| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Lady Swiftstrike Assassin |
Posted - 06 Jan 2012 : 05:38:25
What edition if the Forgotten Realms do you prefer? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Drustan Dwnhaedan |
Posted - 25 Dec 2014 : 00:11:36
I hate to repeat what other scribes have said, but there really should have been an 'ALL' option. Yes, I didn't like a lot of the changes made with 4e (like many people), but I still found things I liked about it, just like every other edition of D&D. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 20 Dec 2014 : 06:33:23
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Big changes don't occur in the setting because a novelist gets an idea... WotC decides to make a big change, and then picks an author or group of authors to write about it.
It can come from both.
I am not privy to WotC's current internal workings, but I am in agreement with Wooly that things probably come from the top (the top being a brand manager or a Vice President, the later having to OK the change if it's a big one) and it becomes the job of designers and/or novel authors to make things happen.
I do know that in the planning for the 3rd Edition version of the Forgotten Realms that the novels side initially had the idea to do a whole lot more damage than just destroying Tilverton, when it came time to introduce the return of Shade.
Novels and games got together and the idea was whittled down.
Of course, changes that make novelist's lives harder happen too, thanks to decisions game designers make.
So sometimes it's game designers, sometimes it's authors (and editors), and sometimes it's corporate bigwigs more concerned with counting beans than with paying attention to what the brand is all about. For example: https://web.archive.org/web/20140202043327/http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/forgottenrumsstory.html (paste the whole thing into your browser). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Dec 2014 : 05:57:25
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
In my opinion, the campaign setting and the novels should be separate.
I just hate it when a big change comes about because a novelist got an idea in their head and writes a novel about it. Then we have future products that reflect that change.
Big changes don't occur in the setting because a novelist gets an idea... WotC decides to make a big change, and then picks an author or group of authors to write about it.
Authors don't have that much freedom on deciding what tales they're going to write, in any shared setting. It's dictated from on high. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 19 Dec 2014 : 19:32:41
In my opinion, the campaign setting and the novels should be separate.
I just hate it when a big change comes about because a novelist got an idea in their head and writes a novel about it. Then we have future products that reflect that change. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 19 Dec 2014 : 19:25:39
I know they aren't FR, but I really loved the Van Richten's Guides. All the mention of The Volo Guides got me thinking about VR. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 19 Dec 2014 : 14:42:52
Hmph.
I had forgotten I had originally stuck Thay down in the Shaar - that was so long ago. That's back when I was quite a bit more conservative on how I made my changes.
Now, I just paste whatever I want, wherever I want, and Thay is very prominent and in a 'cold war' with Waterdeep (The Lord's Alliance).
If 4e did anything right, its that it enabled me to see that my 'shackles' were merely an illusion. Once 4e broke them (by jumping the shark and providing the disconnect), I am finally able to run the kind of game I want using 5e. I guess if this was a cartoon, 4e would have been that alligator that I had to step-on to cross the swamp.
1e/2e/3e will always have my 'rabid fanboi' love, but 5e now has captured my imagination. Not the era - the era actually doesn't even matter in my mash-up game (I use all the 2e/3e lore) - but the rules and modules have given me an new appreciation for the setting. Its no longer just a 'thought experiment' - now is an actual campaign I am running. 4e was like a scalpel separating my inner FR fan from my inner D&D DM. In a way, I think thats what they were trying to accomplish... too bad the 'old Realms' had to die along the way. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 18 Dec 2014 : 22:50:51
2e |
| Tyrant |
Posted - 04 Feb 2012 : 00:17:26
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
I think we agree on more than we disagree.
I'm able to enjoy most of the old era games despite the current era, but the new stuff presents a few more difficulties to get around than before. I wish it wasn't the case, but the genie is out of the bottle.
Actually a big factor is lack of active support or even validation of the past Realms (the whole New Realms are awesome selling point by the company from 4E FR's start). The situation may be shifting to a more balanced tone, so maybe there's hope.
I favor the idea that Erik has put forth of support for every era. I know there will be difficulties and that not every era will get equal treatment, due to print scheduling if nothing else. I believe in that type of scenario it will probably seem that the "present" (wherever they go after 4E) will get a disproportionate amount of product because it is the new and shiny. But, if they do pursue something of this nature and weight the material for each era in any way that accounts for previous lore material then the bulk will be pre Spellplague. To be clear, what I mean is 3 editions of the game take place pre-Spellplague so there should be more pre Spellplague info as 3/4 of the "eras" (assuming they aren't condensed) would be pre Spellplague. And that's without taking into account an "ancient" era and what I hope to see a "plague years" era that fills in the gap.
