| Author |
 Topic  |
|
hashimashadoo
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1152 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 14:50:16
|
Ed Greenwood has been saying very similar things to Crawford's press release for a while now. Last year, at the online GenCon, there was even a panel that espoused the notion that 'canon is only what the DM wants it to be'.
I have been wondering when they would end up making an official announcement like this ever since they let Matt Sernett, the D&D Continuity Editor, go and never replaced him.
Still, I think, considering what they've said before about their 'rule of cool' design philosophy, that the motivations behind this are just laziness on their part. |
When life turns it's back on you...sneak attack for extra damage.
Head admin of the FR wiki:
https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/ |
 |
|
|
Qilintha
Seeker
76 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 15:04:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Damn, WotC announced this the day before Ed's birthday!
Well one would hope that this announcement frees his hands a lot with the NDAs... If anything from past 1489 is not canon...he could spill the beans about a LOT of stuff.
I think the difference is between canon and worldbuilding, and I agree with their statement although terribly phrased, a player doesn't need to know previous events to play official modules. Without making that difference, you make FR's setting that was so great because of its amazing world construction and evolution, character development and so on...stale and stagnant as every other setting.
Canon, I agree -> Canon is what it's related to that edition or you can create a ton of confusion among players.
A better statement would have been " You don't need to play novels, videogames and so on to enjoy D&D 5e, however the FR setting has been around since 1E with several sourcebooks, novels and so on, so if you love the world of Abeir-Toril and you want to know more about some characters you like or about some regions our source materials didn't delve too much lately...please do so" |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 15:40:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Qilintha
A better statement would have been " You don't need to play novels, videogames and so on to enjoy D&D 5e, however the FR setting has been around since 1E with several sourcebooks, novels and so on, so if you love the world of Abeir-Toril and you want to know more about some characters you like or about some regions our source materials didn't delve too much lately...please do so"
Yeah, but making a statement like that encourages people to look at past material -- which then brings up questions like "How come X was this way before, and is now entirely different?"
Plus, a lot of that past material isn't as easy to lay hands on, now.
As I said before, they could have published some gazetteers to bring even the newest people up to date, but this decision was never about making things easier on newcomers.
It's just like the 4E thing of "there's too many gods, so we're wiping some out and combining others -- oh, and here's some new gods we're introducing, while we're at it." Or another of their 4E claims: "There's no place left that we haven't told a story before! Also, we're announcing a six-book series, all set in the same city." |
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!  |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2476 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 16:24:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Qilintha
A better statement would have been " You don't need to play novels, videogames and so on to enjoy D&D 5e, however the FR setting has been around since 1E with several sourcebooks, novels and so on, so if you love the world of Abeir-Toril and you want to know more about some characters you like or about some regions our source materials didn't delve too much lately...please do so"
But this would make people feel they have to read the old materials, something WotC don't want. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
|
|
|
Qilintha
Seeker
76 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 17:02:46
|
And that is where their stupidity lies because as much as they like to think 5ed is a D&D absolute reboot... it is not. Because... they still use the past. Cult of the Dragon/ Zentharim/Netheril. Dang they even made an adventure which ending could potentially make the character travel in time to Ancient Netheril...something there is no canon material reference, if you want to play ancient netheril, you have to dig 2ed material. Again I understand their point in 5e being canon, but they can't erase the world-building made by previous editions. And that world building since it is part of their world now IS canon.
Spellplague is still referenced in 5e adventures. Bhaal return...but when/How did he die/vanish?
That statement was made to not discourage the players that just play adventures and don't or can't investigate the world further.
My hope is that really that statement allows Ed and other sages to unzip their lips about many secrets in the realm from previous novels, editions, sourcebooks...all the history cut from the now NOT canon books.
Edit: Zenomaru made a good point so I removed the derogatory term, didn't mean to offend anyone. |
Edited by - Qilintha on 23 Jul 2021 17:24:02 |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2476 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 17:16:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Qilintha
That statement was made to not discourage lazy players that just play adventures and don't bother with investigating the campaign, railroad players.
