| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
 Posted - 12 Dec 2013 : 20:25:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
You completely ignored...
Good grief... I'm just going to give you one of these:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/maths/images/figure_40.gif
Look... I have a college degree in biology, and while I'm perfectly aware that natural selection sometimes decreases the fitness of individuals while promoting survival of a gene, how a term is used in colloquial speech is often more important than whether or not people are using the term correctly. I was not actually making any claims about the validity of epigenetics, only that "evolution" is almost always a poor metaphor because of what it implies. Evolution doesn't happen in individuals, it happens in populations, so it makes no sense to say something like "Joe is more evolved" or "the Realms has evolved". But this really isn't the place to argue science, particularly when my issue was the use of the word as a metaphor.
quote:
It is true that natural selection, in some cases (the part of my post that you completely ignored is not one of those cases), is important for evolution to remove parts of the genepool from the population...
Really? Evolution "acts" to remove genes? If you want to get into a slap-fight about what evolution means, you should make sure your phrasing is better.
If anything, you're only supporting my contention that as a metaphor, evolution is a poor choice because of what people think it implies.
But again, this is hardly the place to get into that kind of argument.
|
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! |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2013 : 20:26:44
|
4e Tieflings romping around Cormyr? 
I guess it truly isn't the Realms we remember after all.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2013 : 20:31:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
4e Tieflings romping around Cormyr?
I guess it truly isn't the Realms we remember after all.
Well, it's not like Farideh and her sister are welcomed with flowers and handshakes. They pretty much get nasty looks and worse from commoners wherever they go.
Tieflings are more numerous, and have a more diverse alignment choice, but they're still pretty quickly distrusted on sight.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4494 Posts |
Posted - 12 Dec 2013 : 21:47:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Stff, cut for brevity.....
Diffan is best unicorn <3 
I think I would actually enjoy playing in your 4E Realms, because I think you "get" the underlying core feel of what the Realms should be regardless of edition-specific window dressing.
Thing is, I actually kinda liked the 4E rules set in a lot of ways and I didn't dislike all of the thematic elements introduced in 4E Realms... it was far more about the implementation.
Thanks and agree 100% on the implementation! I think both the rules AND how the setting was dealt with both had horrid implementation problems, which were only exacerbated by the promos 4E put out that belittled or poked fun at how previous editions were played. I found them pretty funny and spot on but quite a number of people really took offense.
Also, I'd like to think most Realms fan would enjoy playing in one of my 4E-Realms games. I try to draw the best picture when considering the PC motivations, the plot of the adventure and tie it into the fabric of the setting. I also heavily encourage my PCs to find role-playing things for them to do outside of adventuring. No one is an adventurer 100% of the time and people have desires and paths they want to pursue that probably won't always include 4 other people tagging along.
In our long-running Realms game, I treat our adventures as episodic in nature. Meaning that there isn't a gret, overall quest they much achieve but rather short, tense action that has a moderate impact on the setting with speedy results. These sorts of forays might last 1 to 3 sessions but then I try to focus on someone else in the party. For example, our resident Cleric of Lathander/Amaunator (he made the timejump and is pretty much a supporter of both faces of the deity) is getting visions via dreams that Fort Moringlord is brewing something really bad behind it's barred and sealed doors. He needs to gain the church's trust in order to go in and finally clense the grounds, which have mysteriously been off-limits for quite a long time.
As for the rules themselves, I've had tremendous times using them and found that they "fixed" a lot of stuff that I had problems with in prior editions. That's not to say they're perfect, far from it, but I think the glaring issues (long combats, overly complicated PC turns, min-maxing, and too combat-centric feel) can be adjusted to not be such a big factor when a stong DM who knows the system well steps in. Also, it helps when the designers themselves write-in fixes that should've been in the original PHB.
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
And you may not be a minority for enjoying 4E Realms at all, so I think it is just as important for 4E fans to tell WotC what they liked (and didn't) just as much as any other fans. If we're going to get to a really good place in 5E/Next (or whatever they decide to call it), ALL of us with a true love for Realmsy things need to advocate for what we want to see. Sometimes I think people see me as someone who only wants things their way, but I really am an advocate for a Realms that has a tone and feel that works well for everyone.
