| Author |
 Topic  |
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
 Posted - 01 Dec 2020 : 23:39:39
|
Great Reader Kentinal,
I was thinking the same thing until I read the following, quote:
When the spell ends, you exit the portal at either your point of entry or the portal's destination.
. The spell is also disposable, so it's under the control of the caster. It doesn't appear to account for one way or two way pre-established portals. It merely stipulates that the end of the spell allows for exiting via the entry or exit point. If you can go back through to the entry point, it appears to be temporarily at least a two way portal. There's nothing to indicate that the portal closes and then reopens upon the caster of Portal Well exiting. It appears to stay active during the duration of the spell as far as I can tell.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
 |
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4685 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2020 : 00:21:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
Great Reader Kentinal,
I was thinking the same thing until I read the following, quote:
When the spell ends, you exit the portal at either your point of entry or the portal's destination.
. The spell is also disposable, so it's under the control of the caster. It doesn't appear to account for one way or two way pre-established portals. It merely stipulates that the end of the spell allows for exiting via the entry or exit point. If you can go back through to the entry point, it appears to be temporarily at least a two way portal. There's nothing to indicate that the portal closes and then reopens upon the caster of Portal Well exiting. It appears to stay active during the duration of the spell as far as I can tell.
Best regards,
It does not matter that the caster can exit either way as far as turning an exit only into an two way doorway. The creatures in the waiting room are allowed to choose to complete trip or change mind and not start it. It does not let any other to come in though the out only doorway.
It might be more interesting on how someone else entering an one way portal might see the waiting room and also can stop or have to complete the trip in an instant. |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 02 Dec 2020 : 01:30:37
|
Great Reader Kentinal,
quote:
It does not matter that the caster can exit either way as far as turning an exit only into an two way doorway.
Yeah, I suppose it really must be like a fast moving river, that minus the guy with a speedboat that can move against the current of the river (the caster), someone at the end just couldn't get upstream. I was initially thinking that perhaps the caster could alter the flow again as he anticipated exiting, and thereby, allow the other end of the gate to all of a sudden be one way the other way. It seems odd that at the point that the caster decides to exit from the origin of the portal, that some range of the portal is still going towards the destination, while he is taking the other half or so back, in effect for a brief moment, having their be two directions that the portal is going simultaneously. That is, unless what I was thinking about earlier is true, with the intention of the caster to depart changes the flow of the portal back the other way.
quote:
The creatures in the waiting room are allowed to choose to complete trip or change mind and not start it.
The part about "...change mind and not start it.", implies that there is some sort of time affect. For, the only way to not start something that has already been started, is to go back before that instance happened. That don't see any sort of chronomatic effect in the spell description.
quote:
It does not let any other to come in though the out only doorway.
I was hypothesizing that it remained active and effectively a conduit, and thus people would be able to go back through it. However, in thinking on that, I think the only person that could, would be the caster. That is the only person seemingly able to actively move back against the flow of that portal's teleportative magic.
quote:
It might be more interesting on how someone else entering an one way portal might see the waiting room and also can stop or have to complete the trip in an instant.
Hmm...this is really interesting. I wonder if the Demiplane of Time could/does exert some degree of influence upon the the transitive planes such that the caster would show up an instant later, even though they had the duration of the Portal Well to do what they would during the time. That would change everything about my earlier points, because if time never changed from the time of entering the portal due to the Portal Well, then your earlier point about choosing "...to complete trip or change mind and not start it" would in fact mean the action never started.
Though, imagine that the caster went in with the Portal Well, other characters went through, and then the caster goes back. In accordance with your thought that the caster changes their mind and the caster does "not start it" makes me wonder if the characters that went through the portal would go back, and anything having been done as well wouldn't have happened. That's kind of a cool way to think about that spell.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 04 Dec 2020 : 18:51:40
|
| Part of the use of this spell would be if you're followed into a portal you can trick the follower to pass you and then either come out behind them or just turn around and go back the way you came from. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 04 Dec 2020 : 23:30:35
|
Another thing about portals that kinda confuses me is that there are mentions of permanent portals that let through light in Forgotten Realms material. The underwater beacon in Deepwater Harbor outside Waterdeep is a portal high above the atmosphere channeling light through the beacon 24 hours a day. The Wyllowood in Undermountain is a forest that get sunlight through a portal.
