| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4454 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 19:24:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
The classes shouldn't be balanced, magic items should be wondrous things found infrequently during adventures, not everyone should have access to every ability, the DM should the the primary controller of the game, you don't need spelled out rules (especially ones that have a game effect) for things that you can simply roleplay, etc.
I agree, and I think ths is pretty much present in all forms (edition wise) of Dungeons and Dragons. But this style may only be suited to a fraction of D&D's community. There are people who like doling out Magical Items or having loads upon loads of character options, which makes the Modular model more and more interesting (if they pull it off). And while many claim 4E has a balanced system......realistically it's not. Nor is it close to perfect either. Now, the disparity between the classes isn't as drastic nor does it break down after a few levels, but there is imbalance there, believe you me. Also, I don't know what edition of D&D allowed classes to have access to every ability? Even with 3E's robust Multiclassing/PrC rules or 4E's hybrid/Multiclass rules or 2E/AD&D's dual-class rules this isn't found. Also, I've found that the DM has always been the controller of the game, or storyteller of the campaign or facilitator of the rules. Is there an edition of the game where this is different?
Perhaps it's not necessarily the rules of D&D that make it feel more like it or less like it but the time/space of when your playing with the people your playing with? D&D has always felt like D&D with AD&D, 3rd Edition, and 4th Edition. Pathfinder, while not necessarily D&D also feels like it too. What I find ironic is that everything you've said Apex is precisely what I've encountered playing 4th Edition, lol.
So to relate this to One Canon, One Story, One Realms is that regardless of how the rules change, the Realms will still be strong and has been strong ever since it's inception. The fact that it's endured as many changes in edition and still going strong with lore and player support is pretty amazing. Can Greyhawk say the same? Or Dragonlance? Or Ravenloft (albiet, it's making a comeback)? |
 |
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2012 : 06:09:54
|
The minor healing powers thing might be overstated: most of the classes don't actually "heal" you--they're about finding your second wind, cheering up your fellows, etc. Those are STORY heavy mechanics, which I approve of. You still only have actual "knit flesh" healing in the hands of clerics and paladins.
But this is off topic. Back to the realms!
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" |
|
|
|
Rils
Learned Scribe
USA
108 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jan 2012 : 23:42:13
|
I think for me the biggest thing to do is fill in the gaps. We had a hugely detailed world in 2e. We had an almost as detailed world in 3e. Then it skips a hundred years and we're working on a detailed world for 4e. The biggest beef seems to be in filling in the gaps. We're so used to having all the answers, that any holes in the fabric are just anathema to the hardcore FR community!
Reading over this thread, it seem slike the biggest problem people have with the conversion to 4e was the hundred year gap, and not knowing what happened in between. Nations appeared, nations disappeared, gods rose, gods died, heroes rose, heroes died, etc etc "with no explanation". To me, a unified Realms is entirely possible simply by providing those explanations. Whether through core books, or novels, or supplements, or whatever.
Erik, I think your 70/30 book idea is very plausible. Write a book on Cormyr: cover it's history from it's founding to the late 1400s, talk about it's culture, geography, various tensions that have happened over the years. Then plug in "spotlight" sections on a couple time periods at the back: what are the current events at year 137x, 138x, and 147x (or whatever). This lets those who love the 2e Realms play in that time period, those who grew up on the 3e Realms play in that time period, and those of us who were introduced to the Realms mostly through 4e play in the world which we know and love.
While most of my D&D life has been 4e, I love and have colelcted a number of the 2e era books. My absolute favorites are the Volo's Guides and the Elminster's Ecologies. Both of these are highly detailed accounts of specific locales that add flavor, history, and adventure hooks. The awesome part is that most of that history is easily ported to any "contemporary" FR setting. If I plop my PCs down in the Serpent Hills for example, there are still ruins to be explored etc etc. This is what I would love to see more of, and in the last 6 months or so it seems like WotC has caught on and is doing just that (just look at the Neverwinter setting and this month's Cormyr articles for perfect examples).
I'll admit I don't know enough about the details of previous Realms settings to contribute much in the way of specific "these dots need connecting". We could spend years just filling in the timeline gaps between 2e and 4e. I think that will go a large way towards a Grand Unified Realms Theory.
PS, re: magic dwarves - my very first D&D character was a dwarven specialty priest of Dugmaren (in the 3 games of 2e I played). One thing I loved about him was that he could use magic scrolls, but there was some enormous chance that the effects would backfire: I fireball scroll would shoot snowballs instead, or a polymorph would permanently turn you green, or whatever. Out of all the dwarven clerics, the xothor were the only ones who could do this, and I loved it so much I'm working with my DM to recreate that character somehow in 4e once we start a new campaign. :) |
Dugmaren Brightmantle is my homey. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 01:06:25
|
Erik, you forgot the Age of Dinosaur-riding Ninja Monkey-Pirates! 