True. I was, however, talking about being a 4E-Realms fan here at CK. If you haven't noticed, we're far and few between  . With that being said I think the current team working on the Sundered Realms have an excellent grip on the situation and, despite them pulling apart Returned Abeir which I liked, the future has it's best chances right now in their hands.
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
Ultimately, at least as far as I'm concerned, it really isn't about the individual elements like earthmotes and spellscars, or Chosen and spellfire. It's far more about the overall tone of the Realms and the relationships that PCs have with NPCs. I honestly think that 5E/Next can steer the Realms back to a good place for most fans.
Yeah, I can agree with that. Hopefully we'll at least get more content in the way of actual books and supplements and not just 3 books and some Dragon articles that we were given with 4E. As much as I do enjoy the post-Spellplague Realms, I really wish they went above and beyond with detailing the new place. Even though continunity could've been a problem (and I'm not sold on that it was), new people could have easily gotten on board with a new chapter that started an in-depth and detailed version in 1479 DR. Sadly the designers didn't feel that this was the right step and wanted a more light touch (again, which isn't a horrible idea) but it was too light of a touch honestly. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator
E6 Options: Epic 6 Campaign |
|
|
|
Krafus
Learned Scribe
246 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2013 : 00:48:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Euranna
Erin M. Evans said that some of the novels for their characters will be coming out and still be during the time of the Sundering. Her next novel with Farideh and friends comes out Sept 2014 and is called "Fire in the Blood". They will finally make it to Cormyr. 
I believe Kemp has an approved outline for another Cale novel (Vasen/Cale is how it was phrased).
Thanks for the answer, Euranna. Now if someone could tell me at whose feet I need to grovel so that we'll get the fourth novel of the Shadowbane series... |
Edited by - Krafus on 13 Dec 2013 00:48:40 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Dec 2013 : 04:14:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
4e Tieflings romping around Cormyr?
I guess it truly isn't the Realms we remember after all.
Well, it's not like Farideh and her sister are welcomed with flowers and handshakes. They pretty much get nasty looks and worse from commoners wherever they go.
Tieflings are more numerous, and have a more diverse alignment choice, but they're still pretty quickly distrusted on sight.
Good to know - I thought for a moment it was a 'welcome with open arms' kind of thing.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Lilianviaten
Senior Scribe
489 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 05:20:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
Actually no, evolution does not imply "change that promotes survival" it just implies change.
Just change is mutation. Evolution means that the changes led to improved survival. So I'm right, again. As usual.
quote:
Trying to bring the "old" pre-spellplague fans back is the same as chasing unicorns honestly. The vast majority of people that left won't be coming back even if you deleted everything spellplague related from existence(there's still people complaining about Cyric for crying out loud).
Quack quack, you don't know that.
And Cyric blows. Never should've been added. So there.
I've never met a single 4E Realms fan in real life, not even at GenCon. So quite honestly, they're the elusive unicorns as far as I'm concerned. I know dozens of OGB fans personally who would jump at the chance to buy an updated OGB Realms with Schley maps and new material built from that era. YMMV and I'm not going to argue with you, but your sassy attitude is pointless. I will continue to speak my mind and that's that.
I don't understand the idea of wanting to reset to the Old Gray Box. The fans who are pushing this are supposedly diehard, longtime fans who feel that 4e ruined the Realms for them. But if that's the case, why do they want to erase 2e and 3e? Why would the people who love the Realms more than anyone want to undo every event in the Realms since the very beginning?
That's like the people I've encountered who swear they are huge fans of a horror movie franchise, and the remake ruined it for them. But when I start talking to them, I soon discover that they are purists who really only loved the original, and didn't much care for any of the sequels. So they aren't truly fans of the franchise, just the original film. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 06:26:48
|
That's if everyone agrees 3E or even 2E were perfect continuations of the Old Grey Box. They're not. They added a lot of disjointed concepts and places to the setting or elaborated on them in ways unforeseen in the original rendition.
Resetting back to the original does not invalidate anything. The events of later editions and later add-ons have merely not occurred yet. It just provides everyone with a shared starting point at the earliest published version of the setting. Then it becomes optional to add in later lore at the discretion of each party gaming in the setting. It essentially creates a blank slate for people to run as a sandbox however they wish. They can adhere to the published lore as much as they want (which would be accessible in electronic format via sites like dndclassics.com) or they can diverge as far as they want without ever looking back.
