| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 05:56:14
|
| Personally, I'd prefer if the novel line went back toward the 2e Harper line: smaller stories with regional importance, sometimes following established characters, sometimes introducing new ones, but each time telling a self-contained story. 3e sometimes seemed to be overly focused on trilogies, in addition to RSE's, though the Classes series were attempts to get away from this. Unfortunately, the quality was all over the map. Some were really, really good, others were truly terrible, and many were mediocre. Which happened in 2e as well, of course. The smaller focus doesn't necessarily mean they'll be good, but it does mean the stakes are less for any given book, and it's easier to bring new authors in. The Harpers series is what gave us Arilyn and Danilo, after all. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
 |
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 05:57:56
|
Hey Erik, go get some sleep; sounds like you earned it. Sigh. I was so wanting to get to the con this year, and it just couldn't happen. I'm jealous of you all.
Anyway, we'll hit you up for details once you're conscious and coherent again.  |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 05:59:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Personally, I'd prefer if the novel line went back toward the 2e Harper line: smaller stories with regional importance, sometimes following established characters, sometimes introducing new ones, but each time telling a self-contained story. 3e sometimes seemed to be overly focused on trilogies, in addition to RSE's, though the Classes series were attempts to get away from this. Unfortunately, the quality was all over the map. Some were really, really good, others were truly terrible, and many were mediocre. Which happened in 2e as well, of course. The smaller focus doesn't necessarily mean they'll be good, but it does mean the stakes are less for any given book, and it's easier to bring new authors in. The Harpers series is what gave us Arilyn and Danilo, after all.
Jim Lowder mentioned getting back to the way things were back when the Harper novels were coming out several times, including one time after Edbjoined us. Ed heartilty agreed that was the directions take. |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
JamesLowder
Forgotten Realms Author & Game Designer
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 07:06:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Jim Lowder mentioned getting back to the way things were back when the Harper novels were coming out several times, including one time after Ed joined us. Ed heartilty agreed that was the directions take.
It's important to note that I am not in any way, formal or informal, connected to the 5E Realms. I've not spoken to Wizards about their plans.
The comments I made at the panel were from my experience when serving as Realms line editor and writer. I originally proposed the Harpers series and the Realms anthologies to allow for smaller, author-driven stories, and we structured the Empires Trilogy as discreet point-of-view books, as opposed to a tightly linked, continuous story, to counter the problems created (for writers and readers alike) by the original Avatar books.
From all the official comments I have heard from the con, it sounds like Wizards is again moving in that direction, and likely for some of the same basic reasons that motivated us back in 1990 to make similar changes. But that thought is offered by someone who is an outsider to all current plans. I'm not a current staffer and have not been approached about a freelance role. |
Edited by - JamesLowder on 20 Aug 2012 18:47:10 |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 11:23:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Good to have met you RW - I'm sorry we didn't get to talk more.
As Walker states, there is going to be one last mega-RSE, which they need to do to restore some of what we lost. We want this one, trust me. I am not sure if it is connected to the Rise of the Underdark thing. I had assumed it was, but looking back no-one actually said this, and I didn't think to ask.
After it is all over, the stage will be set of 5eFR. At that point, only 'small stories' will be told. At least, thats the plan. Our characters will be the movers and shakers in the world, and some of what they do will be reflected in future Realms events. YES, that means what happens at YOUR table could become canon. The Realms will no longer highlight the stories of the elite. What you do can actually matter.
As a novel reader I am a little worried about this. I think it is a step in the right direction. But I would hate to see the novels become "boring" as a result of telling these "small stories". Granted, this relies solely on the author's ability as a writer. But seeing that FR has some amazing authors it makes me only a "little" worried.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the idea of players driving the events of the Realms. But didn't they try this with the Living Realms? Either way, I hope we still get some stories involving the power players of the Realms. I enjoy those, but a good mix of small localized stories and stories involving some iconic characters would be nice. I mean, Elminster doesn't have to be in mortal danger or saving the world in every novel. I think it would be fun to have a whole novel where he is shown teasing and foiling the Zhentarim. But that's just me.
