| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Feb 2012 : 23:37:26
|
Seems everyone is against jumping a significant amount into the farther future. Perhaps that highlighta how difficult it was for some fans to bridge the gap the first time. Puts things into perspective, no?
We want to avoid retcons, split world, and time jumps. Funny thing, those were the exact methods used to cause this mess. No wonder the setting feels disjointed. Some say, two wrongs don’t make a right. I would respond, right is tight, but left is loose. Failing that, 180 degrees plus 180 degress makes 360. Of course those are deemed unproductive responses.
The current method using both catalysts prevents the positive characteristics of both from coming into effect, yet accumulates many of the disadvantages.
I could have handled the Spellplague if players were given the chance to affect change and the future was not locked in for a hundred years. I think of it as a very bad ToT, annoying but workable given time and freedom for players and authors/designers to digest the event as it unfolded.
I could have followed along with the extra century if it was used as a mostly quiet respite from the RSEs, a time for things to change gradually, for new plot hooks to spring up as older ones were retired from the setting’s history. With all the issues at the end of 3E, that might be an agreeable direction for everyone. The game books could link the centuries together and start out with a familiar but fresh outlook for everyone. Authors could use novels to bring certain plots and characters into the present or pass the torch to the next generation.
In fact think of it as original Star Trek and The Next Generation. Who was in the pilot episode to send the Enterprise-D off? None other than doctor turned Admiral Leonard McCoy played by the original actor of the role, DeForest Kelley. The two shows are very different, but they still felt connected, they put effort in right from the start (including cameos by several TOS alumni later one). There were few huge setting shaking events in the 70ish years in setting time between the shows, just smaller conflicts and the very strong factor of change in the form of time passed.
Why WotC decided to include both drastic changes is beyond me. Marketing or buzz is not a good answer, either of these were big enough to generate that effect.
With everything else off the table for FR (no retcon, no split world, no time jump, no retreating to the past), we’re left with one method as suggested before, a couple of years advance from 1479 to show some return of the old elements. That works for some, but for me that’s no change at all. How much of the old elements can logically come back in that time? That’s five years to initiate a return, meanwhile a empty century between the two eras still divides the setting. It seems we would just carry on from 4E FR to 5E with virtually no change, no repairs. That anemic approach still represents a “my way or the highway” mentality just with added pretense.
What would get me back on board?
- I want the Spellplague minimized. If the ToT was a 7, make the Spellplague maybe a 8 or 9, not the crazy 11! it seemed in previous reveals.
- Build a bridge of lore *through* the gap and not just *to* the other side. Otherwise I feel like I teleported.
- Similar to the Lore Bridge, use the full century to enact needed changes to the Realms. Like my time jump example in the previous post, use the time to disperse change to the many facets of the setting. This helps de-emphasis the Spellplague (enough with the RSEs). Make the Spellplague feel more like a hiccup and not an aneurysm. “Oh, we thought Change Z was due to the Spellplague, it was actually the localized problem at ABC.” This can’t be used often, but once in a while does fudge the scale of the Spellplague a bit. More importantly it shows the setting has more than one plot of significance. Remember, the Spellplague just ties back to Mystra (again!).
- I want to see some of the Spellplague damage starting to be repaired earlier not starting 1479-1484, but just a few years after 1385. Granted, you can’t remove everything even if it’s revealed people starting earlier. Use this chance to de-emphasize the post-apocalyptic feeling. The Spellplague becomes ToT 1.9 instead of Ragnarok with a virtual reset to the Spellplagued Realms of 4E.
- Related to above, I want some (not necessarily all) of the nations (or reasonable successor states), gods (or equivalent), characters (some for highlight) to come back. Not starting 1479, but well before. They could have been hidden, nursing their wounds or biding their time, plotting, planning, living incognito, waging a secret war. Drop sightings and hints through out the century. Show (novels or game book) some characters didn’t just disappear, but fought or helped, were heroic or villainous as appropriate. Show that they didn’t die like chumps or in a whimpering fetal position. If they went crazy, show them put down by their friends and enemies. Don’t let the Wailing Century be empty, fill it with something that will bring back all the fans. Use it to end stories well but also to start and setup new stories.
Of course it matters not what I want or even what some of the scribes or freelancers want. What does WotC want and do they have the will and ability to carry it out?
|
 |
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 05:07:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Seems everyone is against jumping a significant amount into the farther future. Perhaps that highlighta how difficult it was for some fans to bridge the gap the first time. Puts things into perspective, no?
We want to avoid retcons, split world, and time jumps. Funny thing, those were the exact methods used to cause this mess. No wonder the setting feels disjointed. Some say, two wrongs don’t make a right. I would respond, right is tight, but left is loose. Failing that, 180 degrees plus 180 degress makes 360. Of course those are deemed unproductive responses.
The current method using both catalysts prevents the positive characteristics of both from coming into effect, yet accumulates many of the disadvantages.
