| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 09:50:00
|
I just finished reading Silverfall because it's been like a decade since I read it. Lost my copy years ago sadly. OK, so there's a spot in there where a Red Wizard talks about table magic. Here's an excerpt:
"A single table magic, if it was intricate enough
and unflawed, could lash out like the spells of a dozen arch-wizards acting at once. Some would even
outlast their first awakening, and respond to what had aroused them to lash out anew in specific, aimed
ways. As many as seven of these could be hung on the edge of being unleashed, carried unseen and
untouchable—so long as their tables, hidden elsewhere, remained undisturbed—as single words or
symbols in a caster's mind, or in an innocent-looking bone token or earring."
If Halruaa is put back in, I'd like to see this be a big portion of their power. It's interesting, mysterious and most of all unique and not something I think I've ever seen in published Realmslore. It's from the mouth of the Greenwood, err pen, but still it's canon, just depends on how widespread it would be. Pretty cool and wanted to see what others thought. This feels like it could be developed into something awesome like the lore of 2E days. |
 |
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 10:21:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
2) The Shining South (specifically Dambrath): Near as I can tell, the Shining South sourcebook just sold very poorly, so the powers that be decided it wasn't a viable locale to focus upon, or that it needed a substantial revision, or something. Myself, I think the Shining South just needs some novel love, which I think the Crinti particularly are ripe for. I myself would *love* to write a novel about that culture, but we'll see what happens.
3) Neverwinter Campaign Setting: I'm glad you guys like the NCS. This is good feedback for WotC, to "make more supplements like *this* book." I personally love the concept of localized campaign regions like the NCS offers. One of the things we discussed in the old thread was locations for more sourcebooks like that.
2: If you were to write a book about the Crintri, I would take the plunge and buy a Kindle (as I am assuming Wizbro is going to stick to that annoying format). I dislike the entire concept of e-books, but that would make it worth the cost all by itself. Dambrath got almost as short a stick as the rest of the Shining South - very fortunately, it looks a bit easier to make the required repairs.
3: The NCS is one of the very few things that makes 4th Edition Realms worth anything at all. If I may say so, it pretty much singlehandedly made me think that maybe Wizbro is interested in making products that people will buy. My issues with it are a hands worth of fingers (with some left over), which is nothing short of remarkable considering it is designed for 4th Edition Realms.
The Shining South should get the Neverwinter treatment, in my opinion - after Halruaa, Lantan, Dambrath, and Luiren have been restored in some fashion.
- OMH |
|
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 11:49:05
|
I have to admit that I didn't read most of the stuff in this or the other threads. But when I see whats written here and especially how much is written about how the realms should be redone with the new edition I get the impression that the same is happening here as in many online game forums.
People are getting there hopes up about some small announcements and are creating such excessive expectations in there minds that there is absolutly no way the result will even get near to this.
So an inevitable dissapointment will come when the new product is released even when its done in a good way.
Does anybody really believe that the Forgotten Realms will be completly reseted to a date when 1e came out and all the other stuff will be thrown away cause it didn't happen?
I know this happened to Star Trek but I really don't think wotc will do the same mistake. |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 12:03:54
|
quote:
Does anybody really believe that the Forgotten Realms will be completly reseted to a date when 1e came out and all the other stuff will be thrown away cause it didn't happen?
This thread isn't about a retcon, but about moving forward with current continuity. But as you say, you didn't read it.
quote:
I know this happened to Star Trek but I really don't think wotc will do the same mistake.
One should be so lucky as to make that sort of "mistake", given that Star Trek was a dead franchise for a number of years, with Enterprise being the first Star Trek series since the original to be cancelled while Star Trek: Nemesis was unable to beat a Jennifer Lopez romantic comedy at the box office. By comparison, the new movie was a success, making nearly six times what the last failed movie made and getting a sequel greenlighted almost immediately. A sequel which is currently filming even as we speak. So if that's how we're defining mistakes then WotC should be hoping and praying that they make those kinds of mistakes every day of the week. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 13:58:11
|
| Well said. {we STILL need a clapping smiley} |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
_Jarlaxle_
Senior Scribe
Germany
584 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 14:19:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
This thread isn't about a retcon, but about moving forward with current continuity. But as you say, you didn't read it.
