| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| sno4wy |
Posted - 21 Nov 2016 : 18:56:36
I wasn't able to find a thread about this at-a-glance, and if this information has been covered already elsewhere on these forums, I apologize. I figured the insight Ed shared during Gamehole Con this year regarding the future of Forgotten Realms novels to be interesting, even if he wasn't able to share much due to NDAs and stuff.
The question about whether there will be future Forgotten Realms novels was asked both during the D&D panel with Jeremy Crawford, Mike Mearls and Chris Perkins and the TEGG panel. The WotC guys succinctly informed us that they couldn't talk about it, and while Ed did precaution about his lack of ability to discuss it at length, he did offer some information:
- There will be a story featuring Mirt going on a new adventure. I'm not sure how this story will be formally published, however, a few copies of the pre-release book was given away via raffle during Mirt's 50th Birthday celebration on the first night of the convention. The premise of the story is that Mirt, having outlived all of his acquaintances and friends in Waterdeep, finding himself surrounded by a new generation of nobles that have no idea who he is, accepts the idea of undertaking travels to distant lands that he'd never been to before.
- The TEGG will continue to put out FR material, presumably through the DMGuild. There was also something during the TEGG panel about TEGG taking submissions in the future from FR fans when they're ready to focus on areas of the Realms not covered before.
- Whether there will be future novels Ed suspects will depend heavily on how well the Forgotten Realms movie does. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Cyrinishad |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 18:06:18
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Because if they get into 'new' FR, its only a matter of time they start digging deeper, into its roots. And as we all know, FR is a never-ending onion. An addictive onion we just can't stop peeling layers back from. Its time to go down this rabbit hole one more time.
You hit it right on the money here, and this is exactly what I'm seeing happen with my nephew. At first he just wanted to make Half-Orc Fighter and smash things, and now he can't stop reading about the Realms... |
| Markustay |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 16:39:18
@Sunderstone - I doubt I will ever feel the same about FR again either. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying there is a VERY good opportunity right now for all of us to help FR recover, and become great again. Perhaps not 'our' FR, but something nearly as cool.
Because ALL OF US HERE fell in love once. Thats why we are still here, despite all the crap that we've been slapped in the face with. Thats LOVE. I want a newer generation of gamers to feel that.
Because if they get into 'new' FR, its only a matter of time they start digging deeper, into its roots. And as we all know, FR is a never-ending onion. An addictive onion we just can't stop peeling layers back from. Its time to go down this rabbit hole one more time. |
| Cyrinishad |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 14:47:26
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You want to know when your setting has hit the 'big time'? When Lego does a 'Legends of Drizzt' playset. 
+1 to this... If D&D ever hooks up with Lego, every kid in the world will be playing D&D. I've already started thinking about running a Ninjago game using the 5e rules... |
| Sunderstone |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 04:55:44
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Sunderstone
quote:
Originally posted by Gambit
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
That doesn't mean FR couldn't be great again - after all, D&D (somehow) is having a resurgence of its own, which I certainly couldn't have predicted. But it won't be the same. Maybe the rest of you can get past a hundred year time-jump, but I know I won't. The setting I grew to love is a century in the past now. Could I grow to love the new setting? Possibly... but they'd have to start producing the kinds of products we saw in 1e/2e, and even 3e... and I think hell's going to freeze-over first.
Markus you have very accurately and astutely summed up my feelings on the Realms. I have played some 5E adventures, I have the SCAG sitting on my shelf, but my feelings towards it all lies somewhere between sad fondness and mild ambivalence.
If only they had reversed the time jump when they reversed the Spellplague, then we all could have lived happily ever after.
I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly.
Here's the thing - If I were in charge of 5e, there is a very good chance I would have made the exact same decision(s) they did (I would have provided more story for it, though - the 'hand-waving' is absurd).
And here's why - when they created 4e, they alienated a LOT of the 'old fans', and for whatever their reasoning was, that was done ON PURPOSE (and it absolutely was - they said as much in their podcasts at the time - they wanted to eliminate the 'feelings of entitlement'; that was clearly a shot at US, 'the grognards'). I suppose they were so enamored with their won 'genius' that they thought they could get rid of 'all those pesky know-it-alls', and at the same time, get a whole new generation into D&D and tabletop gaming (notice they did a LOT with related boardgames as well). In fact, that was probably a major selling point for the WotC team to present to Hasbro (because a TOY Company is far more interested in selling physical games than books about them).
The problem was, that while they were highly successful with the first part (and drove MANY of us into Paizo's arms), they didn't do nearly so well with the second part. Those 'new fans' were not arriving in droves, like they had hoped. I blame Paizo for that - the WotC guys thought that by 'cutting Paizo free' it would wither and die, and instead, it flourished in the then-alienated fantasy RPG environment. Paizo took all those disgruntled folks - AND THE HORDES OF NEW GAMERS - and gave them a 'safe space'. A place that 'felt like home' (again). And that is what happened - Paizo's existence (or rather, continued existence and thriving) stopped their plan: the plan to force everyone to march to 'their tune'. We didn't march - we ran in the other direction.
That was the PAST, and it seems some folks got a good dose of 'humility'. GOOD - they needed that. So in 5e, they are presented with the same problem - how to keep the 'current players' (who at that time were the 4e gamers they DID get, which was ALL THEY HAD at that point), and try to coax some of the 'old guard' back, all while getting an even newer generation of gamers interested in D&D. THAT is what 5e is designed to do, and THAT is why we didn't get a reversal of the century time-jump, because that same feeling most of us had (abandonment, unresolved issues, etc), their ONLY customers would have felt. And that was a scary situation for them - they weren't willing to take that risk a second time.
