| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
 Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 07:08:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
Candlekeep has been dedicated to "detraction" of the setting since the advent of 4e. A cursory review of the posts in the last seven years supports this.
Many 'Scribes' have indicated here that they, the Rupert included, would "vote with their money", and not support the setting.
There have been numerous reports from the current design team regarding catering to their detractors.
I occasionally post here to express my opinion, as I have with my post above. As you have stated, Rupert, you encourage statements of opinion in this forum.
So, you're welcome.
Is that you Brace?  |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
 |
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 07:09:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
What damage or mistakes made by the design team which culminated in the 4e Realms do you feel need repaired?
For me, a patch for why a Second Companion was created over Elturel and an explanation on what happened to the one over Eversult. That's about the one thing I see as a blatant error. Perhaps how Tiamat was trapped in the lower planes for a millennia when she's had appearance in 4E. |
|
|
|
Thorn Illance
Seeker
53 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 07:21:27
|
Brim:
Yep!
Coming to the Candlekeep Meet-Up at GenCon?
(Here comes the ban-hammer!) |
Edited by - Thorn Illance on 03 Jul 2014 07:25:14 |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 12:19:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
For 5E it appears the core rulebooks books will be "cross pollinated" with numerous mentions of different campaign worlds, but for the Player's Handbook WotC appear to be using only Realms gods for the list of deities (if what I've read on ENWorld is correct).
I don't have time to look it up now, but Mike Mearl's in an article or in on of the Wotc_DND interviews on twitch/youtube mentioned that Realms, Greyhawk and Mythic earth(I remember Norse, but at least one other is mentioned) pantheons will be presented in the PHB. I would not expect that the realms pantheon presented in the PHB will have every minor realms deity, but who knows. He also mentioned another campaign setting. I want to say DL, but I can't remember.
quote:
Originally posted by hobbitfan
My initial questions was about what we know about WOTC's plan for the Realms in 5E.
Can we please talk about that?
Realms is the first setting that is going to get the covered in depth in 5e. Organized play is based in FR. All of the adventures released which I have already mentioned will be based in FR. The PHB uses examples from wotc owned settings in general. There has not been an official announcement for a FRCG yet. We know that RA Salvatore, Ed Greenwood and Erin M. Evans have contracted novels still to come. He is a link that describes the new D&D adventurer's leaguehttp://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/news/advleague2. That is all I have noticed so far. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
Edited by - Tarlyn on 03 Jul 2014 12:21:26 |
|
|
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1150 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 13:03:10
|
| Interestingly, Scott Kurtz' Table Titans webcomic (http://www.tabletitans.com) is receiving promotion from WotC and his latest story arc is set firmly in the Forgotten Realms. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
|
|
|
Delwa
Master of Realmslore
USA
1270 Posts |
Posted - 03 Jul 2014 : 16:42:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
For 5E it appears the core rulebooks books will be "cross pollinated" with numerous mentions of different campaign worlds, but for the Player's Handbook WotC appear to be using only Realms gods for the list of deities (if what I've read on ENWorld is correct).
I don't like seeing crossover like that. I've always preferred the Realms stay out of the core rulebooks and associated non-setting splatbooks.
But I can see the value in piquing the interest of new-to-D&D players, as well as giving them some familiar reference points when they get a hold of a 5E Realms book for the first time.
Curious what others think about this strategy, as it relates to the OP's question.
I like it, and it seems to be working in my limited view. I used to work part time at one of my local game stores, and I still hang out there, and I see kid's really catching on to this strategy.
By way of comparison (not bashing, just comparing,) what I saw with 3E and 4E was a lot of people going, "I've read some Realms novels, and I've heard of D&D, and would really like to start my own FR game, what do I need?" Hearing that the core books only covered a generic or Greyhawk world was a minor down play. It meant, in order for the kid to get what he wants, he'll have to buy an additional $30 book. Even if you told him to use free content online until he could afford a Campaign Setting, it was still a downer.
This time, with a mix of everything, it's going over better. They have enough material to play a Realms based game with just the core. Granted, they'll want more later, but they aren't left starting from scratch. |
- Delwa Aunglor
I am off to slay yon refrigerator and spoil it's horde. Go for the cheese, Boo!
