| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
 Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 17:24:34
|
| If the novels areset in the1400's, who are the companions in the title of bob salvatore's book? |
 |
|
|
ericlboyd
Forgotten Realms Designer
USA
2089 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 17:31:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
If the novels areset in the1400's, who are the companions in the title of bob salvatore's book?
Bob was unexpectedly not able to able to attend GenCon, so we didn't get much information about his book, other than it should continue the ongoing story of Drizzt and appeal to fans of his books.
--Eric |
--
http://www.ericlboyd.com/dnd/ |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 17:37:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
If the novels areset in the1400's, who are the companions in the title of bob salvatore's book?
Drizzt's old adventuring group were called the Companions of the Hall. I'm betting it deals with that. Makes a person wonder if Drizzt is gonna die? yikes. hehe |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 17:45:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
If the novels areset in the1400's, who are the companions in the title of bob salvatore's book?
Drizzt's old adventuring group were called the Companions of the Hall. I'm betting it deals with that. Makes a person wonder if Drizzt is gonna die? yikes. hehe
I know they were the companions of the hall but all are dead except our dark elf chappie.
Do you really think they will kill off their biggest cash cow?
Answers on a postcard please  |
|
|
|
Razz
Senior Scribe
USA
749 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 18:08:03
|
| What do you mean by not liking Maztica, Kara-Tur or Zhakara? I think the adaptability of playing in an oriental, Mayan/Aztec or Arabian setting and still be set I the Realms was a smart move. Or do you mean uch a thing wasn't executed well? I do believe that, they needed to be more unique and Realmsian. Now they have that opportunity! |
|
|
|
The Red Walker
Great Reader
USA
3567 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 18:16:07
|
I find all the novel talk fascinating, but it's detracting from Eric's original intent of this scroll.
this is a better spot for it :
RAS The Companions
|
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 21 Aug 2012 18:20:54 |
|
|
|
ericlboyd
Forgotten Realms Designer
USA
2089 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 18:17:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
What do you mean by not liking Maztica, Kara-Tur or Zhakara? I think the adaptability of playing in an oriental, Mayan/Aztec or Arabian setting and still be set I the Realms was a smart move. Or do you mean uch a thing wasn't executed well? I do believe that, they needed to be more unique and Realmsian. Now they have that opportunity!
Personally, I would have preferred that Wizards had created uniquely Realmsian cultures (like Thay) rather than start with real world analogs (Maztica, Kara-Tur) or classic fantasy analogs (Zakhara / Arabian Nights). But, as a designer, I have no problem with working with the existing Realms and making it more Realmsian. Also, as a fan, I have absolutely no problem with the fact that some folks like some ideas more than me and others like some ideas less than me.
My point was not to critique any specific issue (or to suggest that my criticism was anything more than my opinion), but simply to point out that the Realms has constantly dealt with the introduction of new ideas in all editions. In other words, this is not the first time that "further design would be desirable". (And that applies to many things I wrote as well.)
--Eric |
--
http://www.ericlboyd.com/dnd/ |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 18:19:51
|
There's no use focusing on the claim that there's a "real" Realms which designers should write about. The point is that the fifteenth century Realms is very different from the fourteenth century one, and some people aren't interested in the former. If some people don't like reading about classical antiquity, they won't buy a historical novel set in the Roman Empire. It doesn't matter whether it's "real" or not - the word doesn't even apply - it doesn't even matter whether it's good or not, they're just not into it. If you ask them what they want in a new product, you might get something like "well, you could write about the British Empire instead." There can't really be much compromise. It's that simple.
I'm not mad at WotC. I'm just not interested. |
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 |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 18:27:47
|
I think Eric's got a point about Zakhara. I love the setting, and have dreamed up any number of plots that could be hatched in it (sadly, I've never had a chance to run or play in it). I really like the way the genies are tied into the setting, and the additional love they got in some of the sourcebooks.
I just have a really, really hard time remembering that there are demihumans in it. Every time I think about it, it's humans as far as the eye can see, until you get to monsters. I have to consciously remind myself that there are also elves and dwarves, gnomes and halflings there as well. Part of the problem, I think, is that they got rid of the racial cultures. It makes sense in the context of the setting, but it does make it easier to lump everyone under the heading of human and just forget about it.
