Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 Reboot of the Realms for 5th edition.
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 22

idilippy
Senior Scribe

USA
417 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  15:42:44  Show Profile Send idilippy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by Sightless

I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy.



This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...



While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.

Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.

Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion.

Edited by - idilippy on 19 Jun 2012 15:44:09
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
34941 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  16:06:54  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by idilippy

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by Sightless

I have always thought the term meant a complete re-start of a system. At least that's how I always used it, and will continue to use that defination when utilizing the term. And while five people that I polled personally agreed with this idea, I and eighty four others say no. I feel that a reboot would be a bad strategy.



This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...



While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.

Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.

Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion.



Agreed, which is why I specified "this particular poll".

As I've stated before, I would prefer resetting to right after Cloak & Dagger came out, but I think it would work better to start over, from the OGB. And for those who insist this would be damaging to the setting and/or cause alienation to some fans, it's pretty hard to argue that this hasn't already happened.

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!

Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 19 Jun 2012 16:08:34
Go to Top of Page

Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader

USA
2717 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  17:12:59  Show Profile Send Jeremy Grenemyer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon

it would damage setting and alienate all the newbs...
Not necessarily.

There are those of us who like the setting in its entirety, warts and all, and don't want to see the setting flipped on its head a second time for the sake of "fixing" it.

Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver).
Go to Top of Page

Therise
Master of Realmslore

1272 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  17:13:09  Show Profile Send Therise a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Therise

A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.

While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.



My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.

Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.

Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families!
Go to Top of Page

Sightless
Senior Scribe

USA
608 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  17:55:59  Show Profile Send Sightless a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer

quote:
Originally posted by sfdragon

it would damage setting and alienate all the newbs...
Not necessarily.

There are those of us who like the setting in its entirety, warts and all, and don't want to see the setting flipped on its head a second time for the sake of "fixing" it.






This may bery well be constreyed as rude, but usually when thereís a major setting change, most of those sources are in print only. Now, thatís perfectly good, if you donít have any visual problems, but I and a few friends of mine happen to do so. So if thereís an entire rebute of the relms, weíve all got to sit around twitingling our thumbs for several years, waiting until that format starts to be accessable to us. This has been true for every version of D&D that has come out. Iíve got a dyslexic friend thatís been playing since second edition, and he doesnít like the idea of of a reboot any more than I do. So, donít just make the assumption that we are all apposed to a reboot because of being new to the game, or because we are so in love with 4e. I have never played 4E, and probably never will.

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.
Go to Top of Page

idilippy
Senior Scribe

USA
417 Posts

Posted - 19 Jun 2012 :  19:08:45  Show Profile Send idilippy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:
Originally posted by idilippy

quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert



This particular poll indicates almost two to one in favor of a reboot...



While I wish that poll were indicative of the feelings of the larger audience(and voted yes, though I am certain it won't happen), I have to point out that the poll's sample size is tiny. Also the population is a fairly biased one consisting exclusively of those registered to this website, who visited this thread, and who chose to vote. The poll results have to be taken with a massive dose of skepticism on those facts alone.

Also, the terminology of the poll is a bit ambiguous, as "complete reboot" is hard to quantify. Does the poll mean a reboot to the grey box alone, will it include lore from pre-ToT sources or Dragon magazine articles about the Realms, will they include novels or lore from 2e onward into the fabric of the Realms, and if so who will decide what is kept and thrown out? Everyone reading the poll will have their own ideas on what the complete reboot means, and that will skew the poll further away from something useful.

Anyways, just piping in to get the point in that internet single question polarized polls like this one are ok conversation starters, but are far from useful as a basis for any sort of conclusion.



Agreed, which is why I specified "this particular poll".

As I've stated before, I would prefer resetting to right after Cloak & Dagger came out, but I think it would work better to start over, from the OGB. And for those who insist this would be damaging to the setting and/or cause alienation to some fans, it's pretty hard to argue that this hasn't already happened.


Ah, for such a short post I missed a very important word in there, it seems you were saying the same thing about the veracity of this survey as I was. Apologies for picking your post to reply to then, though I'll leave my point since I think it's worth considering by anyone who reads through the poll.

