| Author |
 Topic  |
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
 Posted - 02 Apr 2010 : 20:20:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I haven't had time to catch up on the whole scroll yet , but I like how it is going.....150+ posts and not one instance of a moderator having to do a beatdown of an overzealous scribe  
That's because Big Al took the Staff of the Irritated Moderator +5 with him. 
Thanks for sharing Sage....and
My most sincere condolences to the ever lovely Lady K......
It was most unkind of Big Al to take your staff with him  
P.S. if that wasn't open and free spirited....I don't know what is! |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
 |
|
|
Eye of Horus-Re
Acolyte
USA
36 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2010 : 20:43:31
|
I have to agree with the last few posters here. (ok Ashe....you and your troll too)
I would Love to have the Pre-Plague NDA stuff disclosed. I cant understand why they wont do it. I mean, those of us who arent supporting the New Realms arent giving them any money. (For the most part. I have bought a few Post Plague novels that were good) Just from a business standpoint, wouldnt they want the revenue? I am sure they know by now that we are not buying the "New Realms" products, and we arent going to spontaneously change our minds. I dont get it. |
Long live 1384 and that which came before....!!! |
|
|
|
Zorro
Seeker
Germany
82 Posts |
Posted - 02 Apr 2010 : 21:00:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eye of Hores-Re
Just from a business standpoint, wouldnt they want the revenue? I am sure they know by now that we are not buying the "New Realms" products, and we arent going to spontaneously change our minds. I dont get it.
You could have asked the same question when they forbade DriveThru & co. to sell their products, even before 4e came out. I think it's because they don't want in-house competition. Maybe they assume that if we go long enough without our official-material-fix, we'll eventually cave and buy their current edition material. From what I hear, in some cases this assumption proved to be true, after all.
Zorro |
I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability. - Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 00:14:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
The Dragonlance setting, too, had a long history, and many novels were written, but for Dragonlance, there was a far greater proportion of the fiction that was set outside the timeframe for the game setting, detailing the past history of Krynn, rather than chronicling current events. Actually, in the 1E/2E setting, the only (but, admittedly, it's a biggie) Krynn-shattering event is the War of the Lance and its immediate aftermath. The fiction either worked on that, or detailed the past of many of the characters featured in the original trilogy, or detailed historical events (the Cataclysm, the rise of Solamnia, etc.). The fiction line, for the most part, did not make many fundamental changes to the game setting, as some FR fiction has done (and was doing in ever-quicker succession).
The way the fiction was handled for the Dragonlance setting is a large part of what turned me off of the setting, and it's why I adopted the disparaging nickname a friend of mine used, Dragginglance.
I read all of the first five trilogies of books for Dragonlance, and a handful of later ones. And what I quickly noticed was that if Weis and Hickman weren't writing it, the continuity was loose (or non-existent, though it must be noted there's a bit of a discrepancy concerning the Hammer of Kharas in their books) and that nothing new happened. Yeah, reading about the earlier adventures of some of the Companions was good, but the disconnect between those books and the Chronicles was sometimes painful -- for example, it seemed a bit odd that Sturm would have visited Lunitari and then never mentioned it later.
Without anyone moving the storyline forward, the setting quickly got very stagnant, for me. Not only that, but the "one big story" approach made the setting itself almost superfluous to the plot -- yeah, you had to have the Cataclysm and the Third Dragonwar and all that, but I never felt compelled to learn about Solace or Thorbardin or Nordmaar. I didn't feel familiar with those places, and I didn't feel like there was all that much to learn about them.
So that was why when I got into the Realms, I really got into it: things happened there! And I did want to learn more about it, particularly places like Waterdeep and Silverymoon.
For Realms fiction, I would have liked to have seen a little more set in the past. Not a lot more, but at least something more than the once every few years trend we had. And I really would have liked to have seen less RSEs, during 3E. It seemed almost like a superhero comic: every other day, the world had to be saved from some new villain. To this day, I think some of those RSEs were utterly pointless -- big events that happened not to drive the setting, but to drive sales.
And that, to me, is where the biggest mistake was made: instead of remaining a place to tell stories, it became a vehicle to sell stories. |
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 03 Apr 2010 00:16:47 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 00:27:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Without anyone moving the storyline forward, the setting quickly got very stagnant, for me. Not only that, but the "one big story" approach made the setting itself almost superfluous to the plot -- yeah, you had to have the Cataclysm and the Third Dragonwar and all that, but I never felt compelled to learn about Solace or Thorbardin or Nordmaar. I didn't feel familiar with those places, and I didn't feel like there was all that much to learn about them.
You and I have had this discussion before Wooly, and I'm afraid, once again, that I just can't quite agree.
I've been with DRAGONLANCE since the introduction of the original modules and novels, and over that 25+ years, I've noticed a steady progression toward change. Granted, it has slowed occasionally and hit a few bumps along the way [mainly during the post Chronicles and Legends period]. But the "Fifth Age" Saga and "Age of Mortals" material really started moving things forward again -- with the introduction of both minor and major plots and story-lines that either branched off from the core Weis & Hickman formulae, or established entirely new perspectives on certain characters [some newly introduced], places [which had never before received much attention], and races [which might have been ignored in the past].
