| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 30 Aug 2010 : 23:35:36
Hey all,
I posted this article over at the WotC boards (http://community.wizards.com/bookclub/blog/2010/08/30/fire_the_canon!), but thought you guys might like it too. So here we go:
The story
Once upon a time, there was a land called the Forgotten Realms, which was rich with heroes and villains and neutral-aligned characters of ambiguous morality who *did things.*
These things were recorded in sourcebooks, novels, and even video games, and were determined “canonical”--i.e. they truly happened in the Forgotten Realms. These characters (created by authors such as the prodigiously bearded Ed of the Greenwood, the deadly Bob “Twin Scimitars” Salvatore, the mysterious Paul “Shadows” Kemp, and so on and so forth) respectively righted wrongs, wronged rights, or maintained their list of gray hero/villain uncertainty traits through many a tale. In this way, they filled out a rich fantasy setting, which--like all settings in every sort of genre of entertainment there is--required characters and stories to do exactly that.
But a storm was brewing on the horizon. Thousands upon thousands of gamers were visiting this marvelous world on a regular basis, and a growing displeasure swept through them. They believed that these heroes, villains, and dodgy characters of illegible intention were, as it were, stealing their thunder. For in a setting with so many powerful characters, how could they get anything done?
They wanted *their* heroes to *do things* that Elminster, Drizzt, Erevis Cale, and so many others were already doing.
And so the great canon wars began.
The Dilemma
Much has been made over the years of Forgotten Realms canon (or pick your setting!), and specifically how it applies to your home FR game, and one of the major *criticisms* of the setting (and one of the suggested reasons for the 3e to 4e shakeup) has to do with canon itself.
Specifically, it was that canonical characters—usually novel characters such as Drizzt, Elminster, the Seven Sisters, etc.—with their power and influence, seemed to be the primary movers and shakers of the setting. The perception was there was nothing for the PCs to do in the Realms, because the novel characters were doing it all already. And since the novels are considered canonical, that adds to the perception that the events of the novels have to guide their game.
This, as I see it, is a false perception, but we’ll get there.
The struggle between sourcebooks, novels, and home games has always been going on, and *will* always go on. How you deal with it, however, is entirely up to you, and what I hope to do in this article is offer some insights into how you can reconcile things the best way for your game. Because it’s really all about having fun, isn’t it?
The Central Problem
The basic problem is this: I write something in one of my Forgotten Realms novels that affects your game in some way, either major or minor, and you have two options: 1) ignore it or 2) incorporate it.
Seems like an easy choice, but there are variables to consider--particularly if you pride yourself on “being canonical.”
For instance, I write that there is an organization called the Eye of Justice (hardcore shadowy paladin vigilantes) that operates out of Westgate (dodgy “sin city” in the Realms) and played a major role in the elimination of the Night Masks (a vampire thieves guild, formerly of Westgate). This shows up in my most recent novel Downshadow, my forthcoming novel Shadowbane, and a DDI article I published in Dungeon called, well, “The Eye of Justice.” And who knows? It might be in more stuff.
Trouble is, you don’t like it. Or it doesn’t fit into your game. Or—even more dire—what if you’ve already explained the elimination of the Night Masks in some other way? (For instance, Elminster popped in, said “enough of this, then,” and blasted them all to the Fugue Plane.) Or your PCs might have vanquished the Night Masks on their own without those paladin vigilante ponces, and now I’ve all of a sudden overwritten their exploits.
This is easy enough to ignore, then, but if you’re really hard-core into keeping things canonically perfect, what are you supposed to do?
The Point of Canon
First of all, there is no virtue in “being canonical” unless that also means “making it fun.” As a DM, if you’re not making your game fun and coherent and sensical for your players, then you are failing at the job that you were appointed to do. DMing is a *service* you’re doing, and your masters aren’t WotC or the designers or the authors who make up canon, but your players. We don’t care if you use our stuff—I mean, it’s cool if you do, but ultimately you need to do what’s best for your game.
Second, you have to understand the *purpose* of canon. It isn’t to give you rules and boundaries to determine the scope and direction of your game. It’s about filling in a campaign setting to provide 1) entertainment, 2) a place to play in the form of a fully visualized setting, and 3) inspiration for your games.
We’d love to make your PCs the heroes of the all our products--we really would. But since there are thousands upon thousands of you with different PCs doing different things all the time, we have to settle for giving you a sandbox to do it in, and offering novels/sourcebooks/adventures/etc. to give you ideas about things that might have happened in that sandbox.