[tangent]It's a good thing to keep in mind in general actually, for all avenues of life. Any poll, survey, or study, from single question ones like this to all those studies that are cited by magazine articles about the latest wonderfood or health breakthrough, have limitations that need to be considered before basing conclusions off of them. [/end tangent]

Edited by - idilippy on 19 Jun 2012 19:09:53
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Great Reader

2088 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  00:45:47  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer

I don't know what you mean by a reboot, Shadowsoul -- the term is being used inconsistently in other threads.

quote:
Originally posted by entreri3478

Dejavu
This can be arbitrarily interpreted as "do away 4e" or "now, for something completely different with more ponies".
To vote on it, one have to interprete this vague proposal one way or another.
Results may also be interpreted one way or another. Which wouldn't necessarily coincide with what every (or any) voter meant.

People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch

Edited by - TBeholder on 20 Jun 2012 02:37:47
Go to Top of Page

Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer

USA
917 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  01:15:03  Show Profile Send Matt James a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Therise

quote:
Originally posted by Therise

A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.

While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.



My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.

Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.




Posts like this is why anti-continuity bled its way into the setting. You're saying people have to like the Realms the way you do, or else it's invalid. This is the highest degree of arrogance, and not something that will ever improve/advance the setting.

Edited by - Matt James on 20 Jun 2012 01:16:17
Go to Top of Page

Therise
Master of Realmslore

1272 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  01:20:07  Show Profile Send Therise a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James

quote:
Originally posted by Therise

quote:
Originally posted by Therise

A mountain of yes. With an endless field of flowers that bloom tiny yeses in rainbow colors. Light summer rain that pitter-pats "yes" in Morse code.

While a dancing Julie Andrews sings the "Yes!" song.



My answer is unchanged: YES, total reboot to 1E gray box.

Honestly, I don't even remotely understand the concern people have for the "new fans" brought in by 4E Realms. That thing isn't really the Realms anyway, it's a totally different setting. They wanted "minimal, post-apocalypse with no updating" so let them keep their lore-light setting with no updating. Cut it free so that it stops poisoning the future of the Realms, I say.




Posts like this is why anti-continuity bled its way into the setting. You're saying people have to like the Realms the way you do, or else it's invalid. This is the highest degree of arrogance, and not something that will ever improve/advance the setting.


Such a lack of civility.


Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families!
Go to Top of Page

The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Moderator

Australia
31701 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  01:50:07  Show Profile Send The Sage a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Okay, folks, we've managed to work through the last few months without hitting any of the usual "points of contention" when it comes to attitudes toward editions.

Let's just accept, right now, that not every scribe will see eye to eye on this, and simply move on, eh?

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
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  09:39:14  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I voted "yes", although I wanted to clarify on what I was thinking of when I think "reboot."

By that I mean that the Spellplague Realms, in its entirety, ceases to exist as if it never happened. By that I mean that the 5E Realms progresses a year or two after the last Non-Spellplague related 3E Realms product. That is my idea of a reboot.

I was reading another thread talking about how to make the Spellplague Realms palatable to older fans, but from where I'm sitting I honestly don't see how it's possible. So much damage was inflicted on the Realms that to undo it all would pretty much be the same as a reboot anyway. Only difference is that undoing it all would just be silly from a narrative perspective. So Mystra, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc all just happen to come back? Zhentil Keep, Halruaa, Lantan, etc all happen to get rebuilt? After getting sucked into another planet Maztica and Mulhorand return? That sort of thing would be absolutely ridiculous. You may as well cut out the middleman and just retcon out the 4E Realms in its entirety rather than have that blight on your continuity.

Not to mention that, continuing on from the 4E Realms, you're still stuck in that a lot of the great characters and things about the Realms are still firmly stuck a century in the past. I don't know about anyone else, but one of the developments I liked was having Alusair as regent of Cormyr, but that plotline was completely obliterated with the time jump. And she's just one of many, many NPC's who're gone from the setting because of the time jump.

So yes, I vote for retconning out the 4E Realms in its entirety. It's not as if it'd be a hard thing to do. Exactly how much material was published for the Spellplague Realms throughout 4E's lifespan, anyway? Four books? Five? Far more than that was made obsolete by WotC when they decided on the Spellplague. If they had no problem negating several dozen books then I don't see why negating three setting books, one adventure, and a handful of DDI articles would be an issue.

I'm sure there're some 4E Realms fan they'd anger, too, but how many could there possibly be? If there were that many then one imagines that we would've seen more 4E Realms books published, but aside from the original offering all they published was Neverwinter. If there were very many than WotC should be breathlessly excited about all the campaign settings books they're going to be publishing for the Spellplague Realms with the advent of 5E, but they're not doing that. So again I ask, how many Spellplague Realms fans could there be? How many actual diehard fans could there possibly be, at least in comparison to the 1E-3E Realms fans who were infuriated by the 4E Realms changes and would gladly come back if WotC were to excise the Spellplague from the history of the Realms?