So here comes 5e - a continuation of 4e (so those customers stick around), buuuuuut with the motto, "presenting the New Realms, same as the Old Realms", to try to 'make nice' with us old fans and get us back talking about (and maybe even playing in) The Forgotten Realms. I think that actually worked, on both counts. The activity around here lately is proof of that.
And, because both the 4e and pre-4e gamers are now all talking civilly again about FR and D&D, the new TT gamers are also taking notice. Part of that I can put on Paizo no longer being the 'new shiny', but that itself is just a reflection to what is going on - A POSITIVE atmosphere. And WE, the (FR) people, are what is causing THAT. No-one is going to want to 'get into' a game others are talking bad about. No one is going to want to learn or read about some world everyone is bitching about. The reason the newer crop of gamers went running to Paizo is because we were crying the blues about D&D and FR (and maybe rightfully so). We were destroying our own fandom, through our vitriol.
So at the end of the day, we won, but the casualties were enormous. Now is the time to pick up the pieces, and hold the hands of these 'new fans', rather than scare them off by saying books designed explicitly for them 'suck'. Embrace the 4e players, because they are all that kept D&D alive for seven years (it sure as hell wasn't us), and because of THEM, we got FR back, in a slightly mangled incarnation, but its back, and it COULD be great again...
If WE let it.
You make good points but it's just never going to get there for me personally. The hundred year leap was a bridge to far. I have no problem using 5e rule set as that has always been secondary to the story element and interacting part of role playing.
I continue to play in the 1350-1370 era of the Realms. For me that is where it feels more creatively driven and "real" versus commercially driven, although I understand publication is a commercial endeavor.
I would have been happier if they had come up with some contrivance to bring all of the known major protagonists and ancillary NPCs into the new era. An act of AO or whatever but as much as I love Mirt, Eminster and Drizzt, they seem more "Mary Sue" now and shoehorned in. For me it makes the fabric of Faerun feel even less real. Better they killed off every known character and put them in the grave and started completely from scratch.
With a shelf full of 2nd and 3ed Realms Boxed sets and Supplements, I can't see any reason to buy the new lore and play in an era that doesn't feel as organic and exists because of an effort to push new sales with new rule sets. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 03:25:49
quote:
Originally posted by Gambit
Bane would be Tywin, Lawful Evil to the core.
Tywin strikes me as more Neutral Evil. Some of his actions -- especially against House Castamere -- are way too pragmatic and against any kind of regular law to call him lawful. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 03:18:33
@ghilteras - I agree with all your points, and I've been a heavy naysayer myself the past few years (I had almost a year of optimism that came crashing down).
However, we did get rid of 4e, which was replaced by 5e, which is very reminiscent of older editions, AND the Realms are back looking like they should (even if everyone we cared is dead). I've also noticed their products getting steadily 'better' (and by that, I mean more like the kind we want - lore heavy).
I was around for OD&D (with a photocopied set of rules). I was around for 1e. I recall lore-light, silly (some might say 'stupid') adventures and monsters. I remember when they first started publishing novels. I"ve been through all this before - Hasbro has to learn what Gygax & Co. learned over the course of about 15 years or so - how to build something out of every little.
What happens when a big company makes a product that sells well? Like Captain Crunch? We get 10 different varieties of it. Or a car company makes a popular car - year two or three its available in more colors. Etc, etc - all I am saying is that if D&D starts doing very well (and it is), and FR also starts to take off again (which it appears to be), a business is going to do what a business does best - find a hundred different ways to package related products and sell them to us. Some products won't sell so well (because we won't like them). Some will do great, and they'll make more of those. Its economics 101.
I'm not saying Hasbro is going to suddenly grow a halo and bestow blessings upon us, I am saying Hasbro will want our money, and the best way to get our money off our 'well-educated consumer' hands is to provide us with the things we want. Right now, Hasbro doesn't want to bother with the novels any more (probably mostly because of 4e's lackluster performance). IF the movie does well, it will only make sense to do more novels. So here's the thing - we need to all see the damn movie, and hopefully it will be decent, but even if it isn't we have to make them think they should continue trying various markets and products moving forward. And if the movies a whopping success, we'll see related toy lines (hopefully ones that will be cross-compatible with the game), lunchboxes, Happy Meal toys, beach towels, etc, etc... because thats how it works. They want our money, and we want to give it to them - we just need to meet in the middle.
You want to know when your setting has hit the 'big time'? When Lego does a 'Legends of Drizzt' playset. |
| Gambit |
Posted - 10 Mar 2017 : 00:49:19
Cyric as Ramsay would definitely work, both are extremely Chaotic Evil. Bane would be Tywin, Lawful Evil to the core. |
| ghilteras |
Posted - 09 Mar 2017 : 23:53:11
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If 5e is doing well - which it is - that means WE, the D&D fans of all editions, have finally come together and are letting it be fun again. And WE CAN get more lore, and BETTER lore, and get novels back, but we have to show our continued support of the product line.
The problem is that 5e is indeed a hot cake, you admitted that yourself and look at the novel reviews on goodreads and amazon: the sundering sold just fine; yet they were all cut, not just those books who sold less, but even Salvatore himself which (like always) sold by himself more of all the other authors combined.
