| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 03:16:33
|
I want two things from Cormyr: an actual campaign setting (ala Neverwinter) and/or the Royal Lineage. 
Well, I mean, I have the lineage on my computer, but I want it to be PUBLISHED and Brian's extensive work recognized and rewarded.
I'm not going to deny that a lot of info has been released about Cormyr--that's one of my considerations, actually. A campaign setting book would allow us to FOCUS all the info out there about Cormyr. Say you wanted to run a campaign in Cormyr--you'd have to scramble around for all sorts of information from all different corners. With a Campaign Setting book, you wouldn't need anything but that book, and it would of course have an impressive set of "references" where you could look to get more information.
Waterdeep is the same way.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 05:53:35
|
Exactly - this is what I was getting at in my wishlist thread. Even if they don't go with the meta-setting approach, they can still release every regional book as if it was a campaign guide unto itself. They become far more useful, and the setting becomes more modular.
And whether they plan to do a meta-setting or not (dropping the FR logo), it will still happen subconsciously, because products will no longer have the setting-names on them. New Players will only see a "Heroes of the Heartlands' (Cormyr) sourcebook, a 'Tyr Region' sourcebook (Darksun), a 'Dragon Wars' sourcebook (Krynn), a 'Five Kingdoms' sourcebook, etc, etc... and even though at least half the regional splats will be set on the same planet (Toril), no-one will really have to know that, except us grognards.
New players will learn these things as they go along, and DM's could simply use the "now you're over here" approach when buying a new sourcebook (which means the world that setting guide is set on will matter very little, except for us old-timers who 'know better'). DMs will slowly build their own worlds, laid-out completely by the sourcebooks they buy (which is the ultimate version of PoL). When I first started DMing, I always used that approach - plunking the players down right near where the adventure was located. Long, cross-country treks are only fun for older groups who are 'serious RPGers'; youngsters just want action and prizes, so the 'pick a setting, any setting' approach works - you don't even need an explanation to link them, really (for game purposes).
We might care that our characters just walked from Waterdeep to Sharn, but would a group of 14 year olds really care? And this is coming from someone who eats and breaths maps. The meta-setting will happen, I would just prefer it have 'Forgotten Realms' all over it.
And for those of you who protest that The Forgotten Realms will become diluted... just where is the line where they end? Toril? Realmspace? Abeir (which is in another dimension)? The cosmology? If you don't include Abeir (because its not even in the same solar system), then that means Maztica is not a 'forgotten realm', correct? If you do include Abeir, that means EVERY potential locale has to be included (and for all we know Abeir could be Athas, or Eberron, or any number of worlds). Are Kara-Tur and Zakhara 'forgotten realms'?
I can find more connections to Krynn and Oerth in old-edition products then I can to Returned Abeir, so doesn't that mean they should be more a part of the 'forgotten realms' then Abeir is? What about Saurials? They are recent interlopers from another world - they aren't part of the Realms, are they? Asmodeus ate Azuth... but Wait! Doesn't Asmodeus live in hell? Is hell part of the realms? if not, then that lore couldn't possibly be 'Forgotten Realms canon', right? It doesn't take place there at all. Grazzt kidnapped Waukeen, and he is Iuz's daddy - does that mean Iuz (from Greyhawk) is FR canon?
You see what I mean? you can't draw the line at Faerun - its already too interconnected. Every time you push the line further out from the 'core', you have to make exceptions, and more and more lore gets folded into 'the realms'. D&D already is one mega-setting, and has been since 2e - its about time they recognize that. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 20 Apr 2012 21:12:47 |
|
|
|
EltonJ
Learned Scribe
USA
101 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 18:09:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Basically, help me build a single, sweeping, panoramic Realms that is stronger and more vibrant than ever before. One Canon, One Story, One Realms
Before you ask, yes, I've read the other threads, and I think this one is sufficiently *different* from those to have some value as a thread. I also felt there were a lot of threads out there that said "how would you reboot it?" or "how would you change it?" being answered by "reboot!" as though it's just that easy.
<snip, snip>
Cheers
Well, here is what I would do with the Spellplague.
Number 1 -- the Spellplague happened, but GMs can choose to say: "It didn't happen in my game." The Spellplague may be official, but it should be up to the DM to say as to it happened or not.
Number 2 -- An extension of number 1, each and every realms game is to be treated as an Alternate Version of the official World. The Realms should be interpreted by the Many Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics -- there are an infinite number of Torils and Abeirs, and the Official One is just one where they crossed; but this needs to be stressed. When a DM purchases a Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting or Guide, that becomes his own realms and his own sandbox. Thus if the Spellplague didn't happen in your Realms, [b]it didn't happen.[b]
Number 3 -- Write the Realms as one cohesive whole and offer options to play in different eras. Like I'm really interested as to what happened while Magrathea the Mad stalked through history -- she/he has only one entry in the timeline, and wasn't at all mentioned. Why was he/she so important?
