| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 21:24:39
|
Just reading your post fully now, Erik.
You did touch upon something I think might work, but I doubt everyone would agree to.
How about if the game continued on in the 4e era, and the novels continued on in the 1e/2e/3e/Lost century era?
I don't know about anyone else, but that would be like a win-win for me. No silly stories to mess up my game continuity, and I still get to read about all those characters I love.
Of course, my point about "I can play in any old setting and get that" still applies... but at least I'd still be buying the novels. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 21:25:07 |
 |
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 22:16:20
|
Markustay, when did Marvel reboot? DC has a few times, but Marvel has not (as a whole). Parts have been retconned, but I don't recall a reboot and they still have alternate timelines (it's built into the setting). As for Star Trek, that was because of declining sales and horrible handling of the product, not because there were timeline issues.
As for the novels, why not keep making 4E era novels? SW has someone in charge of maintaining canon and they do a fairly decent job of it. FR could quite easily have someone do this job. They would need to create something like the Holocron Database (I believe that is the name) that they have for SW that details every known instance of a location, person, or thing being used. From there, the task is fairly easy. You know the 1-4E characters have to die eventually anyway, so I don't see what the problem is with having novels set in different times. One novel already takes place in the 1600 era (Dawnbringer) and any sequel would also likely take place then. Drizzt novels have almost always been behind the timeline of the rest. Eds Knight of Myth Drannor books took place before the then current novels. I don't believe it is an insurmountable task. SW manages to have books that take place during the movies with characters from the movies even though we all know their eventual fates.
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
Actually, I have the evidence, as evidenced by the 5th edition announcement (on the heels of poor 4th edition sales). And if the Realms 4th edition books were selling like hotcakes, then it is likely that 5th edition would not have been needed anyways. As for your continuing to bring the novels into this gaming discussion, the novels would likely still sell and do quite well (for some time) even if WoTC immediately ended all support for D&D in its entirety.
I'll keep saying it even if you keep ignoring it, 4E D&D =/= 4E FR. One aspect of something can sell quite well while the rest is sinking and that one aspect isn't enough to spare the whole. FR is not the entirety of D&D and very likely does not generate enough on it's own to keep the entire game afloat. I really don't understand what is so hard to grasp here. If Ford makes 30 different cars (random number) and one sells like hotcakes while all the other 29 sit on the lot, guess what? No more Ford (well, until they get government bail out money or legal permission to "renegotiate" all of their prior contracts like your ill conceived airline example) because those other 29 cost money to develop and make (and it takes time to retool the factories making htose 29 to make the 1, and the 29 that you mass produced are still sitting on car lots) and that 1 can't make up for it. D&D is Ford in this example and FR is the one high selling car.
quote:
This BBC Articlehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3655627.stm states that the height was back in the 80s and I have yet to find a non-WoTC cite that says anything to the contrary.
An article from 7 years ago with no citation or explanation of what they atually mean. Bang up job.
quote:
As for Monopoly, as much as gamers hate to admit it, it is a great comparison. We do not need timelines to advance or countless supplements in order to play the game and it is questionable whether or not those supplements (setting adventures aside) are good for a setting or game at all (since it is quite probable that too much information can discourage new possible entrants).
Yet they make 1000 varieties of Monopoly including ones with different ways to play. Funny that.
quote:
Outside of the core books for AD&D, the only supplements (outside of all the classic adventures) published between 1980 and 1986 were a few monster books and yet the game's popularity was at its zenith.
So, in what you are now calling "the good old days" there in fact were not a lot of suppliments released? That is the opposite of your earlier claim. Pick one, I don't care which.
quote:
Do you really believe that the best way to recruit a new gamer is for them to see a shelf with 20 different books (not adventures) for a game (as opposed to say 3).
Recruit, no. Keep, yes. "Casual" gamers don't want to put a lot of work into it, that's why they are "casual". Just giving them a book outlining the world is not enough. I am talking adventures, not 1000 varieties of the Fighter class spread across 20 different books. Those are for the hardcore gamers.
Then again, I think trying to bring "casual" gamers into D&D using any system of D&D is a fool's errand. On the one hand, they do represent a vast, untapped potential financially. On the other hand, it will require dumbing the game down a lot to get them in. These are people who don't game often and don't want the game to take weeks to resolve. Simplifying didn't work with 4E and simplfying further will kill the current customer base. "Casual" gamers play Monopoly because they don't know any better and likely never will, because they don't want to. That's not an insult against them, it's reality. If they wanted to take gaming seriously, they would move beyond Monopoly. This is the same reason the Wii has outsold the 360 and the PS3 (89 million vs 57 and 55 respectively). The Wii brought in "casual" gamers while the 360 and PS3 are aimed at "hardcore" gamers (though their addition of motion controls is an admission that Nintendo got that part right). People who bought the Wii on a whim for casual gaming did not turn around and buy one of the other two systems. If you want "casual" gamers to play D&D you need a very, very simple system and to put it on the shelves at Wal Mart. D&D any edition is not the "simple system" you need. The current board games (Ravenloft, Wrath of Ashardalon, Drizzt) might be simple enough, but I don't know if they are cheap enough (the other thing going for Monopoly).
quote:
AD&D was so popular and much more main stream back in the 80s because the learning (and buying) curve was so much less than it is now. Getting back to that model is probably the only way D&D is going to survive in the future outside of a Chaosium like niche market (who by the way have done quite well without an advancing timeline).
It's still reverting. You are asking people who have all kinds of options to go back to less. 3.0/3.5/PF seems to thrive on complexity. Given that that system is beating 4E, it's clear to me which one the masses prefer. Reducing complexity might bring in some new players, but will they outnumber the players you will lose? That's the question. Saying things were big in the 80s so we should return that ignores a very critical fact, this isn't the 80s. The world has changed, a lot. The popularity of the D&D in the 80s may be due to what you claim. Or, it may be because that was just before the real start of the video game age and competition was limited. Now, competition includes video games and companies that can legally use the 3.5 system. You can't just say "this worked then, so it will work now" and ignore the drastic changes the world has undergone in the 25 years since.