The truth of it is that Hasbro does not see value in the novels or rather it wants to focus the money on something else (according to Ed is the D&D movie). Hasbro does not seems to believe that players need lore (screw those old DMs that want more!) or they would have kept Monte Cook from leaving or would have let Ed lead the other authors finish their initial work started with the Sundering saga right? But this is what we know is going to happen:
- Ed Greenwood has an initiative on Onder Librum where he asks the community to write FR adventures that will be published on the dmguild website in exchange for royalities. BUT he expressly stated that adventures that are touching the gods or traumatizing the world too much will be discarded. Also the adventures CANNOT be set in the sword coast or other hot spot. It needs to be ormpur. The goals is to ask the community to contribute to some areas of Toril that are poorly depicted. More info here -> http://realms.theedgreenwoodgroup.com/rpga-pitch-ormpur/
- Tales of Yawning Portal is just a reboot of adventures so we wont get lore through adventure paths in season 6
- I asked Elaine Cunningham on the FR Facebook group if this is just a temporary pause from novels and if she knows whether the novels are coming back, that's what she answered -> https://www.facebook.com/groups/TheForgottenRealmsArchives/permalink/887660698004156/
- Dragon magazine was where DMs could get their monthly fix of lore, comic strips, location spotlights and in-depth analysis. What we have now in its reincarnation Dragon+ is how to paint miniatures, adventures for kids, cute cats, advertisements to tabletop d&d games that nobody will buy and the Neverwinter MMO which is (guess what?) pay2win -> http://dnd.wizards.com/dragonplus/issue12
Frankly that being said I cannot share any optimism and I actually rather doubt that giving them money will make the lore and the novels come back. If anything the opposite will happen, they would believe that their business model is working and will continue to leave the realms in a suspended half-assed state, with no more novels and a Dragon+ as useful as garbage. We will be lucky if we will get some lore in the future adventures once they finish to reboot the old ones due to lack of creativity..
To me the solution is to look at other campaign settings, Midgard from Kobold Press seems interesting -> https://koboldpress.com/midgard/ |
| Cyrinishad |
Posted - 09 Mar 2017 : 15:05:20
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
*meh*
Every group needs their 'jerk'. The Norse had Loki, etc.
Cyric's just a less-fun, more douchy Loki.
EDIT:
I was just trying to think of another setting to compare him to, and GoT sprung to mind, and while I at first thought of Ramsay Bolton, I had a better idea - Cyric becoming a 'Reek' (Theon), but then who could be our Ramsay? Bane?
That could work... man I would love to see that little pr... jerk get his come-uppance.
Oh, definitely. And just like Theon he is suffering for his Hubris and Pride, but will ultimately be redeemed...
One of my theories on GoT is that by the end Theon will become part of the Night's Watch (just as he considered doing when he realized there was no way out of Winterfell for him, before Ramsay turned him into the Reek)... Of course, now that I've written this Martin will promptly kill Theon in the next book. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 08 Mar 2017 : 22:32:20
*meh*
Every group needs their 'jerk'. The Norse had Loki, etc.
Cyric's just a less-fun, more douchy Loki.
EDIT:
I was just trying to think of another setting to compare him to, and GoT sprung to mind, and while I at first thought of Ramsay Bolton, I had a better idea - Cyric becoming a 'Reek' (Theon), but then who could be our Ramsay? Bane?
That could work... man I would love to see that little pr... jerk get his come-uppance. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 08 Mar 2017 : 21:39:08
It doesn't help that Cyric is the god of lies... |
| Cyrinishad |
Posted - 08 Mar 2017 : 21:33:59
I want to echo some of the sentiments that have been shared in this scroll. We should always be looking to highlight the positive elements of what is being published, and not fall into the trap of highlighting the negative... Negativity just breeds more negativity... I want everyone to come back home to the Realms, where everyone knows your name... Kinda like Cheers, but with more Beer.
Even Cyric swears that he learned his lesson, and will never Spellplague again... |
| Markustay |
Posted - 08 Mar 2017 : 00:33:42
Yes, I thought it was a new setting guide, which is wasn't, and I am a little annoyed at that, but it does the job they meant it to do, so I'm not going to say "its a bad book". I'm more annoyed in the manner you go to buy a corvette, and the salesman talks you into buying a more sensible Malibu. The Malibu's a fine car, but you are going to be kicking yourself for letting yourself get tricked into the thing you had no intention of purchasing.
Maybe if I start running FR again I 'might' appreciate it. Calling it an "adventurer's guide" was an underhanded way of disguising it as something it wasn't, IMO. Like slapping 'Volo' on the title of something... cheap marketing tactics, and NOT something we appreciate. Leave the sleazy gimmicks for the parent company.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If WE let it.
I don't think it's only on us. If WotC/Hasbro isn't willing to invest into the story and lore, then--even assuming that we managed to raise a lot of enthusiasm for the Realms--the new fans wouldn't even have a real way to express their interest in the only language that WotC/Hasbro understand (i.e. money), because there wouldn't be any new FR books about lore (and while new fans could be directed to older books that are sold in pdf format on the DMG, telling to a newcomer that they must use older books if they want something more in-depth isn't exactly a great way to build enthusiasm and interest for the new Realms, and isn't--IMO--likely to get them excited).
But it IS on us, more than most people realize. 4e did poorly because WE 'voted with our wallets' (and were very vocal about how bad 4e FR was). Now we've learned to 'play nice' with the 4e FR fans, and the even newer 5e fans, and are welcoming new discussion, and even allowing discussion of topics we formally detested (Primordials, Abeir, Spellplague, 'Lovecraftian Horrors', etc, etc). They gave in to us, and we acquiesced and gave in a little back.
