# FR Podcast is up



## nightspaladin (Apr 11, 2008)

April Podcast

FR in 4e

Enjoy

Podcast


----------



## Oldtimer (Apr 11, 2008)

So it's episode 22, but the downloadable file is named 'DnD_Episode21.mp3'... go figure.  :\


----------



## Leatherhead (Apr 11, 2008)

The player at the top of the page plays the correct episode.


----------



## Glyfair (Apr 11, 2008)

Leatherhead said:
			
		

> The player at the top of the page plays the correct episode.



And ITunes downloads the correct episode as well.


----------



## Imban (Apr 11, 2008)

Hate podcasts so bad. Anyone feel like transcribing the important details?


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 11, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Hate podcasts so bad. Anyone feel like transcribing the important details?





Off the top of my head and in no particular order:

*Red Wizards are led by Zsass (sp? that lich guy).  They're scarier and so is Thay.  The enclave Red Wizards are unwelcome expatriates who can't return home.

*They avoided ret-conning, instead writing story explanations for the changes, they reiterated the policy that FR should be able to include anything in D&D, and they said they used particularly tough fits as opportunities for creativity.

*There was more talk about bringing back a sense of wonder and mystery for old players while making the setting accessible to new players, but at the same time, they made sure that the veteran FR fan's library wasn't rendered obsolete.  There are supposed to be a lot of "easter eggs" for long time fans of the setting.

*Rich made it a particular point that they weren't trying to shoe horn every setting into the PoL philosophy.

*Most entries in the book are two pages, but some, like Waterdeep's are longer.  (Waterdeep's is six pages.)  The entries concentrate more on adventure hooks and settings than history.

*Ed is part of the merging of two worlds stuff.  Bruce and Rich spoke excitedly about his contributions to the book.  They also mentioned that he had written a 100+ page fluff bible for 4E Waterdeep, and that he was writing a novel series set in and around Waterdeep.

*The book contains a starting adventure set in Loudwater, and is designed so that you can roll up some characters, play the starting adventure, and then start using the rest of the book to run a campaign.  This is for new players who have no idea what FR is about.

*There's a fifty page chapter covering villain groups, NPC antagonists, and monsters specific to FR.

There's probably other stuff I forgot, but that's a bunch of it.  The only thing they really went into detail on were the changes to the Red Wizards.  It was more talk about their design philosophy in regards to FR in 4E.

In my opinion, it all sounds pretty great.  I especially like the Red Wizard stuff.


----------



## Oldtimer (Apr 11, 2008)

Glyfair said:
			
		

> And ITunes downloads the correct episode as well.



Yep, it is the correct episode in the file, it's just that it's named the same as episode 21. Almost had me overwriting the previous saved file before I realized the name was wrong.

Well, I can live with minor mistakes like that, as long as they actually produce good podcasts.


----------



## vagabundo (Apr 11, 2008)

I like the sound of the adventure that is included. I remember running the adventure set in shadowdale in the 2e boxed set, twice. I converted it to 3e and ran it again. It was a nice little dungeon crawl.

Loudwater


----------



## OchreJelly (Apr 11, 2008)

I know opinions on art vary greatly, but I have to say I really like the new kuo-toa art that's on that page.


----------



## Cyronax (Apr 11, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> Off the top of my head and in no particular order:
> 
> *The book contains a starting adventure set in Loudwater, and is designed so that you can roll up some characters, play the starting adventure, and then start using the rest of the book to run a campaign.  This is for new players who have no idea what FR is about.




I know the Realms reasonably well, but I never heard of that town. Where is Loudwater set, or is it perhaps written to be placed where-ever the DM want to start their campaign?

C.I.D.


----------



## Henry (Apr 11, 2008)

Cyronax said:
			
		

> I know the Realms reasonably well, but I never heard of that town. Where is Loudwater set, or is it perhaps written to be placed where-ever the DM want to start their campaign?
> 
> C.I.D.




http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Loudwater

You really CAN Google anything, real or nonexistant.


----------



## Prodigal_Sun (Apr 11, 2008)

Those Kuo-toa's look so... Anime AWESOME


----------



## Guild Goodknife (Apr 11, 2008)

Sadly not much new stuff in this podcast, although the infos about the Red Wizards sounds nice.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 11, 2008)

<shrug>  'meh

I listened to the podcast and felt their excitement about what they are creating.  They genuinely are stoked about their version of the realms, and are trying to make this version as much fun as they can.  Its also clear that they are focusing their work towards new players and GM's which for WotC is a mantra for 4E.  They admit to owing a lot to the older fans and wanting to hook in those same fans while making things new, surprising and mysterious.

But there are still things about 4E FR that don't sit well with me.

Just as the design goals for Eberron (when it won the setting contest) were that the setting had to be able to include everything that was part of D&D, FR now has to include everything that is part of 4E.  So since the game designers created a new version of the Dragonborn race, the FR setting team now had to justify a way to make it fit in FR.

They believe that the changes they've introduced flow naturally from FR history.  But in a number of very important examples (the death of Mystra and the geographically challenged Spellplague to name but 2, the changes appear to me to be overly clunky and contrived.

And the comment that "If you are an old player, all that stuff on your shelf is still pertinent"  made me chuckle.  In the start of the podcast they talk about how everything is changed, brand new and mysterious ... then claim that the stuff on your shelf is pertinent.

WotC needed a setting for 4E, and FR was the logical choice as its the most well known.   My preference would have been that WotC create a brand new setting that really highlighted 4E's system rather than changing the Realms.  But on an intellectual level I can see what WotC is trying to do, and for the success of 4E, I think its the right direction to take.

As a long time fan & GM of the setting, I see that many elements of what attracted me to the setting, and what are core to my FR campaigns have been deleted.  What WotC is attempting to sell, just doesn't "feel" like FR to me.

One fan's opinion.


----------



## malcolm_n (Apr 11, 2008)

I cut my D&D teeth in 3E FR.  I've been a fan ever since.  The coolest thing about the setting for me has always been joining up with a group in any number of circumstances and traveling the continent in search of our goal.  Most games we played spanned at least 4 regions in length, often cutting through others just to go there and explore.

This is still very much a part of the setting, not to mention my group would love to see what's happened to a lot of our "iconic" places and homelands after 100 years.  All in all, I'm very much looking forward to the newer feel of the setting.


----------



## Imban (Apr 11, 2008)

OchreJelly said:
			
		

> I know opinions on art vary greatly, but I have to say I really like the new kuo-toa art that's on that page.




They seem to be missing 2e Kuo-Toa, but I couldn't for the life of me tell you what the official illustration of them looked like. For my money (and based on my recollection) my favorite Kuo-Toa design is still the one used in Baldur's Gate II, but unless the 2e book version came close to that in quality, I'd be willing to say the 4e version is the best that's actually printed in a book.


----------



## Mentat55 (Apr 11, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> They seem to be missing 2e Kuo-Toa, but I couldn't for the life of me tell you what the official illustration of them looked like. For my money (and based on my recollection) my favorite Kuo-Toa design is still the one used in Baldur's Gate II, but unless the 2e book version came close to that in quality, I'd be willing to say the 4e version is the best that's actually printed in a book.



 I think this is the 2e kuo-toa, from one of the Monstrous Compendiums.  The style, at least, is dead on.


----------



## Charwoman Gene (Apr 11, 2008)

Mentat55 said:
			
		

> I think this is the 2e kuo-toa, from one of the Monstrous Compendiums.  The style, at least, is dead on.




It's a late-2e kuo-toa from the Monstrous Manual.

Too fishy-looking for me.

The compendium's was B&W


----------



## OgreBane99 (Apr 11, 2008)

> *Red Wizards are led by Zsass (sp? that lich guy). They're scarier and so is Thay. The enclave Red Wizards are unwelcome expatriates who can't return home.



So are they going to "explain" this change in the new Thay trilogy out?  I just picked up the first book, Unclean, and so far it's pretty good.  Is the trilogy (The Huanted Lands) supposed to be a lead in to the "new" FR for 4e, as far as the Red Wizards and Thay is concerned?

I think Salvatore is doing something similar with the new Drizzt trilogy that started last year.  One of the chapters was a flash-forward scene 100 years in the future.


----------



## Voss (Apr 11, 2008)

> Rich made it a particular point that they weren't trying to shoe horn every setting into the PoL philosophy.




Given that they really only have 2 settings at this point... what is actually using the PoL concept?


----------



## Bishmon (Apr 11, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Given that they really only have 2 settings at this point... what is actually using the PoL concept?



The implied setting.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 11, 2008)

Bishmon said:
			
		

> The implied setting.




The implied setting is PoL, and let's not forget FR.  My assumption is that the "shoe horn" comment was made in answer to the worries that WotC would force PoL on every setting, just as it did to FR.


----------



## Zamkaizer (Apr 11, 2008)

Forgotten Realms has already had so many things shoe-horned into it, there was plenty of space left in it's distended, corpulent bulk for points of light tropes.


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 11, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> *Red Wizards are led by Zsass (sp? that lich guy).  They're scarier and so is Thay.  The enclave Red Wizards are unwelcome expatriates who can't return home.



The only good FR "change" (actually, it's a "fix") in 4e. Boy, that enclave idea in 3e was phenominally stupid (and a quick boo! and thumbs down to those who supported that change). Nice to see they're going back to the 1e/2e (read: proper) Red Wizards.


----------



## JohnSnow (Apr 11, 2008)

Well, after listening to the Podcast, I found myself thinking "Hmm...I may actually give the new Realms a look."

And this is from a guy who gave up on them ages ago. There are parts I like, and parts I hate. I loved the original grey box, but just about everything since has been kinda downhill (although the elves and dwarves no longer being in decline is kinda cool).

There were moments during the podcast where I actually thought I might end up running a Realms campaign, rather than just straight homebrewing. Because it sounds like the new FR might be the perfect mix of civilization and savagery that makes for good gaming.

But in reality, I'll probably just homebrew and mine the Realms for ideas. I was already planning to partially swipe the geography of the Sea of Fallen Stars for my planned seafaring campaign.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 11, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> The only good FR "change" (actually, it's a "fix") in 4e. Boy, that enclave idea in 3e was phenominally stupid (and a quick boo! and thumbs down to those who supported that change). Nice to see they're going back to the 1e/2e (read: proper) Red Wizards.



Really? So, turning Thay into Mordor and Szass Tam into Sauron is better than trying to explore a credible economic impact of magic items on the local economies? 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies instead of "scary wizard guys in red" which they've always been in previous editions. What next? Will they bring Myrkul (the generic eeeeevil death god) back instead of the much more interesting Kelemvor/Velsharoon dychotomy?


----------



## Arnwyn (Apr 11, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Really?



Yes, really. To put it in internet terms: 1e/2e Red Wizards > 3e Red Wizards.



> 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies



Not AFAIC.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 11, 2008)

Wow! I feel so important now.    

Anyways, as far as the Red Wizards are concerned, I think the 3E developments really neutered them as a villain group.  The enclaves were an interesting concept, and they did a good job of explaining the ease with which one could buy and sell magic items in 3E, but the whole thing made the Red Wizards seem much less sinister and mysterious.

One should remember that they specifically mentioned the enclave Red Wizards are still around.  They aren't affiliated with the nation, Thay, anymore, and in fact they're now even more useful and interesting as villains and allies as they still (presumably) do what they did in 3E, but now you have all sorts of potential for stuff like the various European governments-in-exile that existed during WW2 and expatriates with nothing left to lose.



> Just as the design goals for Eberron (when it won the setting contest) were that the setting had to be able to include everything that was part of D&D, FR now has to include everything that is part of 4E. So since the game designers created a new version of the Dragonborn race, the FR setting team now had to justify a way to make it fit in FR.




To be fair, this was always a design goal of the Forgotten Realms.  It was very explicit during the 2E era that anything in D&D could be in or accessed from the Realms.



> And the comment that "If you are an old player, all that stuff on your shelf is still pertinent" made me chuckle. In the start of the podcast they talk about how everything is changed, brand new and mysterious ... then claim that the stuff on your shelf is pertinent.




It wasn't ret-conned out of existence.  There is at least one functioning Time Portal in the Realms circa 4E.  Everything that happened in previous editions still happened and still laid the foundation for the 4E world.  Therefor, all that stuff on your shelf _is_ still pertinent.



> The implied setting is PoL, and let's not forget FR. My assumption is that the "shoe horn" comment was made in answer to the worries that WotC would force PoL on every setting, just as it did to FR.




"Shoe horn" was my words, and the comment I was paraphrasing was in regards to FR.  They said (I'm paraphrasing from memory) that they didn't set out to force the Realms into a PoL dynamic.  They noted how the Realms was characterized by a number of large, ancient, civilized and interconnected regions.  They wanted to reduce this somewhat, but they didn't set out to totally clean the slate and make the setting PoL, just a little bit more PoL.  From what we've heard, I feel that they were successful in this goal.


----------



## OgreBane99 (Apr 11, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Really? So, turning Thay into Mordor and Szass Tam into Sauron is better than trying to explore a credible economic impact of magic items on the local economies? 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies instead of "scary wizard guys in red" which they've always been in previous editions. What next? Will they bring Myrkul (the generic eeeeevil death god) back instead of the much more interesting Kelemvor/Velsharoon dychotomy?




Amen.


----------



## Faraer (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> To be fair, this was always a design goal of the Forgotten Realms.  It was very explicit during the 2E era that anything in D&D could be in or accessed from the Realms.



In Realms-2008 the setting is being bent and selectively replaced without question to accommodate every rules element, when before TSR compromised, only sometimes using the Realms as a dumping ground, at others letting it be itself. There's a clear shift from the previous approaches, where the 2E and 3E rulesets were seen as imperfect lenses. That language has gone.







> Therefor, all that stuff on your shelf _is_ still pertinent.



We've been told that it isn't necessary now, without it being explained how it ever was, that the setting is being simplified to put newcomers on an even plane with veterans, and that past lore is still relevant. But not how all this will be done.







> They wanted to reduce this somewhat, but they didn't set out to totally clean the slate and make the setting PoL, just a little bit more PoL.



Rich Baker explained months ago that the Realms was being piecemeal, not wholesale PoLized. Of course large regions of Faerûn are already that way.


----------



## Wardook (Apr 12, 2008)

Out of that thirty plus minute podcast, the naysayers couldn't find a single thing that you liked or are looking forward to? 

It seems that individuals are determined to dislike the new FR setting. 

I thought that it was very interesting how much Ed Greenwood had contributed to the setting.

It appears from the podcast that Aber-Toril is his baby. 

It appears we now know which realm was forgotten.

I had always thought that Forgotten Realms referenced the fact that Faerun had at one time been connected to our world by gates and that we had forgotten about Faerun.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 12, 2008)

Faraer said:
			
		

> In Realms-2008 the setting is being bent and selectively replaced without question to accommodate every rules element, when before TSR compromised, only sometimes using the Realms as a dumping ground, at others letting it be itself. There's a clear shift from the previous approaches, where the 2E and 3E rulesets were seen as imperfect lenses. That language has gone.




Thousands of murdered assassins would like to have a word with you.



> We've been told that it isn't necessary now, without it being explained how it ever was, that the setting is being simplified to put newcomers on an even plane with veterans, and that past lore is still relevant. But not how all this will be done.




It hasn't been ret-conned out of existence.  It's still the back-story.  There is at least one functioning *Time Portal* in the world.  Just because the 4E book will assume you don't have access to or knowledge of all this material doesn't mean you can't use it to your heart's content in your 4E campaign, nor does it mean that it will lose all relevance in the ongoing development of the setting.



> Rich Baker explained months ago that the Realms was being piecemeal, not wholesale PoLized. Of course large regions of Faerûn are already that way.




And that's what they reiterated in the podcast.


----------



## Kishin (Apr 12, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Really? So, turning Thay into Mordor and Szass Tam into Sauron is better than trying to explore a credible economic impact of magic items on the local economies? 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies instead of "scary wizard guys in red" which they've always been in previous editions. What next? Will they bring Myrkul (the generic eeeeevil death god) back instead of the much more interesting Kelemvor/Velsharoon dychotomy?




Eberron explored the concept better, in all honesty, and Thay is in no way Mordor just because  Szass Tam is in charge. He's a lot more multi-dimensional as a villian than Sauron, who was basically Tolkien's ultimate evil (Well, excluding Morgoth)/Lucifer figure.

The division between the native Thayans and the expats might play out interesting.


----------



## Henry (Apr 12, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Really? So, turning Thay into Mordor and Szass Tam into Sauron is better than trying to explore a credible economic impact of magic items on the local economies? 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies instead of "scary wizard guys in red" which they've always been in previous editions. What next? Will they bring Myrkul (the generic eeeeevil death god) back instead of the much more interesting Kelemvor/Velsharoon dychotomy?




I don't mean to denigrate your point (in fact, those same points I found pretty cool), but whenever one starts having to use the words "explore economic impact", and "dichotomy" to describe a D&D setting, the setting is probably going to not appeal to the majority of D&D gamers. The majority likely wants "scary wizards," "evil death gods", and "militant demons and dragon-men" over the former; when that happens, it's probably in the better interest to shake things up a bit. 

In fact, the EXACT same thing happened in the release of 3E back in 2000. Do you remember what the catch-phrase was then over the convolution and stagnancy of both the Realms and Greyhawk of the time?

*"Back to the dungeon"...*



			
				Peter Weller said:
			
		

> Thousands of murdered assassins would like to have a word with you.




Peter's right on this point: TSR fair-mutilated the realms with the Avatar Trilogy and the change to 2nd edition, and the only thing they left intact I think WAS the landmasses. It's the same song, just a different dance floor.


----------



## med stud (Apr 12, 2008)

Henry said:
			
		

> I don't mean to denigrate your point (in fact, those same points I found pretty cool), but whenever one starts having to use the words "explore economic impact", and "dichotomy" to describe a D&D setting, the setting is probably going to not appeal to the majority of D&D gamers. The majority likely wants "scary wizards," "evil death gods", and "militant demons and dragon-men" over the former; when that happens, it's probably in the better interest to shake things up a bit.



Amen to that. I can read the business pages in my newspaper if I want "complex" economics. When I play RPGs, I want swords, magic, blood and economies that it doesn't matter if they don't make sense


----------



## drjones (Apr 12, 2008)

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> Well, after listening to the Podcast, I found myself thinking "Hmm...I may actually give the new Realms a look."
> 
> And this is from a guy who gave up on them ages ago. There are parts I like, and parts I hate. I loved the original grey box, but just about everything since has been kinda downhill (although the elves and dwarves no longer being in decline is kinda cool).
> 
> ...




This was exactly my response, I DMd 1st and 2nd ed games in FR mostly because I loved the SSI games but it has not held any appeal for a while.  It just seemed too cluttered.  

Now I am looking forward to checking it out.


----------



## Faraer (Apr 12, 2008)

Henry said:
			
		

> Peter's right on this point: TSR fair-mutilated the realms with the Avatar Trilogy and the change to 2nd edition, and the only thing they left intact I think WAS the landmasses. It's the same song, just a different dance floor.



The designers would confirm my characterization. In a deliberate shift of policy, they're explicitly and consistently substituting new design principles for many of the Realms', as was never done before.


----------



## Wardook (Apr 12, 2008)

Henry said:
			
		

> I don't mean to denigrate your point (in fact, those same points I found pretty cool), but whenever one starts having to use the words "explore economic impact", and "dichotomy" to describe a D&D setting, the setting is probably going to not appeal to the majority of D&D gamers. The majority likely wants "scary wizards," "evil death gods", and "militant demons and dragon-men" over the former; when that happens, it's probably in the better interest to shake things up a bit.
> 
> In fact, the EXACT same thing happened in the release of 3E back in 2000. Do you remember what the catch-phrase was then over the convolution and stagnancy of both the Realms and Greyhawk of the time?
> 
> ...




There was much debate on the forerunner of these boards when the 3e FR setting was announced.

Wizards actually asked for suggestions on what they should include in the book.

One of the main fan suggestions was the economics of the realms. There was also a long debate over how to attach the map to the book. 

I'm very happy with Wizard's decision not to go with fan suggestions this time.   

I hated the Avatar books, they were just poorly written. The Time of Troubles was poorly conceived, but the 2e setting book was much better than the 3e setting book. I still have my Gray Box and have made a shrine to it.   

It sounds like the Red Wizards will rock once more.

Space


----------



## pukunui (Apr 12, 2008)

I was a big fan of the 2e FR. I even enjoyed the Avatars trilogy (hey, I was about 13 when I read them!). The changes 3e made to the Realms really turned me off. I didn't like it at all. But the 4e changes are starting to get me interested again. I may not actually play _in_ the Realms but I will definitely be buying Realms products so I can at least plunder them for ideas and the like.

On a side note, I also really dig the new look for the kuo-toa. Making them look more like sinister, primeval fish-like creatures rather than comical floppy frog things was a wise design decision, if you ask me.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 12, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> So, turning Thay into Mordor and Szass Tam into Sauron is better than trying to explore a credible economic impact of magic items on the local economies?




Turning the Red Wizards into Microsoft (you hate us, but you need what we're selling) is yawn-worthy. Oh noes, evil capitalist wizards.

And when was Szass Tam anything but a prime threat evil lich necromancer, more powerful than his rivals in Thay? Never.



> 3E changed Red Wizards into interesting villains and potential allies instead of "scary wizard guys in red" which they've always been in previous editions.




Oh noes! Through sinister machinations, they might start undercutting your local magic item market and put your aunt out of business! Krunk, quickly, use your +3 Axe of Economic Repercussions to save the economy!



> Will they bring Myrkul (the generic eeeeevil death god) back instead of the much more interesting Kelemvor/Velsharoon dychotomy?




Kelemvor's cool.

Velsharoon, the "Eeeeevil Lich God of Eeeevil Undead"... not so much.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 12, 2008)

As a fan of FR and of Economics--I don't see the problem.  The Red Wizards tried a different way, but you sort of knew it might have been a cultural phase.  3e'd take on Thay Enclaves was in my mind an attempt to set up embassies for an evil empire.  

I have no problem with magic shops, guilds, or bazaars.  Heck, I think players should have some more realistic fantasy structures.  While I liked the LoTR movies, the one thing I hated about it was they didn't seem to understand how Middle Earth should have worked.  Great cities of Men should have had the various farms and villages surrounding them--not wide open spaces on moorland!  No matter how cool the battle scenes were that simple fact that any high school kid should know totally distracted me, much like how bad plots can get to you.

But the Red Wizards work best as evil cabals and a nation of slavers and dark elements.  FR has a lot of other ways to get merchants involved, and even nations better suited for it.



> Turning the Red Wizards into Microsoft (you hate us, but you need what we're selling) is yawn-worthy. Oh noes, evil capitalist wizards.




Microsoft is not evil.  (I expect better of you Mourn.)


----------



## Khairn (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> To be fair, this was always a design goal of the Forgotten Realms.  It was very explicit during the 2E era that anything in D&D could be in or accessed from the Realms.
> 
> It wasn't ret-conned out of existence.  There is at least one functioning Time Portal in the Realms circa 4E.  Everything that happened in previous editions still happened and still laid the foundation for the 4E world.  Therefor, all that stuff on your shelf _is_ still pertinent.




In what way are my books detailing the worship of Mystra or the many other gods that were part of FR's cosmology pertinent in 4E FR?  Aside from historical, its not in the least.  WotC didn't ret-con the past, they just created a new future where the past has little to no relevance to what will become the present.



> "Shoe horn" was my words, and the comment I was paraphrasing was in regards to FR.  They said (I'm paraphrasing from memory) that they didn't set out to force the Realms into a PoL dynamic.  They noted how the Realms was characterized by a number of large, ancient, civilized and interconnected regions.  They wanted to reduce this somewhat, but they didn't set out to totally clean the slate and make the setting PoL, just a little bit more PoL.  From what we've heard, I feel that they were successful in this goal.




Take a listen again.  Maybe I'm missing it, but I didn't hear them claim that they didn't set out to force the Realms int a POL dynamic.  I hard them say that they were not going force every setting to be PoL.  If tweaking the Realms to be a "bit more PoL" was indeed their goal, I think they need to take another look at what they've done.   IMHO, they cleared away enough of the setting that it looks like a virtual clean slate to me.

Just as an aside, I actually love the PoL concept.  Those 3E settings that already had a definite PoL theme (Midnight, Scarred Lands etc) are some of my favorites.  I just happen to believe that the FR we had, was better than the FR we will be getting.

Of course all of this is pure conjecture on all our parts, since none of us know what the final outcome will be.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 12, 2008)

Faraer said:
			
		

> The designers would confirm my characterization. In a deliberate shift of policy, they're explicitly and consistently substituting new design principles for many of the Realms', as was never done before.




There has been no shift in policy.  Everything in the PHB, DMG, and MM has always had to have a place in the Realms.  It's more jarring this time because the stuff in the PHB, DMG, and MM has changed a lot more than it did the last two times.  Thayan Enclaves, thousands of dead assassins, and the Simbul having been a sorcerer all along are just a few examples of how they have, with each new edition, deliberately altered the Realms to fit that new edition.



