| Author |
 Topic  |
|
GMWestermeyer
Learned Scribe
USA
215 Posts |
 Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 04:04:01
|
I'm late to this... but I got to say this.
I didn't realize how bad it was. I gave up on FR 3e pretty much when 3e came out and I never paid much attention to it. It was clear to me that WotC didn't ant grognards like me around so I drifted to other settings and stopped buying Realms books for the most part.
And when it came out, despite the fact I was once one of FR's ardent chronology compilers (working on Steven Schend's FR encyclopedia team back in the FR days), I didn't bother buying The Grand History of the Realms.
I recently got a a used copy and I finally read it... it wasn't awesome but it was fine - inoffensive. Then I came to the last few pages, 1373 DR to the end...
I can only assume that people who hate the Realms took the reins. I'm sad and disappointed. I was hoping this would convince me I had been wrong to abandon the Realms with 3e's arrival. But man...
I know most of you are probably sick of stuff like this and it was years ago. I just needed to say it to folks who know the Realms, I'm sorry.
|
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true."
Homer Simpson, _The Simspons_ |
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 04:26:46
|
| It did get horrible the last few years, but I'm cautiously optimistic for the future. We will see what happens with the next iteration of the setting when 5e hits the shelves this year. So far, WotC has been doing what they said they would do...even if many of us would have done things differently than they have. We shall see in a few months if our dedication to the Realms will pay off. Cheers. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 04:47:06
|
In a private email exchange betwixt Ed and I, he said -- without being prompted -- that he was excited about what was coming for the Realms.
Think on that one for a minute.
There has been a lot said about prior editions and the transitions betwixt them... But that is all in the past, now, and the setting's creator is back on board, and excited about what's coming.
The 5E Realms is coming. I'm looking forward to it. I'm done looking back -- the only way we can go is forward. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 05:10:47
|
Your like the guy who showed up for the battle after the war was over.
No offense, but you should thank god you weren't around for the last 6 or so years worth of vitriol. I am surprised there are any fans left.
5eFR - supposedly - will be making the new (post-1479DR) Realms look and feel a lot like the 'classic' Realms. No reset - just an in-setting smoothing of the rough edges, with ED steering things.
If you can't tolerate the century time-jump at all, "abandon hope all ye who enter here". If you don't mind the new geography, new magic, all new characters, new kingdoms and cultures, Dragonborn and Tieflings being 'all the rage', then its still the Realms.
And by that, I mean they are still using the logo.. although they'll probably re-do that as well. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
GMWestermeyer
Learned Scribe
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 07:35:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
In a private email exchange betwixt Ed and I, he said -- without being prompted -- that he was excited about what was coming for the Realms.
Think on that one for a minute.
Ed's said that about every edition. I honor him for his original creation, but Ed being excited about a new FR edition doesn't mean much. If he wasn't excited that would be news.
I just needed to mourn - it shocked me how bad things got. I'll just continue playing the 1e/2e Realms - no biggie. I just recently got a subscription to Audible and I've been reading the AD&D books on there - I started with the Greyhawk books I hadn't read before, and i was very pleasantly surprised by those novels (I had very low expectations there)(and, incidentally, I like most of the 3e Greyhawk stuff I've read - especially the 'Living Greyhawk' stuff)
But then I moved on to the Finder's Stone Trilogy which I really have enjoyed - I read it 20+ years maybe so it has been like reading these books anew. But I'm halfway through Masquarades so I was considering what to read next. Elaine Cunningham is my favorite FR novelist and I will get to her stuff but I was thinking of reading one of the novels I have never read before. Now, that seems less likely. (please don't recommend I read Ed books, he is a great setting creator and a great guy but as a novelist he's on the Gary Gygax level... :()
I'll figure something out. Or I might leave FR for a bit and listen to some classics like Fritz Leiber. |
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true."
Homer Simpson, _The Simspons_ |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 08:13:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The 5E Realms is coming. I'm looking forward to it. I'm done looking back -- the only way we can go is forward.
With publishing you are correct, but where interest and taste is concerned or as a fan that's like saying one has no other choice than to listen to what is currently on the lists and to believe the constant chime of "you have to move with the times". Where a hobby is concerned that is just plain wrong.
