| Author |
 Topic  |
|
edappel
Learned Scribe
Brazil
211 Posts |
 Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 20:56:01
|
Wait... Wait...
Are you sure Ed isn't writing 5E Realms campaign guide? THO don't stop saying he is doing many surprising things with WotC. Is there something somewhere that disaproves this idea?
And Sir Brian James is right.. It's time for us to do our job.. let's spam Wizards with e-mails to make them writers of 5E FRCG! |
--- Ed Appel
*** I'm a brazilian FR fan. So, feel free to correct my writing mistakes to improve my english. |
 |
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 21:50:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by edappel
Wait... Wait...
Are you sure Ed isn't writing 5E Realms campaign guide? THO don't stop saying he is doing many surprising things with WotC. Is there something somewhere that disaproves this idea?
And Sir Brian James is right.. It's time for us to do our job.. let's spam Wizards with e-mails to make them writers of 5E FRCG!
Spam Engine is a go!
And while Ed might be contributing to the new edition, his effort that I am anticipating (as are many here) is the tome based on his home campaign notes. Warts and all, it's going to be good - the Realms as originally envisioned. -CENSORED- yes!  |
|
|
|
Laeknir
Seeker
68 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 22:09:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Resetting the timeline is NOT going to "lure customers back"--good design is the only possible thing that's going to do that. That's what Neverwinter did, and Neverwinter embraced the Spellplague as a thing that happened, whilst simultaneously treating the past lore with respect and affection.
Resetting the timeline WOULD bring me back, whether it's to 1E or even to the end of 3E.
And I rejected the Neverwinter Guide precisely because it's contaminated by 4E changes / spellplague.
What of the other former customers, who feel as I do but have remained silent because you automatically reject us? Clearly you have this belief, but I see only a smattering of anecdocal evidence to support your contention.
|
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 22:23:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I haven't seen much of a drive for "give us a 1480 Realms without the Spellplague." I've certainly seen people ask "give us the Realms without the Spellplague" or "give us 1385-1400 Realms without the Spellplague." But really, if you were offered the choice of "we'll reset the Realms to 1380 without the Spellplague" vs. "we'll create a brand new 1480 Realms as though the Spellplague never happened," which would you choose?
I believe that a 5e which went with a 1480 DR date without the Spellplague would have managed a miraculous feat of game design, i.e. giving us the worst of all worlds and making absolutely no one happy. It would, effectively, be the third setting published under the name of the Forgotten Realms and have as little to do with the previous two as either of them had to do with each other.
A wise man once said: "The past is another country. They do things differently there."
Just as physical distance can seperate some very different places, which, in turn, would be very different settings for roleplaying games, different times do the same.
I'm writing up a list of prospectii now, allowing putative players to vote between 12-14 suggested campaigns set in a variety of worlds, with or without magic and the supernatural. And even campaigns that sound similar on the surface, being games set on an Earth with Magic*, are effectively different settings if one is set in England in the 1630s, one in France in the 1700s, another in the Carribean in the 1790s, one in the Pacific in the early 1800s, one in North America in 1860s, one in North Americ in the 1880s, one in Africa in the early 1900s, etc.
A Civil War setting has similarities to a Wild West one, but it's far from the same thing. And that's just a decade or two, where even with the terrible casualties the majority of people who were alive back then are still alive. A century is more than enough to make something a completely different and almost unrecognisable setting.
*Slight magic, at least, which the truly occult can use but few others. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:00:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
Clearly this is self-serving, but if you *truly* believe that freelancers like Ed, Erik and I are the best suited to bridge the editions and write a kick ass 5E Realms campaign guide, then please communicate this to Wizards of the Coast directly (though snail mail, email, twitter, or facebook).
My problem with this is how do we know that our requests are heard? I posted on Erik's thread on the WotC forums for fans to voice their hesitancy about the eBook only release of Shadowbane, and checked back several times and never say an "official" WotC response. I actually do not understand why they cannot take the time to surf the web and figure out where the largest concentrations of Realms fans are and then go there and do some research on their own. I would be very tempted to contact them if I knew my voice would be heard. Unfortunately, no matter what they have said, they still seem like the large super company that no longer cares about their customers. (A feeling I have have felt since they "sprung" 4e and the 4e Realms on us 4 1/2 years ago.) |
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)
|
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:03:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
My problem with this is how do we know that our requests are heard? I posted on Erik's thread on the WotC forums for fans to voice their hesitancy about the eBook only release of Shadowbane, and checked back several times and never say an "official" WotC response. I actually do not understand why they cannot take the time to surf the web and figure out where the largest concentrations of Realms fans are and then go there and do some research on their own. I would be very tempted to contact them if I knew my voice would be heard. Unfortunately, no matter what they have said, they still seem like the large super company that no longer cares about their customers. (A feeling I have have felt since they "sprung" 4e and the 4e Realms on us 4 1/2 years ago.)
In their defence, even an overwhelming consensus on a message board is only a handful of actual customers.
Candlekeep may have a lot of members listed, but in actual fact, fewer than a 100 scribes are active here on a regular basis. Even if they all agreed on something, they'd still not be many enough to affect sales much one way or another. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:28:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Why does the year change it, out of curiosity?
I may have been a bit hasty with this, or at the very least, the statement itself was too generalized.
IF I see a product that interests me, I will find out more info about it (preferably from people who have bought it), and if I hear things I like (or think I will like), then I will purchase it. Products set in the '4e era' will have very little chance of of interesting me (and I freely admit this is due to bias).
HOWEVER, I have read a few 4e novels, and I have enjoyed about half of them... the ones that I feel didn't beat me over the head with 'Spellplague' (Rich Baker's novels are an excellent example). Two author/designers I respect, and admire (more like "think the world of") wrote ones I didn't really care for, only because I felt like my face was being rubbed in Spellplague on every single page.
I also admit that MUCH about the 4e FR lore I can use, and even find more useful then past versions (like Waterdeep). Despite that, I still 'yearn' for the older, less-useful versions, if only because I miss all the 'familiar faces' (a type of bizarre, fanboi-style homesickness?) So the DM in me sees all the potential, while the fan in me just shakers his head in sadness (as anyone would, after losing many 'friends'... if characters in fiction can be thought of as our friends).