To put it simply, the DRAGONLANCE setting, much like a fine vintage wine, has matured. To the point where I now savour each and every taste, and treasure each moment I have that allows me to run my campaigns using this material. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
Edited by - The Sage on 03 Apr 2010 00:29:18 |
|
|
|
Thauramarth
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
729 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 00:43:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So that was why when I got into the Realms, I really got into it: things happened there! And I did want to learn more about it, particularly places like Waterdeep and Silverymoon.
For Realms fiction, I would have liked to have seen a little more set in the past. Not a lot more, but at least something more than the once every few years trend we had. And I really would have liked to have seen less RSEs, during 3E. It seemed almost like a superhero comic: every other day, the world had to be saved from some new villain. To this day, I think some of those RSEs were utterly pointless -- big events that happened not to drive the setting, but to drive sales.
And that, to me, is where the biggest mistake was made: instead of remaining a place to tell stories, it became a vehicle to sell stories.
The thing being - the RSEs sold well, and, well, they do advance the storyline. Things do happen .
I agree with you on the "ancient history" of the Companions, and the fact that the setting was dominated by a single storyline - the Third Dragonwar. My preference would have been for FR fiction to roll out RSE stories only for past events (Fall of Netheril, Imaskari conquests, and whatnot), and for fiction set in the current day to have only low impact on the overall setting. The sterling examples of these remain the Harpers series, and the Elaine Cunningham's Songs and Swords series. In case the marketing folk were wondering - Low Impact stories do not prohibit the use of the Realms iconic characters. Point in case: Drizzt. Probably the most iconic character of the setting, and you can be pro or con, but the stories written by Bob Salvatore have only a low impact on the overall setting. Elminster? See "Elminster at the Magefair", or El's appearances in "Spellfire", et al.
But ultimately, the whole thing boils down again to this: a setting cannot be a good setting both for gaming purposes and for fiction purposes. A setting for fiction NEEDS to change (because all stories require an arc - things "need to happen"), and a gaming setting NEEDS to remain stable, so that gamers have a common reference, and gaming groups can make the changes they want, through their gaming. So, from a gamer's POV (and I understand this is a bit extreme, perhaps), there's no need for anything to happen in the setting - the gamers make things happen. It would be nicer for the setting to remain static, and additional products to concentrate on broadening and deepening the extent of the "static" setting. |
|
|
|
Julian Grimm
Seeker
86 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 01:01:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
But ultimately, the whole thing boils down again to this: a setting cannot be a good setting both for gaming purposes and for fiction purposes. A setting for fiction NEEDS to change (because all stories require an arc - things "need to happen"), and a gaming setting NEEDS to remain stable, so that gamers have a common reference, and gaming groups can make the changes they want, through their gaming. So, from a gamer's POV (and I understand this is a bit extreme, perhaps), there's no need for anything to happen in the setting - the gamers make things happen. It would be nicer for the setting to remain static, and additional products to concentrate on broadening and deepening the extent of the "static" setting.
I agree with this. Which is one of the reasons I have been drawn more and more to worlds like Greyhawk (1e version) and Aerth. I am thinking that gaming and fiction worlds should be kept separate and that if a gaming world has fiction then it should happen in an alternate universe. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 02:56:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
*snip*
Anyone else find it funny that I cast Summon Troll and Jakk posted?
Just kidding, Jakk! Love ya, man...
If I'd realized Ashe was in the process of casting, I would have done something to disrupt him... I don't consider myself a troll at all; I express my opinion without sugar coating and without looking for any response in particular. I realize that others feel differently from me regarding the Realms, and I'm okay with that.  What matters to me (and, I think, to all of us) is the continued well-being of the Realms, in whatever form it takes (that being said, I'm pretty sure everybody here knows just how I feel about post-1375 canon...). I just wonder (and worry) what's going to happen if the river floods now that Wizbro has burnt its bridges to the past (to continue BlackAce's metaphor)... |
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 03 Apr 2010 03:37:34 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 03:14:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
<snip> To this day, I think some of those RSEs were utterly pointless -- big events that happened not to drive the setting, but to drive sales.
And that, to me, is where the biggest mistake was made: instead of remaining a place to tell stories, it became a vehicle to sell stories.
The thing being - the RSEs sold well, and, well, they do advance the storyline. Things do happen .
I agree with you on the "ancient history" of the Companions, and the fact that the setting was dominated by a single storyline - the Third Dragonwar. My preference would have been for FR fiction to roll out RSE stories only for past events (Fall of Netheril, Imaskari conquests, and whatnot), and for fiction set in the current day to have only low impact on the overall setting. The sterling examples of these remain the Harpers series, and the Elaine Cunningham's Songs and Swords series. In case the marketing folk were wondering - Low Impact stories do not prohibit the use of the Realms iconic characters. Point in case: Drizzt. Probably the most iconic character of the setting, and you can be pro or con, but the stories written by Bob Salvatore have only a low impact on the overall setting. Elminster? See "Elminster at the Magefair", or El's appearances in "Spellfire", et al.
