Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Maaz, Technomancer 11-20-03, 08:25 AM	Sounds confusing at first, but according to the book's i've been reading it's Currently the Year of Wild Magic. Will this year ever end and will another start? Just Something I've Been Wondering.
Dark Harbinger 11-20-03, 09:29 AM	Yes, the years do indeed advance. On page 260 of the Forgotten Realms campaign setting book, it talks about advancing the years. It mentions that the campaign was originally set at 1356 DR. It goes on to say that the timeline will advance about two years (game time) for every five years in the real world. :)
Maaz, Technomancer 11-20-03, 09:48 AM	Nifty. I was thinking and i thought it would be very static if i didn't.
Wooly Rupert 11-20-03, 10:02 AM	And all of the names for years come from the Roll of Years, which covers 2300 years, extending from -700 DR to 1600 DR.
Kuje31 11-20-03, 01:57 PM	Originally posted by Dark Harbinger It mentions that the campaign was originally set at 1356 DR. It goes on to say that the timeline will advance about two years (game time) for every five years in the real world. :) However, this was before the lay off's and people quitting. So that really isn't right any more. However, it's now officially 1373, because the last sembia novel, Lord of Stormweather, changed the date. The Player's Guide in March is going to bring the sourcebooks up to 1373 also.
Richard Lee Byers 11-20-03, 07:53 PM	Kuje, I'm not arguing with your assessment that it's "really" 1373 now. But I'm not absolutely sure that all the FR products come out in strict chronological order. As you see it, Lord of Stormweather officially advanced the year, but it's possible (I think; some WotC mandarin more knowledgable than I may contradict me on this) that in some of the novels and other products published afterward, it was still 1372. If so, maybe we have to resign ourselves to cusp periods when the "real" year is tricky to determine.
Kuje31 11-20-03, 08:10 PM	Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers Kuje, I'm not arguing with your assessment that it's "really" 1373 now. But I'm not absolutely sure that all the FR products come out in strict chronological order. As you see it, Lord of Stormweather officially advanced the year, but it's possible (I think; some WotC mandarin more knowledgable than I may contradict me on this) that in some of the novels and other products published afterward, it was still 1372. If so, maybe we have to resign ourselves to cusp periods when the "real" year is tricky to determine. And I never said there are not some novels and sourcebooks that still take place in the past (the Drizzt novels still do atm) or in 1372. But again the Player's Guide is also going to update the time to 1373 for the sourcebooks. While the novels already have.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-21-03, 12:17 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 However, this was before the lay off's and people quitting. So that really isn't right any more. I didn't even know about that, myself...
kumyat 11-21-03, 08:22 AM	What year would the date be for on the Forgotten Realms Home Page? (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fr/welcome) . Is this 1372 or 1373?
LiXinjian 11-21-03, 02:15 PM	I am asuming by everyone's post that you guys/girls are actually happy they decided to advance the years as new products get published? Well, I am not. When I look up something in the sourcebook and cross-reference it with material found inside another book, I expect the two sources to be complementary. For instance, I expect the material found within the pages of the Underdark sourcebook to provide more details on what's found in the FRCS book. The two books must be standing on equal footing chronologically-wise, so to speak. They must work together to describe a fictional world. One gives a general overview, while the other provides an in-depth look at a certain region or organization of said fictional world. I like to think of the FRCS as a satellite photography of the world called Toril. The Underdark book is a close-up of that underground section. The Unapproachable East is similarly a picture focused on the eastern reaches of Toril. Of what use is a picture taken ten years later of a region previously uncharted, I ask you? It makes the first photograph outdated. How long before we throw our FRCS sourcebooks out the window to buy a new one based in 1392DR instead? And then, what about our old Underdark books? They'll be outdated, too. While we're at it, we could replenish our entire libraries every five years, too? How am I expected to keep track of all the minor changes between the publication of the FRCS and the latest book detailing The Underdark, if the dates aren't concordant? What changed? What remained the same? What are the implications of this or that god having been destroyed recently (i mean: as would be described in the latest book)? Does that mean that his/her famous temple located in Sembia is now deserted? If so, then, what's inside those walls, now, as my PC are approaching it? Without a static world, you can't logically tie each sourcebook to the previous/next. It increases the chances of illogical happenstances a hundredfold. Furthermore, I don't want to have to buy yet another book to tie the two sourcebooks together. It's illogical. When I prepare a game, I don't want to have to double-check everything in three different books just to make ends meet. I expect WoTC to provide me with a rich, detailed world, but a STATIC one. The roll of the years, I'll handle myself, thank you very much. If they want to put out another book, make it a book suggesting a few changes in this or that as the years go by, with precise indications as to what should be adjusted from the sourcebook should you (as a DM) choose to go with the suggested advancement of the years. I understand that seasoned players might feel like they are adventuring in the same year over and over, even as they create new characters. But that's why Toril's such a big place: there's always another region to explore. And nothing keeps a DM from advancing the years himself, too. It's much easier to keep track of changes you made yourself than to try to find out if the changes others made retroactively affect a sourcebook others wrote/created. Anybody else feels like I do?
