| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 16:35:30
|
Alaundo's been asked to review books in the past, and give a quote to help sell them. Much like other authors will give quotes to help sell books by their peers. So, it's not really the site, but Alaundo himself that they are acknowledging. Granted, it gives a certain "official-ness" to the site...
Anyway, this is slightly off-topic. The thing is, between the [url=http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome]GSL and 'Fansite Policy'[/url] that have been released, there are more restrictions against publishing material for the Forgotten Realms IP, even if you offer it for free. Until these questions are answered (waiting for over 2 years now), nobody feels comfortable testing the waters. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
 |
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 18:11:00
|
| I think the real answer (inasmuch as there is one) is that *we* can do a Compendium. *Candlekeep* however, cannot be associated with it. If CK backs such a tome, it risks being shut down; a risk that is in no way worth the reward. OTOH, if some like-minded scribes do it without CK endorsement, and WotC takes umbrage with the production, then they do so without endangering the 'Keep. Of course, we'd have to call it something else, and the 'Keep couldn't host it, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. Frankly, I'm relieved that CK isn't involved, since I would be very, very sad if something happened to this forum. I think that has to be our highest priority; protecting the Keep and doing nothing that places it at risk. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
Edited by - Knight of the Gate on 11 Nov 2010 18:13:01 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 18:34:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Knight of the Gate
I think the real answer (inasmuch as there is one) is that *we* can do a Compendium. *Candlekeep* however, cannot be associated with it. If CK backs such a tome, it risks being shut down; a risk that is in no way worth the reward. OTOH, if some like-minded scribes do it without CK endorsement, and WotC takes umbrage with the production, then they do so without endangering the 'Keep. Of course, we'd have to call it something else, and the 'Keep couldn't host it, but that's the way the cookie crumbles. Frankly, I'm relieved that CK isn't involved, since I would be very, very sad if something happened to this forum. I think that has to be our highest priority; protecting the Keep and doing nothing that places it at risk.
My god, we really are just like the Scribes at the 'Keep, aren't we?
"Do NOT risk the knowledge within!" |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 18:43:17
|
| Hmmm well something tells me without the Candlekeep name on it, it probably wouldn't get as many fan downloads. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 19:16:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Hmmm well something tells me without the Candlekeep name on it, it probably wouldn't get as many fan downloads.
And so we come back the crux of the matter. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2010 : 23:59:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
But considering the sometimes strong anti-4E sentiment, I doubt we're their favorite fan site.down. It's a different world, now.
Yeah, but surely they must know that not all of us here are anti-4E??
Sometimes, that isn't always that clear. And I doubt the folk of Wizards really spend all that much time here anyway -- not when they're busy with the running of their own site. If visitors were to take just a brief snapshot of one of the main and current discussion scrolls, they're likely to see constant unfocused negativity, and inane nonsense spouted by individuals who should know better.
quote:
Couldn't they attack those now anyways (in a ret-con sort of way)?? there wouldn't be any criticism in the Compendium. The sites that were shut down were mostly ones that broke copyright laws (full access to powers) or had their own character builders. Basically, stuff that would cause Wizards to lose money, whereas the Compendium, if anything (with some printed FR books coming our way), would potentially help renew interest in the Realms and make them money. That's how I see it anyways 
Yes, but Candlekeep is in the unique position of having the active participation of both past and present Realms authors/designers. Most other FR fan sites don't. So that changes the playing field somewhat, in terms of what we can and can't do. And I'm sure Wizards respect that uniqueness -- and as much as I dislike the notion of preferential treatment -- I'm inclined to believe we're entitled to it, because of our long-term relationship with the Lorelords Ed, Steven, Erik, Brian, George, and the rest.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 00:59:10
|
| Aha, well not to flog a dead horse or anything (though that's exactly what I'm doing) ... but given what you just said, Sage, then why the hesitation to publish CK10? What am I not understanding? |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 12 Nov 2010 00:59:29 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 01:04:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
Aha, well not to flog a dead horse or anything (though that's exactly what I'm doing) ... but given what you just said, Sage, then why the hesitation to publish CK10? What am I not understanding?
