| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
 Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 03:49:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Even if Sage was in the wrong, and he's not. He un-stickied the post as soon as he could and apologized. That is more than most moderators (or posters, us bunch of unruly rascals) on any forum would do.
True enough... and for the record, Sage, I fully support your original decision to sticky this scroll. Scribe Jeremy was fully in the right to call me out, and he did so for exactly the right reasons. I thought that we had some good thought-provoking discussion going on, which I believe is what Sage was hoping would happen. Can we please try to get back to that in this scroll? |
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. |
 |
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31726 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 03:53:55
|
The support from you all is greatly appreciated, folks. Really, it does mean a lot to me. Thank you.
quote:
Originally posted by Imp
It's just one post. Why are you making such a big deal out of it, Sage?
I think it's because I've always said, in the past, that both myself and Wooly, ultimately, serve at the behest of all scribes, and the general community. I feel like I've betrayed the trust that this community has placed in me, as a result of the recent choices I've made [note, I'm referring to more than just this current situation] over the last few months. This new development has simply reinforced doubts I've had in my own ability to remain objective and neutral when it comes to the overall stance of the Candlekeep community as a whole.
I understand that it might not be a big deal for some, but it is for me. I've served this community for nearly an entire decade. Candlekeep is like a second home to me. Whenever I'm not online, I still like to think about both the great discussions and the great friends I have had and made here over the years. So I'm inclined to think that, with nearly ten years under my belt with respect to helping this community, that I feel something of a special relationship with the site and it's members. I value each and every past, current, and future scribe of this community. Even those I've strongly disagreed with, because I respect that their own passions are just as valid as my own. I don't think less of any scribe I've butted heads with, because I'm simply not programmed that way.
This Sage respects all. So when problematic situations, like those of recent months, have been popping up, I tend to view my own poorly conceived actions as betraying that respect I have for every scribe and every scribe's individual point of view.
I'll deal with it, I suppose, and I suspect I'll get back to respecting my own judgements. [Content temporarily removed pending re-evaluation] I'm not standing down, because I don't feel that would be right for either this community, or my own sense of self. [Additional content temporarily removed pending further re-evaluation]
Thank you, again, to you all. You're a remarkable lot of folk and a treasure of the online Realms community.
|
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 |
Edited by - The Sage on 06 Feb 2012 04:35:01 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 03:59:42
|
Sage, you've been by far the most positive person on these boards throughout my stay here and expressed an almost unmatched zeal for the Realms in it's entirety (all forms, not just selective areas or time-lines). It'd be a very sad day indeed if you left or felt that you should step down. I know things get pessimistic when dealing with certain issues and tempers flare but it's on us (the community) to step back and say "is what I'm posting productive? does it further the discussion/debate? is it inflammatory?" If the answer isn't one that'll provide a positive atmosphere, then stepping back and taking a break or clearing one's head is always better than posting in haste.
Now, I know I've posted things that were not helpful or angered others and I have to understand that people don't share my POV and no matter how hard or loud I yell, it's not going to accomplish things. Rounds after rounds of "Yea huh! Nuh Uh! Yea huh! Nuh Uh!" get no where real quick.
So Sage, I hope you don't step down. You've been such a positive and influential moderator here that it would be a damn shame if you left. I see no reason why you should and your easily justified (by my book) to sticky any thing you feel is relevant to the betterment of this community. |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 04:53:51
|
| Sage must stay..... besides there is nobody to take his place if he steps down... |
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 |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 04:55:23
|
| Ah, I frequent some forums where the mods are really biased. I've never gotten that impression from this forum, or from you Sage. You just made a little gaff, don't worry. |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:15:55
|
[/un-lurk mode]
Sage needs to stay. 
[/re-lurk mode] |
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:26:40
|
| Thank you for chiming in on this one, Therise. And I second Eladrinstar's comments about other forums (and I'll leave the culprit{s} nameless, but they've been mentioned directly by name here in the past, so I suspect that long-time scribes here will remember the events I'm referring to). |
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. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36797 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:34:29
|
I've no problem with publicly admitting that Sage is a better moderator than I. I've got my own flaws to deal with, and I know it. I try not to let them get in the way, but I know there's been once or twice that my reaction to something was not ideal. And Sage can confirm I've second-guessed myself more than once. He's reassured me a lot more oft than I've had to reassure him.
