| Author |
 Topic  |
|
wintermute27
Learned Scribe
USA
179 Posts |
 Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 17:31:14
|
I recently re-read the Forgotten Realms Adventures book cover to cover, and it got me thinking, why is there so much hate for the Spellplague and not for the Time of Troubles? Both include Realms shaking events that serve no other purpose than to explain the "updated" rules (eg "Mystra's dead, here's a new one. That's why magic's kinda different" vs "Mystra's dead, there is no more Mystra. That's why magic's really different"). Is it because the Time of Troubles led into an acceptable set of rules, while the Spellplague leads us into the dreaded 4th edition?
Being a (relatively) new DM, I've only recently fallen in love with the Realms and all they have to offer me. D&D 3.5 and now Pathfinder RPG have been excellent props for me to use to tell the stories I want to tell. I've read and played 4.0, and I feel that it isn't part of the tools that I want to use in these efforts. Aside from the edition change over though, is there anything wrong with the Spellplague or the 4.0 Realms themselves? I have to say that I have gotten a lot of inspiration for stories and adventures reading through the 4.0 Campaign Guide. Can anyone shed some light on this for me?
Note: I've recently gotten my hands on an "Old Grey Box" and am in the process of dialing my campaign back from The Year of the Blazing Hand (1380) to The Year of the Worm (1356) and relocate from Thesk to Cormyr. It was reading up on the Time of Troubles that got me thinking about this.
|
My Current Campaign: The Adventures of the Stonelanders |
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:11:29
|
| There's plenty of people that still dislike the Time of Troubles as well. Personally, the ToT never really affected my play all that much, since it was an event. Yes, it was a BIG event, but the general feeling was that the average person went about as normal afterwards and was overly affected by what had happened (y'know, besides praying to this new god versus the old one). Also, TSR put a lot of story behind it as well, whereas the Spellplague feels more like you fell asleep in Kansas and woke up in Oz without the tornado (this is my personal feeling, others may disagree). |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 29 Jul 2009 18:11:49 |
 |
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:18:49
|
There was a lot of hate, though it's mellowed over the years, and the fact that the internet wasn't where it is now helped to contain the outrage. However, you're right, even at its worst, the ToT disgruntlement pales in comparison to that caused by the Spellplague.
Mostly, it's due to scale. The ToT was global, but its effects weren't that huge. Waterdeep and Tantras got attacked, the Zhents invaded Shadowdale (like that never happened before), magic went screwy for a few months, and everything got kinda unsettled. Assassins died, but hey, who's going to complain about that? Maybe half a dozen gods died, if that.
But for most of the Realms, the events were a little unsettling, but nothing much changed. Once the gods went back up, things returned pretty much to the way they were before, with a couple of tweaks. This was due, in part, because 2e was more an evolution of the existing 1e system than a revolutionary change.
The Spellplague changed *everything*. Magic, classes, land masses, entire continents, gods by the dozen, there wasn't anything that didn't get whacked but good. That, combined with the 100 year jump, didn't just mildly change everything that had come before, it completely invalidated it. Every single human in every single published work (with the exception of maybe a dozen) is dead. Entire realms are gone, or changed so badly as to be unrecognizable. And on. And on.
There are issues with disrespect, as well, where the fans don't think the WotC movers and shakers care the least little bit about the fanbase that supports them. That's also a part. But if you want reasons why the hate is bigger for the Spellplague than the ToT, I'd say primarily the issue is scale. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:20:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
There's plenty of people that still dislike the Time of Troubles as well. Personally, the ToT never really affected my play all that much, since it was an event. Yes, it was a BIG event, but the general feeling was that the average person went about as normal afterwards and was overly affected by what had happened (y'know, besides praying to this new god versus the old one). Also, TSR put a lot of story behind it as well, whereas the Spellplague feels more like you fell asleep in Kansas and woke up in Oz without the tornado (this is my personal feeling, others may disagree).
Actually, I've grown to dislike the ToT more over the course of 3E, curiously, and dramatically more in 4E... without the ToT, Cyric wouldn't be a god, we wouldn't have the Shadow Weave and all of its deleted expletives (or was that 3E? Either way, I think it was retconned to the Year of Sundered Webs), and we wouldn't have a second deity with the motive to murder Mystra; Shar as an intermediate power was quite enough. 
