| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
 Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 18:36:06
|
Basically, help me build a single, sweeping, panoramic Realms that is stronger and more vibrant than ever before. One Canon, One Story, One Realms
Before you ask, yes, I've read the other threads, and I think this one is sufficiently *different* from those to have some value as a thread. I also felt there were a lot of threads out there that said "how would you reboot it?" or "how would you change it?" being answered by "reboot!" as though it's just that easy.
The concept of this thread is to get at those canonical/design hobgoblins that need to be addressed in order to move forward with a Realms that answers all concerns, serves all eras, and makes everyone (or at least most) happy.
This is not me asking "what would you change?" or "how would you reboot?"
This is me asking "what would you do to make things line up?"
(That said, Mods, please review, and let me know if you think this thread is redundant.)
The Concept:
So let's assume that WotC, in their allegedly "modular" approach to 5e FR, doesn't reboot or retcon anything but instead provides a series of "fixes" to the Realms and opens up design to multiple eras (pre-ToT, pre-Spellplague, post-Spellplague).
Basically, we're assuming WotC does what I'm suggesting on my website: How to make 5e FR the greatest of all possible worlds
The Work:
What would you do? How would you address issues that need to be addressed in a way that does not compromise the lore that's been built up over the last thirty years?
The Nitty-Gritty:
I've listed some ideas below, but I'd like to hear from more folks about what they would do as well:
1. Multiple Eras
Design products that are open to use with any edition or era you want should include baseline design for most of the book (70%) with a section for lore added-on to support any particular era (10% for each of three eras).
So for instance, a CORMYR sourcebook will contain 70% lore about the kingdom of Cormyr's lands, political structure, history, nobility, armies, etc., etc., everything you need to know to build a campaign there for any timeline, and 30% lore for three different eras in Cormyr's history (10% each): basically, a plug-in to run Cormyr in that particular era.
What eras, you ask?
1. Age of Legends, 1340s-1358 (grounded in the OGB, stopping just before the Time of Troubles): The classic era of Ed's original Realms. And since this book is Cormyr, we get to learn about his original canon set in the Forest Kingdom.
2. Age of Upheaval, 1368-1384 (2e-3e, stopping just before the Spellplague): Ten years after the Time of Troubles, the Realms has begun to rebuild itself, in time for fresh perils to befall. In Cormyr, we learn about the Fall of Azoun, the establishment of Alusair's court, and the cold war with Sembia.
3. Age of Heroes, 1470-1480s (4e, 100 years after the Spellplague): A hundred years after the cataclysm of the Blue Fire, the Realms has changed in some ways and held true in many others. With many of its legendary champions receding into the shadows, the Realms has never needed heroes more. In Cormyr, we see the court of King Foril, the enduring schemers seeking to destroy the weakening Obarskyr family, and a little of Elminster's activities in the recent novels.
(We could add a 4th option: Age of Change, 1385-1400, which covers the Wailing Years.)
The concept being that you pick one of these eras in which to run your Cormyr game. If you want to run it at some other point--such as in Cormyr's distant past or somewhere between the eras (such as 1358-1368, or in the big gap after the Spellplague)--you have enough lore in the book to do whatever you want.
(Also note, Brian Cortijo's Cormyr Lineage appears as part of this book, or as a web enhancement to the book.)
We Candlekeep folk might term gameplay in the new, all-eras-open Realms to be CLASSIC Realms (1340-1384), HEROIC Realms (1385+), and LEGENDARY Realms (any other era in Realms history.
Novels are, of course, able and encouraged to explore whatever timelines they want and be set whenever they want. I would suggest the majority of them stick to those three eras, probably mostly in the "current" FR of the "Era of Heroes."
2. Dealing with Spellplague
I think we can all agree that something needs to happen with the Spellplague. It's the elephant in the room that is difficult for any of us to ignore. I would suggest that the 5e FR make an effort (whether through an event or just moving away from it in design) to downplay or otherwise neuter the Spellplague. It was never intended to have such sweeping effects on the 4e FR current setting (i.e. it happened 100 years before and only persists in rare flare-ups), but the perception that the 4e marketing fostered was that it was a big deal.
Moving forward with 5e FR, we have an opportunity to correct that, and I suggest that the Spellplague be relegated to the dusty tomes of history as an event that occurred, had sweeping changes, but has largely been forgotten, like the Time of Troubles, the Return of Shade, Lolth's Silence, etc.
3. Big Canonical Sticking Points
This is mostly a question for the community: What areas of the 4e FR grew too wide from the Realms and need to be reigned in--or more accurately, which aspects of the 4e FR need the most work/detail? How would you do it? What needs to happen to make things "line up" in your opnion?
I think my big, transcending point is the lore-lite timejump. As I see it, the big stumbling block of 4e FR was that we advanced 100 years, NONE OF WHICH were filled in. We were given so little hint as to what happened in that time and told to make it up ourselves. No canonical interpretation of WHY things were muddled up, so it just gave rise to all sorts of online debates. This needs to be corrected, at least in some respect. I don't see a need to fill in all that time, but WotC needs to throw us a bone here.
That said, my top three specific canonical concerns are these:
1) Kingdom of Many-Arrows
I think the orc kingdom is an awesome thing that is sorely in need of detail and development. I think a novel ala Cormyr or Evermeet would be exactly what the doctor ordered, detailing Many-Arrows from its founding shortly before the Spellplague to the present day (1480). I know Bob was working with it for a while--I don't know what future plans he has for it.
2) Halruaa
As I've seen suggested in another thread, we need a novel or a trilogy about the event of Halruaa's demise and about survivors of the nation going elsewhere. It's already in the 4e FR book--the skyship fleet, as it were--but we should carry it through to the reclamation of Halruaa or at least a new founding nation.
Me, I'd put Halruaa together with Lantan and create a high-magic city-state out of the survivors of both countries.
3) The Chosen of Mystra
I don't know about you, but when I think of the Realms, I do indeed think of the Chosen of Mystra as being iconic characters that are key to the setting. 4e FR did some rough things to the Chosen (some of which we know about, some are only implied), and I'd like to see it established what happened to all of them (dammit!). If nothing else, this would allow you to use them (or their legends) in your game without feeling like you were wandering really far afield, or shoe-horning them in.