Lazy players? What about the poor players? With the exchange rate of the dollar nowadays, I should have to not eat for a few months (food is overrated, anyways) just to be a "good player" and "properly" investigate the Realms by buying the super expensive Netheril box set, or if not I'm "lazy"...
And some people say "gatekeep is a myth. It doesn't exist". |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
Edited by - Zeromaru X on 23 Jul 2021 17:18:53 |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3741 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 17:51:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
And some people say "gatekeep is a myth. It doesn't exist".
-I can only talk about my own personal experiences (that's literally all any of us can), but from just getting into the Forgotten Realms and asking other people, to being a guy who knew a lot about it and being a person other people asked, to eventually playing in my first Forgotten Realms campaign with someone who was a lot more invested in the minutia than me (RIP Mike), everybody was always welcoming and engaging and always open to sharing and discussing in a friendly manner. I can say with a ton of certainty that's the case for pretty much everyone here and at the WotC boards when they were still around.
-The closest thing to gatekeeping I experienced and saw (here and at WotC) was when someone would ask "I have an idea about XYZ" and people would cite source books or novels related to the person's idea. One poster (who thankfully doesn't seem to be an active member of the online FR community anymore) would accuse people who responded with those citations as gatekeepers and fun takers and grognards whatever else and my response would always be the same: everyone can do whatever they want in their own games and change things however they want and so on and so forth. Canon and what is written is the only commonality that we all have between us, so discussing everything through that lens is hardly gatekeeping. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerûn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerûn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
Qilintha
Seeker
76 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 18:09:41
|
I totally agree, and it was my point as well. Noone prevents anyone to make their own Realms. As Zero mentioned, a lot of people pretends the Spellplague didn't exist or stuff like that. My point is D&D is not a closed vacuum and 5ed uses stuff from previous editions, some people might be curious about the tidbits of lore sprayed here and there and might want, with their own means, trying to expand them. I am one of them for example, I love to explore tidbits of lore, but I lack my own imagination so I try my best to find some answers from Ed or other sages, or dig in the internet to find old source materials. The possibility for me to do that is what I love the most about the realms.
Me not having to find answers in order to enjoy D&D is why I still hope to try 5ed someday.
They basically said, even though this is the fifth edition, you don't need materials from past editions to play this. The jump between editions is not only rules-wise but to some extent lore-wise. It's not the 5th chapter of something, but the first chapter of something else loosely based on what was written also in the 4 editions prior this one. |
|
|
|
Gelcur
Senior Scribe
523 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 19:05:23
|
Well Ed has always been good about presenting the Realms through unreliable narrators. I love digging through lore and feel very proud of myself when I can piece together lots of fun old stuff and interweave my quests into it. But there are times I make mistakes or only later find out something is different.
But the idea that what we get is second hand is great. Turns out Elminster wasn't in Shadowdale after all that day. But, but, but... turns out who ever you are getting your info from was wrong. Or maybe that is what the Old Mage wants us to believe. Or maybe the Elminster you met in my quest wasn't the real one. We are talking a world of magic anything is possible. It is great to have lore as a guide but there is really nothing stopping you from changing anything. It is sort of like a Story version of Rule 0.
I also wonder if this is due to the movie ramping up production. Hollywood hates having to follow old non-movie stories, and prefer to cherry pick what they like and leave the rest behind. |
The party come to a town befallen by hysteria
Rogue: So what's in the general store?
DM: What are you looking for?
Rogue: Whatevers in the store.
DM: Like what?
Rogue: Everything.
DM: There is a lot of stuff.
Rogue: Is there a cart outside?
DM: (rolls) Yes.
Rogue: We'll take it all, we may need it for the greater good. |
|
|
|
Bladewind
Master of Realmslore
Netherlands
1280 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 19:29:38
|
Another bridge burned.