Kuje31 11-21-03, 02:31 PM	Originally posted by LiXinjian I am asuming by everyone's post that you guys/girls are actually happy they decided to advance the years as new products get published? Well, I am not. When I look up something in the sourcebook and cross-reference it with material found inside another book, I expect the two sources to be complementary. For instance, I expect the material found within the pages of the Underdark sourcebook to provide more details on what's found in the FRCS book. The two books must be standing on equal footing chronologically-wise, so to speak. They must work together to describe a fictional world. One gives a general overview, while the other provides an in-depth look at a certain region or organization of said fictional world. (Snip'd the rest) Anybody else feels like I do? Well, all I can say here is get used to this. Yes it's harsh but as many of us know, FR has ALWAYS advanced. The first material came out in 1356 DR. Use what you like, and ignore the rest. Time marches on and things change. Take the Underdark book for instance, since there are many passages in it that detail the effects of the Spider Queen's silence. Changes happen. Shrug, I guess I'd rather have a living world where changes happen (if they make sense and don't conflict with each other), then one that stays always at the mid part of 1372. See the Homebrew vs. Canon thread that is down the main FR boards a bit, to give you some ideas about how you can keep it as 1372, while WOTC's FR continues to move on. Actually I can't think of really one setting or world that isn't changed in some form or another when a new sourcebook comes out.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-21-03, 03:22 PM	I don't think anything is wrong as long as the Realms doesn't advance *too* quickly. And it really doesn't. Moving ahead 2 years for every *five* years in the real world isn't too fast to keep up with, if you think about it. As for the current year, I just say 1372/1373. It may be true that it's moved up a bit by now, but not by that much.
Iakhovas 11-21-03, 07:20 PM	Whoah, you picked the wrong campaing setting LiXinjian. Greyhawk may be a better fit for you. It hardly ever changes.
LiXinjian 11-21-03, 07:58 PM	Don't think so. I've got so many FR books now, and I've read so many of them (although probably not all from cover to cover) that I'm rather unwilling to start over again! :) As for the realms having aged already, I'd say they had to fast forward a bit with the release of 3rd edition, otherwise our old FR boxed sets would have looked too much like the new sourcebook. Besides, it was a way for the new development team to take creative control of the world that is Toril. What would have been the point of simply reprinting the old material? But that hardly matters. At this point, WotC seems rather content to make only minimal changes to the world as time flows by, certainly because of the compatibility issue I mentioned. But I really wish they had included a full entry on Ched Nassad in the Underdark book. I felt they were only using the whole War of the Spider Queen events to reduce their workload.
Kuje31 11-21-03, 08:20 PM	Originally posted by LiXinjian But that hardly matters. At this point, WotC seems rather content to make only minimal changes to the world as time flows by, certainly because of the compatibility issue I mentioned. But I really wish they had included a full entry on Ched Nassad in the Underdark book. I felt they were only using the whole War of the Spider Queen events to reduce their workload. Minimal changes? I dont know what you have been reading but most of the changes has not been minimal. Let's see Shade returned, and Evereska is half destroyed. Tilverton has all but been removed from Cormyr. Anourach(sp?) now has a giant lake in the middle of the desert. Star elves returned to the Yuirwood and have brought some ancient enemies with them. The Underdark is all a mess, with many cities down there totally destroyed or weakened. Heck there hasn't been this much death and destruction since ToT's. :)
LiXinjian 11-21-03, 08:29 PM	I didn't mean minimal changes between 2nd edition and 3rd edition, I meant between new 3rd ed books coming out. Also, I meant "changes with impact on previously published book". Does the fact that the underdark is in total chaos right now affect what's found in the FRCS sourcebook? Not really.
