| Author |
 Topic  |
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 06:08:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
What's "Current" Clack? What year?
"Current Clack" was an old feature of pre-3e FR sourcebooks that included brief canon details about events, characters, organisations, etc. in the Realms for a particular year. Almost like a month-by-month timeline. "Current" would refer to the particular year detailed. For example, my example above about an "musical Realmslore current clack" feature would probably focus on events in 1479/80 DR.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 12 Jul 2010 06:09:01 |
 |
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 07:05:14
|
| Brace: Open up your DM's Sourcebook of the Realms (assuming you have a copy, of course) to page 36 for an example of what Sage is talking about. |
|
|
|
Kyrene
Senior Scribe
South Africa
734 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 08:33:50
|
| Should we not move this discussion over to the Compendium scroll. A lot of good ideas here and one doesn't want to look for it in too many places. |
Lost for words? Find them in the Glossary of Phrases, Sayings & Words of the Realms
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 08:40:28
|
You both know he was trying to steer this thread into yet another edition-debate, right?
I'm sure Brace knows exactly what 'Current Clack' means - he just wanted to know what year Sage meant.
For me, 'Current Clack' would be whatever year I am writing in, and folks can adapt that to whatever year they are running in. As a firm supporter of 4e, I believe it is the DM's job to figure out everything else.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 23:16:06
|
but i thought the realms were advanced forward to make them more compatible with 4e rules? (at least that was what we were told right?)
(even though Eberron and Dark Sun weren't moved forward) |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 23:24:43
|
From what I understand, Dark Sun was actually pushed-back! A lot of people didn't like what happened in the Pentad trilogy, so 'I think' they re-booted Dark Sun to it's initial release year.
This is what I gathered from what little I read, BTW, so take it with a grain of salt. DS is cool, but certainly wasn't in my 'top five' settings, so my knowledge of it is sparse.
Dark Sun and Eberron were already perfect, but the Realms were a broken mess (not my opinion - the opinion of the designers clearly stated in all those wonderful 4e podcasts). The Realms needed to be 'fixed', because people crave giant catfish and DL draconians - this is what the intended demographic wants (supposedly).
Ergo, the Realms were NOT change for the rules, which has been proven patently false, but rather to appeal to a new group of players; people who found it too hard and confusing to run previously.
Not my opinion, mind you, just the condensed version of everything that was stated in the 4e podcasts.
I'm just wondering if any of the folks in-charge ever gave any consideration to just how much disposable income 13-yr-olds have.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 01:59:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
From what I understand, Dark Sun was actually pushed-back! A lot of people didn't like what happened in the Pentad trilogy, so 'I think' they re-booted Dark Sun to it's initial release year.
From what I recall of the early designer notes presented in the DDI for 4e DARK SUN, Rich Baker told us we'd probably only see that a few weeks of time had past between the end of the 2e revised boxed set, and what will be presented in the 4e Dark Sun Campaign Guide. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 02:26:21
|
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 02:38:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
So far as I know. But I should also note that these designer notes were back from when 4e DS was first announced. I've not heard of anything further regarding changes to the setting, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the overall impact of the Pentad series upon the 4e DS setting, has been altered somewhat -- according to either the whims of the designers, or the direction of the 4e setting.
quote:
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Eh. I enjoyed the novels as alternate tales of Athas. I didn't incorporate any of the major changes from those books into my version of DS, mostly because of the pre-existing changes that I'd already made to the setting. Allowing for some of what we'd learned from the novels would've likely negated a few of the more defined alterations I'd made to my interpretation of DS, and since I already had some pretty significant history backing my own changes, I chose to leave it at that.
quote:
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
The last solid and official information I heard, was back from last year's GenCon. The possibility of a 4e Dragonlance Campaign Guide was still confirmed, and a tentative production team was being put together. I suspect that we'll probably learn more about the progress/fate of 4e DL at this year's GenCon. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 03:45:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
Actually, Margaret's 3E License expired in 2008. The last supplement they published was Dragons of Spring |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 04:10:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
Actually, Margaret's 3E License expired in 2008. The last supplement they published was Dragons of Spring
Indeed. The DRAGONLANCE IP is now largely back in the hands of WotC. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 16:38:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Not my opinion, mind you, just the condensed version of everything that was stated in the 4e podcasts.
