| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
 Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:11:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
My own take on canon is that authors writing for the setting should keep to canon/continuity if at all possible as a thing of professionalism, among other reasons. You're paid to know the material and be aware of it as you expand upon it. Specific instances where you go against something can exist, but should never be taken lightly, especially when it comes to large-scale retcons or changes. And flavor continuity should always trump rules.
As for anyone else, canon should be used or ignored as you see fit. Take the setting, make it yours, break it and rework it as needed and have a blast doing so. Lord, I mean I broke things like crazy in my 3.x Planescape games, and I'm as hardcore of a setting purist and canon obsessive as you'll find.
Where's my 'Like' button?
I'm actually chuckling at work reading all this because I read BC's comments and started to respond, but didn't, knowing that there would be responses aplenty (and better written).
Although, I'd have to say it's *technically* possible to have 'canon seamless' game. If you play only published modules and have FR developers run the PCs.  |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
 |
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:16:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Cleric Generic
I can't help myself...
Can you elaborate on what you mean by 'canonically seamless'?
Brace disagrees with me just for the sake of proving me wrong.
I want him to show me an official source where all the actions of his characters and the characters themselves are high-lighted.
'Canonically seamless' and 'canon' are NOT the same thing - NO-ONE runs a canon game. To do so, you would have to live-stream your gaming sessions onto the WotC site, and even the designers don't do that (because then things like "Hand me the Doritos" would become FR canon).
I don't think we want another Brace Vs. Markus(or Markus vs. Brace....) scroll, at least I do not think that was not Erik's intent |
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
|
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:19:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
My own take on canon is that authors writing for the setting should keep to canon/continuity if at all possible as a thing of professionalism, among other reasons. You're paid to know the material and be aware of it as you expand upon it. Specific instances where you go against something can exist, but should never be taken lightly, especially when it comes to large-scale retcons or changes. And flavor continuity should always trump rules.
As for anyone else, canon should be used or ignored as you see fit. Take the setting, make it yours, break it and rework it as needed and have a blast doing so. Lord, I mean I broke things like crazy in my 3.x Planescape games, and I'm as hardcore of a setting purist and canon obsessive as you'll find.
Where's my 'Like' button?
I'm actually chuckling at work reading all this because I read BC's comments and started to respond, but didn't, knowing that there would be responses aplenty (and better written).
Although, I'd have to say it's *technically* possible to have 'canon seamless' game. If you play only published modules and have FR developers run the PCs.
(emphasis mine) That may very well be how he does it and who he is playing with. We have no way to know otherwise. |
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
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:31:12
|
The concept of "canonically seamless" is an interesting one. If every scrap of canon works for you and you use it in your game (and resolve the contradictions) in a way you believe is canonically seamless, then more power to you. The core rule is to "make it fun."
I think there are multiple versions of the realms that are "canonically seamless"--there's no right or wrong way to run a game in the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
Which actually leads to a question for you, Erik, if you have the time and the ability to answer:
I'm wondering if WotC is trying to move away from the whole concept of "canon" in general.
A number of the new novels seem to have a specific setting, so to speak, but I'm not aware of any plans to flesh that setting out. Living FR has had its "canon mantle" revoked. Most of the 4E supplements seem to be "lore-lite." Etc.
Do you have any comment?
I am aware of no such plans, and I really don't see it going that way. I don't say this just because I'd *like* it to be that way, but also because of my recent 4e projects.
Cheers
|
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Brace Cormaeril
Learned Scribe
294 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:35:05
|
To those who disagree with me: You are wrong, I am right. I am sorry your experience is limited, and understanding of this topic incomplete. It does not suprise me that there are many posters here whose Dungeons and Dragons acumen is far inferior to mine.
I am certain the importance of hedging ones' perspective is not lost on the scribes here. There is little which I disdain as much as much as some parvenue telling me "what's-what", and being categorically, empirically, wrong.
|
The Silver Fire's Blade: A Novella in Nine Parts, Available Soon, in the Adventuring Forum!
|
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:42:43
|
| My, my. I DO believe someone's Ego 30 intelligence is showing! (Brace, seriously- you assume WAY too much about other people's D&D knowledge, not to mention your own superiority. Doing that just makes YOU sound like a know-it-all, and it's been MY experience both IRL and in-game, that such people generally- DON'T.) And might I add with all due respect to everyone- OPINIONS are just that. Ther is NO right or wrong opinion. Just yours, mine, his, hers, theirs, or whatever. |
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 |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 21:47:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
To those who disagree with me: You are wrong, I am right. I am sorry your experience is limited, and understanding of this topic incomplete. It does not suprise me that there are many posters here whose Dungeons and Dragons acumen is far inferior to mine.
