| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 14:56:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
Diffan, what 4E changes worked for you and why and what would you like to be retained post-Sundering?
-- George Krashos
Well, for me and my group:
Changes:
• Returned Abeir, Tymanther, Akanűl emerging into Toril and the removal of Maztica, Unther, and Mulhorand. These changes were significant because I now had places I wanted to set my Realms games in. I felt they were original and unique compared to the places they were exchanged with. Further, character ties my PCs made with the people from here were interesting.
• The sinking of Lantan. This even gave me a reason to re-image Lantan as an underwater city that put technological advances, infused with magic, to the test. In my home campaign, Lantan looks a lot like a Forgotten Realms version of Bioshock. They use the local marine life and magic to create wondrous items and exotic weapons and strange magic. Had Lantan not have sank, it would still be that "Gonds Island with some gizmos and gadgets".
• The Limiting of Gods. Essentially I started D&D and FR with the Time of Troubles and the novels Shadowdale, Tantras, and Waterdeep. I felt that the gods were FAR to meddling in the everyday affairs of mortals. I don't mind that they're there, in the cosmos, and working through mortals to promote their agenda. Further, certain gods (ie. Mystra) were just straight up more powerful than nearly any other God besides Ao. This, to me, is a continuity problem because why can Mystra have a say if my deity Bane grants me extremely high powerful spells? What because she doesn't like his agenda? Further, wouldn't that make Mystra nearly the most prayed-to deity? Because she essentially allows said God to grant me spells? "Oh Oghma, lend me the insight to find the solution to this problem. And to Mystra, for allowing Oghma to do this!" Killing her outright wasn't the best solution nor one I really liked, but it was a solution none the less.
• Amanuator. While Lathander was sorta like Buddy Christ and I liked him for that reason, I liked Amaunator more. The fact that he still gives nods to his Lathanderite clergy and the Morninglords is cool. I also like the fact that this ultimately disproves the Risen Sun heresy and that my one Sun Master character back in 1374 DR. wasn't a "fake".
• Helms (and subsequently Tyr) death. Say whatever you like but I enjoyed the fact that this showed how Gods can be used so rooted in their dogma that they lose sight of what's important or even obvious while championing their portfolios. Tyr's error was great and he realized that towards the end. He became blind (metaphorically speaking) due to anger, jealously, and rage and lost everything he upheld. Helm, stoic and unwavering, was also lost in hubris of being the eternal "guardian" and when challenged, didn't think to say "wait a minute, WTF?" he just does his Helm thing and starts swinging (like not bothering to talk to Mystra AT ALL before chopping her in half during the ToT).
• Spellscars. They're like superpowers but with grave consequences for their activations and abilities. I like the "powers with cost" effect.
• The Time Jump. Now 100 years was a bit too much, granted. However I feel this provides authors and designers a LARGE gap to pretty much do whatever they want. I mean, c'mon this opportunity has never really presented itself to designers to fill and I think they should use this space to create truly awesome stories without fearing of messing up continuity.
Post-Sundering
• Knowing that they'll probably remove Returned Abeir, Tymanther, and Akanűl for the other places, at least detail another continent that hasn't received ANY information. They ARE there, off the coasts of Faerűn and Kara-Tur. Detail them and give them the sort of unique characteristics that they gave Abeir. That would at least be nice.
• Keep Lantan sunk so it doesn't invalidate "officially" my Bio-shock version. If, in the case it does, *shrug* I'll just ignore it but this is about what I'd like to continue. Or, hey, just use my idea of an underwater Atlantean-esque area to explore.
• Keep the Gods largely quiet. Seriously, I'm tired of seeing them come down to the prime material plane and having a direct hand in things. They need to shut up. This time around, how's about they let mortals do the work, eh?
• Keep Tyr dead. I know they're bringing back Helm, but the new Triad is Torm, Ilmater, and Bahamut. I'm glad Bahamut now has an actual role with the FR universe instead of being mentioned here and there as some sort of "entity".
• Spellscars are largely going away, but maybe a cult or group who want to keep the Spellplague areas strong with their spellscars are doing something about it?
• The Time Jump is still fully intact and moving the setting forward with 1480 DR. That's fine by my book AND they've apparently given the OK to work with previous eras too. Both good IMO. |
 |
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 17:23:34
|
| I don't have high hopes because I think the damage has already been done. It's like breaking a vase and then being able to glue it back together. Sure it's whole once again, but it's never going to be the same again. |
“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*. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 17:26:30
|
I just want to know the truth as to why?
Who actually thought 4th edition Realms was a good idea and how did they come to the decision they made? |
“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*. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 17:33:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
I just want to know the truth as to why?
Who actually thought 4th edition Realms was a good idea and how did they come to the decision they made?
Someone at WotC, and the full reasoning has never been shared. It's a moot point, now, anyway, since we are looking at a new edition and an effort to return the Realms to what originally made it popular. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 17:47:46
|
Diffan, I really love some of your ideas, but there is a logical argument I want to make for those who disagree with what you like about the Spellplague/4e changes.