I used to get really annoyed with misinformation like this.
But now I pretend I'm reading Glenn Beck. Thus, it's entertainment. 
::::::
I have a gaming buddy who like DS a lot. He's not pleased with DL as it stands now. He doesn't much read the novels anymore.
Another buddy of mine doesn't care and reads whatever WotC publishes. This won't stop him from complaining, but he still bought up the books. |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3286 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 17:11:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
Actually, Margaret's 3E License expired in 2008. The last supplement they published was Dragons of Spring
Indeed. The DRAGONLANCE IP is now largely back in the hands of WotC.
It wouldn't surprize me if Dragonlance was the 2011 setting. No reason in particular, just a hunch. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 17:54:10
|
Sadly, I think the next release of DL will be greeted with the same... ummmm... enthusiasm... as the 3rd edition release of Greyhawk was. I never really got to know that setting, but I think it reached its zenith long ago.
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Not my opinion, mind you, just the condensed version of everything that was stated in the 4e podcasts.
I used to get really annoyed with misinformation like this.
But now I pretend I'm reading Glenn Beck. Thus, it's entertainment.
I've never heard of him... sounds like a brilliant fellow.
Fine.
That is what I got out of them, filtered through my obviously biased perceptions. I suppose different folks concentrate on different parts of the podcasts, and hear different things - to each his own.
Since MANY people are using the 4th edition rules in the old Realms (probably just as many, if not more, then anyone using the new material), I stand by my statement that the fact that FR was changed 'for the rules' is patently false. I can remember at least one designer saying they "wanted to make the setting easier for new fans coming into the Forgotten Realms" - that's a direct quote.
So the gist of what I said is correct, even if I did condense it in a not-so-flattering manner. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 13 Jul 2010 17:56:49 |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3563 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 18:09:37
|
Markus = Glenn Beck 
That paints a picture....although in Markus's defence, I dont think he breaks down in tears after every rant like beck does! |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 18:49:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Since MANY people are using the 4th edition rules in the old Realms (probably just as many, if not more, then anyone using the new material), I stand by my statement that the fact that FR was changed 'for the rules' is patently false.
If WotC can see into the future (that is, know in advance the 4E rules would be used mostly in the pre-Spellplague Realms), then why even publish anything?
Clearly they should be working for the US Government or the Department of Defense.
 |
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 13 Jul 2010 18:53:57 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 20:20:03
|
Why indeed?
I 'believe' (as in, this is more of my opinions) that 4e was designed from the ground-up to do what 3e was supposed to do, before a poorly-worded OGL allowed them to lose control of their source code.
3rd edition D&D was supposed to remain in the hands of WotC, while allowing 3rd party vendors to create modules and possibly settings for those rules. Unfortunately for them, the OGL allowed the re-printing of rules when necessary, without defining how much could be re-printed, and what they wound up with is other companies re-printing THEIR rule books wholesale.
As great as 3rd edition was/is for the fans, it never really met the goal of wotC - that is, to create one set of rules that everyone else has to play by, so that they could concentrate on building and perfecting those rules.
And continue selling those rules, of course, to everyone, no matter what setting, from what company, they happen to be using. It was brilliant play to eliminate rival rule-sets (like GURPs), that were starting to build momentum. Like I said, the OGL did not go far enough in maintaining that control, which is why they went so overboard with the GSL.
The failure on the part of the 4e was that, unlike 3e, they couldn't get anyone else to support their rules. The incredibly restrictive GSL had a big part in that, but I believe it was the amount of resources most small companies already had invested in 3e that played a much larger role.
So, 4e was a 'second attempt' to control the rules that all RPG's would use, and it was a much worse failure then 3e in that regard.