So yes, retcon, retcon, and retcon some more until the Spellplague is nothing more then a terrible, terrible dream Bob Newhart had one night.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."

Edited by - Venger on 20 Jun 2012 09:42:58
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3478 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  10:44:22  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Venger

I voted "yes", although I wanted to clarify on what I was thinking of when I think "reboot."

By that I mean that the Spellplague Realms, in its entirety, ceases to exist as if it never happened. By that I mean that the 5E Realms progresses a year or two after the last Non-Spellplague related 3E Realms product. That is my idea of a reboot.

I was reading another thread talking about how to make the Spellplague Realms palatable to older fans, but from where I'm sitting I honestly don't see how it's possible. So much damage was inflicted on the Realms that to undo it all would pretty much be the same as a reboot anyway. Only difference is that undoing it all would just be silly from a narrative perspective. So Mystra, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc all just happen to come back? Zhentil Keep, Halruaa, Lantan, etc all happen to get rebuilt? After getting sucked into another planet Maztica and Mulhorand return? That sort of thing would be absolutely ridiculous. You may as well cut out the middleman and just retcon out the 4E Realms in its entirety rather than have that blight on your continuity.

Not to mention that, continuing on from the 4E Realms, you're still stuck in that a lot of the great characters and things about the Realms are still firmly stuck a century in the past. I don't know about anyone else, but one of the developments I liked was having Alusair as regent of Cormyr, but that plotline was completely obliterated with the time jump. And she's just one of many, many NPC's who're gone from the setting because of the time jump.

So yes, I vote for retconning out the 4E Realms in its entirety. It's not as if it'd be a hard thing to do. Exactly how much material was published for the Spellplague Realms throughout 4E's lifespan, anyway? Four books? Five? Far more than that was made obsolete by WotC when they decided on the Spellplague. If they had no problem negating several dozen books then I don't see why negating three setting books, one adventure, and a handful of DDI articles would be an issue.




As much as I'd love a reboot to 1374 DR, it doesn't look like a fair choice to me. That is not for the ones who screamed ''OMG QQ too much lore'', but for the new people who started enjoying the setting in 4e and would like to see it evolve and grow (and not just stagnate there), and for the ones who are trying to fix the Realms.

WotC has already said they won't retcon anything but, unlike you, I think that a compromise to bring at least some people back to enjoy the Realms is possible.

If they bring back Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, Mystra, Helm, some of the lands (etc...) through compelling stories, I don't get why it'd be ridiculous. The way they got rid of them was cheap anyway: LP? E and V behaved like they never would in those novels (also, they wouldn't have had any reason to join the game to begin with, given their personalities); Mystra/Azuth? Cheap and meaningless murder plus Azuth lands in Baator for no reason and a devil kills him...; Helm? Seriously, lets not even get started here; the lands? They just exploded/shifted away.

Add this to the fact that the removal of such depth-adding elements was unjust by itself and correcting all of this is the least they can do now. If they managed to pull off some reasonable plots to bring what is most characteristic of what was lost back, then it wouldn't be ridiculous at all and, personally, if they coupled this with making the Realms brighter and heroic as they were, I could be interested in reading about them again.

PS: They said that multiple eras will be supported, but I see this as unrealistic. They're going to have tons of annoying rules modules to dish out, other settings to refine (etc...), so a proper support to many mini (and not so much) settings is unlikely (especially considering how little support the Realms received during 4e). So, they'd have either to reboot or to correct and go forward and, considering what they said, it looks like the latter option is all what we (or at least I) can hope for.

Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 10:48:27
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  10:54:01  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well, like I said, how many of those people are there, really? If there were that many people than WotC wouldn't be trying to entice older fans with this whole "support multiple eras" idea. If there were so many of those fans than they'd be pushing forward full steam ahead with the Spellplague Realms and to hell with the rest. That they're trying to get back older fans tells me that their hopes of getting more fans by blowing up the Realms blew up in their faces and now they're trying to fix their mistake, but they're unwilling to retcon away the 4E Realms. Well, I say they should retcon the 4E Realms. It's like a bandaid. Best to just rip it off clean rather than peeling it off slowly, and trying to undo Every. Last. Change... which was inflicted by the changeover is just downright nuts because there were so many. How can you possibly undo so much while having it all make narrative sense? And in many cases undoing the damage is downright impossible, at least not without another event on the level of the Spellplague. In short, trying to undo the damage inflicted on the Spellplague through narrative is a monumental task, one which in the end will only create this colossal twisted continuity snarl right in the middle of the Forgotten Realms timeline. Not to mention that no amount of narrative will undo the 100 year time jump, which obliterated countless story threads.