How would this fit in with the instantaneous transportation effect of teleport? Do the photons hit the portal and travel through? |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 00:21:32
|
Acolyte Returnip,
quote:
The underwater beacon in Deepwater Harbor outside Waterdeep is a portal high above the atmosphere channeling light through the beacon 24 hours a day.
I had a couple of questions for you about this:
- What source are you referencing for the portal "high above the atmosphere channeling light through the beacon 24 hours a day.
- Did you mean to say that the portal leads to a place "...high above the atmosphere..."?
quote:
How would this fit in with the instantaneous transportation effect of teleport? Do the photons hit the portal and travel through?
Regardless of my questions above to you, that is baffling. This is honestly starting to seem like an oversight in the mechanics. Light coming through seems weird, because if light can, why not oxygen, and other elements? It almost seems like a wizard could try to terraform a planet by sending air from the Elemental Plane of Air through to some world without it, while working other magics.
Also, if light can go through, this would make for super easy way of clearing undead locations with a gate having natural light spill through. That would be super cool to handle it that way.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 00:32:37
|
Captain Hero II
Both references are in City of Splendors - Waterdeep (3.5 ed).
I'm pretty sure there were even reference to miniature portals being used to transport excrement from privies to farms deep in Undermountain. That is strange because I was under the impression that only creatures could pass through, considering the statement that for example an arrow fired at a portal doesn't go through, but rather just bounce and drop to the ground.
EDIT: Or the fact that "once created, a portal cannot be moved" (Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, p 59) contradicted by the sidebar in City of Splendors - Waterdeep, p 154, defining the drifting quality of Halaster's drifting portals (they cost 50% more to create). |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 00:36:52 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 06:07:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
Captain Hero II
Both references are in City of Splendors - Waterdeep (3.5 ed).
I'm pretty sure there were even reference to miniature portals being used to transport excrement from privies to farms deep in Undermountain. That is strange because I was under the impression that only creatures could pass through, considering the statement that for example an arrow fired at a portal doesn't go through, but rather just bounce and drop to the ground.
EDIT: Or the fact that "once created, a portal cannot be moved" (Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, p 59) contradicted by the sidebar in City of Splendors - Waterdeep, p 154, defining the drifting quality of Halaster's drifting portals (they cost 50% more to create).
Easy enough to explain both these things -- say that a standard portal can't be moved and requires living critters to pass through. However, certain skilled and knowledgeable wizards are capable of making variant portals that don't follow those rules.
And it's long been a given, in the Realms, that for every "standard" spell or magical item, there are numerous variants -- mostly one-offs, created by individual casters, such as spells that function the same but don't require certain components, or magical items that function identically to standard item X but have one additional power or do more damage.
With magic in the Realms, there's always another way to do it. |
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!  |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 06:39:58
|
Acolyte Returnip,
Thank you kindly for that reference good sir!
quote:
I'm pretty sure there were even reference to miniature portals being used to transport excrement from privies to farms deep in Undermountain. That is strange because I was under the impression that only creatures could pass through, considering the statement that for example an arrow fired at a portal doesn't go through, but rather just bounce and drop to the ground.
You are correct about the miniature portals: quote:
Undermountain’s privies are also rinsed by magically pumped or redirected water into miniature portals that bring their contents to the farms. The dung-heaps
produced by this process are inhabited by advanced otyughs and gulguthydras, among other foul scavengers. (City of Splendors, Waterdeep, p.127)
You are as well correct about the miniature sh*t portals: quote:
Unattended objects cannot pass though a portal. Fpr example, a character can carry any number or arrows through a portal, but he cannot fire an arrow through a portal. An unattended object that hits a portal simply bounces off. (FRCS, 3rd Edition, p.60)
Sh*t is definitely unattended, unless... well, I don't need to describe it. We've all had those days. I think this is definitely an issue.