If 5e is doing well - which it is - that means WE, the D&D fans of all editions, have finally come together and are letting it be fun again. And WE CAN get more lore, and BETTER lore, and get novels back, but we have to show our continued support of the product line. Hasbro isn't some evil beast, its actually a very simple animal - a corporation. And a corporation is as simple as a shark; its an 'eating machine', and what it eats is money. It LOVES money. Show it you have lots of money to throw at it, and it will do more of whatever it takes to empty your wallet. And YES, that could even mean the kind of good, old-fashioned type of lore-heavy books we used to see. Hasbro cries itself to sleep at night if it thinks you have a dollar in your wallet it couldn't get. And like any dumb, hungry critter, you can get it to stand on its hind legs, do flips, and jump through hoops... just for that 'treat'.
And I do believe their listening, because I've bought several products recently, from 4e to 5e, and I can SEE that they are getting progressively better. We've got them standing on their hind-legs and barking for those dollar bills - now lets just get them to jump through hoops. |
| ghilteras |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 20:23:47
too bad the product was not advertised to be a player oriented product and in any case making a major rebooting of the world without releasing a lorebook makes me understand why Monte Cook left the company, he probaly understood he was dealing with incompetents.. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 20:21:56
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No, I'm not pissed off, because I didn't expect a player-oriented product to have DM-oriented material in it.
I don't like that it's not a proper campaign setting book, but I'm not going to get pissed off for the book not being something it never claimed to be. If I buy a player-oriented resource, then I expect an absence of DM-related material.
Well, even tho I still don't think that the SCAG is a bad book, to be fair they did in fact market it as a book useful to both players and DMs, and as an update of the Realms. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 19:56:05
quote:
Originally posted by ghilteras
quote:
So the book is horrible because it's aimed at new players who don't know the Realms and only has content for those new players?
In other words, it sucks because it has a clearly defined target audience and is explicitly designed for that clearly defined target audience?
so you are not pissed off that you as DM have wasted your money buying a useless campaign setting?
No, I'm not pissed off, because I didn't expect a player-oriented product to have DM-oriented material in it.
I don't like that it's not a proper campaign setting book, but I'm not going to get pissed off for the book not being something it never claimed to be. If I buy a player-oriented resource, then I expect an absence of DM-related material. |
| ghilteras |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 19:05:18
quote:
So the book is horrible because it's aimed at new players who don't know the Realms and only has content for those new players?
In other words, it sucks because it has a clearly defined target audience and is explicitly designed for that clearly defined target audience?
so you are not pissed off that you as DM have wasted your money buying a useless campaign setting?
|
| Irennan |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 18:20:53
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
If WE let it.
I don't think it's only on us. If WotC/Hasbro isn't willing to invest into the story and lore, then--even assuming that we managed to raise a lot of enthusiasm for the Realms--the new fans wouldn't even have a real way to express their interest in the only language that WotC/Hasbro understand (i.e. money), because there wouldn't be any new FR books about lore (and while new fans could be directed to older books that are sold in pdf format on the DMG, telling to a newcomer that they must use older books if they want something more in-depth isn't exactly a great way to build enthusiasm and interest for the new Realms, and isn't--IMO--likely to get them excited). |
| Markustay |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 18:02:19
quote:
Originally posted by Sunderstone
quote:
Originally posted by Gambit
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
That doesn't mean FR couldn't be great again - after all, D&D (somehow) is having a resurgence of its own, which I certainly couldn't have predicted. But it won't be the same. Maybe the rest of you can get past a hundred year time-jump, but I know I won't. The setting I grew to love is a century in the past now. Could I grow to love the new setting? Possibly... but they'd have to start producing the kinds of products we saw in 1e/2e, and even 3e... and I think hell's going to freeze-over first.
Markus you have very accurately and astutely summed up my feelings on the Realms. I have played some 5E adventures, I have the SCAG sitting on my shelf, but my feelings towards it all lies somewhere between sad fondness and mild ambivalence.
If only they had reversed the time jump when they reversed the Spellplague, then we all could have lived happily ever after.
I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly.
Here's the thing - If I were in charge of 5e, there is a very good chance I would have made the exact same decision(s) they did (I would have provided more story for it, though - the 'hand-waving' is absurd).
And here's why - when they created 4e, they alienated a LOT of the 'old fans', and for whatever their reasoning was, that was done ON PURPOSE (and it absolutely was - they said as much in their podcasts at the time - they wanted to eliminate the 'feelings of entitlement'; that was clearly a shot at US, 'the grognards'). I suppose they were so enamored with their won 'genius' that they thought they could get rid of 'all those pesky know-it-alls', and at the same time, get a whole new generation into D&D and tabletop gaming (notice they did a LOT with related boardgames as well). In fact, that was probably a major selling point for the WotC team to present to Hasbro (because a TOY Company is far more interested in selling physical games than books about them).
The problem was, that while they were highly successful with the first part (and drove MANY of us into Paizo's arms), they didn't do nearly so well with the second part. Those 'new fans' were not arriving in droves, like they had hoped. I blame Paizo for that - the WotC guys thought that by 'cutting Paizo free' it would wither and die, and instead, it flourished in the then-alienated fantasy RPG environment. Paizo took all those disgruntled folks - AND THE HORDES OF NEW GAMERS - and gave them a 'safe space'. A place that 'felt like home' (again). And that is what happened - Paizo's existence (or rather, continued existence and thriving) stopped their plan: the plan to force everyone to march to 'their tune'. We didn't march - we ran in the other direction.