Or maybe I've just watched Disney's Aladdin too many times... |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
deserk
Learned Scribe
Norway
242 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 19:04:05
|
I'd certainly love to see Kara-Tur and Zakhara redone from scratch, and made more Realmsian. I honestly feel the way they are, they are in the way of Ed Greenwood or other FR designers, from making some new interesting and unique FR nations/cultures.
Then again, FR designers still have the Utter East to properly lay out. :p
Also wasn't Kara-Tur and Zakhara purportedly heavily affected by the Spellplague as well? If so, then this is one of the few cases where I think a region (or continent) desperately needed a Spellplague to blast it to bits, and have it all redone.
I think Maztica, Kara-Tur and Zakhara should be their own settings and not have anything to do with the Realms, if they can't be anything but blatant New World/Asian/Arabian Nights analogues.
Also, the lack of demihuman nations in these regions also make them suffer a lot. |
Edited by - deserk on 21 Aug 2012 19:15:58 |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 20:11:01
|
I don't know, I sort of like them the way they are (Kara-Tur and Zakhara, that is; I've never particularly cared for Maztica). And I recognize their value from a commercial stand point. "Oriental Adventures" and "Arabian Nights" are two really big and long-standing subgenres of the fantasy genre. Look at the popularity of Marco Polo's writtings, for instance, in the RW. People have been dreaming of going to these far away lands and having adventures there for centuries.
So it makes sense to have game settings aimed specifically at those subgenres, just as the more traditional Realms aims at the "Western Europe Middle Ages" subgenre. And it's really nice to have them all in the same world, so that if you want your knight from Silverymoon to go fight ninja, or bargain with genies in the depths of implacable deserts, you can do it with just a caravan or ship's journey.
I think they just need to be expanded and supported, rather than replaced. But that may be just me. |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 20:17:40
|
| Kara Tur certainly holds a soft spot for me. My handle here is based on my fav character from that setting, a LE bamboo spirit folk samurai named Rokugo Zeshin. I'd like to see some form of Asian-styled culture, but would have no issue with making it more Realmsian. |
"...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 |
|
|
|
Arcanus
Senior Scribe
485 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 21:10:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
This is the type of thing we need to avoid
All eras of the Realms are the "Real Realms" to different people
The last thing that will help this, is to start judging people by what Realms is real to them.
Agreed, each of us takes something different from the realms, it's impossible to create the perfect world for everybody.
The best we can hope for is a common realms (TM) lol. |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 21 Aug 2012 : 23:39:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
This is the type of thing we need to avoid
All eras of the Realms are the "Real Realms" to different people
The last thing that will help this, is to start judging people by what Realms is real to them.
That's a very valid point, though, when we're talking about the elements from Abeir. They're NOT the real Realms. They're elements from what amounts to a whole other campaign setting which were transplanted into the Realms while chunks of the Realms were ripped out and tossed away.
For instance, let's say that it'd been an already pre-existing game world, like Dragonlance. Would a Forgotten Realms in which the Old Empires were vacuumed out and replaced with Solamnia still qualify as being the Real Realms? Maybe the rest of it would be, but THAT PORTION? No, it's not the Real Realms, and it'll never be the Real Realms. Likewise, none of those chunks of Abeir that got tacked on are Forgotten Realms. They're some other campaign setting that's been jammed in there.
quote:
By this logic, none of us exist on the "real" Earth; I guess I am typing this on one of the many 'divergent Earth-alternate timelines'.
Show me the history book that recounts how North America, France, Portugal, and Ireland were whisked off to Mars while the Martian nations of Krizzle Der'Thark, Nannaska Terokia, Eltishia, and Dlan'Thann took their place. Then explain how those Martian civilizations and chunks of Martian soil would count as being the real Earth.
There is a COLOSSAL difference between civilizations evolving over time, and entire sections of one planet switching places with entire sections of another planet. In no way, shape, or form could those sections legitimately be called part of that planet because they're not. They're part of some other planet.
If WotC believes so much in Abeir then, you know what? How about reverting all that Abeir territory back to Abeir, return Maztica, Unther, and Mulhorand to Toril, and then publish Abeir as its own campaign setting? When I buy a Forgotten Realms book, though, it's the FORGOTTEN REALMS I'm interested in. Not the castoff leftovers from another incomplete campaign setting. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 21 Aug 2012 23:49:46 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 01:54:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
What do you mean by not liking Maztica, Kara-Tur or Zhakara? I think the adaptability of playing in an oriental, Mayan/Aztec or Arabian setting and still be set I the Realms was a smart move. Or do you mean uch a thing wasn't executed well? I do believe that, they needed to be more unique and Realmsian. Now they have that opportunity!