Other thoughts?
Remember, this thread is specifically about ADDITIVE lore, POSITIVE design (positive meaning addition, as opposed to negative meaning subtraction), and (I hope) healing. It does NOT consider retconning the whole 4e FR (or any other stretch of time) out of existence. It is NOT about a reset and NOT about a reboot. There are plenty of threads for discussing that. In this thread, please focus on the questions I have asked. Thanks! 
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 17 Jan 2012 19:04:54
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 18:50:19
|
Hmm. Well, I think your idea of splitting the setting into three different periods is one of those logical choices that has almost no chance of actually happening. It works from a lore perspective, but I think the folks in accounting would be worried about how such products would actually sell.
That said, I think of the options, other than an "ignore 4e completely," that this is the best. Stay true to the entire legacy of the setting, not just one part.
I really do think the Spellplague needs to get toned down, and your ideas for that make sense.
I'd also bring the slain gods back, and separate the pantheons out along racial lines again. This is mostly for space constraints; otherwise you start needing to map which deity is active in which time, and where new gods came from, etc. Look at all the new deities that got introduced in the Netheril box set, which then had to be accounted for, have their own priests and ethoi, their own spells, etc. Better to have the one pantheon we had in 2e-3e and let them carry forward.
Your point 3, though, is less "let's get 5e in sync" and more "let's do what 4e ought to have done in the first place." Not that I'm saying it's not desperately needed. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
 |
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:00:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Hmm. Well, I think your idea of splitting the setting into three different periods is one of those logical choices that has almost no chance of actually happening. It works from a lore perspective, but I think the folks in accounting would be worried about how such products would actually sell.
Oh, I don't know--I think there's a strong business case behind: "This product appeals to ANYONE WHO'S EVER PLAYED FR, including all our new 5e players, 4e loyalists, 3e holdouts, and 1e-2e grognards." I think this is a more sensible accounting strategy than anything WotC's ever done.
quote:
That said, I think of the options, other than an "ignore 4e completely," that this is the best. Stay true to the entire legacy of the setting, not just one part.
That's the concept. And I really don't want to discuss the "ignore 4e completely" concept. As I've said elsewhere, I see that as being just as divisive as introducing 4e in the first place (if not more so). What I'm looking for here is how to build a single, strong, vibrant Realms that speaks to all players of any era or setting.
quote:
I'd also bring the slain gods back, and separate the pantheons out along racial lines again. This is mostly for space constraints; otherwise you start needing to map which deity is active in which time, and where new gods came from, etc. Look at all the new deities that got introduced in the Netheril box set, which then had to be accounted for, have their own priests and ethoi, their own spells, etc. Better to have the one pantheon we had in 2e-3e and let them carry forward.
I agree on this point. I think having a broad pantheon with lots of permutation is great. The deific pruning in 4e was, I think, an attempt to appeal to new gamers. Because honestly, when you come to a game to build a cleric and have about 50 options of god to choose from (including at least 3-4 moon gods, magic gods, nature gods, etc), it's more than a little intimidating. In the 5e FR, I'd list the CORE gods (that is, the most powerful gods) as your MAIN choices, and provide a list of LESSER gods (that is, the less powerful ones) that you can explore if you choose to. I think killing off the lesser gods because they're there is not the right way to go.
quote:
Your point 3, though, is less "let's get 5e in sync" and more "let's do what 4e ought to have done in the first place." Not that I'm saying it's not desperately needed.
It could certainly be interpreted that way--WotC maybe should have done something like this back in 2008.
The reason it's here is that I think before you can have my "One Canon, One Story, One Realms" concept, you have to be able to get from one edition to another without it seeming like a different setting. And there's a lot of lore reconciliation to be done to get there--I'm just asking what points people find sticky.
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" |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:13:23
|
A few cents:
1) the hard part about truly "edition neutral" supplements/game materials is going to be keeping that stats out AND more importantly keeping all the later edition changes out of that 70% of basic stuff. In other words, I am not likely to buy something if that 70% is cluttered with prestige classes (ie anything outside of traditional 1st/2nd PHB classes), races that weren't around in the OGB (ie dragonborn, tieflings, etc), or other revisions to make the "basic" stuff fit with new edition X. If that could be pulled off though, I would definitely be a prospective buyer of "new" Realmslore.
2) I would rather not WoTC push the novels towards any era. Leave ALL era's open to equal treatment. If the authors choose to write mostly in the 1350's, oh well (not that this is likely, but I don't think we need more 1400's novels necessarily).
3) You stated "One Canon, One Story, One Realms" concept, you have to be able to get from one edition to another without it seeming like a different setting." That is going to be the trick with the 100 year time jump and the absurdity of RSE's that have occurred in recent years. For many of us, the 4E Realms is a new setting, designed from scratch in concept and then transposed onto the best selling campaign world (only keeping what was necessary/easy so as to not actually have to create a new 4E setting from scratch). |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:23:33
|
I would be in for having very rule-lite Forgotten Realms products. IF WotC can do a good job on the mechanics, than IMO the acountants do not have to worry about the setting products being lite on rules and edition specific.
I would produce setting products that offer a decent amount of lore combined with adventure scenario's (without the mechanics) or campaign ideas for DM's to work out into their own versions with their own set of rules (xE rules, home brew rules, or the deities know what rules) than these could cater to old and new gamers as well as those interested in the lore of the campaign world(s).
Assuming that the above rules-lite approach happens, than I would pick themes to have the designers and novelists work on. I wouldn't pick anything specific right now, there are tons of possibilities.
One time the theme might be area and time specific, i.e. Cormyr 25 years after the death of Azoun. It could consist of a lore-heavy product with lots of hooks - e.g. a Volo's Guide type of product back-up with a series of novels set in and around the theme.