Light must be considered an object. If not, then what other "things" can go through "unattended"?
quote:
EDIT: Or the fact that "once created, a portal cannot be moved" (Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, p 59) contradicted by the sidebar in City of Splendors - Waterdeep, p 154, defining the drifting quality of Halaster's drifting portals (they cost 50% more to create).
Now that is class A research good sir! That appears to be a straight up contradiction! I don't know how that is squared minus an explanation of "it's magic b**ches!**
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 06:47:08
|
Master Rupert,
quote:
Easy enough to explain both these things -- say that a standard portal can't be moved and requires living critters to pass through. However, certain skilled and knowledgeable wizards are capable of making variant portals that don't follow those rules.
I can certainly appreciate your point; however, then why were those "variant portals" not included in the FRCS? By those not having been included (and variable portals do not appear to comport with your notion of variant portals), it appears to be the "Magic Mystery Make It Up As You Go Fun Hour Wizard Craft Show." Essentially when a wizard becomes "skilled and knowledgeable" enough, they can do it? However, what is that line to determine skilled and knowledgeable enough? Page 60 to 62 of the FRCS 3rd Edition spell out very clearly what the options are for portals. The implication by your post is that there is a "certain skilled and knowledgeable" set of wizards that can do otherwise. How is that defined in mechanics, I think, is the issue at hand here. Please correct if I am wrong.
quote:
And it's long been a given, in the Realms, that for every "standard" spell or magical item, there are numerous variants -- mostly one-offs, created by individual casters, such as spells that function the same but don't require certain components, or magical items that function identically to standard item X but have one additional power or do more damage.
I can't disagree with that. There are quite a few things you can find in the Magic of Faerun that overrides spells from other places, etc. It just seems that with the importance of portals to economics, religion, and other staples of the Realms that there would at least be some degree of explaining away how these variable portals are able to be created, etc.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Delnyn
Senior Scribe
USA
890 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 08:45:26
|
Let's put the "to move or not move portals" quandary into the "The game developers changed their minds" category. Here are two explicit changes that occured from FR 3.0 to FR 3.5
Player's Guide to Faerun page 9 concerning Knowledge Synergy: "This rule supercedes the Regional Focus rule on page 9 of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting."
Player's Guide to Faerun page 79 concerning deity specific spells: "Some of the deity specific spells included in the initiate feats previously appeared in Magic of Faerun with a deity designator, but there was no rule prohibiting their use by other clerics. If you use initiate feats in your game, you should not allow clerics without the appropriate initiate feat to cast those spells."
Using Occam's Razor, PGtF took the time to spell out its overrides on FRCS material and W:CoS did not.
|
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 11:28:22
|
I think that Halaster and his portal shenanigans have been known long enough to not have been left out in the portal mechanics in Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. However I feel like +50% cost is too low of a difference to signify "powerful wizard". What if you just go to the bank and take a loan?
Either way, in those cases where 3.5 updates aren't spelled out as replacing 3rd or earlier ed rulings I usually just go with the one I feel is more fitting. Like the sea route to Skullport that I discussed in another thread. 2nd ed (I think) says "magical locks" and 3.5 says "set of hoists". Repeatedly lifting a ship out of the water would over time ruin the structural integrity of the hull, so I'll go with magical locks thankyouverymuch.
That's one of the changes from 2nd ed to 3rd that I like so much about the realms too. 2nd ed was way quicker to solve everything with magic to the point where it was almost a high magic setting. In 3rd they went back to some degree on that and ruled that some things are just as easily solved using technology. Although it's obvious that some authors of source books are more inclined to fall back on magic as a solution rather than technology, but I can live with that. Anyway it just makes sense that not every community has access to a powerful spellcaster to build their infrastructure.
Sorry for the rant. I just love the realms. :) |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 11:28:56 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 16:07:16
|
Part of the issue here is that a lot of retcons happened between 2E and 3E; 3E is when they stopped caring as much about continuity and just started doing whatever they felt like.
They didn't even do a good job of sticking with stuff they wrote themselves; the history and nature of the Shadow Weave kept changing, all throughout the 3.x era, to the point that there was a case where designer Rich Baker said, within weeks of a new adventure release, that what that new book said about the Shadow Weave was wrong.