I am certain the importance of hedging ones' perspective is not lost on the scribes here. There is little which I disdain as much as much as some parvenue telling me "what's-what", and being categorically, empirically, wrong.
Im not going to debate right or wrong, as it's your opinion, you are right. But this is not the right scroll to blast away at your fellow scribes.
Nor is this the place for other Scribes to fire away at Brace.
Take it to a PM if you must say it! |
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
|
Edited by - The Red Walker on 31 Aug 2010 21:48:32 |
|
|
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
|
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
|
|
Brace Cormaeril
Learned Scribe
294 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 22:20:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by capnvan
quote:
Originally posted by Brace Cormaeril
quote:
Originally posted by Cleric Generic
I can't help myself...
Can you elaborate on what you mean by 'canonically seamless'?
Canon is not violated in my campaign.
Given that the FR canon is known to conflict with itself, that is an impressive achievement. 
Indeed, thank you. |
The Silver Fire's Blade: A Novella in Nine Parts, Available Soon, in the Adventuring Forum!
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 22:59:58
|
Just thank god HE s not a designer - can you imagine just how bad the Realms would be with a "I am right and everyone else is wrong" attitude?
It would be some sort of neo-homebrew aberration that no one would buy. 
But seriously folks, we don't need this to devolve again - there is no wrong way to play D&D - do whatever you enjoy. Weather you want to stick religiously to canon, or just plain ignore it, never stop having fun, otherwise you'll turn into a 'grown-up'.
Just Eeeeewwwwww 
- Mark, who turned 47 years young yesterday, and has been playing/running D&D for over 30 years. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Uzzy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
618 Posts |
Posted - 31 Aug 2010 : 23:42:53
|
| Erik's article comes to such a bloody obvious conclusion that it's still quite sad that it needs to be said, and gets me frustrated that there are still people who think that everything written in the books must be taken as absolute canon for all games set in that verse, everywhere. |
|
|
|
Brace Cormaeril
Learned Scribe
294 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 00:48:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Just thank god HE s not a designer - can you imagine just how bad the Realms would be with a "I am right and everyone else is wrong" attitude?
I agree with you there, Mark. Paticularly regarding those who espouse that perspective in over-long posts, without the blatant sarcasm. Or those who seek to preserve 'original intent'... Ewwwwww. |
The Silver Fire's Blade: A Novella in Nine Parts, Available Soon, in the Adventuring Forum!
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 02:26:25
|
You know, I came in here to talk about a topic that I think--while obvious--is important to talk about, and one I value quite highly.
If you can't or aren't interested in participating in the scroll in a mature and respectful manner, please feel free to step right off. No hard feelings.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 04:25:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
You know, I came in here to talk about a topic that I think--while obvious--is important to talk about, and one I value quite highly.
If you can't or aren't interested in participating in the scroll in a mature and respectful manner, please feel free to step right off. No hard feelings.
Cheers
I have to agree. I'm more than a bit tempted to remove some of the side-chatter from this thread -- it gets very, very tiring seeing people refusing to respect the opinions of others.  |
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! |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2449 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 04:41:00
|
That's why I was hesitant to join in this post from the start, Erik. Not that I don't think what you said was valuable, or didn't need saying. If anything, some of the responses have proved just how badly they need to be said. It's just that I could see where this was going from the very beginning.
Though, in a strange way, what happened in the 4e change-over, what's happening here, is actually the highest compliment the (old) designers could be paid. As Joss Whedon once said, the creative process "...is not about making things that people like. It's about making things people love." Yes, the edition wars, the flames, the vitriol are trying, are annoying, but they spring from love. They exist because the designers, from Ed on down, succeeded in creating something people love.
Which just goes to show you why you should never mess with the power of love. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 05:27:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
You know, I came in here to talk about a topic that I think--while obvious--is important to talk about, and one I value quite highly.
If you can't or aren't interested in participating in the scroll in a mature and respectful manner, please feel free to step right off. No hard feelings.