Having not actually gamed for many a year, I have the same concerns.
I also offer a big hat tip to Jim Lowder, your time in the Realms was indeed a golden time and I'd like to thank you for that. |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
577 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 12:36:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
Personally, I'd prefer if the novel line went back toward the 2e Harper line: smaller stories with regional importance, sometimes following established characters, sometimes introducing new ones, but each time telling a self-contained story. 3e sometimes seemed to be overly focused on trilogies, in addition to RSE's, though the Classes series were attempts to get away from this. Unfortunately, the quality was all over the map. Some were really, really good, others were truly terrible, and many were mediocre. Which happened in 2e as well, of course. The smaller focus doesn't necessarily mean they'll be good, but it does mean the stakes are less for any given book, and it's easier to bring new authors in. The Harpers series is what gave us Arilyn and Danilo, after all.
This is exactly how I feel about FR Novels.
What I would have liked, however, is a periodic "Avengers" style big-event novel where several characters from disparate Harpers' regional novels would end up needing to work together to deal with a multi-regional threat or event. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 12:36:17
|
| Hey Jim! Great to see you. And your point of clarification is well taken. But let me echo the others in saying I really enjoyed your tenure with the Realms. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 13:12:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Releasing the old products is a symbolic gesture. Their book plans for the Sundering are also very significant. There's more.
But really you should wait for all the facts before jumping to judgment.
Cheers
Symbolic and important to us.
All I can say right now about all of this shenanigans is bring it on, do your best guys sunder the realms give us the spring board to endless possibility.
quote:
The secret we should never let the game-masters know is that they don't need any rules., Gary Gygax
|
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 14:13:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by JamesLowder
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
Jim Lowder mentioned getting back to the way things were back when the Harper novels were coming out several times, including one time after Ed joined us. Ed heartilty agreed that was the directions take.
It's important to note that I am not in any way, formal or informal, connected to the 5E Realms. I've not spoken to Wizards about their plans.
The comments I made at the panel were from my experience when serving as Realms line editor and writer. I originally proposed the Harpers series and the Realms anthologies to allow for smaller, author-driven stories, and we structured the Empires Trilogy as discreet point-of-view books, as opposed to a tightly linked, continuous story, to counter the problems created (for writers and readers alike) by the original Avatar books.
From all the official comments I have heard from the con, it sounds like Wizards is again moving in that direction, and likely for some of the same basic reason that motivated us back in 1990 to make similar changes. But that thought is offered by someone who is an outsider to all current plans.
Thanks for the clarification, I did not think to include that. |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Uzzy
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
618 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 14:34:27
|
| Hopefully we'll actually see new products, adventures, novels and whatever put out for the pre-Spellplague era. I'd be most disappointed if all we got was older products re-released online. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:04:03
|
'Small' stories doesn't necessarily = 'boring'. Look at the Waterdeep series, or any of the others (Fighters, Citadels, etc). Not everything has to be a trilogy, and not everything need 'shake the world' to be good.
Small stories also tend to be more poignant, IMHO. Not always, but thats been my experience. Also, when you got to blow up a city to get the readers attention, well, thats... hmmmm... cheating? (trying to be diplomatic here).
We also pushed for more anthologies - those act like 'snapshots' of the Realms; of places we rarely get to see. I don't think you really get a feel for the world until you've crawled through every alley and side-trail. Most of the intrigue takes place out of the limelight, and thats where it gets interesting (IMO). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:11:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
After it is all over, the stage will be set of 5eFR. At that point, only 'small stories' will be told. At least, thats the plan. Our characters will be the movers and shakers in the world, and some of what they do will be reflected in future Realms events. YES, that means what happens at YOUR table could become canon. The Realms will no longer highlight the stories of the elite. What you do can actually matter.