There are some really cool ideas that came about in 4e...or there aren't, it depends on your opinion really or your experiences with those areas. Personally, I am not a big fan of the Akanuls and Tymanthers but whatever, I respect the fact that others love these areas. The issue is some people love the OLD areas as well, and in some cases they were just blasted off into oblivion. That was just flat out unnecessary. Why was it necessary to subtract in order to add? Why can't you have Laerakond AND Maztica? If someone hates Maztica, they don't have to go there, but in all honesty I felt like the "way I loved my Realms" was utterly disrespected. It was like a calculated number of fans were just sacrificed when that was totally unnecessary. Now in 3e Maztica was pretty much ignored, with the exception of some Tlincalli incidents on the mainland. I was actually ok with that! But seriously, shunted to another world? How is that in any way necessary. If my Realms doesn't bring enough money, fine, ignore me. If you want to add dragon born and new lands, go for it...but why did it have to be at someone else's expense?
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
I don't edition war...really...I love EVERYTHING Realms related. I just like it all so much, I hate when parts get taken away. |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3805 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 17:57:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
Even with novels, it depends. Does the story actually add something to the setting rather than simply taking away? Do said gods' action actually make sense/advance their goal, are they fitting of their character? For example, as I said, while LP might have been enjoyable novels, they simply deleted a huge, distinguishing aspect of the drow and even had the combined Eilistraee/Vhaeraun sacrifice for something that had nothing to do with or even hurt her goal/character at the end. The stories were commisioned (since drow sell) to remove the Dark Seldarine and eradicate non-Lolthite drow, and they just did that. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 10 Jul 2014 18:13:23 |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 18:27:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
Even with novels, it depends. Does the story actually add something to the setting rather than simply taking away? Do said gods' action actually make sense/advance their goal, are they fitting of their character? For example, as I said, while LP might have been enjoyable novels, they simply deleted a huge, distinguishing aspect of the drow and even had the combined Eilistraee/Vhaeraun sacrifice for something that had nothing to do with or even hurt her goal/character at the end. The stories were commisioned (since drow sell) to remove the Dark Seldarine and eradicate non-Lolthite drow, and they just did that.
I'm pretty much in full agreement with you on these ones. I have to admit there were deaths I enjoyed though. I know the ToT can be just as hotly debated as 4e but I actually liked the stories behind the deaths of Bane, Bhaal, Myrkul. Selvetarms was kind of odd since a mortal killing a god with a fancy sword (Crescent Blade?) had been done better before. I liked the Vhaerun/Eilistraee merger for a while and thought they could've gone so much further with that story. She-he was the perfect anti-Lolth, better than Corellon imo.
The duergar deaths could have been storied and I would have accepted it. I played a Helmite in Maztica so that was a slap in the face. Azuth, again, could've used a novel. Mask was done perfectly imo. Isn't this more than 9? The demihuman aspect concept is utterly absurd. Sure, 10,000 orcs were actually chanting "Obould is Talos"
|
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 19:04:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
Diffan, I really love some of your ideas, but there is a logical argument I want to make for those who disagree with what you like about the Spellplague/4e changes.
There are some really cool ideas that came about in 4e...or there aren't, it depends on your opinion really or your experiences with those areas. Personally, I am not a big fan of the Akanuls and Tymanthers but whatever, I respect the fact that others love these areas. The issue is some people love the OLD areas as well, and in some cases they were just blasted off into oblivion. That was just flat out unnecessary. Why was it necessary to subtract in order to add? Why can't you have Laerakond AND Maztica? If someone hates Maztica, they don't have to go there, but in all honesty I felt like the "way I loved my Realms" was utterly disrespected. It was like a calculated number of fans were just sacrificed when that was totally unnecessary. Now in 3e Maztica was pretty much ignored, with the exception of some Tlincalli incidents on the mainland. I was actually ok with that! But seriously, shunted to another world? How is that in any way necessary. If my Realms doesn't bring enough money, fine, ignore me. If you want to add dragon born and new lands, go for it...but why did it have to be at someone else's expense?
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
I don't edition war...really...I love EVERYTHING Realms related. I just like it all so much, I hate when parts get taken away.
I agree that if they had just created or updated other areas of the world, ya'know the places that are just dark spots on the map with a name scrawled across the top and left blank? I would've been fine with that. It's probably what they should've done IF they wanted to introduce new elements into the world. However one has to figure out HOW they came across the oceans so fast AND blended well with the people Faerűn in just a century? Sure, it can be explained and it might not have been as offensive as removing Mexico and Egypt, but I'm not the one to really answer those questions, just my guess.
As for the Gods, it's been a tentative subject since the ToT. I never really liked their meddling as the novels dictate them. I'm not sure why they killed off the Duergar pantheon? I honestly don't really care because Duergar were never really that strong of a races within the world's history IMO. As for Deities aspects, That's something I actually REALLY like. It's another point that makes deities more 3-dimensional rather than this bland guy/gal who just rolls down from the cosmos to wreak havoc occasionally. Talos was really Gruumsh all along!! Awesome! And, on some level to me, it makes sense. Why would a mortal know this? They know they speak some name, get some prayers, and *boom* religion is born. Talos being an Aspect of Gruumsh also makes sense from a characteristic stand-point. Both love storms, destruction, war. Both are missing an eye. Both favor the strong and oppress the weak. Both are Chaotic Evil in nature. It just makes sense to me.