At the end of the day the number of people who will ever play D&D is a relatively small number. This is unlikely to change for a variety of reasons ("only nerds play D&D", "it takes 8000 books to play that game", "I don't have 3 years to play out a campaign", Why don't I just play W0W and let it handle all the math and it has real moving creatures instead of me actually having to use my imagination", etc). There seem to be 2 major approaches put forth here. One has the company pick a side (the losing side, in my opinion) and tell everyone else where they can go, the other at least attempts to unify the fanbase. It's clear to me which of those two has a better chance of leading to a healthy business and I'm not sure how it can be seen any other way. Though people are free to see it the other way.
|
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
|
|
|
Brix
Learned Scribe
147 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 22:27:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Well met, all--
I collected some thoughts and posted them up on my blog. For those who have been reading my posts, some of this will sound familiar, but at least it's all together. I'll repaste it here:
Yes to every single point.
The day all you suggestions are realized I'll cry ;)
|
|
|
|
|
Khaoss
Acolyte
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 22:28:10
|
I think from a novel point of veiw they need to have a cool story to fix the realms back to a better state. After who ever in charge decided to tear it up. I hope they all got the AXE!!! Anyway like I have stated before I like some of the new and liked 95% of the old. So I think they need to get Ed back in the loop too to help with the old story lines worth saving. MY vote bring back Kelben!!
Also from a game perspective you can do with your version of the realms what ever you want to do. No matter what they do to the story lines. We retconed the hell out of 4ED Realms changes already. |
|
|
|
Brix
Learned Scribe
147 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 22:29:58
|
Regarding the dragonborn, warforged discussion: This annoys me too.
However there is an easy fix. Make dragonborn to dragon-kin and warforged to gondsmen |
|
Edited by - Brix on 10 Jan 2012 22:40:34 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 23:36:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
Markustay, when did Marvel reboot? DC has a few times, but Marvel has not (as a whole). Parts have been retconned, but I don't recall a reboot and they still have alternate timelines (it's built into the setting). As for Star Trek, that was because of declining sales and horrible handling of the product, not because there were timeline issues.
Marvel does 'soft' reboots, not all-encompassing like Crisis. I can think of two that occurred while I was still a fan, and I've heard of dozens more since (when I go to the LGS, my origin-stories do not match any of the ones the 'kiddies' know, for instance, and the movies don't match anything I remember). Spiderman didn't forget about Maryjane? The world never forgot about the X-Men? thats just two off the top of my head, And that Illuminati thing - Yeesh... I'm glad I don't bother with comics any more.
As for Star Trek - the Enterprise series really screwed things up, and the 'WWIII' scenario that was based around the Khan character never happened. The continuity began to crumble, because in one case they tried for a prequel, and in the other, our RW timeline passed by the one created in the OS. Both cases of timeline-distortion forcing a reboot. Stories taking place in different timelines will eventually screw-up the continuity, in every case.
Its just a matter of time for SW - Lucas isn't going to live forever.
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
As for the novels, why not keep making 4E era novels? SW has someone in charge of maintaining canon and they do a fairly decent job of it. FR could quite easily have someone do this job. They would need to create something like the Holocron Database (I believe that is the name) that they have for SW that details every known instance of a location, person, or thing being used. From there, the task is fairly easy. You know the 1-4E characters have to die eventually anyway, so I don't see what the problem is with having novels set in different times. One novel already takes place in the 1600 era (Dawnbringer) and any sequel would also likely take place then. Drizzt novels have almost always been behind the timeline of the rest. Eds Knight of Myth Drannor books took place before the then current novels. I don't believe it is an insurmountable task. SW manages to have books that take place during the movies with characters from the movies even though we all know their eventual fates.
I hate to admit this here....
But I can't finish Elminster Must Die! I love Ed, I enjoy his writing, and I love stories set in Cormyr...
But its not the Cormyr I know, and its not even the Elminster (or Storm) I know. Everything is different, and I simply do not care about anything going on in the novel. It has nothing to do with the writing - I just have no interest what-so-ever in the subject-matter. I do not recognize it as the Realms, and this is a subconscious thing, because I really, REALLY want to like it. I have been reading it for FIVE MONTHS, a page here and a page there, and I have to force myself. I normally read a paperback in one night.
All I can say is, if they don't reboot it, then I'm gone for good. I just have no interest in it. 4e novels that take place in completely unrelated regions - like Rich Baker's - did not have this effect on me at all. There was no sense of broken continuity, because there was nothing previous to stomp upon. Blackstaff Tower had the same effect as EmD on me - I felt like I was reading about some other place - I didn't feel at home at all. Everything just felt all wrong to me.
So there you go - two of my favorite designers can't make me happy with the 4e timeframe. I do not have the emotional attachment to the characters and setting that I did before - its broken.
Strangely, the other Waterdeep novels also didn't give me that feeling. I guess it all depends upon the subject-matter. I expect the familiar to feel familiar.
For those of you who are married or have been in long-time relationships - have you ever in the night (while sleeping) accidentally put your arm around someone else? You wake up instantly, because you know it just feels all wrong.
Thats the feeling I get.
 |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 10 Jan 2012 23:51:26 |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6662 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2012 : 23:50:15
|
When it comes to the Realms, the fundamental problem that has confronted the setting each and every time there has been an edition change has been how to reconcile rule changes with a living game setting. The use of in-campaign events were used for the 1E to 2E and 3E to 4E transitions. Both the Time of Troubles and the Spellplague were and remain to this day controversial additions to the FR firmament. In my view, the fanbase struggled to accept an in-campaign "story" explanation for changes to rules because, well candidly, I don't think either the ToT or the SP were introduced or fleshed out particularly well. They both suffered from "let's make this 'kewl'" and introduce elements into the setting that let us pander to that bundle of 'great ideas' I have in my game designer brain-sydrome. I have no doubt that there are many great ideas in gaming. No doubt they occur on a daily/monthly basis. I would hazard however that the applicability and appropriateness of those 'great ideas' to the Realms campaign setting are much smaller in number and are an eclectic subset, to be used judiciously and only by those who have a deep understanding of the setting and "get it". There should, in my view, be only a single driver of that bus and he lives in the wilds of Canada.
The transition from 2E to 3E was a different kettle of fish entirely. It also had its issues and drawbacks. The change of rules and the use of the designer fiat - "it was always that way" was difficult to swallow for many fans. Dwarves wielding magic, the introduction of sorcerers, clerics/priests changing (again!) made for much fan angst.
What I learned personally from watching all of these Realms transitions (most times from the cheap seats with all the rest of the punters, on one occasion up closer but not fully "in the loop") was that the fans wanted a great explanation that was rooted in the bedrock of the fantasy setting they loved and had devoted time and energy to over countless years and decades, for changes that were going to be fundamental to their gaming experience going forward. They wanted detailed, consistent and understandable reasons for the changes to their gameworld. To top it all off, they wanted those reasons to shine within the firmament of the Realms and for them to look at the whole and say: "well, that makes sense".