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
The minor healing powers thing might be overstated: most of the classes don't actually "heal" you--they're about finding your second wind, cheering up your fellows, etc. Those are STORY heavy mechanics, which I approve of. You still only have actual "knit flesh" healing in the hands of clerics and paladins.
Which is fine. I have always felt that HP really represented Fatigue, rather then actual damage (real damage begins at HP 0). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 03 Feb 2012 02:26:42 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 03:29:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Once again, not the appropriate thread, but since the topic has swung this way...
I was thinking long and hard the past two nights about what (I think) 4e 'got wrong' (rules, not setting). What they did was perfectly balance the classes - but this has been happening incrementally with each 'upgrade' of D&D.
Anyone remember when we had different amounts of EP to level for each class? In OD&D, each class practically had its own set of rules. Then in 3e, we were given enough freedom - with PrCs and Feats - to duplicate most anything any other class could do. Perhaps the thing that 4e (rules) got wrong was that they 'perfected' it too much? That by finally completely leveling the playing field (literally), they've sucked all the flavor right out of it?
I think you're on to something here. In 1E (and, to a lesser extent, in 2E), the balance was the different amount of XP required to advance in level. Wizards got insanely powerful, and so they needed 50% more XP than fighters to go up a level after 10th/11th. Having all classes on the same XP table (3.x) simplifies multiclassing, but it throws the balance off. 4E tried to restore the balance by making magic nothing special (imho), and succeeded brilliantly... or maybe that's the wrong word... at any rate, they succeeded at removing all imbalance from the game, and they might as well have removed all magic from the game as well, instead of allowing everybody to use it. Is it still magic if everyone can do it?
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Those kinds of things - the kewl names in front of the spells, and the naming of each level of each class - those were flavorful things that excited our imaginations. This is what D&D must recapture. No more 'undetailed' lore', and monochrome maps that leaves us shaking our heads, rather then wanting to play there.
In other words, EXCITE US. Put the wonder back into D&D - thats whats been missing. I want my imagination to soar again, not pour over dozens of splats trying to figure out 'the best build'. Lets get back to thwacking stuff for phatt lewts, and doing stupid things that gets us killed... but in a manner we will remember years from now and still be talking about.
Thats MY D&D. 
EDIT: On the subject of sorcerers - thats the perfect way to split the Vancian casters from the 4e power-type casters in the new 5e rules. Ed obviously (to me, anyway) had lots of different ways for folks to 'do magic', including 'natural talents' (hedge wizards) and 'gifts from above'. Having different types of magic and different ways casters work, to me, IS The Realms - 5e may be the most perfect rules for FR we have yet seen.
I realized my post was weird in that it didn't relate to the subject directly, but my point was that diversification is a good thing, and Sorcerers, IMHO, are a great fit for FR. So are Warlocks, warlords, witches, etc...
That's my D&D too, Mark... and I think you've made a great point that connects to the topic we should be discussing (sorry, Erik). Different styles of magic belong in the Realms; we should have Vancian, sorcerous, warlock, witch, and other magic types that (we can hope) will be supported by D&D Next Core, and also explain the differences between the Red Wizards, the Hathrans, the Narfelli and Raumathari, the Netherese, and (hopefully) the Halruaans. 4E Realms violated the "more is better" principle, and while I would like to believe that they had good intentions (easing new players into things, etc.), I don't believe it was worth the cost. At any rate, I don't have much to say to get this scroll back on topic, as I'm still hopeful that we'll be given an ounce of prevention as well as a pound of cure for the Spellplague in the new Realms. I still applaud Erik's efforts on this project, and if I think of something that would help this effort out, I'll be sure to post it here. |
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. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 05:52:07
|
No apologies, Jakk--your post is dead-on.
I myself tend to like all classes advancing at the same rate, if only because it cuts down on a LOT of paperwork and a fair bit of PC jealousy. Also, I tend to ignore XP and advance characters when it's appropriate for the story. So maybe I'm the wrong guy to ask.
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 - 25 Jan 2012 : 07:03:31
|
but I hated vancian spellcasting stuff.....
lore is good, but not when its wasted on a poor mechainic.... though that might jsut be me |
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 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 25 Jan 2012 : 11:58:09
|
Once again I seem to be the outcast opinion in the bunch. I prefer the classes to have different rates of progression, even when that causes some mismatch between PCs over time. I see the "special" classes like paladins and rangers having more class abilities than plain vanilla fighters, so a premium on their XP advancement doesn't seem too unreasonable. An extreme (too extreme) example would be 1E barbarians, who were substantially more powerful than equivalent fighters yet suffered from ridiculously slow level advancement; a level 2 barbarian was comparable to about level 5 in anything else.
I don't see this as unfair to the players either, since they chose their classes after seeing all the relevant information, including the XP-per-level tables. To be honest, the largest contributor towards a gap in PC levels is the (lack of) attendance record of the players themselves; if they miss 75% of the play sessions they shouldn't complain about receiving only 25% the XP and treasure earned by the others. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Icelander
Master of Realmslore
1864 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 00:55:06
|
I think that this is a very attractive idea, mostly because it offers a way for the 5e Realms material to be useful to me, by publishing material set in the 1350s-70s. That is not something I would have expected to see in the future.
