| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
rodrigoalcanza
Seeker
Brazil
67 Posts |
 Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 15:44:30
|
So ... at the end of the series, which would ForgotenRealms 5th Edition, we come back to the decade of 1370s?
What was the exact year ended 3rd Edition? I personally would like that to happen, regardless of which mode (Ao could do this). Because if the chronology actually return, they could even revive Khelben and Halaster (he especially).
Sorry to my English!
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 16:50:13
|
No, there is no rollback of the years. The official timeline is going to continue rolling forward. The Sundering seems to be an attempt to make some changes to the deities, and to fix the geographical changes.
They're using the 1st Edition FR map as a guide to what the end result will look like - so a lot of the shrinking of the map we saw in 3E is also going to disappear.
Basically, all of these changes are being done to set things up so that the 5E Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide is edition neutral. This means you'll have the ability to set your Realms in whatever era that you'd like - whether you want to play a game before the Time of Troubles, post-Time of Troubles, or post-Spellplague.
If I understand things correctly, basically the bulk of the setting book game lore will be written from the perspective of 1st Edition. "This is Cormyr. This is what it is like in Cormyr." Then throughout this information, there would be mentions of the changes that took place in Cormyr over time.
When it comes to things like deities, we'd get a write up for a deity like Bhaal, even though in the timeline he died during the Time of Troubles. We'd learn about his faithful and his followers, and it'd be noted that he died during the Time of Troubles and what ultimately happened to those who worshiped him. You'd also along side Bhaal, get a mention of Cyric, noting that he became a deity after the Time of Troubles, and the changes that his faith went through over time.
So, basically what they're doing they're trying to appeal to everyone regardless of where you want to play on the timeline. If you want to play games pre-ToT, you'll be able to do it. If you want to play games post-ToT or post-Spellplague, you'd be able to do that as well.
However, the canon is going to continue rolling forward. They aren't going to roll back the years or revert back to a previous timeline - there are no retcons. Most of what is being done is trying to align the 4E Realms in such a way that you can basically use the same map as you would in a 1E FR game. They'll likely also be fixing some of the big deity blunders, so we'd see Mystra return, likely along with some other deities.
At least, this is my understanding of what is going to happen. Someone can correct me if I am wrong. |
 |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3811 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 17:26:29
|
Yeah, this is what is going to happen, AFAIK. The only relevant changes will probably be Abeir basically being discarded (which is a waste imo) and some gods (most likely the widely popular ones) possibly being restored by Ao.
TBH, I doubt that this alone will be enough to bring old customers back (which is one of the things they said to be aiming for), considering that this way Wizards isn't offering anything that people can't already do for free (actually, by using a multiple-eras covering sourcebooks model, they'd be charging a good number of potential buyers for lore that they wouldn't even use, not to mention that -considering page count limits- the quality of the book would be disappointing due to the size of the topic). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 15 Jul 2013 17:28:25 |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 17:54:42
|
I'm not sure I agree with that assessment regarding usefulness. First of all, if the 'theme, feeling, and base lore' of the Realms is reverting back to 1E - it's not like we had a ton of source books for that era.
It's like saying we didn't need the Unapproachable East to talk about Thay, because we already had Dreams of the Red Wizards. Or we didn't need 3E's City of Splendors, 2E's Volo's Guide to Waterdeep, or 2E's City of Splendors, all because we had 1E's Waterdeep and the North.
There is obviously a lot of lore overlap in those books, but that didn't diminish their usefulness or desirability.
And of course, just because you're not using a 4E Timeline, doesn't mean some 4E idea's can't be used earlier in the Timeline. A good example of this are the Warlock Knights of Vaasa. I think they're one of the good changes made by 4E, that made the entire Bloodstone Lands more interesting and vibrant for adventure post-Witch King.
Finally, if I am not mistaken the campaign settings and their source books are going to start becoming mechanics neutral. I'm not 100% sure if they'll hold to this, or if it is just a transitional phase between 4E and 5E - but I hope that they do. If they *DO* hold to this, then that means there is more room for lore.
