| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
 Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 00:25:25
|
I have been giving this a lot of thought recently, and I believe that the best solution to the Realms would be to reboot the setting to the time of FR2 Moonshae (ie 1335 DR). Now, when I say reboot, what I really mean is move of the default time to 1335DR and not necessarily the removal of any previously written lore. To me this would be the best of all worlds, as any of the previously detailed time periods could be played (1357-14xx) AND we would get a default timeline back to a lesser detailed era that has many events available for writers to flesh out (with a built in cap on RSE's). By going back to 1335 (without invalidating all previous lore), WoTC would then get roughly 20 years of real time or so before they even had to make their first decision on a RSE (the ToT) and even a redone ToT (assuming it is kept) could be done far better, as we could then get "real time" adventures and lore about what ALL of the gods were doing. WoTC would also be able to flesh out things like the Darkwalker War, Scardale's war on the dales, etc and all without alienating any part of the fanbase.
And even if they chose to split the timeline (not something I am advocating) and have the 1400's Realms continue at the same time, it wouldn't effect the 1330's Realms, since we already know what happened (generally) in the 1330's and the two timelines wouldn't conflict unless we brought time travel into play extensively.
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 01:27:29
|
This type of reboot would make me extremely happy. But then again I've been called things like "arrogant" and "selfish"... and that I apparently want to deny people their toys and force them to play in my sandbox. YMMV.
I wish you luck with your thread, and I hope it encourages others of similar mind to discuss the many positive aspects of a reboot, but I expect that since you're not on a particular bandwagon that you may see a lot of grief.
|
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! |
 |
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 01:37:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
This type of reboot would make me extremely happy. But then again I've been called things like "arrogant" and "selfish"... and that I apparently want to deny people their toys and force them to play in my sandbox. YMMV.
I wish you luck with your thread, and I hope it encourages others of similar mind to discuss the many positive aspects of a reboot, but I expect that since you're not on a particular bandwagon that you may see a lot of grief.
Thanks. I just see this as the only way to go that can both bring back the sales of us high disposable income grognards while also not peeving off those who like more recent developments and at the same time not re-writing any lore. |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 01:45:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
This type of reboot would make me extremely happy. But then again I've been called things like "arrogant" and "selfish"... and that I apparently want to deny people their toys and force them to play in my sandbox. YMMV.
I wish you luck with your thread, and I hope it encourages others of similar mind to discuss the many positive aspects of a reboot, but I expect that since you're not on a particular bandwagon that you may see a lot of grief.
Thanks. I just see this as the only way to go that can both bring back the sales of us high disposable income grognards while also not peeving off those who like more recent developments and at the same time not re-writing any lore.
I agree. I also think that it doesn't -technically- eliminate any possible future (such as 4E) and you could then be much more free to pick and choose among all the lore that's currently available and published.
At the same time, designers and authors wouldn't be constrained by later-period lore and could rewrite various things to execute them in a much better manner (or completely differently) while allowing gamers maximum freedom.
|
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! |
Edited by - Therise on 26 Jun 2012 01:46:13 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 02:14:52
|
I'd rather play in my sandbox than in the current sandbox.....
so whatever, best of luck tou you in your thread |
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 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4266 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 03:24:47
|
I would love to see a publishing effort in support of different ages. I am still deeply in love with 1e (and 2e to a degree) as a rules set...even more with the Old Grey Box feeling I still get when looking at early Forgotten Realms material.
What I think we could perhaps persuade them to do is give us the lore...and let us worry about the rules after that? Many materials that they have published in the years gone by had details inside on how to convert to different rules sets.
The Gazetteer series of Mystara each had a "how to convert to AD&D" section in each book that took only about a page. I don't see how this would be a bad thing for them:
Extra Page 1: "How to use with 1e/2e (since the two are very similar)
Extra Page 2: "How to use with 3.x"
Extra Page 3: "How to use with 4e"
The book itself could be using the 5e mechanics, but give options in each book amounting to only ONE PAGE on how to convert the mechanics for earlier editions.
This would enable us to use the rules we want, while still allowing them the illusion of selling lots of 5e material.
