| Author |
 Topic  |
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
 Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 18:43:22
|
Interesting theory about Lurue... I would not have thought of that.
I like the idea re: the extra detail on gods in the DM's guide. Torm and Tyr have always seemed redundant to me, but that's probably just me. Bottom line is it'll be great to not lose info in the new edition.
quote:
but then lump them altogether in one category mechanics-wise.
This is something I, personally, would like to see less of. There seem to be few enough examples of breaking this rule to begin with, and I think the variety of having something that stands out from everything else is great. It makes a place or group or individual or whatever unique. I get that things are easier to balance when they're all the same, but some things don't need to be balanced. Imo. |
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36884 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 18:47:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And where was Nobanion then?
Down in the Guthmere, as I recall. I can't check, because I'm away from my copy of that file and WotC moved that page yet again.  |
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!  |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36884 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 18:54:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
IMO, we're making too much of this "Chosen" thing. Chosen is just a word that suggests we're talking about a favored servant, and it's not too big a stretch to think it indicates a mortal into whom a deity might have poured some power.
Just because Mystra's Chosen are *more important* to her than the Chosen of other deities doesn't mean that she should have exclusive use of the term "Chosen."
Debate, MT? 
Cheers
I think that part of what damaged the perception of the Realms was the "Chosen arms race" we got when authors decided to have Chosen for multiple deities other than Mystra. Mystra's Chosen at least have a function in the pantheon and the world, but the Chosen of other deities were usually just slightly powered-up mortals. I don't have a problem with other deities having divine servants beyond their priests, or even having those divine servants being more than mortal... I just think we should call them something other than Chosen, to differentiate them from Mystra's Chosen and to make clear that a little bit of a power-up does not make them the same as Elminster or even Dove.
So, as much as I hate to say it, yes, Mystra should have, at least in regard to divine servants, exclusive rights to the term Chosen. Everyone having Chosen makes it seem like there's a Chosen under every rock, and makes the "brand name" about as meaningful as real world brand names that have passed into common usage, like Q-Tip, Band-Aid, or Xerox. |
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! |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 19:21:09
|
Great argument, Wooly. I couldn't have said it better.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Torm and Tyr have always seemed redundant to me, but that's probably just me.
Nope - before even reading your post, I was going to say the same exact thing - Tyr & Torm are redundant, IMHO (at least, in an initial-release, 'bare-bones' deities list).
@Erik - nothing to debate; while I agree in theory, it just gets confusing. Early sources refer to THE Chosen, and they explicitly mean "Mystra's Chosen" . This has actually come-up (and been argued about) concerning other chosen - people feel that the stuff in the Magister, Seven Sisters, and Harper tomes should apply to them as well (and they shouldn't, because those books were written when only Mystra had Chosen.)
Note how I differentiate between the two with a capitol 'C'. Maybe its just me, but I really hate how we have this 'arms race' mentality when it comes to story - the Thieves World anthologies were destroyed by it (each author trying to 'out-power' the others with his main character's 'uberness' - everyone was the child of a god by the time it was over). 'The Eldest' being more powerful then Ao is just that mindset AT IT'S WORST (planet-juggling bad-guys aren't much better... but Paul is so damn good I can forgive him that).
So yeah, they are all chosen, but only a select few are Chosen. 
The old Stormbringer rules called them 'Agents', and Planescape called them 'Proxies' (I rather like that). So why can't earth-bound (prime material) Exarch's be called 'proxies' - why do they have to be 'chosen'? I know its all a matter of semantics, but I really can't help but feel the word is sullied by its usage elsewhere (like calling all 'warrior priests' Paladins in 4e... YUCK).
@xaeyruudh (another name I have to C&P) - I am not talking about completely different creatures, and I am well-aware how much 4e made all the classes seem similar (to some folks); anything to do with PCs should be as different as possible (within reason).
However, look at some of the 'monster groups' presented in the later 3e MMs - that was on the right track. Do we really need completely different entries for 'Orc Skirmisher', or 'Orc Behemoth', or 'Orc Archer', or 'Orc Shaman' even? Just tell us about Orcs, and then highlight the differences with their capabilities. We do not need tons of fluff in each entry.
I think 4e went too far - calling the fluff 'minimal' would be a kindness. I would rather see things the way Paizo did them (I know - mentioning them is even beginning to annoy ME). They did them like the racial books we had in 3e - that's what I am talking about, but on a smaller scale. Give us a couple of pages about the major monsters (Orcs & Goblinoids, Dragons, Illithids, Beholders, etc), and then a bunch of stats for each, the way the 3e Monstrous Manual did it. They even had one section on giants, with general info, and then more specific lore for each sub-group. I don't need a separate entry for each type of brownie (and heaven help us, we did in 2e) - tell us about the basic type, and then a little bit about off-shoots, with altered abilities (powers in 4e).
