| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 04:56:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by archmagestar
I honestly dont know how the spellplague and timeline jump ever got a nod of approval from King Edward. However, being one who reads all the novels, Ed is trying in his novels at least to correct the dammage made. I have said before and will again, I am so disappointed in the way the realms headed with the spellplague.
Ed may be steering the ship for 5E, but I'm pretty sure he was shackled, gagged, and thrown into the cargo hold for 4E's reign. I believe there is a post or two somewhere that states he wasn't very happy with 4E's direction. |
 |
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 04:57:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
I disagree. In fact, I strongly disagree.
No disrespect to Ed, he's a genius and I hold him in high respect, as well as considerable gratitude for creating this wonderful world that we all enjoy, but he made a conscious and willing decision to sell the publication rights and creative control of the Forgotten Realms setting. No one put a gun to his head and forced him to sign it over, he made his choice and now he and all of us have to live with it.
The fact is that the Forgotten Realms aren't Ed Greenwood's setting anymore. It's owned by Wizards of the Coast and saying that they should wait for Ed's approval to do anything is unreasonable.
I think the message conveyed is that the Realms doesn't need yet another RSE to "fix" things. The Realms just doesn't need anymore RSE's period, and where Firestorm says "Unless Ed says so" I think/Feel/Believe he's coming from a point that Ed wouldn't OK one to begin with (were it still his). I also certainly don't think Authors need restrictions to write in a set time of the Realms. I'd hope that Erik Scott de Bie would continue to write in the Post-Spellplague Realms and the adventures of Shadowbane, that Drizzt would continue on with his new adventuring buddies, that storylines lost in the transition to 4E get told.
Ed still has lots of leadership from what I see and I'm fairly certain that he helps steer this ship as best he can manage, along with a bunch of other enthusiastic authors and developers. Should Ed have a "final say" that cannot be vetoed when it comes to the Realms? Probably not, but I have a hard time thinking that this would come to pass this time around.
From what I can tell, Ed is held in respect by the creative team and they let him/ask him to write a lot of lore for the realms and incorporate it into the setting. That being said, Ed's a freelancer. He doesn't work for Wizards, he isn't on their payroll, and he has no creative control over the setting.
My point is that whether Ed would or wouldn't ok something is irrelevant, again with no disrespect intended towards him. It isn't his setting anymore. He sold the rights to it and Wizards will do with it what they will. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 05:05:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
I disagree. In fact, I strongly disagree.
No disrespect to Ed, he's a genius and I hold him in high respect, as well as considerable gratitude for creating this wonderful world that we all enjoy, but he made a conscious and willing decision to sell the publication rights and creative control of the Forgotten Realms setting. No one put a gun to his head and forced him to sign it over, he made his choice and now he and all of us have to live with it.
The fact is that the Forgotten Realms aren't Ed Greenwood's setting anymore. It's owned by Wizards of the Coast and saying that they should wait for Ed's approval to do anything is unreasonable.
I think the message conveyed is that the Realms doesn't need yet another RSE to "fix" things. The Realms just doesn't need anymore RSE's period, and where Firestorm says "Unless Ed says so" I think/Feel/Believe he's coming from a point that Ed wouldn't OK one to begin with (were it still his). I also certainly don't think Authors need restrictions to write in a set time of the Realms. I'd hope that Erik Scott de Bie would continue to write in the Post-Spellplague Realms and the adventures of Shadowbane, that Drizzt would continue on with his new adventuring buddies, that storylines lost in the transition to 4E get told.
Ed still has lots of leadership from what I see and I'm fairly certain that he helps steer this ship as best he can manage, along with a bunch of other enthusiastic authors and developers. Should Ed have a "final say" that cannot be vetoed when it comes to the Realms? Probably not, but I have a hard time thinking that this would come to pass this time around.
From what I can tell, Ed is held in respect by the creative team and they let him/ask him to write a lot of lore for the realms and incorporate it into the setting. That being said, Ed's a freelancer. He doesn't work for Wizards, he isn't on their payroll, and he has no creative control over the setting.
My point is that whether Ed would or wouldn't ok something is irrelevant, again with no disrespect intended towards him. It isn't his setting anymore. He sold the rights to it and Wizards will do with it what they will.
From my understanding, Ed has been placed in charge of design for 5E. So yes, Wizards owns the property, however, Ed is now overseeing design. Which was not the case in 4E. Whether it's now a staff position or a QA oversight type deal, either way it's a good thing. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 05:41:51
|
I've been enjoying the Realms since the days of the Grey Box.
That said, I think some of the very best lore Ed Greenwood has ever written has come during the 4E time period. This includes both game material (through Dragon and Dungeon magazines) and novels.
To me it's kind of ironic that the people who profess such love for the Realms are the ones who've turned their collective backs on it, and so are missing--on a monthly basis, as it happens--a little something of the very stuff they claim to want back so desperately.
Anyway, with all that's come out in terms of previews on the WotC website, I'm looking forward to the 5E Realms.
I'll enjoy and appreciate what I like, ignore what I don't like and otherwise get the most fun out of the 5E Realms as I can, because that's the whole point.
To me, doing it any other way is doing it wrong.