Technically it's the lore of later editions which locks in certain events as inevitable if one plays in older eras. A group in the 3E era working against the influences of Shar and Cyric will inevitably have all their work amount to dust if following the established history. Likewise the same applies to those who wish to avoid the ToT, but that resulted in less drastic setting alterations than the Spellplague.
Everyone can play according to their tastes, of course, but it does mean they have limited reason to continue supporting later products detailing the new timeline that does not support their version of the events. In the past, as the RSEs were more isolated or their damage mitigated to a greater extent, it was easier to draw lore from the official sources to flesh out individual divergent home Realms, but the Spellplague and 4E transition introduced significant changes and the time jump further widened the interchangeable gap.
It can still be done, but it is less plug-and-play as it once was. The degree of adaptability decreases if the current material focuses on the particulars of the Spellplague (plaguescarred, events) or a new addition or subtractions (kingdoms, regions) as there are no counterparts in the old Realms. Thus the downplaying of the Spellplague in recent marketing and the Sundering supposedly being a soft reset in terms of tone and focus if not actual events and lore.
The reset to the OGB is not the only method to achieve the various goals the Sundering appears to be attempting, but it does have certain advantages. Note resets were also used for Dark Sun 4E and Gamma World 4E (more like the 7th actual edition).
Also, the comments about not expecting the Realms to ever be as "ideal" as when we first took interest in it, and how each person should depart to play in their own favorite edition/version while essentially leaving the main fanbase. That is an unhelpful comment and echoes some of the worst of 4E's failed marketing. That strategy might work if one segment of the fanbase overwhelms all others, but that is not the case. Fans of every type are important for the setting. To continue to be successful, the Realms will need all the fans it can get (and retain), especially as competition has increased compared to previous years/editions.
Thankfully the current design team appears to approach the new edition with a more reconciliatory, collaborative tone. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 08:12:35
|
The sense that I've gotten when reading people's calls for a reset to the OGB is that people do in fact want a full reset, meaning all the lore is potentially on the chopping block (going forward and backward in time).
The main issue I have with an OGB reset is that it doesn't move the setting forward--this being the main function of the Sundering, regardless of what ever else this event is trying to accomplish.
While WotC could conceivably reset to the OGB, it's no viable business strategy to rely on reprints alone (perhaps updated with new rules that are downloadable online). You'd need to sell new books and the Realms from the OGB onward have been covered pretty heavily already.
Filling in the gaps is possible, I suppose, but that's certainly not preferable if your goal is to move the setting forward. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 14 Dec 2013 09:29:30 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 08:29:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Also, the comments about not expecting the Realms to ever be as "ideal" as when we first took interest in it, and how each person should depart to play in their own favorite edition/version while essentially leaving the main fanbase. That is an unhelpful comment (snip)
Looking back over the thread, I can't see where anyone suggested anything like this.
In order to support the Forgotten Realms, and thus to be a fan and part of the fan base, all you have to do is actively enjoy the setting. Whether it's running a game, playing in a game at your FLGS or breaking out an old Volo's Guide or favorite Realms novel to re-read, the net effect of supporting the setting is the same.
Advising people who are specifically interested in a particular feel or flavor drawn from a particular era to use the books written in that era as the best means of recreating their ideal experience, as opposed to looking for it in the 5E Realms, is in no way, shape or form a kind of discouragement.
It is, however, a way of encouraging people to support and enjoy the setting.
Advising those same fans that their ideal Realms feeling is unlikely to be recreated wholesale in the new edition because the people writing the new edition aren't the same writers from back in the day (other than Ed, as the advice notes) is just common sense.
Such advice isn't making the claim that older fans won't find something to enjoy the 5E Realms. Nor is it claiming that the 5E Realms won't attempt to borrow elements from older eras. Neither is it a claim the Realms won't be great or otherwise achieve new levels of greatness.
To suggest otherwise is to misinterpret the advice as written. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 14 Dec 2013 11:37:10 |
|
|
|
Wenin
Senior Scribe
585 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 09:52:15
|
I'm having an internal struggle over coming back with the release of 5th edition. It is a struggle that I'm choosing, but is forced upon me due to my situation. I came to the Realms when I was a teenager, who had plenty of time to dive into all the novels and collected all of the materials that I could over the years. I had the time to learn all that I have accumulated, and still I knew there was plenty that I was overlooking and could dig into further.
