Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Corthan 11-24-03, 10:19 AM	Do the novels reflect anything on what happens to the Timeline that gets posted for campaign settings and such?
Wooly Rupert 11-24-03, 10:44 AM	The majority of the FR novels are considered canon sources, and stuff that happens in them is part of the FR timeline.
Kuje31 11-24-03, 12:57 PM	What Wooly said. :). There's only a few novels that are not considered canon and part of the FR line. Once Around the Realms and the Double Diamond novelettes, are both considered fancy chapbooks written by Volo.
Corthan 11-24-03, 01:37 PM	Thanks, and I agree with you signature about 2ed.
Kacesen_Black 11-24-03, 01:38 PM	I think the books try to keep with the cannon stuff
Lashan 11-24-03, 06:52 PM	...and I happen to hate this fact. I think that novels may be nice little stories, but they make for bad game design. Just look at the soap operea the FR pantheon has become. I find that there are too many Realms Changing Events that interfer with my home campaign world. The world is in too much of a constant flux, and I don't agree with all the changes that happen. While you can edit out what you don't like, after a while, it becomes a very difficult task. I've been editing out almost everything that happens since the ToT. It is hard to play in the FR that I prefer.
Crust 11-24-03, 10:38 PM	There are plenty of places in Faerun that are not affected by these "Realms changing events." Such campaigns are not affected by them unless the DM wants them to be so affected. Further, the "soap operas" that exist in a few Realms novels make for better games than a hack and slash that contains no drama and very little role playing.
Lashan 11-24-03, 11:19 PM	Many of the places that are not effected by novels are also the ones that don't have a lot of detail about them at all! I still like many of the popular areas of the Realms, but prefer not to have my campaign hijacked by a novel. I'm glad that my campaign isn't set in Tilverton! As for campaigns that are not hack-and-slash, you don't have to shake up the pantheons to avoid this. I know it is a matter of preference, but I prefer the celestial heavens to be rather unchanging while the stage of mortals to be ever-changing. Still, the novels tend to create mentalities and threads on the message boards that deal with "Which deity is cooler" or "Who's the hottest goddess?". Then again, the ever escalating cold war of "Chosen of" for each deity gets old, too. I know this is only my opinion, and I know that its good to have non-stagnant game worlds. I do prefer that most of the "events" that happen are not so Faerun Shaking. I honestly prefer to have the gods to be these far away and above-human entities.
Wooly Rupert 11-25-03, 01:44 AM	Originally posted by Lashan Still, the novels tend to create mentalities and threads on the message boards that deal with "Which deity is cooler" or "Who's the hottest goddess?". Then again, the ever escalating cold war of "Chosen of" for each deity gets old, too. Oh yeah, I'll agree with that! I get tired of that, too. For me, part of the appeal of the Realms is that stuff does happen. I like most of the events and such that go on -- it helps keep the Realms an interesting place. I'm not saying I want to see a ToT every other week, but the fact that there are major events playing out somewhere very much appeals to me. Whether it's something like the rebirth of Bane or the death of Azoun IV, I have no problem with any of it. I think some of the coolest things they've done are the Manshoon Wars and the Harper Schism. Man, there's a lot of potential there! :D I guess that's why I like the ever-changing nature so much: it makes for so much potential! I read a sourcebook, and I get a dozen different idea for how I could play with this or that element of what's going on. :D
Darkmistress 11-25-03, 02:51 AM	Without the events in the novels, IMO, FR would be a much more boring place. Most of the NPC's would be nothing more than faceless non-entities with little to no personality. Most towns will feel static, most races will feel flat, etc. A few paragraphs, or even scores of information-dump facts, are just not the same as actual narrative. Now, I don't know if you actually read them, but there are novels that are not world-changing. Some deal with more personal adventures and stories on a smaller scale. And frankly, if I hadn't read them, I wouldn't have been interested in FR at all. Besides, all of the inconsistencies seen in FR stem more from the sourcebooks than the novels anyway. (And it's canon, not cannon -- that's a type of weapon, for Eru's sake. Why does almost everyone make this mistake? Huh? Huh?!)