But ultimately, the whole thing boils down again to this: a setting cannot be a good setting both for gaming purposes and for fiction purposes. A setting for fiction NEEDS to change (because all stories require an arc - things "need to happen"), and a gaming setting NEEDS to remain stable, so that gamers have a common reference, and gaming groups can make the changes they want, through their gaming. So, from a gamer's POV (and I understand this is a bit extreme, perhaps), there's no need for anything to happen in the setting - the gamers make things happen. It would be nicer for the setting to remain static, and additional products to concentrate on broadening and deepening the extent of the "static" setting.
(we need an "applause" smiley in CK2) This is exactly what I've been saying lately. Sharing a world between novels and games is tough... but I think that Thauramarth has the only feasible way to do it. Set the "big event" novels in the past, using them to flesh out the history, and set the low-impact novels and adventures in the present and use the PCs (or, novel-wise, the lower-powered NPCs such as the Knights of Myth Drannor or the Company of Eight) to advance the timeline. We've gone through three edition changes with the Realms and we still have only the tiniest glimpse of Toril outside the supercontinent... and the Spellplague has necessitated reinventing the wheel all over again. That is the biggest fundamental reason why I can't buy into the 4E Realms. If we had been given a look at a different, previously unexplored part of Toril, I would have happily purchased the 4E Realms books. As it is, they are of no use to me, simply because of the mandated loss of continuity.
quote:
Originally posted by Zorro
quote:
Originally posted by Eye of Hores-Re
Just from a business standpoint, wouldnt they want the revenue? I am sure they know by now that we are not buying the "New Realms" products, and we arent going to spontaneously change our minds. I dont get it.
You could have asked the same question when they forbade DriveThru & co. to sell their products, even before 4e came out. I think it's because they don't want in-house competition. Maybe they assume that if we go long enough without our official-material-fix, we'll eventually cave and buy their current edition material. From what I hear, in some cases this assumption proved to be true, after all.
Zorro
I think that assumption was part of it... but I also think that they didn't want to risk seeing sales figures for old-edition PDF products outdo 4E Realms sales... because that very well may have happened had they not pulled the licenses.
As for me, I'm getting all the official material I can afford... for Golarion from Paizo. |
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 03 Apr 2010 03:36:22 |
|
|
|
Tren of Twilight Tower
Seeker
51 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 06:31:44
|
Am new here, yet am not too shy to share a rather personal take on this scroll.
Regarding oh-not-so-friendly comments/discussions, "agree to disagree" policy is my golden rule. Internet is an open field where there are all kind of people with all kind of ideas and swinging moods, all under protection of hidden identity. That grants most unusual and unconventional exchange of "fire". I trust forum sages (mods) to deal with scrolls that get out of hand. For the rest, I happily use above noted policy.
Next, addressing how these forums are getting fewer scrolls/scribes, I am sure it could be due to various reasons. However, I would like to point out something that came to my eye and can be found here: http://www.candlekeep.com/.
While looking at "Home" page of Candlekeep, I would like to divert your attention towards "What's New in Candlekeep" section. The latest news that I can see dates August 16, 2008. Now that would be completely fine, if some gentle soul did not pass on me that we are already walking over April of 2010.
Back in time, I was under impression that site must have been abandoned or has hardly any traffic. Then, thankfully, I checked forum link and found this very vibrant and alive community. Not everyone might do so.
To conclude this story of mine, please let it be known that I do not desire to be rude. Quite contrary, I would like to be helpful and my belief is that updating "What's New" section, and keeping it updated on a regular basis, would be a proactive step forward in sense that any first-time visitor would clearly be made aware that Candlekeep is not only up and about, but also kickin' with style. While it is unlikely to solve number-of-visitors issue, it certainly cannot hurt and it can help.
Just my 300 and some coppers.
Tren
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31772 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 08:36:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tren of Twilight Tower
Next, addressing how these forums are getting fewer scrolls/scribes, I am sure it could be due to various reasons. However, I would like to point out something that came to my eye and can be found here: http://www.candlekeep.com/.
While looking at "Home" page of Candlekeep, I would like to divert your attention towards "What's New in Candlekeep" section. The latest news that I can see dates August 16, 2008. Now that would be completely fine, if some gentle soul did not pass on me that we are already walking over April of 2010.
That's only because Alaundo, the Head Administrator of the site, hasn't had the time time update the "What's New" section in quite some time. He's heavily occupied with non Candlekeep-related real-world stuff, and that, unfortunately, leaves little time for updating the site proper.