I don't see post 1E lore taking up much space - a sentence or two here or there to make an important note of something. Significant deviations would likely get a side bar mention. I don't see them effectively cramming the equivalent of 4 different eras into a single source book.
The intrusion will likely be minimal, and of course it doesn't decrease it's value. Good ideas can still be lifted from an era of the Realms in which you do not play - such as the Warlock Knights of Vaasa. Hell, someone might actually like the Shades, but be playing a pre-Time of Troubles game and decide to have them show up early. Other people may exclude them entirely from the lore.
In the end, it makes the campaign setting much more like a toolbox. You can pick and choose what RSE's you want to impact your Realms. Nothing is forced on you through a source book focusing too much on changes to the setting. The base lore remains intact, and major changes would be noted in sidebars.
(Well, that's my hope anyway.) |
Edited by - Aldrick on 15 Jul 2013 18:00:54 |
|
|
|
Lothlos
Learned Scribe
USA
111 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 20:50:59
|
In the 2e Villain's Lorebook page 31 "Further, it is a safe wager that Halaster has multiple contingency spells upon his person to prevent injury or death. ... Probability also leans heavily toward Halaster maintaining clones of himself (with all the above powers and abilities) deep within Undermountain. Always bear in mind that Halaster is one of the most powerful wizards in all of Faerūn."
So in my Forgotten Realms Halaster's clone activated and started collecting all the pieces of his soul. This would take awhile, and then there would be some drow to be kicked back out of Undermountain and some damage to the lover levels to be repaired as well. In 4th edition Halls of Undermountain it hints that he may in fact be alive on page 6. "Halaster has not been sighted in more than a century. Most believe a cataclysm killed him before the Spellplague rocked the world. Even so, rumors that the Mad Mage or his ghost has returned persist, carried on the tongues of the many adventurers who now delve into Undermountain and the desperate wretches who live in an underground community called Downshadow. The most recent reports tell of a dark chuckle in the ear just before disaster strikes, and those who sleep beneath the streets of Waterdeep have become more than a little uneasy. Undermountain seems to be awakening, but no one knows who has roused it."
In this scenario Halaster is alive and well in the current Realms and his absence during the events in Expedition to Undermountain is logically explained as his clone was gathering the many pieces of his soul and joining with them. I am sure that he had a contingency spell for this. I hope they do something similar to this to bring him back in a more official capacity in 5e. Undermountain is just not right without Halaster he could be a force to be reckoned with in Waterdeep especially given that the settlement of Downshadow could be considered an invasion by the City into Undermountain.
A personal note if they wanted to make the Realms Darker why kill off such a great villain or at least a villain with such great potential?
Plus he would want the Twisted Rune (Legion of Doom) to believe him dead until he figured how they remotely messed with his spell and until he is powerful enough to get his revenge. So no Sundering magic needed for that.
Back to the topic Myatra is back already, I hope that Helm and Eilistraee are soon to follow. I would not mind seeing the drow pantheon return. Map fixing would also be nice. I hope the Sea of Fallen Stars rising to its previous level does not wipe out too many people.
I think that moving the timeline back would possibly make more of a mess and alienate those that like 4e.
I for one am looking forward to 5e. |
The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,
Pursuing it with eager feet,
Until it joins some larger way
Where many paths and errands meet.
And whither then? I cannot say.
-J.R.R. Tolkien
|
Edited by - Lothlos on 15 Jul 2013 21:00:18 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3811 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 21:18:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I'm not sure I agree with that assessment regarding usefulness. First of all, if the 'theme, feeling, and base lore' of the Realms is reverting back to 1E - it's not like we had a ton of source books for that era.
It's like saying we didn't need the Unapproachable East to talk about Thay, because we already had Dreams of the Red Wizards. Or we didn't need 3E's City of Splendors, 2E's Volo's Guide to Waterdeep, or 2E's City of Splendors, all because we had 1E's Waterdeep and the North.
