| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Halidan |
Posted - 29 Aug 2008 : 20:16:46
So as not to hijack someone else's thread, I thought I'd open up an new one.
quote:
In that other thread, our every-hopeful Sage waxed peotically Well, you've purchased the book, and admit there are some positive things about the 4e Realms. So why not simply use what you found positive about the post Spellplague Realms, and build your current campaign, using pre-4e Realmslore, toward that?
Like many on these forums, I kept an open mind during the publicity rush prior to the realease of the 4E Realms, and I bought the new FRCG and read it with as much of an open mind as I could muster. I really wanted to find that "Realms magic" that dfemling also said he was looking for. Unfortunatly, I simply failed.
I keep looking at the FRCG and I keep trying to find even a small trace of the excitement that I've felt for the Realms since Ed's first Dragon articles came out in the late 70's. It just isn't there.
The 4E Realms feel sanitized. They've been scrubbed clean of everything that I found unique and interesting (and special) about them. They've lost the Realms flavor. Some of the names are stills the same, but they ring hallow. Waterdeep isn't the City of Splendors anymore, it's just another big, grimy fantasy city. It could easily be the City State of the Overlord or Lankmar.
I'd love to take up the Sage's challenge of taking the post-Spellplague Realms and re-flavoring it with pre-4E lore, but I'm bewildered for a place to start.
How do you add back the thyat magical feeling that we all know the Realms had? I can't even put my finger on what it was that made the Realms so special. I don't know what's missing, but I certainly lcan tell that it's gone from the FRCG. And I want it back!!!
The advice of other Realms fans is always a good place to start. What would you do to add back in that "magical feeling" to the 4E Realms? I'm not talking about changing the last 100 years of history - that's been set now and there's nothing we can do to change that. I really want gamers that are just being introduced to the Forgotten Realms to enjoy the same "magic" that I have for the past 20+ years.
How do we add back the good parts of the old Realms to what's been set before us? Any thoughts? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 18:41:57
quote:
Originally posted by Halidan
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't see much of a reason to go through all the trouble of 'converting' 1e/2e/3e FR material into 4e, because the thing that made FR so great was the fluff, which is really edition-neutral.
I think you misunderstand what I'm asking for help with Markustay. I'm not looking to convert 3+ editions of FR material to 4E. I'm asking what bits and pieces (or if you prefer what types of FR lore and fluff) need to be added to the descriptions in the FRCG to give the 4E Realms the same "magical feel" that the previous edition had?
Like it or not, the FRCS (and all 3.5 editions of previous FR material) are no long being printed. Even with the availabliity of pdf's and the collective knowledge of places like Candlekeep, that lore will become less and less accessible to the new FR gamer as time goes by.
I'm not satisfied with what's been presented in the FRCG. It's too sterile and washed clean of the old FR feeling. I just re-read the grey box set this weekend, and I'm more convinced than ever that the FRCG pales in comparision to it.
So, I'd like to figure out what needs to be added to the FRCG to allow it to give a better representation of the Realms we all know and love.
Well that is a tall order, but it is what Ed intends to tackle with his web articles. But with its 2 page spread format, even if we got one a week(which I think we may get 1 per month) it will take much more time than we all would like.
If I were you I would try to pick the brain of someone like Brian James as well on this subject, I know he is a bust man, but he knoews his stuff! |
| Halidan |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 18:38:11
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't see much of a reason to go through all the trouble of 'converting' 1e/2e/3e FR material into 4e, because the thing that made FR so great was the fluff, which is really edition-neutral.
I think you misunderstand what I'm asking for help with Markustay. I'm not looking to convert 3+ editions of FR material to 4E. I'm asking what bits and pieces (or if you prefer what types of FR lore and fluff) need to be added to the descriptions in the FRCG to give the 4E Realms the same "magical feel" that the previous edition had?