I'll admit when someone is better than me at something, and Sage is more even-tempered than I, stays closer to neutral than I, and has a more delicate touch with problem scribes than I.
I'm better looking, though.*  
I would not have stickied this thread, myself. That said, I do agree with some of the sentiments.
I will add, though, something I've said more than once: to me, the biggest issue driving the edition wars isn't who's right and who's wrong, or who was wronged and who wasn't: it's the lack of respect used when addressing people who disagree. Asking for some courtesy isn't censorship, or dictating opinion, or saying someone can't express themselves. It's just asking for some basic civility. I wish more people understood this.
We are all here because we love the Realms. We may not all like the same aspects or eras, but we're all here to run around in Ed's playground.
*My wife sometimes complains that I do this: crack jokes in an otherwise serious conversation. But hey, in this case, it's just a simple truth! |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36797 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:41:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
Thank you for chiming in on this one, Therise. And I second Eladrinstar's comments about other forums (and I'll leave the culprit{s} nameless, but they've been mentioned directly by name here in the past, so I suspect that long-time scribes here will remember the events I'm referring to).
Pretty much everyone here knows I was banned from the WotC forums, and that I maintain this was wrongfully done.
And another forum I used to be active on, I had serious issues with one of the moderators. I didn't like him before, but after he edited one of my posts to reflect his opinion (which strongly contradicted mine), I lost all respect for him. The fact that another moderator tried to work with me, on that occasion, was all that kept me from quitting (that, and the site owner weighing in on the whole thing). I did later manage to call out that particular moderator, when he was blatantly breaking one on of the rules he was supposed to enforce. His offending post was quietly removed, without comment. A small victory, but I was pleased.
Anyway, those experiences shape, in part, how I wear my own mod hat. If I realize that I'm doing something that one mod would do, then I know I'm in the wrong.
It's kind of sad that that's the example he serves for me, but there you go...
As for myself, I also want people to let me know if they think I'm in the wrong. Or bring it up with Sage, or Big Al. None of us is perfect, and it's human nature to be blind to our own flaws. |
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! |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:52:42
|
The issue, insofar as I see it, is not an 'us' versus 'them' (or shouldn't be, anyways). With the exception of obvious baitmongers like 'Troll King' and the like, a scribe is a scribe is a scribe. And Sage has nothing, as I see it, to apologize for.
The issues are, however:
(1) The tone we often take (and with apologies to Jeremy, that includes some of the tone of the initial post). Antagonism to get your point across may work, but it is very rarely appreciated.
(2) The refusal to budge. I have noticed this more among those scribes that prefer the 4th Edition shelf, but we have all been guilty of it to some degree. My first post here (over two years past) was 'What do you LIKE about 4th Ed. Realms?', and I have tried to highlight those points about it that were positive. But admittedly, when the phrase 'divergent timeline' was used, I admit to preferring that to any other (and was raked across the coals when I said so). I was not about to say 'Only this', but that leads me to my last indisputable (to me, anyways) point:
(3) Wizbro has proven repeatedly that they don't 'get it'. To me, it has nothing to do with anything here - what happens on the WotC boards, at EnWorld, and here in Candlekeep (to name a few) are symptoms - they are not the problem. Ultimately, the fault is in Redmond, and nowhere else. They've had their moments - gems like the Neverwinter Campaign Setting, for example. And if they would just stop -CENSOR-ing around and turn the Realms over to Ed and the (mostly) freelancers who do 'get it', there wouldn't be any Edition Wars or any other type of problem.
Hopefully, Ed's latest efforts are a sign that they are starting to 'get it'. I am hopeful - but at the same time, I am very, very worried that some professor will try to 'improve' Ed's work. And these pointless arguments and recriminations and all other sorts of pointlessness will go on and on. It's rather discouraging.  |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 05:57:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
The issue, insofar as I see it, is not an 'us' versus 'them' (or shouldn't be, anyways). With the exception of obvious baitmongers like 'Troll King' and the like, a scribe is a scribe is a scribe. And Sage has nothing, as I see it, to apologize for.
The issues are, however:
(1) The tone we often take (and with apologies to Jeremy, that includes some of the tone of the initial post). Antagonism to get your point across may work, but it is very rarely appreciated.
