| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| swifty |
Posted - 02 Oct 2008 : 18:27:22
i dont want to slag off here but after reading some of the excellent books from some of the newer authors in the realms eg byers,reid and kemp in paticular i really notice the difference when reading one of eds books.i know without him there would be no realms but ive just read silverfall and it was just awful.i completely lost track of what some characters where meant to be doing and the way the simbul just annhilates everyone so easily is just boring.i actually enjoyed some of the earlier stuff like spellfire and crown of fire but then i read hand of fire and that was shockingly bad.it was like a scrolling beat em up videogame with endless bad guys queing up to be killed.from now on i think hed be better off stickin to the modules and things like that. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 23:37:56
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Yet far from scaling down the Chosen's roles, the 3E era saw them cemented as 'iconic characters', Elminster placed front and centre in the FRCS and his face all over the website, with Julia Martin deciding not to use Ed's 1996 Conspectus introduction because it wasn't by Elminster, two more Elminster novels and more short stories starring El and the Seven. (At the same time, he was removed from his legitimate narrator/mouthpiece role.)
I'm not pointing fingers, but I think it should also be noted that the "signature" trilogy that introduced 3rd edition, The Return of the Archwizards, features the unfortunate trope that "Elminster must know about the evil, and then must be removed from the story," as well as the Chosen being called together to fight the Shadovar as if they were the Justice League of Faerun taking on the Injustice Gang of Shar.
I think this set the tone that:
1. Elminster would react and save the day if he could.
2. The Chosen band together to fight "evil."
3. Every major event has to top the last one.
I think the only reason why they would have to write out the chosen though is because they were writing RSE's. If they hadn't focused so many of the 3e novels on RSE's, they wouldn't have to explain why some "all-powerful" character wasn't around. |
| khorne |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 22:02:58
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
I understand that this is the outgrowth of the fact that they are centuries older and wiser than most of their foes, but I find that El's calm and often condescending superiority, as well as his constant "rightness" becomes tiresome after a while.
I can think of only one time when I was REALLY ticked of at El because of his behaviour. It was in Swords of Dragonfire where he first took Khelbens blackstaff from him and teleported it back to waterdeep, and then his humiliation of Manshoon.
I was shocked at how easily he overpowered Khelben (and that he did. I mean, taking away his namesake STAFF like it was nothing?) and what he did to Manshoon. I was under the impression that El was a bit wary of Manshoon, but here it came across as if Ol' Manshy was hopelessly out of his league. I like my villains to be little less overmatched, thank you very much. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 18:00:23
I'm sure that's so. The hype given the event trilogies, combined with their presentation as 'the' things going on in the Player's Guide to Faerûn (compare that to the 1987 set's current clack!), and the assignment of the year-titles to RSEs, did a lot to undermine the painstakingly built sense of plurality and locality that's so evident in the Knights novels. I commented on the 'must write out the Chosen' thinking in my review of Shadowdale: The Scouring of the Land on Eric Boyd's thread. As well as the implications you cite, both that and Elminster's sojourn in hell suggest an impulse to prune and narrow the Realms as an active world of disparate actors to something like an instanced dungeon in an MMORPG according to what seems to be an antisocial, non-Realmsian idea of what heroism and protagonization are about. Hence the 'space to tell [our] stories in' thing, and Realms-2008.
No one seems to have drawn the parallel between the Knights trilogy and Castle Zagyg: the paradigmatic centres of, respectively, the Forgotten Realms and Gygaxian D&D, published decades late and following so much peripheral tat, incomplete, after the horse has bolted. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 17:51:48
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
I'm not pointing fingers, but I think it should also be noted that the "signature" trilogy that introduced 3rd edition, The Return of the Archwizards, features the unfortunate trope that "Elminster must know about the evil, and then must be removed from the story," as well as the Chosen being called together to fight the Shadovar as if they were the Justice League of Faerun taking on the Injustice Gang of Shar.
I think this set the tone that:
1. Elminster would react and save the day if he could.
2. The Chosen band together to fight "evil."
3. Every major event has to top the last one.
I totally agree with this. It's one of many reasons that I think 3E's intro was where the Realms started going in the wrong direction. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 16:43:38
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Yet far from scaling down the Chosen's roles, the 3E era saw them cemented as 'iconic characters', Elminster placed front and centre in the FRCS and his face all over the website, with Julia Martin deciding not to use Ed's 1996 Conspectus introduction because it wasn't by Elminster, two more Elminster novels and more short stories starring El and the Seven. (At the same time, he was removed from his legitimate narrator/mouthpiece role.)
