries since humans spread throughout the continent. The historical information on places in the Realms lightly touched on in previous editions, the information on trade, on how people live and survive, how mercantilism effects the Realms...that's all applicable to any era you might care to play in, but almost nobody talks about it, even though that work has gone a long way towards knitting past and present together and showed how big events like the Spellplague don't necessarily change the true face of the Realms.
And that's exactly why the "Eye on the Realms" and the "Backdrops" and the "Forging the Realms" and some of the lore heavier adventures have some traction with me and i try to incorporate them in the 1370s. Without Spellplague and timejump i would have a lot less fine tuning to do, a lot less work to port things.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I realize people have their era preferences just like they have their game rules preferences, and they're giving feedback with good intentions.
Uh, thanks, I guess? You giving us the "benefit of the doubt", how generous of you ...
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
It just doesn't make sense to me that people can ask for more, yet insist anything new isn't really of the Realms (or of use) unless it is specifically called out as having been set in a very narrow window of time.
Problem is, the Spellplague and timejump made it so if we want to have the new lore go hand in hand with the old and respect it we have to scrutinize it, select the "good" stuff and adapt it. So when we are not "in the mood" or if we have not enough time you bet that the new shiny will be ignored since the old shiny was better and can work perfectly alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I mean, that window of time didn't magically spring into being. It's part of something larger.
The 1470s happened exactly like that: *WHAM* Spellplague *WHAM* timejump and here you go, something artificial largely removed from the past. And just to be clear, with no disrespect intended towards Ed and the others, having past characters pop out of the blue is not the same as having a reasonable connection to the past.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Something, mind, that Ed has said must change.
That's what makes it alive.
Please refrain from giving biased meanings to Ed's words, the changes brought to us by 4e were drastic and catatrophic and he himself wasn't all that happy with them.
By all means, let's wait for this new changes and let's see were they take us, but as the saying goes "hope for the best but prepare for the worst".
Change for change's sake wasn't a smart move in the past, now there are a lot of reasons to change, let's see where things go. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 15 Nov 2013 : 08:21:07
I find it odd that people repeatedly extol the virtues of Realms history but lament the current (changed) face of the Realms and loss of characters, when the Realms, going back in time, both geographically and in terms of characters, was vastly different from a geographic/map perspective and saw the rise and fall of legions of interesting characters, of whom we've been introduced to only the least fraction.
If all of Realms history is a loaf of bread, the mid to late 1300s era is one very tiny slice. There's a whole lot of loaf left, going backward and forward.
I see comments about how the vast number of characters and their stories are "all gone," and I'm left wondering if the people who make these statements even bother to read anything Realms related these days.
I've collected names from about 80% of Ed's Eye on the Realms articles and two of his last three Elminster novels. Do you know how many unique names that sums up to?
About 650*. Not a small number, that, and it includes a ton of interesting people and their stories, some of whom have been around since before the 1300s and have always been a part of the Realms (including cabals, secret groups of monsters, you name it) but that never saw the light of day until now.
But strangely, to some fans these characters and groups don't count, even though they very much would had they been introduced in prior books (pre-4E Realms).
Lastly, much of the work Ed has done of late has centered on describing the Realms as it's always been, up and down the centuries since humans spread throughout the continent. The aforementioned historical information on people and places in the Realms lightly touched on in previous editions, the information on trade, on how people live and survive, how mercantilism effects the Realms...that's all applicable to any era you might care to play in, but almost nobody talks about it, even though that work has gone a long way towards knitting past and present together and showed how big events like the Spellplague don't necessarily change the true face of the Realms.
I realize people have their era preferences just like they have their game rules preferences, and they're giving feedback with good intentions.
It just doesn't make sense to me that people can ask for more, yet insist anything new isn't really of the Realms (or of use) unless it is specifically called out as having been set in a very narrow window of time.
I mean, that window of time didn't magically spring into being. It's part of something larger.
Something, mind, that Ed has said must change.
That's what makes it alive.