I would rather have MORE fluff about a group, then insufficient fluff about 100 individual creatures. If FR is going to both the 'flagship setting' and the Core setting, this should be even easier to do. take all those great groups created at the tail-end of 3e and place them in FR - thats the ideal scenario.
And I am still waiting for Diffan (or anyone) to answer my question: Did 4e do this? Did we get those 'groupings' of like-critters? I would think that presentation would be perfect for splats/modules. Anyhow, use the 4 Monstrous manual (the big tome) as a guide - that was as perfect as it gets, IMHO. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 14 Feb 2012 22:57:04 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36884 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 19:51:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Torm and Tyr have always seemed redundant to me, but that's probably just me.
Nope - before even reading your post, I was going to say the same exact thing - Tyr & Torm are redundant, IMHO (at least, in an initial-release, 'bare-bones' deities list).
I personally like Torm, but have little use for Tyr. Helm is the one I find redundant. |
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! |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 20:04:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
IMO, we're making too much of this "Chosen" thing. Chosen is just a word that suggests we're talking about a favored servant, and it's not too big a stretch to think it indicates a mortal into whom a deity might have poured some power.
Just because Mystra's Chosen are *more important* to her than the Chosen of other deities doesn't mean that she should have exclusive use of the term "Chosen."
Debate, MT?
Cheers
I agree and disagree at the same time. I agree with the first paragraph entirely. The second paragraph is because Ed happens to like Mystra, and he wrote stories on her Chosen. I think Bob Salvatore has written about several "Chosen" of Mielikki while not calling them so in name, and he certainly wrote about a "Chosen" of Deneir. So I don't agree that Mystra's are more important to her, rather that they've had more press coverage (such as an entire book written solely about them.)
On your other post, Erik, I'd say that the deities are what makes Faerūn so interesting (in part) and I liked the approach of the original gray box. It described the deities, gave minimal information about them, and then in 2E came Adventures and 3E brought Faiths and Avatars. In other words, for those characters who want to know more about deities, buy a supplemental (quality, hard-cover) book, but list the deities in the FRCG. I'd even support listing areas of interest (versus an alphabetica order) such as this:
Death:
Major Deity: Kelemvor
Minor Deity: Jergal
Knowledge:
Major Deity: Oghma
Minor Deity: Deneir
Magic:
Major Deity: Mystra
Minor Deity: Azuth
Moon:
Major Deity: Selūne
Minor Deity: Eilistraee
Nature:
Major Deities: Chauntea, Sylvanus
Minor Deities: Eldath, Mielikki, Lurue, Gwaeron Windstrom
(et cetera)
Once the inevitable e-edition comes out, one can even link to the deity descriptions directly.
I think you've definitely hit on a great topic, Erik, given the number of posts/alerts I receive on this thread daily. (It even outranks the "Questions for Ed" scroll, but we won't tell Ed. )
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 21:30:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I personally like Torm, but have little use for Tyr. Helm is the one I find redundant.
I agree on Torm over Tyr, partly because Torm is (afaik) Realms-specific and Tyr is imported. Natives are better than interlopers, in my book... specifically for the Realms. Other settings can be more simple and generic, but the Realms was originally written by a guy who never seems to do anything the same way twice in a row. I like that compulsive creativity, and I think it should be embodied in the Realms, not as some kind of hero-worship of Ed but because it's a cool idea and it hasn't been done (effectively?) before. Mystara was headed in this direction with its array of very different cultures, and I suppose Greyhawk was too, but those are (for better or worse) ancient history now.
Helm is at least a different (and less exclusive) alignment. I can see the argument for lumping them together; I just looked at them differently I guess.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
However, look at some of the 'monster groups' presented in the later 3e MMs. Do we really need completely different entries for 'Orc Skirmisher', or 'Orc Behemoth', or 'Orc Archer', or 'Orc Shaman' even? Just tell us about Orcs, and then highlight the differences with their capabilities.
I agree with this, though our conclusions might be different. I like fluff, but the Monster Manuals are rulebooks and therefore should be primarily crunch. There needs to be enough info to see what the monster is about, but describing the history of the species would obviously be taking things too far (for a Monster Manual). I do like the "X in Faerun" sections, when they're a paragraph suggesting some locations where they should appear. I can come up with that stuff on my own, as long as their climate/habitat is given, but I like seeing what the designers come up with.