Well, that really comes down to the fact that although we are probably acknowledged by Wizards to be somewhat different, we're still not clear on just *what* we can do with this supposed "uniqueness."
I'm not suggesting that Wizards draw up a separate Fan-Site policy just for Candlekeep. But at the same time, the dictates of the generalised Fan-Site policy already put forth by Wizards shouldn't, as I see it, focus on all fan-sites and Candlekeep as well. Because we have something that most don't. And, as I said above, that changes things. So until we're absolutely sure how the Fan-Site policy relates to Candlekeep's uniqueness, I feel [as well as many others] it's safer to position ourselves on the cautious side of the law, and see how it plays out.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 01:21:46
|
You'd think that a company of game designers, of all people, would always strive to write streamlined rules with as few exceptions as possible. It sounds to me like they're deliberately using a well-entrenched legal bureaucracy to strangle their own product fanbase. Weird. And to think that I'm one of the crowd who prefers to emphasize the positive aspects of Wizbro NDAs (a topic better argued elsewhere), yet this one makes me scratch my head in confusion.
It kinda makes me grin and wonder what you did to irritate them.
So the approach thus far has simply been to avoid stamping the CK brand onto any published material, eh? |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 12 Nov 2010 01:24:50 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 02:07:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
It kinda makes me grin and wonder what you did to irritate them.
I don't believe we have "done anything" to irritate them. I'm more content to assume that Wizards simply don't know how to work our site into the legal-territory established by their Fan-Site Policy.
quote:
So the approach thus far has simply been to avoid stamping the CK brand onto any published material, eh?
Not really. Our approach has been to try and adhere to Wizards' dictates, and respect that we're utilising their IP, while also acknowledging that we're the home of a great deal of "as-close-to-official" source material from the Lorelords -- like Ed. We have to be very careful about what we can and can't do. Which, again, is why I find it's necessary that we simply wait until Wizards discerns how we can continue to published material under the aegis of their new Fan-Site Policy.
I'm sure the majority of us involved in the production of the Candlekeep Compendium would go back to work tomorrow if Wizards' position on all of it were made that much clearer. But until that happens, we're stuck in limbo. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 22:29:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Yeah, but surely they must know that not all of us here are anti-4E?
First off, NO ONE here is anti-4e. That statement in-and-of-itself is far too ambiguous.
We are a site of fans dedicated to the setting that is The Forgotten Realms. We care not a wit what rules a person uses, or even if they play an RPG.
Secondly, I don't think anyone here is truly anti-4e FR. What we are NOT fans of is 'badness', be it poorly-conceived lore, 'thin' products, or just plain ugly maps. What we want is GOODNESS, in whatever form it takes. Many of us here complained about various things (like the ToT) long before 4e reared its head. We have NEVER been fans of 'bad lore', regardless - edition has nothing to do with it.
In every edition you will have people who like and dislike various bits of the new lore. The problem arises in 4e that there is SO MUCH new lore (a complete setting re-boot) that they have given fans too much to find issue with. I doubt any two of the so-called 'naysayers' here would even agree exactly on what they find the most distasteful.
Ergo, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the edition, and everything to do with what was presented. You will note that 3e was welcomed by most folks, which proves that edition-changes of themselves are NOT disliked.
Sorry if I went a bit OT, but I just hate when anyone says that this site is filled with 'anti-4e folk', which is a blatant inaccuracy. Before 4e came along you could find plenty of threads wherein folks complained about any number of lore-related subjects. The vast number of setting-changes have merely given us more fodder for these types of discussions.
So some of us may dislike parts of 4e, but using the term '4e-hater' is too broad a description to honestly describe what is happening here and elsewhere.
Anyhow, I would love to do another CKC article, but I don't think that will ever happen, which is sad, because a lot of good came out of those compendiums.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2010 : 22:50:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Yeah, but surely they must know that not all of us here are anti-4E?
First off, NO ONE here is anti-4e. That statement in-and-of-itself is far too ambiguous.
We are a site of fans dedicated to the setting that is The Forgotten Realms. We care not a wit what rules a person uses, or even if they play an RPG.
