| Author |
 Topic  |
|
The Hidden Lord
Learned Scribe
148 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Sep 2012 : 09:23:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I've never run the 'ring of planes' as actually connected - it never made sense that way (because they are infinite).
It is a little on the dense side, compacting an infinite number of infinities within a singularly infinite space...
but the Unified Dungeons and Dragons Cosmology (the DnDToE) does just that... elegantly. |
 |
|
|
Quale
Master of Realmslore
1757 Posts |
Posted - 10 Sep 2012 : 10:07:42
|
| The Ringlands are actually 1000 miles area around the Spire. It takes 3-18 days between the gate-towns and other sites, no matter the distance. Because everything equalizes in the Outlands. Infinite weird distances are beyond that area, in the Hinterlands. |
|
|
|
combatmedic
Senior Scribe
USA
428 Posts |
Posted - 11 Sep 2012 : 02:57:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic
I don’t know that any such silent majority exists. How can we know that, if it is silent?
And what of the many gamers who cite Elminster and Company as a major reason why they do not like FR—and thus do not buy the books? If Hasbro wants to expand sales beyond the diminished, fractured FR fanbase, it may need to make some pretty bold moves.
Check my signature for the rest.
I'd say they are control freaks who if they don't approve of it, don't want anyone to have it......so great for them. They are also the group that was catered to with 4e and we see where that led. You can't be "more inclusive" running around nuking everything you don't like. Just don't use it yourself...it's really simple.
The more I think about it , the more I like WotC plan to just not talk about a lot of things, that way if you like them...they are still there to do with what you may....if you don't like it.....well, it's not been wrote up recently....it will be easy to ignore in my realms.
I gues my complaint is this...
I have tolerate many, many things in the realms over the years that aren't "my thing"
But I'm about tired of people holding the realms hostage.....god rid of x,y,z or I'm not buying it!.....that gets old. What happened to thinking about other people?
Well, I do think some gamers are a too little quick to trash talk stuff that other people really like, and that designers and authors put a lot of work into making.
I referenced a couple of pretty common compliants about the setting.
I don't ncessarily have any 'compliants' because I just change or ignore whatever doesn't suit my taste. Of course, If I have to change or ignore too much material in a given setting or sourcebook book, I am not likely to buy it. I could simply keep my money --or spend it on something else that I like better.
As far as 4E FR, do we know the sales figures? What's the basis for comparison?
|
YMMV= Your Mileage May Vary. I'm putting it here so I don't have to type it in every other post. :) |
|
|
|
see
Learned Scribe
235 Posts |
Posted - 11 Sep 2012 : 08:57:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I've never run the 'ring of planes' as actually connected - it never made sense that way (because they are infinite).
It's pretty easy to make two infinite-in-two-dimensions sheets of paper touch; you do it through the third dimension, a direction in which neither is infinite. Similarly, two infinite-in-three-dimensions planes can quite easily touch through a fourth spatial dimension. It's hard to visualize, but it makes perfect sense.
Of course, planewalking humans will have the same difficulty seeing the fourth spatial dimension we have, so they won't be able to tell the difference between moving west and moving quaidwise, and thus can't be sure if they went west through a portal or quaidwise across a spatial dimension they can't see. But I'm pretty sure that planetar over there isn't actually sniggering at us humans. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Sep 2012 : 19:03:59
|
I understand what you are saying - I actually believe there are 11 dimensions (until something new comes along that I like better). So if 4-dimensional space is hard to conceive, then 11-dimensional space would literally be 'mind-blowing'. I use a lot of that to explain how travel through the ethereal works in my games, since I connect it to most everything else.
Back when I first got into D&D, I really liked the Great Wheel (which was a lot more primitive back then). At that time, I thought it was precisely how it was illustrated. Then when Planescape came out, all the great lore we got - which should have helped define things - actually made me realize how little we really know, and made me suspect (thanks to that very same canon) that "no-one knows the whole truth", not even the gods.
