| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Apex |
Posted - 16 Apr 2009 : 18:34:01
With the time jump in 4th edition and the presumably drying up of older timeline info, has the Realms that most of us here enjoy been essentially frozen in time? My personal Realms has been frozen in 2nd edition (since I never accepted 3rd or the RSE's of that era as D&D or canon), but now with the huge time jump and many old fans alienated, has the Realms truly froze for everyone here? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Uzzy |
Posted - 09 Jun 2009 : 18:01:24
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I play and run in 4e. I've taken the changes introduced with this latest edition just like I have with every single major change in the Realms over the years; for what it is. I've never allowed myself to get so enameled with the setting that it compromises my fun and enjoyment of Faerun. I accept that things have changed and that more will change in the future.
An interesting sentiment. Unfortunately for me, many of the things that changed about the Realms between 3e and 4e ended up removing many of the things I had fun with and enjoyed. So you can imagine that I ignore most of what 4th Edition's brought.
My own game is frozen around 1374 DR, with several changes (No Elven Crusade, for instance) |
| Snowblood |
Posted - 09 Jun 2009 : 15:34:20
My current capmpaign is set during the arcane age of 714+ in an area of the realms where only a light history has ben written and we know it comes to a crashing end in 882 so we have no problems mucking around in the past....1479 pfft!!!!!! |
| Eye of Horus-Re |
Posted - 20 Apr 2009 : 18:12:10
I think most of us are enameled :) with the Realms. I did get the same feeling that it was generic Barshevy. Capnvan.....Fantastic. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Apr 2009 : 03:05:06
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
I was wondering about the "enameled" bit, myself...
Did you mean "enamored?"
I assume he did. But that particular typo was too much fun to overlook!  |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 20 Apr 2009 : 02:26:25
I was wondering about the "enameled" bit, myself...
Did you mean "enamored?" |
| coach |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 23:35:18
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I play and run in 4e. I've taken the changes introduced with this latest edition just like I have with every single major change in the Realms over the years; for what it is. I've never allowed myself to get so enameled with the setting that it compromises my fun and enjoyment of Faerun. I accept that things have changed and that more will change in the future.
Enameled? How does one get enameled?
don't know, but I'd bet it hurts to take off |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 22:38:55
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I play and run in 4e. I've taken the changes introduced with this latest edition just like I have with every single major change in the Realms over the years; for what it is. I've never allowed myself to get so enameled with the setting that it compromises my fun and enjoyment of Faerun. I accept that things have changed and that more will change in the future.
Enameled? How does one get enameled? |
| Matt James |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 16:42:28
I play and run in 4e. I've taken the changes introduced with this latest edition just like I have with every single major change in the Realms over the years; for what it is. I've never allowed myself to get so enameled with the setting that it compromises my fun and enjoyment of Faerun. I accept that things have changed and that more will change in the future. |
| Barshevy |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 12:59:46
I'm participating in the RPGA / Living Realms games. 4E is enjoyable in its own way (it is a very different beast than the previous editions.) But the new Realms feels like a generic setting. |
| arry |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 12:44:12
quote:
Originally posted by coach
I enjoy 3.5 ruleset and 2e lore and that is mainly what we play
Me too  |
| Quale |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 11:12:14
the usual starting point of my campaigns is the Cloak and Dagger, wish most of the events after never happened to the Realms |
| Neil Bishop |
Posted - 19 Apr 2009 : 05:29:09
My current plan is to continue learning the 4E rules while DMing in the 4E Realms but having much of the changes as a mystery (and the bizarre love triangle simply does not, has not, and will not ever exist- that, simply put, was one of the most stupid ideas that has ever seen print).
In due course, I will return to 1372 DR most likely using the 4E rules but, with some experience under my belt, a better sense of how to convert things like the Shadow Weave, the elven sub-races etc....
For me, anything after 1372 DR simply does not exist. I hate most of what the novels have done to "my" Realms and so I just ignore them completely (that said, I think the actual authors themselves have done a great job- with the exception of Bruce Cordell [and he has potential once he realises that most people don't like sci-fi and FR to be mixed... and that "Kane" and its variants is the most overused name of all time], I think the actual authors are uniformly excellent as writers).
In a sense I am glad that the "real" Realms has effectively died. There is less to ignore and more for my players to shape. I just hope we will see the rest of the Border Kingdoms articles and also the Phlan web enhancement so that FR canon can be "complete". |
| Zanan |
Posted - 18 Apr 2009 : 21:48:06
We started a 3,5E Realms campaign near the eve of 4E and once I knew more about the Spellplague and what the 4E Realms will look like, I placed my campaign (good old Night Below of Carl Sargent) exactly at 1200 D.R.. Lots of Nar and Rhaumatari lore involved, Rashemar Witches even ... and, of course, Ibrandul as a deity of the Underdark as such very much alive.
