quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

That's not the only reason to go back. Some of us just miss Bane.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

That's not the only reason to go back. Some of us just miss Bane.

---

+1. also Bhaal, Myrkul, and Leira, not necessarily in that order.

Also, Jorkens, I loved Elfquest. I bought all the comic books and as many of the "graphic novel" books as I could find. I'm thinking about, for my own campaigns, basing the wild elf culture on the Wolfriders.

I anticipate this whole "rewind" concept being a tough pill to swallow for those who want the timeline to keep marching forward. For the simple reason of "what happens when we get to 1358?" Because we will... every new novel or sourcebook jumps ahead a year, and with several coming out each year, we'll run though the 20 years between 1335 and 1357 before we know what hit us. Then what? The ToT has already been done, they're not going to publish it again. I hope. It'd be worse than a bad sequel... it'd be the same story all over again, but with more writers hacking at it.

So if we're not going to stop the jumps, then I favor going all the way back to "The planet began to cool, and oceans formed..."

A note to the fans of the status quo: Stopping the timeline would not mean the Realms stagnates, or that authors run out of things to write about. It would actually mean exactly the opposite. Just sayin'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xaeyruudh

A note to the fans of the status quo: Stopping the timeline would not mean the Realms stagnates, or that authors run out of things to write about. It would actually mean exactly the opposite. Just sayin'.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by xaeyruudh

A note to the fans of the status quo: Stopping the timeline would not mean the Realms stagnates, or that authors run out of things to write about. It would actually mean exactly the opposite. Just sayin'.

---

I really don't see how stagnation can be avoided when the setting is set on a single, never-changing point in time. How can there be change without time elapsing for the change to happen?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Apex

[quote]I disagree. First, the timeline didn't move that fast until the 4e timejump. The Realms debuted in 1987 in the year 1357DR, it was only at what 1375DR in 2008 when 4e changed it, so we only went through 18 years of the Realms in 19 years of real life. Also, part of the "reboot" easily could be a new policy that puts Realms time at 6 months say to every year of real time advance, just to keep everything in line.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

I really don't see how stagnation can be avoided when the setting is set on a single, never-changing point in time. How can there be change without time elapsing for the change to happen?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jorkens

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

Larloch as a morally-dangerous plot device! I love it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markustay

Wow, these threads are just popping up all over the place now. Hoefully some really constructive stuff will come of it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jorkens

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.

---

Jorkens, I understandf completely how you feel, but how does that affect YOUR game?

The published Realms is the published Realms - it exists as a setting ONLY for novel (and sourcebook) characters. I know this argument has been beaten to death, but no-one runs a canon world, even the in-house designers. Much of what happens in one of their sessions could easily become canon, but what happens at their table (or anyone's table) is heavily edited.

So as novel fan, I can see your point - you won't like anything they do in future novels (although I think they plan to allow people beside Ed to do a little 'time traveling' in regards to story-telling). I can even agree with you on this - I really don't care anything at all about anything in the 4e novels, and don't want to waste my time trying to read them anymore (reading is supposed to be enjoyable - now I feel like I'm back in HS, when the teacher assigns you a chapter in a textbook to read every night).

But as a DM, a 1335 'soft' reboot shouldn't really effect you one way or the other. What happens 'later on' in canon does not have to happen in your setting. You can still enjoy FR as a D&D setting, even if you can't as a novel setting.

This is why I can get behind the 'soft reboot' idea - everything is still canon, unless overwritten by new lore. And who knows? They might be opening Pandora's box. If the old setting proves to be phenomenally successful, they may just decide to do a 'time paradox' (or "it was all just a dream") scenario and scrap the future later on.

Imagine they do a 1335 reboot. Imagine they start producing more and more sources for this period, and FR starts chipping away at Pathfinder's fanbase. Can you picture a cross-over story-arc and adventure path - one where Larloch appears before your characters and hisses, "Quickly! Mystra's in trouble... I need your help! I need you to find a child named Cyric and kill him...".

How freakin' awesome would THAT be?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dalor Darden

I loved the Poor Wizards Almanacs for Mystara...those rocked.

I think Jorkens is in love with the same part of the OGB that I was: simplistic delivery into a vast and enchanting world waiting to be explored. If every single region is "splatted" to death...there is little to explore.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dalor Darden

I think Jorkens is in love with the same part of the OGB that I was: simplistic delivery into a vast and enchanting world waiting to be explored. If every single region is "splatted" to death...there is little to explore.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Sage

quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

Larloch as a morally-dangerous plot device! I love it!

---

Given what Ed's said about Larloch's world-ranging plots... I'd just as easily suggest that Larloch could form the plot for an ENTIRE campaign setting!

Imagine a world shaped by every tweak and twinge of every far-reaching plan ever conceived by Larloch? Hehe.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dalor Darden

I think Jorkens is in love with the same part of the OGB that I was: simplistic delivery into a vast and enchanting world waiting to be explored. If every single region is "splatted" to death...there is little to explore.

---

I don't think that any region could be splatted to death... Hell, Waterdeep has had more coverage than any other point in the Realms, and there is still plenty to explore there. We do not, even after 20 years of gaming material, even know who all 20 of the Lords are!

For me, Waterdeep is the most living, breathing place in the Realms, precisely because of all the coverage (particularly, Volo's Guide to Waterdeep). And yet I've still had plenty of room to work in my own elements: five of the Hidden Lords (four of which were formally written up for the Candlekeep Compendium), plenty of my own NPCs, at least one inn, some unique businesses, a broadsheet inspired by "News of the World" and its pseudo-journalistic ilk, the Lords of Waterdeep having counter-infiltrated the Unseen, and more.

Why have I done so much there? Because I love the City of Splendors.

But my point is that even with all of the information we have about Waterdeep -- perhaps more information than any other fictitious locale ever created -- I've still found plenty of room to maneuver and many ways to make the city my own, all within the boundaries of existing material. I have not been limited in any way by the volume of information we have; some of it, like the Unseen infiltrating the Lords of Waterdeep, has given me more possibilities than I would have otherwise had.

Fencing off a section of ground and putting playground equipment on it does not mean children are no longer free to use their imaginations -- it instead gives them more to work with. I recall pretending that a jungle gym was a house, or an impregnable fortress, or the Millenium Falcon. I couldn't have done that without the jungle gym being there, and I wouldn't have had nearly as much fun in an open field.

Adding detail to a game setting is the same thing. Some possibilities may be taken away, but a lot more will be created.

If someone wants infinite possibility, not constrained by any official material, they need to make their own ruleset and their own setting to apply it to.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by xaeyruudh

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Let's keep things civil, please.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Let's keep things civil, please.

---

Have you forgotten that civil procedings usually start with swearing?

---

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Therise

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.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LordXenophon

That's not the only reason to go back. Some of us just miss Bane.

---