Personally, I would have preferred that Wizards had created uniquely Realmsian cultures (like Thay) rather than start with real world analogs (Maztica, Kara-Tur) or classic fantasy analogs (Zakhara / Arabian Nights). But, as a designer, I have no problem with working with the existing Realms and making it more Realmsian.
I kind of like the tweaks that some designers have brought to the real-world analogues as they exist in the Realms. As Ed has said in the past, it's just one way of viewing these classic cultures through Realms-coloured lens.  |
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 |
|
|
|
Shemmy
Senior Scribe
USA
492 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 03:53:37
|
Eric,
First off thanks for your take on things here. I've got some serious respect for your work and it's really cool to see your thoughts on this all. I'm still mulling over my opinion on the matter, and while FR was the campaign setting that I started playing D&D in (the primarily Material plane campaign setting at least), I largely stopped paying attention with 4e and it's going to be interesting to see if 5e manages to bring me back, since the 4e alterations left such a sour taste in my mouth and FR has competition now from other non-planar campaign settings that it didn't have really before with me (Golarion).
That said, I'm curious how they're going to handle the planes in both 5e at large and with 5e FR in specific. 1e and 2e used the Great Wheel, 3e used a FR specific cosmology which was pretty much the Great Wheel with the serial numbers etched away, and 4e took a complete left turn and used the default PoL planes and tropes such as the Primordials, etc. What's your opinion on how to handle it? |
Shemeska the Marauder, King of the Crosstrade; voted #1 best Arcanaloth in Sigil two hundred years running by the people who know what's best for them; chant broker; prospective Sigil council member next election; and official travel agent for Chamada Holiday specials LLC.
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 04:22:14
|
@Shemmy - from what I gathered (mostly from Ed himself at the seminars), FR's cosmology and even its gods are going to be left largely 'mysterious'. I have no idea what they plan for the 'core setting' (or non-setting, or whatever they decide to call it in 5e). What this will do is allow DMs to use whatever cosmology suits their campaign (because according to Ed, everyone lies, and gods lie worst of all - no-one knows the real truth).
As for Abeir, my take (from the seminars) is that it is gone, but not forgotten. However, it will leave its 'mark' on the world once last time.
And by this, I have to interpret into business-speak as "we will keep what worked, get rid of what didn't, and maybe create something new out of both if neither was all that great on its own". And maybe we might get something altogether brand new (that was never mentioned, but as a realist I have to assume thats a fourth possibility, if all three of the other options look bad).
I have to also assume that they will keep Abeir around so that they can 'tweak' future iterations of the Forgotten Realms (seriously - how useful is another world that becomes coterminous with the campaign world, and is able to swap geography and people between them every so often?) They are using it one last time to "make things right", but they won't throw it away. Its far to useful a mechanic. In a perfect world (and fans love everything about the new setting), we may never have need to see it again. So in all reality, its up to us whether Abeir comes back or not.
Think of Abeir as an evil outsider that is able to derive nourishment from complaining. Lets not feed it too much, eh? 
EDIT: Zakahara and Kara-Tur are fine. Zakhara is based on several different types of Arabian fantasy, and not RW Arabia itself, so it works in The Realms. Its major flaw is that several FR regions already had that flavor (My own solution would be to get rid of the redundant FR locales, not Zakhara, but that is probably heresy to everyone here). Kara-Tur only needs some love; its a great setting, but too much RW history got shoe-horned into it. The right people can really make it shine, and divorce it from those trappings. As for Maztica. I could say much the same (except that it is exponentially more guilty of its crimes). To me, the best-case scenario would be an amalgam of old Maztica and returned Abeir superimposed on one another. There's enough there to make Maztica both original and still retain some its former flavor.
There is no such thing as something that can't be fixed. Except for moats that run uphill... but thats a private joke. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 22 Aug 2012 04:39:32 |
|
|
|
Xnella Moonblade-Thann
Learned Scribe
USA
234 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 05:30:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
This is the type of thing we need to avoid
All eras of the Realms are the "Real Realms" to different people
The last thing that will help this, is to start judging people by what Realms is real to them.
Agreed, each of us takes something different from the realms, it's impossible to create the perfect world for everybody.
The best we can hope for is a common realms (TM) lol.
As Arcanus says.