Exception: Contradictions of Realmslore or when it's obvious that very little thought went into it... not so cool. I know it's easy to be an armchair critic, and hard to generate lore on demand, but... example of a sad result: "Armands in Faerun" in MM3. It's not about pointing fingers... it's about (1) don't put a Realmslore section in the book if you're not going to have someone fact-check it, or if you don't have the time to do so, and (2) have someone else write the Realmslore section if generating new lore isn't your forte. Coming up with interesting critters is awesome too. Everybody should do what they're good at.
Counterpoint: "X in Eberron" is useless to me, and thus results in an inefficient use of space. Solution: Maybe the monster lore should be limited to setting-related books. Not a separate Monster Manual, but something setting-related. It's completely reasonable that the Sword Coast North book should list all the monsters that appear in the Sword Coast North, from all available monster manuals. Lore for monsters invented after the Sword Coast North book is released should be added to a web enhancement. The potential issue here is that this lore automatically becomes canon, whereas it can be easily ignored if it's in a Monster Manual that doesn't have the FR logo. I think the key here is one of the staff Realms gurus needs to okay the Realmslore bits before they get published. That would have fixed the armand problem.
And yes, MT, the 4e Monster Manual looks like the 3e Monster Manual IV and V... separate stat blocks under the same heading, for various classes of goblins, gnolls, ogres, and most everything else. It makes more sense in 4e than it did in 3e, if 4e lacks the system for advancing monsters that 3e has. (I dunno if 4e has a mechanic for that; I just haven't seen it.) I would much prefer to have a general outline of a monster, with notes on advancing it to higher CRs. I like the flexibility that gives me, and I find pregenerated monsters with one specific CR to be dull and uninspiring. Also, taking two pages to list a bunch of variations on the same monster takes up more space than one stat block with notes on advancement... and that inefficiency arouses the cynical conspiracy theorist in me.
Methinks I'm getting kinda far away from Erik's theme. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 21:47:51
|
This question about deities is interesting (and yes, I agree, there should be a 5e Faiths and Pantheons sort of book). Let me ask this:
If you had to pick 12-13 deities to include in the 5e Forgotten Realms Players Guide (or whatever it ends up being called), what would they be? And why? I've already given my list--I'd be interested to see what else people go with. Remember that the kind of baseline assumption is: "These are the deities an adventurer is most likely to worship. Experienced players who know more about the Realms or are willing to delve into the lore can choose any FR deity from the expanded list to worship."
(For the purposes of this discussion, let us assume that ALL Realms deities will get coverage in the 5e DM FR book or a 5e F&P sort of book, and that this list will be sustantive enough to provide portfolios, domains, favored weapons, etc., whatever you need to build your divine PC.)
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" |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 21:50:00
|
I hope they take that back and dont make the FR the core setting..... rather they have no core setting....
ummm for my adventurers in the realms... I hardly use tyr... usually mystra, mielikki, or one of the seldarine plus a few others...
flagship is one thing.... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 14 Feb 2012 : 22:00:52
|
I have created a thread on the question of Player-centered deities in FR: http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16236
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" |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 01:19:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And where was Nobanion then?
Down in the Guthmere, as I recall. I can't check, because I'm away from my copy of that file and WotC moved that page yet again.
From the article Wooly refers to above:-
quote:
In a titanic combat known as the Roar of the Shadows, Nobanion and a handful of Emerald Enclave druids drove Malar north and west from the Gulthmere Forest along the Dragon Coast. Afterwards, Lord Firemane emerged from the Gulthmere to roam the Shining Plains.
|
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
31799 Posts |
Posted - 15 Feb 2012 : 01:20:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
Torm and Tyr have always seemed redundant to me, but that's probably just me.
Nope - before even reading your post, I was going to say the same exact thing - Tyr & Torm are redundant, IMHO (at least, in an initial-release, 'bare-bones' deities list).
I personally like Torm, but have little use for Tyr. Helm is the one I find redundant.
I'm actually a little in the opposite camp. I generally tend to prefer Tyr over Torm. I don't mind Helm too much, but he really doesn't have that much play in my Realms anyway. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3290 Posts |
Posted - 18 Feb 2012 : 05:13:54
|
BUMP!
|
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 04:54:35
|
One Cannon, One Story, One Realms, is the thread that caught my attention enough to start thread hoping around again on Candlekeep. After I read about the financial fortunes of 4ed, I hoped realms would be returning to its glory days. However, after reading several threads and Erik's blog entry this is my attempt at highlighting an issue that end my interest in the realms and could be fixed.