After their sketchy dealings with FR's authors during the Spellplague and the Sundering the writing was already on the wall.
But hey, maybe the movie will somehow recapture the fun of the Realms with oodles of CGI weave use and over the top glamourous heroes, and we'll enjoy visual media from the realms for a while. |
My campaign sketches
Druidic Groves
Creature Feature: Giant Spiders |
|
|
|
Eldacar
Senior Scribe
438 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 19:29:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
I also wonder if this is due to the movie ramping up production. Hollywood hates having to follow old non-movie stories, and prefer to cherry pick what they like and leave the rest behind.
Hollywood is a cesspit and Ponzi scheme entwined with a house of cards and rickety tentpoles erected on should-be-illegal accounting practices, and has been without so much as an ounce of creative blood, bone, or marrow for the past fifteen or so years. If there is cause to be worried about anything happening in relation to FR/D&D, Hollywood is it.
Which is perhaps more cynical than I am about many things in the world, but I reserve a special level of distaste for Hollywood and everything connected to it.
To the announcement itself, I am quite happy to ignore it, after a fashion. It just seems rather silly. I quite like the Baldur's Gate series, and Icewind Dale series. And the first Dark Alliance games (not the latest though, that one sucked). Also Darkness over Daggerford, and Wyvern Crown of Cormyr. All of them are things that I played and enjoyed. I don't really care if what happened in them is suddenly not "canon" according to WotC. What are they going to do, bash down my door and arrest me if I decide otherwise? I played the above games and enjoyed them as things set in the world with varying actions and outcomes, not because "everything happened exactly as I played it to 100% completion" (not that it's possible to 100% complete BG2 for example). I'm hardly going to start a tantrum because the events of all of them aren't perfectly reflected in subsequent lore.
I do wonder how, or if, the announcement will influence people who get involved in D&D through games. BG3 is still coming, after all. I suspect that somebody in marketing probably has the job of figuring out what percentage of people who play the computer game are likely to pick up a tabletop version. And whether they will want to see the game events reflected in the world. |
"The Wild Mages I have met exhibit a startling disregard for common sense, and are often meddling with powers far beyond their own control." ~Volo
"Not unlike a certain travelogue author with whom I am unfortunately acquainted." ~Elminster |
|
|
|
Qilintha
Seeker
76 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 19:53:12
|
About novels, videogames and comics, the message had always been that, what was canon of those books usually got sum up and moved into the sourcebooks...
About BG3, we know waay too little to know how much open and closed the story will be, the ramifications in the world. Personally speaking I'll certainly use some of the tidbits of lore from that game...like a certain Netherese town that was never mentioned before. |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1625 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 21:21:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
What do you think the odds are on this being them clearing the slate before committing to a new Realms book, finally? I honestly can’t decide which way feels more likely.
We know they are revisiting a setting in an upcoming setting book, they eliminated MtG settings from that, Ravenloft is too new, Eberron too static, that left FR and Exandria and we just learned that CR is now self publishing the new setting book, elminating it. That leaves FR, whose "setting" book is the most critized (although among Ravenloft fans, alot critize its retcons).
So yeah know a FR setting book is coming, but the joy of that is now gone. |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1625 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 21:27:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by hashimashadoo
Ed Greenwood has been saying very similar things to Crawford's press release for a while now. Last year, at the online GenCon, there was even a panel that espoused the notion that 'canon is only what the DM wants it to be'.
I have been wondering when they would end up making an official announcement like this ever since they let Matt Sernett, the D&D Continuity Editor, go and never replaced him.
Still, I think, considering what they've said before about their 'rule of cool' design philosophy, that the motivations behind this are just laziness on their part.
Absolutely, they are the laziest, least productive team in the industry, I was shocked at how many projects they abandoned before completion. They really should clean house in the D&D department. |
|
|
|
Swordsage
Learned Scribe
149 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 22:35:04
|
Here are what I consider to be some objective truths relevant to this discussion:
1. The Forgotten Realms campaign setting is one of, if not the, most detailed and comprehensive fantasy RPG settings in the world of gaming.