Another theme might be spanning a larger historical period with events from the the ancient past, recent past and current (5e) situation tied together: the product set (A) in the current time might have an adventure arc, a themed source book (B) would cover the theme topic with events from the ancient past, recent past and tying them into a set-up for product (A), ad novelists could cover the whole time period using lore from (B) and aiding in fleshing out or providing further backdrop for (A). And these products can act as stand alone products as well, the tie in should not be mandatory for purchasing the products, just an juicy incentive...
[*]A third theme might put the package into an historical time frame, with adventures, a sourcebook and novels.
Note: using webenhancements I would publish edition specific information or allow D20 OGL partners to publish edition specific material. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:26:30
|
@Apex: Oh, I didn't suggest that this was going to be an *easy* process, no (though maybe not all that difficult).
To further define the "edition-neutral" supplements/game materials method, yes, I think officially released books should be lore-heavy, mechanics-light. We have plenty of space to do web-supplements to your heart's content to support 1e/2e mechanics, 3.x mechanics, or 4e mechanics. Or WotC could open it up to outside companies ala OGL love. But I don't want to get too deep into it, because we don't know what the 5e mechanics are going to look like. I'd prefer to keep the focus of this thread on the LORE.
And I very much understand that there are a number of people who don't see the bridge between 3.x and 4e. This thread is about bridging all the gaps between all the editions.
Did you have any thoughts about how to do any of these things? Or how about just, tell me some of those things about 4e that stick out as "wrong" to you, and we'll talk about how to resolve them? (For instance, like I listed Many-Arrows, Halruaa, the Chosen, etc?)
Regarding the novels: When running an IP, the editors *have to* maintain some semblance of control over the direction they want the setting to go. I do, however, agree with the concept of placing more power in novelists' hands to determine where/when they want to tell stories. I suspect that most of the authors working in the Realms would like to continue the stories they are currently telling, most of which are set in the 1400s. But indeed, my concept would leave all eras open to equal treatment.
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
7973 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:36:17
|
I'll firmly align myself with the notion of official support for multi-era Realmslore.
Although it's really for entirely selfish reasons: I see it as a way for "canon" developments in both the game and the novels to accommodate fiction set in any place and any time within the Realms. So there'd be no prohibition from publishing new trilogies set, for example, in ancient Netheril or "old" Cormyr or pre-Spellplague Thay and Halruaa. WotC's official policy of exclusively supporting the post-Spellplague post-timejump 4E era really put me off from buying new game materials and novels, and I'm sure they don't benefit from me seeking out secondhand publications which are still compatible with "my" Realms setting preferences. This multi-era approach would allow 5E to sidestep this 4E marketing limitation and hopefully encourage new products attractive to people like myself who have largely abandoned brand loyalty.
I think I would add another point to canonical sticking points, which hasn't been discussed much at Candlekeep but is argued rather energetically in other forums:
4) Thay
There's a lot of divisiveness about what Thay has become. People want old Thay, people want new Thay; much has been argued about Szass Tam and his Dread Rings, about the Zulkirs-in-Exile, people love it and people hate it. I won't assert any positions on these things, I'm just mentioning that it seems to be an area of canon which is hotly debated elsewhere.
There is one element of Thayan lore which utterly disgusts me, though: Thay-Mart. I'd personally love to see it abolished entirely, although I recognize there are many who do not share my little opinion about it. Alas, I cannot objectively suggest any reasonable fixes for this noxious detail. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 17 Jan 2012 19:39:55 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:36:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
To further define the "edition-neutral" supplements/game materials method, yes, I think officially released books should be lore-heavy, mechanics-light. We have plenty of space to do web-supplements to your heart's content to support 1e/2e mechanics, 3.x mechanics, or 4e mechanics. Or WotC could open it up to outside companies ala OGL love. But I don't want to get too deep into it, because we don't know what the 5e mechanics are going to look like. I'd prefer to keep the focus of this thread on the LORE.
And I very much understand that there are a number of people who don't see the bridge between 3.x and 4e. This thread is about bridging all the gaps between all the editions.
I would love to see edition neutral lore, but I still think that the 100 year jump is going to cause some huge problems with that. My guess is that most places would have changed significantly in the last 100 years and thus it may not be possible to give me that 70% "edition neutral" and the 4E player that same 70%.
quote:
Did you have any thoughts about how to do any of these things? Or how about just, tell me some of those things about 4e that stick out as "wrong" to you, and we'll talk about how to resolve them? (For instance, like I listed Many-Arrows, Halruaa, the Chosen, etc?)
Sadly, most of it. The Spellplague itself. The killing of a Greater God. The drastic map changes (very Dragonlance Cataclysmy to me). The elimination of Maztica/Halruaa/Old Empires. I just don't see how those can be reconciled.
quote:
Regarding the novels: When running an IP, the editors *have to* maintain some semblance of control over the direction they want the setting to go. I do, however, agree with the concept of placing more power in novelists' hands to determine where/when they want to tell stories. I suspect that most of the authors working in the Realms would like to continue the stories they are currently telling, most of which are set in the 1400s. But indeed, my concept would leave all eras open to equal treatment.
Cheers
I have no problem with the writers choosing when to set their books. However, if the editors are pushing the 1400s, then you aren't really edition neutral are you? |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:39:22
|
I also think that a "timeline" of the FR novels in new publications (a la the SW one you can find in all newly-printed SW books) would be nice and helpful. I do not know if we need different symbols per different eras, per se; but I do think that some sort of simple guide to let the reader know when the book is taking place would be very nice. I also agree with Apex that no specific era should be pushed for (as with after the advent of the 4e Realms, it was stated that all novels had to be in said era). That is one of the things I love about the SW novel line, is that I can read stuff over a 6,000-year spread, but when I am reading a novel, it is abundantly clear as to when it is happening.
Now, caveats I have with 4e:
* Not enough detail as to what was going on with most (if not all) of the events on the last page (or was it two?) of the GHotR (particularly the deific love triangle and death of Mystra).
* Unwillingness to detail the rest of the planet (and now Abier, since they created it as a separate planet) as Ed has stated that he would like to do before (it is in the Ask Ed scroll, but I do not know when/where).
