| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8030 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 14:32:28
|
Poisonous Midnight corrupting the goddess of magic? I'm not sure what you're trying to say, Therise ... yes, I agree the name "Midnight" is unusual and unfortunate enough to suggest an interesting story, but a Sharran surrogate to impersonate her own divine nemesis? A little too bizarre for my tastes.
I would think the "corruption" of new Mystras is the same as that which affects new kings, presidents, and tyrants. There are always unpleasant details, secrets, surprises, skeletons, and dirty laundry hidden within every administration which the newly appointed administrator must consider. |
[/Ayrik] |
 |
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
498 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:03:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
While i admit that some aspects of the current realms leave me cold I don't think that turning back the clock is the right solution. I agree that the realms as it is cannot rationally be expected to survive but to resurrect most of the fallen gods and empires sounds to gimmicky to me. Like when Barry Allen was brought back by DC. I mean do we want the realms to turn into the sort of place where you die only to return a few issues later?
If the realms is to be stabilized i think it should be left up to new heroes for the most part. Perhaps a few iconic characters like Mystra should be revived.
That's kind of what I was saying. I'm not advocating a Barry Allen approach by any means. There has to be a justification for doing...well, whatever it is they choose to do. We've seen what thoughtless, irrational demolition of a beloved setting does, after all. Just declaring "Oh, so-and-so never really died" (or whatever)would be among the worst ideas they could come up with.
There are ways to involve players, adventure-wise, in many of these efforts, too. For example, I have had an adventuring party, in amongst their other traipsings around Faerun, recovering certain 'items' (when opportunity has presented itself) for a decidedly unsettling character, one they have figured out is a drow. These items include a large shard of a sword (a piece of the Crescent Blade), an esoteric symbol (a holy symbol of Eilistraee), and the skull of a certain elf (in this case, the skull of Qilue Veladorn).
Why? It's a way, to the old drow's way of thinking, to bring his god (Vhaeraun) back. It will, of course, lead to the resurrection of both Eilistraee and Qilue in the process, because (and these simply is no delicate way to put this), killing off all the drow deities was a stupid, stupid idea. Axing Vhaeraun was bad enough (despite him being my favorite), but I could sort of accept the reasoning. The killing off of the others was...well, stupid. Whoever gave Lisa Smedman those instructions, to my way of looking at it, had some sort of intense pathological hatred of drow, and did not stop to think about (or likely give a rip about) the effect it would have on many of the Realms fans who considered such deities an integral part of their game world. I hope these people are among those no longer employed at WotC - they've done enough damage to the Realms as is.
Certain things, as I said, cannot be 'fixed'. The dragonborn had to be shoehorned in somehow (despite there being infinitely better ways to do it), so we kiss Unther and most of Mulhorand goodbye. This is not going to change. I accept this. They could have displaced far more beloved areas, I will acknowledge this as well.
They had (to their mind) to introduce Returned Abeir. I accept this as well. Returned Abeir is actually an excellent addition. I am not happy with how they did it, however. It displaced Maztica - okay, fine. Can we have some hemisphere maps, please? How much of the fringes of the True World is still there? How about Anchorome? Or the southern continent? They gave us the cream filling of the Twinkie, and forgot the golden sponge cake. And you just cannot have a Twinkie without the golden sponge cake.
Halruaa has been toasted extra crispy. This was not a popular decision, either. They, in fact, callously wrecked every land in the Shining South. I used to take adventuring parties there. No more. It is a pointless waste of time now. To say I absolutely despise what they did would be an understatement. Only Dambrath and Estagund (realistically)remain - and they both need to be fixed, and badly.
The Sword Coast is pretty much the only part of the Realms that is still...well...the Realms. They inserted a couple of infantile new names here and there, and made some minor geographical 'tweaks', but you can still see the Sword Coast as the Sword Coast. The awesome effort behind the Neverwinter offerings is a superb example of 'fixing' - it is the best example of un-CENSORED-ing someone else's mistakes I have seen, and I have nothing but praise unbound for the authors, who took rotting lemons and gave us fresh lemonade, lemon cream cookies, and lemon pound cake. They also meticulously avoided using the Sellplague as a reason for Neverwinter's ruined state - that was what convinced me that someone cared about the Realms, and also convinced me to pull out the Visa card. We of course know that there are more than just these authors that love the Realms.
So no, a retcon, although much desired, is not going to happen. I realize and accept this. But Wizbro inflicted a lot of damage, damage that they've only recently begun to fix. They need to do more. A lot more, especially if they want to show us that our opinions and patronage mean anything to them.
- OMH |
|
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:29:22
|
Ok I have to admit I only read until page 3 or 4 because its just too much text here but I want to say something to the suggestion of severall novel lines in difrent timeframes.
On the one hand this could be very very interesting with many new possibilities of cool stories.
But I doubt it will solve the problem some (maney?) people have with what happened in the realms. Because at somepoint you will want to know what currently is going on in the Realms and not only what happend in the past. Or you will have a storie set before the spellplague which at some time will reach the date when the plague happend and will have to either just stop there or go on and include all what happened there into it.
I also doubt that wotc will just say well it never happened, lets just all through it away and make a new start from 1385 DR on and I really doubt that this would be good.
So everyone who really hates the FR after 1385 DR shouldn't get his hopes up too much beause he will have to arange himself with those changes one way or anthoer if he wants to enjoy future realms lore. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8030 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 15:44:02
|
Ah, now, Sandstorm was set in the Shining South and hardly seemed like a ruinous wreck to me.
I'm curious why would you so blithely accept all of Maztica vanishing, concerned more about assessing the perimeter than the vacuous loss it contains, while expressing such vehemence over the destruction of Halruaa? Every region has fans who love it. I'll admit that "Returned Abeir" hasn't amounted to much yet, but it's still a "new" region with limitless potential, no doubt there would be many diehard fans enraged to see it "callously wrecked" in future revisions.
Can you offer any constructive suggestions for how these errors can best be corrected? I would think threatening WotC with "you'd damn well better fix it right or I won't ever buy any of it!" isn't the sort of information they're looking for ... I mean, they are trying to be polite about it all, I see nothing to gain from whipping them for past crimes. In fact, I would be unsurprised to learn that they've already ticked off most of our names under a "grumbling grognard" category whom they consider a lesser subset within a larger market demographic. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 12 Jan 2012 15:54:15 |
|
|
|
MrHedgehog
Senior Scribe
688 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 16:25:56
|
Why is the name Midnight evil? I had a cat named Midnight = P
I agree that a deity of magic should be unaligned, not good or evil. Unless there are multiple deities of magic Midnight (Good), Set (Evil), Azuth (Lawful), Leira (Chaotic), Savras, etc. to balance it out. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 16:36:07
|
I've been reading through this discussion (which is excellent, by the way, though we could stand to relax a little), and the central issue is still the same:
quote:
Originally posted by Kno
Keep dreaming, it's obvious that the Wizards realized their mistake and they will return to the real Realms
But how, is the real question? Do they retcon 4e out of existence and say "this never really happened", or do they acknowledge it and go back to supporting numerous different eras? While each plan has limitations, both of these would achieve the desired goal in some respect: getting us a Realms where we can play in.