Number 4 --Rebooting the Realms can be easy, just say that the DMs have control over how they interpret the realms. For me, my Realms diverges at 1372 DR where I started my campaign. Instead of the Spellplague, I can do a Wizards' War where the Forgotten Realms' wizards are at war with each other (I have plans for such a grand war. Every Wizard and Magus officially at War in the Realms. And it was declared by Manshoon.)
Instead, I'm working with Chessenta right now; before the Year of the Rage of Dragons. In my Realms, Cimbar is a Roman Republic, so the return of Tchazzar is going to be an interesting homecoming . . .
I'm running out of ideas, I'll add more as they come. :) |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 20:42:36
|
Totally on board with you, EltonJ!
I think I see what you're saying, MT, and there's some good stuff there!
All in all, the modular campaign approach seems to be the way to go. A regional campaign sourcebook supports multiple eras, because you can *apply it* to multiple eras. You might want to change the names or factions or whatever in the book to fit your game, but how is that different from what the DM does anyway? And every sourcebook of course includes a timeline with events about that region/city to aid DMs in crafting a game in a different era.
It's kinda like the 3.5 City of Splendors book, only more focused on actually running a campaign in that city. Think 3.5 CoS + 4e Neverwinter CS = 5e regional sourcebook campaign guides (RSCGs).
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 21:38:04
|
Right.
The only people who have to care whether two sourcebooks are on the same world or not are people like us... and will that stop us anyway, if we hear good things about an Eberron book, or a Darksun one?
The Forgotten Realms did something first that no other setting ever did - it was several (6 + 1 sub-setting) settings all set on the same planet. Normally, in the past, it was setting = world. That is no longer the case. When Ed ran it, the Forgotten Realms wasn't even (Abeir-)Toril - it was just Faerun (and mythical Evermeet 'to the west'). It has been growing since the day TSR purchased it.
For us here on Earth, ALL D&D settings should be part of "The Forgotten Realms", because it fits the theme. I am totally on-board with the 'one setting for all' WotC strategy - I just think calling it all 'D&D' is the wrong direction to go in (for the regional splats - the rules should all still be 'Dungeons & Dragons').
Even if they just give the damn name a nod in the 5e PHB and DMG; something like this:
Beyond our world lie myriad others - places just beyond reach, with fantastic creatures that you can sometimes catch out of the corner of your eye. They are right beside us, and yet unimaginably far, all at the same time. There are regions of despair, and paradises full of wonder, places were the elements still rage unchecked, and vast planes of endless sameness and monotony. Realms devastated by war and bloodshed, and others pristine primordial vistas where no man has ever tread. There are heavens and hells, and all the places in-between; places long-sought by mortals, the paths to them lost in the mists of time. These are the worlds of D&D, these are The Forgotten Realms".
FR is not a world - it never was... its a concept. Run with THAT.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 20 Apr 2012 21:43:37 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 21:58:44
|
I don't want all settings to be one, or to be part of the Realms.
I'm happy with Dark Sun, and Eber-whatsit, and Krynn, and any other one being distinctly different. Use Planescape or Spelljammer to connect them, but don't make them all the Realms. The second you do that, you'll have people trying to build lightning rails in Cormyr or teaching defiler magic to Red Wizards, with the justification "it's all the same setting, so what's the difference?"
Settings are distinct for a reason: because the flavor of Krynn is not the flavor of the Realms, and neither matches the flavor of Athas. If you make all settings one, then there's nothing to distinguish them from each other. The unique feel and features of the settings will be lost or shared, and there won't be a difference between playing Harpers in Waterdeep or the Legion of Steel in Neraka.
Throwing everything in to one pot is the best way to lose the individual distinct characteristics. And if you take away the flavor, you take away the appeal. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 22:59:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I don't want all settings to be one, or to be part of the Realms.
I'm happy with Dark Sun, and Eber-whatsit, and Krynn, and any other one being distinctly different. Use Planescape or Spelljammer to connect them, but don't make them all the Realms. The second you do that, you'll have people trying to build lightning rails in Cormyr or teaching defiler magic to Red Wizards, with the justification "it's all the same setting, so what's the difference?"
Settings are distinct for a reason: because the flavor of Krynn is not the flavor of the Realms, and neither matches the flavor of Athas. If you make all settings one, then there's nothing to distinguish them from each other. The unique feel and features of the settings will be lost or shared, and there won't be a difference between playing Harpers in Waterdeep or the Legion of Steel in Neraka.
Throwing everything in to one pot is the best way to lose the individual distinct characteristics. And if you take away the flavor, you take away the appeal.