I really think that the only way to minimize the Spellplague without "retcons, split world, and time jumps" is to reboot the Realms entirely back to some point in the past; the end of 2E is probably my preferred point, so we can get some more detail on the Manshoon Clone Wars and the Harper Schism. The thing is, a reboot would necessarily alienate the Spellplague fans (who, while I don't agree with them, don't deserve to have done to them what was done to us, regardless of how much their input had to do with what was done; from what I've heard, the biggest decisions regarding the Spellplague were made by suits at Hasbro who read the angry anti-Chosen posts and decided that this group was bigger than the current Realms fan base... and apparently have been proven wrong). I'll say it again; I truly believe that a timeline split at the time of the 3.5 adventure megatrilogy is the only solution to this; it allows Wizards to support both the Spellplague and a Realms that is Spellplague-free. That being said, if Ed's book in Q4 does well, we may see a reboot right back to the era of the OGB... but I'd prefer to see Ed's Realms developed as a further sideline to the Realms as published over the last 25 years, rather than a replacement for it. Anyway, I'm not being constructive re: the purpose of the scroll, so I'll shut up now. 
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
I could have handled the Spellplague if players were given the chance to affect change and the future was not locked in for a hundred years. I think of it as a very bad ToT, annoying but workable given time and freedom for players and authors/designers to digest the event as it unfolded.
I could have followed along with the extra century if it was used as a mostly quiet respite from the RSEs, a time for things to change gradually, for new plot hooks to spring up as older ones were retired from the setting’s history. With all the issues at the end of 3E, that might be an agreeable direction for everyone. The game books could link the centuries together and start out with a familiar but fresh outlook for everyone. Authors could use novels to bring certain plots and characters into the present or pass the torch to the next generation.
In fact think of it as original Star Trek and The Next Generation. Who was in the pilot episode to send the Enterprise-D off? None other than doctor turned Admiral Leonard McCoy played by the original actor of the role, DeForest Kelley. The two shows are very different, but they still felt connected, they put effort in right from the start (including cameos by several TOS alumni later one). There were few huge setting shaking events in the 70ish years in setting time between the shows, just smaller conflicts and the very strong factor of change in the form of time passed.
Why WotC decided to include both drastic changes is beyond me. Marketing or buzz is not a good answer, either of these were big enough to generate that effect.
With everything else off the table for FR (no retcon, no split world, no time jump, no retreating to the past), we’re left with one method as suggested before, a couple of years advance from 1479 to show some return of the old elements. That works for some, but for me that’s no change at all. How much of the old elements can logically come back in that time? That’s five years to initiate a return, meanwhile a empty century between the two eras still divides the setting. It seems we would just carry on from 4E FR to 5E with virtually no change, no repairs. That anemic approach still represents a “my way or the highway” mentality just with added pretense.
What would get me back on board?
- I want the Spellplague minimized. If the ToT was a 7, make the Spellplague maybe a 8 or 9, not the crazy 11! it seemed in previous reveals.
- Build a bridge of lore *through* the gap and not just *to* the other side. Otherwise I feel like I teleported.
- Similar to the Lore Bridge, use the full century to enact needed changes to the Realms. Like my time jump example in the previous post, use the time to disperse change to the many facets of the setting. This helps de-emphasis the Spellplague (enough with the RSEs). Make the Spellplague feel more like a hiccup and not an aneurysm. “Oh, we thought Change Z was due to the Spellplague, it was actually the localized problem at ABC.” This can’t be used often, but once in a while does fudge the scale of the Spellplague a bit. More importantly it shows the setting has more than one plot of significance. Remember, the Spellplague just ties back to Mystra (again!).
- I want to see some of the Spellplague damage starting to be repaired earlier not starting 1479-1484, but just a few years after 1385. Granted, you can’t remove everything even if it’s revealed people starting earlier. Use this chance to de-emphasize the post-apocalyptic feeling. The Spellplague becomes ToT 1.9 instead of Ragnarok with a virtual reset to the Spellplagued Realms of 4E.
- Related to above, I want some (not necessarily all) of the nations (or reasonable successor states), gods (or equivalent), characters (some for highlight) to come back. Not starting 1479, but well before. They could have been hidden, nursing their wounds or biding their time, plotting, planning, living incognito, waging a secret war. Drop sightings and hints through out the century. Show (novels or game book) some characters didn’t just disappear, but fought or helped, were heroic or villainous as appropriate. Show that they didn’t die like chumps or in a whimpering fetal position. If they went crazy, show them put down by their friends and enemies. Don’t let the Wailing Century be empty, fill it with something that will bring back all the fans. Use it to end stories well but also to start and setup new stories.
Of course it matters not what I want or even what some of the scribes or freelancers want. What does WotC want and do they have the will and ability to carry it out?
I really like all of these ideas... if they're carried out well, we just might be able to accomplish Erik's goal, but as you say, it's up to WotC and what they're willing and able to do. I'm betting that if Ed's new book does as well as I'm expecting, they'll take the easy way out and just wipe the slate clean and return to Ed's Realms. I just hope Drizzt doesn't find his way there, or it's all for nothing.  |
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 05 Feb 2012 05:14:35 |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 06:58:09
|
WotC could reboot to the end of 2E, but what says that they would detail the Manshoon Wars, or the Harper Schism. Wishful thinking. Really who left at WotC was working on the Realms back then.