Granted, but a lot of other threads here are. I just picked the most up to date which was talkting about how the FR should continue, but this may have been better placed in one of the others.
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
One should be so lucky as to make that sort of "mistake", given that Star Trek was a dead franchise for a number of years, with Enterprise being the first Star Trek series since the original to be cancelled while Star Trek: Nemesis was unable to beat a Jennifer Lopez romantic comedy at the box office. By comparison, the new movie was a success, making nearly six times what the last failed movie made and getting a sequel greenlighted almost immediately. A sequel which is currently filming even as we speak. So if that's how we're defining mistakes then WotC should be hoping and praying that they make those kinds of mistakes every day of the week.
Well that may depend on what you want to see. The last film may have been a very good SciFi action film and many people liked it. But I wonder how many of those people where really Star Trek fans.
I am, and I really liked all the series from TNG to Enterprise and I don't know why Enterprise got canceld because imho it was a very good series. But what I know is that I don't like it when everything what happened in a setting so far just gets thrown away to go into a new direction.
In that case they could just make a new setting and do their stuff there.
So again I would see wotc doing something similar being a huge mistake. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 15:10:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You just gave me another idea (you seem to have a knack for that) - what if Abeir is really a demi-palne similar to Ravenloft? It doesn't necessarily have to be in the Shadowfel - it could be in the Astral or Ethereal (and still occupy the same space as Toril, since those are are all cotermonious{?} planes).
Perhaps we could even stretch this a little further, and say that Ao was originally responsible for fracturing reality and creating two non-separate coterminous planes that occupy the same spatial position in the cosmology. Maybe when either the gods or primordials gain dominance over the other, then Toril or Abeir becomes the dominant plane... based on whichever group of entities comes into greater power.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 16:25:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
(because what you said makes a lot of sense, even if you are just repeating what the Wizbro guys thought).
Well, that *was* the implied question: "why did WotC feel the need to wreak havoc on the Shining South?" And I just answered it based on what I think they were thinking at the time. This is not to suggest I agree. 
I like this concept you guys are discussing about another cosmic convergence. Keep talking!
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
I was about to go off on a pretty long rant about how Ravenloft does not belong in the Shadowfell, but... nevermind. :P
You can blame me in a little part for that, through my work on the Shadowfell boxed set, but really I was just trying to expand/preserve an "option" for Ravenloft in 4e (i.e. pockets within the Shadowfell). The actual "location" of Ravenloft should be mysterious and ill-defined and up to a DM's discretion.
quote:
Originally posted by _Jarlaxle_
I have to admit that I didn't read most of the stuff in this or the other threads. But when I see whats written here and especially how much is written about how the realms should be redone with the new edition I get the impression that the same is happening here as in many online game forums.
People are getting there hopes up about some small announcements and are creating such excessive expectations in there minds that there is absolutly no way the result will even get near to this.
So an inevitable dissapointment will come when the new product is released even when its done in a good way.
Well, it's inevitable that what gets released will not be exactly what anyone describes, but the point of this discussion is to get ideas flowing and stir up concepts for the Realms going forward. I wouldn't think of it in terms of "disappointment" but rather "opportunity."
And though I'd caution anyone about "excessive expectations," I do believe there's every reason to be positive. Ed's steering the ship this time around, and I think the Realms have all the potential to blossom in 5e to be better than ever.
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" |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 16:27:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You just gave me another idea (you seem to have a knack for that) - what if Abeir is really a demi-palne similar to Ravenloft? It doesn't necessarily have to be in the Shadowfel - it could be in the Astral or Ethereal (and still occupy the same space as Toril, since those are are all cotermonious{?} planes).
Perhaps we could even stretch this a little further, and say that Ao was originally responsible for fracturing reality and creating two non-separate coterminous planes that occupy the same spatial position in the cosmology. Maybe when either the gods or primordials gain dominance over the other, then Toril or Abeir becomes the dominant plane... based on whichever group of entities comes into greater power.
