| Author |
 Topic  |
|
shandiris
Seeker
61 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Aug 2011 : 09:59:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
I see this scroll slowly turning into another ill-fated (and off-topic) 4E-hating RSE bash.
It also answers Imp's OP question well enough: the Realms are officially defined by whatever gets put out on the retail bookshelves, and individually (unofficially) defined by the cutoff points where people choose to start and stop buying their Realms books.
Traditional edition bashing comes from the "old" grognards who obstinately insist 4E wrecked the game and nuked the Realms setting. New waves of edition bashing come from the "young" players who were introduced to D&D and enjoy the Realms almost exlusively through 4E - they tend to see the old stuff as being old and stuffy, and to be honest I don't blame them at all for dismissing all the older Realmslore because the grognards so readily condemn instead of encourage interest in D&D and the Realms outside the segments they consider canon.
I'm writing myself out of this scroll, I divine too much chance of it ending ugly.
I assume your definition of "new players" is ones that started after 4th edition was released?
I and most of my group started DND one edition earlier in 3.5 We did try 4th edition but after three sessions recognized that this wasn't what we wanted. It was too "simple" for us. (We tried 2e some time before that, and found that the lore was alot better, but the gaming system wasn't.)
But to answer the OP: I agree that the realms aren't the realms anymore. That is because the realms are a setting defined by magic. Now that the magic isn't as powerful as it was, it doesn't feel the same anymore. In 3e you were able to explain all magical things in the realms quite easily, and at a certain point you could do those things yourself. In the 4e realms this type of magic either doesn't exist, or is based on DM fiat.
Furthermore the changes don't make logical sense. I can't (even with the spellplague) imagine that in certain things so little has changed in 100 years (mostly in terms of politics) and on the other hand certain things they did do can't happen in as short a time as 100 years. You can't simply make wood elves spontaneously transform...
In conclusion: It's still part of the realms, but me (and my group) don't think it feels like the realms anymore.
PS: all IMO with no intention of insulting anyone. |
 |
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2011 : 19:43:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
I find it jarring that the two eras aren’t more different for all the hubbub about the dire need for setting changes and the catastrophic story mechanisms used to bring it about.
I would argue that some things simply could not change too radically, while some changes...and let's be honest here...were actually good. I mean, the old lore explained why, but I never bought Anauroch being where it was. I never actually said anything until after the Netherese had restored all the greenery, however. And High Imaskar is good - if it had to displace something, Mulhorand was likely as painless a target as one was likely to get.
Some things, as I said, couldn't change. With one exception - that being Neverwinter - the Sword Coast is pretty much the Sword Coast as it was. Sure, a couple of things are missing - Undermountain/Skullport (unless I missed something), as an example - but by and large, the area is the same. I imagine that Beregost is the same, that the Cloakwood Mines are still there, and Candlekeep still sits stuffed full of books. All as it should be. If they had mucked with it overmuch, they would not have gotten a positive reaction - and I think that was in their minds even as they changed other things.
And I give the Neverwinter Campaign Setting authors credit - the havoc wreaked there is entirely plausible (of course, I live in volcano country myself, so the entire premise actually made me smile). Furthermore, the damage is pretty much confined to the city and its surrounds, and the entire thing is (in theory) going to see an MMO released next year concerning the area. Yes - I will likely end up playing it if they do release it.