The guys at WotC don't want to write sourcebooks - that much is obvious - they want to create rules. That is why they created the LFR to write most of the lore for them. Get others to do for free what they are getting paid to do - its Huckleberry Finn all over again. Why should they 'waste' all their cool ideas in sourcebooks, when they can 'double-dip' and sell them as novels?
Now they are stuck creating more fluff then they bargained for, because no-one else is creating it, and the low-output of the DDi and meager fluff in the setting books is the result of that.
So what we have is a bunch of guys left over there, who know less about the setting then many of us here, who are aggravated by our (and other groups) existence, because we catch all their mistakes and won't let them write whatever the hell they please.
Instead of using us (which is what I would do) to 'fill in the blanks', they would rather just see us all 'go away'. They do not want any lore created that may someday contradict something they write in a novel. The setting serves the designers-made-authors better, if left blank. Proof of that is them 'firing' their LFR team, who were probably creating some really great lore, which is not what they wanted. They just wanted bare-bones modules, to be run at conventions, to showcase their new rules.
ALL my opinion, of course, and like I said earlier, I am biased, so take it with a grain of salt.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 13 Jul 2010 : 21:55:17
|
It's like pouring water on a weed. Water it a bit and watch whole paragraphs sprout up out of seemingly nowhere.
:::::::::::
Anyway, the 3E OGL was very explicit about what rules could and could not be reprinted, and in what form.
I've not seen one written word that WotC's goal with 3E and the OGL was to overrun competition.
What we do know for a fact was that the OGL was designed as a medium *for* fans and others who’d already shown an interest in borrowing the 2E rules and posting things online in the early days of the internet (all of whom TSR aggressively went after and discouraged from posting anything online).
Instead of prohibiting it outright, WotC gave us a medium (read: set of rules) by which to use their stuff and thus promote it.
LFR doesn’t exist to “write the lore” for the Realms. The adventures are (well, were) required to be lore-light on purpose. Besides, it’s not like what little lore actually produced by LFR is collected and distributed to non-LFR players.
I’m not sure where your magical mind reading powers come from, but I think we can safely dismiss anything about game designers being aggravated and supposedly wanting us all to “go away”.
I’m pretty convinced at this point Markus that you’re writing stream-of-thought ideas just to see how much time I’ll spend happily refuting them and ribbing you in the process. |
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 13 Jul 2010 21:56:56 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 00:21:36
|
LOL
Oh, I'm pretty damn sure they want ME to 'go away'.
You should read my mails.
But I did clearly state that all of that is how I look at it - everyone is going to see things differently.
But the thing about them losing control over 3e was discussed somewhere, awhile back, so I didn't just make that up. One company went as far as to re-produce the PHB and the DMG, without adding anything new to the game. All they did was slightly re-word it.
And many of the setting books were 'complete', meaning they came with the basic 3e rules, alleviating the need for anyone to buy a WotC book, which again, is a fact, and clearly something they would have found distressful (and rightly so).
Mental powers? Not really... I'm more like that guy on Lie to Me, or better yet, The Mentalist. Years ago I was a 'psychic' on the AOL boards... everyone thought I was the genuine article. Cold-reading without seeing a person is a pretty nifty trick.
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Markus = Glenn Beck
That paints a picture....although in Markus's defence, I dont think he breaks down in tears after every rant like beck does!
I finally got curious and looked him up - he doesn't even look familiar.
I tried to watch one of the videos and my browser crashed - damn CIA keeping me from the truth! |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 14 Jul 2010 00:29:19 |
|
|
|
Brace Cormaeril
Learned Scribe
294 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 00:51:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You both know he was trying to steer this thread into yet another edition-debate, right?
I'm sure Brace knows exactly what 'Current Clack' means - he just wanted to know what year Sage meant.
For me, 'Current Clack' would be whatever year I am writing in, and folks can adapt that to whatever year they are running in. As a firm supporter of 4e, I believe it is the DM's job to figure out everything else.