So the act of defining the planer structure, in my mind, made me realize their is no true structure - it is what you think it is. At least, thats how I look at things. Given the info we got in 4e, and now moving into 5e, this concept helps us to 'overlook' conflicting canon, simply by saying "not all canon is necessarily true". I realize that's a slippery slope, but if it helps explain stuff, then why not? If the Gate Towns were really just Gates - or even if the planes were only artificially 'tethered' together (by whatever force also separated the Maelstrom into the Elemental Planes) - that means re-aligning them isn't as hard to do as it would have been otherwise. look at it this way - maybe the great Wheel was one 'great big thing', but even if it is some sort of Uber-artifact (as some suspect), then it is made up of parts, and those parts can be broken apart. I guess what I am trying to say is that planer structure is not a constant thing - perhaps only the Outlands are a constant, and even that is 'iffy'. Just because mortals (and even most planers) might think "its always been this way" doesn't really make it so. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 11 Sep 2012 19:04:25 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 02:07:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
quote:
Originally posted by combatmedic
I also think that Habsro shoud consider splitting the novels' continuity from the game products' presentation of the setting. This would reduce metaplot overload and continuity errors.
I'm a huge fan of this, been advocating for it for years.....it's really the best of both worlds.
Two things:
1) This isn't the sort of thing Hasbro would be for or against, most appropriately/correctly trusting WotC to make their own decision on the issue. They're closer to it, after all.
2) I think the shift in the novels to focus on smaller, less-world-shaking plots is very much in the vein of this suggestion, but I doubt we'll see a full on split. That's the magic of cross-promotion: the novels exist to sell the game world, just as the game world exists to sell the novels. For those who love the game and ignore the novels, great, for those who love the novels and ignore the game, double great, but there are always a substantial number who enjoy both and want to read about where they're gaming or game about what they read. That's the concept behind media tie-in. Otherwise they're just a line of fantasy novels.
Making them have less serious impact on the game world mostly dodges questions of canon and metaplot, etc.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
George Krashos
Master of Realmslore
Australia
6688 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 08:22:50
|
Fans who game in the Realms and read the novels for a bit of fun, leisure and distraction can have the two mutually exclusive. There are many DMs however who like to incorporate fiction events or characters into their campaigns. To divorce the two would make this a more difficult proposition and lead to situations where a DM or player would have to choose just which "Suzail" they want to use - the novel one showcased in Ernie Scutt De Later's story 'Suzail Shenanigans' in the Realms of Realms anthology, or the write-up of Suzail done by Ernie L Bard in the "Cormyr: Land of No Published Lineages" game accessory.
Keeping everything consistent is hard work. At times, it isn't done with the attention to detail that it should receive. But when done properly, it makes the Realms more consistent and a better place to game in. All IMHO opinion of course.
-- George Krashos
|
"Because only we, contrary to the barbarians, never count the enemy in battle." -- Aeschylus |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 09:00:53
|
Well, in Greyhawk the novels were only considered canon if you wanted them to be, and that worked. They didn't make enough impact to dramatically effect the lore one way or another.
Of course, GH novels didn't rain RSE's down on the planet every six months or so. If novels stop 'shaking the world', they could be considered apocryphal moving forward into the 5e era. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 13 Sep 2012 09:01:12 |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 17:42:46
|
| I have noticed differences, not only in D&D vs FR D&D, but also the FRCG vs the FR novels. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 18:37:07
|
There are indeed variations and continuity gaffes (that's just the nature of the beast), but imagine what would happen if you had (as George suggests) dozens of different continuities all teeming with their own concepts and variations on characters, places, and history.
It's quite a lot to ask the editing team to preserve one continuity as it is--trying to make sense of multiple, often-contradictory continuities would just be a nightmare, and beyond WotC's ability (or anyone's, for that matter).
