| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Khaoss
Acolyte
USA
3 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 07:10:27
|
I think that a timeline paradox is needed at least to get the best of the old along with the new together. (A fan of the old Chronomancer hand book) . I did like the doom and gloom of the new edition to a point. I do think they should have had a gods war that cut them down a lot. Or the Great world ending evils that the gods had to stop. I like the abolethic sovereignty being a new power/great evil. But the pointless ways they killed the gods and novel selling heroes of the realms made me and many others turn away from D&D and most of the new FR novels. |
 |
|
|
Brix
Learned Scribe
147 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 08:15:58
|
I don't mind if the 4E storyline will be continiued, even I don't like many of the Spellplague-changes. Why? Easy: because I see many story opportunities.
* Mystra: The most prominent one. I think that she is an integral part of the realms. Since the release of 4E-FR I was thinking of adventure plots to bring her back. I know that there are many others. Wasn't there even an RPGA-adventure where (a part of) Mystra was hidden away at Candlekeep and nourished by followers? To bring back Mystra is could be a epic story I'd love to play.
* Abeir: Many sages have already speculated about this place as a separate Realms-flavored setting. I would like to explore that, too. Even I didn't liked the out of phase continent at first hand.
* Timejump: The current time jump (which I did not like) was 100 years. Former iterations of the FRCS dealt with 10 years if I remember correctly. That means we can enjoy 10 campaign updates before we reach the spellplague events
* old adventure hooks. There are so many adventure hooks that were abandoned with the advent of the 4E FRCS. Those can be picked up again.
I was a strong critic against 4E at all (I was even corrected once by the sage for being to rude in my comments). Now I applause WotC, because they plan to do exactly what many fans were asking for.
There surley won't erease Spellplague from history. But please see it as an opportunity and support WotC in their plans. |
|
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 09:33:25
|
[/quote]
In response to one of your earlier points, I believe the RSEs need to be toned down. Having said that, have we actually had any after the Spellplague and the time jump? I will wait and see about the potential one on the horizon (by the way, if that gave you a bad feeling, check out the blurb for Demon Weave), but I don't recall any having happened since the jump to 4E (though several lead up to it).
[/quote]
Maybe they're just making her the dark counterpart to Correllon. He's god of high magic or something if I recall. That whole blurb for Demonweb makes me think Liriel is back in town. Then again the author isn't E.C. so you got me. Guess I'm all confused on this Rise of the Underdark thing. |
|
|
|
MrHedgehog
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 10:18:43
|
If it were up to be the 4E realms would be retconned into oblivion.
Or release information for the realms in the past before the timeline of the Gray Box, as some people have suggested...with the 4E rules. |
|
|
|
Kno
Senior Scribe
452 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 10:23:10
|
| They should return to 1385 DR and leave 1479 DR as one possible future that depends on PC's actions. |
z455t |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36782 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 10:43:37
|
| I just had a thought... Maybe WotC seeking fan input will make them realize fans have a lot to offer, and thus finally give us a decent Fan Site Policy... |
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!  |
|
|
|
Thelonius
Senior Scribe
Spain
730 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 10:50:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I just had a thought... Maybe WotC seeking fan input will make them realize fans have a lot to offer, and thus finally give us a decent Fan Site Policy...
Well.... who knows? After all the fiery criticism at least paying some attention to fans feedback, though they could do whatever they want afterwards, shows some interest from their behalf... |
"If you are to truly understand, then you will need the contrast, not adherence to a single ideal." - Kreia
"I THINK I JUST HAD ANOTHER NEAR-RINCEWIND EXPERIENCE"- Discworld's Death frustrated after Rincewind scapes his grasp... again.
"I am death, come for thee" - Nimbul, from Baldur's Gate I just before being badly spanked
Sapientia sola libertas est |
|
|
|
ajfurst
Acolyte
Australia
21 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 11:50:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
You know, a thought occurred to me, to have our cake and eat it too: what about TWO Realms novel lines? The regular Forgotten Realms line (which features stories set in the 1480s), and then "Forgotten Realms: Legends," which features stories not only from the pre-Spellplague era but also from far-removed times/places?
That would be great. Whilst I'm not enamoured of all the 4E changes, the one thing that really annoyed about the 4E Realms was the large jump and minimal connections between the time at the end of 3.5E and the 1480's start of 4E. More novels covering the time from when 3.5E ended, through the Spellplague and up to the 1480's, with more explanation of the changes to the world would help fix the biggest glaring problem of continuity between the old and new Realms.
Following on from that, removing the 4E stories / changes as having happened would be a mistake, but toning them down or having some of them rolled back in story (such as the return of Mystra etc.) would go a long way to returning the Realms to it's best, whilst not destroying the 4E fans - be they old or new Realms followers. |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
894 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:19:17
|
Rule-wise, my gaming group prefer customization options over balance (which 4e was all about). Balance is not so much an issue with players who just want to create fun and interesting characters without searching days and days for the single spell/feat that's gonna break the DM's campaign appart.
Lore-wise, no retcon, but fill the various holes in the current and past lore in novels. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:20:15
|
Well I will not comment on the rules. To me D&D is Vancian magic, archtypes Thac0 (or equivalent) etc. But as there are plenty of OSR clones that do that well enough, there is little reason for WotC to go that way.