* The pruning of the pantheons. Part of what I have always loved about the Realms is its diverse pantheons. They reminded me of shadows of RW pantheons, while at the same time being mostly distinct to the Realms.
* Inconsistencies as to how different magic reacted to the Spellplague. (This was a long time ago, but it was originally stated on the WotC boards that the Spellplague was supposed to "flow around" areas of particularly strong magic, yet for some reason Halruaa detonated.)
* Uncertainty as to the fates of many Realms characters that I love.
* [This is not meant for name-calling or anything] As I saw it, wrongly or not, the 4e Realms was the Realms according to Bruce Cordell. And then, when the fans yelled and screamed, they decided to let Ed design New Abeir (or whatever-the-hell it is called). I want to see the Realms according to Ed Greenwood. No, I do not mean a reboot, but I would like to see Ed take the Realms as it is now and once again put his spin on it. I want him to be the lead writer/designer of every aspect of it that he wants to be for the 5e Realms. That being said, I would not mind seeing one-to-three products detailing "Ed Greenwoods Forgotten Realms" as he originally intended it as well (as Jorkens suggested).
If they put talented people on the job of working out the wrinkles of the above things, I think that I could grow to accept (rather than just ignore) the Spellplague and its aftermath. I would also like a public apology for trying to shove the 4e Realms down our throats, but I do not know how likely that is. |
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)
|
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:40:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
2) Halruaa - As I've seen suggested in another thread, we need a novel or a trilogy about the event of Halruaa's demise and about survivors of the nation going elsewhere. It's already in the 4e FR book--the skyship fleet, as it were--but we should carry it through to the reclamation of Halruaa or at least a new founding nation.
Me, I'd put Halruaa together with Lantan and create a high-magic city-state out of the survivors of both countries.
Sounds good. Though the survivors have to be other than just bakers, cooks, and butlers. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Zireael
Master of Realmslore
Poland
1190 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 19:42:39
|
Speaking of Cormyr, I'd love to see Rowan Cormaeril meet his son Azoun V.
1) It has been suggested in another thread that more on the non-Lolthite, non-Eilistraeean drow would be welcome. Same goes for drow cities other than Menzoberranzan.
2) Move the Bedine into Calimshan.
3) Restore Maztica. I'd be glad to see Unther and Mulhorand also, however, they might just be lumped together. Too similar. Both are clear RL analogues.
4) I was to suggest something else, but then it fled from my brain completely... |
SiNafay Vrinn, the daughter of Lloth, from Ched Nasad!
http://zireael07.wordpress.com/ |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:01:09
|
Erik I appreciate your effort in trying to organize this type of discussion. As I said in the other thread, I favor the approach you are trying to outline here. I believe the support for past and present is the way to go and that it can be made to work, as evidenced by the Star Wars approach. I believe their model is the one to look to for inspiration.
As for the Spellplague, I think one thing that needs to be done is to be very clear that the event itself was 100 years ago and aside from scattered pockets of instability that the change is already done. Maybe stating that some of the effects are gradually going away or stabilizing, possibly in connection with the resurrection of Mystra, would help. This would take some of the randomness out of things and give anyone who wants it a reason to say that most or all of it has gone away (like the Earthmotes, for instance).
I agree on needing more info on the Kingdom of Many Arrows. I would add the Warlock Knights of Vassa, mainly because I want to know more about their rise to power and how they operate. Some other ideas:
1) Red Wizards. If I recall the Haunted Lands trilogy correctly, the Zulkirs and some of those loyal to them settled the Wizard's Reach. Have they appointed new Zulkirs? What is their relation, if any, to the Red Wizards who ran the stores? Did those Red Wizards strike out on their own as merchants or did most of them pick sides in the Civil War? I think there is still a lot that can be done with them and seeing how they are dealing with being cast out of Thay.
2) Sembia. What is it really like under Shade rule? Are there internal or external factions trying to cast off Shade rule, or trying to begin a proxy war against Shade via Sembia? Does anyone look to Sembia and they think they don't have it all that bad and are thus trying to openly curry favor with Shade?
3) Calimshan. I think this region has been over all under represented, more so since the changes it has undergone. Sandstorm provided an insight into the new Calimshan but we could use a lot more. A sequel to Sandstorm would be a good start.
4) Baulder's Gate. I don't think any 4E product touches on this aside from the Campaign Guide (unless I missed one). How are things going now that their population is seriously swelling? A new game would be nice but some novel love wouldn't hurt in the meantime.
For Halruaa, I like the idea of the survivors of Halruaa and Lantan trying to forge a high-magic city-state, as you put it. If it wouldn't be cultural overload, perhaps they could becomes allies with Selunnara and convince them to return to the Prime Material to begin planning how to oppose Shade and possibly Thay. But, they would need to keep the enclaves geographically far apart. Otherwise there would need to be a reason why they don't just throw down and settle once and for all who is to bear the title of Netheril. This could also open stories of a few people within Shade and within this new city-state thinking that the other side isn't so bad and that they might be worth talking to to unite under one banner as the Netheril survivor states.
The Chosen. They are part of the setting, but I think the image of them acting as do gooder super heroes has to be dealt with. I don't think killing them is the best approach. I think a better approach is to give them equals. Evil (and Neutral) Chosen, in other words. They would all have strict rules, but their job would basically be to oppose one another. This constant friction, usually via proxy agents, would be what would lead to the magical arms race that would make Mystra stronger and strenghten magic overall as new spells are needing to be developed constantly. The Neutral Chosen would attempt to maintain a balance and keep the two sides in check. I know this sounds a little like the way the gods are set up in Dragonlance, but it does keep a balance. The main difference here would be that balance amongst the Chosen and their agents is their only concern, not balance amonst the rest of the world.
My primary nominee for the Evil side is Manshoon. He's already a virtually immortal opponent for Elminster, may as well make it official. Even Elminster aknowledges that he is a powerful opponent. He has also shown his ability to organize wizards under his command and encourage competition to strengthen them. And his overall plans don't involve blowing up the world or turning it over to undead dragons or anything like that. His plans require the world to remain intact and much as it is.