(2) The refusal to budge. I have noticed this more among those scribes that prefer the 4th Edition shelf, but we have all been guilty of it to some degree. My first post here (over two years past) was 'What do you LIKE about 4th Ed. Realms?', and I have tried to highlight those points about it that were positive. But admittedly, when the phrase 'divergent timeline' was used, I admit to preferring that to any other (and was raked across the coals when I said so). I was not about to say 'Only this', but that leads me to my last indisputable (to me, anyways) point:
(3) Wizbro has proven repeatedly that they don't 'get it'. To me, it has nothing to do with anything here - what happens on the WotC boards, at EnWorld, and here in Candlekeep (to name a few) are symptoms - they are not the problem. Ultimately, the fault is in Redmond, and nowhere else. They've had their moments - gems like the Neverwinter Campaign Setting, for example. And if they would just stop -CENSOR-ing around and turn the Realms over to Ed and the (mostly) freelancers who do 'get it', there wouldn't be any Edition Wars or any other type of problem. Hopefully, Ed's latest efforts are a sign that they are starting to 'get it'. I am hopeful - but at the same time, I am very, very worried that some professor will try to 'improve' Ed's work. And these pointless arguments and recriminations and all other sorts of pointlessness will go on and on. It's rather discouraging.
OMH I couldn't agree with this post more. Spot on. |
"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 |
Edited by - Brimstone on 06 Feb 2012 05:57:57 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:02:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
It's just the thing about the Spellplague was that WotC was listening to what people hated about the Realms, not what people liked about it. It's a setting designed to appease people who just plain didn't like the Realms.
I've been chewing on these two sentences all day.
Thought about replying right away, but I held off because I wanted the thread to develop some (and boy did it ever).
So, I've seen in the past how statements about the Realms can have two origins. Consider the Chosen of Mystra.
I've read statements calling the Chosen a bunch of superheroes; a Realms Justice League that solves all the crimes and puts down evil everywhere.
I've also read statements describing the Chosen as ever present, as having too much spotlight and of being too ubiquitous in the Realms.
The first statement is an example of the internet echo chamber. It's an example of someone who doesn't think before they speak. Instead it's all about jumping on the hate wagon and repeating negative statements about the Realms for the lolz. In terms of signal to noise ratio, it's 99% noise.
The second kind of statement is an example of a critique. It's valid statement of opinion. It's 99% signal and something people at WotC should listen too.
When I read what you wrote, Eladrinstar, it appears to me that you're lumping thoughtless mockery in with valid critique of the Realms as though there's no difference.
The post-Spellplague Realms were not designed for people who hate the setting, because people who offer valid criticisms aren't motivated by hate for the setting. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 06 Feb 2012 06:08:07 |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:08:29
|
Then let me make myself more clear, this is what I think happened:
WotC listened to what fans of the Realms disliked. They also listened to both the dislikes and likes of people who didn't like the Realms.
See the crucial element missing there?
It's obvious in the very nature of the Spellplague, conveniently harming everything the design team wanted to get rid of, and the new setting then emphasized none of the elements fans of the Realms have loved for so many years. |
Edited by - Eladrinstar on 06 Feb 2012 06:10:24 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:22:20
|
I think it was WotC who instead conflated the two statements, superheroes and spotlight, as one mass of extreme dislike. It might have seemed to WotC it was 100% critique signal backed with 100% noise for emphasis. From this skewed perspective they felt it best to discard this element of the setting in the quickest method they thought possible.
Likewise with the abundant number of deities and pantheons, specific deities, certain areas of the Realms, an active recent history, and having to clear territory to create dangerous and untamed areas. |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:23:54
|
Agreed with OMH on his first point. It's often the tone that ignites the flames. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31726 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:27:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm better looking, though.*
[...]
*But hey, in this case, it's just a simple truth!
Perhaps we should put this to the vote, eh? |
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 |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:31:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm better looking, though.*
[...]
*But hey, in this case, it's just a simple truth!
Perhaps we should put this to the vote, eh?
I'd vote Al, instead! |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:32:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
Then let me make myself more clear, this is what I think happened:
WotC listened to what fans of the Realms disliked. They also listened to both the dislikes and likes of people who didn't like the Realms.
See the crucial element missing there?
I think I see the point you're driving at.
I don't agree with you, but I see it.
To me it's more like the designers took all the valid criticisms and tried to enact as many of them as they could.
Could they have weighed the likes-side of things more? I think so.
But I just don't know real details behind how the decision process worked. I wish we knew more hard facts.