Way back in the other thread (or possibly the Create Realmslore! thread), I supposed that Ao was responsible for having "twinned" the worlds, and given over one to the gods and one to the primordials, so I'm definitely on-board with this concept. I do want to say, however, that neither world has to be "dominant"--at this point, there's no reason to believe Abeir is any less "dominant" or "significant" than Toril. We just know much less about it.
Cheers
|
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 17:04:11
|
I’d like to see this tweak to Realmslore from the 4E FRCG, regarding deities:
Instead of keeping with the blunt information in the FRCG that says certain deities were always aspects of other deities, re-write the lore in an unreliable way. Include commentary to the effect that “it’s thought by some sages and high priests that certain deities probably merged with each other for mutual protection and benefit during the planar tumult. It is as likely as not that someday those deities who stopped answering prayers during in the wake of the Spellplague will return, depending on the strength of their last worshippers.”
Then add to the stuff about one or more deities revealing to their followers that they were always just aspects of each other by saying those same deities revealed to other members of the faith that they aren’t aspects; rather one or more deities are just comingling with each other.
So instead of erasing deities, you open up the possibility that those deities will return or that they may have already (quietly) returned, and make it that much easier for DMs who want to use the 4E rules to keep deities around that the Spellplague might have otherwise silenced.
This thought brought to you as a consequence of George Krashos' comment in another thread about "Realmsifying" the post-Spellplague century gap in lore. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 17:35:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I’d like to see this tweak to Realmslore from the 4E FRCG, regarding deities:
Instead of keeping with the blunt information in the FRCG that says certain deities were always aspects of other deities, re-write the lore in an unreliable way. Include commentary to the effect that “it’s thought by some sages and high priests that certain deities probably merged with each other for mutual protection and benefit during the planar tumult. It is as likely as not that someday those deities who stopped answering prayers during in the wake of the Spellplague will return, depending on the strength of their last worshippers.”
Then add to the stuff about one or more deities revealing to their followers that they were always just aspects of each other by saying those same deities revealed to other members of the faith that they aren’t aspects; rather one or more deities are just comingling with each other.
So instead of erasing deities, you open up the possibility that those deities will return or that they may have already (quietly) returned, and make it that much easier for DMs who want to use the 4E rules to keep deities around that the Spellplague might have otherwise silenced.
This thought brought to you as a consequence of George Krashos' comment in another thread about "Realmsifying" the post-Spellplague century gap in lore.
Or make them exarchs. Or have the ''main'' deities showing themselves to their aspects' worshipers as the deities they absorbed, so that the flavor lost with the merges is regained.
When it comes to merged gods, fixes are trivial IMO. Challenge is writing up reasonable stories to bring back the ''dead'' ones, who were in many cases as flavorful as the greater deities (or even more than them), but that were unjustly removed. I've already given my opinion on who among those needs to be brought back. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 28 Jun 2012 17:40:11 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jun 2012 : 23:04:50
|
quote:
You can blame me in a little part for that, through my work on the Shadowfell boxed set, but really I was just trying to expand/preserve an "option" for Ravenloft in 4e (i.e. pockets within the Shadowfell). The actual "location" of Ravenloft should be mysterious and ill-defined and up to a DM's discretion.
You do realize, right, that now I must destroy you?
Whatever the case, I was so relieved when WotC decided to cancel the Ravenloft RPG for 4E. If something as baseline fantasy as the Forgotten Realms could get hammered so badly by the transition to 4E then I could only imagine the damage that would've been inflicted on Ravenloft by trying to kludge it into the 4E cosmology (which is especially irritating given that demiplanes still exist in 4E, and yet somehow Ravenloft just can't be a demiplane in the 4E cosmology). |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 01:56:15
|
I actually thought Ravenloft was a perfect fit for the Shadowfel. I had similar ideas along these lines myself (regarding Faerie, which I consider a 'realm' within the Fewild). In fact, despite my being so negative toward a lot of the 4e lore, its not the lore itself I dislike - A lot of what they did (including to Pantheons) I had already mentally done myself (In other words, in my mind I knew certain gods were just aspects of other gods... but my players didn't have to know that).