Secondly, I don't think anyone here is truly anti-4e FR. What we are NOT fans of is 'badness', be it poorly-conceived lore, 'thin' products, or just plain ugly maps. What we want is GOODNESS, in whatever form it takes. Many of us here complained about various things (like the ToT) long before 4e reared its head. We have NEVER been fans of 'bad lore', regardless - edition has nothing to do with it.
In every edition you will have people who like and dislike various bits of the new lore. The problem arises in 4e that there is SO MUCH new lore (a complete setting re-boot) that they have given fans too much to find issue with. I doubt any two of the so-called 'naysayers' here would even agree exactly on what they find the most distasteful.
Ergo, it has absolutely NOTHING to do with the edition, and everything to do with what was presented. You will note that 3e was welcomed by most folks, which proves that edition-changes of themselves are NOT disliked.
Sorry if I went a bit OT, but I just hate when anyone says that this site is filled with 'anti-4e folk', which is a blatant inaccuracy. Before 4e came along you could find plenty of threads wherein folks complained about any number of lore-related subjects. The vast number of setting-changes have merely given us more fodder for these types of discussions.
So some of us may dislike parts of 4e, but using the term '4e-hater' is too broad a description to honestly describe what is happening here and elsewhere.
Anyhow, I would love to do another CKC article, but I don't think that will ever happen, which is sad, because a lot of good came out of those compendiums.
Well-said, MT. I, for one, think there was a lot that was very well-done with 4E (as in the rule set) but disliked most of the things done with 4E (the Realms). I am no doubt one of the most vocal scribes in deriding the 4E Realms, but I don't like being painted as a '4E Hater'- I'm even now using elements of the 4E Realms in my ongoing game cc1372 DR.
Back on topic:
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
[quote]Originally posted by Alisttair
My god, we really are just like the Scribes at the 'Keep, aren't we?
"Do NOT risk the knowledge within!"
Hahaha... I actually thought of this after I wrote it. Nonetheless, I think it's a great guiding principle. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Nov 2010 : 21:37:16
|
And you know what Lady Nouméa Cardellith said regarding the Sages of Candlekeep:
"I think you're among the most dangerous and powerful forces on all Toril."
We are the keepers of lore - we have the power to help or hinder.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 15 Nov 2010 : 12:50:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Yeah, but surely they must know that not all of us here are anti-4E?
First off, NO ONE here is anti-4e. That statement in-and-of-itself is far too ambiguous.
I'm not saying many are anti-4E, nor am I saying that no one is anti-4E, but upon reading some of the posts that have been made since 4E came (no scribes being finger pointed here), many of them can be perceived as being anti-4E. In most cases, reading more posts from said perceived anti-4E scribes reveals them as not being anti-4E, but not everyone(WotC employees perhaps) would be guaranteed to read more and find that out. And of course, others leave some doubt in the mind, but again, maybe that is from not reading every single post. Of course, sir Markus, you are the former  (strongly opinionated while very open minded). |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
arry
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
317 Posts |
Posted - 15 Nov 2010 : 13:27:53
|
In that case the damage is already done.
As no Compendium is going to be produced until esteemed WotC clarifies the situation (i.e. never), the entire point is moot. |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 15 Nov 2010 : 15:51:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by arry
In that case the damage is already done.
As no Compendium is going to be produced until esteemed WotC clarifies the situation (i.e. never), the entire point is moot.
Sure feels that way...who knows what the future will bring. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 15 Nov 2010 : 18:33:12
|
| The future will bring us 5E of course! |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Nov 2010 : 00:54:27
|
I believed 5e was was sort-of announced only a few weeks after 4e hit the shelves.
I don't remember the precise details - it was at Euro-Con IIRC - and some 'official' type person was asked "are there any plans for a 5e?", and the answer was something along the lines of "I would be lying if I said it hasn't come up".
I remember it struck me very funny.
So a corporation that is in-business to sell products plans on eventually releasing a new line of products?
How Extraordinary! 
Seriously - sometimes even a grognard can't help but laugh at us.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 16 Nov 2010 : 01:06:04
|
| Is this an instance of Chekhov's Canon? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Nov 2010 : 02:18:43
|
I think you may have stumped me with that reference...
Are you referring to Chekhov's Gun? If so, I'm still not getting the connection.