But you are right. It's long been a concern of my own. So I'll contact Alaundo again, via private channels, and see what I can do to rectify that situation. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 08:50:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
The Dragonlance setting, too, had a long history, and many novels were written, but for Dragonlance, there was a far greater proportion of the fiction that was set outside the timeframe for the game setting, detailing the past history of Krynn, rather than chronicling current events. Actually, in the 1E/2E setting, the only (but, admittedly, it's a biggie) Krynn-shattering event is the War of the Lance and its immediate aftermath. The fiction either worked on that, or detailed the past of many of the characters featured in the original trilogy, or detailed historical events (the Cataclysm, the rise of Solamnia, etc.). The fiction line, for the most part, did not make many fundamental changes to the game setting, as some FR fiction has done (and was doing in ever-quicker succession).
The way the fiction was handled for the Dragonlance setting is a large part of what turned me off of the setting, and it's why I adopted the disparaging nickname a friend of mine used, Dragginglance.
I read all of the first five trilogies of books for Dragonlance, and a handful of later ones. And what I quickly noticed was that if Weis and Hickman weren't writing it, the continuity was loose (or non-existent, though it must be noted there's a bit of a discrepancy concerning the Hammer of Kharas in their books) and that nothing new happened. Yeah, reading about the earlier adventures of some of the Companions was good, but the disconnect between those books and the Chronicles was sometimes painful -- for example, it seemed a bit odd that Sturm would have visited Lunitari and then never mentioned it later.
Without anyone moving the storyline forward, the setting quickly got very stagnant, for me. Not only that, but the "one big story" approach made the setting itself almost superfluous to the plot -- yeah, you had to have the Cataclysm and the Third Dragonwar and all that, but I never felt compelled to learn about Solace or Thorbardin or Nordmaar. I didn't feel familiar with those places, and I didn't feel like there was all that much to learn about them.
So that was why when I got into the Realms, I really got into it: things happened there! And I did want to learn more about it, particularly places like Waterdeep and Silverymoon.
For Realms fiction, I would have liked to have seen a little more set in the past. Not a lot more, but at least something more than the once every few years trend we had. And I really would have liked to have seen less RSEs, during 3E. It seemed almost like a superhero comic: every other day, the world had to be saved from some new villain. To this day, I think some of those RSEs were utterly pointless -- big events that happened not to drive the setting, but to drive sales.
And that, to me, is where the biggest mistake was made: instead of remaining a place to tell stories, it became a vehicle to sell stories.
As you know I am quite the opposite here. The one thing I liked about the Dragonlance series were the fact that they did not move forward. When they started doing that they ruined the series for me. The "early adventures" books and historical series (Dwarven Nations and Knights series in particular)were great, for me at least, especially as they nearly always broke with the established rules/storyline in some way.
When they later structured the series to much they took the life out of the setting. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 17:40:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
As you know I am quite the opposite here. The one thing I liked about the Dragonlance series were the fact that they did not move forward. When they started doing that they ruined the series for me. The "early adventures" books and historical series (Dwarven Nations and Knights series in particular)were great, for me at least, especially as they nearly always broke with the established rules/storyline in some way.
When they later structured the series to much they took the life out of the setting.
So... if I'm interpreting you correctly, Jorkens, you would see the individual DM's campaign(s) as the only forward movement in the timeline, and all published material happen in the past, whether novels or game supplements? That would definitely eliminate "RSE creep"... but I worry that it would leave the setting too stagnant. There needs to be some forward movement and change in the canon (coming back to the OP's original point about "sad static places")... or else we end up with Greyhawk pre-Wars... and then someone says "we need a shake-up here" and everything explodes into disbelief... which is how I perceive the Spellplague and the events leading up to it, from my point of view. It's just that in the case of the Spellplague, the shake-up was unnecessary, except as far as the explanation of the change in magic; we had at least three other continents with lots of room for the things that were shoehorned into Faerun, and for an absence of things that were pulled out of Faerun. Anyway, I'll do the mods a favour and stop there. |
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. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 19:18:58
|
No, that was just a comment on which Dragonlance novels I liked best. I don't mind novels taking place in the "now" and things happening in them that affect their surroundings. Take Spellfire for example, there's plenty of things happening and following the novel one could easily see a whole bunch of plots concerning the effects of the book. But when we are talking about novels or gaming products making major changes to the setting in the name of "moving it forward" I am not exactly joyous. I still cant remember an area seeming stale before they jumped in and starting changing things and if its doing preventive actions just to be on the safe side, then I wholly disagree with that tactic. But this might of course seem different to other people.
I don't mind moving the setting forward, but I would like to see it happen in the form of the monthly happenings found in the 1st and 2ed. campaign settings. Many small happenings all over the continent, not the one major thing in one area pr year tendency. The death of a major political figure (in bed), a flood in Marsember, a minor guild- war here and a shipwreck here. Some goblins trying to declare truce, a new breed of horses being shown along the trade routs. One of the hidden Lords of Waterdeep decides to leave, but refusing to tell the other lords the reason, an aggressive halfling trying to mobilize his kin for a raid against Darkhold patrols. Harper rumours about a Phaerimm having ecaped the "prison" of Anauroch, a Tarchion of Thay has declared an embargo against the cloth traders of Thesk. A trio of Centaurs has declared the new horsebreed of the trade routs a sacred animal and proclaims doom for all who use the animal....