I would also spell out that other gods do have Chosen operating in the world, though most of them choose to be a lot less visible. And explain that they can stand up to the Chosen of Mystra should it come down to it. This keeps Mystra's Chosen while providing checks against their power. To soidify it they almost have to have at least one battle occur in-canon. Beyond that, let DMs decide how they want to handle it, but now they have more canon options.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:06:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
To further define the "edition-neutral" supplements/game materials method, yes, I think officially released books should be lore-heavy, mechanics-light. We have plenty of space to do web-supplements to your heart's content to support 1e/2e mechanics, 3.x mechanics, or 4e mechanics. Or WotC could open it up to outside companies ala OGL love. But I don't want to get too deep into it, because we don't know what the 5e mechanics are going to look like. I'd prefer to keep the focus of this thread on the LORE.
And I very much understand that there are a number of people who don't see the bridge between 3.x and 4e. This thread is about bridging all the gaps between all the editions.
I would love to see edition neutral lore, but I still think that the 100 year jump is going to cause some huge problems with that. My guess is that most places would have changed significantly in the last 100 years and thus it may not be possible to give me that 70% "edition neutral" and the 4E player that same 70%.
Oh, I think the "changed significantly" is overstating it, and I think what I outlined is VERY possible. Waterdeep is my principle example of a city that hasn't changed all that much over the 125 years we've been writing about it. As for others . . . well, we'll just have to see, won't we?
quote:
Sadly, most of it. The Spellplague itself. The killing of a Greater God. The drastic map changes (very Dragonlance Cataclysmy to me). The elimination of Maztica/Halruaa/Old Empires. I just don't see how those can be reconciled.
Yes, but I think you're misunderstanding my question: what ABOUT those things stands out as non-Realms to you? What clashes with the canon? What contradicts other Realmslore?
There's a difference between "not liking" a change (which is what you seem to be talking about) and a change being "logically inconsistent" (which is what I was asking about). Maybe we should ask the question, "what could be done to make you LIKE or at least ACCEPT these things?"
Maztica should get a 5e sourcebook that talks about the whole region for 70%, and includes some stuff about it now occupying another world: Abeir. I think the mystery of it disappearing should be resolved, at least in part.
If anything, Halruaa blowing up in the Spellplague made the MOST sense for how the Spellplague was described (as a sweeping magical cataclysm). I think the Halruaa story is valuable, and I've already suggested concepts for what to have happen.
The Old Empires have lots of opportunity for sourcebook love. A 5e sourcebook devoted to the area can discuss all the Old Empires and their continuing feuds, with the "eras" chapter discussing which ones are ascendent when.
quote:
quote:
Regarding the novels: When running an IP, the editors *have to* maintain some semblance of control over the direction they want the setting to go. I do, however, agree with the concept of placing more power in novelists' hands to determine where/when they want to tell stories. I suspect that most of the authors working in the Realms would like to continue the stories they are currently telling, most of which are set in the 1400s. But indeed, my concept would leave all eras open to equal treatment.
I have no problem with the writers choosing when to set their books. However, if the editors are pushing the 1400s, then you aren't really edition neutral are you?
Did I say the editors were pushing the 1400s? Nope, I didn't. I specifically said the AUTHORS would probably want to continue telling their 1400s-based stories.
The editors at WotC should be in the business of looking for AWESOME fantasy novels--that should be the main criteria.
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
7973 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:19:41
|
I notice that little detail is written about the timejump era itself, circa 1385DR-1479DR, the period which Erik tentatively labelled the "Heroic Realms".
Simply advancing the timeline through a century of footnotes may have served Wizbro's "fresh start in the Realms" well, but it was still (in hindsight) a terrible disservice to Realms fans who expected continuity. I think it would be much more difficult for fans to brandish accusations of retcons and demands for reboots if the continuity of the Realms were filled out in more depth. More stories involving the effects of the Spellplague or changes wrought in Halruaa would go a long way towards making the impact of these events "real" with relevant context. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:33:44
|
ummm... yeah... congrats ERik.
you actually got me ot admit something here.... how I hate reading lenthy posts....
blew my mind with it did.....
that said. IMO the 5e deities taht will eventually be listed in the phb whatever should be listed as sample deities
and the deities in the fr should be lsited like they were in the 3.x/2e way. name alignment, worshipers etc.
this way there should(in theory) be no confusion on how to use deity x in setting xyz when said setting has seities abc and not xyz. and as you said the most powerful deities with description in capaign setting.
ohkay... now back on to my other things...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:42:44
|
The Red Wizards of Thay should be united under Szass Tam. Have him rebuild the order that is loyal (more or less) to him. Sure we can have the exiles and whatnot, but the Red Wizards were so iconic they should have that sinister feel and frankly I was always terrified of fighting them because they were so powerful. The Thay enclaves were a neat idea, but I would tone down the ability to buy magic items. Maybe they would sell a minor scroll or potion or two but no real magic. Have Ed create some interesting Thayan trade goods that are the basis of their enclaves instead: spices, slaves, dark lore, ancient Mulhorand artifacts, unique Thayan made items etc.
Eryndlyn, the spellplague cave under the High Moor. Considering this drow city had 3 factions in it, I thought it would be awesome to see it detailed. There was once 60,000 drow living there, where did they all go? Not a huge issue, but that's a large dark elf population. Unless they are all dead of course.
Zhentarim. I know Ed has been working with Manshoon as of late, so maybe we'll see something happen. I would like to see the Zhentarim back or rebuilding out of Darkhold or perhaps Mulmaster. Zhentil Keep as a ruin to adventure and explore is pretty interesting, but maybe it should be resettled too? Have Bane turn Fzoul into a banelich, I remember in the 2E Zhentil Keep book, that they are almost a demipower themselves in strength. He could still be viewed as an "exarch" or demigod type, but he could be running Bane's faith again in the Moonsea.