Suffice to say, what I like or don't like is kinda irrelevant now. I accept the Realms for what they were, what they are, and what they're projected to be. I make my games up the way I want and use Canon like a Buffet (pick and choose to put on my plate). If they kill a god, remove spellscars, remove areas I use, etc. I doesn't change the way I play the game or run the setting. And I'll still buy it because I'm sure they'll come up with something that I'll find fun or interesting to use in my games. I think one of the BEST things 4E could do for me is divorce myself from attempting to run "actual" canon games. It reminds me that such a thing is impossible and that it's rather silly to try. So, like so many others, I use what I want and take what's "official" canon with a grain of salt. |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 19:42:36
|
For me, the problem with 4E wasn't just what they changed....it was the way they went about it. From the poor presentation of the book to the bad PR, WOTC just dropped the ball.
5E looks to have turned things around, at least that's my impression thus far.
It remains to be seen what form the depiction of the Realms will take in 5E. They really haven't told us anything. At all.
It's really a bit mystifying. |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 19:46:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Suffice to say, what I like or don't like is kinda irrelevant now. I accept the Realms for what they were, what they are, and what they're projected to be. I make my games up the way I want and use Canon like a Buffet (pick and choose to put on my plate). If they kill a god, remove spellscars, remove areas I use, etc. I doesn't change the way I play the game or run the setting. And I'll still buy it because I'm sure they'll come up with something that I'll find fun or interesting to use in my games. I think one of the BEST things 4E could do for me is divorce myself from attempting to run "actual" canon games. It reminds me that such a thing is impossible and that it's rather silly to try. So, like so many others, I use what I want and take what's "official" canon with a grain of salt.
You've hit the nail on the head here. Time to just move on eh? What's happened...happened and what hasn't, hasn't. It's fantasy and we get to take it or leave it as we please! 
I'm ready to move on. I formally call for an end to edition war. All in favor say "aye"! Oh wait...it did end years ago didn't it. 
If there was a "Treaty of Candlekeep" though, I'd officially sign it!  |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
hobbitfan
Learned Scribe
USA
164 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 20:05:51
|
I agree with you guys. It's not healthy dwelling on the past and it's not fun being negative.
I'm ready for WOTC to give us good stuff to be excited about. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 21:31:37
|
Well so far the edition itself is apparently getting some positive traction. I do find it funny because there are SO many 4E-isms in the game that a lot of people just didn't like. It makes me believe that had 4E received a different coat of paint and didn't mess as much with the Realms as they had, we'd probably still be talking about it.
Oh well, lets just hope the winds of change bring about a better and stronger community devoted to all playing and enjoying the Realms. |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 21:44:09
|
I'm just jumping in here to respond to Diffan's last post. Despite largely being anti-4E there were some things that I liked, I just felt 4E handled it badly.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• Returned Abeir, Tymanther, Akanűl emerging into Toril and the removal of Maztica, Unther, and Mulhorand. These changes were significant because I now had places I wanted to set my Realms games in. I felt they were original and unique compared to the places they were exchanged with. Further, character ties my PCs made with the people from here were interesting.
I agree that Maztica, Unther, and Mulhorand needed to be better integrated into the setting. I would add Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Chessenta, and the Bloodstone Lands (Damara / Vaasa) to the list as well. None of these places really fit well with the more core areas of the setting - they felt tacked on. Just reading about them in source books made them feel like they didn't fit in the Realms. It was like they were either badly integrated real world analogs, or just hastily added afterthoughts.
It's not that they were bad per-say, it's just that they didn't fit. They needed someone to really go back over them, give them a fresh coat of paint and detail. Knocking them out entirely was a bad idea because some people actually used these regions, and I believe had the time been taken to revamp, better integrate, and re-introduce them that even more people would have enjoyed those regions.
A great example of where 4E got this right was the Warlocks of Vaasa. That's something I took from 4E and included in my post-Spellplague Realms.
I'm not opposed to Tymanther and Akanűl directly. I actually think they fit better into the Realms than the places they replaced. Had they been introduced differently, I think most people would have had a more favorable view of them.
When it comes to Laerakond / Returned Abeir, the continent was one of my favorite parts of the 4E FRCG. Not surprisingly, I believe that was Ed Greenwood's main contribution to the campaign guide. It actually felt like it fit within the setting, and most importantly as you read about it you can't help but imagine telling stories and setting adventures there. You want to explore it more. That's always been something I loved about the Realms - there was always this sense of both mystery and depth that just called to you to dig a little deeper.
Laerakond would have been fantastic had it been introduced as what the people on Osse call their homeland. Osse was never really explored in any depth, and there is very little information or lore out there on it... Laerakond, with a few tweaks, could have been Osse. That's something I'm seriously considering for my home Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• The sinking of Lantan. This even gave me a reason to re-image Lantan as an underwater city that put technological advances, infused with magic, to the test. In my home campaign, Lantan looks a lot like a Forgotten Realms version of Bioshock. They use the local marine life and magic to create wondrous items and exotic weapons and strange magic. Had Lantan not have sank, it would still be that "Gonds Island with some gizmos and gadgets".
