| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Apex |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 15:43:57
The question I have is: Is Candlekeep jumping to 4th edition or will it stick with the previous editions of the realms exclusively (seeing as the time jump may cause some serious conflicts regarding cannon)? What is the general consensus of the members here? I for one would like to see Candlekeep remain true to the previous editions of the Realms with maybe only a separate forum specifically for 4th edition. |
| 21 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Lemernis |
Posted - 30 May 2008 : 11:25:26
Well, I'm glad Candlekeep is devoted to the Realms in itself, and accordingly will address all editions of it. The canon changes wrought by 4e are a huge turnoff to me. Personally, I'm not interested in that at all. And I'm grateful that we all have a place to continue to discuss campaigns run in the setting prior to those changes. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 30 May 2008 : 01:52:58
quote:
Originally posted by Alaundo
As the Sage mentioned, this crusty old place has barely changed since the day it was lauched. Certainly, it's got bigger and the shelves have got more and more packed with scrolls and tomes, but Candlekeep is essential the same, i'm happy to say 
Of course, it wasn't our intention to deliberately plague these halls with the dreaded ASP gremlins.  It's unfortunate that the bigger Candlekeep has got, the more hiding places gremlins have find in order to wreck their own special brand of havoc. |
| Alaundo |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 19:01:00
Well met
Apologies for my late arrival; issues with the server and other matters have kept me away in the deepest dungeons 
Indeed, Erik (and most others who have put things straight on the matter), as i've said before, Candlekeep is a site and forum for fans of the Forgotten Realms. The edition of FR has no bearing, we will support all editions and make fans of all editions feel welcome and feel that they can get a great deal of worth from Candlekeep.
As the Sage mentioned, this crusty old place has barely changed since the day it was lauched. Certainly, it's got bigger and the shelves have got more and more packed with scrolls and tomes, but Candlekeep is essential the same, i'm happy to say
If you don't wish to embrace 4e, then that's fine... there will be all the current material on the site and i'm sure pre-4e discussions will be plentiful on the forums. Likewise with 4e, we will continue to provide product and novel information on the site itself, and also contain any such documents or articles which are submitted to us. The forums are also open to 4e discussions and we will continue to provide monthly Book Clubs for all new releases, as always.
One minor change which I will be applying shortly, will be the Products page. 4th Edition products will have their own page. The current page was becoming a little too messy and the number of listed "Campaign Setting" tomes was already confusing.
|
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 15:10:37
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
So long as the scribe is keen on learning about ALL the options presented in the various editions of the Realmslore, there shouldn't be a problem. If a scribe merely wants to know specifically about the Mystra of 1e, he/she should simply state as such in his/her opening post. If said scribe then wants to learn about the impact of the Spellplague on the Mystra of 2e, 3e and 4e FR, there's plenty of opportunity for new discussion in a new scroll.
I think that in the majority of cases, it will be pretty clear from context, or that quetsions will naturally lend themselves to contextual answers (depending on how general/specific they are).
If the question is "tell me about Mystra," that's all kinds of sources. If it's "tell me about Mystra's death," that's GHotR and potentially 4e sources. If it's "tell me about the pantheon post-spellplague," then it's pretty much all 4e sources.
I think the key is to see the world as a world on a continuum. The Realmslore is tied to the *era* of the world, not the edition of the game. The game is merely intended as a convenient and playable representation of the world--i.e., it lets you experience/live the realms as a player in a game.
Now of course the Realms as a setting is kinda programmed as a support to the game--as a way in which you can play it--but as the game fluctuates in style, the Realms stay the same. It's just one, big, lasting, ongoing world.
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 04:08:46
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Heh. You know, I was actually thinking about selecting a new avatar just yesterday.
Why am I not surprised?
Bring back the kender! I liked that one!  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 03:57:37
Heh. You know, I was actually thinking about selecting a new avatar just yesterday. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 03:00:26
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
But the basic structure and Forums set-up hasn't changed much in the nearly 6 years that I've been here.
... Unlike your avatar.   |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 01:41:08
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
D&D3 came in 2000 and D&D3.5 came in 2003. Then, did CK change any of its systems ? I do not think so.
Well, Alaundo's added new shelves here and there when it's been required -- like the Chamber of Sages for example. But the basic structure and Forums set-up hasn't changed much in the nearly 6 years that I've been here. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 01:36:47
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
As I understand it--and please scribes, correct me on any of these points:
Candlekeep has always been a haven for people playing all different versions of the game, so it doesn't make sense to talk of CK "converting" to a new edition (it's currently in the 1e/2e/3e/3.5e version of the game). The only question is integrated 4e in there as well, and it looks to me as if CK is just going to be adding that. So now it will be 1-4e CK.