Kuje31 11-21-03, 09:28 PM	Originally posted by LiXinjian I didn't mean minimal changes between 2nd edition and 3rd edition, I meant between new 3rd ed books coming out. Also, I meant "changes with impact on previously published book". Does the fact that the underdark is in total chaos right now affect what's found in the FRCS sourcebook? Not really. Well none of those changes are 2e changes, except my brief mention of ToT's. The Underdark being ripped apart doesn't affect what was in the FRCS? How so..... 3/3.5e has done way more damage and changes to FR then half of the old material ever did.
LiXinjian 11-21-03, 11:39 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Well none of those changes are 2e changes, except my brief mention of ToT's. Exactly. They are all 3rd edition changes. But they were all (except for the return of the star elves - which doesn't really affect Toril as a whole, but is rather circumscribed to the East) part of the same dramatic "revamp" of the forgotten realms with the arrival of 3rd edition. The Shades returned with the arrival in stores of the new FRCS sourcebook. Same goes with Tilverton being a smoking crater and the lake in the middle of Anauroch. My point being: all of the dramatic changes occured with the release of the new Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting sourcebook, not afterwards with any of the new products. It's all in the same book. I don't count the return of the Star Elves as major, since most campaigns don't take place in that region, and even then, it's not like you have to go through all of the previously published 3rd edition FR books to make changes because a new race has appeared. Admitedly, the only major change is the whole underdark saga, but since this area was barely mentioned/detailed in the core sourcebook, the implications of those changes are very minimal indeed. That's all I'm sayin'.
Mr. Wilson 11-21-03, 11:57 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Minimal changes? I dont know what you have been reading but most of the changes has not been minimal. Let's see Shade returned, and Evereska is half destroyed. Tilverton has all but been removed from Cormyr. Anourach(sp?) now has a giant lake in the middle of the desert. snipped the rest for space When I read the last line, I almost spewed Mountain Dew all over my computer screen. I knew that the Shades had returned, but I missed the giant lake, in which book did that occur?
Kuje31 11-22-03, 12:10 AM	Originally posted by LiXinjian Exactly. They are all 3rd edition changes. But they were all (except for the return of the star elves - which doesn't really affect Toril as a whole, but is rather circumscribed to the East) part of the same dramatic "revamp" of the forgotten realms with the arrival of 3rd edition. Not all of these changes were in the FRCS..... The Silence of Lolth wasn't until the Spider Queen Novels and the Underdark book. :) There was no mention of her doing what she is doing in the FRCS. Look at Menzoberrazan, it went from 32,000 residents in the FRCS (before the silence) to 11,000 in Underdark. Nor was the destruction of Evereska.
Kuje31 11-22-03, 12:14 AM	Originally posted by Mr. Wilson When I read the last line, I almost spewed Mountain Dew all over my computer screen. I knew that the Shades had returned, but I missed the giant lake, in which book did that occur? The 2nd or the 3rd novel, when they are messing with the weather, and they draw a lot of clouds and fill the Shoals of Thirst. It's also on the map in the FRCS on page 117
Mr. Wilson 11-22-03, 01:41 PM	thanks Kuje, my mind must have just mentally blocked that out. I'll go take a look...
PhilCW 11-23-03, 12:01 PM	Is that 32 000 population or 32 000 Drow. Because it could be that the 11 000 figure is for the drow population, and the rest is comprised of slaves.
Cunning Linguist 11-23-03, 12:12 PM	FRCS and Underdark have the same stats. It says in the FRCS that 1/3 of the pop. is Drow, rest slaves.
Kuje31 11-23-03, 01:18 PM	Your right it still does have the same amount of population, which is a bit stupid considering many of the slaves died as did many of the drow, which is also written up in the Underdark text for the city. But again FR has always changed from sourcebook to sourcebook and I for one hope they never keep it static, even though I dont use most of the changes.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-23-03, 08:37 PM	And they might make a change that you like. :) Some changes are good. Not all, but some.