For me the number one deal breaker that end my reading the novels and use of the canon realms was the spell plague. It is the single event that redefines how realms is perceived. Pre-spell plague magic was a natural thing in realms. Without the weave magic would cease to exist and on several occasions the weave was temporarily lost or damaged enough to remove magic from regions or the setting. Mystra and the weave were strongly implied to be one in the same. And this verison of magic was a unique defining feature of the realms, that magic worked differently and was not associated with any kind of stigma. In fact, most of realms was designed with the assumption that magic users always existed. Mystra was in effect the Mother Nature character of realms, tending Faerun's source of life. Any creature with magic abilities relied on the weave elves, dragons etc. Many would become ill in dead magic zones.
The spell plague was a retcon of what magic meant fundamentally in realms. The last explanation of it I read(and back in early 4ed Mr. Baker seemed to be offer a new justification every week for various changes, so I won't be surprised if it changed again) was that Mystra had been basically filtered magic, greedily controlling it for her own purposes and now that the weave was gone "true magic" was available. Which is a complete 180 from all previous lore. My suggestion is if it is acceptable to take the unreliable narrator approach which is used many times by Eric in Contest: Create Forgotten Realmslore! thread to explain bad decisions by the 4ed dev team. Take that approach with spell plague. If you don't want to retcon spell plague away, then make it fit in the setting. Explain it in away that doesn't ignore all the lore that came before it, or use the incredibility lame "New lore trumps old lore" excuse.
This is just my best attempt at writing something that might work and I hope other scribes can add or edit the idea. Magic existed in 4e and it was not exclusively supplied by demons/devils/angels etc, therefore the weave existed. What caused the spell plague? Mystra and the weave are one in the same and Cyric effectively killed the weave's mind and tried to take control of it. Cyric and Shar both could not handle merging with the weave. Shar because of her shadow weave taint and Cyric because he was mentally incapable(or whatever better reason someone can come up with). The weave effectively began to "died or go wild" causing the spell plague. Something was keeping the weave from unraveling and ending magic in the setting, but it took time for that something to gain enough control to allow magic to work similarly to how it worked before.
One suggestion could be that rather than exploding Halruaa, was warned via divination spells(or Mystra directly) of Cyric's plan and planeshifted the majority of their populace to the ethereal plane which disappeared during 4ed, because it was being hidden, by say Azuth(which also explains Azuth absence) or Correllon(Which is why he was holding the magic portfolio). Throughout the hundred year gap that brave group of mages, priests and others fought the beasts of the ethereal plane while also "tending" the weave as best they could. As they got better at it, magic returned close to normal, but not quite the same as before. Why could teleport only take characters a few feet rather than miles? Well, they couldn't make the weave work like it use too. Why did Halruaa get hit so hard by the spell plague? The Halruaan mages knew that most of their populace was "safely" on the ethereal plane and they allowed that portion of the weave to fall by the way side.
Also, this has the benefit of having any characters that were present in the old realms that got erased say the chosen of Mystra for example could have been part of this effort and reintroduced into the setting when a new Mystra ascends. Which there may or may not be rumors of Mystra's return all over these boards. Once Mystra is back, the halruaans or Mystra clean up that part of the weave in Halruaa and Halruaa reappears with a new magic using tradition that has a much deeper understanding of the weave and how it works. Halruaa can become the foil for the Shadovar empire. Both heirs to Nethril's legacy and both forged in the fires of surviving on other planes.
The Halruaa angle was inspired by several suggestions that Halruaa should return on the Contest: Create Forgotten Realmslore! thread. Kill two birds with one stone. I have a few more suggestions, but this post is far to long, so I will post those later. But the core gist of my suggestion is using the unreliable narrator angle,explain the spell-plague while having the weave be the source of all Faerun's magic. I hope that does not become lost in my suggestion of how to accomplish it. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 07:58:27
|
Goodthoughts Tarlyn--thanks much for the input!
The spellplague was, indeed, the focal point of what drove a lot of people away. I do think it was more the time skip, which was sort of a consequence of the spellplague, that was more damaging to the realms. If we'd had the spellplague but no big time jump, I think that wouldn't have driven so many people away. People were being asked to return to a setting that had been--if not severed--at least substantially removed from its older self. I think that one of 5e FR's priorities should be to downplay the spellplague--not remove it, but make it a footnote in history. I think it's time.
I'm unsure about this "weave as the source of all magic" concept--that wasn't the case in pre-spellplague lore. There were numerous other ways mortals accessed magic--the weave was just the most prevalent (like 95% of magic-users). The shadow weave was making a dent there, but there were others too.