Its now been over 20 years, and not all of those years had I been following the Realms, but whenever I returned it was only a few years had passed in the campaign world, but was very much the same Realms. All the old bad guys were still around, its just their personal stories were advanced a couple decades. So I was able to build upon what I already knew. I could grab my bits of information and pull them together, and I could excuse a couple of years differences in timelines of when things happened.
So then with 4th edition, the change was so dramatic, and all encompassing, I was at a complete loss as to where the realms was 100 years in the future. I now have two kids and a job, I don't have the time to immerse myself into a completely new Realms to rebuild that library of knowledge on recent events within the Realms. Then on top of all that, it was just a fact that I'd have to wait for material to come out on the areas I was most interested in.
Someone had mentioned earlier in this thread that there are players that WoTC can't get back no matter what they do. It should be understood that the loss of those fans are not necessarily by choice of the fan.
I love the 3.5/pathfinder system mechanics, so I'm not looking for another game edition, but I'm happy that their new edition will be designed to be kind of edition neutral. I feel confident in my abilities to retrograde adventures to be usable in the edition I'm playing.
Perhaps in 20 years, when I retire, my kids are out of the house, I will have the time to read through all that has happened since the release of 4th edition.
An awesome Campaign Setting guide that is gigantic, explaining all that has happened since the release of 4th edition (leaving out the pieces that is the least favorite, as if they didn't happen) would be a huge boon for those of us that feel disconnected from the Realms. |
Session Reports posted at RPG Geek.
Stem the Tide Takes place in Mistledale.
Dark Curtains - Takes place in the Savage North, starting in Nesmé. I wrapped my campaign into the Hoard of the Dragon Queen, but it takes place in 1372 DR. |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 10:34:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
The sense that I've gotten when reading people's calls for a reset to the OGB is that people do in fact want a full reset, meaning all the lore is potentially on the chopping block (going forward and backward in time).
The main issue I have with an OGB reset is that it doesn't move the setting forward--this being the main function of the Sundering, regardless of what ever else this event is trying to accomplish.
While WotC could conceivably reset to the OGB, it's no viable business strategy to rely on reprints alone (perhaps updated with new rules that are downloadable online). You'd need to sell new books and the Realms from the OGB onward have been covered pretty heavily already.
Filling in the gaps is possible, I suppose, but that's certainly not preferable if your goal is to move the setting forward.
As one of the people who really, really dislike the way the Realms has been handled the last fifteen years and that starts backing away in reflex when words like franchise starts popping up, I must say that I agree with you. There should not be a general reset. However I do think that it would be a good idea to publish a one-of "Greenwoods OGB" a anniversary book of sorts showing the Realms without any of the later add-ons (Moonshaes, Icewind Dale, Uthgards, Hoardlands Kara-tur etc) and expanded with notes on areas/races not done in the original. This could (if successful be used for publishing minor adventures that with one-line published modifiers could be used in the post Spellplague Realms. But in addition the novels, major source books and events etc. should be published with the continuing advancing setting. This would probably still lead to complaining, but at least WotC could say that they did make a very good attempt to please all groups. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 21:33:44
|
I really can't recall where I heard it, or if I'm making it up in my head, but I recall there being some talk of fiction written in other places of the timeline. I seriously could just be mistaken, so don't take my word for it.
Also, by all appearances, the new stories written within the Realms will be hyper-focused on very intimate stories with the characters involved. This is awesome, and exactly how you can rekindle that feeling. Since the ToT, there's been a sense that one should ignore the flower if the whole damn forest is going to get burned down-- ya know?
Also, I'm not an employee of WotC. Please don't take anything I saw as gospel. I can't hide my giddy fandom of the Realms very well. If my last post read as being dour, I apologize. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
8053 Posts |
Posted - 14 Dec 2013 : 23:00:06
|
quote:
Matt James
I really can't recall where I heard it, or if I'm making it up in my head, but I recall there being some talk of fiction written in other places of the timeline. I seriously could just be mistaken, so don't take my word for it.
I am excited by this possibility, even if it turns out to just be a few short stories or narrative tales-within-tales or somesuch. I‘ve been arguing towards retro-Realms fiction for much too long to give up on this notion.