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
It's obvious in the very nature of the Spellplague, conveniently harming everything the design team wanted to get rid of, and the new setting then emphasized none of the elements fans of the Realms have loved for so many years.
Is "none" really the right word?
Cormyr, Waterdeep, the Savage North, the Heartlands, etc...all still there, their histories still intact, waiting for stories to be told in them.
Also, for many years fans of the Realms have loved the Realms under different guises and rules editions. That a swarm of deities were unleashed into the Realms during mid to late 2nd Edition D&D was not something that all old fans liked--I found the multi-pantheon approach to be cumbersome.
The post-Spellplague Realms at least speaks to a desire for having less deities.
One of the things I hope 5E does is allow for fallen deities to return, or at least introduces the Realms in such a way that DMs who want simplicity aren't confronted with a mile-high list of deities, but encourages DMs who want more complexity and world detail to get a DDI account with WotC and log on for the big giant master list of all Realmsian deities. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:33:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
I think it was WotC who instead conflated the two statements, superheroes and spotlight, as one mass of extreme dislike. It might have seemed to WotC it was 100% critique signal backed with 100% noise for emphasis. From this skewed perspective they felt it best to discard this element of the setting in the quickest method they thought possible.
That's a good point. I hadn't thought of it that way. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:34:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm better looking, though.*
[...]
*But hey, in this case, it's just a simple truth!
Perhaps we should put this to the vote, eh?
THO! |
"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 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 06:59:09
|
Having DDI be an additional resource for DMs and groups who want an expanded pantheon would have been a great idea. If they enacted this strategy during 4E without the harsh scrub down, it might have made the two versions feel less disjointed.
Hopefully this will be part of their plan for 5E, but to put things back to how they were would take more work than if they simply did not emphasize the lesser deities during 4E.
I don't even think the number of deities was the issue so much as the overtly active interventionist deities. It seems some god-war or another has always been happening in the Realms since the ToT. I don't mean just the clergy going at it, which would have been fine, but the gods and avatars themselves.
This is the short list:
- ToT and aftermath
- Bane's return and his conflict with Cyric with each having chosen or seraphs, the baneliches, and Xvim.
- Tiamat making her move late 3e with the Dragonfall and Tchazzar
- Mask and his dealings and chosen
- The Tyr/Tymora/Helm debacle
- The trimming of the dwarven pantheon when they killed or absorbed the duergar
- Blue Fire/Spellplague when Cyric finally kills Mystra and her subordinates.
This is less divine chess (like original Clash of the Titans) but more like chess-boxing where the gods maneuver their mortal pieces on the board then go for a few rounds hand-to-hand - lather, rinse and repeat. |
Edited by - Dark Wizard on 06 Feb 2012 07:01:19 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2421 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 07:00:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon
what.... SAge did something wrong???
cant see SAge doing something wrong.....
quote:
Originally posted by Eladrinstar
You just made a little gaff, don't worry.
Let me elucidate. The Sage bumped the thread proclaiming something well-meant, which as i noted in that thread due to being rather inarticulate can and will be read as "Let's respect each other's opinions: I, for one, will not allow less than shiny mentions of FR.4e (or just 4e?)" - even if it technically wasn't and he probably didn't mean anything close to this.
The holywar remains, it's just rather cold (minor eruptions and demonstrative yawns in their general direction) mainly because it's not hot news and most people realize how silly and useless flamewars as such are. The Sage finally got annoyed by it. Understandable (who isn't?), but a move this "deft" made the boat rock again, provoking a defensive hiss from one side we can see there, and happy hurrah! from another we can see here. That is, stirring the issue brought the entirely predictable results.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Sage, you have an absolute vote of confidence from me. I don't believe for one second that you've overstepped your bounds.
Even if this will happen to be exactly the thing prompting him to put his weight this time on someone rocking on another gunwale? For balance. He looks really fed up with flamewars, who knows... |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 07:05:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
The post-Spellplague Realms were not designed for people who hate the setting, because people who offer valid criticisms aren't motivated by hate for the setting.
I have to put in a quantifier here. Not all criticisms offered up about the Realms before the Shattered Realms were introduced were positively worded, phrased, or intended to be either.
And regardless of the criticisms, constructive or otherwise, made by the 'fans', the sheer arrogance of the professors at WotC, who presumed to tell us what it was we wanted, was absolutely astounding to behold. Don't believe me? It's splashed all over the boards over at Wizbro, and it's been proven that Paizo got a lot of its current adherents from the ranks of those who decided they were fed up with being talked down to by a bunch of people who demonstrated that they didn't give a rat's...behind...about the Realms or anything in them.