That was the PAST, and it seems some folks got a good dose of 'humility'. GOOD - they needed that. So in 5e, they are presented with the same problem - how to keep the 'current players' (who at that time were the 4e gamers they DID get, which was ALL THEY HAD at that point), and try to coax some of the 'old guard' back, all while getting an even newer generation of gamers interested in D&D. THAT is what 5e is designed to do, and THAT is why we didn't get a reversal of the century time-jump, because that same feeling most of us had (abandonment, unresolved issues, etc), their ONLY customers would have felt. And that was a scary situation for them - they weren't willing to take that risk a second time.
So here comes 5e - a continuation of 4e (so those customers stick around), buuuuuut with the motto, "presenting the New Realms, same as the Old Realms", to try to 'make nice' with us old fans and get us back talking about (and maybe even playing in) The Forgotten Realms. I think that actually worked, on both counts. The activity around here lately is proof of that.
And, because both the 4e and pre-4e gamers are now all talking civilly again about FR and D&D, the new TT gamers are also taking notice. Part of that I can put on Paizo no longer being the 'new shiny', but that itself is just a reflection to what is going on - A POSITIVE atmosphere. And WE, the (FR) people, are what is causing THAT. No-one is going to want to 'get into' a game others are talking bad about. No one is going to want to learn or read about some world everyone is bitching about. The reason the newer crop of gamers went running to Paizo is because we were crying the blues about D&D and FR (and maybe rightfully so). We were destroying our own fandom, through our vitriol.
So at the end of the day, we won, but the casualties were enormous. Now is the time to pick up the pieces, and hold the hands of these 'new fans', rather than scare them off by saying books designed explicitly for them 'suck'. Embrace the 4e players, because they are all that kept D&D alive for seven years (it sure as hell wasn't us), and because of THEM, we got FR back, in a slightly mangled incarnation, but its back, and it COULD be great again...
If WE let it. |
| Sunderstone |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 14:42:55
quote:
Originally posted by Gambit
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
That doesn't mean FR couldn't be great again - after all, D&D (somehow) is having a resurgence of its own, which I certainly couldn't have predicted. But it won't be the same. Maybe the rest of you can get past a hundred year time-jump, but I know I won't. The setting I grew to love is a century in the past now. Could I grow to love the new setting? Possibly... but they'd have to start producing the kinds of products we saw in 1e/2e, and even 3e... and I think hell's going to freeze-over first.
Markus you have very accurately and astutely summed up my feelings on the Realms. I have played some 5E adventures, I have the SCAG sitting on my shelf, but my feelings towards it all lies somewhere between sad fondness and mild ambivalence.
If only they had reversed the time jump when they reversed the Spellplague, then we all could have lived happily ever after.
I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly. |
| Gambit |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 06:58:44
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
That doesn't mean FR couldn't be great again - after all, D&D (somehow) is having a resurgence of its own, which I certainly couldn't have predicted. But it won't be the same. Maybe the rest of you can get past a hundred year time-jump, but I know I won't. The setting I grew to love is a century in the past now. Could I grow to love the new setting? Possibly... but they'd have to start producing the kinds of products we saw in 1e/2e, and even 3e... and I think hell's going to freeze-over first.
Markus you have very accurately and astutely summed up my feelings on the Realms. I have played some 5E adventures, I have the SCAG sitting on my shelf, but my feelings towards it all lies somewhere between sad fondness and mild ambivalence.
If only they had reversed the time jump when they reversed the Spellplague, then we all could have lived happily ever after. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 03:46:35
quote:
Originally posted by ghilteras
I own SCAG, there is no answer to anything there. The reason why I think it's the worst setting book ever published is because it's only aimed to new players that dont know anything about FR.
SCAG just offers generic descriptions about the deities. You won't find anything about the current status of Cyric under his description, is he still banished? How do you handle his poirtfolios with Bhaal and Mask coming back? There is no mention to how Helm died slain by Tyr, or how Tyr died in a blaze of glory. New players just read the book and have the impression that this is a new world, with fresh booted gods where lore is optional because you are supposed to buy the official adventures which provides with everything you need to know.
The portfolios are redundant and unclear, we have 3 gods of dead now, Kelemvor the official one, but Jergal is still listed although nobody knows what he is doing and now Myrkul is back.. Same with Helm Torm and Tyr (bahamut, hoar too) for the justice portfolio. They are really redundant and their overlapping was addressed in 4e, now they are back being all alive and well and things could not be more confusing. At least in previous editions you could fix the overlapping with ranks and have the lesser gods being like agents or minions of the greater gods, but now in case you did not notice there is no concept of rank anymore. Before you knew that the more followers a god had the more powerful he was right? But Ao rewrote the tablets of fate so who knows what the rules are now? It's up to the DMs I guess (again!).
Don't get me wrong world building is fun, but it's not something you should be forced do as DM. I mean yes a lot of us have passion and free time to do it, but it should not be mandatory. Besides even if I wanted I simply dont have enough time to fix the hundreds of gaps left in the FR lore.. You would expect the wizards to address this eventually, but it looks like the other way around, I explained my point of view here -> http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21576
I don't want to hijack every thread with my rants so I'll try to shut up and keep my whining confined to only one place :)
So the book is horrible because it's aimed at new players who don't know the Realms and only has content for those new players?
In other words, it sucks because it has a clearly defined target audience and is explicitly designed for that clearly defined target audience?
|
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 03:22:30
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
I've honestly just accepted that the published Realms aren't ever going back to what they were before.