(And besides, Drizzt, Elminster, etc., are basically the PCs of their respective novels, and to deny them the chance to be heroes is just as bad as denying anyone else.)
Canon is necessary in order to build a fully realized campaign world for you to use. That's it--that's the purpose of it.
The Illusion of Exactness and the Necessity of Interpretation
I’ll let y’all in on a little secret as regards canon: you’re never ever going to get it exactly right.
I mean, unless you’re running a game wherein your PCs play the Knights of Myth Drannor through Ed’s three marvelous books (Swords of Eveningstar, Swords of Dragonfire, The Sword Never Sleeps) with exactly the same plot and exactly the same things that happen in exactly the same order at exactly the same time with exactly the same dialogue everywhere without any acting or improvisation but basically just reading the novel to yourself (not even out loud, since that would be an interpretation), then what you’re going to be doing in your game is an INTERPRETATION, not the exact thing.
When you run a published module, you can’t play it “as is,” because the very act of reading it and ascribing what it says to action is an interpretation. I mean, unless the author sets down in a specific order exactly what every monster is going to do every round, you are going to have to interpret the creatures’ strategies to your PCs’ actions. Basically, some intelligence needs to go into the monsters’ artificial intelligence, or else it’s just an old-school Nintendo platformer with anthropomorphic turtles jumping and hurling hammers in a set pattern. (Not that that isn't fun--it's just no D&D.)
The way you get it *right* is by playing it in such a way as your players have a good time, and feel like they had a real Realms experience. If the canon presented fits, then great--if not, there is NO reason you should feel constrained to it. In fact, if you go your own way and create your own stuff, you are likely to have a better time.
Canon is also always moving. New books get published, and things have to happen in them. New sourcebooks appear. Gods die. Landscapes explode. The game keeps changing, in order to give new settings, new ideas, etc., to old gamers and new gamers. What you knew about the setting one year might not apply the next year. And this is just something that has to happen as time passes, or the setting stagnates and becomes irrelevant.
What to do about Canon
So let’s get specific with the above situation (I created an organization in the Realms that relates to your game). The options still stand, but now they have other consequences—note that all the ones marked *2* still fit into what I would consider a “canonical Realms game.”
1) Ignore it.
If it doesn’t fit your game, that’s an easy choice.
2) Incorporate it.
If you do happen to like it, roll with it. Your interpretation, as noted above, isn’t going to be the same as mine, so no matter what you do, it’s not going to be *exact*—but then again (as noted above) it shouldn’t be.
2a) Incorporate and ignore it.
It’s there, but it has no bearing on your game. Perhaps the organization was long ago crippled by some great catastrophe, or perhaps your PCs just never run across it. Or perhaps the focus of your first adventure is to eradicate it because you hate it that much. Either way, you win.
2b) Incorporate and modify it.
It’s there, but the motivations and goals expressed in the article/novels are just a cover for its *real* schemes, to bring back the Night Masks to Westgate. The leaders are all vampires, and Uthias is really Orbakh the Night Master.
2c) Incorporate and flesh it out.
It’s there, but the people noted in the article/novels take a back-seat to events in your game. Instead, you focus on other leaders/operatives in the organization of your own invention (as I only detailed one of the councilors and a couple of the operatives). Go nuts!
2d) Incorporate it as a distant background.
One character in your group might hail from the organization or have had dealings with it in the past. There might be a subplot. Otherwise, it’s completely absent from your game.
Final Thoughts
Finally, please note that you--or whichever gamer in your group gets stuck with the job--are the DM, and what you say goes.
No player should ever stand up in the middle of a session and say "no, it works this way--I read it in [insert author name here]'s book." If that happens, you can either say "no, it's my way" (because you're the DM) or you might change your mind (if you find the argument convincing or the new interpretation helps your game) but either way, you need to have a talk with that player and make it clear that as the DM, you are the arbiter of everything, because the group *chose you to be.*
If your players question your portrayal of the world or events therein, then maybe they want a new DM.
Do what works for your game. Do NOT feel tied by canon, because remember what canon is: a tool for your game.
Cheers |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Mr_Miscellany |
Posted - 30 Oct 2010 : 09:09:46
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Shouldn't maps follow the same rules as the other sources?
No and Yes.