YMMV. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 06:32:08
|
While I may agree with the sentiments (to a point) about 4e, I really can't understand how people can hate stuff they haven't sampled yet (5e).
As a cook, I get highly insulted when someone won't try something I made. I do not get insulted if they try it and then tell me they don't like it (I may get a bit dejected, but not insulted). Everyone's tastes are different and thats completely understandable. I've actually cooked stuff I didn't like, but others did (I am my own worst critic). Its all good.
But at least try it first. Then you may have reason to hate it.. or not. If for no other reason then that they realize the mistake 4eFR was we should give them another chance. If I walked away forever every time one of my friends pissed me off, I'd be a pretty lonely guy. FR, like a good friend, has brought me joy too often in the past for me to let one little edition ruin it forever. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Oct 2012 06:32:32 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 07:15:53
|
Like most people, I wasn't a big fan of 4e, but I didn't avoid it. I've read most of the novels that take place in 4e, and there have been some really good ones. I didn't like the death of the gods or the timejump, it did not stop me from reading the novels, primarily because I wanted to see where it would go and if it would change. I am wary about 5e, but I will give it a chance. It is clear the authors and designers are trying hard to make the Realms what it used to be. The only issue with that is that what designers consider the Realms may not be what gamers/readers feel is the Realms. But, you can't please everyone.
I have bought some sourcebooks for reference, but I have only played D&D 3-4 times. I am mainly a novel reader, so forgive me if I sound ignorant, but haven't those who play D&D always had the option of playing what edition they want? I guess newcomers wouldn't have that option, so maybe this is a moot point, but those who have been playing for awhile, unless they get rid of sourcebooks every time a new edition comes out, would already have access to previous editions? And, IMO, it is much easier for a gamer to decide what edition he/she wants to play in, but for us readers, we don't have it that easy. True, we can choose whether or not to read a novel, but unless you count fanfiction, we can't give "alternate endings".
About authors writing in all eras: this could be interesting, but it has me wary. A lot of people are likely to disagree with me, but here is my opinion: say a city was destroyed in 4e and didn't get restored in 5e, but then a novel was written in an era while it's still standing. It would be like "well, this is great, but I know what happens". The only real reason I can read novels that take place in Myth Drannor before it was destroyed was because I know it gets restored (some people feel otherwise). This, of course, is just an example.
In another thread, someone made a valid point that in the RW, we read things about historic events even though we know the outcome (and it isn't always good). I understand this, and I guess it would really depend on the event for me. I'm not saying authors -can't- write in different eras, but I may or may not read it. Also, if this is done, I think designers/authors will have to be careful with canon, but this has already been stated by others.
But as I said, I am willing to give 5e a chance, and while I am nervous, I am also curious. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 10:21:59
|
This is just repeating myself, but what the …
My simple reason is that I like 1st and to a degree 2nd ed. Realms. I didn’t like anything about 3rd ed. not the books, the look, the rules system or the feel of the Realms used with that rule set. I bought most of the 3ed. books, read them and didn’t like them. As the Ad&d (and D&D) rules themselves the older Realms was a mess of lore and contradictions, but the result of the more coherent 3ed. was a setting that I didn’t like and a world that didn’t feel like the one I used. Then again, I never thought anyone actually cared about canon until about ’05 and trying to do the same almost killed my love for the setting for all times. The Grand History was the nail in the coffin; I can see why people like it, but the setting and history it showed was one I never would GM.
Then again, I don’t read the novels any more ( I tried, but most of those published after about ‘97 didn’t appeal to me) and have no interest in seeing how anyone but Ed develops the Realms further. (that’s my own and the players privilege) And then mainly what points back to the original Realms, not spinning of other writers, this is mostly from a historical interest in the setting. Several of my favourite older Realms products contradict Ed and there are plenty of his ideas I would never use myself, so this is not for some fanatical devotion to the “pure” Realms.
The setting is for me to fill out and that’s it. I am so dated that I don't get what people here are referring to any more (that goes for rule terms, Realms terms and characters)and quite honestly I am not that curious either. I have no beef with WotC I just don’t like their products, the new Elminsters Realms and some of the reprints do interest me, and I have no problem with giving them my money.
This sounded a bit more dismissive and bad tempered than I intended, sorry about that.
|
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Gustaveren
Learned Scribe
Denmark
197 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 12:04:26
|
Well, a major motivation factor is nostalgia for old campaigns and time spend with old friends
It is kind of a problem when the spellplague and timejump either
1) Had them dieing for old age, or as minimum had all their connections dieing from old age / disasters (that is actually a worse fate than dieing from old age)
2) Destoyed so many so beloved parts of the realms were old adventures or retired characters were living
3) Had the wizards going insane, had priests losing their deities and so forth
When you combine that with already having made a huge timeinvestment and moneyinvestment in the realms, it's history and it's web of NPC's do it feel as a better idea to stay to the gold standard of the pre spellplague realms instead of investing time and money in the post spellplague realms there have the flaws I mention (1,2,3)
I also prefer realms having a high coverage of sourcebooks for the timeperiod I am running a game in.