I offer the Ruins of Greyhawk module as a fair (though far from perfect) example of how to build adventures within a new timeframe whilst drowning within the ambience of past continuity. Not Orwellian at all, no matter how strange the change might be.
If this publishing philosophy is a fundamental element of the “5E Realms“ design approach, then I expect I will be pleasantly surprised. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 15 Dec 2013 : 02:59:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
To suggest otherwise is to misinterpret the advice as written.
Says the scribe who's own (re/mis/in)terpretation exceeds the brief exchange of terse comments under discussion.
I don't disagree with your sentiment, but I didn't find that in the original discussion despite your personal addenda to help elaborate.
I suppose in summary, it is apt to say there is a new normal for the Realms. It's not the Realms of prior editions, and by many indications, neither will it be the Realms of the 4E era. What it will become remains to be seen.
As this overall thread has moved on to more positive and more interesting discussion I'd rather not be labeled a "thread carper" by drawing out this side discussion.
So back on topic:
The Sundering is not an admission of screwing up (because corporations never screw up and more importantly never admit it). I think it is a display demonstrating they will try to do better. Better than either and both the 4E Realms and the old Realms. It is the intent, but such can never be a guarantee given the nature of creative projects.
As for a reset to the OGB, I don't see it as anything more than a deluxe one shot like their old edition reprints. I believe there is room for such a singular product, but it would not serve for long as the sole product line for the setting. In fact, the second they publish a handful of books, the illusion is undone. Given WotC's propensity to advance the timeline, often in a gauche event-wise manner, I don't expect the OGB to remain a monolithic touchstone for long. In other threads we discussed a model of product releases based on era rather than region, which may serve as the needed framework for Wizards to support multiple eras.
|
|
|
|
see
Learned Scribe
235 Posts |
Posted - 15 Dec 2013 : 20:49:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
The main issue I have with an OGB reset is that it doesn't move the setting forward
Forward is a direction, not mere motion. If you're driving from El Paso to Los Angeles, and you find yourself in New Orleans, going all the way back to El Paso is going forward, even though that's winding up where you started. Detouring up to Chicago would be going somewhere new, but it isn't forward. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 15 Dec 2013 : 21:47:36
|
I am very wary because I don't see merit in an advanced timeline that is trying to bring the old Realms back. If you are going to attempt this then you might as well just do a reboot. I am very worried about it all being "cheesy". I know some of you may like the book, but what I have heard of "the Companions", it sounds very much like cheese. I mean they bring all the old companions of Drizzt back as reincarnations just ruins it for me. I would rather Drizzt accept their deaths and have a new set of companions on board. I just get the feeling this is how 5e Realms is going to be like.
I know it won't happen, but I would like to see a continuation of the 2nd edition Realms but be edition neutral. I mean they are so worried about undoing the work of authors during 4th edition, but the whole 4th edition era did this anyway but to all pre-4th fans so what's the difference?
In my opinion, 4th edition Realms is the equivalent of "Highlander 2". Just act as if it never happened. |
“Fantasy is escapist, and that is its glory. If a soldier is imprisioned by the enemy, don't we consider it his duty to escape?. . .If we value the freedom of mind and soul, if we're partisans of liberty, then it's our plain duty to escape, and to take as many people with us as we can!”
#8213; J.R.R. Tolkien
*I endorse everything Dark Wizard says*. |
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 15 Dec 2013 : 22:48:05
|
For many years they have struggled with growing wizards of the coast, RPG is has been through a lot in the last several years there has been some kinda of disconnect from management of wizards and the gaming community. This disconnect has unfortunately damaged the company and the relationship between them and us the first, second and generations of players. But nothing is lost.
Its difficult to run a company like wizards and make it a profitable business that as a whole has been acquired by a multinational with shareholders in the end it is a public company.
I hold not grudges with them, they will not admit anything they have too regain peoples trust move the realms forward and rebuild the foundations of a great game where new comers and existing players can have fun.
It is not going to appease everyone some of us don't care any more others will only truly be happy with ED's version of FR (you will only ever get that if you play with his group)..
Honestly I want the realms feel that feeling of the forgotten realms which i remember vividly from the old days is not about ToT or spell plaque etc that feeling is beyond that beyond the reckoning, its the forgotten realms the mystery on every paragraph keys to countless adventures in this wonderful world.