No, if you're creating something for DMs and players to use. DMs are generally made of stern enough stuff that they can tweak things (like precisely where cities are at on a map and distances between places) without trouble or feeling like some faceless designer was out to hurt the DMs feelings. Players need to accept that sources can be variable; the players are inhabiting the game world through their characters and those characters don't have omniscient geographical world knowledge.
Yes, if you're creating something like an FR Atlas that's several pages of specific information, where that info is lore for the lore fan's sake and you're not trying to fit everything on one poster map that'll be inserted into a gaming product.
Regardless, go with what makes sense to you. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Oct 2010 : 07:01:57
Since I'm tweaking the Nether Mountains anyway, I suppose shifting Silverymoon to at least the same latitude as Sundabar would be a fair trade-off.
Earlier I had scanned-in The North from both the original 2e campaign map and from the 3e SM book (I had already scanned the SM awhile back, but I wanted a higher resolution this time), and when I over-lapped them it was scary just how far off everything was. When I worked on my last FR map project I was just comparing the last 2e map with the 3e FRCG map, and although there were still huge differences, it was nothing like what I have comparing the very first FR map with one of the last to come out in 3e.
Maybe Alustriel moves her city around every few years to keep the Orcs confused.  |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 Oct 2010 : 02:48:32
My inclination would be to go with its 1E location. The 3E map got shrunk, and there were things on the 4E map that did not match descriptions. I'd consider the 1E and 2E stuff to be the most accurate, because that era was when they still had a traffic cop keeping everything straight.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Oct 2010 : 02:15:11
I was gonna start my own thread, but then I figured I'd just Rez this one since its a related subject matter.
How canon is canon?
As an amateur cartographer I've run into my share of headaches trying to blend the various editions of the Realms into one, cohesive map. The last one I was working on would have been the 'ultimate' blend of the 2e and 3e maps, but I never finished that one (I've changed my style since then).
So now I'm working on another fun little project, and I can't seem to figure out where to put Silverymoon. Apparently, the thing was built on roller-skates, 'cause the designers keep pushing the damn thing around! (hundreds of miles - it used to be in the Moonlands... which kinda made sense...)
It was originally north of of Sundabar, and its been creeping south every since. I'm surprised it isn't somewhere down near Calimshan in 4e. 
So here's my dilemma - I could 'fix it', but should I? Shouldn't maps follow the same rules as the other sources? That the last official publication contains the correct information?
In that other (unfinished) project, the whole point was to put things 'back the way they were', but that's not the point of the new project at all, so shouldn't I just make everything match the 3e Silver Marches map?
Or should I split the difference? That's an option, but then it wouldn't be 'correct' in any edition. Maybe you folks still running 1e/2e Realms can help me - what maps do you use? Do you use the newest maps, even though you are running an older edition? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 18:21:55
quote:
Originally posted by Bluenose
By the way, I take issue with the idea that everything people complained about was a misconception or could be ignored. Some things are minor enough to be ignored. Others, not so much. If something is so silly it ruins people's suspension of disbelief, yet altering it to a sensible form has major consequences, what are people expected to do? Apart from play a different setting, or course.
Fair enough.
I have issue with the Shades, or at least, how they were brought back, so I understand completely. The 'New Netheril' and 'Shadows' have become such an over-arching storyline in the Realms it has become impossible for me to completely ignore them. There are many other thing I don't care for, but that's probably the biggest, pre-plague.
I would like to point out that in some cases further research into the subject matter a person is having trouble digesting often leads to better understanding of that particular piece of lore, which tends to make more sense when viewed in its 'true form', rather then the common misconceptions often applied to the lore (For instance, Mystra's Chosen as the 'JLA" of the Realms).
Man, was that a mouthful... and one hell of a run-on sentence. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 05:56:09
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It's funny that you mention Lantan because that was one nation I actually kept in my 4E Realms but now it's a cool combination of Atlantis and Bio-Shock with elements of steam-punk and revolutionary inventions like the Ironclad Warships.
Hmmm, intriguing. Tell me more. 