I do not believe, that WOTC can finance making sourcebook coverage as good for the 5e realms as for the 2e / 3e realms
One of the few strategies there might tempt me to look at the 5e realms would be, if they initially created volo guides for at least 10 different regions. Each region having their own volo guide
Those guides has always been among my preferred products |
Edited by - Gustaveren on 16 Oct 2012 12:56:16 |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 14:40:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
I disagree. In fact, I strongly disagree.
No disrespect to Ed, he's a genius and I hold him in high respect, as well as considerable gratitude for creating this wonderful world that we all enjoy, but he made a conscious and willing decision to sell the publication rights and creative control of the Forgotten Realms setting. No one put a gun to his head and forced him to sign it over, he made his choice and now he and all of us have to live with it.
The fact is that the Forgotten Realms aren't Ed Greenwood's setting anymore. It's owned by Wizards of the Coast and saying that they should wait for Ed's approval to do anything is unreasonable.
I think the message conveyed is that the Realms doesn't need yet another RSE to "fix" things. The Realms just doesn't need anymore RSE's period, and where Firestorm says "Unless Ed says so" I think/Feel/Believe he's coming from a point that Ed wouldn't OK one to begin with (were it still his). I also certainly don't think Authors need restrictions to write in a set time of the Realms. I'd hope that Erik Scott de Bie would continue to write in the Post-Spellplague Realms and the adventures of Shadowbane, that Drizzt would continue on with his new adventuring buddies, that storylines lost in the transition to 4E get told.
Ed still has lots of leadership from what I see and I'm fairly certain that he helps steer this ship as best he can manage, along with a bunch of other enthusiastic authors and developers. Should Ed have a "final say" that cannot be vetoed when it comes to the Realms? Probably not, but I have a hard time thinking that this would come to pass this time around.
From what I can tell, Ed is held in respect by the creative team and they let him/ask him to write a lot of lore for the realms and incorporate it into the setting. That being said, Ed's a freelancer. He doesn't work for Wizards, he isn't on their payroll, and he has no creative control over the setting.
My point is that whether Ed would or wouldn't ok something is irrelevant, again with no disrespect intended towards him. It isn't his setting anymore. He sold the rights to it and Wizards will do with it what they will.
We were told, multiple time by multiple peole from Wotc that all things realms go through Ed...so for what's that is worth....his OK means a bit more than it did jsut a short time ago.
A good analogy is , 4e Ed was a rower alongside many others, 5e he is at the helm. |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 14:48:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
While I may agree with the sentiments (to a point) about 4e, I really can't understand how people can hate stuff they haven't sampled yet (5e).
As a cook, I get highly insulted when someone won't try something I made. I do not get insulted if they try it and then tell me they don't like it (I may get a bit dejected, but not insulted). Everyone's tastes are different and thats completely understandable. I've actually cooked stuff I didn't like, but others did (I am my own worst critic). Its all good.
I'm also a cook, and I'm somewhat picky about what I eat. For example, I detest okra. I also don't like too much salt, it's overpowering and can ruin a dish.
You can water down a soup when it has too much salt. But no amount of water can fix something for me if it has okra in it. There's just no way that I'll eat it if I know it has okra added to it.
In the case of the Realms, if it had -simply- been the case that 4E had some unappealing and overpowering themes I didn't like, then sure... water those things down by "fixing" or minimizing those things. In that case, what Erik has suggested (just weaken or do mild changes to minimize the "salt") would work.
But unfortunately, it's not just a few themes that can be minimized. WotC is making the choice here of not only keeping the okra (history of the spellplague, Mystra's death, re-ordering of the planes, the time jump that killed off my favorite NPCs), they're choosing to add even more wretched okra to the pot. In this case, they're having yet another mega-RSE (supposedly to end all RSEs, but we all know how that will really turn out) and they're showcasing certain elements I haven't liked since the days of the ToT (e.g. Cyric is featured in one of the novels, the gods are central once again to the meta-plot).
So the cookpot is full of horrid okra, and I know they're adding more. It's utterly beyond me how they're saying that once this new RSE and the novels are finished that "there will be no more RSEs, we promise, it'll be awesome!" Heard that before. Just like I've heard, "you'll learn to like okra!" Well, no. Never. It's slimy and gross, even if it's fried.
quote:
But at least try it first. Then you may have reason to hate it.. or not. If for no other reason then that they realize the mistake 4eFR was we should give them another chance. If I walked away forever every time one of my friends pissed me off, I'd be a pretty lonely guy. FR, like a good friend, has brought me joy too often in the past for me to let one little edition ruin it forever.
That's just it, Markus. I've seen all this before, and you have too. It's just that you've been affected by the spin.
For the record, I don't "hate" it, though. I'm just saddened that they took this same course, once again. I'm sad because I won't be on this shared-world journey any longer.
|
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 16 Oct 2012 14:57:14 |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 14:53:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
While I may agree with the sentiments (to a point) about 4e, I really can't understand how people can hate stuff they haven't sampled yet (5e).
As a cook, I get highly insulted when someone won't try something I made. I do not get insulted if they try it and then tell me they don't like it (I may get a bit dejected, but not insulted). Everyone's tastes are different and thats completely understandable. I've actually cooked stuff I didn't like, but others did (I am my own worst critic). Its all good.