I agree with Wooly on this. I am okay with taking the regions/nations of the Realms and turning them into mini settings, but I do not like the idea of putting the other campaign settings who already have their own IP under the IP of the Realms. I like the Realms because it is the Realms. And I like Eberron because it is Eberron. And I do not even mind the idea of travel from one to the other via established means (i.e. Planescape and Spelljammer). But I do not want to see Eberron products under the FR logo, as much as I do not want to see FR products under the Eberron logo. Plus, I think that this would actually infuriate and further drive a wedge between consumers who prefer the other settings consumers of the Realms. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 20 Apr 2012 : 23:10:26
|
and when does it no longer become teh realms at such a point that every thing and anything that was created for another setting gets shoe horned in.
I'm not against have a mini settings either( I do think that they shouldn't be called settings but a FR settig if its the realms opr a DS setting if its dark sen, etc) but like Hawkins, I'm with Wooly |
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 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 04:05:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The only people who have to care whether two sourcebooks are on the same world or not are people like us...
Just chiming in here that when I was 14 it mattered to me what world a book was set in.
Yes, I collected everything I could get my hands on, but my interest in the worlds of D&D came from the fact that each setting was different.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I am totally on-board with the 'one setting for all' WotC strategy - I just think calling it all 'D&D' is the wrong direction to go in
The idea of being able to visit all other worlds through the Realms is intriguing. It sort of sets up the Realms as a window through which to view other campaign settings.
Two things though:
1) I think some of those worlds do have the strength to stand on their own, in the sense that they offer stuff the Realms does not.
2) "D&D" is by far a stronger brand than "Forgotten Realms".
One reason why Wizards of the Coast reduced the large footprint of campaign settings when they released 3rd Edition D&D was to get rid of the glut of worlds. There were too many products competing with each other on the shelves, too many niche books with a limited customer base and very concrete divisions between customers over what they would and would not buy.
Fast forward to now and I don't think your average D&D customer thinks of themselves as only a Realms fan or an Eberron fan. Rather, they just like D&D. They likely know each world is distinct and are probably already comfortable with the idea of mixing and matching to suit their play needs.
Within the brand of D&D you have the campaign settings, but those settings should never, ever, trump the core brand.
I would like to see the Realms reign supreme because it's the best campaign setting ever, but I think pushing for that is bad for the game. What's bad for the game is bad for the Realms. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 21 Apr 2012 04:06:24 |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6689 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 05:19:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Within the brand of D&D you have the campaign settings, but those settings should never, ever, trump the core brand.
That business model worked a treat in 4E. So much so that the next edition got announced the quickest of all edition changes ...
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6689 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 05:48:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Now for a question, @ Erik and George (and other published/official 'types' who care to chime-in) - have any of you considered my idea of a 'greater Forgotten Realms' meta-setting? I was hoping to hear some feedback, or pro's and con's.
I've considered it, but I've never been the fan of the idea. And, respectfully, you're not the first to have it and it has in the past been implemented, albeit to a lesser degree.
The problem is the conduit - the planes. Planar cosmology is a biggie. It is well-defined, detailed and all encompassing. So much so that people have long subordinated the campaign setting to the Planes. My Realms does not have the TSR/WotC planar baggage attached to it. How can it when I know exactly how Ed's Nine Hells interface with the Realms? An interface that is not reproduced in the Planescape view of the planes.
If the FR "meta-setting" was implemented only by way of gates/portals (easily controllable by DMs to suit their campaign needs) rather than having a planar flavour, then I would be more amenable to the idea, but truly, it does little for me.
The Realms is the Realms, Greyhawk is Greyhawk, etc. etc. In game terms, let individual DMs decide how much "over the hill" factor their games and campaigns will have. If they want to give their PCs the chance to travel to the Pomarj when they've started out in the Dripping Dagger in Waterdeep, they'll work out the how and whys of that happening. As long as the Dripping Dagger has some campaign meat to it in the published products and so too does the Pomarj, the rest is superfluous IMO. They don't need WotC to tell them how to do it, or by making the Realms the centre of the universe, ram it down people's throats.
As I've said a few times previously, they just need to write damn good FR products for the FR fans with enough great gaming ideas, lore, mechanics and flavour that will compel non-FR fans to borrow and steal. In my opinion the absolute best way to do this is to stop blowing up the world and concentrate on the staples of gaming and pack them with FR flavour that translates. What DM wouldn't love to use a properly detailed dwarven hold with maps, ideas about the society within, trade stuff, names, mining stuff, traps, weapons, battle tactics, new spells, magic items, and dwarven crunch? The fact that all this information comes with big fat gobs of FR lore dripping off it which is easily sheared off if the stuff is being cannibalised for another setting or homebrew, is what will make the Realms work in the new edition.
How about an elven tree village, an orc tribe, a merchant coster, a wizard cabal, a thieves guild, an order of knights, a druid circle, etc. etc? Let the fantasy staples, the bread and butter of gaming experiences, shine in the new Realms. Give them great FR roots, history and lore but make them transplantable. In my view, this is what will bring success to the FR gaming line should it get a go in 5E.