"The Realms change; seldom at the speed desired of those who strive, but far too quickly for those who resist." - The Simbul, taken from the Forgotten Realms Campaign Conspectus |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 01:23:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
Interestingly, Scott Kurtz' Table Titans webcomic (http://www.tabletitans.com) is receiving promotion from WotC and his latest story arc is set firmly in the Forgotten Realms.
Interesting read there. Thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 02:09:09
|
I was looking back over my initial post and it occurs to me that I might have phrased things better. I think "Has WOTC committed to detailing or covering the Realms in 5E" might have been better than using the word "fix".
I apologize if any 4E Realms fans might have felt excluded or picked on by the thrust of my initial question. I was interested more in finding out WOTC's plans for the future and not so much attacking the 4E Realms book.
I made an erroneous assumption in my first post that most fans would feel like me and did not consider differing opinions.
My fault there. |
|
|
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 14:36:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Making statements and giving them reprieve as an opinion is not helping much. One of the bigger things that I've stated for several years now is that there is a whole new slate of consumers that have come to learn of the Realms through things like organized play. They learned of the Realms, and then moved on to reading novels, etc... It is the highest form of arrogance to suggest that their enjoyment is invalidated at the behest of an era of the game they never knew of (and in many cases were not born yet).
Star Wars is always the best yard-stick of this. Look at what's happening with the news that the EU is not canon anymore. On a personal level, it's absolutely maddening that all the time I spent reading the EU novels and content is now invalidated. I will never get that time back.
Why is the same goal being suggested now with the Realms?
I could not agree more with this statement. As a Star Wars fan I too feel disappointed by the decision to make the entirety of the EU non canon but at least I know there was a reason behind that decision and if the new movies are sufficiently awesome I am willing to forgive and forget.
However there is no such rationale for a reboot of the realms other than a section of the community who preferred the older versions. Nothing wrong with that but please realize there are some of us who like the new realms just fine. If you dont want to follow the latest lore then that is your choice, I dont see why you have to invalidate the new stuff. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 15:09:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
I could not agree more with this statement. As a Star Wars fan I too feel disappointed by the decision to make the entirety of the EU non canon but at least I know there was a reason behind that decision and if the new movies are sufficiently awesome I am willing to forgive and forget.
However there is no such rationale for a reboot of the realms other than a section of the community who preferred the older versions. Nothing wrong with that but please realize there are some of us who like the new realms just fine. If you dont want to follow the latest lore then that is your choice, I dont see why you have to invalidate the new stuff.
That's part of why I suggested, a long time ago (when 4E was still going strong), splitting the 4E Realms off into its own setting, and having it and the 3E Realms go in separate directions. I've never understood why the idea of giving all the Realms fans exactly what they want was met with such opposition... A lot of the opposition revolved around WotC's inability to support multiple settings, though they were able to do that in 3E and earlier. |
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!  |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 05 Jul 2014 15:09:55 |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6361 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 17:20:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
That gets my vote wooly.
It's obviously a moot point, now, but I still think it would have been a good idea.
Me, I'm waiting to see what the 5E Realms brings us. The fact that they are involving Ed from the beginning gives me hope, and Ed himself told me -- unprompted, in a private email exchange -- that he was excited about what was coming. That's enough for me.
I'm obviously not going to like everything about it, but I like most of what I've heard, thus far. |
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! |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 20:37:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I've never understood why the idea of giving all the Realms fans exactly what they want was met with such opposition...
Splitting off the 4E Realms was not something fans new to the Realms with 4E, or frankly fans of the setting in its entirety--like myself--wanted.
Besides, the idea itself is naturally divisive. It suggests the Realms aren't one cohesive whole and it jumped the gun by assuming that further development couldn't knit everything together, which is exactly what's happened.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
A lot of the opposition revolved around WotC's inability to support multiple settings, though they were able to do that in 3E and earlier.
"Supporting multiple settings" means different things, depending on whether you're talking about 2E or 3E.
Setting support was secondary to the concern about what is and isn't official. One need look no further than the commentary on Star Wars and the idea of the novels losing their canonicity to see why splitting 3E of from 4E is a bad idea. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 21:11:32
|
You know, where I feel emotionally as a Realms fan now is pretty close to how I felt about Dragonlance before Weis and Hickman came back and used the War of Souls to sorta reboot/fix things.
There's stuff in the recent past I didn't really like but I've heard things are supposed to change for the better.
But details on that change are just rumors now...