On the other hand, writing guidelines that are era-agnostic would be extremely difficult. Societal change in the Forgotten Realms is not slow. There are no two ways about it. Kingdoms fall, powers are brought down, new polities rise.
A hundred years is a long, long time. As a mental exercise, try to imagine writing a guide to London, New York or Kinshasha that works for the period from 1872-2012. Would a lot of the 1880s stuff be relevant to the 2010s stuff?
Granted, technological progression in the Realms is not always as fast as in our world. On the other hand, smokepowder started to become known in central Faerun in 1358 DR and ten years later, we had robust and reliable wheelocks. That's a lot faster than things went in our world. Nor is it the only example of rapid technological change. Seagoing technology has been advancing steadily since the 600s DR around the Inner Sea and every time ship types become more advanced, the world effectively becomes smaller.
Captain Deudermont's Sea Sprite is 19th century marine technology at its finest, the Watercourse trilogy featured technology advancing at a fairly decent clip and the Council of Blades ended with both tanks and laser technology having been weaponised*.
While massive magical catastrophes might put a damper on some of the societal changes caused by new technology, they do so by causing new and less predictable changes. And probably end up causing a shift in investment from magic and into technology anyway, so that a hundred years later, the area is utterly unrecognisable.
I wish this was possible. I'll buy it if it's done. But the only way I see this being done is with almost none of the material for 4e Realms being usable for earlier Realms and vice versa. It's just been too long. There won't be the same NPCs, there probablly won't even be the same polities. There certainly won't be the same adventure hooks, political factions, local happenings or flavour.
*This, at least, I wish I had been making up. |
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Forgotten Realms fans, please sign a petition to re-release the FR Interactive Atlas
|
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 02:10:07
|
Heh... I lost track of this scroll for a few days, and some very interesting things have been said.
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
but I hated vancian spellcasting stuff.....
lore is good, but not when its wasted on a poor mechainic.... though that might jsut be me
There was a lot that I didn't like about Vancian magic too... but when 4e made abilities for all classes pseudo-Vancian, I realized that it makes so much more sense as a mechanic for magic... and nothing else. That being said, I'm still a bigger fan of spell-point systems, but there has to be a way to separate the wizard from the sorcerer, and mode of magic use is the easiest way to do that. I really hope we see something like this in 5e, where we have different styles of magic for different classes (and please, if you must include healing surges, make them an optional rule; but it sounds like most rules will be options, or at least finally spelled out that way... those of us who have been playing for a while know that all rules are optional). |
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. |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 02:35:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
Captain Deudermont's Sea Sprite is 19th century marine technology at its finest, the Watercourse trilogy featured technology advancing at a fairly decent clip and the Council of Blades ended with both tanks and laser technology having been weaponised*.
*This, at least, I wish I had been making up.
So... Council of Blades joins Beyond the High Road on the list of Realms novels that need to be de-canonized... I place the second title on that list because we got no lore on the Lords Who Sleep... and then they slept (and were) no more. Hopefully the upcoming release of Ed's Realms will correct this... and many other things besides, if it becomes a separate setting on its own with regular releases to support it.
 Sorry... forgot the purpose of this scroll... but still... with the direction some of these novels are taking, I'm starting to think that our best hope for the mission of this scroll is with Ed's Realms being published in their entirety, with an editor who restricts their activities to simple proofreading. |
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 03 Feb 2012 02:41:28 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 02:55:39
|
I read Erik's post. I appreciate his reconciliatory concept. Shared settings need more like him, he's willing to work from the foundation provided instead of going off entirely in his own direction.
Similar to what a few previous posters have said, I don't think something as grand as he proposes will work for WotC. At least I don't think its feasible (from a company standpoint) to support all eras equally even electronically through DDI. Likely what will happen is a focus towards the Spellplague (Heroic) era. Some pieces will be released for the previous eras, many probably framed as historical pieces with a link to how things are in the Spellplague era.
I guess many, including myself, will have to settle for that.
Hmm, let’s consider the thread topic for a moment.
One Canon, One Story, One Realms.
What actions does this exclude. No retconning out the Spellplague or much of anything. No exclusion of the existing events, so no ignoring the future by focusing only on the past. Differences could be made by execution and delivery. The writing could weight more heavily on different aspects while not focusing on the hot button topics. The atmosphere of the setting can be conveyed differently. Things can be brought back to a limited degree. New things can be added.
Where do all the factions intersect. Focusing on any one era means others get left out. Jumping to the ancient past (ala Terra Nova or more appropriately Star Wars: Old Republic era) ignores the Spellplague. All non-starters.
If the different fan factions don’t intersect now or in the past…
How about something even more radical.