Every edition has its fans (as it should be), but the fanbase (and Candlekeep)should be a combination of all of them. Me and Diffan will never agree on the way the setting (and game) has developed, but so what? I still like his points and opinions. There can be to much agreement too. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 09:43:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
Ed's said that about every edition.
No, he hasn't.
Since you left off others have picked up the lore collecting torch, and so the work continues.  |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6353 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 14:28:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The 5E Realms is coming. I'm looking forward to it. I'm done looking back -- the only way we can go is forward.
With publishing you are correct, but where interest and taste is concerned or as a fan that's like saying one has no other choice than to listen to what is currently on the lists and to believe the constant chime of "you have to move with the times". Where a hobby is concerned that is just plain wrong.
Every edition has its fans (as it should be), but the fanbase (and Candlekeep)should be a combination of all of them. Me and Diffan will never agree on the way the setting (and game) has developed, but so what? I still like his points and opinions. There can be to much agreement too.
Hey, it's well known that I'm a huge fan of the 1E/2E era of the Realms. The 3E Realms had a lot of good stuff, too, though there were some issues with it, like the flood of (sometimes pointless) RSEs or the unexplained retcons.
And it's also very well-known that I have a lot of issues with the 4E Realms, and don't care for it. I've been attacked and personally insulted for my stance on the latter many times.
Nothing will ever change my love for the pre-4E Realms. Nothing will ever change the fact that I think they should reset the setting to the day before the 3E FRCS came out, and go forward in a new direction from there.
I could argue for these things, or pine for them, or daydream about winning the lottery and buying WotC and then shaking it up the way I see fit... I could do all of these things, and it would not change the fact that WotC is not going to back down from what was done, and that they have decided the best way forward is to fix what was broken and keep going.
I've put a lot of energy into not agreeing with what WotC is done. Now that there is a new edition coming out, I'm not going to waste my energy on the past. I'm putting it into the future. Sure, I'll complain about anything in 5E that I disagree with, but I'm done complaining about prior editions.
WotC has made its decision, and right or wrong, I'm never going to get exactly what I want. Neither is anyone else who likes the Realms. So I'm going to go forward, embrace the future, and hope that I like the new Realms.
That's my point: regardless of our feelings on prior editions, a new one is coming. I prefer to hope for the best from what's coming, rather than keep going on about the failures of the past. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 16:18:37
|
Yea, sorry I should have kept my mouth shut (I was thinking more generally than you personally), especially since I know your stance Wooly and for the most part agree with it.
My point is that I can see the point of moving forward and looking ahead, but the stance of just not caring for what is done ahead and staying at the point most enjoyable for one self is just as valid. In general respecting other peoples interest even if you don't agree with them is probably what I am getting at. Which I know that you do.
Every time a new development in the Realms shows up the "we as fans should/must..."yada,yada posts shows up and that's what I am afraid will happen again with the new edition where someone will try to get their ideals across by just screaming the loudest and whining. Or just accusing everyone else of killing the Realms.
I really hope we get an ignore button here with the new Candlekeep.
You know, I am just sounding like a disillusion idiot here, so I will take another break I think. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 16:35:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
I'm late to this... but I got to say this.
I didn't realize how bad it was. I gave up on FR 3e pretty much when 3e came out and I never paid much attention to it. It was clear to me that WotC didn't ant grognards like me around so I drifted to other settings and stopped buying Realms books for the most part.
3e had cases of MUD creeping in, and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding (see "redundant creature" template  ), but if you ignore the obviously loonie parts, a lot of materials are okay, a few are even good.
quote:
I can only assume that people who hate the Realms took the reins. I'm sad and disappointed. I was hoping this would convince me I had been wrong to abandon the Realms with 3e's arrival. But man...
Well, if something quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and... 
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
No reset - just an in-setting smoothing of the rough edges
Exactly.
No continuity editing? It's okay! Authors who obviously didn't care to read FR stuff beyond a short intro run over and retcon anything Ed Greenwood (or RSA, never mind his golden egglayer status) wrote? It's okay! To reset this - what? Oh, no, we can't do that, it would be so horribly offensive to everyone who ever failed to give a damn about FR in the first place, but took an opportunity to jump on a bandwagon pulled by the twilight albatross and skim the cream off it - so now we must respect what they did above all else.