As for the Realms two books. One, a fully updated Realms with the new edition, including the whole canon and all the happenings of novels since 4th. This is the main book for the new edition.
The other one; a special “the Realms of Ed Greenwood” detailing the pre-published Realms, without any later changes. Thick and illustrated by an illustrator that fitted the tone (I know, I know Fabian is not available any longer) Not as a reboot, but as a historical document of sorts. No rules or rules-light (maybe levels, alignment and classes ). It would hold an appeal to most Realmsfans from all editions and would not be a declaration of right or wrong where the development of the realms was concerned. The book could be backed up with web-articles showing the use of the 5th edition with the book for example or the stats of major characters with the new system.
If nothing else it would be a nice gesture towards the various groups and it would lay the whole argument concerning rebooting dead. If one the books was a huge success it could be developed further, if one was a failure no one could really blame WotC for not going further in that direction. A sort of test really.
|
|
|
|
arry
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
317 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:20:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
Spinner of Lies by Bruce Cordell (Apr 2012).
The release notes read: "Spinner of Lies is a sequel to Sword of the Gods, and is also tied to the Rise of the Underdark, an event that will have bold, sweeping ramifications across (and under) the Forgotten Realms." (emphasis mine)
Thoughts? Opinions?
This makes me think of a bowl of Petunias saying "Oh no, not again!" |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:36:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I just had a thought... Maybe WotC seeking fan input will make them realize fans have a lot to offer, and thus finally give us a decent Fan Site Policy...
That's actually a nifty idea, and would go a long way toward redefining the "fan site" void we currently find ourselves in. |
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 |
|
|
|
brock
Acolyte
United Kingdom
1 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 14:41:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
The other one; a special “the Realms of Ed Greenwood” detailing the pre-published Realms, without any later changes. Thick and illustrated by an illustrator that fitted the tone (I know, I know Fabian is not available any longer) Not as a reboot, but as a historical document of sorts. No rules or rules-light (maybe levels, alignment and classes ). It would hold an appeal to most Realmsfans from all editions and would not be a declaration of right or wrong where the development of the realms was concerned. The book could be backed up with web-articles showing the use of the 5th edition with the book for example or the stats of major characters with the new system.
This I would buy. If I did, it would be the first Realms product I've bought since I defected to Paizo/Pathfinder/Golarion at the start of 4ed. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 15:43:29
|
I voted 'other'.
I would revert the setting to the day the Spellplague happened, and explain in-game what changed (some ritual or contingency kicked-in, or something WORSE happened in 4e, and Ao decided to set things right). So long as the back-story is good I am sure fans will accept it. In other words, we would all know its a DeuxeEx machina, but don't make it scream "deux ex machina". Put a LOT of thought into it.
You could also use it, to bridge the gap, and also sell another product; say that "a group of heroes used the Arch of Time" (or whatever other artifact/ritual their brains want to come up with) and arrived at the last possible moment to stop Cyric's killing blow. Don't name the heroes - those can be the 4e PCs. 
The day of the spellplague you have nearly ALL of the 1e/2e/3e lore still intact, AND you also have the Spellplague and all its badness... or not... every DM gets to decide what changed in their own games. The best of both worlds, as it were. Just say Mystra was mortally wounded, and disappeared right after the events of the attack on her, and she has 'gone silent' (which is another great device for DMs to use). Don't obliterate lore - that is precisely the opposite of good design. Leave enough open-ends for people to go in whatever direction they want. But don't make it vague either - thats a fine line 4e crossed over. "Inaccurate 3rd-person" reporting has worked well in the past.
The Weave is unstable, and Mystra might die, or already be dead - no one knows, and magical chaos is still going on. Most of the Weave is intact, but parts of it are missing or damaged (representing Mystra's wounds). You would have a situation very much like the Time of Troubles, but on-going and possibly much worse (DMs discretion). Why they ever placed the new setting after the most interesting period of history is completely beyond me.
USE the old setting and marry it to the new material - don't simply replace things. And re-think Returned Abeir as some sort of amalgam of it and Maztica - imagine if you super-imposed the new regions and cultures into the jungle lands. You have an entire new area that NO ONE - not even the inhabitants - knows much about. Bizarre pyramids in the uncharted wilderness, strange creatures flying around impossibly tall mountains, ruins that have never been seen before on Abeir or Toril... turn it into FR's version of Xendrik. In fact, you could even say that the new Spellplague (Sp2.0? ) forced Ao to re-merge the two worlds. Then you can get away with anything, and still leave whatever people like (still up to the individual DM) intact.
The novels become a bit of a problem, and they might have to retcon the 4e ones (For instance, Rich Baker's novels could have happened a few years into this era, around 1400 DR or so). If they keep the stories small and local - like the Waterdeep series and others - it is possible to have the uncertain lore and still have canon novels. It would be tricky, but if they avoid RSE's it can be done.
They will have to try to avoid detailing most settlements (at least at first), except for places big-enough to hide any ambiguities (like Waterdeep and Neverwinter). New stories can center around entirely new settlements, from either Abeir, elsewhere, or newly-settled.