Cheers
I have to agree. I'm more than a bit tempted to remove some of the side-chatter from this thread -- it gets very, very tiring seeing people refusing to respect the opinions of others.
Indeed. And when it starts to impact upon those Realms designers/writers who willingly choose to devote some of their valuable time to online communities like Candlekeep, it's important that we, as Moderators, take a stand and declare such activity counter-productive to the function of this site.
Knock it off! |
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 |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 06:09:16
|
Well said Erik. |
"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 |
Edited by - Brimstone on 01 Sep 2010 23:31:36 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 16:40:27
|
Here's my problem:
(complete disclosure - I play 1st/2nd edition since the GB and personally do not consider 4th ed to even be the Realms).
People took the novels/sourcebooks way, way too seriously. The novels are there to primarily provide entertainment and potentially in depth information about interesting events/places that take place in the realms in much the same way that a book on say Reagan's presidency looks back. They are filled with subjectivity (ie not every word or exact sequence should be taken a literally a top down view, the books are not written from a Zelda 1 perspective) and interpretation (from the author describing said events/places). Most importantly, the novels should primarily be looked at to fill in areas of the campaign world where the PC's are not (ie if the campaign started in 1360DR with the PC's in Anauroch acting as Harper agents, then perhaps "Parched Sea" doesn't happen as described because of PC intervention, but at the same time "Crusade" takes place without the PC's and provides additional "life" to the background of the Realms).
As for sourcebooks, I always viewed them more as an almanac type source where the information was as accurate as possible for the "published" date, but that some info may always be wrong and that things are subject to change based on other campaign events (ie the butterfly effect).
My real problem (especially in recent years) has been the "faith" we have put in the so-called game designers. Besides information that comes from the creator (ie Ed), game designers come and go and most have no greater grasp of the Realms than any of us and yet we place them (and their views) on some pedestal entirely because they got hired by some corporation. That to me is not the way one should evaluate Realmslore.
|
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 17:03:20
|
Personally, I'm more middle of the road when it comes to "using canon". (Since I don't actually run/play in the Realms, it's kind of a mmot point, but I DO adapt things I like to my campaign. No one else I know knows anything about the FR, or has any interest in it, so it's hard to run games in a world no one else cares about.) I enjoy reading the novels, and love the wonderful bg from the sourcebooks, but it hardly matters to me what El or Drizzt or Canilo are doing, because I'm not using THEM. And unless you want those characters showing up and stealing your players' spotlight, they really should stay in the bg. At least that's one DM's take on things.
I've played in Eberron, too, and even a little in Grayhawk, but never used or run into any major players from either of those settings. (Okay, my hubby borrowed Soth from Krynn once in a game he was running, and scared the bejeebies out of my PC with him, but that's about it.) I've even had a player "try" to play as Drizzt (before either of us knew his actual stats- she kinda blew it...) but it has always been away from canon. I usually adapt generic modules, or create my own whole cloth. It's what works for me. I consider canon to be something that should stay in the novels and sourcebooks, not in my game, unless it's as a backdrop for whatever my players are doing. (Although, if I was WRITING something for FR, you can bet your booty I'd keep to canon! Call it a spill-over from my comic-geek fanatisism...)
BTW- happy birthday, MT!!
|
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 |
Edited by - Alystra Illianniis on 01 Sep 2010 17:03:53 |
|
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 18:17:17
|
My interest in the Realms is almost wholly as a game setting; I've read a few of the novels, but very little of what happens there has ever made it into my home Realms. As an example, my current high-level campaign is running along the Impiltur/Damara border; several things that have happened in the novels are also happening in my game. Namely, Gareth decided to annex Vaassa (which I had him do because 1)it suited my needs that the king and his epic-tier friends be far away from the action of my game and 2) it makes sense to me that he would do just such a thing) though in a vastly different way, and for different reasons than those given in the novels. Also, my PCs are facing a BBEG called the Rotting Man- largely because I like the name and the concept- but my RM is a cleric/sorcerer with the Worm that Walks template, not the half-fiend druid/blightlord that was presented in the novels; because it suited the theme and needs of my game that he be so.