Far better to minimize the impact the novels have on the sourcebooks, so that DMs can easily ignore or incorporate novels without it being a big deal.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1288 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2012 : 18:41:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
There are indeed variations and continuity gaffes (that's just the nature of the beast), but imagine what would happen if you had (as George suggests) dozens of different continuities all teeming with their own concepts and variations on characters, places, and history.
It's quite a lot to ask the editing team to preserve one continuity as it is--trying to make sense of multiple, often-contradictory continuities would just be a nightmare, and beyond WotC's ability (or anyone's, for that matter).
Far better to minimize the impact the novels have on the sourcebooks, so that DMs can easily ignore or incorporate novels without it being a big deal.
Cheers
Consider that Marvel is a bigger enterprise than Forgotten Realms. MARVEL can't keep their continuity straight, and they do not have to worry about a game.
In one of the A vs X spinoffs an artist gave Thor a two handed MAUL. Any editor should have stopped that. At least Forgotten Realms gets the basics down, and for the most part, the continuity of the Forgotten Realms is pretty well looked after.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 08 Oct 2012 : 22:23:27
|
When is it okay to change things?
This has come up in another thread (at this point, all the threads eventually turn into the same discussions).
I am in the process of making a new (3e era) map, and I am in the Bloodstone region - an area originally not meant to be in the Forgotten Realms. Now, much of it does fit the Realms nicely, and its history is now part of our favorite setting (sometimes going back further then it it should, since these regions are supposedly only recently unveiled from the ice). So I am looking the maps over (I use a plethora of them for each region, to get them as accurate as possible), and my eye is drawn to Heliogabalus...
The rest in that vicinity are Realmsian; Brotha, Trails End, Withermeet, etc... but Heliogabalus? Its WAY too Latin-sounding.
When this area was created it wasn't part of the Realms, so that was fine. But once it became part of the Realms some changes were in order (there are a couple of Greek gods in there as well). How about we get a name change for the capital of Damara in 5e?
Or are we slaves to canon that wasn't even originally for this setting? Is the current consensus amongst the designers - even the freelancers - that we change nothing, even when its just plain bad? Are people's egos more important then the setting, to the point where the setting has now come into jeopardy?
This isn't a rant - I want an honest discussion. I am a stickler for canon (Grognard and proud of it), but does that mean we are close-minded to the setting's faults? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 08 Oct 2012 22:25:07 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 08 Oct 2012 : 22:57:47
|
| Capitals of countries changing names or even moving to different cities are things I've read before, not sure if they have been in Realms only products though. Realms-ifying anything that doesn't seem to fit in the setting I'd be cool with. I'd love to see Ed's take on making a dark Stygian Mulhorand, Unther, Thay or how those countries would be if he was designing what's to come or what is left once 5E starts. |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 08 Oct 2012 : 23:44:49
|
I've got no issue with a name change, come on, names of cities changed in our world, why not in a fantasy one. Come up with a reason, change in ruler family, significant political/economic shift, a lot of younger nobles don't like the name. A person said that a horrible curse would be let loos if the name wasn't changed; come on, it's happened, it should frankly happen more often, especially for places that are in the edge of the known civilized world, possible perception of in-game peoples. Heck, I wouldn't even mind if one city had several names depending on where it was being mentioned, the Thayans calling a city one thing, while the Sembians called it something utterly different. The realms should be dynamic, and shifts in names can help create that level of dynamic if kept within the proper context. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 08 Oct 2012 : 23:57:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
I've got no issue with a name change, come on, names of cities changed in our world, why not in a fantasy one. Come up with a reason, change in ruler family, significant political/economic shift, a lot of younger nobles don't like the name. A person said that a horrible curse would be let loos if the name wasn't changed; come on, it's happened, it should frankly happen more often, especially for places that are in the edge of the known civilized world, possible perception of in-game peoples. Heck, I wouldn't even mind if one city had several names depending on where it was being mentioned, the Thayans calling a city one thing, while the Sembians called it something utterly different. The realms should be dynamic, and shifts in names can help create that level of dynamic if kept within the proper context.