Ashe, that's a brilliant description of the Spellplague. My assessment of it is similar, except that I would also apply the following quote:
quote:
"Mathematics is the part of science you could continue to do if you woke up tomorrow and discovered the universe was gone." - Anonymous, put on the web by Dave Rusin.
This makes perfect sense with regard to the Brave New Realms (TM), because 4E is all about the numbers... hence, you don't need a cohesive world that makes sense.  |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 29 Jul 2009 18:24:11 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:20:35
|
For me, at least, the hate for the Sellplague has nothing to do with the edition change. I don't like 4E, but I can ignore it.
Essentially, the Time of Troubles was limited in scope. Yeah, magic and nature went wonky for a while, and there was some deific juggling. But after all was said and done, everything pretty much went back to what it was before. Yeah, there were wild and dead magic areas, and things like the corrupted water at Boareskyr Bridge, but that was it.
The Sellplague, on the other hand, radically reshaped the Realms. Continents disappeared, countries were transposed, Halruaa may or may not have blown up, magic went way wonky, and we got more deific shuffling. And we got stuff we didn't need to make the Realms interesting, like earth motes. On top of that, some aspects of the Sellplague are either illogical, nonsensical, or self-contradictory.
As if all that wasn't enough, we then got a timejump on top of everything else. Which means that everything that remains is new again, and that the detailed history that drew many of us in has dramatically decreased in importance.
On the Firefly DVDs, there's a feature which discusses how Serenity itself was a character during the series. Thinking about that, it's made me realize I see the Realms setting as something quite similar to a character. A lot of the stories simply don't work as well without the familiar (pre-4E) setting. Trying to read post-Sellplague stories is like reading a new tale in which a familiar and well-loved character has become something entirely different. It's like a sequel to the Classic Star Wars trilogy, in which Han Solo has somehow become a Sith Lord named Darth Smirkus. It's so jarring that it throws me out of the story, and I simply can't enjoy the stories as much because I can't get away from the fact that the setting is not at all like the one I fell in love with.
And for the record, there are plenty of people that didn't like -- and still don't -- the Time of Troubles. Part of the difference is that when the ToT happened, there weren't readily accessible forums like this one where people could complain. Another part of the difference is that the Time of Troubles happened a while ago, as far as the publishing history is concerned. A lot of people who are now Realms fans came aboard after the ToT was over and done with.
Note: I'm not repeating other people's points; when I started typing, no one had yet replied.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 29 Jul 2009 18:21:47 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:25:11
|
And now, I will put on my mod hat for a moment:
This discussion will stay civil. For or against, keep it respectful for all involved: your fellow scribes, the authors, and the designers. I do not want this to devolve into yet another 4E-bashing thread; we've had way, way too many of those.
If this thread starts getting ugly, we can and will prune posts or even lock the thread. I don't like doing that, so don't force me into that position.
Just keep it civil. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:28:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Note: I'm not repeating other people's points; when I started typing, no one had yet replied.
Heh. The same thing happened to me, Wooly... to the extent that I had to edit this part of my post because of your two quick posts in order to include a quote of what I was responding to...
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
<chop>
There are issues with disrespect, as well, where the fans don't think the WotC movers and shakers care the least little bit about the fanbase that supports them. That's also a part. But if you want reasons why the hate is bigger for the Spellplague than the ToT, I'd say primarily the issue is scale.
I think you're right on both counts here, Hoondatha; I could have quoted your entire post, as I agree to some degree with everything you said, but that would have served no purpose. As you mention in the part I did quote, the big issues for me are the scale of the Spellplague and the issue of WotC not giving an expletive what the long-term fans think (whether that expletive flies is entirely up to you).
And yes, let's keep things reasonably calm here, as Wooly says. Hopefully I'm not crossing the line with my last sentence above. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 29 Jul 2009 18:32:38 |
|
|
|
wintermute27
Learned Scribe
USA
179 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 18:40:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
...without the ToT, Cyric wouldn't be a god...
It's funny you mention that, one of my objectives in going back to the "start" of the Realms is to see what my players can change. I fully expect them to kill Cyric during the Time of Troubles, preventing him from becoming a god. It's sort of like a big "what if..." experiment.
