| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4441 Posts |
 Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 16:29:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I've certainly never been beholden to accept EVERY piece of Realmslore created to my table, why should a designer making an Adventure be too? Especially higher level ones where the cost is more dramatically felt across a greater region. AND especially IF people don't like the story to begin with? Like, say I hate the adventure Tomb of Annihilation and their depiction of Chult, NOW I don't have to worry it being Canon in my 4E games because the Canon from one to the next is irrelevant.
Why should the designers be beholden to Realmslore? That is their job. They are supposed to be painting a story in the Forgotten Realms. You as a DM can cherry pick what you want. But they need to maintain order and consistency.
Well no, they paint *THEIR* story that you can enjoy or not. As for the order and consistency, how many Retcons and contradictions have there been with the Realms, without Canon being taken into consideration? More importantly, what have they done - in terms of the Sword Coast Adventure Guide and the adventures currently - that really messed with the Consistency of the Realms? I could understand better IF every adventure published was wiping away HUGE swaths of Canon from previous supplements, but that just isn't happening. I don't see why people would think - NOW - they're going to start?
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
So yes, I do find it amusing IF someone has muttered "I don't use the Spellplague" or "not in MY Realms" or used some way to disparage an Edition they ignored and now has the gall to be upset when the Canon and Lore they've literally ridiculed and dismissed for a decade "no longer counts".
I use as much canon as humanly possible in my Realms. Personally I have no taste for 4E rules or lore BUT I just don't run in that time period. The lore from 4E is still useful to me in my 1491 DR campaign. For you nothing changes, you continue cherry picking like nothing has happened but for a DM like me, now I'm forced to cherry pick I cannot rely that anyone has done any work to ensure contradictions haven't occurred. Even the DMs who care very little about lore, they pick an adventure and run it, if in one Orcs are killed on site and in another they are very well tolerated the players are going to question what in the nine hells happened?
One, why would Orcs be killed on-sight? I mean, I'd understand if they were attacking a village or scouting around a place for the best way to assault it at a later date....maybe but the entire concept of a natural humanoid race that's just inherently evil is dumb and has been so for decades. Even RAS has touched on this WAAAY long ago with Drizzt's short story "Dark Mirror" which he has to confront his own prejudices against Goblins, which he took for ALL being evil (as that was the expectation) when it's just not so. Honestly, I don't know what your point here way in bringing up Orcs and how DMs run certain adventures?
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
|
 |
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 18:11:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Mike Krahulik has been viciously transphobic in the past and broadly has a checkered record; consider leaving him out of your public ‘complain at a soulless corporation about their IP” campaign.
Never heard of the guy before you brought him up, but since you did....
Michael Krahulik is an American artist for the webcomic Penny Arcade and co-founder with Jerry Holkins of Child's Play, a charity that organizes toy drives for children's hospitals.
sounds like a horrible person.....
A quick google will show you over a decade of transphobia controversies and an incident where his webcomic featured a sexual assault joke that he sold merchandise referencing after outcry. Him having done charitable work does not erase his prior misdeeds.
You say you’ve never heard of the man. Why defend him?
Because I am not favorable of all these things I see occurring nowadays where someone makes one bad decision and they're hung in effigy, and a lot of times if you peel back the onion, what's being said about them can be outright lies (as in they didn't even do what they're accused of, or what they're accused of is misconstrued). The web is full of lies, and if I see things like "they helped run a charity to bring toys to kids", I'm more inclined to give someone the benefit of the doubt. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 18:30:40
|
| I'm inclined to think the topic of Mike Krahulik has been adequately addressed and isn't something overly relevant to the original discussion, anyway. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 18:34:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
Sometimes the retcons are glaring and don't require delving into one particular issue of a magazine. Even if you didn't know who Jander Sunstar was, it's still an issue when his chosen deity, one who is all about redemption and second chances, is saying "screw this guy who has always been faithful, let him get tortured in Hell for his transgressions."