There is obviously a lot of lore overlap in those books, but that didn't diminish their usefulness or desirability.
And of course, just because you're not using a 4E Timeline, doesn't mean some 4E idea's can't be used earlier in the Timeline. A good example of this are the Warlock Knights of Vaasa. I think they're one of the good changes made by 4E, that made the entire Bloodstone Lands more interesting and vibrant for adventure post-Witch King.
Finally, if I am not mistaken the campaign settings and their source books are going to start becoming mechanics neutral. I'm not 100% sure if they'll hold to this, or if it is just a transitional phase between 4E and 5E - but I hope that they do. If they *DO* hold to this, then that means there is more room for lore.
I don't see post 1E lore taking up much space - a sentence or two here or there to make an important note of something. Significant deviations would likely get a side bar mention. I don't see them effectively cramming the equivalent of 4 different eras into a single source book.
The intrusion will likely be minimal, and of course it doesn't decrease it's value. Good ideas can still be lifted from an era of the Realms in which you do not play - such as the Warlock Knights of Vaasa. Hell, someone might actually like the Shades, but be playing a pre-Time of Troubles game and decide to have them show up early. Other people may exclude them entirely from the lore.
In the end, it makes the campaign setting much more like a toolbox. You can pick and choose what RSE's you want to impact your Realms. Nothing is forced on you through a source book focusing too much on changes to the setting. The base lore remains intact, and major changes would be noted in sidebars.
(Well, that's my hope anyway.)
Oh, sourcebooks structured like that would actually be useful. I thought that they wanted to divide books in sections about the aspect of a single element of the setting in each era, thus making them less efficient and appealing (at least to me).
Lore with general validity about a region/character/deity plus a sideline about major changes sounds way better (even tho -personally- some elements need to be restored and supported in the published setting for me to return to buy from WotC: at the end of the day content mostly made up of old info in a different form isn't going to be that different from what I've got now). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 15 Jul 2013 21:23:01 |
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 21:52:38
|
| That will most likely be the Players guide to the realms or the forgotten realms core setting book, I imagine the rest of the 5e books, being much less constrainted by trying to be everything to everyone. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36880 Posts |
Posted - 15 Jul 2013 : 23:00:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lothlos
I hope the Sea of Fallen Stars rising to its previous level does not wipe out too many people.
The original Sundering reached back and forth in time, so presumably, the redrawing of the map will be something that happened before the 4E era -- in other worlds, time will be altered so that the sea level never changed. At least, that is my assumption.
It must be noted that the map showing the coastline of the Sea of Fallen Stars did not appear to have been redrawn in 4E, as it certainly should have been to reflect a changed coastline.
Another thing that was unaddressed in 4E was the effect of having the previously submerged Sharksbane Wall suddenly cutting off a section of the sea. This should have affected sea traffic at the very least, and most likely environmental conditions, as well. If they don't adjust the water levels, then I hope they address this issue.
quote:
Originally posted by Lothlos
I think that moving the timeline back would possibly make more of a mess and alienate those that like 4e.
Before 5E was announced, my personal thought was to split the setting into alternate timelines, giving both camps what they want. This idea was met with a lot of resistance, though, from folks here.
I'm still not keen on WotC continuing to move forward from the 15th Century, but I'm withholding judgement until I see the 5E campaign book.
Ed himself told me -- in an email, not a public exchange -- that he was excited about what was coming. That's enough to make me hopeful. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2013 : 01:16:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Oh, sourcebooks structured like that would actually be useful. I thought that they wanted to divide books in sections about the aspect of a single element of the setting in each era, thus making them less efficient and appealing (at least to me).
That's basically how I'm picturing it. It wouldn't make sense to do it any other way. The alternative is that they take an "editionless tone" - which would basically be the same thing. The only difference is that instead of the lore text where they'd note Azoun IV as the King of Cormyr, they'd mention him over in the sidebar with the rest of the changes to Cormyr over the years. Then in the text they'd just use a generic term like, "the King or Regent".