Patrakis 11-25-03, 12:19 PM	I thought is was the job of DMs to put life in a world and make it seem like it is alive!! Novels just take away that job from Dms and in itself its not bad...not everyone has time to think all sorts of stories and events. We have to face this..FR is for lazy...or out of time...DMs. :) As for me?..i'm just lazy
Wooly Rupert 11-25-03, 12:39 PM	Originally posted by Patrakis Novels just take away that job from Dms and in itself its not bad...not everyone has time to think all sorts of stories and events. We have to face this..FR is for lazy...or out of time...DMs. How do novels take away from the DMs? Novels don't always have big, dramatic effects on the Realms. I read the novels because I like them. I may get an idea or two from them, but they certainly don't detract anything. And I further disagree that the Realms are for lazy or out of time DMs. How is it lazy to want to use a nicely detailed world? Sure, I'm not taking the time to detail some things myself... But where's the harm in that? If I want an area to detail, I pick the area and detail it. If I want an area that's ready to go, I pick that area. There's nothing forcing me to play in Waterdeep, for example. I choose to play there because I like the material available, and I get plenty of ideas from the various sources. And having the detail right there often leads to ideas I prolly wouldn't have had, otherwise. Further, even though I am an imaginative sort, there's a lot of other imaginative people out there. No matter how many nifty ideas I come up with, someone somewhere else is gonna come up with some nifty stuff I'd not even considered. If the idea is good, what does it matter who came up with it? Besides, I may think of another direction for your nifty idea, one you didn't think of. And even if I didn't, how I use the idea in my campaign is gonna be different from how you use it in yours. Besides, playing in a shared world means a lot of people have put in a lot of effort to make sure things make some semblance of sense. If I make my own campaign world, I may add something that makes perfect sense to me. Other people may look at it and wonder where my brain was when I came up with that... Just because one draws on an available resource does not make one lazy. I play the Realms not because I'm lazy or out of time, but because I just plain like the setting.
Faraer 11-25-03, 12:45 PM	-- TSR and WotC had and have no hard and fast 'canon' distinction between different mediums such as novels and RPG books. Glad that misconception is no longer holding sway here. -- Giving priority to the sourcebooks is only personal preference because the Realms began as a setting for fiction, and these decades later it's the fiction that brings in most money. -- Some people (me among them) are transported and entranced by great sourcebook writing (such as Ed's), while others don't truly imagine settings without narrative fiction set in them. -- The advancing timeline has fairly clear pros and cons for the Realms as (1) a pure secondary world and (2) a setting for roleplaying (and (3) a commercial property). For myself, I like the Realms better as a playground for the imagination, a legendary neverwhen, than a modern, historical, inexorably advancing, consumed and watched present. If ever there was a world that didn't need the moving timeline to feel alive...
Lashan 11-25-03, 08:49 PM	I have to admit that I have read few of the FR novels. I found I don't care for them. I started to fall in love with FR before any boxed set came out. I read Mr. Greenwood's wonderful Dragon magazine articles that described magic items and wonderous creatures. When the boxed set came out, I loved it! I found a setting that I really liked and that felt alive (as compared to the Greyhawk boxed set). When all the novels started to come out, they certainly didn't seem like the original boxed set that I first read! I didn't need the novels to make the game world come alive and NPCs to seem real. In fact, I found the game world that was presented to be quite different from what I liked about FR. Magic became ever increasingly more prevelant. Fr was never a "magic heavy" gaming world. It just turned into that. I've found that the longer you play in FR, the greater the chance that something happens in a novel or sourcebook that contradicts your home game. If you started playing a long time ago, these changes add up considerably. Some posters who hear about my game world claim that I am not even really playing in the FR at all!!! I usually stick to everything that happens prior to the Time of Troubles and avoid all those changes all together.
Darkmistress 11-26-03, 01:44 AM	I have to admit that I have read few of the FR novels. So... making a blanket statement about them is rather unwise, don't you think? When all the novels started to come out, they certainly didn't seem like the original boxed set that I first read! ...might just be because the authors are different. Every author has a distinct tone, I find. Really, I think, if FR was worked on by a single author, it'd have been poorer. Take, for instance, Tolkien. He may be very detailed about languages, history, and landscape. But when it comes to cultural customs of, say, Rohan? Oh, forget it. Dwarven society? Nuh-uh. He focused most of his energies into the Elves, and it's all about the Elves everywhere. We could've had a FR where details are thin and the only place/characters that get attention are the Daleslands and Mystra's Chosen. I've found that the longer you play in FR, the greater the chance that something happens in a novel or sourcebook that contradicts your home game. That's because the sourcebooks contradict each other, too. So what will you do? Disregard all sourcebooks and novels alike?
