Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Products
 Forgotten Realms Novels
 Novels with a full party?
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Author  Topic Next Topic  

Imbaownage
Acolyte

2 Posts

Posted - 15 Nov 2017 :  05:35:08  Show Profile Send Imbaownage a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
I feel like I have read every single d&d novel out there but the only books I can think of with a full or close to a full party of adventures I can think of is dragonlance chronicles and in part the drizzt books. Am I missing something?

When we play d&d it's almost always with a complete party supporting each other I would love to see more of that in the novels

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
6428 Posts

Posted - 15 Nov 2017 :  07:31:34  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Dragonlance books had a few too many people in the party. I've not met many DMs who could manage and entertain a dozen PCs at once, lol.

The AD&D-era FR novels were always party-centric, usually 3-5 characters receiving "equal" attention and importance. A party lacking some sort of warrior, wizard, priest, or thief would rarely venture far without first acquiring characters to fill these roles, although the smallest parties could cover the gaps with multiclassed members instead. But somewhere along the way the style changed to one main hero along with some sidekick support cast, mirrored by one main villain along with treacherous/disposable minions, sometimes mirrored again by other actors/companions working through other plot arenas. I think it's a stylistic legacy from Drizzt.

[/Ayrik]
Go to Top of Page

Artemas Entreri
Great Reader

USA
3068 Posts

Posted - 15 Nov 2017 :  16:43:58  Show Profile Send Artemas Entreri a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Avatar Series- Fighter, Wizard, Thief, Cleric

Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin

Be my friend on Goodreads.com: http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/6751111-brian
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
6428 Posts

Posted - 15 Nov 2017 :  17:27:11  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Avatar Series was 1E/2E AD&D.

But in 3E-onwards D&D novels - one epic hero with entourage, one nasty bad guy with reinforcements, sometimes other good/bad parties acting out secondary plots.

[/Ayrik]
Go to Top of Page

Imbaownage
Acolyte

2 Posts

Posted - 15 Nov 2017 :  18:31:24  Show Profile Send Imbaownage a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Ahh yes the avatar series forgot about those I liked them alot
Go to Top of Page

George Krashos
Master of Realmslore

Australia
4920 Posts

Posted - 16 Nov 2017 :  04:26:48  Show Profile Send George Krashos a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Spellfire.

Rage of Dragons trilogy.

Swords of Eveningstar trilogy.

-- George Krashos

"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus
Go to Top of Page

Madpig
Learned Scribe

Finland
127 Posts

Posted - 16 Nov 2017 :  07:29:55  Show Profile Send Madpig a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

The Dragonlance books had a few too many people in the party. I've not met many DMs who could manage and entertain a dozen PCs at once, lol.

The AD&D-era FR novels were always party-centric, usually 3-5 characters receiving "equal" attention and importance. A party lacking some sort of warrior, wizard, priest, or thief would rarely venture far without first acquiring characters to fill these roles, although the smallest parties could cover the gaps with multiclassed members instead. But somewhere along the way the style changed to one main hero along with some sidekick support cast, mirrored by one main villain along with treacherous/disposable minions, sometimes mirrored again by other actors/companions working through other plot arenas. I think it's a stylistic legacy from Drizzt.



Just saying, but if my memory servers me correctly, not all the DL characters were actually PCs. I think it was Raistlin, Tanis, Tasslehoff and 1 or 2 others.
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
6428 Posts

Posted - 16 Nov 2017 :  10:19:35  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Raistlin and Caramon, Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Sturm, Riverwind and Goldmoon, Kitiara, Laurana, Kitiara, Fizban/Paladine, etc.

They weren't always all "partied together" or pursuing the same story arc all the time - they tended to split off into sideplots and eventually into numerous other stories. But in the first novels it seemed (to me) like too many characters to follow on an adventure, a "typical" party of 4-6 characters would've offered more simplicity and more focus on depth of character than on variety of characters. Although Dragonlance was immensely popular, of course, I think it would've likely become the "flagship" D&D setting if the legendary Old Grey Box hadn't introduced the Realms.

A round dozen classed PCs/NPCs travelling around in a big pack - and constantly splitting off into smaller groups - and containing a curious little kender - would be a serious chore for any DM to handle, lol.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 16 Nov 2017 10:23:29
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
30338 Posts

Posted - 16 Nov 2017 :  17:46:47  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

Raistlin and Caramon, Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Sturm, Riverwind and Goldmoon, Kitiara, Laurana, Kitiara, Fizban/Paladine, etc.

They weren't always all "partied together" or pursuing the same story arc all the time - they tended to split off into sideplots and eventually into numerous other stories. But in the first novels it seemed (to me) like too many characters to follow on an adventure, a "typical" party of 4-6 characters would've offered more simplicity and more focus on depth of character than on variety of characters. Although Dragonlance was immensely popular, of course, I think it would've likely become the "flagship" D&D setting if the legendary Old Grey Box hadn't introduced the Realms.

A round dozen classed PCs/NPCs travelling around in a big pack - and constantly splitting off into smaller groups - and containing a curious little kender - would be a serious chore for any DM to handle, lol.



Well, keep in mind the OGB came about because TSR was looking for a new setting... To me, Krynn isn't as much a setting as it is the background for three big, interconnecting stories. One of the strengths of the Realms has already been that it's not about the ONE BIG STORY, the way Krynn was -- the Realms was made for many, many stories, not just one.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 16 Nov 2017 18:15:22
Go to Top of Page

Madpig
Learned Scribe

Finland
127 Posts

Posted - 17 Nov 2017 :  12:40:14  Show Profile Send Madpig a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

Raistlin and Caramon, Tanis, Tasslehoff, Flint, Sturm, Riverwind and Goldmoon, Kitiara, Laurana, Kitiara, Fizban/Paladine, etc.

They weren't always all "partied together" or pursuing the same story arc all the time - they tended to split off into sideplots and eventually into numerous other stories. But in the first novels it seemed (to me) like too many characters to follow on an adventure, a "typical" party of 4-6 characters would've offered more simplicity and more focus on depth of character than on variety of characters. Although Dragonlance was immensely popular, of course, I think it would've likely become the "flagship" D&D setting if the legendary Old Grey Box hadn't introduced the Realms.

A round dozen classed PCs/NPCs travelling around in a big pack - and constantly splitting off into smaller groups - and containing a curious little kender - would be a serious chore for any DM to handle, lol.



I meant that PC thing from D&D point of view. I meant actual number of players was quite low. I know full well the amount of characters in the book. But I can follow what are you meaning. I think there was way too many fill in characters.
Go to Top of Page
   Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2017 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000