This.
And I must note that Heliogabalus' name was in fact changed in the FRCG. It's called Helgabal now. They didn't say why it was changed, but that's understandable given the space constraints. |
Never sleep under the jackfruit tree.
Tales of Moonsea - A Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World. Check out our website at http://www.talesofmoonsea.com and our video trailer at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am304WqOAAo&feature=youtu.be, as well as our thread here at Candlekeep: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12955
My campaign thread: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16447 |
|
|
|
Joebing
Learned Scribe
USA
202 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 02:47:11
|
Let's pretend 4th never happened. The second D&DNext playtest already set that in motion, setting the Reclaiming of Blingdenstone about 7 years prior to the start of 4th (yes I am a continuity nut when it comes to my Realms world at home, fortunately, we are still playing 3.5). The things that occurred in what little 4E product I read made me nauseous in regards to the Realms. Maybe make it an alternate timeline caused by the Spellplague. The entire Returned Abeil pissed most of us off.
Bring back our old expanded settings, like Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Malatra, Maztica, and the Hordelands. Explore the areas around them, like Lopango and Osse and Anchorome. If Returned Abeil was placed in a place on the map of Toril where there was just water, I think we all would have been okay.
Maybe even delve into the old Spelljammer Realmspace stuff? Just a thought...
BTW, Erik, the events of Menzoberranzan as of late...my gaming party was wondering if Wizards put a bug in my house? We did that same stuff a few years ago... |
Now plugging away on mass conversion to 5e, as well as my imprint J. Halk Games.
http://www.facebook.com/JHalkGames
First adventure on DM Guild: Lair of Elaacrimalicros |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 08:51:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
[quote]Originally posted by Sightless
And I must note that Heliogabalus' name was in fact changed in the FRCG. It's called Helgabal now. They didn't say why it was changed, but that's understandable given the space constraints.
You are talking about 4e, right? because its the old name on the 3e campaign map.
Well, I might just change it on mine, even though mine is 3e era. I really dislike Heliogabalus, and obviously someone else did as well.
So there we go - a perfect example of something that should have been changed, and was, and I guess everyone is okay with that? Because the question still remains - is it okay to make minor tweaks if it improves the setting? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Lord Bane
Senior Scribe
Germany
479 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 13:39:00
|
If you change a name give a reason why it was changed and have it tied into the lore.
You dislike how a city is named? Have an event with great impact on the local populace change it in rememberance of the event or have a ruler out of a whim name it after his liking with locals opposing the name change which would give some plot hooks or simply have it conquered by someone else and renamed by the new owner.
Even in the real world you got cities named differently by different countries. |
The driving force in the multiverse is evil, for it forces good to act. |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 14:45:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joebing
Let's pretend 4th never happened. The second D&DNext playtest already set that in motion, setting the Reclaiming of Blingdenstone about 7 years prior to the start of 4th (yes I am a continuity nut when it comes to my Realms world at home, fortunately, we are still playing 3.5). The things that occurred in what little 4E product I read made me nauseous in regards to the Realms. Maybe make it an alternate timeline caused by the Spellplague. The entire Returned Abeil pissed most of us off.
Bring back our old expanded settings, like Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Malatra, Maztica, and the Hordelands. Explore the areas around them, like Lopango and Osse and Anchorome. If Returned Abeil was placed in a place on the map of Toril where there was just water, I think we all would have been okay.
Maybe even delve into the old Spelljammer Realmspace stuff? Just a thought...
BTW, Erik, the events of Menzoberranzan as of late...my gaming party was wondering if Wizards put a bug in my house? We did that same stuff a few years ago...