Amusing, isn't? By some strange coincidence it looks exactly as if... the same petty gnawing didn't go anywhere, just someone who sits higher pressed the boot down and demanded to keep things somewhat profitable. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Blueblade
Senior Scribe
USA
804 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 16:51:26
|
I really don't want to plunge once more into the edition wars, but I just have to say I found this sadly amusing:
GMWestermeyer posts: "(please don't recommend I read Ed books, he is a great setting creator and a great guy but as a novelist he's on the Gary Gygax level... :()
I'll figure something out. Or I might leave FR for a bit and listen to some classics like Fritz Leiber."
Well, we're certainly all entitled to our own literary opinions, but I vividly remember sitting at an sf convention and being thrilled to finally see an elderly and ailing Fritz Leiber in the flesh - - on a panel with three other writers, Ed Greenwood being one of them. And Mr. Leiber went out of his way to compliment Ed on something Ed had written (I don't think it was Realms-related), that he'd really enjoyed. He called Ed "a writer I'm going to follow."
So always remember: YMMV.
Me, I'm eagerly looking forward to The Herald, because for ME, an Ed book is always a rip-roaring good read.
What I want to know is, is there any truth at all to the rumor that Ed's being doing behind the scenes Dr Who writing?
BB |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 17:08:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
I'm late to this... but I got to say this.
(snip) The Grand History of the Realms.
(snip) Then I came to the last few pages, 1373 DR to the end...
I can only assume that people who hate the Realms took the reins.
(snip)
This suggests that you haven't yet seen the utterly gutted 4E Realms Campaign Guide. Do yourself a favor and avoid it at all costs. Seeing it may retroactively contaminate your appreciation of 1E/2E Realms.
I'm serious.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 19:20:46
|
yeah... the $e Realms setting books felt like it was written to be 10 years afterwards and focused too much on the spell plague.
avoid it, I owned a copy of it, and sold it back early last year.
look to the future, and put the spell plague where it should have been, it happened, it ended, now reduce it to a foot note in the roll of years. |
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 |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2014 : 23:17:46
|
A cautious reply...
The 1st-3rd editions kept the atmosphere of the setting. 4th did not.
5ht hopefully will again. RETCON for the win! |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6646 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 01:58:48
|
IMO, the only thing wrong with the 4E Realms was the execution of the new campaign release. If it had approached the content of the 3E campaign guide and given some greater concern to explaining the changes wrought by the Spellplague (and IMHO perhaps gone with a more subtle brush than the one they ultimately elected to use), I think the level of complaints would have been lessened. The 100 year jump was a bold move, but the reset didn't meet expectations simply because it didn't adequately replace its predecessor and suffered in comparison. So, in terms of 5E, consider this: it will have to drip with major suckle to be worse than the 4E release!
And to Paul (the OP), the Realms continues to live, and the nostalgia that many feel for the 1E and 2E Realms in my view has a significant amount of rose-tinted reminiscing attached to it. Don't forget, for every "Faiths & Avatars" there was a "Netheril" boxed set. Every edition of the Realms has featured releases that could have been ever so much better.
IMO 3E featured some excellent FR products, although I grant you that WotC went "back to the well" too many times in terms of providing an update on existing products. We didn't need another "Waterdeep" book, but I challenge anyone not to pick up the 3E "City of Splendors" book and not find at least a dozen, new FR 'bits' of interest and inspiration.
Ed is truly enthusiastic about 5E. As he was for every edition of the setting. He can't help it; it's in his nature. His glass is always half full. I plan to top it up for him at GEN-CON this year.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 03:02:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The 5E Realms is coming. I'm looking forward to it. I'm done looking back -- the only way we can go is forward.
With publishing you are correct, but where interest and taste is concerned or as a fan that's like saying one has no other choice than to listen to what is currently on the lists and to believe the constant chime of "you have to move with the times". Where a hobby is concerned that is just plain wrong.
Every edition has its fans (as it should be), but the fanbase (and Candlekeep)should be a combination of all of them. Me and Diffan will never agree on the way the setting (and game) has developed, but so what? I still like his points and opinions. There can be to much agreement too.
Very true. Plus I don't think the new developers (or the old ones for that matter) hate the Realms at all. I think that the difference here is that one really tried to push for a much bigger fan-base at the cost of the current one. Perhaps the designers of 4E didn't think the backlash would've been as big as it was OR perhaps the felt that the new stream of players and fans would over-ride the old but I at least give them credit for trying.