They could also possibly try Paizo approach with multi-setting adventures (which they did try in 4e with the Feywild and Shadowfell). I'm not sure why it was more acceptable when Paizo did this - perhaps because it wasn't considered canon. II am thinking about their old Adventure-paths; you publish an adventure, and then provide a FREE web-enhancemeent to tailor it to your setting of choice. Like I said, it worked for Paizo and Dungeon, but I'm not sure how well-recieved that would be by fans who are setting-nazis. I personally don't mind it at all - I applaud what Paizo did with Savage Tide and the others - but I also know that a lot of people don't like that sort of 'modular' approach to gaming.
Don't destroy what others have built - that didn't work. Use it, fix it if you have to, and ADD to it -thats good design. Anyone with a sledehammer can take crap apart, but it takes genius to build something beautiful from the rubble. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater - keep the baby, and run a new bath. The setting was only a backdrop - its the people and their stories we missed.
Monte, I'm looking at you (and we are all counting on you) - this could be your crowning achievement - make From the Ashes look like a tea party.
And replace the silly Wemics with those Lionmen from your world - they are just so much cooler.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 15:49:15 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 15:46:11
|
Jorkens, it's nice to see you back in these vaunted halls of lore.  |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 15:46:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
The other one; a special “the Realms of Ed Greenwood” detailing the pre-published Realms, without any later changes. Thick and illustrated by an illustrator that fitted the tone (I know, I know Fabian is not available any longer) Not as a reboot, but as a historical document of sorts. No rules or rules-light (maybe levels, alignment and classes ). It would hold an appeal to most Realmsfans from all editions and would not be a declaration of right or wrong where the development of the realms was concerned. The book could be backed up with web-articles showing the use of the 5th edition with the book for example or the stats of major characters with the new system.
While I do not think that rebooting is a viable option (no matter how much I hate many of the changes made in the 4e Realms), I really like the idea of one to three (more than one only because I do not think that Ed could fit it into one ), purely fluff, volumes detailing the Realms as Ed intended it originally to be. The other thing I would want (aside from what I mentioned in an earlier post) would be novels set in all eras of the Realms, instead of just focusing on the current era. |
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)
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 15:59:53
|
Agreed - welcome back Jorkens. 
Haven't read through the thread yet - just responding to the OP.
As for the rules, I could care less - I always change 'em up anyway. It is possible to have both Vancian and non-Vancina magic. In fact, having 3-5 different types of magic would work very well. Balance Vancian's limitations by given it more power - they started this with the Sorcerer class in 3e; just take it to the next level (like how Paizo ran with Sorcerer bloodlines). The Wizard is an artist, and the sorcerer a bruiser. The artist always wins if the fight goes on long enough; a bruiser needs a quick K-O. One well-placed blow (or spell) is all you need sometimes, rather then a flurry of limited ones.
In other words, the 4e system might work very well for a new sorcerer class, without any need to get rid of the Vancian Mage. Personally, I never liked Vancian magic, but I do agree that it is what makes D&D D&D, so I guess a compromise is in order (and folks should be able to choose which way they want to play, so provide both).
EDIT: Oh, and get rid of the 'martial power-source' - thats just butt-ugly. Call it 'Qi powers', or whatever else, but there is no "I'm gonna kill sumthin'" power source - its just plain dumb. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 16:11:44 |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 16:08:49
|
I'm not sure what it would take to get me back. I've been happily enjoying Paizo's Pathfinder/Golarion setting since the outset of 4e.
4e was a disaster on all fronts for my gaming tastes. I purchased the 4e core rulebook set and was horrified and disgusted with the new system (and after playing about 6 months worth, I was convinced it was complete and utter crap). All was not lost at that point, I figured I could still pick up the Realms book and use it for lore and such, as the stories set there were almost always quite enjoyable. When I read that and what had happened there, I was even more appalled. Sure, I could still easily use the content from a lore perspective, but the world had been altered so much and in such a way I found profoundly not to my liking, I decided to move to Pathfinder RPG/Golarion.
Keep in mind the above is simply my opinion based off of my personal likes/dislikes. In no way is it meant as an all-encompassing judgement that everyone (or anyone but myself) should heed. It was merely to provide some basis as to my state of mind (past and present) regarding D&D and the Forgotten Realms, before I contribute any ideas that may lead me back to that world.
So, what would I like to see that would help re-engage my interest in the Realms (and the D&D brand in general)? That's a tough one really. I agree with the point that a retcon is a bad idea. Forward is the direction to go. Minimizing some of the uglier changes would be nice though. For example:
- Spellplague: effects wane to the point of barely knowing it happened, the floating motes have gradually sunk and by the time of 5E Realms book are on the ground and just another lumpy, but normal, piece of land again
- Deities: easy enough to return or have another deity step in to fill the portfolios of those passed. I imagine Mystra will return, but in a much less naive and goody-goody aspect and be back to a more balanced outlook, etc.
- Netheril: was best when it was a former empire, destroyed by its own arrogance with remnants of its arcane legacy scattered about. Shade started out interesting, but quickly became Thay for Goths
- Thay: ....well....um....you will be missed
- Returned Abeir: I would like these bits to go away. Forever. I really don't care how. Begone dragonkin. The Realms has enough for the munchkins.....okay, I'll leave that alone....I just cannot be rational when it comes to Returned Abeir, I hate it far too much.