Wizbro was the problem. They have been the problem. And they will continue to be the problem if they can't demonstrate they've put a successful brake on the insufferable self-righteousness that landed us all in this mess in the first place.
- OMH |
Edited by - Old Man Harpell on 06 Feb 2012 07:07:51 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2421 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 07:39:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Believe it or not, there was no secret cadre of people out to make as many Realms fans as possible suffer.
...so OP hotly argues with a strawman of Them Stupid Conspiracy Theorists (let's use the term more often before some pro propagandist pops up to claim the soparight ) and...
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Some of us�no, most of us, are fans of all the Forgotten Realms. We may prefer some version of a setting light on Chosen, not choked with deities and generally free from Realms Shaking Events, but that doesn�t mean we wouldn�t be interested in paging through a Volo�s Guide, we somehow don�t care about the history of the setting or we�re mostly new to the Realms and don�t know much about it.
...plays the old game "there's no Us and Them, there's only Us All and a handful of greedy savages people who just like to be rude and contrary". It almost looks like there's no fandom split at some issue - just shining Unity (c) and some disrespectful trolls, that's all, right?
Essentially, it's old good trick with "self-assigned voice of Progressive Humanity (TM)", or "NPOV". 
So, here's a voice from a chair in the back row: we may not exactly all "prefer some version of a setting" which you so laconically described. What gave you such a strange thought? Wishing the problem away? Or most folk not doing a wardance on top of barricades? 
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Am I understanding this correctly?
It sounds like Sage has caught a rather huge pile of flack for daring to support a call for unity? [...] I cannot believe one or more scribes actually went after him to the point where he felt compelled to offer his head up on a chopping block.
..and now can become The Sage's personal White Knight! I, confusingly, see neither a cry for champion from The Sage, nor why he would need any in the first place - does that seem to be superfluous?  Raising your echoing cross section isn't necessary at this stage either, for that matter.
The only thing confusing me more is that a champion presumably have to stand before the guarded - and starting from this your message the disposition somehow turned to the exact opposite. 
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
If yes...well, if anyone is that angry, feel free to PM me with your angry rants. I can take the worst you have to offer. Believe me.
Thanks for the hospitality, o fellow Realmsfan! You are always welcome to my cozy quiet /dev/null as well. For example, you won't be reading my idle musings on your methods here if you'd put in PM your happy, ah, hunt call.
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
(1) The tone we often take (and with apologies to Jeremy, that includes some of the tone of the initial post). Antagonism to get your point across may work, but it is very rarely appreciated.
I love understatements. You're my favourite sage for now. quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
(2) The refusal to budge. I have noticed this more among those scribes that prefer the 4th Edition shelf, but we have all been guilty of it to some degree.
It's so with all holywars. People don't move, so the choice obviously limits to standing where you are or standing where you are and blowing a vuvuzela. Until vuvuzela itself starts to bother even fans of the same team, that is. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36797 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 11:05:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
To me it's more like the designers took all the valid criticisms and tried to enact as many of them as they could.
I disagree. I'm one of those that believes they took most criticisms, valid or invalid, and tried to cater to them. And most of those criticisms were invalid.
Without coming down on any edition, I fail to see any improvements to the setting whatsoever with the 4E Realms. That's not me saying it's bad, that's me saying it's not better than anything that came 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! |
|
|
|
Salacar
Acolyte
Denmark
33 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 12:13:49
|
This reminds me of the first time I took a look at the 4th edition Player's Handbook, and thought to myself "Since when did DnD turn into WoW?".
I'm just fine with the post-Spellplague Realms, I even like some parts of the story, the only thing I disliked in 4th edition were the rules, these same rules however were probably liked by many other people, new and old players alike.
I don't know any of those people though, since everyone I play with agree that 4th edition was made for "roll-players" instead of "roleplayers", as we like to put it ^_^
Regardless, some people like 3th edition and the "old" realms and some people like 4th edition and the "new" realms, who are we to decide which one is best and which one should be used? We could strut our opinion around all day and it wouldn't make a lick of difference. |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 14:05:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Hi Jakk,
I’m about to write some pretty strong words. They’re not pointed at you specifically, but rather at some of the ideas/memes floating around these halls that one of your posts in another scroll are built on.