I wasn't too keen on the sinking of Lantan, though I can certainly get behind your suggestion here. I think this is a great way forward using the current lore. Though I'd encourage them to take a similar tact to my home Realms version of Lantan, which is to have some type of limiting factor to their magitech to keep it limited to Lantan. In my Realms, they draw upon a different source of energy to fuel their magic that isn't the Weave, and that power source is localized to Lantan. So people can't really build what they built on the mainland nor can they transport things from Lantan to the mainland and have it work as effectively (assuming it works at all).
I also made my Lantan more gnome dominated. Humans live there, but they're a minority group.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• The Limiting of Gods. Essentially I started D&D and FR with the Time of Troubles and the novels Shadowdale, Tantras, and Waterdeep. I felt that the gods were FAR to meddling in the everyday affairs of mortals. I don't mind that they're there, in the cosmos, and working through mortals to promote their agenda. Further, certain gods (ie. Mystra) were just straight up more powerful than nearly any other God besides Ao. This, to me, is a continuity problem because why can Mystra have a say if my deity Bane grants me extremely high powerful spells? What because she doesn't like his agenda? Further, wouldn't that make Mystra nearly the most prayed-to deity? Because she essentially allows said God to grant me spells? "Oh Oghma, lend me the insight to find the solution to this problem. And to Mystra, for allowing Oghma to do this!" Killing her outright wasn't the best solution nor one I really liked, but it was a solution none the less.
• Keep the Gods largely quiet. Seriously, I'm tired of seeing them come down to the prime material plane and having a direct hand in things. They need to shut up. This time around, how's about they let mortals do the work, eh?
I agree with this 100%. I have always advocated bringing Mystra more in line with the other deities. If Shar dies, the night isn't going to disappear - there isn't going to be daytime forever. If Selune dies, the moon isn't going to disappear. If Chauntea dies, things aren't going to stop growing. If Umberlee dies the oceans aren't going to magically dry up. If Malar dies hunters will still be able to find food, and wild and dangerous predatory beasts will still roam the world. If Silvanus dies wild and untamed nature isn't going to magically die off.
Why then should Mystra be any different? Especially since EVERYONE knows how dependent the Weave is on Mystra's existence. What intelligent person in their right mind is going to want to put all their eggs in the Weave basket if they know it's still attached to Mystra?
My pleading fell on deaf ears. The moment we knew she was dead and everyone was up in arms, I said: 'She will be back. They will bring her back, I guarantee it.' And of course, I was right. She's back. Sigh.
My solution to this entire problem was just to try and encourage WotC to detach the Weave from Mystra herself. Let the Weave be an independent semi-sentient construct that can do some self-repair. Change it's nature. Let Mystra be the Guardian of the Weave, someone who is dedicated to studying, protecting, and encouraging it's use. Just don't let Mystra and the Weave be the same thing.
Nope. As far as I know, we're right back where we started. I fully expect Mystra to get whacked again in the future as a result, maybe for 7E, 8E, or 9E - who can say. But it's coming. And of course, they will bring her back... again. She is to the Realms what Kenny is to South Park.
Ironically, in my home Realms I kept the Mystra is the Weave problem. However, I used it differently. Instead of having her die, I instead had Moander infect the Weave (with assistance from Shar) and thereby infect Mystra. This was my reason for the Spellplague in the setting. The magic from the Weave in my Realms is heavily inspired by how magic works in WFRP, and the fall out from it was loosely inspired by the Breaking of the World from the Wheel of Time.
This has allowed me to highlight other magical traditions in the Realms (which have always existed). However, they're typically weaker or have limitations when compared to Weave magic. So it's basically a choice between immense power and versatility at the expense of becoming an insane and physically warped abomination over time V.S. using a weaker form of magic V.S. magic that has clear limitations.
Mystra herself lost some portfolios, gained some new ones, and has been radically altered as a character. As she was once known as the Mother of Magic, she's now known as the Mother of Madness. She's totally crazy (like a hundred times worse than Cyric ever was on his worst day), and is portrayed as a bloated and twisted monstrosity. Oh, and then there is the occasional problem of the magical plague lands where the corruption is actually leaking from the Weave itself and twisting and corrupting things in the area... fun times.
My changes here allowed me to have a setting with a much darker tone, which is something I wanted and the reason I went this route.
As for the other deities and their interventionist tendencies, well... I basically had my version of the Spellplague (or rather the fall out from the Spellplague) be my Realms equivalent of the Sundering. Ao put his foot down and really restricted the deities - they don't even have the ability to manifest avatars on their home plane anymore. As a result no one is ever going to physically encounter a deity. Deities can only interact with mortals through abstract means - dream visions, minor manifestations of power (the equivalent of a very minor illusion) and the like. It's enough for everyone to realize the gods are still there, but no one is ever going to have a conversation with one again. Ever.
All the work of the deity is either done through divine servitors or mortal clergy... and all of them are fallible. Everything is subject to personal interpretation.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• Amanuator. While Lathander was sorta like Buddy Christ and I liked him for that reason, I liked Amaunator more. The fact that he still gives nods to his Lathanderite clergy and the Morninglords is cool. I also like the fact that this ultimately disproves the Risen Sun heresy and that my one Sun Master character back in 1374 DR. wasn't a "fake".