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" |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 08:53:20
|
| heavy magic was not reliant on the weave..... just ask Lord KArus...... or not as he might explain it in a way that would make our heads explode...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 09:00:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
The spellplague was, indeed, the focal point of what drove a lot of people away. I do think it was more the time skip, which was sort of a consequence of the spellplague, that was more damaging to the realms. If we'd had the spellplague but no big time jump, I think that wouldn't have driven so many people away. People were being asked to return to a setting that had been--if not severed--at least substantially removed from its older self.
As a representative of the 'driven away'*, I think that Erik is spot on here.
I recognise that I will not agree with all artistic choices made by any author, team of authors or the holder of an IP who hires authors. And I accept that. If a game setting takes a path I don't particularly like, I'll either spin the changes some way that is more fun to me or ignore them. I won't stop using the setting and I won't even stop buying future product, if they are any good.
On the other hand, the value of a detailed setting like the Realms for me lies in the decades of labour that have gone into establishing a layered, textured look at it. Of necessity, because no one has infinite time, not even Ed and the many who have gotten to play in his sandbox, this look was focused at one particular moment** of the world. History before that might be mentioned, as it shaped the present, but the focus was on presenting the people, societies and adventures of today.
We might imagine the Realms of our world existing as a small window into the time of Toril, providing a clear view of one small sliver of time and place, with an emptiness in front of it representing the unknown future and a black shroud with tiny pinpricks of glowing threads extending backwards, representing the slight idea we have of the past of Toril.
Severing the connection between the lighted Realms and establishing an outpost in the emptiness means that the work of Ed's lifetime and a couple of decades of work from a variety of talented authors is relegated to playing the role of the tiny pinpricks, possibly inspiring events of the present by extending a little tendril through the emptiness, but essentially not having much to do with the new setting.
All the current clack, adventure seeds, intriguing plots and political and economic conditions of the 1300s are useless in the new setting. Any 'normal people', i.e. human NPCs without ultra-powerful magic, are dead. Any NPCs that live will have a whole century of new history, which is usually long enough to make them different people with different goals, personalities, allegiances and careers (probably 'retired' in many cases).
Most of the nations, even those that bear the same names, will be changed so much that they are hardly recognisable. In fact, by volume or by utility, far more than 99% of the published Realms so far is gone by the passage of time.
And because the new Realms are so far removed from the old ones, any lore from them will be ill-suited to anyone continuing to game in the old ones. Adventure ideas, characters and even the texture of places presented in supplements for the 1400s will not fit the 1300s and nor should they. These are different times, with different people.
In theory, if we had enough authors, enough time and enough resources, we could detail a far larger part of Toril's history than just the 1340-1370s as well as Ed managed for that time. We might even make the 1400s more interesting than the 1300s. But until enough detailed lore for the 1400s is published to match or at least approach the texture of the earlier time, it is no good to me. And realistically, that would require well over 20 man-years from Ed or someone as inspired, diligent and prolific.
In the absence of that, anything published under the name of the Realms has to have lore useful to me when playing in the 1300s to appeal to me (and I suspect a lot of other scribes). Whether or not it mentioned Spellplagues would be largely a matter of indifference to me.
*I haven't bought a Realms supplement since GHotR and when novels started being set so long after the 1300s that most ordinary people living then would be dead, I lost interest in them too.
**While the 18 years between 1357-1375 might seem a long time, they are a moment when considered on the scale of world history.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm unsure about this "weave as the source of all magic" concept--that wasn't the case in pre-spellplague lore. There were numerous other ways mortals accessed magic--the weave was just the most prevalent (like 95% of magic-users). The shadow weave was making a dent there, but there were others too.
I agree. The Weave has always been presented as an 'operating system' for accessing magic, not the sole possible source. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 15:55:38
|
Well said, Icelander, though I think we might be overstating the disconnect here. While obviously the 2008 4e Realms were an intentional jump so as to "wipe the slate clean," so to speak, the Realms as we know them today are heavily connected to the Realms as we knew them five years ago. Some products make the syncronicity clear, while others follow the original intention of taking advantage of the time jump to shrug off restriction and tell brand new stories that (at least in theory) truly reflect the realms. To me, both approaches are equally valuable: whether your work is strongly steeped in history or only lightly tinged. I don't want readers to have to be realms wonks to share this setting that has provided me so much enjoyment, but I also want there to be all the good lore-rich stuff hardcore fans crave. Difficult, this duality of function? Sure. Doable? Absolutely.
IMO the real test isn't how heavily researched or lore-rich or even creative a story is--it's about whether it captures the heart and soul of the realms. And I firmly believe any story set in any timeline can do that with flying colors.
