| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Bellua Aeneus Lacerta |
Posted - 11 Aug 2003 : 00:28:05
Finally decided to give this a read. I've had the first two books for quite awhile, but finally got the third coming in the mail
I really liked these books so far, even if they have histoical inaccuracies, or too much historical fact(depending on your viewpoint). I can start to see at the end of the second book where this would be a cool place to "play" for awhile.
edit:Hey--this trilogy has Drow in it too |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| wwwwwww |
Posted - 17 Aug 2005 : 00:11:47
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
And no one is lieing or hating here.
When you say things like, "Rick Swan's feeble pseudo-Inuit Great Glacier . . ." you are hating.
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
more or less out-of-tune developments of places Ed created
According to who? You? Well I would consider that an opinion, like anyone else's opinion.
Back on topic, the Maztica trilogy is enjoyable, albeit quite different from other FR novels. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 23:17:44
OK fair enough!
Well what was Anchorome supposed to be? Was it another continent? Or was it another place like evermeet?
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 23:10:18
Mournblade,
Yes, the second trilogy is a little more Realmslike, and yes, the fact that it's an island explains away the difference of tone to a degree -- though other islands have much better continuity with the Realms feel. I also agree that given the circumstances TSR did a fair job and that it isn't a particularly bad fit. But Doug's Moonshaes gain little (except book sales, of course) from being attached to Ed's Realms, attaching places with different design principles weakens the integrity of the whole, and we will now never get to read about the Moonshaes first mentioned in Dragon #69.
I think it was a mistake adding Vaasa and Damara too -- when I read FR9 it didn't seem like part of the Realms at all. The H-series modules certainly don't. But they only replaced part of a glacier, not an existing, developed island chain.
I didn't say the Moonshaes had anything to do with Ed's Anchorome -- it's Maztica that obliterated that, which is where the new Anchorome -- which isn't even detailed much -- is now.
wwwwwww,
No, Ed created almost all of Faerûn.
Attached outside of Faerûn: the Hordelands, Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Maztica
Attached within Faerûn: the Moonshaes, Vaasa and Damara, the Blade Kingdoms
Created within Faerûn by other people with the existing Realms in mind: many small places, like Icewind Dale, and also Erlkazar.
Plus there's the Bedine inserted into Anauroch, Rick Swan's feeble pseudo-Inuit Great Glacier, and Scott Bennie's somewhat-more-Earthified Old Empires, more or less out-of-tune developments of places Ed created.
Many people other than Ed have contributed to the detailing of Faerûn and added greatly to the Realms. The best of that work continues the spirit and design principles of Ed's work while adding its own creativity. Less good products approximate the Realms style less well or are just bland. But taking an independently created land and sticking it onto the Realms is entirely a different thing.
I haven't read Lady of Poison, no. But either the monster you refer to fits the Realms, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, that's bad. What point are you making?
And no one is lieing or hating here.
Woolly -- didn't see your post. Happy to continue this discussion on another thread. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 23:04:04
Just a reminder, folks, let's keep it civil. No one's gotten out of hand yet, but I should really hate to see this thread get locked because of strong emotion.
We're also straying into a bolt-on versus original debate, which was not the original intent of the thread. We should rein it back in, thinks I. |
| wwwwwww |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 22:43:45
I've gotta side with Mournblade on this one. If you want to start ripping on the Moonshae's for being "bolted-on", you could literally rip on about 50% to 60% of FR (don't tell me Mr. Greenwood created almost every location of the realms, because that would be a flat out lie). In my mind, the Moonshae's have a fantasy feel to them, and fit the overall world just fine. There are certainly many more places in Toril that don't fit the "dales" style of fantasy, far worse than the Moonshae's.
Geez, have you read Lady of Poison? What the hell is a Gungarian (or however you spell it)? Not that I hate Gungarian's at all, but they don't fit the "dales" style of fantasy either. Do you hate them as well? |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 22:14:59
Well said indeed. But I fail to see how the SECOND trilogy did not follow suit with the realms. The moonshae Islands are separate from Faerun and so do not have all the power struggles of the secret societies affecting them and such.