I happen to think (again, IMO, with good reason) that axing the 4e era would deprive a lot of fans of their place to play, and that this is just as bad as axing the 3e era. So I support BUILDING UP the setting by expanding to multiple timelines, rather than TEARING DOWN what a segment of the fanbase doesn't like. How is catering to the 4e-naysayers any different from catering to the FR-naysayers who got us into this mess in the first place?
Far better to heal the divides by expanding the setting and saying, now there is enough from everyone! With 1e, 2e, 3e, and 4e support for whatever you want to play. WotC should be in the business of giving us Realmslore and setting, not micromanaging the mechanics you use to present that setting.
I don't think the "oh noes, our future is doomed!" concept should prevent us from exploring 3e. The SECOND you start a campaign in 3e, your Realms differs from the canonical Realms. I've said it over and over and over again: CANON IS A TOOL, NOT A STRAIT-JACKET. Your game is SUPPOSED to vary from canon, because canon is only a source of suggestions and ready-made material for you to use or ignore as your game demands. The only ones for whom canon should be iron-clad are designers and authors, whose job it is to produce new canon.
I want this attitude made center-stage of all WotC material going forward.
And seriously, if you run a campaign that lasts from 1350 all the way through 1385, more power to you. I think by that point you are MORE THAN JUSTIFIED in saying the Spellplague doesn't happen, and you can just build your new Realms from there.
As to my larger point. Know that I don't speak for WotC or anyone here. I am only myself and can only speak for myself.
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION IN THE FORGOTTEN REALMS
By my use of that concept, I don't want to overstate this, or compare it to much more important real world issues, but the thing about this is, we are in need of healing. Damage was done, and the only way to address it is to repair the rift and heal the wounded.
As I see it, the drive to kill 4e FR isn't a logical reaction--it's a product of (well-justified) anger. I (just like thousands of other Realms fans) was shocked and, indeed, hurt to see aspects of 4e FR the way they were. I hear and sympathize with your feeling that the setting you have loved and devoted so much of your time to was suddenly not your own. And why wouldn't you react to that with anger? When someone attacks you (even if the attack was inadvertent, as 4e was), you fight back--you defend yourself and hurt the attacker before you can get hurt again.
But if life in the real world has taught us nothing, it is that anger begets hate which begets a cycle that doesn't stop. And the only way to break it is to step outside ourselves for a moment and look at what it is we really want and how we can achieve that.
Mistakes were made, clearly. And WotC has been paying for it for some time, as evidenced by the number of its loyal fans who have broken away from the setting (whether for PFRPG or greener pastures elsewhere). It's also relevant that many of the designers who handed down these major changes to FR are no longer working at WotC. It's a new creative team working on FR these days, and I don't think it's fair to stick them with the blame for what people didn't like.
No one here is a villain to be rebuked. No one here is a bad person to be be punished. We're all just human, and we all make mistakes. I will gladly cop to the mistakes that I've made in my novels and game design--I haven't always served the Realms's best interests, but gods and goddesses know I've tried. And I want to keep trying--to put this world back together into something we all recognize as worthy of respect and love.
On that subject--and this is important--it is clear to me (as it should be clear to you) that the harm inflicted with the 4e FR was UNINTENTIONAL. No one set out to design something bad or offensive or whatever you might call it. Indeed, the designers of 4e FR thought they were doing exactly what the setting needed--and in some respects, they were. But not all the changes they introduced were good ones, and at this point it is unrealistic of anyone to expect a different attitude. Damage was done, and now the question is, do we ignore it, or do we heal it?
I say we heal it. I say we acknowledge the hurt, acknowledge how we--all of us--feel about it, and find a way to move on. Pain can be forgotten in time, but wounds left untreated fester. Retconning the 4e FR is as much as applying a Spongebob Squarepants bandaid to a gaping laceration. What is done is done, and the only way to fix it is to deal with it directly and completely, rather than hand-wave it away.
Let's move forward, acknowledging what's past, and create the brighter future we all want.
Not everyone will agree with me, certainly, but please hear my call for truth rather than ignorance--reconciliation rather than avoidance.
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 12 Jan 2012 16:43:28 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 17:40:05
|
Trying to play 'catch-up' - I haven't seen a thread move this fast since the 4e announcement (which makes some sense, considering)
First, I had an aspect of Mystra - a woman in Kara-Tur who was a secret Chosen - named Wuyč. That means 'Midnight' in Chinese. 
In other words, she stored the specific Midnight aspects of her (multiple)personality within that woman - she has the same personality (morality, etc), but has no memory of her past before the events of Crucible. I left it ambiguous if she was created whole-cloth at that time, or this was power placed within an existing woman (it could even be a woman who had just died, and Mystra saved her in this manner). Open-ended is always best in these situations - gives plenty of elbow-room for DMs/designers later on.
This lore is homebrew, and was created for the K-T netbook project, which never saw the light of day. I give full permission to whomever to use that if they want. My current idea is that when Mystra was 'destroyed', there was this one hidden aspect she didn't (intentionally) 'call home' for the battle. like Lolth, Mystra has merely 'gone silent', and the assumption is she is dead. How does that contradict any canon (any more then any other edition-conflicting 4e lore did?)
Next up, multiple timelines: The big problem I see (beyond the ever-changing Dramatis Personae) is the maps, which changed from edition to edition (not so much between 1e & 2e). We need one VERY GOOD map that is an amalgam of 1e/2e/3e (Too bad I never finished mine). By tweaking the terrain (and adjusting the sizes slightly), you can still fit all of the 1e/2e terrain and locales onto the 3e continental shape (I know this for a fact, because I was almost finished with mine). You can even get Erlkazar and Shareach back. 
The big problem is with a 4e map, which actually should have been much more different then it was (none of the coastlines were properly adjusted). Fix the 3e map as I have just specified (shrinking and tweaking to get everything right), and THEN build a new 4e map off of that. I am sure Shley is more then up to the job.
If anything like that happens, I would also ask the eastern map-edge be extended to the Dragonwall, so we can at least see the crater where it used to be pre-plague. It is also about time The Wastes officially became part of Faerűn, and not a sub-setting anymore. Imaskar was there, along with the Hordlands - we need it in the main campaign area. Something like THIS, showing all the islands, the Utter East, and the edges of the other two major Torillian Campaign areas. Note: I 'skinnied-up' the eastern half of the wastes, as a design-idea, along the line of what was down between 2e & 3e, in order to square-up the eastern edge of the Hordelands (for mapping purposes, so we didn't end up with a big chunk of K-T in Faerun). I don't care how hard it will be - give us four large map sections (a'la Dragon magazine if you have to). I would prefer this to be included in the Campaign guide somehow. I suppose it could be split - you could have a $50 tome with one map, and a 'deluxe edition' with the four-section map (which could also be sold separately for around $16). Another $10 isn't going to bother anyone if we get a few sweet maps, like in older editions.
