| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Mar 2012 : 16:11:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
<chop>
Ultimately, it seems to me that WotC looks at Planescape and each of its campaign settings as being fundamentally different settings, though of course you as the DM can lace them together if you want. I can see arguments for this direction or the opposite (integrating everything), but largely I fall on the "separate but lace-able" team, leaving it up to DMs to decide on the cosmology they're going to use.
Cheers
[bold added] The bolded part clearly wasn't true for 4e, or they wouldn't have gone so far to shoehorn everything core into all worlds. Otherwise, I am in complete agreement with everything you've said in your last few posts. I'm waiting for Ed's book, and everything else of Ed's Realms that WotC decides to publish. I'll have a look at the "official" FR book when it comes out, but even with the excellent job done by yourself and others here with making the 4e changes make sense, I'm not holding my breath. Anything for the "open timeline" prior to 1385, I will definitely look seriously at, and I'll even take a look at the later-era stuff too, but 4e has given me the greatest faith in WotC's ability to foul things up, and until they prove that faith unjustified, I'm not buying anything for the new edition, FR or core, without a close look first. That's part of why I've been absent again the past few weeks; the rest of it is a massive RW-myth genealogy project (still ongoing) and my day job.  |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
 |
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2012 : 16:21:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I think the Realms continuity as presented in Realms sourcebooks should be looked at with a grain of salt.
-While I agree, as seemingly most talk of the arrangement of planes is more esoteric than literal as far as I can tell, and this is how I've treated such planar matters in my own setting, the sourcebooks offer definitive "this is how things are" descriptions. It's easier to chalk all of the incongruities off to "well, they don't know what they're talking about and are reporting things inaccurately", but that's not how books have been presenting the info, sadly.
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
The bolded part clearly wasn't true for 4e, or they wouldn't have gone so far to shoehorn everything core into all worlds.
-I'd say that 3e was the only one that didn't, with separate 'Core'/Pseudo-Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, Oriental Adventures, Eberron, and other cosmologies in their respective books. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerûn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerûn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
Edited by - Lord Karsus on 21 Mar 2012 16:22:55 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2012 : 17:10:50
|
@Jakk: Totally fair. And my comment about the separate settings wasn't aimed at any edition in particular--I just think there's a tendency (and to my mind, there should be) to develop campaign settings that aren't strictly lined up with others. 2e obviously tried to unite everything, with some measure of success, while 3e rigorously broke it apart, then 4e was a turn back toward a unified cosmology. I don't think the 4e FR specific cosmology quite lines up with the greater Astral Sea/Elemental Chaos cosmology presented in 4e core. It's left up to DM to determine how much of the various cosmologies to use, if any.
@LK: Yes, I agree, the planar discussion is largely an academic one as related to the Realms. Interesting, but somewhat secondary to the development of the setting itself.
All that said, I shall vacate this particular scroll (so as not to cause further discussion disruption) and head back to my own!
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" |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 21 Mar 2012 : 20:34:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
If WotC puts in some of those things but not others, what's to stop the fans who don't like the things WotC kept or do like things WotC got rid of?
WotC is never going to be able to please all of the Realms fans all of the time. I know you know that, but it needed to be said.
quote:
I am much more comfortable relying upon the DM to pick and choose what to use, play up, gloss over, or ignore as regards Realmslore, rather than relying on WotC (or any designer whatever) to come up with EXACTLY what each individual DM needs.
Exactly. The best lore and canon is that which we can insert into any game and it doesn't cause ripples in the Realmsian lake or cause a building to collapse in Raven's Bluff. Canon is merely another author's suggestions on how they see things happening regardless of how famous an author they may be.
quote:
Devotion to the canon is something a lot of Realms gamers are interested in--I get that. But you should never let this impinge upon the fun of your game. You should never incorporate an event you hate just to "be accurate," and you should always feel free to ignore something that doesn't work for you and/or your game.