I take their DM's Guild approach to allowing fans to write their own material (and possibly make a little money) as confirmation of this.
It's not actual confirmation of course, but likely the closest they'll ever come to out and out admitting as much. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 03:16:23
quote:
Originally posted by ghilteras
oh well, like I said above I own SCAG and I play FR since 2nd edition. I read ~30 novels set in the realms so trust me the last thing I know is a refresher on the gods and their portfolios :D
the problem of redundancy stands right there. Enumerating the gods should just show you the magnitude of the problem and I mean that is only the tip of the iceberg. Some gods like Jergal are said to have their own priesthood and followers, but they seem to be servants of other gods, like exarchs or something? But again the ranks are gone so those are just conjectures; all part of a generic confusing that is "up to the DM" to solve. Same for all the other gods I mentioned above, whose status is unknown, making the portfolio redundancy only one of the many problems that afflict the current state of the realms.
I was more pointing to how the SCAG reorganized the portfolios to make the returned gods fit (for example, Cyric no longer has murder). I surely wasn't trying to lecture you, my apologies if it came off like that.
As a personal take, I don't see the redundancy that you see. After all, Ed has said that he meant the Realms to have many minor, specialized deities and their own followers base, because it adds flavour and it contributes to making the world more colorful (since our history is also full of minor cults).
As a DM, if that redundancy is problematic, then ignoring the gods that you don't want in the world will save you a lot of troubles (you could even keep using the 4e frame). I don't think that there's a need to cut the options for people who like them, and the opportunity for more stories to be written about them.
I wouldn't say that their status is unknown either (especially given that WotC have said multiple times that all the gods are back), as the book is meant to present the Realms as of the 1490s DR, as those deities can be picked in AL games, some have been used in AL adventures, and so on. To me, the real disappointment is the heavy handwaving.
quote:
I don't know what you mean by the new policy of WoTC, but they already blew up stuff and ate the backlash.. Yes they are probably terrified now to make any change because they don't have somebody big like Monte Cook or Ed Greenwood to put his face on it, but leaving the work half done is indeed not bad. It's terrible :)
compare it to paizo or numenera where lore updates get on a weekly/monthly basis and you would understand what I mean and you would see the difference between a setting that is well curated and one that has been basically abandoned.
I meant their new approach to writing FR/D&D books. They don't aim for in-depth lore, they want the setting as a backdrop for their adventures and that's it. It's indeed a sad state IMO, but it's not for them. They are not really eating any backlash like they did back in 4e (their decision to undo the 4e changes both to the rules and the setting is telling), as their sales are really strong.
As for understing what you mean, I really do, and I too really want actual lore updates.
quote:
I really don't see any rule to be honest. Nobody knows what Ao wrote on the new tables of fate or why he brought back the dead gods. I guess that's why the ranks are disappeared, because nobody knows anything anymore! Maybe there is simply no concept of ranks anymore? Up to the DM again I guess :)
The rule has been in place even when the tablets were no more, so it's probably unrelated to them. In the various Sundering panels the authors have described what I said in my previous post, that's why I wrote that explanation of what Ao's reforging of the tablets was supposed to do.
quote:
The only real explanations we got were not in SCAG, but on to the Sundering saga. Thanks to the writers we know more about how Mystra, Mask and Azuth came back and few mentions about others (like Eilistraee)
It seems their work had just begun, they laid out the new layout ready to elaborate when they got their contracts cut and now they cannot write more novels..
Yeah, I know that the SCAG doesn't have any real explanation, I didn't mean to deny that. I only meant to say that it does its intended job: presenting the current state of the setting to newcomers (so, while of little use to us, I wouldn't call it a bad book).
As I said, I would really enjoy it if they decided to explore the consequences of the Sundering in detail (and for Eilistraee we didn't even get an explanation to her return--in novels, at least, Ed has explained it here--only mentions that she's back and has been appearing to a lot of people. And her and the whole Dark Seldarine's return truly deserve a better explanation IMO, given how they were removed).
However, lets look at what they did: they presented a book as "the post-Sundering update to the Realms: discover the status of regions, gods, etc... here", and that book was basically an in-universe reboot. They are staying away from significant metaplot-related explanations, just *very* broad descriptions of what happened and how things are now. They have already moved away from the transition phase and are focusing on new stories. I don't think that they have any real interest in actually going back to explain that transition, especially not when they have no real interest in putting out a lot of lore.
quote:
I get that Hasbro only cares about money, but this was really the most terrible way of handling the business.. I doubt new players will come to love the realms the way we did without novels and lorebooks coming to keep their curiosity sated. I pray I am wrong and that 2017 will be a great year with tons of 5e novels, comics, videogames and whatnot.
The problem likely is that they perceive that novels and lorebooks don't sell or aren't interesting to the players. It's just how their business works (which is why a lot of people say that Hasbro's influence ruined the Realms, and I agree with them).
I've honestly just accepted that the published Realms aren't ever going back to what they used to be. I would have even been fine with this reboot with little to no explanation (many people were really excited that their favourite characters, regions or gods were coming back, about a rebirth of the Realms, WotC had their attention), if they had actually used it as a base to write more novels, more lore, and to build the Realms again (after years of massive catastrophes, the 100 years jump, gods dying like flies and then coming back, and a cheesy overall metaplot driven by WotC's design changes rather than the story itself). |
| ZeshinX |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 03:10:03
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
They're doing this 'Paizo style', which means the setting material comes in the AP's, and all the rules-specific crap (which is mostly for players) comes in the splats. I found the Tiamat thing pretty sad, but SKT was worth the money I spent. Just my 2¢
Even Paizo still releases setting material separately from their APs (quite a bit too). A good chunk of setting material in the APs is unique to that AP (meaning it doesn't appear in any other setting book, at least for a while anyway), but there's still a great wealth of material outside of APs.