> In what way are my books detailing the worship of Mystra or the many other gods that were part of FR's cosmology pertinent in 4E FR? Aside from historical, its not in the least. WotC didn't ret-con the past, they just created a new future where the past has little to no relevance to what will become the present.




How pertinent do you want them to be?  I can think of a dozen ways in which the religious ceremonies of dead gods, for example, can still play a major part in my 4E campaign, if I wish.    I'm planning on starting my 4E campaign with Cyricist cultists sacrificing a worshipper of Leira on Blackwater Bridge.  There's an obscure religious ceremony involving a dead goddess, and I am sure of my ability to make it very pertinent to the story we are going to tell.  

Also, is there need for hyperbole over the amount of gods that have been whacked?  You make it sound like the entire cosmology was wiped out, instead of the pair of major players and handful of ancillary deities that are the only known casualties of the edition change.



> Take a listen again. Maybe I'm missing it, but I didn't hear them claim that they didn't set out to force the Realms int a POL dynamic. I hard them say that they were not going force every setting to be PoL. If tweaking the Realms to be a "bit more PoL" was indeed their goal, I think they need to take another look at what they've done. IMHO, they cleared away enough of the setting that it looks like a virtual clean slate to me.




Again with the hyperbole.  I think the part where they waxed about their respect for the setting as it existed and their stated goal to not go overboard altering the core of the setting is a pretty clear statement of their intent to not make FR a wholesale PoL.  How can it be a virtual clean slate when virtually all the core regions and power groups have survived relatively unchanged?  When there's still a Cormyr, a Savage Frontier, a Waterdeep, a Moonshaes, a Dalelands, a Western Heartlands, and a Moonsea still existing under relatively unchanged power structures and social dynamics, the slate has hardly been cleaned.

Honestly, I know we're not going to agree on this one, but I have to say that your observations about the changes seem pretty unfounded.


----------



## Bishmon (Apr 12, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> Turning the Red Wizards into Microsoft (you hate us, but you need what we're selling) is yawn-worthy. Oh noes, evil capitalist wizards.
> 
> Oh noes! Through sinister machinations, they might start undercutting your local magic item market and put your aunt out of business! Krunk, quickly, use your +3 Axe of Economic Repercussions to save the economy!



It'd probably be a good idea to tone down the overt sarcasm when disagreeing with someone's opinion.


----------



## Nymrohd (Apr 12, 2008)

As said above the core of the Realms remains unchanged. The Heartlands and the North are as they were in basis with a few changes made that will improve adventuring. Anauroch is far more interesting with the Shades in it and Cormanthor far more interesting with the elves. Plus I keep hearing about major players being killed, when exactly did that happen? Most NPCs who died, died in novels during 3e. The only absurd change to the Realms is what happened to Helm, but I trade it for the rest of the changes willingly.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> Honestly, I know we're not going to agree on this one, but I have to say that your observations about the changes seem pretty unfounded.




You're right in that we won't agree on this one.  You believe my observations are unfounded and I believe you're wearing tinted glasses so you dont see what seems pretty damn clear to me.  What can we do?

C'est la vie.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> You're right in that we won't agree on this one.  You believe my observations are unfounded and I believe you're wearing tinted glasses so you dont see what seems pretty damn clear to me.  What can we do?
> 
> C'est la vie.




I don't know what we can do, but you can pull your head out of the sand and realize that these sweeping, essentially slate-clearing changes aren't nearly as sweeping and slate-cleaning as you'd like them to be.

That's right; I went there.  I'm sorry if you want to continue being purposefully obtuse in your observations, which I believe your posts illustrate very well.  I'm not going to convince you that the 4E team didn't ruin the Realms, but it's not because we have a difference in opinion; it's because you are adamant in your view-point, and you're not going to let the evidence sway you.  It's like trying to explain evolution to a YEC, except our discussion hasn't led me to believe you are retarded, merely you have a viewpoint and you're going to stick with come hell or high water.

I'm sorry, man.  I'm really not trying to pick on you.  The only reason why I've been posting a lot in this thread is because my original summary was put on the front page, and thus I feel it's my obligation to clarify any misconceptions about the content of the podcast that may have come about due to my phrasing and presentation.  I've tried to present this clarification, but in doing so, I've realized there are people who just want to nit-pick.  They don't want further explication of what was in the pod-cast.  You may or may not be one of these posters.  I'm not a name calling kind of person, so I'll leave that one up to you.

It's still the Realms.  Big, crazy happenings and a hundred years have changed it in many ways, but you cannot look at the setting and honestly say that it isn't a development and continuation of what had come before because it is, and every new tidbit of information they give us further reinforces that it still is very recognizably FR.

Continue to tell me my glasses are rose tinted, and I'll continue to tell you to put yours on and take a good, damn look.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 12, 2008)

On another note.

Anyone else pick up on this design change:  The new source book will allow someone new to the setting to sit down and PLAY right from the book.  Three (IIRC) linked mini-adventures right in the first chapter.

THAT'S the way it's done folks.  If you want source books, don't go the history text-book way, give people books they can actually use.

I hope that this is just the tip of the iceberg.  I hope that future source books will be about 50/50 split between setting information and adventures.


----------



## Fobok (Apr 12, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> THAT'S the way it's done folks.  If you want source books, don't go the history text-book way, give people books they can actually use.




While I actually like that they do this in the core campaign setting, I wouldn't want to see it in any other books. To me, the 'history text-book' elements are of *far* more use than adventures I'll never play.


----------



## Sammael (Apr 12, 2008)

I've never used a single FR adventure which was shoved printed in any 3.x regional supplement. On the other hand, I tried to incorporate a healthy amount of historical data in my campaigns, in the form of ruins, ancient texts, artifacts from kingdoms long past, strange and wondrous locations, and so on. 

Eberron CS, to me, felt... forced. Like the authors were compelled to write every single sentence of the book as a plot hook or adventure location. Every time I read the book I felt like there were a thousand annoying voices behind me chanting "PLAY ME! PLAY ME!" I dislike that. 

Looks like they are aiming for the same goal with The New Realms. I hope for their sake that they did a very thorough market research prior to making that decision.


----------



## Nate Jones (Apr 12, 2008)

Sammael said:
			
		

> I've never used a single FR adventure which was shoved printed in any 3.x regional supplement. On the other hand, I tried to incorporate a healthy amount of historical data in my campaigns, in the form of ruins, ancient texts, artifacts from kingdoms long past, strange and wondrous locations, and so on.
> 
> Eberron CS, to me, felt... forced. Like the authors were compelled to write every single sentence of the book as a plot hook or adventure location. Every time I read the book I felt like there were a thousand annoying voices behind me chanting "PLAY ME! PLAY ME!" I dislike that.
> 
> Looks like they are aiming for the same goal with The New Realms. I hope for their sake that they did a very thorough market research prior to making that decision.




Perhaps I am but a lazy, bad DM, but I much preferred the Eberron style Campaign Setting Book to the Forgotten Realms.  I felt Eberron held so much more energy, so much more potential than the dry annal style FRCS held.  For me, reading the Forgotten Realms campaign gudie was a chore, which was completely opposite of what I felt with Eberron (I don't even like the Eberron setting!).  I, for one, welcome our new Hook overlords.


----------



## Nate Jones (Apr 12, 2008)

Edit: Late night double post.  Sorry.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 12, 2008)

I just loathe the world building wankery that goes on in most of those setting books.  It's a "Read me once or twice and then sit on the shelf gathering dust" thing.  I find that when I get these sorts of sourcebooks, they just do nothing but act as nicely bound paperweights.

If I'm going to shell out 40 bucks or so on a book, I want to use 99% of that book.  That means adventures for me, because the history of the shape of windows just doesn't really do it for me.

I'm looking at the setting sourcebooks that I've bought over the years, and I realize that, after reading them, maybe even reading them a few times, I've used a tiny fraction of what's there.

Make it relavent or don't bother.


----------



## Primal (Apr 12, 2008)

Spacekase said:
			
		

> Out of that thirty plus minute podcast, the naysayers couldn't find a single thing that you liked or are looking forward to?
> 
> It seems that individuals are determined to dislike the new FR setting.
> 
> ...




If I have understood correctly, Ed Greenwood has mostly worked on "new" regions of the Realms, developing those unexplored continents (Anchorome) and other areas never detailed before. He disagrees with a lot of the 4E FR changes, which is pretty evident if you read his posts on Candlekeep.com. 

Abeir-Toril has never been his creation. The name was invented by Jeff Grubb, and eventually 'Abeir' was dropped out of the need for "simplicity". The 4E Design Team apparently thought it would be cool and awesome if it were a "lost" sibling world, even though it would contradict a *LOT* of published Realmslore in the FR continuity (which to me speaks volumes).


----------



## Wrox (Apr 12, 2008)

Nothing about Abeir contradicts established continuity. It's an additional element which you may or may not like, but its existence does nothing to invalidate standing lore.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> The 4E Design Team apparently thought it would be cool and awesome if it were a "lost" sibling world, even though it would contradict a *LOT* of published Realmslore in the FR continuity (which to me speaks volumes).


----------



## Wardook (Apr 12, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> If I have understood correctly, Ed Greenwood has mostly worked on "new" regions of the Realms, developing those unexplored continents (Anchorome) and other areas never detailed before. He disagrees with a lot of the 4E FR changes, which is pretty evident if you read his posts on Candlekeep.com.
> 
> Abeir-Toril has never been his creation. The name was invented by Jeff Grubb, and eventually 'Abeir' was dropped out of the need for "simplicity". The 4E Design Team apparently thought it would be cool and awesome if it were a "lost" sibling world, even though it would contradict a *LOT* of published Realmslore in the FR continuity (which to me speaks volumes).




The realms was originally called the Forgotten Realms because the fair people of this little rock that we live on have forgotten the realms, excepting in myth. We were connected at one time through portals. This was Ed's original idea. Mr. Greenwood sold the rights to his creation and other authors have shaped the realms with their artistic ability since that time.

The Realms are no longer Mr. Greenwood's creation. Of course he doesn't like the changes, they aren't his changes. Does this make the changes bad? I have no idea, I will know come August. 

If you are a staunch Greenwood supporter, I would think the fact that the previously unknown regions are his creation would have you shouting "Thank Ao!" Play in those regions. Mr. Greenwood is very creative, so these regions should be awesome. I'm excited, but then again I'm an optimist. 

I am feeling good about the 4e book due to the fact that it appears we won't be getting a text book this time. 

Space


----------



## Henry (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> I don't know what we can do, but you can pull your head out of the sand...Continue to tell me my glasses are rose tinted, and I'll continue to tell you to put yours on and take a good, damn look.




Let's please be more civil - no need to get hostile with one another. Enough with both the rose-colored glasses AND the heads in the sand.


----------



## Khairn (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> I don't know what we can do, but you can pull your head out of the sand and realize that these sweeping, essentially slate-clearing changes aren't nearly as sweeping and slate-cleaning as you'd like them to be.
> 
> That's right; I went there.  I'm sorry if you want to continue being purposefully obtuse in your observations, which I believe your posts illustrate very well.  I'm not going to convince you that the 4E team didn't ruin the Realms, but it's not because we have a difference in opinion; it's because you are adamant in your view-point, and you're not going to let the evidence sway you.  It's like trying to explain evolution to a YEC, except our discussion hasn't led me to believe you are retarded, merely you have a viewpoint and you're going to stick with come hell or high water.
> 
> ...




First let me re-iterate what I said in my original post on this thread.  I really love PoL, I can see how the designers are excited about what they are creating, and I can understand why WotC is making the changes to FR that they are.  

I don’t know about you, but personally I am a long time fan of FR going back to the gray box.  I don’t consider myself a canon-fanatic by any stretch, but I do like the extensive and detailed history and support that the setting had available for me to use (or not).  I have enjoyed each revision of the Realms to various degrees.  But the changes in the past have not been as dramatic as what we are seeing now.  And its the changes for FR-4E that I am saying go too far and change too much of what I personally loved about the setting.

Lets take a look at just a few of the changes in design and actual set-up of the Realms that are being introduced.

-Move from the Renaissance theme for FR to more of a modern high fantasy feel
-Necessity to change the Realms to fit 4E Pardigm
-Death of Mystra that causes the Weave to collapse.  Something that didn’t happen in the past when Mystryl and the original Mystra died
-Spellplague that sweeps across the world, shattering nations, porting in new realms,  centered around places of high magic use, but somehow seems to by-pass Warterdeep, Cormyr, Silverymoon
-Death/ expulsion/ demotion of how many … ¾ (?) of the realms gods
-Sespech, the Golden Plains, and the Nagalands are gone, replaced with “Plaguewrought” lands where Faerun now has Motes- floating landbergs 
-Across Faerun you have magical / fantastical landscapes interspersed with regular stone and earth
-Vilhon Reach is gone
-Unther is gone
-Destruction of Halrua
-Elimination of Maztica
-Large portions of Chondath and Chessenta ported away and replaced
-Ret-con of Faerun Cosmology from Great Wheel

I do admit that I was wrong when I said the changes were “slate cleaning”.  But these changes seem a lot more than just development and continuation of the setting to me.

And these changes are just off the top of my head.  If you want I can go and gather more or provide you with the links if needed.  My point is that the changes to FR (in addition to what has happened by moving to 4E) are both extensive and dramatic.  

I'm not trying to nit-pik and I certainly don't want to descend into “name calling”.  My opinion, is that the over-all changes are numerous and varied to the point that it no longer feels like the Realms I've enjoyed over the years.  Its now a new setting that to a large part, has separated itself from its past IMHO.  That’s not hyperbole, its my opinion.

And as I said on an earlier post, all of this is personal opinion, and is based on some articles and podcasts.  None of us have seen the final product and until we do, we won’t know how it will turn out.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> -Move from the Renaissance theme for FR to more of a modern high fantasy feel




I'm not sure if you can say the FR had a Renaissance theme that's been subverted by a more modern high fantasy feel.  FR has always been high fantasy with perhaps a tinge of Renaissance.



> Necessity to change the Realms to fit 4E Pardigm




As opposed to changing the Realms to fit the 2E and 3E paradigms.



> -Death of Mystra that causes the Weave to collapse.  Something that didn’t happen in the past when Mystryl and the original Mystra died




They did a better job of killing her this time.  It makes sense even if you don't like it.




> -Spellplague that sweeps across the world, shattering nations, porting in new realms,  centered around places of high magic use, but somehow seems to by-pass Warterdeep, Cormyr, Silverymoon




Note how the areas it bypasses are areas that are considered core regions of the Realms.  It's basically ignoring the areas presented in the original Gray Box.



> -Death/ expulsion/ demotion of how many … ¾ (?) of the realms gods




We don't know the number, and it's probably going to be a case of demotion over expulsion or death, in which case their religions are still going to be important and pertinent.



> -Sespech, the Golden Plains, and the Nagalands are gone, replaced with “Plaguewrought” lands where Faerun now has Motes- floating landbergs




These are ancillary regions.  



> -Across Faerun you have magical / fantastical landscapes interspersed with regular stone and earth




I don't think adding more fantastical elements to the setting really changes it all that much, but YMMV, of course.



> -Vilhon Reach is gone
> -Unther is gone
> -Destruction of Halrua
> -Elimination of Maztica
> -Large portions of Chondath and Chessenta ported away and replaced




More arguably ancillary regions.  Also, we don't know if Maztica has been eliminated.  The language used was "subsumed."



> -Ret-con of Faerun Cosmology from Great Wheel




Open your 3E FR book to page 256 and read about the cosmology of the Realms.

Listen, I'm not saying there aren't some major changes going on, but those changes really don't alter the core of the setting in great ways.  They alter the outlying regions in some major ways, but the core has stayed relatively the same.  Look at the regions you mentioned: Sespech, Halruaa, Maztica, etc.  These are all outlying regions that barely registered a mention in the 1E and 2E boxes.


----------



## DandD (Apr 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> F
> 
> -Move from the Renaissance theme for FR to more of a modern high fantasy feel
> -Necessity to change the Realms to fit 4E Pardigm
> ...



Wait a minute, didn't all these changes already happen with that Times of Troubles-sillyness already? All Assassins died back then, gods died in the dozens, new nations arised, the changes from a totally hog-wash  medieval fantasy world to a even more hog-wash renaissance world, floating islands, tons of portals and all that stuff... Also, in 3rd edition, Faerun never was part of the Great Wheel anymore, it was ret-coned to be always these crystal-sphere-thingies in the official campaign book. 

Of course, the Forgotten Realms always were hog-wash, and trying to make all these things stick to canon makes it like Star Trek. As soon as there is some change, or something doesn't stick to canon, it's the ultimate terror, and the sky is falling. I'd rather have new iterations, like Transformers: Animated retelling the Transformers saga, but this time even better.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

> We don't know the number, and it's probably going to be a case of demotion over expulsion or death, in which case their religions are still going to be important and pertinent.




Demigods/Exarchs aren't going to have religions. They're going to be like saints in the faiths of Lesser and Greater Powers. Deneir, Nobanion, etc no longer have churches or followers.


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara (Apr 12, 2008)

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> Well, after listening to the Podcast, I found myself thinking "Hmm...I may actually give the new Realms a look."
> 
> And this is from a guy who gave up on them ages ago. There are parts I like, and parts I hate. I loved the original grey box, but just about everything since has been kinda downhill (although the elves and dwarves no longer being in decline is kinda cool).
> 
> snip




this

I am in the same position


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Demigods/Exarchs aren't going to have religions. They're going to be like saints in the faiths of Lesser and Greater Powers. Deneir, Nobanion, etc no longer have churches or followers.



Don't think so. I think it just comes down to making them less powerfull uber-monster (level 25+ encounters) instead of the more powerfull uber-monsters (level 30+ encounters) that are the real deities.

Even demoted to exarchs they most likely still have their followers and churches even if these now ackknowlegde their superior too.


----------



## Primal (Apr 12, 2008)

Spacekase said:
			
		

> The realms was originally called the Forgotten Realms because the fair people of this little rock that we live on have forgotten the realms, excepting in myth. We were connected at one time through portals. This was Ed's original idea. Mr. Greenwood sold the rights to his creation and other authors have shaped the realms with their artistic ability since that time.
> 
> The Realms are no longer Mr. Greenwood's creation. Of course he doesn't like the changes, they aren't his changes. Does this make the changes bad? I have no idea, I will know come August.
> 
> ...




I know where the name comes from (I've been a very committed FR fan for almost twenty years now, after all). Actually, down the years, Ed has apparently liked (and publicly admitted doing so) a lot of stuff done by several esteemed FR "lorelords", such as Steven Schend, George Krashos, Brian R. James, Eric Boyd, et al. (all of who, in my opinion, have done as brilliant job as Ed). Ed himself has written (and contributed to) quite a lot of FR novels and accessories. So you could say that 2E/3E FR still has had a lot of Ed's "handprints" all over them.

4E FR seems to be the first edition of the Realms -- based on what we've seen so far -- that I have absolutely no interest in (and neither do any of the 30+ FR fans I know in RL). Maybe it's because the "spirit" and "feel" of the Realms is no longer the same? I doubt that even Ed by writing the 4E FR books all by himself could salvage much of this train wreck I perceive 4E FR to be. Therefore, I doubt that I'm going to run anything anywhere in 4E FR. I have plenty of 3E material left (enough to sustain my campaigns for ten years or so), and I think I'm going to use Pathfinder RPG for my Realms campaigns (we're starting a playtesting campaign soon) in the future.

Oh, by the way, AO is no longer part of 4E "canon" Realmslore -- he was apparently too "uber" and too-high-level for PCs to kill (so he'd have made them feel insignificant). That's why he was simply eliminated from the Realms.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

Mirtek said:
			
		

> Don't think so. I think it just comes down to making them less powerfull uber-monster (level 25+ encounters) instead of the more powerfull uber-monsters (level 30+ encounters) that are the real deities.
> 
> Even demoted to exarchs they most likely still have their followers and churches even if these now ackknowlegde their superior too.




From this link. 



> The deity-status thing is a handy shortcut for nailing down a god's place in the world. Here's how I see it working:
> 
> Greater God: You've got a worldwide church, clerics, and worshippers. You're powerful enough to generate an astral dominion (outer plane) of your own, and it generally takes on the characteristics you want; you are ruler over a celestial court. Not all greater gods choose to make their own planes--sometimes a couple of greater gods share a plane. Tyr is a good example.
> 
> ...


----------



## Primal (Apr 12, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Wait a minute, didn't all these changes already happen with that Times of Troubles-sillyness already? All Assassins died back then, gods died in the dozens, new nations arised, the changes from a totally hog-wash  medieval fantasy world to a even more hog-wash renaissance world, floating islands, tons of portals and all that stuff... Also, in 3rd edition, Faerun never was part of the Great Wheel anymore, it was ret-coned to be always these crystal-sphere-thingies in the official campaign book.
> 
> Of course, the Forgotten Realms always were hog-wash, and trying to make all these things stick to canon makes it like Star Trek. As soon as there is some change, or something doesn't stick to canon, it's the ultimate terror, and the sky is falling. I'd rather have new iterations, like Transformers: Animated retelling the Transformers saga, but this time even better.




Of course, those are your subjective opinion -- not facts (please remember to use phrases like "in my opinion" or "I think" etc.). As for ToT, gods didn't die "in the dozens" (assassins died by the thousands -- you got that right), and I can't recall any new nations arising. Floating mountains? Isn't that one of those 4E "mote" things? If you are referring to the enclaves of Netheril, that was one man's version of an ancient "High Magic" kingdom (sloppily designed and *not* how Ed envisioned Netheril to be). 

Continuity and consistency are important to any setting -- If I did the 4E Eberron CG and erased/modified some of the "iconic" stuff there (such as that Mournlands were never formed and Sharn fell last year and is now a ruined city or the Rakhasas are actually Dragonborn Exarchs), don't you think I would be lynched by the Eberron hard-core fans? Evolution is one thing, change for change's sake another, right?


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

> Oh, by the way, AO is no longer part of 4E "canon" Realmslore -- he was apparently too "uber" and too-high-level for PCs to kill (so he'd have made them feel insignificant). That's why he was simply eliminated from the Realms.




Here's Rich Baker's post on why they're not mentioning Ao (Not mentioning isn't the same as getting rid of him. He's still around, but just not being talked about).


----------



## Shemeska (Apr 12, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> Open your 3E FR book to page 256 and read about the cosmology of the Realms.




4e FR appears to be retconning its cosmology a second time:

1e/2e Great Wheel cosmology
3e Great Tree cosmology, lots of retconning of planar elements and associated FR history
4e Great Tree retconned to seemingly have the structure of the 4e PoL cosmology (from what I've seen)







Edit: FWIW I started FR in 3e, and I played and enjoyed it. I just never used its IMO wonky cosmology. With what I've seen of 4e FR, it looks like it may have lost me, which is unfortunate, because I rather liked the setting. But the elements I liked most are dismantled or unrecognizable now, and pretty much every non-immortal NPC and tons of plot hooks vanished with the time leap.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> From this link.



Well, it seems a little bit self-contradictory.

_"but you're immortal and you are known to the mortals of the world as a mythological figure."_ 
-> people use to worship someone for being much less than a recognized immortal champion of deity XY

So even while the worshippers of the Red Knight might openly admit her being in servitude to Tempus, she should still have no problem to get worshippers who call themself servant of the Red Knight first and servant of Tempus second.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

Mirtek said:
			
		

> Well, it seems a little bit self-contradictory.
> 
> _"but you're immortal and you are known to the mortals of the world as a mythological figure."_
> -> people use to worship someone for being much less than a recognized immortal champion of deity XY
> ...




I don't see a contradiction. Rich Baker states unequivocally that they "don't have clerics or worshippers". They're figures within the religion, but that doesn't mean they're worshipped. The same is true of numerous realworld religions, in which you have important figures of the faith who are themselves not worshipped. When a designer flat out states "they're not worshipped", their not being worshipped ought to be fairly self evident.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Where's the contradiction? Rich Baker states unequivocally that they "don't have clerics or worshippers". They're figures within the religion, but that doesn't mean they're worshipped. The same is true of numerous realworld religions, in which you have important figures of the faith, but they're not worshipped.



Well, there are quite a few arguments whether christianity isn't actually polytheism (given all the orders "worshipping" a certain saint as patron even if they pay him/her homage as servant of god)


			
				Green Knight said:
			
		

> When a designer flat out states "they're not worshipped", they're not being worshipped ought to be fairly self evident.



Which still makes it illogical. In the FR people even worship lifeless spheres of annihilation or minor demonlords not even close to the league of Orcus & Co.

And none worship powerfull exarchs?


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

Not in the 4E Realms, they don't.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Not in the 4E Realms, they don't.