I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Ayrik
Great Reader

Canada
7433 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  11:17:06  Show Profile Send Ayrik a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Venger

I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline.

That's no less arbitrary than post-timejump 1470DR. Why invalidate all the lore for 1470DR and beyond? Why not reset all the way back to 1356DR, y'know, to accommodate everyone who rejected the ToT and rules-based-lore inflicted on the Realms with AD&D 2E?

It's been said many times before, in fact by some of the Realms designers/authors (in this scroll and in several others, if you search), that the retcon will not be retconned away. Expect the Spellplague and *all existing lore* to remain reasonably intact. You may not like it, you may not like it all, you might even reject it entirely, too bad ... but it is the most "realistic" expectation.

[/Ayrik]

Edited by - Ayrik on 20 Jun 2012 11:22:31
Go to Top of Page

Thauranil
Master of Realmslore

India
1591 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  11:30:58  Show Profile Send Thauranil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think a reboot will be a terrible idea. its just not realistic and will alienate new users, who have no interest or knowledge of the
" good old days" of 1e or 2e or whatever. There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale.
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  11:45:32  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
That's no less arbitrary than post-timejump 1470DR. Why invalidate all the lore for 1470DR and beyond? Why not reset all the way back to 1356DR, y'know, to accommodate everyone who rejected the ToT and rules-based-lore inflicted on the Realms with AD&D 2E?


Because A) The 2E changes were far more widely accepted, and B) Doing so would invalidate dozens of books, whereas retconning the 4E Realms would invalidate a grand total of four game books, one of which is an adventure?

quote:
It's been said many times before, in fact by some of the Realms designers/authors (in this scroll and in several others, if you search), that the retcon will not be retconned away. Expect the Spellplague and *all existing lore* to remain reasonably intact. You may not like it, you may not like it all, you might even reject it entirely, too bad ... but it is the most "realistic" expectation.



In which case the most realistic expectation for me is that I'll continue to ignore their Realms and all related products they publish as I have for the entire duration of 4E.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3478 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  11:50:20  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik

quote:
Originally posted by Venger

I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline.

That's no less arbitrary than post-timejump 1470DR. Why invalidate all the lore for 1470DR and beyond? Why not reset all the way back to 1356DR, y'know, to accommodate everyone who rejected the ToT and rules-based-lore inflicted on the Realms with AD&D 2E?

It's been said many times before, in fact by some of the Realms designers/authors (in this scroll and in several others, if you search), that the retcon will not be retconned away. Expect the Spellplague and *all existing lore* to remain reasonably intact. You may not like it, you may not like it all, you might even reject it entirely, too bad ... but it is the most "realistic" expectation.



Yes, they've already made their choice. No retcon or reboot. But if they really want to get some of the old people back, they'll have to get some of the old elements back, i.e. : restore some of what was lost.

@ Venger.
quote:
Well, like I said, how many of those people are there, really? If there were that many people than WotC wouldn't be trying to entice older fans with this whole "support multiple eras" idea. If there were so many of those fans than they'd be pushing forward full steam ahead with the Spellplague Realms and to hell with the rest. That they're trying to get back older fans tells me that their hopes of getting more fans by blowing up the Realms blew up in their faces and now they're trying to fix their mistake, but they're unwilling to retcon away the 4E Realms. Well, I say they should retcon the 4E Realms. It's like a bandaid. Best to just rip it off clean rather than peeling it off slowly, and trying to undo Every. Last. Change... which was inflicted by the changeover is just downright nuts because there were so many. How can you possibly undo so much while having it all make narrative sense? And in many cases undoing the damage is downright impossible, at least not without another event on the level of the Spellplague. In short, trying to undo the damage inflicted on the Spellplague through narrative is a monumental task, one which in the end will only create this colossal twisted continuity snarl right in the middle of the Forgotten Realms timeline. Not to mention that no amount of narrative will undo the 100 year time jump, which obliterated countless story threads.

I agree with you, though, that supporting multiple eras is unrealistic. Which is why they should retcon it away and move forward from the 1370's with a new timeline.