For the new developers, I think there's a lot of back peddling on what transpired after 4E's arrival. I think the return of certain Gods, the return of a different and old Cosmos (is the Great Wheel back, again?) and other implements they're throwing in to revert some of the more divisive and obvious changes has been their goal. To some, it's too little too late and for others (like myself), it's unnecessary and unwanted but I think the majority of fans will come back with the steps put forth with this new iteration of the game.
Also, what I don't understand is why people cannot just play in the edition/years that they are accustomed to or enjoy the most? With 5E, depending on how the system is, I'll probably buy a few books for it and my games will continue as they always have. I don't feel the need to have the next phase of the setting conform to what I personally want. I don't want Mulhorand or Unther to come back but I'm fairly certain that is the case. *shruggs* it won't affect my setting at all. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 03:16:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Ed is truly enthusiastic about 5E. As he was for every edition of the setting. He can't help it; it's in his nature. His glass is always half full. I plan to top it up for him at GEN-CON this year.
I REALLY have to make it this year.
If I promise to ductape my mouth shut, can I have lunch with you and Ed?
Of course... eating might be a problem..... |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 05:20:08
|
quote:
Also, what I don't understand is why people cannot just play in the edition/years that they are accustomed to or enjoy the most?
Because if you like to stick somewhat closely to canon and follow developments as they happen, then you have to do whatever the current era is. Playing in a non-supported era is not an option everyone is willing to embrace. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
GMWestermeyer
Learned Scribe
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 05:33:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
Ed's said that about every edition.
No, he hasn't.
Yes, he has. I've looked at interviews with Ed every time a new edition comes out. I don't blame him, I just don't find that Ed's opinion of Realms products is a good guide for whether or not I will like them.
quote:
Originally posted by Blueblade
I really don't want to plunge once more into the edition wars, but I just have to say I found this sadly amusing:
GMWestermeyer posts: "(please don't recommend I read Ed books, he is a great setting creator and a great guy but as a novelist he's on the Gary Gygax level... :()
I'll figure something out. Or I might leave FR for a bit and listen to some classics like Fritz Leiber."
Well, we're certainly all entitled to our own literary opinions, but I vividly remember sitting at an sf convention and being thrilled to finally see an elderly and ailing Fritz Leiber in the flesh - - on a panel with three other writers, Ed Greenwood being one of them. And Mr. Leiber went out of his way to compliment Ed on something Ed had written (I don't think it was Realms-related), that he'd really enjoyed. He called Ed "a writer I'm going to follow."
Ed is a very, very good writer, I think the Volo's guides are the best setting material written for any RPG setting to date. But Ed is not a good novelist. I find it interesting that he is similar to Gary Gygax in that regard.
Leiber's politeness during a convention panel doesn't change any of that.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
And to Paul (the OP), the Realms continues to live, and the nostalgia that many feel for the 1E and 2E Realms in my view has a significant amount of rose-tinted reminiscing attached to it. Don't forget, for every "Faiths & Avatars" there was a "Netheril" boxed set. Every edition of the Realms has featured releases that could have been ever so much better.
George, if you remember me at all you must remember I am not prone to nostalgia in my evaluations (see my clear-eyed view of Ed above). There is a difference between issues with individual products like Netheril (agreed) or the Marco Volo adventures <shudder> and issues with something widespread and central to the new setting, like this Spellplague crap.
For example, I'm still a defender of the Time of Troubles... and I seem to be the only guy who remembers that whole thing was Ed's idea in the first place - he described it as a method of changing editions for a campaign in one of his earliest Dragon articles, about AD&D pantheons (Dragon #54 'Down to Earth Divinity'), IIRC that was the first public view of the Faerunian pantheon. That said, i understand the concerns of those who hate the ToT. It could have been handled much better.
|
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true."
Homer Simpson, _The Simspons_ |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 06:49:39
|
@GMWestermeyer, better late than never? Actually you spared yourself the conflagration of the latest edition war. Consider yourself lucky, you saved yourself some time.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
IMO, the only thing wrong with the 4E Realms was the execution of the new campaign release. If it had approached the content of the 3E campaign guide and given some greater concern to explaining the changes wrought by the Spellplague (and IMHO perhaps gone with a more subtle brush than the one they ultimately elected to use), I think the level of complaints would have been lessened. The 100 year jump was a bold move, but the reset didn't meet expectations simply because it didn't adequately replace its predecessor and suffered in comparison. So, in terms of 5E, consider this: it will have to drip with major suckle to be worse than the 4E release!