I don't want to get into the god thing again - I've talked about that enough in the past. I like the current conversation regarding the planes, and the 'unstable' transitive planes.
What if all transitive planes were like immature Prime Planes? Think about it - The Prime Material consists of an energy (phlogiston) in which float 'bubbles' (Crystal Spheres) of worlds. Planes like the Shadowfel and Feywild (amd possibly the Astral and Ethereal, and maybe planes like that of Mirrors, etc) contain small microcsoms as well - what we call demi-planes. If a transitive plane is burgeoning 'universe' (Prima Material), then these demi-planes are like world-fetuses. As they develop and begin to become conscious, they reach out and 'borrow' bits from other wolrds to finish their own creation.
Ravenloft does this, and so does Faerie. Why can't Abeir be one of these? Abeir may have been created by Ao, but what he did was start the ball rolling. Worlds (in fantasy/mythology) are sentient - they have their own consciousness. If Ao took the Crystal Sphere that was Realmspace and 'gave birth' to a new demi-plane - one currently still attached to Toril like a fetus with an umbilical cord - then that proto-plane is just behaving the way it is supposed; experimenting and borrowing matter (people and places) from other worlds (mostly Toril, which it is closest to).
When enough worlds (demi-planes) 'mature' within a transitive plane, the plane itself undergoes an apotheosis, and a new Universe is born.
This may seem to fall way outside of what we are talking about here - rebuilding the Forgotten Realms - but if we use this as a basic premise of the D&D multiverse itself, then we can canonically change (or change BACK) anything we want. No-one bats an eye when Ravenloft changes all the time, because that is within its nature. But what if we extend this, and apply it to Abeir and everything else? That the cosmos is a living, breathing thing, always changing and adapting, and even learning. That maybe the gods (the OLD ones... and maybe some smart new ones) realize this, and figured-out that they can influence the way universes are created?
Apply this to the new primordial lore going forward - that the universe itself is in-flux (and perhaps in jeopardy), and that things change, ALL THE TIME, and a lot of the time, no-one (mortal) is even aware of it (once again, think Ravenloft here).
And this just so happens to fit FR's most basic premise of all - the Interconnectivity (and entropy) of all things. Kingdoms come, and Empires go, Primordials are imprisoned and gods fall, mortals die and are reborn, in an endless cycle of change, and the Wheel of Time keeps turning. 5e won't be THE beginning, but it is a new beginning...
Oops... wrong setting.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Jun 2012 01:57:49 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 02:11:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
quote:
You can blame me in a little part for that, through my work on the Shadowfell boxed set, but really I was just trying to expand/preserve an "option" for Ravenloft in 4e (i.e. pockets within the Shadowfell). The actual "location" of Ravenloft should be mysterious and ill-defined and up to a DM's discretion.
You do realize, right, that now I must destroy you?
Whatever the case, I was so relieved when WotC decided to cancel the Ravenloft RPG for 4E. If something as baseline fantasy as the Forgotten Realms could get hammered so badly by the transition to 4E then I could only imagine the damage that would've been inflicted on Ravenloft by trying to kludge it into the 4E cosmology (which is especially irritating given that demiplanes still exist in 4E, and yet somehow Ravenloft just can't be a demiplane in the 4E cosmology).
Don't take it so hard. I nudged a few Ravenlofty things into the Shadowfelland I pointedly refused to include things that were directly taken from Ravenloft and put into the Shadowfell. These actions I took out of a desire to lay the groundwork for the setting's revival. As it stands, there are touches of Ravenloft filtered throughout a lot of 4e, and you could transplant the setting into the 4e D&D universe if you want to, or not--the Shadowfell is just a likely vehicle for it.
WotC basically let Ravenloft die in 3e (though of course there's the third-party version), so I wanted to put some things in place for raising (animating?) the setting from the grave down the road. I mean, it worked for Orcus.
I may be a devoted lover and champion of the Realms, but Ravenloft will always be my first and darkest mistress.