- A return to general story telling and world flavoring hearkening back to the 1E/2E days (novels, game materials, etc). I found that approach most enjoyable. Not from a nostalgic sense, but after re-reading a lot of my 1E/2E and 3E material (and the awful 4E doorstop the FRCG is), I found the magic and wonder and sense of joy more in the older approach.
Those are just some ideas that would help, though I can't guarantee I'll ever return. One thing I can guarantee is that I will give the 5E Forgotten Realms a thorough look (i.e. purchase the campaign setting....guide...or whatever they call it this time around). |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 16:14:13
|
Another option would be to create an independent rule-set, and make the settings rules-neutral. I don't see that happening, but I think it might work. People want choices - that was the true beauty of 3e, and why it is still so popular. 3e did the "One rules to rule them all" far better then 4e did, despite that being 4e's mantra.
The only other option is to go the route every other RPG company does - focus on one setting and build the game around that. I just don't see that happening with D&D, and I'm not sure I would even want that (which would we chose? I still love GH, and Eberron is kinda cool and popular, and some of the others were really great). This is why I think separating the rules from the setting would work best for Hasbro - a game company HAS TO produce rules, after all. Give us options, NOT limitations. Make the setting-books more like the Volo's guides, and I think that would be a win-win.
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
ISo, what would I like to see that would help re-engage my interest in the Realms (and the D&D brand in general)? That's a tough one really. I agree with the point that a retcon is a bad idea. Forward is the direction to go. Minimizing some of the uglier changes would be nice though.
Problem is, unless they do go backwards, they have still gotten rid of 95% of why we fell in love with the Realms in the first place; the characters and their stories.
After all, the setting without those is just a map, and those are dime-a-dozen. I can find you a hundred gorgeous fanasy maps on the Cartographer's Guild site.
What made FR so great? The characters Ed (and others) created. No one falls in love with a forest, mountain, or swamp. Any time-shift removes those, and creates a complete disconnect for the fan-base. Do I really care if Anauroch is there or not? NO... but I care who lives there. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 16:26:58 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 16:39:51
|
quote:
No one falls in love with a forest, mountain, or swamp. Any time-shift removes those, and creates a complete disconnect for the fan-base. Do I really care if Anauroch is there or not? NO... but I care who lives there.
I do. The geography is to me more important than the individual characters.
And thanks for the welcome. I can’t see the return being permanent. I am quite happy at the Piazza and my reasons for leaving (both where a couple of posters and the site itself is concerned) are still here, so there is little positive for me to contribute with. But as I still see myself as a Realmsfan I decided to at least grumble out an opinion.
|
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 16:47:31
|
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
ISo, what would I like to see that would help re-engage my interest in the Realms (and the D&D brand in general)? That's a tough one really. I agree with the point that a retcon is a bad idea. Forward is the direction to go. Minimizing some of the uglier changes would be nice though.
Problem is, unless they do go backwards, they have still gotten rid of 95% of why we fell in love with the Realms in the first place; the characters and their stories.
After all, the setting without those is just a map, and those are dime-a-dozen. I can find you a hundred gorgeous fanasy maps on the Cartographer's Guild site.
What made FR so great? The characters Ed (and others) created. No one falls in love with a forest, mountain, or swamp. Any time-shift removes those, and creates a complete disconnect for the fan-base. Do I really care if Anauroch is there or not? NO... but I care who lives there.
An excellent point. I did find your idea quite appealing though, so perhaps a little back-stepping is in order. :) |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 17:02:12
|
Well met, all--
I collected some thoughts and posted them up on my blog. For those who have been reading my posts, some of this will sound familiar, but at least it's all together. I'll repaste it here:
What follows is my list of what WotC should do, IMO, to make the Forgotten Realms the awesome, financially successful, flagship setting it deserves to be.
1. Don’t retcon 4e out of existence–rather than destroy, BUILD:
Personally, I would not do a retcon. That would be bad from a business standpoint, a fan standpoint, and a story standpoint. Not only would they burn bridges with all their fans of 4e, but they’d also demolish story hooks that are being advanced in 4e. Erevis Cale? Done. Shadowbane? Done. Even DRIZZT? Done. Fortunately, I also don’t think WotC is going to go that way. They already saw the havoc that wreaked on Dragonlance. Do they–or we–really want to see our beloved Realms go down in flames like that?
Also, we saw what happened when we tried to enact sweeping, unprecedented changes to the setting.
What would be BEST is if we could get to a place where we all agree on the setting, and just go with it there. But since that isn’t going to happen, what *I* would do is release stuff that supports all eras of the Realms, so that people playing 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e, or 5e can still use anything that comes out. I’m completely fine with seeing the mechanical stuff that comes out support whatever edition is *current*, but story material should support any edition. I’d like to return to the days of 75% flavor, 25% crunch. (Which is where I think WotC design is headed, actually.)
2. Support all eras–sourcebooks, novels (more, please!), and online fiction included:
Give the eras of the Realms the Star Wars Expanded Universe treatment. Release sourcebooks that support multiple eras–that give you a baseline of what a place is like (Waterdeep, Suzail, Silverymoon, Dalelands, etc.), then give you customizing tools to tailor it to whatever era you want to play in.