That's what I hope they do anyway, or something close to it. Even though I like the present, I want to see a lot more of the past as well and I think this way will also entice some other fans back into the fold. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 04 Feb 2012 : 00:08:39
I think we agree on more than we disagree.
I'm able to enjoy most of the old era games despite the current era, but the new stuff presents a few more difficulties to get around than before. I wish it wasn't the case, but the genie is out of the bottle.
Actually a big factor is lack of active support or even validation of the past Realms (the whole New Realms are awesome selling point by the company from 4E FR's start). The situation may be shifting to a more balanced tone, so maybe there's hope.
|
| Tyrant |
Posted - 04 Feb 2012 : 00:00:29
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
If Halruua is still a wasteland, then clearly the right answer is that the survivors haven't returned until 1479 to start trying to reclaim their territory. The canon lawyer can't over rule that as the book says nothing about it not happening. I question any DM that can't find a way around this problem.
Maybe you meant something else, but that's exactly my point.
It doesn't matter what the DM does, WotC overrides him with their canon. The DM can do something, but good luck finding players who see his game as anything other than an Arcane Age one-off. That is something I don't want to see happen to the 1300s Realms, but it is starting to happen as WotC uses their resources to support the 1400s Realms.
It's not about the characters, it's about the players and groups having to deal with a game of "shibboleth" before sitting down to play together.
What I meant was that the proposed "Halruaan Return" scenario can play out, so long as it starts in 1479 or concedes that previous attempts have so far met with failure. That keeps the story and lines up with the campaign setting. This is one of those things that I don't see how it is a big deal here but isn't a big deal in past "updates". The scope is obviously much larger, I get that. What I mean is, in the past when a person or place you were using was, by canon, dead or destroyed in an update or novel, didn't you find a way around it or otherwise deal with it? Like I said, I get that this situation is different in it's scope and thanks to the blackhole created by the time jump, but in principle the idea is the same.
I think one way to smooth over these spots is to fill in the blackhole as much as possible. Then it's less braving uncharted territory and 100% winging it and more ignoring the bits you dislike.
Wooly, I take your point but I guess it's never been an issue to me so I am trying to understand. I know that the ones who control the setting will do what they will do whether I like it or not, though obviously if they do too many things I dislike I will stop supporting it (and no one should buy something they dislike). I still play Knights of the Old Republic 1 and 2, even though I know by canon how they are supposed to end. That doesn't stop me from becoming a Sith Lord and taking over the galaxy. To answer your question, yes I would play that RPG. I don't see a huge difference between that and playing on Athas. You don't need to know the future there to know it's utterly hopeless. The only difference there is the ship is sinking slower (or the sand is creeping slower as the case may be). Just because I know how it all ends doesn't mean I can't enjoy myself. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 23:17:02
See my massive edit above.  |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 22:47:24
The point remains, because one potential future is officially support and is in fact THE official start point for all subsequent lore and games, it does make it more difficult to gather the players and readily accessible materials (books, etc) to play in another era.
Canon overrides these games in that sense, having to specifically say this is where we're starting can everyone agree on this unusual starting point for a game? What of new players only exposed to the New Realms? "I've never heard of this, are you sure we're talking about the same setting."
It is why I see just letting 4E come and retreating to the past for my own games means that era begins to fade. We here all know of the Old Realms and can make our decisions. The choice is not presented to players new to the Realms. WotC starts their current published setting at 1479, including LFR.
I guess where I'm going wrong is thinking there is a choice offered by Wizards at all. Not my setting, I shouldn't be making a big fuss about it. I should just be satisfied with my own Realms games and let the 1300s fade into a historical aspect of the setting. I guess I will just have to look harder for a group that prefers the same era.
Regarding Theoretical Ed changing canon. If he did I have no doubt people would have a similar reaction. Some fans would get on board, some would hate his guts. Some hate him already.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 22:44:16
As a long-time DM, who has run dozens of worlds, published and homebrew, I will say that FR fans are the second-worst I have encountered in regards to being 'Setting Nazis'. When I ran Greyhawk (for YEARS), I never once encountered anyone who told me "Thats not how its supposed to be!"