Rich also only says _"Here's how *I* see it working"_, which doesn't mean that this is 100% the way the new FRCS and further FR adventures/supplements will see it. I would be suprised if we won't see orders dedicated to certain exarchs as part of the bigger church of the deity the exarch is serving

Like Driz'zt introduced himself as "servant of Gwaern Windstroem ranger champion of Mielikki"


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

Well, feel free to disbelieve if you like.  But all things considered, don't be surprised when the 4E Realms comes out and it states that Demigods don't have worshippers or Clerics. 

Incidentally...


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Well, feel free to disbelieve if you like.  But all things considered, don't be surprised when the 4E Realms comes out and it states that Demigods don't have worshippers or Clerics.



As long as the FR have people worshipping clearly mortal things like [undead] dragons it's just absurd that no-one would worship an exarch.

Worshipping someone and having your powers granted by someone has tradition in D&D (almost all hero deities worked this way and more often than not their worshippers knew where their spells were coming from, e.g. like followers of Murlynd know that their deity is a servant-deity of Heironeus and he is granting him their spells when they pray to Murlynd)

In RL the religious devout medieval knights recognized god as the only god and still founded orders _of Saint-John_, _of Saint-Lazarus_, _of Saint-Thomas_, ....


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 12, 2008)

> In RL the religious devout medieval knights recognized god as the only god and still founded orders of Saint-John, of Saint-Lazarus, of Saint-Thomas, ....




They didn't worship the Saints, though. And God most certainly was never secondary to them. 



> As long as the FR have people worshipping clearly mortal things like [undead] dragons it's just absurd that no-one would worship an exarch.




Hey, don't argue with me. I don't like it, either. I'm just reporting what the situation is.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> They didn't worship the Saints, though.



Which is controversial (aka _"Christianity: is it polytheism in denial?"_ -> don't want to take any side in this debate, just point out that it exists)

I guess it depends how you define "worshipping", but to me a prayer like _"Lady Red Knight be with us and plead our case to your liege Tempus, Lord of Battles"_ would be worshipping the Red Knight even if the prayer is ultimately to address Tempus


----------



## Mighty Veil (Apr 12, 2008)

It's a good thing podcast isn't  phone in show. Nothing but gnome questions from the people who like them.

I'm not sure about the new Thay. I do like the nation of wizards. Don't see why a nation of arcane users could not have been done. A nation of the undead sounds neat on paper but in practice I'm not sold yet. The idea of Red Wizards now a group without a home I like the sound of. 

I'm really hoping the Zents won't get nerfed. That's the one group/place I don't want to be reset. I want my Zhent Republic.

I still say Saurials will be ret-con to be from the the Dragonborn lands. I hope Myrukul will have become more than a crown in a hundred years too.


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 12, 2008)

Green Knight said:
			
		

> Here's Rich Baker's post on why they're not mentioning Ao (Not mentioning isn't the same as getting rid of him. He's still around, but just not being talked about).





An important tidibit from that very post about the FR gods:



> And, before anyone gets on me--most of our upcoming pantheon development leaves the original FR deities in place.




Dying in droves, eh?



> Maybe it's because the "spirit" and "feel" of the Realms is no longer the same?




Can you articulate what the "spirit" and "feel" are in your opinion?  In my opinion, the "spirit" and "feel" of the Realms is its nature as a big old grab bag of fantasy tropes where you can find a place for anything in D&D.  That certainly hasn't changed, even though the Goddess of Magic is dead and Chessenta is no more.

EDIT: Oh, another thing: *They are not ret-conning the FR cosmology!*  They have already said that they are providing an in-story explanation for why the cosmology changes.  If it is explained with a story that is a new part of continuity, it isn't retroactive continuity.  You can't just go around using the term "ret-con" for every change you don't like.


----------



## DandD (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Of course, those are your subjective opinion -- not facts (please remember to use phrases like "in my opinion" or "I think" etc.).



I refuse. I mean, seriously, this are the internets, of course everything is opinion or thinking about. Fortunately for me, my opinions happen to coincide with the facts... 


> As for ToT, gods didn't die "in the dozens"



I really don't know how many died, as there are still some hundred million gods for anything in the Forgotten Realms. I know that Bane got better, and that Baal-dude died, thanks to the Baldur's Gate-games, and appearently that Mystra-chick, and some cave-god that got eaten by that Shar-hussy, and the former evil death god, and some more who got beaten to a bloody pulp by that Cyric-guy with a god-slaying sword, who got around and killed some more lesser gods and so. And there were also some elven gods who killed some dwarven gods, if that Marvel Comic about the lame Forgotten Realms is true, and some adventurers went around and killed some more gods, and other non-human gods killed or got killed other non-human gods, and so on... 



> (assassins died by the thousands -- you got that right), and I can't recall any new nations arising. Floating mountains? Isn't that one of those 4E "mote" things? If you are referring to the enclaves of Netheril, that was one man's version of an ancient "High Magic" kingdom (sloppily designed and *not* how Ed envisioned Netheril to be).



So what? It was 3rd edition already. And as others have pointed out, what that Ed-dude says is moot. At best, he's now a co-designers for the Forgotten Realms, since the day he sold his intellectual property to other guys. 







> Continuity and consistency are important to any setting -- If I did the 4E Eberron CG and erased/modified some of the "iconic" stuff there (such as that Mournlands were never formed and Sharn fell last year and is now a ruined city or the Rakhasas are actually Dragonborn Exarchs), don't you think I would be lynched by the Eberron hard-core fans?



Meh, Eberron only makes sense for D&D 3rd edition, as it's the only campaign setting where they intelligently applied most of the magic rules to a world, unlike the crudely stitched Forgotten Realms. The Forgotten Realms just are more the effort to be redone than Eberron, because people played Baldur's Gate and perhaps also Icewind Dale enough to become D&D-pen-and-paper-players. All that Eberron has to show is the lame-o-game D&D Online. It's all about name-recognition and brands. 


> Evolution is one thing, change for change's sake another, right?



That's why they said that 100 years pass, so people like you should feel happy, because it "evolved" to the new face it gets (hur hur hur hur  ). That spellplague stupidness is as idiotic as the Times of Troubles, and it changes the setting to accomodate the rules better. And it's so that the new demographic still see, hey, that's the world where that Baldur's Gate-city is located, that's cool, I can now play in that world too with my ranger-barbarian who's got a miniature giant pet hamster from space, and all that other whacky shenanigans.


----------



## jensun (Apr 13, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> Move from the Renaissance theme for FR to more of a modern high fantasy feel




I keep seeing this and have no idea where its coming from.  I have played in and bought FR material since 1e and have yet to see anything I would describe as Renaissance outside of Waterdeep.  It has always felt like a high fantasy world (just go back and read Greenwoods first realms books) with a bunch of pseudo real world cultures jammed in around the edges.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 13, 2008)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> 4e FR appears to be retconning its cosmology a second time




Retcon means "retroactive continuity," which means "it has always been this way, older books be damned."

That's not how the new cosmology happened. It changed because of the Year of Blue Fire.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Evolution is one thing, change for change's sake another, right?




Just because you don't like it or won't accept the reasons for change as being valid doesn't mean it's "change for change's sake."


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> An important tidibit from that very post about the FR gods:
> 
> 
> 
> Dying in droves, eh?




Well, all the deities of magic (Mystra, Azuth, Velsharoon and Savras) and Cyric are either dead or banished to the Astral Sea. Tyr killing Helm (his long-standing ally) and Torm apparently "stealing" both of their portfolios. Elven deities have been revealed to be mere "aspects" of the human deities (e.g. Sehanine has always been just Selune "in disguise"). Dwarven deities Haela, Gorm, Laduguer and Deep Duerra all dead. And the Pantheon being "trimmed down" to 20 or so "real" Deities with the rest of the gods being reduced to their servants ('Exarchs') without any worshippers or churches (e.g. Clanggedin, an Intermediate Power, becoming Moradin's 'Exarch'). Not any significant changes to the Pantheon, right? 



> Can you articulate what the "spirit" and "feel" are in your opinion?  In my opinion, the "spirit" and "feel" of the Realms is its nature as a big old grab bag of fantasy tropes where you can find a place for anything in D&D.  That certainly hasn't changed, even though the Goddess of Magic is dead and Chessenta is no more.




To me the "spirit" or the "feel" of the Realms is that it feels like a living, thriving world filled with interesting people (NPCs) who all have their own stories -- whether they be "movers and shakers", humble farmers, greedy merchants, other adventurers, black-hearted villains, The Chosen of Mystra, and so on. It is a setting that has unknown lands and villains, ancient secrets and hidden threats, but also "homely" villages and familiar faces. To me, the Realms are defined by its detailed history, people and lands, that all offer endless possibilities to tell and experience stories. In 4E, most of those people are gone and the world shattered almost beyond recognition. It will take another twenty years to get the same level of detail I have now, so why bother, if it is important to me and my players? 



> EDIT: Oh, another thing: *They are not ret-conning the FR cosmology!*  They have already said that they are providing an in-story explanation for why the cosmology changes.  If it is explained with a story that is a new part of continuity, it isn't retroactive continuity.  You can't just go around using the term "ret-con" for every change you don't like.




I am well aware of what the term implies. So let's talk about Shadow Weave, for example -- it was Rich's idea for 3E FR, and it was "retconned" as having always been part of the Weave . Then, as the news about the Spellplague started to trickle in, some posters pointed out that Shadow Weave -- as part of the Weave and dependent of its fate -- would also collapse. Suddenly, Rich Baker announced that they're going to retcon it again, so that Shadow Weave can exist outside the Weave. All the gnomes in FR? Retconned to become 4E Gnomes and most likely their kingdoms and villages have never existed, either (I wish to point out that the designers used the term "retcon" themselves). And to be frank, I doubt that they've actually gone through all the historical events in the FR timeline to ensure that the introduction of Abeir (and it being the "source" of all aberrations in FR) is not contradicting some previously written major event or detail.


----------



## DandD (Apr 13, 2008)

They don't retcon it. They let a hundred years pass, and say that crazy stuff happened that made the world of the Forgotten Realms be so now. In your words, evolution instead of change for the sake of change. Exactly as you rather wanted it to happen, instead of being always so. 

Now, the development might not be liked by you (and I frankly don't really care what happens to the lame-o-Forgotten Realms in any iteration, as I already knew the Forgotten Realms light, the "continent" of Aventuria/Arcania in The Dark Eye, and believe me, the germans are far more anal-retentive about simulationism), and that's valid.


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> I refuse. I mean, seriously, this are the internets, of course everything is opinion or thinking about. Fortunately for me, my opinions happen to coincide with the facts...




Really? Then, at least, get your facts right (starting with names).



> I really don't know how many died, as there are still some hundred million gods for anything in the Forgotten Realms. I know that Bane got better, and that Baal-dude died, thanks to the Baldur's Gate-games, and appearently that Mystra-chick, and some cave-god that got eaten by that Shar-hussy, and the former evil death god, and some more who got beaten to a bloody pulp by that Cyric-guy with a god-slaying sword, who got around and killed some more lesser gods and so. And there were also some elven gods who killed some dwarven gods, if that Marvel Comic about the lame Forgotten Realms is true, and some adventurers went around and killed some more gods, and other non-human gods killed or got killed other non-human gods, and so on...




Um, are you sure that you're thinking about the Hindu Pantheon? Because I can't recall the Realms having even 200 Deities at any point in time. And Baal is a RW deity, while Bhaal is the former deity of death and murder you referred to. You know what? We had less 'deicides' during ToT than the Spellplague. 



> So what? It was 3rd edition already. And as others have pointed out, what that Ed-dude says is moot. At best, he's now a co-designers for the Forgotten Realms, since the day he sold his intellectual property to other guys. Meh, Eberron only makes sense for D&D 3rd edition, as it's the only campaign setting where they intelligently applied most of the magic rules to a world, unlike the crudely stitched Forgotten Realms. The Forgotten Realms just are more the effort to be redone than Eberron, because people played Baldur's Gate and perhaps also Icewind Dale enough to become D&D-pen-and-paper-players. All that Eberron has to show is the lame-o-game D&D Online. It's all about name-recognition and brands.
> That's why they said that 100 years pass, so people like you should feel happy, because it "evolved" to the new face it gets (hur hur hur hur  ). That spellplague stupidness is as idiotic as the Times of Troubles, and it changes the setting to accomodate the rules better. And it's so that the new demographic still see, hey, that's the world where that Baldur's Gate-city is located, that's cool, I can now play in that world too with my ranger-barbarian who's got a miniature giant pet hamster from space, and all that other whacky shenanigans.




Actually, for most FR fans what Ed says is not "moot" -- he may have sold the commercial rights of the Realms to TSR, but he has written a lot of FR novels and sourcebooks since then, so "what that Ed-dude says" has actually became "canon" (as in "official") quite often. And Ed's contract with TSR has a clause which reverts the copyright back to him if WoTC doesn't publish any FR products anymore. By the way, CRPGs (Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate and so on) are not part of FR "canon", but some of the events were later "canonized" by the designers in novels and accessories. Indeed, it seems that 4E FR is targeting a whole new consumer base who does not have access to 1E/2E FR accessories. Whether it will success or not, only time will tell, but I'm personally quite pessimistic about it.


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> They don't retcon it. They let a hundred years pass, and say that crazy stuff happened that made the world of the Forgotten Realms be so now. In your words, evolution instead of change for the sake of change. Exactly as you rather wanted it to happen, instead of being always so.
> 
> Now, the development might not be liked by you (and I frankly don't really care what happens to the lame-o-Forgotten Realms in any iteration, as I already knew the Forgotten Realms light, the "continent" of Aventuria/Arcania in The Dark Eye, and believe me, the germans are far more anal-retentive about simulationism), and that's valid.




So the designers saying "I think we're going to retcon this and that" is not, in fact, retconning? Amazing. And if the "in-story" explanation given to all the changes is going to be "well, that's what happened during the 100 years of Chaos -- and it was all caused by the Spellplague", I can assure you that my cat could come up with a better explanation. And tell me how is the "Armageddon-like" magical world-wide catastrophe "evolution" in any way? I would call it a "cheap trick that we're using 'cuz we don't want to spend too much time pondering over individual changes"-type of tactic.

Let me mention another inconsistency I've spotted: the Spellplague apparently is not "powerful" enough to break High/Epic Magic wards (i.e. Mythals and Mythal-like magics), *but* it's able to shuffle around the planes (destroying the planes ruled by demipowers, lesser powers and intermediate powers -- not to mention "tossing" Abyss to the bottom of the Elemental Chaos). Wow, I guess those gods should have invested in Elven High Magic instead of Salient Divine Abilities...


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> Just because you don't like it or won't accept the reasons for change as being valid doesn't mean it's "change for change's sake."




Would you call the Spellplague natural evolution? I don't. What we are seeing in 4E FR is a conscious design direction to break down the world to its basic elements, so that it can be rebuilt to fit a new model and a new customer base. Therefore, I think it's change for change's sake.


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

jensun said:
			
		

> I keep seeing this and have no idea where its coming from.  I have played in and bought FR material since 1e and have yet to see anything I would describe as Renaissance outside of Waterdeep.  It has always felt like a high fantasy world (just go back and read Greenwoods first realms books) with a bunch of pseudo real world cultures jammed in around the edges.




Those "pseudo-real RW cultures" were not Ed's idea. Nor does his "Home Realms" have them. They were added to FR by various TSR designers.


----------



## DandD (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Really? Then, at least, get your facts right (starting with names).



I think the fact that I'm using dude and guy and chick and other appendages to the FR-gods is proof that I really don't care about their names. 


> Um, are you sure that you're thinking about the Hindu Pantheon? Because I can't recall the Realms having even 200 Deities at any point in time. And Baal is a RW deity, while Bhaal is the former deity of death and murder you referred to. You know what? We had less 'deicides' during ToT than the Spellplague.



Nope, I'm sure I'm thinking about the Forgotten Realms-game-pantheon. I think it's obvious that I clearly exagerate and don't like it at all, but I also think it's obvious that me putting out that there are 1 trilliion gods simply means that there are too many gods, most of non-important stature. And there have been many god-slayings, and there are still too many gods around. 



> Actually, for most FR fans what Ed says is not "moot"



You don't even know if it's most. Most fans could actually like all the other stuff that wasn't written by Ed Wood, but or because of the things that his co-designers applied to the Forgotten Realms. Or, shock and horror, because of Drizzt Do'Urden (that Drow dude with the double scimitars and that panther-thingie), who lives on this world. 


> -- he may have sold the commercial rights of the Realms to TSR, but he has written a lot of FR novels and sourcebooks since then, so "what that Ed-dude says" has actually became "canon" (as in "official") quite often. And Ed's contract with TSR has a clause which reverts the copyright back to him if WoTC doesn't publish any FR products anymore.



And what the other dudes have written are considered canon as well.



> By the way, CRPGs (Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate and so on) are not part of FR "canon", but some of the events were later "canonized" by the designers in novels and accessories. Indeed, it seems that 4E FR is targeting a whole new consumer base who does not have access to 1E/2E FR accessories. Whether it will success or not, only time will tell, but I'm personally quite pessimistic about it.



See, you say "canonized". 

One thing is, Wizards of the Coast wants the Forgotten Realms to be a big playground that Game Masters can do whatever they want with it, without being constrained by the novels, which is why WotC is trying to communicate better with the novel writers and planning stuff accordingly. 

Now, that might not function at all, and the results may still become garbage, but at least, they tried.


----------



## small pumpkin man (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Would you call the Spellplague natural evolution? I don't. What we are seeing in 4E FR is a conscious design direction to break down the world to its basic elements, so that it can be rebuilt to fit a new model and a new customer base. Therefore, I think it's change for change's sake.



"Change for changes sake" means changing things merely so they are new and shiny without caring if the new is better than the old. Change for no reason other than to change. The Spellplague is there for a very specific reason (the new magic system), so it's very obviously not "Change for changes sake".


----------



## DandD (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> So the designers saying "I think we're going to retcon this and that" is not, in fact, retconning? Amazing. And if the "in-story" explanation given to all the changes is going to be "well, that's what happened during the 100 years of Chaos -- and it was all caused by the Spellplague", I can assure you that my cat could come up with a better explanation.



I could come up with an even better explanation. The Allmighty God Ao said, and the world of Abeir-Toril became as he decided, on a whim. 

And you know what? It's perfectly logical, because the Uber-Deity Ao has the power to do that. But it lacks apocalyptic stuff, as you mentioned it, so spellplague it is, and it has the benefit to kill some more deities. 


> And tell me how is the "Armageddon-like" magical world-wide catastrophe "evolution" in any way? I would call it a "cheap trick that we're using 'cuz we don't want to spend too much time pondering over individual changes"-type of tactic.



If it works for the DC-Universe with its bajillions of superheroes, like Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman and Flash and Green Arrow and Zatanna and Dove and Hawk and and and (and comic book fans are as least as nit-picky as roleplayers, in fact, most roleplayers are comic book fans), it also will work and sell well for the Forgotten Realms with its Seven Sisters and Blackstaff and Szasz Tam and Elminster and Drizzt and Manshoon and so on... 



> Let me mention another inconsistency I've spotted: the Spellplague apparently is not "powerful" enough to break High/Epic Magic wards (i.e. Mythals and Mythal-like magics), *but* it's able to shuffle around the planes (destroying the planes ruled by demipowers, lesser powers and intermediate powers -- not to mention "tossing" Abyss to the bottom of the Elemental Chaos). Wow, I guess those gods should have invested in Elven High Magic instead of Salient Divine Abilities...



Yeah, Elven Magic has always been better than any other kind of magic in D&D, which is why we had to endure all that elven-crap, with Blue Elves, Dark Elves, Grey Elves, Wood Elves, Wild Elves, Green Elves, Sky Elves, Sea Elves, Mere Elves, Gold Elves, Moon Elves, Silver Elves, High Elves, and all that other elfi-stuff, and that's why gods loose to D&D-elves. Elves in D&D have more "fanbois" than those whacky Forgotten Realms-gods could ever have...


----------



## Khairn (Apr 13, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> Just because you don't like it or won't accept the reasons for change as being valid doesn't mean it's "change for change's sake."




The reason for many of the changes appears to be the system changed, therefore the designers had to figure out how to force that change into the Realms while attempting to work within FR's history.  Or at least that is what the designers blogs said.

<shrug>

At the end of the day we are all just speculating on the smallest fraction of the material that has been released.  Who knows what we'll end up thinking once we actually see the finished product.


----------



## Teemu (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Those "pseudo-real RW cultures" were not Ed's idea. Nor does his "Home Realms" have them. They were added to FR by various TSR designers.



So it's a good thing they're removing Unther, Mulhorand, and Chessenta? I think it's brilliant.







			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Would you call the Spellplague natural evolution? I don't. What we are seeing in 4E FR is a conscious design direction to break down the world to its basic elements, so that it can be rebuilt to fit a new model and a new customer base. Therefore, I think it's change for change's sake.



I agree. I also think it's pretty smart.


> To me the "spirit" or the "feel" of the Realms is that it feels like a living, thriving world filled with interesting people (NPCs) who all have their own stories -- whether they be "movers and shakers", humble farmers, greedy merchants, other adventurers, black-hearted villains, The Chosen of Mystra, and so on. It is a setting that has unknown lands and villains, ancient secrets and hidden threats, but also "homely" villages and familiar faces. To me, the Realms are defined by its detailed history, people and lands, that all offer endless possibilities to tell and experience stories. In 4E, most of those people are gone and the world shattered almost beyond recognition. It will take another twenty years to get the same level of detail I have now, so why bother, if it is important to me and my players?



Wait, Elminster's gone? The farmers are gone? Merchants? Ancient secrets and hidden threats?


----------



## Imban (Apr 13, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> Wait, Elminster's gone?




Elminster's been rendered incapable of using magic on pain of being possessed by spirits instantly, and is thus just a useless old man. So... yes.


----------



## marune (Apr 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Elminster's been rendered incapable of using magic on pain of being possessed by spirits instantly, and is thus just a useless old man. So... yes.




Ok.. Elminster fearing to use his magic is useless...


----------



## Teemu (Apr 13, 2008)

Elminster doesn't exist in the 4e Realms? Are you sure about that? 

He does exist. It just happens that he's a much more useful plot tool than what he's ever been before. An old man on the verge of insanity, once one of the most poweful spellcasters the world knew but now afraid to call upon his strength in fear of losing control of what's left of his identity. Elminster's never been this cool before.


----------



## Majoru Oakheart (Apr 13, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> Elminster doesn't exist in the 4e Realms? Are you sure about that?
> 
> He does exist. It just happens that he's a much more useful plot tool than what he's ever been before. An old man on the verge of insanity, once one of the most poweful spellcasters the world knew but now afraid to call upon his strength in fear of losing control of what's left of his identity. Elminster's never been this cool before.



I agree.  I love the new Elminster.  He's got the knowledge of history from being alive so long.  He's wise, he USED to be powerful.  He has lots of contacts and friends.  However, he can't save the world anymore.  He can only use his knowledge to help other people save it.


----------



## Teemu (Apr 13, 2008)

Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> I agree.  I love the new Elminster.  He's got the knowledge of history from being alive so long.  He's wise, he USED to be powerful.  He has lots of contacts and friends.  However, he can't save the world anymore.  He can only use his knowledge to help other people save it.



Well, he couldn't save the world before either - he was always planes hopping or busy with other threats. You know, despite the entire world being in danger.


----------



## jensun (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Those "pseudo-real RW cultures" were not Ed's idea. Nor does his "Home Realms" have them. They were added to FR by various TSR designers.



I never suggested that they were.  Even if you look at Ed's core areas and his novels there is nothing in them that even suggests a Rennaissance feel outside of perhaps Waterdeep. 

Cormyr - more Arthurian than anything else
Shadowdale - not even close
The North - PoL, small cities surrounded by wilderness

You could make an argument for Silvermoon being rennaissance but it feels far more high fantasy than anything else in everything I've seen published for it.


----------



## jensun (Apr 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Elminster's been rendered incapable of using magic on pain of being possessed by spirits instantly, and is thus just a useless old man. So... yes.



So he has been returned to how Greenwood originally used him apparently, as a crotchety old sage who would occasionally give out advice about what was going on.  

The real difficulty with Elminster wss his presentation in the novels as a deux ex machinae, both by Greenwood and others.  See for example Spellfire.


----------



## mach1.9pants (Apr 13, 2008)

skeptic said:
			
		

> Ok.. Elminster fearing to use his magic is useless...



Doesn't Elminster have a couple of levels in fighter, rogue and cleric?


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Well, all the deities of magic (Mystra, Azuth, Velsharoon and Savras) and Cyric are either dead or banished to the Astral Sea. Tyr killing Helm (his long-standing ally) and Torm apparently "stealing" both of their portfolios. Elven deities have been revealed to be mere "aspects" of the human deities (e.g. Sehanine has always been just Selune "in disguise"). Dwarven deities Haela, Gorm, Laduguer and Deep Duerra all dead. And the Pantheon being "trimmed down" to 20 or so "real" Deities with the rest of the gods being reduced to their servants ('Exarchs') without any worshippers or churches (e.g. Clanggedin, an Intermediate Power, becoming Moradin's 'Exarch'). Not any significant changes to the Pantheon, right?