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" |
|
|
|
Azuth
Senior Scribe
USA
404 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 20:20:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Well said, Icelander, though I think we might be overstating the disconnect here. While obviously the 2008 4e Realms were an intentional jump so as to "wipe the slate clean," so to speak, the Realms as we know them today are heavily connected to the Realms as we knew them five years ago. Some products make the syncronicity clear, while others follow the original intention of taking advantage of the time jump to shrug off restriction and tell brand new stories that (at least in theory) truly reflect the realms. To me, both approaches are equally valuable: whether your work is strongly steeped in history or only lightly tinged. I don't want readers to have to be realms wonks to share this setting that has provided me so much enjoyment, but I also want there to be all the good lore-rich stuff hardcore fans crave. Difficult, this duality of function? Sure. Doable? Absolutely.
IMO the real test isn't how heavily researched or lore-rich or even creative a story is--it's about whether it captures the heart and soul of the realms. And I firmly believe any story set in any timeline can do that with flying colors.
Cheers
My concern, which was validated, was the discontinuance of new Realms books. I thoroughly enjoyed Bob Salvatore's books, but Cadderly couldn't possibly live that long. The loss of Deneir further compounds matters. While I like Drizzt, I liked the dynamics between all the characters. With the death of all but him, I feel as if many would-be excellent stories were "stolen" from me. Elminster sort of stands alone, but the loss of the synergies of the Seven Sisters also broke what had been a great tool for me as a DM, and my hopes for a follow-up to Silverfall.
As I've said before, I would much have preferred something akin to Ravenloft where these new things are a demiplane of the Realms. Without our history, we are nothing. We are a collection of memories as people, and when a swath of those memories become irrelevant, large majorities of us instinctively rebel.
95% is enough for me to say that The Weave is the source of magic. To be told that it's now the other 5% that matters, and not have details on what it is... That's too much ambiguity. I can make up my own worlds without shelling out money. I used the Realms specifically because of, not in spite of, the rich lore.
Just my cantrip on the subject,
Azuth |
Azuth, the First Magister
Lord of All Spells
The greatest expression of creativity is through Art.
Offense can never be given, only taken. |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 20:25:17
|
| The rich lore was kinda the point of the Realms. It kinda seems like they changed the Realms to pander to people who didn't like the Realms. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2012 : 20:50:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Most of the nations, even those that bear the same names, will be changed so much that they are hardly recognisable.
One would have a hard time believing this after having a look at articles like Backdrop: Cormyr.
I think it comes down to how a Dungeon Master views the Realms. I've run into many people who seem to view Realmslore as static; something set in the impervious stone of the Realms timeline.
Myself, I don't take such a hard view of things. I prefer to play up the best parts of the Realms with an eye towards what my players know about the setting before play starts.
It's very liberating as a Realms DM to be able to take the best of what the Realms has to offer and really use it in play. Granted the post-Spellplague Realms is light on lore when compared to the dearth of older era books, but it has plenty of good stuff to use.
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
And because the new Realms are so far removed from the old ones, any lore from them will be ill-suited to anyone continuing to game in the old ones. Adventure ideas, characters and even the texture of places presented in supplements for the 1400s will not fit the 1300s and nor should they.
I've no doubt this is true for you, but you give too little credit to gamers like me as well as the greater mass of at large gamers, who know full well good ideas can and do come from anywhere.
Just so I don't seem entirely contrary, I agree that yes, the post-Spellplague Realms is a different time with different people, but it's still the Realms.
To return to Cormyr: what makes Cormyr Cormyr isn't just a mass of published material covering a roughly 40 year period in its history; it's the full history of the place, from the time before the first Obarskyr ruled through to the current era where King Foril rules.
When I read the various Elminster Novels set in post-Spellplague Cormyr, the Backdrop articles (covering Cormyr and Suzail), Brian Cortijo's (and others) recent Cormyr articles and those of Ed's Eye on the Realms articles that touch on Cormyr, all I see is Cormyr.
I don't see a division or break that somehow makes it impossible for me to do what I am currently doing: running a pre-Spellplague D&D game set in Cormyr that mixes pre- and post-Spellplague lore.
One Canon. One Story. One Realms. When the work of game designers is done carefully, it all fits together and it's all quite useful. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 21 Feb 2012 01:01:38 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 01:15:41
|
And that's what I'd like to see--work done carefully, that fits together, and is all quite useful.
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" |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 04:05:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Design products that are open to use with any edition or era you want should include baseline design for most of the book (70%) with a section for lore added-on to support any particular era (10% for each of three eras).