We have become too focus in a story line we haven't written or even have great effect on sure its difficult to trust them again ultimately they own the IP and they will move the realms forward regardless of what we say hopefully we wont make things difficult enough that its going to kill off the franchise, remember a lot of us are "hardcore" realms fans what we say here influences intermediate and novice players, there has been a huge amount of study about the "hardcore player" phenomenon in computer gaming industry and its funny it has not yet been noticed or taken seriously in this section of the industry. (I cant find some of the original articles or people taking about it but read this interview with Bioware in gamespy about hard core players, http://www.gamespy.com/articles/701/701787p3.html)
Thinking this way for example paizo did really well to include the early adopters right from the start they made them happy with the product they were building and paid off everyone i spoke to find PF great (and It is basically 3.5 rehashed not a great system encourages min/maxing and quite difficult with a ton of tables and maths required for Dm and players (this is my personal opinion, I play 3.5 and i enjoy it)).
Anyhow I have talked too much but my point is we have a great impact on the industry our feedback, what we say has a GREAT impact on the game (all spectrums) for good or ill. If we love FR we have to support it even if it means forgiving their past mistakes or trying to forget but make constructed criticisms and not the hate-mongering that will only lead to the darkside of the force.
And i am not saying that anyone here is hatemongering
|
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1885 Posts |
Posted - 16 Dec 2013 : 00:10:31
|
| Great article Portella thanks for sharing it. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
SirUrza
Master of Realmslore
USA
1283 Posts |
Posted - 16 Dec 2013 : 17:28:50
|
I just want EDITION support for different eras of play, real edition support. If I want to use D&D Next for an adventure I'm running in 1368 or 1373 I'll have official material to help with that.
But I know anything beyond lip service and generic source material is a pipe dream. |
"Evil prevails when good men fail to act."
The original and unapologetic Arilyn, Aribeth, Seoni Fanboy. |
Edited by - SirUrza on 16 Dec 2013 17:31:09 |
|
|
|
Drustan Dwnhaedan
Learned Scribe
USA
324 Posts |
Posted - 16 Dec 2013 : 23:28:50
|
Hmmm... it looks like Therise and The Arcanamach have already said everything I intended to say. Guess that's what I get for taking a few days to try and work out what I'm going to say, and in a way that wouldn't start an argument. I also needed time to cool off; as Therise said earlier on, some people aren't ready to just 'forgive and forget' WotC for what they did to the characters (and world) they loved. (I didn't even realize I was one of these people until reading more of this scroll, and a bunch of feelings I thought I had gotten over began affecting me. Guess I'm not quite as open-minded or understanding as I thought I was.)
EDIT: ...And I just read my post and realized it's probably going to start another argument (and it's the least rant-y post I was able to think of over the last five days!) |
Edited by - Drustan Dwnhaedan on 16 Dec 2013 23:33:24 |
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 16 Dec 2013 : 23:43:29
|
| I get what you mean. |
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Dec 2013 : 16:11:19
|
I'm pretty much back in 'wait & see' mode.
I liken it to an airplane waiting to land, circling the airport. I WANT to land, but they are not letting me. If I have to wait much longer I'll run out of fuel, in which case I had better find some other airport to land in.
I think many of us 'old guard' are in much the same boat (How'd I go from planes to boats? LOL!)
Anyhow, all this discussion just keeps running us in circles, and gets us nowhere. The only thing it does is stir-up old 'hard feelings', which isn't a good thing. Its self-defeating. I say we wait to see what they give us - we may be pleasantly surprised - and THEN we can discuss things until the end of time. Right now, we are just guessing.
I remember when this site was about great lore - can we get back to that? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Dec 2013 16:12:07 |
|
|
|
Werthead
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
213 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 13:10:21
|
quote:
But FWIW, I would -still- prefer a reboot to either OGB or 3E Realms. I just would, and given how many people I talked to at GenCon there's no way that I'm in the minority.
The 'total reboot' option is unpopular because I think you have to keep moving forwards to survive. If we look at STAR TREK, Paramount decided that the continuity built up by the previous TV series (particularly TNG, DS9 and VOYAGER) had grown far too complex, so they tried a prequel (ENTERPRISE) and when that didn't work, a total reboot (the Abramsverse). Whilst the reboot has been financially successful, it's been a more mixed bag critically and hardcore fans are highly sceptical of it (though, generally, not to 4E controversy levels). Alienating your old fans to try to bring in new ones is always a dangerous tactic.