But at least try it first. Then you may have reason to hate it.. or not. If for no other reason then that they realize the mistake 4eFR was we should give them another chance. If I walked away forever every time one of my friends pissed me off, I'd be a pretty lonely guy. FR, like a good friend, has brought me joy too often in the past for me to let one little edition ruin it forever.
You may take your cooking too personally (but what chef doesn't)
But I see where your going, but disagree just a tad. If you make me the best dish you have ever cooked, but it has anything more than a few small slivers of onions or green peppers....I wont eat it. EVER....I will be polite about it, but anything more than a pinch of either makes me ill. Its not your fault, and it's definately not my fault I cannot tolerate them....it is what it is.
Now I am enetering 5e fairly happy, willing to wait and see now that Ed is at them helm. But, if I had read that an element or two I could not stomach was going to be a focus of 5e....I might feel different. This is where I agree with you more than I disagree, there has not been enough concrete information about 5e to "hate it" (unless your one of the less Ed is good crowd, then I guess they can feel free to hate it now)
One of the recent things I cannot stand are aboleths....I havent totally ran from the realms, but I do actively screen novels for there presense and avoid anything with more than a dash of them. If tommorow it was announced the 5e would be centered about aboleths...then I guess I would be on a strict diet indeed.....but would it be ebough to stop grazing the realms buffet? time will tell...
So if(or when) the 5e recipe has more than a dash of something each scribe can't "eat", things get interesting. But for me as long as there is at least one "main course" to 5e that I enjoy...I can still have a great meal! |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Gustaveren
Learned Scribe
Denmark
197 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 15:01:34
|
I hated that the aboleths got loose
Well, very tired of the old plot "something incredible evil get loose from imprisonment" and wreck havoc upon the realms and it did feel as if it diminished the storyline about the personal sacrifices in order to make sure they were confined |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 15:13:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
While I may agree with the sentiments (to a point) about 4e, I really can't understand how people can hate stuff they haven't sampled yet (5e).
As a cook, I get highly insulted when someone won't try something I made. I do not get insulted if they try it and then tell me they don't like it (I may get a bit dejected, but not insulted). Everyone's tastes are different and thats completely understandable. I've actually cooked stuff I didn't like, but others did (I am my own worst critic). Its all good.
I'm also a cook, and I'm somewhat picky about what I eat. For example, I detest okra. I also don't like too much salt, it's overpowering and can ruin a dish.
You can water down a soup when it has too much salt. But no amount of water can fix something for me if it has okra in it. There's just no way that I'll eat it if I know it has okra added to it.
In the case of the Realms, if it had -simply- been the case that 4E had some unappealing and overpowering themes I didn't like, then sure... water those things down by "fixing" or minimizing those things. In that case, what Erik has suggested (just weaken or do mild changes to minimize the "salt") would work.
But unfortunately, it's not just a few themes that can be minimized. WotC is making the choice here of not only keeping the okra (history of the spellplague, Mystra's death, re-ordering of the planes, the time jump that killed off my favorite NPCs), they're choosing to add even more wretched okra to the pot. In this case, they're having yet another mega-RSE (supposedly to end all RSEs, but we all know how that will really turn out) and they're showcasing certain elements I haven't liked since the days of the ToT (e.g. Cyric is featured in one of the novels, the gods are central once again to the meta-plot).
So the cookpot is full of horrid okra, and I know they're adding more. It's utterly beyond me how they're saying that once this new RSE and the novels are finished that "there will be no more RSEs, we promise, it'll be awesome!" Heard that before. Just like I've heard, "you'll learn to like okra!" Well, no. Never. It's slimy and gross, even if it's fried.
quote:
But at least try it first. Then you may have reason to hate it.. or not. If for no other reason then that they realize the mistake 4eFR was we should give them another chance. If I walked away forever every time one of my friends pissed me off, I'd be a pretty lonely guy. FR, like a good friend, has brought me joy too often in the past for me to let one little edition ruin it forever.
That's just it, Markus. I've seen all this before, and you have too. It's just that you've been affected by the spin.
For the record, I don't "hate" it, though. I'm just saddened that they took this same course, once again. I'm sad because I won't be on this shared-world journey any longer.
Just out of curiousity....what was it about 4e that turned you off, that before we know almost anything about 5e, you are so sure will be unaddressed or left alone, that will prevent you from trying 5e?
What's the Okra?(which I cannot abide either)
And to say Mark is or had been affected by the spin....that made me laugh out loud....if he has bought in(and I am not going to speak for him!), knowing him just a bit...its because he believes, or wants to believe its going to get better. No amount of smooth talk and sweet wirds are going to change that ones mind about the realms. He is as independant of a realms thinker as I have ever encountered! The designers wont bluster, bait, lead astray, convince, schmooze, pull the wool over his eyes or in anyway lead him to a conclusion....if anything that guy is a free thinker.
....and upon meeting him, knowing what they say about good chefs...the boy can cook too 
I can see Mark in a room of Realms designers trying to convince him of something he isnt buying....He would then fly into an impromptu variant of Wonka's fizzy lifting diatribe aimed at grandpa Joe, complete with flying spittle |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
Edited by - The Red Walker on 16 Oct 2012 15:24:22 |
|
|
|
Kilvan
Senior Scribe
Canada
896 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 15:25:26
|
I think it is very unfair to discredit something that has not even come out, especially when there seems to be effort given to patch things up.