Doing things like that, or turning a human NPC into a yuan-ti -- it's a problem, regardless of if it's re-writing huge swaths of continuity or not.
And this whole discussion is about the fact that they've given themselves that option -- it doesn't matter that it hasn't happened yet, they're saying they're going to if they want to. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 05 Aug 2021 18:37:01 |
|
|
|
Gelcur
Senior Scribe
523 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 20:42:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
So yes, I do find it amusing IF someone has muttered "I don't use the Spellplague" or "not in MY Realms" or used some way to disparage an Edition they ignored and now has the gall to be upset when the Canon and Lore they've literally ridiculed and dismissed for a decade "no longer counts".
I use as much canon as humanly possible in my Realms. Personally I have no taste for 4E rules or lore BUT I just don't run in that time period. The lore from 4E is still useful to me in my 1491 DR campaign. For you nothing changes, you continue cherry picking like nothing has happened but for a DM like me, now I'm forced to cherry pick I cannot rely that anyone has done any work to ensure contradictions haven't occurred. Even the DMs who care very little about lore, they pick an adventure and run it, if in one Orcs are killed on site and in another they are very well tolerated the players are going to question what in the nine hells happened?
One, why would Orcs be killed on-sight? I mean, I'd understand if they were attacking a village or scouting around a place for the best way to assault it at a later date....maybe but the entire concept of a natural humanoid race that's just inherently evil is dumb and has been so for decades. Even RAS has touched on this WAAAY long ago with Drizzt's short story "Dark Mirror" which he has to confront his own prejudices against Goblins, which he took for ALL being evil (as that was the expectation) when it's just not so. Honestly, I don't know what your point here way in bringing up Orcs and how DMs run certain adventures?
I was speaking in hyperbole using commonly disagreed on Realm's lore to show that if designers have no rules they could easily cause trouble for DMs who just want to pick up adventure books and run them.
I will also add, in much of above ground Faerun (at least the Heartlands, the North, the Dalelands), Orcs/Drow are treated "as a threat" & “run for your weapons and sound the alarm and lock your doors” (Cormyr), "feared and hated" (Silverymoon), "unease or open dislike" (Waterdeep). There are exceptions, Baldur's Gate is one of the most tolerant places, where you may very well see Drow and Orcs occasionally in the city. And of course you can find characters of these races hidden in Waterdeep and Silverymoon. I am sure some areas do kill on sight, and others aren't that extreme. But just because Drizzt had a realization doesn't mean most of Faerun has. It has nothing to do with "dumb" or "evil" it is the result of a long history of repeated attacks. It is more like warring territories, there are plenty of real world examples of this that go back hundreds if not thousands of years.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
Sometimes the retcons are glaring and don't require delving into one particular issue of a magazine. Even if you didn't know who Jander Sunstar was, it's still an issue when his chosen deity, one who is all about redemption and second chances, is saying "screw this guy who has always been faithful, let him get tortured in Hell for his transgressions."
Doing things like that, or turning a human NPC into a yuan-ti -- it's a problem, regardless of if it's re-writing huge swaths of continuity or not.
And this whole discussion is about the fact that they've given themselves that option -- it doesn't matter that it hasn't happened yet, they're saying they're going to if they want to.
When I read a new product one of my first thoughts ALWAYS is did they consider X, Y, AND Z. In a perfect world the designers would add footnotes and a bibliography so I can easily find where they got this information from. Some of our wonderful sages here do just that.
Obviously you and I are near polar opposite DMs, which is fine. I have no desire derail this scroll arguing our different styles. These non-canon changes obviously will not effect you and you can continue enjoying yourself as you please. The point of this scroll is that the way many of us enjoy the Realms is likely being threatened. |
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. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 05 Aug 2021 : 23:31:41
|
You know, one thing that I've been wondering.... in today's climate, would a topic like the Eldreth Veluuthra even be considered "acceptable" by WotC.