Something for the Realms fans, something for the D&D fans. It should be win win if it's done well.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
Edited by - George Krashos on 21 Apr 2012 05:55:57 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 06:26:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
That business model worked a treat in 4E. So much so that the next edition got announced the quickest of all edition changes
To be clear, the business model of publishing next to no paper-based Realms products during the run of the current edition of the D&D game isn't what I was talking about.
I like to think 4th Edition would have lasted longer had Wizards of the Coast done more for the Realms (and other campaign settings) than publishing a campaign guide and players guide and then calling it a day.
I want WotC to publish more Realms books in 5E, I just don't want them to put the setting ahead of the D&D brand.
It should be "within D&D there are fantastic worlds to play in" and not "within the Realms there are fantastic worlds to play in." |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6689 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 11:14:58
|
Jeremy, agreed.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 16:36:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
As I've said a few times previously, they just need to write damn good FR products for the FR fans with enough great gaming ideas, lore, mechanics and flavour that will compel non-FR fans to borrow and steal. In my opinion the absolute best way to do this is to stop blowing up the world and concentrate on the staples of gaming and pack them with FR flavour that translates. What DM wouldn't love to use a properly detailed dwarven hold with maps, ideas about the society within, trade stuff, names, mining stuff, traps, weapons, battle tactics, new spells, magic items, and dwarven crunch? The fact that all this information comes with big fat gobs of FR lore dripping off it which is easily sheared off if the stuff is being cannibalised for another setting or homebrew, is what will make the Realms work in the new edition.
How about an elven tree village, an orc tribe, a merchant coster, a wizard cabal, a thieves guild, an order of knights, a druid circle, etc. etc? Let the fantasy staples, the bread and butter of gaming experiences, shine in the new Realms. Give them great FR roots, history and lore but make them transplantable. In my view, this is what will bring success to the FR gaming line should it get a go in 5E.
Something for the Realms fans, something for the D&D fans. It should be win win if it's done well.
-- George Krashos
Well said, friend Krash, very well said! I would "like" or "+1" this post, if that was an option! |
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! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Apr 2012 : 17:26:05
|
Well said, Krash. I'm glad to have your voice in this thread!
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2012 : 17:49:51
|
I think some of what I am getting-at is getting lost, to varying degrees, by each reader (which I can understand, because it is a very convoluted concept).
I am not saying to mix the worlds - I am saying to ignore them as a focal point on the covers of splats. They obviously plan to do this, regardless - I was just trying to 'stretch' the FR branding beyond its normal parameters (and also pointed out everyone would probably disagree at exactly where FR stops, and other worlds begin). I am trying to save the Realms brand - I think dropping it completely is a HUGE mistake.
And as I said, FR =/= Faerun, or even (Abeir-(Toril) - "The Forgotten Realms" is a concept, and we've already seen realms come and go, and get swapped around. How is this any different?
@Jeremy - having a more well known brand is NOT the same as 'good branding'. I am very surprised you (and anyone at at WotC) hasn't realized yet there is far more negativity associated with 'D&D' then anything positive. Just go to any cartoon, movie, TV program, comic, story, etc where 'D&D Players' are show-cased - they are NEVER, EVER portrayed in a positive light. Don't let your own love of the hobby cloud your judgement. Average people are turned-off by 'D&D'. For instance, slapping 'D&D' on a movie at this point would be box-office poison, IMHO.
@Hawkins (and others) - why would it bother you if I put a lghtening rail in Cormyr? I don't work for WotC, so none of that would become official - would you refuse to talk to me anymore because I don't play FR the way you do? I do not understand this point of contention at all. I am not saying to mix everything together, I am saying that by placing the actual world settings are on secondary to the individual sourcebooks, it eliminates a lot of the perceived entitlement. Folks will still know which setting is on which world - i wouldn't want to lose that either. but for new players, who are just looking for 'kewl stuff', why would it matter? The individual canon for each setting/sourcebook would still be world-specific, but it needn't be emphasized to the point where certain folks won't buy it just for that reason.
They plan to do this anyway - its obvious (to me). I would just like the entire concept of 'Forgotten Realms' to be a part of the brand - it is THE BEST PART. I don't want it getting washed-out in 5e. They tried the "everything is just D&D now" approach in 4e, an we all saw how successful that was. I am also not saying to over-emphasize the FR thing - just present it in such a way to be useful to groups who aren't so hung-up on what world they are on (which would be just about any new players). It becomes a tool, using it as a hub - nothing more. Tools don't need to be used, they merely provide options.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Apr 2012 16:15:06 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 22 Apr 2012 : 19:28:37
|
I guess I still don't get what you're saying, then, if you're saying that stretching the FR brand to include everything isn't the same as including everything...