Jump significantly further into the future. We can’t move back, but we can move forward.
I’m going to think on this, more later. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 03:24:38
|
Had a chance to ponder the future to come.
If the Realms does jump again, by how much? That’s like asking how much is enough for the economic stimulus, no good answer.
The necessary number is a good amount beyond a human lifetime, so like the century between 3e and 4E. Coincidentally, as 4E is in the late 1400s, this theoretical 5E FR (we’ll call this T5EFR) would put us in the late 1500s. If I recall the Roll of Years only goes up to 1600. Nothing is going to happen, but like 2012 is supposedly a year of cosmic significance, there could be underlying apprehension. T5EFR will not start beyond 1600, probably should leave a number of years before the end date (1580 to 1590ish, but 1599 is too gimmicky). This way, if 6E wants to leap through 1600 for some major event, it has that opportunity available.
Why not continue right from 4E? Short answer is: ‘Cause I don’t like it, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I’m not discounting it entirely, it encapsulates a lot of wrong thinking regarding the Realms, but I’m willing to admit a few gems can come out of it. Let’s return to that later.
Why the second jump? It does what WotC should have done with any time jump, ‘fix’ the setting without the use of a colossal RSE, but instead use many smaller gradual changes. Not only is T5E 100 years beyond 4E, it’s over 200 years beyond 3E, with a major event to rearrange things. Say the Spellplague did not complete yet in 4E, but continued slowly to repair the setting. If the Spellplague didn’t happen, the century between 3E and 4E would have been enough, but we don’t get that luxury here. Since 4E is so far removed from 3E anyway, another century makes little difference going back, but it does clear the air going forward. This is not to punish the 4E fans either. Everyone starts on the same page, whether fans of FR 1E, 2E, 3E, or 4E. T5EFR is where everyone meets up again.
What would T5EFR look like? It’s a pseudo-reset to the vibe of the Old Grey Box, for real this time. FR 4E had the baggage of the Spellplague, sometimes literally in the form of Plaguewrought Lands and spent too much time explaining why things were different from the 1300s Realms. No, this is like the Grey Box, nothing major in the recent past, plot hooks a plenty, but no major RSEs for over 200 years, history even for long lived races.
By T5EFR, everything weird has mostly died down. It is as clean a slate as we can get without a bigger jump or a restart. Use the century to clean up 4E, use the two centuries to clean up 3E. Since 3E to 4E is not too detailed, a lot can be slipped in there. Anything that can’t work in there can be fixed in the century between 4E and 5E. New nations can rise, new races appear, new lands come and go, old or new gods arise. Nations that never should have been Abeir’ed can return, some could stay there. A chance to pick and choose the best of the new and old.
Use the Spellplage and anything else to really clean up this time. Don’t use any more RSEs beyond that. Everything else that changes is due to smaller actions, regular invasions, war, births, coronations, natural deaths, singular spell duels, gradual fading, the occasional mysterious disappearance. Some characters can die natural deaths, some can finish their stories. Some can die horrible deaths. Some can survive, some should survive.
The key is nothing is absolutely tied to the black hole of stories that is the Spellplague. It is the means, not the ends. Yes, there are problems with arguing the Spellplague was merely a means, it was uses as an end. The Spellplague is de-emphasized and with time faded into a background event like the best RSEs were. Diverge everything, disperse the responsibility and consequences of change.
Ideally, WotC will plan some modest events between the eras and 5E, brainstorm a bunch of good idea, throw most of it out because a lot of it will be crap, but keep the good stuff. Offer the broad strokes in the setting book, with the recent years getting towards 1590 bieng a bit more defined. Then use those past events for novels. So WotC can still have some big event stories. Stories set after the game setting start should remain smaller scale, keeps the living setting momentum but doesn’t displace the focus on the players.
Fans of 4E FR do not face a retcon. Fans of pre-4E Realms do not have the Spellplague poking them all the time, either in the future (if playing 1300s) and it’s now so far past its relevancy fades. There is hope for a future, as even several of the chosen and gods (but not in an interventionist role) can return. For them it was a long vacation.
Like Old Republic is far removed enough for events to not directly affect the Rebellion era, but unlike the victory at the end of Ep VI, the Spellplague was a defeat. This moves forward from the gloom and disagreements.
This will not please everyone, but it is a compromise that puts everyone back on the same page and gives enough distance for a fresh start.
I know it’s crazy.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36844 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 04:55:12
|
The only reason the published Roll of Years doesn't go past 1600 is because that's where the real-world authors decided to stop. There is no indication whatsoever of a similar cutoff date on the in-seting Roll -- we just haven't seen the whole thing.
As for another timejump... Well, I'm in a minority, when it comes to people that dislike both the Spellplague and the timejump. For me, the timejump was merely irksome -- others, however, have expressed that the timejump was for them far worse than the Spellplague. I think another timejump would anger everyone, because then even the 4E Realms fans would understand the feeling of their lore having been brushed aside.