When I look to my left, about 30 3.xE books (FR and rules that is) stand on the shelves, not to mention the good old AD&D FR books and PDFs (free WotC downloads). I had a glance at the 4E Realms and to me they are just another Eberron. As in: another setting to play in. Yet, not my setting. So in this respect .... Freeze, 4E FR Freeze!
Because these green hills are not Highland hills,
Or the island hills,
They're not my land's hills.
And fair as these green foreign hills may be,
They are not the hills of home!
|
| Mr_Miscellany |
Posted - 18 Apr 2009 : 19:48:21
I run two Realms games: One is a 3E game that's been going since the Third Edition D&D core rulebooks were released (nine or so years) and has covered about four years of game time in the Realms.
The other is a 4E Realms game that we started up when the Fourth Edition core rulebooks were released.
I take all the ups and downs of the setting and roll with it as I see fit.
One thing I've found that makes my 4E game more lively and easier to run are the many changes made to magic, the various races and the geography post-Spellplague. During play I'm able to contrast how things are now with how they were prior to the Spellplague. This gives my game a more immediate sense of history and scale, and keeps it right in line with the general concept of deep history that pervades my 3.5 Realms game and the setting in general. |
| coach |
Posted - 18 Apr 2009 : 15:16:44
I enjoy 3.5 ruleset and 2e lore and that is mainly what we play
I am not freezing My Realms
playing in 1372
as for disliked 3e RSE's I take them as canon and make a plot for the players to "fix" them (i.e. Shade is in but they have been pummeled to the point to where they simply can't/don't seek to expand their empire)
just going REAL slow now, which adds more detail and depth anyways
i can see never getting past 1385 but that is 13 DR years for us and I can see that taking 26 RL years at a 1:2 pace |
| BlackAce |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 23:44:38
I don't think any canon events have made it into my Realms since 1372. They've all blown chunks. 
Don't even get me started on the huge bouts of brainless deicide.
|
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 21:17:30
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Not only did my Realms "freeze" at the end of 1374, but there are several events from before that date that I don't accept as they are, if at all (the reestablished Myth Drannor, for example).
That's actually one of the few 3E things I accept... Though the end result would be a well-fortified stronghold in Myth Drannor, with years of work ahead to pacify the entire city, and decades longer for it to return to being a viable city.
True. Even if I did accept that event in my Realms, I agree that restoring Myth Drannor would take a lot longer and probably would be a lot more complicated. |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 20:42:56
quote:
Originally posted by Eye of Hores-Re
Rabiesbunny, and Ashe.....Hit it on the head. I just started posting to this board this week, and I must say I am pleased to see that I am not the only one doing exactly what you guys are (for the most part) My Realms will stay in the 1350-1390 area. My group plays 3.5e. The stuff these guys came up with (at Wiz) is so proposterous I cant even formulate a comment on it. Though the 1 thing from 3e that I did not employ was Halaster biting the big one. If this happened why hasnt Waterdeep been consumed by the hordes of Undermountain?
Actually, my hubby Raith and I have had several long discussions about the whole halaster thing. Grand History of the Realms is helpful up until about 1373, then it starts tossing in things that seem to be a precursor to 4e. Unfortunately, Halaster is one of these things. As far as I'm concerned, so is the killing os Scyllua (sp?) Darkhope by a party of four adventurers for a convenient module. I found that to be a BIG point of rage, actually.
Wow, I'm off topic. Apologies, it's nice outside, I'm stuck at work, and getting chatty fast.
;) And welcome to the boards! |
| Eye of Horus-Re |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 20:23:14
Rabiesbunny, and Ashe.....Hit it on the head. I just started posting to this board this week, and I must say I am pleased to see that I am not the only one doing exactly what you guys are (for the most part) My Realms will stay in the 1350-1390 area. My group plays 3.5e. The stuff these guys came up with (at Wiz) is so proposterous I cant even formulate a comment on it. Though the 1 thing from 3e that I did not employ was Halaster biting the big one. If this happened why hasnt Waterdeep been consumed by the hordes of Undermountain? |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 19:21:11
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Both their names start with Ty-... Duh! They must be soul-mates! 
..actually, that fits right into 4e logic.
 I think you're on to something! |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 18:50:47
quote:
Originally posted by Rabiesbunny
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
If anything, I would be most likely to omit the Tyr/Tymora/Helm love triangle. Not because Helm dies, but because it felt the most contrived (IMO, of many contrived plots at the end there).
Not to derail the topic, but I wholeheartedly agree. Lawful god of justice jumps to conclusions over an extremely chaotic female he is somehow enamored with, and kills lawful god of duty, the only god loyal enough that ao himself allowed him to remain a god during the Time of Troubles, because you think he is macking on your woman.