Wooly Rupert 11-23-03, 09:03 PM	You know, that was one thing that surprised me: there was no real major, Realms-wide event for the release of 3rd Edition... There's not a lot of differences between 1st and 2nd Edition, but they had the ToT to explain that transition. But there is a lot of differences between 2nd and 3rd, but there was no Realms-shaking event to justify the changes in the fiction...
Sirius_Black 11-24-03, 10:25 AM	Originally posted by LiXinjian How long before we throw our FRCS sourcebooks out the window.... At least not til 4th edition comes out.
Sirius_Black 11-24-03, 10:27 AM	Originally posted by Richard Lee Byers If so, maybe we have to resign ourselves to cusp periods when the "real" year is tricky to determine. Not to mention novels that don't always include a clear date. I don't recall the WOTSQ series ever mentioning a date for any of the novels. Additionally, Paul Kemp's new novel about Mr. Cale, if I recall, doesn't give an official date as the story begins. Granted, one can make a deduction based upon the last Sembia novel, but it would still have been nice to see a date listed.
Sirius_Black 11-24-03, 10:29 AM	Originally posted by Iakhovas Whoah, you picked the wrong campaing setting LiXinjian. Greyhawk may be a better fit for you. It hardly ever changes. What's Greyhawk?????? :confused:
Sirius_Black 11-24-03, 10:32 AM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert You know, that was one thing that surprised me: there was no real major, Realms-wide event for the release of 3rd Edition... I don't know Wooly Rupert. I think the Return of the Shade and the chaos of the Archwizards series comes pretty close or was at least the company's attempt at a Realm shaking event for 3E. I wonder what destruction they will rain down upon the elves when 4th edition comes out??? Maybe they will clone Drizzt and have him brood the elven race into mass suicide. :angel:
Wooly Rupert 11-24-03, 10:52 AM	Originally posted by Sirius_Black I don't know Wooly Rupert. I think the Return of the Shade and the chaos of the Archwizards series comes pretty close or was at least the company's attempt at a Realm shaking event for 3E. I wonder what destruction they will rain down upon the elves when 4th edition comes out??? Maybe they will clone Drizzt and have him brood the elven race into mass suicide. :angel: Well, I've still not read the last book of the Archwizards trilogy. And I'll agree that it is certainly a big event. But it has nowhere near the magnitude of the Avatar Crisis. The return of Shade has affected certain areas, but the vast majority of Realms simply hasn't noticed. And yet, we still have all this new stuff that has nothing to do with Shade. Elven paladins? Shadow Weave? Sorcerors? Things like that simply weren't around in 2nd edition. Other than dropping some character classes, the changes from 1st edition to 2nd edition were pretty minor -- and yet there was a Realms-wide event to explain away the abrupt changes. The change from 2nd to 3rd edition has created a lot of changes, but much of it either isn't explained or is given a explanation that's not really all that hot. "There's always been sorcerors, it's just that no one knew about it!" I was honestly disappointed by that.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-24-03, 11:19 AM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert The change from 2nd to 3rd edition has created a lot of changes, but much of it either isn't explained or is given a explanation that's not really all that hot. "There's always been sorcerors, it's just that no one knew about it!" I also find that to be extremely annoying. I wonder if that's what they'll say about the Great Wheel--"everything you read that took place on those planes was a LIE!" :rolleyes:
Patrakis 11-24-03, 01:00 PM	For those in search of a campaign that is developped in a static mode...i suggest looking the Harn campaign/world. Very detailed and nothing is being developped behond the year....cant remember the year exactly. THe world is rich and interesting, low on magic and very close to the medieval world we know. Very far for FR philosophy. As for changes in FR..well...if you ve been following the realms for the last 16 years...one cant say it is a static or even semi static campaign/world. The philosophy behind the design is that WotC is making the world and the major events. We, as gamers and Dms, must fit into this evolution of the world. Either that or take one book at one time and develop from that point never bothering with following information. No mather where you start your campaign, you never know when