I'm not pointing fingers, but I think it should also be noted that the "signature" trilogy that introduced 3rd edition, The Return of the Archwizards, features the unfortunate trope that "Elminster must know about the evil, and then must be removed from the story," as well as the Chosen being called together to fight the Shadovar as if they were the Justice League of Faerun taking on the Injustice Gang of Shar.
I think this set the tone that:
1. Elminster would react and save the day if he could.
2. The Chosen band together to fight "evil."
3. Every major event has to top the last one. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 16:26:44
Because the Wizards people aren't telling us which of their stated justifications were primary and which are fringe benefits, we've all been having to guess what the real process was. I don't know if I've got it right, but I can put together an argument for what they did that's a good deal more compelling than most of the reasons stated individually, many of which are weak if not insupportable. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 15:38:58
Not only that, but there are other ways they could have been written out of their active roles without killing them or blowing up the setting...
As a challenge to myself, I took the supposed problems of Mystra and her Chosen, and decided to see if I could remove them without the Sellplague or any other ridiculousness. I followed the same idea of having Cyric murder Mystra 2.0, but made it plausible, and then drew from existing Realmslore (and a lot of my own ideas) to reduce the number of Chosen, create a new Mystra, and give her a strong neutral aspect.
So if I, someone who has never signed an NDA or seen any shared-world product before it was released, can come up with a more plausible way to accomplish the same thing without blowing up the setting, then the professionals certainly could have. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 15:01:18
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
Again, "history" is trumping what would make a stronger story.
I really don't think so: just a more linear and a more conventional story. Both of Orn's objections, the lack of simplistic focus and the role of happenstance and manipulation over easy self-determination, aren't characteristics of Ed's writing per se but of the Realms, and some of my favourite. Unfortunately, some people -- not Orn necessarily -- confuse heroism with egotism.quote:
Originally posted by Kajehase
On the whole TSR/WotC wanting El/Seven Sisters novels while also wanting their role cut down to size topic - before starting to complain about paradoxes and the like, shouldn't one consider the possibility that it might be because the people now in charge of the Realms are not the same people as those who decreed that "there must be Elminster novels and a Seven Sisters sourcebook?"
Phil Athans and Richard Baker were in major roles then and now.
In one of the promo articles for the 3E Realms in 2001, Richard said: 'This isn’t Elminster’s world. This is the world where your player characters are engaged in writing the story of their deeds, their defeats, and their triumphs.' Rob Heinsoo added: 'It also gives you a clearer sense that the PCs’ actions matter, that Elminster and the other major characters of the Realms won’t solve the world’s problems.'
Yet far from scaling down the Chosen's roles, the 3E era saw them cemented as 'iconic characters', Elminster placed front and centre in the FRCS and his face all over the website, with Julia Martin deciding not to use Ed's 1996 Conspectus introduction because it wasn't by Elminster, two more Elminster novels and more short stories starring El and the Seven. (At the same time, he was removed from his legitimate narrator/mouthpiece role.)
The Wizards editors and managers kept on abusing Ed's characters long after Rich, at least, recognized it was a bad idea, then years later used the same rhetoric to justify a different, even more harmful outcome, without admitting the least responsibility for what they'd done. |
| swifty |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 14:48:34
talkin bout all powerful heroes ive been a bit disapointed with the ease with which a lot of dragons have been overcome by mere humans.i thought they were uber powerful.even entreri in p o t w k refers to the dragon sisters in some awe.and hed wipe the floor with most of the cast from rogue dragons which is the series i was referring to. |
| Kajehase |
Posted - 15 Feb 2009 : 12:07:40
On the whole TSR/WotC wanting El/Seven Sisters novels while also wanting their role cut down to size topic - before starting to complain about paradoxes and the like, shouldn't one consider the possibility that it might be because the people now in charge of the Realms are not the same people as those who decreed that "there must be Elminster novels and a Seven Sisters sourcebook?"