I already see a problem... which map? Include a much better 4e one (no smudged-up, B&W 3e one), and then sell the four-section one separately? At that point, it would appear they are 'taking sides'.
Which leads me directly to my next point - the 'official' 5e campaign setting, which you will have to settle on at some point. I know I am repeating myself, but the year after the Year of Blue Fire is the PERFECT compromise. Give us a map of that, and then have the other two (pre-plague, and hundred-years out) as part of the edition-specific web enhancements. That is the ideal way to bridge editions, and allow lore from both to be used. I would like a four-section map I can hold in my hands, and we have to pay separately for that then so be it. I don't think that will be necessary for 4e, because of the nature of the 'uncertain lore' which they were going for, but a large, detailed one will be necessary for people wanting to run it in the 1e/2e/3e era.
One simple rule they must follow for all of this (maps, lore, etc) - MORE is better. The minimalist approach did not work (for most of us).
Then give us a monthly Ed Greenwood "Eye on..." column, featuring specific regions in the New Realms (circa 1386 DR). You want everyone to buy the new Realms, be happy with it, AND subscribe to the DDi? DO THAT - I would bet my bottom-dollar that would work. You get the continuation of the 1e/2e/3e story-lines, with all the 4e badness (and by badness, I mean Spellplague, not as in "bad material").
here's your blurb -
"Mystra has fallen, the Weave is shattered, and chaos rules the land. The world has never needed heroes as it does now. Will you be the one to save the Forgotten Realms?"
The kiddies will eat it up, and you'll have peaked the grognard's curiosity.
It WILL work.
And we can still have the web-Enhancment thingy, for people who want to go backwards or forwards. In fact, if they do it specifically the way I laid out, they won't even need WE's for the past - they can just provide old-edition downloads for FREE again. They would only need to continue to support the 4e setting (and personally, if they knock everyone's socks off with the 5e Realms, after awhile, they won't even need to do that anymore).
Everyone's a winner, and all those FREE (old edition) downloads will create thousands (millions?) of new FR fans - if you build it, they will come. Its like selling drugs - GIVE them some for FREE the first time, and they'll be back... oh yes, they will. 
First you hook them, THEN you real them in. Its Business 101. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 12 Jan 2012 17:56:23 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 17:52:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
But how, is the real question? Do they retcon 4e out of existence and say "this never really happened", or do they acknowledge it and go back to supporting numerous different eras? While each plan has limitations, both of these would achieve the desired goal in some respect: getting us a Realms where we can play in.
That "how" is indeed the important question. But no matter what, you're going to lose some people. It's unavoidable at this point.
quote:
I happen to think (again, IMO, with good reason) that axing the 4e era would deprive a lot of fans of their place to play, and that this is just as bad as axing the 3e era. So I support BUILDING UP the setting by expanding to multiple timelines, rather than TEARING DOWN what a segment of the fanbase doesn't like. How is catering to the 4e-naysayers any different from catering to the FR-naysayers who got us into this mess in the first place
The decision to build onto 4E vs. axing it completely, that's a decision that depends on how many people were lost with 4E vs. how many were gained. If far more were lost by 4E, it should be axed. If it was a wash, or numbers increased with 4E, then 4E should be kept. We don't know the numbers, but this has to be a logical decision for the company. WotC cannot afford to lose a ton of customers, but they will lose some.
quote:
Far better to heal the divides by expanding the setting and saying, now there is enough from everyone! With 1e, 2e, 3e, and 4e support for whatever you want to play. WotC should be in the business of giving us Realmslore and setting, not micromanaging the mechanics you use to present that setting.
Whether or not people can stomach the 4E changes and "go forward" depends entirely on how well they liked the changes in the first place. If they loved, liked, or "didn't mind" the changes, they won't have much problem with a "going forward" heal-the-realms plan. But if they hated the 4E Realms changes with a passion, it's unlikely you'll ever convince them that keeping it is a good thing. And truthfully, WotC can't afford to make an emotional decision here. They need to base their decision on numbers (which we don't know), as above.
quote:
I don't think the "oh noes, our future is doomed!" concept should prevent us from exploring 3e. The SECOND you start a campaign in 3e, your Realms differs from the canonical Realms. I've said it over and over and over again: CANON IS A TOOL, NOT A STRAIT-JACKET. Your game is SUPPOSED to vary from canon, because canon is only a source of suggestions and ready-made material for you to use or ignore as your game demands. The only ones for whom canon should be iron-clad are designers and authors, whose job it is to produce new canon.
The appeal of this, to an individual customer, is going to depend entirely on whether or not they could enjoy (or live with) the 4E Realms. You are absolutely right that canon should never be a strait-jacket. But that's a logical argument, and people are going to make an emotional decision regardless of all the logic in the world.
I totally understand the argument from the Star Wars model as well, with different eras of semi-separate canon. As a Star Wars fan as well, I can tell you that I haven't read enough of the books for it to bother me. I've seen the movies, and I'm playing the new SW MMO. But I haven't read the books, so those eras that generate white hot hatred for some players, it doesn't affect me. I like what I have experienced, and I haven't experienced anything to make me question enjoying it.
The Realms are old, though. I've been following them since their first appearance in Greenwood articles in Dragon, ages ago. I played in the 1E era when the gray box came out. I followed it through 2E and 3E, and I've studied 4E. I know the deep history pretty well, I know what it means to accept 4E to me. And I can tell you, logic and rational arguments make no impact: I'm only going to come back as a customer if I -like- what happens.
quote:
By my use of that concept, I don't want to overstate this, or compare it to much more important real world issues, but the thing about this is, we are in need of healing. Damage was done, and the only way to address it is to repair the rift and heal the wounded.
Can the rift be "healed", though? For some of us, and perhaps it's enough people for WotC to consider scrapping the 4E Realms, the divide is too big.
quote:
As I see it, the drive to kill 4e FR isn't a logical reaction--it's a product of (well-justified) anger. I (just like thousands of other Realms fans) was shocked and, indeed, hurt to see aspects of 4e FR the way they were.
Look, I used to be angry. But I made a decision, and came to terms at the beginning of 4E that WotC simply didn't think I was valuable to them as a customer. Did it work out for them? I don't know, because I don't know the numbers of gain vs. loss. But is my current desire for them to axe 4E borne out of that old anger? No, because I gave up on them. I accepted it back then, and I stopped buying things that I didn't like.
This new impetus where I'm letting them know the conditions where I would buy something? That's just honesty, not anger. I'm well prepared, if they keep 4E around, to just be the same old me with a Realms that is highly homebrewed. I'm not going to be angry if they keep 4E, I'll be disappointed perhaps. Because I think this is a good opportunity for them to get me back.
But I'm not going to be angry if the numbers support them staying with 4E. That milk was spilled long, long ago.
quote:
But if life in the real world has taught us nothing, it is that anger begets hate which begets a cycle that doesn't stop. And the only way to break it is to step outside ourselves for a moment and look at what it is we really want and how we can achieve that.