Besides, if it wasn't for the material they made on 4e Realms, I wouldn't have found a few interesting tidbits or gone looking for certain novels/books (like the interesting tidbits of Faer'tel'miir, the ancient Library City of Miyeritar/Rhymanthiin, the Hidden City of Hope). In my Realms campaign, I took most of what happened as-is, but made it so that Khelben was severely weakened as a result of the use of High Magic. I had Mystra severely weakend and she hid from her "killers" long enough to heal and plan a revenge coup against them. Abeir appeared, but it was placed on continents where there was nothing in lore (which means Maztica, Kara-Tur, and Zakhara are still on Toril*, and the regions that were supposed to have been lost because of the switch between worlds are still present, but the regions which replaced them in 4e are on another continent instead).
*I happen to like these three "additions" to the Realms 2e, because when I started playing in the setting, they were there. I didn't learn until after that they had been added on. |
"Sweet water and light laughter until next we meet." - traditional elven farewell
Please forgive any spelling and grammer errors, as my android touch-screen phone has no spellchecker. If I do make a grammer mistake, please let me know and I'll try to fix it.
New laptop, still trying to sort my "scrolls" on its shelves...and when will this cursed thing stop doing things I tell it not to? |
Edited by - Xnella Moonblade-Thann on 22 Aug 2012 05:32:23 |
|
|
|
Darkmeer
Senior Scribe
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 06:00:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
@Shemmy - from what I gathered (mostly from Ed himself at the seminars), FR's cosmology and even its gods are going to be left largely 'mysterious'. I have no idea what they plan for the 'core setting' (or non-setting, or whatever they decide to call it in 5e). What this will do is allow DMs to use whatever cosmology suits their campaign (because according to Ed, everyone lies, and gods lie worst of all - no-one knows the real truth).
As for Abeir, my take (from the seminars) is that it is gone, but not forgotten. However, it will leave its 'mark' on the world once last time.
And by this, I have to interpret into business-speak as "we will keep what worked, get rid of what didn't, and maybe create something new out of both if neither was all that great on its own". And maybe we might get something altogether brand new (that was never mentioned, but as a realist I have to assume thats a fourth possibility, if all three of the other options look bad).
I have to also assume that they will keep Abeir around so that they can 'tweak' future iterations of the Forgotten Realms (seriously - how useful is another world that becomes coterminous with the campaign world, and is able to swap geography and people between them every so often?) They are using it one last time to "make things right", but they won't throw it away. Its far to useful a mechanic. In a perfect world (and fans love everything about the new setting), we may never have need to see it again. So in all reality, its up to us whether Abeir comes back or not.
Think of Abeir as an evil outsider that is able to derive nourishment from complaining. Lets not feed it too much, eh?
EDIT: Zakahara and Kara-Tur are fine. Zakhara is based on several different types of Arabian fantasy, and not RW Arabia itself, so it works in The Realms. Its major flaw is that several FR regions already had that flavor (My own solution would be to get rid of the redundant FR locales, not Zakhara, but that is probably heresy to everyone here). Kara-Tur only needs some love; its a great setting, but too much RW history got shoe-horned into it. The right people can really make it shine, and divorce it from those trappings. As for Maztica. I could say much the same (except that it is exponentially more guilty of its crimes). To me, the best-case scenario would be an amalgam of old Maztica and returned Abeir superimposed on one another. There's enough there to make Maztica both original and still retain some its former flavor.
There is no such thing as something that can't be fixed. Except for moats that run uphill... but thats a private joke.
I would argue that what was done with the Hordelands near the end of Paizo's run on Dragon would be a great analog for what's being proposed for Maztica and Zakkhara.
I also agree that some of the historical civil marriage between the historical and the Realms needs to be addressed. And, given that Laerakond would actually fit north of maztica, it's feasable that it could even be moved entirely, adding to the setting rather than subtracting. I like this much more than destroying something entirely that the fans of 4e would be upset with.
While I'm not a 4e fan, there needs to be respect on both sides for this type of compromise. This would work, and I applaud you for putting this idea out there, MarkusTay. |
"These people are my family, not just friends, and if you want to get to them you gotta go through ME." |
|
|
|
Baroth
Acolyte
Switzerland
14 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 06:27:36
|
@eric: Being part of the playtest does not really help if one wants something akin to 2.5e with all the options of the four game options books included from the start unless you tell me that there is a chance for doing just that. :-)
@Markustay: If they really do not specify on the cosmology and the gods, it will be a huge turn off for me. I mean the gods are an integral part of the realms. How can you not include them? |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 07:12:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Baroth
@Markustay: If they really do not specify on the cosmology and the gods, it will be a huge turn off for me. I mean the gods are an integral part of the realms. How can you not include them?