I'm saying this, because in my opinion the scaling down of the Chosen of Mystra's roles began early on in the 3rd edition publications (and if they'd kept it at that level I personally would have had no complaints - but they had to go and kill off as many of them as they could instead. Grrr). |
| Orn |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 18:55:52
Thanks, Lady Hooded one. I read your post a few times, and you raised some excellent points. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 17:32:54
I agree.
And yes, Hooded One, thank you. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 16:12:59
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
What's ironic is that Ed never wanted to write about Elminster OR the Seven as anything more than offstage, referred-to-by-others characters, but the publishers always want him to make them the main characters in his novels. Just as Bob Salvatore finds it very hard to get away from the constant urgings to write more about Drizzt. "Write another surefire tale about your iconic character" has been the refrain for literally decades now.
I'm sure if Ed never wrote another word about any of the Chosen, he'd be more than happy. He has SO many neglected characters to tell the stories of, dating back to before TSR ever approached him to make the Realms into a game setting.
love,
THO
-THO,So WotC/TSR wanted Ed to write about the settings "Iconics". And now they took THEM away?   Very interesting. 
BRIMSTONE
EDIT POST 500 
As wild as it sounds it's exactly what they did. Its a major reason I got riled up with what they did, i can put up with most anything....but I hate hipocracy.
Ed's characters, that he created, nutured and loved deserved better.
ed: sp |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 07:09:54
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
What's ironic is that Ed never wanted to write about Elminster OR the Seven as anything more than offstage, referred-to-by-others characters, but the publishers always want him to make them the main characters in his novels. Just as Bob Salvatore finds it very hard to get away from the constant urgings to write more about Drizzt. "Write another surefire tale about your iconic character" has been the refrain for literally decades now.
I'm sure if Ed never wrote another word about any of the Chosen, he'd be more than happy. He has SO many neglected characters to tell the stories of, dating back to before TSR ever approached him to make the Realms into a game setting.
love,
THO
-THO,So WotC/TSR wanted Ed to write about the settings "Iconics". And now they took THEM away? Very interesting.
BRIMSTONE
EDIT POST 500
It's something many of us have pointed out before... According to some Wizards folks, "people" perceived Elminster and the Seven as being too prominent, and that's why they had to be removed. These same Wizards folks conveniently ignore the fact that it was their demands to Ed that made El and the Sisters keep getting screen time. |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 07:03:58
Thank you for that milady. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 04:18:33
quote:
Originally posted by The Hooded One
What's ironic is that Ed never wanted to write about Elminster OR the Seven as anything more than offstage, referred-to-by-others characters, but the publishers always want him to make them the main characters in his novels. Just as Bob Salvatore finds it very hard to get away from the constant urgings to write more about Drizzt. "Write another surefire tale about your iconic character" has been the refrain for literally decades now.
I'm sure if Ed never wrote another word about any of the Chosen, he'd be more than happy. He has SO many neglected characters to tell the stories of, dating back to before TSR ever approached him to make the Realms into a game setting.
love,
THO
-THO,So WotC/TSR wanted Ed to write about the settings "Iconics". And now they took THEM away? Very interesting.
BRIMSTONE
EDIT POST 500 |
| The Hooded One |
Posted - 13 Feb 2009 : 02:00:52
Heh. He's SUPPOSED to be tiresome.
What's ironic is that Ed never wanted to write about Elminster OR the Seven as anything more than offstage, referred-to-by-others characters, but the publishers always want him to make them the main characters in his novels. Just as Bob Salvatore finds it very hard to get away from the constant urgings to write more about Drizzt. "Write another surefire tale about your iconic character" has been the refrain for literally decades now.
I'm sure if Ed never wrote another word about any of the Chosen, he'd be more than happy. He has SO many neglected characters to tell the stories of, dating back to before TSR ever approached him to make the Realms into a game setting.
As far as the Knights trilogy (and I fear the 4e timeshift will prevent Ed doing what he wanted to do: write a lot more Knights books), there are some things I feel I should tell Orn. Such as:
* The books have way too many main characters, but Ed's stuck with that, because he's covering Realms "history." Believe me, he simplified events drastically - - but he can't make core members of the Knights "go away" to make a simpler, tighter story.