@Marky Mark and his Grognard Funky Bunch:
I don't do edition-debate, wasichu, such concerns are below me. However, considering the vehemence issued by Candlekeep's scribes regarding the timeline, it is a wholly appropriate to ask what year is considered 'current', regarding a 'Current Clack' project. |
The Silver Fire's Blade: A Novella in Nine Parts, Available Soon, in the Adventuring Forum!
|
Edited by - Brace Cormaeril on 14 Jul 2010 03:25:44 |
|
|
|
Caolin
Senior Scribe
768 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 01:54:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Why indeed?
I 'believe' (as in, this is more of my opinions) that 4e was designed from the ground-up to do what 3e was supposed to do, before a poorly-worded OGL allowed them to lose control of their source code.
3rd edition D&D was supposed to remain in the hands of WotC, while allowing 3rd party vendors to create modules and possibly settings for those rules. Unfortunately for them, the OGL allowed the re-printing of rules when necessary, without defining how much could be re-printed, and what they wound up with is other companies re-printing THEIR rule books wholesale.
As great as 3rd edition was/is for the fans, it never really met the goal of wotC - that is, to create one set of rules that everyone else has to play by, so that they could concentrate on building and perfecting those rules.
And continue selling those rules, of course, to everyone, no matter what setting, from what company, they happen to be using. It was brilliant play to eliminate rival rule-sets (like GURPs), that were starting to build momentum. Like I said, the OGL did not go far enough in maintaining that control, which is why they went so overboard with the GSL.
The failure on the part of the 4e was that, unlike 3e, they couldn't get anyone else to support their rules. The incredibly restrictive GSL had a big part in that, but I believe it was the amount of resources most small companies already had invested in 3e that played a much larger role.
So, 4e was a 'second attempt' to control the rules that all RPG's would use, and it was a much worse failure then 3e in that regard.
The guys at WotC don't want to write sourcebooks - that much is obvious - they want to create rules. That is why they created the LFR to write most of the lore for them. Get others to do for free what they are getting paid to do - its Huckleberry Finn all over again. Why should they 'waste' all their cool ideas in sourcebooks, when they can 'double-dip' and sell them as novels?
Now they are stuck creating more fluff then they bargained for, because no-one else is creating it, and the low-output of the DDi and meager fluff in the setting books is the result of that.
So what we have is a bunch of guys left over there, who know less about the setting then many of us here, who are aggravated by our (and other groups) existence, because we catch all their mistakes and won't let them write whatever the hell they please.
Instead of using us (which is what I would do) to 'fill in the blanks', they would rather just see us all 'go away'. They do not want any lore created that may someday contradict something they write in a novel. The setting serves the designers-made-authors better, if left blank. Proof of that is them 'firing' their LFR team, who were probably creating some really great lore, which is not what they wanted. They just wanted bare-bones modules, to be run at conventions, to showcase their new rules.
ALL my opinion, of course, and like I said earlier, I am biased, so take it with a grain of salt.
Wow, I never looked at it that way. I totally agree with that opinion. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 02:05:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
Actually, Margaret's 3E License expired in 2008. The last supplement they published was Dragons of Spring
Indeed. The DRAGONLANCE IP is now largely back in the hands of WotC.
It wouldn't surprize me if Dragonlance was the 2011 setting. No reason in particular, just a hunch.
That seems to be the current belief among most DL rumour-mongers. Though it's strange that we've not heard much about the next setting.
I suppose Wizards might be holding back on any particular info re: the next setting, for now at least, until this year's setting has been released. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 02:09:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
However, considering the vehence issued by Candlekeep's scribes regarding the timeline, it is a wholly appropriate to ask what year is considered 'current', regarding a 'Current Clack' project.
I think it would be more appropriate to note that, given some intent among scribes here to keep their games in a pre-4e setting, the very definition of an era-specific "Current Clack" series becomes somewhat vague for them. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 04:14:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So they did leave the Pentad series canon? Interesting...
I never read those books, but I had friends that ran a DS campaign and know they were upset over how much those novels changed the setting.
Have you heard anything about a 4e DL? Last I read, they had extended Weis' 3e license for at least another year, but that should be up real soon.