The fans are yet to get that in the Realms. Maybe this time they will.
I have no preference for how 5E will shape the Realms, if at all. For all we know, campaign settings might not be part of the 5E D&D experience and that the Realms will be reduced to a place to set novels in. We shall all see in due course. Let's hope it all makes sense this time.
Oh, and for the record - and without trying to come across as arrogant - if they want my help, they'll get it in spades and for free. I'm an e-mail away.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 00:07:02
|
MT, what I'm basically suggesting is a line of products that are edition-neutral. Waterdeep, for instance, doesn't necessarily change a whole lot. You could write a sourcebook about Waterdeep, including a lot about its history, politics, structure, etc., and then have a section with notes on running it in multiple times. Who's in charge when, etc., etc.
The meat of the Waterdeep sourcebook is what Waterdeep IS (the various wards, Undermountain, politics, etc), not constrained to any particular timeline. You'd be able to pick up this book and run a Waterdeep campaign in any timeline, and obviously there might be supplementary material depending on what era you want to run (if 3e, for instance, you can use City of Splendors verbatim, if 4e, refer to the 4e FRCG, etc).
Such products are still mainly supporting WotC's current line, but they're also accessible to anyone playing in a different era without requiring excess legwork.
You don't think that will work?
quote:
Originally posted by Brix
However there is an easy fix. Make dragonborn to dragon-kin and warforged to gondsmen
That's basically what I do. 
@George: Sing it, brother. A proper explanation--one crafted by Ed, Steven, Bob, Elaine, Brian, you (George), any and all of the longtime designers/authors who know the Realms best--should be first on the list of Realmslore in 5e. On page 1 of the campaign setting book, even.
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" |
|
|
|
Khaoss
Acolyte
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 00:24:47
|
| Marvel has rebooted several times. Like right now they are rebooting all thier comics if you look. A new spiderman. All the X's got rebooted just over a year or so ago because they are all like at issue #20. A new team of Avengers ect. I have read a few at the book store lately. And between the horrid art, less story and more ads and bad (plots!!) I think they are going down hill fast. And looks like they are already changing all the xbooks again just even with them being only at issue #20. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 00:59:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
MT, what I'm basically suggesting is a line of products that are edition-neutral. Waterdeep, for instance, doesn't necessarily change a whole lot. You could write a sourcebook about Waterdeep, including a lot about its history, politics, structure, etc., and then have a section with notes on running it in multiple times. Who's in charge when, etc., etc.
The meat of the Waterdeep sourcebook is what Waterdeep IS (the various wards, Undermountain, politics, etc), not constrained to any particular timeline. You'd be able to pick up this book and run a Waterdeep campaign in any timeline, and obviously there might be supplementary material depending on what era you want to run (if 3e, for instance, you can use City of Splendors verbatim, if 4e, refer to the 4e FRCG, etc).
Such products are still mainly supporting WotC's current line, but they're also accessible to anyone playing in a different era without requiring excess legwork.
You don't think that will work?
Perhaps, if they did something along the lines I suggested above, with the adventures (doing it the way Paizo presented the Adventure-arcs in Dungeon).
In other words, do a Waterdeep sourcebook, and then give us TWO different web-enhancements (or more), for each era, detailing the 'whos who' and 'current clack'. Maybe that would work. One sourcebook, two separate attachments (similar, almost, to how some of the 3e MMs had "In the Realms..." or "In Eberron...", etc).
The same exact presentation could be used for everything - make all sources modular. Hell, create a 'Jungle Plane', a'la the Beastlands or Happy Hunting Grounds, or just call it a 'darker' part of the feywild, and you could even do Jungle adventures and have separate Xendrik, Maztica, Hepmonaland, Malatra, etc web enhancements.
Its not the perfect solution, but what is? It might work. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 11 Jan 2012 01:00:10 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 01:03:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
When it comes to the Realms, the fundamental problem that has confronted the setting each and every time there has been an edition change has been how to reconcile rule changes with a living game setting. The use of in-campaign events were used for the 1E to 2E and 3E to 4E transitions. Both the Time of Troubles and the Spellplague were and remain to this day controversial additions to the FR firmament. In my view, the fanbase struggled to accept an in-campaign "story" explanation for changes to rules because, well candidly, I don't think either the ToT or the SP were introduced or fleshed out particularly well. They both suffered from "let's make this 'kewl'" and introduce elements into the setting that let us pander to that bundle of 'great ideas' I have in my game designer brain-sydrome. I have no doubt that there are many great ideas in gaming. No doubt they occur on a daily/monthly basis. I would hazard however that the applicability and appropriateness of those 'great ideas' to the Realms campaign setting are much smaller in number and are an eclectic subset, to be used judiciously and only by those who have a deep understanding of the setting and "get it". There should, in my view, be only a single driver of that bus and he lives in the wilds of Canada.
The transition from 2E to 3E was a different kettle of fish entirely. It also had its issues and drawbacks. The change of rules and the use of the designer fiat - "it was always that way" was difficult to swallow for many fans. Dwarves wielding magic, the introduction of sorcerers, clerics/priests changing (again!) made for much fan angst.
What I learned personally from watching all of these Realms transitions (most times from the cheap seats with all the rest of the punters, on one occasion up closer but not fully "in the loop") was that the fans wanted a great explanation that was rooted in the bedrock of the fantasy setting they loved and had devoted time and energy to over countless years and decades, for changes that were going to be fundamental to their gaming experience going forward. They wanted detailed, consistent and understandable reasons for the changes to their gameworld. To top it all off, they wanted those reasons to shine within the firmament of the Realms and for them to look at the whole and say: "well, that makes sense".
The fans are yet to get that in the Realms. Maybe this time they will.
I have no preference for how 5E will shape the Realms, if at all. For all we know, campaign settings might not be part of the 5E D&D experience and that the Realms will be reduced to a place to set novels in. We shall all see in due course. Let's hope it all makes sense this time.
Oh, and for the record - and without trying to come across as arrogant - if they want my help, they'll get it in spades and for free. I'm an e-mail away.
-- George Krashos
Preach it, brother Krashos!
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 01:09:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
MT, what I'm basically suggesting is a line of products that are edition-neutral. Waterdeep, for instance, doesn't necessarily change a whole lot. You could write a sourcebook about Waterdeep, including a lot about its history, politics, structure, etc., and then have a section with notes on running it in multiple times. Who's in charge when, etc., etc.