The Scope of the change is something (surprisingly) that I never considered while I was thinking of this last night. The Spellplague is a far bigger change to the Realms than the Time of Troubles ever was.
I was talking to a good friend of mine the other day and I asked him how his 4E campaign was going. After chatting for a bit I expressed my opinions about 4E and even he admitted that "establishing an ongoing story in 4E is a lot harder than it was in 3.5"
Note: It was never my intention to stir up a hornets nest here. I was just looking for other's opinions about this. |
My Current Campaign: The Adventures of the Stonelanders |
Edited by - wintermute27 on 29 Jul 2009 18:43:38 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 19:23:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
The Spellplague changed *everything*. Magic, classes, land masses, entire continents, gods by the dozen, there wasn't anything that didn't get whacked but good.
Sounds like the 3ed. to me.
I really dislike the Time of Troubles for several reasons and one of them is the fact that after a year or so people just went about their business and nothing was really effected. The chock of the events disappeared with a whimper. It should never have happened in the first place, but when it did it should have played a larger role in the Realms for several years to come.
As for the Spellplague. I don't care about that one at all, as it has no effect on my game. I quit caring with the introduction of 3ed. and just went on with the Realms as they were, a combination of my own ideas and TSR ideas.
I actually agree with the timejump following the Spellplague, as it gave the Realms a breather after the endless series of large scale events that have been piled onto the setting in the later years. Continuing directly after still another catastrophe would have turned the whole thing into parody. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 20:48:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by wintermute27
<chop>
Note: It was never my intention to stir up a hornets nest here. I was just looking for other's opinions about this.
 It's all the same to me. I actually have just as much fun in the online hornets nests as I do in the more subdued dialogues... RL hornets nests, of course, are another matter...  |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 20:52:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
At least we kept Vancian magic in 3rd Edition! (j/k)
I'm still working on finding a happy medium between the 1E-3.5 system and the 4E system (which, mechanically, I like the basics of; I just detest the changes that were made to the spells in the process  ). If you have anything like that, I'm interested in seeing what you've done. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 21:03:53
|
I haven't bothered to read-through most of the responses here, because I figured I'd just give my own opinion without getting 'riled-up' by negativity.
Basically, after the silliness of the ToT, we had the Realms. It was pretty-much the same (and in-fact, bizarrely un-affected by most of what happened - people just 'moved-on').
In other words, the setting was still intact.
At the beginning of 3e, we had the Deaths.. errr... the return of Shade. Those were 3e's 'big baddies'. Ohhhh... I'm soooo scared! A nation of uber-powerful Mages who hangout in their flying city... and thats about it.
Yeah... REAL dramatic. Just don't go to Anauroch and you'll never even know they're there. So, just like the 1e-to-2e transition, we still had the same setting.
Sure, Elves come and go (very indecisive folks, those Elves... they can't even seem to figure-out if they're Elves anymore... but I digress...). Azoun died (Azoun!  ), Tethyr's royal regime was re-established, Maztica was discovered and colonized...
And the Realms were still the Realms, just chuggin' along at a decent pace, and time moved along... SLOWLY.
Up till then, I could still use ALL of my 1e and 2e sourcebooks, and although people were a little older and some political stuff happened, it was still all familiar enough for me to use my $500+ of gaming material and 99% of it would still be accurate across editions.
Then the Spellplague happened (not so bad in-and-of itself), Mystra died, the Weave collapsed (a mainstay of the setting), yadda, yadda, yadda...
And a hundred years went by... just like that. the little information we are given tying the old 1e/2e/3e Realms to the new setting (and YES, even WotC refers to it as a 'NEW' setting) is lame at best (so Cyric wacked Mystra with Azuth's staff while Shar did a 'Hootchie-dance'... Okaaaaay....)
Some bad stuff happened in the past, but we got over it, and life moved on, both in the Realms and in real life. This time, it's not quite so simple. I find its easier to list what hasn't change (Cormyr, basically) then what has, which is telling. My old sourcebooks are 90% useless (that one's just for Misc ).