The Warlock Knights of Vaasa - Somewhat of an interesting idea. I would spin them as some sort of Nauzghul (Lord of the Rings Ringwraiths) Lich King rulers. The various Chaos Scar adventures are pretty sweet, you could spin that off as the Telos being and add the Far Realm element or just some horrific corrupting force. Like a petrified corpse of a demon hits the ground and still talks to his followers etc. |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:47:56
|
A key question in this scenario is to what extent the eras would have their own identity, feeling, sensibility and/or design principles: what balance struck between cohesion and diversity, what mean of continuity and difference.
The earlier era(s), particularly, would carry forward the essence of the early Dragon articles, the lore Ed contributes here, and the work of all the authors who've upheld it in the last quarter-century. I don't say 'follow the essence': this is not an exercise in antiquarianism or pastiche but giving free reign to ideas, vital roots and trunks of the originating Realms, that are yet unfulfilled in print -- to name a few, Ed's lore-first approach to magic items, the Art with its wards and personal craftings and counter-spells and all, his planar and inter-world work, the highly parallel and involved intrigues and strivings, the rising power of the merchant class, the centrality of social bonds and the pre-eminence of hope.
There's a word for this: instauration.
The fifteenth-century era could be approached in different ways. Several authors have worked to bridge the gap between the lore-is-a-burden, appeasing-Realms-critics 2008 setting books and the parent Realms, looking for compromises and reinstatements. But, especially if there's a substantial audience that actively likes Realms-2008 as a world, you could argue for more fidelity to its original principles as laid out by Bruce Cordell and co., or some of them: a Realms where it's easier to go it alone and become a big fish, perhaps one with more modern primary literary influences than Ed's.
Even if you downplay the Spellplague, you still have the loss of Mystra and the Weave, which is not just the Realms' source of magic but its anima mundi, its Force, a symbol of human memory, friendship, connection, correspondence and cause. This is primary, and though I don't know what it means for a multi-era setting, it's the first thing to remember. In comparison, the logical consistency problem with the soap-operatic gods and the 2008 authors' forgetting that the very purpose of Mystra's Chosen is to ensure her survival can surely be written over with the kind of clever fix certain Realms scribes are famous for.
I would like authors to write novels and short stories about the demise of Halruaa, the return of Bane, the Knights of Myth Drannor, Sharanralee Crownstar, Arilyn and Danilo . . . if they want to, and not if not, and I hope they have that choice to the greatest practical extent.
For the gods, both the original set and the 4E book have the same fine approach -- with the exception of the culling-the-others bit -- of detailing those most prominent in the main campaign area and popular with adventurers, which isn't the same as greater vs lesser. |
Edited by - Faraer on 17 Jan 2012 20:52:46 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 20:49:31
|
Maztica could be interesting. Is it popular? I dunno, but I never cared for real world like places in gaming. Has anyone ever played Age of Conan? Where you start out on that jungle type island full of pirates, killer pygmies, and dark monsters and magic? That's how I would do that setting. Total Robert Howard dark fantasy.
Re-reading the Returned Abeir section, this might be a workable area. It seems somewhat interesting. Perhaps Ed could do a supplement about the place. I'm not sure how to tie Maztica into it however. I always found the whole two twinned worlds somewhat confusing. |
Edited by - Eilserus on 17 Jan 2012 21:12:59 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7973 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 21:43:07
|
| How about Volo's Guide to Time Travelling? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 22:26:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
A key question in this scenario is to what extent the eras would have their own identity, feeling, sensibility and/or design principles: what balance struck between cohesion and diversity, what mean of continuity and difference.
Well said. I think we could strike a common tone in the Realmslore--for lack of a more apt descriptor, a *Realmsian* tone. It's really up to DMs to determine the flavor of their games.
quote:
Even if you downplay the Spellplague, you still have the loss of Mystra and the Weave, which is not just the Realms' source of magic but its anima mundi, its Force, a symbol of human memory, friendship, connection, correspondence and cause. This is primary, and though I don't know what it means for a multi-era setting, it's the first thing to remember. In comparison, the logical consistency problem with the soap-operatic gods and the 2008 authors' forgetting that the very purpose of Mystra's Chosen is to ensure her survival can surely be written over with the kind of clever fix certain Realms scribes are famous for.
I wouldn't want to speculate on what Ed's doing with Mystra (because he's clearly doing something in his novels), but as I've said in other places, IMO the death of Mystra presents not an obstacle but an opportunity: it's a built-in quest/story for the PCs to undertake. If indeed you want to explore that in your campaign.
quote:
I would like authors to write novels and short stories about the demise of Halruaa, the return of Bane, the Knights of Myth Drannor, Sharanralee Crownstar, Arilyn and Danilo . . . if they want to, and not if not, and I hope they have that choice to the greatest practical extent.
No doubt it surprises no one that I, an author in the setting, would love to give authors in the setting more power to determine their own courses. Though I would temper that with my usual caveat that it's important that the editors have enough power to maintain their IP. Authors should advance the ideas, the editors should have veto power--which is sort of the setup we have now, though under this new system, we'd be more open to writing stories in various timelines.
All of these ideas I'd love to see (though I wonder if Ed's done with the KoMD for the moment. That would be up to him, of course (as you yourself say).
quote:
For the gods, both the original set and the 4E book have the same fine approach -- with the exception of the culling-the-others bit -- of detailing those most prominent in the main campaign area and popular with adventurers, which isn't the same as greater vs lesser.
This is probably a better way of putting it. The PHB should have a writeup of popular adventurer deities, while either the 5e FR Campaign Setting or a 5e FR religion sourcebook should contain the rest.
And my personal preference would be NO DEITY STATS. I personally find those unnecessary, and they convey a certain message about where your games should go that we don't need. (Also, if Monte's column holds the truth about using multiple editions, the stats are already out there.)
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" |
|
|
|
Mandarb Carai an Caldazar
Acolyte
17 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 22:36:33
|
Well Met all.
I felt like chiming in here as a person who is an avid reader of the novels but only kept (remotely) in touch with the P&P supplements, as what Erik is driving at is the issues in the Lore.
