| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| paladincarvin |
Posted - 05 Feb 2009 : 00:05:11
Well met; first post.
I've been looking here and this seems to confirm what I've felt, for the most part. People are generally upset about 4th FR. I am too. But, rather than complain or join the strife I thought I would do what is core to D&D: Create.
I have decided to create a community project; a wiki. It will be a collection of an alternate history of the realms. The timeline splits at the end of 1373 DR (The Year of Rogue Dragons). The core change? The Book of Black does not exist. At least, it is fairly consistent with that idea. The rest is up to whomever takes up the pen. But check it out for yourself.
Beside an obvious plug, I am curious about a more general reaction. Even if you have no desire to contribute I'd like to hear what you think. If you have very core ideas (this must go, this was a good idea) that is good too; I want a realms that is consistent and that is hard to do with one perspective.
Warning: Please, NO ONE impede on anyone's way they play. The entire purpose of this project is to create a better campaign for some people to play. What is better in the eye of the beholder and casts a 30 foot cone of anti-magic. Wait... well, anyway. I expect this standard from any side of the debate.
Mod Edit: Removed web address. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 13:48:01
At least you didn't say "maybe she could give me a hand with that".  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 22:46:38
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You've forgotten already?
It wasn't a '900' number... you recall we joked (at WotC, IIRC) about your having an '800' number, and I said every time I called it you would 'talk dirty' to me? 
Probably the last time I had a real 'spit-take' on my monitor. 
That's right. "Realms dirty talk." I was meant to ask Ed what that'd be like. Maybe the Lady Hooded One could help out.  |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 20:13:22
-Markus did you take your meds today? 
BRIMSTONE |
| Markustay |
Posted - 10 Feb 2009 : 17:51:08
quote:
Originally posted by Kiaransalyn
Well after Mark convincing me about the Spellplague I took GHotR of the shelf and flicked through the dreaded final pages, which convinced me to return to my original position. So now I agree with you. The Spellplague and some of the events of the years preceding it never happened in my Realms.
I'm not trying to sway anyone to my own way of thinking - I was just sharing my thoughts on the matter.
The way I look at it, everyone that died and everthing that was changed by those final few entries - they all make EXCELLENT fodder for a campaign! Gods have died and come back aplenty in FR - Bane, Moander, Mystra, Tiamet, Orcus.. well he's a Demon, but you get the idea...
That means we have a wonderful precedent for gods returning, and I think a conspiracy by Derro/Duergar to bring back those 'fallen deities' would be kinda cool... and as for Mystra... her dying has become a staple of FR! Nothing new there - just get your players up to epic levels by 1385 DR and have them recue her, or bring her back.
Its like the old saying goes - "Reports of my death are greatly exaggerated"
Just because you accept the GhotR as canon doesn't mean you can't do some really fun stuff to change it back to what you like. 
Don't hate the lore - use it. 
I don't know if it was this thread or another, but I made a point about the Realms being officially 'pushing-forward' at the rate of one game year to 2.5 real years, so that from 1375 DR we have ten years of game-time, meaning that you have another Twentyfive years of gaming in 3e before you even need consider the Spellplague happening! 
Now, apply that to my view that the GhotR is just the "common knowledge" of what went down (with little or no details), its easy to do what you want and keep who you want - wouldn't it be just like some sneaky god to fake their own death, to avoid really being destroyed? That sounds like a damn good plothook to me.
Come a Toril: 1386 - Year One campaign, all those gods that 'died' can all come back, and between the spellplague and all the other madness going on, you can spin it all anyway you like. In fact, not knowing which gods are really alive and which are dead - or even which were really other gods all along (if you go in for that sort of thing) makes the campaign even less predictable, which is why I like the idea of a 'lost Century' campaign - No rules (literally!), and all bets are off. The Spellplague allows you to basically re-write FR the way YOU want it to be, not the way a bunch of corporate muckity-mucks wanted it.
Ignore 4e, but don't ignore the Spellplague - rarely in an official setting do we ever get to "write our own ticket". In fact, the greatest irony of all is that the 'missing century' better accomplishes the goals of the FR design team then 4th edition EVER could - the 'feelings of entitlement' are non-existant... even 4eFR can't claim that.