I do not mean to insult anyone, but sometimes I think WE are a bit hipster-ish regarding the Realms. Everything was so much better before, now everything taste like dung and nothing will ever change it, I won't even give it a chance. That is not reasonable.
That said, I understand your point, and I can only hope that the new edition will bring back the Realms to a state that satisfy us, if that is even possible.
|
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 15:43:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Just out of curiousity....what was it about 4e that turned you off, that before we know almost anything about 5e, you are so sure will be unaddressed or left alone, that will prevent you from trying 5e? What's the Okra?(which I cannot abide either)
Many of the things I strongly dislike had their origins in other editions, so it's not entirely about 4E. It's just that 4E Realms put them into sharp focus and went down a path that firmly cemented all the things I dislike into Realms history.
So, my primary list of "okra" things (not necessarily complete):
- gods as active NPCs and characters in novels
- Midnight-Mystra the ridiculously overpowered
- monocular-vision gods in general
- really bad god-drama, going back to the Time of Troubles
- Cyric
- the plot armor of Shar and her Netherese, formerly Mystra and Chosen
- the reliance on RSEs to "advance" meta-plot
Specific "okra" things from 4E:
- the post-apocalypse "in recovery" radical change to the core theme
- the time jump, because it wiped away a million cool NPCs
- spellplague, because we already had wild talents and danger-areas
- the narrowing of the gods, killing off many and combining others
- dragonborn/Abeir/primordials
- aboleth and the overuse of the Far Realm
- the Lathander-to-Amaunator thing
- Talos was Gruumsh, really?
- the way they reordered and merged planes to create Shadowfel, etc.
There's just way, way too much okra for me. Still, I'd like to point out that personally, I'm WAY beyond being mad or bitter about these things. It's just sad for me at this point, because I know I won't be enjoying any of the new stuff. I enjoyed the time when I looked forward to new novels, dragon/dungeon articles and regional sourcebooks.
Nothing lasts forever.
quote:
And to say Mark is or had been affected by the spin....that made me laugh out loud....if he has bought in(and I am not going to speak for him!), knowing him just a bit...its because he believes, or wants to believe its going to get better. No amount of smooth talk and sweet wirds are going to change that ones mind about the realms. He is as independant of a realms thinker as I have ever encountered! The designers wont bluster, bait, lead astray, convince, schmooze, pull the wool over his eyes or in anyway lead him to a conclusion....if anything that guy is a free thinker.
....and upon meeting him, knowing what they say about good chefs...the boy can cook too
Markus is definitely independent and outspoken. But come on, he's flip-flopped over the 4E Realms in a pretty big way. I remember his original discontent with the 4E Realms as he expressed it on the WotC boards.
And it's fine that he changed his mind. I've changed my mind on many things too. But if anyone is affected by hope and wishing, it's our Markus. I'm sure he'd say the same thing, I'm not intending to be mean here.
|
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 16 Oct 2012 15:48:14 |
|
|
|
Gustaveren
Learned Scribe
Denmark
197 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 16:27:08
|
One of the reasons I always liked the volo guides was the level of details, the presence of many hamlets and each one having their own unique feeling and people feeling optimistic about the future. Basically, it is a campaign world there is the opposite of the point of light campaign philosphy for the post spellplague realms with few points of civilisation, with few details and with a pessimistic mood.
quote:
Originally posted by Gustaveren
I also prefer realms having a high coverage of sourcebooks for the timeperiod I am running a game in.
I do not believe, that WOTC can finance making sourcebook coverage as good for the 5e realms as for the 2e / 3e realms
One of the few strategies there might tempt me to look at the 5e realms would be, if they initially created volo guides for at least 10 different regions. Each region having their own volo guide
Those guides has always been among my preferred products
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 17:46:05
|
I hadn't intended to post further in this thread, but this point is too tempting to pass up . . .
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I can see Mark in a room of Realms designers trying to convince him of something he isnt buying....He would then fly into an impromptu variant of Wonka's fizzy lifting diatribe aimed at grandpa Joe, complete with flying spittle
TRW and I actually HAVE seen MT in a room full of Realms authors/designers talking about the Realms and plans for 5e, and he didn't spit on any of us. 
Ultimately, yes, the Realms was broken in 4e. That doesn't mean it was all bad, but yes, there were mistakes made (largely by people no longer working at the company). This is a new story team, one that places much more faith in Ed and more value in his counsel. He isn't directing the ship, because he isn't a WotC employee (and they're the ones who own the IP), but he's the guide, and the current story team is heeding his words much more than in the 4e era.
Going forward, the team is making a real effort to fix it (yes, FIX it, not just mask it). It will be a long, arduous effort, and there are no shortcuts to fixing it. And at this point you have a choice: come along for the bumpy ride, or hang back and don't. If you at some later date decide you want to catch up and check out the view at that point, that's fine--you're more than welcome.