More wishful thinking, and rose colored glasses. If only WotC would reboot and everything will be happily ever after... |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Laeknir
Seeker
68 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 16:36:25
|
Put me in the camp that wants a reboot to the old gray box. All the 4E changes need to be totally removed and undone IMO, including the retcons that poison the creation myth of Toril and change the nature of the planes.
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 18:01:27
|
If they highlight 1386 DR for 5e (and still support all other eras), I think that would be the perfect way to bridge the editions. Pushing the PlagueWrought Realms another 3-5 years out will just push the 4e fans further away from prior-edition fans, and that would be counter-productive, IMHO.
A Rules edition should be designed to support a particular era of play - there has to be a 'now'. The Wailing Years are the only 'neutral' period that should not offend anyone (overmuch). They could still easily support the other eras going both backward and forward.
This should be done, IMO, regardless of weather they do an 'alternate timeline' thing or not (because then the Wailing Years would automatically be part of the 4e timeline, and people who wish to ignore it may continue to do so). It will be easier (for DMs) to borrow (crunch-wise) from all eras (folks can 'dip into' the grab-bag of the 5e material, and take what they want from it).
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
@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.)
Yes, a lot of what we got wasn't what we wanted (to put it mildly), BUT my point is that 'most' people would have probably gotten over it - even if it meant playing in an earlier time period (LOTS of folks did that during 3e - they played prior to 1372 DR). In every other edition, if folks didn't like the current era, they had the choice of playing earlier. I can't say 4e made that impossible, but because it was so radically different, it caused a split - 1e/2e/3e lore was mostly useless to people running a 4e game, vice-verse.
THAT was caused by the timejump, and nothing else. Major lore changes between editions does not cause that kind of split in the fanbase - it never has before. They polarized the fans by splitting them temporally (1e/2e/3e was still considered the same 'era').
How different were the Realms pre-ToT to post-ToT? Not as much as the 4e Realms were, but they did have a lot of differences, including changed and dead gods, political upheaval, 'Helmlands' (which were our old-edition plaguelands - nothing new there), etc, etc... Hell, we lost Erlkazar and Shaareach at the outset of 3e.
When they jumped the century, they also "Jumped the Shark".
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
@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.
I originally (after the 5e announcement) thought that the 'smoothing the edges' thing was the appropriate way to proceed, but by all the vitriolic feedback I got when I took that stance, I no longer feel that way. Two unrelated, alternate FR's is definitely the way to go. I don't care for it much, but I will go with the consensus (and buy products in all eras, if they produce the kind of material I enjoy).
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 05 Feb 2012 18:44:30 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 18:30:54
|
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.
So far, so good.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
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.
Too specialized (IMHO).
I'd prefer George Krashos. Ed would be ideal, but I'd rather we keep him chained to his desk churning out Realmslore 'till the end of time. 
Alternately, a group of people who have their specialties, and whenever ANYTHING regarding their areas of expertise comes in, they are to be consulted. A sort of 'Council of Realmslore Experts', if you will (heh... notice that spells 'CoRE'  )
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
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.
Possible, yes. Able to please the 'sweet spot' of gamers - doubtful.
Every time I tried to build that bridge I met with a wall of refusal. What you will wind-up doing is splitting the fanbase in 3 - those who refuse to 'move backward' (4e grognards... we can call them that now  ), those who will not accept ANYTHING to do with the tail-end of 3e (BECAUSE thats when the GHotR and Mystra's fall is set in, in case they haven't noticed), and those who will except a well-thought-out amalgam of the lore (and you and I, and a handful of people, will be pretty lonely in that group, I fear).
Do I think it could be great? YES. Would I personally prefer that? YES. Do I think it will work? NO. Fans are the stubbornest of people, and nerdboi fans are epic-level stubborn.
I do feel the 4e fanbase would be more receptive to it (IF they don't take a huge leap backwards with the rules - that could be a deal-breaker for them). Ergo, I have to also assume a LOT is going to be riding on the new rules. If most of the RPG players find them interesting (and use them), then you might see a slow-but-steady stream of folk 'coming over to the dark side'. That will bring the naysayers and non-D&D players 'back into the fold' (POSSIBLY - those rules better be pretty awesome to accomplish that).
And then their is the massive variable of setting-fans who do not play, which is unpredictable. The only one of those I know - my niece's boyfriend - no longer reads his beloved Driz'zt novels since 4e, if thats any indication... but thats one person, so I have no way of knowing... BUT THEY DO (and by 'they' I mean WotC - they have 'the numbers'.) |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 05 Feb 2012 18:48:30 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 20:47:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
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.
Too specialized (IMHO).
I'd prefer George Krashos. Ed would be ideal, but I'd rather we keep him chained to his desk churning out Realmslore 'till the end of time.
Alternately, a group of people who have their specialties, and whenever ANYTHING regarding their areas of expertise comes in, they are to be consulted. A sort of 'Council of Realmslore Experts', if you will (heh... notice that spells 'CoRE' )
I'll agree on all counts here, Mark. Particularly on keeping Ed churning out Realmslore; making him play traffic cop as well is not the best use of his time, and if not Ed, someone like GK would be ideally suited for the job. CoRE is a neat idea, tho... Brian Cortijo (Cormyr) is the only name immediately coming to mind, but after January's DDI, I have Cormyr on the brain.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
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.