I would love to see the setting moving ahead at a leisurely pace, with plots and rumours that could be evolved to major changes if one wanted. I still miss the old Waterdeep Herald from The Yet Another Forgotten Realms page. Now would this be to most fans liking and would it be good for business? Probably not, or somebody would have tried it by now (I hope). I cant say anything about how I think the Realms should be published, I can only say how I would have liked to see the world evolve. |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 20:21:15
|
| Now, see, that's how I felt about it, too, along with a few other major changes from certain major business/creative entitys (Spidey's OMD/BND *cough* Don't even get me started on that one.). But let's be honest here- change sells. When fans get complacent (read- bored) the powers-that-be decide that things need shaking up. But since many of them are fundamentally out of touch with the fan-base, we end up with these kinds of disastrous changes that no one likes and which end up damaging the game or story or whatever it was the fans loved so much in the first place. So there has to be some sort of change to keep existing fans from getting bored, but not so much that they start to leave in droves. (And we all know THAT'S never happened, right?) |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 21:32:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alystra Illianniis
Now, see, that's how I felt about it, too, along with a few other major changes from certain major business/creative entitys (Spidey's OMD/BND *cough* Don't even get me started on that one.). But let's be honest here- change sells. When fans get complacent (read- bored) the powers-that-be decide that things need shaking up. But since many of them are fundamentally out of touch with the fan-base, we end up with these kinds of disastrous changes that no one likes and which end up damaging the game or story or whatever it was the fans loved so much in the first place. So there has to be some sort of change to keep existing fans from getting bored, but not so much that they start to leave in droves. (And we all know THAT'S never happened, right?)
Change doesn't have to happen on a Realms-wide scale... Look at Elaine's books: great stories that everyone loves, and the things that change in them are at most regional, like the shifting balance of power in Tethyr or the destruction of the necromancer Akhlaur. Look at Azure Bonds: a swordswoman tries to recover her lost memory, and sure an assassin's guild gets decimated and a forgotten deity blows up, but those aren't RSEs.
Right there are three examples of stories that bring change to the setting, keeping it fresh and dynamic, but don't involve the disaster of the week.
Somewhere along the way, WotC went the Hollywood route: every story told had to be bigger and more explosive than the one before. That's where the damage was done. |
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! |
|
|
|
Tren of Twilight Tower
Seeker
51 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 21:46:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Tren of Twilight Tower
Next, addressing how these forums are getting fewer scrolls/scribes, I am sure it could be due to various reasons. However, I would like to point out something that came to my eye and can be found here: http://www.candlekeep.com/.
While looking at "Home" page of Candlekeep, I would like to divert your attention towards "What's New in Candlekeep" section. The latest news that I can see dates August 16, 2008. Now that would be completely fine, if some gentle soul did not pass on me that we are already walking over April of 2010.
That's only because Alaundo, the Head Administrator of the site, hasn't had the time time update the "What's New" section in quite some time. He's heavily occupied with non Candlekeep-related real-world stuff, and that, unfortunately, leaves little time for updating the site proper.
But you are right. It's long been a concern of my own. So I'll contact Alaundo again, via private channels, and see what I can do to rectify that situation.
Many thanks for looking into that, Sage.
Tren |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 22:08:43
|
We can certainly say that advancing the timeline fast and violently enough that sources can't properly describe the state of things and tell their stories before that state changes (sometimes before characters literally die of old age) is bad news for those of us who want those places, people and events described and told. ('It is a lamentable state of affairs when things happen at such a pace that folk can scarce talk things over and grumble before the face of the land is changed again.') At a certain point it became clear that there was no will for TSR/Wizards to publish the written Realmslore backlog or otherwise cover the major gaps, or give space to non-'iconic' older characters at the expense of 'exciting' potential new Drizzts.
The current clack in the Old Grey Box, Polyhedron and elsewhere is some of my favourite stuff ever published for the Realms, and the RSE novels my least favourite. The thinking behind the two is planets and suns apart -- with 'the face of Toril will never be the same again'-style marketing, and the 'one major thing in one area pr year tendency' that Jorkens rightly points to, which were part of the published Realms' simplification and foreshortening by eroding its mutiplicity and locality.
Let's also not forget that those book department obsessions that harmed the Realms like nothing else, the 'iconic' characters and the RSEs, weren't passive responses to buyer preferences but deliberate strategies TSR and Wizards chose and carried out. |
Edited by - Faraer on 03 Apr 2010 22:14:17 |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 22:20:22
|
"Change doesn't have to happen on a Realms-wide scale... Look at Elaine's books: great stories that everyone loves, and the things that change in them are at most regional, like the shifting balance of power in Tethyr or the destruction of the necromancer Akhlaur. Look at Azure Bonds: a swordswoman tries to recover her lost memory, and sure an assassin's guild gets decimated and a forgotten deity blows up, but those aren't RSEs."