I'm hopeful and trying to remain positive but I would greatly appreciate WOTC communicating SOMETHING about their plans. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 05 Jul 2014 : 21:13:23
|
The Star Wars thing is not the same scenario. Splitting the Realms into two settings would have maintained canon for both, and part of the idea was to support both. With Star Wars, they've tossed aside a large amount of prior canon and said it's never going to be supported.
But as I said, it's a moot point. I'm on board for the 5E Realms, because I like most of what I've been hearing, and because Ed is. |
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! |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 21:34:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by hobbitfan
You know, where I feel emotionally as a Realms fan now is pretty close to how I felt about Dragonlance before Weis and Hickman came back and used the War of Souls to sorta reboot/fix things.
There's stuff in the recent past I didn't really like but I've heard things are supposed to change for the better.
But details on that change are just rumors now...
I'm hopeful and trying to remain positive but I would greatly appreciate WOTC communicating SOMETHING about their plans.
WOTC has communicated a fair amount of the plans through their seminars at GenCon. They also have shown the direction they are taking through the newest novels and adventures. Are you just curious about a campaign guide? |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 23:24:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Making statements and giving them reprieve as an opinion is not helping much. One of the bigger things that I've stated for several years now is that there is a whole new slate of consumers that have come to learn of the Realms through things like organized play. They learned of the Realms, and then moved on to reading novels, etc... It is the highest form of arrogance to suggest that their enjoyment is invalidated at the behest of an era of the game they never knew of (and in many cases were not born yet).
Star Wars is always the best yard-stick of this. Look at what's happening with the news that the EU is not canon anymore. On a personal level, it's absolutely maddening that all the time I spent reading the EU novels and content is now invalidated. I will never get that time back.
Why is the same goal being suggested now with the Realms?
You may be approaching it from another perspective, but for some fans, such an "era-invalidating" decision was already carried out in the 3E to 4E transition.
In fact, compared to the Star Wars EU non-canonization, the Spellplague, Abeir, century jump, and sundry changes, additions, subtractions, etc. for 4E Realms were far more extensive than the EU non-canonization.
The Star Wars EU was never fully canon, it was shuffled into the pseudo-canon of the Expanded Universe for a reason (SW is George Lucas's baby and he has final say in everything). The Realms equivalent would be if only Ed Greenwood's books and maybe the official campaign guides (since Ed help authored them) were true canon. In this example, none of the supplements or any works by other authors (not even RA Salvatore, Elaine Cunningham, or Troy Denning, etc.) could be actual canon. They would form a web of supporting material with links to the official canon sources and Ed could swoop in with a novel trilogy to change or invalidate anything, which is what Lucas could do with the prequel movies or any potential sequel. That is what Disney is exercising at this point with forging their own path with the new movie franchise(s). Star Wars EU fans kind of knew this was the possibility when signing on as fans of the whole pseudo-canon apparatus.
How is this not worse than the advent of the 4E Realms?
For one, the new movies more or less take place in the same era as the original Star Wars movies and the majority of the EU, which was more or less concurrent with it. Elements of the EU could still potentially, and logically, be incorporated into the new movies and continuity. They are still compatible in the temporal sense much like Realms 1E/2E/3E were more or less compatible.
There is a much wider time gap to bridge between earlier Realms and the 4E version of the setting. A full four human generations have passed. As much as we want to say a character's great-grandchild is much like their great-grandsire, this gimmick can only be pulled a few times before it becomes silly. The older setting is invalidated in the sense it has become setting background for the 4E setting, for 1372 DR is as far removed from 1479 DR as 1372 DR is from 1265 DR.
To say nothing of the altered geography, collapsed pantheon, political relationships, new kingdoms (sprung whole-cloth from another world), new races (ditto), plaguewrought lands, etc. The difference is undeniably greater.
Why is the suggestion for undoing the 4E Realms occurring now? It's been happening since GHotR was published with that controversial final decade appended on to the known-at-the-time timeline. The suggestion has been present for the last 6-7 years since 4E. It has existed because WotC caused a huge divide in the setting and fanbase. They have not offered an adequate substitute. The so-called detractors of the 4E Realms aren't being mean and dismissive of the 4E setting for the hell of it, mostly they want to see their pre-4E era return as the primary focus of WotC's Realms publications. The 4E Realms has the unfortunate position of being in the way of that potential revival.