Sure! But first you have to understand why it is the way it is. See, just after the warforged revolution Lantan knew that any sort of attack from an outside source (including a counter-attack from the now revolted Warforged) would spell the down-fall of the island nation so they started to build all sorts of defenses including armored plated boats and the gnomish submersable (who's first cast off sent over 195 gnomes to their watery grave). But despite their first draw-backs, they were gaining success with their inventions. Then one gnomish cleric/artificer named Dingle Blimth was hit by a vision from Gond that something terrible was going to happen to Lantan in the form of a giant tidal wave. So using his influence from the church of Gond, Dingle convinced the main rulers of Lantan (I used a council from different aspect of the nation [farming/produce, technology/advanced sciences, magic/arcane arts, and the divine] to run the nation) to build a Dome made up of LARGE amounts of Glassteel and cold-iron. This would incompass the entire Nation and through the help of magic and what warforged/Gondsman they had left working 24-hrs a day, they completed it a week before the Spellplague hit.
When the tidal wave hit Lantan, the nation was safe though problem did arise such as leaks here and there as well as the materials holding under so much pressure but the dome persisted and kept in tact. After the wave was done, the Water level in the area was about near the top of the dome, immersing most of the nation under water. So the gnomes and other areas of the populace started looking down to the depths for new adventure and avenues for discovery and technology. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 01:29:36
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Don't forget, there is a lost mythal city in Lantan, Myth Iliscar. Maybe now it's a western version of Myth Nantar.
-- George Krashos
Which reminds me... I need to finish up my "Music of Lost Myth Iliscar" write-up. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 01:28:10
Don't forget, there is a lost mythal city in Lantan, Myth Iliscar. Maybe now it's a western version of Myth Nantar.
-- George Krashos
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Sep 2010 : 01:25:01
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I have just two words: Gnome submarine.
Think about it. 
Cheers
Oooh! GnomeQuest: DSV. |
| Bluenose |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 21:23:24
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Precisely - it was that horrible misconception that lead to the re-shaping of the Realms. If the vast majority of the FR-naysayers had just learned to ignore those aspects of the setting they didn't care for, we probably would have seen only a decade time-jump, at the most, and the history of the Realms proceed in a more... ummmm... LESS radical pace.
I suspect the vast majority of FR naysayers simply didn't bother playing in the setting. Whether the fanbase was slowly dwindling, as I suspect, or not, WotC took action to try to change things and attract more interest.
By the way, I take issue with the idea that everything people complained about was a misconception or could be ignored. Some things are minor enough to be ignored. Others, not so much. If something is so silly it ruins people's suspension of disbelief, yet altering it to a sensible form has major consequences, what are people expected to do? Apart from play a different setting, or course. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 20:28:15
Precisely - it was that horrible misconception that lead to the re-shaping of the Realms. If the vast majority of the FR-naysayers had just learned to ignore those aspects of the setting they didn't care for, we probably would have seen only a decade time-jump, at the most, and the history of the Realms proceed in a more... ummmm... LESS radical pace.
For example, I never liked Wemics. Can't stand them, actually... but I don't think any of you have ever heard me complain about them. There are plenty of things like that I just plain ignore; In the immortal words of John Lennon, "It's easy if you try..." |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 19:18:26
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I have just two words: Gnome submarine.
So you've played Warcraft I & II, eh? 
Yeah buddy. 
So that illustrates my point--if you like the canon as it is, use it. If you don't, adapt it. In 90% of cases, you will be able to work within the boundaries of the canon to get whatever result you want.
I want to encourage people to do that, so we don't create the misconception of feeling *constrained* by canon.
Cheers |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 18:32:25
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I have just two words: Gnome submarine.
So you've played Warcraft I & II, eh? |
| Bakra |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 18:31:05
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I have just two words: Gnome submarine.
Think about it.
Cheers
We all live in a Gnomish Submarine,
a Gnomish Submarine,
a Gnomish Submarine,
lalalala |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 18:28:34
Another scenario would be for Gond to have built-in a 'doomsday device'. Basically, since he is an anti-magical power anyway, and inventiveness breeds paranoia, he may have built some sort of steamtech-style engines beneath Lantan's major settlements which would be activated in case of a magical emergency (or catastrophe, as in the case of the spellplague).
Maybe he would have created the magical equivalent of Mythalars, so the cities could leave Lantan of threatened, or even some sort of anti-magical domes to protect the cities, which would also serve to keep the atmosphere viable (designed to keep-out 'Stinking Cloud' type effects, but would also fortuitously maintain air for the inhabitants if the cities sank).
Or he could have just built a device that teleported everything 'man-made' to Abeir. If the cloaking-effect Ao used to hide Abeir was magical in nature (which seems obvious), Gond of all the gods would have found a way around it (just as he found a way around other tech-restrictions imposed by Ao). Then if you wanted to still use Lantan, you could say that the newly-designed flying ships of Lantan were trans-planer vessels (which also provides a neat way for DMs to get their PCs to Abeir if they want).