Since we've been talking about Star Wars, let's talk about the Sith code a little.
Anger isn't a problem, it's a natural reaction. The only problem with anger is if you let it consume you and decide to reject it, choke it down, ignore it, or do nothing about it. If you don't process anger, and come to some understanding and plan for dealing with what caused the anger in the first place, that's where you're screwed. Anger tells you, "figure this out, because it's a major problem." As the Sith might say, passion must be understood, and it should be acted upon.
I understand what it was that made me angry. I didn't like 4E, nor did I like the way they treated me as a customer. So, my thought-out response, which is appropriate? I stopped buying stuff that I didn't like. End of story on the anger, it cooled off long ago.
quote:
Mistakes were made, clearly. And WotC has been paying for it for some time, as evidenced by the number of its loyal fans who have broken away from the setting (whether for PFRPG or greener pastures elsewhere). It's also relevant that many of the designers who handed down these major changes to FR are no longer working at WotC. It's a new creative team working on FR these days, and I don't think it's fair to stick them with the blame for what people didn't like.
No one here is a villain to be rebuked. No one here is a bad person to be be punished. We're all just human, and we all make mistakes. I will gladly cop to the mistakes that I've made in my novels and game design--I haven't always served the Realms's best interests, but gods and goddesses know I've tried. And I want to keep trying--to put this world back together into something we all recognize as worthy of respect and love.
As I said, my anger cooled a long time ago. Still, these new people (all of whom are not new, Cordell who LOVES apocalyptic/Cthulu-esque stuff that I don't want in my Realms, he's still there front and center BTW) they've inherited a decision: which way should they go?
They will make a decision that is based on statistics and logic, and hopefully not how they feel. The past team "felt" they were going in a better direction, but I strongly suspect they didn't run their ideas past a 4E Realms test group. Companies always get into trouble when they make emotional decisions. They need to decide the big question on the numbers.
quote:
On that subject--and this is important--it is clear to me (as it should be clear to you) that the harm inflicted with the 4e FR was UNINTENTIONAL. No one set out to design something bad or offensive or whatever you might call it. Indeed, the designers of 4e FR thought they were doing exactly what the setting needed--and in some respects, they were. But not all the changes they introduced were good ones, and at this point it is unrealistic of anyone to expect a different attitude. Damage was done, and now the question is, do we ignore it, or do we heal it?
I don't care if it was intentional or not, I really don't. This is only a question of what I like and what I don't at this point.
If a waiter serves you a delicious-looking dessert that was accidentally made with salt rather than sugar, should I just accept it, pour a sauce over it and pretend to enjoy it?
No, I'm going to send it back. It doesn't matter if the chef did it intentionally or even with the best intentions, if it's a horrible dessert it's going back. Now, if tons of people start loving this dessert that I really find unpalatable, I'll chalk it up to taste differences and simply never buy it again.
It's really, seriously no longer about anger at this point. It's about what I like or don't like as a potential customer.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:12:15
|
Getting rid of 4e (at this point) would be as bad as what happened with 4e's introduction, IMHO. All you will do is piss people off, and you you won't make enough of the grognards happy (probably just give them more ammunition, along the lines of, "See? Even they know it sucked!")
I mentioned that article earlier - the one about 'Additive Lore'. Don't throw away 4e, USE IT. Yeesh, it wasn't all bad. I would agree that the presntation was less-then-stellar, but the material itself (at least some of it) was pretty darn good.
And depending upon where and precisely when someone starts their campaign (provide a three-year timeline in the CG?), you could pick-and-choose what you want. Don't like Aboleths? Don't use 'em! Like the Warlock Knights - run with that! Love the new Thay? have freakin' party there!
Its all about providing choices, NOT tying people down to one specific set of lore. Embrace the changes, but make them yours. To just throw all of that away and give us back what we had in the late '80s is counter-productive, IMHO.
Sure, Khelben is gone, but lets learn about Rhymanthiin! Thay is getting weird, but now we can actually play through that, and have hand in those events!
Use it, or not, but don't throw it out - that would be the final blow, I just know it. At that point nearly everyone will feel 'betrayed'. Fix things - throwing crap out was what got us here in the first place!
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
I understand what it was that made me angry. <snip>
The five stages of Grief are -
1) Denial
2) Anger
3) Bargaining
4) Depression
5) Acceptance
Can we all just get to stage five already? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 12 Jan 2012 18:23:21 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:21:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Poisonous Midnight corrupting the goddess of magic? I'm not sure what you're trying to say, Therise ... yes, I agree the name "Midnight" is unusual and unfortunate enough to suggest an interesting story, but a Sharran surrogate to impersonate her own divine nemesis? A little too bizarre for my tastes.
I would think the "corruption" of new Mystras is the same as that which affects new kings, presidents, and tyrants. There are always unpleasant details, secrets, surprises, skeletons, and dirty laundry hidden within every administration which the newly appointed administrator must consider.
Back during the Time of Troubles, I played around with an idea that Midnight (Ariel Manx) was an unwitting pawn of Shar. At the time, I didn't consider Shar to be as heavily focused on entropy and evil, but rather on loss and darkness. By incorporating Midnight into herself, Mystra unknowingly allowed herself to be poisoned by Shar.
As time went on, I thought maybe the designers had come up with something pretty brilliant. Because if you look at Midnight/Mystra's subsequent problems, she's experienced a TON of loss, darkness, etc. First, she lost her mortality. Trying to hang on to shreds of her mortal life, she ended up losing her friends, her high priest, and people started questioning her as a goddess as well. Eventually, she lost the love of Kelemvor... loss after loss. Finally, it appears that she lost her good sense by inviting Shar and Cyric into her home plane and turning her back on them for longer than a millisecond.
In the subsequent moments, she lost her divinity, her allies (Savras, Azuth, her Chosen, etc...), and her worshipers. She also lost the Weave.
So "Midnight" could have been a plant, a hidden time-bomb, designed by Shar to take Mystra down hard. The designers didn't quite go that way, but it was an idea I toyed around with for a while.
How interesting would it be, though, if Lurue turns out to be an old Avatar of the original Mystryl that gained independence and rejects joining with the remnant of Mystra we've seen interacting with Elminster? But I'm not sure the current team even remotely has something like this in mind.
|
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 - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:37:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
I understand what it was that made me angry. <snip>
The five stages of Grief are -
1) Denial
2) Anger
3) Bargaining
4) Depression
5) Acceptance
Can we all just get to stage five already?
LOL, Markus this isn't applicable to this situation.
The "stages of grief" ONLY apply to things that absolutely cannot be changed. Someone dies, or develops cancer, or their child becomes ill, this is the chart that applies.
This isn't a real life problem. It's fantasy, it's an IP for a game, which we know -can- be changed in nearly every way. You can have reveals, retcons, time-loops, alternate realities, the list is endless. It's fantasy. In no way shape or form does "stages of grief" apply here, that's just silly.