*raises hand*
It still wouldn't solve my issue, if Ao is the one that seperated the two in the first place, why would he want them back to gether? I don't see how the spell plague would undo something he did. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36963 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 14:52:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Well, I might just change it on mine, even though mine is 3e era. I really dislike Heliogabalus, and obviously someone else did as well.
So there we go - a perfect example of something that should have been changed, and was, and I guess everyone is okay with that? Because the question still remains - is it okay to make minor tweaks if it improves the setting?
Yes and no... I, too, hated the name Heliogabalus, and I don't have an objection to it being changed. I'm not so fond of Helgabal, but it's (marginally) better than Heliogabalus.
All that said, what I dislike is the fact that it was changed without explanation. It's the same complaint I've had since 3E was inflicted on the Realms: not that things changed, but that they changed without an in-setting explanation provided. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 15:57:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Well, I might just change it on mine, even though mine is 3e era. I really dislike Heliogabalus, and obviously someone else did as well.
So there we go - a perfect example of something that should have been changed, and was, and I guess everyone is okay with that? Because the question still remains - is it okay to make minor tweaks if it improves the setting?
Yes and no... I, too, hated the name Heliogabalus, and I don't have an objection to it being changed. I'm not so fond of Helgabal, but it's (marginally) better than Heliogabalus.
All that said, what I dislike is the fact that it was changed without explanation. It's the same complaint I've had since 3E was inflicted on the Realms: not that things changed, but that they changed without an in-setting explanation provided.
Then just make one, it's not that difficult is it? I mean, isn't possible, remotely, that they left some things open for individual DMs to change on purpose? Heck they did it with star wars all the time. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36963 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 16:26:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Well, I might just change it on mine, even though mine is 3e era. I really dislike Heliogabalus, and obviously someone else did as well.
So there we go - a perfect example of something that should have been changed, and was, and I guess everyone is okay with that? Because the question still remains - is it okay to make minor tweaks if it improves the setting?
Yes and no... I, too, hated the name Heliogabalus, and I don't have an objection to it being changed. I'm not so fond of Helgabal, but it's (marginally) better than Heliogabalus.
All that said, what I dislike is the fact that it was changed without explanation. It's the same complaint I've had since 3E was inflicted on the Realms: not that things changed, but that they changed without an in-setting explanation provided.
Then just make one, it's not that difficult is it? I mean, isn't possible, remotely, that they left some things open for individual DMs to change on purpose? Heck they did it with star wars all the time.
I didn't get into a shared setting to have to explain designer-driven changes myself.
I have no problem playing in gray areas or fleshing out things that are left open to be fleshed out. But that's for adding NPCs, or populating an inn, or explaining away a villain's motivation.
I have, in fact, written up 4 additional Lords of Waterdeep, which are in the Candlekeep Compendium. I've made three versions of Realms-based warforged; I've started my own thread on that, and those will be part of the next site update. I'm working on creating and populating my own inn, in Waterdeep -- and I've even been chatting with Ed on that. I've got another NPC written up and prepared to be shared at a moment's notice; I just don't have a plan on when or where to share him out.
Give me an open space, and I'll play in that space, if I have an idea and the space allows for it. I'm happy to do that.
What I'm not happy about is an official change to the setting that is left unexplained. If something about the setting itself is changed, there needs to be an in-game explanation. That's the job the designers should have done when they decided to make the change. |
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! |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 16:54:39
|
I see your point, I just guess to me it's less importen, since often the case is explanations that do exist are at times scattered about and at times lack conciseness. The moonlight men for instance has stuff for them scattered throughouta sourcebook and more Dragon entries than I can count. I only know because I was looking for something related to them.
So to me it's a kind of shrug and carry on. More than likely it's an issue of something being cut, or somebody not realizing something wasn't explained, until later. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 17:05:00
|
Agree with Wooly on all counts. The name isn't a lot better, but it is better. We need to know if thats an 'it was always that way' situation, or it was changed in-game (because for those of us who enjoy maps, it matters).