The fact that we were given very little info about the new setting (just two sourcebooks, and I hear the second one just repeats a lot of what was covered in the first) just adds insult to injury. Even if we wanted to 'get into' the new setting, there's just not enough there to wet the appetities of most FR fans - we are spoiled, and anything less then a constant stream of new lore is unacceptable at this point.
At least, thats how I feel - I really can't speak for anyone else. I also hope I maintained a neutral tone - sometimes I don't even realizes when I'm crossing the line. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Jul 2009 22:09:23 |
|
|
|
Lord Necro
Acolyte
18 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 21:18:04
|
I wasn't even aware that Mystra died!
who is the new God of Magic? |
"Time? time has no meaning to the dead..." ~ Necro Lazerus, Male Moon Elven Shade/Lich.
"Life is but a cloak we wear fleetingly.." ~ Etrius Lazerus, Male Moon Elven Shade. |
|
|
|
wintermute27
Learned Scribe
USA
179 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 21:26:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Necro
I wasn't even aware that Mystra died!
who is the new God of Magic?
There isn't one. |
My Current Campaign: The Adventures of the Stonelanders |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 21:46:23
|
well I hate the spellplague more, than the tot.
the ToT came and went and changed a few things, and left things.
the spell plague came and went, changed a bunch of things, returned a bunch of things and took way to much and gave to little in replace.
I'm glad I didnt get rid of my 3.x stuff.
4e realms are sadly unbalanced.
better to have told off dms and players long ago who overused uber characters and stating that why doiesnt EL do this with his army??
oh well things get worst before they get better, maybe wotc will get wise and republish the 3.x frcs for compatability of the 4e rules.
but I never liked the vacian spellcasting garbage, spell points would of done better.
each their own I guess. |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 22:34:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by wintermute27
Note: It was never my intention to stir up a hornets nest here. I was just looking for other's opinions about this.
You didn't stir anything up. It's just that there's a lot of hostility out there because of the Sellplague, and we've had threads that didn't even mention the Sellplague wind up becoming anti-4E and anti-Sellplague bitchfests. I'm trying to make sure that doesn't happen.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Uzzy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
618 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jul 2009 : 22:58:47
|
Time of Troubles happened twelve years before I even knew what the Forgotten Realms was. So for me, it was part of the backstory.
Spellplague wasn't. And as mentioned above, it changed things on a massively different scale. |
|
|
|
Nerfed2Hell
Senior Scribe
USA
387 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 00:41:08
|
I lived through the Time of Troubles. For me, it was an annoyance... but one could ignore it or play around it, continuing 1st edition rules with 2e events without too much difficulty or pick up 2nd edition rules and keep on playing without really acknowledging the ToT events (or perhaps just limiting player exposure to those events).
Spellplague brings with it drastic rules changes and a 100 year jump in timeline with world altering events that are hard to play around or adapt to. The 4e rules are pretty harsh to adopt to, so if you have a 3.x character you want to carry over into the new system, you not only have to come up with a way to transcend the time jump, but you have to redefine your character... sometimes dramatically and no longer resembling the original character's abilities.
For me, though, its the fact that Spellplague brings with it the new lack of lore preference from the execs... FR has had the lore drop kicked out of it and adding new lore seems to be considered a bad idea. Add to that the complete disrespect for old school players who want to see old pre-4e lore released. That's why I harbor such ill will toward the spellplague. |
Some people are like a slinky... not good for much, but when you push them down the stairs, it makes you smile. |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 20:22:48
|
It's easy to look back on the Time of Troubles and say, "Oh, it didn't really change much."
But if you were a player who gamed heavily in the Realms and read the novels when the ToT came about, it was a different and -for some- harder experience.
Borrowing a post of mine from another forum:
quote:
Time to step into the wayback machine.....
Personally I didn't like the changes. Gone were Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul, not to mention Mystra, whom I couldn't believe was gone. In their place were mortals that were in no way inscrutable or mysterious.
I remember that our gaming group more or less ignored the Time of Troubles after trying and failing at finishing the railroad-style adventures that event spawned. We had the new AD&D 2nd Edition rules and soon after places like Undermountain and Phlaan to explore, so we had much to occupy us with anyway.