Agreed, Wooly. I like a little change in my Realms, as I'm sure do most of the fans. But major chages for the sake of change itself seems to do more harm than good, which is what I was getting at. Like you said, they went the Hollywood route, and we all paid for it.
|
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
Julian Grimm
Seeker
86 Posts |
Posted - 03 Apr 2010 : 22:37:31
|
I can go for small changes here and there but, I would have preferred to see the 2e Realms box as an update to the 1e box that includes info from the few 1e expansions. Then the 3e set could have been an update to the 2e with selected info from various expansions. Feeling the need for each edition to have to have an 'event' that changes everything is going to far in my own opinion. I could have done without the ToT, Return of the Shade and, yes, the Sellplague. Even with the small changes above I would have still bought the new sets.
|
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 00:45:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauramarth
But ultimately, the whole thing boils down again to this: a setting cannot be a good setting both for gaming purposes and for fiction purposes. A setting for fiction NEEDS to change (because all stories require an arc - things "need to happen"), and a gaming setting NEEDS to remain stable, so that gamers have a common reference, and gaming groups can make the changes they want, through their gaming. So, from a gamer's POV (and I understand this is a bit extreme, perhaps), there's no need for anything to happen in the setting - the gamers make things happen. It would be nicer for the setting to remain static, and additional products to concentrate on broadening and deepening the extent of the "static" setting.
Very well said. I wish you, or people with your thinking, worked for a gaming company that produced Realms material and had all the pull with what went into products. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Milith holder of HB8
Seeker
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 02:12:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
I think many fail to see the truth of the matter. The Realms is not anything at all what it used to be, and every contradiction is simply a "Spellplague" issue makes things not only severely muddled and chaotic, but also insults all Realms designers and authors that came before along with insulting the loyal fanbase. The current Realms is a mere shadow of its former self. Clinging to it feels icky, to me anyway.
Therefore, to me, relevance to the Realms only comes from 3E and previous edition material. It's hard for me to accept, or twist, whatever 4E says because it wasn't ever originally intended to be Realmslore. It will always be something that is made to "shove" into the Realms and make it work, no matter what. One major point of the reset is so authors don't have to research a ton of FR material to write a book or novel. So why, then, would they continue that trend when writing 4E Realmslore? They don't have to. This is why I know for a fact the Realms we've come to know for a couple of decades is dead.
Hold up a bit, I strongly disagree here. While I was as shocked and confused as any person as to why Wizards would go so far as to alter the setting for an edition change left me spun around, I really don't think you're being fair here.
Did they nuke the setting? Yes. A hundred times yes. The death of Helm for one, struck me more painful than anything else. Of all the gods, I would have thought that he would have survived the edition change.
But on that same note, I believe the words "the more things change, the more they stay the same" is 100% true here. Has large parts of the Realms been utterly demolished? Yes, I agree with that, but some of the stuff they added isn't too bad either. I like the return of Netheril! I fell in love with ancient Netheril the moment I saw it and it's cool to see that Netheril has returned. A shadow of itself, but slowly returning. And despite the tragedy of Midnight's death, her death means her ban no longer exists; 10th+ spells can now be created and this can open up entirely new parts for characters and writers alike.
It's entirely true that Wizards cut away old portions of the painting and left us a blank white canvass and an empty feeling in our hearts, but at the same time, it is a blank canvas. We can fill that with new and old ideas, mixed together to create something that may even surpass the original.
For example, what sort of cultural things have come about in the past hundred years? What sort of things can we fill in here and there? I don't see what's wrong with us filling it in.
And much of that lore is still there; it's just a hundred years ago.
If we all do our part, I don't see why we'd be rejected. God knows that Ed could use the help filling in everything. |
Hey, babe, see my shiny teeth as I smile my very best wolf smile- Ed Greenwood. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 02:48:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Milith holder of HB8
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
I think many fail to see the truth of the matter. The Realms is not anything at all what it used to be, and every contradiction is simply a "Spellplague" issue makes things not only severely muddled and chaotic, but also insults all Realms designers and authors that came before along with insulting the loyal fanbase. The current Realms is a mere shadow of its former self. Clinging to it feels icky, to me anyway.
Therefore, to me, relevance to the Realms only comes from 3E and previous edition material. It's hard for me to accept, or twist, whatever 4E says because it wasn't ever originally intended to be Realmslore. It will always be something that is made to "shove" into the Realms and make it work, no matter what. One major point of the reset is so authors don't have to research a ton of FR material to write a book or novel. So why, then, would they continue that trend when writing 4E Realmslore? They don't have to. This is why I know for a fact the Realms we've come to know for a couple of decades is dead.
Hold up a bit, I strongly disagree here. While I was as shocked and confused as any person as to why Wizards would go so far as to alter the setting for an edition change left me spun around, I really don't think you're being fair here.