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" |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 02:12:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You just gave me another idea (you seem to have a knack for that) - what if Abeir is really a demi-palne similar to Ravenloft? It doesn't necessarily have to be in the Shadowfel - it could be in the Astral or Ethereal (and still occupy the same space as Toril, since those are are all cotermonious{?} planes).
Perhaps we could even stretch this a little further, and say that Ao was originally responsible for fracturing reality and creating two non-separate coterminous planes that occupy the same spatial position in the cosmology. Maybe when either the gods or primordials gain dominance over the other, then Toril or Abeir becomes the dominant plane... based on whichever group of entities comes into greater power.
Way back in the other thread (or possibly the Create Realmslore! thread), I supposed that Ao was responsible for having "twinned" the worlds, and given over one to the gods and one to the primordials, so I'm definitely on-board with this concept. I do want to say, however, that neither world has to be "dominant"--at this point, there's no reason to believe Abeir is any less "dominant" or "significant" than Toril. We just know much less about it.
Cheers
That works just as well.
I'm wondering, now, actually, just how much the street-level inhabitants know about Abeir and it's impact on Toril. The transposing of realms, and the shifting of Returned Abeir, I think would be well-known among most of the more "professional" types... but those folk running the local inn or tavern are probably only aware of the barest rumours about these places. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 02:31:43
|
I'm of a mind that unless somehow protected (some natural ability or magic) that over time, common folks 'forget' that something changed.
This was the premise I was going to use with my Nentir Vale/FR convrsion (my best map... now sadly gone forever). The folks of Nentir Vale are sure they've always been there (Delimbyr Vale), and the folks in the surrounding lands remember that 'something' was always there, but when they think too hard about it, their heads start to hurt. The curious may notice that in old records, there is nothing about the other region(s), and may even contain mention of people & places no-one has ever heard of. When the folks of Nentir Vale are questioned about these things, Most just scratch their heads and have a distant look in their eye. If pressed, they may become belligerent, even. No-one likes to think that their 'past' may be just an illusion (several movies have used this plot device).
In fact, some Sages believe that Netheril was once part of another world. 
Maybe even the Moonshaes and the Bloodstone Lands as well...
Certain Elven libraries have areas protected with chrono-magic (shielding), to keep the records intact in case reality itself is altered (the Elves are keenly aware of this, since High Magic taps into probabilities and makes changes by altering the past). Some even say there is even a secret cavern far below Candlekeep filled with 'lost lore' from people and places that never were... and that some of these tomes were already ancient when the Creator Races first walked the Realms.
Just more of ramblings... don't mind me...  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Jun 2012 03:09:45 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 08:10:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I actually thought Ravenloft was a perfect fit for the Shadowfel.
I don't want to derail this thread horribly, so I put my response here.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16698
quote:
WotC basically let Ravenloft die in 3e (though of course there's the third-party version)
I didn't want to derail this thread horribly, so I put my response here.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16698
But anyway, this thread isn't about Ravenloft, so enough of this digression. :P If anyone wants to continue that discussion, you can do so on the above link. Getting back on topic, I do have a Forgotten Realms question. I was just reminded that the Raven Queen is the God of the Shadowfell in the core setting. Who fulfills that role in the Forgotten Realms? It says Shar made it but she doesn't live there nor does she seem to control it. If nobody holds that Portfolio, how about giving it to a resurrected Myrkul and letting him set up shop there? :) |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 10:56:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
But anyway, this thread isn't about Ravenloft, so enough of this digression. :P If anyone wants to continue that discussion, you can do so on the above link. Getting back on topic, I do have a Forgotten Realms question. I was just reminded that the Raven Queen is the God of the Shadowfell in the core setting. Who fulfills that role in the Forgotten Realms? It says Shar made it but she doesn't live there nor does she seem to control it. If nobody holds that Portfolio, how about giving it to a resurrected Myrkul and letting him set up shop there? :)
The deities of the Realms cover concepts, not locations.
And per canon, Myrkul prefers not being a god. I personally think there's a lot more potential in a former deity making trouble, as opposed to returning a dead power to divinity. |
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! |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
268 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 11:06:34
|
Some cover locations. Shiallia is goddess of Neverwinter Wood, for one. But yeah, a few minutes after I posted that I realized that a Shadowfell Portfolio is a stupid idea.