You're right, Rich Baker is a damned liar.  Wait...

I'm going to take his word over yours, buddy.



> To me the "spirit" or the "feel" of the Realms is that it feels like a living, thriving world filled with interesting people (NPCs) who all have their own stories -- whether they be "movers and shakers", humble farmers, greedy merchants, other adventurers, black-hearted villains, The Chosen of Mystra, and so on. It is a setting that has unknown lands and villains, ancient secrets and hidden threats, but also "homely" villages and familiar faces. To me, the Realms are defined by its detailed history, people and lands, that all offer endless possibilities to tell and experience stories. In 4E, most of those people are gone and the world shattered almost beyond recognition. It will take another twenty years to get the same level of detail I have now, so why bother, if it is important to me and my players?




This is the biggest pile of platitudes I have ever seen.  You've basically said, "FR is a world with a bunch of detail and a bunch of fantasy."  That hasn't changed. 




> I am well aware of what the term implies. So let's talk about Shadow Weave, for example -- it was Rich's idea for 3E FR, and it was "retconned" as having always been part of the Weave . Then, as the news about the Spellplague started to trickle in, some posters pointed out that Shadow Weave -- as part of the Weave and dependent of its fate -- would also collapse. Suddenly, Rich Baker announced that they're going to retcon it again, so that Shadow Weave can exist outside the Weave. All the gnomes in FR? Retconned to become 4E Gnomes and most likely their kingdoms and villages have never existed, either (I wish to point out that the designers used the term "retcon" themselves). And to be frank, I doubt that they've actually gone through all the historical events in the FR timeline to ensure that the introduction of Abeir (and it being the "source" of all aberrations in FR) is not contradicting some previously written major event or detail.




Does any of this actually have anything to do with the cosmology?  I have to say that it's pretty funny you're getting up in arms about them ret-conning a ret-con.  The first one was cool, but the second time around it is totally ruining the Realms, eh?  Where do you get this information about them ret-conning the Gnomes and all their important villages and kingdoms.  I mean, I understand that the Gnomes are an inherent part of the Realms and all... wait a minute...  Finally, you have no grounds to assume that they didn't do their homework when developing the changes.  This is a classic example of some fanboy assuming he's more qualified than the professionals who have been entrusted with his favorite property.


----------



## mach1.9pants (Apr 13, 2008)

As a slight aside, I play FR in 3.5 but I haven't purchased a book since the PGtF. Thus I haven't kept up with the continuing story line of FR. Now I will probably run a home-brew campaign for 4E first, just to have a low level rung through but we are thinking of switching FR latter (even with he same characters or starting from scratch). 
Now, being a bit lazy, I don't really feel like trawling through threads etc and getting the low down on the changes that way. Especially since some people have opinions about the changes which are a little on the strong side .So what I am getting at is what is the trilogy to read (like the avatar for 3E)? Cos I'll probably get that to get me going and (with all the FR books out) I can't seem to figure which books are relevant. 
Maybe not published yet?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Would you call the Spellplague natural evolution? I don't. What we are seeing in 4E FR is a conscious design direction to break down the world to its basic elements, so that it can be rebuilt to fit a new model and a new customer base. Therefore, I think it's change for change's sake.



Comparable to... say a meteorite strike. Or maybe a new ice age. Except not so bad, since apparently, races don't go extinct...


----------



## Wardook (Apr 13, 2008)

Gnomes don't exist any more, all the cities are wiped out? I thought that they just weren't including Gnomes in the PHB. I didn't know that they were going to kill them off.

I'm a Gray Box kind of guy, so I guess the changes don't upset me. The Realms has become too complicated for me. This is what happens with twenty some years of setting and novels. The shadow weave is a good example of something that I could do without. 

I thought that the Time of Troubles was kind of stupid and the books were lousy, but it didn't cause me to be as upset as some folks are about the 4e changes. No one has killed the realms, as far as I can tell from the previews. They seem to be alive, but maybe not well, plagues can do that. 

What products would you like to see released for 4e FR. I vote for an Aurora Catalogue.   

Space


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

Majoru Oakheart said:
			
		

> I agree.  I love the new Elminster.  He's got the knowledge of history from being alive so long.  He's wise, he USED to be powerful.  He has lots of contacts and friends.  However, he can't save the world anymore.  He can only use his knowledge to help other people save it.




Actually, that's incorrect -- Elminster is not powerless, at least according to contemporary FR Canon. You see, Elminster (and the other Chosen) carries and safeguards a portion of Mystra's Divine Essence, which does not vanish with Mystra's death or the Weave's collapse (unless the designers are going to retcon this) . You can compare this to deities granting Divine Ranks to their followers in 3E, thus making them effectively Demigods -- even if the "sponsor" dies, the newly-created Demigod does not "lose" his Divine Ranks or Salient Divine Abilities. Apparently the FR Design Team forgot about this, and Ed did not spell it out to them (and I doubt they even asked him about Mystra or Elminster, because his job is to write about "unexplored" parts of Faerun).


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 13, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> You see, Elminster (and the other Chosen) carries and safeguards a portion of Mystra's Divine Essence, which does not vanish with Mystra's death or the Weave's collapse (unless the designers are going to retcon this).




That's why he's still around, since he is still immortal. However, it doesn't do anything to change the fact that when he attempts to use magic, bad things happen to him, so he's afraid to use it.


----------



## Imban (Apr 13, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> You're right, Rich Baker is a damned liar.  Wait...
> 
> I'm going to take his word over yours, buddy.




Well, we know, for a fact, that they're doing what Primal said, from previews that have been officially released. Rich Baker *also* says they're also not making significant changes to the pantheon. I'm not sure these two statements are compatible.

At the very least, Rich Baker seems like he's equivocating with that statement, doing one thing while saying he's doing something completely different. It is possible that, actual setting book in hand, he will be entirely right. It seems much more likely, at this present time, to mean that they selected a pantheon of 21 deities that they would not make "significant changes" to, and considered leaving these mostly unremoved "not making significant changes to the pantheon."


----------



## Primal (Apr 13, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> That's why he's still around, since he is still immortal. However, it doesn't do anything to change the fact that when he attempts to use magic, bad things happen to him, so he's afraid to use it.




Ah, but he still has that Divine Essence to play with (and it definitely should grant El more abilities than just Immortality, hey?). And El also has Spellfire plus Psionics, too. And did he just lose all his magical items, too? You know, even if stripped of all the other abilities by the designers, he still should have plenty of items in store.


----------



## DandD (Apr 13, 2008)

The nature of the divine changed over the years. And perhaps that Mystra-babe didn't do it right with those shards. After all, some human became the new Mystra-hussie, after all, so it doesn't mean that what she planned did really work out, same as that senile old grandma Shar hoped that that Shadow Weave thingie worked out better, but it really didn't. 

Sucks to be them.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Spacekase said:
			
		

> Gnomes don't exist any more, all the cities are wiped out? I thought that they just weren't including Gnomes in the PHB. I didn't know that they were going to kill them off.




Well, it appears that FR Gnomes are retconned into "Core" (MM) Forest Gnomes, so I doubt that kingdoms like Oelerhode or villages like Hardbuckler will appear in 4E Realmslore. Most likely they will be conveniently "forgotten". 



> I'm a Gray Box kind of guy, so I guess the changes don't upset me. The Realms has become too complicated for me. This is what happens with twenty some years of setting and novels. The shadow weave is a good example of something that I could do without.




I'm a "Gray Box" guy myself, which is *exactly* why I'm so livid and upset about these changes. I've never felt the Realms, Elminster, the other Chosen or Mystra being too complicated to run. I've pretty much ignored most of the changes that have taken place in FR novels, because the RSEs have been happening so rapidly that I've lost count years ago. Sadly, the Shadow Weave will still be around, whether you like it or not. 



> I thought that the Time of Troubles was kind of stupid and the books were lousy, but it didn't cause me to be as upset as some folks are about the 4e changes. No one has killed the realms, as far as I can tell from the previews. They seem to be alive, but maybe not well, plagues can do that.




Well, I didn't like ToT, either -- they killed three of my favourite (as a DM  evil deities and introduced a new "God-of-ALL-Evil" (Cyric) in their stead. Yet the scope of the changes and the shift in the timeline were pretty mild in comparison -- it's almost as if (after hearing about one of Ed's potential "Realmsdoom" scenarios -- the "Spellstorm") they said: "Hey! Let's do Time of Troubles on steroids! We can explain away everything with it, because, well, it's magic! More than that, actually -- it's a frickin' *STORM* of magic! A PLAGUE OF MAGIC! ". *Sigh*.  :\ 




> What products would you like to see released for 4e FR. I vote for an Aurora Catalogue.
> 
> Space




Well, Volo's Guides would be a good idea for a 4E FR product line, but I doubt that they'll do anything like that, since the whole idea of these "New Realms" were to cut down the level of detail in the setting (unless they want to do another 'Sellplague' for 5E or 6E). Frankly, I don't really care, since my group will keep playing 3E/Pathfinder RPG, and therefore I'm not going to buy any 4E FR stuff.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Comparable to... say a meteorite strike. Or maybe a new ice age. Except not so bad, since apparently, races don't go extinct...




No, some of them will apparently be just "forgotten" (e.g. Saurials and 3E Dragonborn) or outright retconned (e.g. Gnomes). In the former case I don't see any difference to extinction. Do you?

And when is the last time an Ice Age or Meteorite Strike shuffled around the whole Cosmology and toppled most of the gods down from their thrones? Hmmm...


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Ah, but he still has that Divine Essence to play with (and it definitely should grant El more abilities than just Immortality, hey?).




Not necessarily. Things changed. Dramatically. The planes themselves almost fell apart from the backlash. The rules of reality have changed.



> And El also has Spellfire plus Psionics, too.




Yeah, I forgot that some developers had a huge boner for the guy and turned him into the Samuel Haight of the Forgotten Realms. Seeing how they didn't give him either of those capabilities in 3rd Edition (they replaced Spellfire with the Chosen Silver Fire ability; they cut psionics from him entirely), I don't think he'll have them now, either.



> And did he just lose all his magical items, too? You know, even if stripped of all the other abilities by the designers, he still should have plenty of items in store.




Do you not pay attention to ongoing lore? Shadowdale was invaded by the Zhents, Elminster fled and his tower (and all the stuff in it) was destroyed. Kablooey. Couple that with the deaths/disappearances of his allies, and the Old Sage ain't got much going for him anymore.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> No, some of them will apparently be just "forgotten" (e.g. Saurials and 3E Dragonborn) or outright retconned (e.g. Gnomes). In the former case I don't see any difference to extinction. Do you?




Got any actual quote about FR gnomes being changed in any way? Or should I just take this as your typical fact-free anti-4e rant?



> And when is the last time an Ice Age or Meteorite Strike shuffled around the whole Cosmology and toppled most of the gods down from their thrones? Hmmm...




And when was the last time our world had gods or a cosmology that could be objectively proven? Oh yeah... NEVER.


----------



## DandD (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Well, it appears that FR Gnomes are retconned into "Core" (MM) Forest Gnomes, so I doubt that kingdoms like Oelerhode or villages like Hardbuckler will appear in 4E Realmslore. Most likely they will be conveniently "forgotten".



Or perhaps smashed under mountains, or simply transported into the Feywild because of crazy magic effects. Happens all the time on Faerun, after all. In fact, most races' ancestors are aliens from another dimension, either brought in by wizards, or entering this world through stargate-thingies. 


> Well, I didn't like ToT, either -- they killed three of my favourite (as a DM  evil deities and introduced a new "God-of-ALL-Evil" (Cyric) in their stead. Yet the scope of the changes and the shift in the timeline were pretty mild in comparison -- it's almost as if (after hearing about one of Ed's potential "Realmsdoom" scenarios -- the "Spellstorm") they said: "Hey! Let's do Time of Troubles on steroids! We can explain away everything with it, because, well, it's magic! More than that, actually -- it's a frickin' *STORM* of magic! A PLAGUE OF MAGIC! ". *Sigh*.  :\



Yes, magic can really explain everything. That's why 100% of all apocalyptic stuff that threatens your run-on-the-mill fantasy world, which the Forgotten Realms are, are always magical in nature. 


> Well, Volo's Guides would be a good idea for a 4E FR product line, but I doubt that they'll do anything like that, since the whole idea of these "New Realms" were to cut down the level of detail in the setting (unless they want to do another 'Sellplague' for 5E or 6E). Frankly, I don't really care, since my group will keep playing 3E/Pathfinder RPG, and *therefore I'm not going to buy any 4E FR stuff.*



So, does this mean you won't waste your own time for a forum that is dedicated to a product that you dislike? I mean, I wouldn't waste my time on a AD&D 2nd edition forum either, or more realistically, on the official "The Dark Eye 4th edition"-message board to tell the people there that I have no intention to switch to the new edition. It would frustrate me, and the people there would think of me as disruptive, if I absolutely made it clear I'm not going to change at all, but still attempt to critisize every thing about it. Sometimes, it's just better to let it go, and enjoy the game that works for oneself.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> You're right, Rich Baker is a damned liar.  Wait...
> 
> I'm going to take his word over yours, buddy.




Feel free to do so, but first read the final pages in the 'Grand History of the Realms' and also what Rich has revealed about 4E FR in the 'Ask the FR designers'-thread (on the WoTC forums). All of the things I've mentioned are "official" changes verified by Rich or some other WoTC designer.



> This is the biggest pile of platitudes I have ever seen.  You've basically said, "FR is a world with a bunch of detail and a bunch of fantasy."  That hasn't changed.




It hasn't? Could you tell me which 4E FR accessory has all that level of detail we've had ever since the Grey Boxed Set came out? Wow... the lore of tens of thousands of pages stuffed into FRCG, perhaps? If not, it has changed, hasn't it? Because it's not as if Waterdeep or Suzail are the same as in 3E.



> Does any of this actually have anything to do with the cosmology?  I have to say that it's pretty funny you're getting up in arms about them ret-conning a ret-con.  The first one was cool, but the second time around it is totally ruining the Realms, eh?  Where do you get this information about them ret-conning the Gnomes and all their important villages and kingdoms.  I mean, I understand that the Gnomes are an inherent part of the Realms and all... wait a minute...  Finally, you have no grounds to assume that they didn't do their homework when developing the changes.  This is a classic example of some fanboy assuming he's more qualified than the professionals who have been entrusted with his favorite property.




Um, I think it was a guy called...wait... Rich Baker? Yeah, that was the name. He said (on those pretty vague and probably unreliable WoTC forums) that FR gnomes will be retconned into "Core" 4E Gnomes in the 4E Monster Manual. 

As for the Cosmology changes... you heard that the Spellplague will change the FR Cosmology to match the Core Cosmology? And as the Weave has been the "upholder of all life" on Toril (and all beings have been connected to the Weave), its collapse affects the Cosmology (and the Deities, although not on the level the Spellplague appears to do). I never actually liked the Shadow Weave or the Shade -- in fact, neither of them have *ever* appeared in my campaigns (they do exist, but in the background, waiting for the day if a PC is interested enough to mess with them). 

I never claimed that I'm more "qualified" than the 4E FR designers (lest of all Ed, Brian or Rich) -- however, *some* of them apparently have very little experience with FR and its "spirit" or "feel" (IIRC *nobody* has been running FR campaign at WoTC for years). And what's even worse, those designers have apparently not done their "homework" (i.e. poured through all the FR books). That's the only reason I can come up with why some explanations have "holes" you could fly the Spelljammer through. So I can claim that some of the designers haven't done their homework.  

Really, it's no different from me being hired into the 4E Eberron Design Team -- I have absolutely no great passions about Eberron one way or the other, and I haven't read a single Eberron book ever. Would that make me a "true professional" in your eyes? Now, if I started writing 4E Eberron stuff, you'd expect me to know all possible Eberron tidbits so that my stuff wouldn't contradict anything published in 3E books, right? And, I'm probably just as "experienced" as a DM as most of the guys working at WoTC. The only "real" difference between me and, say, James Wyatt, is that his work has been published, while mine has not (and you cannot claim that my stuff would be inferior in comparison as you haven't actually played in my campaigns or seen my stuff, right?). If you were referring to being "qualified" in the sense of formal *education*, I can pretty much say that I'm *perfectly* qualified to write anything (since I haven't heard of any TT RPG Designer courses anywhere).


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> The only "real" difference between me and, say, James Wyatt, is that his work has been published, while mine has not (and you cannot claim that my stuff would be inferior in comparison as you haven't actually played in my campaigns or seen my stuff, right?).




So, the only difference is that people are willing to exchange hard currency for his writing and give him creative control over long-standing intellectual properties, and none (to my knowledge) have demonstrated a willingness to do the same for you?

You're right, that's the only difference.

The problem is that it's a hugely important difference.


----------



## DandD (Apr 14, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> So, the only difference is that people are willing to exchange hard currency for his writing and give him creative control over long-standing intellectual properties, and none (to my knowledge) have demonstrated a willingness to do the same for you?
> 
> You're right, that's the only difference.
> 
> The problem is that it's a hugely important difference.



Mourn, stop crushing dreams and telling sober truths. Your uber-evil-meter will break the scale, and you know we can't afford repairs.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Or perhaps smashed under mountains, or simply transported into the Feywild because of crazy magic effects. Happens all the time on Faerun, after all. In fact, most races' ancestors are aliens from another dimension, either brought in by wizards, or entering this world through stargate-thingies.




Stargate? Oh, you mean portals -- you *do* know that you can't just "dial" any address with them? There's a difference. And there *are* Creator Races native to Toril, you know (humans being one of them, in fact). I very much doubt that Gnome settlements will be even mentioned in FRCG (or any other 4E FR book, for that matter), but it *would* be better if they vanished into the Feywild, for example, than if they're just retconned or completely forgotten/ignored.



> Yes, magic can really explain everything. That's why 100% of all apocalyptic stuff that threatens your run-on-the-mill fantasy world, which the Forgotten Realms are, are always magical in nature.




One of my current "Realmsdoom Scenarios" involves the biggest Orc Horde ever to muster (due to good, old-fashioned intrigue) -- nothing magical about it, unless you count the (not-too-many) magical items and spellcasters they have. And there are a lot of things which set the Realms apart from your "run-of-the-mill" fantasy worlds (apparently more than I imagined, if we take a look at the scope of things 4E FR will have). 



> So, does this mean you won't waste your own time for a forum that is dedicated to a product that you dislike? I mean, I wouldn't waste my time on a AD&D 2nd edition forum either, or more realistically, on the official "The Dark Eye 4th edition"-message board to tell the people there that I have no intention to switch to the new edition. It would frustrate me, and the people there would think of me as disruptive, if I absolutely made it clear I'm not going to change at all, but still attempt to critisize every thing about it. Sometimes, it's just better to let it go, and enjoy the game that works for oneself.




At least I'm passionate about the Realms, and I wish to post my opinions whenever I perceive something which is (in my subjective opinion, of course) either a misconception or misinformation. Since you've admitted that you are not very serious about the Realms, let me ask you, in turn: why are *you* "wasting" your time here, if you're not into FR?


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> completely forgotten




The "forgotten folk" being forgotten is as ironic as it is appropriate.


----------



## hong (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> If you were referring to being "qualified" in the sense of formal *education*, I can pretty much say that I'm *perfectly* qualified to write anything (since I haven't heard of any TT RPG Designer courses anywhere).




... you just choose not to.


----------



## DandD (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Stargate? Oh, you mean portals -- you *do* know that you can't just "dial" any address with them? There's a difference. And there *are* Creator Races native to Toril, you know (humans being one of them, in fact). I very much doubt that Gnome settlements will be even mentioned in FRCG (or any other 4E FR book, for that matter), but it *would* be better if they vanished into the Feywild, for example, than if they're just retconned or completely forgotten/ignored.



I'm pretty sure that you know that other human races on the other hand come from other dimensions/planes/however that is called in Forgotten-Realmian, like those Mulhorandi. 
Bam, Stargate all over the face! 
And you seem to not know what fate attends the gnomes in the 4th edition Forgotten Realms, so you should stop complaining about their fate, if nobody really knows what will happen to them. 



> One of my current "Realmsdoom Scenarios" involves the biggest Orc Horde ever to muster (due to good, old-fashioned intrigue) -- nothing magical about it, unless you count the (not-too-many) magical items and spellcasters they have. And there are a lot of things which set the Realms apart from your "run-of-the-mill" fantasy worlds (apparently more than I imagined, if we take a look at the scope of things 4E FR will have).



But Orc Hordes are lame and won't destroy the world, and get defeated by high-level heroes easily, unless the Orc Hordes got backup by demons and devils or uber-evil wizards of doom and destruction, which in this case, it's magical once again. Although, the Orc Hordes will need uber-magic anyway, least they get swayed away by your standart-high level wizard, be they NPC or PC, so magic is always involved, and the primary factor. 


> At least I'm passionate about the Realms, and I wish to post my opinions whenever I perceive something which is (in my subjective opinion, of course) either a misconception or misinformation. Since you've admitted that you are not very serious about the Realms, let me ask you, in turn: why are *you* "wasting" your time here, if you're not into FR?



Because I'm playing there anyway thanks to our Gamemaster, so I get to know stuff about that setting automatically. I just don't care about it at all if the homelands of my character get stomped by giant mountains from another world or dragon-like humanoids with boobs slaughter his descendants in the fourth edition. Stuff happens. It's 100 years later then. By then, he's dead. Fortunately, I didn't play an elf (because D&D-elves suck).


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> So, the only difference is that people are willing to exchange hard currency for his writing and give him creative control over long-standing intellectual properties, and none (to my knowledge) have demonstrated a willingness to do the same for you?
> 
> You're right, that's the only difference.
> 
> The problem is that it's a hugely important difference.




That was not the point -- you might be the best adventure-writer or DM in the whole world, but unless you *want* to be a "professional" game designer and apply for a job, or post your stuff on the Internet, nobody outside your own gamer buddies will know of it. And before anyone comments on it, no, I don't consider myself to be a great adventure-writer or DM (I can do a decent job, but hardly anything above an "average" Joe DM). But I personally know a DM who could (if he only wanted to) probably land a job as a game designer in any D20 company he wanted to. Not only does he write the best adventures I've ever seen anywhere (and I read a lot of RPG stuff), but he also draws beautiful and exciting maps *AND* is the best DM I've played under. Yet he has no aspirations as a game designer, because he sees RPGs as a form of entertainment and also the best way to relieve stress -- he does not want  to make it a job and a *source* of stress. If you ask me, the only differences he has with James Wyatt is that IMO he writes better stuff than even James, *AND* he has not published his stuff anywhere (and does not want to). In my eyes he's more "professional" than James.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> ... you just choose not to.




But I do. I write a lot of stuff for my own games -- it just isn't published anywhere.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Well, it appears that FR Gnomes are retconned into "Core" (MM) Forest Gnomes, so I doubt that kingdoms like Oelerhode or villages like Hardbuckler will appear in 4E Realmslore. Most likely they will be conveniently "forgotten".




Or, it could easily be that in the ensuing century, both places have been ground into the dust and destroyed because a kingdom of gnomes would have the staying power of a snowball on a hotplate when the chips REALLY come down.  Never minding, of course, that small states in RL got regularly destroyed and forgotten about all the time.



			
				Primal said:
			
		

> I'm a "Gray Box" guy myself, which is *exactly* why I'm so livid and upset about these changes. I've never felt the Realms, Elminster, the other Chosen or Mystra being too complicated to run. I've pretty much ignored most of the changes that have taken place in FR novels, because the RSEs have been happening so rapidly that I've lost count years ago. Sadly, the Shadow Weave will still be around, whether you like it or not.




Yes, but, that's just you.  Do you seriously suggest that the Realms should be written for you, a twenty year veteran and compulsive collector, or me, a casual collector?  Which direction would sell more books do you think?



> Well, I didn't like ToT, either -- they killed three of my favourite (as a DM  evil deities and introduced a new "God-of-ALL-Evil" (Cyric) in their stead. Yet the scope of the changes and the shift in the timeline were pretty mild in comparison -- it's almost as if (after hearing about one of Ed's potential "Realmsdoom" scenarios -- the "Spellstorm") they said: "Hey! Let's do Time of Troubles on steroids! We can explain away everything with it, because, well, it's magic! More than that, actually -- it's a frickin' *STORM* of magic! A PLAGUE OF MAGIC! ". *Sigh*.  :\




Why not?  We can create ENTIRE PLANES of existence with magic.  We've done so in all sorts of various D&D supplements.  Why can't a magical disease wreak havoc on a setting?  Heck, look at Scarred Lands.  There's a setting where your Spell Plague has physical embodiment in the forms of the Titans.  And, guess what?  A mindless plague that randomly affects various things, but leaves others relatively untouched is actually fairly believable.