As a novel reader I am a little worried about this. I think it is a step in the right direction. But I would hate to see the novels become "boring" as a result of telling these "small stories". Granted, this relies solely on the author's ability as a writer. But seeing that FR has some amazing authors it makes me only a "little" worried.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the idea of players driving the events of the Realms. But didn't they try this with the Living Realms? Either way, I hope we still get some stories involving the power players of the Realms. I enjoy those, but a good mix of small localized stories and stories involving some iconic characters would be nice. I mean, Elminster doesn't have to be in mortal danger or saving the world in every novel. I think it would be fun to have a whole novel where he is shown teasing and foiling the Zhentarim. But that's just me.
All indication is that going forward, the Realms is going to focus on smaller, character-driven stories that don't reshape the world every six months. We need to break the "bigger = more exciting" bias that we have. There will be stories about iconic characters--you better believe Drizzt is alive and well--they just won't be saving the world every book.
The Harpers series analogy is a really good one. That's where WotC is aiming going forward: small-scale, exciting, personal, character-driven novels. We don't have to blow up the world every few months to sell novels. (Or, at least, we shouldn't.)
The cycle of ever-escalating RSEs was basically a sales-gimmick, the thought being that everyone who participated in the Realms HAD to read these novels, to know what was going on. But the problem with that is that you're constantly rewriting your setting after every book, and it gets wearisome for the fans.
Realms Shaking Events are going to be left to you, the players, running through campaigns. WotC is going to the plan of "collect feedback from DMs about what happened in a set of campaigns, and incorporate that going forward." Did the majority of people playing this adventure in Sundabar assassinate the king? Then it happened. Did such-and-such thieves' guild get destroyed in the course of an adventure in Baldur's Gate? Then it happened in the lore. Shared-experience events will be canonized.
Novels will also (presumably) still be canon, but they will be way, WAY less intrusive. They will have little bearing on the course of world-wide events, but rather merely concern that small group of people in that small area. You won't be faced with the option to ignore them or not, but rather the option to incorporate them or not.
More later.
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" |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3823 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:29:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
After it is all over, the stage will be set of 5eFR. At that point, only 'small stories' will be told. At least, thats the plan. Our characters will be the movers and shakers in the world, and some of what they do will be reflected in future Realms events. YES, that means what happens at YOUR table could become canon. The Realms will no longer highlight the stories of the elite. What you do can actually matter.
As a novel reader I am a little worried about this. I think it is a step in the right direction. But I would hate to see the novels become "boring" as a result of telling these "small stories". Granted, this relies solely on the author's ability as a writer. But seeing that FR has some amazing authors it makes me only a "little" worried.
Don't get me wrong though, I love the idea of players driving the events of the Realms. But didn't they try this with the Living Realms? Either way, I hope we still get some stories involving the power players of the Realms. I enjoy those, but a good mix of small localized stories and stories involving some iconic characters would be nice. I mean, Elminster doesn't have to be in mortal danger or saving the world in every novel. I think it would be fun to have a whole novel where he is shown teasing and foiling the Zhentarim. But that's just me.
Novels will also (presumably) still be canon, but they will be way, WAY less intrusive. They will have little bearing on the course of world-wide events, but rather merely concern that small group of people in that small area. You won't be faced with the option to ignore them or not, but rather the option to incorporate them or not.
At last...
quote:
Realms Shaking Events are going to be left to you, the players, running through campaigns. WotC is going to the plan of "collect feedback from DMs about what happened in a set of campaigns, and incorporate that going forward." Did the majority of people playing this adventure in Sundabar assassinate the king? Then it happened. Did such-and-such thieves' guild get destroyed in the course of an adventure in Baldur's Gate? Then it happened in the lore. Shared-experience events will be canonized.
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Not to mention the ones who will submit their feedback about the destruction of something just because they want to see it disappear (or,as it was mentioned before, Realms haters)... Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happen with close frequencies in players' campaigns? |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 20 Aug 2012 16:38:45 |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:37:25
|
Whilst I agree that we have had enough of RSE, I would still like to read about the movers and shakers of the world. Yes some of the books focused on the more mundane people were good, I'll bet that the major sales are from the novels about the more powerful characters. I know Ed mentioned that these characters stories Realms effect would be downscaled but how exactly are they going to do that? Their very nature and influence means that they play their parts on the "big stage".