Possible, yes. Able to please the 'sweet spot' of gamers - doubtful.
Every time I tried to build that bridge I met with a wall of refusal. What you will wind-up doing is splitting the fanbase in 3 - those who refuse to 'move backward' (4e grognards... we can call them that now ), those who will not accept ANYTHING to do with the tail-end of 3e (BECAUSE thats when the GHotR and Mystra's fall is set in, in case they haven't noticed), and those who will except a well-thought-out amalgam of the lore (and you and I, and a handful of people, will be pretty lonely in that group, I fear).
Do I think it could be great? YES. Would I personally prefer that? YES. Do I think it will work? NO. Fans are the stubbornest of people, and nerdboi fans are epic-level stubborn.
"4E grognards"... I like it. I agree with Erik; I don't want a completely new campaign world, either. If I did, I wouldn't be so vocal around here; at least, that's how I see it. In many ways, I also agree with you, Mark. Do I want a return to something resembling the "old" Realms? YES. Absolutely. Do I think we can make it happen with continuity from the current Realms? If you had asked me two days ago, I would have said NO, without hesitation. Now, I believe that answer to be YES, emphatically. Do I think it will work? That all depends on the realization by Realms fans (of any era) that, just because it's in print, doesn't mean they have to use it. One group of fans wants the Chosen? Fine. Another group wants the Spellplague? That's fine too. The problem with 4E was that it made these decisions for all of us. See my response to Jeremy G in this scroll for the details of my proposal. For the record, even though I've said as much in that thread, I believe that Jeremy was absolutely right to call me out on my comments, and I applaud him for doing so. Mark, you're absolutely right about the epic stubbornness of nerdboi fans, and I'm even more so... my birthday's at the end of April, and (while I don't have much time for astrology in depth) I'm an absolutely textbook Taurus... as you've probably already noticed.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I do feel the 4e fanbase would be more receptive to it (IF they don't take a huge leap backwards with the rules - that could be a deal-breaker for them). Ergo, I have to also assume a LOT is going to be riding on the new rules. If most of the RPG players find them interesting (and use them), then you might see a slow-but-steady stream of folk 'coming over to the dark side'. That will bring the naysayers and non-D&D players 'back into the fold' (POSSIBLY - those rules better be pretty awesome to accomplish that).
I agree on all counts... and I have a framework slowly being filled out in my head for what I think they are doing with the new rules, but expressing it has been difficult at best. I'm hoping they release a public alpha PDF the way Paizo did with Pathfinder.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And then their is the massive variable of setting-fans who do not play, which is unpredictable. The only one of those I know - my niece's boyfriend - no longer reads his beloved Driz'zt novels since 4e, if thats any indication... but thats one person, so I have no way of knowing... BUT THEY DO (and by 'they' I mean WotC - they have 'the numbers'.)
That's an interesting case you present there... if even the Drizzt fans don't like the 4E-era Drizzt books, then maybe  Drizzt can't carry the Realms on his back after aging 100 years. Hard to say... as you know (I've been rather vocal about this over the years), I'm not a 4E (Realms or core) fan, but I have enjoyed Ed's 4E Elminster novels like I haven't enjoyed a Realms novel since Elminster in Hell... and prior to Cormyr and Death of the Dragon, I couldn't say... I actually came back to the earlier Elminster novels after EiH, and I was a teenager when I read the first Realms novels; I took a long break from Realms fiction after the Drizzt prequel trilogy, and never went back to catch up on anything I'd missed that didn't have Ed's name on it.
And yes, WotC has 'the numbers'... and the fact that we haven't seen any hard numbers on 4E, only approximations and speculations coming from the retail end of the industry, suggests to me that the numbers aren't good. I've already rambled on at length, multiple times, about the logical consequences of that, so I'll shut up and let this scroll get back to topic. |
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 05 Feb 2012 20:50:53 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4454 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 21:19:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
And yes, WotC has 'the numbers'... and the fact that we haven't seen any hard numbers on 4E, only approximations and speculations coming from the retail end of the industry, suggests to me that the numbers aren't good.
I actually speculate that the numbers weren't horrible, just not up to snuff with Hasbro standards. I mean, 4E did pretty well in the last two quarters of '08, all of '09, and some of 2010. It was a good portion of 2011 that they didn't see the returns they thought they'd make and so *Bam* design-shift and release of a more "community friendly" approach of D&D:next. I don't really think 4E is a bad system (it's my favorite thus far), I just don't think it was the best implementation of that system. And they needed more playtesting and should've rolled out with the Essential products FIRST, instead of a quick grap for older players that it is commonly known for. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 22:11:08
|
I have to go with Diffan on this one.
'The Numbers' may have been phenomenal by old TSR standards, but they were probably abysmal compared to GI Joe and Transformers.
Which is why I feel RPGs really needed to stay as a 'basement industry', at least until virtual reality becomes a reality, and then eeryone can be playing 'D&D' for real.
I think thats the next big step in gaming is marrying MORPGs to P&P games, and the big difference between them is the GM (DM). If they can turn mods into 'storytellers', they may be onto something. The modding-community is another offshoot of this mindset. Give folks a set of rules and tools to build their own 'dungeons', and I think they will knock one so far out of the park, they'll wonder what planet the park was on. The only real drawback to this plan would be cheaters - if you can design your own dungeons (and rewards), you'd be able to hand-tailor your PC to be and do whatever you want.