Authors and designers should work in all eras. I want to see this made not only more possible but actively encouraged. The problem is a little bit the business case–people want to feel as though they are witnessing progress, so novels set mostly or entirely in the past need to have some clear connection to the future–they still need to move things along. Thankfully, Realms history is so rich with mysterious events and cool happenings (see Grand History of the Realms) that I don’t see this being a problem. I would love to write a whole series about more than one of my “post-dated” characters–Fox-at-Twilight and Arya Venkyr spring to mind.
I would like to see WotC put out more novels (15-20 a year, not the 10-12 we have now) and I’d like to see them move into inexpensive online fiction, which hits every other week or so. $1-$2 for a 6k-8k story, downloadable from WotC, from Amazon, the iTunes store, or whatever you want. These may be included with your DDI subscription (up to WotC to decide that–I would personally do it).
A thought occurred to me, to have our cake and eat it too: what about TWO Realms novel lines? The regular Forgotten Realms line (which features stories set in the 1480s), and then “Forgotten Realms: Legends,” which features stories not only from the pre-Spellplague era but also from far-removed times/places?
3. Work hard to give us a strong mechanical system and also ACRES OF STORY:
I don’t know about 5e’s mechanics–they’re still in the works. But the big opportunity here is to build a system that lends itself to ALL ERAS of play. You could pull this off with previous editions, too, with a lot of work. But 5e can be integrated–can bring all eras together under one umbrella so that you can flow into anything you want. This game should be so badass that you’ll WANT to use the system.
And for those players who don’t want to use 5e? What about people who are perfectly happy with 1e, 2e, 3e, 4e, or (yes) Pathfinder RPG? (Because no matter how good the system is, there will be some, I promise!) Fortunately, there’s everything that goes along with it: story, sourcebooks, content up the wazoo. The business case for this is simple: reach out to everyone who plays any sort of D&D and say “here–here’s a setting you can use whole-cloth with whatever you’re doing. Have at it.”
Anyone playing any edition should be able to pick up a 5e Forgotten Realms sourcebook and use it in his/her game. It’s as simple as that.
The Realms is vastly underdetailed, especially considering the scope of its history. Start with better explanations of the 4e transitions. There’s a lot of story there, and I think we can get to a narrative point where some of the big shenanigans are resolved. And I think that a lot of this is being dealt with as we speak, er, type. Let Ed deal with the Mystra situation, for instance (which he’s currently doing). Give us another piece about the drow and their pantheon (hint hint, Menzo sourcebook). Let me deal with Helm (which I’m currently doing). Give Paul time to work the Shar/Mask/Erevis Cale thing (again). Continue this trend.
Also, let us fill in some of that gap. I know it’s nice for DMs to have an open area they can “fill in” with their own stuff, but it’s far better for them to have the information to use if they want, and ignore it if they don’t, rather than be FORCED to make it all up.
Bottom Line?
5e is our opportunity to pull everything together and move forward with a strong, vibrant Realms that is better than ever before.
(Also: yay!)
Now let’s get to work.
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" |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 18:02:31
|
A strong foundation on story and background, emphasis on Realmslore "fluff" is good, and it's what most of us have been saying one way or another.
But I think it's only part of the solution, and it cannot blithely "move forward" without addressing events and details of consequence which put snags into the moving tapestry. Tieflings weren't around, then they were. Sorcerors apparently were around since the dawn of time, but somehow nobody noticed them for thousands of years. Genasi and warforged and dragonborn seem to sort of come and go, appearing greatly prominent in some stories yet nonexistant anywhen else. Gods have been born, slain, reborn, exploded, hard to pretend such stuff isn't happening when entire continents are spellscarred. Retcons, particularly the more sweepingly noxious ones from 4E, are impossible to consolidate when they cannot exist and not exist side by side, there cannot be two skies, yes?
I'll admit that nothing is impossible in a world of magic and fantasy, where creative writing can trump mundane limitations. But there are limits because some concessions towards "realism" do need to be made to keep things at least a little believable.
I'll admit that part of the problem is the fanbase itself. There are those among us who automatically defy unwanted changes and brand anything subsequent as being intrinsically wrong. We must be more accepting and responsive because the alternative is to strangle and stagnate a setting and system which are meant to be vibrant and dynamic.
I'm of the opinion that the third part of the problem is the corporation, be it WotC or the Brand Management and Profitability Overgods to which they must answer. I'm completely outside the industry and cannot pretend to know how things really work ... but even so, it seems painfully evident that WotC and Hasbro are somewhat at odds, and both are pulling the D&D brand apart by constantly trying to tug it into their own antiquated ideas about how it should be sold. If the business model is failing then it is time for a new business model, there is no substitute for success. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 19:03:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
Says the person who thought it was a losing proposition 26 years ago while the game has quite clearly survived through to today.
um, it is widely known (and accepted) that the peak of D&D's popularity was back in the mid-1980s and that when WoTC bought TSR, TSR wasn't making money (and amazingly they were still publishing tons of stuff every year). Also, have you ever flown on an airline? That industry hasn't made any money in 30 years and yet you can still get flights pretty easily.
quote:
Yet again, I point out that FR has numerous products coming out this year while the other settings (as far as we know right now) do not. It isn't rocket science to figure out that one of the settings is still making money.