And for the lightning rail thing... If you want that in your Cormyr, that's fine. I'm saying that I don't want the FR brand stretched to the point that there is no canon reason to avoid having a lightning rail in Cormyr. Saying that everything is FR means you could mix and match settings, and make the Realms into the patchwork quilt I always perceived Oerth to be.
For me, one of the strengths of the Realms has been the fact that it does all mesh together, into one cohesive whole. If you expand the parameters of what is the Realms, that cohesiveness is going to be lost. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 01:22:50
|
| I think what Markus is saying is that the Forgotten Realms could be viewed as a concept and not a proper title. Literally Realms that have been Forgotten (by those of us on Earth). In which case, Krynn, Oerth, Athas, etc all qualify even though they are different planets/dimensions/crystal spheres/what have you. And as part of that they are all still connected (I imagine primarily through The Planes) in one way or another. It isn't making all of them part of Toril, it's expanding the concept to fit the other worlds. Kind of the reverse of every time The Realms has had to adapt to fit the rules, only in this case it's only an additional part of the name for the other settings. They would remain distinct and seperate, but there would officially be a connection beyond the rules. If I understand Markus correctly. And having said that, I can see some merit to it as the FR name is possibly viewed more positively than D&D and beyond that the concept does fit. |
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 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3768 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 02:48:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by EltonJ
I'm running out of ideas, I'll add more as they come. :)
-All of these things are already "in play", or whatever you want to call it. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 04:51:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tyrant
I think what Markus is saying is that the Forgotten Realms could be viewed as a concept and not a proper title. Literally Realms that have been Forgotten (by those of us on Earth). In which case, Krynn, Oerth, Athas, etc all qualify even though they are different planets/dimensions/crystal spheres/what have you. And as part of that they are all still connected (I imagine primarily through The Planes) in one way or another. It isn't making all of them part of Toril, it's expanding the concept to fit the other worlds. Kind of the reverse of every time The Realms has had to adapt to fit the rules, only in this case it's only an additional part of the name for the other settings. They would remain distinct and seperate, but there would officially be a connection beyond the rules. If I understand Markus correctly. And having said that, I can see some merit to it as the FR name is possibly viewed more positively than D&D and beyond that the concept does fit.
I don't think that's true to the spirit of the Realms. Part of the idea is that much real-world folklore comes from the Realms, a land we once knew but have since forgotten... The idea has been built in, from the beginning, that the Realms have (or had) connections to Earth. That's just not the case for the other settings. |
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! |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3768 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 16:36:58
|
| -Eberron is the opposite, really. With it's 'special' Planes, and afterlife, and deities that are generally unconventional in comparison to other settings, lumping it in with other worlds would be kind of problematic. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know) |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 17:21:44
|
Tyrant got it dead-on.
Wooly - I understand your concerns - I probably love The Realms more then is healthy (for a sane, grown man). I don't want Faerun (which is the actual setting) to be officially convoluted with tons of crap. I fear this started to occur in 2e (becoming the 'kitchen sink' setting), and then they dialed it back (thankfully) in 3e, and then they went full-bore with it once-again in 4e (trying to fit every new idea into The Realms). I would hate that as much as anyone.
However, MY Realms are similar to - but very different then - the official, canon Realms. I borrow from EVERYWHERE, This is my choice, and doesn't effect anyone but me and my players. Somehow, doing this exact thing has 'gotten lost' somewhere along the way. I understand (and even agree with) what Jeremy proposed - no branding on the regional books. This will alleviate the perceived notion that you have to be "a Realms expert" to run the damn thing. Not because it really changes anything - it just takes the name out of the equation.
For instance, suppose I own 8 5e regional splats -
1) Ancient Empires
2) Dragonriders of Ansalon
3) Nether wastes
4) The Burning World: Tyr Region
5) Steppes of Carnage
6) Taladas: Realm of Minotaurs
7) Land of Fate
8) Followers of the Dragon
New players/DMs will be interested in - and buying - these sources because of the 'kewl' titles and material they cover. You and I will know that only books 1, 3, & 5 are set in Faerûn, books 2 & 6 are set in Dragonlance, and book 4 is about Darksun/Athas. Books 7 & 8 are set on Toril, but are they Forgotten Realms? They aren't Faerûn - thats where the lines get blurred.
But that doesn't really matter - each book will be like a complete CG unto itself, with canon lore specific to the subject matter of that tome. They may touch-upon surrounding areas (brief mentions), but they will be focused on a campaign set specifically in that region. I assume at least half the 5e regional splats will be FR-specific anyway.
So we get what we want - more lore on specific areas of Faerûn (and beyond), WotC gets what it wants - to use FR to anchor its 5e line, and the new players (and those of us who don't mind home-breweing the heck out of our Realms) get to use whatever they want, without fearing 'its wrong'. A new (5e) DM will probably come to realize after a time that some of the locales his players visited¹ were on the 'wrong planet', but so what? At that point, he can either A) ignore it², B) fudge things and make his own map, based on where they've been, or C) run his setting like it was something akin to Ravenloft - that all those locales covered in the sourcebooks are just 'islands' floating in a sort-of planer-sea (which may seem odd to us, but it would certainly work).