So there would have to be two tiers of play - one 'official', and one 'unofficial'. Fortunately, they already have a model for this - games like Diablo use this method (private servers use mods). Then what folks can do is submit their own dungeons to be excepted as 'official' - they can use the community to grow the community. It will be very similar to what they were trying to accomplish with the RPGA - too bad the game table never got finished in time.
Thats the future of RPGs that I see - I just hope I live to see it (I use to love creating my own maps for Heroes of Might & Magic. Some of the best designers in the (video game) industry came from the mod-community.
Give me the tools WotC, and D&D will grow wings. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 05 Feb 2012 22:13:57 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 05 Feb 2012 : 23:08:49
|
I don't think the bridge is impossible to build. There might be need for more than one bridge not only because of the wide gap but also the breath/depth/scope of it.
Also, I hate to say it, but the situation is meaningless if just fans or even freelancers try to get everyone on the same page. Ultimately it is up to WotC to implement a constructive policy to link the eras. They have the clout and resources to encourage any perspective on their setting.
Thus far, this early on, everything WotC says is just talk. We've all heard similar before and came away with some uninspiring, even outright disruptive, results. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 08:25:45
|
I don't really care overly who the continuity editor is, so long as there IS one, who is qualified and has the realmslore to back it up. All the people I named are indeed somewhat specialized, and Krash is too (would he be a great representative for FR post 2e? Maybe, maybe not.)
Barring a full-time traffic cop, I'd like to see WotC run FR ideas past a small group of "Canon wonks" who will at least have a chance to catch missteps before they happen. I make this suggestion particularly considering the turn-over in their editorial department. For instance, Susan Morris was a great asset to the FR story, but she left, and the canon reins got handed to folks who just don't know the realms as well. A devoted team of 4-5 would do the trick.
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" |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 22:20:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Barring a full-time traffic cop, I'd like to see WotC run FR ideas past a small group of "Canon wonks" who will at least have a chance to catch missteps before they happen. I make this suggestion particularly considering the turn-over in their editorial department. For instance, Susan Morris was a great asset to the FR story, but she left, and the canon reins got handed to folks who just don't know the realms as well. A devoted team of 4-5 would do the trick.
If they took that advice to term, the resulting panel of "canon wonks" as you call them should come from here. You guys know more about canon than anyone from what I've seen the past few weeks here. If anything gets overlooked by the staff, I'm quite sure someone here will see it. Heh.
As for the Realms, I'm still plugging along in NE Cormyr near Highcastle with my current campaign in 1367 (I think it's 1367...uh oh! Date mind slippage!). In the future Realms (and present day products), I have no intention of seeing my beloved Luiren sink into the sea (blasphemy! My Realms-shire!) Halruua imploding, or whatever they may determine beyond Spellplague impacts to "fix" global catastrophes such as those.
I've even (gasp!) considered moving on from the Realms recently to the 15 Books of Mystara, to try a different game world for a change. The Realms is all I've gamed in, and while the changes that have impacted Toril's features (and my campaign's future, should I ever decide to follow canon) in so many ways haven't impacted my version of Toril (and most likely never will), I think it's about time to try new places after this campaign wraps. We'll see. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 07 Feb 2012 : 20:32:44
|
'Canon Wonks'... hmmmm... I could swear I've seen that idea somewhere... oh yeah!quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Alternately, a group of people who have their specialties, and whenever ANYTHING regarding their areas of expertise comes in, they are to be consulted. A sort of 'Council of Realmslore Experts', if you will. (heh... notice that spells 'CoRE')
I'd rather be a member of 'The CoRE', then a 'Wonk', but YMMV.
So yeah, a group of people that it is mandatory to run something past, just to catch any glitches. That means extra overhead on the publishing end, but it will save a LOT of headaches. We have an internet now people; its not like the old-days when we had to mail hard copies to everyone involved, and they had to mail them back. How hard would it be to have a 6-12 people proof-read everything first? Most of the folks around here would probably do this for free (because then we get a 'first look' at everything, which is way cool).
So there's your answer - put it before the scribes here (privately), and they get free 'rough drafts', and they get to influence Realmslore. All you have to do is throw them a bone - a 'special thanks' in a splat every now and then (like Gray Richardson got - that was SWEEEEET).
And make Ed the CoRE Chairmen, and have final say... ON EVERYTHING. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 07 Feb 2012 20:34:57 |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1294 Posts |
Posted - 07 Feb 2012 : 21:29:13
|
I wonder how many copies of Ed's book I will have to buy to convince Wizards to set the realms back to his vision....I was initially against a Star Trek reboot but after a few weeks of thought, I'm all for it. I really dislike pretty much anything after RotA (except Elminster must Die, which was mostly made up of Elminster's pre RotA memories) so there is my happy zone.
As for fans of the Spell Plague era...sorry, but nothing is stopping you from enjoying the books you have now and continuing your games in your own era/world/time. I think that's what I was told, sauce for the goose and all that. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 07 Feb 2012 : 22:06:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
As for fans of the Spell Plague era...sorry, but nothing is stopping you from enjoying the books you have now and continuing your games in your own era/world/time. I think that's what I was told, sauce for the goose and all that.