Because they're covered already, in-detail.
We've also had at least three iterations of FR's cosmology - take your pick. There is no right one, because according to Ed, "none of it is true". Even if we got something brand new for 5e, that too would be mere hearsay - mortals simply can not know how the planes works. Even the deities are only guessing (and lying).
From what I understand, planes never 'touch' in the conventional sense, so the idea of walking from one plane to another is preposterous. When a mortal thinks they are doing so, all they are really doing is walking through an immense portal (which may or may not be there the next time they look for it). When planes do intersect, the results are catastrophic. Abeir and Toril are worlds (out of sync with one-another) within the same lane, and look how much trouble it causes when they become coterminous... and thats not even really 'touching' in the physical sense.
So all these connections - Gates, Portals, Conduits, 'astral seas', branches in the tree of life and forks in the abyssal river, etc are all just doorways through space-time, and they change from time to time, and sometimes all or nearly all of them change when their is an upheaval in the cosmos - what we mortals define as a 'change to the cosmology'. All that really happened is the connections were altered. Some planes may disappear, and new ones form, but who's to say those are just ones where the connections were lost, or found?
So nothing really changes, and the cosmology at its core stays the same, but its mortal perception of how they are linked together that changes. All the cosmologies we've had so far - none are right, and none are wrong. They are 'the truth' of the moment.
From what I understand from what was said, the gods themselves may see a lot less face-time, but that doesn't mean their priests won't be very busy in the Realms. The focus will be more on the faiths then the avatars.
I also think that you may get your wish with the system, or something very close to it. Their 'modular approach' seems very much akin to what you are saying. D&D has always been that way, but it seems folks lost sight of that. Ed's original Dragon articles were all about options, before he ever allowed us to share in his world. However, as for core D&D and the rules I really can't say much - I was focusing more on The Realms at Gencon. What little I know of the D&Dnext comes from their articles/interviews and the playtest. In the end, you should be able to replicate whatever era system you want with the 5e rules set (at least, thats the plan). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 22 Aug 2012 07:14:04 |
|
|
|
Baroth
Acolyte
Switzerland
14 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 08:17:00
|
Thanks for your answer.
Concerning the gods and the cosmology, I cannot agree with your points.
I never liked the idea that one does not cover something in the rules or in a setting book for in-game reasons because the creator determines what is correct in the setting. If he/she says the cosmology works in a certain way, it really does work in this way. Naturally, you can still come up with beliefs in the world about how the cosmology works, but how it really works is to be defined by the creator of the fictional world. If they simply adapt the cosmology of the core rules, that is fine, but they should still fit their gods into this cosmology instead of giving a DIY-box.
Further, it really does make a difference to the realms whether or not certain gods still exist and what their motives are. Naturally, we do not need a 100 avatars on Faerun (been there, done that ^^), but they should at least flesh out the motives of the gods and how they are using their churches, perhaps even give guidelines concerning their avatars depending on strong the player characters can get.
Concerning the rules system, the problem is I do not want a modular approach unless the core rules will use every every module by default and allow to simply ignore certain parts of the rules. If I have to add and change the stats of monsters/locales/etc. because they were created by using just a few modules, I do not see a point in buying these rules as I have to do half the work myself. |
Edited by - Baroth on 22 Aug 2012 08:20:06 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 22:43:09
|
| so can we call it Sundering:Reloaded???? |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Aug 2012 : 23:09:22
|
Yes, until Ultimate Sundering comes out. 
@Baroth - I understand what you are saying, but I think that they want to take a step back form the 'in-your-face' deities.
However, you make an excellent point in your last statement - I hadn't even thought of that. It will be interesting to see how they solve that problem. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3290 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2012 : 00:13:01
|
The Sundering: A New Hope!
The Sundering Strikes Back!
Return of the Sundering!