As for Myrkul, tastes vary. For me, he's much more interesting as a god than some random magical artifact. Nor do I much care about his feelings. :P Seriously, though. A guy can always change his mind, and Myrkul could easily tire of being a crown and might want to be a god again. And IMO, he was fantastic as a god and could be even better if he were to be brought back. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 29 Jun 2012 11:09:07 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 20:52:17
|
In Paul Kemp's novels, we see The Fane of Shadows - a temple within the Shadowfel (then Plane of Shadows). Inside we see many statues of 'shadowy gods', most unrecognizable (from other worlds, or long gone). These statues tower above mortals, but vary in size... and the statue of Shar stands supreme, above all the others.
Going by that, I would think The Raven Queen is just one more deity of the mutliverse that Shar 'allows' to play in her sandbox. Shar, on the other hand, is something more... primordial.
But this is not why I am here... I am here to contribute to the thread, dammit! (going for 'shock value' there). 
With all the new threads springing up (including this rebooted one), and the idea of 'support for all eras' that seems to be the catch-phrase for 5e, I think I have a solution.
When 5e is released, TWO FR setting guides should be released simultaneously. Its the only way to move away from the idea that 'one era is more important then the other'.
Which ones? The two furthest apart, of course. 
Go with the 1335 DR idea people seem to love in the other thread (Azoun as a young adventurer!), AND go with the push-the-timeline-forward concept the designer/authors are pushing for (what I like to refer to as 4.5e) You immediately have a fanbase for both - old players and new - and if done correctly the two product lines can even support each other. (for instance, publish a Border Kingdoms sourcebook with NO dating). Adventures/dungeons do not have to be shoe-horned into specific eras - those could work with all versions of FR. The same can be done with Sossal, Shareach, and so much more.
I think by putting TWO setting guides out at the same time they will accomplish what they want, without all the negativity; everyone gets what they want. This will also imply that 'everything in-between' can be played as well.
And you will only need ONE Players's Guide. 
I realize its more lucrative to force everyone to buy everything (and they can slowly ease into this paradigm), but at the outset of 5e they need to mend some bridges, and I think dual setting guides will go a long way in smoothing ruffled feathers.
So take a hit in the beginning, give FR a fighting chance, and then make the money on the endless (era-free) splats that can come later. If they play their cards right, this sort of introduction could give them far more returns in the long run then one fat, all-or-nothing setting guide would provide.
I am hoping that this is precisely their plan with the "Elminster's Realms" book. Please make it about the classic Realms, and put all the new material in a separate guide for the 4e fans and players to enjoy. Its time to disarm the resentment felt on both sides. A single setting guide (or one released before another) will only fan the flames further, and 5eFR may well die at the starting gate. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Jun 2012 21:08:12 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 22:09:27
|
I don't think we need new "campaign setting guides"--we've already got those (the 2e FR guide, the 3e FRCS, the 4e FRCG). What I'd prefer is if we focus on specific locales.
I think there should be multiple campaign guides that give a fully detailed campaign locale within the greater setting--like the Neverwinter Campaign Setting. It's obviously within the Realms, but it's also a place where you can play out an entire 1st-10th level campaign (or go past it if you want).
Each one of these books should have info on running a campaign in various eras, or that info can take the form of web supplements. I.E., the book includes a "timeless" default setting, and you can go online for free web enhancements to customize the sourcebook to fit whatever timeline you want to use.
Though she does dwell in the Shadowfell, The Raven Queen isn't *the* god of the Shadowfell, no more than any particular god is *the* god of Toril or even *the* god of the Prime Material plane. Granted, most creatures in the Shadowfell worship TRQ or at least pay her grudging respect, but she doesn't rule the entire realm.
A while back we discussed the Raven Queen in the Realms, and some neat ideas regarding an incarnation/echo of Mystra were floated. This is indeed the case in my game. I don't think Ed's going that direction with his novels, though.
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" |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 22:54:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I don't think we need new "campaign setting guides"--we've already got those (the 2e FR guide, the 3e FRCS, the 4e FRCG). What I'd prefer is if we focus on specific locales.