There was a time I felt - as a FAN - I needed to read every supplement and novel, even if they were about areas I had little or no interest (and in some cases, my interest would be piqued by those products). I no longer feel that way - now I will only read stuff I think I could use, or that other fans are 'raving about'.
So, saying I won't buy a product because of it's time period is NOT "set in stone"; I just know from past experience I will probably not buy those products (Note: I never bought any of the Arcane Age products, except for the Netheril box, simply because of the time period those were set in).
And I was disappointed by the Netheril box (so I may have bought others, had that one been better).
But, if people (online and elsewhere) are absolutely raving about something, then of course I will buy it regardless - my biases won't effect my good sense. I am a DM first, and can always use more goodness for my games. The era may irk me in a subconscious way, but my inner FR-fanboi isn't going to stop the DM in me from adding to his arsenal of awesome.
So here it is - my D&D purchases will be based entirely upon quality, whereas my novel purchases will more likely be effected by the time period. I really don't give an Osquip's Arse whats happening to who in 1479+, even if its to characters I've known in the past. In fact, I am more likely to buy books about completely random (new) characters, then see ones from the past 're-imagined' (that just gets under my skin). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Mar 2012 23:35:06 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7968 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:32:23
|
quote:
Hawkins
My problem with this is how do we know that our requests are heard? ... I actually do not understand why [WotC] cannot take the time to surf the web and figure out where the largest concentrations of Realms fans are and then go there and do some research on their own. I would be very tempted to contact them if I knew my voice would be heard. Unfortunately, no matter what they have said, they still seem like the large super company that no longer cares about their customers.
My personal experience - as seen from inside a "large super company" (not WotC) - is that they do indeed allocate some labour towards the internet, it's basically recognized as being free advertising. The real problem is that while online they do not painstakingly search for or respond to every instance of customer commentary or feedback. In addition to maintaining their own website, the main focus of their web time is spent on optimizing Google search parameters or creating Wikipedia entries so that their product has more exposure. Feedback scattered all over the place is routinely ignored, even most of feedback on the corporate site is initially given automated responses, sometimes fed towards a human operator where they are most often used to increment statistical counters of some sort for internal development or marketing purposes.
In short, companies generally don't really go surfing around for complaints but will dutifully process complaints they receive. So posting complaints all over the web really doesn't accomplish much, contacting a company directly is usually the best shot at being heard. WotC already runs a D&D forum, they really aren't obligated to surf all the other D&D forums - although it does turn out that some non-WotC D&D forums (like Candlekeep) are frequented by WotC-affiliated people. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 27 Mar 2012 23:37:17 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:32:39
|
@Hawkins: You make valid points, Hawkins. But I will say that since I have started these threads, which have sparked this much discussion, I have had far more success offering thoughts, suggestions, and ideas to WotC. I can't give you real specifics, but it does seem to be having an effect.
For instance, talking about the ebook-only release of Shadowbane *is* having an effect. Not having posts recently seems to have dropped it off WotC's radar a bit, but I have seen a shift in the book department on this.
If this is something you care about--if you really want to see a particular designer working in your setting, then it's up to you to advocate for it. Go on the WotC boards. Find D&D on Facebook. Find Greg Bilsland, James Wyatt, Mike Mearls, Matt Sernett, etc., on Twitter. This is your setting. Fight for it.
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" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:34:35
|
@Laeknir: You're saying "retcon out the Spellplague, and I'll come back and play in this setting that I already have on my shelf and could play at any time, and which you're proposing to create new things for." Basically, burn everything that's come out since 2008--regardless of how many other Realms fans enjoy or play with those toys--and you will come back, and maybe others. That really doesn't sound like much of an offer for WotC.
It's a little like if I said "I hate the Star Wars prequels, so they've ruined Star Wars for me. I will only come back to the Star Wars universe if Lucas burns them from existence and retcons them away." Obviously, this isn't the case for the Star Wars universe--lots of things have come out since the widely reviled prequels, and Lucas has still done really well for himself. Star Wars didn't have to break the prequels as toys--it just had to create more toys for people to use. That's exactly what I'm advocating for the Realms.
It's perplexing to me.
Let's say hypothetically I get my way. I hand you a 200 page Forgotten Realms Core sourcebook which has 75% Realmslore that applies to the Realms regardless of era or region you choose to use. The remaining 25% involves the post-Spellplague world, so you probably won't use it--10% of it is just after 1385, while 15% of it is 1480ish. All of which can be neatly ignored. In fact, if you really want to, you can tear those pages out and burn them, and the book will hold up great.
You're really going to sit there and tell me that you don't want this: 150 pages of Realms that you can use without tweaks or changes, that you can work into your game with almost no effort. And the REASON you don't want this is because 50 pages exists somewhere, elsewhere, that you aren't going to use?
It's like refusing to play 2e FR because the Maztica boxed set exists. Or declaring you will never ever play 3e because Lost Empires of Faerun offends you.
I've said before that WotC cannot reach into your head and pull out the perfect setting, and even if they could, they shouldn't, because what works for YOU isn't what works for EVERYONE. Nothing works for EVERYONE--the only possibility is to put all the tools on the table and let people decide, in their intellectual agency and knowing their own games, which ones to pick up and play with.
And I know that if one has an emotional reaction to something--that the 4e FR is really OFFENSIVE to that person on an emotional level--that you can get like this, where you don't ever want to look at the setting again, beacuse it's been *spoiled* for you. Absolutely no compromise. But then, if that's the case, how am I to take seriously the claim that you would come back, much less any other fans? This is EXACTLY what got us into the 4e mess in the first place--WotC listening to non-fans insisting that Mystra, the Chosen, Halruaa, etc., were "problems" that needed to be "fixed."
Anyway. I am seriously trying everything in my power to make as many people as happy as possible, because I care about the setting and want to see it survive and thrive. And if what I'm proposing doesn't work for you, there's really nothing I can do about it. Obviously you're going to play what you like and ignore what you aren't. Whether that happens with the Realms or not, well, that's really up to you.
All I can ask is that you give it a chance. If not, well, that's your decision to make.
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" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:36:14
|
Also, it bears noting that WotC is hardly a "super company." Every year, they have a smaller and smaller workforce, and fewer and fewer resources.
I think the most effective means of communicating your desires as regards design is personal communication.
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" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2012 : 23:49:48
|
A retcon would be nearly as bad (for the brand, and otherwise) as the Spellplague + Timejump was. I don't mind the future - I just want it to stay in the future.