And as I keep saying, for me it's not about anger at this point. It's a choice. I would ask, though... since some people are convinced that it's anger, are YOU the one holding on to anger inappropriately? Did you decide to choke down something you really didn't like and it's festering there in your gut?
I'm not in any kind of denial myself. For me, it's clear: I'm a customer, potentially, that might buy something. If I like it a lot, I'll probably buy it. If it has more things in it that I don't like than what I do like, I won't. No anger, really. But if I did force myself to choke down something I really disliked, I'd be angry with myself. I might not realize it at first, because perhaps my mind is clouded with notions of supporting the "community" or whatnot.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 18:46:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I've been reading through this discussion (which is excellent, by the way, though we could stand to relax a little), and the central issue is still the same:
quote:
Originally posted by Kno
Keep dreaming, it's obvious that the Wizards realized their mistake and they will return to the real Realms
But how, is the real question? Do they retcon 4e out of existence and say "this never really happened", or do they acknowledge it and go back to supporting numerous different eras? While each plan has limitations, both of these would achieve the desired goal in some respect: getting us a Realms where we can play in.
I happen to think (again, IMO, with good reason) that axing the 4e era would deprive a lot of fans of their place to play, and that this is just as bad as axing the 3e era. So I support BUILDING UP the setting by expanding to multiple timelines, rather than TEARING DOWN what a segment of the fanbase doesn't like. How is catering to the 4e-naysayers any different from catering to the FR-naysayers who got us into this mess in the first place?
Far better to heal the divides by expanding the setting and saying, now there is enough from everyone! With 1e, 2e, 3e, and 4e support for whatever you want to play. WotC should be in the business of giving us Realmslore and setting, not micromanaging the mechanics you use to present that setting.
I don't think the "oh noes, our future is doomed!" concept should prevent us from exploring 3e. The SECOND you start a campaign in 3e, your Realms differs from the canonical Realms. I've said it over and over and over again: CANON IS A TOOL, NOT A STRAIT-JACKET. Your game is SUPPOSED to vary from canon, because canon is only a source of suggestions and ready-made material for you to use or ignore as your game demands. The only ones for whom canon should be iron-clad are designers and authors, whose job it is to produce new canon.
I want this attitude made center-stage of all WotC material going forward.
And seriously, if you run a campaign that lasts from 1350 all the way through 1385, more power to you. I think by that point you are MORE THAN JUSTIFIED in saying the Spellplague doesn't happen, and you can just build your new Realms from there.
As to my larger point. Know that I don't speak for WotC or anyone here. I am only myself and can only speak for myself.
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION IN THE FORGOTTEN REALMS
By my use of that concept, I don't want to overstate this, or compare it to much more important real world issues, but the thing about this is, we are in need of healing. Damage was done, and the only way to address it is to repair the rift and heal the wounded.
As I see it, the drive to kill 4e FR isn't a logical reaction--it's a product of (well-justified) anger. I (just like thousands of other Realms fans) was shocked and, indeed, hurt to see aspects of 4e FR the way they were. I hear and sympathize with your feeling that the setting you have loved and devoted so much of your time to was suddenly not your own. And why wouldn't you react to that with anger? When someone attacks you (even if the attack was inadvertent, as 4e was), you fight back--you defend yourself and hurt the attacker before you can get hurt again.
But if life in the real world has taught us nothing, it is that anger begets hate which begets a cycle that doesn't stop. And the only way to break it is to step outside ourselves for a moment and look at what it is we really want and how we can achieve that.
Mistakes were made, clearly. And WotC has been paying for it for some time, as evidenced by the number of its loyal fans who have broken away from the setting (whether for PFRPG or greener pastures elsewhere). It's also relevant that many of the designers who handed down these major changes to FR are no longer working at WotC. It's a new creative team working on FR these days, and I don't think it's fair to stick them with the blame for what people didn't like.
No one here is a villain to be rebuked. No one here is a bad person to be be punished. We're all just human, and we all make mistakes. I will gladly cop to the mistakes that I've made in my novels and game design--I haven't always served the Realms's best interests, but gods and goddesses know I've tried. And I want to keep trying--to put this world back together into something we all recognize as worthy of respect and love.
On that subject--and this is important--it is clear to me (as it should be clear to you) that the harm inflicted with the 4e FR was UNINTENTIONAL. No one set out to design something bad or offensive or whatever you might call it. Indeed, the designers of 4e FR thought they were doing exactly what the setting needed--and in some respects, they were. But not all the changes they introduced were good ones, and at this point it is unrealistic of anyone to expect a different attitude. Damage was done, and now the question is, do we ignore it, or do we heal it?
I say we heal it. I say we acknowledge the hurt, acknowledge how we--all of us--feel about it, and find a way to move on. Pain can be forgotten in time, but wounds left untreated fester. Retconning the 4e FR is as much as applying a Spongebob Squarepants bandaid to a gaping laceration. What is done is done, and the only way to fix it is to deal with it directly and completely, rather than hand-wave it away.
Let's move forward, acknowledging what's past, and create the brighter future we all want.
Not everyone will agree with me, certainly, but please hear my call for truth rather than ignorance--reconciliation rather than avoidance.
Cheers
You know how real businesses solve this problem? They fire those that created it (ie ALL of them) and then they go back to what worked. The New Coke (and yes Spellplague era Realms is New Coke)/Coke Classic example is probably the closest one to this.
While Tyrant keeps insisting that the 4E Realms are selling well, every actual point of data we have says they are not (or at least not nearly as well as 3E or 2nd before that. It would be virtually impossible to see a failed 4E with somehow 4E Realms keeping its old pace, only someone without business experience would believe that. The question that really needs to be asked, is whether the business model itself of constant updates/publications/new rules is actually profitable, because I am not convinced that it is anymore (too much other competition). |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36965 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 19:04:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
While Tyrant keeps insisting that the 4E Realms are selling well, every actual point of data we have says they are not (or at least not nearly as well as 3E or 2nd before that. It would be virtually impossible to see a failed 4E with somehow 4E Realms keeping its old pace, only someone without business experience would believe that. The question that really needs to be asked, is whether the business model itself of constant updates/publications/new rules is actually profitable, because I am not convinced that it is anymore (too much other competition).
The only such data I know of is a couple of references to the ruleset not selling as well as anticipated. Have you some actual numbers?
It is my perception that the 4E Realms aren't selling as well, but I have no data to back that up, and I'll readily admit that my own feelings could be influencing that perception. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1303 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 19:08:30
|
Here's my plan to solve the problem.
Wait for someone to invent a time machine. Once it is built, use it to go back to 2005(? whenever the idea was first brought up) and figure out who decided to create the 4th Edition Forgotten Realms and destroy all we loved and held dear with Spell Plague and time skip.
Then use the time machine again and break up the parents of this person before they can spawn. Thus ending the problem forever.
The end.
|
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4487 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 19:53:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
While Tyrant keeps insisting that the 4E Realms are selling well, every actual point of data we have says they are not (or at least not nearly as well as 3E or 2nd before that. It would be virtually impossible to see a failed 4E with somehow 4E Realms keeping its old pace, only someone without business experience would believe that. The question that really needs to be asked, is whether the business model itself of constant updates/publications/new rules is actually profitable, because I am not convinced that it is anymore (too much other competition).