I'm not saying to lump everything into Faerûn - THAT is our primary setting-of-choice, nor am I saying to lump everything onto Toril, or even Realmspace. All I am saying is to take Ed's concept of 'Forgotten Realms' and broaden the definition to include the whole of D&D. Its just a name - is it wrong to share it? We still have OUR setting (pristine and un-mixed), but we have to think in terms of Faerûn, (Abeir-)Toril, and Realmspace. The Forgotten Realms is NOT a setting - we need to let go of that - the setting is the continent/world FR was set on.
Most of the novels these days have parts that take place off-world, either in the planes, or in space (Corsair) - why is that considered FR canon? The definition has already broadened - I am just pointing it out.
What if I ran an FR game for awhile, and eventually my players got a hold of a Spelljamming vessel. Now, I don't want to run an SJ campaign, so I limit it to just Realmspace. This broadens my sandbox, without me needing to travel to other worlds (settings) or planes. So am I still running an FR campaign, since it has only Torillian characters and only takes place in Realmspace, or am I now running an SJ campaign? Suppose, instead, I had them visit the Outer Planes every so often. How many visits to Sigil does it take before I am officially running a Planescape game? If the PCs are all from FR, and are still based out of there (but spend most of their adventuring-time in the planes), at which point does the name of the setting change?
And why does that even matter?
Get the point?
¹ Because of the sourcebooks he purchased, based on his interest in them.
² Ignore it, as in, 'it doesn't really matter anyway' - A DM using the "now you're here" method of moving the PC around will never have to explain how they got anywhere - the assumption would be these are all places separated by some distance on the same hypothetical world. If you are just playing the game, and aren't a 'setting fanboi', then this will never matter to your players. This method has worked just fine for many scify/fantasy authors (Vance's Dying Earth and even Lieber's world of Lankhmar follow this protocal). The story simply takes place wherever it needs to take place - I have seen this done many times (le quin's Orsinian Tales, The Throne of Bones, etc). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Apr 2012 17:27:20 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 17:41:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Eberron is the opposite, really. With it's 'special' Planes, and afterlife, and deities that are generally unconventional in comparison to other settings, lumping it in with other worlds would be kind of problematic.
Not really.
Closed Sphere, just like Athas/Darksun.
The planes in Eberron's Sphere could either be completely separate from the main ones, or be linked to the Great Wheel planes (be local 'neighborhoods' within the greater planes, perhaps with very specific borders to that plane, that cannot be crossed by just anyone). There are varying degrees of both: For instance, if they are separate, there could still be numerous portals to the 'mother plane' (which may or may not be carefully guarded/warded/etc), or conversely, those portals could be numerous and fairly easy to navigate, making it more like the later example.
The local plane could have thousands of connections to a greater plane, but if you don't know how to find them, or don't have the 'key', then its the same as if the weren't connected at all. By the same token, if the local plane was within the greater plane, but surrounded by a nigh-impenetrable 'wall' around it (planers beings could cross with ease), then it would be the same as if there were no connection at all (from a PC standpoint).
And the 'rules' of a sphere/plane continue to apply to someone native to that plane, regardless. If Torillians think their local planes are a tree, and Eberronans think its an Atom-like structure, then they will be limited by that when they attempt to navigate the cosmology, whereas someone from Greyhawk would have no such restrictions... unless they cross into a local cosmology not-their-own, and that sphere/planes has specific rules pertaining to 'interlopers' (and some do, as we know from our Imaskari lore). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Apr 2012 17:42:30 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 18:29:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
@Jeremy - having a more well known brand is NOT the same as 'good branding'. I am very surprised you (and anyone at at WotC) hasn't realized yet there is far more negativity associated with 'D&D' then anything positive. Just go to any cartoon, movie, TV program, comic, story, etc where 'D&D Players' are show-cased - they are NEVER, EVER portrayed in a positive light. Don't let your own love of the hobby cloud your judgement. Average people are turned-off by 'D&D'. For instance, slapping 'D&D' on a movie at this point would be box-office poison, IMHO.
Once again it seems like we’re talking in two different directions.
While it’s true the D&D movies didn’t do well, the negativity associated with the movies was something expressed by the already existing D&D fan base, not the wider public. Why? Because the movie was marketed to gamers.
Speaking of the wider public: if they bothered to go to the last D&D movie at all they didn’t say “that movie sucks so I’m not watching another D&D movie again,” rather they said “that movie sucked.”