A reset to a MUCH earlier period (pre-OGB) would allow them to create new material, while adding-in connections to future material (Primordials, Aboleths, Abeir, etc) WITHOUT invalidating anything.
You fix the Spellplague merely by ignoring the Spellpague. They don't have to get rid of it - just 'shelf it', and then they can decide what to do about it at a later time (after the IP and fanbase have healed, and the edition war is ended). Maybe 6e can bring us through the wailing years, or into the 4e era, but right now we need to dial things back a notch.
Or if 5e focuses on the immediate after-effects of the Spellplague (1385-1400), then 6e can be a complete reboot of the 4e era, and by then, everyone will be able to accept it (hopefully).
If you turn your music up to '10', and the neighbors complain, you don't crank-it-up to '11' - you dial it back down to 5 or 6. Turning it up higher just pisses everyone off (and guys in blue show up... with plungers...)
For some reason, every time someone mentions "moving the setting forward", I get this weird picture in my head, of jack Nicholson in Batman saying, "wait'll they get a load of ME." Its not a positive feeling AT ALL. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 Mar 2012 23:50:11 |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 00:04:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Also, it bears noting that WotC is hardly a "super company." Every year, they have a smaller and smaller workforce, and fewer and fewer resources.
I think the most effective means of communicating your desires as regards design is personal communication.
Cheers
I think you have your paradigms wrong, Erik. The story here should be Star Trek, not Star Wars. I am a huge fan of TOS, and all of the other series offends me for one reason or another. However, Star Trek was neatly segregated into three eras... TOS, TNG/DS9/Voyager, and Enterprise. I can elect to play in any era, but as most Trekkies (like me) will tell you, TNG storywriters and even TOS writers often contradicted canon.
I don't think that WoTC getting smaller is of necessity a bad thing. TSR was pretty small and they produced great products. Wizards brought the core books into much nicer form with 3E, but as a brand I don't think Wizbro knows what to do with the Realms. If they were smart, they'd hire Ed full-time to run that division and watch true magic happen again.
I agree that Candlekeep's community is too small to effect change on its own. I also think that Facebook is a great way to get things moving. The problem with Facebook is that it's far too chaotic to get things done. It would be far better to create a "Let Ed, Erik, and Jim Fix the Realms" page and get people to like it.
I think that Wizards could and maybe should consider taking the 4E Realms and calling it something like "The Shattered Realms" or "The Fractured Realms" or whatever. I still stand by my previous post, but let's be honest here: the overwhelming majority of the population couldn't care less. Just to be on Candlekeep means you're a devoted FR fan. We are not their target audience, but that doesn't mean we're voiceless. Lemmings populate Facebook, and will "like" things because their friends like things. If we can create a compelling argument for something, people will like it. (I am not saying I agree with ripping out Spell Plague stuff, just that it should be considered along with other ideas)
The best possible outcome I can see is to get Ed in charge, with Erik working on this closely. Brian can certainly be a big part of it, but I'd also really like to see Jim Lowder come back, too. With no offense intended to anyone, I think Jim writes the gods better than anyone else - even Ed.
This is WoTC's opportunity to do what Apple did, and bring back the equivalent to Steve Jobs. Nobody knows the Realms better than Ed, and thus nobody can fix the Realms better than Ed. Gary Gygax had an idea - Ed turned it into something absolutely amazing. Dungeons and Dragons are things, the Realms is an experience. The very fact that we have this scroll, this site, and this discussion with such vigor is because of Ed's particular vision. The game's mechanics are really irrelevant and have largely been ignored in this thread.
Using a D&D metaphor - Wizards's approach to 4E was a fireball. Ed would use a magic missile to tackle specifics in the way that only he can do. He'll need an army to get it done this decade, and Erik has led the charge as far as I can tell from the "current" set of Realms authors. He's doing everything he can to help us get a usable setting back, and I'm getting cranky at all of the arguments without solutions. Time cannot be undone, and so 4E happened. So did Star Trek V, and I'm still traumatized by that. But guess what, nearly the entire Star Trek community almost completely ignores it. It can be done, and has been done. We can and should trust in our proven leaders with authority (AKA the developer and the designers who have produced great Realms stuff before) and support them. Argue minor points later, but let's make some progress, here! I want to "advance" my game setting a little bit from 3E. But just like Star Trek, you can skip a setting (or movie) and still survive.
Who wants to toss up the Facebook page? I will if nobody else wants to, but let's not fracture our efforts to the point that we're 1,000 voices shouting instead of one very loud one.
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 00:48:06
|
The facebook idea is flattering, Azuth. Aww shucks!
Resetting Star Trek was an interesting thing they did, and one which I myself enjoyed. I might be open to something like that at some point, but I don't think it's necessary in this case, nor am I convinced the Realms IP lends itself to that. It's basically asking ALL fans of EVERYTHING in the Realms to give up on everything they know and love, sever all the ongoing stories that are active now, invalidate the ones that have been used, and go back to a rebooted version.
Maybe it's the written medium, as opposed to the visual. Star Trek you could do amazing things visually, and there are just iconic images that show up and connect the dots. If we were to reboot the Realms, who would you get to do that? Would you want someone like me to write a reboot "version" of Alias or Dragonbait? (Which I would NEVER do, btw.)
And also, Star Trek may be a huge universe, but largely it's limited to several certain sets of characters: Kirk's crew, Picard's crew, the DS9 folks, the Voyager peeps, etc. To use the metaphor, you can boil this down to Kirk's Crew as the central iconic figures of the setting. Does the Realms have an equivalent? The Knights of Myth Drannor? Drizzt and the Companions? Those groups specifically belong to Ed Greenwood and R. A. Salvatore.
The Realms is so broad with so many stories and so many contributors. I'm concerned that a Star Trek-esque reboot would edge out the vast majority of it.
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
7968 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 01:11:19
|
Star Trek can make easy use of time travel and parallel universes and quantum black hole worm tunnelling warp whatevers. Such "technological" mechanisms are basic staples within sci-fi. The Realms are fantasy so "magical" equivalents need to be applied instead.
But writing a trilogy which is basically about somebody casting a 99th level Reboot Realms spell is really just cheap and wasteful, even insulting to the readers. Even if it's cleverly disguised under the coolness of Szass Tam activating his dreaded Dread Ring Ritual or Ao desperately exploding to save the Realms from Asmodeus or whatnot ... it's still cheap.