So for instance, a CORMYR sourcebook will contain 70% lore about the kingdom of Cormyr's lands, political structure, history, nobility, armies, etc., etc., everything you need to know to build a campaign there for any timeline, and 30% lore for three different eras in Cormyr's history (10% each): basically, a plug-in to run Cormyr in that particular era.
I like the concept of this quote in theory, but I am interested how it would work in practice. The Cormyr source book works really well in the multiple editions format. Cormyr did not change that drastically from 2ed-4ed(I can't speak for 1 ed because I never played in it). This allows the 70% shared to work really well. However, how does this model approach Thay and Halruaa which are drastically different? Or Mulhorand and Unther and their 4ed counterparts that have nothing to do with each other at all? Also, how does this approach deal with NPCS? Are they mentioned at all and in how much detail? |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Rils
Learned Scribe
USA
108 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 19:38:43
|
I think it still works, you'd just have to adjust for the specifics a little bit. Say we're talking about Thay, you still have the history of the nation from its origins to the late 1400s. And then the "snapshots" are maybe Thay in it's early days, Thay in the 1380s, and Thay in the 1480s. Each of these will look substantially different, but the history section covers the evolution of the nation over time, or in other words "How We Got From Point A to Point C."
Nations like Mulhorand might be covered in more of a regional book, say, "Nations of the Eastern Seaboard". This book may be split differently; a history and snapshot of Mulhorand pre-spellplague, and a (shorter) history and snapshot of High Imasker post-spellplague.
Cormyr of course has received a lot of love over the years, and has quite a bit more material prepared for it, hence why it (typically) gets it's own book. More often you have larger areas like "The Shining South" or the "The Silver Marches". You can use a similar format, just maybe the percentage of the material in each section adjusts. The history of the area as a whole might be a little shorter, and more generic. You might even have 1-page maps of the region at various moments in time, ie the 1380s, the 1480s, etc. Then the snapshots of various nations take a bigger percentage of the book. "The Shining South" would have sections for Calimshan, Tethyr, and Amn, each with its sub-history and triple-highlight section.
As a real-world example, think of it as writing a general book on the "History of Europe", and including a couple of chapters specific to nations like Gemany, France, and the UK. You still get the general gist of how things changed over time, as well as some more specific info on specific nations. Other things like smaller countries or specific regimes may get glossed over in the regional book, which (back to the FR now) could be expounded on in DDI articles or future supplements.
This isn't really a new idea, tbh. Timelines and "current event" sections have been integral parts of sourcebooks since day 1. The idea here is in unifying the editions through common sourcebooks, so that one sourcebook can service pre- and post-spellplague (taking that as the assumed major dividing line). Unless I totally missed the point of this conversation. :) |
Dugmaren Brightmantle is my homey. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2012 : 23:11:45
|
Nope, you got it, Rils.
Re npcs: certain npcs are iconic enough that they can be discussed as enduring aspects of the position. For instance Waterdeep would discuss the Blackstaff, and note that the first and most famous to hold the post is Khelben. A dalelands book will discuss Elminster and Storm as timeless fixtures. Cormyr has a whole section on the Obarskyrs, Thay and environs will discuss Szass Tam and the Simbul, the Moonsea will discuss Manshoon and Fzoul, the north Alustriel, etc. Timeline specific npcs get discussed in the timeline sections.
Etc.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 02:05:03
|
one thing is to not be afraid to just explain away (using old lore) the silly stuff that was not Realmsian but was just put in to grab the new era MMO fans
such as (but not limited to) worshipping or siphoning power from an outerspace alien in Vaasa?!?
