| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Thrasymachus |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 16:59:56
If you ran a game where the novels were not merely as canon as the source books, but in fact novels trump the sourcebooks; what contradictions would you run into?
|
| 28 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 15:10:41
Yeah.
It'd be simplicity just to say, "The Bhaalspawn married Jaheria, refused godhood, and adventured for the rest of his life." |
| The Sage |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 14:58:07
Ah, so you were referring to the myriad endings of the various LucasArts games, like Knights of the Old Republic and so forth. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 11:48:12
About Lucasfilm or Badlur's Gate?
But yes, Lucasfilm has the "good" endings of all of its games canonized. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 03:07:32
Where was this stated?
|
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 01:44:28
quote:
* The Baldur's Gate novels in a nutshell.
Why?: Because they were just BAD.
Though they are, unfortunately, canon -- so says WotC and the authors of the novels.
And, of course, the games cannot be considered FR canon, as the author, Drew Karpyshyn says, "because of their multiple endings, the BG games can't be considered 'official' in the FR world."
[/quote]
Lucasfilm just had the "best" ending and the good aligned characters considered official. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 00:32:11
quote:
Originally posted by Charles Phipps
* The Baldur's Gate novels in a nutshell.
Why?: Because they were just BAD.
Though they are, unfortunately, canon -- so says WotC and the authors of the novels.
And, of course, the games cannot be considered FR canon, as the author, Drew Karpyshyn says, "because of their multiple endings, the BG games can't be considered 'official' in the FR world." |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 00:23:49
But yes, here's my issues I'd run into with the novels as "canon."
Magic
* Shadow Weave magic and Weave Magic creates explosions equivalent to fireball spells or small scale nuclear weapons depending on when and where they happen.
Why?: Aside from the obvious incompatibility issues. The Netherese are weaker because of this than anyone else. A Weave spell-lobber could target their magic deliberately and blow the City of Shade sky-high rather easily.
Characters
* Drizzt Do'Urden is too low a level.
Why?: Not really a PROBLEM per say but he defeated Shimmergloom and Errtu in ways that make it highly unlikely anyone would be able to do on such an easy level.
Plots
* The Baldur's Gate novels in a nutshell.
Why?: Because they were just BAD.
* The Avatar books.
Why?: Mostly because Kelemvor tricking Bane just makes Bane look bad. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Jan 2012 : 00:16:10
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Never watched the cartoon, but I will take your word for it that he is 'Presto'.
The scene occurred when Elminster introduced Presto to Volo, inside an exclusive mage-club in Cormyr. Right after El and the kid disappear, you see the two TSR employees sneak over to Volo, and get his All things Magical. AFAIK, it is the only appearance of RW individuals inside of the Realms (I am not even sure if Ed himself has ever been there).
And all of this is 'in-game', of course. I know none of them went there for real.. I'm not nuts. 
Then again, you never know with Ed..... 
EDIT: I added a link to that scene. Its amazing, really - not only did the comic survive the fire, but it somehow miraculously translated in Spanish! 
Ah, okay, I'm remembering that now. My bad.  |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 23:47:14
Never watched the cartoon, but I will take your word for it that he is 'Presto'.
The scene occurred when Elminster introduced Presto to Volo, inside an exclusive mage-club in Cormyr. Right after El and the kid disappear, you see the two TSR employees sneak over to Volo, and get his All things Magical. AFAIK, it is the only appearance of RW individuals inside of the Realms (I am not even sure if Ed himself has ever been there).
And all of this is 'in-game', of course. I know none of them went there for real.. I'm not nuts.
Then again, you never know with Ed.....
EDIT: I added a link to that scene. Its amazing, really - not only did the comic survive the fire, but it somehow miraculously translated in Spanish! |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 23:40:53
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
What I stated above is even supported by the 2e-era comic A Grand Tour of the Realms, in which two designers (I think Jeff Grubb and Julia Martin - I no longer have it) snuck through Ed's portal and got Volo's Guide to All Things Magical from Volo, without Ed or Elminster's permission, much to their chagrin (which is why it has that 'previously banned' status).