			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Well, Volo's Guides would be a good idea for a 4E FR product line, but I doubt that they'll do anything like that, since the whole idea of these "New Realms" were to cut down the level of detail in the setting (unless they want to do another 'Sellplague' for 5E or 6E). Frankly, I don't really care, since my group will keep playing 3E/Pathfinder RPG, and therefore I'm not going to buy any 4E FR stuff.




If you think that we won't see a raft of world building wankery for FR in the next couple of years, both filling the pages of Dragon and hardcover books, I've got a bridge to sell you.  

The idea was to cut down on the level of detail that prevents people from starting play.  That means that you don't reference fifteen year old supplements that are out of print.  That was the problem of FR - like the Volo's Guides for example.  Fantastic supplements.  A really fun read.  Out of print for at least a decade.  What is the point of referencing a book that your audience will likely never have heard of, let alone see?


----------



## PeterWeller (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Feel free to do so, but first read the final pages in the 'Grand History of the Realms' and also what Rich has revealed about 4E FR in the 'Ask the FR designers'-thread (on the WoTC forums). All of the things I've mentioned are "official" changes verified by Rich or some other WoTC designer.




There can be a whole lot of changes that, in the end, don't really amount to much at all, especially when you're dealing with a pantheon of over a hundred figures.  A dozen or so gods getting aced may seem like a lot, but you still have another hundred hanging around.

Rich's comment seems to indicate that this is the case.




> It hasn't? Could you tell me which 4E FR accessory has all that level of detail we've had ever since the Grey Boxed Set came out? Wow... the lore of tens of thousands of pages stuffed into FRCG, perhaps? If not, it has changed, hasn't it? Because it's not as if Waterdeep or Suzail are the same as in 3E.




So your contention is that a new setting book needs to update every single little factoid about the Realms that has ever been published?  Well, in that case...

Of course, you're ignoring the fact that much of that lore is already five, ten or even twenty years out of date, and a lot of it is also essentially time-neutral.  Waterdeep and Suzail aren't the same as they were in 3E, yes, but they're very, very similar.  You can take a lot of your street level fluff and port it over with little more than changing a first name here and there.  People are still going to own bars with secret basements and entrances to Undermountain in Waterdeep, and nobles are still going to plot against the crown in Suzail.  The people engaging in these activities in 4E are most likely going to be the descendants of those who did so in 3E. 




> Um, I think it was a guy called...wait... Rich Baker? Yeah, that was the name. He said (on those pretty vague and probably unreliable WoTC forums) that FR gnomes will be retconned into "Core" 4E Gnomes in the 4E Monster Manual.




You're right.  They're going to look a little different. 



> As for the Cosmology changes... you heard that the Spellplague will change the FR Cosmology to match the Core Cosmology? And as the Weave has been the "upholder of all life" on Toril (and all beings have been connected to the Weave), its collapse affects the Cosmology (and the Deities, although not on the level the Spellplague appears to do). I never actually liked the Shadow Weave or the Shade -- in fact, neither of them have *ever* appeared in my campaigns (they do exist, but in the background, waiting for the day if a PC is interested enough to mess with them).




That the weave is the upholder of all life on Toril isn't actually canon.  It's not even supported by Realms canon.  How does Eliminister survive without the weave when he travels to Oerth to visit Mordenkainen or Krynn to visit Dalamar?  If the weave was necessary for life to exist on Toril, why didn't we see mass extinctions during Karsus' Folly and The Time of Troubles?  Why don't you drop dead the instant you step within a region of Dead Magic? 



> I never claimed that I'm more "qualified" than the 4E FR designers (lest of all Ed, Brian or Rich) -- however, *some* of them apparently have very little experience with FR and its "spirit" or "feel" (IIRC *nobody* has been running FR campaign at WoTC for years). And what's even worse, those designers have apparently not done their "homework" (i.e. poured through all the FR books). That's the only reason I can come up with why some explanations have "holes" you could fly the Spelljammer through. So I can claim that some of the designers haven't done their homework.




Your assuming your knowledge of the Realms is so complete that anything you perceive as a mistake by the development team must be a mistake.  You have seen an incomplete picture and assumed that the incompleteness is due to a lack of "homework."  You go on to insinuate that you're at least as qualified as the designers.  Are you so vain as to actually believe this?  



> Really, it's no different from me being hired into the 4E Eberron Design Team -- I have absolutely no great passions about Eberron one way or the other, and I haven't read a single Eberron book ever. Would that make me a "true professional" in your eyes? Now, if I started writing 4E Eberron stuff, you'd expect me to know all possible Eberron tidbits so that my stuff wouldn't contradict anything published in 3E books, right? And, I'm probably just as "experienced" as a DM as most of the guys working at WoTC. The only "real" difference between me and, say, James Wyatt, is that his work has been published, while mine has not (and you cannot claim that my stuff would be inferior in comparison as you haven't actually played in my campaigns or seen my stuff, right?). If you were referring to being "qualified" in the sense of formal *education*, I can pretty much say that I'm *perfectly* qualified to write anything (since I haven't heard of any TT RPG Designer courses anywhere).




You're right, I can't judge the quality of your work, but I have to ask, if it's so good, why have you not tried to publish it, and if you have, why hasn't someone published it?  The ball is in your court as to the quality of your work.  If you're not willing to afford me the opportunity to judge it, I have every right to assume that's because it's not as good as the work of those who do afford me that opportunity.

I find it especially amusing that you say you're as experienced a DM as people who play D&D for a living.  You may very well be a very experienced DM, I think most of us here on ENWorld are, but I very much doubt you play or DM in three games a day, five days a week.

You may be very knowledgeable about FR canon, you may be a talented writer, and you may be an experienced dungeon master, but you haven't the access to material that the professionals have (Ed's 100+ page fluff bible for 4E Waterdeep, for instance), you haven't the experience playing and running games the professionals have, and someone hasn't take the risk to invest in publishing your writing as they have with the professional developers.  Note that this risk has also been rewarded.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> So it's a good thing they're removing Unther, Mulhorand, and Chessenta? I think it's brilliant.




That depends on whether you've used them or not. A whole Dragonborn Empire whisked by magic out of another plane, because they couldn't come up (or didn't bother with) with a plausible explanation how to "tweak" the 3E Dragonborn (logically implemented into the Realms in 'Dragons of Faerun') to fit the new "mold" -- you'd call that brilliant? I call it laziness.



> I agree. I also think it's pretty smart.




Well, that depends on how they succeed in selling the "New Realms" into new customers -- "FR haters" and non-gamers alike. My personal RL experience (discussing the changes with a bunch of FR fans -- both players and DMs alike) is that most of the current "old guard" is not so keen on the changes and may skip 4E FR altogether. I also get the same kind of "vibe" after reading any FR threads here, at Candlekeep and the WoTC forums. Of course, only time will tell how succesfull 4E FR will actually be (and I *am* well aware that "Internet savvy" fans do not represent the whole customer or fan base). My gut feeling is that it won't sell nearly as much as they expect it to. It's a calculated risk (which they have publicly acknowledged) which may turn out to be the stupidest thing they've done. 



> Wait, Elminster's gone? The farmers are gone? Merchants? Ancient secrets and hidden threats?




The current level of details will be gone, the Pantheon mutilated into a collection of interracial deities with "angelic"/hero deity servants who churches (and worshippers) have mysteriously vanished into thin air (even in the areas *not* ravaged by the Spellplague). Almost all of the NPCs (who include a lot of merchants and farmers, indeed) I've created are dead. As in "toss out the 300+ pages of NPCs you've written".The same with all the wizards, priests, villains, etc. In fact, all of the stuff I've written needs "tweaking" -- even "fluff". Just because D&D and FR are going through *both* mechanical and thematical changes, which saldy *does* affect the spirit and feel of the setting. So FR is going to become more "Points-of-Lightish" (to use Rich Baker's expression)? That affects local customs, rituals, economy, and so on. And we don't even know if there will be any farmers in the Western Heartlands, for example -- certainly there won't be in Turmish or Chessenta, hey?

As for Elminster, no he won't be gone, but apparently he can't cast any magic and the designers have forgotten that the Divine Essence of Mystra within him should still work just fine (unless *ALL* the gods are rendered as powerless as Elminster in 4E FR -- not likely, right?). And that Divine Essence -- plus Spellfire and Psionics -- should let him accomplish him, well, pretty much anything now that he's no longer bound by Mystra's will.


----------



## hong (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> But I do. I write a lot of stuff for my own games -- it just isn't published anywhere.



 IOW... you write lots of stuff, you just choose not to publish it?


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> IOW... you write lots of stuff, you just choose not to publish it?




And why should I publish it? I don't have any ambitions in that field, and I prefer keeping RPGs as a hobby, not a profession. Neither do I want to desperately seek recognition and fame by posting my stuff on the Internet. Nothing wrong in that either.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> The "forgotten folk" being forgotten is as ironic as it is appropriate.




They're not "forgotten" in my group -- we occasionally play Gnome PCs and my campaigns have actually featured a lot of the "small folk" (halflings and gnomes). Oh, and the village of Hardbuckler actually plays a central role in my current campaign.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 14, 2008)

Can god make a stone so heavy he can't lift it? Can the god of magic create magic so powerful even she can't break it? 

I wouldn't count on Mystras Divine Essence working the way it used to (whatever this was) for Elminster, since the world and its magic has changed.


----------



## hong (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> And why should I publish it? I don't have any ambitions in that field, and I prefer keeping RPGs as a hobby, not a profession. Neither do I want to desperately seek recognition and fame by posting my stuff on the Internet. Nothing wrong in that either.



 Yes, Primal.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> I'm pretty sure that you know that other human races on the other hand come from other dimensions/planes/however that is called in Forgotten-Realmian, like those Mulhorandi.
> Bam, Stargate all over the face!
> And you seem to not know what fate attends the gnomes in the 4th edition Forgotten Realms, so you should stop complaining about their fate, if nobody really knows what will happen to them.




I do know that they're being retconned into those wretched 4E monster-Gnomes. And who would the FR equivalent of the Goa'uld? Can't think of any "parasites" posing as false deities. And another thing: I *do* think Unther, Mulhorand and the Orcgate Wars were written before SG came out -- maybe it's the other way around, and whenever you're watching SG you should say: "Bam, Mulhorand all over the face!" 



> But Orc Hordes are lame and won't destroy the world, and get defeated by high-level heroes easily, unless the Orc Hordes got backup by demons and devils or uber-evil wizards of doom and destruction, which in this case, it's magical once again. Although, the Orc Hordes will need uber-magic anyway, least they get swayed away by your standart-high level wizard, be they NPC or PC, so magic is always involved, and the primary factor.




Lame? Those same orc hordes that have stormed and pillaged their way through half the world? Those same orc hordes that took the combined might of all the civilized races to vanquish? The only time I remember an Orc Horde being shattered by high-level adventures was when the Moonlight Men (led by Mintiper Moonsilver) and their allies broke a (relatively small) Horde in the Turnstone Pass -- and only *seven* (IIRC) of the "triumphant" victors walked away alive (the rest are buried in cairns in the pass). Also remember that they were holding a narrow pass and were prepared to fight the Horde -- that was a significant tactical advantage.

I also have personal experience in 3E about battling a goblinoid horde with a party of high-level (from 13th to 24th level PCs) characters. In addition to this, we had over 150 elite (i.e. mid-to-high level NPCs) allies in that battle, *AND* we were defending a walled city (a very significant advantage in this case). The Horde of 30,000 (mostly *unarmed* and unarmored goblins, but also including some hundreds of orc and hobgoblin "veterans" and even some giants) or so had only a few spellcasters  (five? We killed almost all of them before the battle had begun). No demons or devils. So it was a mob of poorly armed and armored goblinoid "rabble" with an occasional "veteran" or a giant -- hardly equivalent to Obould's forces, for example. Did I mention that our small "army" included several Archmages (one PC Wizard of 24th level) and about 70 clerics (many of whom were High Priests). Our spellcasters lobbed spell after spell (I think our PC Wizard was *four* spells per round, thanks to Quicken Spell, 3.0 Haste and a rare 9th level FR spell), using Blade Barriers, Flame Strikes, Reverse Gravity, Fireballs, Fire Spiders, All kinds of 'Wall'-spells and Summon Monster-spells, etc. It felt like fighting an angry swarm of insects with a needle. Even with all that high-level magic at our disposal, and the tactical advantage (cover, for example) we had from the walls, we would have lost. After a grueling fight which saw most of our valiant army slain (including my own fighter), we won when we managed to kill the leaders of that horde. We had killed some thousands (about 5000 all in all) of our enemies, while we lost all but 30 of our "elite" allies. A Pyrrhic victory, at best, but the enemy reatreated. And yes, we played it round by round through several sessions, which makes it pretty easy to say that no *single* Archmage (or even a *group* of Archmages) could single-handedly take on, say, tens of thousands of enemies and hope to win -- even if survived, he'd pretty soon run out of spells.  

The "Apocalyptic Horde" I'm referring to would be far more powerful in sheer numbers that the gathered army of the goblinoids at Torglor's Triangle (Battle of Bones). And *they* numbered hundreds of thousands. 



> Because I'm playing there anyway thanks to our Gamemaster, so I get to know stuff about that setting automatically. I just don't care about it at all if the homelands of my character get stomped by giant mountains from another world or dragon-like humanoids with boobs slaughter his descendants in the fourth edition. Stuff happens. It's 100 years later then. By then, he's dead. Fortunately, I didn't play an elf (because D&D-elves suck).




That doesn't still explain why you're hanging around here -- seems you only care about the setting because you're "forced" to play in it. So, why?


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Can god make a stone so heavy he can't lift it? Can the god of magic create magic so powerful even she can't break it?
> 
> I wouldn't count on Mystras Divine Essence working the way it used to (whatever this was) for Elminster, since the world and its magic has changed.




Mystra's Divine Essence held by the Chosen exists separately from the Weave, Mystra and the Planes, which is why it should not be affected by the Spellplague in any way -- unless *ALL* the deities lose their access to Divine Essence and their powers. I thought most of the deities became Exarch-servitors due to their planes (their 'Places of Power') were destroyed, NOT because their Divine Essences were affected directly by the Spellplague or Mystra's death? No matter how Divine Abilities function in 4E this should be one of the things the designers should keep in mind.


----------



## hong (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Mystra's Divine Essence held by the Chosen exists separately from the Weave, Mystra and the Planes, which is why it should not be affected by the Spellplague in any way -- unless *ALL* the deities lose their access to Divine Essence and their powers.




The power of handwavium is infinite.


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> Well, he couldn't save the world before either - he was always planes hopping or busy with other threats. You know, despite the entire world being in danger.




Oh, I thought a lot of that "plane-hopping" had to do with dealing with a threat here and there? Read some of the novels by Ed Greenwood, if you need proof of that. I've posted on a number of threads on three different forums about how some DMs have a problem with Elminster as "Deus-Ex-Machina", and frankly I've become quite tired of it. 

However, let me offer you some RL examples of why Elminster might not wish to jump in to save the Realms time after time. First of all, why doesn't U.S. just nuke North Korea, Iran or China -- all are dangerous "tyrannies" who threaten the world peace and use ruthless methods to repress their citizens. They certainly have the *power* to do so -- probably even to take on all three at once. Maybe they fear the international response? Potential acts of retaliation? World War III? Environmental and collateral damage? 

Now, hold on to those thoughts. If Elminster (or *all* the Chosen) decided to "go nuclear" on Thayvians, Zhentarim, Larloch et al. -- what do you think would happen? The magical backlash from a magical conflict of that size would be immense, and certainly *not* sanctioned by Mystra. And speaking of Mystra, some of those "villains" are actually her worshippers whose magical research contributes greatly to the spreading of magic (which is one of the goals of Mystra and her servants). 

So Elminster is bound the will or Mystra, and being CG he also prefers to act through subtlety -- disguises, false aliases and "proxies" (e.g. the PCs). And why wouldn't he? If El would spend all his time saving the Realms time after time, there would be no need adventurers (and he's intelligent enough to realize this, have no doubt about it!). If El would flit everywhere, unleashing spells and slaying villains left and right (and *IF* Mystra would permit this), nobody else would earn XP or "grow" to become heroes (and defenders of the righterous causes) after his time is up. 

Therefore, I think it's safe to say that Elminster acts in the shadows, furthering the agenda of good, because he also knows that sometimes intrigue and subtlety works where "blasting", intimidation and pure force fails. Take a look at 'Silverfall', for example, to see how "limited" the Chosen are, if acting on their own.

I also wish to point out that IF (and that's something I don't agree with) it was absolutely necessary to remove Mystra and her Chosen (plus all the other "bothersome" high-level NPCs) to make FR "playable" again, this Spellplague (i.e. a "worldwide magical catastrophe") is IMO the cheapest and cheesiest trick in the book –- one that you can always use if you can’t come up with anything creative and feel lazy (you *could* do a brilliant work with it, but I haven't seen any proof of that). Sure, you can explain away anything by saying “It’s magic! It’s unpredictable! It’s Time of Troubles on steroids and more!”, but if you try to address individual issues and details, at least make sure you’re consistent in what you are writing and aware of how those details worked in previously published lore.

If the Chosen absolutely should be rendered "powerless", there are ways to do that in a more creative and interesting fashion. I wouldn't have any trouble with "guilt-ridden" and "afraid-to-use-his-powers" Elminster, if, for example, Mystra had (in a moment of utter divine panic) bestowed her powers on her Chosen.  And what are the Chosen, after all? Probably little more than mortal tools -- useful and intriguing tools, but tools nonetheless. Now, as Ed has subtly (and not-so-subtly) hinted at the Chosen going slightly insane (i.e. their mortal minds cannot "deal" with the divine essence forever) with each passing year -- therefore, it would completely "in tune" with the previously published Realmslore if the their minds (just like Halaster's) would have completely shattered by the sudden influx of raw divine power. They would have lost control of themselves, and struggling to control the energy, they would have unleashed the Spellplague and shattered whatever still remained of the Weave. Once they regained their senses, they would have found out that some of them were dead and the rest of them had lost most of their powers. What would have been even worse, they had failed in their duty and unleashed the terrible 'Spellstorm' (prophecied by Alaundo) on poor Faerun. Wouldn't that have been a more logical way to explain why El and the rest of the Chosen would have been powerless (or reluctant to use their powers) and "guilt-ridden"? At least I think so, but that's just my subjective opinion -- I also would have preferred the 'Coming of the Black Star'-"Realmsdoom Scenario" (especially as it could be linked to Shar).


----------



## Primal (Apr 14, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> If it works for the DC-Universe with its bajillions of superheroes, like Superman and Batman and Wonder Woman and Flash and Green Arrow and Zatanna and Dove and Hawk and and and (and comic book fans are as least as nit-picky as roleplayers, in fact, most roleplayers are comic book fans), it also will work and sell well for the Forgotten Realms with its Seven Sisters and Blackstaff and Szasz Tam and Elminster and Drizzt and Manshoon and so on...




The DC Continuity is probably not a good example of a consistent timeline (not that Marvel Continuity is any better) -- every now and then the creative team has decided to eliminate some inconsistencies (or “holes”) with an  ‘<Insert your favourite “apocalyptic” term here> Crisis’. And now it appears that something called the ‘Final Crisis’ is looming on the horizon (whoo-pee!). Frankly, I’ve lost count of the changes/retcons ever since ‘Identity Crisis’… for example, is Superboy part of the “official” DC history anymore? I can't tell anymore.



> Yeah, Elven Magic has always been better than any other kind of magic in D&D, which is why we had to endure all that elven-crap, with Blue Elves, Dark Elves, Grey Elves, Wood Elves, Wild Elves, Green Elves, Sky Elves, Sea Elves, Mere Elves, Gold Elves, Moon Elves, Silver Elves, High Elves, and all that other elfi-stuff, and that's why gods loose to D&D-elves. Elves in D&D have more "fanbois" than those whacky Forgotten Realms-gods could ever have...




Your list actually includes some subraces that do not exist in the Realms. I strongly advise you to take a look at 'Races of Faerun', okay? ;P


----------



## DandD (Apr 14, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> I do know that they're being retconned into those wretched 4E monster-Gnomes. And who would the FR equivalent of the Goa'uld? Can't think of any "parasites" posing as false deities. And another thing: I *do* think Unther, Mulhorand and the Orcgate Wars were written before SG came out -- maybe it's the other way around, and whenever you're watching SG you should say: "Bam, Mulhorand all over the face!"



I sure hope that you know that nobody really believes that Stargate predates the Forgotten Realms, not even I. It's after all only a tautology regarding the alienism of some the humans from the Forgotten Realms. 



> Lame? Those same orc hordes that have stormed and pillaged their way through half the world? Those same orc hordes that took the combined might of all the civilized races to vanquish? The only time I remember an Orc Horde being shattered by high-level adventures was when the Moonlight Men (led by Mintiper Moonsilver) and their allies broke a (relatively small) Horde in the Turnstone Pass -- and only *seven* (IIRC) of the "triumphant" victors walked away alive (the rest are buried in cairns in the pass). Also remember that they were holding a narrow pass and were prepared to fight the Horde -- that was a significant tactical advantage.



I really don't know nor do I wish to know how they fought and where these places are located. If you don't give them uber-demon allies and high level magician support, they'll be easily defeated by high-level wizards with their uber angel allies. 



> I also have personal experience in 3E about battling a goblinoid horde with a party of high-level ... (and so on)... even if survived, he'd pretty soon run out of spells.



You know, that's why you can summon extraplanar beings with high damage reduction and just steamroll them with powerful iron golems.  If your players or your NPCs don't use the really good spells, I can totally see why they do a suboptimal job. 


> The "Apocalyptic Horde" I'm referring to would be far more powerful in sheer numbers that the gathered army of the goblinoids at Torglor's Triangle (Battle of Bones). And *they* numbered hundreds of thousands.



I also don't know if that goblinoid army at whatever battle even should be considered a threat, if it's them versus a high-level party (or perhaps even epic). In the end, they get plastered easily, and can only win if they get high-level magic support, unless you restrict that campaign to low-level. 
Then it might really feel epic, without using the epic rules. 

Like "DM of the Rings".  With all the crazyness that applies to such a campaign, and the complaints that it will feel hackneyed. 


> That doesn't still explain why you're hanging around here -- seems you only care about the setting because you're "forced" to play in it. So, why?



I'm pretty sure that if we switch to 4th edition, the GM will take a look at the new material for the new Forgotten Realms. So I'm taking a look at it as well. Who knows, perhaps the new Forgotten Realms may even grow on me, and I might even want to moderate a game there. Or perhaps not. But I really won't care for what happened at all in the 100 years that passed between Mystra dying for the n-th time and the present where gnomes are driven out to the Feywild. 



> The DC Continuity is probably not a good example of a consistent timeline (not that Marvel Continuity is any better) -- every now and then the creative team has decided to eliminate some inconsistencies (or “holes”) with an ‘<Insert your favourite “apocalyptic” term here> Crisis’. And now it appears that something called the ‘Final Crisis’ is looming on the horizon (whoo-pee!). Frankly, I’ve lost count of the changes/retcons ever since ‘Identity Crisis’… for example, is Superboy part of the “official” DC history anymore? I can't tell anymore.



Yeah, but it still works, and as most roleplayers also are comic book readers who can accept this crap easily, they can also easily accept the changes to the Forgotten Realms. In the end, all that matters is that the people remember that the FR is that world where Elminster and Drizzt live, and where the city of Baldur's Gate lies. 


> Your list actually includes some subraces that do not exist in the Realms. I strongly advise you to take a look at 'Races of Faerun', okay? ;P



Everything exists in the Forgotten Realms. That's one of its special properties, dude. "Races of Faerun" only introduces more race-creep, like Aasimar, Thieflings, Genasi, some bird-men, and such. It's not the end-all-be-all of the race-glut in Faerun, unfortunately. 
At least in 4th edition, some of those thousand elf-subspecies will be collectively regrouped in Eladrin or Elf, and for those who still prefer the out-dated names, they will still be called by their assinine green-elf/gold-elf/wild-elf/moon-elf/sky-elf etc. names. But at least technically, there won't be thousands of stupid elf-subtype-rules anymore. 

At least, that was promised.


----------



## Imban (Apr 14, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Everything exists in the Forgotten Realms. That's one of its special properties, dude.




I'm pretty sure that Grey Elves don't exist in the Realms. I mean, maybe a very few do, holdovers from 2e, where you could travel between Greyhawk and the Realms, but that's it.

Personally, I'm fine with crunching most of those Elves down to Elves and Eladrin, though I think Aquatic Elves, Avariel, and Drow need to be separate. The Fey'ri / Daemonfey / Half-Fiend Eladrins too, I suppose, though I'd also be fine if they all died in a fire.


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

PeterWeller said:
			
		

> There can be a whole lot of changes that, in the end, don't really amount to much at all, especially when you're dealing with a pantheon of over a hundred figures.  A dozen or so gods getting aced may seem like a lot, but you still have another hundred hanging around.
> 
> Rich's comment seems to indicate that this is the case.