See, I myself see them as a perfectly acceptable thing in a campaign, because I think some elves are like that. Is what they do reprehensible? Sure. Does it need to be retconned out? Hells no. But some would point to it and say that "it's literally an organization about racism". I look at it as a roleplaying means to deal with real world issues (much like how I also view the mulan people, the githyanki, the neogi, etc....). For that matter, many dragonborn are probably just as racist (not the ones necessarily in Tymanther mind you.. thinking ones that might serve dragonkind). Are these concepts doomed to be made "non-canon" by WotC because of modern society trends? I will say if they do so, then I don't think I'll be as interested in published FR anymore, because it will no longer resemble reality to me (and one of the things I liked about FR was its willingness to embrace both the light and the dark side of things). But, if they think they'll get more customers by doing that (not sure if that's true mind you), they might.
|
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
Edited by - sleyvas on 05 Aug 2021 23:38:43 |
|
|
|
Baltas
Senior Scribe
Poland
955 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 00:20:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
You know, one thing that I've been wondering.... in today's climate, would a topic like the Eldreth Veluuthra even be considered "acceptable" by WotC.
See, I myself see them as a perfectly acceptable thing in a campaign, because I think some elves are like that. Is what they do reprehensible? Sure. Does it need to be retconned out? Hells no. But some would point to it and say that "it's literally an organization about racism". I look at it as a roleplaying means to deal with real world issues (much like how I also view the mulan people, the githyanki, the neogi, etc....). For that matter, many dragonborn are probably just as racist (not the ones necessarily in Tymanther mind you.. thinking ones that might serve dragonkind). Are these concepts doomed to be made "non-canon" by WotC because of modern society trends? I will say if they do so, then I don't think I'll be as interested in published FR anymore, because it will no longer resemble reality to me (and one of the things I liked about FR was its willingness to embrace both the light and the dark side of things). But, if they think they'll get more customers by doing that (not sure if that's true mind you), they might.
To be fair, even if we take a rather neative view on the influence of current political climate on D&D, Eldreth Veluuthra are a villainous group of elven supremacists, who started as a group elves against migration of non-elves to Myth Drannor.
I think people, inclding "woke" ones, would be okay with them, at least as villains, though that's how they were characterized in the past.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 00:20:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
You know, one thing that I've been wondering.... in today's climate, would a topic like the Eldreth Veluuthra even be considered "acceptable" by WotC.
I don't see an issue there. There's a difference between "every single member of this race is evil, except for a special handful!" and "okay, most members of this race are cool, but there is one group that are just plain gits."
There is also far less potential there for drawing parallels to any real world peoples. Sure, there are parallels there, but it's not like it is with drow, where any casual observer who was unfamiliar with the game could believe real-world racist elements were being depicted.
Besides, WotC is far more likely to just ignore the Eldreth Veluuthra. They don't command anywhere near the attention that drow or orcs do. They're also specific to a single setting and not overly prominent within that setting. Unless I am mistaken, the EV has pretty much been ignored since 3E, and they didn't get a whole lot of attention, even 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! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 06 Aug 2021 02:29:47 |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2476 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 05:24:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
I will also add, in much of above ground Faerun (at least the Heartlands, the North, the Dalelands), Orcs/Drow are treated "as a threat" & “run for your weapons and sound the alarm and lock your doors” (Cormyr), "feared and hated" (Silverymoon), "unease or open dislike" (Waterdeep). There are exceptions, Baldur's Gate is one of the most tolerant places, where you may very well see Drow and Orcs occasionally in the city. And of course you can find characters of these races hidden in Waterdeep and Silverymoon. I am sure some areas do kill on sight, and others aren't that extreme. But just because Drizzt had a realization doesn't mean most of Faerun has. It has nothing to do with "dumb" or "evil" it is the result of a long history of repeated attacks. It is more like warring territories, there are plenty of real world examples of this that go back hundreds if not thousands of years.