2. WotC are a company who own the D&D brand and the Forgotten Realms and employ people as game designers/writers/creators on a professional basis. They do this for a living and are considered by many to be some of the “best in the business”. They are not devoted amateurs such as people like Eric Boyd or George Krashos.
3. No one has the right to tell any D&D player or DM how to run their game, what to include in it, when to set it and what it might feature.
So, all of the above facts considered, I think yesterday’s decision by WotC about Realms “canon” is wrong and in the simplest terms an absolute disgrace. Fans of the Realms deserve to have a comprehensive, inclusive, coherent and consistent FR campaign setting from the company that owns and controls it. They should present it in this fashion so every DM/player in the Realms operates from the same base standard. It’s from that base standard that every DM/player can the make the Realms their own.
I’ve seen several commentators say, “All WotC are saying is that canon in your game is whatever you want it to be”. They are under a misapprehension. Canon is a concept that is for WotC to adhere to, not players/DMs in the Realms. Canon is essential to WotC presenting the Realms to the people who play in it in a way that then allows them to decide how they want to play. Canon is an internal consistency commitment that is solely the preserve and responsibility of the company that legally owns the FR brand and more importantly controls access to it.
The decision of WotC is a cop out. It shirks responsibility under the false guise of “everyone’s game should be played the way people want to play it”. That’s not what canon is all about and that is not what this decision is actually communicating to the fan base. What WotC are telling you as they stand in front of the overstuffed and full FR larder is: make your game out of these five ingredients. We’re relying on you to make it awesome. Hope you manage it. Oh, and you owe us $50 for the ingredients we’ve chosen for you.
Sad.
The Swordsage |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 23:09:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
What do you think the odds are on this being them clearing the slate before committing to a new Realms book, finally? I honestly can’t decide which way feels more likely.
We know they are revisiting a setting in an upcoming setting book, they eliminated MtG settings from that, Ravenloft is too new, Eberron too static, that left FR and Exandria and we just learned that CR is now self publishing the new setting book, elminating it. That leaves FR, whose "setting" book is the most critized (although among Ravenloft fans, alot critize its retcons).
So yeah know a FR setting book is coming, but the joy of that is now gone.
What about Dragonlance, Greyhawk, Birthright, Mystara, Spelljammer, Dark Sun, and Planescape?
Besides, why would they revisit the Realms when they clearly have no intention of writing a single word for the setting that doesn't support the adventure they're writing right then? |
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! |
|
|
|
sno4wy
Senior Scribe
USA
466 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jul 2021 : 23:09:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Swordsage
Here are what I consider to be some objective truths relevant to this discussion:
1. The Forgotten Realms campaign setting is one of, if not the, most detailed and comprehensive fantasy RPG settings in the world of gaming.
2. WotC are a company who own the D&D brand and the Forgotten Realms and employ people as game designers/writers/creators on a professional basis. They do this for a living and are considered by many to be some of the “best in the business”. They are not devoted amateurs such as people like Eric Boyd or George Krashos.
3. No one has the right to tell any D&D player or DM how to run their game, what to include in it, when to set it and what it might feature.
So, all of the above facts considered, I think yesterday’s decision by WotC about Realms “canon” is wrong and in the simplest terms an absolute disgrace. Fans of the Realms deserve to have a comprehensive, inclusive, coherent and consistent FR campaign setting from the company that owns and controls it. They should present it in this fashion so every DM/player in the Realms operates from the same base standard. It’s from that base standard that every DM/player can the make the Realms their own.
I’ve seen several commentators say, “All WotC are saying is that canon in your game is whatever you want it to be”. They are under a misapprehension. Canon is a concept that is for WotC to adhere to, not players/DMs in the Realms. Canon is essential to WotC presenting the Realms to the people who play in it in a way that then allows them to decide how they want to play. Canon is an internal consistency commitment that is solely the preserve and responsibility of the company that legally owns the FR brand and more importantly controls access to it.