Thats why I ran Greyhawk back then - I didn't have to "get it right".
However, Setting-Fanbois aside, its not okay in my book for the REAL setting to be divergent, or to be wishy-washy about the lore. Any changes I personally make to the world I am running is my problem, and I do so taking into account all the variables on how it will effect the canon of the setting.
For instance, I moved Thay down into the Shaar, near Mulhorand and Unther. That meant all of the cross-lore regarding them and the Old Empires could remain intact, but that I would have to rethink Rashemen lore.
My point is that the CANON for the OFFICIAL setting is there for me to build off of, not to ignore. Without the canon, then I am just a mouse running blind through a dark maze - with it, I can see my path, and work-out all the twists and turns. I NEED that canon, regardless of weather I use it or not.
You know what happens when you just start ignoring canon willy-nilly? You get discrepancies. Bad Ones. If I say Netheril didn't ever exist, then why are the Stonelands there? How did Anauroch become a desert? How did the Weave ever fall in the past? Where did all those 'ancient artifacts' originate from? I can't just throw it out, I have to replace it with something, otherwise a million loose ends start to unravel.
I don't like Netheril; never used it, and probably never will. But its there, in my game, where it belongs. I just don't 'poke it with a stick', is all. The bigger the changes you make to the canon, the larger the repercussions, and only by being aware of all those connections - and respecting them - can I run a plausible game.
In other words, if I am running an adventure module and the PCs find a Netherese Scepter, and I didn't bother to keep or replace Netheril with an equivalent, my players are going to be like, "What the heck?" What are they to do? Bring it to a diviner and and have him say "it comes from a powerful kingdom, that seems to exist in an alternate reality"?
So YES, we have always been able to "just ignore it" when it comes to canon lore, but in a setting as involved and detailed as FR, cutting out pieces of lore is like playing a game of Jenga - one bad move and the whole thing collapses.
Weather we run a canon game or not, we need the canon, otherwise it all falls apart. The setting just becomes a pretty map at that point (and not so pretty in 4e).
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The issue isn't the characters, it's the players. Who is going to want to play thru the three supermodules, for example, knowing that no matter how well their characters succeed, everything is still going to go south in an off-stage event that they can't prevent? Would you be interesting in playing Titanic: The RPG?
That sounds friggin' awesome! Do I get to hold Leonardo DiCaprio underwater? 
Next we can play Last Days of Pompei.  |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 22:19:40
You're skirting an interesting point.
That point, from my view, is Timeline.
Once you start generating a massive timeline, such as now exists in The Realms, you are exactly correct that if handled incorrectly, it appears that all future destiny is dictated. The same thing happened to Battletech. With the future already created, it becomes difficult to change the course of events in any significant fashion without falling prey to the afore mentioned 'that's not canon' issues.
This is why I feel that Ed has always encouraged us to take The Realms and make them OURS.
No one has said that you MUST take all this information and tie it to your campaign setting. Who cares other than the 'canon-nazis' about how you handle your home game? A brief reality check here....
Ed, the undisputed master of Realmslore, has been asked by WizBro to detail his home campaign. What if (and it's highly probable they are) Ed's Realms are significantly different than the 'official' Realms published by WizBro? Who in their right mind is going to be the one to volunteer to stand up and say, "Yeah, well, that's not canon and just a bunch of nonsensical homebrew." to Ed Greenwood?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
It doesn't matter what the DM does, WotC overrides him with their canon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point is this. You're allowed to pick and choose what events to use and what events not to use in your home campaign. I'll share my own example. I like some of the effects of the Spellplague. I don't care for how that particular issue came about. Decision? I generated an alternate reason for Spellplague effects throughout my home campaign world and only used the ones I felt enhanced the game's storyline. End result? You still get a post-apocalyptic feel with a cataclysmic feel but it is not, as of this point, unrecoverable. Caveat: My home campaign timeline has not yet progressed to the 1400s and the drastic change in maps does create some 'how will i get there' issues. Answer? It's time to pick and choose again.
Good Hunting!
EDIT: Time Sync. This was started before the previous two posts but didn't get completed because of a flurry of activity at work. It says much the same as one of them so I apologize for the apparent double-tap on the post. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 22:13:30
It's nice your own situation worked out.