@Wooly - it sounds better when you say as "Helga-Bahl", instead of "Hel-Gabal" (the second one sounds like 'Hell Cabal', which is maybe what they were going for?).
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
It still wouldn't solve my issue, if Ao is the one that separated the two in the first place, why would he want them back together? I don't see how the spell plague would undo something he did.
I think you may be getting it backawards... not sure.
Ao did want them separated, because the primordial war almost destroyed the world. It was the Spellplague that brought the two back together. That means the weakening/absence of the Weave was the cause, not Ao, and one could speculate about that.
We know that the Weave is much more then just a magical interface - it also filters-out Raw magic, which in its pure state is harmful. What if it is meant to filter more then that? Or maybe, energy itself is provided by other planes, and magic is just one of them? Thus, instead of filtering magic, perhaps the Weave is designed to filter numerous energies by reducing the amount of contact Realmspace has with those other planes.
If you don't use a coffee filter in your machine, you get a lot of nasty particles in your coffee (or if the filter tears, gets bent, etc). Thats what those pieces of Abeir were - chunks of other places that managed to slip through the damaged filter.
What Ao needs to do is run out to the store and buy a new filter, metaphorically speaking. I don't need an explanation why he needs to do all this - the pieces to the puzzle are all there in the past. The only answer I need is WHY it took him so long to correct the situation. In every other instance Mystra/the Weave got 'rebooted' almost instantly - why did it take him a century to set things right? |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 09 Oct 2012 17:09:17 |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 17:39:59
|
What I meant, is that if Ao seperated them, I've got two different explanations on to the why, and he's the over deity , the biggest baddest boy on the block, the traffic cop that can kick everybody out on a whim... exageration yes, then if he does something, why does Mystra’s death suddenly change that? there's to many lose threads here on that score, and yes, an equally good question is why didn't he do anything about it. I don't think Ao takes vacations.
To put another way, the moment mystra kicked the bucket, why didn’t Ao just simply say, X you’re the new god/godess of magic, get to it. Unless, Ao’s like that farside comic strip, hmm, Mystra’s dead again, maybe I’ll just see what happens when the weave unfolds(humer).
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 18:27:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Joebing
Let's pretend 4th never happened. The second D&DNext playtest already set that in motion, setting the Reclaiming of Blingdenstone about 7 years prior to the start of 4th (yes I am a continuity nut when it comes to my Realms world at home, fortunately, we are still playing 3.5).
Well, WotC has made it very clear that isn't their direction. The new edition of the Realms will embrace and encompass ALL the world's history/lore/timeline (or at least as much as possible) whilst at the same time undoing the effects of some of the mistakes that have been made across the various editions. (And yes, *there have been mistakes,* as you and I can both attest.)
I'm curious: I haven't had the chance to check out the adventure you refer to. What's the actual date of the adventure? You say "7 years prior to the start of 4e," but does that mean 1378 (7 years prior to the Spellplague) or 1472 (7 years prior to the Year of the Ageless One where most of the adventures/novels in 4e start happening)?
quote:
The things that occurred in what little 4E product I read made me nauseous in regards to the Realms. Maybe make it an alternate timeline caused by the Spellplague. The entire Returned Abeil pissed most of us off.
Yeah, not every change is going to please everyone, and the 4e change displeased a lot of people, you apparently included. That doesn't mean we should undo the whole thing--the proper way forward is just to give you something you're going to want/use. And rest assured, 5e FR is definitely targeted in that direction.
quote:
Bring back our old expanded settings, like Kara-Tur, Zakhara, Malatra, Maztica, and the Hordelands. Explore the areas around them, like Lopango and Osse and Anchorome. If Returned Abeil was placed in a place on the map of Toril where there was just water, I think we all would have been okay.
Maybe even delve into the old Spelljammer Realmspace stuff? Just a thought...