They were very successful with this type of strategy when transitioning from 1e to 2e...and to a lesser extent into 3.x (with their little free conversion booklet). I'm sitting here right now looking at two of the books they did this with: Greyhawk Adventures and Forgotten Realms Adventures. They did something similar with Dragonlance going to 2e as well.
I hope that the shadows are telling me the truth...that WotC is going to try "Lore Heavy" on settings while at the same time sporadically release mechanics books (core books) for the various rules systems they have rights to in addition with any new materials they are publishing in the D&D Next (5e) line.
They already have had luck with the print of 1e...and not just because it is in memory of Gary Gygax...pre-orders have been solid on this one. If they have the same luck with their new idea of a 3.5 release; then I think we will see much more support in the future for re-prints of older material in union with new "Lore Heavy" materials to use with any and all systems.
I hope.  |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4266 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 03:45:51
|
Thinking a little bit more on this, I think it would be awesome if they opened up the novel line to various ages as well!
Who doesn't remember tales coming to light even today after being unearthed by someone in a dig. It would be awesome to be able to hear stories from the various ages in novels...and that ISN'T something they haven't done before.
Elaine Cunningham did a damn fine job with the Elves of Evermeet novel!
It is something that CAN be done...we just have to convince them there is the market for it. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 07:03:32
|
@Apex: would you be at all interested in going a little further back? Something on the order of 1275 DR (approx. the date of rule of Salember the Rebel Prince" in Cormyr)?
That's about 60 years prior to what you're suggesting, I realize, but I wonder if 60 more years isn't better in terms of capturing and expressing (through new sourcebooks) the classic Realms feel? |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 26 Jun 2012 07:06:34 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 07:54:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
@Apex: would you be at all interested in going a little further back? Something on the order of 1275 DR (approx. the date of rule of Salember the Rebel Prince" in Cormyr)?
That's about 60 years prior to what you're suggesting, I realize, but I wonder if 60 more years isn't better in terms of capturing and expressing (through new sourcebooks) the classic Realms feel?
I would like it, but I think that this would be very risky. One of the main complaints against the 4ed. was that so many npc's were dead. I think a lot of people would have the same objections concerning them not being born. '35 has the advantage of a lot of the characters just starting out and a generation we have never really seen being the dominant one.
And 35' would give me more information on the Gondegal war (with the players working with him of course; the decision to send him to Ravenloft is not among my favourites), fighting Lashan and removing the Bhaalites from the inn (embarrassed here that I cant for the life of me remember the name)now run by gnomes in the Sword Coast. Oh I would love this. But i would gleefully buy a 1275 book too. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Thrasymachus
Learned Scribe
195 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 08:50:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
I have been giving this a lot of thought recently, and I believe that the best solution to the Realms would be to reboot the setting to the time of FR2 Moonshae (ie 1335 DR). Now, when I say reboot, what I really mean is move of the default time to 1335DR and not necessarily the removal of any previously written lore. To me this would be the best of all worlds, as any of the previously detailed time periods could be played (1357-14xx) AND we would get a default timeline back to a lesser detailed era that has many events available for writers to flesh out (with a built in cap on RSE's). By going back to 1335 (without invalidating all previous lore), WoTC would then get roughly 20 years of real time or so before they even had to make their first decision on a RSE (the ToT) and even a redone ToT (assuming it is kept) could be done far better, as we could then get "real time" adventures and lore about what ALL of the gods were doing. WoTC would also be able to flesh out things like the Darkwalker War, Scardale's war on the dales, etc and all without alienating any part of the fanbase.
And even if they chose to split the timeline (not something I am advocating) and have the 1400's Realms continue at the same time, it wouldn't effect the 1330's Realms, since we already know what happened (generally) in the 1330's and the two timelines wouldn't conflict unless we brought time travel into play extensively.
1335 DR sounds good here. Good luck with the thread. |
Former Forgotten Realms brand manager Jim Butler: "Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon". |
|
|
|
BARDOBARBAROS
Senior Scribe
Greece
581 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 09:15:12
|
| Yes.... 1335 DR would be best reboot !!! |
BARDOBARBAROS DOES NOT KILL.