Despite how harsh the words may seem, they’re written with good intentions and directed at the general population of Candlekeep.
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk
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;
The idea of a “them” and an “us” is, to put it far, far too nicely, a load of stinking rubbish.
People who enjoy the post-Spellplague Realms in some way (Living Forgotten Realms, Realmslore from DDI subscriptions, novels, FRCG/PG or the Neverwinter Campaign Guide) are by no means just fans of the post-Spellplague Realms.
Some of us…no, most of us, are fans of all the Forgotten Realms. We may prefer some version of a setting light on Chosen, not choked with deities and generally free from Realms Shaking Events, but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t be interested in paging through a Volo’s Guide, we somehow don’t care about the history of the setting or we’re mostly new to the Realms and don’t know much about it.
It doesn’t mean we approve of how WotC handled the Spellplague, either.
And no, calling out for things to be trimmed back isn’t the same thing as screaming bloody murder that the setting be gutted and its long time fans be made to suffer.
Believe it or not, there was no secret cadre of people out to make as many Realms fans as possible suffer. I sincerely hope nobody on this forum takes this idea seriously.
With all due respect, if you’re a longtime fan of the Realms but hated the Spellplague, that doesn’t mean you own the exclusive right to call yourself a fan of the Realms.
Anyone who buys a Campaign Guide or reads a Forgotten Realms novel and lets one of these products inspire their imagination is a fan of the Forgotten Realms.
This fact remains true for as long as they let their imagination wander the Realms, just like Ed Greenwood did when he was a kid.
This is why it should be pretty clear we are all fans of the Forgotten Realms.
It would therefore be an improvement of gargantuan proportions if scribes on this website stopped reinforcing the "us vs. them" meme (itself an echo of the D&D edition wars) and started talking in terms of us. (I think Jakk was moving in that direction in his post, btw, even if I disagree with how he went about it.)
Nobody who calls him or herself a fan of the Realms deserves to have another Spellplague-like event happen again.
I think we can all agree that once was more than enough, thank you very much.
Apologies to Wooley and Sage if this post causes you any headaches.
Someone needed to say it.
Mod Edit: Removed some virtual adhesive.
Well there is alot to be said.
First I want to address the edition wars. Have you ever been to some sci fi sites, for example the science fiction poetry association? When discussing what sci fi actually is that website exploded. The website wanted to keep its credentials as HARD science fiction, but they thought they had to expand to include the more unbelievable genres like star trek. The flame wars were intense. Much like if you go to a truck enthusiast website and read some discussions between Chevy owners and Ford owners. Incredibly stupid flame wars. Much like PF/4e flame wars. Flame wars are not unique to passionate gamers, nor are such stupid topics for flamewars unique to passionate gamers.
With that said, WOTC is again changing D&D. I had a pretty intense dislike for 4e realms and the game. Yet WOTC sales suffered. Did the flame war contribute to that? I don't know. But if it did, and I as a misnomered 'grognard' (as if I was a 19th century artillerist) might possibly get the game I wanted. SO where I can agree the flame war was hurtful and fractured the hobby, the flame war might actually be the catalyst to provide the game system that unites the hobby once more.
Look for me 4e was a BAD thing. Having WOTC change 4e to anything but 4e I considered a step in the right direction. It is hard to say this without trying to sound like I approve of the flame wars; but it appeared the changes to 4e were from squeaky wheels that wanted something new. Maybe because many of those that desired the 'new' made their presence more known on the net, so WOTC mistakenly thought they constituted ALL gamers. The flame war coupled with numbers that did not make them happy in sales, forced them to change the game. Into something I would like I hope. Into something I hope is not so divisive.
Now for the realms. The GOOD that was touted for the 4e realms was exactly what you claim was not the case. The internet buzz was that the 'realms can finally be played in because I do not have to read so much material.' "there are finally no superheroes to disrupt my games," "No more players can tell me I am wrong as a gm!".
Since a DM could ignore the lore he did not like, and since Elmister and the Seven Sisters never visited my home and demand they were injected in the game (though I would welcome any of them into my home, ESPECIALLY Qilué Veladorn), and since as a GM you can tell a player that you are running the Game the way you see fit, all of these problems could have been solved without throwing the meat out of the stew.
In short, grognards would claim Realms was great as is, and the response would be, too bad the realms were too hard.