I think there should be multiple campaign guides that give a fully detailed campaign locale within the greater setting--like the Neverwinter Campaign Setting. It's obviously within the Realms, but it's also a place where you can play out an entire 1st-10th level campaign (or go past it if you want).
Each one of these books should have info on running a campaign in various eras, or that info can take the form of web supplements. I.E., the book includes a "timeless" default setting, and you can go online for free web enhancements to customize the sourcebook to fit whatever timeline you want to use.
Though she does dwell in the Shadowfell, The Raven Queen isn't *the* god of the Shadowfell, no more than any particular god is *the* god of Toril or even *the* god of the Prime Material plane. Granted, most creatures in the Shadowfell worship TRQ or at least pay her grudging respect, but she doesn't rule the entire realm.
A while back we discussed the Raven Queen in the Realms, and some neat ideas regarding an incarnation/echo of Mystra were floated. This is indeed the case in my game. I don't think Ed's going that direction with his novels, though.
Cheers
This would be really cool to see for places like the Haunted Halls of Eveningstar, Arabel and the local area. Or Shadowdale and it's environs, both above and below ground like the caverns under the Twisted Tower. Daggerdale would be another good one with Tethyamar in it. Baulder's Gate would probably be fun, that city never seemed to get a true love treatment. Mulmaster...man this approach would be fun to see. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jun 2012 : 23:00:23
|
Yes, I'd like to see that approach too. Local campaign settings that can be used as standalone or as part of a Realms game.
That is one of the things that WotC should've done to answer the complaints like ''OMG!! Too much lore!'' instead of nuking things into oblivion. Make the areas of the Realms like independent settings, usable without much knowledge about the rest, yet connected by the FR background. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 00:56:20
|
Actually, if you read my 'wishlist' thread, thats precisely what I was asking for awhile back.
Regional books, each one setup like a setting guide, including a detailed 'start area'/base of operations.
However, the 'Elminster's Realms' appears to be along the lines of a full-blown setting guide, so I was worried we'd have too much focus on one era or another. Forgive me if that is incorrect (since most of us have no idea what that tome is going to be).
I was thinking more on this - you know, you really only have to change the details in the human areas. An Elven king (or dwarf lord, or halfling Governor, etc) would all still be around after a century. The demi-human regions are fairly static, even across centuries.
For instance, if they hadn't nuked Evermeet, there was absolutely no reason why we couldn't use the 2e Evermeet book in 4e... AS IS. (which makes it doubly weird they bothered to nuke it at all). You can say the same for The Great Rift, and many other areas.
And certain groups fall into this category, like the Twisted Rune and Warlock's Crypt. In fact, any Lich abode/realm remains static enough to be viable across multiple eras.
I'm still not sure how they are going to handle the 'support for all eras' though. If I want info on pre-spellplague Realms, am I stuck paying for all the relevant post-1470 information as well? I foresee that becoming a big problem if thats the case. You are simply NOT going to get most of the folks here to buy books containing info they have no need for, nor any desire to even look at.
And releasing a new edition - with FR supposedly as the flagship/core setting - without releasing a setting-guide just seems so... un-D&D. Its become one of the looked-forward-to tropes of new editions. Do they think they can avoid change-backlash simply by avoiding producing a book focused on the setting itself? Not sure how thats going to work out...
Are all the books going to be digital, or print? That makes all the difference in the world. I was thinking that era-specific material (like who's pulling the strings in certain areas) could be in Web Enhancements for each regional source, to avoid contamination (I use that word, because thats exactly how a lot of folks look at 4e lore).
I don't want to have to wear a Hazmat suit to look through my new books. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 30 Jun 2012 01:52:11 |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 01:39:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Though she does dwell in the Shadowfell, The Raven Queen isn't *the* god of the Shadowfell, no more than any particular god is *the* god of Toril or even *the* god of the Prime Material plane. Granted, most creatures in the Shadowfell worship TRQ or at least pay her grudging respect, but she doesn't rule the entire realm.