HE DECAPITATES!!!
"The city changes, but the fools within it remain always the same" (Edwin Odesseiron- Baldur's gate 2) |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
498 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 09:26:56
|
I would buy either a 1275 or 1335-centered tome...both, if both were available (which I very much doubt would be the case, sadly).
I hope the thread produces positive ideas, and suggestions, Apex. Good luck!
- OMH |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 14:21:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
@Apex: would you be at all interested in going a little further back? Something on the order of 1275 DR (approx. the date of rule of Salember the Rebel Prince" in Cormyr)?
That's about 60 years prior to what you're suggesting, I realize, but I wonder if 60 more years isn't better in terms of capturing and expressing (through new sourcebooks) the classic Realms feel?
I would like it, but I think that this would be very risky. One of the main complaints against the 4ed. was that so many npc's were dead. I think a lot of people would have the same objections concerning them not being born. '35 has the advantage of a lot of the characters just starting out and a generation we have never really seen being the dominant one.
And 35' would give me more information on the Gondegal war (with the players working with him of course; the decision to send him to Ravenloft is not among my favourites), fighting Lashan and removing the Bhaalites from the inn (embarrassed here that I cant for the life of me remember the name)now run by gnomes in the Sword Coast. Oh I would love this. But i would gleefully buy a 1275 book too.
I picked 1335 for a few reasons. One of which was that it was far enough back to give the Realms time to develop without immediately coming into contact with potential changes in Realmslore (ie RSE's), while also being recent enough that many of the same players we grew to love were still active/beginning their careers (which can make for more great novels). The 1335 year also works well because we have a rough sketch of about 20 years of poorly detailed Realms history that could use a ton of fleshing out, but would add valuable lore to all eras of Realms campaigns. Finally, I chose the 1335 year because it was the year that FR2 was set and thus a pretty good jumping off point from an already published basis.
I would guess that this "reboot" (but not really a reboot since I would not advocate invalidating any already written lore, just a restart of the default time for the Realms) would be the least offensive to a Realms player of any era, as it wouldn't eradicate any existing lore (thus allowing play in all eras) while also fleshing out the history of the world that is useful to all eras of play. |
|
|
|
Brian R. James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
1098 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 16:01:00
|
| As long as the intent was to not alter the canonical timestream (prevent the Time of Troubles from happening, for example) I could get behind something like this. Because really what you're proposing isn't so much a reboot. It's just a campaign sourcebook set in a different era, ala Arcane Age. |
Brian R. James - Freelance Game Designer
Follow me on Twitter @brianrjames |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 16:17:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
As long as the intent was to not alter the canonical timestream (prevent the Time of Troubles from happening, for example) I could get behind something like this. Because really what you're proposing isn't so much a reboot. It's just a campaign sourcebook set in a different era, ala Arcane Age.
Well, not exactly. What I am proposing is that the default timeline (ie for most published materials and for the new FR Campaign Guide and other sourcebooks) be set in 1335 (instead of 14xx). And yes, I am not proposing alternative the existing canon, which is something that can be easily accomplished by going back to 1335. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 16:25:55
|
| In that case I would be more sceptical; the end result would be very different from the world found in the Grey box. The filling out that has been done would make it less interesting for me, in addition to one having a heavily pre-written future looming ahead and blocking various plots and adventures. If this had any plans of being a rpg product it would have to resort to every trick Dragonlance was ever accused of to keep the setting moving in one direction. Keep npc's alive, watch out for players changing the pre-written plot etc. In such a case I cant see an advantage over just continuing with the 15th century. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 16:46:49
|
| Personally, I'd prefer that PCs have clear adventure opportunities for preventing "known" events, and thereby create an alternate timeline/reality. Part of my reasons for wanting a reboot are so DMs and PCs can use all those little plot hooks rather than seeing them just repeat events as the timeline advances. |
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! |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4266 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 17:25:00
|
I don't have a problem with it. WotC could go ahead with the Timeline as planned...but players could change it any way they liked.