Crust 11-26-03, 07:29 AM	This is an old argument, the importance of novels in the campaign... I can say this from experience: DM's who have players that read the novels had better stay true to the novels in game. Why? Because players will constantly question the campaign, and it's annoying. On the flip side, if novel-reading players don't question their DM (in the event that he/she isn't using novel information, details, tidbits, or any other bit of information that would breathe a bit of life into an otherwise lifeless campaign), then those players are roll-players, and typically only care about making sure their characters are, at some point (sooner than later), adorned with a powerful magical item on every inch of their bodies. Incorporating novel information, events, and tidbits detailing, say, rural life in Shadowdale, or the behavior of a merchant from Cormyr, or the disposition of an assassin from Calimport, can only improve one's campaign. To disregard a fantastic source of information for one's game is to short change your players. By refusing to read the FR novels, DMs are depriving themselves of an infinitely valuable source of information. There are no two ways about it. Someone might not like the novels. Some folks might assume they can create a living, breathing FR campaign without reading the novels... But players who are reading the novels will know differently, and will have an insight into the shared world of FR that their DM doesn't have, and at that point, the player reading the novels should take over. Why? Note above.
Kuje31 11-26-03, 01:36 PM	Originally posted by Crust This is an old argument, the importance of novels in the campaign... I can say this from experience: DM's who have players that read the novels had better stay true to the novels in game. Why? Because players will constantly question the campaign, and it's annoying. On the flip side, if novel-reading players don't question their DM (in the event that he/she isn't using novel information, details, tidbits, or any other bit of information that would breathe a bit of life into an otherwise lifeless campaign), then those players are roll-players, and typically only care about making sure their characters are, at some point (sooner than later), adorned with a powerful magical item on every inch of their bodies. Well this doesn't have to be true. I play under a FR DM who doesn't read the novels, and I just shrug it off. I have every realms novel to date, and even I don't use all of them in my campaigns. For example the Shade novels or the Silence of Lolth are not taking place ever in my games.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-26-03, 03:46 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 What Wooly said. :). There's only a few novels that are not considered canon and part of the FR line. Once Around the Realms...are both considered fancy chapbooks written by Volo. If Once Around the Realms isn't canon, than doesn't that mean that the little sideplot in "Realms of Magic" isn't canon, either?
Kuje31 11-26-03, 04:31 PM	Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin If Once Around the Realms isn't canon, than doesn't that mean that the little sideplot in "Realms of Magic" isn't canon, either? I guess?. hehe shrug. :) Once Around the Realms Brian Thomsen 1995 1367 1367 Volo Novel; unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes!
Lashan 11-26-03, 08:07 PM	Actually, I have read a decent sampling of various authors and parts of series for the FR. I think I have a good idea of what is in most of the novels. I can say that I don't care for them. I think the experience that I have had with the novels that I have read indicate that most of the novels are on the same sub-par (to me) reading material. I can expect this as the same authors or same characters are going to be continued. If you feel I am still wrong, what percentage of novels would I have to read before I am allowed to declare them bad? I also disagree with the assumption that because I don't use the novels that my games are "roll player" games instead of role playing. To be honest, I view the stuff that happens comes out of novels to be a bit on the over-powered and inane side (spellfire, the Chosen, moonblades, etc.). As an expereinced DM, I can put detail and flavor into my games based solely on my reading the gaming supplements. Many of the sourcebooks give enough material for a resourceful DM to have a great game without resorting to pulling info out of the novels. There are some people who claim that FR is for lazy DMs who don't want to make up stuff. If all you do is read the sourcebooks and novels and then transport the exact same stuff into your campaign, then you might fit that lazy DM description. The comparision to Tolkien being too focused on elves is very amusing to me. Have you ever noticed how much elves get attention in FR? How many sourcebooks are there for dwarves? One. How many for halflings and gnomes? None. How many for elves? Too many. There is a large complaint by FR fans that I have noticed that there is too much concentration on elves! So, I think that your comparision is amusing. The idea about the soucebooks contradicting themselves is not the reason why someone's home game would not match the "official" novels. This is not based on the amount of times that the novels are just wrong from the sourcebooks, either. It happens when a DM plans a whole campaign and puts a lot of effort into it, and then a novel comes out that changes things to make all that work null and void. A prime example would be if I were a DM and I based my home game on Tilverton. Why, with one novel, all the city is gone. The players are all dead and the campaign is at an end. I can either follow that path or digress from the "official" novel story.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-26-03, 08:08 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 I guess?. hehe shrug. :) Once Around the Realms Brian Thomsen 1995 1367 1367 Volo Novel; unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! *laughs* I agree! I admit that little "sideplot" was in some ways extremely silly, but overall I liked it and was genuinely surprised by the ending.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-26-03, 08:13 PM	Originally posted by Lashan Actually, I have read a decent sampling of various authors and parts of series for the FR. I think I have a good idea of what is in most of the novels. I can say that I don't care for them. I think the experience that I have had with the novels that I have read indicate that most of the novels are on the same sub-par (to me) reading material. I can expect this as the same authors or same characters are going to be continued. If you feel I am still wrong, what percentage of novels would I have to read before I am allowed to declare them bad? I understand your point of view, even if I personally like reading the novels. If the novels left a bad taste in your mouth, who am I to judge? I don't think anyone should force themselves to read novels they don't enjoy for the sake of making a "better" campaign. If it isn't fun for you, what's the point? I am an advocate of reading the novels because I think they are fun to read and give a good "feeling" of the Realms. But you do bring up some good points and I don't think your views are totally without merit.