No, we’re not dealing with a “Pantheon of over a hundred figures” in 4E anymore –- perhaps you missed it, but *only* twenty or so of the gods will be Deities anymore, and the rest of the deities will be their *servitors*. Let me say it again: only TWENTY deities. Which means that hundreds of shrines, temples, monasteries and strongholds… all vanished? Some of them never even existed, while the rest just fell into ruin? No more racial pantheons? Major temples of Moradin and Corellon appearing in human cities, and temples of Selune and Oghma in dwarven and elven cities? Uh… I don’t know about you, but to me that really “amounts to much”.



> So your contention is that a new setting book needs to update every single little factoid about the Realms that has ever been published?  Well, in that case...
> 
> Of course, you're ignoring the fact that much of that lore is already five, ten or even twenty years out of date, and a lot of it is also essentially time-neutral.  Waterdeep and Suzail aren't the same as they were in 3E, yes, but they're very, very similar.  You can take a lot of your street level fluff and port it over with little more than changing a first name here and there.  People are still going to own bars with secret basements and entrances to Undermountain in Waterdeep, and nobles are still going to plot against the crown in Suzail.  The people engaging in these activities in 4E are most likely going to be the descendants of those who did so in 3E.




No, that’s not what I said –- I merely commented on you saying “you’re going to have the same level of detail in 4E, too”. While the Realms have been hit with a lot of RSEs, we have been pretty much free to ignore them, as the events and effects have mostly concerned and appeared in the novels. Besides, most changes have had little impact outside their "area of effect" -- I can apply the "fluff" and NPCs from the Volo's Guides, for example.

And “time-neutral” lore when the “leap” is 100 years forward, while even the planes and deities themselves have shuddered at the hands of a highly-magical catastrophe? Uh, I am talking about architectural details, NPCs, economy, political factions, city/town/village maps, geography, etc. With flying mountains and wide-spread poverty and misery? Monsters roaming the countryside (outside the ‘Points of Light’) in untold numbers? Temples, shrines, monasteries and strongholds of almost 90% of the 3E deities gone? And no more racial pantheons (which influences a lot of things, in the end, even “fluff-wise”)? Tell me -- if the “fluff” hasn’t changed really changed in 4E (in Waterdeep to use your example), why has Ed Greenwood written that “100-pages 4E Waterdeep Fluff Bible”, hey?  And, how could I apply *any* 1E/2E/3E “fluffy” lore to places like Baldur’s Gate, whose population has soared to millions (which has an effect on pretty much everything, especially economy, crime, architecture, racial balance, organizations/factions and so on)?



> You're right.  They're going to look a little different.




And also lose their PC class abilities, to boot. And if I’m not completely senile, I recall gnomes becoming forest-dwelling fey?




> That the weave is the upholder of all life on Toril isn't actually canon.  It's not even supported by Realms canon.  How does Eliminister survive without the weave when he travels to Oerth to visit Mordenkainen or Krynn to visit Dalamar?  If the weave was necessary for life to exist on Toril, why didn't we see mass extinctions during Karsus' Folly and The Time of Troubles?  Why don't you drop dead the instant you step within a region of Dead Magic?




The Weave is connected to all beings on Toril, so even when Elminster is “plane-hopping”, he is still part of the Weave and the Weave is within him (and Dead Magic Zones are “holes” in the Weave – it’s not the same as stepping into a vacuum). IIRC Ed did not have much to do with Karsus’ Folly – the way it turned out in published Realmslore was one designer’s (who apparently didn’t even consult Ed when he was writing the Netheril Boxed Set) perspective on how it happened. As for ToT, I don’t recall the Weave being destroyed during that event – do you? Yes, the decay of the Weave reflected quite dramatically in the Realms, but the Weave *existed*. Now, wait a minute… funny you should mention Karsus’ Folly, because I can’t recall any sort of Spellplague taking place during Netheril’s Fall… which should have logically happened from the 4E perspective, since Mystryl died (which should also destroyed the Weave, right?). As I already said, I can’t recall the Spellplague happening during ToT, either. And yet, if those ‘Countdown…’-articles (and Rich’s replies) are to be believed, the Spellplague was triggered by the Death of the Goddess of Magic (Mystra) and the subsequent collapse of the Weave. Uh… talk about consistency there.  



> Your assuming your knowledge of the Realms is so complete that anything you perceive as a mistake by the development team must be a mistake. You have seen an incomplete picture and assumed that the incompleteness is due to a lack of "homework." You go on to insinuate that you're at least as qualified as the designers. Are you so vain as to actually believe this?
> 
> (*SNIP*)
> 
> ...




First of all, as I already noted above, I don’t have any professional ambitions about my beloved hobby. Neither am I seeking any “fame” or fortune by trying desperately publish my stuff on the Internet. So, no, I haven’t offered my stuff to any RPG publisher and nor do I want to put it on the Internet. It’s enough that me and my players can occasionally get together and have a good time. And I truly doubt that Ed's "Fluff Bible" is a very good example of any  -- he probably wrote it just for fun, and it's a "bonus" for the Design Team. Do you REALLY believe that all freelance novel writers are going to read it through? Just like Mark Anthony read the Waterdeep Boxed Set when he wrote 'Escape from Undermountain' (in which we see an evil Durnan and his band of cutthroats, plus those nasty dungeons of Waterdeep in which innocent are tortured... *sigh*)? Or when Brian Thomsen (IIRC) wrote the 'Once around the Realms'? In which he even couldn't spell two very important letters -- AO (he constantly referred to a commonly-worshipped "overgod" called EO).  

Let me say it again: I’m *not* claiming to be more “qualified” as a writer, or a “better” DM, than any WoTC  designer.  Note that even those professional game designers are just *normal people* first and foremost -- they may have better “routine” in running and planning encounters and writing articles, modules and accessories, but do they still *enjoy* the game the same way as you do? I know film directors (not personally, of course) who can’t just enjoy a movie like you and I do –- they’re constantly focusing on how every film has been directed (e.g. which kind of stunts there are, which kind of visual effects, what could he had done better, what sort of professional “tricks” he could steal from it, and so on). The same goes for composers, musicians, authors, etc. -– in fact,  it’s the same in almost any other  “creative” profession ; you just don’t enjoy your “work” the same way you did when it was a hobby. Therefore,  I would dare to guess that most professional adventure designers cannot take a look at an article, adventure or rule book without analyzing how it’s written, how the encounters are planned, what’s the basic premise, etc. And in the end it affects how they DM and write their campaigns, too. For example, imagine yourself writing (and running) brief encounters, day after day, just to test every critter in the new Monster Manual or certain new rules –- can you honestly claim it wouldn’t kill off some of the passion for D&D and therefore affect your own “home” campaigns?  

Let’s get back to “feel” and “spirit” and knowledge of the details. I’m amazed how much blind faith you have in people who may be professional game designers but have very little (or even no) experience with the Realms at all. Unless they have actually read the FR novels and accessories, how *could* they have any sense of FR “spirit” or “feel”? It just isn’t enough that you quickly pour through the latest supplements and memorize some places and names. Yes, they may be professionals, but unlike you, I don’t think that professional designers are necessarily or automatically  better DMs or authors than your average “Joe DM”. Compare this to a FR DM (who hadn’t ever read a single Eberron book) writing or running an adventure set in Eberron -- how would it feel to “hard core” Eberron fans? They would probably point out how the author/DM has forgotten faction X in Xen’Drik, or NPC Y of House Z. And, most likely, he forgot that people in Kingdom W *only* wear purple and how the priests of deity Q should *not* be LE. Therefore, if I did an adventure set in Sharn (“Hey, isn’t that like a seaside metropolis with griffons and flying carpets and so on -– like Eberron’s Waterdeep or something?”), for example, it would probably feel like a FR module with some Eberron places but definitely the NPC names would sound more “Realmsian”. In fact, I’m fairly sure that the end result would be a pretty “bland” mixture of Generic/FR feel, because I just don’t know enough about Eberron to use those details in the story.  

So,  isn’t it quite valid to note that almost *any* Eberron DM is more “qualified” to write and run Eberron stuff than I? Or more “qualified” than even the Grandmaster of all DMs, Ed Greenwood? Therefore, isn’t it just fair to note that if I and Keith Baker were to write an article or adventure set in FR, Keith would probably pull it off a lot quicker due to his professional routine, but I’m quite certain that my stuff would *feel* more Realmsian (due to those details) . If we were to run a 3E FR Campaign, I’m quite confident that I could put it together quicker than he could (and again, it would probably feel more like a FR campaign than his). But if we are talking about Eberron stuff, I have no illusions about my abilities –- anyone with even marginal knowledge about Eberron would do a better job than I. Note that we are not talking about *quality* of the *content* here (Keith Baker –- along with Chris Perkins and Ed Greenwood -- is, IMO, probably the best designer and writer ever to work at WoTC). So I would never claim to be a better DM or better adventure-designer than Keith –- far from it!

We are, however, talking about “feel” and “spirit”, and to elaborate this even further with a concrete example: Robert Jordan has, for years, been one of my favourite authors, whose ‘Wheel of Time’-series is a true masterpiece in fantasy fiction. No matter how much I love his ‘Wheel of Time’-novels, I have never really liked his take on Howard’s ‘Conan’-stories –- they just lack something in “spirit” and “feel” that Howard's stories have (and Jordan also apparently misinterpreted/ignored some details and yet some of them even contradict  Howard's own text). Neither do I think that one of my other favourite authors, Ed Greenwood, could write a ‘Wheel of Time’-story that would compare to Jordan’s work –- in fact, I’m sure it would feel like a FR story set in a completely different environment.


----------



## DandD (Apr 15, 2008)

Consider that the spellplague happened because Cyric, some loonie god of evil with rumored help from that Shar-hussie killed Mystra in her own house, not as a mortal deity banished to the world by uber-god Ao (or EO? ). Everything's possible, like in every superhero comic book series. The monasteries and temples and whatever structure dedicated to beings who were formerly gods and now have become demi-powers at best will just become ruins, or have been strangely affected by the return of the crazy world of Abeir into Toril. And in 100 years, some structures just get abandoned anyway. Also, it has been said that Gnomes will be detailed in the Forgotten Realms-Campaign book as a player character-race, so please, just stop with them.


----------



## Guild Goodknife (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> No, we’re not dealing with a “Pantheon of over a hundred figures” in 4E anymore –- perhaps you missed it, but *only* twenty or so of the gods will be Deities anymore, and the rest of the deities will be their *servitors*. Let me say it again: only TWENTY deities. Which means that hundreds of shrines, temples, monasteries and strongholds… all vanished? *Some of them never even existed*, while the rest just fell into ruin? No more racial pantheons? Major temples of Moradin and Corellon appearing in human cities, and temples of Selune and Oghma in dwarven and elven cities? Uh… I don’t know about you, but to me that really “amounts to much”.



As far as i understand it the missing gods will not be retconned, most of the lesser gods were just not strong enough to keep their realms and powers during the Spellplague. (Which  can also be seen as an explanation why Elminster shouldn't retain his Chosen powers.)



			
				Primal said:
			
		

> The Weave is connected to all beings on Toril, so even when Elminster is “plane-hopping”, he is still part of the Weave and the Weave is within him.



As far as i know the Weave is not the Force, and your interpretation was never part of the official definition.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> (and Dead Magic Zones are “holes” in the Weave – it’s not the same as stepping into a vacuum).



That just doesn't make any sense. If the Weave is the source of all life on Toril there shouldn't be any plants growing or animals living in a Dead Magic Zone. 


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> IIRC Ed did not have much to do with Karsus’ Folly – the way it turned out in published Realmslore was one designer’s (who apparently didn’t even consult Ed when he was writing the Netheril Boxed Set) perspective on how it happened. As for ToT, I don’t recall the Weave being destroyed during that event – do you? Yes, the decay of the Weave reflected quite dramatically in the Realms, but the Weave *existed*. Now, wait a minute… funny you should mention Karsus’ Folly, because I can’t recall any sort of Spellplague taking place during Netheril’s Fall… which should have logically happened from the 4E perspective, since Mystryl died (which should also destroyed the Weave, right?). As I already said, I can’t recall the Spellplague happening during ToT, either. And yet, if those ‘Countdown…’-articles (and Rich’s replies) are to be believed, the Spellplague was triggered by the Death of the Goddess of Magic (Mystra) and the subsequent collapse of the Weave. Uh… talk about consistency there.



You missed a little point - this time Shar and Cyric also destroy Dweomerheart, Mystras own plane! Also, Mystra and Mystryl are arguably not the same deity, so differnt reactions of the Weave to their death seem (to me) not too far fetched.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Lame? Those same orc hordes that have stormed and pillaged their way through half the world? Those same orc hordes that took the combined might of all the civilized races to vanquish? The only time I remember an Orc Horde being shattered by high-level adventures was when the Moonlight Men (led by Mintiper Moonsilver) and their allies broke a (relatively small) Horde in the Turnstone Pass -- and only *seven* (IIRC) of the "triumphant" victors walked away alive (the rest are buried in cairns in the pass). Also remember that they were holding a narrow pass and were prepared to fight the Horde -- that was a significant tactical advantage.




It's amazing how novels ignore mechanics.

Unless your goblin horde is led by 20th level goblins, a single archmage could wipe them out.  He just bombs Elder Air Elementals on them every day or so from a comfortable height of about half a mile and sits back.  After about a month, all the gobbies are dead.

I remember reading a rather lengthy thread on ENworld about a 20th level lich and a million 5th level PC's.  The Lich wins.


----------



## Fobok (Apr 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> It's amazing how novels ignore mechanics.
> 
> Unless your goblin horde is led by 20th level goblins, a single archmage could wipe them out.  He just bombs Elder Air Elementals on them every day or so from a comfortable height of about half a mile and sits back.  After about a month, all the gobbies are dead.
> 
> I remember reading a rather lengthy thread on ENworld about a 20th level lich and a million 5th level PC's.  The Lich wins.




At least that's an advantage of 4e: The flattened level curve will make those novels (and Primal's plotline) make a lot more sense.


----------



## vagabundo (Apr 15, 2008)

Fobok said:
			
		

> At least that's an advantage of 4e: The flattened level curve will make those novels (and Primal's plotline) make a lot more sense.




So 4e may be the most mechanically suited to FRs fluff? hmm many will be displeased.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Oh, I thought a lot of that "plane-hopping" had to do with dealing with a threat here and there? Read some of the novels by Ed Greenwood, if you need proof of that. I've posted on a number of threads on three different forums about how some DMs have a problem with Elminster as "Deus-Ex-Machina", and frankly I've become quite tired of it.
> 
> However, let me offer you some RL examples of why Elminster might not wish to jump in to save the Realms time after time. First of all, why doesn't U.S. just nuke North Korea, Iran or China -- all are dangerous "tyrannies" who threaten the world peace and use ruthless methods to repress their citizens. They certainly have the *power* to do so -- probably even to take on all three at once. Maybe they fear the international response? Potential acts of retaliation? World War III? Environmental and collateral damage?



Why does Elminsters magic use cause more environmental and collateral damage then that of the PCs? He doesn't have to throw magical nukes, he can rely on Improved Invisibility and Delayed Blast Fireball just as any other PC.


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Consider that the spellplague happened because Cyric, some loonie god of evil with rumored help from that Shar-hussie killed Mystra in her own house, not as a mortal deity banished to the world by uber-god Ao (or EO? ). Everything's possible, like in every superhero comic book series. The monasteries and temples and whatever structure dedicated to beings who were formerly gods and now have become demi-powers at best will just become ruins, or have been strangely affected by the return of the crazy world of Abeir into Toril. And in 100 years, some structures just get abandoned anyway. Also, it has been said that Gnomes will be detailed in the Forgotten Realms-Campaign book as a player character-race, so please, just stop with them.




I have a lot of trouble imagining that even two Greater Deities can just teleport unnoticed into Dweomerheart (Mystra's place of power) and kill her without her, Azuth or Savras having any sort of warning of it. Now, if Velsharoon had any hand in it (yet apparently he didn't, as he was banished to the Astral Plane as well), it would make at least *some* sense. IMHO this whole thing is every bit as ridiculous as the Tyr-Helm-Tymora "love triangle" ("Helm, hast thou be courting my Chaotic wife-to-be, my oldest ally? Have at thee, Blackguard, for despite our friendship for over a thousand years and the fact that I have no evidence, I must challenge thee into a Duel of Death!").

And Mystra "dying in her own house" should not have nothing to do with the Spellplague -- the Weave is not Dweomerheart, or Dweomerheart the Weave (nor is it "anchored" there, as it permeates and surrounds the whole world of Toril). This is pretty evident if you take a look at the events of the Time of Troubles -- Dweomerheart remained "unharmed" and yet all magic went wild (which resulted from Mystra's banishment, as she is the Weave's guardian and caretaker).  

Note that I could just "handwave" all this away (like Hong apparently suggested), but to me the Realms has always been about little, consistent details -- Oh, ToT *did* introduce *some* elements that contradicted previous Realmslore and I either ignore or rewrote it. This time, however, the scope of the changes is simply so vast (and almost everything we've seen so far is contradictory to the previously published lore) that I simply don't see the point. It's easier just to skip this edition and keep playing in 3E FR. 

As for the gnomes: where did you read that they are going to be detailed in 4E FR? IIRC Rich Baker said (on the WoTC boards) that they *won't* be given as a PC race, and you have to create them yourself from the MM stat block.


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

Mustrum_Ridcully said:
			
		

> Why does Elminsters magic use cause more environmental and collateral damage then that of the PCs? He doesn't have to throw magical nukes, he can rely on Improved Invisibility and Delayed Blast Fireball just as any other PC.




If Elminster used all his resources (which he probably should, if he took on the likes of Larloch, Szass Tam or Shaaan) -- including Spellfire, his abilities/powers as a Chosen (including Silverfire) and a vast array of powerful/Epic magical items and artifacts. I'd hardly see Delayed Blast Fireball or Improved Invisibility working with Szass Tam, for example -- in fact, even mid-level Zhentarim magelings or Red Wizards should have 'See Invisibility' and resistance (or even immunity) to elements (fire and lightning, at least). And, as Ed Greenwood has often noted, an "epic" magical duel will cause permanent damage to the Weave -- Elminster and the other Chosen clashing with Larloch would probably cause as much environmental/collateral damage as dropping a small nuke in that spot.


----------



## DandD (Apr 15, 2008)

Appearently, Shar managed to veil Cyric somehow. The details are unimportant. It's just a poorly concived plot-device like almost everything in comic book stories or the Forgotten Realms, like the Times of Troubles. There's always something far more uber than the last time. The death of the new inexperienced Mystra and the destruction of Dweomerheart have brought unexpected results that nobody anticipated, and perhaps Ao doesn't care, because he didn't like the current world of the Forgotten Realms either, which is why he didn't intervene at all. Of course, Ao is a poorly conceived plot device too, to enable the Times of Troubles in the first place. 
Nobody should really be surprised about this. To think that the Forgotten Realms would be treated better than superhero-comic book-franchises, where reboots and universal collapses happen every decade to stir up interests is amusing at best. There ain't no detail important enough for that. It's just a place for make-believe superheroes fighting some monsters, but instead of New York City and Metropolis, you're in Baldur's Gate and Waterdeep, and instead of wearing your underpants outside, you wear chainmail-bikini. 

If I had access to the search function on the ENWorld forums, I would look here, but I'll never be able to find the thread regarding the playability of lame-o-gnomes for the Forgotten Realms anymore.


----------



## DandD (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> And, as Ed Greenwood has often noted, an "epic" magical duel will cause permanent damage to the Weave -- Elminster and the other Chosen clashing with Larloch would probably cause as much environmental/collateral damage as dropping a small nuke in that spot.



So wait, if two epic magic users battle it out, there will be permanent damages to the Weave, but if the goddess of magic gets gutted to a filet by a uber-crazy god with possible help from another dark goddess from the dawns of time who has worked on her own Weave-copy, and the home plane of the Mystra 3.0 (or is she even already the fourth one?) gets smashed, something like the Spellplague happening would be improbable?


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> It's amazing how novels ignore mechanics.
> 
> Unless your goblin horde is led by 20th level goblins, a single archmage could wipe them out.  He just bombs Elder Air Elementals on them every day or so from a comfortable height of about half a mile and sits back.  After about a month, all the gobbies are dead.
> 
> I remember reading a rather lengthy thread on ENworld about a 20th level lich and a million 5th level PC's.  The Lich wins.




By the way, that battle is not from any FR novel -- it is mentioned in several 1E/2E FR accessories (I trust that you're familiar with Mintiper Moonsilver?). More detailed notes are to be found in 'Gold and Glory', if you want to take a look at them. Also note that you couldn't summon Elder Air Elementals back in the days of AD&D.

The goblin horde my group faced included a lot of scarred orc/hobgoblin veterans (5th to 10th level warriors with an occasional fighter, rogue or barbarian) and some giants. Oh, we could have let the wizards have "all the fun", summoning Devas and Elementals and whatnot. In fact, we could have all just left and went home, phoning the DM or the wizard's player and asking him how it went (*and* let him gain all the XP). But the trouble is, half the kingdom (and half of its population) would have been destroyed within the month -- and we *were* supposed to defend that besieged city and its tens of thousands of commoners. 

Now, if D&D is only about "winning" or "beating" the encounters in the most effective and quickest way, why don't we all just play wizards or clerics, those dreaded CODzillas? Or why don't we just (ab)use the Skill Challenge system in 4E to make it to the final encounter? Just say that you are using Stealth to sneak through the whole complex unnoticed until you find the BBEG -- unless there are some sort of limitations to the system, that could be perfectly legal, ruleswise.


----------



## Green Knight (Apr 15, 2008)

> If I had access to the search function on the ENWorld forums, I would look here, but I'll never be able to find the thread regarding the playability of lame-o-gnomes for the Forgotten Realms anymore.




Only two races will be written out as PC races in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. The Drow and the Genasi. The Swordmage class will also be getting a write-up. Think you may've misread Genasi for Gnomes or something, cause they're not getting a PC writeup there.


----------



## DandD (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> The goblin horde my group faced included a lot of scarred orc/hobgoblin veterans (5th to 10th level warriors with an occasional fighter, rogue or barbarian) and some giants. Oh, we could have let the wizards have "all the fun", summoning Devas and Elementals and whatnot. In fact, we could have all just left and went home, phoning the DM or the wizard's player and asking him how it went (*and* let him gain all the XP). But the trouble is, half the kingdom (and half of its population) would have been destroyed within the month -- and we *were* supposed to defend that besieged city and its tens of thousands of commoners.



The uber-wizards and clerics and whatever spellcaster there are in your ranks would have destroyed them in a few days, faster than the poor goblinoids could have ransacked an open barn in an abandoned village. 







> Now, if D&D is only about "winning" or "beating" the encounters in the most effective and quickest way, why don't we all just play wizards or clerics, those dreaded CODzillas?



Because they have the negative stigma of only being heal-bots for the others. However, should one group really decide to play a cleric/druid party-only, I can easily imagine how frustrated the GM becomes, because they breeze through all the encounters without any problems, unless the GM throws level-inappropriate problems at them. 
The Cleric-or-Druid-zilla is one of the many problems that 4th edition tries to rectify, after the guys at Wizards of the Coast found out that in order to make Clerics more attractive, they beefed him up too ridiculously. 


> Or why don't we just (ab)use the Skill Challenge system in 4E to make it to the final encounter? Just say that you are using Stealth to sneak through the whole complex unnoticed until you find the BBEG -- unless there are some sort of limitations to the system, that could be perfectly legal, ruleswise.



Perhaps. I even hope so. Alas, we don't know how the rules really work, and I personally think that there's a little bit too much hype around that Skill Challenge System for 4th edition. I'm prepared to be underwhelmed, personally, but still hope to be positively surprised.


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> So wait, if two epic magic users battle it out, there will be permanent damages to the Weave, but if the goddess of magic gets gutted to a filet by a uber-crazy god with possible help from another dark goddess from the dawns of time who has worked on her own Weave-copy, and the home plane of the Mystra 3.0 (or is she even already the fourth one?) gets smashed, something like the Spellplague happening would be improbable?




Permanent *local* damage, according to Ed Greenwood (you know, the creator of the Realms) . Any "global" effects would depend on the scope of the struggle itself and who cast what -- a lot of factors. Not every spellbattle would cause damage to the Weave, but Epic spellcasters using every spell at their disposal would. The Shadow Weave was neatly retconned in 3E as having always existed, but now it's being re-retconned into having existed separately from the Weave (go figure). 