Erik, as an author would this be hard?
I mean, either the author or a well-informed editor would need to be versed in the Realms for this. For example, not featuring spellscars or earthmotes (specific to 4E), and not including wild/dead magic areas (more common in 2E) would be necessary for edition-neutral novels and supplements. References to historical events would have to be fairly distant, perhaps, or avoided.
But within a single novel or trilogy set, I think much could be accomplished. Some new magic spell, or old Netherese dig-find, those kinds of things could be kept within the space of a trilogy without needing to date the novel to a given time period or year.
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 01:44:59
|
One thing I absolutely do NOT support is the concept of having alternate timelines or alternate futures or such weirdness. Regardless of era, it is all one Realms--warts and all--and it should be kept to that singular standard.
I do think one thing the Realms has been missing for some time is a traffic cop--one person at whom the canonical buck stops. Someone who understands, loves, and respects the Realms.
(And no I'm not volunteering myself. I have novels to write, after all, and some game design to do here and there. But someone with the canonical, Realmslore chops to get the job done. I have my own ideal candidate in mind, but we will see what we will see.)
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
MT, what I'm basically suggesting is a line of products that are edition-neutral. Waterdeep, for instance, doesn't necessarily change a whole lot. You could write a sourcebook about Waterdeep, including a lot about its history, politics, structure, etc., and then have a section with notes on running it in multiple times. Who's in charge when, etc., etc.
Erik, as an author would this be hard?
I mean, either the author or a well-informed editor would need to be versed in the Realms for this.
I can only ever speak for myself, but I think this would be doable. I would certainly be up to try my hand at it, and I know there are many authors/designers out there who would be equally ready to do it. Personally I think that there's a vast amount of room to tell whatever story you want, finding a historical event or setting to focus it. For instance, we should feel free to have a Manshoon Wars novel. Or a Bane resurrection story. Or a novel about one of the other gods in the Time of Troubles. Or a story of the Red Knight's ascension. Or a story set against the backdrop of the fall of Myth Drannor, the retaking of Tethyr, etc. All of those would be awesome.
And I should make it clear that I'm not strictly outlining a hypothetical here: my thoughts are rooted in where I see the design headed. I would keep my eyes open . . .
quote:
For example, not featuring spellscars or earthmotes (specific to 4E), and not including wild/dead magic areas (more common in 2E) would be necessary for edition-neutral novels and supplements. References to historical events would have to be fairly distant, perhaps, or avoided.
Well, I don't think avoided, necessarily--just not the focus. The Waterdeep sourcebook I proposed above can mention edition-specific phenomena, but it makes it clear that they belong to particular eras of history.
The thing about the novels is that the novels are always KIND OF edition-neutral. I mean yeah, they reflect the game, but only the game in concept, not necessarily the specific rulesets. For instance, the reason Drizzt can do half the things he can do is because rangers in 1e could do all that. Is it a big problem, now that we're 3+ editions advanced from there? Not remotely.
quote:
But within a single novel or trilogy set, I think much could be accomplished. Some new magic spell, or old Netherese dig-find, those kinds of things could be kept within the space of a trilogy without needing to date the novel to a given time period or year.
Well, I think dating novels is extremely important. (Just don't keep them out past midnight or their fathers get upset . . . ahem!) The Realms thrives on a robust, detailed history and mythos, and I would not encourage trying to release products that don't acknowledge history and its effects.
It's more like what MT and I hit upon: a single product that is MAINLY timeless, but also has a section (a chapter, an appendix, a web-enhancement) which is timeline specific. So 80% of the product is applicable to playing Waterdeep at any particular time, and 20% is divided amongst a number of timelines you could be using.
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" |
Edited by - Erik Scott de Bie on 11 Jan 2012 01:47:47 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31727 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 02:12:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Khaoss
Like right now they are rebooting all thier comics if you look. A new spiderman.
That's not really a reboot. It's a relaunch, whereupon all the main "Ultimate" books started out again -- focused on dealing with the fallout from either the "Death of Spider-Man" storyline in the previous volume of Ultimate Comics Spider-Man, or the prior stories, like the "Ultimatum" saga and subsequent follow-ups back in 2008/2009/2010.
quote:
All the X's got rebooted just over a year or so ago because they are all like at issue #20.
"Regenesis" isn't a reboot either. It's just a redefining of the X-teams goals for the next year or so. It's more about the splitting of the X-Men down ideological grounds. It's somewhat similar, though not exactly representative, of the divisions in the X-teams during the formation of the Gold and Blue teams of the early 90's.
quote:
A new team of Avengers ect.
It's not a new team of Avengers. The old core of the team, from the early 60's, has reformed once again -- being Captain America/Steve Rogers, Iron Man, Thor, and the rest. Hawkeye, Ant-Man, and the other core members all have places in the myriad Avenger teams as well. Plus, we have the next generation of Avengers in Avengers Academy. Secret Avengers is Steve Rogers "pseudo-black ops" specialist team of both new and former Avengers. New Avengers is a carry-on from the previous incarnation of the New Avengers after the disastrous fallout of "Avengers Disassembled." That team also includes both new and old Avengers as well.
|
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 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31727 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 02:19:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
One thing I absolutely do NOT support is the concept of having alternate timelines or alternate futures or such weirdness. Regardless of era, it is all one Realms--warts and all--and it should be kept to that singular standard.
I'm probably running against the grain here, somewhat, but I do like the idea of multiple timelines -- or, at the very lest, one timeline set in the pre-Spellplague and one set after.
Having already experienced the overall success of FanPro/Catalyst Game Labs' initiative with the "current" and "future" timelines of BATTLETECH -- being mainstream BattleTech and the future Dark Age/Age of Destruction -- I'm accustomed to what can be positively accomplished with capable oversight [which, in the case of the Realms would be a traffic cop of Grubb/Schend-level, as Erik hinted at above] when running two timelines set in the same universe.
Alternate realities is another matter entirely, and one I'd like to address more definitively when I have more time. |
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 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 02:39:48
|
On the topic of the RSE in conjunction with edition change to fit the Realms to the rules is, IMO, incorrect. First, lets establish a 1375 Realms with 4E material. Aside from one aspect (eladrin), where else does the current (5E is still a bit away) ruleset contradict what's actually accomplished with the setting? Wizards need to rest to regain spells (looks at 4E books, check). Druids serve the primal elements of nature and pray to those gods (looks at 4E books, check). Clerics gain their power through divine elements and their deities (looks at 4E books, check). These are elements found in the Forgotten Realms (regarless rules) yet these are aspects of 4E that are common.