Some of the more unique setting stuff is still best found in its relevant AP (Jade Regent for Dragon Empires, mainly Minkai, for example), but overall, you have good variety, especially if APs aren't otherwise particularly useful to you, which is nice.
5e has been particularly frustrating to me, since I love the system, but strongly dislike WotC's current handling of the brand as a whole (though I commend the efforts of the handful of people dedicated to D&D at WotC). I'm glad their storyline/adventure books offer some setting info, but to me it's not good enough in that I will not spend the kind of money their asking for these things (even with Amazon's big discounts) for what amounts to scattered bits of useful (or just interesting) info. The actual adventure portion is of no use to me, since I prefer (and have the luxury of time) creating my own. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 01:48:02
I'm not so sure its "the worst setting book ever publish", but I will go so far as to say I can't think of worse one, off hand. I bought it recently, and found it a total waste of money. If you are looking for a 'setting guide' (for The North), then Storm King's Thunder does a much better job (which truly isn't saying much, since just about anything would have done a better job).
The SCAG is a Player's Guide, nothing more, and practically useless to DM's. Since I don't run FR, or even D&D at this point, it was a total waste of my money (because I wanted to know about the setting, not races, classes, and a 'Cliff's Notes' refresher-course on the gods and some political groups (some of which didn't even belong there).
They're doing this 'Paizo style', which means the setting material comes in the AP's, and all the rules-specific crap (which is mostly for players) comes in the splats. I found the Tiamat thing pretty sad, but SKT was worth the money I spent. Just my 2¢ |
| ghilteras |
Posted - 07 Mar 2017 : 01:04:10
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Myrkul is the current deity of death and decay, Kelemvor is the current deity of dead, and Jergal is Kelemvor's scribe, who keeps record of the dead and aids in judgement. Bhaal is the god of murder. Cyric is the deity of lies and strife, Mask is the deity of thievery and thieves, and Leira the goddess of illusions.
[...]
Tyr is a deity of justice (meant as in adherence to the law, he is in fact a god of judges); Torm stands for duty and loyalty, Helm stands for vigilance (so there's only some overlapping between Torm and Helm, that's true). Hoar is a deity of revenge and poetic justice, more than of justice itself.
oh well, like I said above I own SCAG and I play FR since 2nd edition. I read ~30 novels set in the realms so trust me the last thing I know is a refresher on the gods and their portfolios :D
the problem of redundancy stands right there. Enumerating the gods should just show you the magnitude of the problem and I mean that is only the tip of the iceberg. Some gods like Jergal are said to have their own priesthood and followers, but they seem to be servants of other gods, like exarchs or something? But again the ranks are gone so those are just conjectures; all part of a generic confusing that is "up to the DM" to solve. Same for all the other gods I mentioned above, whose status is unknown, making the portfolio redundancy only one of the many problems that afflict the current state of the realms.
quote:
It's indeed aimed to newcomers, but that's not a bad thing (and that's the approach that 4e should have taken IMO, rather than blowing up stuff and then eating a huge backlash for that), and it doesn't exclude a deeper treatment (WotC's new policy does). Ofc, it sucks for us who want explanations--and I really, really do--but the SCAG isn't a bad book per se.
I don't know what you mean by the new policy of WoTC, but they already blew up stuff and ate the backlash.. Yes they are probably terrified now to make any change because they don't have somebody big like Monte Cook or Ed Greenwood to put his face on it, but leaving the work half done is indeed not bad. It's terrible :)
compare it to paizo or numenera where lore updates get on a weekly/monthly basis and you would understand what I mean and you would see the difference between a setting that is well curated and one that has been basically abandoned.
quote:
The rule's still there. In fact, the rule was there while the Tablets of Fate no longer existed (Ao had grounded them to dust after the Tot). He rewrote the Tablets to set in stone the various gods' portfolios (that supposedly was what brought so many of them back to life) and separate Abeir and Toril.
I really don't see any rule to be honest. Nobody knows what Ao wrote on the new tables of fate or why he brought back the dead gods. I guess that's why the ranks are disappeared, because nobody knows anything anymore! Maybe there is simply no concept of ranks anymore? Up to the DM again I guess :)
The only real explanations we got were not in SCAG, but on to the Sundering saga. Thanks to the writers we know more about how Mystra, Mask and Azuth came back and few mentions about others (like Eilistraee)
It seems their work had just begun, they laid out the new layout ready to elaborate when they got their contracts cut and now they cannot write more novels..
I get that Hasbro only cares about money, but this was really the most terrible way of handling the business.. I doubt new players will come to love the realms the way we did without novels and lorebooks coming to keep their curiosity sated. I pray I am wrong and that 2017 will be a great year with tons of 5e novels, comics, videogames and whatnot. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 06 Mar 2017 : 23:36:04
quote:
Originally posted by ghilteras
I own SCAG, there is no answer to anything there. The reason why I think it's the worst setting book ever published is because it's only aimed to new players that dont know anything about FR.
SCAG just offers generic descriptions about the deities. You won't find anything about the current status of Cyric under his description, is he still banished? How do you handle his poirtfolios with Bhaal and Mask coming back? There is no mention to how Helm died slain by Tyr, or how Tyr died in a blaze of glory. New players just read the book and have the impression that this is a new world, with fresh booted gods where lore is optional because you are supposed to buy the official adventures which provides with everything you need to know.