Stereotyping the average D&Der as a geek or a nerd or what have you is nothing new, it’s been going on for decades. During that time the game has had its ups and downs, selling extremely well (during 3E) and (presumably) tanking during 4E. (As an aside: if you watch any TV at all, you’ll find geeks and nerds are portrayed positively.)
With respect, the idea that the average person is turned off by D&D is absurd.
Anyway, negativity or positivity expressed in response to attempts to make D&D appeal to the mainstream public is different than negativity expressed by a brand’s core audience.
And that’s we we’re talking about here: the core audience.
You serve your core audience first. The core audience plays Dungeons & Dragons. D&D is not a negative term to its core audience. However, for some in the audience the term “Forgotten Realms” is a negative.
It simply makes more sense that D&D, and not Forgotten Realms (however one cares to use the term), be the brand and the logo on the front cover of 5E books.
|
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 19:08:32
|
I think you and I may have a difference of opinion about what is 'negative' and what is 'positive'.
I love the TV show The Big Bang Theory (and they have been shown to play D&D-like games), but if you think those are 'positive' portrayals then we are definitely not on the same page.
Although many of the D&Ders (nerds) I have met and played with throughout my life may aspire to be 'a Sheldon', I do not, and neither does most of the world. I'd probably go to jail for ringing his neck after 10 minutes.
So within our hobby, judging what is 'cool' and what is 'un-cool' is VERY different then the norm. Go to a singles bar and tell any of the hot girls there you play D&D, and watch what happens. Thats all I'm sayin'.
My brother-in-law -a guy I taught how to play when he was 14, and went on to run a group of his own for years - gave away ALL his minis (including his Warhammer armies) after The Forty Year Old Virgin came out, simply because the main character painted minis... and he did not want to be associated with that (he pretends to be cool, and has most people fooled, but I know he's a 'closet nerd').
My own wife used to tell her friends (on the phone) "Mark's playing with his little men" (in a very derogatory tone) whenever I was painting my minis. Unlike my bro-in-law, I got rid of the wife.
I don't worry about 'my image' at all (which should be painfully apparent by now), but most folks do, which is unfortunate for D&D, considering what it is associated with (runny noses & asthma inhalers, pocket-protectors, thick glasses, 40-year-old men who have no life outside the game and live in their mom's basement, etc, etc).
Have you seen the Reno 911 D&D episode? Or the Sarah Silverman D&D episode? If you think the rest of the world thinks D&D is cool, you're delusional... I'm sorry. Its just a fact.
D&D is something people avoid like the Kooties. You want to change people's minds, you need to shift the branding. Even people who play VG's make fun of us (even though they are playing MORPGs).
By the way, I hate both of those shows (never watch them), but it has nothing to do with those episodes. If you want to know why I am aware of them - its because family and friends (who don't play) like to throw them in my face. I could link you to a dozen more just like that, if you want.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Apr 2012 19:13:55 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36998 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 19:15:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I'm not saying to lump everything into Faerûn - THAT is our primary setting-of-choice, nor am I saying to lump everything onto Toril, or even Realmspace. All I am saying is to take Ed's concept of 'Forgotten Realms' and broaden the definition to include the whole of D&D. Its just a name - is it wrong to share it? We still have OUR setting (pristine and un-mixed), but we have to think in terms of Faerûn, (Abeir-)Toril, and Realmspace. The Forgotten Realms is NOT a setting - we need to let go of that - the setting is the continent/world FR was set on.
I guess I'm just not seeing how we're going to call everything the Forgotten Realms, even if it has nothing to do with the Realms. I mean, yeah, just slapping a one-size-fits-all label on to everything, I understand that -- I just don't see why we'd want to do this.
And you may disagree, but for me, the Forgotten Realms is the setting. It may include all of Realmspace, but that's still a setting. The brand can't be expanded and yet keep that definition, and I personally would be highly offended to see non-FR material with an FR "brand" slapped onto it. I imagine that those who strongly support other settings would hate to see their setting relabled, as well.
Oh, and since the Realms were forgotten by the people of Earth, yeah, it is wrong to include Krynn or Athas under that label. |
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! |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3768 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 19:20:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Closed Sphere, just like Athas/Darksun.
-Yes, but with so many 'mechanical' difference between how physics work, what accomplished by simply calling everything 'Forgotten Realms'. As was mentioned, the Forgotten Realms are called such because Ed Greenwood theorized that magical creatures and all kinds of things that once existed on Earth have been 'Forgotten', and that they've crossed over to Realmspace utilizing the many connections between our planet and that one. Eberron was created in a closed continuity and isn't Forgotten, like Faerûn is supposed to be.