Exactly. There's really no easy way to distinguish the division between the previous editions of the Realmslore and what's coming in 4e FR. And while some may claim that the Spellplague is a convenient line of delineation -- the simple fact is, it is STILL Realmslore. And just as 3e lore was altered here and there, so will the 4e lore. It's also just as likely that some parts will remain the same as it was in previous editions. So lore discussions about these elements will still include previous editions of the Realmslore.
quote:
What affects the answer to any given Realmslore question is--and always has been--the CONTEXT of the question. If you're asking about anything historical, you're going to get different answers depending on what period of history--so it is with the different editions. For instance, if you wanted to know about the pre-ToT Mystra, you might want a 1e-related answer (i.e., it may be more likely that you'd find the answer in an older product), but if you want to know about the Spellplague, well, you'll probably get a 4e answer (from a 4e product).
Indeed. Erik has the right of it. 
quote:
There can be overlap, of course, and sourcebooks from different editions may have different answers for different questions. I know there are some number of contradiction between 2e and 3e, for instance. Some of these are simple mistakes, but some of them are contextual--i.e., the answer is different (or differently understood) at different times.
Very true. So long as the scribe is keen on learning about ALL the options presented in the various editions of the Realmslore, there shouldn't be a problem. If a scribe merely wants to know specifically about the Mystra of 1e, he/she should simply state as such in his/her opening post. If said scribe then wants to learn about the impact of the Spellplague on the Mystra of 2e, 3e and 4e FR, there's plenty of opportunity for new discussion in a new scroll.
quote:
A potential strength of the 4e FR, as I see it, is that it doesn't have to contradict anything in 3e--because they are removing it a way from the current Realms status-quo, they can keep everything we understand today "as-is" and just add new stuff without trampling over current stuff. Whether scribes like the new lore or not is strictly their choice.
A good point. So long as scribes are clear in what edition of the Realmslore they want to discuss here at Candlekeep, this type of perspective should keep things simple and effective.
quote:
If in the future, any number of scribes don't want to bother learning about 4e, they can just keep answering 3e questions (or earlier), and everyone can answer historical questions. That will still be a very necessary function.
Aye.
quote:
The 4e additions don't invalidate the 3e lore in any way, or make any 3e games irrelevant. There's also still plenty of room for adventures in 3e, just as there always have been--perhaps no more sourcebooks, but you're probably already set and there will be lore to be gleaned from the 4e books.
If your PCs were on the track to saving the world, well, you must have already customized your realms (as the setting is *designed* for), and whether you bother with the whole Spellplague thing or not is totally your call. Everyone's home Realms campaign is just a little bit different--how much attention you pay to canon or how it affects your game is--and should be--up to you, the DM and players.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
quote:
There's no reason you can't adapt your game to use the 4e D&D rules without the Spellplague . . . or stick with whatever version you're playing--as you have always been able to do.
Do I have the right of it? CK sages?
You do indeed. Much appreciated Erik. Thank you. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 29 May 2008 : 00:57:46
quote:
Originally posted by Fillow
I'm not sure that I'm still in-topic... and that my sentences understandable ! Are they ? Please tell me.
Yes. |
| Fillow |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 19:57:32
I'm not a D&D player but just a FR novels reader. So, I may mistake.
CK was created in 1999, while AD&D2 was on the air.
D&D3 came in 2000 and D&D3.5 came in 2003. Then, did CK change any of its systems ? I do not think so.
So why should CK change its way of lore discussing ?
Moreover, scribes almost always quote their sources. so it will be as easy as is it now to place the lore within the timeline.
I'm not sure that I'm still in-topic... and that my sentences understandable ! Are they ? Please tell me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 18:33:58
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
If your PCs were on the track to saving the world, well, you must have already customized your realms (as the setting is *designed* for), and whether you bother with the whole Spellplague thing or not is totally your call. Everyone's home Realms campaign is just a little bit different--how much attention you pay to canon or how it affects your game is--and should be--up to you, the DM and players.
There's no reason you can't adapt your game to use the 4e D&D rules without the Spellplague . . . or stick with whatever version you're playing--as you have always been able to do.
Do I have the right of it? CK sages?
Hell yes. |
| Dart Ambermoon |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 18:12:56
Besides, oftentimes itīs exactly the combination of lore spanning several editions, that makes a picture complete. And to echo Markustay, "the posters will include whatever information is neccessary for them to get the answer they need, regardless of edition". Questions for lore are rarely accompanied by a request for specific edition lore, and even if itīs not really a problem, no matter how many editions there are. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 18:06:07
Yup - thats pretty much the way I see it.
CK doesn't need to take any 'official' stance - the posters will include whatever information is neccessary for them to get the answer they need, regardless of edition.
I thought a post-Spellplague forum would have been helpful, but only in organizing the time-period the question is set in. If I were to create a Dragonlance Forum, I would definately seperate that into different 'Ages'.
But the 'powers that be' have also pointed out the problem in that - having ONE SEPERATE forum almost appears as an osticization on our part, so to avoid that I suppose I would have to agree that it might not be such a great idea (even if it is efficient).