I also get that a lot of Realms fans enjoy the canonical aspects of the setting too, but I also think canon can be a Realms curse too. I use the Realms as a game world, not as a bible from which to run my Realms game. For me, the only real useful aspect of canon is when it inspires me or gives me good ideas to create an adventure for my non-canon PCs. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Elsenrail
Seeker
Poland
72 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2012 : 12:32:13
|
I'm really surprised that so many voted for a reboot. Personally, I dislike reboots, since they are a cheap way to fix things. In the case of the Realms, a reboot will please some folks, and annoy others. I dislike many things about 4th ed Realms, but there are some that I really like.
What is great about FR is that it evolves, changes. Every novel contributes to its rich history. I think the best approach to 5th ed Realms would be to jump the timeline a decade (1489) and iron some things out - make the effects of the Spellplague seem lesser, bring back more of the lore that we liked about pre-Spellplague... and especially, make the setting book rich in lore, not mechanics (FR is all about lore). 4th ed Realms are still the Realms, they just need some fixes.
I don't like the current Calimshan - it would be difficult to completely change the political state of this area, but in 5e the genasi's power could be lesser, they just could rule the realm (a ruling caste), with majority of population being human, and with lots of human controlled, independened areas.
Loved the pre-Spellplague Thay? Let's bring back the Red Wizards as the opposition to Szass tam and his legions. They could control the Wizard's Reach (they still do, perhaps - as far as "Brotherhood of the Griffons" goes"), make them conquer Alaor and Bezantur, and gather strenght for a counterstrike.
Etc etc |
|
|
|
froglegg
Learned Scribe
317 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2012 : 13:28:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
I love the Realms but I have never been a fan of Elminster (Sorry Ed).
Would I would like to see done is have Elminster wake up after his vision of the Spellplague and Mystra instructing him on how to prevent it but would end up costing him his life.
Now that would take some guts! Talk about putting your money where your mouth.
John |
Long live Alias and Dragonbait! Kate Novak and Jeff Grubb the Realms need you more then ever!
On my word as a sage nothing within these pages is false, but not all of it may prove to be true. - Elminster of Shadowdale
The Old Grey Box gets better with age! |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jun 2012 : 18:14:29
|
| I'm starting to lean towards using the existing lore and building from there. And the main reason is, its a simple matter to keep all the famous characters around with various lore plots and ideas...like we saw in the last Elminster book. With that aside, it allows designers and Ed to revamp lore for certain areas. One of my biggest gripes was seeing reprints of old lore with a smidge of new stuff added in over the years. Not that I have an issue with lore, I just prefer new lore to recycled stuff. With the design team building new stuff in familiar areas, one would assume those products would sell better than a rehash of old stuff. All they need to do is tone down spellplague things like earthmotes and other effects...make them unique like adventure sites and not the norm and it could be good to go. Just my thoughts. ;) |
|
|
|
lowtech
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2012 : 15:47:15
|
Simply put, a 'reboot'* is the only thing that could bring me back to the Forgotten Realms....but I suspect that fans like myself will be written off as 'sunk cost', and from a business standpoint that's probably the safest course to take.
*By reboot, I mean alternate timelines with equal company support-and for those who say this will only split the fanbase further, I reply that the fanbase is already broken, and simply altering a few aspects of the 4E Realms is not going to bring me or others like me back. With an alternate timeline, it might be possible to regain the alienated portion of the fanbase without causing 4E fans to lose anything. |
|
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2012 : 16:40:37
|
| I'm starting to lean towards another setting, hope they do a good job though. |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2012 : 23:29:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
I'm starting to lean towards another setting, hope they do a good job though.
I don't mean to pry, but why in particular and what setting? Just curious. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 10:43:31
|
| Nothing new, returning back to Planescape (just Sigil), but with some changes cause I lost interest in (quasi)medieval worlds. |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 12:48:08
|
| I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 13:08:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy.
This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot... |
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!  |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 13:53:35
|
Informative, but not suprising, different samples often produce different results. Hence my posting of question in the One story, one canon thread. My previous sample also showed a greater prefrence for 3 and 4e than what is found here. I wonder if there is a corlation.
What's are sample size? |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 14:41:35
|
I'd still prefer a reboot to the old grey box. A soft reboot, which means until overwritten by something new, the old lore would still apply. This would allow them a 'fix things as we go along' strategy.