I've not had as much luck, aside from some PBEMs/PbPs, and even those are limited. Though maybe I'm biased, but I've noticed recently more interest in pre-Spellplague games on the PBEM boards. Maybe this will become a non-issue, but for the moment it is an issue for me.
Don't think from my posts here I'm some Realms only purist. If I had to tally it, I've spent most of my gaming in homebrews, Dark Sun, L5R, and various versions of the Realms so different they might as well not carry the name. However, I'm not talking about a product I'm hoping to purchase from those settings or homebrews. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 21:32:19
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
It doesn't matter what the DM does, WotC overrides him with their canon.
With all due respect, WotC can't override any DM, anywhere, with what's in print.
That's literally impossible for them to do.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
The DM can do something, but good luck finding players who see his game as anything other than an Arcane Age one-off.
If you asked my players in my current campaign two questions:
1) What is the Spellplague?
2) what is the Arcane Age?
You're going to be greeted with blank stares. Note: two of my players have been playing D&D longer than I have and I've been playing since the early 80s.
Your conditions assume players are already well versed in Realmslore and are unwilling to cooperate with their Dungeon Master to ignore any part of published Realmslore.
Now I know for some people it's an issue. The Spellplague really puts a damper on things because some groups do like to play in the official Realms as much as possible.
Because of this, anything done in play before the Spellplague hits seems pointless.
I say "some people" because most players are concerned about their characters way, way more than extraneous events not linked to their Dungeon Master's campaign.
It's a fact many D&D campaigns ignored the Time of Troubles. Ed Greenwood's home game is an example of this.
For most campaigns, I firmly believe ignoring the Spellplague is not an issue.
Most people just want to play Dungeons and Dragons. |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 20:48:05
Granted everyone can put this aside for however long they can, but from the perspective of some fans who wants to see support for their preferred era yet having all future destiny dictated in a direction counter to their preference, you can see why they wouldn't care much for this approach.
It's all about preference.
Likewise, whatever problems some fans had with the Pre-Plague Realms, many told them the same (Ignore it, deal with it), but they persisted and look at where that got us. There is a problem, even if it is in our perception. I think the current problems are as a whole greater than the problems with the previous setting. You are free to disagree. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 19:44:02
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The issue isn't the characters, it's the players. Who is going to want to play thru the three supermodules, for example, knowing that no matter how well their characters succeed, everything is still going to go south in an off-stage event that they can't prevent? Would you be interesting in playing Titanic: The RPG?
We actually played through 2 of the adventures and had a blast. And that's knowing what's going to happen a decade later (as a player). As a character, the Zhents were the immediate threat as were the Shades and Shar's clergy. It only mattered in stopping them. What people minunderstand is the Spellplague is a separate event (completely) from the events of the mega-trilogy of Cormyr/Shadowdale/Anauroch. At least, I always felt they were. And while Cormyr had some pretty big problems (mechanically speaking), the second one was a LOT of fun. I had thought of buying the 3rd installment and finishing it up. Because Ivan Brightflame, Purple Dragon and Pegasus Knight of Cormyr is a man to see these adventurs through.
And sometimes, adventures are just fun to run through regardless of the over-all ramifications. Lets keep in perspective that this is a game. |
| Wolfhound75 |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 19:33:44
I wish..................
[enjoys seeing everyone cringe as the words of fate begin to leave his mouth]
that everyone could find a way to understand that the edition rules (1E, 2E, 3E, 4E) are different than the lore.
Acknowlegement: New lore is often released with new editions but I think we should all try to train our brains to divorce the lore, stories, etc. from the rules sets in use at the time of their release.
A better way to view it would be what I'll term in 'micro-eras'. Meaning the lore that covers the time period spanning from 1358 DR through 1375 DR, for example. What were the major events? Who was where? Who is fighting whom? And the big one, what are the inconsistencies with volumes that cover eras before and after or even overlap?
By training yourself to view the lore in this manner, I've found that it helps me enjoy the who, what, where, when, and why regardless of what rule set edition your group happens to prefer.
Food for thought.