This. I still feel it wasn't the Spellplague or the events leading up to it (though the moronic deific shenanigans really pushes it), the 100 year jump, or even the combination of them that caused the resultant issues for 4E Realms. The additive effect of those events with the multiplier of WotC's execution was the shot fired through the setting's head.
I felt the 100 year jump, out of all the changes of 4E, would have offered the greatest opportunity to "reset" the setting to the wily, clean-slate, sandbox feel of the OGB while keeping a respectful and intriguing connection to the prior setting incarnation.
No such luck.
Some scribes will disagree, saying the 4E Realms accomplished all the things I just noted. While some of the newer push resembles the direction of a 4E/5E Realms extrapolated from the prior edition version, much of it is too little too late (imo). The 4E Transition (events and execution) created an indelible negative impression the current Realms.
WotC likely realizes this and is using the Sundering event to help shift the perception once again (plus it's a lucrative excuse to sell books).
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Also, what I don't understand is why people cannot just play in the edition/years that they are accustomed to or enjoy the most?
Because if you like to stick somewhat closely to canon and follow developments as they happen, then you have to do whatever the current era is. Playing in a non-supported era is not an option everyone is willing to embrace.
I will also add, settings (and franchises of these sorts in general) are like plants. They grow by being feed. The food in this case is new support materials and books, merchandising, advertising, a growing fanbase, and an energized fandom.
Any segment of the setting that is not supported, will eventually decline. It's fine for stable groups that will play with each other for years to come. For players seeking groups, the supported version is often the most accessible and available.
As the new edition arrives, the older edition takes a back seat, and then pushed further and further back as the years and editions go by. The exception to this may be the OGL as it opened up the way for the ascent of Pathfinder, the divergence of various 3E offshoots, and revival of pre-3E games through the OSR.
|
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 07:01:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Also, what I don't understand is why people cannot just play in the edition/years that they are accustomed to or enjoy the most?
Because if you like to stick somewhat closely to canon and follow developments as they happen, then you have to do whatever the current era is. Playing in a non-supported era is not an option everyone is willing to embrace.
I'm going to be frank, thats the risk one takes when putting such preferences into their campaigns. There's very little chance one is going to like every (or heck, even most) of the story lines, changes, and plots that are set forth from designers and authors in a,living breathing world. Espically one such as FR where there are a LOT of hands in the pot. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 07:53:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
Yes, he has.
Paul, I follow Ed's comments pretty closely too.
For 4E, I've yet to see an interview where he stated he was enthusiastic about its release. Cautiously optimistic, yes. ("Wait and see what they do first," I believe he said.)
But enthusiastic about the whole shebang? No.
This includes my experience observing him while sitting in at GenCon when he helped introduce the concept of the Spellplague for the Realms seminar that year.
I don't doubt your sincerity, mind. Perhaps there's an interview that I missed.
<Points at the following quote for those who still mistakenly think the ToT was "no big deal.">
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
For example, I'm still a defender of the Time of Troubles... (snip) That said, i understand the concerns of those who hate the ToT. It could have been handled much better.
</point>
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 23 Feb 2014 08:02:15 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2384 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 10:37:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
5ht hopefully will again. RETCON for the win!
Alas, you missed "no resets" part.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
IMO, the only thing wrong with the 4E Realms was the execution of the new campaign release. If it had approached the content of the 3E campaign guide and given some greater concern to explaining the changes wrought by the Spellplague (and IMHO perhaps gone with a more subtle brush than the one they ultimately elected to use),
IMO you miss the whole point. "Explaining the changes", as well as "subtle brush", is based on an implicit assumption that those in charge cared about Realms fans at all. But then, why throw it on the floor and demonstratively stomp on it at all?
And IMO the only thing wrong with the 4E Realms was a clumsy attempt to dress it up and palm off as "Realms" in the first place - just like the only thing wrong with the 4E D&D was a clumsy attempt to dress it up and palm off as "D&D". Without trying to cover it with glue and stick random D&D terms on it, the thing could even be viable. Of course, if it was still made by the same developers who did Bear Lore and Bloody Path without giving them hemodialysis and locking away the results of their own Nature checks, it would be just as stoned, but perhaps coherent enough to be actually amusing.
quote:
Don't forget, for every "Faiths & Avatars" there was a "Netheril" boxed set.