*Note this doesn't include characters from any of the 4E Realms sourcebooks, any other 4E Realms author's characters nor the NPCs listed in Ed's Forging the Realms articles. |
| Farrel |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 19:59:47
I've been keeping a very low profile in regards to saying anything about 5e, and what it means to the realms. After being singled out for a comment that I made about the shoddy stewardship in 4e.
I don't read the novels now. I did collect them quite rabidly at one point, but felt that as though the 3e/3.5e novels were all about one-upmanship, from the majority of the authors, to see who could create the most uber villain etc. - They smashed plot hooks without sowing the seeds for others - They played power games with NPCs that I believe were intended for the players to come up with their own ideas for. Meh...
There are so many viable eras of play within the history of The Forgotten Realms - Yet, apart from Arcane Age: Netheril, we've seen absolutely nothing. I've always wanted to be able to run campaigns in the early days of Faerun and, if necessary, carry them through to the current time (1348-1370ish)
I'm still waiting to pass judgment on 5e - I love the old realms of 1e/2e/3e/3.5e - But, I want lore for all eras of play.
If they concentrate on only the events after the Sellplague then they've lost me.
If they regurgitate all the same old sourcebooks, and cities, that have been done to death, specifically for 5e, then they've lost me.
If the books are all large font and white space then, again, they've lost me.
SirUrza puts it well.
My take on his last sentence would be:
If the supplements don't have proper support for 1340/1350/1360/1370 Realms play then they're useless to me. |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 19:43:30
I have similar feelings as Markustay (or not). I won't pre-judge 5e, but I am neither particularly excited or hopeful about it. 4e ruined both brands for me (I won't delve into details unless asked via PM, I have no wish to spark any edition war flames).
I signed up for the 5e playtest material and can say I'm honestly unimpressed. Likewise my feelings for the Realms are similarly 'blah' (which I'll admit is unfair, since there's been so little material to even be 'blah' about).
Ultimately, I think I've just completely moved on from D&D and the Realms as products I purchase and that is what feeds my feeling of them now. From time to time I peek in to see what's going on with D&D and the FR, but ultimately I doubt I'll ever return as a consumer of content of either. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 18:59:11
I've been trying to avoid say this because it's very impulsive, but simply put about Realm-next or 5e Realms.. the "feel" or any other buzz word they're going to use doesn't matter to me.
There's a big hole in the map that leads to the underdark where land used to be, there's a new race I don't care for running around who come from lands I again don't care about (and was never given a good reason to care about.) There are nations and organizations that have been devastated or don't exist anymore. Gods and their followers have been destroyed or obliterated. Lastly there are characters that have died and been replaced by distant relatives.
They could take any of the campaign box sets, copy and paste them word for word and just update the proper nouns and I still wouldn't care.
My Realms is the Realms they nuked to make it generic for any number of reason.
If the supplements don't have proper support for 1360/1370 Realms play then they're useless to me.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 18:43:04
quote:
Originally posted by SirUrza
Difference with Star Wars 7 is different people are running the show Wooly.
And the people running the show with the 4E Realms are not the ones running the show with the 5E Realms. Not only that, but this time, we know they're making a point to involve Ed.
Most of the people responsible for inflicting the 4E Realms on us are no longer at WotC. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 18:01:53
Difference with Star Wars 7 is different people are running the show Wooly. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 16:48:33
To me, the 5E Realms won't be here until we have the 5E FR campaign book. Since they've not even announced a title or release date for it, nor for any other 5E FR products, it's not here.
Heck, all we have for Star Wars episode 7 is a release date and a blurb about the type of characters they are looking for -- that doesn't stop me from being excited about it, and it doesn't make me think that it's just going to be a rehash of the prequels or Clone Wars cartoon or anything like that. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 16:28:02
The difference between us, I think, is that I feel 5e FR is already here - we've been getting samplings of it for the past year or so. you are still waiting for something 'grander' - something i fear may never arrive.