Another notable case was in the Expedition to Undermountain book, where they lay out the magical restrictions in Undermountain and then have a NPC violate them 20 pages later.
As far as magic is concerned, I'm always going to stick with 2nd edition ideas and concepts -- 2E magic still had wonder in it. 3E and later editions tried to industrialize it. Why can't a wand have two closely related spells, as was canon before? Why were all the wizard names stripped away? Where's the odd stuff, like greenstone amulets (the thing that made me spend years hunting for FR4 The Magister!) or my beloved wand of misplaced objects from the 2E Tome of Magic? Which sounds better, a wand of lightning or a wand of lightning bolts? |
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! |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 17:26:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Why can't a wand have two closely related spells, as was canon before?
Because that's now a staff because game balance. Personally I thought the fallback on magic to solve everything became too much in 2nd. While I think 3rd and 3.5 is a bit too number crunchy at times I liked that the general infrastructure didn't rely on powerful wizards as much. Like "we need a road here. Go fetch master what's-his-face and have him cast stone wall all the way to the next city" or "Oh dear. The streets sure are dark at night. Let's get a couple of wizards to cast continual flame all over the place". Normal people in the world need a purpose too and the sheer amount of magical solutions in 2nd made it seem like it was either an abundance of powerful wizards, or the few that were there were overworked running around building roads and city walls and all kinds of stuff. I'm exaggerating of course, but that was the general feeling I got from the difference between the two editions. In my opinion magic becomes more rare and mysterious in 3rd/3.5 because it isn't everywhere in the hands of everyone.
Sorry for the derail, but this was an interesting topic too. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 17:27:42 |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 18:30:05
|
Senior Scribe Delnyn,
The only issue I see here with that line of reasoning is that FRCS is the broadest set of rules for the Realms, and it gets more controlling by specificity as you move to the PGtF and then to W:CoS.
So, if the rules from the FRCS --> PGtF become more specific, then you would expect that W:CoS would be an overriding rule upon the "core" Forgotten Realms source, the FRCS. That seems odd to me, because W:CoS is an accessory for one location. So, is it therefore something that exists in just Waterdeep for some reason, or is this a Realms-wide issue?
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 19:32:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Why can't a wand have two closely related spells, as was canon before?
Because that's now a staff because game balance. Personally I thought the fallback on magic to solve everything became too much in 2nd. While I think 3rd and 3.5 is a bit too number crunchy at times I liked that the general infrastructure didn't rely on powerful wizards as much. Like "we need a road here. Go fetch master what's-his-face and have him cast stone wall all the way to the next city" or "Oh dear. The streets sure are dark at night. Let's get a couple of wizards to cast continual flame all over the place". Normal people in the world need a purpose too and the sheer amount of magical solutions in 2nd made it seem like it was either an abundance of powerful wizards, or the few that were there were overworked running around building roads and city walls and all kinds of stuff. I'm exaggerating of course, but that was the general feeling I got from the difference between the two editions. In my opinion magic becomes more rare and mysterious in 3rd/3.5 because it isn't everywhere in the hands of everyone.
Sorry for the derail, but this was an interesting topic too.
I'm sorry, but no, that is not game balance. A staff with only two functions, compared to what other staves do, is not balanced.
What you're essentially saying here is that size matters. A small stick can hold a single spell, but you need a bigger stick to hold a second spell -- even if the second spell is way wimpier than the first.
The 2E wand of lightning had two functions -- a 6d6 damage lightning bolt and a 1d10 damage melee attack shock. That's it. A second, wimpier, shorter-ranged attack. What is so unbalancing about this, compared to the wand that only does lightning bolt and nothing else?
And that was just one example of them stripping out the wonder and making magic a one-size-fits-all, just another attack kind of thing. Stripping wizard names from spells doesn't affect game balance -- it just makes spells less interesting, because now you don't wonder who Bowgentle or Presper was.
Getting rid of weird stuff like the wand of misplaced objects doesn't affect game balance, either. I think they got rid of that one for two reasons: it didn't cause damage and they didn't have a handy spell they could list in the creation costs.