Although I'd like to see most of the changes undone, as you said, it'd be ridiculous. However, while some of the changes were just disappointing (I don't like current Thay, it's just nowhere as appealing as the Zulkirate was), others (like those ones I mentioned in my previous post) were really a punch in the face of old fans, not only because they removed flavorful, characterizing elements that they enjoyed, but because of the cheap, brutal and -in some cases- ridiculous way they did so. Considering that they won't retcon anything, correcting these errors is what they have to do and it's not going to be ridiculous.

As for the fans, yes they *may* be few (we don't actually know), but why deprive them of what they like when a compromise could be possible? You may say that such a thing was possible before, and that's true (and it would have been the best route to take, presenting lore in different more accessible way, reducing in power the so hated good guys and not eliminating them, keeping the deities but relegating them to appropriate sourcebooks/articles and stuff like that which would have made the Realmslore not intimidating at all for the ''fresh blood'' that the setting apparently needed), but just because it didn't happen, it doesn't mean they have to repeat the same mistake now.

When they started killing off things for NO reason (in setting, that is), I felt like they were telling the fans who enjoyed them: ''We don't want you anymore, so we're destroying what you like of this setting to make it palatable to the ones who dislike it. Go take a hike'' and for this reason I decided to not buy ANYTHING (not only FR related products) from WotC, because I deemed them not trustworthy and not respectable. If they repeated the same error now, paradoxically, I'd just keep not buying anything from them and ''boycotting'' them, even tho I like the Old Realms, because they'd show me that I was right about them not being a respectable company.

From a more practical PoV, now they're in the same situation they were before: trash loyal customers for an uncertain number of ''new'' buyers, or try to appeal to both? They chose the latter, now it's time to see if they'll be able to respect their promises.

Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 13:27:53
Go to Top of Page

Tarlyn
Learned Scribe

USA
313 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  11:54:21  Show Profile Send Tarlyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
You may not like it, you may not like it all, you might even reject it entirely, too bad ... but it is the most "realistic" expectation.

While it does seem a forgone conclusion that the current timeline is going to be continued, people might as well vent their frustrations. It is better to have someone campaigning to change the realms than another person giving up on it.


quote:
Originally posted by Wooley Rupert
And for those who insist this would be damaging to the setting and/or cause alienation to some fans, it's pretty hard to argue that this hasn't already happened.

I think the flame throwers of Therise and Matt James did a fair job of showing of the grand divide between fans. In my opinion, the debate should be framed around what move can keep / attract the most people. Unfortunately, do to the aggressiveness in which the 4e realms design team pursued creating the gap, I don't think that you can create one compromise setting that includes the flavor and feel of both pre-4e and 4e realms. No matter what decision is made, someone is likely to not get what they want.

Tarlyn Embersun
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3478 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  12:10:07  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil

I think a reboot will be a terrible idea. its just not realistic and will alienate new users, who have no interest or knowledge of the
" good old days" of 1e or 2e or whatever. There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale.



It's fantasy. High fantasy. Realistic is a word out of place there. Besides, overwhelming evil is not realistic, PoL influence bleeding over the FR is not appropriate for such a setting.

I like the ''shades of gray'' approach to characters (and I deem it necessary to make an interesting villain, and not just an idiotic -sorry it is- ''for powah'' trivial and boring foe, with no motivation at all), but there have to be some people/deity/monster/whatever who serve as inspiring shining beacons.

Good and evil need to be balanced, if there's some evil it should have good counterparts. A setting where people who can only hope to passively resist to evil factions/deities/overlords... (especially when they are the ''evulz'' I talked about before, which is most of the cases) and never bring the fight to them is boring to me. If I wanted this, I'd go play Warhammer (which is actually a cool setting, just not where I'd RP in) or something, not the FR.

Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 12:14:43
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  12:30:14  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
From a more practical PoV, now they're in the same situation they were before: trash loyal customers for an uncertain number of ''new'' buyers, or try to appeal to both?


Well, I wouldn't call the number uncertain. The number's pretty certain, as they should know how many people purchased 3E Forgotten Realms material versus how many people purchased 4E Forgotten Realms material. If they published a campaign setting book which was a reasonable continuation of the 3E Realms than they could reasonably assume that the numbers of people who'd purchase it would be comparable to the number of people who purchased the 3E Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.

quote:
Although I'd like to see most of the changes undone, as you said, it'd be ridiculous. ... Considering that they won't retcon anything, correcting these errors is what they have to do and it's not going to be ridiculous.