And it would be more of a disconnect from the NPCs, the richly detailed history, and the lore that drew so many of us to the setting. The Realms isn't just a map -- it's everyone in it, the lives they lead, and the things that happen around them.
Another timejump would disconnect from that, effectively treating the Realms as just another blank chalkboard, waiting for anyone to draw on it without any regard to what was there before. |
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! |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:00:37
|
| +1 Wooly Rupert |
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 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31798 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:03:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The only reason the published Roll of Years doesn't go past 1600 is because that's where the real-world authors decided to stop. There is no indication whatsoever of a similar cutoff date on the in-seting Roll -- we just haven't seen the whole thing.
Tom Costa addressed this exact issue as part of the FAQ for the REALMS-L:-
quote:
5.4.2. How were the beginning (-700 DR) and ending (1600 DR) years for the Roll of Years chosen?
Tom Costa replied: As one of the namers, here are some answers.....
This was for the most part an arbitrary decision based on part on making sure we covered dates that covered all the years from Alaundo and Auguthra the Mad's prophecies. However, we came up with more names than originally expected and so Steven added more named years to the rolls. It was a lot of names to come up with and I think all of us were pretty proud of the result. In the end, I believe the ultimate goal was to cover a period far back in history for creators and players to be able to use year names and far enough in the future to cover anticipated future events and products (which 200+ years should aptly cover I believe).
Steven Schend added:
Why did we stop at -700 and 1600? Well, two reasons. A) 2300 years names is more than enough grist for the creative mills of DMs out there. and B) If we added more at either end of that spectrum, they're either so far before or after current campaigns that they're less and less useful.
I tend to view the Roll of Years as an archaic source of information about the Realms as it was back when the Roll was first put together. There may have been a lot of good ideas and references floating around at the time that were incorporated into it, and then either ignored, forgotten, or simply cast aside as progress on the setting's design shifted elsewhere.
Regardless, 1600 DR probably seemed like an adequate "Let's stop it here" point -- once most of the work on the Roll, was done. |
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 |
|
|
|
Aryalómë
Senior Scribe
USA
666 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:06:53
|
Here's some things I would like to do- fix a lot of the fey things, fix some of the devil and demon things, and not destroy half of the friggin' FR pantheon.
1) Keep Elves and Eladrin seperate! Eladrin are celestial fey! (I think they should basically be fey angels and live in Arvandor) Elves are not! (They should be what they previously were)
2)Bring out more on the fey! They have been too ambiguous in previous editions. Especially get more into the LeShay. They have a lot of potential.
3) Erinyes should go back to what they were like in 3.5e, not these hideous things in 4e. I like the to be the male and female devilish counterparts to the DEMONIC incubi (and let's not let them be hideous this time, please) and succubi.
4) Keep the Ffolk and Northlanders apart! They are obviously analogous the Celts of Britain and Norse of Scandinavia. They should be kep apart as separate people and cultures.
5) Let's not butcher the pantheon! Please resurrect a lot of the deities we love and miss (Kiaransalee especially for me). In fact, all of the drow deities should be brought back. I also like how some of the Seldarine became aspects of other gods (I really miss Hanali Celanil, next to Kiaransalee). Hanali Celanil, Sehanine Moonbow, and Aerdrie Faenya need to be brought back!
These are all of the ones I could think of, at the moment. I may post some more soon. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 05:09:17
|
I know about the real life logistics of the 1600 year, but it seemed a convenient tool to use for this. Others have done crazier with less.
I'm not saying this is the ideal solution, but it is one solution. With the extreme choices WotC made for 4E, I no longer leave any weird ideas off the table when it comes to them.
I probably would have accepted the 100 year jump if done in the gradual way I outlined.
I would have been able to maybe settle with the Spellplague if it eventually underwent the smoothing out the ToT eventually received.
I guess I'll have to wait for that to iron out the Spellplague and the Waling Years Century. It needs some industrial pressing.
Maybe now that WotC use Spellplague for the effect they wanted it for (probably not how they intended), they can drop it down to a footnote ("That's one huge asterisk"). I guess like how the weirdness with the Council of Blades was not addressed. |
|
|
|
arry
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
317 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 13:23:06
|
I think that if the only way to save the Forgotten Realms is to have another time jump, it might be better to let them go gently into that good night. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 15:47:01
|
My personal feelings on the matter:
The 4e rules weren't all that bad. They were actually a good set of rules, for what they were trying to accomplish.
The (immediate) changes wrought by the Spellplague were (mostly) not so bad. They could have been less heavy-handed - many off us have figured out less offensive ways of adding a lot of that lore to the setting. The setting already had Tieflings, Genasi, and Dragonborn - there was absolutely no need for Abeir (and we still have a near-useless continent across the sea, because its TOO DAMN FAR).