I assume Abeir is/was hidden in the Astral, given the lack of any sort of 'system' around the planet, and the uniform silver sky. However, you can really put it anywhere you like, and just say the cloaking-effect caused the sky's color. You could even use one of the the other theories - where Abeir is in the same orbit as Toril, 180° on the other side of the sun - and have the Gnomes Spelljamming between worlds.
Lots of things one could do with Lantan. They didn't really get rid of it, but rather, untethered it from canon, making it more useful to DMs. Now you can use it or ignore and it will work either way. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 18:17:59
I have just two words: Gnome submarine.
Think about it.
Cheers |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 17:27:20
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It's funny that you mention Lantan because that was one nation I actually kept in my 4E Realms but now it's a cool combination of Atlantis and Bio-Shock with elements of steam-punk and revolutionary inventions like the Ironclad Warships.
Hmmm, intriguing. Tell me more. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 17:27:05
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Really love Lantan, for instance, and are bummed that it got exploded? Well, either you incorporate/modify (and a colony of gnomes actually escaped to set up a new island of invention elsewhere in the Realms--possibly on a floating earthmote? in the Underdark? in a tavern in Silverymoon?) or ignore (Lantan didn't explode--it's right there) or a combination (people only *thought* Lantan blew up, but what *really* happened to it is . . .), etc.
All of which, are equally plausible.
As I recall, Lantan was "mostly" destroyed by the great tsunamis that inundated the island, after the shifting of the continents. When the region emerged from the waters, the majority of its people and technology, as such, were gone. The island still exists, but 'tis greatly reduced in size.
To bring back the island, it could be as easy as having explorers eventually discover [given the disruption of the Spellplague and subsequent chaos impacting on overall shipping throughout the region] that much more of Lantan emerged intact, than was previously thought. Both the gnomes and humans of Lantan are an inventive sort, so I wouldn't automatically assume that they can't or won't re-settle the island, nor deny any attempts at restructuring their cities and towns to take advantage of the altered landscape. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 17:17:13
Why couldn't Lantan be a floating earthmote?
A very, VERY big one.
And if you 'anchor it' somewhere, you can have a 'Land under Shadow' which could be useful for other things. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 17:10:50
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Really love Lantan, for instance, and are bummed that it got exploded? Well, either you incorporate/modify (and a colony of gnomes actually escaped to set up a new island of invention elsewhere in the Realms--possibly on a floating earthmote? in the Underdark? in a tavern in Silverymoon?) or ignore (Lantan didn't explode--it's right there) or a combination (people only *thought* Lantan blew up, but what *really* happened to it is . . .), etc.
Cheers
It's funny that you mention Lantan because that was one nation I actually kept in my 4E Realms but now it's a cool combination of Atlantis and Bio-Shock with elements of steam-punk and revolutionary inventions like the Ironclad Warships. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 15:13:54
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie... (and a colony of gnomes actually escaped to set up a new island of invention elsewhere in the Realms--possibly on a floating earthmote? . . .)
Pardon me while I steal this idea for my campaign... |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 15:07:08
quote:
Originally posted by Galuf the Dwarf
Pardon, Mr. de Bie. Don't know if you may see this or not, but here it goes. What would you say about posters (ex: me, Diffan, etc.) who create our own content for the perusal and adoption by other players or DMs? Is that any bit in line with your agenda through this thread?
Basically, one DM/player sharing ideas about stories in the Realms with another? Of course that's 100% cool!
It's considerate to let people know that the ideas you're generating don't come from one of the books (or are an extrapolation of something you read), but otherwise this is exactly what the Realms designers do everyday.
As regards the idea that 4e has somehow "thrown out" (i.e., fired!) all the canon that has come before . . . I don't really see it. I don't see any reason you can't bring forward ideas in the Realms from before 1385, why you can't just import things wholly through the time-skip. I just don't see all that much in 4e that contradicts 3e or before. I mean, for better or worse, their "reboot" on the setting leaves a largely empty slate that you can fill up with what you want, whether it's deeply steeped in Realmslore (if you're a veteran fan) or brand new invention (if you're a newbie or just not interested in all that history).