I'm not sure what you're getting at here, since you say it'll be ridiculous and then say it won't be ridiculous. There's no way "correcting" those errors won't be ridiculous, though, because there're just so many errors that cleaning them all up, or even a portion of them, will just be a massive continuity snarl of epic proportions.

First off, the gods. Exactly how many gods are going to need to be resurrected? What kind of story can be devised to justify that many gods from so many disparate pantheons coming back to life? Will Mystra, Helm, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc be brought back separately, or will they be brought back in the same story?

Then how do you handle the gods who were merged? Do they stay merged, or do we discover that Gruumsh really isn't Talos, Selune really isn't Sehanine, Sune really isn't Hanali Celanil, Lathander really isn't Amaunator, and so on?

How do you bring Lantan back without a RSE? That country can't just spring back up out of the waves as if nothing happened. Even if the water's recede and gnomes and humans start moving back in, it'll take time for it to be repopulated and all their secrets to be rediscovered (And another huge time jump is certainly the last thing we need). How do you bring back Halruaa and Luiren without RSE events, too, seeing as how they're both drowned (For the record, I've used Luiren in my campaigns)?

How do you bring back Zhentil Keep (Which was one of my favorite things about the Realms and one of the things which defined the Realms for me) when it's been gone a hundred years? At least when it was first reduced to ruins its rebuilding made sense as a portion of the city and its people still survived and were fighting to reclaim the rest of the city, which they eventually did. But here that continuity is gone as the people are all gone and have been dead for a century. All that's there now are squatters, pirates, and bandits. Hardly the foundations for a new Zhentil Keep, as they'll just be Zhentil Keep in name and not in reality (Incidentally, I found that extremely frustrating. I liked having the Shades return, but NOT at the expense of Zhentil Keep. More variety in villains is always great, as well as villains who're opposed to each other. Having the Shades just arbitrarily annihilate Zhentil Keep, though, just flat out sucked).

And what kind of sense does it make to have a nation centered on the worship of Torm out in the west (who by rights should be worshipping Amaunator, given that second sun business) instead of the new nation which now has Tantras as its capital city?

And I don't even know where to start with Mulhorand, Unther, Tymanther, and Akanul...

And that's just a start. I could go on, but after four years, I haven't given the Spellplague Realms any thought and have forgotten a ton of the issues I had with it. I can probably remember some of the more nitty gritty details, though, should I start rooting around again, though I'd rather not. I was pretty happy forgetting the details of the Spellplague Realms and I would like to continue forgetting.

quote:
There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale.


Comparing the Spellplague Realms to Game of Thrones is an insult to Game of Thrones.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."

Edited by - Venger on 20 Jun 2012 12:47:09
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  12:34:42  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
If I wanted this, I'd go play Warhammer (which is actually a cool setting, just not where I'd RP in) or something, not the FR.


Agreed. And you know what? Settings like those do appeal to me. I love the setting for Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay, I also adore the Midnight setting from Fantasy Flight. Forgotten Realms, however, is not those settings nor should it be, and it's foolish to demand that every single setting conform to a certain theme. What's the point of having multiple settings if they're all the same thing? If that's the sort of thing that appeals to you then by all means, go play in campaign settings that're tailor made to that and were built on those assumptions. But stop trying to force a square peg into a round hole by taking the Forgotten Realms and making it conform to the flavor of the month, because that's the best way to ensure that the setting will die for good.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  12:43:40  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
While it does seem a forgone conclusion that the current timeline is going to be continued, people might as well vent their frustrations. It is better to have someone campaigning to change the realms than another person giving up on it.


Yep. If you prefer I continue to not spend money on the Forgotten Realms, then I'll go ahead and not spend any more money on it. But if someone's going to ask what your preferences are, such as in this thread, then yes, I'm going to say what my preferences are. And my preference is for the Spellplague Realms to be expunged from canon completely.

quote:
I think the flame throwers of Therise and Matt James did a fair job of showing of the grand divide between fans. In my opinion, the debate should be framed around what move can keep / attract the most people. Unfortunately, do to the aggressiveness in which the 4e realms design team pursued creating the gap, I don't think that you can create one compromise setting that includes the flavor and feel of both pre-4e and 4e realms. No matter what decision is made, someone is likely to not get what they want.