It will be interesting to see how it's done. |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:37:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happens with close frequency in players' campaigns?
From the sounds of it, canon-effecting change will occur based on what players do in officially released adventure modules. That leaves I'd say a fair amount of control on the designer's side to limit what kinds of major shake-ups can occur, based on what the module covers.
Having DM'd many an adventure (and continue to do so), players will always suprise the heck out of you, even among a group you've known a long time. My guess is it will be a majority of feedback of the module's outcome, so that one random group that burned down Waterdeep, mooned Selune creating a heretical subset of her clergy called The Streaks and stole Elminster's pipe will not likely have much effect on canon. |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
Edited by - ZeshinX on 20 Aug 2012 16:38:40 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:37:46
|
The Lord of the Rings model works when it resolves old and artfully crafted political and metaphysical tensions. When the great conflict is contrived anew for each RSE, the result, I think, has tended to be crass and grandiloquent, spurious empty spectacle hung onto added to indifferent or ordinary themes and characterization.
As I understand it, the big blow-uppy thing has been one of the books departments' sales pillars, and as Erik kind of says, it's involved training the audience, in a sense, to expect it. So a fine and bold move to try to break out of it. Interesting insight from Jim Lowder above about how he tried to moderate the RSE effect in the Empires Trilogy. |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:39:52
|
Whilst I agree that we have had enough of RSE, I would still like to read about the movers and shakers of the world. Yes some of the books focused on the more mundane people were good, I'll bet that the major sales are from the novels about the more powerful characters. I know Ed mentioned that these characters stories Realms effect would be downscaled but how exactly are they going to do that? Their very nature and influence means that they play their parts on the "big stage".
It will be interesting to see how it's done. |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:47:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happens with close frequency in players' campaigns?
From the sounds of it, canon-effecting change will occur based on what players do in officially released adventure modules. That leaves I'd say a fair amount of control on the designer's side to limit what kinds of major shake-ups can occur, based on what the module covers.
Having DM'd many an adventure (and continue to do so), players will always suprise the heck out of you, even among a group you've known a long time. My guess is it will be a majority of feedback of the module's outcome, so that one random group that burned down Waterdeep, mooned Selune creating a heretical subset of her clergy called The Streaks and stole Elminster's pipe will not likely have much effect on canon.
Realistically there seems to be a very limited way how gamers can affect future canon. If the adventures have only one or two possible outcomes then it's merely a gimmick, with control resting firmly in the hands of the publishers. |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 16:58:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
Realistically there seems to be a very limited way how gamers can affect future canon. If the adventures have only one or two possible outcomes then it's merely a gimmick, with control resting firmly in the hands of the publishers.
That's where the control rests anyway when you get right down to it.
Seems to me it's all still very early and experimental. Almost like taking a bit of novel based RSE, mixed with Living FR, in a base of DDI (my wild guess is the modules will have some online code or something in the product so you can enter the results of your playthrough through DDI or something akin to that).
I'm certainly interested to see how they make this happen (whether or not it works I'll let history decide). My interest in 5E from a mechanical standpoint is bleeding away with every playtest released, my interest in 5E Realms is starting to perk up. That little bit of hope for the Realms is enough for me for now. |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36982 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:12:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happens with close frequency in players' campaigns?
From the sounds of it, canon-effecting change will occur based on what players do in officially released adventure modules. That leaves I'd say a fair amount of control on the designer's side to limit what kinds of major shake-ups can occur, based on what the module covers.
Having DM'd many an adventure (and continue to do so), players will always suprise the heck out of you, even among a group you've known a long time. My guess is it will be a majority of feedback of the module's outcome, so that one random group that burned down Waterdeep, mooned Selune creating a heretical subset of her clergy called The Streaks and stole Elminster's pipe will not likely have much effect on canon.
Realistically there seems to be a very limited way how gamers can affect future canon. If the adventures have only one or two possible outcomes then it's merely a gimmick, with control resting firmly in the hands of the publishers.
I wouldn't call that a gimmick. Imagine if the 3 "supermodules" of 3E had been set up similar to this -- one outcome could have been the prevention of the Sellplague, and everything could have progressed very differently from there.