Essentially I got thrown for a loop during the transition in editions because it felt like WotC decided to just ignore what came before and pretend the Realms started when the Spellplague hit. Gods died, the landscape morphed, and very important people died or got seriously nerfed (to borrow a gaming term) and it felt like WotC could have told that story in a paragraph or two. This is supposed to be an Epic Fantasy Setting so that kind of behaviour doesn't sit well with me (nor should it with anyone). As far as I am concerned there should be no such thing as different tones or different Realms, especially when we're only talking about 100 frickin' years!! S**t hits the fan, people run for the hills, and then rebuild when it's all over...and that should be that. The people weren't replaced, the geography just changed a little. What I would like to see is all the lore gaps filled in.
To cap it off, because of this (perceived) attitude, my purchasing of Realms novels has contracted to the few on-going story lines that (somewhat) bridge the gap. Namely(by author), Bob Salvatore, Ed Greenwood, and (when the new books are finally released) Paul S Kemp. If WotC refuses to bridge the canyons in the time line, when those story lines end, so does my readership. |
For Manetheren! |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 23:08:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mandarb Carai an Caldazar
To cap it off, because of this (perceived) attitude, my purchasing of Realms novels has contracted to the few on-going story lines that (somewhat) bridge the gap. Namely(by author), Bob Salvatore, Ed Greenwood, and (when the new books are finally released) Paul S Kemp. If WotC refuses to bridge the canyons in the time line, when those story lines end, so does my readership.
Hopefully this won't derail Erik's thread. Mandarb, there are a few other novels you might want to check out if you are focusing on the transition type novels. The Haunted Lands trilogy focuses on the Thayan Civil War and part of it is happening when the Spellplague hits and it's immediate aftermath on Thay and the war are described. It is a little lore lite after a certain point because it jumps forward in time, but it does show some of the changes as they happen. The Abolethic Sovereignty trilogy starts before the Spellplague and then jumps forward a little. It explains what the Sovereignty is, how they came to emerge, and what they are trying to do. Then it jumps into the "present".
I do agree with your other comment that the lore needs to be filled in. Or at the very least the major parts that lead to major change. |
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 |
|
|
|
Mandarb Carai an Caldazar
Acolyte
17 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jan 2012 : 23:41:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
quote:
Originally posted by Mandarb Carai an Caldazar
To cap it off, because of this (perceived) attitude, my purchasing of Realms novels has contracted to the few on-going story lines that (somewhat) bridge the gap. Namely(by author), Bob Salvatore, Ed Greenwood, and (when the new books are finally released) Paul S Kemp. If WotC refuses to bridge the canyons in the time line, when those story lines end, so does my readership.
Hopefully this won't derail Erik's thread. Mandarb, there are a few other novels you might want to check out if you are focusing on the transition type novels. The Haunted Lands trilogy focuses on the Thayan Civil War and part of it is happening when the Spellplague hits and it's immediate aftermath on Thay and the war are described. It is a little lore lite after a certain point because it jumps forward in time, but it does show some of the changes as they happen. The Abolethic Sovereignty trilogy starts before the Spellplague and then jumps forward a little. It explains what the Sovereignty is, how they came to emerge, and what they are trying to do. Then it jumps into the "present".
I do agree with your other comment that the lore needs to be filled in. Or at the very least the major parts that lead to major change.
Yep, I tried to be as specific as possible, as in, I specified "on-going story lines", that "somewhat" bridge the gap. Mayhaps I should have left that part out, the important information was the on-going descriptor. The issue I'm having is there's a giant fluorescent elephant in my brain representing the missing information and I'm hesitant to pick up an "isolated" book or trilogy. This is hardly a knock against any of the authors currently writing in the setting, I wouldn't hesitate to pick up anything from them set in the 1300s DR or non-Realmsian (and haven't in the past), it's the disconnect of having a character-driven story ostensibly set in the Realms which is almost un-relatable to other works, beyond place-names and labels. I can't cling to a setting that's both Epic and modular at the same time, I'm not wired like that, it needs to be one or the other. No-one else may see it this way, this is entirely IMO, but that's kind of the point, no? Perceptions are subjective.
I also agree with you agreeing with me, lol, the gaps need to be filled in.
Also, why do Araevin Teshurr and Galaeron Nihmedu star in one (arguably VERY important) trilogy each and then get dumped in the gutter? That situation has grated on my nerves recently as well. If I completely missed something PLEASE TELL ME! I will run out to the store RIGHT NOW or order them if I have to, great characters. |
For Manetheren! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 00:29:25
|
Nah, it doesn't derail my thread. I think filling in that long gap and connecting strings left severed is extremely important. We designers have actually been gradually filling in that gap as the years go on, though not fast enough to make up for the suddenly emergent gap. (If you read my novels, this is something that I do in them.) This should be a priority in 5e.
If the timeline advances for 5e FR, it should be 1-2 years, maybe, and the lore we produce should be filling in the gap.
quote:
Originally posted by Mandarb Carai an Caldazar
...it's the disconnect of having a character-driven story ostensibly set in the Realms which is almost un-relatable to other works, beyond place-names and labels. I can't cling to a setting that's both Epic and modular at the same time, I'm not wired like that, it needs to be one or the other. No-one else may see it this way, this is entirely IMO, but that's kind of the point, no? Perceptions are subjective.
I think you're using "modular" to mean "character-driven," which isn't what it means. "Modular" means something like "inclusive" and is more a gaming term than a narrative one.
The Realms has always been accomodating to both Epic, world-shaking stories and smaller, Character-driven stories. This has been the case since its founding. The early Drizzt books were all very character-driven, with small events that didn't leave a huge impact on the Realms at large. Azure Bonds is like that too, as are most of the Harper books. Contrast those with the Moonshae books, which are pretty epic in scale, and the chronicles of huge FR events. I don't think that's going to change anytime soon--FR novels will continue to come out that are either Epic or Personal.
quote:
Also, why do Araevin Teshurr and Galaeron Nihmedu star in one (arguably VERY important) trilogy each and then get dumped in the gutter? That situation has grated on my nerves recently as well. If I completely missed something PLEASE TELL ME! I will run out to the store RIGHT NOW or order them if I have to, great characters.