I would argue that while there are things about the Shattered Realms that I intensely dislike, it is still the Realms, and not just because Wizbro says so. If one stays west of the Heartlands and north of the Cloud Peak Mountains, and disallows certain things (dragonborn player characters, something I will never allow in any game I run), the atmosphere should be almost identical to that of a century previous. Just avoid that which rankles (like Halruaa being sandblasted and Dambrath being creampuffed), and the Realms can be what you want it to be. |
Edited by - Old Man Harpell on 30 Aug 2011 19:46:31 |
|
|
|
Abenabin Gimblescrew
Seeker
USA
75 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2011 : 20:05:50
|
| I disagree with the Mulhorand removal. I don't mind High Imaskar coming back, but I think it would have been far more interesting to have a growing Mulhorand Empire suddenly shaken to its foundation as an old enemy comes back from the past to reclaim what once it had. A new war erupts between Mulhorand and the Imaskar bringing in a new dynamic and spicing up the region some giving it some character, then the usual doldrums it has the reputation of being in the past. At least that is how I would have handle it, but will probably only be seen in my campaign world if I ever decide to make such a change that radical. I've never been a huge fan of using cataclysms as an excuse for making radical changes unless the story warrants it. As the history was going in FR I didn't really see it happening, especially since they just had a huge shake up in the cosmos with the Time of Troubles. |
Invention is the key to staying ahead of the competition. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2011 : 20:41:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Abenabin Gimblescrew
I disagree with the Mulhorand removal. I don't mind High Imaskar coming back, but I think it would have been far more interesting to have a growing Mulhorand Empire suddenly shaken to its foundation as an old enemy comes back from the past to reclaim what once it had. A new war erupts between Mulhorand and the Imaskar bringing in a new dynamic and spicing up the region some giving it some character, then the usual doldrums it has the reputation of being in the past. At least that is how I would have handle it, but will probably only be seen in my campaign world if I ever decide to make such a change that radical. I've never been a huge fan of using cataclysms as an excuse for making radical changes unless the story warrants it. As the history was going in FR I didn't really see it happening, especially since they just had a huge shake up in the cosmos with the Time of Troubles.
Cataclysms aren't high on my list of things I like, either. The one time it didn't leave a bad taste was in Dragonlance, when your first steps in Ansalon take place long after the fact. Any stories set prior to that do not leave you with an 'I was robbed' feeling, as you know what's coming down the pike, and have no way to claim you were blindsided.
I always regarded the Old Empires as one of those areas that was sort of...well...just kind of there. I think my players found a reason to travel to Chessenta one time - that encompassed maybe half a session's worth. Otherwise, I never did anything with the place.
Of the three, only Unther can be said to have been completely scoured from the face of Faerun. Chessenta is still there, obviously. Of the three, Mulhorand sort of exists in that grey area. One of the old Mulhorandi cities is still there - who is to say that the new landlords (the Imaskari) won't undertake some sort of restoration project? Some still-remaining documents from the Mulhorand era may yet remain, giving the Imaskari some ideas how to placate some of the descendents of the Mulan people they replaced. Maybe there could even be a revival of Mulhorandi culture and traditions, even as the Imaskari keep a tight lid on the political/military situation.
And certainly, if anyone has the magical skills and equipment to make the needed changes, the Imaskari fit the bill. Their capital city is a gigantic TARDIS - why not be able to duplicate that on a smaller scale in other places (such as the aforementioned Mulhorandi city)?
Wizbro is not going to give us old-timers what we want - which is a Star Trek-style reboot (that, I suppose, would be admitting they made a horrible mistake...or something). So the next best thing is incremental changes and repair. Obviously, the Sword Coast is by far and away the easiest. There's very little to do to make it the way it was/ought to be. But other areas can be made the way they were, with a little more imagination and effort. Unless they are beyond salvage (Luiren and Var, for example), completely obliterated (Unther and probably Halruaa), or yanked off the planet altogether (Maztica), all it will take is a little mental elbow grease. And if we're lucky, maybe Wizbro will realize this. |
|
|
|
Tyr
Learned Scribe
225 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2011 : 21:08:33
|
The wierd part is when you compare it to how they converted Dark Sun, which had very little changed but for a little bit of shoehorning to fit the Eladrin in and their primordials vs gods generic backstory. They had sections based on more roleplay elements and what the settings races were rather than trying to add more or replace them.
It's probably what they should have tried so it atleast was the same setting, maybe even with moving it back to where 2e started and just to keep it internally consistant with itself. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 30 Aug 2011 : 23:50:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyr
The wierd part is when you compare it to how they converted Dark Sun, which had very little changed but for a little bit of shoehorning to fit the Eladrin in and their primordials vs gods generic backstory. They had sections based on more roleplay elements and what the settings races were rather than trying to add more or replace them.
It's probably what they should have tried so it atleast was the same setting, maybe even with moving it back to where 2e started and just to keep it internally consistant with itself.