-I mean, in effect, all that is changing is labeling everything 'Forgotten Realms' instead of 'Dungeons and Dragons', so it's not like there are any kind of in-game changes to things. But, all that you accomplish is watering down what the Forgotten Realms are (as they are published right now- a single Crystal Sphere, with the primary focus on a single planet, and the main focus on a single continent on that single planet). It's not good or bad, per se, but it seems unnecessary and confusing. D&D is a bad brand in terms of image, I agree, but the subculture that enjoys it doesn't care about image as you said. I'd even agree that most probably embrace it, and try to be nerdy (and I'd also like to punch the crap out of most of them, too- this is why I'd never go to a convention.). At most, I think you'd confuse and/or upset people with the branding shift that seems to come out of left field without doing much to attract others- a person who sees fantasy as uncool in general isn't going to magically pick up a product because it says 'Forgotten Realms' rather than 'D&D'. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know) |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 20:09:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Go to a singles bar and tell any of the hot girls there you play D&D, and watch what happens. Thats all I'm sayin'.
You're not actually speaking from experience, I take it.
I spent 365 consecutive days at a bar. It was a new year's resolution of mine. I didn't sleep there, but I visited every day, made new friends, drank every kind of liquor they served and met a ton of people.
Not once did I get even a mildly negative reaction from anyone when I told them I played D&D. The response usually went like this: of the people who actually new what D&D was, very few had ever played them game. Instead they had a brother who played or knew someone in junior high or high school who did. Those people expressed surprise that I still played, but they were never negative towards me.
Those who never played the game were to a man (and woman) curious to learn more about the game and how it works.
I’ve embraced my inner geek and I try to champion that culture whenever I can. It’s never been much of an issue.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You want to change people's minds, you need to shift the branding. Even people who play VG's make fun of us (even though they are playing MORPGs).
Message board sniping aside, gamer culture just isn’t like that. Conventions have been serving for years to unify the culture and bring people together. D&D is simply one part of a myriad of forms that gamer culture takes.
Yes, there’s always been a “my game is better than yours” attitude, but that feeling goes in both directions and hardly owes itself to any shared dislike for D&D.
I agree in spirit that D&D can always use more positive lights shined on it, but the D&D brand just isn’t in need of a major facelift owing to any sort of unified negativity directed at it by the masses at large—because that negativity doesn't exist.
This is my last post on the topic. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 23 Apr 2012 21:42:11 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 20:51:12
|
MT, I can see where you're going with this, and I'm empathetic to your passion for this topic. I am, however, going to have to disagree with this course of action. I just don't think the payoff is worth the dilution of the setting.
Not that you ARE diluting the setting, necessarily, but that's a very, very fine distinction you're making. It's been difficult enough to explain the concept to the group of us, being the intelligent and open-minded gamers that we are. Try explaining this nuanced plan to the legions of gamers out there who will instantly shout this down as "that damn setting is taking over my D&D!"
The term "Forgotten Realms" is inextricably tied to the setting that includes Faerun, Kara-Tur, etc. If all of D&D were to be called "the Forgotten Realms," then what would we call our setting? The Forgotten Realms is branded to this setting. I think expanding the brand outward to encompass all of D&D achieves the opposite of what you're trying to do, namely, foster the impressions that it's a kitchen-sink setting without any distinctive flavor of its own, and suggest that no other setting is worth a damn, because they're all subservient to the Realms.
The analogy here would be taking everything with spaceships and aliens and declaring them all "Star Wars." I mean, yeah, there are stars and wars, so it fits, right?
One more, somewhat light-hearted observation on this point:
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I'm not saying to lump everything into Faerûn - THAT is our primary setting-of-choice, nor am I saying to lump everything onto Toril, or even Realmspace. All I am saying is to take Ed's concept of 'Forgotten Realms' and broaden the definition to include the whole of D&D. Its just a name - is it wrong to share it?
Well, from a contractual/copyright stand-point, yes. Ed has a contract with WotC stipulating that he controls an interest in "The Forgotten Realms" as an intellectual property, which is defined by certain bounds. It would be pretty amusing to watch WotC expand the definition of Forgotten Realms to cover all of D&D, thus giving Ed control over ALL of D&D. But that seems pretty unlikely, right?
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" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 23 Apr 2012 : 21:04:39
|
Also, on the subject of D&D being off-putting:
Geek culture in general has become more acceptible as time goes on (the geek shall inherit the earth and all that). As recently as ten years ago, you wouldn't have had a New York Times article announcing the advent of a new D&D edition. We wouldn't have major cultural figures like Stephen Colbert or tough-guy actors like Vin Diesel talking about playing D&D and loving it. You wouldn't have had as many women in the hobby--I've only been going to GenCon since 2006 but I can already see a difference in attendance.
The world is making it much more comfortable to embrace your geekiness. Are we there yet? Not remotely. But there's progress being made. Having caricatures on TV is just part of the process--the key is when we're seeing geeks poking fun at themselves, which we are seeing (the Guild springs to mind, Community, etc). MMORPGs and other VGs have done quite a bit to expand the hobby.
Dwelling on the past doesn't help us dispel the negative images associated with gaming. We move forward with positivity and strength.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