The only such data I know of is a couple of references to the ruleset not selling as well as anticipated. Have you some actual numbers?
It is my perception that the 4E Realms aren't selling as well, but I have no data to back that up, and I'll readily admit that my own feelings could be influencing that perception.
Agreed, and to counter-point: The Forgotten Realms probably receive double the amount of attention in Dungeon/Dragon insider articles than any other setting. Kara-Tur, Moonshae (thanks Matt, BTW!), and now Cormyr. I also have a feeling they'll be doing a Rasheman one soon (or so says another designer). So if they're putting so much effort into design and data for the Forgotten Realms through this media, is that not at least worth a consideration? |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 19:53:56
|
@Therise: I understand and appreciate you're not still angry. My post is not strictly directed at you, but rather addresses the sea of angry fans still out there who want their Realms back. 
WotC coming out with 4e FR was not their way of telling you they didn't want your business. Obviously, they did--they were just not doing a good job at getting it.
And yes, I think healing can still be done. I think the way to do it, ultimately, is with positive action (additive lore, as MT calls it), rather than negative. 4e FR itself was an attempt to remove things that were seen to be problems with the setting. Doing that again would only make it worse, IMO.
WotC had just better do it right and make it awesome. That is what it comes down to, and that's where I think you and I agree, Therise.
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" |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:09:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
While Tyrant keeps insisting that the 4E Realms are selling well, every actual point of data we have says they are not (or at least not nearly as well as 3E or 2nd before that. It would be virtually impossible to see a failed 4E with somehow 4E Realms keeping its old pace, only someone without business experience would believe that. The question that really needs to be asked, is whether the business model itself of constant updates/publications/new rules is actually profitable, because I am not convinced that it is anymore (too much other competition).
We have some pretty good anecdotal data though. Just a few years after the 4th edition release, we have an announcement of 5th edition (for which it appears they are soliciting much more input than they did for either 3rd or 4th edition). If sales/profits were fine this wouldn't happen. Second, we know that a) the FR are part of 4E and that b) it appears that many 3.5 players switched over to Pathfinder (thus likely limiting Realms sales). It is also likely that the 100 year jump turned off many fans of the novels as well, as they were no longer "the Realms they knew". The question to be asked is how many true 4th edition supporters are there that would quit spending if the setting was reset back to a prior date? Because all new players wouldn't know the difference and are going to come in under whatever is current, so the only subset that matters are people that want to play in the 4E Realms MORE than a previous one. My opinion (and educated guess) is that there are far more supporters of earlier timelines than of the new one.
The only such data I know of is a couple of references to the ruleset not selling as well as anticipated. Have you some actual numbers?
It is my perception that the 4E Realms aren't selling as well, but I have no data to back that up, and I'll readily admit that my own feelings could be influencing that perception.
|
|
|
|
Kno
Senior Scribe
452 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:18:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Kno
Keep dreaming, it's obvious that the Wizards realized their mistake and they will return to the real Realms
I happen to think (again, IMO, with good reason) that axing the 4e era would deprive a lot of fans of their place to play, and that this is just as bad as axing the 3e era...
I also want for both sides to be happy, fans of 1479 DR wanted Realms-lite, wanted freedom from canon bloat, you don't want to overburden them again, they got what they wanted, now it's our turn. |
z455t |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 20:29:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kno
I also want for both sides to be happy, fans of 1479 DR wanted Realms-lite, wanted freedom from canon bloat, you don't want to overburden them again, they got what they wanted, now it's our turn.
That's a really good point, actually.
The argument I saw over and over -for- 4E was "too much bloat, too much stuff, make it light".
Opening up ALL of 1E-4E may turn off all the people who wanted "simplicity" and a vast paring down of lore.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
@Therise: I understand and appreciate you're not still angry. My post is not strictly directed at you, but rather addresses the sea of angry fans still out there who want their Realms back.
WotC coming out with 4e FR was not their way of telling you they didn't want your business. Obviously, they did--they were just not doing a good job at getting it.
And yes, I think healing can still be done. I think the way to do it, ultimately, is with positive action (additive lore, as MT calls it), rather than negative. 4e FR itself was an attempt to remove things that were seen to be problems with the setting. Doing that again would only make it worse, IMO.
WotC had just better do it right and make it awesome. That is what it comes down to, and that's where I think you and I agree, Therise.
Absolutely, I think they really have to do it right and make it awesome. I also believe that there are probably several ways to do this, but what's good for the company may not be the best thing for every potential customer out there.
Some people will see the divide as minimal. Others will see it as too far to cross. No matter what, I think the company has to do something to appeal to the greatest number of customers who will actually buy it. That may leave me (and people like me) out in the cold. It may leave the 4E fans out in the cold. There may also be a way (which I can't picture) to keep/get both of us and gain more customers.
What WotC absolutely cannot afford to do is make an emotional decision, either based on what they like internally or based on how they "feel" people might respond. I think they'd best go the smart route and really try to understand what different people in the fractured fanbase all want, use polling and play-trials, so they make an informed, logical decision. Only customers can afford to make emotional decisions.
|
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! |
Edited by - Therise on 12 Jan 2012 20:47:13 |
|
|
|
Nicolai Withander
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1093 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:29:26
|
First of all... I have not read all the above posts, but since I woted something else... I will now tell you.. I would continue the realms, but most of the stuff would be "repaired"
The chosen would combine theeir essence and re animate Mystra, kill shar and cyric and create a ruleset which would be 3.x rules.
|
|
|
|
Kris the Grey
Senior Scribe
USA
422 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:33:12
|
I can't tell you how delighted I am that the 4th Edition experiment is finally over, and in 4 years flat.
I'm not sure how 5E will turn out, or if it can ever pry me free of Pathfinder at this point, but I do know one thing...
When a company asks for consumer input in the way WoTC is now, then those with strong opinions HAD BETTER START FLOODING THEM WITH INPUT.
Speak now, or forever hold your peace.
So, get cracking there folks. |
Kris the Grey - Member in Good Standing of the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors, the Arcane Guild of Silverymoon, and the Connecticut Bar Association |
|
|
|
Bakra
Senior Scribe
628 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:37:45
|
All I can really ask, “Can we stop using the New Coke(Coke II) analogy?”
Coca Cola didn’t clean house and the product lasted for over 15 years.
|
I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . .
So saith Ed. <snip>
love to all,
THO
|
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 21:49:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
While Tyrant keeps insisting that the 4E Realms are selling well, every actual point of data we have says they are not (or at least not nearly as well as 3E or 2nd before that. It would be virtually impossible to see a failed 4E with somehow 4E Realms keeping its old pace, only someone without business experience would believe that. The question that really needs to be asked, is whether the business model itself of constant updates/publications/new rules is actually profitable, because I am not convinced that it is anymore (too much other competition).