Unless you mean the other Chekhov, but I understand he was more into Photon Torpedoes then canons. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 16 Nov 2010 : 02:26:05
|
Yes, it was intended to be a pun on Chekhov's Gun. (Defined at Wikipedia and TV Tropes, but don't click on the second site unless you have a few hours to kill.)
I don't think the other Chekhov was in charge of the Photon Torpedo button. In fact, I really have no idea what purpose he served beyond always being the first victim of sinister plot events. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
|
|
irinotecan
Acolyte
USA
1 Posts |
Posted - 27 Dec 2010 : 03:38:46
|
OK I'm sort-of new here (not really, but not active enough to fully understand what's been going on); but I'm reading through and seeing something about "waiting for WotC's fansite policy" WRT anymore Compendiums getting published.
Can someone explain to me what the importance is of this policy is? My understanding is that the Compendium is largely unofficial realmslore, correct? Is there really need to worry about non-canon "fanlore" if Wizards doesn't give it an official blessing, so long as it's labeled as such? Is the worry here that Wizards/Hasbro could get mad enough to invoke "copyright infringement" and yank the candlekeep.com domain? And is this why, in general, it seems that the realmslore/fanlore scrolls have stagnated here since '07?
One other thought, since I suspect there is a strong likelihood of someone just saying, "That's a correct analysis of the situation". If I am right about this, what is the harm of running with WotC's pre-4.0 fansite policy until they tell us otherwise? |
Edited by - irinotecan on 27 Dec 2010 03:45:06 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Dec 2010 : 23:33:35
|
Yes, you've gotten the gist of the situation.
The pre-4e 'fansite policy' doesn't exist, AFAIK. It basically amounts to "just ignore them, unless they do something we don't like". To clarify, they RARELY 'went after' anyone, unless they were re-producing copyrighted material, making money off of a Hasbro-owned Intellectual property, or were producing something for the 4e rules set (in other words, using their new, NON-OGL rules to produce new D&D material).
We will never see a fansite policy, simply because it is better for them from a legal standpoint to never create one. Once you lay down the rules, the first thing people do is find ways around them; without ANY rules allowing fans to use their IP, (in any way, shape, or form) they can 'pick & choose their battles'.
Not only do we produce material directly related to their most lucrative IP, but the name of this site is even their property. We exist at their mercy, and without knowing what will 'piss them off', we can do nothing.
Sadly, so it goes. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 28 Dec 2010 23:35:31 |
|
|
|
Khelben
Acolyte
Denmark
25 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jul 2011 : 19:14:04
|
So where can I get the CandleKeep Compendium....? (not hoping for a Power Word Kill...)
-Khelben |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jul 2011 : 20:12:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Khelben
So where can I get the CandleKeep Compendium....? (not hoping for a Power Word Kill...)
-Khelben
Click on the link in my sig.  |
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! |
|
|
|
Khelben
Acolyte
Denmark
25 Posts |
Posted - 26 Jul 2011 : 21:26:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Click on the link in my sig.
Thx Rupert - it looks great but why did this creative work stop in 2007? |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2011 : 05:51:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Khelben
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Click on the link in my sig.
Thx Rupert - it looks great but why did this creative work stop in 2007?
Lack of contributions, mostly. Also, several regularly contributing scribes, such as myself, often found ourselves with less and less time to devote to such projects.
Then, finally, with the coming of 4e in 2008 and the restructuring of Wizards' Open Gaming License, it became somewhat precarious for fan sites, such as Candlekeep.com, to continue publishing fan-based sources without an official mandate to utilise such Intellectual Property from the license-holder.
Couple these kinds of problems/issues together, and we're still largely in a kind of limbo about how to proceed with the Compendium.
|
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Brian R. James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
1098 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jul 2011 : 21:30:25
|
| Woah! Has it really been four years? I think it's time to get the band back together. |
Brian R. James - Freelance Game Designer
Follow me on Twitter @brianrjames |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jul 2011 : 01:44:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
Woah! Has it really been four years? I think it's time to get the band back together.
You're not going to start by singing "On The Road Again," are you? |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
The Candlekeep Compendium