Let me see if I understood this well... are you saying, because in the real world some places are full of racism and prejudice, it's ok to emulate and reproduce that in the Realms because "its the lore of the place" and for the sake of maintaining the sanctity of canonicity?
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
You know, one thing that I've been wondering.... in today's climate, would a topic like the Eldreth Veluuthra even be considered "acceptable" by WotC.
See, I myself see them as a perfectly acceptable thing in a campaign, because I think some elves are like that. Is what they do reprehensible? Sure. Does it need to be retconned out? Hells no. But some would point to it and say that "it's literally an organization about racism". I look at it as a roleplaying means to deal with real world issues (much like how I also view the mulan people, the githyanki, the neogi, etc....). For that matter, many dragonborn are probably just as racist (not the ones necessarily in Tymanther mind you.. thinking ones that might serve dragonkind). Are these concepts doomed to be made "non-canon" by WotC because of modern society trends? I will say if they do so, then I don't think I'll be as interested in published FR anymore, because it will no longer resemble reality to me (and one of the things I liked about FR was its willingness to embrace both the light and the dark side of things). But, if they think they'll get more customers by doing that (not sure if that's true mind you), they might.
The Eldreth Veluuthra are the same as the slavers from Dark Sun. As long as they are considered as the villains and what they do is portrayed as the problem to fix, it is ok. The key is not portraying that stuff as if it where something good, that is something the Realms fails at.
In the Realms, slavery has been portrayed as a good thing (for instance, in Mulhorand and Thay is acceptable to enslave people that is not from the Mulani heritage... so, slavery and racial supremacism painted as good things), and that's why the place is so problematic; unlike Dark Sun, where slavery is portrayed as an evil practice and one of the problems of that world. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
Edited by - Zeromaru X on 06 Aug 2021 05:29:18 |
|
|
|
Gelcur
Senior Scribe
523 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 06:27:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
Let me see if I understood this well... are you saying, because in the real world some places are full of racism and prejudice, it's ok to emulate and reproduce that in the Realms because "its the lore of the place" and for the sake of maintaining the sanctity of canonicity?
That is not what I am saying at all. I am giving the same exact reasoning that Ed gave you on Twitter back in January of 2020. And there are real world examples where neighboring territories hate each because they are fighting over land and/or resources. You seem to believe all disputes are based on racism. Which whatever you are welcome to believe what you like, doesn't bother me.
What I care about is what Ed has to say about the Realms, and what he and countless other created over many years. FR is my favorite hobby because of the lore, good creators add to what has come before, they craft meticulously. We should ALL be hoping Wizards puts out good quality Realms lore. |
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. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 06:40:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
In the Realms, slavery has been portrayed as a good thing (for instance, in Mulhorand and Thay is acceptable to enslave people that is not from the Mulani heritage... so, slavery and racial supremacism painted as good things), and that's why the place is so problematic; unlike Dark Sun, where slavery is portrayed as an evil practice and one of the problems of that world.
Because Mulhorand and Thay are shining beacons of good, right? Former slaves, who suffered from slavery, who in turn became nationalists and slavers, and a ruthless, backstabby, warmongering magocracy. Absolutely positive examples of society.
What's next, slavery is portrayed as good because it's accepted among Lolthites? |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 06:48:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
Every day.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 06:53:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
In the Realms, slavery has been portrayed as a good thing (for instance, in Mulhorand and Thay is acceptable to enslave people that is not from the Mulani heritage... so, slavery and racial supremacism painted as good things), and that's why the place is so problematic; unlike Dark Sun, where slavery is portrayed as an evil practice and one of the problems of that world.