We have some pretty good anecdotal data though. Just a few years after the 4th edition release, we have an announcement of 5th edition (for which it appears they are soliciting much more input than they did for either 3rd or 4th edition). If sales/profits were fine this wouldn't happen. Second, we know that a) the FR are part of 4E and that b) it appears that many 3.5 players switched over to Pathfinder (thus likely limiting Realms sales). It is also likely that the 100 year jump turned off many fans of the novels as well, as they were no longer "the Realms they knew". The question to be asked is how many true 4th edition supporters are there that would quit spending if the setting was reset back to a prior date? Because all new players wouldn't know the difference and are going to come in under whatever is current, so the only subset that matters are people that want to play in the 4E Realms MORE than a previous one. My opinion (and educated guess) is that there are far more supporters of earlier timelines than of the new one.
The only such data I know of is a couple of references to the ruleset not selling as well as anticipated. Have you some actual numbers?
It is my perception that the 4E Realms aren't selling as well, but I have no data to back that up, and I'll readily admit that my own feelings could be influencing that perception.
Your anecdotal evidence is still unconnected, that is my point. Yes, fans of 3.5 left for wherever. Yes, some of them almost had to be Realms fans. Yes, 4.0 is not doing what they hoped it would. Yes, FR is a part of 4.0. But from here your analysis is nothing but guess work. 4.0 failing does not mean FR is failing. Nothing you say can change the simple fact that nothing backs up this claim. The two are not interchangable.
Is it possible that the Realms is also in a bad state? Yes, that's certainly possible. Is it an absolute, no. If so, show me with something solid that it is. I do believe there was a drop in sales with 4E for the Realms. People obviously left, I have never said otherwise. The real questions though, and they're ones none of us can answer with anything solid, is A) how many left? B) how many were gained or at some point came back? C) how many would leave if 4EFR was radically changed in some way (retconned, whatever)? D) how many people can be brought back into the fold, and how best to do so? and E) how do we get new people into the fold?
It is quite obviously the setting in the best shape. Does that absolutely mean it is in actual good shape? No, it doesn't, and I admit that. I am saying it is doing better than Eberron and Dark Sun and the amount of product being released for each setting should paint that picture pretty clearly. It is well within the realm of possibility that the whole ship is sinking. But, until I see something solid, I have no reason to believe that absolutely must be the case.
So, to clarify because Apex has misunderstood my point (possibly because I was misrepresenting it somehow), I am not saying 4E FR is selling well and everything A Okay. I am saying it is selling better than it's other 4E counterparts and is obviously the horse WotC has decided to back. And I don't believe most people back a known loser. I'm sure there is room for improvement and I wouldn't be at all surprised if 4E FR is selling less than 3.5. The question is, by how much? And is it enough to really endanger the IP? I don't have an answer for that, but I believe the best course doesn't involve giving current fans the boot. It should be obvious to anyone reading this thread that that leads to anger.
As a side note Apex, I agree with your earlier suggestion that pretty much all of the back catalog (not just FR) should be made available for purchase (at an actual reasonable, cheap price) as pdfs. I also think reprinting the Grey Box, and possibly other high profile products from the past, as part of the larger plan isn't a bad idea. Honestly, I think one of the best things they could do would be to come up with a conversion guide for all editions. It would have some examples. 1E to 2E or to 5E or what have you. Forward and backward. But, I think the real point would be to have an in depth explanation of what each edition was trying to accomplish in terms of character creation. The math will never be 100% (1E HP might never be able to perfectly work out to 5E HP, and HP might mean more in one edition than another, and so on), so understanding the ideas behind each edition would give people a far better idea of how to convert as they would understand what a 5th level Fighter in 1E should be able to do and have a better idea of what that means in terms of another edition. Obviously there will always be wiggle room when converting, but I think something like that, with some examples, would be very useful. I would make that free. A copy comes free with the 5E core books and a free copy via download to anyone who buys a Pdf product. Maybe even just make it a free article on the website for anyone that wants it. I think something like that makes the stat side a lot more useful no matter the edition.
quote:
Originally posted by Kno
I also want for both sides to be happy, fans of 1479 DR wanted Realms-lite, wanted freedom from canon bloat, you don't want to overburden them again, they got what they wanted, now it's our turn.
That's a broad assumption isn't it? I would've never asked for any of that, but I think the 4E FR has plenty of story to tell and the books are good. You could call me a fan. I am also a fan of the previous editions. In the dream novel thread I believe most or all of my ideas were pre Spellplague. I like canon bloat, but I also like the 1479 Realms. I never asked for it, but I am okay with what I got. The 1300s Realms is still there. |
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 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 22:11:44
|
The rather premature announcement of yet another edition, I think, puts the lie to how well 4e is doing. You don't replace something that is selling - thats a complete waste of resources. You know why Gasoline still sells a century later? Because it still works. Can they make cars run on something else? Of course they can... but why? They don't make more money that way. Its not business-economical to build something new if the old thing still works.
Note that in this example, I am specifically talking about companies that provide gasoline - I am not talking about the many, MANY alternatives now available that would love to see gas-powered cars replaced. Those companies can't give the same size campaign-contributions Gas companies can.
As for FR, I would gauge that by how many books - both source and novel - are scheduled to be releasd, and compare that to previous years. I have to agree that you cannot simply assume that 4e and FR are connected (a mistake many of us make constantly).
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
LOL, Markus this isn't applicable to this situation.
The "stages of grief" ONLY apply to things that absolutely cannot be changed. Someone dies, or develops cancer, or their child becomes ill, this is the chart that applies.
Ahhhh....
But the existence of 4e is something that absolutely cannot be changed (even if we retcon it), and many of us are still grieving over it.
However, I think this thread itself puts us firmly in the 'pleading' stage. 
Anyhow, I wasn't picking on you (I would hope you know that), I was just pointing out that we should all be doing less whining, and more 'fixing' - we finally are being given the exact chance we have been asking for.
More Realms lore in 5e? HELL YEAH!!!
quote:
Originally posted by Bakra
Coca Cola didn’t clean house and the product lasted for over 15 years.
I don't always drink Cola, but when I do, its Pepsi.
Coke tastes like syrup to me. New, old... doesn't matter - just give me Pathf.. err.. Pepsi.
Now Cream Soda... Mmmmmm... thats like the FR of carbonated beverages... |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 12 Jan 2012 22:24:19 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 22:20:33
|
| I wouldn't compare entertainment to a commodity like fuel. People can live without RPGs. Fuel touches too much of everyday life :p |
Edited by - Matt James on 12 Jan 2012 22:21:11 |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 22:23:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
And yes, I think healing can still be done. I think the way to do it, ultimately, is with positive action (additive lore, as MT calls it), rather than negative. 4e FR itself was an attempt to remove things that were seen to be problems with the setting. Doing that again would only make it worse, IMO.
Seen as problems by whom?