I would have liked to have both, and sadly it seems like in 5E they're axing Amaunator all together to bring back Lathander. Sigh. There was no reason that there couldn't have been followers of Lathander and followers of Amaunator, and just let there be a full out schism within the cult. That's basically what I did in my Realms. In fact, I had multiple schisms from the cult of Amaunator itself. (Daelegoth Orndeir was assassinated in my Realms, and this lead to a schism forming between some of his would-be successors. It's basically what happens when some charismatic cult leaders die.)
I liked the fact that no one really knew the truth, and it was all debatable. In fact, I've done similar things with other deities regarding some of the 4E changes to the gods. There is a huge and ugly divide between the Elves of Myth Drannor and Silverymoon. Most of it (well aside from my Myth Drannor being heavily influenced by the Eldreth Veluuthra) is a result of the heresies many of the Elves of Silverymoon have embraced such as the belief that Selune is Sehanine Moonbow. It's beliefs like this that are actively being spread by human cults in order to sway over Elves living in human lands... and it absolutely drives the Elves of Myth Drannor crazy - foaming at the mouth, stab, murder, kill the flat-eared bastards crazy.
...and it's a mystery because Sehanine can't just show up and set her people straight. Both sides truly believe that they are right, and neither is operating with intention to manipulate.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• Helms (and subsequently Tyr) death. Say whatever you like but I enjoyed the fact that this showed how Gods can be used so rooted in their dogma that they lose sight of what's important or even obvious while championing their portfolios. Tyr's error was great and he realized that towards the end. He became blind (metaphorically speaking) due to anger, jealously, and rage and lost everything he upheld. Helm, stoic and unwavering, was also lost in hubris of being the eternal "guardian" and when challenged, didn't think to say "wait a minute, WTF?" he just does his Helm thing and starts swinging (like not bothering to talk to Mystra AT ALL before chopping her in half during the ToT).
• Keep Tyr dead. I know they're bringing back Helm, but the new Triad is Torm, Ilmater, and Bahamut. I'm glad Bahamut now has an actual role with the FR universe instead of being mentioned here and there as some sort of "entity".
I really hope they keep Torm as the head of the Triad, and let Tyr stay dead.
I really liked how I set things up in my Realms, as I created a Dark Triad as a counter to the Triad. The Triad consisted of Torm, Ilmater, and Bahamut. The Dark Triad consisted of Bane, Loviatar, and Tiamat.
The church of Bane's focus in my Realms has moved away from the Moonsea and toward the lands of Threskel and Old Unther. Down there the cult of Tiamat has been completely dominated by the cult of Bane, as has the Cult of the Dragon. The belief growing out from this region is that Bane has dominated and enslaved Tiamat, and has taken Loviatar as his divine consort.
Obviously, the whole "dominating and enslaving Tiamat" thing pisses off a lot of people (not to mention the many dragons who worship the deity - all of whom reject it completely).
Anyway, it worked out perfectly to have the old rivalries line up like follows:
Torm vs Bane (the important heads of each Triad)
Ilmater vs Loviatar (old long time rivals)
Bahamut vs Tiamat (also long time rivals)
Religious art for both groups who believe in the Triads frequently show Torm riding on the back of Bahamut doing battle with Bane riding on the back of Tiamat who clearly is enslaved to Bane.
I really liked both the imagery and the symmetry this created.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
• The Time Jump. Now 100 years was a bit too much, granted. However I feel this provides authors and designers a LARGE gap to pretty much do whatever they want. I mean, c'mon this opportunity has never really presented itself to designers to fill and I think they should use this space to create truly awesome stories without fearing of messing up continuity.
I actually recall them saying the time jump was for the authors and the designers. The feeling that WotC gave was that the lore for the setting had become too much of a burden. They needed some space from it to keep telling stories. They also claimed it would be better for new players.
I think, more than anything, this is what pissed a lot of people off. People didn't like a lot of the changes, but I think the Time Jump was the straw that broke the camels back.
The time jump was a horrible idea, and even today with the rolling out of 5E it's STILL the primary sticking point for many people who want a reboot or retcon. (Neither of which will ever happen.)
In my home Realms? I found that 100 years wasn't long enough, and I had to go out even further to smooth out and better integrate some of the radical changes I made to the setting. However, that's the difference between my home Realms and the official setting - just because it was useful for me, didn't mean it was a good idea for the canon setting.
Really, I think going forward their biggest hurtle is the time jump. They're really going to have to work hard to make 5E worth it to persuade some people.
Personally, I feel the best way to do it is make all the source books edition neutral like Elminster's Forgotten Realms. You get an idea of what the Realms or a particular area in the Realms is like, and you get snippets as to how it's different and changed from era to era. I think that's the best way to bridge the divide. That way they're creating a book that is useful to everyone.
|
|
|
|
Mirtek
Senior Scribe
595 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jul 2014 : 23:34:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I have always advocated bringing Mystra more in line with the other deities. If Shar dies, the night isn't going to disappear - there isn't going to be daytime forever. If Selune dies, the moon isn't going to disappear. If Chauntea dies, things aren't going to stop growing. If Umberlee dies the oceans aren't going to magically dry up. If Malar dies hunters will still be able to find food, and wild and dangerous predatory beasts will still roam the world. If Silvanus dies wild and untamed nature isn't going to magically die off.