* Ed's whole point, in these early books, is to show just how bumbling and powerless novice adventurers are. Being a hero is being scared ***tless but doing what has to be done anyway, and striving and striving again no matter how much of a mess you make of things, NOT scoring improbably-easy after improbably-easy shining victory. The Knights are incredibly lucky to stay alive, and they're also kept alive because more powerful beings WANT them kept alive, and "watch over them." This is the Realms, and that's often the way things work. Again, "history" is trumping what would make a stronger story.
* Ed's also trying to underscore that heroics often involve being loyal to your friends/companions, and learning to work as a team. That's what the Knights accomplish in these three books - - and it's quite legitimate to contend that this is about ALL they accomplish, though they do manage the "being utterly scared and up against stronger foes but going in and doing it anyway" heroism. Ed told me how much he wanted to have more wordcount and more time to write, to bring the Knights into Shadowdale and show Doust ruling it and Florin gaining stature throughout the Dales . . . but there just wasn't the time and wordcount, because he refused to leave important story elements out or not show the reader the banter and subtly growing characters of the Knights (and to those who say they don't develop, I merely shrug and say that as an editor, I can certainly see the character development; Ed kept it far more subtle than most fantasy authors bother to, but that's a strength of his writing, not a deficiency).
And when I write these things, believe me: as the player of a Knight or two, I'm a far harsher critic of these books than most readers are equipped to be.
And I like them very much. I think the first and the third are the best books in the series, and I wish there had been another two trilogies, at least. However, I strongly suspect that you'll see more Elminster books from Ed's pen next - - because, I suspect even more strongly, that's what the editors will demand.
I also disagree, Orn, that the Knights failed to complete "most of their quests." Their primary 'quest,' after they got the charter, was to stay alive ... and they managed that. 
love,
THO |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 23:44:08
quote:
I agree with you on all points except the bit about Storm and Elminster being all-powerful, all-knowing, etc.
Fair enough. They are not gods. They are neither omniscient nor omnipotent, but in Ed´s fiction they are almost invariably superior to all of their foes. There are, of course, a few exceptions. But even when they are magically disadvantaged --as El is in Shadows of Doom-- they are still tactically superior. I understand that this is the outgrowth of the fact that they are centuries older and wiser than most of their foes, but I find that El's calm and often condescending superiority, as well as his constant "rightness" becomes tiresome after a while. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 22:25:48
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
I too like this aspect of the Knights books. I am frankly tired of the smirking, all powerful, all knowing, self-assured characters like Storm Silverhand and Elminster. I much prefer my "heroes" to be attempting to do the right thing under very adverse circumstances. In reality, that's what most people who are dubbed "heroes" say about themselves.
I agree with you on all points except the bit about Storm and Elminster being all-powerful, all-knowing, etc. |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 22:03:59
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
One problem might have been that I didn't read of their adventures in Shadowdale (and such).
Good point. The novels should stand on their own.
I think they do, actually, but since the Knights are a feature of Shadowdale in FR novels and in the Shadowdale booklet in the 2E Campaign Setting, I would like to see the origens story of this legendary group bring us up to the point at which they connect prominantly with the Campaign Setting and existing novels. |
| Orn |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 21:28:42
One problem might have been that I didn't read of their adventures in Shadowdale (and such). |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 20:21:57
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
I very much like to see a struggle. I realize that many would be heroes would fail more often than not, but they are not worth writing about unless they accomplish or change something (maybe).
This get's at why I found the last book in the Kights of Myth Drannor trilogy to be a disappointing end to the series. I enjoyed that fact that the Knights had a bumbling beginning, and owed their initial success as much to luck as to personal strength. I also enjoyed the way they were caught between forces they had nothing to do with, and then hustled away by Vangey the control freak as soon as they attained any degree of success. But the fact is that the Knights later become heroic protagonists in the history of Shadowdale. I'd like to see at least one more novel that would draw a narrative line between this motley adventuring party and their heroic future. |
| Orn |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 17:30:14
quote:
Thanks. I see what you mean, but to me that was a positive thing. It was a nice change from the usual victory by the smallest margin. Then again, Ed is probably the only (current) Realms author I enjoy, so I am partial.
Well I very much still enjoy victories by a small margin, but maybe on day I'll tire of it too (hope not). I can't see that happening because events will often not work out as expected.