Because their stories are done, as far as I can tell. They did what they were meant to do. That's usually what happens when a character's story is finished--the character either dies or peacefully retires. Rich Baker (who wrote Araevin's story) moved on to the Moonsea series (see the novel Swordmage). Troy Denning (who wrote Galaeron) has taken a break from writing in the Realms to go write all those Star Wars novels--you never know when he'll be back.
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 18 Jan 2012 00:30:22 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 00:41:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
(That said, Mods, please review, and let me know if you think this thread is redundant.)
I think it's fine the way it is.
We have a great many creative folk here, so I'm inclined to assume that we will rarely but up against the dread scroll-redundancy monster.
Have at it!  |
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 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 01:26:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
If the timeline advances for 5e FR, it should be 1-2 years, maybe, and the lore we produce should be filling in the gap.
And what if Bruce decides that the only "problem" with 4E was that they just didn't jump far enough and left too many things for the old-guard to cling to? What if the jump between 4E and 5E is 500 years, is it still "The Realms" then? What about if they decide to collide Athas with Toril, still the Realms? At what point do you draw the line and say "you know what, this just doesn't fell like the Realms to me anymore? |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7973 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 01:48:28
|
Apex - what if we concentrate on offering criticism about how we'd like the Realms to be reconstructed instead of tearing parts of it down? Wizbro may or may not decide to implement fanon input, but they most surely will ignore input from fans who refuse to be appeased.
I prefer to think of "modular" in the context of being able to add pieces, selectively or entirely, which fit together to make a greater whole. Modular does not mean a jigsaw puzzle unable to show a complete picture until every piece is properly fitted. Modular does mean something like LEGO, where any number of pieces can be used (or discarded) yet still create all sorts of constructs which are each unique and each unified and compatible - constructs which can be joined together, which can later be altered at will, even modified using different pieces which were not previously available. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 18 Jan 2012 01:57:46 |
|
|
|
Thrasymachus
Learned Scribe
195 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 02:08:15
|
I’ll take off my “Reboot  Society” pin, for a moment…
I don’t really believe that a 5th Edition Rulebooks necessitate a slew of 5th Edition setting fixes. I am sure it’s tempting to try to “fix” it, but if we’re all shuffling along anyway I would say, cut the losses and don’t make it worse.I would suggest letting the campaign setting ride, and continue filling in the gaps in the eras as you detailed using your idea of “Ages”. In particular limiting the new age (1385-1400) (aka 5E) to about 15 years to work in as your suggested. I wouldn’t “change” lots of things in this new era, but instead use the new era/edition as a canon heavy span of time. A lot of source books like “The North” which was a great snapshot, can be updated to the current snapshot of "The North".
1st, 2nd and 3rd Editions are sturdy launching pads. 4th Edition, strikes me as more of a flimsy rope bridge, that you are forced to cross blindfolded, while it’s being shaken.
From my point of view a new edition comes down to two possibilities…
(1) The Forgotten Realm extends that flimsy rope bridge, and shakes it some more.
or
(2) The Forgotten Realms creates another sturdy launching pad. 
I would release a final 4th Edition product (or make it the first 5th Edition Product) by Brian R James, and name it what ever fits from the period where 3E ended (where Brian left off in The Grand History of the Forgotten Realms), and 5th Edition Begins.
I would publish novels for all the eras. I don't know if Wizards got burned by the Arcane Age products they put out, but FWIW I am interested in reading about all eras in novels.
|
Former Forgotten Realms brand manager Jim Butler: "Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon". |
Edited by - Thrasymachus on 18 Jan 2012 02:10:47 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7973 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 02:21:00
|
| (Are there not already some novels set in Arcane Ages Netheril, Cormanthyr, and Myth Drannor?) |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 18 Jan 2012 02:21:51 |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 03:01:47
|
Just a thought on Evermeet and the Eladrin/Elves that builds on 4e events and not necessarily causes a "reboot".
Mystra is mostly reformed through Ed's writings and new 5E lore, and the weave restored to close to pre-spellplague levels. As a result, the Eladrin/Elves of Evermeet, who were wisked away to the Feywild, as a result of 4E events, are able to use long lost magics to return Evermeet proper to Toril and retain strong links to the Feywild. The Eladrin/Elves immediately seek a return to the Faerunian mainland to link up with Myth Drannor and the various other Eladrin/Elven realms that builds a strong and unbreakable alliance of the people. Additionally, Evermeet would seek to restore lost lands along the North and Sword Coast, to their former glory.
Moonblades go wild. Many blades, long thought to have gone dormant, blaze with blue-white light when the Weave and Evermeet returns, ushering in a new era of Elven might. Some Distant/lost Moonflower Heir is identified through some sort of ** fill in the blanks adventure/ story *** that allows the Royal Council to concede power and the throne finally warmed by a new king/queen. The newly crowned King/Queen could maybe be protected by an elite company of newly awakened Moonblade wielding knights, Blade Singers, etc.
Anyway, my 2 coppers. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jan 2012 : 03:06:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
If the timeline advances for 5e FR, it should be 1-2 years, maybe, and the lore we produce should be filling in the gap.
And what if Bruce decides that the only "problem" with 4E was that they just didn't jump far enough and left too many things for the old-guard to cling to? What if the jump between 4E and 5E is 500 years, is it still "The Realms" then? What about if they decide to collide Athas with Toril, still the Realms? At what point do you draw the line and say "you know what, this just doesn't fell like the Realms to me anymore?
As much as you might fear otherwise, Bruce isn't in charge. As far as I know (and I probably know farther than you do), it's a GROUP of people, including Bruce, Ed, James Wyatt, Mike Mearls, Matt Sernett, probably Monte, and other people not yet named. They are really serious about doing this right, and I think we should at least give them a chance. (Why are we here if we don't think there's any hope?)
You kinda sounds like you're all set to give up before you even begin. What I'm looking for here are suggested solutions, rather than reiterating an old "it doesn't seem like the Realms" discussion we've all had before. Your legitimate gripes are heard and acknowledged, by me at least. Time to move on.
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" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