I'm willing to bet that a lot of the reason they changed very little in Dark Sun was that it was already a wrecked world by original design. All they needed, as you said, was a little bit of shoehorning to bring it under the redundant 'Points Of Light' that they seem insistent on smashing virtually all their intellectual properties with. I am willing to bet that the Ravenloft fans and my friends over at birthright.net have given fevered thanks that the Points Of Light Wrecking Crew passed them by this time around. |
|
|
|
skychrome
Senior Scribe
713 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 01:40:31
|
| In the beginning I was really annoyed about 4e. I am still not very much convinced, but still it is the realms and I love them. After all my favorite setting is 2e and though I feel there is so much lore from 3,5e lost, 4e still is the realms and D&D would be nothing without 'em. And it also has a certain appeal to play with a party on the ruins what used to be a living city or site in 3.5 and now its an ancient ruin... |
"You make an intriguing offer, one that is very tempting. It would seem that I have little alternative than to answer thusly: DISINTEGRATE!" Vaarsuvius, Order of the Stick 625 |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 02:56:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
In the beginning I was really annoyed about 4e. I am still not very much convinced, but still it is the realms and I love them. After all my favorite setting is 2e and though I feel there is so much lore from 3,5e lost, 4e still is the realms and D&D would be nothing without 'em. And it also has a certain appeal to play with a party on the ruins what used to be a living city or site in 3.5 and now its an ancient ruin...
True.
And I will be among the first to say that not all the changes were bad. Someone pointed out that the real problem is not the Sellplague, or even much of the changes, but the 100-year jump that tosses the Realmslore we love into the dustbin in one way or another.
Have the Sellplague strike...and wait five years, detailing each of those five years meticulously and in-depth. Come up with a plausible reason why the Weave went bonkers (Mystra dying - AGAIN - was weak and seemed forced). Maybe detail how certain things came about, such as Tyrmanther, Akanul, and the rise of High Imaskar. And give player characters a chance to be there when some of these RSE's take place ("Tymora's <CENSORED>s! Dragon-men!"). I would make book that if they has done it this way, the dissatisfaction would have been muted, and a lot less.
Some areas have hardly changed at all - the Sword Coast is a perfect example (from which no campaign I run will ever, ever depart, save to Returned Abeir if the occasion happens along). Some are actually good additions to the Realms (Anauroch gone, High Imaskar, the Shadovar, and so forth). It's a matter of picking the good and ignoring the bad. While there is undeniably a lot of 'bad', there is still a lot of 'good' left - the Neverwinter Campaign Setting is the first of what I hope will be a continuation of ways for us to make the Shattered Realms back into the Forgotten Realms we knew and wish we still had. |
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 14:25:05
|
Personally i don't care for the 3rd or 4th edition D&D style. 2nd edition was perfect for my friends and I whenever we got together for a session. I don't let my dislike of the 4th edition rules affect, in any way, my enjoyment of the Realms books being released now. I do favor the older Realms novels over the newer ones,but i think many people are that way when talking about something they love. Whatever first got you interested in something will always hold a higher place in your heart over the newer stuff.
Another beautiful thing about playing/reading in a fantasy setting: if you don't like a rule change that applies to the D&D side, then don't use it in your campaigns or don't let it affect your enjoyment of the novels. Each of us can shape the Realms any way we want. LOL i remember having some CRAZY campaigns back in high school which would make many of you laugh...or cry. :) |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
MrHedgehog
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 16:47:51
|
| Why would High Imaskar and Mulhorand have gone to war? The Imaskari as detailed in the Underdark book weren't evil. |
|
|
|
Tyranthraxus
Senior Scribe
Netherlands
423 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 16:48:49
|
I've been keeping an eye out on this scroll but I was afraid this turned out into yet another edition bash. Thanks fellow scribes and mods for keeping it civil  .
As for the OP, I think the 4E Realms are still the Realms. Like others have posted before me things have changed but the majority is still the same.