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. They decided that any magic item X would be the exact same thing as any other magic item X, and that there had to be a simple recipe for creating it that could be reduced to a single sentence.
They reduced magic to just being another tool, another kind of hammer or damage dice. They took the magic out of using magic. |
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! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 05 Dec 2020 19:33:13 |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 19:56:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Why can't a wand have two closely related spells, as was canon before?
Because that's now a staff because game balance. Personally I thought the fallback on magic to solve everything became too much in 2nd. While I think 3rd and 3.5 is a bit too number crunchy at times I liked that the general infrastructure didn't rely on powerful wizards as much. Like "we need a road here. Go fetch master what's-his-face and have him cast stone wall all the way to the next city" or "Oh dear. The streets sure are dark at night. Let's get a couple of wizards to cast continual flame all over the place". Normal people in the world need a purpose too and the sheer amount of magical solutions in 2nd made it seem like it was either an abundance of powerful wizards, or the few that were there were overworked running around building roads and city walls and all kinds of stuff. I'm exaggerating of course, but that was the general feeling I got from the difference between the two editions. In my opinion magic becomes more rare and mysterious in 3rd/3.5 because it isn't everywhere in the hands of everyone.
Sorry for the derail, but this was an interesting topic too.
I'm sorry, but no, that is not game balance. 1. A staff with only two functions, compared to what other staves do, is not balanced.
2. What you're essentially saying here is that size matters. A small stick can hold a single spell, but you need a bigger stick to hold a second spell -- even if the second spell is way wimpier than the first.
The 2E wand of lightning had two functions -- a 6d6 damage lightning bolt and a 1d10 damage melee attack shock. That's it. A second, wimpier, shorter-ranged attack. 3. What is so unbalancing about this, compared to the wand that only does lightning bolt and nothing else?
And that was just one example of them stripping out the wonder and making magic a one-size-fits-all, just another attack kind of thing. 4. Stripping wizard names from spells doesn't affect game balance -- it just makes spells less interesting, because now you don't wonder who Bowgentle or Presper was.
Getting rid of weird stuff like the wand of misplaced objects doesn't affect game balance, either. I think they got rid of that one for two reasons: it didn't cause damage and they didn't have a handy spell they could list in the creation costs.
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. They decided that any magic item X would be the exact same thing as any other magic item X, and that there had to be a simple recipe for creating it that could be reduced to a single sentence.
They reduced magic to just being another tool, another kind of hammer or damage dice. They took the magic out of using magic.
I was very unclear in my previous reply and I apologise for that. Let me clarify what I meant and comment on another thing as well (numbered and bolded).
1. A magic item with more than one function is what I meant. Not limited to two.
2. What I meant was that creator level matters rather than size. In this case the feat required to create the item puts a level requirement on versatility. 3rd/3.5 is very number crunchy and that is in my opinion the most probable reason for many such decisions. The more complex rules you have the more you have to think about balance.
3. Well, the impact of it on game balance can be discussed of course, but there's a big difference between having to switch between items to produce different effects and being able to produce several effects with one item. That's why you can't activate more than one magic item of certain types at once without the help of a feat (Double Wand Wielder, Complete Arcane).
4. Stripping Wizard names was probably just done to make the spells generic. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that you were encouraged to name the spells after famous or powerful spellcasters if you were playing in the Forgotten Realms specifically. And adding to that almost every sourcebook that came out for Forgotten Realms had several spells with wizard names in their names. But I'm speculating here. I don't know that was the case.
Either way I find it interesting that you feel like 2nd edition had more mysterious magic and 3rd/3.5 was more "industrialised" and I find the latter to feel more mysterious and the former to have magic being overused. Pretty fascinating that we can interpret the two so differently. Maybe it depends on what you played the most? I can easily say I played more 3rd/3.5 than 2nd. Would you say it was the other way for you? |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 19:58:22 |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 20:09:51
|
Acolyte Returnip,
quote:
Maybe it depends on what you played the most? I can easily say I played more 3rd/3.5 than 2nd. Would you say it was the other way for you?