the company will decide to implement a major event. Just ask DMs that were running a campaign with major zenths involvment when they almost destroyed the network. FR has become a novel driven world. Every development that occur in gaming books finds its roots in the novels they publish. That has not always been the case but it seems that in todays market, that is the most economic way to go for WotC. I stoped long ago to read those novels for that fact alone. Anyway, all i wanted to say is FR is far from a static world. Everything can happen and will eventually happen. In these circumstances, you have to pick and choose the events that you want to keep or not. And that will continue until the day they stop making money with novels, which i doubt they ever will. That being said...i love the realms..always played in them and probably always will. I just dont bother myself will those silly world shaking events that they throw at us from time to time to sell more novels. Time of trouble? pfff, never happen. What is this about Azoon dying? just a rumor...never happen. Shades in the desert? a new floating city...bedtime stories...good rumors though..very good hooks to get a campaign going :)
Kuje31 11-24-03, 01:34 PM	Originally posted by Patrakis FR has become a novel driven world. Every development that occur in gaming books finds its roots in the novels they publish. That has not always been the case but it seems that in todays market, that is the most economic way to go for WotC. I stoped long ago to read those novels for that fact alone. Anyway, all i wanted to say is FR is far from a static world. Everything can happen and will eventually happen. In these circumstances, you have to pick and choose the events that you want to keep or not. And that will continue until the day they stop making money with novels, which i doubt they ever will. I have to disagree here. FR has ALWAYS been a novel driven world. The first official product (besides what was in printed in Dragon/Dungeon) was a novel, Darkwalker on Moonshae. So that should have clued people in that FR was both a novel and sourcebook driven world and it still is.
ender 12-15-03, 11:57 PM	What I am curious about is the stated ratio of 2 years=1 year. I have heard this from several sources. Beginning with the grey box the years always corresponded; 1356-1372 is 16 years, as is 1987-2003. Any idea why they decided to change the rate of change?
Lashan 12-16-03, 05:45 PM	First, I want to address the person who asked what Greyhawk was. If you really don't know, it's the first game world that the creator of DnD (Gary Gygax) created. It was the first game world that TSR developed. All the original modules were set in it. It was going to be the "default" game world that DnD was set in. All the gods listed in the Player's Handbook are from Greyhawk. If you were just making a joke, then forget it. I have to agree with Patrakis and disagree with Kuje31. Just because the first product was a novel doesn't mean that the entire product line was going to be novel driven. You can have a novel that is based in a game world, but then not have the game world reflect that novel. In fact, the first book was not really placed in FR, but since FR was coming out, they changed it. That means they had to add the Moonshaes into FR when they weren't there originally. If you have novels in the game world, you don't have to have every novel really take place in the plotline of the game world. Why not just make some great stories about the game world, but leave the gaming products out of it? I really feel that the novels have had a detrimental effect on the game world. Things that happen in a novel might make a great story, but are not good from a game design perspective. Also, if you don't happen to like a plot that happens in a novel, you might not like to put it in your game world. If the game world were more static, or even if they were friendly to people who wanted them to be static, it would be much easier. The old Faiths and Avatars book included the stats and info for the "dead" gods that died in the horrible ToT. Why can't all products include info like this for those people who like to ignore the novels and the plotlines that happen in them? It wouldn't be too hard and you would please both groups of people. As a side note, they didn't have anything like the Time of Troubles for 3E b/c most people hated it! Or at least enough of them complained about it that they would never do anything like that again. I have to say that the ToT was the worst thing to happen to the FR. I came close to giving up on FR at that point.