That's not going to happen though. 
I think at this point, I am more interested in the 5e rules then I am in whatever they do to the Realms (if they insist on pushing the timeline further forward). I have my own game setting now - The Realms has just become a place where novels happen. I am still invested in it, but not as a place to RPG. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 19 Jun 2012 14:42:28 |
|
|
|
idilippy
Senior Scribe
USA
417 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 15:42:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy.
This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...
While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.
Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.
Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion. |
Edited by - idilippy on 19 Jun 2012 15:44:09 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 16:06:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by idilippy
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy.
This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...
While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.
Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.
Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion.
Agreed, which is why I specified "this particular poll".
As I've stated before, I would prefer resetting to right after Cloak & Dagger came out, but I think it would work better to start over, from the OGB. And for those who insist this would be damaging to the setting and/or cause alienation to some fans, it's pretty hard to argue that this hasn't already happened. |
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! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 19 Jun 2012 16:08:34 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 17:12:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
it would damage setting and alienate all the newbs...
Not necessarily.
There are those of us who like the setting in its entirety, warts and all, and don't want to see the setting flipped on its head a second time for the sake of "fixing" it. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 17:13:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.
While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.
My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.
Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 17:55:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
it would damage setting and alienate all the newbs...
Not necessarily.
There are those of us who like the setting in its entirety, warts and all, and don't want to see the setting flipped on its head a second time for the sake of "fixing" it.
This may bery well be constreyed as rude, but usually when there’s a major setting change, most of those sources are in print only. Now, that’s perfectly good, if you don’t have any visual problems, but I and a few friends of mine happen to do so. So if there’s an entire rebute of the relms, we’ve all got to sit around twitingling our thumbs for several years, waiting until that format starts to be accessable to us. This has been true for every version of D&D that has come out. I’ve got a dyslexic friend that’s been playing since second edition, and he doesn’t like the idea of of a reboot any more than I do. So, don’t just make the assumption that we are all apposed to a reboot because of being new to the game, or because we are so in love with 4e. I have never played 4E, and probably never will. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
idilippy
Senior Scribe
USA
417 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 19:08:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by idilippy
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...
While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.
Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.
Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion.
Agreed, which is why I specified "this particular poll".
As I've stated before, I would prefer resetting to right after Cloak & Dagger came out, but I think it would work better to start over, from the OGB. And for those who insist this would be damaging to the setting and/or cause alienation to some fans, it's pretty hard to argue that this hasn't already happened.
Ah, for such a short post I missed a very important word in there, it seems you were saying the same thing about the veracity of this survey as I was. Apologies for picking your post to reply to then, though I'll leave my point since I think it's worth considering by anyone who reads through the poll.
[tangent]It's a good thing to keep in mind in general actually, for all avenues of life. Any poll, survey, or study, from single question ones like this to all those studies that are cited by magazine articles about the latest wonderfood or health breakthrough, have limitations that need to be considered before basing conclusions off of them. [/end tangent]
|
Edited by - idilippy on 19 Jun 2012 19:09:53 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2382 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 00:45:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
I don't know what you mean by a reboot, Shadowsoul -- the term is being used inconsistently in other threads.
quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478
Dejavu
This can be arbitrarily interpreted as "do away 4e" or "now, for something completely different with more ponies".
To vote on it, one have to interprete this vague proposal one way or another.
Results may also be interpreted one way or another. Which wouldn't necessarily coincide with what every (or any) voter meant. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
Edited by - TBeholder on 20 Jun 2012 02:37:47 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 01:15:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.
While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.
My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.
Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.
Posts like this is why anti-continuity bled its way into the setting. You're saying people have to like the Realms the way you do, or else it's invalid. This is the highest degree of arrogance, and not something that will ever improve/advance the setting.  |
Edited by - Matt James on 20 Jun 2012 01:16:17 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 01:20:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.
While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.
My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.
Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.
Posts like this is why anti-continuity bled its way into the setting. You're saying people have to like the Realms the way you do, or else it's invalid. This is the highest degree of arrogance, and not something that will ever improve/advance the setting.