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" |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 17:53:11
|
| I dont understand how people can hate the 5e realms before its even come out. I mean nostalgia is all well and good but to say that only the novels and material from 1 and 2 e ere any good shows a very closed mind. Some of the best novels of FR have been set in 3 and 4 e , helmed by bold new authors such as Paul S Kemp. At least give them a try before arbitrarily writing it all off because of some marco events that individual authors have no control over. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 18:04:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
I mean nostalgia is all well and good but to say that only the novels and material from 1 and 2 e ere any good shows a very closed mind.
Nope, it shows a preference. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36963 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 22:55:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
I mean nostalgia is all well and good but to say that only the novels and material from 1 and 2 e ere any good shows a very closed mind.
Nope, it shows a preference.
Agreed, so long as material from other editions is read and judged with an open mind. |
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! |
|
|
|
Gustaveren
Learned Scribe
Denmark
197 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 22:58:28
|
| I did read the 4e campaign guide and players guide to the realms, but it did not feel like the realms |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 23:12:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I hadn't intended to post further in this thread, but this point is too tempting to pass up . . .
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I can see Mark in a room of Realms designers trying to convince him of something he isnt buying....He would then fly into an impromptu variant of Wonka's fizzy lifting diatribe aimed at grandpa Joe, complete with flying spittle
TRW and I actually HAVE seen MT in a room full of Realms authors/designers talking about the Realms and plans for 5e, and he didn't spit on any of us.
Ultimately, yes, the Realms was broken in 4e. That doesn't mean it was all bad, but yes, there were mistakes made (largely by people no longer working at the company). This is a new story team, one that places much more faith in Ed and more value in his counsel. He isn't directing the ship, because he isn't a WotC employee (and they're the ones who own the IP), but he's the guide, and the current story team is heeding his words much more than in the 4e era.
Going forward, the team is making a real effort to fix it (yes, FIX it, not just mask it). It will be a long, arduous effort, and there are no shortcuts to fixing it. And at this point you have a choice: come along for the bumpy ride, or hang back and don't. If you at some later date decide you want to catch up and check out the view at that point, that's fine--you're more than welcome.
Cheers
I just hope the good things that came out of 4e(which I personally believed outweighed the bad, it was more the implementation than anything that put a sour taste in people's mouths) stay and aren't thrown out the window in an attempt to appease the portion of the fanbase who things everything 4e is the devil. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 23:30:52
|
I got busy painting a couple of rooms (for the holidays) in my house and I suddenly became the focus of conversation in an anti 4e/5e thread? 
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
And to say Mark is or had been affected by the spin....that made me laugh out loud....if he has bought in(and I am not going to speak for him!), knowing him just a bit...its because he believes, or wants to believe its going to get better. No amount of smooth talk and sweet wirds are going to change that ones mind about the realms. He is as independant of a realms thinker as I have ever encountered! The designers wont bluster, bait, lead astray, convince, schmooze, pull the wool over his eyes or in anyway lead him to a conclusion....if anything that guy is a free thinker.
....and upon meeting him, knowing what they say about good chefs...the boy can cook too
Markus is definitely independent and outspoken. But come on, he's flip-flopped over the 4E Realms in a pretty big way. I remember his original discontent with the 4E Realms as he expressed it on the WotC boards.
And it's fine that he changed his mind. I've changed my mind on many things too. But if anyone is affected by hope and wishing, it's our Markus. I'm sure he'd say the same thing, I'm not intending to be mean here.
I change my mind about stuff at least once a day, probably much more. It doesn't take much to tip me back over the edge.
However, that has nothing to do with my recent posting habits. Its not so much of a 'flip-flop', as it is a desire to see this site move in a more positive direction. The negativity was wearing thin even on me (and I was once responsible for quite a bit of it). What we need to do is present a united front, not scare away prospective new fans.
Do I like 4e? NO... and I doubt I ever will. Am I willing to accept that some of it can be pretty darned good if given the right spin? YES. Do I think the WotC guys are really trying to make us all happy this time out? YES. Do I think if anyone is capable of that it's Ed? A great big 'YES'. Do I think they will be successful? Hmmmmm... only time will tell. I fear we may have hit the 'too little, too late' mark, but I also see a LOT of 'old timers' crawling out of the woodwork (even if it is just to voice their negativity).
Believe it or not, negativity can be a good thing - it means those people still care. Ambivalence is our enemy - 5e lore has to be something that makes people sit up and take notice. It can't just be good, it has to be great. Thats a tall order.
So no, I haven't 'drank the koolaid' or any such nonsense. What I have done is realize that 4e is now behind us, and judging by the great bunch of people I met at Gencon (NONE of them had horns!), I think they 'might' be able to pull this off. I do know they are sure as hell going to try. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Oct 2012 23:35:39 |
|
|
|
Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader
USA
3750 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 23:33:10
|
| You know, I perused the 4th ed FRCG, and never bought it, for the simple reason that it just did not have that Realms feel, and having the Spellplague, loss/merging of so many gods, and deaths of so many of my favorite characters was just too depressing. I've read a VERY few 4th era novels, and those too felt unfamiliar and a bit "forced" for me. Like they were just trying too hard to attract interest. I sincerely hope that the new edition will be different, that it will return to the spirit of the Realms. I know that the "glory days" are gone, and I'm okay with that, but aside from one or two scourcebooks (possibly the GHotR and the Menzo book) I know I will never buy or read any other 4th ed game products. I have/will continue to read a few novels, but I am going to start fresh with the new edition, and see where it goes. |
The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.