I agree with you. Anybody who thinks that there's a perfect compromise which will make everybody happy is only kidding themselves. Either A) Any changes they make in the 5E Realms won't go far enough to get back the old fans, or B) They may go too far and alienate the 4E fans. So the only question, then, is which fanbase can WotC live without? My theory is that the 4E Realms fans, the ones who're absolutely diehard about the Spellplague Realms and nothing else, aren't enough to hang their hat on. If they were then WotC wouldn't need to bother with this multi-era support strategy going into 5E. In which case I say they should be the ones getting the short end of the stick, especially since they have the least to lose. Four years, four books? That's hardly an investment worth getting into a twist over, at least in comparison to 20 years and over a hundred books. If the 3E style Realms isn't to your taste then go play Eberron, or go check out Midnight and Warhammer Fantasy. I want my old Forgotten Realms back.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3478 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  13:00:29  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Venger

quote:
Although I'd like to see most of the changes undone, as you said, it'd be ridiculous. ... Considering that they won't retcon anything, correcting these errors is what they have to do and it's not going to be ridiculous.


I'm not sure what you're getting at here, since you say it'll be ridiculous and then say it won't be ridiculous. There's no way "correcting" those errors won't be ridiculous, though, because there're just so many errors that cleaning them all up, or even a portion of them, will just be a massive continuity snarl of epic proportions.

First off, the gods. Exactly how many gods are going to need to be resurrected? What kind of story can be devised to justify that many gods from so many disparate pantheons? Will Mystra, Helm, Azuth, Vhaeraun, Eilistraee, etc be brought back separately, or will they be brought back in the same story?

Then how do you handle the gods who were merged? Do they stay merged, or do we discover that Gruumsh really isn't Talos, Selune really isn't Sehanine, Sune really isn't Hanali Celanil, Lathander really isn't Amaunator, and so on?

How do you bring Lantan back without a RSE? That country can't just spring back up out of the waves as if nothing happened. Even if the water's recede and gnomes and humans start moving back in, it'll take time for it to be repopulated and all their secrets to be rediscovered (And another huge time jump is certainly the last thing we need). How do you bring back Halruaa and Luiren without RSE events, too, seeing as how they're both drowned (For the record, I've used Luiren in my campaigns)?

How do you bring back Zhentil Keep (Which was one of my favorite things about the Realms and one of the things which defined the Realms for me) when it's been gone a hundred years? At least when it was first reduced to ruins its rebuilding made sense as a portion of the city and its people still survived and were fighting to reclaim the rest of the city, which they eventually did. But here that continuity is gone as the people are all gone and have been dead for a century. All that's there now are squatters, pirates, and bandits. Hardly the foundations for a new Zhentil Keep, as they'll just be Zhentil Keep in name and not in reality (Incidentally, I found that extremely frustrating. I liked having the Shades return, but NOT at the expense of Zhentil Keep. More variety in villains is always great, as well as villains who're opposed to each other. Having the Shades just arbitrarily annihilate Zhentil Keep, though, just flat out sucked).

And what kind of sense does it make to have a nation centered on the worship of Torm out in the west (who by rights should be worshipping Amaunator, given that second sun business) instead of the new nation which now has Tantras as its capital city?

And I don't even know where to start with Mulhorand, Unther, Tymanther, and Akanul...

And that's just a start. I could go on, but after four years, I haven't given the Spellplague Realms any thought and have forgotten a ton of the issues I had with it. I can probably remember some of the more nitty gritty details, though, should I start rooting around again, though I'd rather not. I was pretty happy forgetting the details of the Spellplague Realms and I would like to continue forgetting.




What I meant is what I wrote between the two phrases you quoted. Some changes are ''doomed'' to stand. You're totally right about them: a reversal would have to rely on overly complex artifices to be ''reasonable''. Others can be reasonably undone and should be got rid of. Some of the deities you mentioned, for example, are already in the works: Mystra and Helm in novels, Eilistraee and Vhaeraun (probably) in a sourcebook coming out shortly, with different stories for each of them.

The exploded lands: well, look at the One Realms(...) thread: people are trying to propose non ridiculous events that would bring back some of them there. So it may be possible. Or their destruction could even be retconned away. I wouldn't mind this particular fact, tbh (even tho they said No retcons). None worked on destroying things, so nothing would be lost this way. Same as the merged deities.

I dislike what happened to the Realms too and I agree with you that some (many) things are obviously impossible to reconcile without a retcon. I'm giving my opinion about what WotC could do to appeal as many people as they can, considering that they've already made their choice.