I consider that the slavery in Mulhorand and Thay has been portrayed as a "thing", not a "good thing". A small, but real, distinction.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3806 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 06:53:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Well no, they paint *THEIR* story that you can enjoy or not. As for the order and consistency, how many Retcons and contradictions have there been with the Realms, without Canon being taken into consideration? More importantly, what have they done - in terms of the Sword Coast Adventure Guide and the adventures currently - that really messed with the Consistency of the Realms? I could understand better IF every adventure published was wiping away HUGE swaths of Canon from previous supplements, but that just isn't happening. I don't see why people would think - NOW - they're going to start?
Already gave you some examples, and I haven't even been following closely the new developments. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 06 Aug 2021 06:53:37 |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 07:11:32
|
I must have missed the memo where the Red Wizards were a shining beacon of progress in the Realms instead of being dickish asshole wizards.
Next up, Orc baby stew is a delicacy among gold elven communities. |
Edited by - LordofBones on 06 Aug 2021 07:12:11 |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2476 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 08:58:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I consider that the slavery in Mulhorand and Thay has been portrayed as a "thing", not a "good thing". A small, but real, distinction.
-- George Krashos
You should read the slaves entry in the Mulhorand section in Old Empires. It even says that life as a slave in Mulhorand is a good thing if compared to the life of a slave Thay. As if being robbed of your freedom (even if you're "well treated") was a good thing.
But well, I do try to understand the author. Not all people lives in a country where kidnapping is something all too common. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
|
|
|
Zeromaru X
Great Reader
Colombia
2476 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 09:11:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gelcur
That is not what I am saying at all. I am giving the same exact reasoning that Ed gave you on Twitter back in January of 2020. And there are real world examples where neighboring territories hate each because they are fighting over land and/or resources. You seem to believe all disputes are based on racism. Which whatever you are welcome to believe what you like, doesn't bother me.
I live in Colombia. You just need to read its entry in Wikipedia to know this country has been plagued by civil wars since before I was born. I know the reasons people fights for first hand, so, I assure you that I also know that because a person lives in Land A, it doesn't mean that person shares their leaders' views or enmity against the inhabitants of Land B. There is also the people in the middle, you know?
So yeah, Cormyr may been at war with goblins since always, but that doesn't mean all goblins have an ill will against Cormyr. Or that all a goblin that comes from another land, unrelated to those goblins who fight against Cormyr, should be killed on sight because he is a goblin and the Cormyrians have "justification" to kill him.
People may have a history of conflict. That doesn't mean that these conflicts should be shown as something good. If we have to mention them, then they should be mentioned as something negative, a tragedy or folly, not a feature or something to be proud of. |
Instead of seeking change, you prefer a void, merciless abyss of a world... |
|
|
|
deserk
Learned Scribe
Norway
238 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 09:29:37
|
Zeromaru X, it is not stated that slavery is a good thing in that book. What is said is the following:
"Life as a slave in Mulhorand is not easy or particularly pleasant, but it is better than a slave's life in other lands, especially Thay." Old Empires pg. 13
That hardly comes across as a universal endorsement of slavery. Not to mention in Mulhorand there is a large cultural divide between the priesthood of Horus-Re (whom advocate for tradition and by extension the practise of slavery) and that of Anhur (whom wish to abolish slavery outright). I don't follow much on 5e or 4e Realms, but I believe SCAG mentioned that slavery has been abolished in Mulhorand in the current timeline.
Personally I think quite honestly some people today are far too overly sensitive and sanctimonious, in a way that reminds me of the Christian right back in the 90s and early 2000s. Just because slavery exists in a particular fantasy world, does not mean that it is a thing that is promoted by it's designers, just in the same way that death and suffering happens in that world, because these are aspects of life itself. I don't think any D&D player wants to play in a utopian world, where there are no grave crises to attend to, and everyone's hugging it out and picking flowers. |
Edited by - deserk on 06 Aug 2021 09:31:39 |
|
|
|
Scars Unseen
Acolyte
Japan
16 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 11:56:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by deserk
Personally I think quite honestly some people today are far too overly sensitive and sanctimonious, in a way that reminds me of the Christian right back in the 90s and early 2000s. Just because slavery exists in a particular fantasy world, does not mean that it is a thing that is promoted by it's designers, just in the same way that death and suffering happens in that world, because these are aspects of life itself. I don't think any D&D player wants to play in a utopian world, where there are no grave crises to attend to, and everyone's hugging it out and picking flowers.