Really love Lantan, for instance, and are bummed that it got exploded? Well, either you incorporate/modify (and a colony of gnomes actually escaped to set up a new island of invention elsewhere in the Realms--possibly on a floating earthmote? in the Underdark? in a tavern in Silverymoon?) or ignore (Lantan didn't explode--it's right there) or a combination (people only *thought* Lantan blew up, but what *really* happened to it is . . .), etc.
Cheers
|
| Zanan |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 09:32:30
Well ... Erik makes good points, his final sentences essentially says it all:
quote:
Do what works for your game. Do NOT feel tied by canon, because remember what canon is: a tool for your game.
I have never ever felt hindered by canon lore, I embraced it as an attempt by the designers to create a living world of fantasy. I always understood this world as the playground of the "TSR/WotC-DM", while "my Realms" always work for my group as I want it to be. None of my players ever questioned that (though most are veteran gamers and have no problem here). Still, I also embraced the Realms as they were fletched out from the early 1990s to roundabout 2005, essentially much of the old material brushed and spiced up to 3RE. I also had no problems reading some of the grand-NPC novels, like most of Ed Greenwood's Seven Sisters and Chosen of Mystra folk, but in my mind they were only movers and shakers within his Realms. If you scan the history, there's barely a great mention of them at every corner, so that "overwhelming influence" of the NPCs is hardly something "real". Of course, if you hand this movers & shakers role to PCs who dislike the Elminsters and Manshoons of the real Realms, wouldn't that mean that if one group finishes it tour, you'd have to chop their stuff (if one or more new players join up and develope a similar dislike for "previous movers & shakers") as well. Leaving a blank, raw campaign world?
Which brings me back to the initial remark. The Realms were different from most other settings (bar a few) because of their detail, full fletched NPCs with grand or not so grand ties to the gaming world as such. Something that makes this world feeling "real" (on a fantasy level). The Eberron setting was AFAIK thrown into the ring to provide the gamers with a point-of-light version, not that many NPCs and a great many opportunities to form the NPCs to the "movers & shakers". Hence my utter dismay about the "designers" choice of bombing the Realms back into a similar state by the introduction of the 4E via Spellplague and all that went along. The canon of two or three generations of designers went out of the window, was essentially lost. Of course, you can play a system of D&D in at every stage of FR history, be that AD&D in the New Realms or 4E in the age preceeding the Times of Troubles. But since I was ensorcerelled by the Realms as I knew them, 1996 onwards, and playing along close to but not utterly tied to the canon and traditions, I was deeply disappointed to see this all go out of the window.
AND no matter what people might say to sooth the feeling, if you know that there's a sword of Damokles hanging about the campaign world from 1385 onwards, about all the gods you embrace, the characters, the places ... there's little you can do but to have that bad gut feeling about it all. And that sooner or later will dampen your love for the Realms, old or new.
If you can't imagine what I mean, just think of ... getting a child, a million dollars from the lottery, the job or lass/chap of your dreams ... but also the info that it's "kingdom come" a week on Sunday. |
| Tamsar |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 02:53:05
At the end of the day, "Canon" is information about the realms. It is at everyone's own discretion on how they use it in their game.
The information can be ignored, adapted, used verbatim, however YOU deem to use it. As long as it's utilised (or not) to enhance your own game and make it more fun then its all good. Cannon is a tool, not an end product.
Everyone one can use it as they see fit, there is no right or wrong way, only your way.
|
| Galuf the Dwarf |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 01:30:57
Pardon, Mr. de Bie. Don't know if you may see this or not, but here it goes. What would you say about posters (ex: me, Diffan, etc.) who create our own content for the perusal and adoption by other players or DMs? Is that any bit in line with your agenda through this thread?
Yes, I see you're intending us to omit details that do not work with our playing/DMing style. Granted, I don't play or DM; I'm merely a creative think tank that prefers to churn out homebrew mechanics to help enhance gameplay so that people have more fun - and unique - rules to toy with. But in hindsight, I wonder if the likes of me and others with our homebrew content that we post here is helping players and DMs to 'think outside the box,' so to speak.
In all, I wonder if such a trend may lead to a brighter tomorrow as far as "firing the canon" is concerned. Maybe people can abide by what guidelines they need to and still find a method of having fun within such necessary constraints. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 00:03:47
LOL - I didn't think this would stay edition-neutral, but it should.
Having your games RULED by canon is silly - it is there is you need it, and you can ignore it when you don't. It has always been that way, so edition doesn't apply to the topic at all. FR canon tends to be more... respected... then that in most other settings simply because so very much of it is wrapped-up in the continuing plot-hooks of the Realms, and to disregard any of it would be 'opportunities lost'. That's why I never say "such-&-such does NOT exist" - I just let it sit in the background and don't highlight that particular lore in my sessions. You never know what may become useful down the road.
