| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Mar 2010 : 15:53:41
|
I think the bottom line is, write what you like as long as it doesn't contradict what has already happened. An example would be writing a short-story about a charcter from Halruaa(sp?) set in the 1480's or talking about a cleric of Helm using the current date. Other such things, like Uzzy's idea I believe would be fine and something I'd personally like to read.
And I don't think the Compendium has ever been edition neutral since there are character write ups (stats and the like) in addition to Organizations that use 3.5 mechanics. Not that it's wrong, but one can't argue to keep it "edition neutral" and still post articles with edition mechanics. If it was fine for using 3.5 stuff I see no problem with adding 4e stuff into the mix. |
 |
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 26 Mar 2010 : 16:02:40
|
Ok thanks for clearing it up. My original article has 3.5E regional feats to select, as well as a few minor edition specific crunch items in it that I could easily remove for the compendium (thus making it specifically historical/lore to use that piece of time to play in with any edition or for reading pleasure)  |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Arioch
Learned Scribe
Italy
222 Posts |
Posted - 26 Mar 2010 : 16:18:17
|
quote:
I want to heal the wounds and bridge the gap, not rewrite something someone else did.
When I think about writing something on the Spellplague (which I, in fact, did a couple of times here in Candlekeep), I do not have in mind to change other's work!!
My efforts are just in filling up the blanks! A sort of "what if..", within the boundaries of the official lore.
I like to do that, often my game campaigns start exactly from this sort of speculation that I enjoy a lot.
That said, I feel that we can cover among others also the Spellplague topic, as long as this do not become the main subject covered or an excuse for "rewrite something someone else did"! |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 26 Mar 2010 : 16:19:37
|
| I agree. Filling in the blanks are great, and something I want badly :) |
|
|
|
Zanan
Senior Scribe
Germany
942 Posts |
Posted - 26 Mar 2010 : 18:37:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
The compendium would be for the modern day of the Realms in 1480 DR.
Dunno, but IMHO the only stuff the Wizards would keep us doing without looking to claw it in under the GLC and what have would be stuff pre-Spellplague, since that is something they do no longer support. Writing stuff "alongside" official material and under the current climate though ... I'd have my doubts that they leave us do that.
BTW, nothing out of my pen or keyboard will support anything post-Spellplague. |
Cave quid dicis, quando et cui!
Gæð a wyrd swa hio scel!
In memory of Alura Durshavin.
Visit my "Homepage" to find A Guide to the Drow NPCs of Faerûn, Drow and non-Drow PrC and much more. |
Edited by - Zanan on 26 Mar 2010 18:45:16 |
|
|
|
Gray Richardson
Master of Realmslore
USA
1291 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2010 : 18:06:24
|
| I have some Aearee ideas I might could contribute. |
|
|
|
freyar
Learned Scribe
Canada
220 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2010 : 18:19:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
And I don't think the Compendium has ever been edition neutral since there are character write ups (stats and the like) in addition to Organizations that use 3.5 mechanics. Not that it's wrong, but one can't argue to keep it "edition neutral" and still post articles with edition mechanics. If it was fine for using 3.5 stuff I see no problem with adding 4e stuff into the mix.
I'm right now looking at Candlekeep Compendium Volume II, which has both 2e and 3.5e character write-ups (and stories/lore, canon or not, that runs from the 1350s to 1370s). That's precisely what edition neutral means, supporting any edition that contributors care to write about, whether mechanics or the period where lore is set. Kobold Quarterly is edition-neutral in terms of mechanics, at least among 3.5e, 4e, and Pathfinder, as an example. I just think that any fanzine associated with Candlekeep should be inclusive like that. |
My DnD Links and Creations |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2010 : 18:25:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by freyar
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
And I don't think the Compendium has ever been edition neutral since there are character write ups (stats and the like) in addition to Organizations that use 3.5 mechanics. Not that it's wrong, but one can't argue to keep it "edition neutral" and still post articles with edition mechanics. If it was fine for using 3.5 stuff I see no problem with adding 4e stuff into the mix.