I actually think the Devs used 4E to usher a buch of Realms changes because they felt this was the best direction of the Realms. I also believe that even if the rules changed minimally, such as a system more like Pathfinder or Star Wars: Saga we still would've seen so much of what happened: Spellplague, Mystra and Helm's death, 100 year time jump. |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
575 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 03:22:10
|
Hi all. Once upon a time I spent a lot of time here. Then 4E happened and I abandoned ship.
I just saw some 5E rumors and stopped by to see what all was going on.
-----------------
I'd retcon (obviously)
The Realms were never the continents, the Crystal Sphere or anything else. It was always the people. Now that the people are gone, the Realms are too. Bring the people back, and you'll have my money back as well.
|
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
Edited by - WalkerNinja on 11 Jan 2012 03:30:11 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 03:27:41
|
I did not want alternate timelines to co-exist - I don't care for that much (not since I was a kid, when I read about DC's Earth-1 and Earth-2) - as I got older, I realized that was just a cheap way to explain why Superman and Batman (and Wonder Woman, etc) weren't all using walkers or in an old-age home.
You have to reboot the continuity in hero-comics, because after awhile, it no longer makes sense. Superman fought Nazis, and Spiderman is still in college since the 60's! (and they say he is smart!) 
What I was suggesting was an in-story retroactive re-imagining (lets not say 'retcon' or 'alternate timeline'). If someone - the Heroes - in the 4e timeframe went back and 'corrected past wrongs', you could have them save Mystra, and it would still be part of the 4e continuity (the 4e heroes would have fixed their own past). You won't have erased 4e, because thats the 'dark future' that could have happened (and did, until corrected). In fact, they even provided a built-in reset switch with Shar's Dark Chronology, which appears to me as an alternate timeline already. Shar basically sent history down a divergent path, and she started this during the ToT (Cyric's ascension was essential to her plans).
Ergo, you won't be erasing 4e, you will be correcting it. There a subtle difference (and one I think many fans would embrace, since they think 4e was 'wrong' in many ways). just as 5e will be correcting the over-generic-ness of the rules, 5e FR could correct the... ummm.. overly ambitious? new setting.
And everything would STILL be valid - the 4e setting of 1479 DR could still happen. Mystra's gone missing, and magic is unstable (ToT-class, like a spellplague but less severe).
I once had this disagreement with GK (IIRC) on the Wizards boards - there is already two separate timelines, in canon. At least two, in fact. There is the Abeir-Toril that existed up until the Elves cast The Sundering Ritual. And then there is the Toril that existed in the aftermath of that ritual. Elaine's Evermeet novel even states entire peoples were wiped out, as if they had never been. Most of those folks living on the proto-continent up until the that Ritual were suddenly, retro-actively erased.
So its okay if this happened in the past, perhaps multiple times, but its not okay if it happens during the current game-era? Heck, I can't think of any other setting that is better setup for this scenario.
We can have our cake and eat it to - we can. I just know it would work. It really all comes down how good the rules are, and if they will please both (or all) camps. If both 3e and 4e gamers approve of them, then an amalgam of the old lore and 4e lore could work. Crisis worked for DC (too bad they ruined it with Crisis 2, Crisis 3, etc), and it could work for us - we don't have to lose a thing - the world still has the potential to windup as it did in the Year of the Ageless One. In fact, I (and nearly every other old FR fan) has been upset about the dearth of lore between editions, but now I applaud it - I STAND UP and applaud it - thats our out right there. We don't know what much of what happened, so now we have nearly a hundred years before we run into that continuity wall. It took Star Trek 40 years of real time to run into that problem.
Don't get rid of anything - remember that article about additive lore that someone linked here awhile back? Thats what we need - additive fluff, not subtractive. I'm not asking anyone to erase 4e, I'm just saying we can have it all - just roll back the clock. Call it a prequel if it makes you feel any better.
The time-jump was the biggest disconnect for everyone, IMHO - its what wiped-out 75% of the lore in all our old editions sources. No other edition-change did that much damage. I used to be able to look-up who tends bar in some crappy little tavern in some one-horse, obscure village on Tuesday afternoons - now I have to make it all up. We need to fix THAT.
I simply do not see a 'one size fits all' product being able to take care of that problem. I doubt Foamy McAleflinger is still serving booze for a 94 year span (unless he's a dwarf... but you can only get away with that so may times). Its that sort of minutia that made the 1e/2e/3e Realms come alive.
You know when it really hit me in Ed's novel? When we 'met' Alusiar's ghost. I remember her as 13-yr old girl, I remember her as a young woman in the Tuigan War, and I remember her as a grizzled veteran during the Devil-Dragon crisis. Now she is a half-remembered legend - a disembodied spirit haunting the keep. Thats not MY Cormyr.
I'm sorry, but its just not. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 11 Jan 2012 03:39:14 |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
575 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 03:38:17
|
I just thought for about thirty seconds and realized that what is necessary isn't a retcon, it's a reboot. You already know what Realms Fans like--and it's primarily old stuff. No one's ever really liked new stuff, they just tolerate it with varying degrees of graciousness.
Do a re-boot. Appoint Erik's traffic cop as an chief editor. Start publishing the material with the intent to unifying and clarifying the realms. Advance continuity on a planned and regular basis. Convert old novels into digital graphic novels, and adapt the plotlines and outcomes as necessary to serve the rebooted continuity--always releasing them in concord with advancements in the timeline. At key turning points (such as The Time of Troubles) open the opportunity to change the continuity to the players. Run a series of RPGA events, have some elections, allow people to help guide things by giving them access. Agency is what social inverts seek to gain from gaming and you'll finally be giving it to them. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
Edited by - WalkerNinja on 11 Jan 2012 03:39:31 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 03:46:12
|
Erik doesn't want the job (he said so). George would be great, as would Old Sage here (he has his own FR database!), and of course Ed would be PERFECT (but I think Ed is too busy). We need someone who knows nearly as much as Ed (and is able to pick Ed's brain when he wants), and still hasn't got a gazillion projects keeping him from doing his job.
Other suggestions would be Kuje, and Gray Richardson, but I think their areas of interest may be more focused then George's (although I don't now Kuje well-enough to judge that, really). Steven Schend is also an obvious choice - he wrote many of those timelines that made up the GHotR. The task could also be split, with one person specializing in Planer lore (Shemmy?), and another in Faerun history, and another in regions beyond Faerun, etc, etc. Maybe one traffic-cop, and lots of 'go-to' people. This ships been on auto-pilot for far too long. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 11 Jan 2012 03:47:05 |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
575 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 04:10:40
|
Went back and read the thread.