However, there is also an idea here that could work for the Realms as well. The Abramsverse did make a sop to hardcore fans by clearly using time travel and parallel universes to establish that the former continuity still exists and is still continuing (and novels and computer games in that timeline continue to appear, and Paramount apparently has even taken pitches for a new TV series set post-TNG/DS9/VOYAGER, suggesting they are open to the idea of returning to the original timeline). The Realms, of course, have a built-in precedent for time travel magic (in the ARCANE AGE 2E products) and even changing the timeline: the original Sundering caused shifts in the timeline going backwards and forwards.
Using this precedent, WotC could release a large-scale, epic campaign involving time travel in which adventurers travel back from the Spellplague Era to prevent the event from ever happening, heading off the murder of Mystra etc. Novels could also be released to explore this storyline. Basically, the adventurers succeed and the Spellplague does not happen. However, this results in the creation of an alternate timeline, not a replacement one: the 4E Realms could continue to exist, be explored in occasional products or even handed over to a group of developers and fans to explore online (a bit like the unofficial-but-tolerated 3E DARK SUN stuff), whilst the 'reset Realms' could continue to be explored in new, official products. The novels and adventures published during 4E would have still happened and it may be possible to implement them in a revised timeline (Drizzt retains his memories of the alternate timeline for whatever magical timey wimey reasons and uses this to inform his decisions in the new one).
Using this idea, you could return to 1385 and take the setting forwards from there in a non-nuked world, whilst the 4E fans would still get material set in their time period as well. There are problems with this idea - managing the material so as not to be confusing could be difficult, plus there's an element of having your cake and eating it - but I think it would generally work. If 5E is going to have multiple time settings, and considering how many Realms DMs and players completely ignore the Spellplague and continue to play in the 3E era (even if they are using 4E or other rules), this may actually happen organically anyway. |
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 15:29:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Werthead
However, there is also an idea here that could work for the Realms as well.
No it couldn't. If I buy a FR novel I expect it to tell me something that happened in the Realms and not only in "Realms A" which are totally different and not to be confused with "Realms B"
quote:
Originally posted by Werthead
Using this idea, you could return to 1385 and take the setting forwards from there in a non-nuked world, whilst the 4E fans would still get material set in their time period as well.
And people who are just fans pf the Realms, no matter where it story takes it our how ugly it gets, are then completly SOL, since there is no more Realms for them. |
Edited by - Mirtek on 21 Dec 2013 15:31:36 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 16:46:19
|
LOL... Mirtek, every time you post, all I hear from you is "screw the old fans, screw 'em all."
Werthead's idea of a split timeline has been suggested before. I suggested a time-travel adventure that advances the story by reverting to an older period of time and moving ahead with changes. Others have suggested a JJ Abrams style "Trek" reboot, which would keep both timelines "alive" for development. More recently, Markustay has suggested an adventure path where time becomes "unmoored" and adventurers can create any number of different timelines by hopping around to different events and being able to change them.
There are lots of ways to advance the story and move forward WITH a reboot. Many different types of reboots are possible, as people have explored above. As long as the stories and novels don't stop, the Realms are moving forward whether there's a reboot or not.
The real question is this: if the number of fans who want a reboot significantly outnumber those who would never accept a reboot, why not do the reboot? After all, the fans are divided badly, and mostly over the inclusion of the 4E era's material. Some people are going to be SOL no matter which way they go.
And frankly, there are a LOT of different types of reboots that I'd be willing to accept if it removed the 4E era. I'd accept a reboot to a pre-ToT OGB that never does a ToT. I'd also accept any reboot to a time in 2E or 3E, just not the period immediately before the Spellplague that started in with the "setting the stange" junk that was plopped in. I'd even be willing to accept an Abrams "Trek" reboot that splits the timeline, allowing the 4E timeline to exist in a separate reality.
For the moment, I am willing to wait and see what happens with the "keep 4E and do a Sundering" plan by Ed and the novels team. I'm actually hopeful that they'll dump 4E themes and threads entirely and move into something new. If WotC totally ignores 4E Realms in this move forward and repairs the cosmology and tone of the setting, I'm willing to try it. But if they screw it up, I'm OUT until there is a reboot.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Werthead
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
213 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 16:51:06
|
quote:
And people who are just fans pf the Realms, no matter where it story takes it our how ugly it gets, are then completly SOL, since there is no more Realms for them.