To spin your statement in the way I've seen it for all these years (and I mean no offense by this. Just highlighting the difference in our views):
"One of the bigger things that I've stated for several years now is that there is a huge slate of consumers that have come to learn of the Realms through the twenty years it had been published. They learned of the Realms, and then moved on to reading novels, or vice versa, etc... It is the highest form of arrogance to suggest that their enjoyment be invalidated at the behest of an era of the game formulated in two years and conforming to one edition, while the setting existed for decades before and has spanned three editions prior.
The 4E Realms transition was always the best yard-stick of this. Look at what happened with the news that the Realms would undergo the Spellplague. On a personal level, it's absolutely maddening that all the time I spent reading about the Realms, both sourcebooks and novels, and the content is now essentially invalidated. I will never get that time back continue to play in the older Realms and support other companies." |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 06 Jul 2014 : 23:37:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thorn Illance
Brim:
Yep!
Coming to the Candlekeep Meet-Up at GenCon?
(Here comes the ban-hammer!)
I thought so. To the GenCon thingy. Alas no I am not. I don't really post here anymore. Not interested in 5e or what WotC is doing nowdays. I haven't read any of the books, don't really care to anymore. Work and life are more important. I figure in 5 to 10 years WotC will screw it up again. Hide and watch... |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 01:37:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
You may be approaching it from another perspective, but for some fans, such an "era-invalidating" decision was already carried out in the 3E to 4E transition.
The problem with your whole argument is that 4E didn't invalidate a thing about 3E. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 02:09:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
quote:
Originally posted by hobbitfan
You know, where I feel emotionally as a Realms fan now is pretty close to how I felt about Dragonlance before Weis and Hickman came back and used the War of Souls to sorta reboot/fix things.
There's stuff in the recent past I didn't really like but I've heard things are supposed to change for the better.
But details on that change are just rumors now...
I'm hopeful and trying to remain positive but I would greatly appreciate WOTC communicating SOMETHING about their plans.
WOTC has communicated a fair amount of the plans through their seminars at GenCon. They also have shown the direction they are taking through the newest novels and adventures. Are you just curious about a campaign guide?
I'm curious as to the current state of the Realms.
The kind of info typically in a campaign setting book, yes.
They haven't said anything about if they are even doing one yet.
I've watched the GenCon seminars on Youtube. The ones I've been able to find have been setting up the Sundering & Sundering Pr type of deals. In those Bob S. and Ed G. mention that the Realms feels fresh again and reminds them of the mid-80s times. I'm excited by their exceitement but I haven't seen or heard anything from WOTc that indicates WHAT the authors are excited about. Sundering books happen then silence.
If there are clues in the adventures I don't know about them as I don't run or play in organized play games currently. Can you summarize what hints of future realms developments you've seen in the adventures?
As to the new Tyranny of Dragons and such..they haven't come out yet so how can we know?
Basically, I'd like to know something about the current state of the Realms and I'd like an idea of WOTc's plans for products.
|
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6662 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 02:42:40
|
Not even whispers yet regarding the 5E FR product line. As before, I expect that more will be revealed at GEN-CON. If anything comes out publicly it will be posted here no doubt.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Thorn Illance
Seeker
53 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:43:42
|
Bummer Brim.
I'm looking forward to meeting my many detractors at GenCon. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31726 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 03:58:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Not even whispers yet regarding the 5E FR product line. As before, I expect that more will be revealed at GEN-CON. If anything comes out publicly it will be posted here no doubt.
-- George Krashos
Heh. It's the highlight of every GenCon year for those of us who can't attend. We mostly all frantically refresh these pages on our browsers several times every few minutes when the scheduled D&D/FR press conferences are running...
I know I'm often left either checking this site via a desktop or Sage- Phone/Pad device. |
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 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:00:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
You may be approaching it from another perspective, but for some fans, such an "era-invalidating" decision was already carried out in the 3E to 4E transition.
The problem with your whole argument is that 4E didn't invalidate a thing about 3E.
For all intents and purposes, they did. An official statement doesn't need to be made to do something, actions can accomplish the same in short order. Politicians do it all the time; say or not say one thing, but do something else, often to the detriment of some group or another.
Wizards might not have stated the lore is invalidated, but because of their choices for 4E there are now substantially more barriers to crossing over lore between the editions, more so than any other edition. Entire areas of the setting are in ruins or overwritten by Abeir or Plaguewrought Lands. Those that are not have gone through a century of change, with new political neighbors, altered pantheons, new races, etc.