For the "No Retcon/Reboot" crowd, I am very glad that you weren't in charge of Coca Cola's response to the New Coke fiasco. Or Pepsi Clear. Or that Neflix streaming thing.
The one thing that is true about America is that when you mess up you can be forgiven, as long as you're honest about it. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 04:23:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by WalkerNinja
I just thought for about thirty seconds and realized that what is necessary isn't a retcon, it's a reboot. You already know what Realms Fans like--and it's primarily old stuff. No one's ever really liked new stuff, they just tolerate it with varying degrees of graciousness.
I'm a long time Realms fan, coming aboard with the Time of Troubles. I'm also one of the few people that can say I've bought 98% of all Realms material twice.
And I didn't dislike anything until we had things change in 3E with no explanation -- and it was the lack of explanation I disliked, not the changes. Heck, I love sorcerers, and I've no problem with spellslinging dwarves (again, other than the failure to explain the change).
I didn't start disliking any Realms events until we got to the RSE of the week timeframe -- and part of my objection there is that I think some RSEs were entirely driven by sales, and had nothing at all to do with adding to the setting.
And though I'm no fan of the 4E Realms, there are some things I think could be backported quite well into prior editions.
So saying that no one has liked new stuff is the same kind of pigeonholing we've seen done so many times here before -- and it's quite offensive. It's also dismissive of a large number of people, and that kind of dismissal is partially why we've seen so much debate since the advent of 4E.
And it's also patently false -- Erevis Cale is newer than Drizzt, and I dare you to say no one likes him. The post-Spellplague Realms are newer than prior edtions, and the prior edition wars are proof positive that some people embraced them quite readily. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 04:36:46
|
I think this multiple timeline idea is being misunderstood. What I am talking about (and what I believe Erik is talking about) is one, single timeline with support for multiple portions of said timeline. In the Post-Spellplague part, most of the known folks are still dead. In the Pre-Spellplague era they aren't. It's not trying to explain how they are still alive 100 years later (except in those cases where they actually are alive 100 years later obviously). It's about giving everyone what they want, not trying to explain how characters are still up and moving 100 years later because they will be dead 100 years later (again, barring special circumstances where they aren't dead). SW has one timeline, not several. Luke is only alive for a finite stretch of that timeline. He is not in The Old Republic Era nor is he in the way in the future Era whose name I can't recall. Very, very few characters* cross over into a second era and there is usually a pretty good reason. Their timeline is divided into segments so people know which general era the story is taking place. All of the stories (in theory, since they started really keeping track) line up.
*The major exceptions are the Prequel Era to Original Trilogy Era as there is a lot of crossover and the OT Era to the New Jedi Order Era as the OT Era is very short in comparison to other eras and it is well within believability for someone to live from the PT era through to the NJO Era.
For the Realms this would mean the post Spellplague Cormyr is the Cormyr of before, but 100 year later so numerous events have transpired to shape it's current form. This is no different than Pre-Spellplague Cormyr. It is not identical to Cormyr at it's founding because centuries of events have helped shape it. The Cormyr of the past won't suddenly change into the post Spellplague Cormyr in a story set in the past. There is plenty of time to play with pre-Spellplague. Or during the Spellplague if they are so inclined. Under the "support multiple parts of the timeline" idea, stories set pre-Spellplague could still be told, so long as they don't screw up "the future". Likewise, any mention in the Post Spellplague of the past will have to line up with previous lore and any other future plans for past time periods. There are plenty of plot hooks that were never explored that can still be fleshed out, which will hopefully lead to other plot hooks. Under this plan, stories taking place in the 1-3E era still have the characters everyone seems to want more of because they are still alive. 4E and onward has the few that survived the time jump coupled with all new characters. Those who want more of the past can get more of the past. Those who want things to keep moving get that too. A large number of people get what they want while being able to ignore what they don't want.
This has already been done in other Realms stories. One trilogy was set in Ancient Nethril. More than one short story has been set thousands of years in the past. I believe the one about the origin of the Dragon Rage is set tens of thousands of years in the past. Ed's Knights trilogy was set before the then current year. It can be done, even with known characters. We all know that most of them are destined to die of old age or something sharp or explody so I don't see how knowing they aren't alive 100 years later really impacts that. The two key parts will be having someone oversee it to avoid continuity problems and to not go the Drizzt route and set a record for how fast you can kill characters.
Markustay, I don't see how the Khan issue is an issue at all for Star Trek. First, let's get real for a moment. Do you think anyone who decided to become a Trek fan before the reboot couldn't easily look past that point and see it as a relic of an ear where pretty well everyone assumed there would be a WWIII before the end of the century (likely sooner rather than later). A point that would only be a point if they watched 1 specific episode of the original series (or was it a 2 parter?). If that was a huge issue, I don't think a retcon to change the date would cause a huge uproar in the fanbase. Did Iron Man the movie fail because Tony Stark built the armor in Afghanistan? Did old fans really get upset over that in any real numbers? No, because Iron Man is about the character, not him building his armor in a different cave, in a different country, during a different war, with a different box of scraps. I would like to believe when dealing with real world type settings most fans can accept that dates have to change to match expectations of character ages and real world events. Is Superman less of a character because they now say he landed well after WWII? Is Lex less of a character because he was remade into an evil scientist/business man?
The Realms does not face this issue because it is not bound to our real world timeline and events. All of the events within the Realms are completely within the control of WotC and not bound to the whims of history and the combined effects of the free will of billions. The easiest way to avoid it is to be a little light on the details of the past in Post Spellplague novels. Don't have page after page of characters sitting around talking about how this, that, and the other all went down 100 years ago. Or at the very least don't throw out specific dates. The Khan example wouldn't be an issue at all if it were simply "X hundreds of years in our past" from the perspective of Kirk and Co. Then again I don't fault writers for not being able to predict the future. How many movies/books/shows assumed the Cold War was going to end in nuclear annihilation? Now how many assumed it would end the way it really did? Is Terminator 2 any less entertaining because we passed Judgement Day over a decade ago (August 29th 1997 if I recall correctly) and nuclear oblivion followed by the new nightmare of the war against the machines has yet to come to pass? |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
Edited by - Tyrant on 11 Jan 2012 04:56:45 |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 04:48:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by WalkerNinja
Went back and read the thread.