I have been with the PUBLISHED realms from the beginning. Perhaps you have a closer relationship with Ed Greenwood and have known about it longer, and so may see the 'damage' adding the moonshaes has done. I think that TSR actually did a good job of bolting it on so to speak.
If you are going to say all this about the moonshaes, then the same can be applied to the Bloodstone Lands (Which I have used EXTENSIVELY). I think it was F9. This seems MORE jammed in the realms to me than the Moonshaes did. I still think Damara works, but it is obvious that Gareth and Company were a previous campaign that got added to the realms. I don't have a particular problem with this, but it actually seems like MORE of a bolt on than the Moonshaes do.
I have read alot of Ed Greenwood's writing mostly from Dragon pre published realms material, as well as things published on paper over the last several years, but still, I apparently am not as familiar as many of the scribes here on most of his thoughts.
I do not see how adding the Moonshaes would of hurt the addition of Anchor Home since the moonshae Island chain was already there. If you have any more information please do tell. I am interested in reading about it.
I can concur that Maztica was a half way attempt at a new land, and maybe THIS spoiled Anchorhome. But I do not see how the Moonshaes did. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 18:24:37
Doug Niles substantially completed Darkwalker on Moonshae to be set in a new world that was going to be a 'British Dragonlance' before it was decided to place it in the Realms, when the book adopted the name of Ed's island chain but the rest -- the culture, names, gods -- wasn't substantially changed, and the sequels followed the first book's lead.
On the other hand, Bob Salvatore created Menzoberranzan after having read considerable Realms materials. The first is a bolt-on, the second a normal part of the shared-world process. Now, Doug's Moonshaes are not a particularly bad fit, but they stand out like a sore thumb compared to the Realms proper -- it couldn't have been otherwise given the circumstances of their writing -- even to TSR who didn't always exhibit any such sensitivity. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 10:38:30
Moonshaes may not have been part of Ed's original forgotten realms, but I fail to see how these islands did not fit in with the realms.
In fact from what I remember Darkwalker on Moonshae came out before any other realms novel. moonshae works fine, there is really no hindrance to it. I see how Zakhara, Maztica, Hordelands, Kara Tur etc may not have the 'realms feeling' but I fail to see how the Moonshaes do not have that feel.
Because it was made by someone else? How is Menzobarranzan any more realms than the moonshaes?
|
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 04:08:34
Only two? There was Calimshan, Semphar, the Bedine culture in Anauroch, and depending on how you read Akbar bel Akash Turmish was a sort of middle eastern realm . . .
Dispite the fact that I didn't quite enjoy the full "attachment" of Maztica to the Realms, I was kinda intriuged by what the more Northern tribes on the continent would be like. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 03:06:17
Maztica I resent for wiping out Ed's Anchorome which we'll now never see. The Doug Niles Moonshaes likewise. Zakhara, I agree, is a perfectly fine setting that was only attached to the Realms for crossover sales reasons -- at least, I never heard any others. The joining does nothing for Zakhara, and having two Middle Eastlike regions, one loosely influenced and one directly based on Hollywood Arabia, is obviously inelegant design. Ed always met these surgeries with extraordinary public grace, doing design work with Doug's Moonshaes and Troy Denning's Bedine with no less energy than his own creations. |
| Mournblade |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 02:28:32
Maztica was a stretch. Zakhara tended to make Calimshan lose its shine. Kara Tur however I think was a VERY useful addition. IF anyone bothered to develop it, the setting would add ALOT to the fantasy of the realms.
In my campaign I do not allow Kensai, Samurai, Ninja, or other asian sorts of characters unless the character is from kara Tur. I am not a big fan of the EAST/WEST Amalgamation that is common in gaming ideas now. I have no problem with it per se, it is just not my style (maybe because I am a historian).
Maztica was a definite attempt at parralleling world history, BUT I managed to make this work. Amn no longer has the resources to reap all the gold from Maztica because Emperor Sythillis conquered half of Amn. Waterdeep as mercantile as they are (I am playing as idealists) have sent troops there NOT to take over, but to free the people from Amn. When Amn is beat down, I am going to establish a watch station there maintained by waterdeep to make sure Continental Faerunians do not act like the old Continental Europeans who later became Americans.