I think it was at that point that I realized as a D&D player I was starting to look on the setting as a fictional place in the sense of it being an alternate world that I read about but never participated in. The Realms that we played D&D in was becoming entirely separate from the one I was reading about in the novels, because I didn't like accepting that so much had changed or been replaced.
Before the ToT I never, ever thought of things being separate like this. When I read a novel like Darkwalker on Moonshae, the events that happened there were part of the same world my characters occupied.
It left me feeling like I'd lost something.
Fast forward back to now and I find I still don't like the ToT and what it did. Although I think it's an important lesson for DMs to learn that excluding elements of a campaign setting that don't fit is not only OK but sometimes necessary (as opposed to matching a campaign to the setting exactly; which many DMs did back then), I still think the method of teaching this lesson via the ToT was too harsh.
Like so much else about the Realms, it's ultimately a matter of perspective. Looking back at the ToT it may seem easy to hand wave it off, but if you stop to look through the eyes of the gamers that experienced the Realms during that time, then yeah, the ToT was the kind of event that changed how many gamers viewed the Realms.
I'd also like to point out that some years after the Time of Troubles, just at the turn of the century when TSR had been bought out by WotC and Third Edition D&D and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting were in the planning stages, Wizards of the Coast sampled the Realms community to find out if a ToT-style event would be acceptable as part of the change-over to Third Edition.
The resounding answer, even after several years? NO! |
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 30 Jul 2009 20:26:22 |
|
|
|
Arion Elenim
Senior Scribe
933 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 20:30:36
|
quote:
It's like a sequel to the Classic Star Wars trilogy, in which Han Solo has somehow become a Sith Lord named Darth Smirkus.
I feel it's more like the afore mentioned Darth Smirkus has opened up a gate way to the Battlestar Galactica and Star Trek universes, let all the creatures establish new planets and systems, destroyed the Force altogether, and then killed himself with a lightsaber.
Oh and for some reason, despite all this, Elminster is there. |
My latest Realms-based short story, about a bard, a paladin of Lathander and the letter of the law, Debts Repaid. It takes place before the "shattering" and gives the bard Arion a last gasp before he plunges into the present.http://candlekeep.com/campaign/logs/log-debts.htm |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 20:51:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I'd also like to point out that some years after the Time of Troubles, just at the turn of the century when TSR had been bought out by WotC and Third Edition D&D and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting were in the planning stages, Wizards of the Coast sampled the Realms community to find out if a ToT-style event would be acceptable as part of the change-over to Third Edition.
The resounding answer, even after several years? NO!
And yet they went the same route for the 4th Edition update... |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 21:00:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I'd also like to point out that some years after the Time of Troubles, just at the turn of the century when TSR had been bought out by WotC and Third Edition D&D and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting were in the planning stages, Wizards of the Coast sampled the Realms community to find out if a ToT-style event would be acceptable as part of the change-over to Third Edition.
The resounding answer, even after several years? NO!
And yet they went the same route for the 4th Edition update...
To WotC defence ( I cant believe I just typed that)no matter what path they take they will upset a large part of their fanbase. The "its always been that way" line wasn't all that popular either. All of us have an idealized version of how the Realms should develop and its more or less impossible to do anything without rubbing most people the wrong way. My ideal would be a complete retcon and "Greenwoodisation" of the Realms. something that would make a lot of people make great Deep Purple impersonations.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jul 2009 : 21:19:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I'd also like to point out that some years after the Time of Troubles, just at the turn of the century when TSR had been bought out by WotC and Third Edition D&D and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting were in the planning stages, Wizards of the Coast sampled the Realms community to find out if a ToT-style event would be acceptable as part of the change-over to Third Edition.
The resounding answer, even after several years? NO!
And yet they went the same route for the 4th Edition update...
Not only that, but knowing we didn't want a big RSE for the change-over, they instead gave us a flood of them after the change.
And I'm a little skeptical on the lack of 2E to 3E transition event, anyway. The 1E to 2E transition really didn't affect much in the Realms, rules-wise. Okay, some spells were a little different, and now we couldn't have assassins or cavaliers. And that was it. With the 2E to 3E transition, we had a lot of things change. There were entirely new classes, some existing ones were changed, and now any member of any race could be any combination of classes. Nowhere is this more notable that with dwarves and magic: in 2E, dwarves couldn't be arcane casters, and they were so non-magical that magical items used by dwarves had a chance of failure. Then, in 3E, with no explanation whatsoever, we've suddenly got dwarven spellslingers and any dwarf using any magical item without issue.