As I recall, that particular comic was the one that had Elminster taking Presto (of the D&D cartoon) around with him as he made his daily rounds.
I don't recall seeing what you describe in any of the comics, though one of the last Forgotten Realms comics (I want to say it was #24; it was the "Everybody Wants to Rule the Realms" issue) did show a lot of interaction between the comic/setting characters and TSR staffers, at TSR headquarters. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:56:37
What I stated above is even supported by the 2e-era comic A Grand Tour of the Realms, in which two designers (I think Jeff Grubb and Julia Martin - I no longer have it) snuck through Ed's portal and got Volo's Guide to All Things Magical from Volo, without Ed or Elminster's permission, much to their chagrin (which is why it has that 'previously banned' status).
The basic premise is that everything MUST go through Ed's hands, and everything MUST be reviewed by Elminster, and heavilly edited, before passing it on to Ed. AFAIK, that Volo's Guide is THE ONLY example of realmslore that has circumnavigated the normal channels.
That means, aside from that one single tome, EVERYTHING FR could just be so much Elminster BS. THAT is why you really can't have retcons, because the 'real truth of the matter' is never really known - we get an edited version, always.
Which is a really great, in-game explanation of continuity glitches. |
| Therise |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:15:21
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I don't know, I get all my lore from a certain shadowy, untrustworthy elf who shows up uninvited in the middle of the night when I'm close to deadline and spins a tale or two over a few bottles of wine.
Or maybe that's just my imagination . . .?
That's no everyday ordinary elf, that's Labelas Enoreth. See this photo? He's never satisfied with house wines, am I right? It always has to be the aged, good stuff. It's Labelas alright. 
|
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:05:49
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
HOWEVER....
The assumption, from the beginning, is that the entire setting - NOVELS AND SOURCE - are tales retold to Ed Greenwood, by Elminster, in his Canada home, on cold winter nights, that Ed is kind enough to share with us.
It doesn't matter if Ed hasn't really written it all - the basic premise is that all Forgotten Realms lore is derived through that one avenue - the portal in Ed's house.
ERGO, everything is hearsay. 
I don't know, I get all my lore from a certain shadowy, untrustworthy elf who shows up uninvited in the middle of the night when I'm close to deadline and spins a tale or two over a few bottles of wine.
Or maybe that's just my imagination . . .?
Cheers |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 19:46:58
HOWEVER....
The assumption, from the beginning, is that the entire setting - NOVELS AND SOURCE - are tales retold to Ed Greenwood, by Elminster, in his Canada home, on cold winter nights, that Ed is kind enough to share with us.
It doesn't matter if Ed hasn't really written it all - the basic premise is that all Forgotten Realms lore is derived through that one avenue - the portal in Ed's house.
ERGO, everything is hearsay.
As for the OP, I think newer sources should trump older, and Ed should trump everything, UNLESS specifically overwritten in a new, official printed source (physical or internet), which was always his deal anyway. The question of 'novel vs source' shouldn't matter - it should go by the RW date the lore was published.
On the other hand, I do not think authors should change canon willy-nilly, at their whim, which I think at least one does (he doesn't do it on-purpose, he just doesn't give an Osquip's arse, which I why I don't think he even understands the concept of a shared-world). You can alter canon for the better, but to do so out of laziness should never be tolerated.
IMO, of course. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:10:28
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
Map continuity errors I forgive, each versions maps are slightly different.
I guess it's okay as long as the text itself doesn't run into this. The lore being unreliable is a canon feature after all.
quote:
Some of the earlier books had characters acting strange relative to their later selves (Storm in "Tantras", Alustriel in the Icewind Dale trilogy and subsequent books from the early 90s).