I hope there is more to it then that, but I am starting to get the feeling that what we see is all that there is. Until they leak a little more, 'The Sundering' is just another underwhelming 'Rise of the Underdark' or 'Abyssal Plague' - its just another way to market products. We need something concrete, because all the hype that they generated with the 5e announcement (D&Dn) is wearing-out, and people have gone back to whatever corners of the gamingverse they were hiding in before. Their 'window of opportunity' is closing fast, if it hasn't already.
WOW US, thats all I am saying. Gencon 2012 got me excited again - I need another 'shot in the arm'. Show us something we can sink our teeth into, and leave us drooling for more. They started off very well, but they are loosing momentum, fast. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 16:17:35
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
FR Novels don't make me happy anymore - I'm really afraid they never will. Thats why I started this thread - I WANT to be a fan of the novels gain, but I want to read about events during the setting I fell in love with. The new setting is not that setting, and I think hoping that 5eFR will be that setting is asking for too much. What I have learned from all this is that its not the geography that makes a setting a setting, its the people and their stories... and those are all gone now. Even if you bring a host of old characters back, we just get some weird 'Khelben in space' type of scenario, and it just cheapens everything that happened in the old setting.
When we have absolutely zero published 5E Realms material, how can you say the new version is not the same as the old version? When we have designers specifically stating they want to get back to the original feel of the setting, how can you say they've failed without reading what they've done? And why is it apparently impossible for them to create new and interesting characters?
I get not being into the 4E Realms -- I've taken more fire than anyone else here on that particular topic, and have in fact been personally insulted for my stance. But that doesn't mean that all of the characters from that time period are not worth reading about, and it doesn't mean there weren't good stories told during that time period.
We know a lot of the changes from the 4E era are going to be undone. We know that the designers want to go back to the 1E/2E feel of the setting. We know that the setting's creator is excited about what is coming. To me, all of that is more than enough to justify a wait and see approach.
I can also understand sharing what you'd like to see. I just can't understand the rush to dismiss things that don't even exist yet for not meeting your desires.
I do not think that asking for the 5E Realms to have the same feel as the 1E/2E Realms is asking for too much. It's what they've promised to try to do. If you like the earlier eras, I think you owe it to yourself to at least see what they do before dismissing it.
If you want to be a fan of the novels again, wait until there are some novels to read, and then make your decision. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 15:43:52
Which means pouring more money into a division that Hasbro would rather just let die... and the only reason why we still have a D&D is because it shares a 'brand' with MtG, which is the ONLY part of WotC Hasbro really has any interest in - thats right from about a dozen 'horses mouths' at last years Gencon, and not a 'hush-hush' type of thing - they were VERY open about that. Basically, if MtG suddenly drops in popularity, D&D disappears forever.
Paizo is a new 'superpower' in the gaming world, and WotC is the 'declining empire'. Those rarely ever 'bounce back' - they are hemorrhaging human resources ATM. You can't build a shiny new aircraft carrier with an erector set.
HOWEVER, if the novel line suddenly undergoes a renaissance, and FR takes-off again (by getting back all those old fans, dammit!), THEN Hasbro may decide to start pouring money back into D&D.
Like it or not, that is where we are at - we NEED for the novel line to become popular again, otherwise I just see us bailing-out a sinking ship with a few leaky paper cups. Which is why I started this thread - connect the two settings together - get those fans BACK - and we just may be able to get this old tub back to port, safe and sound.
Now when the heck did I go all 'nautical' with my analogies?
I usually go the computer/tech route. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 15:12:09
I am (very) cautiously optimistic for 5e. I wont go so far as to say that Ed's "excitement" over the upcoming Realms tips the scales for me (he is biased and it's in his best interest to promote his world, after all)...but it does give me HOPE. Ed has always come across as genuine when discussing his thoughts and opinions, and that's enough to make me optimistic.
Now, as I see it, the problem is we need MORE of an appetizer for the upcoming material. Wizbro has a few adventures, novels, videos, summits and interviews discussing the 5e Realms...and yet they have revealed very little and the hype is, well, anti-climactic, IMO. There is still too much 'hush-hush' surrounding the new Realms and the advertising is a bit lean.