I really don't understand why people insist on erasing and rewriting history. Don't like the timejump? Just set your calendar back 100 years. Don't like the Spellplague or Time of Troubles? Then it didn't happen, or it was just a lot less apocalyptic and happened differently. I've played campaigns set in "1E" 1356DR using rulesets from every other game edition (even 4E), I expect it'll be possible to play by strict 2E rules even after five more timejumps in Realms 6E set circa 2099DR.
I applaud all efforts to reconstruct and unify the Realms setting so it can move forward - even if some of the building blocks are 4E canon which I personally despise or reject. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 28 Mar 2012 01:15:15 |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 01:42:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Star Trek can make easy use of time travel and parallel universes and quantum black hole worm tunnelling warp whatevers. Such "technological" mechanisms are basic staples within sci-fi. The Realms are fantasy so "magical" equivalents need to be applied instead.
But writing a trilogy which is basically about somebody casting a 99th level Reboot Realms spell is really just cheap and wasteful, even insulting to the readers. Even if it's cleverly disguised under the coolness of Szass Tam activating his dreaded Dread Ring Ritual or Ao desperately exploding to save the Realms from Asmodeus or whatnot ... it's still cheap.
I really don't understand why people insist on erasing and rewriting history. Don't like the timejump? Just set your calendar back 100 years. Don't like the Spellplague or Time of Troubles? Then it didn't happen, or it was just a lot less apocalyptic and happened differently. I've played campaigns set in "1E" 1356DR using rulesets from every other game edition (even 4E), I expect it'll be possible to play by strict 2E rules even after five more timejumps in Realms 6E set circa 2099DR.
I applaud all efforts to reconstruct and unify the Realms setting so it can move forward - even if some of the building blocks are 4E canon which I personally despise or reject.
I need to keep this brief, so apologies for the holes I'm undoubtedly about to unleash.
First, I don't actually think a reboot should be done on the Realms, only that it needs to be considered and explained why it's not going to work in terms understandable to the average user of D&D/FR. I used Star Trek as a metaphor to explain how different timelines to exist. While I love J.J. Abrams version of Star Trek, at present, Leonard Nimoy, not Zach Quinto pops into my mind when someone says "Spock."
Ayrik, I agree that the Sci-Fi metaphors don't equate 1:1 to Fantasy, but Warp Drive is still pure fantasy, based on no science whatsoever. Scientists can (and do) poke holes in the "science" of Star Trek frequently. I believe that anything doable in Sci-Fi is doable in Fantasy. However, I do not advocate such a concept. In fact, one of the things most disingenuine to me was the very Sci-Fi feel to the 4E Realms.
I do, however, think that the time-jump was a huge mistake. WoTC needs to support the Realms as people knew them pre-4E. They took so much away, it is (to me and a large number of others) Realms-in-name-only.
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 02:09:09
|
As promised, I have created a Facebook page on which we can begin our “like” campaign. Since I'm not a fan of dead causes, if we don't have the minimum 25 likes in a couple of days, I'm taking the page down. Also, if someone else wants to be an admin of the page, just let me know (either PM me here or via the page on Facebook.) Click the link below to go to Facebook.
Let Ed Greenwood Recreate the Forgotten Realms
Cheers,
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 02:19:54
|
@Azuth: I hear you. Also, cool page!
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I applaud all efforts to reconstruct and unify the Realms setting so it can move forward - even if some of the building blocks are 4E canon which I personally despise or reject.
That's what I'm going for.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 05:33:47
|
I understand people being upset with the timejump, all those NPC's snuffed out. Sure it sucks, but half a dozen Volo type guides could fix that, and I imagine most the popular ones are going to receive some form of "get out of jail err...death" cards. I prefer to rebuild rather than reboot, because if I ever got my hot little hands on a new Volo's Guide to the Dalelands or some other type of product, it would be alot of new stuff in there if we were rebuilding, as opposed to mostly rehash of things already read with a reboot.
Wizards just needs to come up a solution to the titanic lore the setting has without requiring or making a person feel like they have to own every product ever published. Though frankly, they could probably make a ton of cash selling the old 2E and 3E stuff in PDF form for super cheap. I never understood why they took those down, digital product = do the work once, sell it forever. Hopefully, whoever is in charge of the Faerun Interwebs over there isn't drinking the ding-a-ling kool-aid, like the person(s) who pulled the plug on them. They seem to be hinting we'll get these back and man I'd love to be able to buy the Forgotten Realms Interactive Atlas without feeling like im shelling out for a car payment.
On the other side, I always thought their prices were a bit high. I have no idea what their target market is, they do, but if its the younger crowd, 40 or 50 bucks a book is pretty spendy. I'll pay premium price for a campaign guide or a big book, but I'll be just as happy if they go back to black and white like in 2E if it lowers prices alot. Keep the maps and whatnot prettied up, but I don't really need a high gloss page for information. Just a thought anyways and I guess I'm kind of rambling. hahah. |
Edited by - Eilserus on 28 Mar 2012 05:35:16 |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 06:18:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
I understand people being upset with the timejump, all those NPC's snuffed out. Sure it sucks, but half a dozen Volo type guides could fix that, and I imagine most the popular ones are going to receive some form of "get out of jail err...death" cards. I prefer to rebuild rather than reboot, because if I ever got my hot little hands on a new Volo's Guide to the Dalelands or some other type of product, it would be alot of new stuff in there if we were rebuilding, as opposed to mostly rehash of things already read with a reboot.
Wizards just needs to come up a solution to the titanic lore the setting has without requiring or making a person feel like they have to own every product ever published. Though frankly, they could probably make a ton of cash selling the old 2E and 3E stuff in PDF form for super cheap. I never understood why they took those down, digital product = do the work once, sell it forever. Hopefully, whoever is in charge of the Faerûn Interwebs over there isn't drinking the ding-a-ling kool-aid, like the person(s) who pulled the plug on them. They seem to be hinting we'll get these back and man I'd love to be able to buy the Forgotten Realms Interactive Atlas without feeling like im shelling out for a car payment.