And what's about it so horrible that it's supposed to be a "silver bullet"? In context of 4e, at that. Other than attempts to introduce chronomancy in order to crossbreed snake with hedgehog, which are easy to ignore.
Not even counting that Netheril was beyond bulkhead, being in Arcane Age - and separate from Cormanthyr AA, at that - and had little to no impact on anything else - except the later clumsy attempts to introduce 3e Magic Pony class into setting raising more questions, which is just as well, because if the Cuteness-Is-Magic! thing didn't exist at all, nothing valuable would be lost, IMHO.
quote:
Every edition of the Realms has featured releases that could have been ever so much better.
I see faulty logic here. To use an analogy - while some of us may occasionally figuratively compare bad cakes to dung, their very existence does not automatically make all and any dung a variety of cakes.
quote:
IMO 3E featured some excellent FR products
Yes, but even they were contaminated by the fad of forcible insertion of 3e stuff - and not really shiny on its own, to say the least - into existing settings. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 12:27:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
I'm late to this... but I got to say this.
I didn't realize how bad it was. I gave up on FR 3e pretty much when 3e came out and I never paid much attention to it. It was clear to me that WotC didn't ant grognards like me around so I drifted to other settings and stopped buying Realms books for the most part.
3e had cases of MUD creeping in, and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding (see "redundant creature" template ), but if you ignore the obviously loonie parts, a lot of materials are okay, a few are even good.
quote:
I can only assume that people who hate the Realms took the reins. I'm sad and disappointed. I was hoping this would convince me I had been wrong to abandon the Realms with 3e's arrival. But man...
Well, if something quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and...
No continuity editing? It's okay! Authors who obviously didn't care to read FR stuff beyond a short intro run over and retcon anything Ed Greenwood (or RSA, never mind his golden egglayer status) wrote? It's okay! To reset this - what? Oh, no, we can't do that, it would be so horribly offensive to everyone who ever failed to give a damn about FR in the first place, but took an opportunity to jump on a bandwagon pulled by the twilight albatross and skim the cream off it - so now we must respect what they did above all else.
Amusing, isn't? By some strange coincidence it looks exactly as if... the same petty gnawing didn't go anywhere, just someone who sits higher pressed the boot down and demanded to keep things somewhat profitable.
Look you guys I know you did not like 4e but that whole issue is moot now. To continuously rant on about it is unseemly as is your denigrating of the authors who worked on it.
A setting that does not grow and evolve will soon enough perish.
I empathize with the fact that you did not like the new direction they decided to take the realms but that does not mean that everything they did was wrong . If you are willing to look at it objectively then I am sure you will be able to find at least a few things you like about 4e.
|
Edited by - Thauranil on 23 Feb 2014 12:30:31 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 12:58:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
A setting that does not grow and evolve will soon enough perish.
RPG examples of settings that at times has lived perfectly fine without support: Greyhawk, Mystara, Tekhumel, at times Dragonlance not to mention Glorantha. Or should we start going through literary settings such as Lankhmar, Middle Earth etc.
A world might change in its fanbase and form, but to proclaim it dead when official writing stops is pure nonsense, as is the idea that the number of fans is the only way of grading its health.
And for the record I couldn't care less about 4ed., my beef is with 3rd. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
Edited by - Jorkens on 23 Feb 2014 13:00:20 |
|
|
|
Cbad285
Learned Scribe
160 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 13:24:02
|
| All hail second edition! All hail the thaco, master of fate, wielder of the secret zero. And most of all...all hail tyax! |
"Beware the Dream Fever!" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 14:02:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Also, what I don't understand is why people cannot just play in the edition/years that they are accustomed to or enjoy the most?
Because if you like to stick somewhat closely to canon and follow developments as they happen, then you have to do whatever the current era is. Playing in a non-supported era is not an option everyone is willing to embrace.
I'm going to be frank, thats the risk one takes when putting such preferences into their campaigns. There's very little chance one is going to like every (or heck, even most) of the story lines, changes, and plots that are set forth from designers and authors in a,living breathing world. Espically one such as FR where there are a LOT of hands in the pot.