Even though this was directed at Master Rupert, I wanted to answer it. :)
I played both. In fact, I started with the monochromatic box that my uncle had back in 1983. I see the magic from 2nd to 3rd to be more of a flavor difference. I see there being more science if you will, to magic in 3rd, but no less mysteriousness to it. I think a certain amount of it was clarifying. Gamer's are smart, and they figure these things out from 1st/2nd and I think they decided to address a certain amount of it during 3rd, while making a damn good bit of money at the same time. :)
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 20:15:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
..while making a damn good bit of money at the same time. :)
Oh gods yes. All my books..  |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 21:09:43
|
Acolyte Returnip,
I mean, I loved looking forward to the production release every month for what next Realms product was coming out. Too bad they lost out on that revenue. Tsk, tsk.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Delnyn
Senior Scribe
USA
890 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 21:16:12
|
If a magical event could happen somewhere in Toril, then given all the same conditions, it could happen anywhere on Toril. The absense or presense of all necessary and sufficient conditions overrides the question of global vs. local. The so-called local exceptions have active conditions not available elsewhere.
Also, Occam's razor in my example translates to: How much proofreading will an editor and crew perform or can afford on a sourcebook? EDIT: Therefore, t designers may have been in too much of a rush to explicitly spell out the override of FRCS.
quote:
Originally posted by cpthero2
Senior Scribe Delnyn,
The only issue I see here with that line of reasoning is that FRCS is the broadest set of rules for the Realms, and it gets more controlling by specificity as you move to the PGtF and then to W:CoS.
So, if the rules from the FRCS --> PGtF become more specific, then you would expect that W:CoS would be an overriding rule upon the "core" Forgotten Realms source, the FRCS. That seems odd to me, because W:CoS is an accessory for one location. So, is it therefore something that exists in just Waterdeep for some reason, or is this a Realms-wide issue?
Best regards,
|
Edited by - Delnyn on 05 Dec 2020 21:41:48 |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 21:19:20
|
Delnyn
If you create for such a vast work as the Forgotten Realms you'd assume they had some rules set down, documented and readily available on file, to keep everything consistent. :)
EDIT: I'm not complaining though. If everything was crystal clear we would have less things to discuss. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
Edited by - Returnip on 05 Dec 2020 21:20:15 |
|
|
|
Delnyn
Senior Scribe
USA
890 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 21:47:32
|
It takes time, effort and money to keep things consistent across editions and across accretion of history. WoTC seems to lacking some or all three of the above factors. Maybe if Wizards and Hasbro offered a lucrative contract to retain people like our esteemed community of scribes, there would not be these discrepancies.
So no, I do not casually assume everything was well documented and readily available.
quote:
Originally posted by Returnip
Delnyn
If you create for such a vast work as the Forgotten Realms you'd assume they had some rules set down, documented and readily available on file, to keep everything consistent. :)
EDIT: I'm not complaining though. If everything was crystal clear we would have less things to discuss.
[ |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 22:06:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Delnyn
It takes time, effort and money to keep things consistent across editions and across accretion of history. WoTC seems to lacking some or all three of the above factors. Maybe if Wizards and Hasbro offered a lucrative contract to retain people like our esteemed community of scribes, there would not be these discrepancies.
So no, I do not casually assume everything was well documented and readily available.
Yeah, that was sort of my point. Some of it weaves beautifully together no doubt. While other things just doesn't add up. It's hard work. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 23:55:23
|
Senior Scribe Delnyn,
quote:
If a magical event could happen somewhere in Toril, then given all the same conditions, it could happen anywhere on Toril. The absense or presense of all necessary and sufficient conditions overrides the question of global vs. local. The so-called local exceptions have active conditions not available elsewhere.
Great point, but at the same time, it's these kinds of inconsistencies in available information to make sense of things that makes it both good and bad.