This happens all the time already.
A good number of years starting from 1335 on would not "allow PCs to change the timeline" because most printed material could be simply Lore Heavy and deal with fleshing out areas that perhaps didn't get much attention to start with.
Meanwhile, players could do whatever they wanted. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 17:49:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I don't have a problem with it. WotC could go ahead with the Timeline as planned...but players could change it any way they liked.
This happens all the time already.
A good number of years starting from 1335 on would not "allow PCs to change the timeline" because most printed material could be simply Lore Heavy and deal with fleshing out areas that perhaps didn't get much attention to start with.
Meanwhile, players could do whatever they wanted.
That and the enticement of this version of the timeline is that the "big" events that people might want to change won't even occur for over 20 years of gametime and based on the precedent of real time:realms time set between 1st edition and end of 3rd edition, those 20 years of realms time should take at least 15 years of real time and thus WoTC can essentially put off any hard decision on changes to existing canon for a long time. |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 18:21:14
|
| While I would appreciate novels set in this era, I would also like to see the 5e Realms novels not have to focus on any specific point in time. Ideally, I would like to see a few more novels like Cormyr and Evermeet, as well as some set in ancient Cormanthyr, Imaskar, Narfell, and Jhaamdath, in addition to books set in latter era 3.x, in 4e, and the time in between. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 20:23:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
While I would appreciate novels set in this era, I would also like to see the 5e Realms novels not have to focus on any specific point in time. Ideally, I would like to see a few more novels like Cormyr and Evermeet, as well as some set in ancient Cormanthyr, Imaskar, Narfell, and Jhaamdath, in addition to books set in latter era 3.x, in 4e, and the time in between.
All could be accomplished, but books would need to be labeled appropriately so that people knew what era the novel was written for. And even then, writers should be encouraged under this "reboot" to concentrate on the lore of the 1330's or thereabouts. |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 20:49:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
All could be accomplished, but books would need to be labeled appropriately so that people knew what era the novel was written for. And even then, writers should be encouraged under this "reboot" to concentrate on the lore of the 1330's or thereabouts.
I personally like Star Wars' icon system, by which you know what era the novel you are reading takes place. Also, all Star Wars novels have a detailed timeline in the beginning which show which novels take place at what point in the timeline. I think that something like that would be really awesome for Realms novels. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 21:29:16
|
As I've discussed recently in a PM with one Loremaster who knows who she is ( ), I think that if the Realms is going to undergo a "reboot," then this is probably the best solution feasible. The Realms of the OGB has a certain amount of nostalgia and iconic value that should not be overlooked, whether it's return to old stomping grounds for grognards (I use the term with all affection) or a new place to explore for complete FR newbies. I grew up playing 2e Realms, but I've enjoyed my occasional forays into 1e FR. I, for one, would be happy to play in this era.
Make no mistake: in 5e, I want to see 1e-era Forgotten Realms development. That is a key part of my plan.
The questions to be considered are these:
1) Does this fall prey to the same pitfalls as the 4e jump?
What you're essentially proposing is a new version of the setting that's going to be alien to a lot of people currently playing in the Realms, whether they're playing 3e or 4e. There was a lot of development between 1e and 3e and especially 4e, such that one could consider them different settings (even if they're technically the same). The concern is that you put off as many people as last time.
2) *Are they* the same setting?
Even if you build in 20 years to be filled in before you even have to *think* about whether your Classic Realms lines up with the 2e, 3e, or 4e world, you will still have fans crawling all over you demanding an answer as to whether/how the 1e Realms lines up with later versions of the setting. If the answer is "yes, but we're not going into how," you have a 3e to 4e timejump problem. If the answer is "no," then you've got an edition war.
I do think this war would be less heated, since it's more obvious how 1e FR evolves into 2e FR than, say, 3e FR into 4e FR, but it's still a concern, and Loremasters will want to know.
3) Does there have to be an official datestamp at all?
It's kinda nice that each "edition" of the game reflects a particular "edition" of the game. But is that still a necessary aspect of editions of the game? If 5e embraces an era-neutral approach, do we even need a datestamp for 5e?