So, we basically have a decent set of rules, and some good ideas that were poorly presented. I even like most of the changes to the cosmology (blasphemy!). All in all, I don't think any of that would make us give up FR and flee to Paizo. We would grumble, as we always do after edition-changes (a lot of people still hate the ToT), but we'd eventually get over it. At least, IMHO.
I think the total deal-breaker was the timejump. Without that, we would have still had the ability to apply much of the old material to our new campaigns (just as we have done in every prior edition). The Spellplague did not do what they wanted - get rid of all previous lore... in fact, it did the complete opposite. It forced new players to dig into the older material to find stuff out, because the new setting was so 'bare bones'. The only thing the century timejump did was get rid of the fans, not the lore.
A new timejump, IMO, would be the final nail in FR's coffin. Faerun is just a backdrop - its the characters and their stories we care about.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 03 Feb 2012 15:48:14 |
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 16:25:59
|
How about a mild (let's say 2-5 years) timejump from 1479 so that they can show that some things are changing (hopefully for the better). For instance, if Mystra (and other gods) are brought back in current novels a mild jump can show their churches being rebuilt and repopulated. With Mystra, for instance, perhaps with her back her church can now begin to reclaim the plaguelands. But, it should be a costly, time consuming endeavor so it doesn't seem like they just sweep it under the rug over night. Show that it is happening, but it's going to take a while. This you still have the plaguelands for anyone that wants to use them and you have the knowledge that they are being dealt with (and adventure hooks to help deal with them) for anyone who doesn't like them.
Along with that, and honestly I think this should be done with any method of moving forward, the time gap needs to be filled in as much as possible. If they go with the multi era set up similar to SW, make the gap one of the eras and start publishing material for it.
Edit to add: They also need to use Abeir. Make that the undiscovered playground/testbed for new ideas. If Mystra returns, say that her return has stabilized magic to the point that portals (lost or new) are now fully functional between the two to allow for exploration/adventuring. |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
Edited by - Tyrant on 03 Feb 2012 16:29:27 |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 16:44:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
My personal feelings on the matter:
The 4e rules weren't all that bad. They were actually a good set of rules, for what they were trying to accomplish.
The (immediate) changes wrought by the Spellplague were (mostly) not so bad. They could have been less heavy-handed - many off us have figured out less offensive ways of adding a lot of that lore to the setting. The setting already had Tieflings, Genasi, and Dragonborn - there was absolutely no need for Abeir (and we still have a near-useless continent across the sea, because its TOO DAMN FAR).
So, we basically have a decent set of rules, and some good ideas that were poorly presented. I even like most of the changes to the cosmology (blasphemy!). All in all, I don't think any of that would make us give up FR and flee to Paizo. We would grumble, as we always do after edition-changes (a lot of people still hate the ToT), but we'd eventually get over it. At least, IMHO.
I think the total deal-breaker was the timejump. Without that, we would have still had the ability to apply much of the old material to our new campaigns (just as we have done in every prior edition). The Spellplague did not do what they wanted - get rid of all previous lore... in fact, it did the complete opposite. It forced new players to dig into the older material to find stuff out, because the new setting was so 'bare bones'. The only thing the century timejump did was get rid of the fans, not the lore.
A new timejump, IMO, would be the final nail in FR's coffin. Faerun is just a backdrop - its the characters and their stories we care about.
I think 4e was a good set of rules for skirmishing, excellent for that actually. I never liked 4e from the start despite trying to like it. I stuck with it until the Plague Realms was released.
Then the ridiculous story changes occured, paradigms of nations were broken (OK the PREMIER trading city is REALLY going to allow ships to stay as hulks in their port?), the gods were changed, the characters were gone, and 4EFR was pretty much proof in the pudding, that I could not run the games I wanted with 4e. They even had to change a world to make the rules work (that is not necessarily how I feel now, but it was enough of an initial impression to get me to stop supporting WOTC).
I thought Abeir, and changing nations, and flooding nations, and making fey kingdoms, and changing the geography was enough to get me to jump ship to Paizo. I can't stress enough how much I disliked the changes to the realms. The time jump was the least of it for me. I hated the Spellplague as an excuse to change the gods, geography, and paradigm.
I understand they need to keep some of it to make some fans happy. However I am very happy with Pathfinder running both 3rd edition realms and Golarion. I am willing to give WOTC another chance, if they support mostly pre 1400 realms I will subscribe to DDI and give them my money. I still think the spellplague changes a mistake and I, and many older fans cannot be unboard with even equal support to plague realms. It would not be worth my money when Paizo puts out such high quality material.
I left WOTC and didn't look back until I heard the concerns of older fans are being addressed. Now I, and many others want to make it clear to WOTC it was not just 4e that we didn't like, it was the New Forgotten Realms. I cannot be onboard with D&D 5e if the realms does not get the proper support before spellplague. I would prefer an option to ignore the spellplague completely, but I am sure that will not occur. At least bring the majority of support to the realms as it has been for years, before it was changed to a completely new campaign world.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 17:14:51
|
DDI is already moving into a paradigm of supporting various eras of the Realms. The Cormyr articles, for instance, support both pre- and post-Spellplague Cormyr adventures (including the court of Regend Alusair, slightly advanced of the 3.5 baseline but before the Spellplague). Other products are moving this direction too.