On the other side, I always thought their prices were a bit high. I have no idea what their target market is, they do, but if its the younger crowd, 40 or 50 bucks a book is pretty spendy. I'll pay premium price for a campaign guide or a big book, but I'll be just as happy if they go back to black and white like in 2E if it lowers prices alot. Keep the maps and whatnot prettied up, but I don't really need a high gloss page for information. Just a thought anyways and I guess I'm kind of rambling. hahah.
I can understand this notion, but a lot has changed with respect to color publishing since the 2E and 3E books were first bound. Yes, color does cost more than black on white, but not a lot more. The 3E books felt (and were) a much higher quality of bond (paper) and binding. I think they went a little overboard on the 3.5 edition books. You cannot make printed jewels looks like anything but that. I also think they could make a lot of money for a "deluxe" version with a fake leather cover, too. However, I do think there's a case for a digital version as well, not the least of which is that it can be updated without pages of errata.
I'm not sure I can agree with Volo's Guides replacing all of the NPCs that were removed. I would like to hear more on that topic if possible.
Different people have different amounts of money, of course, and different priorities. Even (way back) when I was a teenager, I still footed the extra money for a hardcover book if it was available. I don't like e-books as my sole source, but love them as a "digital copy" of a book. I liken it to the current trend with blu-ray wherein you get a DVD copy if you're not yet in the HD era, and a "digital" copy you can download to a device. However, most of the digital copies expire or cannot be redownloaded, and that's a problem. When e-versions of books cost 99 cents, I'll pay for them, but for $7.00, a publisher is going to spend its money on giving me a copy I can hold.
But, I concede the point that not every book need be hardcover or full of 4-up color pages. To counter my own concession, though, I would have paid extra (as an example) for a copy of Prince of Lies wherein the illustrations were in color.
However, while these are all valid points, and this is a good topic, it doesn't add much in with supporting a single canon, or help further the intent of this thread. Therefore, I'll leave it at that and hope that Erik's latest works get published on paper so I can read them!
Cheers,
[h3[Azuth[/h3] |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 14:54:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
@Laeknir: You're saying "retcon out the Spellplague, and I'll come back and play in this setting that I already have on my shelf and could play at any time, and which you're proposing to create new things for." Basically, burn everything that's come out since 2008--regardless of how many other Realms fans enjoy or play with those toys--and you will come back, and maybe others. That really doesn't sound like much of an offer for WotC.
-While I do not agree with Laeknir, and agree with you, you're looking at it too simplistically. Sure, anybody can run a D&D game using whatever products. Hell, you don't necessarily even need any books to run a Forgotten Realms game if you don't want, and can use using bits and pieces that you know from however, and make up everything else on the fly. The utility of future products, be they novels, sourcebooks, online articles, and anything else in-between remains at or close to nil if one doesn't like the 4e setting (be it, say, 50% to 100%). Just like you are doing your best to raise awareness that people don't need to adhere to canon in their own games, I am always advocating and reminding everybody that to people like myself (once again, presumably, most fans of the Forgotten Realms, because of the widespread, mainstream appeal of novels and video games, as opposed to simply using it as a D&D setting, because D&D is a niche hobby), the appeal of products hinges on notions that we already like/approve of/whatever, and is necessary and primary for our enjoyment of them, because sources are not blueprints for D&D games, but are rather pictures of what the Forgotten Realms world is, how it operates, and so on. Again, that's not to say that a big old retcon should happen- it's shouldn't, in any form, be it "Elminster was having a Dallas moment", or the reset button is pressed, or whatever else. But, with the uptick of you (and others) reminding everyone that they need not stick to canon to enjoy things if they don't like them, I feel beholden to remind people that for plenty of others, that maxim is not true. Neither here nor there, but... |
(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 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 15:28:51
|
Don't forget the Pic-badge I created to support the Realms some time ago - I did the FB thing first. 
So why wouldn't a reboot to an earlier period - perhaps pre-OGB - NOT work? That would be the most neutral way to proceed - who could be offended by that? No-one is saying to 'un-do' everything that has gone before (like what happened in Start Trek). This would be a reBOOT, not a reSET.*
If people are going to argue that many 4e fans will then have to adapt the material to their later-set campaigns, then I have to ask, "why is okay to force fans of the older setting to do the exact same thing?"
Which fanbase is is dominant? THAT should be the time period they should aim for. Catering to a smaller group, and forcing the larger group to 'adapt' doesn't make much sense, IMHO.
And if older fans are the minority, then fine, they SHOULD cater to the 4eFR fans. I will go with the consensus. But if they are just moving FR further forward to stroke someone's damaged ego, then I think someone with some business sense needs to be in charge. They need to cater to whichever group has the most potential to provide Hasbro with profit. I do not think this 'game in any era' is going to work - they need FOCUS - something 4e completely lacked. Pick a direction, and stick with it (even if that direction is 4.5e).
And by 'support all eras', does that mean a border-kingdoms reboot (as speculated) would have no dating associated with it? Wouldn't that be akin to shoving a knife in the canon's heart? You can't have canon, if none of the new material is dated. I am thinking it will have its own 'internal dating system', otherwise they couldn't even maintain self-consistency (within 5eFR).
I can picture it now - someone here or on the WotC boards will ask, "when did that happen in DR?", and the standard answer will be, "Does it matter?" I don't think thats gonna fly (not in a pack of rabib grognards). Diluting the IP is NOT the answer, IMO - I'd rather see it go in a direction I hate, then no direction at all.
*EDIT: @Erik - if they do go back, you could even do a prequel for Ghostwallker - tell us the original story of Quarvarr, only some of which you alluded to. Prequels would be a great way to go in such a soft-reboot, for everyone (authors and fans alike). The novels should NOT be limited by the settings 'current' era - they should take-place whenever a good story could be told. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 28 Mar 2012 15:57:01 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 16:02:12
|
-I don't see how a 'timeline-neutral' idea would work, either, given that the things that are more-or-less timeline neutral are the surrounding details (This is the geography of Cormyr, for example) that people either don't like because it presents things in a depth they don't like, or people skip over to get to the 'good stuff', and find meaningless, or at best, are secondary. The things that are, more or less, truly 'timeless' and timeline-neutral and will still be in play and relevant in -2,000 DR or 2,000 DR. Unless I am understanding the concept incorrectly.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So why wouldn't a reboot to an earlier period - perhaps pre-OGB - NOT work? That would be the most neutral way to proceed - who could be offended by that? No-one is saying to 'un-do' everything that has gone before (like what happened in Start Trek). This would be a reBOOT, not a reSET.*
-In effect, it would be similar to what was done with the change in the timeline with 4e, although not that dramatic. If I was a fan of how things were presented as of July 2004, lets say, what difference would there be if WotC decided to alter how the world was presented to reflect 1,350 DR or 1,479 DR? In either case, the products that they'd be selling wouldn't be touching on the specific world that I enjoyed as it was. If I totally was into the return of Shade, I'd be SoL. If I totally was into the Tuigan Horde, I'd be SoL. If I was totally into seeing the relationship between Mystra, Kelemvor and Cyric, I'd be SoL. Not to the degree that moving so far into the future presented, but the same nonetheless. The world as I liked it, from X date to Y date, would no longer be getting airtime.