Zakhara... SUCH a good idea, but so POORLY executed. Zakhara would have worked well as a new campaign world, with all of its ARABIAN influences. I do not add Zakhara to my campaign, but I USE some of the Zakharan concepts to enhance Calimshan.
All three of these ideas were good. Kara tur had a place in the realms, Maztica should not have been added, but I made it work, and Zakhara was brilliant, but sadly shoe horned into the realms. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 01:59:55
quote:
Originally posted by Realmslore
Maztica is no more or less based on pseudo-Earth culture than Faerûn is. Faerûn is clearly based on a pseudo-European culture. This can not be disputed. If you want something with little or no Earth culture comparisons, try Dark Sun.
Yeah, but there's a difference. The Heartlands are inspired by medieval Europe, but there are no direct parallels. Maztica, on the other hand, is the New World with magic and more deities.
I think the complaints are that using such a direct parallel draws one out of the fantasy, so to speak. |
| Faraer |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 01:36:22
The Realms somewhat resembles medieval Europe not because it's based on it but because that's part of the convention of swords and sorcery, which it is based on. Everything that makes the Realms the Realms -- a distinct setting and not characterless quasi-medieval fantasy -- is its implementation of that genre, based on multitudinous influences and person-decades of creativity. The ancient empires, the terminology, bloodlines, the national cultures and the fantastic cultures of adventurers, mages, secret societies, the monstrous ecology, how names sound, how people see the world, speech patterns and figures of speech, magic -- all of these, and yet they're manifestations, epiphenomena, of the spirit of the Realms. Basing nations on specific nations of Earth is foreign to that design philosophy, as Ed has discussed several times and is acknowledged by all good Realms authors and by Wizards of the Coast. Otherwise, as I said, there is no Realms, just an incoherent patchwork jumble.
The Realms lived and breathed for 20 years before those extra marginal bits -- most of them commercial and artistic failures that permanently hurt the integrity and reputation of the Realms and treated it as a dumping ground -- were bolted on, not emerging organically from the setting but crudely stapled to it, and has no trouble living and breathing now that they're rightly avoided in the sourcebooks and fiction. |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 01:07:54
Maztica is no more or less based on pseudo-Earth culture than Faerûn is. Faerûn is clearly based on a pseudo-European culture. This can not be disputed. If you want something with little or no Earth culture comparisons, try Dark Sun.
I for one enjoy the 'tacked-on' environments. It makes Toril a living breathing *world*, instead of yet another single continent pseudo-European fantasy setting.
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
All of the novels that deal with pseudo-Earth cultures (like the Maztica trilogy) may be damn fine novels, but for Realms content they are quite obvious tack-ons to the original campaign setting.
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 01:00:27
 One of my favourites was the town of "Guidodale" on the northern borders of Impiltur. When I e-queried Ed once re anything he may have on this place, his dry reply was "Guidodale? Right next to Sanducci-town, perhaps? Nope, not one of mine." It still makes me grin.
-- George Krashos
|
| The Hooded One |
Posted - 16 Aug 2005 : 00:15:20
And bad FR novels ignore or contradict established Realmslore. I’m sure all longtime Realms readers can think of their own “favourite” examples; I’m not interested in naming names and digging up corpses.
But I well remember Ed’s exasperated reply to a certain senior TSR designer at a long-ago GenCon, about a real-world name being used “as is” for something in the Realms: “Evoke, man, evoke! Don’t jarringly copy real-world stuff! REMIND us of historical stuff, don’t COPY it! You’re getting PAID to be a designer, remember! I know history teachers generally make more than game designers, but . . .”
This got a roar of applause. I just wish Ed’s words had been heeded. Then I wouldn’t have had to sit through TSR designers arguing about whether or not Purple Dragon cavalry should have stirrups or not (because of real-world history) or Waterdeep’s population should only be this much (because of their grade school history assumptions about real-world medieval population), and so on and on and on.
Stallions named Avalon? Burrrr. The Dalai Lama (the DALAI LAMA?) in the Realms as an NPC player characters can kill, in an FR module?
Sigh.