However (again, keeping in mind that WotC has already chosen the route to take), I think that restoring some of the characterizing old elements (what is reasonably possible) and getting rid of the grimness that appears to envelop the Realms after the Plague could make them a decent place (IMO, at least) to read about, or even to play in again.

Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 13:33:41
Go to Top of Page

Thauranil
Master of Realmslore

India
1591 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  15:09:05  Show Profile Send Thauranil a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil

I think a reboot will be a terrible idea. its just not realistic and will alienate new users, who have no interest or knowledge of the
" good old days" of 1e or 2e or whatever. There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale.



It's fantasy. High fantasy. Realistic is a word out of place there. Besides, overwhelming evil is not realistic, PoL influence bleeding over the FR is not appropriate for such a setting.

I like the ''shades of gray'' approach to characters (and I deem it necessary to make an interesting villain, and not just an idiotic -sorry it is- ''for powah'' trivial and boring foe, with no motivation at all), but there have to be some people/deity/monster/whatever who serve as inspiring shining beacons.

Good and evil need to be balanced, if there's some evil it should have good counterparts. A setting where people who can only hope to passively resist to evil factions/deities/overlords... (especially when they are the ''evulz'' I talked about before, which is most of the cases) and never bring the fight to them is boring to me. If I wanted this, I'd go play Warhammer (which is actually a cool setting, just not where I'd RP in) or something, not the FR.


Well whether the power of evil is overwhelming is debatable as most evil factions are busy trying to destroy each other, but even if that is so then it only helps to make your stories more epic, a candle in the darkness kind of thing. I am not saying the realms need to turn into a warhammer clone only pointing out possibilities, also the setting may be in a fantasy land but the people in it are Humans or elfs or whatever and thus sentient beings capable of both good and evil and this needs to be acknowledged .Otherwise they are simply caricatures , empty virtuous or evil statues fighting each other.
Go to Top of Page

Irennan
Great Reader

Italy
3478 Posts

Posted - 20 Jun 2012 :  15:17:18  Show Profile Send Irennan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil

quote:
Originally posted by Irennan

quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil

I think a reboot will be a terrible idea. its just not realistic and will alienate new users, who have no interest or knowledge of the
" good old days" of 1e or 2e or whatever. There nothing wrong with 4e , its made the setting more realistic. People today are not interested in shining knights and noble paladins, morally ambiguous characters are more popular. Look at Games of Thrones or even Erevis Cale.



It's fantasy. High fantasy. Realistic is a word out of place there. Besides, overwhelming evil is not realistic, PoL influence bleeding over the FR is not appropriate for such a setting.

I like the ''shades of gray'' approach to characters (and I deem it necessary to make an interesting villain, and not just an idiotic -sorry it is- ''for powah'' trivial and boring foe, with no motivation at all), but there have to be some people/deity/monster/whatever who serve as inspiring shining beacons.

Good and evil need to be balanced, if there's some evil it should have good counterparts. A setting where people who can only hope to passively resist to evil factions/deities/overlords... (especially when they are the ''evulz'' I talked about before, which is most of the cases) and never bring the fight to them is boring to me. If I wanted this, I'd go play Warhammer (which is actually a cool setting, just not where I'd RP in) or something, not the FR.


Well whether the power of evil is overwhelming is debatable as most evil factions are busy trying to destroy each other, but even if that is so then it only helps to make your stories more epic, a candle in the darkness kind of thing.



It is not more epic because, ''realistically'', for example, the Shades (given their immense OP power) would crush your group with a snap of their fingers if you bothered them. You're going to ignore this fact (just like people could ignore powerful good NPCs, btw) in order to play, but you can't when you're going to read about the Realms. Candle in the darkness thingy is the PoL theme, not the FR's one.

quote:
I am not saying the realms need to turn into a warhammer clone only pointing out possibilities, also the setting may be in a fantasy land but the people in it are Humans or elfs or whatever and thus sentient beings capable of both good and evil and this needs to be acknowledged .Otherwise they are simply caricatures , empty virtuous or evil statues fighting each other


No, as I said, shades of gray are fine on most characters (and especially on villains, given that ''for powah'' is often the best motivation for their actions). But some shining beacons, people/deities/monsters/whatever who can actively oppose evil, fight for a valuable goal and not just look at their own interests (which is not empty virtue at all) don't hurt the setting and are even needed in a high fantasy one. Again, balance is needed.

Edited by - Irennan on 20 Jun 2012 15:24:03
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 22 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2021 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000