But by the same token, you shouldn't let canon tie your hands - its a tool, nothing more. Tools don't have to be used; they are just there to make your job easier, where applicable.
As a carpenter, I know the job is never about the hammer - it is about the nails you are driving home. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 20:35:02
I think we're misunderstanding my "Fire the Canon!" observation. In reality, all I mean with that is that you should be free to discharge any canon that doesn't work for you.
Cheers |
| Jakk |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 18:32:36
Wow... a lot has been said here since my last look, even if not all of it needed to be said... ...but this post by Markustay says it all from my POV. Unlike Mark, I was a Realms gamer from Day 1 of the OGB; the only thing I really miss from Greyhawk is the heraldry... I wish Wizbro would do something with all those Realmsian heraldic bits TSR got from Ed way back when...
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
<snip>
I can name changes in every edition I didn't care for, including the first one - some things Ed had were better, IMHO. <snip> I bought EVERYTHING TSR back then, just to find ways to adapt the stuff to my own campaign, so FR sat on a back-burner for several years.
I can entirely agree with Mark here on both counts, except that FR was never on the back burner for me except for a year and a half in which I was self-employed in a small town with no gamers, and had no time to play anyway... self-employment does that to a person when it's a new business...
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Fast Forward - I was coerced into running FR for a group of Newbs, and bought the Gold box which had just come out - that was really the first FR product I read (despite owning several 1e FR products already). I begrudgingly thought it was 'pretty good', but wound-up adapting quite a bit of my GH material to the FR campaign, simply because I knew it better. At around the same time I began reading the novels - first the Moonshaes (which really gave me the wrong look at the Realms), and then the Avatar trilogy (which is why I was never bothered by the ToT, I suppose). Reading those two series, and one Harper novel (Red Wizards) gave me a VERY poor impression of the Realms, <snip>. Anyhow, during the period the campaign was up and running, I went back and read all the older stuff I had, including the Gray box, in order to fill in the blanks and be a better FR DM (despite my reservations). What I found was a very deep and rich world filled with history<snip>.
I'll agree with your assessment of the Moonshae trilogy (see below), and everything else here. I actually read the OGB and the first few gaming supplements before I read any of the novels, and I loved the detail and sense of history that infused the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Fast forward again - I have always been an avid reader, so continued to read all sorts of Sci/Fantasy, and in the process discovered the Drizzt books, and thought "Hey... there actually is one FR writer who knows how to write". From there I read other series, some good, some bad, but it maintained my interest in the Realms, despite my non-desire to play D&D again.
Since starting back in 1984 (I first started FRP gaming with Tunnels & Trolls back in 1982), I never went through a period of not wanting to play D&D, although (and this is my personal experience with the rules talking here; by necessity, others will have different (if possibly similar) experiences) the recent edition change brought me very close. If not for the fact that I was actively gaming with three separate groups, none of whom were switching to the new rules, I probably would have quit altogether... not because I didn't like the new rules (I hadn't yet played them), but because I didn't want to shell out for another new set of rules that openly advertised itself as not being backward-compatible.
Anyway, I'm getting off topic; I also liked the first couple of trilogies from RAS, but I had to choose between the game products or the novels, and the game products won. Because of this, I have never felt an obligation to treat the novels as canon. Heck, the Moonshaes in my Realms aren't even called the Moonshaes, and the entire island group resembles the northern region settled by the Northmen. I like everything about the pagan Norse, probably in part because I'm descended from them, and a world without such a society is incomplete.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I heard the hype about 3e long before it appeared. There were giant cardboard dudes at the bookstores and game stores, and there was even a story on the 6 O'Clock evening news here in NY about the new edition (why couldn't 4e get coverage like that?) I heard one of the very first sourcebooks that was being released was the FRCS, so of course I purchased the 3 core books, and the FRCS when it came out.
And I was stunned! It was by far the most 'perfect' edition of D&D I have ever seen, and managed to get rid of many the bad things I myself had written-out over the years. I began immediately working on a new campaign with more new players (ages 13-16), and began to re-read ALL of my old FR material, both 1e and 2e, and bought everything 3e that came out. I even went so far and hunted down a few products I had missed at the end of the 90's.