I'm right now looking at Candlekeep Compendium Volume II, which has both 2e and 3.5e character write-ups (and stories/lore, canon or not, that runs from the 1350s to 1370s). That's precisely what edition neutral means, supporting any edition that contributors care to write about, whether mechanics or the period where lore is set. Kobold Quarterly is edition-neutral in terms of mechanics, at least among 3.5e, 4e, and Pathfinder, as an example. I just think that any fanzine associated with Candlekeep should be inclusive like that.
Ah, I see what you mean now. So not edition neutral in that it posts nothing about game mechanics but in that it welcomes all and any sort of game mechanics. Much better than what I originally thought, lol. Well in that case, why aren't we starting yet?!  |
|
|
|
Lady Fellshot
Senior Scribe
USA
379 Posts |
Posted - 27 Mar 2010 : 22:20:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I welcome older lore, I just like to stay away from alternate timelines that rewrite what the FR designers have created. I believe if WotC has any issue- it would be with things such as this.
I apologize, but I can't do that when a big chunk of the new official lore didn't make any logical sense to me to begin with. There's no reconciliation without noting that someone might have been mistaken about a few "minor but important" details here and there.
I had been looking forwards to possibly contributing too... *goes to crawl back in her burrow and cry* |
|
|
|
Zanan
Senior Scribe
Germany
942 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2010 : 00:05:58
|
There will be far more issues with WotC if people start writing (possibly alternative) 4E FR stuff, since this will no doubt interfere with with official stuff WotC will present to the public in one way or another, as well as probably falling under the GLC rules.
There is, on the other hand, an aweful lot of white space in pre-Spellplague Realmslore, especially AD&D (rule) lore that needs updating to 3RE or e.g. PF. If you check the sourcebooks, hardly anything bar the odd Arcane Age adventure happens in pre-1250 D.R. Realmspace. Lots of blanks sheets to be filled here, if you e.g. expand on a few bits and pieces given in TGHotR. |
Cave quid dicis, quando et cui!
Gæð a wyrd swa hio scel!
In memory of Alura Durshavin.
Visit my "Homepage" to find A Guide to the Drow NPCs of Faerûn, Drow and non-Drow PrC and much more. |
|
|
|
Lady Fellshot
Senior Scribe
USA
379 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2010 : 02:24:26
|
| Well, half the problem is that the area I'd be interested in would almost certainly directly contradict The Company Line, regardless of when I set it. :/ |
|
|
|
Tyranthraxus
Senior Scribe
Netherlands
423 Posts |
Posted - 28 Mar 2010 : 23:41:22
|
I would very much like to see a new volume of the compendium, and I don't mind if it's pre- or post-Spellplague lore (or AD&D, 3.5, PF or 4e rules). Although I would like to see some more post-Spellplague articles and am willing to contribute any way I can.
Dips his quill in ink and starts writing homebrew Realms lore |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 03:36:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
My concern is that, from viewing the responses, a significant portion of potential contributors see themselves as unwelcome, based, apparently, on what they view as the imposed constraints of the project.
This strikes me as being ultimately contrary to the spirit of the edition-neutral policy at Candlekeep.
In short, if there are scribes who believe that their contributions would be ignored or refused, then it wouldn't really be a Candlekeep Compendium, would it?
The only constraints are that you don't go against established canon lore. This never seemed to be an issue with previous Compendium articles. Before 4E, would a story detailing the assassination of Elminster set in 1375 DR be allowed in the Compendium? I'd probably think not. Same applies here. Previous lore, I believe, is perfectly fine as long as it's not an attempt to re-write the Spellplague or try to do a "What if Mystra hadn't died?" sort of stories. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 10:28:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
My concern is that, from viewing the responses, a significant portion of potential contributors see themselves as unwelcome, based, apparently, on what they view as the imposed constraints of the project.
This strikes me as being ultimately contrary to the spirit of the edition-neutral policy at Candlekeep.
In short, if there are scribes who believe that their contributions would be ignored or refused, then it wouldn't really be a Candlekeep Compendium, would it?