Ed's vision of the Realms would reset the setting to something far different than your personal cutoff point of Return of the Archwizards, meaning we'd all be in the same boat.
You wouldn't want that, would you?
When I look at Ed's Eye on the Realms articles, I'm reminded how the content is pure Realms, even though it's nominally set in the post-Spellplague era.
100% of that material can be used in any Realms campaign. I have a feeling the same will be true of his latest book. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 07 Feb 2012 22:21:59 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 07 Feb 2012 : 22:43:07
|
One timeline, which would include EVERYTHING published from the OGB on...
And a separate one, based on 'Ed's Realms', for everyone to buy and enjoy. Two alternate Forgotten Realms, but not how anyone pictured it.
The we can just sit back and see which one sells better. 
If they keep the 4e material married to the 1e/2e/3e material (which I think they will), then I can see the split getting wider... MUCH wider. Too many people blindly hate everything associated with 4e, and nothing 5e does will change that.
I had more here, but whats the point? I will just continue my 'wait & see' attitude. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 00:08:16
|
Dude, the thread is called "One Canon, One Story, One Realms." How do we get "alternate realities" out of that?
I fully support Ed's project--in fact, that's something I really, really want. I'm anxious to see how it goes.
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 - 08 Feb 2012 : 00:34:32
|
somewhere along the lines that wotc said why not put all your notes into a book so the fans could see what he did at his table is what I think has caused a part of the alt. version of the realms deal..... could be wrong though....
hate to tell everyone this.... but.... its your table and thus your realms and as such there are alot of alt realities. |
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 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 02:34:32
|
I think the 5E Realms should kick start a Realms campaign, much like the intro adventures in the past but maybe with its own Neverwinter type sourcebook with the following: The dwarves of the Iron House at the head of a rebuilt Mithril Legion, led by the twin Princes Tasster and Teszter have invaded Tethyamar intent on reclaiming their ancient homeland.
From what we know, Tethyamar had the Blackrock Gate, the Runegate of Dorn's Needle, Helgrinn's Arch and the Tethyamar Mines. The Iron House could have reconquered one of these holds and established a foothold to wage their war of reclamation. Calls to the surrounding lands have been sent for brave adventurers and mercenaries to fight the goblinoid and infernal armies. Merchants would likely also see the ability to ship arms, food, supplies etc to the area and depending on who's involved, their destination could be orc or dwarven holds. With the major centers of the old Zhentarim in ruins, it would be a prime time to capitalize on this dream of the dwarves.
The various kingdoms of Cormyr, the Dales, Sembia, Shade and the Moonsea would all have their own views and probably mixed views on the outcomes of this war. We could possibly see the forgotten races of dwarves and even gnomes detailed like nothing before!
So how do we make this happen? Or am I just crazy? hehe ;) At any rate, 5E Realms has me excited and dreaming about the possibilities we could see.
|
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 02:53:04
|
Well, there's been a lot of interesting discussion here in the last day. I guess I'll just start at the beginning of it all...
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So yeah, a group of people that it is mandatory to run something past, just to catch any glitches. That means extra overhead on the publishing end, but it will save a LOT of headaches. We have an internet now people; its not like the old-days when we had to mail hard copies to everyone involved, and they had to mail them back. How hard would it be to have a 6-12 people proof-read everything first? Most of the folks around here would probably do this for free (because then we get a 'first look' at everything, which is way cool).
So there's your answer - put it before the scribes here (privately), and they get free 'rough drafts', and they get to influence Realmslore. All you have to do is throw them a bone - a 'special thanks' in a splat every now and then (like Gray Richardson got - that was SWEEEEET).
And make Ed the CoRE Chairmen, and have final say... ON EVERYTHING.
I REALLY like this idea... but there are several scribes who already knew I'd say that, Markustay among them, I'm sure. Now, how do we convince Ed to make the Realms his "day job" as well as his "nearly every other waking moment" job? But then, maybe he doesn't need to do that; we already know that he must have a real, functional ring of sustenance, not to mention several clones who are similarly equipped.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
One timeline, which would include EVERYTHING published from the OGB on...
And a separate one, based on 'Ed's Realms', for everyone to buy and enjoy. Two alternate Forgotten Realms, but not how anyone pictured it.
The we can just sit back and see which one sells better.
If they keep the 4e material married to the 1e/2e/3e material (which I think they will), then I can see the split getting wider... MUCH wider. Too many people blindly hate everything associated with 4e, and nothing 5e does will change that.
Your last point isn't necessarily true. If the rules are good enough, I can see said people moving to the new rules... but unfortunately, I agree with you on the Realms canon issues. The perception of post-Spellplague lore as "poison" regardless of its details is still, unfortunately, present, but it's something that even I've been cured of after last month's Cormyr extravaganza... most of which is usable in any era... after 26 DR, of course.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I had more here, but whats the point? I will just continue my 'wait & see' attitude.
I've been trying to do that too, but I've never been very patient. I've assembled in my head a pretty good idea of the new edition's core rules framework based on what's been said officially. Now, I just want some official word on exactly *how* they plan to support all eras of play in the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Dude, the thread is called "One Canon, One Story, One Realms." How do we get "alternate realities" out of that?