In short, I agree with Erik wholeheartedly. It often amazes me that people need to have this sort of thing spelled out to them; the game is yours, make of it what you will. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 18:32:36
|
Wow... a lot has been said here since my last look, even if not all of it needed to be said... ...but this post by Markustay says it all from my POV. Unlike Mark, I was a Realms gamer from Day 1 of the OGB; the only thing I really miss from Greyhawk is the heraldry... I wish Wizbro would do something with all those Realmsian heraldic bits TSR got from Ed way back when...
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
<snip>
I can name changes in every edition I didn't care for, including the first one - some things Ed had were better, IMHO. <snip> I bought EVERYTHING TSR back then, just to find ways to adapt the stuff to my own campaign, so FR sat on a back-burner for several years.
I can entirely agree with Mark here on both counts, except that FR was never on the back burner for me except for a year and a half in which I was self-employed in a small town with no gamers, and had no time to play anyway... self-employment does that to a person when it's a new business...
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Fast Forward - I was coerced into running FR for a group of Newbs, and bought the Gold box which had just come out - that was really the first FR product I read (despite owning several 1e FR products already). I begrudgingly thought it was 'pretty good', but wound-up adapting quite a bit of my GH material to the FR campaign, simply because I knew it better. At around the same time I began reading the novels - first the Moonshaes (which really gave me the wrong look at the Realms), and then the Avatar trilogy (which is why I was never bothered by the ToT, I suppose). Reading those two series, and one Harper novel (Red Wizards) gave me a VERY poor impression of the Realms, <snip>. Anyhow, during the period the campaign was up and running, I went back and read all the older stuff I had, including the Gray box, in order to fill in the blanks and be a better FR DM (despite my reservations). What I found was a very deep and rich world filled with history<snip>.
I'll agree with your assessment of the Moonshae trilogy (see below), and everything else here. I actually read the OGB and the first few gaming supplements before I read any of the novels, and I loved the detail and sense of history that infused the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Fast forward again - I have always been an avid reader, so continued to read all sorts of Sci/Fantasy, and in the process discovered the Drizzt books, and thought "Hey... there actually is one FR writer who knows how to write". From there I read other series, some good, some bad, but it maintained my interest in the Realms, despite my non-desire to play D&D again.
Since starting back in 1984 (I first started FRP gaming with Tunnels & Trolls back in 1982), I never went through a period of not wanting to play D&D, although (and this is my personal experience with the rules talking here; by necessity, others will have different (if possibly similar) experiences) the recent edition change brought me very close. If not for the fact that I was actively gaming with three separate groups, none of whom were switching to the new rules, I probably would have quit altogether... not because I didn't like the new rules (I hadn't yet played them), but because I didn't want to shell out for another new set of rules that openly advertised itself as not being backward-compatible.
Anyway, I'm getting off topic; I also liked the first couple of trilogies from RAS, but I had to choose between the game products or the novels, and the game products won. Because of this, I have never felt an obligation to treat the novels as canon. Heck, the Moonshaes in my Realms aren't even called the Moonshaes, and the entire island group resembles the northern region settled by the Northmen. I like everything about the pagan Norse, probably in part because I'm descended from them, and a world without such a society is incomplete.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I heard the hype about 3e long before it appeared. There were giant cardboard dudes at the bookstores and game stores, and there was even a story on the 6 O'Clock evening news here in NY about the new edition (why couldn't 4e get coverage like that?) I heard one of the very first sourcebooks that was being released was the FRCS, so of course I purchased the 3 core books, and the FRCS when it came out.
And I was stunned! It was by far the most 'perfect' edition of D&D I have ever seen, and managed to get rid of many the bad things I myself had written-out over the years. I began immediately working on a new campaign with more new players (ages 13-16), and began to re-read ALL of my old FR material, both 1e and 2e, and bought everything 3e that came out. I even went so far and hunted down a few products I had missed at the end of the 90's.
And thus began my 'love affair' with the Realms - it was a combination of three editions. If I had to pinpoint one I considered 'right' it would be 2e/post-ToT, because that's when I started running it, but I had experience with both 1e and 3e settings before I actually rook the plunge and gave up entirely on GH.
So, the new rules helped, Bob Salvatore's novels definitely helped, and it was a weird combination of all three editions that really made me into an FR Junkie. I use everything I like, from every edition, and ignore the rest - its still there, in the background, if I need it (like the Shades). I also borrow heavily from other settings and even other genres - its all good.