It does remind me of how TSR had to start calling demons and devils "tanar'ri," "baatezu" and "yugoloth" to avoid religious persecution. Only now it's Twitter persecution instead. In both cases largely by people unlikely to purchase their products in the first place. There have been some positive changes, like attempts to make the hobby itself more friendly to people outside the core 20th century nerd demographic (read: white, male and hostile to people invading "their" territory), but I think that a lot of the changes to the game worlds have been reactionary and unnecessary for the most part. |
|
|
|
LordofBones
Master of Realmslore
1536 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 12:47:33
|
| "Life in the land of not-pharaohs kinda sucks, but not as much as life in the land of dickish asshole wizards" is hardly a ringing endorsement of slavery. |
|
|
|
Demzer
Senior Scribe
877 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 13:41:36
|
I don't have anything positive to say about this shitstorm and the way some people here are acting but I have one question.
The statement by Crawford in the article on the original post says this: "If you’re looking for what’s official in the D&D roleplaying game, it’s what appears in the products for the roleplaying game," Crawford said. "Basically, our stance is that if it has not appeared in a book since 2014 [the year that Dungeons & Dragons' Fifth Edition core rulebooks came out], we don’t consider it canonical for the games."
So nothing Ed has ever said (unless it is in a 2014-onward WotC book) is canon anymore? How does this mesh with the statement (or variations of it) "if Ed said/wrote it then it is canon until officially erased/modified/overwritten"? |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 13:42:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scars Unseen
quote:
Originally posted by deserk
Personally I think quite honestly some people today are far too overly sensitive and sanctimonious, in a way that reminds me of the Christian right back in the 90s and early 2000s. Just because slavery exists in a particular fantasy world, does not mean that it is a thing that is promoted by it's designers, just in the same way that death and suffering happens in that world, because these are aspects of life itself. I don't think any D&D player wants to play in a utopian world, where there are no grave crises to attend to, and everyone's hugging it out and picking flowers.
It does remind me of how TSR had to start calling demons and devils "tanar'ri," "baatezu" and "yugoloth" to avoid religious persecution. Only now it's Twitter persecution instead. In both cases largely by people unlikely to purchase their products in the first place. There have been some positive changes, like attempts to make the hobby itself more friendly to people outside the core 20th century nerd demographic (read: white, male and hostile to people invading "their" territory), but I think that a lot of the changes to the game worlds have been reactionary and unnecessary for the most part.
I honestly preferred the names tanar'ri, baatezu, and yugoloth, myself. Not only did it avoid the real-world religious nomenclature, the names are far more distinctive and easier to keep straight than devil and demon are. The changed names are more interesting and lack the blandness of the originals. I wish they'd stuck with them. |
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! |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 13:45:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Zeromaru X
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
I consider that the slavery in Mulhorand and Thay has been portrayed as a "thing", not a "good thing". A small, but real, distinction.
-- George Krashos
You should read the slaves entry in the Mulhorand section in Old Empires. It even says that life as a slave in Mulhorand is a good thing if compared to the life of a slave Thay. As if being robbed of your freedom (even if you're "well treated") was a good thing.
But well, I do try to understand the author. Not all people lives in a country where kidnapping is something all too common.
The exact quote is
Life as a slave in Mulhorand is not easy or particularly pleasant, but it is better than a slave's life in other lands, especially Thay.