All those things are on the table, and many of them were directly discussed at the FR planning meeting back in July. I suspect (but can neither confirm nor deny) that Returned Abeir will be heading back to Abeir (returned-Returned Abeir), but it will leave echoes that remain in FR.
quote:
BTW, Erik, the events of Menzoberranzan as of late...my gaming party was wondering if Wizards put a bug in my house? We did that same stuff a few years ago...
I am not now, nor have I ever been, nor will I (probably) ever be an employee of Wizards of the Coast, but I will say that to my knowledge, WotC has neither the resources nor will to effect such intricate espionage.
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
It still wouldn't solve my issue, if Ao is the one that seperated the two in the first place, why would he want them back to gether? I don't see how the spell plague would undo something he did.
I've explained it before, but I'll explain it again:
AO separated the worlds in the first place, long, long ago, to keep the gods and the primordials from tearing the place apart. The gods got half (Toril), the primordials the other half (Abeir). The Tablets of Fate were a kind of focus for this Sundering, where AO inscribed divine reality as it would function in his twin worlds.
Fast forward to the Time of Troubles, when the Dark Three stole the Tablets of Fate, thinking they would give them great power. This was the straw that broke the camel's back with AO, and he decided the gods needed to be taught a lesson. If they wanted to exist without his guidance, then so be it--he would remove what he had done to protect them (the Sundering). He crushed the Tablets, signalling the beginning of the Era of Upheaval, where the Sundering gradually fell apart and the worlds slowly rejoined.
In 1385, the Weave unraveled, which was a major part of what was holding the worlds apart. The slow conjunction of the worlds ceased being so slow. The Spellplague speeded the unraveling process of the Sundering, but it didn't cause anything.
In 1485, we're going to see another Sundering, at which point AO ends the Era of Upheaval, restores divine reality to fit his vision, and begins a new era in the Realms.
@Wooly, Sightless, Markus discussion about changed names, etc: I think Sightless is largely in the right on WotC's direction, which is to change things occasionally without explaining it and leave it to individual DMs (and/or future designers/authors) to pick up and run with if they want to do so. Things do gradually change, and as long as there are potential explanations for why something is different, I don't think every change needs to be spelled out.
The name "Helgabal" comes from the new (dictatorial) ruler of Damara, who changed the city's name to consolidate his rule and seem to be in complete control. In the RW, this happens all the time--heck, dictators have changed the names of cities or entire countries to be named after themselves.
It's a matter of lines and degrees. It's a lot easier to accept an unexplained change that you like than one you don't like. Also, if there's an unexplained change you don't like, why not just ignore it and go with what you know?
"Shared World" does not mean "fully developed and everything explained." What it means is that multiple people are always working on fleshing it out and answering questions left unanswered, like "why did this city's name change?" or "where did this otherwise unknown god come from?" As a writer and designer working in a shared world, I personally delight in explaining things that otherwise aren't explained and developing things that were only hinted at in earlier editions/sourcebooks.
Ultimately, that's sort of the Ed Greenwood philosophy: close one door, open a few windows. Heligobabalus vs. Helgabal is one such window.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Joebing
Learned Scribe
USA
202 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 18:30:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
What I meant, is that if Ao seperated them, I've got two different explanations on to the why, and he's the over deity , the biggest baddest boy on the block, the traffic cop that can kick everybody out on a whim... exageration yes, then if he does something, why does Mystra’s death suddenly change that? there's to many lose threads here on that score, and yes, an equally good question is why didn't he do anything about it. I don't think Ao takes vacations.
To put another way, the moment mystra kicked the bucket, why didn’t Ao just simply say, X you’re the new god/godess of magic, get to it. Unless, Ao’s like that farside comic strip, hmm, Mystra’s dead again, maybe I’ll just see what happens when the weave unfolds(humer).
Picturing that far side comic now...lol!