4) Can I include this in my plan?
As we know, I'm the (crazy) author/designer who started the thread about unifying the Realms. What if I were to tell you (crazy, right?) that this idea is part of my idea--that the 1e FR is one of the many eras I want to see actively supported? Why wouldn't that work?
My idea has multiple eras (much like the saga idea from Star Wars). I'm not sure what I called them initially, but it's something like:
Legendary Realms: 1e era
Classic Realms: 2e/3e era
Heroic Realms: 4e era
All of these get supported, and players are free to play in any individual era. Once your game gets going, you are absolutely free to include or ignore whatever events you want from any of the eras. So the ToT or the Spellplague doesn't have to happen in your game, for instance.
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" |
Edited by - Erik Scott de Bie on 26 Jun 2012 21:32:42 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 21:36:58
|
If it was to reboot hen a new ghotfr book would need to be printed and have everything from the old one up to the current year of 4e.
and in the first chapters:
Rule 0: yes everything in this book is canon, however it is not required that you use it or some such line for those of us scribes who detest the century jump and the plague.
I'd buy it a 1e realms setting book assuming its a book and not a box of ... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 21:42:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Apex
I picked 1335 for a few reasons. One of which was that it was far enough back to give the Realms time to develop without immediately coming into contact with potential changes in Realmslore (ie RSE's), while also being recent enough that many of the same players we grew to love were still active/beginning their careers (which can make for more great novels).
I see.
I hadn't thought about the "death effect" (if that's the right pair of words) from the century forward jump also working for a century in reverse.
If I may, my interest in a somewhat earlier period of time had to do with what was going on in the Realms. That is, from the point of view where things are different, but in a familiar (and hopefully good) way, with the understanding that what's coming in the future is known and generally accepted as good (up to the Spellplague kicking in, at any rate).
That and the designers would have over a hundred years of game world time to use and play with, without it butting up right against what's already very detailed.
Around 1275 or so, Waterdeep is just beginning to expand its wards to include North Ward and Sea Ward and is recovering from the second Guild War.
In Cormyr, Salember has taken the reigns of power and will in ten years divide Cormyr; lots of fun strife there to play in there.
Fzoul Chembryl has just taken power in Zhentil Keep.
And King what'sisname in Tethyr has just been slain by elves of the Eldreth Veluuthra.
This is what I meant by different, but familiar in a welcome way. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 17 Jul 2012 16:52:04 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jun 2012 : 22:00:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
The questions to be considered are these:
1) Does this fall prey to the same pitfalls as the 4e jump?
2) *Are they* the same setting?
3) Does there have to be an official datestamp at all?
4) Can I include this in my plan?
Cheers
Thanks for your thoughts. I also think this is the best solution possible (humble, I know), because by going before OGB you can throw a bone to the grogs without having to immediately rewrite history.
Replies to your questions:
1)I don't think it does. This isn't really a time jump, since the history is already written (or at least the big stuff anyways), while leaving lots of room for more intimate development of regions/characters/events. My analogy would be it is like Back to the Future. We know the "big stuff" that happened (ie parents met, lightning hits clock tower, etc), but now we get to see more interesting details (of course without the change in the continuity).
2)They are the same setting. No changes. And I do not think simply not answering questions about the ToT creates problems, as a) it is years off, and b) could spoil the surprise of additional lore that was happening around the time.
3)I think we do need an "official" date stamp, as it sets the tenor for the majority of the lore/novels. Without one we are going to be left with a hodgepodge that is going to be very difficult to sell to anyone but very dedicated Realms fans.
4)Use whatever you like, it is an anonymous post on a forum after all. I would like to stress though that I am not advocating going to the OGB, but to 2 decades before (FR@ if you will).
Thanks for the input. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2012 : 07:16:19
|
Ok; this is probably the ultimate grognard post, but bear with me here. . I think some people (those that say just remove everything you don’t like)downplay how enormous the differences in approach between the OGB and the end of 2nd. Ed. is and how many of the changes have far wider consequences than just what is happening in the year in question.