First, I was talking about game supplements, not novels (as the point of this thread was 5th edition) and because the novels are going to sell well regardless of what happens to the game/timeline so long as they are well written.
As for the game supplements, they have been much fewer since 4th edition (which wouldn't be the case if they were making mad cash on them) and all increasing this year's number means is that they have costs sunk into 4th edition books that they need to rush out before the changes of 5th (and this is a good reason to expect big changes, as if they were minor, one wouldn't have to rush the books out).
quote:
Which "good old days"? 1998 appears to be the peak with 19 novels and if I had to guess that probably has something to do with WotC taking over at some point in 97 so there were probably books in production that were halted until after the take over. Again, that is just a guess. In 1997 there were 5. I should note that is 11 years after 1986 and that the game itself still continues. That was coming off 14 books in 1996. And followed by 9 books in 1999. 10 books in 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. 13-15 in 2004-2008. For this year there are 9 listed and I believe Erik's next book is supposed to be out this year along with Paul's and neither of those are listed yet making 11. That we know of. 11 is well within the average and there may yet be more. Only 2 years under TSR hit 12 or more books while the rest had 8 or less, which is less than any year after 97. From 1987-1996 the average number of books a year was 7.5. I am not sure if the 97 books were under TSR or WotC. From 98-2011 the average was 12.28 per year. WotC quite clearly has been pumping out more material than TSR did and next year falls in line with the average we have come to expect over the last decade. Nostalgia is a poor substitute for evidence. Care to try again?
AS I stated above, I (and this thread) is about the game and supplements, not the novels. And again, well written novels are going to sell no matter what they do to the timeline.
quote:
You mean when they stop supporting anything after the grey box, that won't be forcing people to revert back a few decades if they want to keep using the currently published material? How is that in any way different from what was done with 4th? You don't start building bridges by burning the few you have left.
Nope. It would serve as the base information for the Realms and any other information can be used by a gaming group if they wanted (ie the basic Realms would go back to 1357 as originally published). No one is forced into doing anything plus it is a huge money saver for WoTC, as they have no development costs at all.
quote:
A) in your opinion and B) who will buy it when they can just buy the original grey box? Remember, businesses need money. That's why they won't revert back to 3.5. The number of potential customers who can't get 3.5 material considerably cheaper than WotC would be selling it for is a rather small number of an already small population segment.
First, it is hardly just my opinion. Second, ever heard of Monopoly? Same game for decades, tons available second hand, and yet I would bet that Hasbro makes far more on Monopoly than on any D&D book. There aren't a ton of decent shape Gray Boxes around, which would make sales ok. And keeping the setting more rigid isn't a bad thing for the more casual gamers (or new gamers) who aren't going to have the time/desire to keep up with every change all the time like those of us here. A static setting like the Gray Box would be a huge winner for WoTC with no development cost risk and still provides the flexibility to develop other timelines/etc as needed (something a 1480's base setting doesn't do without time travel).
quote:
That's great for anyone that cares about that. What about everyone else who has moved beyond that point and has no interest in going back? They get thrown out in the hope that people who love a decades old product that the industry has long since moved past will come flocking back in droves. Either you are grossly overestimating how many people would come back or I am grossly underestimating how many people will see such a transparent move for what it is and decide they have no interest in being burned again after they rebuy material they already have.
Really? I am going to bet that most (non-fanatics) gamers have not even seen the Gray Box, let alone own one. Second, this move is nothing more than getting the game back to its very successful and very popular roots (like Hasbro did with GI JOE and Star Wars toys) or Coke did when they released Coke Classic after the joke that was New Coke (and yes, I am comparing the 4th edition Realms to New Coke). And I don't care about people coming back (although I am sure Hasbro would love that, since us older gamers likely have far more disposable income than the younger set), but in returning the Realms to a more pure, less complicated form (and the less complicated is what will sell the product).
quote:
The very first suppliment that violates canon does exactly what you think won't happen. If they don't release something new, then they will be accused of just reselling what a number of fans probably already have (and the accusation will be spot on).
First, nothing even says they have to continue to put out supplements. Most of Hasbro's products do not get regular supplements and supplements are very expensive to design with a hard to predict market. They could easily go to just the base set (the Gray Box) and then allow print on demand or digital copies of the already expansive library. Your reselling argument makes no sense, since goal number one is new customers (who don't have the product and would be getting an introduction anyways (and the Gray Box is a far easier intro than anything since it is Realms ground zero)) and many "fans" would be happy to get the opportunity to get out of print supplements.
quote:
You are also making a wild assumption that we will see more of Ed's unpublished lore under this scenario and apparently not see it under any other. Nothing is stopping them from publishing it right now, for instance.
Well, we have a better chance of it under my scenario, since most of Ed's stuff is from the 1st-2nd edition era of the game. I don't see why we would ever get it now since the timeline is so far removed that most of Ed's stuff likely conflicts with what has happened since (or is simply not relevant). Do you really think we will see Ed's info on Halruaa? Or on the old Sea of Fallen Stars? Or Mulhorand? Etc.
quote:
I'll ask again, do you actually have anything to back up your claims?
More than you, since they are pushing a new edition, which appears to likely include changes to the Realms. Also, since I understand how businesses actually work (and understand what declining margins/revenues actually mean).