I very much like to see a struggle. I realize that many would be heroes would fail more often than not, but they are not worth writing about unless they accomplish or change something (maybe). "Heroes" that had everything handed to them, I find very boring. When playing Dungeons and Dragons, my friends call it a "joke plot".
|
| Jorkens |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 08:50:47
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
I meant anti-heroic in the way that "heroes" in Swords of Eveningstar utterly failed to complete most of their quests. It was far too clear that the Knights were simply pawns of greater powers, unable to complete anything on their own. Beyond the first chapter, they were unable to accomplish much of anything. Indeed any rewards they were given were acquired much too easily.
Thanks. I see what you mean, but to me that was a positive thing. It was a nice change from the usual victory by the smallest margin. Then again, Ed is probably the only (current) Realms author I enjoy, so I am partial.
I too like this aspect of the Knights books. I am frankly tired of the smirking, all powerful, all knowing, self-assured characters like Storm Silverhand and Elminster. I much prefer my "heroes" to be attempting to do the right thing under very adverse circumstances. In reality, that's what most people who are dubbed "heroes" say about themselves.
True, but I prefer those others to the Drizzt/Dragonlance, etc. "We face impossible odds, but still we triumph through luck and morale" clichés. Almost as irritating as most of the long-winded "we must stop the ancient world threatening evil" epics. Then again, I hate long action scenes in any form as well, which is a problem with the Elminster stories. |
| Brimstone |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 03:49:53
-I like the novels because the characters were low-level. After awhile I get tired of the Epic Uber-Cheese that goes on in the Realms. Sometimes the novels too me got Helter-Skelter. Its like where did that come from.
BRIMSTONE |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 12 Feb 2009 : 00:58:44
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
I meant anti-heroic in the way that "heroes" in Swords of Eveningstar utterly failed to complete most of their quests. It was far too clear that the Knights were simply pawns of greater powers, unable to complete anything on their own. Beyond the first chapter, they were unable to accomplish much of anything. Indeed any rewards they were given were acquired much too easily.
Thanks. I see what you mean, but to me that was a positive thing. It was a nice change from the usual victory by the smallest margin. Then again, Ed is probably the only (current) Realms author I enjoy, so I am partial.
I too like this aspect of the Knights books. I am frankly tired of the smirking, all powerful, all knowing, self-assured characters like Storm Silverhand and Elminster. I much prefer my "heroes" to be attempting to do the right thing under very adverse circumstances. In reality, that's what most people who are dubbed "heroes" say about themselves. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 22:20:55
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
I meant anti-heroic in the way that "heroes" in Swords of Eveningstar utterly failed to complete most of their quests. It was far too clear that the Knights were simply pawns of greater powers, unable to complete anything on their own. Beyond the first chapter, they were unable to accomplish much of anything. Indeed any rewards they were given were acquired much too easily.
Thanks. I see what you mean, but to me that was a positive thing. It was a nice change from the usual victory by the smallest margin. Then again, Ed is probably the only (current) Realms author I enjoy, so I am partial. |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 19:01:14
quote:
Originally posted by Orn
I meant anti-heroic in the way that "heroes" in Swords of Eveningstar utterly failed to complete most of their quests. It was far too clear that the Knights were simply pawns of greater powers, unable to complete anything on their own. Beyond the first chapter, they were unable to accomplish much of anything. Indeed any rewards they were given were acquired much too easily.
I feel a differently about it. I feel like the foes they come up against are above and beyond what they can handle themselves and are much more that would come up against a comparable group that is "out of the spotlight". |
| Orn |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 18:47:12
I meant anti-heroic in the way that "heroes" in Swords of Eveningstar utterly failed to complete most of their quests. It was far too clear that the Knights were simply pawns of greater powers, unable to complete anything on their own. Beyond the first chapter, they were unable to accomplish much of anything. Indeed any rewards they were given were acquired much too easily. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 11 Feb 2009 : 01:40:56
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
-I just picked up all the Elminster Novels. (Making, Myth Drannor, Temptation, In Hell, and His Daughter. )
-All together I got 16 Realms Novels today!
BRIMSTONE
You are sooo lucky...my favorite used book store closed down about 2 years ago, so I've been having a hard time finding the older books since... |
|
|