Seeing the direction WotC seems to be taking, I really don't think what I'm proposing is all that ambitious. Sure, it won't be the perfect expression of my idea, but a lot of what I'm saying is very do-able. All that is required is a shift in design leadership (which has happened), an emphasis on edition-neutral/era-agnostic products (which we've had a couple of), and (I really want) a continuity editor who is familiar with all eras of play (someone like Brian James or Brian Cortijo or Steven Schend). Combine those three things, and we're in business.
One thing I really do NOT want is a completely new campaign world. I want a synthesis of all previous eras of play--a campaign setting that gives you the basics about what the Forgotten Realms *IS,* how to run a campaign there, what the culture/cities/NPCs/gods are like, with a smaller section that talks about different modular configurations to support any particular era. As I've talked about before.
I *know* this is possible, and I *suspect* it will scratch everyone's itch. It's just a matter of whether WotC will do it.
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" |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 18:48:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
DDI is already moving into a paradigm of supporting various eras of the Realms. The Cormyr articles, for instance, support both pre- and post-Spellplague Cormyr adventures (including the court of Regend Alusair, slightly advanced of the 3.5 baseline but before the Spellplague). Other products are moving this direction too.
Seeing the direction WotC seems to be taking, I really don't think what I'm proposing is all that ambitious. Sure, it won't be the perfect expression of my idea, but a lot of what I'm saying is very do-able. All that is required is a shift in design leadership (which has happened), an emphasis on edition-neutral/era-agnostic products (which we've had a couple of), and (I really want) a continuity editor who is familiar with all eras of play (someone like Brian James or Brian Cortijo or Steven Schend). Combine those three things, and we're in business.
Erik I run the Realms in 1385 after the Cormyr ---> Anauroach time and I write it as the players stopping the spellplague. If WOTC is NOW releasing stuff for that time period, I am interested.
If you can reply to this post and tell me that I would find a good amount (I understand not most, probably not even one quarter) of pre spellplague realms materials on DDI I am willing to subscribe to DDI. A good amount for me is about 1 article in 8 under the circumstances. My demands would be more for 5e realms but for now I am willing to take the chance of rolling an 8 on a d8 to find a FR article I can use.
If I can get assurance my $10 a month will get me like 4 really good pre spellplague articles I am willing to subscribe to DDI to read those. I would Pay $10 for 4 articles.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 19:00:53
|
@MT For me the deal breaker was a lack of cohesive thought behind the changes (at least as I interpreted what was presented to the public for free), the heavy-handedness of the changes, and the "pruning of the pantheons." The timejump, while not ideal, was not the dealbreaker for me. (Though forcing everyone and everything to exist in that time period was, to some extent.)
@ESdB I really hope that the current design team behind the Realms works to smooth edges. I agree with you that a reboot is not the ideal choice. My main concern is that the design team will be well-meaning, but no do a good job of it. What would honestly make me feel the best would be to know that Ed was helming the forward movement (not necessarily the timeline, but the setting as presented in the new iteration of D&D). If he had free reign to fix things as he saw fit while working within the established lore of all editions, I think that that would bring the most customers back to 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)
|
|
|
|
Garen Thal
Master of Realmslore
USA
1105 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 19:47:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
Erik I run the Realms in 1385 after the Cormyr ---> Anauroach time and I write it as the players stopping the spellplague. If WOTC is NOW releasing stuff for that time period, I am interested.
If you can reply to this post and tell me that I would find a good amount (I understand not most, probably not even one quarter) of pre spellplague realms materials on DDI I am willing to subscribe to DDI. A good amount for me is about 1 article in 8 under the circumstances. My demands would be more for 5e realms but for now I am willing to take the chance of rolling an 8 on a d8 to find a FR article I can use.
If I can get assurance my $10 a month will get me like 4 really good pre spellplague articles I am willing to subscribe to DDI to read those. I would Pay $10 for 4 articles.
Well, DDI is only $10 a month if you subscribe on a pay-per-month basis, or dip in for only one month. It's cheaper if you commit for longer.
I can't promise anything about what the month-to-month content is going to be; that's not something WotC shares even with its freelancers, and even if they did, we couldn't reveal it without getting into mondo-trouble. I can hold up January as an example, though.
Of the 5 Cormyr articles that were out in Dungeon and Dragon this past month, two (Backdrop: Suzail and Heroes of Cormyr) deal primarily with the 4E status in Cormyr; the backdrop is the capitol city as of 'now,' and Heroes really is a game article much more than a lore one.
The other three articles break down as follows:
-"Blades of Cormyr" is a 4-page article containing descriptions of the Cormyrean swords of state, their (4E) statistics, their histories, and some information about Ilbratha and Shiningbite. The rules are 4E, but the lore is usable in any era.