I fully support Ed's project--in fact, that's something I really, really want. I'm anxious to see how it goes.
Cheers
As am I, Erik... I just hope we get some teasers sprinkled through the next eight months, or they will be very long indeed. |
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. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 05:12:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
The perception of post-Spellplague lore as "poison" regardless of its details is still, unfortunately, present, but it's something that even I've been cured of after last month's Cormyr extravaganza.
That perception is unfortunate.
For some it's easier to simply discriminate against anything post-Spellplague Realms than it is be patient, to give the setting a chance to get back on its feat and see how the setting is developed before deciding whether to quit purchasing Realms products.
From Backdrop: Cormyr onward we've seen how so much of the post-Spellplague Realms is no different than it was pre-Spellplague, save for the passage of a century.
To me it's the quality of the lore that we've been getting from DDI, as well some good novels, that make it necessary for their to be One Canon, One Story and One Realms.
The lore is hiqh quality. It builds on previous information; it's mindful of what came before and doesn't contradict. It's mostly rules free, which I like.
Most important: a lot of the material doesn't emphasize the Spellplague. Rather it recognizes that the big event happened in the past and then moves on to how things are in the Realms now.
Best of all, a lot of it is useful in any era. It's the simple work of a novice DM to borrow a name, organization or concept from the new lore and port it into any campaign set in any era of the Realms.
I hope the 5E Realms, whatever its final incarnation, continues this design trend. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 08 Feb 2012 05:22:34 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 06:00:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
From Backdrop: Cormyr onward we've seen how so much of the post-Spellplague Realms is no different than it was pre-Spellplague, save for the passage of a century.
Going by this and other things currently being said, I can now see exactly what is going to happen - 5e is just going to be 4e+. This one single sentence makes me realize they have no clue why people hated it so much.
I can't read the DDi material, but I can a gist of it from Ed's thread, from how the articles are currently being handled. The 5e era is going to be a few years into the future of 4e, and the pre-plague fans are going to get stroked.
Basically, we are history.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 08 Feb 2012 16:30:35 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 07:13:02
|
Not too disappointed if they go that route. Pretty much everyone expects that course to be their only logical option. WotC has 4-5 choices, and few of them are ideal or even feasible.
A) "5E ~ 4.99E" Start with 4E, expand with heavier articles and lore for historical periods, but maintain 4E as the foundation of the current setting. This keeps 4E playerbase, but works towards getting some of the previous fans to sign back on.
B) "FR 4E+!" Even More Spellplague and zany 4E style stuff, probably okay for current fans, not much to bring back some of the previous fans.
C) "Threeboot" Reset to 3E FR. Caters to 3E era fans, 4E fans may feel left out.
D) "Going Grey" Reset to the Old Grey Box. Suitable for many fans of all eras, but not without controversy or barriers.
E) "Second Chances" Reset to 2E FR. Highly unlikely.
F) "Burning Time" Jump far into the future of 4E. Highly unpopular, has no draw for any existing fans.
WotC is most likely going to choose 'A'. They've stuck with what they wrought. Their view is probably just deal with it. Moving back will cause a similar shake-up like the 4E transition.
I do hope they put a little extra effort making option A into 5E - 0.001, predominately a new normal with the Spellplague as a footnote that has died down while many familiar aspects returned or some suitable or appropriate equivalent is in place.
If I don't see something close to this, I will continued as I am ignoring the latest version as a still-in-publish setting. If I see some of that old setting magic allowed to flourish, they have me as a customer again. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 15:51:17
|
The Spellplague as a footnote. That's the ticket.
The push for 4e talked too much about the Spellplague, IMO. The design philosophy seemed to be that that was the "cool thing" that everyone would want to read about, but it wasn't. So design going forward should focus on the aspects of the setting that *are* the cool things everyone wants to read about--things that have persisted for thirty years and made the setting magical.
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 - 08 Feb 2012 : 16:41:43
|
What I had hoped for was a blending of the lore - using all the 4e retcons to the meta-setting (cosmology, etc), and backwards-engineer the 1e/2e/3e era, and re-starting FR sometime IN that era (either pre-plague or just after).
I don't mind the 4e lore - I just don't want to play in that time period; it has NOTHING to offer me.
The other option - what a lot of 'old school' fans are clamoring for - is a reboot to the pre-plague Realms, with the option of going either way (save Mystra, or not). That creates a divided timeline, which is only a temporary patch; whatever year they reboot to (say, 1380 DR), they only have a couple of years before they run smack into that wall, and have to decide which is going to be the 'official' timeline. I think it would work, but it has a small shelf-life.
That is what I thought was going to happen up until about a week ago - I got very excited and thought a 3rd possibility had opened up; that we were going to get an 'alternate Realms' using Ed's original, which means we get to choose to continue on in the 'Plagued Realms', or reboot our own campaigns Ed-style. I had not even dreamed that this would be one of the choices, and got very excited about this.
However, now I'm leaning in another direction entirely. I think Ed's Realms is going to be a one-shot, like the GHotR, which is just to get the fans 'all warm & fuzzy' before the axe drops.