how did this get by all of the Realmsian-like checks and balances? ... I can imagine Ed's face when he first read this
so perhaps the Warlock Knights thought it was an alien but in actuality some leftover Witchking artifact was leaking power, manifestation of Zhengyi returned, new Orcus influence in the region etc
this is just one example ... WotC just needs to look at these instances and say "this was a royal screwup in Realmsian 'feel' and we will fix it" |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 02:42:34
|
dragonborn:
i can live with this race if we have a 'reason' behind them
bahamut and tiamat 'creations' in their eternal war; some year of rogue dragon/kingkiller star magic gone awry; cult of the dragon breeding program; etc |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
coach
Senior Scribe
USA
479 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 05:03:25
|
i just read this whole thread:
ideas i liked that perhaps could be combined:
1) for the entire setting ... set the default date somewhere in the 1480's (keep new fans) .. but drop all the silly MMO crap from canon
2) then have official "mini-settings" (or dare i say 'Adventure Paths') releases of other eras (-160 to -150DR Raumathar vs Narfell, 1482-1487DR War in Abeir, 710-714DR the Fall of Myth Drannor, -25000DR Ostoria vs Dragon Kingdoms, -300 the Heighth of Jhaamdeth, etc, etc, etc (new and old fans)
3) have a special emphasis (i.e. more than half) of these mini-settings adventures occuring between 1348 and 1385 (regain old fans)
4) lore heavy regional books ( i'd go 40% general and 20% ancient, 20% 1300's, and 20% 1400's ) (new and old fans) ... and these regional books will be produced for all major regions and will fill in gaps
5) Ed's book (regain old fans) ... he must be allowed 100% freedom, no editing, no cutting, we will pay whatever you charge up to $149.99, it needs to be at least as big as AEG's world's greatest dungeon and world's greatest city ... umm combined ... yeah
6) lore heavy former setting and settings-never-detailed books (maztica, al-qadim, osse, karatur, etc) same format as regional books except smaller and cheaper (these wont be money makers just break even) (new and old fans)
7) very nice looking Realms Bestiary, Realms Deities, Realms NPC books (for all eras)
i'll think of more later |
Bloodstone Lands Sage |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 05:59:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by coach
i just read this whole thread:
ideas i liked that perhaps could be combined:
1) for the entire setting ... set the default date somewhere in the 1480's (keep new fans) .. but drop all the silly MMO crap from canon
2) then have official "mini-settings" (or dare i say 'Adventure Paths') releases of other eras (-160 to -150DR Raumathar vs Narfell, 1482-1487DR War in Abeir, 710-714DR the Fall of Myth Drannor, -25000DR Ostoria vs Dragon Kingdoms, -300 the Heighth of Jhaamdeth, etc, etc, etc (new and old fans)
3) have a special emphasis (i.e. more than half) of these mini-settings adventures occuring between 1348 and 1385 (regain old fans)
4) lore heavy regional books ( i'd go 40% general and 20% ancient, 20% 1300's, and 20% 1400's ) (new and old fans) ... and these regional books will be produced for all major regions and will fill in gaps
5) Ed's book (regain old fans) ... he must be allowed 100% freedom, no editing, no cutting, we will pay whatever you charge up to $149.99, it needs to be at least as big as AEG's world's greatest dungeon and world's greatest city ... umm combined ... yeah
6) lore heavy former setting and settings-never-detailed books (maztica, al-qadim, osse, karatur, etc) same format as regional books except smaller and cheaper (these wont be money makers just break even) (new and old fans)
7) very nice looking Realms Bestiary, Realms Deities, Realms NPC books (for all eras)
i'll think of more later
I like this... although for #2, rather than actual adventures, I would simply provide adventure hooks and hints and tips for the DM for each. This takes up less room... meaning there can be more of them. And for #7, I'm not sure we need different monster books for different eras. Deities and NPCs, possibly, but monsters of any sort should be able to fit into any era (the sole exception that I can think of being the Shades prior to the 3E timeline, and in many ways they're really just a special case of an existing, timeline/setting-independent creature type).
Edit: And for point #5: Keep the page count reasonable, but make sure that it's book #1 of however many it takes to publish all currently-extant Ed-lore. I'd say 250-300 pages per volume would be good, and if there are going to be that many volumes, we should probably keep the price somewhat reasonable, coach. But still, I'll buy the whole series either way.
Excellent ideas, Coach. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 22 Feb 2012 06:02:04 |
|
|
|
Rils
Learned Scribe
USA
108 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2012 : 06:26:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Re npcs: certain npcs are iconic enough that they can be discussed as enduring aspects of the position. For instance Waterdeep would discuss the Blackstaff, and note that the first and most famous to hold the post is Khelben. A dalelands book will discuss Elminster and Storm as timeless fixtures. Cormyr has a whole section on the Obarskyrs, Thay and environs will discuss Szass Tam and the Simbul, the Moonsea will discuss Manshoon and Fzoul, the north Alustriel, etc. Timeline specific npcs get discussed in the timeline sections.
Yeah that - NPCs get discussed under an appropriate location guide, with a "they were active from 12xxDR to 14xxDR" timestamp. You could do the same for cities, deities, anything really - "Lathander was worshipped from xxDR to xxDR, when it was revealed to his clergy that..." or "Myrkul was generally assumed to have risen as a power in xxDR, and in the ToT he was presumed slain by abc but later..."
Just because something or someone is tied to a certain point int he timeline doesn't mean they can't be highlighted, even if it's only a sidebar. History is history - significant things happen, then life goes on. |
Dugmaren Brightmantle is my homey. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