THO
|
| George Krashos |
Posted - 15 Aug 2005 : 08:38:26
quote:
Originally posted by Realmslore
Many people say it but I still don't understand their meaning. How can a novel in the realms not seem "Realms-like" or "Realmsy".
All of the novels that deal with pseudo-Earth cultures (like the Maztica trilogy) may be damn fine novels, but for Realms content they are quite obvious tack-ons to the original campaign setting.
FR novels have to give you a sense of place and people. Incongruous elements (like Shou junks in the Inner Sea or Genghis ... err .. the Khahan invading the 'western lands') really jar me out of the story thread. I want FR names, FR references and elements that aren't already in print that are unique to the Realms. That's why I love Ed's novels. You are always going to get a unique food, or drink or term of address or card game or insult or ... heck, just about anything. That's what is 'realmsy': not writing a book set in Murann and not providing any information on the place other than what we all know as FR fans already. Good FR novels give you new FR references and information. Poor FR novels trot out or regurgitate stuff that is already there.
-- George Krashos
|
| Mournblade |
Posted - 14 Aug 2005 : 21:29:05
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I have actually been toying with a Conquistador regional Prestige class for Amn.
And just how far along are you? I wouldn't mind seeing what you can come up with for this...
Currently I am in the south region of Arizona. No books here except for FR campaign, Underdark, and City of Splendors. When I get home I wanted to work on the prestige class.
|
| Faraer |
Posted - 14 Aug 2005 : 18:57:29
quote:
Originally posted by Realmslore
How can a novel in the realms not seem "Realms-like" or "Realmsy".
...
Neither one feels more like the Realms than the other.
If this was true, the Realms wouldn't be a coherent setting at all, just a collection of different stories unconnected in feel and nature, merely linked by shared geography and other 'brute facts'. Though it isn't one specific narrow register, but an envelope that varies by time, place, etc.
The Realms feel, its spirit, is by far the most important thing about the Realms -- it *is* the Realms -- and we most certainly can say that certain authors capture it better or worse than others.
The original Moonshae trilogy certainly doesn't feel like the Realms, because it wasn't written for the Realms or with any knowledge of the Realms. That's why Ed Greenwood was directed to Realmsify it in FA1 Halls of the High King. |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 14 Aug 2005 : 16:33:50
My thoughts exactly!
quote:
Originally posted by Bellua Aeneus Lacerta
I think I liked them BECAUSE they weren't `Realmsy'. They were more like a story from Toril. There is a whole planet that the Dales are on, you know
|
| Bellua Aeneus Lacerta |
Posted - 14 Aug 2005 : 15:34:27
I think I liked them BECAUSE they weren't `Realmsy'. They were more like a story from Toril. There is a whole planet that the Dales are on, you know |
| jklang |
Posted - 05 Aug 2005 : 02:24:50
For me, this series was hard to start out. I bought them when they first came out and throughout the years was never able to get into them enough to complete the trilogy. But about two years ago I was finally able to read them all and really enjoyedt he trilogy. Same with the Empires trilogy. Both trilogies are hard to start out, but once you get used to the new terminologies, both Maztica and Empires are enjoyable reads. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 03 Aug 2005 : 06:37:11
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
I have actually been toying with a Conquistador regional Prestige class for Amn.
And just how far along are you? I wouldn't mind seeing what you can come up with for this...
|
| Mournblade |
Posted - 03 Aug 2005 : 05:19:08
quote:
Originally posted by Realmslore
Many people say it but I still don't understand their meaning. How can a novel in the realms not seem "Realms-like" or "Realmsy".
Are you really saying that a novel set in Waterdeep doesn't feel like a novel set in Calimport? Or that a novel set in Maztica doesn't feel like a novel set in Chult. Of course they don't feel the same. Geographically they are in different settings.
Some Realms novels are murder mysteries; some are action adventures, while some are history novels. None of these feel more or less "Realms-like" to me.
The great thing about the Realms (to me anyway), are its diverse cultures and diverse writing styles of its authors. Salvatore writes nothing like Greenwood. Nor do Niles and Cunningham. But they are *all* wonderful stories set in the Forgotten Realms. Neither one feels more like the Realms than the other.