Sadly for all of us, tabletop gaming is a declining industry and thus it is likely that any attempt at a new/creative structure in an effort of revival (4th edition I am looking at you) is going to be met with failure. Sometimes, the best business model is to embrace the nostalgia and reproduce the memories of your old fans with the most disposable cash (and at the least cost to the company since development could go away).
Mod edit: Fixed the coding to remove the funky blue text |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 10 Jan 2012 19:20:34 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 19:34:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
EDIT: Oh, and get rid of the 'martial power-source' - thats just butt-ugly. Call it 'Qi powers', or whatever else, but there is no "I'm gonna kill sumthin'" power source - its just plain dumb.
I think there might be a misunderstanding here. A person with the "martial power source" isn't deriving some mysterious cosmic energy from "Ms. Martial" or whatever--the "martial power source" is just a mechanical designation for a character whose skills and abilities grow out of rigorous, mundane training. It's not magic, it's not Qi (that's Psionic, actually)--it's just skill.
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
But I think it's only part of the solution, and it cannot blithely "move forward" without addressing events and details of consequence which put snags into the moving tapestry.
I don't think these are snags, but rather just emerging threads. Observe:
quote:
Tieflings weren't around, then they were.
The tiefling race in FR blossomed around the end of 1360s--they had been around before, of course (as long as outsiders and mortals had been getting it on), but in very small numbers and mostly limited to the planes (see the 2e Planes of Chaos supplement). I see their growth in popularity as a logical reflection of the race growing more numerous.
quote:
Sorcerors apparently were around since the dawn of time, but somehow nobody noticed them for thousands of years.
Magic-users have always been mysterious, and there have always been some who take more to arcane magic than others. The wizard/sorcerer distinction grew wider in the 3.x era, when it became officially recognized and no longer one of magic's big secrets. (I also think there was MORE magic used in this period, thanks to Midnight/Mystra and her increasingly active Chosen, than before.)
quote:
Genasi and warforged and dragonborn seem to sort of come and go, appearing greatly prominent in some stories yet nonexistant anywhen else.
All of these races are exceedingly rare, though genasi became more prevalent in 3.x (somewhat like tieflings). "Warforged" is just a mechanical designation for a sentient entity forged from metal. "Dragonborn" come from Abeir, and--depending on how you interpret it--also descend from the Realms' plentiful dragon/human pairings.
quote:
Gods have been born, slain, reborn, exploded,
This is part of the unfolding story of the Realms and has been going on as long as the Realms have been around. Nothing new.
quote:
hard to pretend such stuff isn't happening when entire continents are spellscarred.
So story events reshape the world. This is fantasy. It happens--particularly in the Realms. Falling empires and shifting terrain is actually a central theme in the setting. The fall of Netheril gave us the Anauroch desert. 2e gave us areas of dead/wild magic. Why would we pretend it isn't happening?
quote:
I'll admit that nothing is impossible in a world of magic and fantasy, where creative writing can trump mundane limitations. But there are limits because some concessions towards "realism" do need to be made to keep things at least a little believable.
That's what I have attempted above.
quote:
I'm of the opinion that the third part of the problem is the corporation, be it WotC or the Brand Management and Profitability Overgods to which they must answer. I'm completely outside the industry and cannot pretend to know how things really work ... but even so, it seems painfully evident that WotC and Hasbro are somewhat at odds, and both are pulling the D&D brand apart by constantly trying to tug it into their own antiquated ideas about how it should be sold. If the business model is failing then it is time for a new business model, there is no substitute for success.
I get the sense that Hasbro exercises SOME oversight (and might mandate some products or suggest accessories, etc), but most of their interest is financial. The Realms HAS to sell, or Hasbro cuts its losses and cancels it. That's just kinda how it goes.
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" |
Edited by - Erik Scott de Bie on 10 Jan 2012 19:37:18 |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 20:54:45
|
| Apex, I had a lengthy reply written up but I have decided against posting it. You have repeatedly shown a total lack of ability to back up your points with anything approaching evidence and have conflicting aspects of your arguments that can not coexist ("remember the good old days when they released all those books. I mean "suppliments". Followed by "they don't even need to release suppliments"). Your line about not caring about getting customers pretty well tells me all I need to know. By your own words, if that weren't an issue we wouldn't be having this discussion. I could explain how Monopoly sells as well as it does for several factors that have nothing to do with it being a good game (which it most certainly is not) and have everything to do with nostalgia, it being a "classic", and it having lots of easily misplaced pieces for kids to easily lose even if they aren't playing the game. I could explain that "casual" gamers want adventures and don't want to come up with them on their own, otherwise they wouldn't be "casual" gamers. I could explain that growth is needed so sticking with a single product released decades ago while telling all the fans of the current setting to sit on it is quite possibly the quickest way to kill what's left of your fan base in an attempt to appease die hards who have long since given up and have no desire to get burned yet again (proving that you won't burn them by burning your current customers is a poor move). But, it is obvious this will fall on deaf ears so until you come up with a clear plan that isn't riddled with assumptions and contradictions I see no point in continuing this discussion with you and sidetracking this thread. |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:12:51
|
You have given a lot of thought to all of this, Erik, and I can really appreciate that. Unfortunately, you also look at it through the lens of an author, which means you would automatically be against anything that would screw-up the novels.