The only constraints are that you don't go against established canon lore. This never seemed to be an issue with previous Compendium articles. Before 4E, would a story detailing the assassination of Elminster set in 1375 DR be allowed in the Compendium? I'd probably think not. Same applies here. Previous lore, I believe, is perfectly fine as long as it's not an attempt to re-write the Spellplague or try to do a "What if Mystra hadn't died?" sort of stories.
Well, that's the problem. The old Compendium never had a set rule that canon should be followed. I never thought twice about letting a good idea go before canon, at least with small details. If I had to double check every detail to see if I adhered to lore and a "feel" that had little to do with my own picture of the Realms, then I have better use for my time.
I wish this project all the luck in the world, but just for the record, I will not contribute. |
|
|
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 12:04:05
|
I'm not a WotC lawyer, but I think the issue would be with large rewrites (e.g. the what if no spellplague scenario) rather than accidentally contradicting something written in a novel or sourcebook you're not familiar with.
Anyway, I suppose it's all fairly academic until we get some kind of clarification as to what would cause grief with officialdom and actually get the go ahead for resurrecting the compendium.
EDIT: Blarg! Cleric Generic hate Double Post! |
Cedric! The Cleric Generic and Master of Disguise!
ALL HAIL LORD KARSUS!!!
Vast Realmslore Archive: Get in here and download everything! http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/rl
2e Realms book PDFs; grab em! - http://poleandrope.blogspot.com/2010/07/working-around-purge.html |
Edited by - Cleric Generic on 29 Mar 2010 12:05:37 |
|
|
|
freyar
Learned Scribe
Canada
220 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 14:25:34
|
I really don't understand why everyone seems to think that a canon-only 4e-only publication is more likely to avoid a cease-and-desist order from WotC. Whatever edition, FR is all WotC's intellectual property. Since they haven't tried to shut Candlekeep down yet (or any of the other setting fan-pages, which all seem to be posting new material for different editions), I'm not sure why we think they're likely to come after Candlekeep for posting something new. I think, to be honest, Candlekeep is being overly cautious. But it's not my website, and Alaundo should be as cautious as necessary to be comfortable.
Also, oddly enough, parody is well-known to be legally protected. So I'd think that the safest thing to write would be an alternate version of FR that's very silly, Spellplague, ToT, Drizzt, or whatever. |
My DnD Links and Creations |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 14:26:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cleric Generic
Anyway, I suppose it's all fairly academic until we get some kind of clarification as to what would cause grief with officialdom and actually get the go ahead for resurrecting the compendium.
And, thus, why we have been diligently waiting for a fansite policy that would determine this.
The wheel keeps on turnin'. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Bakra
Senior Scribe
628 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 14:54:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
My concern is that, from viewing the responses, a significant portion of potential contributors see themselves as unwelcome, based, apparently, on what they view as the imposed constraints of the project.
This strikes me as being ultimately contrary to the spirit of the edition-neutral policy at Candlekeep.
In short, if there are scribes who believe that their contributions would be ignored or refused, then it wouldn't really be a Candlekeep Compendium, would it?
The only constraints are that you don't go against established canon lore. This never seemed to be an issue with previous Compendium articles. Before 4E, would a story detailing the assassination of Elminster set in 1375 DR be allowed in the Compendium? I'd probably think not. Same applies here. Previous lore, I believe, is perfectly fine as long as it's not an attempt to re-write the Spellplague or try to do a "What if Mystra hadn't died?" sort of stories.
Well, that's the problem. The old Compendium never had a set rule that canon should be followed. I never thought twice about letting a good idea go before canon, at least with small details. If I had to double check every detail to see if I adhered to lore and a "feel" that had little to do with my own picture of the Realms, then I have better use for my time.
I wish this project all the luck in the world, but just for the record, I will not contribute.
I’m sure there was an unofficial rule about loosely following canon. Would any of the editor(s) care to comment…or tell horror stories about proposals that dealt with El being killed by a kobold? |
I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . .
So saith Ed. <snip>
love to all,
THO
|
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 29 Mar 2010 : 20:11:39
|
| I have to ask, because it seems prudent. If there are so many who refuse to support guidelines that maintain canon- who is the audience? Candlekeep scribes only? If it is for the people of CK, then why would we go through the trouble of making a stellar presentation when submitting a scroll/post accomplishes the same thing? |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 05:53:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I have to ask, because it seems prudent. If there are so many who refuse to support guidelines that maintain canon- who is the audience? Candlekeep scribes only? If it is for the people of CK, then why would we go through the trouble of making a stellar presentation when submitting a scroll/post accomplishes the same thing?
I just don't think people want to support something that might involve the changes that have occured. That being said, I feel it's just as good to write about something in the past as well as the present.
Like others have said, submitting articles that detail say...a specific organization you've created in the Realms set in the year 1375 DR is perfectly fine as well as doing a short story about a character in the Realms set in 249 DR so long as it doesn't attempt to undo or re-write what's already happened.
Just the same, if the individual who created that organization uses the Pathfinder rule-set, it's still all well and good.
In fact, besides the conversions of Paragon Paths/Epic Destinies I've done for 4eFR, I plan on submitting an organization set in a pre-spellplague Realms and also have the history leading up to the current date. The characters in there will have both 3.5 stat write-ups and possibly 4e stat write-ups. I think this is perfectly do-able because I'm not attempting to use this organization to alter the current setting's established lore (like if this organization obilerated Szass Tam for example). |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 06:16:04
|
| Sounds good to me. I'd like to ee another compendium, and might even consider contributing something- just not 4th ed post-Spellplague stuff. I might attempt to bridge some of the time between, though- I was thinking of what might happen to all the followers of Eilistraee who were left adrift after WotSQ/Lady Penitant. I've noticed that hundred year gap could covere a LOT of lore about them! (And possibly a certain drow ranger, too....) |
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 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 06:24:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
quote:
Originally posted by freyar
Also, oddly enough, parody is well-known to be legally protected. So I'd think that the safest thing to write would be an alternate version of FR that's very silly, Spellplague, ToT, Drizzt, or whatever.
Something along the lines of, "Cyric, creeping into Dweomerheart to murder Mystra, trips over the supine form of Sune, who had been intending to pay her own visit on the Goddess of Magic, but got distracted and started studying her own beauty in a small wading pool. In tripping, Cyric accidently lunges forward into Shar, who was hiding behind a curtain to watch her plan in action, killing her and alerting Mystra, who turns and simply remarks, "It's been 5 or 6 books so far, and it still hasn't happened."
Meanwhile. Tyr overwhelms Tymora in the throes of passion, causing every gambler throughout the Realms to simultaneously win. Waukeen, in despair at this, drowns herself in the Golden Water. Umberlee, curious at the chaos in that area of her realm, comes to investigate, but loses her divinity on a really bad bartering roll to a canny Durpari. Helm, busy watching all of this, doesn't watch his step and trips on the Celestial Staircase, breaking his own neck. He spends the rest of eternity seeking a voice synthesizer.
 This. Is. Brilliant. Material that I could actually work with... largely because it doesn't mess with the world. THAT was my big problem with the Spellplague: the geographical changes and the timeline jump. I wasn't thrilled with seeing every single Faerun-specific deity of arcane magic snuff it, either; in 4E, wizards need divine protection more than ever, because they're just like everybody else.[/rant]
This is even better than the version I came up with... hang on, and I'll grab a link... here. My only complaint: It doesn't do anything nasty to Cyric. Of course, we could always have Mask take care of that...