I love and hate things about all the FR editions. I try and stick with canon but I'm not afraid to alter things to fit my Realms or simply ignore it. In the end it's your campaign and you can do whatever you want with it. |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 17:01:02
|
| See, for me, it is not even that I do not like most of the changes (even though I don't). I could have handled any number of changes that I didn't like (given time) if they had taken the time to give the changes well thought out and explained reasoning. My big example of this (though there are plethora, well, maybe not plethora, of other little examples) is the Tyr/Tymora/Helm love triangle thing. Now, I am have never been a big fan of Tyr or Helm, so I am not overly sad to see either go. But, the whole idea of this whole scenario was poorly explained and never detailed in any measure at a later point (which was promised in the Countdown to the Realms articles). Why would a CG goddess marry an LG (and rather uptight) god? Again, why would said lawful good god lose control and kill his best friend in a duel? The same could be said about Cyric killing Mystra via the strings of Shar? It is not that Cyric killed Mystra, which I didn't like (killing the goddess of magic again? isn't that a bit of a tired trope for this setting?), but that they didn't explain why the subterfuge worked? Another was their stated reasoning of removing "non-Realmsian" regions like Mulhorand and Maztica, but then they blow up Halruaa as well!? That was one of the most "Realmsian" countries in my book. Once again with Halruaa, it was stated that the Spellplague was supposed to move around areas of dense magic, but for some reason, this magic-saturated country was blow up. Anyways, I have probably been a bit too long at explaining my exasperation with how the changes were implemented, and so I should probably stop. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 17:50:27
|
See, I like having the seemingly wacky or random things to explain. And I've said before, just because we don't have the explanation readily available doesn't mean there isn't one.
quote:
Originally posted by MrHedgehog
Why would High Imaskar and Mulhorand have gone to war? The Imaskari as detailed in the Underdark book weren't evil.
Though no doubt both sides call themselves good and the other evil, good and evil have nothing to do with it--wars are rarely fought over ideology, even in the Realms. One nation has something the other wants--be it land, treasure, magic, etc.--and they fight it out.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 20:18:26
|
I'm kind of digging the new Realms changes. I tend to envision the new setting as somewhat of a post apocalyptic era where people are still rebuilding and there is a lot more monster haunted ruins and destroyed areas than previously available. Caravans probably don't make the trek from say Waterdeep to Sembia anymore and so news about neighboring realms is spotty and distorted at best.
With alot of the old high powered NPC's dead or missing, such as Khelben, Alustriel, Elminster(not in shadowdale anymore), and many others, there's a lot more wiggle room for awful things to happen for PC's to fix. If the armies of Bane invade the Dales again, chances are the Chosen aren't going to show up and melt the entire army with spells nowadays.
I don't care much for most the gods being dead or gone, but that's fixable. And I'm still working out the details to fix the drow pantheon, though I'm likely to leave Eilistraee out of the picture. I always liked Laduguer and Deep Duerra and not sure why they got whacked. The recent duergar article about how they worship devils is a pretty neat idea, so I'll probably combine that and the old gray dwarf pantheon somehow.
Oh and here's a request. We need more information about Elturgard. That whole regime reminds me of the Kingpriest era from Dragonlance where the forces of good goes too far. I'd love to see more maps of various Realms areas done by Mike Schley or whoever made the Daggerdale backdrop maps.
I was pretty against all the Realms changes at the beginning but I've warmed to them somewhat and changed whatever I don't like. I don't use 4th edition rules because they don't appeal to me, so all this is coming from 2nd or 3rd edition viewpoints. I spose I've rambled long enough. haha. |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1266 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 20:58:57
|
(Warning..incoherent rant) I like the idea a previous poster had and to view the 4E realms as "The Arcane Age" setting. I *really* dislike the 4E realms, because I loved the 1st & 2E setting and to a lesser extent the 3rd Edition. Destroying all (and yes, it did destroy those 3 prior versions by the Cataclysm..sorry "Spell Plague") that I loved is too hard to swallow. I've read Elminster Must die and will read Bury Elminster Deep and am happy with those books so far. But the setting itself is no longer interesting to me since everything I learned about and studied and loved is gone and reshaped on the whim of some marketing genius at Wizards. Apologies to all who love the 4E realms and hate the previous, that is certainly your perogative. Me, I'll just stick to the old stuff that has been with me since I was a little kid opening my Pool of Radiance gold box set for the first time and marveling how the creatures from my Monster Manual had made it onto my C128 computer.