"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491
"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs
Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469
My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188
Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Oct 2012 : 23:51:37
|
When I look back at the 4e FRCG, I realize a lot had to do with the 'unfinished' feel of it. I understand that they've said they were shooting for a very... ummmmm... 'undefined' presentation, in order to alleviate the 'feelings of entitlement' of older fans, and the off-putting monumental amount of past material. Personally, I think thats just an excuse for not wanting to put much effort into it, but whatever. If they were going for 'ill-defined', they overshot that mark by quite a bit. We either got differing information about certain things, or no information at all.
So with that in-mind, I realized that if we gave those same exact concepts (and goals) to Ed Greenwood, Erik Boyb, Steven Schend, etc... we would have gotten something very different, and something we probably would have all liked... even though the same lore-kernals were presented. Presentation is everything, and 4e failed on so many levels - poorly advertised roll-out, horrendous map, dry source material....
So if the same stuff could have been taken and re-worked into something good to begin with, that means its not too late for them to still do that. Don't blame the lore, blame how it was written. I could pick a dirty hotdog up off the floor and try to get you to eat it, or I can take a fresh one out of a package, smash it flat with a hammer and grill it, pour BBQ sauce over it and add some onions and call it a 'McRib', and then market it as 'for a limited time only'.
One you will turn your back on, and the other you will rush out to buy. In the end, its same damn hotdog. We need Ed (and others) to turn it into a McRib.
Aboleths are not really a deal-breaker... at least not for me, anymore. They have always been there, canonically; they were just never very important. That whole bit felt very forced (someone trying to turn the published Realms into their home game). I think if they just toned that down (perhaps even ignoring it completely moving forward) it would be just fine. I've actually used aberrations (my own versions of all of them) in my HB setting, but my setting isn't FR, and the flavor is completely different. What works in one setting doesn't necessarily work in another. We need to be given choices, not have certain elements rammed down our throats.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Oct 2012 23:52:45 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4487 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2012 : 00:03:47
|
The best I think I can hope for when it comes specifically to the 5eFR is the limited about of mechanics involved. Now, I say this as an avid 'Crunch' guy and LOVE mechanics as it helps me in building the sort of game I invision. But, as of late, I've come to the realization that most of the stuff in the FRCS (3E) that I find myself referencing is the lore elements. They, by and large, carry over no matter WHAT rules your using. Does the Hathran Prestige class rules for 3E help my D&D:Next game at all? No, not really. Does the lore involving the Witches of Rasheman and their strong ties to Primal/spiritual magic of the land from 3E help my D&D:Next game if it's in Rasheman? Yes, yes it does.
I haven't been to a book store in over 6 months so I haven't had a chance to look at the Menzo-book but I hear it's pretty good. So if the FR-sourcebooks are more akin to 80% flavor and 20% mechanics, I can live with that. The one thing I think D&D:Next needs to move away from is redundant mechanics bloat, something 3E started and 4E fell into really hard. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Sylrae
Learned Scribe
Canada
313 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2012 : 01:28:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gustaveren
I did read the 4e campaign guide and players guide to the realms, but it did not feel like the realms
I also read them, found them to be a different (and unlikeable setting) and did not buy them. I did take a look at them though. The big problem (IMNSHO) was that they decided to shoehorn 4e Core into FR; and made it into a completely different setting in the process.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
The best I think I can hope for when it comes specifically to the 5eFR is the limited about of mechanics involved. ...[Most] of the stuff in the FRCS (3E) that I find myself referencing is the lore elements. They, by and large, carry over no matter WHAT rules your using. Does the Hathran Prestige class rules for 3E help my D&D:Next game at all? No, not really. Does the lore involving the Witches of Rasheman and their strong ties to Primal/spiritual magic of the land from 3E help my D&D:Next game if it's in Rasheman? Yes, yes it does.
Ideally the setting books should have very little crunch in them, and most of the material should still be relevant regardless of the system you use. 3E had some good setting stuff, but there was too much crunch in those books.
Obviously that will not be the case for bestiaries and the like; And I would very much like it if all of the crunch was in modules and crunch books (put the setting and crunch in separate books)
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
So if the FR-sourcebooks are more akin to 80% flavor and 20% mechanics, I can live with that. The one thing I think D&D:Next needs to move away from is redundant mechanics bloat, something 3E started and 4E fell into really hard.
I could live with that if I had to.
Having participated in the 5e playtest, It *Could* become the game I play. Maybe. I've been playing Pathfinder, which I like better than 3e, which is infinitely better than 4e, but there are still many things I really don't like about it.