Actually according to the avatar novels, that's exactly what would happen (unless another deity picks up the portfolio soon).
During the interregnum between Cyric and Kelemvor as lord of death, no one on Faerun could die (as some torture victims and people struck by deadly and painful accidents found out much to their chagrin)
|
Edited by - Mirtek on 10 Jul 2014 23:34:17 |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 00:29:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I have always advocated bringing Mystra more in line with the other deities. If Shar dies, the night isn't going to disappear - there isn't going to be daytime forever. If Selune dies, the moon isn't going to disappear. If Chauntea dies, things aren't going to stop growing. If Umberlee dies the oceans aren't going to magically dry up. If Malar dies hunters will still be able to find food, and wild and dangerous predatory beasts will still roam the world. If Silvanus dies wild and untamed nature isn't going to magically die off.
Actually according to the avatar novels, that's exactly what would happen (unless another deity picks up the portfolio soon).
During the interregnum between Cyric and Kelemvor as lord of death, no one on Faerun could die (as some torture victims and people struck by deadly and painful accidents found out much to their chagrin)
That's true, I had forgotten about that. Although that dealt strictly with the portfolios of Death and the Dead, so it might be another special case like the Weave.
There have been lots of examples of gods dying or portfolios being lost, and nothing bad of the sort happening.
For example, no one has picked up the dusk portfolio since Myrkul died. Yet, presumably as far as we know there is still a dusk. Similarly, until Lathander started to claim to be Amaunator, there was no deity of high sun in the Realms.
Otherwise, for a long period of time in the Realms (from the end of the Time of Troubles till sometime in the mid-to-late 1370's), there was only dawn in the Realms. The day literally went from night to dawn to night again.
Or how about Myrkul's portfolio of old age. Do people just not age any longer in the Realms?
Murdane the goddess of reason and pragmatism is dead. Yet, as far as we know both still exist in the Realms. Mask dies, as far as we know no one took his portfolios, and both thievery and thieves still existed. Velsharoon dies and Liches, Undeath, and Necromancy continue in his absence. Azuth dies and spellcasters, particularly wizards, don't magically lose their knowledge or ability.
So, there are lots of examples here of a deity dying and things not getting all screwed up as a result. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 07:29:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
Even with novels, it depends. Does the story actually add something to the setting rather than simply taking away? Do said gods' action actually make sense/advance their goal, are they fitting of their character? For example, as I said, while LP might have been enjoyable novels, they simply deleted a huge, distinguishing aspect of the drow and even had the combined Eilistraee/Vhaeraun sacrifice for something that had nothing to do with or even hurt her goal/character at the end. The stories were commisioned (since drow sell) to remove the Dark Seldarine and eradicate non-Lolthite drow, and they just did that.
I'm pretty much in full agreement with you on these ones. I have to admit there were deaths I enjoyed though. I know the ToT can be just as hotly debated as 4e but I actually liked the stories behind the deaths of Bane, Bhaal, Myrkul. Selvetarms was kind of odd since a mortal killing a god with a fancy sword (Crescent Blade?) had been done better before. I liked the Vhaerun/Eilistraee merger for a while and thought they could've gone so much further with that story. She-he was the perfect anti-Lolth, better than Corellon imo.
The duergar deaths could have been storied and I would have accepted it. I played a Helmite in Maztica so that was a slap in the face. Azuth, again, could've used a novel. Mask was done perfectly imo. Isn't this more than 9? The demihuman aspect concept is utterly absurd. Sure, 10,000 orcs were actually chanting "Obould is Talos"
When you actually think about it all, it seems like such an obvious and awful change that it makes just sit back and laugh at the stupidness of it all, mostly the whole "aspects" BS. |
“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*. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 07:34:42
|
| I also think it's funny how RAS gave them the old proverbial middle finger with regards to the time jump, even though I think the whole companions thing is cheesy and ridiculous. |
“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*. |
|
|
|
Shadowsoul
Senior Scribe
Ireland
705 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 07:36:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
I just want to know the truth as to why?
Who actually thought 4th edition Realms was a good idea and how did they come to the decision they made?
Someone at WotC, and the full reasoning has never been shared. It's a moot point, now, anyway, since we are looking at a new edition and an effort to return the Realms to what originally made it popular.
What made it fun for me has already been destroyed and nothing short of a reboot will fix it. |
“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*. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 08:11:47
|
At this point I find myself hoping the 5E Realms is not edition neutral, but pure, 100% 5E.
I was hesitant to accept the possibility of Ed Greenwood writing the 5E Realms all by himself, but given the number of sore spots in the Realms (that Dark Wizard mentioned a few pages ago in this scroll) and given the hints of the Realms we've gotten here (that is, how Ed envisioned parts of the Realms before other game designers were tasked with filling in those areas back in the 80s and 90s), I think what we have is an opportunity for Ed to reshape the Realms closer to his original ideas, while also solving the "problems" of Lantan, Halruaa, etc.
This might run afoul of prior lore, but I hope there is a middle ground that Ed can find that honors that old lore while inserting technically new material (from Ed's original Realms vision).
(Let's also hope that Eric Boyd and George Krashos are reading Ed's drafts and inserting lots of useful, lore-fixing ideas.)