The decision of WotC is a cop out. It shirks responsibility under the false guise of “everyone’s game should be played the way people want to play it”. That’s not what canon is all about and that is not what this decision is actually communicating to the fan base. What WotC are telling you as they stand in front of the overstuffed and full FR larder is: make your game out of these five ingredients. We’re relying on you to make it awesome. Hope you manage it. Oh, and you owe us $50 for the ingredients we’ve chosen for you.
Sad.
The Swordsage
Very nicely put. I salute you sir. |
|
|
|
SaMoCon
Senior Scribe
USA
403 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 01:06:24
|
Sooo... It's no longer Forgotten Realms. The history IS the Forgotten Realms. Without that history what you have left is any other generic fantasy setting that is just a collection of cliches. Just like in real life, trying to make sense of the present without having the context of history just gives us distorted inferences of what is happening depending upon the biases and prejudices of the beholder using nothing more than labels & stereotypes as a basis. WotC may continue to slap the label "Forgotten Realms" on their products, but they aren't the FR anymore than putting the same sticker on "Riftwar Universe" novels or "Runequest" game accessories. I'm surprised they haven't started leasing out the Forgotten Realms brand for other people to sell their knock-off junk under just to make more money from the people who still buy products with the FR label.
*looks around*
Anyone want to give a eulogy? I think we passed that point, now. |
Make the best use of the system that's there, then modify the mechanics that don't allow you to have the fun you are looking for. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 01:50:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Swordsage
Canon is essential to WotC presenting the Realms to the people who play in it in a way that then allows them to decide how they want to play. Canon is an internal consistency commitment that is solely the preserve and responsibility of the company that legally owns the FR brand and more importantly controls access to it.
Yes. Without coherence and internal logic, a setting is worth nothing.
Oh, but you can "draw inspiration". A Google search is free and will probably give a larger buffet of ideas than whatever WotC is asking people to pay for. Possibly also stuff that is more creative than the standard D&D tropes. That's one of the reasons why the only 5e product I bought is the SCAG: to me, their stuff isn't valuable as a setting, and isn't valuable enough as "inspiration".
Then again, I believe most people buy D&D stuff purely for the rules, statblocksm and what you have. Personally, I haven't seen much enthusiasm for the D&D lore around; most new players/DMs are passionate about Critical Role, which isn't produced by WotC.
I wonder what would happen if WotC dropped all the flavor, and just put out books with rules and stats for a variety of fantasy archetypes, that could be adapted to many settings. Would the sales even go down? Would they increase? |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 24 Jul 2021 01:55:13 |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1625 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 02:16:32
|
| I feel like I wanted a proper 5e FR setting book so badly, I accidently made a deal with Asmodeus (clearly the true identity of Ray Winniger) while wishing on a monkey's paw I never knew I had, and the price is the souls of FR and all the other settings. |
|
|
|
Gyor
Master of Realmslore
1625 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 02:23:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Eberron has always done this and I think it works wonderfully.
Eberron's novel line failed, FR's lasted decades until some moron at WotC decided to externalize the novel and largely failed.
Did Eberron’s novel line fail? It stopped getting books when everyone else did.
FR's continued after they stopped doing Eberron novels. |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 02:25:00
|
I will continue to be a dissenting voice here and say that this approach had always worked for Eberron: it’s coming up on twenty years old, where everything but the rulebooks have always been considered “non-canon,” and that setting has a vibrant, lore-focused community. We aren’t suffering or stagnant - Keith continues to give further depth and definition to the lore, both with his blog and his Guild releases - but we never have to bear radical lore shakeups, “Realms-shaking events,” or some boneheaded author shaking things up with their under-researched novel. The notion of having an understanding of your own personal shape of canon is so profound that Keith describes his positions as “well, in /my/ Eberron…” and has @InMyEberron as the handle of his press twitter. The setting serves your table, first and foremost.