Such a lack of civility.
|
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! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 01:50:07
|
Okay, folks, we've managed to work through the last few months without hitting any of the usual "points of contention" when it comes to attitudes toward editions.
Let's just accept, right now, that not every scribe will see eye to eye on this, and simply move on, eh? |
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 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 09:39:14
|
I voted "yes", although I wanted to clarify on what I was thinking of when I think "reboot."
By that I mean that the Spellplague Realms, in its entirety, ceases to exist as if it never happened. By that I mean that the 5E Realms progresses a year or two after the last Non-Spellplague related 3E Realms product. That is my idea of a reboot.
I was reading another thread talking about how to make the Spellplague Realms palatable to older fans, but from where I'm sitting I honestly don't see how it's possible. So much damage was inflicted on the Realms that to undo it all would pretty much be the same as a reboot anyway. Only difference is that undoing it all would just be silly from a narrative perspective. So Mystra, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc all just happen to come back? Zhentil Keep, Halruaa, Lantan, etc all happen to get rebuilt? After getting sucked into another planet Maztica and Mulhorand return? That sort of thing would be absolutely ridiculous. You may as well cut out the middleman and just retcon out the 4E Realms in its entirety rather than have that blight on your continuity.
Not to mention that, continuing on from the 4E Realms, you're still stuck in that a lot of the great characters and things about the Realms are still firmly stuck a century in the past. I don't know about anyone else, but one of the developments I liked was having Alusair as regent of Cormyr, but that plotline was completely obliterated with the time jump. And she's just one of many, many NPC's who're gone from the setting because of the time jump.
So yes, I vote for retconning out the 4E Realms in its entirety. It's not as if it'd be a hard thing to do. Exactly how much material was published for the Spellplague Realms throughout 4E's lifespan, anyway? Four books? Five? Far more than that was made obsolete by WotC when they decided on the Spellplague. If they had no problem negating several dozen books then I don't see why negating three setting books, one adventure, and a handful of DDI articles would be an issue.
I'm sure there're some 4E Realms fan they'd anger, too, but how many could there possibly be? If there were that many then one imagines that we would've seen more 4E Realms books published, but aside from the original offering all they published was Neverwinter. If there were very many than WotC should be breathlessly excited about all the campaign settings books they're going to be publishing for the Spellplague Realms with the advent of 5E, but they're not doing that. So again I ask, how many Spellplague Realms fans could there be? How many actual diehard fans could there possibly be, at least in comparison to the 1E-3E Realms fans who were infuriated by the 4E Realms changes and would gladly come back if WotC were to excise the Spellplague from the history of the Realms?
So yes, retcon, retcon, and retcon some more until the Spellplague is nothing more then a terrible, terrible dream Bob Newhart had one night. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 20 Jun 2012 09:42:58 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 10:44:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
I voted "yes", although I wanted to clarify on what I was thinking of when I think "reboot."
By that I mean that the Spellplague Realms, in its entirety, ceases to exist as if it never happened. By that I mean that the 5E Realms progresses a year or two after the last Non-Spellplague related 3E Realms product. That is my idea of a reboot.
I was reading another thread talking about how to make the Spellplague Realms palatable to older fans, but from where I'm sitting I honestly don't see how it's possible. So much damage was inflicted on the Realms that to undo it all would pretty much be the same as a reboot anyway. Only difference is that undoing it all would just be silly from a narrative perspective. So Mystra, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc all just happen to come back? Zhentil Keep, Halruaa, Lantan, etc all happen to get rebuilt? After getting sucked into another planet Maztica and Mulhorand return? That sort of thing would be absolutely ridiculous. You may as well cut out the middleman and just retcon out the 4E Realms in its entirety rather than have that blight on your continuity.
Not to mention that, continuing on from the 4E Realms, you're still stuck in that a lot of the great characters and things about the Realms are still firmly stuck a century in the past. I don't know about anyone else, but one of the developments I liked was having Alusair as regent of Cormyr, but that plotline was completely obliterated with the time jump. And she's just one of many, many NPC's who're gone from the setting because of the time jump.