I would agree with MOST of that statement, but I have yet to read a Realms novel that is historical as applies to earth. They attempt, yes, but well they just are NOT historical nor should they be. Read Nigel Tranter for the history.
Moonshaes was the FIRST FR trilogy. I find it very hard to accuse that of NOT Feeling like the realms because it was the first. Maybe the other books after it failed to feel like the realms? The Druid Home trilogy was VERY realms. Remember the Elf eater? Who sent that? Oh yeah! MALAR. Douglas Niles weaved Celtic lore into the realms quite nicely.
But OK Maztica? That was an attempt at writing a historical account. All it did was expose people to very basic 5th grade history. It was well written and a good story. But that was coming around the time when it looked like the realms were going to PARALLEL earth history. I am all for the feel of earth history, as in setting specific areas to represent earth cultures and the like, but Cortez, Pizzaro, and Ghenghis Khan are NOT part of the realms.
The best thing I got out of Maztica was actually fleshing out Amn, making it a picture of Moorish Spain. Oh yeah.. and I admit... I have a general in the Amnish army named... ahem.. Cortez. But he fights off the Sythillisians.
I have actually been toying with a Conquistador regional Prestige class for Amn.
I am such a sucker for the Spanish Empire. It is one of my favourite periods of history. ANd age of Empires is only ever a good INTRODUCTION to the period of history. It is very difficult to garnish any information out of it, unless you have some prior knowledge to build on.
|
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 29 Jul 2005 : 00:48:02
Many people say it but I still don't understand their meaning. How can a novel in the realms not seem "Realms-like" or "Realmsy".
Are you really saying that a novel set in Waterdeep doesn't feel like a novel set in Calimport? Or that a novel set in Maztica doesn't feel like a novel set in Chult. Of course they don't feel the same. Geographically they are in different settings.
Some Realms novels are murder mysteries; some are action adventures, while some are history novels. None of these feel more or less "Realms-like" to me.
The great thing about the Realms (to me anyway), are its diverse cultures and diverse writing styles of its authors. Salvatore writes nothing like Greenwood. Nor do Niles and Cunningham. But they are *all* wonderful stories set in the Forgotten Realms. Neither one feels more like the Realms than the other.
|
| Neo2151 |
Posted - 28 Jul 2005 : 08:21:51
As I'm currently begining Feathered Dragon, I must say I've really enjoyed the Maztica trilogy so far. Though, i'll definitly agree it has very little realms flavor, but honestly, neither did the Druidhome trilogy or the Moonshae trilogy. Not to bash Doug Niles, as i've enjoyed all his reads, it's just it seems like he borrowed a world to do his own thing. Honestly, I bought the Maztica trilogy for completeness, and as I said, it doesn't feel very realms like, it IS still a very good read. Just don't go in expecting the usual. |
| Jindael |
Posted - 25 Jul 2005 : 12:31:03
I found it entertaining, but, like many have said before, just a re-write of earth history. It's well written though, I think, and fun to read. Just not very FR.
To spread this topic out a little, I've always disliked Maztica, Kara-Tur and Zakhara (sp?) as part of the realms, and don't include them in my home game. I do, however, plan on using the continent that Maztica is on at some point, but just not as an Aztec copy. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 24 Jul 2005 : 08:37:08
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I've never given this trilogy a shot... In fact, I just recently acquired it. I was refusing to buy it, earlier, but decided to get it for the sake of completeness.
I had a similar experience. I didn't purchase this trilogy for a very long time -- several years in fact (after its initial release). And even after I purchased the three books, it took quite a long time for me to finally decide to read them -- especially when you consider all the other prevalent Realms novels being released at the time (1998).
Having said that, I read the trilogy shortly after I finished Evermeet. It was what I expected, and that is to say that it is a tale with little actual "Realms" flavor -- an interesting story nonetheless.
I doubt I'll read it again though...
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Jul 2005 : 07:07:07
I've never given this trilogy a shot... In fact, I just recently acquired it. I was refusing to buy it, earlier, but decided to get it for the sake of completeness.
Why have I avoided it? I didn't like the Moonshae trilogy all that much. I've no reason to expect this one to be better. |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 24 Jul 2005 : 00:33:40
I highly recommend this trilogy. |
|
|