Kuje31 12-16-03, 06:33 PM	I have to agree with Patrakis and disagree with Kuje31. Just because the first product was a novel doesn't mean that the entire product line was going to be novel driven. You can have a novel that is based in a game world, but then not have the game world reflect that novel. In fact, the first book was not really placed in FR, but since FR was coming out, they changed it. That means they had to add the Moonshaes into FR when they weren't there originally. Ah but the Moonshae's did exist in Ed's world originally, however you are right they were not the same Moonshae's that exists there now. However they did exist. So you can disagree but the truth is from the very beginning FR was also a novel driven world, pretty much just like Dragonlance. If you have novels in the game world, you don't have to have every novel really take place in the plotline of the game world. Why not just make some great stories about the game world, but leave the gaming products out of it? Because many of us like the stories in the novels? Shrug, I never use all the novels and all the sourcebooks, but I read all of them because they are usually good reads and they are good to draw ideas from. I really feel that the novels have had a detrimental effect on the game world. Things that happen in a novel might make a great story, but are not good from a game design perspective. Also, if you don't happen to like a plot that happens in a novel, you might not like to put it in your game world. If the game world were more static, or even if they were friendly to people who wanted them to be static, it would be much easier. The old Faiths and Avatars book included the stats and info for the "dead" gods that died in the horrible ToT. Why can't all products include info like this for those people who like to ignore the novels and the plotlines that happen in them? It wouldn't be too hard and you would please both groups of people. I do feel the same way about many sourcebooks. Some of the material in the sourcebooks might make a great plot hook but then they might not. I for one don't want a static FR, so I get to pick and choose from the novels and sourcebooks what I want to include in my games and what I don't. As a side note, they didn't have anything like the Time of Troubles for 3E b/c most people hated it! Or at least enough of them complained about it that they would never do anything like that again. I have to say that the ToT was the worst thing to happen to the FR. I came close to giving up on FR at that point. Which is why I don't use ToT's in my games. However between the return of Shade and the Spider Queen story arc and the other 3e RSE's, these have all changed FR for the new edition like they did for ToT.
Lashan 12-16-03, 06:47 PM	Actually, the first that the FR was introduced to the public at large was via the early Dragon Magazine articles. That is when I first started to read about places like Myth Drannor and Zhentil Keep. These articles were about gaming products. They weren't about short stories. You can argue that before that Ed based it all on short stories, but I still say that the FR was introduced to the public not as a novel or short story. I still say that TSR and WOTC could be more accomedating to both types of gamers. In their products, they can include info about pre- TOT (or whatever change there was) and post change info. They did this with Zhentil Keep. They included the dead gods in Faiths and Avatars. Why didn't they include this in the new Faiths and Pantheons? I believe that there is a way to have products that can show both sides of the fence. There are other ways to show characters and abilities from novels to the public without having to change the core FR rules, as well. Dragon Magazine is a great way to show various NPCs from FR novels without having to take up valuable space in FR source books.
Kuje31 12-16-03, 07:02 PM	Originally posted by Lashan Actually, the first that the FR was introduced to the public at large was via the early Dragon Magazine articles. That is when I first started to read about places like Myth Drannor and Zhentil Keep. These articles were about gaming products. They weren't about short stories. You can argue that before that Ed based it all on short stories, but I still say that the FR was introduced to the public not as a novel or short story. I still say that TSR and WOTC could be more accomedating to both types of gamers. In their products, they can include info about pre- TOT (or whatever change there was) and post change info. They did this with Zhentil Keep. They included the dead gods in Faiths and Avatars. Why didn't they include this in the new Faiths and Pantheons? I believe that there is a way to have products that can show both sides of the fence. There are other ways to show characters and abilities from novels to the public without having to change the core FR rules, as well. Dragon Magazine is a great way to show various NPCs from FR novels without having to take up valuable space in FR source books. I said that originally about the material in Dragon, if you go back and reread my posts in this thread. Here I quote myself. "I have to disagree here. FR has ALWAYS been a novel driven world. The first official product (besides what was in printed in Dragon/Dungeon) was a novel, Darkwalker on Moonshae. So that should have clued people in that FR was both a novel and sourcebook driven world and it still is." Now I do agree that it would be nice for WOTC to do what you are asking, but then TSR didn't do that, that much either. Yes they did it on some of thier products but the majority of thier 120+ sourcebooks did not have a history that detailed both before and after changes. Besides WOTC has said many times they are not beholden to the old material, so they have no reason to add in changes that took place twenty years ago in FR's timeline. Shrug true on the NPC's and they do that already but then it turns into the debate of "Is Dragon/Dungeon "official."" So they print them in sourcebooks instead. Besides how many really use the NPC's, except as, "I want to kill Elminster because I hate him and he and the other NPC's cause my PC or my PC's to be overshadowed by them."
Wooly Rupert 12-16-03, 08:25 PM	I agree with most of what Kuje31 said, except for the part about the Time of Troubles. I actually liked that.