Yes, but didn't most of this eventually turn out to be leftovers after the editors removing several plotlines because walking and chewing is supposedly too complex for us readers?
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Personally, I look at at all the novels that way - stories told by bards in-world, which may or may not be true (so as not to disturb any of my own D&D gaming).
In novels what matters is the narration mode. If a character tells the tale, we can assume it's colored by the character a lot. Like that High Moor deforestation thing.
But it's easy to see cursory overview parts of the sourcebook lore like this too - "what everyone knows" vs. "what a few know", "certain point of view" vs. "very certain point of view", etc. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:26:40
Well those reports about the novels are based on my perspective and opinions. I'm sure I would've been less critical or even overlooked their canon-consistency failings if I wasn't disappointed by them. |
| Seravin |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:10:41
Oh lord those Baldur's Gate novelizations are terrible, aren't they? The games were so amazingly brilliant. I wish someone had told Wizards or TSR that "Volo's Guide to Baldur's Gate 2" is the worst name for a product ever, and renamed it "Volo's Guide to Amn" with a tagline about Baldur's Gate 2 someplace for sales.
I actually liked Pool of Radiance the novel, it was fluffy and light but in contrast to the darker/death/evil/gritty FR novels it was enjoyable. Tarl and Shal and Ren are all great characters. Now the 2nd novel in the Pools trilogy was sooooo poorly written and Bane teleporting major cities to the underdark seemed stupid and non-canon to me. I haven't read the 3rd book yet but it's sitting on my shelf.
Darn. I liked Red Magic too...I didn't realize it was so far off from canon. The depiction of Thay with the wizards making it tropical for growing oranges and all the centaur citizens and the gold mines and tent cities outside the gates for the poor was actually interesting reading. But I defer to your wisdom Ayrik on the violation of lore depicted in the book. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:04:18
Big change, if I didn't "pick and choose" elements from the game the Baldur's Gate series would be canon versus the novels. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 08:39:24
Canon keeps changing, novels get dated.
The Pool of Radiance novel was substantially different from (and I think inferior to) the CRPG and adventure. But the novel material was canonized when maps and lore concerning Phlan and the Moonsea were updated.
Red Magic was written by Jean Rabe, a prolific author of Dragonlance and Greyhawk novels who clearly had no knowledge of the Realms and has not written any FR fiction before or since. The novel was so full of then-canon violation I wouldn't know where to begin ... but again, later canon about Red Wizards blindly privileged the novel over other sources; the Red Wizards didn't turn out too badly in the end, but I would've thought sources like FR6 Dreams of the Red Wizards should have had precedence over a bad novel. |
| Thrasymachus |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 05:30:30
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
The Swords of series on the KoMD didn't tie in exactly with what was written in the Grey Box set, for instance.
How so? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 01:52:33
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The Double-Diamond novels are considered non-canon. Some of what occurred in them was made canon by other sources (just as in the cases of the VGs), but they themselves are not canonical.
It's tentative. As such, it would appear WotC assume some parts are canon [or at least will be], given the reference in the 'Doppelganger' entry of Monsters of Faerûn. Wizards also told us that when the timeline reached 1377 DR, some form of those novels would become canon [we learned this in the mid-to-late days of 3e]. However, given the time-jump, I'd assume we'll probably never really know the status of some of the events in the novels, unless they're specifically referenced as historical events in post-Spellplague sources.
I know some scribes find it hard to reconcile the fact that Khelben appears in one of the books in 1377 DR [especially given the events of Khelben's status-change in Blackstaff]. A possible *fix* that I've put forth before, is to suggest that the "Khelben" featured in the 1377 DR storyline of the DDTS books, was in fact Tsarra-in-the-guise-of-the-Blackstaff instead.
quote:
Once Around the Realms is considered canon, but it is also considered hearsay. In other words, it is the way Volo told it, and may not be the way things actually unfolded (he is considered a consummate story-teller, after all).
Once Around the Realms enjoys a canon status much like that of the "Double Diamond" books.