Did they nuke the setting? Yes. A hundred times yes. The death of Helm for one, struck me more painful than anything else. Of all the gods, I would have thought that he would have survived the edition change.
But on that same note, I believe the words "the more things change, the more they stay the same" is 100% true here. Has large parts of the Realms been utterly demolished? Yes, I agree with that, but some of the stuff they added isn't too bad either. I like the return of Netheril! I fell in love with ancient Netheril the moment I saw it and it's cool to see that Netheril has returned. A shadow of itself, but slowly returning. And despite the tragedy of Midnight's death, her death means her ban no longer exists; 10th+ spells can now be created and this can open up entirely new parts for characters and writers alike.
It's entirely true that Wizards cut away old portions of the painting and left us a blank white canvass and an empty feeling in our hearts, but at the same time, it is a blank canvas. We can fill that with new and old ideas, mixed together to create something that may even surpass the original.
For example, what sort of cultural things have come about in the past hundred years? What sort of things can we fill in here and there? I don't see what's wrong with us filling it in.
And much of that lore is still there; it's just a hundred years ago.
If we all do our part, I don't see why we'd be rejected. God knows that Ed could use the help filling in everything.
Here's the key to that: I purchased the Realms sourcebooks because I liked what they were writing. I even liked the return of Netheril, but I wanted to see them go down hard and not "rebuild the empire" (which is incredibly similar to what's happened in the Star Wars novels...)
If I wanted to fill in a hundred years of history and fill in blank spaces on the map, I didn't need them to publish anything to do so. I could have done that all on my own. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36803 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 03:19:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Milith holder of HB8
It's entirely true that Wizards cut away old portions of the painting and left us a blank white canvass and an empty feeling in our hearts, but at the same time, it is a blank canvas. We can fill that with new and old ideas, mixed together to create something that may even surpass the original.
For example, what sort of cultural things have come about in the past hundred years? What sort of things can we fill in here and there? I don't see what's wrong with us filling it in.
I didn't become a fan of the Realms because of the blank spots -- I became a fan because of all the spots that were filled in.
If I want a setting that is a blank canvas for me, I'll go to a new one. I actually think the 4E Realms would have stood quite well on their own, as an entirely new setting -- if they'd called it something new, and not tried to make it a continuation of the old, I think they'd have had a lot more fans, and certainly wouldn't have caused such a rift in our community. |
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 04 Apr 2010 03:20:20 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 04:14:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
<chop>
Here's the key to that: I purchased the Realms sourcebooks because I liked what they were writing. I even liked the return of Netheril, but I wanted to see them go down hard and not "rebuild the empire" (which is incredibly similar to what's happened in the Star Wars novels...)
If I wanted to fill in a hundred years of history and fill in blank spaces on the map, I didn't need them to publish anything to do so. I could have done that all on my own.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I didn't become a fan of the Realms because of the blank spots -- I became a fan because of all the spots that were filled in.
If I want a setting that is a blank canvas for me, I'll go to a new one. I actually think the 4E Realms would have stood quite well on their own, as an entirely new setting -- if they'd called it something new, and not tried to make it a continuation of the old, I think they'd have had a lot more fans, and certainly wouldn't have caused such a rift in our community.
Amen! If I wanted a campaign setting as sparsely detailed as the 4E Realms, I would just build my own; I've done it before, but not in over 20 years, as I've been playing in the Realms since it was released. As a result, my effort at world-building was blatantly obvious as the work of a 15-year-old... a very well-read 15-year-old, but still...
Anyway, I've been decidedly apathetic creatively lately, so work on my alternate-timeline Realms has been little, if anything... and thinking about all the now-obsolete NDAs that we'll likely never see lifted is depressing me further, so I'm going to switch worlds and read some of my Midnight material from Fantasy Flight Games to cheer me up.  |
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 04 Apr 2010 04:15:24 |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
Milith holder of HB8
Seeker
USA
63 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 04:38:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Here's the key to that: I purchased the Realms sourcebooks because I liked what they were writing.
So did I.
quote:
I even liked the return of Netheril, but I wanted to see them go down hard and not "rebuild the empire" (which is incredibly similar to what's happened in the Star Wars novels...)
And I disagree. I think them returning was pretty cool. I fear I don't follow the SW novels however.
quote:
If I wanted to fill in a hundred years of history and fill in blank spaces on the map, I didn't need them to publish anything to do so. I could have done that all on my own.
Of course you could.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I didn't become a fan of the Realms because of the blank spots -- I became a fan because of all the spots that were filled in.
Perhaps I missed something. But all of it still exists. The only difference is we're a hundred years in the future.
quote:
If I want a setting that is a blank canvas for me, I'll go to a new one. I actually think the 4E Realms would have stood quite well on their own, as an entirely new setting -- if they'd called it something new, and not tried to make it a continuation of the old, I think they'd have had a lot more fans, and certainly wouldn't have caused such a rift in our community.