This is all predicated on the notion that Ed's the only person writing the new Realms, but given what I believe to be the success of Ed Greenwood Presents: Elminster's Forgotten Realms (it was a test book, I'm certain), plus the mention in the latest Ask Ed thread that he's written about a million words in the last month...well, I think he is doing the lion's share of the work.
***
I also like how WotC are dropping just enough of the Realms into the core rulebooks that if a DM wants to use the Realms but not be burdened by all the lore, it would appear he or she can do so with just the standard rules and the fluff wrapped around it.
That utility is enough for me to overlook my dislike of having many Realms-things mixed in with the core D&D rules.
***
p.s.: Shadowsoul, don't give up yet. The 5E Realms haven't been released and there's no good reason to turn your back on something you haven't even seen yet. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 11 Jul 2014 08:15:04 |
|
|
|
Shemmy
Senior Scribe
USA
492 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2014 : 22:04:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by hobbitfan
5E looks to have turned things around, at least that's my impression thus far.
We'll see, but having seen the PHB tiefling today which appears to ignore all of 2e and 3e, and locking them in as devil blooded only doesn't fill me with hope. And I had been optimistic given how they'd spoken regarding the planes and being respectful of prior D&D history. |
Shemeska the Marauder, King of the Crosstrade; voted #1 best Arcanaloth in Sigil two hundred years running by the people who know what's best for them; chant broker; prospective Sigil council member next election; and official travel agent for Chamada Holiday specials LLC.
|
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 00:52:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Well so far the edition itself is apparently getting some positive traction. I do find it funny because there are SO many 4E-isms in the game that a lot of people just didn't like. It makes me believe that had 4E received a different coat of paint and didn't mess as much with the Realms as they had, we'd probably still be talking about it.
Oh well, lets just hope the winds of change bring about a better and stronger community devoted to all playing and enjoying the Realms.
It's probably multi-factorial. Some people didn't like 4E rules, some didn't like 4E Realms, some people were just sick of WotC for various reasons. Between them, WotC couldn't convert enough people to instantly make 4E the mega-success they wanted.
Then Pathfinder stole their thunder, first through use of Wayne Reyolds covers (better than for 4E), subsumed a chunk of the 3E fanbase, and eventually challenged WotC's industry dominance albeit Wizards themselves went into a self-imposed hibernation of sorts while they play-tested 5E.
Someone said earlier that 4E Realms might have received criticism and derision because it premiered with and was linked to the 4E rules, that it was the rules that set people off.
Speaking for myself, my dislike stems purely from the 4E Realms setting. I'm neutral on the 4E rules. By principle, I didn't support WotC's products for all of 4E with the exception of Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms. Even purchased the FRCG used many months after it released so Wizards wouldn't derive new sales. Plus it was dirt cheap second-hand and still is.
This is still a fair bit better than the Eberron CG, which I received free in a promotional giveaway (not sure for what). Maybe WotC should have tried that to initially turn fans to the dark side.
The framework of 4E isn't bad with an improved context. One of my recent interest has been 13th Age (Archmage Engine), a rules set derived from the 4E framework with some 3E-ism and a healthy dose of indie-inspired concepts, designed by Jonathan Tweet and Rob Heinsoo. So, 4E-isms are definitely here to stay in some form or another. |
|
|
|
Tanthalas
Senior Scribe
Portugal
508 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 13:17:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
We'll see, but having seen the PHB tiefling today which appears to ignore all of 2e and 3e, and locking them in as devil blooded only doesn't fill me with hope. And I had been optimistic given how they'd spoken regarding the planes and being respectful of prior D&D history.
It's because of stuff like this that WotC doesn't stand a chance.
Yes, they could have easily included 2E/3E Tieflings (and probably should have). But people see one thing that they don't like and they're already sharpening their pitchforks to burn 5E at the stake. |
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 |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 14:41:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tanthalas
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
We'll see, but having seen the PHB tiefling today which appears to ignore all of 2e and 3e, and locking them in as devil blooded only doesn't fill me with hope. And I had been optimistic given how they'd spoken regarding the planes and being respectful of prior D&D history.
It's because of stuff like this that WotC doesn't stand a chance.
Yes, they could have easily included 2E/3E Tieflings (and probably should have). But people see one thing that they don't like and they're already sharpening their pitchforks to burn 5E at the stake.
Shemmy is expressing disappointment, not writing off 5E. And I share Shemmy's sentiments, here -- after promising to incorporate older stuff, they explicitly failed to do so, even though using pre-4E tieflings and 4E tieflings together would have been very easy.
So when preview material shows a failure to adhere to the promises WotC has made, yeah, people are justified in expressing disappointment. WotC is not living up to their word.
This is not the most promising sign, but I personally don't think this is nearly enough to write-off 5E. And I'm still going to encourage people to give it fair shakes. |
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! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 16:50:39
|
I don't really understand the problem here? Is there anything invalidating 2E lore that somehow disables any attempt at making 2E-like Tieflings OR is it just flavor and backstory to a portion of the Tiefling race that only adds to the continuing lore?