Edit: And to keep this scroll on topic (and the mods happy): I would love for the Compendium to continue, and for it to be lore-focused and edition-neutral. I agree with previous posters, in that the best way to achieve that is to focus on the missing years: pre-1385 for pre-Spellplague, and the Long Gap for post-Spellplague. And no, we fans of the Old Realms don't have less to work with, because there are many events from Toril's past that have not been detailed or even mentioned; we have complete creative freedom as long as we don't try to undo what's been 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. |
Edited by - Jakk on 30 Mar 2010 06:42:19 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 08:26:30
|
| I like that there is really LOTS that can be done with this. As long as Canon isn't contradicted, then I don't see a problem with writing lots of things! |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Snowblood
Senior Scribe
Australia
388 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 10:27:47
|
| Every elf realm I've detailed is done using the GHOTR as its base source, so that any history I write in, dovetails in with what has gone before.....its a fine line to walk... |
Aryvandaar, Ilythiir, Arnothoi, Orva, Sarphil, Anauria/Asram/Hlondath, Uvaeren, Braceldaur, Ilodhar, Lisenaar, Imaskar, Miyeritar, Orishaar, Shantel Othrieir, Keltormir, Eaerlann, Ammarindar, Siluvanede, Sharrven, Illefarn, Ardeep, Rystal Wood, Evereska are all available here for download:http://phasai.deviantart.com/gallery/
|
|
|
|
freyar
Learned Scribe
Canada
220 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 14:26:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I have to ask, because it seems prudent. If there are so many who refuse to support guidelines that maintain canon- who is the audience? Candlekeep scribes only? If it is for the people of CK, then why would we go through the trouble of making a stellar presentation when submitting a scroll/post accomplishes the same thing?
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I just don't think people want to support something that might involve the changes that have occured. That being said, I feel it's just as good to write about something in the past as well as the present.
I'm not sure if you want my opinion, as I'd not likely contribute (unless someone wants 3.X/PF monster stats! ), but I'll give it a shot. Diffan is largely right but doesn't go quite far enough for me. I don't mind if the Compendium takes canon as a guideline, though clearly marked "alternate histories" would be ok with me too. What bugs me is the idea that I have to accept the 1480s as the "present" if I want to contribute to or even read what you propose. I, and I think a number of other scribes, take WotC's FR history after 138x (or even 137x) as nonexistent. So, when you say that lore about the 1370s is ok but has to be written as a "historical" piece, that's not consonant with how many people see the Realms. It changes the reading experience. And it forces changes to proposed articles, like Uzzy's.
On a more practical matter, I think the PDF Compendia are just easier and more fun to read than forum posts anyway. |
My DnD Links and Creations |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 15:26:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I have to ask, because it seems prudent. If there are so many who refuse to support guidelines that maintain canon- who is the audience? Candlekeep scribes only? If it is for the people of CK, then why would we go through the trouble of making a stellar presentation when submitting a scroll/post accomplishes the same thing?
I definately put more in the article I wrote than in any forum posts (I don't proof read my forum posts sometimes and usually just skim through it - as opposed to multiple proffreadings by myself and others). Let me know if you need me to send it to you Matt. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 15:33:28
|
Okay, I read back through this scroll and I wanted to clear some things up.
(1) The project would be game edition neutral. If you want to include stats and other game mechanics, my idea was to have references to the back of the project for such. Meaning, if you have a stat block, we would leave a hook in the document that would reference to the back of the book where all such information would be located
(2) You can write on ANY era of the Forgotten Realms. I just don't want to work with alternate timelines, etc... Despite feelings for the current time-line, I would be highly insulted if someone rerouted around my work. There are plenty of Realms Authors that still write for the setting and I just don't want to go there.
(3) I want to focus on the stories. If you want to steer-clear of the Spellplague- by all means. If you want to write about the formation of Faerun and the creator-races- by all means.
Again, I want to focus on the story of the Realms. There is no need to tangle with game design if you don't want to. Find story-elements that help describe the changes if you are inclined to contribute on that era. |
|
|
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 30 Mar 2010 : 22:19:23
|
I still hope that someone has asked Alaundo if he appreciates that someone else has taken his project away from him.
Beyond that, I'm dedicated to Alaundo's Compendium, so I doubt that I'll be including anything in James', especially because of many reasons that I've stated more then once in many different threads. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
Edited by - Kuje on 30 Mar 2010 22:21:05 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Candlekeep Compendium discussion...