I felt the same way about 3E and the 3.5 revision; it really inspired me to get seriously back into gaming. My last regular gaming group had disbanded (due to college graduation for most of us) a couple of months before 3E came out, so it wasn't that long a break, but I got a new group together as quickly as possible, including the owner-operator of my FLGS, who was another old college buddy. Like Mark, I wasn't tied down by edition; I used what I liked, tossed out what I didn't, hoped for the publication of more of Ed's original lore (which didn't happen in nearly large enough volumes for my tastes), and (unlike Mark) left the maps alone, apart from the occasional geographical feature; for example, my PCs found and stoppered the decanter of endless water responsible for the swamp in Halruaa whose name escapes me atm, and at the end of the long pre-3E campaign mentioned above, they also found the key to the redemption of Vyshaantar (which I tied in with the Hellgate Keep Dungeon Crawl adventure) and began the restoration of the High Moor long before Blackstaff. (This, among other things, is part of why Khelben is still alive and well in my Realms.)
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So I really can't be pegged as an edition-bigot, since there were many factors and much time involved, but I can honestly say that the latest iteration of the Realms had the opposite effect on me that 3e did - it practically drove me from FR for good. As it is, I am back to just buying the novels, and like always, some are good, some bad, but I keep reading.
And hoping........
I can entirely agree with this sentiment, except that I'm not even buying the novels (mostly because I never did through any edition). I suspect I may have to start buying the latest string of Elminster novels, just from what I've heard... 
Anyway, like Erik said, fire the canon! Even Wizbro has done so, if you look at the Dark Sun reboot. I was overjoyed by that decision, if only because it sets a precedent...  |
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 01 Sep 2010 18:34:52 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 01 Sep 2010 : 20:35:02
|
I think we're misunderstanding my "Fire the Canon!" observation. In reality, all I mean with that is that you should be free to discharge any canon that doesn't work for you.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 00:03:47
|
LOL - I didn't think this would stay edition-neutral, but it should.
Having your games RULED by canon is silly - it is there is you need it, and you can ignore it when you don't. It has always been that way, so edition doesn't apply to the topic at all. FR canon tends to be more... respected... then that in most other settings simply because so very much of it is wrapped-up in the continuing plot-hooks of the Realms, and to disregard any of it would be 'opportunities lost'. That's why I never say "such-&-such does NOT exist" - I just let it sit in the background and don't highlight that particular lore in my sessions. You never know what may become useful down the road.
But by the same token, you shouldn't let canon tie your hands - its a tool, nothing more. Tools don't have to be used; they are just there to make your job easier, where applicable.
As a carpenter, I know the job is never about the hammer - it is about the nails you are driving home. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 02 Sep 2010 00:08:41 |
|
|
|
Galuf the Dwarf
Senior Scribe
USA
621 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 01:30:57
|
Pardon, Mr. de Bie. Don't know if you may see this or not, but here it goes. What would you say about posters (ex: me, Diffan, etc.) who create our own content for the perusal and adoption by other players or DMs? Is that any bit in line with your agenda through this thread?
Yes, I see you're intending us to omit details that do not work with our playing/DMing style. Granted, I don't play or DM; I'm merely a creative think tank that prefers to churn out homebrew mechanics to help enhance gameplay so that people have more fun - and unique - rules to toy with. But in hindsight, I wonder if the likes of me and others with our homebrew content that we post here is helping players and DMs to 'think outside the box,' so to speak.
In all, I wonder if such a trend may lead to a brighter tomorrow as far as "firing the canon" is concerned. Maybe people can abide by what guidelines they need to and still find a method of having fun within such necessary constraints. |
Galuf's Baldur's Gate NPC stats: forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8823
Galuf's 3.5 Ed. Cleric Domains: forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=14036
Galuf's Homebrew 4th Edition Races: forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=13787
Galuf's Homebrew Specialty Priest PrCs: forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=14353
Galuf's Forgotten Realms Heralds and Allies thread: forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8766 |
|
|
|
Tamsar
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
141 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 02:53:05
|
At the end of the day, "Canon" is information about the realms. It is at everyone's own discretion on how they use it in their game.
The information can be ignored, adapted, used verbatim, however YOU deem to use it. As long as it's utilised (or not) to enhance your own game and make it more fun then its all good. Cannon is a tool, not an end product.