Isn't there a deity or other entity within the Realms we can use as a scapegoat for 4e? Some kind of temporal entity playing time-mind freak games with us or a hallucinogenic agent of some kind dispersed on a massive global level that caused everyone in the Realms to suffer through some form of mass delusion/insanity where decent deities were slain, landscapes were torn asunder, and Halruua turned into a dead zone?
Since global RSEs seem to be the Realms part and parcel in recent years, how about another one where time resets itself? A massive energy ribbon from space is sent towards Toril from a distant star that goes supernova, and the energy ribbon collides with Toril, effectively spinning off numerous temporal timelines in parallel. Some of these timelines diverge back into the "normal" time river of the Realms, while others spin off and never are able to rejoin the river, effectively becoming their own unique worlds.
Or, maybe not. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 22:24:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The rather premature announcement of yet another edition, I think, puts the lie to how well 4e is doing. You don't replace something that is selling - thats a complete waste of resources. You know why Gasoline still sells a century later? Because it still works. Can they make cars run on something else? Of course they can... but why? They don't make more money that way. Its not business-economical to build something new if the old thing still works.
You didn't quote me so I have no idea if this was directed at my comments, but I am apparently coming across to others as saying 4E is doing fine so I will respond to this. I am not saying that. 4E is obviously not doing fine, because as you say we wouldn't be hearing about 5E if it were. All I am saying is that 4E D&D failing does not necessarily mean 4E FR is failing. 4E FR could very easily be meeting expectations, while the game as a whole is not. I have no clue how likely that is, but it is possible and that's all I am saying. I look at it like a movie studio. A movie studio can be failing as a whole but still have successful movies. They just aren't having enough of them. |
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 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 22:47:02
|
It was just a general statement. If you like, I will re-phrase it to "Not doing as well as anticipated". Either way, the folks in-charge were obviously not happy with things the way they are, otherwise they would not be seeking to correct them. Its a numbers game, and the numbers that would have satisfied TSR won't satisfy Hasbro.
For example, If I made a million dollars last year, I would be VERY satisfied, but if Oprah made a million dollars last year, she'd want to make some major changes - she would considered it a failure (and BAD one, in her case). However, at the end of the day - she still made a MILLION dollars! Certainly not a failure by most of our standards.
For TSR, 4e might have been considered a phenomenal success.
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I wouldn't compare entertainment to a commodity like fuel. People can live without RPGs. Fuel touches too much of everyday life.
Which is why it should be even more applicable.
Gasoline SHOULD be replaced, but the folks making money from it will never allow things to change. If it wasn't making them money all of a sudden, you'd see just how quick they'd change gears.
Games, on the other hand, can be easily changed, or just as easily be kept static (Monopoly, for example). So long as Monopoly is still making money, it will be around forever. So would 4e, IF it had done nearly as well as they had thought it would.
I spent the '80s installing windows and doors. In 1990, the bottom fell out of the economy and there was no construction work, and I started boarding-up foreclosed houses for the banks. I changed what I did, because I was no longer making the money I wanted to, and found something related that I could still make a decent income from.
It really is that simple. You only change things when they aren't working. I would have been stupid to do so earlier, when I was making very good money.
To use the much-hated 'New Coke' analogy again - it wasn't aimed at Coke-drinkers, it was aimed at Pepsi drinkers. However, instead of attracting new costumers (in any great numbers), it alienated far more of the old ones. The wrongful thinking came-in when they targeted a group they didn't already have: Old Coke wasn't working for them. If old Coke wasn't working for everyone, then they would have been correct in trying to change it. You do not change something to please customers you already have. That is what they were trying to accomplish, and failed miserably. If people are satisfied, then it makes perfect business sense to keep things the same.
People in this day-and-age are no longer 'brand-loyal', as they once were. Piss us off, and we will go elsewhere. On the bright side, we will just as quickly 'come back' if you make us happy. I site Apple as a clear example of that.
Make us happy, thats all I ask. No hard feelings, really. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 12 Jan 2012 22:59:46 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 23:01:08
|
@Therise: My suggestions aren't entirely *emotional,* though I will confess that part of this is what I *feel* is the right thing to do. They're based on discussions with WotC staffers and other game designers, my observations online and of other games/entertainment products (i.e. comic books, video games, movie reboots, etc), and my long experience working in the setting. *Also* because I feel this is the right course.
I do think that some emotion is necessary, as decisions from a purely analytical/bean-counting perspective aren't always the best decisions. (4e, Essentials, for instance.)
quote:
Originally posted by Varl
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
And yes, I think healing can still be done. I think the way to do it, ultimately, is with positive action (additive lore, as MT calls it), rather than negative. 4e FR itself was an attempt to remove things that were seen to be problems with the setting. Doing that again would only make it worse, IMO.
Seen as problems by whom?
The people 4e FR was aimed at, who may or may not have picked up the setting. I think trying to appeal to non-fans at the expense of current fans is actually a *bad* policy, not a good one.
Let me clarify what I was saying: As I understand it, with 4e FR, WotC was attempting to appeal to people who had never picked up the setting because they were scared off by its rich lore and story. Things like Mystra, the Chosen, etc., were cited frequently as "problems" for the setting, so 4e FR either destroyed them or weakened them. And we can all see how this turned out.
(For the record, I do not believe they are problems.)
What I was saying was likening the suggestion of "retcon 4e away" to "fix FR by creating 4e." The similarity in the situations is quite clear and unsettling to me. And that would "make it worse."
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" |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2012 : 23:03:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The rather premature announcement of yet another edition, I think, puts the lie to how well 4e is doing. You don't replace something that is selling - thats a complete waste of resources. You know why Gasoline still sells a century later? Because it still works. Can they make cars run on something else? Of course they can... but why? They don't make more money that way. Its not business-economical to build something new if the old thing still works.
We don't know how well 4E Realms is working, we don't have the numbers. Furthermore, one cannot judge that a product is selling wonderfully (or poorly) based solely on the fact that it is available; you need numbers. But I will say, businesses the world over have consistently replaced products that are poor or average sellers. It's good business to do so, and this is after all a business.
quote:
Ahhhh....
But the existence of 4e is something that absolutely cannot be changed (even if we retcon it), and many of us are still grieving over it.
There are many ways to retcon, and there are many ways to reboot. Just, as I'm sure, there are many ways to fix or repair.
quote:
However, I think this thread itself puts us firmly in the 'pleading' stage.
If we are pleading with someone, how so? WotC asked for input, and many are simply stating the criteria that would be necessary for them to remain (or come back) as customers.
quote:
Anyhow, I wasn't picking on you (I would hope you know that),
I know, and I didn't take it that way.
quote:
I was just pointing out that we should all be doing less whining, and more 'fixing' - we finally are being given the exact chance we have been asking for.
More Realms lore in 5e? HELL YEAH!!!
Honestly, I don't see any real whining in this thread either, I just see people offering input. And I think that's great.
I don't believe that we, as customers, can do any of the "fixing" in this. WotC owns the court and the ball. We can offer them input, as they have asked, but not really much more. They must accomplish the fix, the repair, the retcon, or the reboot, whatever it is.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
WotC is asking for input, so...
Topic Locked