For the "No Retcon/Reboot" crowd, I am very glad that you weren't in charge of Coca Cola's response to the New Coke fiasco. Or Pepsi Clear. Or that Neflix streaming thing.
The one thing that is true about America is that when you mess up you can be forgiven, as long as you're honest about it.
I'm still waiting for anything solid that makes that comparison valid. The novels seem to be going full steam ahead and the Realms are the only setting that is getting additional suppliments. That tells me this gap is more imagined than real and that of the currently supported settings the Realms is the one doing the best (though I concede that doesn't prove it is doing "good", but so far nothing has come along to prove that it isn't). 4E D&D as a system might be another story, but as I have said repeatedly 4E Realms does not represent the entirety of 4E D&D and people should quit using the two interchangably. The 4E Monster Manual not selling well* does not mean the 4E Realms is not selling well. One is not evidence of the other.
*That is a hypothetical to illustrate a point, I do not know if that particular book is/was selling well or not.
|
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 04:54:46
|
I'm hoping 5E does some changes with how class levels work. I hope we see something more along the lines of 2E rules for multi-classing. I don't have the skill with 3E to know how to hardcore min-max things, but player multi-classing really seems to be a self-gimping system. A 5/5 fighter/mage lets a person play with sword and spell, but you're really only as good as a 5th level fighter or 5th level wizard, however, you are considered a 10th level character. So you have the skillset of a 5th level character and you are supposed to be fighting 10th level monsters. You're better off just sticking as a 10th level fighter or a 10th level wizard. This probably wouldn't matter so much if the entire party was multi-class and encounters were adjusted accordingly, but from what I've seen the multi-class person is going to be the gimp of the party.
And prestige classes. Just make them similar to 2E specialty priests, a template of abilities to be added to any base class. No sacrificing levels to get them or halting of class progression. Prestige classes as an idea of allowing customization was a great vision. Game mechanics and how it turned out, I dunno, but I'm not much of a fan. Then again, maybe they should be phased out to keep it simple and just make the core classes banging.
What I would also like to see is spell progression past 20th level like we used to. A 40th level wizard should have twice as many spells as a 20th level wizard, much like in 2E days. I would also ditch epic magic and just stick with 9th level spells. I'd be ok with 10th, 11th and 12th level spells too, much like the Netheril boxed set from the days of old. The spell progression system from that box set was kind of a neat idea too where you have a total pool of spell points you can use and each spell level costs "x" points. It's a nice way to add flexibility to spell casters and makes acquiring books of new spells actually exciting and useful treasures.
Just a few ideas. Maybe I'm just crazy though. hah. ;) |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31727 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 05:12:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by WalkerNinja
No one's ever really liked new stuff, they just tolerate it with varying degrees of graciousness.
That's a little disingenuous... to simply assume that we all feel this way. I know I've never said that I don't like the new stuff, nor do I just tolerate it to any degree.
Like every edition of the Realms, there are elements that I like and elements that I dislike. The 4e Realms was no different in that regard. And I can assume that's a more accurate conception for how most Realms fans tend to view each and every incarnation. I've never met any fan who loves absolutely EVERYTHING as it is printed for each edition of the setting.
Development of shared worlds is always prone to ruffle feathers -- whether we like it or not.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 05:25:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
I think this multiple timeline idea is being misunderstood. What I am talking about (and what I believe Erik is talking about) is one, single timeline with support for multiple portions of said timeline.
Indeed, that's what I meant. Going by Sage's definition, what I don't want is "alternate realities" or "multiple canons." I want one single canon--this is the baseline for the Realms, take it and do what you will with it. I don't think anyone is served by having multiple canons and multiple Realms.
The whole concept of "canon" is so that internally, design can all follow the same rules and be moving along the same way. Your own home games are going to vary from canon--it's just the way it goes. But if we have a "Classic Realms" canon, where the Time of Troubles never happened and Elminster is a doddering old wizard smoking a pipe in his twisted tower and dispensing sage advice to all the adventurers who weren't caught peeping at Storm Silverhand chopping wood (and summarily got chopped in half or drafted to help), vs. a "Points of Light Realms" canon, where the Time of Troubles did happen, AND the Spellplague, and everything is the suxxor, that will just be confusing, divisive, and not the right way to go.
I want a single timeline, with support for multiple spots on that timeline. There can be a lot of activity at certain points (i.e. 1370s, 1480s, etc.), but there can and should be activity wherever on the single golden timeline of the Realms.
No retcons. The lore is all there. We should not be in the business of invalidating it.
A reboot is, by definition, a huge retcon that will throw out some amount (usually a lot) of lore. It may feel the same, and that's great, but that's still what it is. And that, I do not think is what the Realms needs.
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" |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 05:33:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
I think this multiple timeline idea is being misunderstood. What I am talking about (and what I believe Erik is talking about) is one, single timeline with support for multiple portions of said timeline. In the Post-Spellplague part, most of the known folks are still dead. In the Pre-Spellplague era they aren't. It's not trying to explain how they are still alive 100 years later (except in those cases where they actually are alive 100 years later obviously). It's about giving everyone what they want, not trying to explain how characters are still up and moving 100 years later because they will be dead 100 years later (again, barring special circumstances where they aren't dead). SW has one timeline, not several. Luke is only alive for a finite stretch of that timeline. He is not in The Old Republic Era nor is he in the way in the future Era whose name I can't recall. Very, very few characters* cross over into a second era and there is usually a pretty good reason. Their timeline is divided into segments so people know which general era the story is taking place. All of the stories (in theory, since they started really keeping track) line up.
*The major exceptions are the Prequel Era to Original Trilogy Era as there is a lot of crossover and the OT Era to the New Jedi Order Era as the OT Era is very short in comparison to other eras and it is well within believability for someone to live from the PT era through to the NJO Era.
For the Realms this would mean the post Spellplague Cormyr is the Cormyr of before, but 100 year later so numerous events have transpired to shape it's current form. This is no different than Pre-Spellplague Cormyr. It is not identical to Cormyr at it's founding because centuries of events have helped shape it. The Cormyr of the past won't suddenly change into the post Spellplague Cormyr in a story set in the past. There is plenty of time to play with pre-Spellplague. Or during the Spellplague if they are so inclined. Under the "support multiple parts of the timeline" idea, stories set pre-Spellplague could still be told, so long as they don't screw up "the future". Likewise, any mention in the Post Spellplague of the past will have to line up with previous lore and any other future plans for past time periods. There are plenty of plot hooks that were never explored that can still be fleshed out, which will hopefully lead to other plot hooks. Under this plan, stories taking place in the 1-3E era still have the characters everyone seems to want more of because they are still alive. 4E and onward has the few that survived the time jump coupled with all new characters. Those who want more of the past can get more of the past. Those who want things to keep moving get that too. A large number of people get what they want while being able to ignore what they don't want.