-Moving back to 1,350 DR, or some other date in the past, also would bring with it the same problems moving the date back to 1,375 DR would (although, certainly less so): If I know that everything is eventually going to translate back into the setting going all haywire, that so many (if not most) large-scale plot events would likely trace themselves back to the Spellplague, does that not put a damper on things? |
(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 28 Mar 2012 16:09:10 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 16:54:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Don't forget the Pic-badge I created to support the Realms some time ago - I did the FB thing first.
Oh yes. You get full props.
quote:
So why wouldn't a reboot to an earlier period - perhaps pre-OGB - NOT work? That would be the most neutral way to proceed - who could be offended by that? No-one is saying to 'un-do' everything that has gone before (like what happened in Start Trek). This would be a reBOOT, not a reSET.*
If people are going to argue that many 4e fans will then have to adapt the material to their later-set campaigns, then I have to ask, "why is okay to force fans of the older setting to do the exact same thing?"
I don't want to force anyone to adapt anything. I want to give players the option to use what's presented--lore to support many eras of play--or to adapt stuff. There is absolutely no reason you HAVE TO adapt post-SP lore. You have plenty of pre-SP lore in the form of what's going to be released now, as well as WotC's extensive backlist of FR stuff. Which the company should re-release. Like tomorrow.
quote:
Which fanbase is is dominant? THAT should be the time period they should aim for. Catering to a smaller group, and forcing the larger group to 'adapt' doesn't make much sense, IMHO.
I'm not privy to those numbers, but even if I were, I think we shouldn't be talking about pleasing one group over another when we can please EVERYONE. There needs to be stuff for the old guard as well as welcoming stuff for new fans (and there have been new fans--no question). It would be nice to identify target groups and work on appealing to them--I suspect those groups will be LEGENDARY (1e-2e era), CLASSIC (3e), and MODERN (4e).
quote:
And if older fans are the minority, then fine, they SHOULD cater to the 4eFR fans. I will go with the consensus. But if they are just moving FR further forward to stroke someone's damaged ego, then I think someone with some business sense needs to be in charge. They need to cater to whichever group has the most potential to provide Hasbro with profit. I do not think this 'game in any era' is going to work - they need FOCUS - something 4e completely lacked. Pick a direction, and stick with it (even if that direction is 4.5e).
I disagree. They should not cater to ANYONE in particular, but rather design with EVERYONE in mind. I also disagree that 4e has no focus: the original FRCG was very broad/high-level, but the Neverwinter book was extremely focused, and that worked out very well. This is the sort of design WotC needs to do.
quote:
And by 'support all eras', does that mean a border-kingdoms reboot (as speculated) would have no dating associated with it? Wouldn't that be akin to shoving a knife in the canon's heart? You can't have canon, if none of the new material is dated. I am thinking it will have its own 'internal dating system', otherwise they couldn't even maintain self-consistency (within 5eFR).
I can picture it now - someone here or on the WotC boards will ask, "when did that happen in DR?", and the standard answer will be, "Does it matter?" I don't think thats gonna fly (not in a pack of rabib grognards). Diluting the IP is NOT the answer, IMO - I'd rather see it go in a direction I hate, then no direction at all.
Nope, "all eras" does not mean "no dating." There is a definite timeline for those who want it: it's present in the history section of each sourcebook that shows up. This is NOT about diluting the IP--it's about pouring more content/flavor into those areas that are currently diluted. Players and DMs have a set timeline and are encouraged to borrow things from other eras if they want--the key is that the book isn't going to pretend something never happened.
Let's take Waterdeep for example. Hypothetically, assume it gets a 150 page sourcebook--I'd advocate for more, but this will work for our discussion.
The majority of the book (120-125 pages) is establishing a baseline to play the city in any given era:
- Geography: Waterdeep itself, Undermountain, Skullport, nearby cities.
- Culture: things to do, taverns, churches, broadsheets, etc.
- Politics/economics: noble families, trade cartels, etc.
- City Locations: Yawning Portal, Blackstaff Tower, etc)
- Organizations (with notes about when active, when ascendent, when sleeping, etc): Masked Lords, Watchful Order, City Guard, Gray Hands, Waterdeep Shadow Thieves, etc.
- Iconic NPCs (important people the PCs might meet): Khelben, Laeral, Mirt, Durnan, the Paladinson, Lord Neverember, Lord Adarbrent, etc. Each of them has historical notes about when they are active in the history of Waterdeep.
- Adventure Sites: Undermountain, Skullport, Ardeep forest, etc.
- 100 Adventure hooks and plot threads
Throw in about 5-10 pages on mechanics:
- Non-system-specific adventurer themes
- A little more miscellaneous crunch
What we're left with is 20 pages for history:
- Timeline of Waterdeep, from founding to 1480
- What tweaks you need to make to the baseline as represented to fit multiple eras (broken into the three: legendary, classic, and modern)
If you want to play through some of the plot threads launched in Cloak and Dagger, for instance, you grab up the classic era information, whereas if your PCs are fresh out of the 4e Neverwinter campaign and itching to up the ante, you use the modern lore.
The concept here is that the majority of the book (130 out of 150 pages) is going to apply to your Waterdeep game regardless of when you set it, and the remaining pieces are going to give you guidance upon instilling the flavor of a particular era. The canon is completely and studiously maintained.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
*EDIT: @Erik - if they do go back, you could even do a prequel for Ghostwallker - tell us the original story of Quarvarr, only some of which you alluded to. Prequels would be a great way to go in such a soft-reboot, for everyone (authors and fans alike). The novels should NOT be limited by the settings 'current' era - they should take-place whenever a good story could be told.