They have no intention of resetting the clock - in fact, I think they are going to push it ahead even a little more. If they do that, GAME OVER.
That's not 'ending the edition war', that's polarizing it further. 4eFR was HUGE mistake, and if they continue to insist on pushing it on the fans who have already demonstrated they don't want it, that will be the final straw. That's not a new edition of FR - that's just 4eFR on steroids.
I guess that's what happens when two of the people in charge refuse to except they created doo-doo.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 08 Feb 2012 16:46:05 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 16:58:12
|
| I mostly just want Wizards to honour the spirit of their agreement with Ed Greenwood by publishing substantial material set in the 14th-century Realms he created: what else is published (and I wish Erik the best in this), the precise time frame, canon niceties and all that is firmly secondary. I don't believe Ed's hope would be so high if all we'll get is a yet-again-advanced timeline with occasional nods to the original (and commercially proven) Realms -- that is, the same as we're getting now -- and my guess is Wizards won't be so foolish this time. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 17:15:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
What I had hoped for was a blending of the lore - using all the 4e retcons to the meta-setting (cosmology, etc), and backwards-engineer the 1e/2e/3e era, and re-starting FR sometime IN that era (either pre-plague or just after).
If you're reading DDI material, then you know some of the blending is already taking place.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't mind the 4e lore - I just don't want to play in that time period; it has NOTHING to offer me.
I think if you read any of the DDI material, especially Ed's work, you'd change your mind on this sentiment. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 17:23:45
|
No offense meant to anyone, on any future predictions or wants, but I think EVERYONE is looking way too far ahead.
There hasn't been any announcement of a "5E Realms campaign guide" (or "D&D Next FRCG") at all. Not even really any plans for one, at least not yet. There has been the announced title for Ed Greenwood's Realms, but it won't be canon. It can't be, right? Because we know that Ed's Realms have diverged in a number of ways, it is going to be a really different Realms. Maybe it's the "prime" Realms, but whatever else it might be, it's an alternate reality to canon.
Since that is the case, I can't see Ed's book being much more than a one-shot release. It may even totally confuse the current crop of 4E fans, considering that most of them probably don't use forums. So this one-shot is meant to appeal to the old FR grognards.
That means that apart from DDI and a few novels, we have nothing that suggests change of any kind. All we have is that vague comment about how they'll leave it up to the players as to what era we want to play in. Until we see some kind of announcement of a 5E Realms book, or even an announcement of how they'll plan on handling the future, we have zip. All this crazy-wild speculation isn't really doing us much good until we have something to genuinely chew on.
|
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4454 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 17:24:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
However, now I'm leaning in another direction entirely. I think Ed's Realms is going to be a one-shot, like the GHotR, which is just to get the fans 'all warm & fuzzy' before the axe drops.
They have no intention of resetting the clock - in fact, I think they are going to push it ahead even a little more. If they do that, GAME OVER.
That's not 'ending the edition war', that's polarizing it further. 4eFR was HUGE mistake, and if they continue to insist on pushing it on the fans who have already demonstrated they don't want it, that will be the final straw. That's not a new edition of FR - that's just 4eFR on steroids.
I guess that's what happens when two of the people in charge refuse to except they created doo-doo.
What about no clock? Each and every new edition placed the Realms at one specific time and then went slowly along. 2E was what...1350-something? (Time of Troubles had already occured). 3E was set specifically in 1372 DR at the Return of the Archwizards and Bane. 4E was set 107 years later at 1479 DR and some novels span into 1480s. Well, how about we throw that model out the window? There is no set time in D&D-Next for the Forgotten Realms. It isn't starting point or place in the Realms. How about they focus on the Realms in it's entirety, talking about different areas and times throughout the whole damn book and setting? I'd like for them to put a stopper on the timeline at about 1480 DR and upto that point, everything written is Canon and we now find reasons to flesh out those canon parts that don't fit exactly like a jig-saw puzzel.
Though I'm just not sure if there will be any middle ground. As a post-Spellplague fan, I'm happy with the changes they made and enjoy playing in that timeline (amongst other timelines too). I DON'T like Maztica, Mulhorand, or Unther. I never cared for them at all YET I still considered them apart of the Realms canon. I changed the place to fit something else I like. So why is that so hard to ask of other fans who don't enjoy the Spellplague. If you were to completly consider the whole thing non-existant or an alternate timeline and your campaign is still set in pre-1385....what does it change? Really, what is the problem here? Those events won't happen for you or your group. You can change whatever you like AND you can still benefit from aspects of the "Future" IF they spark your fancy AND it's canon IF that's something you like adhering to every once in a while.
Honestly, at this point I think people are just over-reacting now. They're going to do what they're going to do and I'll buy it and change it to my hearts content, using the Realms like a big 'ol Buffet. |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1294 Posts |
Posted - 08 Feb 2012 : 18:20:01
|
quote:
Ed's vision of the Realms would reset the setting to something far different than your personal cutoff point of Return of the Archwizards, meaning we'd all be in the same boat.
You wouldn't want that, would you?
Actually, I would love that. I trust in Ed's version of the Realms--far more than I trust in the people who were responsible for the 4th edition FR and seem to have been let go. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