Like I keep saying - I have NO problem with 4e fans - the more the merrier. There really is no 'wrong way' to love the Realms. If anything, I would prefer they mix with us, so we can show them the glory that was.
Without being too 'preachy'. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 17:42:29
As I understand it--and please scribes, correct me on any of these points:
Candlekeep has always been a haven for people playing all different versions of the game, so it doesn't make sense to talk of CK "converting" to a new edition (it's currently in the 1e/2e/3e/3.5e version of the game). The only question is integrated 4e in there as well, and it looks to me as if CK is just going to be adding that. So now it will be 1-4e CK.
What affects the answer to any given Realmslore question is--and always has been--the CONTEXT of the question. If you're asking about anything historical, you're going to get different answers depending on what period of history--so it is with the different editions. For instance, if you wanted to know about the pre-ToT Mystra, you might want a 1e-related answer (i.e., it may be more likely that you'd find the answer in an older product), but if you want to know about the Spellplague, well, you'll probably get a 4e answer (from a 4e product).
There can be overlap, of course, and sourcebooks from different editions may have different answers for different questions. I know there are some number of contradiction between 2e and 3e, for instance. Some of these are simple mistakes, but some of them are contextual--i.e., the answer is different (or differently understood) at different times.
A potential strength of the 4e FR, as I see it, is that it doesn't have to contradict anything in 3e--because they are removing it a way from the current Realms status-quo, they can keep everything we understand today "as-is" and just add new stuff without trampling over current stuff. Whether scribes like the new lore or not is strictly their choice.
If in the future, any number of scribes don't want to bother learning about 4e, they can just keep answering 3e questions (or earlier), and everyone can answer historical questions. That will still be a very necessary function.
The 4e additions don't invalidate the 3e lore in any way, or make any 3e games irrelevant. There's also still plenty of room for adventures in 3e, just as there always have been--perhaps no more sourcebooks, but you're probably already set and there will be lore to be gleaned from the 4e books.
If your PCs were on the track to saving the world, well, you must have already customized your realms (as the setting is *designed* for), and whether you bother with the whole Spellplague thing or not is totally your call. Everyone's home Realms campaign is just a little bit different--how much attention you pay to canon or how it affects your game is--and should be--up to you, the DM and players.
There's no reason you can't adapt your game to use the 4e D&D rules without the Spellplague . . . or stick with whatever version you're playing--as you have always been able to do.
Do I have the right of it? CK sages?
Cheers |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 17:31:28
quote:
Originally posted by BARDOBARBAROS
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
I for one would like to see Candlekeep remain true to the previous editions of the Realms with maybe only a separate forum specifically for 4th edition.
i want this also.. But 4th edition will devour everything in the end ... All 3.5 edition products (inside wizards or outside) will transform to 4th edition.. This will happen and to candlekeep..sooner or later
But we don't produce products. And we're not affiliated with WotC. So we can happily keep talking about any prior edition, as long as people are willing to do so. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 17:16:39
quote:
Originally posted by BARDOBARBAROS
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
I for one would like to see Candlekeep remain true to the previous editions of the Realms with maybe only a separate forum specifically for 4th edition.
i want this also.. But 4th edition will devour everything in the end ... All 3.5 edition products (inside wizards or outside) will transform to 4th edition.. This will happen and to candlekeep..sooner or later
Eh, I doubt it. |
| BARDOBARBAROS |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 17:07:04
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
I for one would like to see Candlekeep remain true to the previous editions of the Realms with maybe only a separate forum specifically for 4th edition.
i want this also.. But 4th edition will devour everything in the end ... All 3.5 edition products (inside wizards or outside) will transform to 4th edition.. This will happen and to candlekeep..sooner or later |
| The Sage |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 16:53:42
Indeed.
As it now stands, Candlekeep will still be THE place for 1e/2e/3e and [after August] even 4e FR Realmslore discussions.
|
| Ergdusch |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 16:36:00
In relation to another querry in another thread The Sage tackled the issue already. I will quote from there as I think his words answer your question somewhat if not completely:
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I'm not really sure that's appropriate. It kinda reminds me of the same problems we might encounter with the idea of splitting of the Forums into those for 1e/2e/3e fans, and those who are solely on-board for the 4e changes.
[snip]
My own personal concerns aside, Candlekeep should still try to maintain the perception that it is a free and open community where Realms fans, old and new, can come together and engage in discussions about ALL editions of the setting.
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 28 May 2008 : 16:11:57
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
The question I have is: Is Candlekeep jumping to 4th edition or will it stick with the previous editions of the realms exclusively (seeing as the time jump may cause some serious conflicts regarding cannon)? What is the general consensus of the members here? I for one would like to see Candlekeep remain true to the previous editions of the Realms with maybe only a separate forum specifically for 4th edition.
Candlekeep is currently edition-neutral, and from what I understand we intend to stay that way. |
|
|