The portfolios are redundant and unclear, we have 3 gods of dead now, Kelemvor the official one, but Jergal is still listed although nobody knows what he is doing and now Myrkul is back.. Same with Helm Torm and Tyr (bahamut, hoar too) for the justice portfolio. They are really redundant and their overlapping was addressed in 4e, now they are back being all alive and well and things could not be more confusing.
Myrkul is the current deity of death and decay, Kelemvor is the current deity of dead, and Jergal is Kelemvor's scribe, who keeps record of the dead and aids in judgement. Bhaal is the god of murder. Cyric is the deity of lies and strife, Mask is the deity of thievery and thieves, and Leira the goddess of illusions.
Tyr is a deity of justice (meant as in adherence to the law, he is in fact a god of judges); Torm stands for duty and loyalty, Helm stands for vigilance (so there's only some overlapping between Torm and Helm, that's true). Hoar is a deity of revenge and poetic justice, more than of justice itself.
All of that is in the SCAG (that's why I said that they even rearranged the portfolios to make things fit). It's true that past events regarding the deities are not described, or only quickly mentioned, but that's the general approach of the book, providing a status quo of the setting: which gods are currently active, some relevant NPCs, the current state of the Sword Coast (and--very briefly--of the Realms as a whole), how the situation is now. It's indeed aimed to newcomers, but that's not a bad thing (and that's the approach that 4e should have taken IMO, rather than blowing up stuff and then eating a huge backlash for that), and it doesn't exclude a deeper treatment (WotC's new policy does). Ofc, it sucks for us who want explanations--and I really, really do--but the SCAG isn't a bad book per se.
quote:
At least in previous editions you could fix the overlapping with ranks and have the lesser gods being like agents or minions of the greater gods, but now in case you did not notice there is no concept of rank anymore. Before you knew that the more followers a god had the more powerful he was right? But Ao rewrote the tablets of fate so who knows what the rules are now? It's up to the DMs I guess (again!).
The rule's still there. In fact, the rule was there while the Tablets of Fate no longer existed (Ao had grounded them to dust after the Tot). He rewrote the Tablets to set in stone the various gods' portfolios (that supposedly was what brought so many of them back to life) and separate Abeir and Toril.
quote:
Don't get me wrong world building is fun, but it's not something you should be forced do as DM. I mean yes a lot of us have passion and free time to do it, but it should not be mandatory. Besides even if I wanted I simply dont have enough time to fix the hundreds of gaps left in the FR lore.. You would expect the wizards to address this eventually, but it looks like the other way around, I explained my point of view here -> http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21576
I don't want to hijack every thread with my rants so I'll try to shut up and keep my whining confined to only one place :)
Don't get me wrong as well, I totally share your disappointment about how things currently look like. I want the stories behind the return of the various gods, continents, and chatacters, and better explanations too. Sadly, I really doubt that we'll get them  |
| ghilteras |
Posted - 06 Mar 2017 : 20:47:53
I own SCAG, there is no answer to anything there. The reason why I think it's the worst setting book ever published is because it's only aimed to new players that dont know anything about FR.
SCAG just offers generic descriptions about the deities. You won't find anything about the current status of Cyric under his description, is he still banished? How do you handle his poirtfolios with Bhaal and Mask coming back? There is no mention to how Helm died slain by Tyr, or how Tyr died in a blaze of glory. New players just read the book and have the impression that this is a new world, with fresh booted gods where lore is optional because you are supposed to buy the official adventures which provides with everything you need to know.
The portfolios are redundant and unclear, we have 3 gods of dead now, Kelemvor the official one, but Jergal is still listed although nobody knows what he is doing and now Myrkul is back.. Same with Helm Torm and Tyr (bahamut, hoar too) for the justice portfolio. They are really redundant and their overlapping was addressed in 4e, now they are back being all alive and well and things could not be more confusing. At least in previous editions you could fix the overlapping with ranks and have the lesser gods being like agents or minions of the greater gods, but now in case you did not notice there is no concept of rank anymore. Before you knew that the more followers a god had the more powerful he was right? But Ao rewrote the tablets of fate so who knows what the rules are now? It's up to the DMs I guess (again!).
Don't get me wrong world building is fun, but it's not something you should be forced do as DM. I mean yes a lot of us have passion and free time to do it, but it should not be mandatory. Besides even if I wanted I simply dont have enough time to fix the hundreds of gaps left in the FR lore.. You would expect the wizards to address this eventually, but it looks like the other way around, I explained my point of view here -> http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=21576
I don't want to hijack every thread with my rants so I'll try to shut up and keep my whining confined to only one place :) |
| Irennan |
Posted - 04 Mar 2017 : 02:28:45
quote:
Originally posted by ghilteras
the real problem here is that a DM with a job, a wife and kids does not have time to world build and decide if Talos and Gruumsh are still an aspect of the same god, if myrkul and bane are back, what happened to tyr etc. etc. (I just said the first 3 things that bug my mind, the list is endless)
The answer to that is in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide. Yes, they're all back--they even redistributed portfolios to make them fit in. What hasn't been specified is how they came back (I mean, beyond "Ao started the Sundering and every god was resurrected"), and what that implies, so I get where you're coming from.
Although they won't likely ever release those answers, and I can kinda get why (they didn't want to impose too much lore on new players, so they just provided the status quo of the setting). |
|
|