(incoherent rant over)
|
|
|
|
idilippy
Senior Scribe
USA
417 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2011 : 21:11:52
|
| The 4e Realms, much as I despise a large majority of the changes and explanations(or lack thereof), are the official Forgotten Realms setting so in that regard I believe they are THE Realms. However, as far as I am concerned they are not My Realms, which is the important thing as far as I and my players are concerned. My Realms, the setting that I DM almost all of my games in, is a loose and sometimes morphing fusion of 1e-3.5e material that I have kept, material from other settings(including the 4e Realms in a couple cases) that I like, and material I or my players have created for our specific games. This changes as players have an impact on the world they are in, I read forgotten bits of 3e and earlier lore and decide to adopt it, cut it, or ignore it, and as I read other fiction and non-fiction and decide that something I read would fit perfectly into the setting. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2011 : 02:08:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
See, I like having the seemingly wacky or random things to explain. And I've said before, just because we don't have the explanation readily available doesn't mean there isn't one.
Wholeheartedly agreed. Plus, as DMs, we're free to come up with an explanation that works for our own campaigns when confronted with wacky and/or random things.
I know I've usually followed that exact path with most of the Realmslore published over the last fifteen or so years. I've fleshed out so much of my own Realms campaign that I've rarely used officially material "as is." Every time I have purchased a new Realms product -- whether it be a novel or sourcebook -- I like to note what I can take from each so that, after a little tweaking, I can find a place for these wacky tidbits in my Realms.
And just as an example, I'm now eagerly anticipating doing very much the same when I finally receive my copy of the Neverwinter Campaign Setting.
[I'll admit, I was a little unsure of this book. But that notion had nothing to do with any apparent anti-4e stance. Moreover, the Neverwinter of my Realms is VERY different from the official Realms. So I initially feared there would be very little I could take from this book. However, reading the thorough review for the book on EN World has convinced me otherwise.] |
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 02 Sep 2011 02:10:49 |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2011 : 10:09:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
See, I like having the seemingly wacky or random things to explain. And I've said before, just because we don't have the explanation readily available doesn't mean there isn't one.
Wholeheartedly agreed. Plus, as DMs, we're free to come up with an explanation that works for our own campaigns when confronted with wacky and/or random things.
I concur to a point - every edition has given the DMs of the Realms a plethora of material, up to now. Any DM that can't insert 'filler' has some potential problems, particularly when set against a rich tapestry of history and lore that is the fabric of the Realms.
This edition simply requires more filler. A whole lot more filler. But...
It's the Realms - so of course we're going to do it, because this is the world we all love. And we'll accept the fact we need to spend more time 'filling' and less time actually weaving a tale for our players. And hoping what we make is worthy of being Realmslore, as we try and weave our vision into that tattered tapestry. |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1266 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2011 : 15:57:51
|
| I just wish the activity level returned in the community that it was in the 3rd edition. It seems like the 4th edition killed the realms in that sense. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2011 : 16:06:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
This edition simply requires more filler. A whole lot more filler. But...
I think that is happening, but it's happening slowly. And while I also would like to see more/more/more/faster/faster/faster, I also recognize that it's incredibly easy to overdo it. We need to strike a proper balance and have the right amount of stuff come out at the right pace.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2011 : 19:14:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I also recognize that it's incredibly easy to overdo it. We need to strike a proper balance and have the right amount of stuff come out at the right pace.
Cheers
It is, for a fact. The problem here, however, is just the exact opposite of 'more, faster' - the release of anything was all but totally stagnated until the release of the Neverwinter Campaign Setting. Obviously, I am not including novels in this assessment, but I would like to see Wizbro put just a bit more effort into some background of the last 100 years. Material all of us can access, and should have had with the FRCG. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2011 : 19:43:12
|
Agreed. We used to get at least 1 or 2 articles a week, for free, in addition to novels, magazines, and sourcebooks. Now we get a small amount in an online "magazine" that many have said isn't as good as the print version was, and the novels.
And a lot of the online content we got was stuff that gave good lore without broadly affecting the setting -- write-ups on previously unknown NPCs, spellbooks and magic, descriptions of unique businesses/locations, ghost stories, etc. It was stuff that further fleshed out the setting without overwhelming anyone with too much detail. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2011 : 20:00:18
|
If Neverwinter continues to be a success, then that will no doubt go some way to pushing WotC to release more Realms stuff. It's a new design team with a new design philosophy, and that philosophy seems to be much more supportive of the Realms.