Actually, Margaret's 3E License expired in 2008. The last supplement they published was Dragons of Spring
Indeed. The DRAGONLANCE IP is now largely back in the hands of WotC.
It wouldn't surprize me if Dragonlance was the 2011 setting. No reason in particular, just a hunch.
That seems to be the current belief among most DL rumour-mongers. Though it's strange that we've not heard much about the next setting.
I suppose Wizards might be holding back on any particular info re: the next setting, for now at least, until this year's setting has been released.
Don't they announce it every year at GenCon now? |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Brace Cormaeril
Learned Scribe
294 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 04:18:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
However, considering the vehence issued by Candlekeep's scribes regarding the timeline, it is a wholly appropriate to ask what year is considered 'current', regarding a 'Current Clack' project.
I think it would be more appropriate to note that, given some intent among scribes here to keep their games in a pre-4e setting, the very definition of an era-specific "Current Clack" series becomes somewhat vague for them.
Agreed. Hence the need for clarification.
|
The Silver Fire's Blade: A Novella in Nine Parts, Available Soon, in the Adventuring Forum!
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 04:23:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Don't they announce it every year at GenCon now?
Pretty much. Though the '08 GenCon was the first time we had any real and definitive info/confirmation about a 4e DLCG. There wasn't much said last year, beyond who would likely be working on it.
Maybe this year's GenCon will offer something different in terms of news about 4e DRAGONLANCE. Or at least hint that it will indeed be the next setting published by Wizards.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 16:29:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
Agreed. Hence the need for clarification.
I think the point Sage is getting at is that there is no official year or whatever, project or no project.
Just pick a year that suits your interests and go for it.
|
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 14 Jul 2010 16:30:39 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 17:20:06
|
About a decade past, in the small fishing village of Cargoon on the coast of Sembia, the Mage Sraulthond built himself a keep. He hired the Dwarven engineering company of Moradin's Anvil for the project, and they in turn hired some of the locals to help with the manual labor. At first the villagers hated the idea that some spell-hurler was to live among them and ruin their community, but the influx of coin into the normally impoverished settlement was welcome, so they held their tongues. Once complete, The Mage kept a few of the locals on to help with the keep's day-to-day maintenance, gardening, and cooking. His Chamberlain, however, was a dark and dour fellow who hailed from somewhere 'to the west', and ran the household with an cold efficiency.
The villagers grew used to their new neighbor, mostly because Sraulthond kept to himself, but also because of the greater prosperity they enjoyed by the needs of the Keep. Some even began to feel the Mage helped to keep them safe from outside threats... until recently. In the past few weeks, dark and mysterious figures have been seen on the outskirts of town, and just two days past Ol' Skory, the town drunkard, swears he saw a shadow rise in an alley when there was no-one about.
Rumors abound now, about 'dark experiments' conducted at the keep, or that evil forces are out to steal Sraulthond's secrets. Some say it is old enemies of his, while others claim it is a group of assassins after the chamberlain, for abandoning whatever post he formerly held. Some of the more level-headed oldsters of Cargoon say it is nothing more then desperate wolves, who have come close because the harshness of last winter depleted their usual prey. Whatever these strange goings-on may be, the townsfolk are considering hiring a group of adventures to find their source.
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
...it is a wholly appropriate to ask what year is considered 'current', regarding a 'Current Clack' project.
Not really.
What year did the above happen in? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 14 Jul 2010 19:05:32 |
|
|
|
Kyrene
Senior Scribe
South Africa
734 Posts |
Posted - 14 Jul 2010 : 18:44:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
About a decade past . . . the townsfolk are considering hiring a group of adventures to find their source.
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
...it is a wholly appropriate to ask what year is considered 'current', regarding a 'Current Clack' project.
Not really.
What year did the above happen in?
Bravo! Great one, MT. You should start writing "Steal This Hook" articles for Wizards. |
Lost for words? Find them in the Glossary of Phrases, Sayings & Words of the Realms
|
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Canon Fodder