Like it or not, the FRCS (and all 3.5 editions of previous FR material) are no long being printed. Even with the availabliity of pdf's and the collective knowledge of places like Candlekeep, that lore will become less and less accessible to the new FR gamer as time goes by.
I'm not satisfied with what's been presented in the FRCG. It's too sterile and washed clean of the old FR feeling. I just re-read the grey box set this weekend, and I'm more convinced than ever that the FRCG pales in comparision to it.
So, I'd like to figure out what needs to be added to the FRCG to allow it to give a better representation of the Realms we all know and love. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 17:06:09
Don't mean to beat a dead horse, but seriously - it's MUCH easier to take the things you like in 4e and put them into the 3e world then the other way around.
If I use FR for gaming at all (and at this point, I'm still undecided weather to just walk away from FR as a game setting), I wil create an amalgam of the two, using all the old locales and descriptions from works like the Volo's Guides, and just sprinkling in some of the 4e stuff (Eminenece of Araunt, Warlock Knights, Genasi and Earthmotes, ect...).
The rules edition you use should not matter if you do this, because, seriously, do you really need stats for every shopkeep and Tavern owner? The old material has all the descriptive text you need to run interesting encounters, and any combat situations should be planned ahead with adversaries using the edition of preference.
I don't see much of a reason to go through all the trouble of 'converting' 1e/2e/3e FR material into 4e, because the thing that made FR so great was the fluff, which is really edition-neutral. |
| questing gm |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 06:49:52
quote:
Originally posted by Halidan
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Alright, folks, let's find our way back to the topic. 
Thanks Wooly. I was about to make this same plea myself, but I appreciate your assistance.
Folks - while I appreciate (and even agre with) many of the frustrations expressed about the FRCG, I really do want to work with this book. I may not like how the FRCG presents the post-Spellplague Realms, but for many new Realms fans, this book will be how they are now introduced to the Realms.
What my original post was trying to accomplish was to get the Realms fans and experts on this board to help me identify what needs to be added to the FRCG to give new FR gamers the same experience that the rest of us have enjoyed for 20+ years.
With the collective Realms knowledge on this forum, we should be able to figure out what suplimental information is needed to allow the currently missing "Realms magic" to spring forth from the FRCG. I really want folks who are now meeting the Realms for the first time to be able to experience this "magic." I just can't figure where to start. I'd really welcome your help.
I really admire and appreciate what you are trying to achieve with this and really wish you luck.
But I find this a very hard thing to do. I'm not so sure if we can still find traces of reliving the 'magic' of the old Realms because so much has changed and the way that the very magic itself worked has also dramatically changed. Maybe if we pin-pointed what exactly is this 'magic' you speak of then we can head towards a certain direction.
I do think that if we tried to find something that helps us get the 'exciting feeling' that we used to get from the old Realms, then i think that is plausible which involves a rewrite of how we are introduced to the Realms.
'Old Setting, New (exciting) Flavor,' of a sort.
I'm guessing that some of us are just bitter because we had to know what was being 'destroyed' for the new setting instead of concentrating on what's the new things about the Realms. I still haven't read the FRCG mind you, so maybe I'm just babbling what I don't know. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 04:14:21
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Which makes me wonder - wasn't Mystra in charge of all the connections between Toril and Temporal Prime?
Mystryl had the Time portfolio, but she really didn't do anything with it.
quote:
Without her, I'm wondering if anyone is monitoring the Timestream and keeping things right.
Amaunator of course. He misinterpreted another passage on another contract you see, and thus, thinks he's the "god of time" again. 
Somewhere, Labelas Enoreth must be laughing... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Sep 2008 : 01:12:07
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Don't you mean Mystryl? :)
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Mystra had the Time portfolio, but she really didn't do anything with it.
Aye. That's the one. Sorry, I was kinda already halfway to bed when I wrote that. It must've slipped my mind.  |
| Kuje |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 17:23:36
Don't you mean Mystryl? :)
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Mystra had the Time portfolio, but she really didn't do anything with it.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 17:20:33
LOL - I had forgotten about that.