If every part of canon is to be respected: I would never go back to the OGB if this was the plan. If you make everything that has happened canon there is absolutely no advantage to be had from this choice. The appeal of the original box was the lorelightness and openness. By including everything that has happened you will ruin this as it will close a lot of the ideas. The mystery of what Netheril was and how it was destroyed, the mysterious beastmaster, the unknown distant lands, the non-historic based cultures/names, lower magic, the traditional Ad&d tropes. To not go against canon you would have to not just look at the various happenings in the future, but also at what is more permanent and what is said to have happened through history, Karsus, Planetouched, drow galore, the chosen of this and that, the seventh sister revealed, Dragon Quest material included, beduins of the desert, different elven races, monster-lead Iron throne, amazons of the Vilhon etc. Celts, mongols, the (to me) boring Great Glacier. All these things are canon and I am just brainstorming here after not really thinking much about canon in years, so there is probably an enormous amount of minor details that I have forgotten. Going against what is already said is seen as going against canon, but a lot of the additions has also fundamentally changed the past in spirit if not in words, making the nothing is contradicted argument a bit thin at times. There are few contradictions between the various versions of the Shining South for example, but the end result in the various editions is very different.
In such a case it is a far better idea to go with Wooly’s wish of just after the Cloak and Dagger supplement as this will be far closer to what the Realms look like in the heads of many of those that has followed the story of the setting. The world is more set in stone and the important elements are relatively detailed, which would probably sit better with a large group of fans.
|
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2012 : 09:17:42
|
hm. i've maybe said more than my fair share in Erik's thread, so if you're sick of me and we have no common ground feel free to ignore me. but maybe i can admit to having failed to really consider something that might be a bigger problem than i've given it credit for, which Jorkens has gently and unknowingly walloped me over the head with. 1e Faerun and 4e Faerun were written with fundamentally different design goals. i know i'm paraphrasing but i think we're saying some of the same things.
Ed wrote the 1e Realms without basing it on the D&D rules. the PCs were supposed to be heroes, in a world filled with foes and forces that "need watching" and the point of reading about the Realms was to explore a new world.
an evolution started taking place as soon as the Realms left Ed's direct control. the Knights, in the old gray box, were level 4-9ish iirc. i'm sure they leveled past that, quickly, but the point is that the Realms was originally developed for relatively low level characters. D&D meanwhile, was written for (more or less) unlimited level advancement. not all of us are going to be playing levels 1-10 over and over forever. there need to be challenges for higher level characters, which means higher level villains, which means the lords of cities and nations need to be higher level or else why hasn't evil taken over everything, and the realms turned into a nuclear arms race.
4e was written to make money. not a real kind way of putting it, but i think it's accurate. the 4e Realms makeover was not about exploring the Realms. it exploded the Realms. in 4e the PCs aren't just bold warriors and brash wizards and holier-than-thou clerics and opportunist rogues... they're super-heroes. maybe that's why the Realms seems to have all the depth, lore-wise, of a comic book. but in defense of comic books, Groo (yea, i'm that old) would have been a better model than the X-men, for the powers-that-be who wanted to go that route with the Realms. Groo actually explores his world, and occasionally houses/neighborhoods/cities are demolished but people always immediately start rebuilding. Groo isn't a superhero... he's just a hero, and that makes him better reading.
the point is that 4e Realms isn't put together the same way as 1e Realms was... and that's why a rewind won't work the way we wish it would. i pick that word because i think it's a better way to describe moving the official timeline back to (wherever). i would be completely satisfied with rewinding to 1357 and i wish/hope that that's what "Elminster Presents" will do, but i doubt it. i doubt it because WotC is attached to constantly moving the timeline forward. perhaps they're listening to the readers on this forums, and probably the wotc forums, who feel that time must march on. personally, i think they're failing to see how it's already been demonstrated that this is not in fact necessary, but that's a topic for another day/thread/headache.