I'm hearing about a lot of FR support coming up. Granted, this is Dragon, but we might also see print products. Don't give up hope!
http://www.wizards.com/DND/Article.aspx?x=dnd/4news/20110901
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 03 Sep 2011 : 21:51:17
|
If a certified Shattered Realms critic like myself can pick up the Neverwinter Campaign Setting and judge it not only acceptable, but a fine addition to All Things Realms, then what you describe, Erik, sounds plausible. And if there's someone else steering the ship of the Realms now from the ones who dropped the 100-year nuke, so much the better.
Neverwinter pretty much fills in the one gap in the Sword Coast (unless you count smaller places, like Highcliff, Beregost, Nashkel, High Hedge, and so forth), and gives us the basic framework we needed. And it did so without sell(plaguing)ing out to the Points of Light Wrecking Crew, which, believe me, is very much appreciated. There are a couple of head-scratchers in there, sure, but this is the level of publication where it is up to the DM to make campaign-specific changes.
In short, we all know 'where we are'. The question now is 'how did we get there?' If it were up to the Marmells, Sernetts, and die Bies, I would be much less pessimistic of ever finding out, and not continually dreading yet another retcon. But as I said before (somewhere)...it's the Realms. So of course I will wait and see. I owe myself, as well as Ed and those of his mind, no less. |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2011 : 17:26:16
|
| You guys are in for some pleasant surprises (plural). No spoilers *finger on nose* |
Edited by - Matt James on 05 Sep 2011 17:26:29 |
|
|
|
Laeknir
Seeker
68 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2011 : 17:44:03
|
No offense to anyone, but the new Neverwinter Campaign didn't really fit with my Realms. Too dark, and I don't use 4E anyway. Sorry, Erik.
As for the new Realms being "THE" Realms, I'd have to vote no. I've never liked post-apocalypse settings (I didn't care for Eberron, either).
|
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2011 : 18:04:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
You guys are in for some pleasant surprises (plural). No spoilers *finger on nose*
You, sir, are a sadist.
If what's to come is as good as what we were just handed (NCS), then I will have no complaints. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2011 : 18:21:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Laeknir
No offense to anyone, but the new Neverwinter Campaign didn't really fit with my Realms. Too dark, and I don't use 4E anyway. Sorry, Erik.
As for the new Realms being "THE" Realms, I'd have to vote no. I've never liked post-apocalypse settings (I didn't care for Eberron, either).
Eberron didn't grab me, either. My son bought me the Eberron Player's Guide for Father's Day - I will say that it has quite a lot of neat stuff in it that is easily transposed to the Realms, lots of crunchy bits that are useful (races, options, abilities, etcetera) but I am very thankful he did not waste his money on the campaign guide as well - Eberron is...well...boring.
The only 'dark' part of Neverwinter I see is the Abolethic presence (it's hard for me to think of devil worshipers as 'dark' at this point), and I will be editing that part heavily (of course, maybe I just think dark as a matter of course). Neverwinter, to me, is best described as a 'free-for-all'. The way it was written, in my opinion, makes it one of the better offerings Wizbro has these days. Sure, it relies a bit much on the 'post-apocalypse' trope, but unlike the Sellplague, the reason Neverwinter was trashed was at least plausible, which I very much appreciate.
I will agree with the line in the OP, by the way, that 4th Edition is a wholly different system. It was designed to appeal to the MMO crowd, without realizing that people who want such things will generally go and...play an MMO. Not saying it's bad, but it is the reason I use the Pathfinder system. |
|
|
|
Wormys_Queue
Acolyte
Germany
7 Posts |
Posted - 05 Sep 2011 : 20:28:19
|
| I have to admit that I love what I hear Erik and Matt saying. :) |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 07 Sep 2011 : 23:04:33
|
So do I. I cannot find anything in the Neverwinter Campaign Setting that I think merits dismissal. If the stuff being hinted at is of this sort of quality, color me satisfied.
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
I just wish the activity level returned in the community that it was in the 3rd edition. It seems like the 4th edition killed the realms in that sense.
I would say that you aren't seeing a decent portion of the 'new' community here in Candlekeep, for the simple fact that the 4th Edition is their introduction to the Realms, and they simply aren't cognizant of the 'magic' that the Realms had before then.
What we need to do now (and what the NCS has done, and, hopefully, the hinted-at material will do) is do what we can to bring some of that magic back. I'm betting we will see more of that magic returning in the near future, and the more people we can make aware of that, the better. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Are 4th Ed Realms still THE Realms?