It HAS lore.
If you want your players COMPLETELY in the dark - which is the stated goal of 4e - then nothing is better then having them wake-up the morning of the 1st of hammer, in 1386 DR. Despite claims to the contrary, 4e still has pre-conceptions. The 'Plague Years' have NONE.
quote:
Originally posted by Uzzy
Markus has a good idea with starting straight after 1385 DR, but I'd miss Alusair's ruling of Cormyr, Eilistraee, Mystra, Helm, the independent Sembia, Mask etc. Too much is lost in the years between 1374 DR and 1385 DR to make it worthwhile.
And, as I've said, you have 25 years of wonderful gaming ahead of you before you even get there... if thats what you prefer.
When WotC hands you Lemons... make Hard Cider.
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
I've a 'Hot Line' number? Cool!
You've forgotten already?
It wasn't a '900' number... you recall we joked (at WotC, IIRC) about your having an '800' number, and I said every time I called it you would 'talk dirty' to me?
Probably the last time I had a real 'spit-take' on my monitor. |
| paladincarvin |
Posted - 09 Feb 2009 : 19:32:05
Kiaran: First, being a Lewis Theologian, I too appreciate many of the old gods (especially the Norse). Tyr doesn't bother me so much since he seems to have a flavor to himself. He's also the only one, which isn't as much trouble. He also isn't so tied to his origin or to a specific geography. I think especially if Mulhurand is supposed to be part of Faerun that their gods should be in the pantheon too- they can fight for their profiles just like everyone else.
Uzzy: I like much of what I see past Dragon, but it's something that shouldn't be hamfisted.
Nerfed: Agreed |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 08 Feb 2009 : 01:03:20
Yeah... hasn't Cormyr been ignored enough? |
| Uzzy |
Posted - 07 Feb 2009 : 22:36:30
I prefer going the route of ignoring everything after the last Sourcebook printed for the Realms, which was, if I remember right, Dragon's of Faerún. Mainly because everything after that is just silly.
Markus has a good idea with starting straight after 1385 DR, but I'd miss Alusair's ruling of Cormyr, Eilistraee, Mystra, Helm, the independent Sembia, Mask etc. Too much is lost in the years between 1374 DR and 1385 DR to make it worthwhile. |
| Kiaransalyn |
Posted - 07 Feb 2009 : 05:08:30
quote:
Originally posted by paladincarvin
Third, I will note that I am somewhat inspired by Hoar. Personally, he's one of my favourite deities. I like that he hopped pantheons and became much more interesting. Pantheon merging isn't too much of a problem to me and can pump up the concept of a deity (it worked well for Tiamat too). I think it would be a great thing to do to the Mulhurandi pantheon I think, but I'd have to get a feel for what other people think. I have never liked them; it felt cheesy when I found out they existed in the realms.
I don't mind too much on deities becoming adopted by other pantheons. That has happened in the real world. Usually, the deity's name changes slightly as does their portfolio.
The Mulhorandi pantheon do jar a little since they are so clearly based on the Egyptian pantheon. Yet, the fact they are there opens new areas of role-play. It suggests there are ways between our world and Toril.
Tyr's presence jars a little too. Mostly because I know people for whom the Norse pantheon are still worthy of worship. I once offered a small ritual to Thor to bring rain and break a heatwave, and he very kindly obliged.
In the end though, I would sooner the rich diversity of deities is retained since this is definitely a positive attribute of the Realms. |
| paladincarvin |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 18:06:25
Woo- quite a bit of stuff.
First, thank you Sage for returning the scroll to the original topic. : )
Second, I also dislike the thinning of the dwarf pantheon, but mostly on principle. I don't think I've ever seen or used a character with a dwarven god (even Moradin) in my time of playing and DMing in the Realms. I still don't like the idea. Some of the finer points of why the god crusade would be against dwarven policy have already been mentioned, but just blasting through pantheons is a bad idea.