Also note that the battle took place in Dweomerheart, Mystra's place of power (i.e. probably filled with all sorts of spell triggers, magical wards and whatnot -- *ESPECIALLY* against Cyric and Shar), so she should have had "home field advantage" even against two Greater Deities (and apparently she was also attended by Azuth -- probably Savras, too). Mystra's power is also from the "Dawn of Time", and she is actually the third deity of magic (Mystryl was first, and Mystra 1.0 came after her -- the mortal known as Midnight became Mystra 2.0 after ToT). As I said, the Weave is not "anchored" in the Dweomerheart, nor should Dweomerheart's destruction affect it in any way. If you can come up with a reference that states otherwise, feel free to do present it.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> If Elminster used all his resources (which he probably should, if he took on the likes of Larloch, Szass Tam or Shaaan) -- including Spellfire, his abilities/powers as a Chosen (including Silverfire) and a vast array of powerful/Epic magical items and artifacts. I'd hardly see Delayed Blast Fireball or Improved Invisibility working with Szass Tam, for example -- in fact, even mid-level Zhentarim magelings or Red Wizards should have 'See Invisibility' and resistance (or even immunity) to elements (fire and lightning, at least). And, as Ed Greenwood has often noted, an "epic" magical duel will cause permanent damage to the Weave -- Elminster and the other Chosen clashing with Larloch would probably cause as much environmental/collateral damage as dropping a small nuke in that spot.



I was talking about (high level) threats that the PCs are supposed to engage. I am not talking about "metathreats" that will always exist. 
If Elminster needs Spellfire and his Chosen Mystra abilities, then the PCs obviously will need something similar to face these threats, and I really don't see how this can't have the same adverse effects as Elminsters powers. 



> ote that I could just "handwave" all this away (like Hong apparently suggested), but to me the Realms has always been about little, consistent details -- Oh, ToT *did* introduce *some* elements that contradicted previous Realmslore and I either ignore or rewrote it. This time, however, the scope of the changes is simply so vast (and almost everything we've seen so far is contradictory to the previously published lore) that I simply don't see the point. It's easier just to skip this edition and keep playing in 3E FR.



All the little details you love (and I get why someone can love them) are exactly the reasons why it feels (factually it probably is wrong) so difficult - or nigh impossible - to play (and especially DM) in the Forgotten Realms. There are too many details for a beginner to know and keep in mind, and if you accidentally diverge too much from them, this can seriously hurt the experience for people that remembered some of these details, possibly basing story and character development decisions based on their now invalid knowledge. 
There is no way to gauge the important of any detail on the FR, since it is often also based on personal preferences and previous experience.


----------



## Primal (Apr 15, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> The uber-wizards and clerics and whatever spellcaster there are in your ranks would have destroyed them in a few days, faster than the poor goblinoids could have ransacked an open barn in an abandoned village.




Actually, by the time we arrived they were storming the walls of a large city (with the population of tens of thousands of commoners). Without our involvement, the city would have fallen in hours, not days. So time was of the essence. Besides, the wizard's spell list was not "optimized" for a mass battle.



> Because they have the negative stigma of only being heal-bots for the others. However, should one group really decide to play a cleric/druid party-only, I can easily imagine how frustrated the GM becomes, because they breeze through all the encounters without any problems, unless the GM throws level-inappropriate problems at them.
> The Cleric-or-Druid-zilla is one of the many problems that 4th edition tries to rectify, after the guys at Wizards of the Coast found out that in order to make Clerics more attractive, they beefed him up too ridiculously.




I agree that it's a very real problem. I've had the "honor" of playing in a group with *both* a high-level cleric and a high-level druid. The rest of us held back the enemy for a few rounds until they've finished with buffing/summoning spells and then proceeded to wipe out the enemies in a round or two. HThere are ways to deal with this problem, however, but that requires that everyone clearly understands how and why these classes are problematic. 



> Perhaps. I even hope so. Alas, we don't know how the rules really work, and I personally think that there's a little bit too much hype around that Skill Challenge System for 4th edition. I'm prepared to be underwhelmed, personally, but still hope to be positively surprised.




Actually, the Skill Challenge system is one of the few things I like in 4E. And despite my misgivings about the 4E FR Design Team, I'm fairly sure that Mearls, Wyatt, Baker et al. are familiar enough with a number of Indie RPGs to avoid these kind of "pitfalls".


----------



## DandD (Apr 15, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Permanent *local* damage, according to Ed Greenwood (you know, the creator of the Realms) . Any "global" effects would depend on the scope of the struggle itself and who cast what -- a lot of factors. Not every spellbattle would cause damage to the Weave, but Epic spellcasters using every spell at their disposal would.



And epic battles between gods wouldn't affect it? Hard to believe... 


> The Shadow Weave was neatly retconned in 3E as having always existed, but now it's being re-retconned into having existed separately from the Weave (go figure).



What's the difference here? Seems to have always existed separately. 


> Also note that the battle took place in Dweomerheart, Mystra's place of power (i.e. probably filled with all sorts of spell triggers, magical wards and whatnot -- *ESPECIALLY* against Cyric and Shar), so she should have had "home field advantage" even against two Greater Deities (and apparently she was also attended by Azuth -- probably Savras, too).



Yeah, but appearently, against the might of those two loonie-gods combined, it didn't help. It's like those prisons and prison dimensions for the supervillains in superhero universes. They actually do nothing and aren't worth the time to be installed, because they get breached constantly and easily. Call it Darkseid, the Joker, Brainiac, Red Skull, Loki, Doctor Doom, whatever the name, evil badguys don't break a sweath with the seemingly unpenetrable defenses of the Batcave/Fortress of Solitude/Aunt May's House/Asgard and get to fight the good fight with the good guy (or gal) anyway. 


> Mystra's power is also from the "Dawn of Time", and she is actually the third deity of magic (Mystryl was first, and Mystra 1.0 came after her -- the mortal known as Midnight became Mystra 2.0 after ToT).



But Magic-Goddess 3.0 hasn't been a goddess that long. She might have screwed up, or got out-tricked by the crazy-joker-like Cyric, and the ancient hag Shar. Happens all the time in the DC-Universe. 


> As I said, the Weave is not "anchored" in the Dweomerheart, nor should Dweomerheart's destruction affect it in any way.



The Death of Mystra and the Destruction of that plane together might. It didn't happen before, which is why nobody knew that it might cause the Spellplague. Now, everybody knows it better. It just happens that there won't be a Mystra anymore. Oh well, sucks to be her.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> The Weave is connected to all beings on Toril,




Sourcebook and page number, please.

I know Ed has said this on Candlekeep, but if it's not in a published book, then it isn't canon. Ed may be the guy that originally come up with the idea, but it's no longer his property, and hasn't been for 20 years.



> Now, wait a minute… funny you should mention Karsus’ Folly, because I can’t recall any sort of Spellplague taking place during Netheril’s Fall… which should have logically happened from the 4E perspective, since Mystryl died (which should also destroyed the Weave, right?).




Mystryl died and Mystra was born the same instant, which caused the Weave to restructure itself, not to unravel. When Mystra 2.0 died, there was nothing to stabilize it, so it went crazy.



> As I already said, I can’t recall the Spellplague happening during ToT, either.




Probably because the gods were no longer in control of their portfolios, since AO (I agree he was a horrible idea) stripped them, so it makes sense that AO would be holding everything together while his punishment is being meted out.



> And yet, if those ‘Countdown…’-articles (and Rich’s replies) are to be believed, the Spellplague was triggered by the Death of the Goddess of Magic (Mystra) and the subsequent collapse of the Weave. Uh… talk about consistency there.




Good job ignoring the key difference between all those events: no new goddess of magic popped up to save the day again.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> Sourcebook and page number, please.
> 
> I know Ed has said this on Candlekeep, but if it's not in a published book, then it isn't canon. Ed may be the guy that originally come up with the idea, but it's no longer his property, and hasn't been for 20 years.




IIRC it was mentioned in one of the 1E/2E FR accessories -- 'The Magister', most likely. And whatever Ed says is canon for me, since no one else has the same kind of "understanding" of how the Realms work.



> Mystryl died and Mystra was born the same instant, which caused the Weave to restructure itself, not to unravel. When Mystra 2.0 died, there was nothing to stabilize it, so it went crazy.




Yet there was the moment when all magic "died" and Netheril fell, as Karsus lost control of the Weave -- IMO this would have been long enough to begin the Spellplague, if it was linked to the death of the deity of magic (or lack of "caretaking").  



> Probably because the gods were no longer in control of their portfolios, since AO (I agree he was a horrible idea) stripped them, so it makes sense that AO would be holding everything together while his punishment is being meted out.




Yep, AO was a terrible idea, and I kind of wonder how they're going to keep him in the background in 4E.



> Good job ignoring the key difference between all those events: no new goddess of magic popped up to save the day again.




So the Weave is linked to Mystra's existence? I thought she (along with Azuth) were the Guardians and Caretakers of the Weave -- *not* the "source" of its power. And if AO took care of the Weave during ToT, why didn't he do so now? How did Shar stop Mystra 3.0 from ascending? And if she was already "born", how come the Weave didn't restructure itself this time?


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> IIRC it was mentioned in one of the 1E/2E FR accessories -- 'The Magister', most likely.




Sourcebook and page number. I've seen this claim before, and seen Rich Baker openly ask someone for a published citation (since he also knew that Ed had said it at Candlekeep) and noone provided one. So until there's a published, canon citation, it's just fan wankery.



> And whatever Ed says is canon for me, since no one else has the same kind of "understanding" of how the Realms work.




And what is canon to you is not real canon, so it has no bearing on any objective discussion, so the point is moot.



> Yet there was the moment when all magic "died" and Netheril fell, as Karsus lost control of the Weave -- IMO this would have been long enough to begin the Spellplague, if it was linked to the death of the deity of magic (or lack of "caretaking").




But there was still a god of magic (since the spell transferred divinity from Mystryl to Karsus), and the Weave was still restrained enough to not destroy the world. An instant later, Mystra was in full effect, changing the rules and all that jazz.

In 1385, Mystra just gets axed and nothing steps in to deal with the repercussions. Nothing. At all. No weak-minded mortal-turned-deity, no reborn goddess, nothing.



> Yep, AO was a terrible idea, and I kind of wonder how they're going to keep him in the background in 4E.




Rich Baker said they just won't be mentioning him, because they don't really want to deal with that can of worms.



> So the Weave is linked to Mystra's existence? I thought she (along with Azuth) were the Guardians and Caretakers of the Weave -- *not* the "source" of its power.




She's the caretaker. Just like a gardener keeps a garden orderly and clean, she kept the Weave stabilized and set up in the format that was arranged so long ago. She dies, and noone can tend to it, so "nature" takes it's course and it goes wild. Just like a garden that lacks tending.



> And if AO took care of the Weave during ToT, why didn't he do so now?




Because he's totally lame and they don't want to use him? Just because a mistake was made in the past to use something like AO doesn't mean they should just repeat that silliness simply because "it's been done before." Sometimes when you recognize past mistakes in continuity, it's best to ignore them and never reference them again.



> How did Shar stop Mystra 3.0 from ascending?




Who says she actually did? People suspect that of happening, but whose to say that the bursting of the Weave and the reordering of the cosmos didn't fill that gap without the need for some petty divinity?



> And if she was already "born", how come the Weave didn't restructure itself this time?




It's been stated, explicitly, that there is and will be no Mystra replacement.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Guild Goodknife said:
			
		

> As far as i understand it the missing gods will not be retconned, most of the lesser gods were just not strong enough to keep their realms and powers during the Spellplague. (Which  can also be seen as an explanation why Elminster shouldn't retain his Chosen powers.)




Incorrect. The divine essence that Mystra has bestowed in her Chosen is similar to how bestowing Divine Ranks work -- they won't disappear if the "benefactor" dies. And it has been said that not even Mystra could take back those powers. Therefore, the Chosen should retain their abilities, unless, of course, this is either retconned *or* every single Divine Being loses all their Divine Abilities in 4E (i.e. there won't be any deities).

And speaking of the Divine "Power" -- ever since ToT it has been Canon that the power and existence of deities is directly linked to the number of their *worshippers*. If they lose all their worshippers, they "die" of neglect and are banished to the Astral Plane. This means that no 'Exarchs' (i.e. "servitors" without any worshippers) could, in fact, exist in FR. As the designers have said that Exarchs have *no* worshippers, we have a problem. Hmmm... somehow I'm perceiving yet another retcon looming on the horizon...  :\ 



> As far as i know the Weave is not the Force, and your interpretation was never part of the official definition.




It's not similar to Force. The Weave surrounds and permeates the world of Toril and its inhabitants -- I think that's canon alright. 



> That just doesn't make any sense. If the Weave is the source of all life on Toril there shouldn't be any plants growing or animals living in a Dead Magic Zone.




Those Dead/Wild Magic Zones were born during ToT -- IIRC they were never mentioned in any 1E FR book? And therefore it's quite valid to say that this is something the designers forgot back then (Ed probably had nothing to do with them).



> You missed a little point - this time Shar and Cyric also destroy Dweomerheart, Mystras own plane! Also, Mystra and Mystryl are arguably not the same deity, so differnt reactions of the Weave to their death seem (to me) not too far fetched.




Mystra 2.0 inherited Mystra 1.0's powers, and Mystra 1.0 was reincarnated Mystryl (same source and level of power, if you ask me). As I already mentioned above, I can't recall Dweomerheart being the source, anchor or "heart" of the Weave -- if you can find a canon reference that says otherwise, feel free to post it. A deity's home plane is not the source of his/her power -- the worshippers are (as I said above). Therefore I cannot see why Dweomerheart's destruction would "trigger" the collapse of the Weave and the Spellplague.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> The Weave surrounds and permeates the world of Toril and its inhabitants -- I think that's canon alright.




The "inhabitants" part is debatable, since I've yet to see a published canon citation for it's validity.

And your "It's not the Force" comment is slightly amusing. You seem to be claiming that the Weave permeates the physical universe of FR as well as the living inhabitants, and that life cannot exist without the Weave. Well, the Force permeates the physical universe of SW as well as the living inhabitants, and life cannot exist without the Force (since midi-chlorians are required for life, and are Force-based symbiotes). They both allow particular groups of people to accomplish impossible tasks through force of will and practice.


----------



## Guild Goodknife (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Incorrect. The divine essence that Mystra has bestowed in her Chosen is similar to how bestowing Divine Ranks work -- they won't disappear if the "benefactor" dies. And it has been said that not even Mystra could take back those powers. Therefore, the Chosen should retain their abilities, unless, of course, this is either retconned *or* every single Divine Being loses all their Divine Abilities in 4E (i.e. there won't be any deities).



 My point is: Several lesser deities *lost* their Divine Ranks through the Spellplague, so why should the Chosen be excluded?


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> And speaking of the Divine "Power" -- ever since ToT it has been Canon that the power and existence of deities is directly linked to the number of their *worshippers*. If they lose all their worshippers, they "die" of neglect and are banished to the Astral Plane. *This means that no 'Exarchs'* (i.e. "servitors" without any worshippers)* could, in fact, exist in FR*. As the designers have said that Exarchs have *no* worshippers, we have a problem. Hmmm... somehow I'm perceiving yet another retcon looming on the horizon...  :\



 I don't see why they should not exist. They just can't be gods, grant spells etc. since they have no worshippers. You don't cease to exist just because no one prays to you. Is this "banishment to the Astral Plane" (which btw changed too because of the SP) a hard rule?


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

I strongly reject the current overall attitude of the Candlekeep community, but I'm pretty sure that what Ed writes there *is* canon until contradicted by a WoTC product.


----------



## The Little Raven (Apr 16, 2008)

skeptic said:
			
		

> I strongly reject the current overall attitude of the Candlekeep community, but I'm pretty sure that what Ed writes there *is* canon until contradicted by a WoTC product.




As Wizards of the Coast is the current owner of the Forgotten Realms intellectual property, only products and statements officially approved by them is canon. Since they don't approve his Candlekeep statements, they're not canon.

It's the same deal with Keith Baker and Eberron. Sure, he's "the Eberron dude," but he still doesn't get to make up canon unless it shows up in an official Eberron book.

Sure, hardcore fans feel differently, but hardcore fans are always willing to ignore things that don't fit their vision.


----------



## Hussar (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> IIRC it was mentioned in one of the 1E/2E FR accessories -- 'The Magister', most likely. And whatever Ed says is canon for me, since no one else has the same kind of "understanding" of how the Realms work.




And, that second bit is why we are talking past eachother.  Yes, Ed originated the Realms.  And his work with that is greatly appreciated.  But, the Realms are far more than what he started with.  The Realms are a shared project now.  Authorial intent is meaningless.  It doesn't matter what he says outside of published works.  It's simply not canon and cannot be considered canon.

It's like saying that nothing Erik Mona creates for Greyhawk applies because he doesn't have the same understanding of Greyhawk that EGG did.  It doesn't matter.  The material is published under the banner of the setting and thus becomes canon.  

That you or anyone else likes or doesn't like it doesn't change that fact.


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> As Wizards of the Coast is the current owner of the Forgotten Realms intellectual property, only products and statements officially approved by them is canon. Since they don't approve his Candlekeep statements, they're not canon.




IIRC, it was established in his initial contract with TSR when he sold them FR.

I have read messages from FR authors like Steven Schend and Elaine Cunningham that said "Contrary to Ed, I can't answer those questions, etc."

Now I'm sure Keith Baker didn't get the same.

BTW, I consider myself a pretty "hardcore" FR fan and my overall idea of 4E FR, not unlike of 4E in general, is : so refreshing!

So tired of canon-nazi simulationist FR players/DMs


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Guild Goodknife said:
			
		

> My point is: Several lesser deities *lost* their Divine Ranks through the Spellplague, so why should the Chosen be excluded?
> 
> I don't see why they should not exist. They just can't be gods, grant spells etc. since they have no worshippers. You don't cease to exist just because no one prays to you. Is this "banishment to the Astral Plane" (which btw changed too because of the SP) a hard rule?




They should not exist because the canon lore says that without worshippers they *die* of neglect, and their bodies end up in the Astral Plane. Of course, 4E may retcon this, but it's the current state of the canon, and has been since ToT.

And I'm not sure how those deities "lost" their Divine Ranks -- it could only happen if they lost their worshippers somehow. Note that the Chosen are not "real" deities, so they (just like any other "semi-divine" beings) are not bound by this rule.


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> They should not exist because the canon lore says that without worshippers they *die* of neglect, and their bodies end up in the Astral Plane. Of course, 4E may retcon this, but it's the current state of the canon, and has been since ToT.




First, it is *not * a retcon, the Spellplague has caused the changes in the cosmology. (Yeah its a far stretch!)

Second, who cares ?, that's how the 4E FR pantheon is built to make it help players & DMs have better D&D games.


----------



## hong (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> It's not similar to Force. The Weave surrounds and permeates the world of Toril and its inhabitants -- I think that's canon alright.




So the Weave is what, then? Duct tape?


----------



## DandD (Apr 16, 2008)

The idea of gods needing worshippers to maintain a divinity status was idiotic to begin with. By this notion, the most mightiest gods would be those who offer fertility, sex, wealth, health, and power, while almost every other god is reduced to nothingness. No, it was a bad idea to make deities dependent on mortal worshipping, and that was a mechanic introduced by the Times of Troubles, which we can all agree are dumb in every way imaginable.


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

The problem with the Weave under 1e/2e/3e is that it never changed anything *significant * in the game.

4E could have go both ways : make the Weave significant or kill it. I could say they went for the easy route, but either one was better than statu quo IMHO.


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> No, it was a bad idea to make deities dependent on mortal worshipping, and that was a mechanic introduced by the Times of Troubles, which we can all agree are dumb in every way imaginable.




The saddest edition change job is ToT (AO  ).

The ugliest is 3.x retcon (not that I have a problem with well-done retcons, such as Batman begins).

I have reasons to hope that the Spellplague one will be the best (perfect ? No).


----------



## Hussar (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> They should not exist because the canon lore says that without worshippers they *die* of neglect, and their bodies end up in the Astral Plane. Of course, 4E may retcon this, but it's the current state of the canon, and has been since ToT.
> 
> And I'm not sure how those deities "lost" their Divine Ranks -- it could only happen if they lost their worshippers somehow. Note that the Chosen are not "real" deities, so they (just like any other "semi-divine" beings) are not bound by this rule.




And this is where you are mistaken.  Yes, it is true that gods without followers die of neglect.  However, this is NOT the only way a god can die.  Gods die from all sorts of things, including a sword in the forehead.  ((If it's the right sword))

There is no canon which tells us how a god may lose his/her divine status.  None.  There is canon which tells us how a god may die, but that's different.  So, in the absence of any canon to the contrary, how is it impossible for a god to be stripped of his/her divine ranks?  Particularly when ToT shows us that it is possible for dvinities to lose their divine status.


----------



## Vempyre (Apr 16, 2008)

skeptic said:
			
		

> So tired of canon-nazi simulationist FR players/DMs




*shares his ice cream with Skeptic for having similar thoughts*

Although mine opinion isn't limited to FR only, but all fantasy works in general


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

Vempyre said:
			
		

> Although mine opinion isn't limited to FR only, but all fantasy works in general




I would add that it's even worse in settings foremost defined by a strong story, think Middle earth, Star Wars universe, Krynn, etc.

But the quest for the "true Greenwoodian" feel/genre/themes is also difficult to beat


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> And this is where you are mistaken.  Yes, it is true that gods without followers die of neglect.  However, this is NOT the only way a god can die.  Gods die from all sorts of things, including a sword in the forehead.  ((If it's the right sword))
> 
> There is no canon which tells us how a god may lose his/her divine status.  None.  There is canon which tells us how a god may die, but that's different.  So, in the absence of any canon to the contrary, how is it impossible for a god to be stripped of his/her divine ranks?  Particularly when ToT shows us that it is possible for dvinities to lose their divine status.




*Sigh*, I think I mentioned that after ToT AO decreed that each deity's power (i.e. Divine Ranks in 3E terms) depends on the *number* of its *worshippers*. So if a deity loses worshippers, he also loses Divine Ranks -- likewise, if he gains more worshippers, he gains Divine Ranks. If the deity loses all of it worshippers, it dies of neglect. And yes, that is all canon. Also note that Xvim ascended to "true" divinity (Lesser Deity) after he gained power from a ritual performed by his worshippers (all the details -- including the adventure based around this event -- are found in the 'Zhentil Keep Boxed Set'). 

I never claimed that gaining or losing "status" (Divine Ranks) in not possible -- I only mentioned that if a deity loses *all* of his worshippers (just as the 'Exarchs' apparently did, if the 4E designers are to be believed), he dies of neglect -- at least according to the current canon lore.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> So the Weave is what, then? Duct tape?




No, the Weave permeates all -- even duct tape! By the way, if you know where to get duct tape in Faerun, let me know -- my players could use it!


----------



## hong (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> I never claimed that gaining or losing "status" (Divine Ranks) in not possible -- I only mentioned that if a deity loses *all* of his worshippers (just as the 'Exarchs' apparently did, if the 4E designers are to be believed), he dies of neglect -- at least according to the current canon lore.




Hmmm.


> And I'm not sure how those deities "lost" their Divine Ranks -- it could only happen if they lost their worshippers somehow.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Hmmm.






			
				hong said:
			
		

> Hmmm.




Alright, Hong, I'll spell it out to you: my phrase ("And I do not know how those Deities lost their Divine Ranks") means that "I do not know how those Deities lost **ALL* of their Divine Ranks during the Spellplague and yet have not died*. I haven't seen any reference to their power level, i.e. Divine Ranks, being linked to their home planes, and therefore I see this particular point as being contradictory to the current canon Realmslore." Did that clarify my point?


----------



## hamishspence (Apr 16, 2008)

*Exarchs*

Maybe now, a long as someone revere an exarch enough to serve it, that counts as sustaining it, if you are using the statement in Waterdeep novel that gods without worshippers can wither and die:

" a ranger humbly serving Gwaeron Windstrom, hero of the Goddess Mielikki" So Drizzt worships Mielikki, but serves The Tracker Who Never Goes Astray.

Or maybe exarchs still have semiliving bodies with immortality. Basically. they are really like 30th level PCs, but a bit more widely known, with more people emulating them and "serving" them.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Apr 16, 2008)

Maybe the gods that lost their worshippers found a way to retain their life, maybe thanks to their allies with the gods still worshipped? 
Or there are actually still some worshippers, but none of them are public, nor do they have churches.

Think of Terry Prattchetts "Small Gods" - the Great God Om found out that there was only one worshipper remaining, a simple, young boy, barely noticeable except for his strong faith (and his great memory). The rest of his followers no longer worshipped him, but only the institution of his Church.
He used him worked together with him to reincite the faith his people had for him.
Imagine he had failed, but Brutha survived...


----------



## D.Shaffer (Apr 16, 2008)

...Reading this thread, I'm slightly amused by how much it resembles people arguing about what's 'canon' in Marvel or DC and various Star Trek vs. Star Wars threads.