I can look at it and say: cool! Some wizard figured out something that no one else did, i.e. Halaster Blackcloak. However, the skeptic in me says: someone got lazy and didn't do their research. At that point, how many of those instances does it take to make that slippery slope kill it? That's my issue there. I also completely admit I have no solution to that. I think short of having Ed come in to clear things up, it's hard for authors at a certain point to keep it all straight, and therefore, it becomes mightily expensive for WotC to keep hiring these super, uber, lore authors with too much of an expertise in their field such that they can demand enormous amounts of pay. It's tough.
quote:
Also, Occam's razor in my example translates to: How much proofreading will an editor and crew perform or can afford on a sourcebook? EDIT: Therefore, t designers may have been in too much of a rush to explicitly spell out the override of FRCS.
Yeah, I've made this point before myself. Production economics doesn't go to support the validity of proofreading to the point that it all makes sense, as one would have to evaluate the marginal disapproval rating relative to those that do not scrutinize it in such a manner and determine if that dissuades enough people from reading such that they lose money rather than gain. Again, that's legitimately tough.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 05 Dec 2020 : 23:58:13
|
Acolyte Returnip,
You make a valid point there. It is interesting to consider how far an author would be willing to go to effectively stick to such a rules list, to thereby create continuity. Again, this also reduces the available pool of authors willing to do so, and such labor supply at a deadweight loss relative to demand facilitate the floor increasing to ensure that market equilibrium is maintained. I don't think they hire economists at their company to figure that out, and I would gather that their marketing department doesn't have that background as well (most marketers sadly don't cross train in economics).
I think this is an issue that could be solved with the right hands on deck, that WotC does not have on deck.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2020 : 00:00:40
|
Senior Scribe Delnyn,
Yeah, you are essentially on the right track as to what I was mentioning to Acolyte Returnip. They just do not have the staff on hand to make sense of the multiple issues coming at them. I think if they hired one or two specialists to make sense of it all, they could make the margins bear fruit.
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2020 : 03:35:44
|
Circling back to the point of the portals...
Compare them to cars. Any company can put four tires under a basic frame and slap some exterior paneling on it and an engine into it. And that's why there are multiple automotive companies, around the world, each building what is essentially the same thing.
But if you want to make something really special, something that hits 200 miles an hour and corners like it's on rails, then you've got to know all the ins and outs of how to make a car -- and how to go beyond them. You've got to have people that have studied how to make cars for years, and who truly understand all the physics involved in how cars operate. You get those guys together and let them loose, and they'll make you a car that does things your SUV couldn't even dream of.
For just about every thing you can say that cars can't do, someone has made one that does exactly that. Flying cars have been around for a while -- not mass-produced and certainly not efficient, but they exist. There's an underwater car. There are boat-cars. There are cars designed to go from railroad tracks to roads and back. You've got monster trucks and swamp buggies and a whole lot of other odd things out there.
And it's not just cars. For just about anything you can think of, there's a standard version that does X, and then a very small number that do X+1 or X+Y... You can buy a toaster that does two slices of bread -- or you can buy one that does four, or one that does 2 slices but burns Darth Vader's face into them. There are so many variations out there, on everything.
That's why it doesn't bother me to have "standard" portals and then ones made by experts that do things those standard ones aren't allow to do. |
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! |
|
|
|
cpthero2
Great Reader
USA
2285 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2020 : 04:01:59
|
Master Rupert,
So, to make sure I understand you correctly, when you say "standard" portals, are you defining standard as (FRCS, 3rd Edition, p.60-2),
- Keyed Portals
- Random Portals
- Variable Portals
- Creature-Only Portals
, or are you including others as well?
Best regards,
|
Higher Atlar
Spirit Soaring |
|
|
|
Returnip
Learned Scribe
221 Posts |
Posted - 06 Dec 2020 : 09:22:27
|
| I'll agree with that, Wooly Rupert. However, I feel that drifting portals are presented as another standard version. A cost of 50 percent more than any other standard portal hardly feels like an expert made it. How about increase the time required, add an xp cost, or make sure it requires several high level spells to cast? Maybe creating a drifting portal requires learning an epic spell? I don't know what would be a suitable cost, other than I feel like +50% is not enough to signify the work of a master. |
On the other hand you have different fingers. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Question re: one-way portal detection and analysis