So yes, I vote for retconning out the 4E Realms in its entirety. It's not as if it'd be a hard thing to do. Exactly how much material was published for the Spellplague Realms throughout 4E's lifespan, anyway? Four books? Five? Far more than that was made obsolete by WotC when they decided on the Spellplague. If they had no problem negating several dozen books then I don't see why negating three setting books, one adventure, and a handful of DDI articles would be an issue.
As much as I'd love a reboot to 1374 DR, it doesn't look like a fair choice to me. That is not for the ones who screamed ''OMG QQ too much lore'', but for the new people who started enjoying the setting in 4e and would like to see it evolve and grow (and not just stagnate there), and for the ones who are trying to fix the Realms.
WotC has already said they won't retcon anything but, unlike you, I think that a compromise to bring at least some people back to enjoy the Realms is possible.
If they bring back Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, Mystra, Helm, some of the lands (etc...) through compelling stories, I don't get why it'd be ridiculous. The way they got rid of them was cheap anyway: LP? E and V behaved like they never would in those novels (also, they wouldn't have had any reason to join the game to begin with, given their personalities); Mystra/Azuth? Cheap and meaningless murder plus Azuth lands in Baator for no reason and a devil kills him...; Helm? Seriously, lets not even get started here; the lands? They just exploded/shifted away.
Add this to the fact that the removal of such depth-adding elements was unjust by itself and correcting all of this is the least they can do now. If they managed to pull off some reasonable plots to bring what is most characteristic of what was lost back, then it wouldn't be ridiculous at all and, personally, if they coupled this with making the Realms brighter and heroic as they were, I could be interested in reading about them again.
PS: They said that multiple eras will be supported, but I see this as unrealistic. They're going to have tons of annoying rules modules to dish out, other settings to refine (etc...), so a proper support to many mini (and not so much) settings is unlikely (especially considering how little support the Realms received during 4e). So, they'd have either to reboot or to correct and go forward and, considering what they said, it looks like the latter option is all what we (or at least I) can hope for. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 10:48:27 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 10:54:01
|
Well, like I said, how many of those people are there, really? If there were that many people than WotC wouldn't be trying to entice older fans with this whole "support multiple eras" idea. If there were so many of those fans than they'd be pushing forward full steam ahead with the Spellplague Realms and to hell with the rest. That they're trying to get back older fans tells me that their hopes of getting more fans by blowing up the Realms blew up in their faces and now they're trying to fix their mistake, but they're unwilling to retcon away the 4E Realms. Well, I say they should retcon the 4E Realms. It's like a bandaid. Best to just rip it off clean rather than peeling it off slowly, and trying to undo Every. Last. Change... which was inflicted by the changeover is just downright nuts because there were so many. How can you possibly undo so much while having it all make narrative sense? And in many cases undoing the damage is downright impossible, at least not without another event on the level of the Spellplague. In short, trying to undo the damage inflicted on the Spellplague through narrative is a monumental task, one which in the end will only create this colossal twisted continuity snarl right in the middle of the Forgotten Realms timeline. Not to mention that no amount of narrative will undo the 100 year time jump, which obliterated countless story threads.
I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 11:17:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline.
That's no less arbitrary than post-timejump 1470DR. Why invalidate all the lore for 1470DR and beyond? Why not reset all the way back to 1356DR, y'know, to accommodate everyone who rejected the ToT and rules-based-lore inflicted on the Realms with AD&D 2E?
It's been said many times before, in fact by some of the Realms designers/authors (in this scroll and in several others, if you search), that the retcon will not be retconned away. Expect the Spellplague and *all existing lore* to remain reasonably intact. You may not like it, you may not like it all, you might even reject it entirely, too bad ... but it is the most "realistic" expectation. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 20 Jun 2012 11:22:31 |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 11:30:58
|
I think a reboot will be a terrible idea. its just not realistic and will alienate new users, who have no interest or knowledge of the
" good old days" of 1e or 2e or whatever. There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Reboot of the Realms for 5th edition.