I believe that Torg had some success doing something similar with the Possibility Wars. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Caolin
Senior Scribe
769 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:14:04
|
| If they are looking towards the Harper series as a template for these "small" stories then I am on board. But are they getting away from the novels affecting the Realms all together? Or will they scale it down to once in a blue moon? I mean, why should the players of the game get to have all the fun? I am sure novel readers support the Realms just as much. They can throw us a bone every now and then. :D |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:25:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
If they are looking towards the Harper series as a template for these "small" stories then I am on board. But are they getting away from the novels affecting the Realms all together? Or will they scale it down to once in a blue moon? I mean, why should the players of the game get to have all the fun? I am sure novel readers support the Realms just as much. They can throw us a bone every now and then. :D
I heard 17% thrown out as a rough percentage of buyers who are just novel readers. |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:26:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happens with close frequency in players' campaigns?
From the sounds of it, canon-effecting change will occur based on what players do in officially released adventure modules. That leaves I'd say a fair amount of control on the designer's side to limit what kinds of major shake-ups can occur, based on what the module covers.
Having DM'd many an adventure (and continue to do so), players will always suprise the heck out of you, even among a group you've known a long time. My guess is it will be a majority of feedback of the module's outcome, so that one random group that burned down Waterdeep, mooned Selune creating a heretical subset of her clergy called The Streaks and stole Elminster's pipe will not likely have much effect on canon.
Realistically there seems to be a very limited way how gamers can affect future canon. If the adventures have only one or two possible outcomes then it's merely a gimmick, with control resting firmly in the hands of the publishers.
I wouldn't call that a gimmick. Imagine if the 3 "supermodules" of 3E had been set up similar to this -- one outcome could have been the prevention of the Sellplague, and everything could have progressed very differently from there.
I believe that Torg had some success doing something similar with the Possibility Wars.
I doubt that any of the games released. will give a chance to alter the setting in any meaningful way.After all, when the sudering is over they have already admitted that there will be no more RSE like the spellplague or the TOT.
Of course, I could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:34:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I heard 17% thrown out as a rough percentage of buyers who are just novel readers.
Hee hee.  
If I'd been at GenCon, I would have liked to ask WotC about stuff like this. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 18:41:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
I heard 17% thrown out as a rough percentage of buyers who are just novel readers.
Hee hee.
If I'd been at GenCon, I would have liked to ask WotC about stuff like this.
Luckily there was an "only novel reader" (at least she admitted she was until recently , when the realms finaly sucked her completely in) and she asked about his with concern for that group. Ed threw that % out there, so I am good with it |
A little nonsense now and then, relished by the wisest men - Willy Wonka
"We need men who can dream of things that never were." -
John F. Kennedy, speech in Dublin, Ireland, June 28, 1963
|
Edited by - The Red Walker on 20 Aug 2012 18:42:06 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36982 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 19:05:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
Originally posted by ZeshinX
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This worries me: if people start destroying a popular villain/organization (or hero, or deity) in their campaign, it will get canonized, and it won't differ much from having RSEs, as thousands of campaigns combined can wreck many many things. Besides people who -unfortunately- don't have the possibility to play, but that enjoy the setting nonetheless will have no say in this. Also, what happens if two radically different outcomes for the same event happens with close frequency in players' campaigns?
From the sounds of it, canon-effecting change will occur based on what players do in officially released adventure modules. That leaves I'd say a fair amount of control on the designer's side to limit what kinds of major shake-ups can occur, based on what the module covers.
Having DM'd many an adventure (and continue to do so), players will always suprise the heck out of you, even among a group you've known a long time. My guess is it will be a majority of feedback of the module's outcome, so that one random group that burned down Waterdeep, mooned Selune creating a heretical subset of her clergy called The Streaks and stole Elminster's pipe will not likely have much effect on canon.
Realistically there seems to be a very limited way how gamers can affect future canon. If the adventures have only one or two possible outcomes then it's merely a gimmick, with control resting firmly in the hands of the publishers.