Everyone one can use it as they see fit, there is no right or wrong way, only your way.
|
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light |
|
|
|
Zanan
Senior Scribe
Germany
942 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 09:32:30
|
Well ... Erik makes good points, his final sentences essentially says it all:
quote:
Do what works for your game. Do NOT feel tied by canon, because remember what canon is: a tool for your game.
I have never ever felt hindered by canon lore, I embraced it as an attempt by the designers to create a living world of fantasy. I always understood this world as the playground of the "TSR/WotC-DM", while "my Realms" always work for my group as I want it to be. None of my players ever questioned that (though most are veteran gamers and have no problem here). Still, I also embraced the Realms as they were fletched out from the early 1990s to roundabout 2005, essentially much of the old material brushed and spiced up to 3RE. I also had no problems reading some of the grand-NPC novels, like most of Ed Greenwood's Seven Sisters and Chosen of Mystra folk, but in my mind they were only movers and shakers within his Realms. If you scan the history, there's barely a great mention of them at every corner, so that "overwhelming influence" of the NPCs is hardly something "real". Of course, if you hand this movers & shakers role to PCs who dislike the Elminsters and Manshoons of the real Realms, wouldn't that mean that if one group finishes it tour, you'd have to chop their stuff (if one or more new players join up and develope a similar dislike for "previous movers & shakers") as well. Leaving a blank, raw campaign world?
Which brings me back to the initial remark. The Realms were different from most other settings (bar a few) because of their detail, full fletched NPCs with grand or not so grand ties to the gaming world as such. Something that makes this world feeling "real" (on a fantasy level). The Eberron setting was AFAIK thrown into the ring to provide the gamers with a point-of-light version, not that many NPCs and a great many opportunities to form the NPCs to the "movers & shakers". Hence my utter dismay about the "designers" choice of bombing the Realms back into a similar state by the introduction of the 4E via Spellplague and all that went along. The canon of two or three generations of designers went out of the window, was essentially lost. Of course, you can play a system of D&D in at every stage of FR history, be that AD&D in the New Realms or 4E in the age preceeding the Times of Troubles. But since I was ensorcerelled by the Realms as I knew them, 1996 onwards, and playing along close to but not utterly tied to the canon and traditions, I was deeply disappointed to see this all go out of the window.
AND no matter what people might say to sooth the feeling, if you know that there's a sword of Damokles hanging about the campaign world from 1385 onwards, about all the gods you embrace, the characters, the places ... there's little you can do but to have that bad gut feeling about it all. And that sooner or later will dampen your love for the Realms, old or new.
If you can't imagine what I mean, just think of ... getting a child, a million dollars from the lottery, the job or lass/chap of your dreams ... but also the info that it's "kingdom come" a week on Sunday. |
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 02 Sep 2010 09:35:43 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 02 Sep 2010 : 15:07:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Galuf the Dwarf
Pardon, Mr. de Bie. Don't know if you may see this or not, but here it goes. What would you say about posters (ex: me, Diffan, etc.) who create our own content for the perusal and adoption by other players or DMs? Is that any bit in line with your agenda through this thread?
Basically, one DM/player sharing ideas about stories in the Realms with another? Of course that's 100% cool!
It's considerate to let people know that the ideas you're generating don't come from one of the books (or are an extrapolation of something you read), but otherwise this is exactly what the Realms designers do everyday.
As regards the idea that 4e has somehow "thrown out" (i.e., fired!) all the canon that has come before . . . I don't really see it. I don't see any reason you can't bring forward ideas in the Realms from before 1385, why you can't just import things wholly through the time-skip. I just don't see all that much in 4e that contradicts 3e or before. I mean, for better or worse, their "reboot" on the setting leaves a largely empty slate that you can fill up with what you want, whether it's deeply steeped in Realmslore (if you're a veteran fan) or brand new invention (if you're a newbie or just not interested in all that history).
Really love Lantan, for instance, and are bummed that it got exploded? Well, either you incorporate/modify (and a colony of gnomes actually escaped to set up a new island of invention elsewhere in the Realms--possibly on a floating earthmote? in the Underdark? in a tavern in Silverymoon?) or ignore (Lantan didn't explode--it's right there) or a combination (people only *thought* Lantan blew up, but what *really* happened to it is . . .), etc.
Cheers
|
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
"Fire the Canon!" essay