While I agree we should wait to pass judgement until the product line is released in full, I understand Markus' frustration. For me, that frustration centers on the lack of information and marketing. Sorry to say it, but Paizo is eating Wizbro's lunch. Hopefully Wizbro can once again set the industry standard but I think the only way to accomplish that is to bring back some of the 'old' crew and require new writers to do their homework on the lore before writing anything (novels or otherwise).
Just my two coppers. Cheers. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 13:43:32
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Markus I take it you've given up on giving up on Alusair as a character?
Was the double-negative on-purpose, or a typo? 
I haven't given up on Alusair - there is a great story to be told there. Filfaeril as well - they are both amazing characters, and the Realms needs its 'strong women' back.
Here's the thing - when I do a map project, I delve deep into old FR lore and maps, which unfortunately has the side-effect of irking the heck out of me when I realize how much great material was completely ignored or over-written over the years. I have seen nothing that looks like the old Erik Boyd or Steven Schend material... yet. When I see something that actually feels like those old sourcebooks, I will be happy.
FR Novels don't make me happy anymore - I'm really afraid they never will. Thats why I started this thread - I WANT to be a fan of the novels gain, but I want to read about events during the setting I fell in love with. The new setting is not that setting, and I think hoping that 5eFR will be that setting is asking for too much. What I have learned from all this is that its not the geography that makes a setting a setting, its the people and their stories... and those are all gone now. Even if you bring a host of old characters back, we just get some weird 'Khelben in space' type of scenario, and it just cheapens everything that happened in the old setting.
So, if they do these type of hybrid novels - going back and forth between two periods (and many have done this before, like Ed and Elaine, with aplomb), I WILL READ THEM, and there is a chance I will get drawn into the new stories about the new characters. I truly want to like 5e FR, but it is hard to do so, when looking at the the big mess we just left behind. They need to embrace the 'support for all eras' thing, and not just in game products.
Novels based in other game-worlds tend to be historic in nature (the few I have read, anyway), so why not go that route? Why must FR novels forever be driving the setting forward? Thats counter intuitive, IMHO. As soon as a novel takes place somewhere, it has made some game product obsolete, and that is how FR 'gets broken'. |
| SirUrza |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 03:03:45
You know what, Markustay had the right idea. Nevermind. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 14 Nov 2013 : 00:19:06
I think a Greenwood-Cortijo team up novel focused on Cormyr pre and post-Spellplague would be awesome.
Something that touches on Queen Fee's Blades, Alusair's life after leaving her Regency and Vangey's fate would be cool. I am not sure what to focus on/tie this in with for post-Spellplague Cormyr, but I think Brian would be up to the challenge.
Markus I take it you've given up on giving up on Alusair as a character? |
| Tarlyn |
Posted - 13 Nov 2013 : 22:17:36
It is extremely difficult to judge what the 5e era will look like without seeing a single gaming product that is based in that era. I actually think WotC is making the right move right now by trying to add definition to the new era with the Sundering series and their current adventure modules. The 4e changeover was heavily criticized among other things for its lack of detail and they are really putting a lot of effort to add detail this time around.
As a side note, there was nothing cheap or comic bookish about The Companions. That is one of RAS best novels to date(probably somewhere in his top 10) and really puts a lot of effort into showing the sacrifices that the Companions make to resume their lives. |
| sfdragon |
Posted - 13 Nov 2013 : 21:54:56
I'm just in the wait and see boat... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Nov 2013 : 21:33:48
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I erased my entire post, twice. Edit: Thrice now
There just isn't anyway to sugar coat it.
I just hope you're not waiting in vain, Wooly. I truly believe 5e is already here, and has been for about a year now... they snuck it right past us. But whatever...
If you believe that, then you're not giving them a fair chance, as you previously said you were doing.
Lurue knows I got burned with the release of 4E. But I'm still going to give them a chance. I cannot decide if something is good or bad without all of the information on it, and with nothing released yet, we don't have any information. |
|
|