Indeed. It's very similar to the deity-set-up we had in previous editions, whereby some deities would have greater power and influence on their respective home planes, than other neighbouring deities.
In this case, I would assume the Raven Queen would be among the most powerful and influential of those *known* deities of the Shadowfell. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 01:55:32
|
Look at it this way - ALL planes are like the Hells, or the Abyss. In certain regions there are going to be 'all powerful' lords... but only within their own domains. Even the Prime Material works this way (with Ao being the BBG in Realmspace)
The Shadowfel is just a different kind of Hell, is all. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Snotlord
Senior Scribe
Norway
476 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 12:48:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
1) Your number one favorite thing about the Realms, which needs to be preserved or developed. Give suggestions if you like.
2) Your number one thing that needs to be addressed, for you to love the Realms like you used to. Maybe you're upset about Mystra (which Ed is working on, so take some comfort there), or you want Halruaa back, or whatever. We all have things we want fixed. Here's where we discuss them.
Great thread and initiative.
1) I love the lighthearted heroics and the rich history. I've followed FR since the Grey Box, but first became a devoted fan 10 years later with the Baldur's Gate games. Future incarnations of the setting must continue in the same manner - I can get dark and gritty elsewhere.
2) I hope Elminster's Forgotten Realms will be the reboot for the folks who want to keep to the origins of the setting.
That means the ongoing One Canon setting should include everything that has passed, including the many errors of the past. The 4e used a sledgehammer when a chinsel would have been better, so reverting everything back would be just as bad if continuity is the point. For instance, bringing Mirt and Alusair back as ghosts just to gloss over the timeslapes is a bad idea. Similary, introducing demiplanes and new cosmic events to restore the pantheon and lost kingdoms makes the 4e changes a joke and further cheapens the setting - it makes matters worse.
For the One Canon setting, I say move foreward, while rewriting the past to make the setting more acceptable for both new and old fans.
IMO the 4e setting was poorly executed, it read like an in-house document focusing on changes and gimmicks like the spellplague, rather than simply showing the new setting. A softer rewrite - like Brian James' post spellplague Cormyr article in a Dragon way back - can improve on past errors and move the setting foreward.
|
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 13:48:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snotlord
[...]
Similary, introducing demiplanes and new cosmic events to restore the pantheon and lost kingdoms makes the 4e changes a joke and further cheapens the setting - it makes matters worse.
[...]
Personally, I disagree about this point. If the devs come up with compelling and fitting stories to bring back the elements that add depth and flavor to the setting but that were removed for the sake of simplicity, the situation won't be worsened, but improved (especially if we consider the cheap way such elements were removed). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 30 Jun 2012 14:01:51 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 19:34:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I don't think we need new "campaign setting guides"--we've already got those (the 2e FR guide, the 3e FRCS, the 4e FRCG). What I'd prefer is if we focus on specific locales.
I've begun advocating for something like this on the D&D Next General Discussion boards.
But doing so has meant I've had to change my mind about integrating the new rules into the setting. I no longer feel it's best to make the Realms a rules-neutral setting for D&D Next.
I'm comfortable changing my mind because I'm reasonably confident WotC will not make the mistake of blowing up the Realms again for 5E.
That and I feel the more the rules are presented in new Realms sourcebooks, the closer the setting is tied to the new edition and so the better its chances of surviving into the future.
@Erik: How do you feel about returning the concept of the unreliable narrator to the Realms for D&D Next? |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jun 2012 : 23:29:24
|
Ive a strange question...
but what if someone doesnt have a 3e of 4e frcs then.....
thats only for I dont feel we need to re-do campaign setting books and do local settings.
It's nto a bad Idea, my only gripe with it is that there are alot of locals in the REalms.
the neverwinter book deals specifically Neverwinter at large and to a lesser extent Helms hold and the elven city and lesser than those the other areas.
A waterdeep book should have waterdeep and Ardeep's ruins.
would a local book say for Cormyr be 150+ pages detailing the purple dragons, the war wizards, notable npcs, all of the major cities, current affairs, rumors, current enimies, adventure hooks and a side section of comryran bawdy sea shanties?
|
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 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e) THE SEQUEL