This has already been done in other Realms stories. One trilogy was set in Ancient Nethril. More than one short story has been set thousands of years in the past. I believe the one about the origin of the Dragon Rage is set tens of thousands of years in the past. Ed's Knights trilogy was set before the then current year. It can be done, even with known characters. We all know that most of them are destined to die of old age or something sharp or explody so I don't see how knowing they aren't alive 100 years later really impacts that. The two key parts will be having someone oversee it to avoid continuity problems and to not go the Drizzt route and set a record for how fast you can kill characters.
Markustay, I don't see how the Khan issue is an issue at all for Star Trek. First, let's get real for a moment. Do you think anyone who decided to become a Trek fan before the reboot couldn't easily look past that point and see it as a relic of an ear where pretty well everyone assumed there would be a WWIII before the end of the century (likely sooner rather than later). A point that would only be a point if they watched 1 specific episode of the original series (or was it a 2 parter?). If that was a huge issue, I don't think a retcon to change the date would cause a huge uproar in the fanbase. Did Iron Man the movie fail because Tony Stark built the armor in Afghanistan? Did old fans really get upset over that in any real numbers? No, because Iron Man is about the character, not him building his armor in a different cave, in a different country, during a different war, with a different box of scraps. I would like to believe when dealing with real world type settings most fans can accept that dates have to change to match expectations of character ages and real world events. Is Superman less of a character because they now say he landed well after WWII? Is Lex less of a character because he was remade into an evil scientist/business man?
The Realms does not face this issue because it is not bound to our real world timeline and events. All of the events within the Realms are completely within the control of WotC and not bound to the whims of history and the combined effects of the free will of billions. The easiest way to avoid it is to be a little light on the details of the past in Post Spellplague novels. Don't have page after page of characters sitting around talking about how this, that, and the other all went down 100 years ago. Or at the very least don't throw out specific dates. The Khan example wouldn't be an issue at all if it were simply "X hundreds of years in our past" from the perspective of Kirk and Co. Then again I don't fault writers for not being able to predict the future. How many movies/books/shows assumed the Cold War was going to end in nuclear annihilation? Now how many assumed it would end the way it really did? Is Terminator 2 any less entertaining because we passed Judgement Day over a decade ago (August 29th 1997 if I recall correctly) and nuclear oblivion followed by the new nightmare of the war against the machines has yet to come to pass?
The more everyone talks about this the better I understand it. And really your post just made me realize why this would be such an awesome idea: Ok, so we ALL know who the movers and shakers are of Faerun right now, El and the Chosen and various other popular characters. But, WHO were the heroes and villains of the Realms before they all came along? Or after? I think that's a very interesting and fun question to ask.
Like is said, one timeline, just different eras. There's an old map in the grey realms box with a picture of the Cormyr and surrounding survivor states of Netheril. DR 112, The Year of the Tusk. Who are the heroes or villains of that time? Or as I think someone once already mentioned, how about the Crown Wars or the era of Shanatar and the dwarven kingdoms? Being able to play in the Realms when it is a truly frontier wilderness in ancient times is really appealing.
I think we also need more good quality maps as nothing breathes life into the world like a good map. Some of the latest Backdrop articles have been the bomb diggity, and the maps are top notch. I hope we keep seeing work of that quality.
In line with this, WotC could probably put out a book about say Deep Shanatar and maps of the various cities and tunnels of the regions. You could describe most the book as a living place and maybe a booklet or portion of the book as the place in ruins. Regardless of how you do it, the maps would be timeless for whether the kingdom still stood or was in ruins and gamers could use as they see fit. |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 05:45:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
The more everyone talks about this the better I understand it. And really your post just made me realize why this would be such an awesome idea: Ok, so we ALL know who the movers and shakers are of Faerun right now, El and the Chosen and various other popular characters. But, WHO were the heroes and villains of the Realms before they all came along? Or after? I think that's a very interesting and fun question to ask.
Like is said, one timeline, just different eras. There's an old map in the grey realms box with a picture of the Cormyr and surrounding survivor states of Netheril. DR 112, The Year of the Tusk. Who are the heroes or villains of that time? Or as I think someone once already mentioned, how about the Crown Wars or the era of Shanatar and the dwarven kingdoms? Being able to play in the Realms when it is a truly frontier wilderness in ancient times is really appealing.
I think we also need more good quality maps as nothing breathes life into the world like a good map. Some of the latest Backdrop articles have been the bomb diggity, and the maps are top notch. I hope we keep seeing work of that quality.
In line with this, WotC could probably put out a book about say Deep Shanatar and maps of the various cities and tunnels of the regions. You could describe most the book as a living place and maybe a booklet or portion of the book as the place in ruins. Regardless of how you do it, the maps would be timeless for whether the kingdom still stood or was in ruins and gamers could use as they see fit.
Yeah that's what I mean. I've wanted something like that for a while. I want the timeline to keep going, but I also want to know a lot more about past events. I believe this is quite possibly the best chance to see it happen if WotC really is interested in building bridges and I believe they are in a position where they pretty well have to be interested in building bridges. |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31727 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2012 : 06:12:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
..., as would Old Sage here (he has his own FR database!), ...
If you're referring to me, here, then I must say that I'm somewhat humbled that you would consider me capable [infamous "To-Do" lists notwithstanding] of handling such a position.
Thank you Markus.
...
That being said, and I realise that I've never written anything for the Realms in an official capacity, but I'd like to echo what Krash said above about providing help for Wizards Realms development if and when it's required. That is, should a 5e of the Realms eventuate. While I'm also an email away, I would eagerly welcome any and all opportunities to finally act in an official capacity... no matter how slight.
Fact-checker/proof-reader would be fine. Even unpaid. I know Kuje and I started joking about Wizards possibly involving the both of us in fact-checking for the Realms in mid-3e. We moved to a somewhat more serious stance, when the publication of Dragons of Faerūn arrived. Heck, even Eric Boyd championed such a role for the both of us when he was putting his Realms dragons database together.
Anyway, should any Wizards/Realms developer be listening, I'm more than ready! |
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 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
WotC is asking for input, so...
Topic Locked