So the reason I am skeptical is because I can't see a dedicated fan of any setting saying "Oh, the new rule set is going to change a lot of things, huh? No, I don't need an in-game explanation for something like that." |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 00:03:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by wintermute27
I recently re-read the Forgotten Realms Adventures book cover to cover, and it got me thinking, why is there so much hate for the Spellplague and not for the Time of Troubles?
I've often railed against the Avatar Crisis, both for its handling and immediate effects and for its pernicious influence on the course of Realms publishing.quote:
Both include Realms shaking events that serve no other purpose than to explain the "updated" rules (eg "Mystra's dead, here's a new one.
No, both upheavals served multiple purposes. The Time of Troubles was an opportunity for a Dragonlance-modelled epic trilogy in TSR's new setting, a chance for the staff to put their mark on it, a big marketing hook, as well as a tie-in with the new ruleset and the bowdlerization of D&D. The Spellplague is the most visible effect of a thorough reconception of the Realms to match the new rules and their play assumptions more closely than before but also to play a different role in the publishing structure of D&D, due to Wizards' economically driven consolidation to two 'core brands' and switch from parallel setting lines to a series of setting books in which 'everything is core', to appeal to a broad range of purchasers including those who misunderstood or legitimately disliked the Realms, to reduce the company's reliance on outside freelance writers, to create a buzz of newness and a fresh entry point, and again to put their own stamp on it, to name the most obvious.
The Time of Troubles was certainly a traumatic catastrophe for Faerūn -- although as with the RSEs that followed you had to read between the lines to see much of its aftermath -- but the published Realms of 1990 had umistakably the same creative hands, largely Ed's, as the Realms of 1988.quote:
Aside from the edition change over though, is there anything wrong with the Spellplague or the 4.0 Realms themselves?
I think so, in that as a secondary world Realms-2008 is a stitched-together compromise without the Realms' accustomed creative particularity, richness, density, and much of its long-term subtext. But the reason I don't like it is that it's ended, for now, Ed's project of cumulatively detailing the Realms, as conceived from 1967 to 2007, in print.quote:
I have to say that I have gotten a lot of inspiration for stories and adventures reading through the 4.0 Campaign Guide.
Have you also read Castlemourn? I've still yet to read a comparison of the two books.quote:
Note: I've recently gotten my hands on an "Old Grey Box" and am in the process of dialing my campaign back from The Year of the Blazing Hand (1380) to The Year of the Worm (1356) and relocate from Thesk to Cormyr.
What differences and similarities have you noticed between how the 1987 and 2008 settings are written and put together? |
Edited by - Faraer on 31 Jul 2009 00:24:24 |
|
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 00:06:06
|
IMO, the thing that causes the most rancor (amongst those you dislike the new setting) is the time-jump. The ToT changed some things, but in the end, ALL of the Realms materials previously published were still applicable. With the 100 year flash-cut, combined with certain events (viz. Halruua), the setting is not recognizably the Realms, inasmuch as virtually all of the NPCs are dead, and many political and national institutions are no longer extant. This all combines to obviate the vast majority of previously published Realmslore.
As I've said elsewhere, it's not the setting that I object to: If this was 'The Spellscarred lands', or if they did this to Eberrwhatever, I might have even been interested enough to play it. Alas, instead, they visited all this change on the most fully-realized fantasy world ever published, invalidating the work and dreams of more than 3 decades.
Again, YMMV, this is just my take. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 00:13:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Knight of the Gate
IMO, the thing that causes the most rancor (amongst those you dislike the new setting) is the time-jump. The ToT changed some things, but in the end, ALL of the Realms materials previously published were still applicable. With the 100 year flash-cut, combined with certain events (viz. Halruua), the setting is not recognizably the Realms, inasmuch as virtually all of the NPCs are dead, and many political and national institutions are no longer extant. This all combines to obviate the vast majority of previously published Realmslore.