LOL!!!! |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2012 : 00:23:49
|
| It's when they start cloning the Sundering that I'll start to worry... |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2012 : 00:40:08
|
| The Sundering: attack of the drizzt clones |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2012 : 01:29:25
|
| Sundering seems fine it fits with in the lore after all they want to link up the existing lore and expand on those links it is cool to see lore expanded. Mind I preferred if all of the last 100 years was mystra's glimpse to the future in a god-nanosecond as the deity of time she can see all possible futures at the same time and chose an outcome and she chose to dodge. ;) |
Purple you say?!
|
Edited by - Portella on 23 Aug 2012 01:31:37 |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12194 Posts |
Posted - 23 Aug 2012 : 02:58:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by ericlboyd
Greetings,
In another scroll, I promised my thoughts on the Sundering and what was announced at GenCon, so this my attempt to begin to assemble those thoughts. I don't promise to not change my mind, of course. ;-)
Note most of what follows is in the first person, because I'm trying to talk about how I approached things when writing in the past and why I did that, not because I think my philosophy is the "right one" or to in any way neglect all the many contributions and philosophies of the many authors to this shared world.
Where I'm Coming From
===============
For me, the real question is how to do game design for the Realms. I always tried to write by the rule: Always honor what has come before faithfully, but with nuance.
In practice, what that means, is that I have always tried to never invalidate any bit of prior Realmslore just because I think its awful/bad/noxious/pigheaded/<insert adjective>. What the "nuance" bit means: You can always shape it, neglect it, twist it, or expand on it, that's fine, just don't invalidate it.
For example, I might boil an entire prior project down to "there are vague rumors of X happening over in Y", but never say "X never happened."
In other words, going the "Bobby in the shower" approach (a reference to the American TV show where one whole season was shown to be the fevered dream of one character in the shower) does not honor what has come before, and honoring everything that came before, even if I think bits of what came before were less than good, is honoring the Realms.
For me, the primary reason for this philosophy is that once you say "we're going throw the bad stuff out", there's no way to stop. Who draws the line at what's good and what's bad? I know that many of my favorite designers have all written a clunker here or there, and that I certainly have as well. I also know that all the stuff I think is a real clunker ... (I'm looking at you <censored>) ... other fans absolutely adore. If you take that approach to its logical conclusion, you should reissue the old gray box and never dare write another product.
The secondary reason for this philosophy is that in my opinion game design is better with constraints. In other words, I can make anything up if I'm staring at a blank page, but there's no particular reason to make something up in particular. If I have a fist-full of constraints (like the tangled knot of Fallen Kingdom references before George and I started digging into it), the resulting design I can come up with is both reasoned and complicated for a reason, not just because I wanted to fill the page count.
What about the Sundering?
================
So, my primary issue with the 4e campaign setting is *not* that it blew up the world, advanced the timeline by 100 years, etc. It was that it didn't try particularly hard to explain it in the context of the prior lore. I also really didn't like the paragraph in the front of the 4e campaign setting that said "time to wind down your campaign and start a new one in this bright, shiny new world." (To the first point, I also think there were plenty of past FR products in 1e/2e/3e that also failed that test.)
So, looking at the Sundering and the hoped-for-by-me 5e campaign setting. Based on the statements of the Wizards folks and the authors:
They care very much about the fans and the setting.
They are all good, creative authors / artists/ game designers who want to honor the spirit of Ed's vision.
They are trying very hard to make the setting have the feel of the old grey box (a good thing in my mind).
They are trying very hard to make a setting where the PCs are the heroes and the novels tell more character-driven stories.
They are trying to honor the continuity of the Realms going forward and they are doing that by honoring all things good and honoring / nuancing all things less good about all editions of the Realms.
Do I wish 4e hadn't made some of the changes it made (e.g. Spellplague)? Yes.
Do I wish 3e hadn't made some of the changes it made (e.g. world map changes, escalating RSEs)? Yes.
Do I wish 2e hadn't made some of the changes it made (e.g. Time of Troubles, Maztica, Kara-Tur, Zakhara)? Yes.
Do I wish 1e hadn't made some of the changes it made (e.g. Pools of Radiance)? Yes.
Are all those things able to be improved upon if good design follow? Yes.
Is the Realms far richer for having had even the parts I don't particularly like expanded and improved upon? Yes.
So, if you made it through that long ramble ... I'm optimistic about the next generation of the Realms and the stories that can be told. And I look forward to the continuing stories of Ed's vision. So I am optimistic about what comes next.
--Eric
Just one quick question here Eric. Does this mean you are back on the design team? Don't get a swelled head or anything, but basically, my feelings were once I started seeing work not driven by you, Steven Schend, and Ed.... well, the quality just started tanking (although, I gotta say, OMG the Grand History of the Realms was one of the greatest works I ever saw). Anyway, it may sound simplistic, but if you're back, I'm buying again. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Sundering and Game Design