-"Crowns and Mantles" is a 9-page article dealing with Cormyrean titles, ranks, and status. Other than a brief mention of who the current holders of certain titles are in 1479 DR, this information applies to all eras of Realms play.
-"Cormyr Royale" is an 18-page article describing the royal courts of the Steel Regent and of King Foril. Pages 2-7 are Alusair's court, pages 8-12 are Foril's court (with an updated family tree, "The Royal Succession of Cormyr," interrupting on page 13 before one more column on Foril's court), page 14-16 is a description and map of the Hall of the Purple Dragon and the Shrine of the Four Swords, and the last 2 pages are a timeline carrying Cormyr from 1371-1479.
I don't know whether you'd consider this sort of stuff worthwhile for your campaign in particular, but at the very least, those 22 pages of pre-Spellplague material, but it sounds like you might be interested in checking it out.
[For what it's worth, I think the post-Spellplague stuff that Dan, Eric, and I put together is pretty darned good, too. We worked incredibly hard to make sure that the Cormyr of 1479 is the Cormyr of 1379, or 1371, or 1357, or 1344. Time advances, and changes happen, but it's the way that the world deals with those changes, how it copes with and explains them and grows from them, that makes it "Cormyr" or "not-Cormyr," "the Realms" or "Not the Realms." In my opinion, anyway.]
|
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 20:59:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Garen Thal
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
Erik I run the Realms in 1385 after the Cormyr ---> Anauroach time and I write it as the players stopping the spellplague. If WOTC is NOW releasing stuff for that time period, I am interested.
If you can reply to this post and tell me that I would find a good amount (I understand not most, probably not even one quarter) of pre spellplague realms materials on DDI I am willing to subscribe to DDI. A good amount for me is about 1 article in 8 under the circumstances. My demands would be more for 5e realms but for now I am willing to take the chance of rolling an 8 on a d8 to find a FR article I can use.
If I can get assurance my $10 a month will get me like 4 really good pre spellplague articles I am willing to subscribe to DDI to read those. I would Pay $10 for 4 articles.
Well, DDI is only $10 a month if you subscribe on a pay-per-month basis, or dip in for only one month. It's cheaper if you commit for longer.
I can't promise anything about what the month-to-month content is going to be; that's not something WotC shares even with its freelancers, and even if they did, we couldn't reveal it without getting into mondo-trouble. I can hold up January as an example, though.
Of the 5 Cormyr articles that were out in Dungeon and Dragon this past month, two (Backdrop: Suzail and Heroes of Cormyr) deal primarily with the 4E status in Cormyr; the backdrop is the capitol city as of 'now,' and Heroes really is a game article much more than a lore one.
The other three articles break down as follows:
-"Blades of Cormyr" is a 4-page article containing descriptions of the Cormyrean swords of state, their (4E) statistics, their histories, and some information about Ilbratha and Shiningbite. The rules are 4E, but the lore is usable in any era.
-"Crowns and Mantles" is a 9-page article dealing with Cormyrean titles, ranks, and status. Other than a brief mention of who the current holders of certain titles are in 1479 DR, this information applies to all eras of Realms play.
-"Cormyr Royale" is an 18-page article describing the royal courts of the Steel Regent and of King Foril. Pages 2-7 are Alusair's court, pages 8-12 are Foril's court (with an updated family tree, "The Royal Succession of Cormyr," interrupting on page 13 before one more column on Foril's court), page 14-16 is a description and map of the Hall of the Purple Dragon and the Shrine of the Four Swords, and the last 2 pages are a timeline carrying Cormyr from 1371-1479.
I don't know whether you'd consider this sort of stuff worthwhile for your campaign in particular, but at the very least, those 22 pages of pre-Spellplague material, but it sounds like you might be interested in checking it out.
[For what it's worth, I think the post-Spellplague stuff that Dan, Eric, and I put together is pretty darned good, too. We worked incredibly hard to make sure that the Cormyr of 1479 is the Cormyr of 1379, or 1371, or 1357, or 1344. Time advances, and changes happen, but it's the way that the world deals with those changes, how it copes with and explains them and grows from them, that makes it "Cormyr" or "not-Cormyr," "the Realms" or "Not the Realms." In my opinion, anyway.]
Ok I have joined. The noble article was great. Is the only place to find realms lore the DRAGON or Dungeon or is there a separate place on DDI? I am even finding use for the Karatur 4e article so that I can make an ethnicity for Pathfinder.
I am looking for Cormyr Royale now.
Many thanks!
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Aryalómë
Senior Scribe
USA
666 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 21:02:51
|
| I love 4e rules the best out of any of the editions, just not FR's lore. |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 21:08:43
|
Thank you!
Cormyr Royale saved me HOURS of work!
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 21:11:05
|
Holy Crap! Thanks Again. You guys kick ass! Good stuff!
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