It's also worth noting that Brian James confirmed [back in 2007] that he included no events from Once Around the Realms into the Grand History. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 22:21:11
The Double-Diamond novels are considered non-canon. Some of what occurred in them was made canon by other sources (just as in the cases of the VGs), but they themselves are not canonical.
Once Around the Realms is considered canon, but it is also considered hearsay. In other words, it is the way Volo told it, and may not be the way things actually unfolded (he is considered a consummate story-teller, after all). Since the Double-Diamond books were written like chapbooks, it is possible to consider them examples of in-game canon as well; they are chapbooks that are available for people in Faerun to read, and are based on some truths, but also highly embellished.
Personally, I look at at all the novels that way - stories told by bards in-world, which may or may not be true (so as not to disturb any of my own D&D gaming). It would be better if they were like that for real, but unfortunately, they are canon. IIRC, the comics are also considered canon.
EDIT: As an aside, several FR cities have gotten the north/south of the river thing confused, and in some cases explanations were given; something along the lines of "the old city lies on the other side of the river", etc. I usually just go with that. |
| Artemas Entreri |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:52:32
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You know why I could never really get into Highlander? Because the continuity blew chunks. If you can't even keep the rules the same from book to book or movie to movie, then its all just a bunch of unrelated gibberish.
Pshhh... what'chu talkin' bout Highlander "continuity"?
Everyone knows there was only one.
lol
|
| Seravin |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:04:52
Map continuity errors I forgive, each versions maps are slightly different. Often cited example is the Clerical Quintet, the Snowflake Mountains and the lake seem to be different in the novels relative to the FR maps in the sourcebooks.
Some of the earlier books had characters acting strange relative to their later selves (Storm in "Tantras", Alustriel in the Icewind Dale trilogy and subsequent books from the early 90s)..but by and large the novels are very nicely consistent with the source material.
I only hold Ed up to the highest standards in this regard, the other authors can be close to the source books and not get any problem from me but if Ed's novels are off from sourcebooks that he wrote, I get frustrated. The Swords of series on the KoMD didn't tie in exactly with what was written in the Grey Box set, for instance.
|
| Therise |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 20:53:47
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You know why I could never really get into Highlander? Because the continuity blew chunks. If you can't even keep the rules the same from book to book or movie to movie, then its all just a bunch of unrelated gibberish.
Pshhh... what'chu talkin' bout Highlander "continuity"?
Everyone knows there was only one.
|
| Thrasymachus |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 20:41:24
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
None.
Novels should NEVER contradict or over-ride source. Continuity is the glue that holds the setting together (especially a shared world, otherwise all you have is a bunch of authors writing unrelated novels about parallel worlds).
You know why I could never really get into Highlander? Because the continuity blew chunks. If you can't even keep the rules the same from book to book or movie to movie, then its all just a bunch of unrelated gibberish.
Lol - I agree. They never should. But, I am looking over my shoulder at a collection that is 8 novels shy of complete. With that many books I had to ask. Take the sourcebooks for example. I seem to remember that the city of Daggerford was on the North side of the river in one source, and Southside of the river according to another. Yes, we’re talking specifically about novels, but that’s the kind of contradiction I am looking for in the novels.
I had heard somewhere that The Double Diamond Triangle Saga was not considered canon. Any truth to that?
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 20:24:58
None.
Novels should NEVER contradict or over-ride source. Continuity is the glue that holds the setting together (especially a shared world, otherwise all you have is a bunch of authors writing unrelated novels about parallel worlds).
You know why I could never really get into Highlander? Because the continuity blew chunks. If you can't even keep the rules the same from book to book or movie to movie, then its all just a bunch of unrelated gibberish. |
| Charles Phipps |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 18:53:06
There's surprisingly few, really.
However, presumably, Drizzt Do'Urden would be an Epic level character.
I'd say, 22nd to 27th. |
|
|