Oh, there could be abandoned tidbits and quest starters laying under the plague surfaces of those areas, but it's not like you could open up the Halruaa section of the FRCS and the corresponding Halruaa entry in the FRCG and immediately use the lore between them as is with the same NPCs and locations. There would have to be some adaptation (a lot of adaptation in some instances). The tone of each now differs drastically.
Same holds for Luiren, Dambrath, Var, the Great Rift, parts of the Sea of Fallen Stars, most of the Lake of Steam, all of the Old Empires, Thay, Nimbral and Lantan (unless you pull an mass-illusion gimmick), majority of the Vilhon Reach (now Wilds), even the Shaar is not the same. Anauroch had a century of terraforming and rule by the Shades, Sembia is a century under Shade hegemony. Even the Western Heartlands and the Dragon Coast are drastically shifted in terms of political affiliations (parts of the former falling under the dominion of Elturgard, the latter as part of 'Imperial' Cormyr).
Technically, most of the new lore we're getting is for 4E. It only so happens Wizards has gone for a more edition agnostic take on its articles for some years since it looked like 4E's days were numbered. Wonder why...?
It will be interesting to see how they handle the heavily Spellplagued areas for 5E. An article on 'ancient' 3E era Halruaan factions does little for post-4E other than to serve as back filler for ruins and dungeons. An article on destroyed Halruaa, with its airship mercenary companies, does little for circa 3E Halruaa. Splitting the article means half the word count for two tangentially related topics. Ignoring the periphery means more and more lore for the core areas which have always received more coverage.
Then, unless there's a reversal, we're still getting into the notion that the Spellplague wiped out most of the 'colored' areas. Note the additional push of Turmish into the forefront to compensate.
You may like the 4E Realms just fine. More power to you. I feel it's a severe loss in depth and breadth. Porting between the two is not done with ready ease, unless one chooses to ignore aspects of either version. I've no problem doing so, but why bother if the same effort is involved in porting over materials from other 'third party' sources. |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:08:10
|
quote]Originally quoted by hobbitfan
If there are clues in the adventures I don't know about them as I don't run or play in organized play games currently. Can you summarize what hints of future realms developments you've seen in the adventures?
[/quote]
First, in the interested of the Realms being financial successful this time around, I would like to kindly remind you that you don't need to run organized play to purchase and/or use the current adventures. I run a homebrew game using the background info from some of the available adventures(Murder in Baldur's Gate and Ghosts of Dragonspear castle) and occasionally play in an organized play event.
I have already summarized the world influencing events from the first 2 sundering adventures and the first five sundering novels here:http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=19166&whichpage=1. I will provide you with what additional information I can remember from Scourge of the Sword Coast and Dead in Thay. Please note, that my attendance was spotty for both of these adventures and I don't own them. Although, I am temped to pick up Scourge. Spoilers below:
Scourge of the Sword Coast is a sandbox style adventure and can easily be used in conjunction with other adventures set in the same region.
-Szass Tam's faction of the Red Wizards is in league with a group of fiends and attempting to invade the region
-Haela BrightAxe provides magic protection to PCs that are respectful at her statue.
-A group of Duergar are encounter that worship Deep Duerra rather than Asmodeus.
Dead in Thay is the sequel to scourge and is one giant dungeon. There are plenty of opportunities for interaction rather than combat, but if you are going to run this one you are committing to a lengthy dungeon crawl.
-The PC encounter several chosen that the red wizards have imprisoned which include chosen of: Talona, Ibrandul, Ghaunadaur, Auril, Bhaal, Rillifane Rallathil.
-The party is working with a rebel faction of red wizards to topple Szass Tam's second in command throughout the adventure.
Unfortunately, I missed a lot of the Dead in Thay adventure, so I find it difficult to summarize. The big take away for me was that a ton of "Dead" gods are significantly less dead.
The Herald
-Alustriel and Laeral have been running the Moonstars in secret since Khelben's death.
-Larloch and the Srinshee karmic strike killing each other maybe. Ed's thread kind of muddies the water on this, so they might be alive.
-Shade crashes into Myth Drannor as the city is over ran by the Netherse mercenary army. Both cities are ruined and most of Shade's populace including Telamont die.
-Mystra ascends again using the magic gathered in the Mythal and Candlekeep's wards to restore the weave.