It's also preceded by all kinds of rules about how slaves are protected from the majority of abuse that's typically seen regarding slaves (which I know occurs in Thay, and probably occurs just as badly in old Unther and probably Chessenta as well... though at least in Chessenta most slaves are criminals being punished).
So, of the four countries particularly known for slavery in that region, I would say that life for a slave in Mulhorand is not nearly as tragic as elsewhere. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Scars Unseen
Acolyte
Japan
16 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 13:54:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I honestly preferred the names tanar'ri, baatezu, and yugoloth, myself. Not only did it avoid the real-world religious nomenclature, the names are far more distinctive and easier to keep straight than devil and demon are. The changed names are more interesting and lack the blandness of the originals. I wish they'd stuck with them.
Considering I pretty much got started with 2E (I briefly played OD&D from a friend's parents' collection, but moved on pretty quickly), I more or less agree. The outcome worked out well enough. But we can only say that now because they were basically forced to change it then by the social pressures of the time. I can appreciate the end result and still disagree with the cause.
In much the same way, I can agree with the opening up of the hobby while also criticizing how the same pressure that caused communities to be more open to, for example, trans players also pressured a general sanitizing of game worlds. Especially when it's new writers overwriting and disregarding the work of previous writers and even the original creator.
|
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
11829 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 13:57:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Scars Unseen
quote:
Originally posted by deserk
Personally I think quite honestly some people today are far too overly sensitive and sanctimonious, in a way that reminds me of the Christian right back in the 90s and early 2000s. Just because slavery exists in a particular fantasy world, does not mean that it is a thing that is promoted by it's designers, just in the same way that death and suffering happens in that world, because these are aspects of life itself. I don't think any D&D player wants to play in a utopian world, where there are no grave crises to attend to, and everyone's hugging it out and picking flowers.
It does remind me of how TSR had to start calling demons and devils "tanar'ri," "baatezu" and "yugoloth" to avoid religious persecution. Only now it's Twitter persecution instead. In both cases largely by people unlikely to purchase their products in the first place. There have been some positive changes, like attempts to make the hobby itself more friendly to people outside the core 20th century nerd demographic (read: white, male and hostile to people invading "their" territory), but I think that a lot of the changes to the game worlds have been reactionary and unnecessary for the most part.
I honestly preferred the names tanar'ri, baatezu, and yugoloth, myself. Not only did it avoid the real-world religious nomenclature, the names are far more distinctive and easier to keep straight than devil and demon are. The changed names are more interesting and lack the blandness of the originals. I wish they'd stuck with them.
I find myself in a similar boat. Demons and Daemons was just annoying as a separation between what we call tanar'ri and yugoloth. I further like that there are abyssal beings who crafted the tanar'ri, and there's other groups of abyssal beings, etc... So, the abyss becomes this swirling mess of different factions, etc.... Meanwhile, the hells are more rigid in form.
I will also add though that "devils" does bother me less, but I agree it can invite religious issues, and I like the option of "fiend" to cover all such lower planar types of entities.
I will also add that I liked the IDEA that they had in 4th edition of making a type of being that serves the gods (i.e. "angels") and that such beings weren't necessarily the epitome of good. I just feel like they need another term, just like with the other, to separate such beings from religious imagery... as it does kind of make talking about things with people outside of the game have a different reaction because they have a different definition of the term. I get why they wanted to use the term though, because saying "an angel of death" is very vivid. The idea behind the task genies in Zakhara could fit this very well actually... but making them all genies also doesn't work.... but the idea does. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4441 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 14:45:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Well no, they paint *THEIR* story that you can enjoy or not. As for the order and consistency, how many Retcons and contradictions have there been with the Realms, without Canon being taken into consideration? More importantly, what have they done - in terms of the Sword Coast Adventure Guide and the adventures currently - that really messed with the Consistency of the Realms? I could understand better IF every adventure published was wiping away HUGE swaths of Canon from previous supplements, but that just isn't happening. I don't see why people would think - NOW - they're going to start?