No one said you have to like every single thing to prefer to stick with canon. You could ignore the Rage of Dragons, for example, without it having an effect on your 3E Realms.
But that's not the same thing as liking most of it up to a certain point and then not liking the majority of what comes after. At that point, if you're going to play in an unsupported setting, why bother playing in a published setting at all? If nothing is going to happen unless you make it up yourself, then you have nothing to lose by just going it alone.
Quite frankly, I dislike the attitude of "well, if you don't like this era, go for another era" because it comes across as "hey, they're giving me what I like; if you're not getting what you like, who cares?" I'm sure that's not the intent of such a statement, but it certainly comes across that way. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 15:19:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cbad285
All hail second edition! All hail the thaco, master of fate, wielder of the secret zero. And most of all...all hail tyax!
This is pure win! hehe +1
:) |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 15:29:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
IMO, the only thing wrong with the 4E Realms was the execution of the new campaign release. If it had approached the content of the 3E campaign guide and given some greater concern to explaining the changes wrought by the Spellplague (and IMHO perhaps gone with a more subtle brush than the one they ultimately elected to use), I think the level of complaints would have been lessened. The 100 year jump was a bold move, but the reset didn't meet expectations simply because it didn't adequately replace its predecessor and suffered in comparison. So, in terms of 5E, consider this: it will have to drip with major suckle to be worse than the 4E release!
And to Paul (the OP), the Realms continues to live, and the nostalgia that many feel for the 1E and 2E Realms in my view has a significant amount of rose-tinted reminiscing attached to it. Don't forget, for every "Faiths & Avatars" there was a "Netheril" boxed set. Every edition of the Realms has featured releases that could have been ever so much better.
IMO 3E featured some excellent FR products, although I grant you that WotC went "back to the well" too many times in terms of providing an update on existing products. We didn't need another "Waterdeep" book, but I challenge anyone not to pick up the 3E "City of Splendors" book and not find at least a dozen, new FR 'bits' of interest and inspiration.
Ed is truly enthusiastic about 5E. As he was for every edition of the setting. He can't help it; it's in his nature. His glass is always half full. I plan to top it up for him at GEN-CON this year.
-- George Krashos
I think this sums it up nicely. |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 15:34:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
I'm late to this... but I got to say this.
I didn't realize how bad it was. I gave up on FR 3e pretty much when 3e came out and I never paid much attention to it. It was clear to me that WotC didn't ant grognards like me around so I drifted to other settings and stopped buying Realms books for the most part.
3e had cases of MUD creeping in, and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding (see "redundant creature" template ), but if you ignore the obviously loonie parts, a lot of materials are okay, a few are even good.
quote:
I can only assume that people who hate the Realms took the reins. I'm sad and disappointed. I was hoping this would convince me I had been wrong to abandon the Realms with 3e's arrival. But man...
Well, if something quacks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and...
No continuity editing? It's okay! Authors who obviously didn't care to read FR stuff beyond a short intro run over and retcon anything Ed Greenwood (or RSA, never mind his golden egglayer status) wrote? It's okay! To reset this - what? Oh, no, we can't do that, it would be so horribly offensive to everyone who ever failed to give a damn about FR in the first place, but took an opportunity to jump on a bandwagon pulled by the twilight albatross and skim the cream off it - so now we must respect what they did above all else.
Amusing, isn't? By some strange coincidence it looks exactly as if... the same petty gnawing didn't go anywhere, just someone who sits higher pressed the boot down and demanded to keep things somewhat profitable.
Look you guys I know you did not like 4e but that whole issue is moot now. To continuously rant on about it is unseemly as is your denigrating of the authors who worked on it.
A setting that does not grow and evolve will soon enough perish.
I empathize with the fact that you did not like the new direction they decided to take the realms but that does not mean that everything they did was wrong . If you are willing to look at it objectively then I am sure you will be able to find at least a few things you like about 4e.
I have run 4e for the game store pretty extensively. I still frankly think it added nothing better to the game. 4e realms only subtracted from the good of the realms, it added nothing positive.
I might give you that warlord was the best contribution 4e gave to d&d but that alone is not worth what 4e's legacy will truly be: a mistake that fractured the fan base.
Ultimately it will be remembered for fracturing and arbitrary changes. |
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
It was so much worse then I had imagined...
Topic Locked