I wouldn't call that a gimmick. Imagine if the 3 "supermodules" of 3E had been set up similar to this -- one outcome could have been the prevention of the Sellplague, and everything could have progressed very differently from there.
I believe that Torg had some success doing something similar with the Possibility Wars.
I doubt that any of the games released. will give a chance to alter the setting in any meaningful way.After all, when the sudering is over they have already admitted that there will be no more RSE like the spellplague or the TOT.
Of course, I could be wrong.
The setting can be altered in a meaningful way without an RSE -- the death of a prominent NPC (like a king), thwarting the plans of a powerful nastybad (like a deity or major fiend), restoring a dynasty or a city (like Myth Lharast), etc.
Things don't have to blow up to have impact. |
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! |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 19:13:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
The setting can be altered in a meaningful way without an RSE -- the death of a prominent NPC (like a king), thwarting the plans of a powerful nastybad (like a deity or major fiend), restoring a dynasty or a city (like Myth Lharast), etc.
Things don't have to blow up to have impact.
Agreed. Something like Azoun IV's passing (Cormyr, Beyond the High Road, Death of the Dragon). Quite impactful, but the Realms as a whole were very much as they always were, if not moreso.
Granted it's been quite a while since I read the Cormyr series, but I don't recall it being all that devastating in the grand scope of things. Azoun IV died, Vangy was not dead as I recall, but quite removed from life and the torch passed to the heirs and succeeding generation (willingly or not).
An excellent major event that didn't require orbit-shifting ramifications.  |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
Edited by - ZeshinX on 20 Aug 2012 19:13:35 |
|
|
|
Caolin
Senior Scribe
769 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 19:14:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
If they are looking towards the Harper series as a template for these "small" stories then I am on board. But are they getting away from the novels affecting the Realms all together? Or will they scale it down to once in a blue moon? I mean, why should the players of the game get to have all the fun? I am sure novel readers support the Realms just as much. They can throw us a bone every now and then. :D
I heard 17% thrown out as a rough percentage of buyers who are just novel readers.
I'm not sure I believe in that, but only because of my personal experience. Everyone I know in my personal life only reads the novels and hasn't played the game in years. Mainly it's a getting older thing and they have no time to play. It would be interesting to see the numbers. But I want to see the dollar splits between game material and novel sales. |
|
|
|
JamesLowder
Forgotten Realms Author & Game Designer
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 19:17:24
|
If it has not been mentioned before, the Legend of the Five Rings card game has utilized tournament play to direct the world storyline quite actively. So that's not a new concept, and Wizards will, if they are thorough, look into where this program has succeeded and where it has failed.
Any group or hierarchy can become oppressive to creativity, and any absolute rules about what will and will not be allowed in the fiction will, in the longterm, prove problematic. It's going to be almost impossible to create working definitions of things such as "RSE" that will not change depending upon who is in charge.
The best approach I've found is to create lots of open opportunities for the writers and artists to pitch what they think of as good stories they want to tell and then have a thorough process for reviewing and fine tuning those pitches. Sometimes RSEs can be good stories--if the story being told merits that scope and they are not being generated by the publisher to chase reader attention. Absolutely walling off the possibility of a good RSE story will, eventually, cost the publisher and the readers a great book. Or, if Wizards finds one and decides to publish it, they will have to change their public proclamation, which is not a good move for PR and will undermine reader trust.
Again, offered as someone who line edited and wrote in the Realms a long time ago and who is not involved in 5E in any way. |
Edited by - JamesLowder on 20 Aug 2012 21:40:43 |
|
|
|
JamesLowder
Forgotten Realms Author & Game Designer
USA
310 Posts |
Posted - 20 Aug 2012 : 19:22:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by FaraerInteresting insight from Jim Lowder above about how he tried to moderate the RSE effect in the Empires Trilogy.
As I have heard the six-book Sundering series described, it reminded me of Empires: an epic event, but told through stories focused on individual characters and tighter points of view. This approach allows the authors to control the stories and makes the books much easier to manage. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forgotten Realms Next: to those concerned