Good Hunting! |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 18:59:24
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
As for the "it's all doomed anyway" outlook, so what? The star our planet orbits will one day consume this planet in a fiery blaze wiping out any and all signs of us having ever existed and, by the logic I keep seeing here, rendering every effort throughout the course of human history pointless. Taking it one step further in case someone decides to get smart and point out that our technological progress may culminate in our species being able to leave this planet, there is still the final heat death of the universe to contend with. Does anyone really live their life thinking that and go about their daily routine knowing it's all so completely and utterly pointless? In the Realms, if you are playing before the Spellplague, the people/places you are saving are alive now. You are having an impact on that world now. At some point in the future those places will be destroyed and those people will be dead. Guess what, that was going to happen with or without the Spellplague. The only difference is now you know the date should you choose to use it. Giving up because it will be destroyed (and I think we can drop the hyperbole that it all gets destroyed, that is demonstably not the case) later is the easy path. Your characters are heroes, they didn't sign on for the easy path. Why does anyone let material they don't like dictate their actions and thoughts?
Well with the Cormyr -----> Anauroch adventures they wrote a GREAT set of adventures I think as good as a PAIZO AP with a grand conclusion. Then WOTC publishes the plague realms, and you get the feeling those adventures were pointless for the story (they were fun, yes that's the point) and they were not worth undertaking.
That series was a LONG amount of game time. I would like to think it was going to have more of an impact on the realms.
My players enjoyed the HELL out of those mods, but even the ones that were not 'realms fans' felt cheated.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:24:19
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
As for the "it's all doomed anyway" outlook, so what? The star our planet orbits will one day consume this planet in a fiery blaze wiping out any and all signs of us having ever existed and, by the logic I keep seeing here, rendering every effort throughout the course of human history pointless. Taking it one step further in case someone decides to get smart and point out that our technological progress may culminate in our species being able to leave this planet, there is still the final heat death of the universe to contend with. Does anyone really live their life thinking that and go about their daily routine knowing it's all so completely and utterly pointless? In the Realms, if you are playing before the Spellplague, the people/places you are saving are alive now. You are having an impact on that world now. At some point in the future those places will be destroyed and those people will be dead. Guess what, that was going to happen with or without the Spellplague. The only difference is now you know the date should you choose to use it. Giving up because it will be destroyed (and I think we can drop the hyperbole that it all gets destroyed, that is demonstably not the case) later is the easy path. Your characters are heroes, they didn't sign on for the easy path. Why does anyone let material they don't like dictate their actions and thoughts?
The issue isn't the characters, it's the players. Who is going to want to play thru the three supermodules, for example, knowing that no matter how well their characters succeed, everything is still going to go south in an off-stage event that they can't prevent? Would you be interesting in playing Titanic: The RPG? |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:22:03
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
If Halruua is still a wasteland, then clearly the right answer is that the survivors haven't returned until 1479 to start trying to reclaim their territory. The canon lawyer can't over rule that as the book says nothing about it not happening. I question any DM that can't find a way around this problem.
Maybe you meant something else, but that's exactly my point.
It doesn't matter what the DM does, WotC overrides him with their canon. The DM can do something, but good luck finding players who see his game as anything other than an Arcane Age one-off. That is something I don't want to see happen to the 1300s Realms, but it is starting to happen as WotC uses their resources to support the 1400s Realms.
It's not about the characters, it's about the players and groups having to deal with a game of "shibboleth" before sitting down to play together. |
| Tyrant |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 04:51:36
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The chaotic events ARE a great time to adventure in.
Too bad they set the setting a century later. 
Enter "The Age of Boredom".
We already had a Barrens of Doom & Despair.
The glut of big events and blatantly desperate railroading to move the community to the Spellplagued 4E Realms struck me as too much in a short time.
Any one of the 4E Realms transition events would have been plenty, all of them at once contributed to the discontinuity between the classic Realms and the Spellplagued Realms.
If the 4E era picked up shortly after the Year of Blue Fire with the Spellplague’s ravagers still fresh, characters play an active part in alleviating the ails of the world. Groups can have epic adventures to lessen the impact and can return much of the world to some semblance of what it was. The choice is left up to each group. Moving the setting so far after the event locks in one official version and rigidly reinforces that vision across a hundred years.
Here’s how it could have worked out:
4E FR officially set immediately after the Spellplague:
- DM One: In my game, some mages of Halruaa hide out on another plane during the Spellplague. They soon returned, reclaimed, and restored some of Halruaa. Some parts remain dangerous and our adventure party is charged with eliminating the more dangerous Plague monsters and securing ancient Halruaan relics and cultural artifacts.