Clever goose, teasing me with something I obviously want (and still plan) to do. But as you say, that book would be irrelevant to what era the actual sourcebooks describe. The only thing that would prevent that book from being written is a hard reboot that invalidates all of the continuity that builds it up.
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" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 16:59:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Moving back to 1,350 DR, or some other date in the past, also would bring with it the same problems moving the date back to 1,375 DR would (although, certainly less so): If I know that everything is eventually going to translate back into the setting going all haywire, that so many (if not most) large-scale plot events would likely trace themselves back to the Spellplague, does that not put a damper on things?
Well, I think enough lore work can be done to mitigate the "all haywire" feeling of the 4e FR.
But even if you still hate the 4e FR and want nothing to do with them, why does some theoretical future event have anything to do whatsoever with your game? If you're playing PCs in 1370, why does an event in 1385 matter?
And if it DOES matter to your game, why not have your PCs avert it and call it a day?
WotC should not be in the business of dictating when or how you should play your game. Nor should they busy themselves with endless "what if?" scenarios: "What if the ToT hadn't happened? What if the Spellplague hadn't happened? What if the Shades hadn't returned? What if the Chosen had managed to destroy them?" etc. You can literally tie yourself up in knots trying to release actual official design to answer any of these questions.
Fortunately, that's what internet boards such as Candlekeep are for: posting hypotheticals for individual games. If you want to run a Realms where the Spellplague didn't happen, don't look to WotC to come up with a version of the Realms that works for you--instead, consult Candlekeep for some ideas, and fill in stuff yourself. You've already diverged from canon, though there's nothing that says you can't incorporate things you DO like. Make the game your 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" |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 17:17:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Moving back to 1,350 DR, or some other date in the past, also would bring with it the same problems moving the date back to 1,375 DR would (although, certainly less so): If I know that everything is eventually going to translate back into the setting going all haywire, that so many (if not most) large-scale plot events would likely trace themselves back to the Spellplague, does that not put a damper on things?
Well, I think enough lore work can be done to mitigate the "all haywire" feeling of the 4e FR.
But even if you still hate the 4e FR and want nothing to do with them, why does some theoretical future event have anything to do whatsoever with your game? If you're playing PCs in 1370, why does an event in 1385 matter?
And if it DOES matter to your game, why not have your PCs avert it and call it a day?
WotC should not be in the business of dictating when or how you should play your game. Nor should they busy themselves with endless "what if?" scenarios: "What if the ToT hadn't happened? What if the Spellplague hadn't happened? What if the Shades hadn't returned? What if the Chosen had managed to destroy them?" etc. You can literally tie yourself up in knots trying to release actual official design to answer any of these questions.
Fortunately, that's what internet boards such as Candlekeep are for: posting hypotheticals for individual games. If you want to run a Realms where the Spellplague didn't happen, don't look to WotC to come up with a version of the Realms that works for you--instead, consult Candlekeep for some ideas, and fill in stuff yourself. You've already diverged from canon, though there's nothing that says you can't incorporate things you DO like. Make the game your own.
Cheers
Aside from his failure to capitalize the proper noun "Internet," everything Erik says above is both true and something he has said probably dozens of times now. He has detailed his plan, he has outlined how it would work, and he has even laid some specifics even though this is still conceptual.
Fellow scribes, please stop saying why it won't work and start helping make it work for you (and me). Or, if you have a better idea, state it! But WoTC is not going to abandon all-thing-4E.
Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion, and I don't want to stifle that. But let's focus on bridging gaps instead of digging them deeper.
I need to go resurrect Eldath so we can get some calming water flowing.
Cheers,
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3736 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 21:10:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Well, I think enough lore work can be done to mitigate the "all haywire" feeling of the 4e FR.
-I agree that new detail can be added in and existing details expanded upon to mitigate things, but ultimately, if somebody doesn't like the fact that Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, Kiaransalee and Selvetarm were all killed (from a metagame point of view pretty senselessly), no amount of new details is going to detract from the fact that Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, Kiaransalee and Selvetarm are all dead or somehow inherently changed from what they were. For some theoretical people, who theoretically only play D&D campaigns where all PCs are Drow, and everything is Drow-centric, no matter how much filler is added in to make it more palatable, the characters are all still dead and/or inherently and fundamentally changed for the short-longterm (100+ years in game time, and it's been around five years in real time?). Products related to Drow will only be fractionally as useful as they had been previously. As I've used in the past, only so much cream and medicine and band-aids can be put on a cut to stop the scarring. If someone wants smooth, blemish-free skin, and won't accept anything less, whether the scar is light or dark, to them, it's still a scar that is hard to see past.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
But even if you still hate the 4e FR and want nothing to do with them, why does some theoretical future event have anything to do whatsoever with your game? If you're playing PCs in 1370, why does an event in 1385 matter?
And if it DOES matter to your game, why not have your PCs avert it and call it a day?
WotC should not be in the business of dictating when or how you should play your game. Nor should they busy themselves with endless "what if?" scenarios: "What if the ToT hadn't happened? What if the Spellplague hadn't happened? What if the Shades hadn't returned? What if the Chosen had managed to destroy them?" etc. You can literally tie yourself up in knots trying to release actual official design to answer any of these questions.
Fortunately, that's what internet boards such as Candlekeep are for: posting hypotheticals for individual games. If you want to run a Realms where the Spellplague didn't happen, don't look to WotC to come up with a version of the Realms that works for you--instead, consult Candlekeep for some ideas, and fill in stuff yourself. You've already diverged from canon, though there's nothing that says you can't incorporate things you DO like. Make the game your own.
-Because, as I've stated numerous times already, the majority of individuals who have an interest in the Forgotten Realms- be it passing or hardcore- do not associate it with Dungeons and Dragons games with any regularity (if at all), do not have their own version of the Forgotten Realms that they dictate what is official and what isn't official, and take in the setting directly though the products (video games, novels, game sourcebooks, online articles). If the product is something that we don't like, we are severely handicapped as the alternative to "change things however you like to suit your own preferences!" means nothing.