I think Amaunator must use a devil for his attorney.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 17:15:34
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Which makes me wonder - wasn't Mystra in charge of all the connections between Toril and Temporal Prime?
Mystryl had the Time portfolio, but she really didn't do anything with it.
quote:
Without her, I'm wondering if anyone is monitoring the Timestream and keeping things right.
Amaunator of course. He misinterpreted another passage on another contract you see, and thus, thinks he's the "god of time" again. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 16:55:48
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
I am not so sure if Moander would have seized the opportunity to corrupt Tyche if the Dawn Cataclysm would not have occured at that time. After all, Lathander tried to get rit of some evil gods, most probably Moander, too, and he in retaliation attacked Lathander's love. But I am speculating.
I've not seen any indications that Moander had any personal stake in what was going on. It's certainly possible that he did, but in the absence of those indications, I think he simply saw a chance and took it. I also think he was likely waiting for such an opportunity, and it would have happened sooner or later regardless of what else was going on at the time. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 16:47:55
Which makes me wonder - wasn't Mystra in charge of all the connections between Toril and Temporal Prime?
Without her, I'm wondering if anyone is monitoring the Timestream and keeping things right. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 16:13:05
quote:
Originally posted by Christopher_Rowe
I wonder if in this case, "outside time" could be fairly taken as "whenever a Dungeon Master wants?"
That's a fair enough assumption, I think. Basically, in terms of Eric's theory, the Dawn Cataclysm *may* have occured outside the timestream and, thus, could not be properly dated. That pretty much leaves the door wide open for the DM to utilise the event when he/she wants.
|
| Christopher_Rowe |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 15:29:58
I wonder if in this case, "outside time" could be fairly taken as "whenever a Dungeon Master wants?" |
| Ayunken-vanzan |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 13:58:42
I am not so sure if Moander would have seized the opportunity to corrupt Tyche if the Dawn Cataclysm would not have occured at that time. After all, Lathander tried to get rit of some evil gods, most probably Moander, too, and he in retaliation attacked Lathander's love. But I am speculating. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 13:42:13
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The first Dawn Cataclysm is the oft-debated one that happened "outside of time", and presaged the fall of Myth Drannor. Murdane was slain during it, and it was at this time that Tyche split into Tymora and Beshaba (though this has no apparent connection to the Dawn Cataclysm).
"Tyche found herself embroiled, along with the rest of her circle of deities, in a war between the gods resulting from the actions of a current pararmour. Always fickle with her favor, Tyche kissed the Morninglord with misfortune and wandered off to explore the realms." (F&A, p 44) Then the attack of Moander occured.
Without Tyche's action Lathander's plan would probably have been successfull, and Moander's attack on her seems to be a maneuver of the aforementioned gods' war.
Moander didn't directly attack her, though. He noted that she had wandered off, and he put a rose in her path. She pluck the rose (poking herself on the thorns) and put it in her hair. From there, Moander was able to corrupt her. When Selūne saw that she had been corrupted, she zapped her and Tyche split.
So as I see it, it wasn't a result of the Dawn Cataclysm. Moander saw an opportunity and took it, and it just happened that this occurred during the DC. It wasn't a result of it, as Tyche could have wandered off at any time. |
| Ayunken-vanzan |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 06:17:11
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The first Dawn Cataclysm is the oft-debated one that happened "outside of time", and presaged the fall of Myth Drannor. Murdane was slain during it, and it was at this time that Tyche split into Tymora and Beshaba (though this has no apparent connection to the Dawn Cataclysm).
"Tyche found herself embroiled, along with the rest of her circle of deities, in a war between the gods resulting from the actions of a current pararmour. Always fickle with her favor, Tyche kissed the Morninglord with misfortune and wandered off to explore the realms." (F&A, p 44) Then the attack of Moander occured.