a simple rewind leaves us with a problem of power levels. a problem of superheroes, not that there's anything wrong with superheroes, but they're not compatible with the original Realms. the old gray box doesn't have superheroes... the high level characters don't behave that way; they're watchers and actors-behind-the-scenes and often-ignored voices of wisdom. the original Realms is a place where low-level heroes are the worldshapers. and in a sense, that's a better fantasy world than 2e or 3e... and 4e isn't even a contender. it's better to have low-level PCs making a big difference in the world because they're closer to the common man. they're closer to you and me, and (importantly) to kids. your 2nd level PC just saved a town? that's *awesome* because 2nd level is totally achievable. that's like *you* (assuming you're not professionally involved in politics) lobbying your legislature and helping to write a bill that cuts pollution in your district/county by 50% (for example; we all have our priorities).
the best fantasy is the fantasy that's achievable. the more do-able it is (not easy or simple, but visibly *possible*) the better it is. your 20th level character killed something? big whoop. your 2nd level rogue solo'd some nasty beast with her daggers after the rest of the party ran out of hit points? now that's cool. that's a story. and that's what D&D is supposed to be. that's how it was originally. but it's not that way anymore, and it's tough to make it that way now. because the world is put together differently now. everything is bigger, badder, more powerful, which means yes your 2nd level PC can still make a difference but it's going to be on the scale of saving Old Mrs Kirtcev's potato crop this month... not on the scale of changing the future of the town you grew up in. you'll have to wait for at least 15th level for that, because the Zhentarim baddy in charge is 18th level and he has a lot more friends than you do.
my stance is still that 5e should rewind to 1357 DR, and we should again see NPCs written up at close to their gray box power levels. particularly if we're going to still have this thinly veiled level limit brightly labeled as an "epic destiny" *insert shiny awesomeness here, there, and everywhere.* if almost nobody in the world is 30th level or above, then it's okay for anything above 20 to be truly epic, and even 10th level characters are major movers and shakers. so put Manshoon back at 16th or 18th level; no harm done, because the PCs aren't going to be able to reach him for a while and by then he can be higher level in that campaign... without needing to be published at a higher level in an official sourcebook.
if we rewind, the 1479 Realms doesn't just go away, just like 1372 Realms doesn't go away. they're placed in the future. DMs are then free to insert the word *possible* and thereby obtain the real and actual freedom to make the Realms what they want it to be.
in contrast, advancing the timeline and saying that DMs are free to ignore whatever they want is pure stupid, or an outright lie. events in 1480 will build on what happened in 1479, and all of it is predicated on the Spellplague having happened... if that weren't true, then what exactly would be the point of advancing to 1480? and once you build on events in 1479, then those events cannot be ignored without invalidating everything that comes after. basically, this inevitably means that my choice to call the Spellplague dumb, combined with the fact that the timeline is moving ever onward, means that I will never be able to use another FR product. as it stands right now, in the 4e era, I have near-zero use for any Realms product Wizards will ever publish in the future. and that's sad for me, and money lost for WotC.
unless/until Wizards wises up and resurrects the Arcane Age line and does something productive with it. like, i dunno, write products for it and make us "grognards" happy -- and you'd think it would make them happy too, since it's worth at least 647 astral diamonds.
so bring back Arcane Age, only call it something else. something more flexible. something that doesn't mean just the past. rewind the timeline to 1357. Stop Advancing. use the Arcane Age line for continuing to publish products for the 1372 and 1479 Realms. there's your support for multiple eras, and it also avoids confusing or alienating folks who are currently enjoying the 4e Realms. some people like the Spellplague, cool, play in 1479. some people like the Time of Troubles; cool, play in 1372. some of us, however, do not accept those events... and if we don't have something pre-1358 to play with, then we have to write all of our own campaign material, which frankly we're probably already doing, but that means our money stays in our wallets and makes nobody else happy.
stop advancing the timeline. the longer you stay in one place, the longer we can play without hitting an RSE that ends the campaign... and the more books WotC can sell. i call that a win-win, with a total lack of downsides.