Third, I will note that I am somewhat inspired by Hoar. Personally, he's one of my favourite deities. I like that he hopped pantheons and became much more interesting. Pantheon merging isn't too much of a problem to me and can pump up the concept of a deity (it worked well for Tiamat too). I think it would be a great thing to do to the Mulhurandi pantheon I think, but I'd have to get a feel for what other people think. I have never liked them; it felt cheesy when I found out they existed in the realms.
Forth, like I've said, I hope the changes I make don't just 'erase' events, but alter them slightly. I think that not only is 'erasing' events so easy it's not worth making a wiki for, but it's a lack of creativity (further reason why it wouldn't worth writing down).
Mournblade: The link is in my sig, please go ahead and make some comments or posts regarding to what you want to work on. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 17:08:28
I am interested in this...
but I think Mystra should be saved. I think the killers of Mystra should be caught or stopped somehow.
I have figured that Cyric is still going to be imprisoned because he was captured.
I would love to contribute to a community effort on this.
|
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:53:50
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I personally wanted EVERYTHING in the Grand History of the Realms to be canon, and everything after that to be changed, and have the new campaign start as of 1386 DR.
-Everything up until the old "present", 1,375 DR, you mean. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:50:38
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't hear a lot of complaints about the Dwarven down-sizing, so that could probably stand as-is
Actually, I'm pretty sure I did, but then again, with the whole mess of other changes and "explanations" that came along, those are almost tame in comparison.
Seconded, count me as another person who liked the dwarven gods the way they were. They are all still alive in my Realms.
Just in case anyone was wondering, the culling of the dwarven deities was one of the many things I disliked on the last page or two of the GHotR. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:35:10
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't hear a lot of complaints about the Dwarven down-sizing, so that could probably stand as-is
Actually, I'm pretty sure I did, but then again, with the whole mess of other changes and "explanations" that came along, those are almost tame in comparison.
Seconded, count me as another person who liked the dwarven gods the way they were. They are all still alive in my Realms. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:34:33
As much as I dislike many of the changes made in the last page or so of the GHotR, I actually agree with Markus on this one. Since it is the last of the 3.x products for the Realms, it provides a clean break point. Especially since this was before they decided to make so many racial deities aspect of human deities. That bit just infuriates me, I think more than anything else about the 4e Realms.
I actually find it kind of ironic, because originally (as in right after the announcement of 4e and that the Realms was going to be the first setting converted to the new system) I was going to buy all of 4e Realms products for the lore even though I was not going to buy any of the 4e Core books. But then they told me what they were going to do to the Realms. And then they lost me as a customer of their 4e products all together. Now if they had been less hamfisted and more logical in their implementation of the 4e Realms, then there is a good chance I would have eventually bought into the 4e rules set because of the Realms. But because of what they did to the Realms, I actually have only bought 1 new WotC product in the past year-and-a-half, and that was a 3.5e supplement (Elder Evils). |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:12:52
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone-Now I really dont care what Markus says about you Sage.
SAY WHAT?! 
Trouble maker! <where's our 'Razz' smiley?>
I would never insult a fellow comic book and Doctor Who enthusiast!
Besides... I still have his 'Hot Line' number. 
I've a 'Hot Line' number? Cool!
...
And, now, since I've just realised that I'm partially to blame for this recent bout of "off-topicness," I think we should all probably head back to the topic of the scroll.
1-900-SAGE-4YOU
Now I will veer back to topic! |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 16:10:42
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by ranger_of_the_unicorn_run
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-Markus you mentioned Giant Psionic Catfish, count me in dude. Now all I need is a tentacled smilie and I will be set!
BRIMSTONE
Yes! There needs to be a Cthulhu smilie!
-I agree.
BRIMSTONE
Actually, I've long been compiling a list of emoticons for Alaundo to include in Candlekeep 2. A Cthulhu smilie was among the first I included.
After flipping through Plague of Spells and passing on it, I will make a $$$ donation to Candlekeep 2 to prevent any more Lovecraft creeping in
P.S. I want a Bearded Ed Greenwood Smiley instead!! |
| Kajehase |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 11:24:18
The worst thing that should happen to a deity is to be so diminished that an attempt to visit the Material Plane will lock them there in the shape of a small snapping turtle or similar-sized creature. |
| Kiaransalyn |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 10:56:20
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't hear a lot of complaints about the Dwarven down-sizing, so that could probably stand as-is, and all of the other "this god was really that god all along" nonsense was all 4e - never mentioned in the GHotR!