Without Tyche's action Lathander's plan would probably have been successfull, and Moander's attack on her seems to be a maneuver of the aforementioned gods' war. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 05:50:19
quote:
Originally posted by arry
The only thing that springs to mind is to reintroduce some of the excellent NPCs that Ed. Greenwood (& others) developed. Also I would suggest that you ignore the 'PCs are the most powerful people in the world' idea.
This is pretty much what I was going to say.
It was the hundreds of interesting people (NPCs) that made the Realms first come alive for me.
And the Intrigues are a big thing, too, for flavor. Re-establish some of them as being as poweful as pre-Spellplague, but now being much more covert about it (Like the Zentarim, Harpers, and Red Wizards).
Oh... and don't let all the 'new empires' eclipse the past ones. Ruins are what make the Realms the Realms, so focusing on 'Old Netheril' or ' Old Imaskar', rather then their born-again counterparts, is the way to give it some of that old-school feel. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 04:12:12
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
"Second" dawn cataclysm? I think my memory is failing... did F&P not refer to the Dawn Cataclysm as something to come? I don't remember about a "first" dawn cataclysm... although I seem to recall something about the gods not liking it...
I think the confusion stems from the fact that we don't have an official marking point on the timeline for the Dawn Cataclysm itself. Some indications suggest it occured in the past, and thus would establish your proposed idea as a *second* Dawn Cataclysm I suppose. If we take the "outside of the timeline" explanation offered by Eric Boyd for the Dawn Cataclysm, then the theory you propose would probably involve THE Dawn Catacylsm.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 04:10:40
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
"Second" dawn cataclysm? I think my memory is failing... did F&P not refer to the Dawn Cataclysm as something to come? I don't remember about a "first" dawn cataclysm... although I seem to recall something about the gods not liking it...
The first Dawn Cataclysm is the oft-debated one that happened "outside of time", and presaged the fall of Myth Drannor. Murdane was slain during it, and it was at this time that Tyche split into Tymora and Beshaba (though this has no apparent connection to the Dawn Cataclysm). We really don't know much more about it than that... But, going by a couple of tidbits and ignoring the "outside of time" explanation (which I have never liked), it's pretty much been narrowed down to having happened some time between 700 DR and 712 DR. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 03:48:44
"Second" dawn cataclysm? I think my memory is failing... did F&P not refer to the Dawn Cataclysm as something to come? I don't remember about a "first" dawn cataclysm... although I seem to recall something about the gods not liking it... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 Sep 2008 : 01:20:24
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight
Either that, or [booming deity voice begins]...... HAVE LATHANDER, IN THE FACE OF SUCH DESTRUCTION, AND OUT OF GENUINE FEARS THAT AUMANATOR IS ABOUT TO BUMP HIM OUT OF OFFICE, FINALLY INITIATE HIS DAWN CATACLYSM, ESSENTIALLY RESETTING THE REALMS TO 1373~ISH. yeah!
Using a second Dawn Cataclysm is an interesting idea for a reboot... Though it's hard to figure out how to do it in the Shattered Realms, since Lathander isn't around, then.
I think PDK was suggesting Lathander initiate a second Dawn Cataclysm before the aspect of Amaunator re-established itself. |
| Ayunken-vanzan |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 22:45:11
quote:
Originally posted by keijemon
I don't quite see what the hubbab is about. The old realms didn't go anywhere. You can still adventure there, you can easily apply new rules there (mostly patron deity name change is all you need). And you get great creative space trying to fill in the missing 100 years with adventures that would go through the motions as you would like them to appear. The old FR with all its history and characters didn't go anywhere, why is everyone acting like it did? Just stay in the past until the present gets more developed with novels and supplements.