Example: "Cormyr is ruled by a King, who is the absolute monarch." vs "Cormyr is ruled by Azoun IV, who is the absolute monarch."
Example: The text talks about the difference between Cormyrian commoners and the nobility, then on a side bar notes how Cormyr has over time attempted to increase the rights of the common folk, specifically noting Azoun V's attempt to do so and the push back by the nobility.
All of this is good and useful to everyone, because not only does it describe what Cormyr is like (regardless of edition), but it gives a good idea of how Cormyr COULD change in your Realms and simply reading it could give a DM interesting plot ideas.
Basically it's what I'd think of as the "toolbox" approach. It allows a DM to take things they like and include them in their Realms while ignoring the things that they don't. It allows you to game in any era that you'd like, as the core "theme and feel" of the region would remain the same. Each "era" simply brings some interesting ideas to the table that a DM might want to include in their games.
This is how I understand things are going to be presented. I could be wrong, of course, as the 5E FRCS is still a long way off. They could still decide to go in a radically different direction, but to the best of my understanding - this is how things will likely turn out.
I honestly can't imagine them doing it any different than what I outlined - it's as close as they can get to "fixing" the Realms short of a full blown reset. And they have been VERY clear that a reset is not going to happen. |
|
|
|
Lothlos
Learned Scribe
USA
111 Posts |
Posted - 16 Jul 2013 : 21:29:56
|
quote:
The original Sundering reached back and forth in time, so presumably, the redrawing of the map will be something that happened before the 4E era -- in other words, time will be altered so that the sea level never changed. At least, that is my assumption.
That approach would also address the flooding of the underdark as well, at it would have never been flooded.
Which makes me wonder how the aquatic elves and other underwater races were affected, and how will the Sundering effect the surviving aquatic races? If the Spellplague wiped them out will the Sundering bring them back?
|
The Road goes ever on and on
Down from the door where it began.
Now far ahead the Road has gone,
And I must follow, if I can,
Pursuing it with eager feet,
Until it joins some larger way
Where many paths and errands meet.
And whither then? I cannot say.
-J.R.R. Tolkien
|
|
|
|
BEAST
Master of Realmslore
USA
1714 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 02:57:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by rodrigoalcanza
What was the exact year ended 3rd Edition?
I believe that 3E ended in 1385 DR. That's when The Grand History of the Realms concluded, with a vague reference to the Spellplague, which ushered in the 4E.
But the FR Campaign Setting (3E) was officially set in 1372 DR.
RAS's Drizzt Saga was running a little behind the current timeline in 2E, and then he stopped writing for the Realms for a little while, so when he began writing Drizzt books again, he had to play catch-up with the rest of the timeline. "The Hunter's Blades Trilogy" takes place over the course of 1371 DR.
So 3E ran from 1372 to 1385 DR, I guess. |
"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)
<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works"> |
Edited by - BEAST on 17 Jul 2013 03:01:02 |
|
|
|
Kris the Grey
Senior Scribe
USA
422 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 03:47:34
|
Beast,
You are 100% right. Shieldmeet 1372 to 1385 was the reign of 3E FR.
(By the by, go check out my prior post on Blingdenstone, you might see something that'd interest/amuse you). |
Kris the Grey - Member in Good Standing of the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors, the Arcane Guild of Silverymoon, and the Connecticut Bar Association |
|
|
|
Joebing
Learned Scribe
USA
202 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 05:47:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
The Sundering seems to be an attempt to make some changes to the deities, and to fix the geographical changes.
They're using the 1st Edition FR map as a guide to what the end result will look like - so a lot of the shrinking of the map we saw in 3E is also going to disappear.
Basically, all of these changes are being done to set things up so that the 5E Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide is edition neutral.
However, the canon is going to continue rolling forward. They aren't going to roll back the years or revert back to a previous timeline - there are no retcons. They'll likely also be fixing some of the big deity blunders, so we'd see Mystra return, likely along with some other deities.