If 5e fails to impress me, I probably won't run Pathfinder again, I'll make a spin-off(alt. corebook) of pathfinder for myself that I like (and may self-publish), and design it to be easily compatible with Pathfinder stuff so I can use anything they put out that I like; and their Bestiaries and Modules and Feats and Spells and (etc), should I so choose. I would still be interested in setting books, and modules; so WotC *Might* get my attention if they put out more material like Elminster's Realms and Menzoberranzan; or if the setting books go back to as much crunch as 2e. But of course, like many people here, it will largely depend on what Toril looks like after they're done with it. I will want the things 4e ignored to be back. If we still have Eladrin and Dragonborn and the feywild instead of the types of elves, Eladrin as celestials, and dragon-kin, and if all the locations I'm interested in are still gone, they won't see a purchase of the 5e frcs from me, and I will continue to be vocal about my dislike of each product they put out that I dislike in the realms. Personally I don't feel a need to have all the dead human NPCs back - Give me Khelben, (Ideally) Halaster, and don't kill off my favorite Elves and Dwarves; Though fixing the cosmology, pantheons, and countries should be a difficult task in itself.
I'm hoping they can fix it to the point I would consider it palatable, but it's a tall order, and I'm not yet convinced they're up to the challenge.
If they keep up the "all eras" idea, I will skim the book, estimate percentages, and figure out if I'm willing to pay the asked price for the book considering how much I don't care for the events, settings, themes, and retcons between 1385 and (whenever 4e ends). If 50% of a 300 page book is "Spellpuke Space", I will ask myself if a 150 page book with shoddy production values is worth the price they ask.
So long as its not a substantial quantity of the book, my money isn't impossible to get.
Though I want proper PDFs again, and at reasonable prices. I much prefer to bring my nexus 7 to a game away from home than a stack of RPG books. |
Sylrae's Forgotten Realms Fan-Lore Index, with public commenting access to make for easier improvement (WIP) |
|
|
|
Gustaveren
Learned Scribe
Denmark
197 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2012 : 01:59:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Now, I say this as an avid 'Crunch' guy and LOVE mechanics as it helps me in building the sort of game I invision. But, as of late, I've come to the realization that most of the stuff in the FRCS (3E) that I find myself referencing is the lore elements. They, by and large, carry over no matter WHAT rules your using.
I had the same experience a long time ago with my 1e and 2e sourcebooks for my 3e fr campaigns. A primary reason, I prefer sourcebooks high in lore and low in rules since I know I will also be able to use that book 10 years from now.
Seems to me, if you want the "support all ages concept" to be a success is it crucial to keep the sourcebooks high in lore and low in rules. Many campaigns will after all be run in 3.5 or pathfinder and many old fans had the experienced that the only books they use after some years are those high in lore. Seems even more crucial with high lore content when you know you do not need a part of the lore due to it handling events in the wrong age. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2012 : 02:08:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
I mean nostalgia is all well and good but to say that only the novels and material from 1 and 2 e ere any good shows a very closed mind.
Nope, it shows a preference.
Agreed, so long as material from other editions is read and judged with an open mind.
Which is kind of the point I was trying to make earlier.
I've no problem with judging the strengths and weaknesses of 4e and what we know of 5e. What I don't like, is the small number of folk who seem to overlook the fact that previous editions of the game also had their problems in terms of inconsistent lore and the like.
It's confusing. |
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 |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 17 Oct 2012 : 02:12:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
When I look back at the 4e FRCG, I realize a lot had to do with the 'unfinished' feel of it. I understand that they've said they were shooting for a very... ummmmm... 'undefined' presentation, in order to alleviate the 'feelings of entitlement' of older fans, and the off-putting monumental amount of past material. Personally, I think thats just an excuse for not wanting to put much effort into it, but whatever. If they were going for 'ill-defined', they overshot that mark by quite a bit. We either got differing information about certain things, or no information at all.
So with that in-mind, I realized that if we gave those same exact concepts (and goals) to Ed Greenwood, Erik Boyb, Steven Schend, etc... we would have gotten something very different, and something we probably would have all liked... even though the same lore-kernals were presented. Presentation is everything, and 4e failed on so many levels - poorly advertised roll-out, horrendous map, dry source material....
So if the same stuff could have been taken and re-worked into something good to begin with, that means its not too late for them to still do that. Don't blame the lore, blame how it was written. I could pick a dirty hotdog up off the floor and try to get you to eat it, or I can take a fresh one out of a package, smash it flat with a hammer and grill it, pour BBQ sauce over it and add some onions and call it a 'McRib', and then market it as 'for a limited time only'.
One you will turn your back on, and the other you will rush out to buy. In the end, its same damn hotdog. We need Ed (and others) to turn it into a McRib.
Aboleths are not really a deal-breaker... at least not for me, anymore. They have always been there, canonically; they were just never very important. That whole bit felt very forced (someone trying to turn the published Realms into their home game). I think if they just toned that down (perhaps even ignoring it completely moving forward) it would be just fine. I've actually used aberrations (my own versions of all of them) in my HB setting, but my setting isn't FR, and the flavor is completely different. What works in one setting doesn't necessarily work in another. We need to be given choices, not have certain elements rammed down our throats.
I still remember being in the Secrets of the Realms panel, sitting with my fellow scribes, and more or less hearing, "you know that Cormyr article in Dragon about 4e Cormyr? Wasn't that great? Yeah, we don't want to do articles like that, and that isn't what we are looking for, but, hey, it was great, wasn't it?"
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Reasons I will avoid 5e and 4e FR