And thus began my 'love affair' with the Realms - it was a combination of three editions. If I had to pinpoint one I considered 'right' it would be 2e/post-ToT, because that's when I started running it, but I had experience with both 1e and 3e settings before I actually rook the plunge and gave up entirely on GH.
So, the new rules helped, Bob Salvatore's novels definitely helped, and it was a weird combination of all three editions that really made me into an FR Junkie. I use everything I like, from every edition, and ignore the rest - its still there, in the background, if I need it (like the Shades). I also borrow heavily from other settings and even other genres - its all good.
I felt the same way about 3E and the 3.5 revision; it really inspired me to get seriously back into gaming. My last regular gaming group had disbanded (due to college graduation for most of us) a couple of months before 3E came out, so it wasn't that long a break, but I got a new group together as quickly as possible, including the owner-operator of my FLGS, who was another old college buddy. Like Mark, I wasn't tied down by edition; I used what I liked, tossed out what I didn't, hoped for the publication of more of Ed's original lore (which didn't happen in nearly large enough volumes for my tastes), and (unlike Mark) left the maps alone, apart from the occasional geographical feature; for example, my PCs found and stoppered the decanter of endless water responsible for the swamp in Halruaa whose name escapes me atm, and at the end of the long pre-3E campaign mentioned above, they also found the key to the redemption of Vyshaantar (which I tied in with the Hellgate Keep Dungeon Crawl adventure) and began the restoration of the High Moor long before Blackstaff. (This, among other things, is part of why Khelben is still alive and well in my Realms.)
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So I really can't be pegged as an edition-bigot, since there were many factors and much time involved, but I can honestly say that the latest iteration of the Realms had the opposite effect on me that 3e did - it practically drove me from FR for good. As it is, I am back to just buying the novels, and like always, some are good, some bad, but I keep reading.
And hoping........
I can entirely agree with this sentiment, except that I'm not even buying the novels (mostly because I never did through any edition). I suspect I may have to start buying the latest string of Elminster novels, just from what I've heard... 
Anyway, like Erik said, fire the canon! Even Wizbro has done so, if you look at the Dark Sun reboot. I was overjoyed by that decision, if only because it sets a precedent...  |
| Knight of the Gate |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 18:17:17
My interest in the Realms is almost wholly as a game setting; I've read a few of the novels, but very little of what happens there has ever made it into my home Realms. As an example, my current high-level campaign is running along the Impiltur/Damara border; several things that have happened in the novels are also happening in my game. Namely, Gareth decided to annex Vaassa (which I had him do because 1)it suited my needs that the king and his epic-tier friends be far away from the action of my game and 2) it makes sense to me that he would do just such a thing) though in a vastly different way, and for different reasons than those given in the novels. Also, my PCs are facing a BBEG called the Rotting Man- largely because I like the name and the concept- but my RM is a cleric/sorcerer with the Worm that Walks template, not the half-fiend druid/blightlord that was presented in the novels; because it suited the theme and needs of my game that he be so.
In short, I agree with Erik wholeheartedly. It often amazes me that people need to have this sort of thing spelled out to them; the game is yours, make of it what you will. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 17:03:20
Personally, I'm more middle of the road when it comes to "using canon". (Since I don't actually run/play in the Realms, it's kind of a mmot point, but I DO adapt things I like to my campaign. No one else I know knows anything about the FR, or has any interest in it, so it's hard to run games in a world no one else cares about.) I enjoy reading the novels, and love the wonderful bg from the sourcebooks, but it hardly matters to me what El or Drizzt or Canilo are doing, because I'm not using THEM. And unless you want those characters showing up and stealing your players' spotlight, they really should stay in the bg. At least that's one DM's take on things.
I've played in Eberron, too, and even a little in Grayhawk, but never used or run into any major players from either of those settings. (Okay, my hubby borrowed Soth from Krynn once in a game he was running, and scared the bejeebies out of my PC with him, but that's about it.) I've even had a player "try" to play as Drizzt (before either of us knew his actual stats- she kinda blew it...) but it has always been away from canon. I usually adapt generic modules, or create my own whole cloth. It's what works for me. I consider canon to be something that should stay in the novels and sourcebooks, not in my game, unless it's as a backdrop for whatever my players are doing. (Although, if I was WRITING something for FR, you can bet your booty I'd keep to canon! Call it a spill-over from my comic-geek fanatisism...)
BTW- happy birthday, MT!!
|
|
|