No, I hate the down-sizing of the Dwarven deities. That hasn't happened in my Realms either. Although, I like the idea of the duergar deities returning to the fold.
I'm just against dead deities in general. Deities are deities. Their worship might decline, they might even be just the deity of a well or a genius loci but they are still deities.
Deep Duerra and Laduguer are still alive...[Rant continues for several hours]
So, I for one, am against Dwarven down-sizing. After all, they're short enough already. |
| Kiaransalyn |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 10:47:24
quote:
Originally posted by paladincarvin
Kiara: I agree with the idea that some of the last official 3.5 canon was geared for 4th edition. The spellplague is needed for a solid 4th edition game. That is why the date I am using is not that far ahead. There are good ideas in there, but the whole thing is pretty difficult to swallow; thus the timeline.
Well after Mark convincing me about the Spellplague I took GHotR of the shelf and flicked through the dreaded final pages, which convinced me to return to my original position. So now I agree with you. The Spellplague and some of the events of the years preceding it never happened in my Realms. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 08:09:53
-
BRIMSTONE |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 06:45:56
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
And, now, since I've just realised that I'm partially to blame for this recent bout of "off-topicness," I think we should all probably head back to the topic of the scroll.
See! It's not just me!
*runs and hides* |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 04:58:30
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone-Now I really dont care what Markus says about you Sage.
SAY WHAT?!
Trouble maker! <where's our 'Razz' smiley?>
I would never insult a fellow comic book and Doctor Who enthusiast!
Besides... I still have his 'Hot Line' number.
I've a 'Hot Line' number? Cool!
...
And, now, since I've just realised that I'm partially to blame for this recent bout of "off-topicness," I think we should all probably head back to the topic of the scroll.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 04:37:36
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone-Now I really dont care what Markus says about you Sage.
SAY WHAT?!
Trouble maker! <where's our 'Razz' smiley?>
I would never insult a fellow comic book and Doctor Who enthusiast!
Besides... I still have his 'Hot Line' number. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 04:14:50
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by ranger_of_the_unicorn_run
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-Markus you mentioned Giant Psionic Catfish, count me in dude. Now all I need is a tentacled smilie and I will be set!
BRIMSTONE
Yes! There needs to be a Cthulhu smilie!
-I agree.
BRIMSTONE
Actually, I've long been compiling a list of emoticons for Alaundo to include in Candlekeep 2. A Cthulhu smilie was among the first I included.
-Now I really dont care what Markus says about you Sage. (J/K) You are alright in my book!
BRIMSTONE |
| Matt James |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 03:20:08
If you guys need any help, let me know. I do this kind of stuff for a living (technical guru) ;) |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 02:37:19
quote:
Originally posted by ranger_of_the_unicorn_run
So, a little off topic, but what is this Candlekeep 2? Is it Candlekeep with more features, or a different organization of the lore, or something very different?
Candlekeep 2 is, essentially, an update and re-structuring of the existing Candlekeep format. It'll include both new forum software features and aspects of the entire interactive community process here at Candlekeep.
We're presently determining how the organisation of the boards will be carried out for the update, as well as what new options, if any, need to be included.
|
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 01:54:34
-The "updated" layout, programming, etc. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 01:20:52
So, a little off topic, but what is this Candlekeep 2? Is it Candlekeep with more features, or a different organization of the lore, or something very different? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 00:56:06
I'm intending on making it available here at Candlekeep in the near-future, so that scribes can also add their own selections for emoticons that Alaundo could, theoretically, include on Candlekeep 2. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 06 Feb 2009 : 00:37:21
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Actually, I've long been compiling a list of emoticons for Alaundo to include in Candlekeep 2. A Cthulhu smilie was among the first I included.
Would you have a list somewhere of the proposed smilies, or is this a secret?  |
|
|