It might not be everyone’s favorite, but it’s the way I think tabletop settings work best, and I think we all already do this. This community has “hating what Wizards has done to the setting” as a cornerstone of almost every single discussion; why be upset that you now have official carte blanche to ignore their work? |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 02:36:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I will continue to be a dissenting voice here and say that this approach had always worked for Eberron: it’s coming up on twenty years old, where everything but the rulebooks have always been considered “non-canon,” and that setting has a vibrant, lore-focused community. We aren’t suffering or stagnant - Keith continues to give further depth and definition to the lore, both with his blog and his Guild releases - but we never have to bear radical lore shakeups, “Realms-shaking events,” or some boneheaded author shaking things up with their under-researched novel. The notion of having an understanding of your own personal shape of canon is so profound that Keith describes his positions as “well, in /my/ Eberron…” and has @InMyEberron as the handle of his press twitter. The setting serves your table, first and foremost.
It might not be everyone’s favorite, but it’s the way I think tabletop settings work best, and I think we all already do this. This community has “hating what Wizards has done to the setting” as a cornerstone of almost every single discussion; why be upset that you now have official carte blanche to ignore their work?
But Eberron still has its internal consistency. WotC essentially left in the hands of Keith.
FR, even setting the novels aside, with the declaration of "canon is whatever the hell we decide on the spot" lost that (well, it had already lost it, but you get what I mean). FR is no longer a setting, because there's nothing tying it together save for a map. It's a collection of D&D clichés bound by nothing. Google will give you all you want of that, without asking you to pay anything. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 24 Jul 2021 02:37:01 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 03:07:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
This community has “hating what Wizards has done to the setting” as a cornerstone of almost every single discussion; why be upset that you now have official carte blanche to ignore their work?
I think it's important to address this one.
Most of us are here because we are very passionate about the setting. We care what happens to the Realms; we want to see it flourish.
And when designers deliberately ignore things they don't like or violate the internal consistency of the setting, that is not helping it flourish.
How would you feel if tomorrow WotC came out and said nothing actually happened to Cyre, it was just in a really dense fog? Or that the Draconic Prophecy was just an elaborate prank by some halflings?
That's the kind of thing we're seeing with the Realms.
As Irennan said, Eberron has been able to preserve its internal consistency, because WotC has basically kept their hands off of it. That's not the case with the Realms.
And it has nothing to do with whether or not the setting is stagnant. TSR used to employ people specifically to make sure internal consistency was maintained. Sure, mistakes were still made -- more often because of poor management, rather than anything else -- but they still tried. They knew that any setting needs to maintain that internal consistency, and they put real effort into doing so.
Now they're not even making a pretense of trying.
Sure, we don't like to a lot of the changes they've done, and we can ignore them -- but that doesn't change the fact that we care about the setting, and even if we ignore something, it still hurts to see the setting mistreated. |
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! |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 05:58:50
|
| I suppose I don't understand continuing to be upset when it seems like the bulk of the userbase has hated WotC's output for multiple decades at this point; for those who've been ignoring everything written after Second or Third Edition, what does this meaningfully change? Most people here haven't cared about WotC's canon almost as long as I've been alive - why care what they say is canon now? |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 06:13:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by Gyor
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Eberron has always done this and I think it works wonderfully.
Eberron's novel line failed, FR's lasted decades until some moron at WotC decided to externalize the novel and largely failed.
Did Eberron’s novel line fail? It stopped getting books when everyone else did.
FR's continued after they stopped doing Eberron novels.
Eberron's last novel was in 2012; the last two Realms novels that weren't by Salvatore were in 2016, going off of Wikipedia's list here. That's hardly a damning difference in lifespan, especially considering that support for 4e tapered off near the end, the Realms were picked as the default setting for 5e, and Eberron wasn't officially supported for the first four years of 5e's lifespan. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 06:53:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I suppose I don't understand continuing to be upset when it seems like the bulk of the userbase has hated WotC's output for multiple decades at this point; for those who've been ignoring everything written after Second or Third Edition, what does this meaningfully change? Most people here haven't cared about WotC's canon almost as long as I've been alive - why care what they say is canon now?
