Post Reply
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:14AM
#3601
|
|
|
What if only a small group of consumers like very detailed settings with lots of lore? A company wants to get their product into the hands of the masses not the just a select group of people. It is a shame because I do not think you need to learn all the lore either to play in the setting but many people think this way. By making the setting feel newer they hope to get more people into it. Yes it will tick off some people, but it also might bring in new folks and bring back people who left for other settings.
Well, it seems WotC wants a setting that is more or less the exact opposite of what the Realms are: a shallow (as in: not very detailed), easy to grasp plug-and-play setting that requires a lot of work from the individual GM (which is why your Realms will differ vastly from my Realms because we have to insert all the details the setting doesn't provide for us). And you know what? That's great. Settings like these have their customer base, too, and if WotC wants to profit from it, more power to them. But that's not what the Realms are. They bury 20 years of published lore and cut the customers out of the most detailed setting there is by not continuing the product line and putting something into that slot that's the exact opposite - almost no other setting even comes close as far as the level of detail is concerned. (Only DSA, Germany's biggest RPG, is as detailed - which is why it's the most successful setting over here. But of course it's of little use to English speakers.)
So why do they have to change the Realms so drastically to achieve this? Why don't they say, "All right, we don't want to put up with doing so much homework even for a small article, and the Realms as a setting are unusable anyway. We decided to let it rest in peace and move on. And here is our shiny new setting: Realms of Arkania!" (Or whatever.)
Because the name still draws customers. In spite of how clunky, unwieldy, over-populated by
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:37AM
#3602
|
|
|
If that is indeed true, then I just wish the folks at WoTC would be honest with us just this once and release a press release that says something along the lines of
"Dear longtime fans of the Forgotten Realms, We don't give a damn about any of you."
Hear hear! :evillaugh
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:39AM
#3603
|
|
|
Yes, the Harpers are still around in 4e Realms. They don't get a lot of air time in the new FRCG or FRPG, but they're still around. Bards, druids, barbarians, sorcerers, etc., are on the way. They weren't in the first Player's Handbook, but they're not out of the game. In fact, I'd expect to see at least a couple of those classes available in DDi content by this summer, and they'll be in print in 2009. So there are a few places in the FRCG where we refer to classes that just aren't out yet, but will be pretty soon. Harpers still, well, harp.
Rich,
Sorry if its been asked, but I am curious about something, which I'm almost sure is not going to get an answer, but I find myself wondering just how the Harpers, presuming they survive in some incarnation, are going to function without bards, as that class seems rather integral to them. Some hint perhaps of how this is going to be resolved, or perhaps if it isn't going to be an issue... a breadcrumb maybe?
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:40AM
#3604
|
|
|
Because the name still draws customers. In spite of how clunky, unwieldy, over-populated by
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:47AM
#3605
|
|
|
Thank You for taking the time, once again, to field questions Rich.
From your response, am I to gather that any mechanics that come out in the DDi will be available in print format at a latter time? :confused:
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 9:54AM
#3606
|
|
|
No worries, Asgetrion, although I'm really a little puzzled why this question keeps resurfacing. I just re-read Magic of Faerun page 9, and it says nothing about the Weave being necessary for life. OK, then... well, first, I'd like to know who exactly "The Historian" is before I agree that he's in a position to accurately cite the 20-year-old-plus contract. People hiding behind screen names claim to have inside information all the time. Heck, I was the Realms creative director for years, and I have only the broadest familiarity with the terms of the deal. In any event, we've already contradicted that "the Weave is necessary for life itself" statement on numerous scores, going all the way back to the Time of Troubles. People don't drop like puppets with their strings cut when they walk into a dead magic zone. Some people *live* in dead magic zones (remember the Tuigan Horde?) That's been around since the early years of 2nd Edition. If that's the case, then it's crystal-clear to me that life gets along OK without the Weave.
Hi Rich!
First of all, this post is not meant to be “snarky” or insulting in any way –- I only wish to comment on an issue which has weighed on my mind for a while.
I’m not sure if this has been discussed for a while here (if it is, my apologies), but it came up on EnWorld –- namely, whether the Weave “permeates” all of Faerun and all its inhabitants. A poster called Mirtek pointed out that it’s said on page 9 in ‘Magic of Faerun’, and indeed, it more or less *does* say so.
As for the Weave being the “upholder” of all life on Faerun, I’m pretty sure that Ed has said so on Candlekeep.com, and isn’t his word considered official (canon) unless directly contradicted by another official source?
This is an interesting quote from a poster called The Historian (on EnWorld):
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.
*SNIP*
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.
Therefore, if this particular poster is to be believed (and I think other “lorelords” have also said that Ed’s word counts as official while their doesn’t), I think it may indeed be canon that the Weave is the upholder of all life on Toril (unless I’m completely messed up and Ed has never said so). I also heard that you've promised a reward for anyone who can quote a canon source, so perhaps someone greedier than I would like to claim it and find a quote on Candlekeep.com? :)
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 10:17AM
#3607
|
|
|
Rich, it's not that you die as soon as you get in a DMZ, the death is slow, more like a body without food, which is what the Weave is, food for life. Areas inside a DMZ tend to become arid (Myth Drannor hasn't because the DMZ moves all the time)
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 10:26AM
#3608
|
|
|
Rich, it's not that you die as soon as you get in a DMZ, the death is slow, more like a body without food, which is what the Weave is, food for life. Areas inside a DMZ tend to become arid (Myth Drannor hasn't because the DMZ moves all the time)
How did you figured that out?
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 10:35AM
#3609
|
|
|
How did you figured that out?
Simple logic, most places that have DMZ aren't filled with trees and cute tiny squirrels, they are usually places with little or no life at all, and since nobody dies just by entering a DMZ then the only logical conclusion is that life needs the Weave in the same way it needs food, it can live some time without it, but little by little he would start to deteriorate.
The lifedrain dweomers of the Phaerimm caused DMZs. Or viewed from my theory, the lifedrain dweomers were actually DMZ spells casted bt the Phaerimm to weaken the Netherese Mages, and without the Weave life started to die. That's why the Anauroch desert was created. Even now it has some DMZs and it hasn't become fertile again because the climatic conditions of the area changed to those of a desert, so even with the Weave again in the Anauroch area it still needs other factors to restore it's former state.
|
|
2 years ago ::
Apr 25, 2008 - 11:13AM
#3610
|
|
|
Simple logic, most places that have DMZ aren't filled with trees and cute tiny squirrels, they are usually places with little or no life at all, and since nobody dies just by entering a DMZ then the only logical conclusion is that life needs the Weave in the same way it needs food, it can live some time without it, but little by little he would start to deteriorate.
The lifedrain dweomers of the Phaerimm caused DMZs. Or viewed from my theory, the lifedrain dweomers were actually DMZ spells casted bt the Phaerimm to weaken the Netherese Mages, and without the Weave life started to die. That's why the Anauroch desert was created. Even now it has some DMZs and it hasn't become fertile again because the climatic conditions of the area changed to those of a desert, so even with the Weave again in the Anauroch area it still needs other factors to restore it's former state.
Meh, It can also be the fact that DMZ have a sense of "dread" that makes animals and humans uneasy
|
Post Reply
|