And at the moment the people who are fans of the 1E-3E Realms and dislike the turn 4E has taken - a vastly larger group of people - are completely SOL as well. The number of people who ONLY like 4E Realms and hate 1-3E are vanishingly small. Those who like 1-3E Realms and not 4E exist in much greater numbers. The disappointing sales performance of 4E reflects that. WotC are a business, and should be pursuing the larger audience.
This idea allows for both versions to coexist. It also isn't a case of 'Realms A' and 'Realms B' coexisting for the purposes of novels and so on: they would only continue with the official version of the setting, which would be the reset timeline version. The coexisting idea would be for the purposes of gaming.
Of course, this is just an idea. It's clearly not going to happen as a deliberate policy. I think it's quite likely that 5E will default to that direction though: if it emphasises the Realms as a setting regardless of timeline, then the most popular periods will get the most development. |
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 20:05:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Werthead
And at the moment the people who are fans of the 1E-3E Realms and dislike the turn 4E has taken - a vastly larger group of people - are completely SOL as well.
No they have the same chance like all others to like the next turn of the wheel more than the last (or dislike it even more).
quote:
Originally posted by Werthead
The number of people who ONLY like 4E Realms and hate 1-3E are vanishingly small.
And don't give a ### about 4e Realms. It happens, it was certainly the worst incarnation so far, but it has happened so live with it.
For me the notion of a single undivided always progressing timeline is the most important of all. No matter how #### the progress turns out to be, if it happened it has to stay happened.
quote:
Originally posted by Werthead
This idea allows for both versions to coexist. It also isn't a case of 'Realms A' and 'Realms B' coexisting for the purposes of novels and so on: they would only continue with the official version of the setting, which would be the reset timeline version.
The don't waste time with that other version. If it's not the official version there's no need for it.
And it means I wasted time and money reading novels that have been declared void. And it means I'll never again will spend time and money on FR novels since I can never be sure again that what I read is really what's happening to the Realms and not something that is just retconned out 5 years from now |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 20:43:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
For me the notion of a single undivided always progressing timeline is the most important of all. No matter how #### the progress turns out to be, if it happened it has to stay happened.
LOL this is not any kind of enlightened philosophy of needing to make due with reality.
quote:
The don't waste time with that other version. If it's not the official version there's no need for it.
By this logic, I'm not allowed to enjoy JJ Abrams Trek and still go back and rent Shatner's Wrath of Khan movie. I think I can tell that they're totally different things, and I see the value of having both. In fact, if another TV series ever gets made, I'd rather have them pick up from Voyager or DS9's universe rather than Abrams-Trek.
This is, in fact, fantasy, where we are NOT required to choke down garbage and drek. Why not take advantage of dumping the incredibly bad parts so that we end up with something truly amazing instead of something that still contains a huge load of historical drek that most people hate anyway?
Sometimes people get overly wrapped up in "principles" when it comes to fantasy. This isn't real life, this is make-believe.
|
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 21 Dec 2013 21:16:45 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 21:14:19
|
I wanted a reboot, but not a 'hard' reboot (which is what ST got... I think). Everyone's ideas about reboots seem to be a bit different, though.
MY notion of a 'soft' reboot would be to turn the clock back to the ToT (because I think thats when everything started going downhill, both in-game and out), BUT - and this is THE most important part - unless overwritten by new material, everything that happened still happens. That means novels would not be voided - they may just not have happened yet. Some of the details might get slightly tweaked, but they still stand on their own merits.
This would allow us to clean-up a lot of the inconsistencies that have crept in over the years, while at the same time continue to move the setting forward, and leaving whatever authors wrote intact (for the most part). I think thats what this 'push forward' is really all about - ego. Some people don't want their contribution to The Realms to get axed.
Sadly, though, some of it SHOULD get axed, egos be damned.
I'm not sure what they are going to do - most of us don't (and those that do, can't talk about it). I just hope it is something that will have a little bit of something for everyone, and not just be 4e 2.0 that I feared it would be. If 'support for all eras' just means reprinting old sources, then thats precisely what this all is - a rebranding of 4th edition.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Is "the Sundering" an admission to screwing up?