I don't use FR or D&D lore in my games because I like creating my own stuff, so my interest isn't (well, wasn't) tied to that. I only followed FR for the stories, the lore, and the video-games. I'm far from the only one, and this easily explains why some may care about the current iteration of the setting even if they don't use it in their games.
You also see things from the perspective of a DM (I believe we're mostly DMs here), but players rarely get to choose which version of the setting is used, so--if they are FR fans--they have all the reasons to care about the current iteration: it's the default assumption (especially for organized play).
Also, setting my motivations aside, is it unconceivable to you that some people might have an emotional attachment to a setting and, like Wooly said, want to see it flourishing and respected? This is fiction, stories, not a bunch of tropes on a stick. Stories cause emotions, people don't let go of attachment easily, even if they don't use the current lore in their games.
It's an "unhealthy" thing to do, but hey, if you want a reason, that's one of the first places where to look. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 24 Jul 2021 07:03:29 |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 07:01:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
I suppose I don't understand continuing to be upset when it seems like the bulk of the userbase has hated WotC's output for multiple decades at this point; for those who've been ignoring everything written after Second or Third Edition, what does this meaningfully change? Most people here haven't cared about WotC's canon almost as long as I've been alive - why care what they say is canon now?
I don't use FR or D&D lore in my games because I like creating my own stuff, so my interest isn't (well, wasn't) tied to that. I only followed FR for the stories, the lore, and the video-games. I'm far from the only one, and this easily explains why some may care about the current iteration of the setting even if they don't use it in their games.
You also see things from the perspective of a DM (I believe we're mostly DMs here), but players rarely get to choose which version of the setting is used, so--if they are FR fans--they have all the reasons to care about the current iteration.
Also, setting my motivations aside, is it unconceivable to you that some people might have an emotional attachment to a setting and, like Wooly said, want to see it flourishing and respected? This is fiction, stories, not a bunch of tropes on a stick. Stories cause emotions, people don't let go of attachment easily.
It's an "unhealthy" thing to do, but hey, if you want a reason, that's one of the first places where to look.
I don't think folks want to hear my opinion on how 'healthy' a lot of Candlekeep behavior skews :p |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 07:09:45
|
I'm sure a lot of people have some piece of fiction that they hold really dear, and if someone randomly destroyed it while showing no respect for either the work or the creators, they wouldn't be happy. Even if they no longer consumed that fiction.
It's a typical human behavior, there's nothing strange about it, though refusing to let go can definitely be seen as "unhealthy". Learning how to detach yourself from stuff isn't easy, at all. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
keftiu
Senior Scribe
656 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jul 2021 : 07:17:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
I'm sure a lot of people have some piece of fiction that they hold really dear, and if someone randomly destroyed it while showing no respect for either the work or the creators, they wouldn't be happy. Even if they no longer consumed that fiction.
It's a typical human behavior, there's nothing strange about it, though refusing to let go can definitely be seen as "unhealthy". Learning how to detach yourself from stuff isn't easy, at all.
It's not destroyed, though; those novels and games are all still extant and can be consumed or re-consumed. All that /is/ destroyed is their place in a canon I think the overwhelming majority of this website's users have rejected for decades. They didn't delete anything, just said out loud what they've been doing for quite a while - "we don't want to utilize the bulk of this stuff" - and if anything, those characters and stories are now /safer/ from being interfered with by writers this community takes a pretty dim view of.
Hell, if this policy had kicked in earlier, we might not've seen Jander Sunstar get put through the ringer so hard, because they likely would've just used a new character.
Congratulations, everyone. WotC can no longer mess with your darlings. |
4e fangirl. Here to queer up the Realms. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forgotten Realms Novels Not Canon: WotC