Your chaotic woman.
How did they even come up with that one?
Both their names start with Ty-... Duh! They must be soul-mates! |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 18:46:15
quote:
Originally posted by HawkinstheDM
If anything, I would be most likely to omit the Tyr/Tymora/Helm love triangle. Not because Helm dies, but because it felt the most contrived (IMO, of many contrived plots at the end there).
Not to derail the topic, but I wholeheartedly agree. Lawful god of justice jumps to conclusions over an extremely chaotic female he is somehow enamored with, and kills lawful god of duty, the only god loyal enough that ao himself allowed him to remain a god during the Time of Troubles, because you think he is macking on your woman.
Your chaotic woman.
How did they even come up with that one? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 18:20:01
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Not only did my Realms "freeze" at the end of 1374, but there are several events from before that date that I don't accept as they are, if at all (the reestablished Myth Drannor, for example).
That's actually one of the few 3E things I accept... Though the end result would be a well-fortified stronghold in Myth Drannor, with years of work ahead to pacify the entire city, and decades longer for it to return to being a viable city. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 18:00:59
Not only did my Realms "freeze" at the end of 1374, but there are several events from before that date that I don't accept as they are, if at all (the reestablished Myth Drannor, for example). |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 16:04:33
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
As far as I'm concerned, everything up until the end of 3e - 1385 DR - is canon, which means all the events in the GHotRs are canon.
No 'future lore' effects me at all, and how I 'spin' all the various events may be very different then how we 'know' they turned out in 1479. The GHotR was so vague on so many of those 'end-of-days' entries that we have a lot of leeway as to the story behind them (and weather the outcomes were real, or merely how things were perceived by most folks).
So yeah... the Realms goes on, but there is no more 'canon' to intefere with MY setting, which is a good thing, considering all the utter garbage that was happening the last few years (both RW and FR). I no longer have to worry about the next 'kewl RSE' nuking my storylines.
I actually agree with MT here. But I did not begin buying Realms accessories until 3e (even though I have been reading the novels for 15 years). If anything, I would be most likely to omit the Tyr/Tymora/Helm love triangle. Not because Helm dies, but because it felt the most contrived (IMO, of many contrived plots at the end there). |
| Chosen of Moradin |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 15:44:45
I DM basically in the 1368-1372 period of time. My actual East campaign will migrate to the 4th (Rules, the rules, not the setting!!!) in the end of the campaign, and some of the players want to play with their "second generation", so I´m preparing something to my 1392 Realms  |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 15:38:17
I run 3e and use most of the canon timeline (the valid complaint of most scribes regarding 3e- 'an RSE a week' I am using as a baseline to prep my players for the return of an Elder Evil... all the 3e RSEs are harbingers of it's coming, IMC). Having said that, I'm playing in 1373, and have been in that year for over a year IRL, despite playing weekly. I (and my players) are detail-oriented, and don't cover much more time IG than is spent IRL. As such, I can't imagine running out of 'old' stuff to play with, despite my abhorrence of everything Wizbro has tried to sell me under $e. Even were I to run out, I'd just take any of the (literally) hundreds of unfinished plot-strands and make up my own outcomes for them. The Realms will only 'freeze' when we, as DMs and players, stop caring about them. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 15:30:45
I'm unfond of the whole period when events were dominated by the books department's whims and 'clever' (misguided) ideas: I find it so much less appealing and credible than the preceding decades, so the 1340s and 1350s DR are my Realms 'now' (though I like and use many ideas and elements that turned up in later-set works). The 4E shenanigans seem to me just a ramping-up of designing-according-to-other-things-than-the-Realms that has been happening at least since 1989 and which Faraer has railed against since he turned up. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 14:19:59
quote:
Originally posted by Tyr
I think it seems everyone who doesn't like 4e stopped at the 3e boundary, although I have to say that the most detailed period was 2e by far.
I'm more like Ghost King. There are a few 3E events I liked, but not all of them... If I was running a Realms campaign, I'd set it right before 3E came out. That way, I could use what I liked of 3E and ignore the rest. |
| Gelcur |
Posted - 17 Apr 2009 : 14:14:36
My current campaign, 3E, started in 1364 DR and I actually like a lot of the events that occurred 3E lore. This should hold my group over for countless years. It's taken us 4 years running pretty much weekly to make it through 1 FR year. At a minimum even if we pick up to a fast clip of 1:1 we still got a good 10+ years of content.
Now that's not to say I wouldn't love more details on places that have been left empty. And interconnections are always awesome. Honestly I see a larger demand in the future put on poor Ed by users who want info on parts of the FR from the past that will never get covered in source books now. |