Of course, the past didn't go anywhere, but they have robbed the future. Since they have ruined the realms, they would have to massively alter the changes introduced with 4e to make the present realms palatable. The 4e desaster banishes realms fans to the past and blocks them from the "realms" of the present or from getting new, official developments derived from the pre-1385 state of affairs. |
| keijemon |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 22:21:21
I don't quite see what the hubbab is about. The old realms didn't go anywhere. You can still adventure there, you can easily apply new rules there (mostly patron deity name change is all you need). And you get great creative space trying to fill in the missing 100 years with adventures that would go through the motions as you would like them to appear. The old FR with all its history and characters didn't go anywhere, why is everyone acting like it did? Just stay in the past until the present gets more developed with novels and supplements.
Or are there people in your houses holding guns to your heads, telling you that you can only use 4e rules in 4e FRCG setting? |
| arry |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 21:22:38
The only thing that springs to mind is to reintroduce some of the excellent NPCs that Ed. Greenwood (& others) developed. Also I would suggest that you ignore the 'PCs are the most powerful people in the world' idea. |
| Halidan |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 20:35:33
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Alright, folks, let's find our way back to the topic.
Thanks Wooly. I was about to make this same plea myself, but I appreciate your assistance.
Folks - while I appreciate (and even agre with) many of the frustrations expressed about the FRCG, I really do want to work with this book. I may not like how the FRCG presents the post-Spellplague Realms, but for many new Realms fans, this book will be how they are now introduced to the Realms.
What my original post was trying to accomplish was to get the Realms fans and experts on this board to help me identify what needs to be added to the FRCG to give new FR gamers the same experience that the rest of us have enjoyed for 20+ years.
With the collective Realms knowledge on this forum, we should be able to figure out what suplimental information is needed to allow the currently missing "Realms magic" to spring forth from the FRCG. I really want folks who are now meeting the Realms for the first time to be able to experience this "magic." I just can't figure where to start. I'd really welcome your help. |
| Lemernis |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 20:28:56
I like to approach the Realms as offering an unfixed future from whatever point the DM wishes to begin a campaign. This is what we did at the NWN2 PW project referenced in my sig. We started with Amn in late 1370, the nation rocked back on its heels by the shocking invasion of the Sythillisian Empire, and let the story unfold from there. Events then have unfolded irrespective of the official canon that has been laid down since from WotC. Consider it an alternative future.
I have no interest at all in the 4th edition Forgotten Realms. So for me the Realms will always live vibrantly in my imagination prior to 4th edition. And players will interact with it as a blank slate from whenever we begin the adventure. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 20:05:23
Alright, folks, let's find our way back to the topic. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 18:55:37
quote:
Originally posted by Kiaransalyn
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I bought a Pet Rock too, when they came out in the 70's.
Pet Rocks?
You mean people sold rocks and other people bought them as pets. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, but rather a lot of you on the West side of the Atlantic are a bit odd at times.
Hmmmmm.....could there be any odd likes on the left side of the pond???
No chance.....except who is that German Rock Star who no one hear can understand why?.....
David Hasslehoff,
if your fellow Germans can make him an uber-star, I think you can forgive us our pet rocks!!   |
| Kiaransalyn |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 18:51:24
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I am equally amazed at Amy Winehouse (as are most Americans).
My Pet Rock is far more attractive, in SO many ways.
You make a fair point. I'm not quite sure what Amy Winehouse is supposed to be apart from a total mess. It's well known that the lass likes a drink or two. I was recently in England for a holiday and apparently she is the celebrity most people have nightmares about. Which makes sense to me. I wouldn't want to wake in the middle of the night and find her standing at the foot of my bed. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 31 Aug 2008 : 17:53:31
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
quote:
Originally posted by Kiaransalyn
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I bought a Pet Rock too, when they came out in the 70's.
Pet Rocks?
You mean people sold rocks and other people bought them as pets. I'm sorry, I don't mean to be offensive, but rather a lot of you on the West side of the Atlantic are a bit odd at times.
Sometimes I am quite amazed at this fountain of wisdom.
I am equally amazed at Amy Winehouse (as are most Americans).
My Pet Rock is far more attractive, in SO many ways. |
|
|