Oh I agree, this should have been handled much better. They should have put it on a part of the map where there hadn't yet been something identified. Infact, they could have transported the entire base setting of the Core campaign and therefore had to of altered little. Sure, I can see a few changes to shake things up, maybe a small time jump--a decade or so at most. The gap they made is incredibly large, the devistation to the realms very wide, and the wounds deep. However, I don't think it's worth abandoning the setting.
I see it as just more opportunity to add more lore. Between the then and the now.
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
Amen! If I wanted a campaign setting as sparsely detailed as the 4E Realms,
Surely you overestimate the devistation. Surely I think, old lore can be updated and new things can be added. I mean, if this was a sourcebook instead that stated about a future Realms where the very same thing happened, I don't think many of you would be nearly as upset as you are now.
The past is right there. This is the Realms. They've had time travel since 2e, at least to my knowledge. And yes, I know they retconned a few things to fit in with the new cosmology, but I didn't think it was that bad, was it?
quote:
I would just build my own; I've done it before, but not in over 20 years, as I've been playing in the Realms since it was released. As a result, my effort at world-building was blatantly obvious as the work of a 15-year-old... a very well-read 15-year-old, but still...
Anyway, I've been decidedly apathetic creatively lately, so work on my alternate-timeline Realms has been little, if anything... and thinking about all the now-obsolete NDAs that we'll likely never see lifted is depressing me further, so I'm going to switch worlds and read some of my Midnight material from Fantasy Flight Games to cheer me up.
Well, I'm sorry to hear that.
But I still think the setting is worth saving and despite the devistation, still a very, very rich place of lore and adventure. |
Hey, babe, see my shiny teeth as I smile my very best wolf smile- Ed Greenwood. |
|
|
|
Zorro
Seeker
Germany
82 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 14:09:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
(...) so I'm going to switch worlds and read some of my Midnight material from Fantasy Flight Games to cheer me up.
You could do a lot worse. Great setting, although Fantasy Flight's public relations are even worse than WotC's. For all intents and purposes it's discontinued, but FF doesn't have the guts to come out and say so. The rest was silence...
Zorro |
I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability. - Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 14:18:38
|
I guess that could be better that GamerRadio0's hype 4E plan...lets bad mouth the 3E and the products were are still trying to sell you before we switch to the 4E system in 10 months.
What a fiasco.
|
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Zorro
Seeker
Germany
82 Posts |
Posted - 04 Apr 2010 : 14:34:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Milith holder of HB8
Perhaps I missed something. But all of it still exists. The only difference is we're a hundred years in the future.
See, I'm sure that a hundred years ago a ton of interesting people lived in my hometown - but I'll never know. In other words: Little of the old lore has any impact on the New Realms.
Now, your time travel suggestion does hold merit, but there's a problem, too. Firstly, isn't it sad that you have to use such drastic measures? Secondly - and most importantly -, we all know now what the outcome will be. The Realms' allure, the "What comes next?" excitement is gone. So some of us prefer the past because we don't like the official present. But with having the official present in mind (which to some is sub-par and to others even a travesty), the attraction of playing in an already doomed setting will wane, because officially questions like "Will the Zhentarim take over the Dalelands and Cormyr" or "What will become of the Seven Sisters" or a thousand other ones don't arise - we already know the answers, and some of us don't like them one bit.
Just to be clear: The above applies to those who feel the need to comply with official canon. Most of us either decree that a new edition never happened, or play other settings altogether.
quote:
Originally posted by Milith holder of HB8
I see it as just more opportunity to add more lore. Between the then and the now.
But lore is bad. At least that's what WotC tells us. It's a little miracle, isn't it, that they keep publishing lore via DDI, although they officially said that it's not good for the setting. Anyway, IMHO the publishing model WotC chose isn't conducive to the long-term development of any setting, let alone such a massive one.
quote:
Originally posted by Milith holder of HB8
But I still think the setting is worth saving and despite the devistation, still a very, very rich place of lore and adventure.
Well, it sure was - but that's the same we'd be saying if WotC had officially discontinued it. "Okay, there will never be new lore, none of all those story arcs will ever be resolved, but hey, all the previous lore's still there, you can still play with it." In either case it sucks for those who wanted a continuation of the setting, because in either case they're not getting it. Another problem is the compatibility. Before we were all on the same page, but with no official support the Old Realms fandom will slowly wither away, and it will be harder and harder for OR fans to find like-minded people to play with. Don't forget that WotC put a ban on the online retailers - they're not allowed to sell their pre-4e supplements anymore. So how are people supposed to get their hands on OR material? No one in their right mind will spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars hunting it down on eBay bit by bit, even less so when they don't even know why they should get into it when the New Realms material is so comparatively inexpensive. And because the brand name is still in use, we can't put up a website with all the material the retailers are not allowed to sell anymore. So it's just a question of time when the OR fandom will be just a footnote. Let's face it, WotC doesn't want us to play in the OR. They want us to play in a setting they support so they get the revenue.
Zorro |
I think that God in creating Man somewhat overestimated his ability. - Oscar Wilde |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
What happened to Open ,Free and Spirited Debate?