- DM Two: That sounds awesome. In my game, I didn’t do anything yet with Halruaa, but if I ever run a game there I might consider that idea, my players would probably enjoy rebuilding a major nation.
- DM Three: I never did much with Halruaa, I think I’ll keep it how it is for now.
- DM One: That’s alright too, it could go either way.
How it works currently with 4E a century after the Spellplague but some brave soul trying to accomplish the same thing:
DM One: (Same as above)
DM Two: Is this Post-Spellplague? You do know the FRCG said Halruaa is a wasteland in 1479 right? I doubt there is much to rebuild. I mean, it’s been a century and no one has been able to reclaim anything in the region. Face it, the Halruaans have been reduced to roving mercenary bands.
DM Three: Maybe it’s Pre-Plague. If that’s the case it took them a while to get started, if Halruaa is still a wasteland in 1479 they haven’t made much progress. I thought the Halruaans are powerful mages.
DM One: No, my game is set just a few years after the Spellplague.
DM Two: That’s crazy, the Spellplague’s immediate aftermath put everything into flux. Your group’s efforts are in vain, it’s like shoveling water into a sieve hoping to fill the container. Halruaa remains a wasteland a hundred years later. Whatever your players manage to accomplish will be wiped out when they get into the real Realms timeline.
DM One: Then my game is non-canon…
DM Three: Meh, get with the times. Why are you playing in a setting if you throw out a hundred years of it.
DM One: …
To some extent this has always been a potential problem with any RSE, but the Spellplague coupled with the century jump makes this especially pronounced.
If Halruua is still a wasteland, then clearly the right answer is that the survivors haven't returned until 1479 to start trying to reclaim their territory. The canon lawyer can't over rule that as the book says nothing about it not happening. I question any DM that can't find a way around this problem.
As for the "it's all doomed anyway" outlook, so what? The star our planet orbits will one day consume this planet in a fiery blaze wiping out any and all signs of us having ever existed and, by the logic I keep seeing here, rendering every effort throughout the course of human history pointless. Taking it one step further in case someone decides to get smart and point out that our technological progress may culminate in our species being able to leave this planet, there is still the final heat death of the universe to contend with. Does anyone really live their life thinking that and go about their daily routine knowing it's all so completely and utterly pointless? In the Realms, if you are playing before the Spellplague, the people/places you are saving are alive now. You are having an impact on that world now. At some point in the future those places will be destroyed and those people will be dead. Guess what, that was going to happen with or without the Spellplague. The only difference is now you know the date should you choose to use it. Giving up because it will be destroyed (and I think we can drop the hyperbole that it all gets destroyed, that is demonstably not the case) later is the easy path. Your characters are heroes, they didn't sign on for the easy path. Why does anyone let material they don't like dictate their actions and thoughts? |
| Jakk |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 04:03:49
Markustay and Dark Wizard, I agree completely. The Spellplague and the Wailing Years would have been great fun as a chronological setting for a campaign. And I think Dark Wizard's scenarios are exactly on the mark; in the Year of the Ageless One, we have no reason to believe that things will get any better, because they've been this way for a century. Nothing (significant) happened in that time, so why would anything significant happen in the present or future? |
| Dark Wizard |
Posted - 02 Feb 2012 : 23:00:42
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The chaotic events ARE a great time to adventure in.
Too bad they set the setting a century later.
Enter "The Age of Boredom".
We already had a Barrens of Doom & Despair.
The glut of big events and blatantly desperate railroading to move the community to the Spellplagued 4E Realms struck me as too much in a short time.
Any one of the 4E Realms transition events would have been plenty, all of them at once contributed to the discontinuity between the classic Realms and the Spellplagued Realms.
If the 4E era picked up shortly after the Year of Blue Fire with the Spellplague’s ravagers still fresh, characters play an active part in alleviating the ails of the world. Groups can have epic adventures to lessen the impact and can return much of the world to some semblance of what it was. The choice is left up to each group. Moving the setting so far after the event locks in one official version and rigidly reinforces that vision across a hundred years.
Here’s how it could have worked out:
4E FR officially set immediately after the Spellplague:
- DM One: In my game, some mages of Halruaa hide out on another plane during the Spellplague. They soon returned, reclaimed, and restored some of Halruaa. Some parts remain dangerous and our adventure party is charged with eliminating the more dangerous Plague monsters and securing ancient Halruaan relics and cultural artifacts.