 I think people are missing the big picture here.  The world is there for people to adventure in and have fun.  The vast majority dont CARE that in the year of the Burning Armadillo, Mystra said such and such and so all Gnomes have always feared Pangolins from that point.  The fact that people can go on for hours, quoting 'Lore' turns off a lot of people.  You may not like it, but consider that the new Realms is designed for a people who dont want, and really dont care all that much for what went on before.  I'm sure someone's going to bring up 'Lowest Common Denominator' at some point, but majority rules when it comes to marketing. 

Any changes to the Realms need to be judged on how it effects people playing in it FOR 4th EDITION. Not whether it matches whatever nebulous definition of 'canon' personally applies for yourself.


----------



## hong (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Alright, Hong, I'll spell it out to you: my phrase ("And I do not know how those Deities lost their Divine Ranks") means that "I do not know how those Deities lost **ALL* of their Divine Ranks during the Spellplague and yet have not died*. I haven't seen any reference to their power level, i.e. Divine Ranks, being linked to their home planes, and therefore I see this particular point as being contradictory to the current canon Realmslore." Did that clarify my point?



 Yes. Of course, your point doesn't make any sense, but it is now very clear.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> And, I'm probably just as "experienced" as a DM as most of the guys working at WoTC. The only "real" difference between me and, say, James Wyatt, is that his work has been published, while mine has not (and you cannot claim that my stuff would be inferior in comparison as you haven't actually played in my campaigns or seen my stuff, right?). If you were referring to being "qualified" in the sense of formal *education*, I can pretty much say that I'm *perfectly* qualified to write anything (since I haven't heard of any TT RPG Designer courses anywhere).


----------



## Crosswind (Apr 16, 2008)

Just to chuck it in there:  It's a good thing whoever was defending against the army of 30,000 orcs was...errr, silly.  Or didn't have access to a level 15 druid armed with only core spells.

'cause, well, a Control Winds tornado would pretty much kill that entire army.  6d6 damage per round, for 2 and a half hours, to anybody in a 200-meter-radius circle.  Aside from the fact that you could fit 45,000 medium or small-sized creatures in the -original- circle, this being a relatively low-level spell (a mere 5th level), I'd imagine the druid could pretty easily cast enough of them to wipe out the entire army in...oh, a minute?

Two minutes?

Face it - 3.5, it was all about who had more levels.  Not who had more numbers.  The "Oh nos, hordes of low-level orcs!" approach should work a lot better in 4.0.

-Cross (There are lots of other spells like this.  This is just the lowest-level one in the PHB to my knowledge.)


----------



## vagabundo (Apr 16, 2008)

Crosswind said:
			
		

> Face it - 3.5, it was all about who had more levels.  Not who had more numbers.  The "Oh nos, hordes of low-level orcs!" approach should work a lot better in 4.0.
> 
> -Cross (There are lots of other spells like this.  This is just the lowest-level one in the PHB to my knowledge.)




I'm looking forward to letting my guys go up a few levels, nice and smug like. Then introduce them to a riot and a mob .....


----------



## The Historian (Apr 16, 2008)

*Ed Greenwood Lore IS "Canon"*

A number of posters in this thread have advanced their own opinions on whether or not Ed Greenwood's postings on Candlekeep and elsewhere are "canon" or not.
The truth is this: as a former TSR legal eagle, I can attest that in the original Realms purchase agreement, it is stipulated (I'm paraphrasing the legalese here) that anything Ed Greenwood "publishes" about the Realms, in any media that exists now or in the future IS "official" (canon) as anything printed in any TSR (now WotC, but only because they own TSR) product, UNTIL they contradict something specific that Ed has said, in a future product. In other words, anything Ed says at a con, writes in a published article or product, or posts on the Web IS canon. Until contradicted.
To reiterate: until specifically contradicted, any Realms material Ed Greenwood posts IS canon. Rich Baker's opinion or postings are immaterial; if the original Realms agreement is broken, the Realms revert to Ed and he regains full control of the Realms, and "canon" is whatever he says it is.
I'm not taking sides on anything said in this thread, mind you. Just setting posters straight on what's canon and what's not. These are the facts, regardless of anyone's opinions. (I've even heard WotC staffers deny this, but it doesn't change the applicable law or the original agreement.)
I find it odd, frankly, that this is ever argued over. There have been many, many adaptations, game and film and otherwise, of Tolkien's LOTR, but no one questions that what Tolkien wrote was "canon" or not. (And to spare us all a lot of catty posts, I'm NOT equating the Realms and Middle-Earth in terms of quality. That's purely a matter of personal taste. I'm using an illustration of the creator of a popular creation that became an intellectual property rather than remaining only a printed-fiction series.)


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Let’s get back to “feel” and “spirit” and knowledge of the details. I’m amazed how much blind faith you have in people who may be professional game designers but have very little (or even no) experience with the Realms at all. Unless they have actually read the FR novels and accessories, how *could* they have any sense of FR “spirit” or “feel”? It just isn’t enough that you quickly pour through the latest supplements and memorize some places and names.



As a matter of fact, that's one of the things that attracts me most about the endeavor.  I want to see a fresh take on FR.  I'm not interested in a flat update; the FR wasn't an interesting enough setting to tempt me heavily before, and it certainly won't now.

You seem to be operating under the fallacy that those posting in this thread, and those who are the potential customers of the new FR book, have the same priorities for FR as you do.

I can assure you; that's not the case.  You can say all you like what you want FR to be, but *arguing* with someone else's tastes?  Waste of time, pal.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Yes, they may be professionals, but unlike you, I don’t think that professional designers are necessarily or automatically  better DMs or authors than your average “Joe DM”.



Nobody said that they couldn't be; although I personally believe very strongly that the chances of "Joe Blow DM" writing better RPG material than professional game designers is... not high.  To put it charitably.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> We are, however, talking about “feel” and “spirit”, and to elaborate this even further with a concrete example: Robert Jordan has, for years, been one of my favourite authors, whose ‘Wheel of Time’-series is a true masterpiece in fantasy fiction.



Ah, I see the problem already.  You think Robert Jordan is a talented writer and Wheel of time is something other than a bloated, interminable fantasy soap opera.

No wonder you're so invested in the current iteration of Forgotten Realms.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> So wait, if two epic magic users battle it out, there will be permanent damages to the Weave, but if the goddess of magic gets gutted to a filet by a uber-crazy god with possible help from another dark goddess from the dawns of time who has worked on her own Weave-copy, and the home plane of the Mystra 3.0 (or is she even already the fourth one?) gets smashed, something like the Spellplague happening would be improbable?



Yeah; what was it he said?  Realmslore is based on detailed, self-consistent elements just like that.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> Yes. Of course, your point doesn't make any sense, but it is now very clear.




And I fail to see why it doesn't make any sense, because isn't it quite clear that those FR preview articles contradict current canon lore?


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> Yeah; what was it he said?  Realmslore is based on detailed, self-consistent elements just like that.




Read the whole thread, please -- I think I've addressed this subject in many posts.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

The Historian said:
			
		

> I find it odd, frankly, that this is ever argued over. There have been many, many adaptations, game and film and otherwise, of Tolkien's LOTR, but no one questions that what Tolkien wrote was "canon" or not.



Ah, how refreshing!  Someone who's never entered the trench warfare of Tolkieniana and argued whether details published in _The Book of Lost Tales_ can be given any credence, and if so how much, or how much the nascent complete revamping of the Silmarillion can be credited, etc.

People argue over whether what Tolkien wrote was canon or not *all the frikkin time*.  Heck, there's even arguments about how much details of _The Hobbit_ can be considered canonical.  About the only thing that nobody argues about is the text of _Lord of the Rings_ itself.  Everything else is up for grabs.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Read the whole thread, please -- I think I've addressed this subject in many posts.



I have, much to my chagrin.  And you have addressed it, just not satisfactorily.  You're spinning around in circles trying to pretend that the Realms is consistent, but let's face it; it's notoriously not so.

Heck, even *YOU've* given plenty of examples yourself.  In this thread.  Of blatant inconsistencies.

Now, how about *you* read the whole thread please, and rather than skip over my meatier posts—about which I suspect you can't satisfactorily argue—address them.  You've managed to cut through three of them and simply focus on my flippant one-liner instead, thinking that perhaps you had a chance with that one.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 16, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> Sourcebook and page number. I've seen this claim before, and seen Rich Baker openly ask someone for a published citation (since he also knew that Ed had said it at Candlekeep) and noone provided one. So until there's a published, canon citation, it's just fan wankery.





			
				Mourn said:
			
		

> The "inhabitants" part is debatable, since I've yet to see a published canon citation for it's validity.



Magic of Faerun, page 9

So Rich Baker doesn't even know some of the newest 3.x supplements? It's not as MoF is some obscure 1e/2e lore (and even that I expect them to know since it's the job they get paid for)


			
				Mourn said:
			
		

> But there was still a god of magic (since the spell transferred divinity from Mystryl to Karsus),



Which was actually not what the spell did, even in it's first flawed incarnation. From it's frist printing in N:EoM it only was supposed to be a temporary merge between the caster and the deity. The limited duration was mentioned several time in the paragraphs preceding the actual rule write up. Only at on line in the rule write up someone made a misstake and wrote unlimited duration rather than the limited duration mentioned earlier in the supplement (the misstake was already corrected in the spell's second rule write up in Powers&Pantheons which did set it's duration to limited)


----------



## The Historian (Apr 16, 2008)

*Greenwood is Canon*

Perhaps FANS do, Hobo. Judging by this thread, fans seem to love arguing over everything, all the time.   
However, critics, academics, and lawyers do not. Unless hired to do so.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 16, 2008)

hong said:
			
		

> So the Weave is what, then? Duct tape?



Actually the Weave is a condom. Raw magic of Realmspace is instandly lethal to mortals. Even the greatest archmage would burn himself to ash if he tried to cast a mere cantrip without using the weave as a shield between him and the raw magic he wants to channel.

This was how it has been pre-4e. So maybe the spellplauge weakened raw magic and allows mortals to use it without protection


			
				DandD said:
			
		

> No, it was a bad idea to make deities dependent on mortal worshipping, and that was a mechanic introduced by the Times of Troubles, which we can all agree are dumb in every way imaginable.



However it was also strange that Ao did mention that at all, because he actually did not newly introduce this rule. In the FR deities died of neglect long before the ToT and they also died of neglect outside of the FR


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> As a matter of fact, that's one of the things that attracts me most about the endeavor.  I want to see a fresh take on FR.  I'm not interested in a flat update; the FR wasn't an interesting enough setting to tempt me heavily before, and it certainly won't now.
> 
> You seem to be operating under the fallacy that those posting in this thread, and those who are the potential customers of the new FR book, have the same priorities for FR as you do.
> 
> I can assure you; that's not the case.  You can say all you like what you want FR to be, but *arguing* with someone else's tastes?  Waste of time, pal.




Ah, you missed the point there. I was criticizing how there seem to glaring "errors" in the "New Realms" (lore which contradicts current canon lore) which implies that the designers have not done their "homework". Even if you're reshaping the setting so that everybody can start from a "clean slate", you should make sure that you know the details. I could see Eberron fans being irritated if 4E Eberron Campaign Setting would contain information about, say, Dragonmarks, that is contradictory to 3E lore. Of course, the designers can always say "Uh, we forgot about that, but from now on it will work this way, because we're retconning it". But to me that speaks volumes about their lack of dedication, interest and respect towards the setting and its current fans.

Now, I'm not under any illusion that WoTC would consider the "old guard" their primary target demographic for 4E FR -- in fact, after reading those 'Countdown...'-articles, isn't it quite obvious that they're not? This is completely understandable from the business perspective, even though I don't personally agree with or like the nature and scope of the changes. In fact, I hate almost all the changes we've seen or heard of so far. However, I'm not arguing that they should cater only to my tastes -- as already noted, my problem with the 4E FR is that they're clearly not familiar with the traditional "feel" and "spirit" of the Realms *and* they don't seem to be interested enough in reading the previously published books. I'm also wondering why they didn't hire George Krashos, Eric Boyd and Steven Schend to work on the  first 4E books, because those guys are all admired and talented designers who know the Realms inside-out -- why hire people who admit that they've never DMed or played in the Realms? 



> Nobody said that they couldn't be; although I personally believe very strongly that the chances of "Joe Blow DM" writing better RPG material than professional game designers is... not high.  To put it charitably.




Well, I know many "Joe Blow DMs" who have DMed various systems and campaign settings for over twenty years. Some of them can do better maps and hand-outs than we've seen in any WoTC products ever, but they could not write a module with the same kind of routine than a professional game designer can. One or two can also write an adventure that rivals (storywise) even the best works of Chris Perkins, Ed Greenwood and Keith Baker -- who, in the end, were just your average "Joe Blow DMs" before their "rise to fame", right?

Yet some professional game designers don't have the same kind of passion your average "Joe Blow DM" has -- it's *work*, after all, and no matter how much you love it, your attitude towards it changes as it becomes your profession. It's hard to be creative or give your best when the deadlines pile on you, and this is true in any "creative" industry.  



> Ah, I see the problem already.  You think Robert Jordan is a talented writer and Wheel of time is something other than a bloated, interminable fantasy soap opera.
> 
> No wonder you're so invested in the current iteration of Forgotten Realms.




Let me quote you: "...but *arguing* with someone else's tastes?  Waste of time, pal."

So you don't think much of Robert Jordan and that's just fine by me -- it's your opinion. But tell me: have you actually read any 'Wheel of Time'-novels? I do agree that ever since Book 6 the series ground to a halt, but those first books are IMHO among the best fantasy fiction novels I've ever read.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

The Historian said:
			
		

> Perhaps FANS do, Hobo. Judging by this thread, fans seem to love arguing over everything, all the time.
> However, critics, academics, and lawyers do not. Unless hired to do so.



Critics and academics do indeed.  Lawyers—of course—do not, because it is of no legal interest whatsoever whether or not a reference in _The Book of Lost Tales_ to entire flights of balrogs means that by the time of the more modern _Silmarillion_ story Tolkien still meant for balrogs to have literal wings and the capacity to fly.

For instance.


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Let me mention another inconsistency I've spotted: the Spellplague apparently is not "powerful" enough to break High/Epic Magic wards (i.e. Mythals and Mythal-like magics), *but* it's able to shuffle around the planes (destroying the planes ruled by demipowers, lesser powers and intermediate powers -- not to mention "tossing" Abyss to the bottom of the Elemental Chaos). Wow, I guess those gods should have invested in Elven High Magic instead of Salient Divine Abilities...



You could easily say that the mortals were lucky and the spellplauge that hit the world was a mere shadow of the spellplauge from before it burnt out most of it's potency against the divine powers.

So without the deities lessening the spellplague by defending (successful or not) their realms against the plague the world of mortals would have hit much more badly.


----------



## Daniel D. Fox (Apr 16, 2008)

Threads like this are precisely why I hate Forgotten Realms. Too high of magic with too many publishing vehicles that have inevitably contradicted themselves throughout the entire setting's lifespan.


----------



## Desdichado (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Ah, you missed the point there. I was criticizing how there seem to glaring "errors" in the "New Realms" (lore which contradicts current canon lore) which implies that the designers have not done their "homework".



Your "point" might just as well be "made" without the use of so many "quotations."

If that's what you're doing, you're way off base, IMO.  That's sorta like saying that the Iron Man movie got it all wrong based on the trailers.  It's the tail wagging the dog.  You aren't equipped to even make that judgement at this point.

Also; I (and many others) are making the point that those aren't "errors" just because you say they are.  They may well be changes, but they're not errors.  Just like the introduction of midichlorians as the source of the Force wasn't an error—unless you want to call it an error of judgement.  

If you think it's a bad idea, that's perfectly valid: attempting to "disprove" the previews, based on what little we know about them because you think minor bits of esoterica renders what you believe they're doing with the setting impossible to do; that's just fan wankery.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> However, I'm not arguing that they should cater only to my tastes -- as already noted, my problem with the 4E FR is that they're clearly not familiar with the traditional "feel" and "spirit" of the Realms *and* they don't seem to be interested enough in reading the previously published books. I'm also wondering why they didn't hire George Krashos, Eric Boyd and Steven Schend to work on the  first 4E books, because those guys are all admired and talented designers who know the Realms inside-out -- why hire people who admit that they've never DMed or played in the Realms?



Because they believe those people are more in touch with the target demographic, as you point out?

I mean, it's not rocket science here.  The only reason to hire "old guard" authors and be a real stickler for all the minutiae of the setting is if they were trying to resell the setting exclusively to the existing "old guard" fanbase.  I think it's fair to say they hope to have better sales numbers than that; you've even conceded as much yourself.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Yet some professional game designers don't have the same kind of passion your average "Joe Blow DM" has -- it's *work*, after all, and no matter how much you love it, your attitude towards it changes as it becomes your profession. It's hard to be creative or give your best when the deadlines pile on you, and this is true in any "creative" industry.



Just as you claim that I can't *know* that some Joe Blow DM doesn't have the potential to be the next Sean K Reynolds or whatever, you can't possibly *know* that professional game designers have no passion for gaming.

I have no doubt that you're correct for some game designers out there, but the idea that all these guys are just picking up a paycheck and going through the motions is actually somewhat insulting.  And illogical.  They can cash a better paycheck in all kinds of other careers.  They by and large do this because they love it.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Let me quote you: "...but *arguing* with someone else's tastes?  Waste of time, pal."



You seem to really struggle to decipher my flippant comments from my serious ones.  I guess to keep on the same page, I'll have to refrain from the former when dealing with you.    


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> So you don't think much of Robert Jordan and that's just fine by me -- it's your opinion. But tell me: have you actually read any 'Wheel of Time'-novels? I do agree that ever since Book 6 the series ground to a halt, but those first books are IMHO among the best fantasy fiction novels I've ever read.



Of course; I described them as torrid, interminable soap operas, didn't I?  You think I got that impression reading the dust jackets?  I read nine of them before I gave up in disgust.


----------



## Primal (Apr 16, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> I have, much to my chagrin.  And you have addressed it, just not satisfactorily.  You're spinning around in circles trying to pretend that the Realms is consistent, but let's face it; it's notoriously not so.
> 
> Heck, even *YOU've* given plenty of examples yourself.  In this thread.  Of blatant inconsistencies.
> 
> Now, how about *you* read the whole thread please, and rather than skip over my meatier posts—about which I suspect you can't satisfactorily argue—address them.  You've managed to cut through three of them and simply focus on my flippant one-liner instead, thinking that perhaps you had a chance with that one.




Oh, most certainly -- but whatever inconsistencies were introduced back in 2E/3E pale by comparison to these "blatant" 4E inconsistencies (i.e. I could work around them or ignore them or even rewrite some stuff). Besides, a great many inconsistencies (which were the result of TSR using so many designers/freelancers unfamiliar with the details) were largely dealt with by Boyd, Schend and Krashos. 

I thought I already addressed the "Shar-and-Cyric-teleporting-into-Dweomerheart"-topic? Can you explain to me, using arguments based on Realmslore facts, how that whole farce could have happened?

Fact 1: Cyric and Shar are both major enemies to Mystra -- she would have placed magical wards and traps against them in Dweomerheart. 

Fact 2: Mystra is the most powerful of the Greater Deities. Powerful enough to withstand a direct assault from two other Greater Deities -- *especially* on her own "place of power". It is nigh-unthinkable that Cyric and Shar could take her by surprise in Dweomerheart.

Fact 3: Mystra can use her 'Deny Weave'-power, which she would have done the moment Shar or Cyric tried to enter her plane. 

Fact 4: Mystra was apparently attended by one of the other deities of magic (IIRC, it was Azuth?). This would have made the fight even harder for Cyric and Shar.

Fact 5: Savras and his followers should have had some kind of "warning" well in advance that Shar and Cyric are planning to assassinate Mystra. 

Fact 6: Shar could not use the Shadow Weave to transport them into Dweomerheart, since it is no longer part of the Weave.

 It would feel a bit more logical *if* Shar had used the Shadow Weave to transport herself and Cyric into Mystra's presence, *BUT* as the designers posted on the WoTC forums, they're "separating" Shadow Weave from the Weave. If they didn't Weave's collapse should have destroyed the Shadow Weave, too (Bye-bye Shade! Bye-bye Sharrans!).

Are you satisfied, now?


----------



## Mirtek (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 1: Cyric and Shar are both major enemies to Mystra -- she would have placed magical wards and traps against them in Dweomerheart.



A deity of magic would know how to do that. A deity of murder would know how to sneak past that. 50:50

Also Shar has quite her share of experience with magic and, even he doesn't get the credit he deserves in MoF, Cyric is a deity of magice too (since slaying Leira and taking her stuff)


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 2: Mystra is the most powerful of the Greater Deities. Powerful enough to withstand a direct assault from two other Greater Deities -- *especially* on her own "place of power". It is nigh-unthinkable that Cyric and Shar could take her by surprise in Dweomerheart.



Cyric once almost took her out while being denied access to magic (something which Mystra should have been unable to do at the place the fought)


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 3: Mystra can use her 'Deny Weave'-power, which she would have done the moment Shar or Cyric tried to enter her plane.



Which wouldn't impede their SDAs


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 4: Mystra was apparently attended by one of the other deities of magic (IIRC, it was Azuth?). This would have made the fight even harder for Cyric and Shar.



No one said it was an easy win.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 5: Savras and his followers should have had some kind of "warning" well in advance that Shar and Cyric are planning to assassinate Mystra.



A deity of seers vs. a deity of secrets. The 50:50 issue once again. And no one said that they were completly surprised, they just did not know enough to evade their fate.


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 6: Shar could not use the Shadow Weave to transport them into Dweomerheart, since it is no longer part of the Weave.



They most likely did not attack the goddess of the weave with the weave. Surely mostly SDAs and the good old cold steel (or whatever metaphysical matter weapons like Razor's Edge are made of)


			
				Primal said:
			
		

> If they didn't Weave's collapse should have destroyed the Shadow Weave, too (Bye-bye Shade! Bye-bye Sharrans!).



Hasn't the SW been destroyed too? Since weave users now cast without the weave, who says shadow weave users now cast without the shadow weave.

Shadow magic isn't tied to either weave


----------



## DandD (Apr 16, 2008)

Primal said:
			
		

> Fact 1: Cyric and Shar are both major enemies to Mystra -- she would have placed magical wards and traps against them in Dweomerheart.



And they would have worked together to overcome these wards and traps. 
FR-gods aren't allmighty, they're only outsiders with many many hitdices. If mortal heroes and villains can overcome ancient mystical traps and wards from uber-magical civilizations, so can two evil gods who work together. 


> Fact 2: Mystra is the most powerful of the Greater Deities. Powerful enough to withstand a direct assault from two other Greater Deities -- *especially* on her own "place of power". It is nigh-unthinkable that Cyric and Shar could take her by surprise in Dweomerheart.



Appearently not. I mean, seriously, in the end, it's just about withering down the hitpoints of your enemy. We have one more-than-epic spellcaster vs. one more-than-epic rogue aided by a more-than-epic witch. 


> Fact 3: Mystra can use her 'Deny Weave'-power, which she would have done the moment Shar or Cyric tried to enter her plane.



Guess that's when the 'Use Shadow Weave'-Power comes in handy. 


> Fact 4: Mystra was apparently attended by one of the other deities of magic (IIRC, it was Azuth?). This would have made the fight even harder for Cyric and Shar.



Nah, nobody helped her in the fight. Azuth and whatever other lesser magic god just got lost into the astral space or so when Mystra died and her house exploded. Magic does all kind of crazy stuff. 


> Fact 5: Savras and his followers should have had some kind of "warning" well in advance that Shar and Cyric are planning to assassinate Mystra.



Why? 


> Fact 6: Shar could not use the Shadow Weave to transport them into Dweomerheart, since it is no longer part of the Weave.



What has being part of the Weave to do with being able to teleport or somehow being able to enter into the plane of Mystra 2.0? Gods are using divine salient powers. 


> It would feel a bit more logical *if* Shar had used the Shadow Weave to transport herself and Cyric into Mystra's presence, *BUT* as the designers posted on the WoTC forums, they're "separating" Shadow Weave from the Weave. If they didn't Weave's collapse should have destroyed the Shadow Weave, too (Bye-bye Shade! Bye-bye Sharrans!).



So?


----------



## marune (Apr 16, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> Just as you claim that I can't *know* that some Joe Blow DM doesn't have the potential to be the next *Sean K Reynolds * or whatever, you can't possibly *know* that professional game designers have no passion for gaming.




Very bad example.

SKR and Rich Baker are the 3.x era designers hated by FR canon fanatics.

A good example would be Eric L. Boyd, who has vanished from Candlekeep boards and got his name on the 4E FR Players guide...  

I bet on Bruce Cordell (lead designer of the FR DM guide) to be the next guy to hate, according to the reputation of his FR novels and his recent Realmslore articles.


----------



## Eridanis (Apr 16, 2008)

I had hoped a word here to tone down discussion would be sufficient, but there are way too many people being angry at one another.

Thread closed. Feel free to open another thread on specific FR-related issues raised here, but leave the sniping behind.


----------