As I've said elsewhere, it's not the setting that I object to: If this was 'The Spellscarred lands', or if they did this to Eberrwhatever, I might have even been interested enough to play it. Alas, instead, they visited all this change on the most fully-realized fantasy world ever published, invalidating the work and dreams of more than 3 decades.
Again, YMMV, this is just my take.
Timejump or no, once they blew it up, it was no longer the same setting for me. And even without the timejump, blowing it up still rendered a lot of existing lore non-viable -- like either Shining South book or any of the Maztica stuff.
I do agree, though, that had this been a new, from scratch world, with us seeing the aftermath of some catastrophe, I would have readily embraced it. It's like my PBJ analogy. Short version: they took the peanut butter and the jelly out of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich that I loved, and substituted entirely different ingredients. It doesn't matter how good the sandwich is, because I ordered a PBJ, they gave me what they said was a PBJ, but it's nothing like what I expected. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 31 Jul 2009 00:14:47 |
|
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 00:27:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Knight of the Gate
IMO, the thing that causes the most rancor (amongst those you dislike the new setting) is the time-jump. The ToT changed some things, but in the end, ALL of the Realms materials previously published were still applicable. With the 100 year flash-cut, combined with certain events (viz. Halruua), the setting is not recognizably the Realms, inasmuch as virtually all of the NPCs are dead, and many political and national institutions are no longer extant. This all combines to obviate the vast majority of previously published Realmslore.
As I've said elsewhere, it's not the setting that I object to: If this was 'The Spellscarred lands', or if they did this to Eberrwhatever, I might have even been interested enough to play it. Alas, instead, they visited all this change on the most fully-realized fantasy world ever published, invalidating the work and dreams of more than 3 decades.
Again, YMMV, this is just my take.
Timejump or no, once they blew it up, it was no longer the same setting for me. And even without the timejump, blowing it up still rendered a lot of existing lore non-viable -- like either Shining South book or any of the Maztica stuff.
I do agree, though, that had this been a new, from scratch world, with us seeing the aftermath of some catastrophe, I would have readily embraced it. It's like my PBJ analogy. Short version: they took the peanut butter and the jelly out of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich that I loved, and substituted entirely different ingredients. It doesn't matter how good the sandwich is, because I ordered a PBJ, they gave me what they said was a PBJ, but it's nothing like what I expected.
I agree on all points, Wooly: I DO, however, think that had it not been for the timejump, the Spellplague itself wouldn't have so completely alienated many die-hard FR fans. If I can still use all my old sources for (at least) the Heartlands and the North, well that's about 25% more usefulness than I'd get out of my old books playing 4E as-is.
Again, I don't like ANY of the revelations of 4e- but I think that if it's one thing that made the whole setting go 'splat', I'd pick the timejump over the sellplague. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
Edited by - Knight of the Gate on 31 Jul 2009 00:29:09 |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 00:41:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So the reason I am skeptical is because I can't see a dedicated fan of any setting saying "Oh, the new rule set is going to change a lot of things, huh? No, I don't need an in-game explanation for something like that."
Lolz you didn't read my post earlier, did you? |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36805 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 01:09:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So the reason I am skeptical is because I can't see a dedicated fan of any setting saying "Oh, the new rule set is going to change a lot of things, huh? No, I don't need an in-game explanation for something like that."
Lolz you didn't read my post earlier, did you?
I did. I fail to see any connections or relevance. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
wintermute27
Learned Scribe
USA
179 Posts |
Posted - 31 Jul 2009 : 01:25:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
What differences and similarities have you noticed between how the 1987 and 2008 settings are written and put together?
The more I get my hands on earlier materials (1e/2e) the more I've fallen in love with the early realms. As I said in my original post here, once I got my hands on the "old gray box" and started reading it, I knew that this was where I wanted to tell my next story. I can sit down and read the 1e DM Sourcebook and Cyclopedia like a novel and it holds my attention, I find that the 3.x/4e core books fail to do this for me.
A bit off topic, but in your collective opinions, which 1e/2e materials would you recommend for a new collector of realmslore? I already have the 1e/2e Core Box Sets, City System, Waterdeep and the North, Realmspace, and Spellbound.
|
My Current Campaign: The Adventures of the Stonelanders |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Time of Troubles vs Spellplague