-To the context of what was said, if the focus of the timeline is simply moved back to an earlier period, we know that certain events that people felt were deal breakers are still going to happen. In the short term, that helps people who might dislike the changes that happened from 1,375 DR+ (or even beforehand, such as the return of the City of Shade, or even the Time of Troubles, depending on how far the timeline is rewinded) because the focus of products wouldn't be on things that they don't like, but rather, things they do. At the same time, in the long run, the person knows that those deal breaking events still happen (with or without the added bonus of having new information smooth out details). |
(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 28 Mar 2012 21:14:11 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 21:40:50
|
which is why I think the timeline should be moved forward 5 years from the 4e frcg.
dont focus on thespell plague and reduce it to a foot note in the recent event section. most if not all the changes from the plague can and could be mentioned in this section.
the one thing though that I would really love to see... is change luiren's destruction.flooding it was pathetic. have it overrun by gnolls and hobgoblins lead by whatever that beholder or whatever's name was mentioned in the 4e frcg. Have the area similiar to that of how myth drannor was before the reclamation. thus the halflings still would have been uprooted from their country.
as much as I'd like to see it changed or reversed.. aint going to happen....
|
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 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 21:43:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
As I've used in the past, only so much cream and medicine and band-aids can be put on a cut to stop the scarring. If someone wants smooth, blemish-free skin, and won't accept anything less, whether the scar is light or dark, to them, it's still a scar that is hard to see past.
That’s a pretty good analogy; gets the point across.
That said, I do think people who play in the Realms are more likely to want to play in eras where, for example, Elistraee and company are still alive and active in the Realms.
In terms of practical decision making of the “do I or don’t I want to play the game?” I think players will gravitate towards doing things their own way as opposed to opting out for the sake of hurt.
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Because, as I've stated numerous times already, the majority of individuals who have an interest in the Forgotten Realms- be it passing or hardcore- do not associate it with Dungeons and Dragons games with any regularity (if at all)
I don’t agree with this.
I think the majority of people associate the Realms with D&D, whether it be the rules in general or with their own campaigns, while also viewing the (Canon) Realms as something distinct.
What I’m getting at is that most gamers are both a fan of the setting for its own sake, and fans of the Realms in terms of using it as the backdrop for D&D campaigns.
The setting and the D&D rules have always been inextricably linked. Since before the Realms was published all the way to now, the Realms have been practically the engine driving the D&D game forward.
Personally, I’d like to see that change (at least for one hopefully long lived edition of the D&D rules).
I think it’s a very good point to remind us all, as Karsus did, that people do like the setting for its own sake. Radical changes to the setting alone can turn potential buyers off, even before they think to consider whether to set a game in the Realms.
The extent to which people are fans of the setting and fans of the setting for D&D purposes is something WotC ought to be trying very hard to figure out, because that’s where their revenue stream for this game is at. If they craft their products to appeal to gamers at the point of overlap between these two types of Realms fans, they stand the best chance of appealing to everyone.
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 28 Mar 2012 22:17:06 |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2012 : 21:51:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
<snip>
-To the context of what was said, if the focus of the timeline is simply moved back to an earlier period, we know that certain events that people felt were deal breakers are still going to happen. In the short term, that helps people who might dislike the changes that happened from 1,375 DR+ (or even beforehand, such as the return of the City of Shade, or even the Time of Troubles, depending on how far the timeline is rewinded) because the focus of products wouldn't be on things that they don't like, but rather, things they do. At the same time, in the long run, the person knows that those deal breaking events still happen (with or without the added bonus of having new information smooth out details).
I need to discuss something very important here: history. Yes, the D&D game is a fantasy game, but whether I like it or not, gunpowder was introduced into the Realms. I do not like where that is leading, and as a DM, I do everything in my power to subvert and avoid the use of gunpowder weapons. Ironically, I have no problem with cannons on ships, even though they are, of course, powered by gunpowder.
I see historical reenactments all of the time. I actively participate in a local Renaissance Festival every year. During these periods, I do not focus on knowing that the Renaissance is going to end, or that the Influenza Pandemic will wipe out descendants of people lucky enough to have survived the Black Plague.
I have also never run a game that spans more than five years in game time. I'm trying to hit that mark again with my current group. I have and continue to successfully play a 3E version of the game. I do not like what has been happening to my favorite characters in the novels, but that in no way inhibits my ability to play them as they were written.
Here, Erik is offering an opportunity for continued, supported, published lore in all eras. I don't give a damn about game mechanics, so whatever the group wants, be it 1E, 2E, 3E, 3.5E, or even 4E, rolling dice doesn't make my game. As DM, I have absolute authority. Yes, your "natural twenty" missed. Sorry, I know the book says it always hits, but it isn't right in this instance. That's why were' Dungeon Masters, and not slaves.
2E gave choices to the characters who worshipped "The Dead Three" and stated their power was likely coming from Cyric. It didn't matter. I happened to be playing a Priest of Bane in 1E, and Bane's death was hard for me because I disliked Cyric. I read the books, I knew that Bane was canonically dead, and with my DM's permission, I ignored it. Were there consequences? Yes, I had a harder time finding temples, but it was a game-playing opportunity. Similarly, in 3E, Tilverton disappeared. That didn't stop my players from visiting it for its fine horses. They didn't know when it would disappear from the map, but the (accurately) suspected I wouldn't ruin our game play by killing them (or whatever) by having Tilverton's doom happen while they happened to be in town.
People seem to be seeking certainty now. We cannot be certain that anything will happen in the next edition of D&D, or the one after that. We have no idea (truly) what Ed has written but not divulged about "his" Realms. I only know that I trust him more than bureaucrats at Wizbro to make a lore-filled game in which I can continue my player's adventures.
For anyone seeking a great time, find a copy of the 2E Desert of Desolation module. Expect to do some math if you don't use the 2E rule set with THAC0, but the experience is great. And I ran it a few months ago in the 3E Realms, even though it has almost nothing to do with "Canon" Realms.
Frankly, the world is going to end someday. I don't know when it is, and be it a fantasy world or the one I inhabit when not gaming, I don't fret over what's yet to come. Unlike real life, however, I can choose where and when I and my players will exist in D&D. While I do not agree with 100% of Erik's suggestions, I agree with over 90% of them. I would rather focus first on making that 90% come true and hashing out the other 10% than continually saying "this won't work!" I will not presume to speak for any other scribes herein, but I can only say that I hope Erik's is the view that prevails with Wizards. The 3E books are getting harder to find, and more expensive as time passes. I'd love new copies with more things I can use in my game.
|
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