All good news indeed. The other big deity blunder: Kiaranselee...because Lolth NEEDS the evil, jealous goddess scheming. This all in all makes 5e seem to be the penultimate edition, no matter what you want to run in. Is this where the rumors of WotC releasing the entire back catalog with appendixes for each edition came from? |
Now plugging away on mass conversion to 5e, as well as my imprint J. Halk Games.
http://www.facebook.com/JHalkGames
First adventure on DM Guild: Lair of Elaacrimalicros |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 12:13:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joebling
Is this where the rumors of WotC releasing the entire back catalog with appendixes for each edition came from?
I think the re-release of old products as PDFs was announced last year at GenCon during the keynote address. If I remember right it was when they were discussing what would happen to all their settings. It could also have been announced by Mike Mearls in one of his Monday articles. Either way, it was from an official source and already in motion(See the PDF store option under products on WotC's site). |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 13:43:34
|
Not sure how they are going to pull it off, and I agree that paying for stuff I can already do on my own (use anything in any era) seems a bit unnecessary, but I am willing to give it a chance and see what they come up with. I would love to once-again be interested in the story that is The Forgotten Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
It must be noted that the map showing the coastline of the Sea of Fallen Stars did not appear to have been redrawn in 4E, as it certainly should have been to reflect a changed coastline.
At the end of the day, I have to say this one, single thing irked me the most.
How does a coastline move 25-50 miles out to sea, and yet all of the setting's port cities remained port cities?  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Jul 2013 13:45:17 |
|
|
|
rodrigoalcanza
Seeker
Brazil
67 Posts |
Posted - 17 Jul 2013 : 14:06:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
No, there is no rollback of the years. The official timeline is going to continue rolling forward. The Sundering seems to be an attempt to make some changes to the deities, and to fix the geographical changes.
They're using the 1st Edition FR map as a guide to what the end result will look like - so a lot of the shrinking of the map we saw in 3E is also going to disappear.
Basically, all of these changes are being done to set things up so that the 5E Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide is edition neutral. This means you'll have the ability to set your Realms in whatever era that you'd like - whether you want to play a game before the Time of Troubles, post-Time of Troubles, or post-Spellplague.
If I understand things correctly, basically the bulk of the setting book game lore will be written from the perspective of 1st Edition. "This is Cormyr. This is what it is like in Cormyr." Then throughout this information, there would be mentions of the changes that took place in Cormyr over time.
When it comes to things like deities, we'd get a write up for a deity like Bhaal, even though in the timeline he died during the Time of Troubles. We'd learn about his faithful and his followers, and it'd be noted that he died during the Time of Troubles and what ultimately happened to those who worshiped him. You'd also along side Bhaal, get a mention of Cyric, noting that he became a deity after the Time of Troubles, and the changes that his faith went through over time.
So, basically what they're doing they're trying to appeal to everyone regardless of where you want to play on the timeline. If you want to play games pre-ToT, you'll be able to do it. If you want to play games post-ToT or post-Spellplague, you'd be able to do that as well.
However, the canon is going to continue rolling forward. They aren't going to roll back the years or revert back to a previous timeline - there are no retcons. Most of what is being done is trying to align the 4E Realms in such a way that you can basically use the same map as you would in a 1E FR game. They'll likely also be fixing some of the big deity blunders, so we'd see Mystra return, likely along with some other deities.
At least, this is my understanding of what is going to happen. Someone can correct me if I am wrong.
Although I still prefer a reset or retcon, I like this chance that you wrote. Makes sense and would be a good solution. It would be really fantastic "tone and feel" of the 1st Edition.
On the other hand, do not think WOTC would no longer rollback the years simply to not alienate players of 4e. The Fourth Edition has alienated players of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition! I think WOTC would not make a retcon or reset simply because it would take public a great ... big mistake with 4e Realms. |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
The Sundering - Return to the decade of 1370s