Already gave you some examples, and I haven't even been following closely the new developments.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Already gave you some examples, and I haven't even been following closely the new developments.
Well...no, what you sited was issues YOU had with RAS coming up with reasons why Avendrow and Lorendrow exist, which you've somehow deduced completely upends Existing lore, which it doesn't. Especially when absolutely ZERO dates were given in the event. You assumed it was immediately and I see no reference to that speculation. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4441 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 14:48:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
Every day.
-- George Krashos
I wonder if similar authors have access to the resources some deem required to pursue that endeavor? Is it really required to read every single piece created just to write an Adventure in any particular area of the Realms? Or, better questions, SHOULD it be required? |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 14:50:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
So nothing Ed has ever said (unless it is in a 2014-onward WotC book) is canon anymore? How does this mesh with the statement (or variations of it) "if Ed said/wrote it then it is canon until officially erased/modified/overwritten"?
Hasbro/WotC studiously ignore their contractual obligations to Ed and relationship with him these days. A sad indictment on the company.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 15:04:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I wonder if similar authors have access to the resources some deem required to pursue that endeavor? Is it really required to read every single piece created just to write an Adventure in any particular area of the Realms? Or, better questions, SHOULD it be required?
It's not absolutely required and never has been. An author/designer should read what's relevant to what they're doing, but what's relevant does not equal "every single piece created" that's been written for the setting.
If a story/adventure focuses on intrigue between 3 noble houses in Waterdeep, then the writer damn sure needs to know as much as they can about those houses. They won't need to know about back alleys in the Trades Ward, though, or what kind of magic the owner of the Old Xoblob Shop is packing, unless those details are for some reason relevant.
And that's just for Waterdeep, the most covered area of the setting. Most areas of the Realms don't have anywhere near that kind of coverage, so there would be a heck of a lot less reading.
From what I can see, WotC's current attitude seems to be "I don't want to read everything or acknowledge that I don't have to, so I'm not going to read ANYTHING." |
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! |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6666 Posts |
Posted - 06 Aug 2021 : 15:10:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
As for using current books and not being sure the Writer did their homework, was this a consideration you ever pondered before, even with previous retcons occurring? I mean, you never read a supplement and thought, "Gee, this doesn't sound right. I wonder if the author went to the great lengths to see if X, Y, or Z element was done properly with the bit of Canon as expressed in Dungeon magazine #85?) I sure as heck haven't. Again, what is currently made in 5e that expressly discounts and re-writes huge swaths of Realms Continuity?
Every day.
-- George Krashos
I wonder if similar authors have access to the resources some deem required to pursue that endeavor? Is it really required to read every single piece created just to write an Adventure in any particular area of the Realms? Or, better questions, SHOULD it be required?
You surely can't be implying that I have access to better resources than WotC?
But be that as it may, WotC do what they want. I have zero expectations of them when it comes to the Realms. Some of the stuff they come up with is good. Some not so - in my opinion. I'm sure people feel the same way about my FR musings over the years.
I personally agree with an earlier poster that this "you determine canon" think is a a total snowjob. I'm a fan. I don't determine canon. I make the Realms what I want it to be for my gaming experience but that's all I can do. WotC determine canon - and right now I think any new, casual fan getting into the Realms has just had their life made much more difficult.
When they want to play a game in Iceland Dale down the track, they might have to choose elements from 2-3 different genres: novels, gaming products, computer games, etc. Many would consider that to be easy, but I disagree. I would suggest that in a situation where you are new to a setting and there is a growing collection of out of sync information, that can only lead to confusion and frustration.
But what do I care? I write Realms every day. Work on it every day. Build on it every day. I've never needed WotC for that, and never will. Oh, and if they ever need some help with research, they need only ask. I've never said no.
Now if you'll excuse me, I have an Uthgardt tribe to write up.
-- George Krashos |
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forgotten Realms Novels Not Canon: WotC