You may all find this strange (considering what I do here as a hobby), but I find the map the least appealing thing about FR. If thats all that is going to be left of the setting I fell in love with, well then, I can just as well go somewhere else and start learning about new characters there (on MUCH prettier maps).
You can't apply the same logic to a Space-Opera setting, because being in completely different environments with completely different beings is part of the genre.
As for the 'lets do multiple eras' thing - guess what?Its been done by comic books, and is one of the main reason for both Marvel and DC's reboots. The problem is, eventually one timeline catches up to - and even passes - the timeline in front of it. This happened with Deathlok (Marvel), it happened with The Dark Knight, its happened with several other characters including Ironman, and its even happened in Star Trek (Khan from the original series NEVER happened in our RW), and even Star Trek had to reboot because of it.
If we go the way you say, it will be a temporary fix at best, and eventually everything will get garbled and they will be forced to reboot. Its happened in both major comic companies when they did future stuff, it happened with ST, and it will happen every single time (unless you manage to guess some of the future accurately, which happened in Back to the Future, amazingly enough).
I do not think multiple timelines is sustainable, except maybe for SW, because George Lucas is a maniac when it comes to maintaining canon. Tell me George Lucas was just made continuity editor, and I might agree with you.
Hmmmm... wait a sec... we have our own George. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 21:18:34 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:13:08
|
On the subject of tieflings... why the "headgear" art? It needs to go.
Tiny horns, twisty horns, red skin, leathery hide, scales, bat wings, tails, hooves, anything but that "headgear" art.
Seriously, except for the current default art, I kinda like the occasional tiefling. I have a hard time seeing them as a "race" though (in the sense that elves or dwarves are a race). They should all be unique, IMO.
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:14:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
Apex, I had a lengthy reply written up but I have decided against posting it. You have repeatedly shown a total lack of ability to back up your points with anything approaching evidence and have conflicting aspects of your arguments that can not coexist ("remember the good old days when they released all those books. I mean "suppliments". Followed by "they don't even need to release suppliments"). Your line about not caring about getting customers pretty well tells me all I need to know. By your own words, if that weren't an issue we wouldn't be having this discussion. I could explain how Monopoly sells as well as it does for several factors that have nothing to do with it being a good game (which it most certainly is not) and have everything to do with nostalgia, it being a "classic", and it having lots of easily misplaced pieces for kids to easily lose even if they aren't playing the game. I could explain that "casual" gamers want adventures and don't want to come up with them on their own, otherwise they wouldn't be "casual" gamers. I could explain that growth is needed so sticking with a single product released decades ago while telling all the fans of the current setting to sit on it is quite possibly the quickest way to kill what's left of your fan base in an attempt to appease die hards who have long since given up and have no desire to get burned yet again (proving that you won't burn them by burning your current customers is a poor move). But, it is obvious this will fall on deaf ears so until you come up with a clear plan that isn't riddled with assumptions and contradictions I see no point in continuing this discussion with you and sidetracking this thread.
Actually, I have the evidence, as evidenced by the 5th edition announcement (on the heels of poor 4th edition sales). And if the Realms 4th edition books were selling like hotcakes, then it is likely that 5th edition would not have been needed anyways. As for your continuing to bring the novels into this gaming discussion, the novels would likely still sell and do quite well (for some time) even if WoTC immediately ended all support for D&D in its entirety.
This BBC Articlehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3655627.stm states that the height was back in the 80s and I have yet to find a non-WoTC cite that says anything to the contrary.
As for Monopoly, as much as gamers hate to admit it, it is a great comparison. We do not need timelines to advance or countless supplements in order to play the game and it is questionable whether or not those supplements (setting adventures aside) are good for a setting or game at all (since it is quite probable that too much information can discourage new possible entrants). Outside of the core books for AD&D, the only supplements (outside of all the classic adventures) published between 1980 and 1986 were a few monster books and yet the game's popularity was at its zenith. Do you really believe that the best way to recruit a new gamer is for them to see a shelf with 20 different books (not adventures) for a game (as opposed to say 3). AD&D was so popular and much more main stream back in the 80s because the learning (and buying) curve was so much less than it is now. Getting back to that model is probably the only way D&D is going to survive in the future outside of a Chaosium like niche market (who by the way have done quite well without an advancing timeline). |
|
|
|
Pazuzu
Seeker
Germany
61 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:17:54
|
My two copper pieces: I really like what is WotC showing so far, though, it is not very much to form a substantiated opinion. I really do love the realms, and I think the 3E content is the best. This is just my opinion, but I have to tell that I was a DM when my group played 2E. Though, I also use a source from the older edition when I write my adventures for 3E. I really don't like 4E realms that much. However, I do plan to switch to 4E (though, I may skip 4E and switch right to 5E) in the next years playing a campaign to resurrect Mystra based on the tidbits by Ed (blueflame ghosts). I hope (and I do think that WotC will do it like this) that 5E realms will have many things back, but *not* to deny 4E. Mystra can be raised in novels and the same goes for Helm, etc. Everything will be fine again, and we will have some new and nice realms (just as Erik already mentioned).
Thanks! |
May your dice obey your will. - Gary Gygax (*1938 - †2008) |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
WotC is asking for input, so...
Topic Locked