- DM Two: That sounds awesome. In my game, I didn’t do anything yet with Halruaa, but if I ever run a game there I might consider that idea, my players would probably enjoy rebuilding a major nation.
- DM Three: I never did much with Halruaa, I think I’ll keep it how it is for now.
- DM One: That’s alright too, it could go either way.
How it works currently with 4E a century after the Spellplague but some brave soul trying to accomplish the same thing:
DM One: (Same as above)
DM Two: Is this Post-Spellplague? You do know the FRCG said Halruaa is a wasteland in 1479 right? I doubt there is much to rebuild. I mean, it’s been a century and no one has been able to reclaim anything in the region. Face it, the Halruaans have been reduced to roving mercenary bands.
DM Three: Maybe it’s Pre-Plague. If that’s the case it took them a while to get started, if Halruaa is still a wasteland in 1479 they haven’t made much progress. I thought the Halruaans are powerful mages.
DM One: No, my game is set just a few years after the Spellplague.
DM Two: That’s crazy, the Spellplague’s immediate aftermath put everything into flux. Your group’s efforts are in vain, it’s like shoveling water into a sieve hoping to fill the container. Halruaa remains a wasteland a hundred years later. Whatever your players manage to accomplish will be wiped out when they get into the real Realms timeline.
DM One: Then my game is non-canon…
DM Three: Meh, get with the times. Why are you playing in a setting if you throw out a hundred years of it.
DM One: …
To some extent this has always been a potential problem with any RSE, but the Spellplague coupled with the century jump makes this especially pronounced. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 02 Feb 2012 : 15:11:45
The chaotic events ARE a great time to adventure in.
Too bad they set the setting a century later.
Enter "The Age of Boredom".
We already had a Barrens of Doom & Despair. |
| Thauranil |
Posted - 02 Feb 2012 : 11:08:20
I like 4e because i think that the world is far more interesting with the chaotic events going on.However i feel that they have gone overboard with the "bleakness" thing but nonetheless it by far the most enjoyable setting. |
| idilippy |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 22:35:25
The 2e Realms, it isn't even close though I played more 3.5e rules I always fall back on 2e lore. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 21:13:59
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
I agree on all counts, Diffan. I consider the term "grognard" to be a badge of honour, much as I do the term "geek". 
I would like to think that the anti-4E sentiment has died down in the last year simply because people had come to accept it and move on, but part of me suspects that my absence from the Keep for most of the past year had something to do with it too (edit: or is that my ego talking?). It was the announcement of D&D Next that brought me back to CK, and I'm trying to thin out my trollish blood going forward in the hopes that the new edition of both the game and the Realms will be something that brings all fans back on the same side. I suspect my hopes are a bit high, but we'll see what happens. I'm looking forward to (hopefully) being involved in the playtest.
I too am looking to be involved with the Playtest, and espically after they said it wouldn't contain an NDA, so that'll make for some good discussions. And I think the work of the Mods have been a good reason things are more civil around here.
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
I agree... this is the only FR/D&D board where I do more than lurk, and I saw a whole lot of hostility on the WotC boards (nearly all of it pro-4E and anti-Realms, and no, I'm not claiming the two are the same... although even a year ago, I probably would have done). Here, we had much the reverse reaction, and I played no small part in it, for which, even though I've apologized in other scrolls, I am sorry. Anyway, I second Ayrik's vote; +1.
Your kind words are much appreciated. Thank you.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Actually, from what I've seen, the die-down in the anti-4E sentiment has been caused in large part by some of those most vociferous scribes falling silent -- many have migrated on to other sites, and I know that some fell silent because it was easier than continuing to maintain their negative stance. I should like to think that Sage and I coming down hard on people disrupting pro-4E threads was also a factor.
Agree as well. Good job and thanks. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 19:59:42
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
[brI would like to think that the anti-4E sentiment has died down in the last year simply because people had come to accept it and move on, but part of me suspects that my absence from the Keep for most of the past year had something to do with it too (edit: or is that my ego talking?).
Actually, from what I've seen, the die-down in the anti-4E sentiment has been caused in large part by some of those most vociferous scribes falling silent -- many have migrated on to other sites, and I know that some fell silent because it was easier than continuing to maintain their negative stance. I should like to think that Sage and I coming down hard on people disrupting pro-4E threads was also a factor. |
|
|