-Mystra hands Shar another defeat at the end of the novel.
-It is pretty clear by the end of the Sundering that Shar won't be lauching an overt destroy the world plan for awhile. However, there are a few survivors of Telamont's mistakes. Similar to Shar, the Netherse are no longer in a position to overly smash every nation around them. They will also have to start playing the long game.
D&D basic PDF(Which is free and doesn't require you to fill out any kind of form prior to downloading.)
-Page 81 has a section called "The weave of magic". This is a pretty big nod to 2e-3e FR, not the same but very similar.
-The basic PDF has a few other fun nods to FR. So far, the weave of magic one is the largest that has caught my eye. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
JohnnyGrognard
Acolyte
USA
19 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 04:08:26
|
Kris the Grey can attest to this, I am not the biggest Realms fan around. I generally play in Greyhawk and Mystara. However, the stuff I've been reading as of late, pertaining to the Sundering and what is happening to the Realms has me super stoked!
It seems as if the Realms is still moving forward, yet capturing the AD&D feel I really enjoyed about it. If it keeps going in the direction I think it is, I can totally see it becoming my new goto world.
So Kris....you may have won me over finally..... |
Door, Room, Monster, Treasure! |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 07 Jul 2014 : 19:52:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
You may be approaching it from another perspective, but for some fans, such an "era-invalidating" decision was already carried out in the 3E to 4E transition.
The problem with your whole argument is that 4E didn't invalidate a thing about 3E.
For all intents and purposes, they did.
You can ignore reality all you want, but the Forgotten Realms changing to something you personally dislike does not come anywhere close to your desire of making 4E non cannon. 3E is still cannon. |
Sir Markham pointed out, drinking another brandy. "A chap who can point at you and say 'die' has the distinct advantage". |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 00:24:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
You can ignore reality all you want, but the Forgotten Realms changing to something you personally dislike does not come anywhere close to your desire of making 4E non cannon. 3E is still cannon.
Canon has nothing to do with it. Never said 4E non-canonized the 3E Realms. I did say it invalidated it, as in removed it from active status and disrupt the setting features enough to make 3E and 4E Realms not mutually as relevant or compatible as comparing 3E to prior editions.
WotC could theoretically make most sources non-canon (ex: the novels) and still publish a setting that keeps the majority of Realmslore valid. This is more or less how they handle Eberron (note they only had a two year jump with minimal disruptions. Curious that.)
Indeed, I personally want the 4E Realms to be rendered non-canon. In that way it would serve more as light inspiration for the Realms going forward rather than a hard guideline. The sources would still be available for individual groups to decide whether they want to adopt them as background filler, much like the 3E Realms was rendered shortly following 4E's arrival. The situation has improved somewhat in recent years and we'll have to see how the 5E version turns out.
The concept of invalidating the older version of the Realms, while not stated so plainly, goes back to the sentiments expressed at the transition to 4E where even the designers talked about implementing changes that evened the playing field in terms of "burden" of lore. They were going for a clean slate via the Spellplague, Abeir, deicides, pantheon shrinking and overlaying the Points of Light motif over the setting, which in their minds necessitated fewer civilized areas (and unfortunately it so happens the periphery areas were call culled). The key was to recreate a setting far removed enough from the old setting to make it an easy, lore-lite entry point for new fans, while keeping a few core elements to tangentially call it the same thing. Don't mistake the hard work put in over the years (by a partially/mostly different team of contributors) to close the gap and expand the setting back out for its original intent to invalidate the old setting.
So if anyone is ignoring reality (and what is being said) it's you.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Guys, can we avoid replaying the edition wars yet again?
The edition wars are over. Everyone lost.
Then again, everyone won. The market is more diverse than it has been for some time and I do believe the vacuum of industry leadership self-inflicted by Wizards helped foster the ascent of other games, settings, and companies. |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 08 Jul 2014 : 00:44:06
|
| You are all very articulate on what you like and dislike about the changes being made in 5e. I have some similar thoughts, but without really being able to explain it, I just FEEL like the Realms I loved and read for decades is coming back. Who knows if I'll ever find a product like the gray box again (that I retread 100x) and truth be told, I will be utterly disappointed if Maztica doesn't make a comeback at some point, but this is legitimately the first time in a decade (at least) I've liked the direction we're heading. Of course, I still reserve final judgement... |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Has WOTC committed to fixing the Realms in 5E