in answer to one of Erik's questions, i don't think we need an official date, per se... as long as we're going to see development of kingdoms both past and future (again in the renamed and revamped Arcane Age line). start us off with beginning and end dates for the various kingdoms, and succession lists so if i open up a campaign in some random year like -4 DR i'll know what the political landscape looks like and have a name for whose rump is warming each throne at that time. i actually really dislike that each edition of the game has resulted in a makeover of the Realms; it creates an association between time frames and rules, which i think breaks the fantasy.
which brings up another idea that probably needs its own thread. all of the rules systems should be supported. 5e should be an option, and of course get the most active support, but it shouldn't be a replacement, if Wizards is serious about the idea of bringing all players together. every rules rewrite has alienated some % of the players. so if you really want to bring disillusioned players back to the game, and to the Realms, throw us a few free .pdfs officially (WotC logo plainly visible) resurrecting (without major rewrites/overhauls) 1e, 2e, and 3.5e rules, and supporting 4e, and inviting everyone to use their favorite ruleset, because 5e setting products will support all of them.
anyway... that's probably more than anybody cares to read of my opinion, and i've kinda wandered all over the place. i'd give you a medal for reading this far, but um... i don't have any medals. so... have a cool day. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2012 : 10:17:35
|
Just to give a couple of comments to Xaeyruudh (phw, I finally got the name right, not easy for a dyslectic). You are absolutely right here where I am concerned; we have extremely rarely gone past 12th level, there has been three or four wizards in my campaigns throughout twenty years of gaming making it less high-powered and I generally cant stand superheroes (for me comicbooks are the French/Belgian versions , mixed with a smattering of Donald Duck and Elfquest)all of which turned me more and more of canon Fr.
And if I wore a medal I would just end up looking like one of the Bee Gees.
|
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jun 2012 : 15:13:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
Ok; this is probably the ultimate grognard post, but bear with me here. . I think some people (those that say just remove everything you don’t like)downplay how enormous the differences in approach between the OGB and the end of 2nd. Ed. is and how many of the changes have far wider consequences than just what is happening in the year in question.
If every part of canon is to be respected: I would never go back to the OGB if this was the plan. If you make everything that has happened canon there is absolutely no advantage to be had from this choice. The appeal of the original box was the lorelightness and openness. By including everything that has happened you will ruin this as it will close a lot of the ideas. The mystery of what Netheril was and how it was destroyed, the mysterious beastmaster, the unknown distant lands, the non-historic based cultures/names, lower magic, the traditional Ad&d tropes. To not go against canon you would have to not just look at the various happenings in the future, but also at what is more permanent and what is said to have happened through history, Karsus, Planetouched, drow galore, the chosen of this and that, the seventh sister revealed, Dragon Quest material included, beduins of the desert, different elven races, monster-lead Iron throne, amazons of the Vilhon etc. Celts, mongols, the (to me) boring Great Glacier. All these things are canon and I am just brainstorming here after not really thinking much about canon in years, so there is probably an enormous amount of minor details that I have forgotten. Going against what is already said is seen as going against canon, but a lot of the additions has also fundamentally changed the past in spirit if not in words, making the nothing is contradicted argument a bit thin at times. There are few contradictions between the various versions of the Shining South for example, but the end result in the various editions is very different.
In such a case it is a far better idea to go with Wooly’s wish of just after the Cloak and Dagger supplement as this will be far closer to what the Realms look like in the heads of many of those that has followed the story of the setting. The world is more set in stone and the important elements are relatively detailed, which would probably sit better with a large group of fans.
Well, the point of the "reboot" to 1335 would also be to reset the power level back to where it existed around the time of the OGB (especially since we do have approximate level data from that era if you will). Also, I don't think the future would necessarily be set in stone (it wouldn't have to be addressed for almost 20 years anyways), but there is so much to detail that happened between 1335 and 1357 that has nothing more than a sentence or two of lore right now, that those issues would not need even come up while still allowing for a massive expansion of new lore. |
|
|
|
LordXenophon
Learned Scribe
USA
147 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 23:41:50
|
| That's not the only reason to go back. Some of us just miss Bane. |
Disintegration is in the eye of the Beholder. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
A Reboot to FR2 (ie 1335DR)