Ao was slow to react to this. But he is busy. However, the unfolding of the Weave should have been noticed by him. Maybe he felt no one was worthy? Maybe he wanted an important figure of the Realms to ascend? |
Now plugging away on mass conversion to 5e, as well as my imprint J. Halk Games.
http://www.facebook.com/JHalkGames
First adventure on DM Guild: Lair of Elaacrimalicros |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 18:35:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I don't need an explanation why he needs to do all this - the pieces to the puzzle are all there in the past. The only answer I need is WHY it took him so long to correct the situation. In every other instance Mystra/the Weave got 'rebooted' almost instantly - why did it take him a century to set things right?
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
What I meant, is that if Ao seperated them, I've got two different explanations on to the why, and he's the over deity , the biggest baddest boy on the block, the traffic cop that can kick everybody out on a whim... exageration yes, then if he does something, why does Mystra’s death suddenly change that? there's to many lose threads here on that score, and yes, an equally good question is why didn't he do anything about it. I don't think Ao takes vacations.
No vacation, no incompetence, nothing. AO left the coffee grinder running without a filter for a century ON PURPOSE. The gods made their bed--he's just letting them sleep in it for a while. They thought they could do things their own way, free of him and his authority, so he left for a century so they could try it out, and what happened?
Chaos.
A world on the brink.
We see the devastation in the Realms in very human terms and wonder why AO would possibly leave the Realms running the way they did between 1385 and 1485. We can call AO cruel or unfeeling or senseless, but the truth is that he is showing the gods what happens without him. It may have been painful for him to watch, or he may look at it completely without feeling. He's thinking long-term, and a long-term Realms without AO is unsustainable--this was just him proving it.
In all possibility and likelihood, question AO's method as we might, he had to do something to maintain the survival of Abeir and Toril. That is his job, and he will do whatever it takes to do it.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 18:55:10
|
| Wow, this just proves that I have a bad memory. I read the Avatar series, but I did not remember Ao leaving. That makes more sense as to why he didn't do anything when Shar and Cyric murdered Mystra. Here is the thing I have wondered since the Spellplague happened though: magic is a big part of Toril. It helped keep Abeir and Toril separate, and is "woven" throughout the world. That said, why did Mystra's death affect so much of the world? The gods had to scrabble to keep ahold of their realms, and some died. IMO, the fact that it was THAT important to have Mystra govern the Weave would put her on par with Ao in terms of power. She is more necessary, it seems, than all other gods because of how much her life/death affects everything. I could be missing something here, but it has puzzled me. Divine power is different from arcane power, isn't it? Clerics get their "magic" from a divine source, right? So if the gods have their divine powers (though some are more powerful than others), why did the chaos of arcane power affect them like it did? Lover of the gods that I, I’d like to know, even though asking makes me feel kind of ignorant. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Joebing
Learned Scribe
USA
202 Posts |
Posted - 09 Oct 2012 : 19:00:20
|
[quote]Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm curious: I haven't had the chance to check out the adventure you refer to. What's the actual date of the adventure? You say "7 years prior to the start of 4e," but does that mean 1378 (7 years prior to the Spellplague) or 1472 (7 years prior to the Year of the Ageless One where most of the adventures/novels in 4e start happening)?
[quote]
The date of the playtest adventure is "about a hundred years ago", as the first part of the background reads. It is referring to the Fall of Blingdenstone, which, at the time the 3rd Edition Campaign Setting was set (1372 DR), was abandoned. If we assume that 100 years passed from then, it would place the adventure in 1472 DR. The 4E campaign setting lists 1479 DR as the start of the campaign (p.40 "Your Campaign in 1479 DR"). So the DnDNext playtest adventure Reclaiming Blingdenstone would take place 7 years prior to the most recent events listed in the 4E Campaign Setting |
Now plugging away on mass conversion to 5e, as well as my imprint J. Halk Games.
http://www.facebook.com/JHalkGames
First adventure on DM Guild: Lair of Elaacrimalicros |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e) THE SEQUEL