The impression, right or wrong was that the realms were reduced due to intellectual laziness. Yet as you say, MANY MANY 4e realms fans are delving into old lore to flesh it out. That tells me it was a bad move by WOTC. They could have kept the Realms AS IS, and I bet the people, labeled for convenience in your post as 'them' would have been just as happy, and the people labeled as 'us' would have given 4e more of a chance.
In essence I agree with you. I was convinced to read FR lore on DDI. It is good, quality, Lore. Even the Swords of state article which is mostly crunch which I am converting to Pathfinder now.
So I see the FR is still quality. However I cannot regret the flamewar, because it just might have caused the change I want. The idea out of the gate with 4e, was WOTC telling the gamers that they listened to them on forums. Well the grognards listened to that. Apparently WOTC listened.
With that said I do not want to see the fans of 4e lost the realms they know because i have changed my tune and I see the realms STILL as quality. I do however want the new edition of D&D.
I don't actually blame HASBRO at ALL. They tell WOTC what they want. It is up to WOTC how they execute the order. |
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
Edited by - Mournblade on 06 Feb 2012 14:12:50 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 14:06:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I see our commonalities as follows:
1. We're all fans of the Forgotten Realms.
2. We are all motivated to talk with strangers on the Internet about the Forgotten Realms. Not every fan of the Realms does this.
3. None of us likes the Realms 100%. There is for all of us some part or parts of the setting, novels, stories, plot arcs or sourcebooks we just aren't interested in or don't care for. This informs what parts of the Realms we set our D&D campaigns in and what constitutes our personal "view" of the Realms in our mind's eye.
I am going to disagree with this attempt at establishing some commonality (and probably upset some in the process).
1) Only because the Shattered Realms has the same name are we fans of the Forgotten Realms. I could just as easily say that both I and some of our British posters here are fans of football, but we would be talking about entirely different things.
2) Sure, however the time jump and what not has made it virtually impossible for those of us that like the original Realms (ie 1300's) setting to discuss much with those tied into the 4E Shattered Realms (too many people are gone, places obliterated, etc). In other words the division was created by the 4E Realms themselves.
3) This is entirely different from jumping a setting 100 years into the future, destroying the very map, and essentially making the "new lore" virtually worthless to those of us that preferred the Classic Realms. I can easily ignore the ToT if I wanted, but still access virtually all of the 2nd edition lore. The same cannot be said about the Shattered Realms. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 14:53:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I disagree. I'm one of those that believes they took most criticisms, valid or invalid, and tried to cater to them. And most of those criticisms were invalid.
Without coming down on any edition, I fail to see any improvements to the setting whatsoever with the 4E Realms. That's not me saying it's bad, that's me saying it's not better than anything that came before.
I might suggest staying far away from RPG.net then, as there is a thread over there that might disagree with you pretty vehemently. But I'm all for reading other peoples views and opinions on the topic. Their criticsm of the Realms is often the same ones cited over 3 years ago and even with the changes, they weren't enough to bring them over to the setting. Sure, it might make someone more indifferent than hostile, but for the most part, the changes didn't sway their opinion. And of course the changes angered a lot of the fan base at that time as well. But I can't begrudge WotC the attempt to pander to people on the fence or might not like the setting in hopes of grabbing them as potential customers IN ADDITION TO new players that might have been intimidated by all the lore surrounding the Realms.
But whether you love the changes to the Realms via Spellplague or like the Realms pre-Time of Troubles or love the hodgepodge inbetween, your a Realms fan and that's the point of the thread. People's opinion differ about the Realms but we're here cus we're fans OF the Realms. We should focus on that and not on the negative aspect each of us individually dislike. |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1281 Posts |
Posted - 06 Feb 2012 : 14:54:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
To me it's more like the designers took all the valid criticisms and tried to enact as many of them as they could.
I disagree. I'm one of those that believes they took most criticisms, valid or invalid, and tried to cater to them. And most of those criticisms were invalid.
Without coming down on any edition, I fail to see any improvements to the setting whatsoever with the 4E Realms. That's not me saying it's bad, that's me saying it's not better than anything that came before.
What Wooly said, I agree massively. And in making this "change for the same", they alienated a huge amount of paying customers.
The more I have time to digest, I agree with a Star Trek style reboot of the Timeline. Ed Greenwood's version of the Realms works for me. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Sorry, we're all fans of the Forgotten Realms.
Topic Locked