Basically looks don't need to be 100% matches of what the books say. I like Tieflings to be both like the Prince of Darkness in Legend, or the Tiefling in the preview posted above or like THIS or THIS. Does it honestly matter in the context of the game how Tieflings are portrayed when there are other sources that give other reasons for their being? |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11808 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 17:06:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seethyr
Diffan, I really love some of your ideas, but there is a logical argument I want to make for those who disagree with what you like about the Spellplague/4e changes.
There are some really cool ideas that came about in 4e...or there aren't, it depends on your opinion really or your experiences with those areas. Personally, I am not a big fan of the Akanuls and Tymanthers but whatever, I respect the fact that others love these areas. The issue is some people love the OLD areas as well, and in some cases they were just blasted off into oblivion. That was just flat out unnecessary. Why was it necessary to subtract in order to add? Why can't you have Laerakond AND Maztica? If someone hates Maztica, they don't have to go there, but in all honesty I felt like the "way I loved my Realms" was utterly disrespected. It was like a calculated number of fans were just sacrificed when that was totally unnecessary. Now in 3e Maztica was pretty much ignored, with the exception of some Tlincalli incidents on the mainland. I was actually ok with that! But seriously, shunted to another world? How is that in any way necessary. If my Realms doesn't bring enough money, fine, ignore me. If you want to add dragon born and new lands, go for it...but why did it have to be at someone else's expense?
The same holds for gods. Oh wait a minute, the pantheon is too populated...kill some! Oh wait no, entire demi human pantheons were just aspects of the other gods...huh? What about those of us who actually liked those gods? A dying god in a novel is okay because at least they are given some respect, but otherwise it's just, "oh you never really mattered." That was really aggravating.
I don't edition war...really...I love EVERYTHING Realms related. I just like it all so much, I hate when parts get taken away.
This is why my thoughts are, when they re-merge the two, I'd really like it if Laerakond (aka Returned Abeir) is actually not in the same space as Maztica (even though the two were made to be roughly the same size and shape). I wasn't a big fan of Laerakond, but at least its detailed. If they DO shift it back, then I want them to start detailing Abeir as a world where the two meet.... that way people don't get pissed for losing something. That's why I got mad with the loss of Mulhorand and Unther. In the dragon 358, they produced this great info on Mulhorand and Unther.... only to wipe it from the face of Toril.
I have to say, I wouldn't be upset if they keep Akanul as well. Tymanther, well, I'd prefer the dragon men go elsewhere as a result of the Untheric people returning. High Imaskar? I don't get it, why? Mulhorand was so much better to me, and High Imaskar was just another magocracy with little info. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 17:12:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I don't really understand the problem here? Is there anything invalidating 2E lore that somehow disables any attempt at making 2E-like Tieflings OR is it just flavor and backstory to a portion of the Tiefling race that only adds to the continuing lore?
Basically looks don't need to be 100% matches of what the books say. I like Tieflings to be both like the Prince of Darkness in Legend, or the Tiefling in the preview posted above or like THIS or THIS. Does it honestly matter in the context of the game how Tieflings are portrayed when there are other sources that give other reasons for their being?
The 5E description of tieflings gives them a more-or-less uniform appearance. They all have horns. They all have tails at least 4 feet long. They all have solid-colored eyes and sharp teeth. And they are all related to Asmodeus.
Sure, there is room for customization within those parameters, but the description given does not mention the possibility of not having any of those features. And the description does not mention any other possible heritage.
It's a one-size-fits-all approach. It does not allow for non-Asmodean tieflings, or for ones that have a more human appearance. You can't mix and match features like before, to have a tiefling that could pass for human if he kept his mouth closed or if you didn't get a good look at her eyes or if they stayed covered in robes and a hood. The 5E tiefling is, like the 4E tiefling, kin to Asmodeus and immediately revealed as such with even a casual glance.
The way the description is written, saying you want to play a tiefling without horns would be the rough equivalent of saying you wanted to play an elf without pointed ears, or a halfling that stood 6'3". It is a base racial description, describing physical features common to all members of the race.
So, yes. We now have two editions that invalidate the prior tiefling lore, and we have them all given roughly the same appearance.
Part of the appeal of most of the plane-touched races was that because of their mixed heritage, no two members of the same race would have identical features. The 5E tiefling ignores that. |
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! |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1624 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 17:31:35
|
The old style Tiefling is now a member of the Planetouched race, with the pact Tiefling aka the 4e Tiefling beings a magically enhanced off shoot that is its own race oc tiefling thanks to Asmodeaus.
Think of it like this, if old Tieflings were homo sapiens, the new Tieflings would be homo superior, a new species of Tiefling descended from the old, but enhanced in a sense.
|
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6662 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 17:48:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The 5E tiefling ignores that.
And I ignore the 5E tiefling.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2014 : 18:25:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So, yes. We now have two editions that invalidate the prior tiefling lore, and we have them all given roughly the same appearance.
I see them as invalidating themselves -- not wholly but in that part -- just as they would if they said 'all dwarves are blue'. Editions and variants come and go; the underlying Realmslore is what it is.
Though in this case, the base 5E Realms book may yet say, 'In the Realms, tieflings . . .'. |
Edited by - Faraer on 12 Jul 2014 18:38:50 |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6361 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Has WOTC committed to fixing the Realms in 5E