Darkmistress 11-26-03, 09:43 PM	The comparision to Tolkien being too focused on elves is very amusing to me. Have you ever noticed how much elves get attention in FR? How many sourcebooks are there for dwarves? One. How many for halflings and gnomes? None. How many for elves? Too many. There is a large complaint by FR fans that I have noticed that there is too much concentration on elves! So, I think that your comparision is amusing. How many sourcebooks have there been about non-elves? How many sourcebooks have there been about regions that have little to nothing to do with elves? Oh, wait -- how many sourcebooks have there been about humans?
Lashan 11-26-03, 10:28 PM	The level of detail given to many of the elven races and their sub-culture fills many pages of material. Detail of human cultures was scant until the arrival of Races of Faerun.
Crust 11-26-03, 10:42 PM	Originally posted by Lashan I also disagree with the assumption that because I don't use the novels that my games are "roll player" games instead of role playing. Though I was the one to use the term "roll player," I wasn't aiming that statement at you or any one person. It was a general statement meant for everyone who fits that bill. My statement referred to DM's who don't use the novels but have players that read them and know them. I can understand how you would misinterpret my words. Many of the sourcebooks give enough material for a resourceful DM to have a great game without resorting to pulling info out of the novels. You misunderstand me again. A DM who uses the novels isn't taking what happens in the novels and regurgitating it at the gaming table. A DM who uses the novels includes the tidbits and nuances of the campaign world into his/her campaign, the information that is severely lacking (or is outright contradicted) in sourcebooks. Novel information is not for crunchy, factual bits about the "Realms shaking" events of FR. Of course, a campaign set in the current FR timeline that has Azoun as king would be odd to players that have read Death of the Dragon, the same way a campaign set in Shadowdale during 1372 DR that has Elminster hail and healthy would be odd to players who have read Elminster in Hell. Major information from novels is important, but novels also aid in breathing that bit of intangible life into a campaign, and when both the DM and the players are reading the novels, everyone can experience the world that is FR on a much larger and broader scale. At least that's what I've experienced. There are some people who claim that FR is for lazy DMs who don't want to make up stuff. If all you do is read the sourcebooks and novels and then transport the exact same stuff into your campaign, then you might fit that lazy DM description. Reading all the novels and sourcebooks ain't being lazy. Being a DM period ain't being lazy. Showing up with your character sheet, borrowing your DM's dice, and asking, "We gamin' today?" is being lazy. Any adult with a job (and a productive life outside that job) will agree that writing your own home-brewed campaign world (and one that equals the scope of FR) is not something that can be easily done... unless one is getting paid for it. The idea about the soucebooks contradicting themselves is not the reason why someone's home game would not match the "official" novels. This is not based on the amount of times that the novels are just wrong from the sourcebooks, either. It happens when a DM plans a whole campaign and puts a lot of effort into it, and then a novel comes out that changes things to make all that work null and void. A prime example would be if I were a DM and I based my home game on Tilverton. Why, with one novel, all the city is gone. The players are all dead and the campaign is at an end. I can either follow that path or digress from the "official" novel story. I DM my campaign in the Shadowdale area, and I've left Elminster out of the picture due to the events in Elminster in Hell. If I had included Elminster in games during the last year or so, players would ask me, "Dude, why are we dealing with Elminster in today's game when we all know he's in Hell?" Only after getting a response from Greenwood himself concerning Elminster's whereabouts did I write him back into the campaign. If you're going to use the novels, you do have to be careful. Lashan's example is a good one. However, his example only continues the argument. DMs out there know that any novel event that might throw a wrench into a campaign can be either avoided or fixed on the fly without much of a problem. DMs can get angry and flustered, or they can add their own touch to what is obviously a shared world.
Kuje31 11-26-03, 10:59 PM	Originally posted by Crust You misunderstand me again. A DM who uses the novels isn't taking what happens in the novels and regurgitating it at the gaming table. A DM who uses the novels includes the tidbits and nuances of the campaign world into his/her campaign, the information that is severely lacking (or is outright contradicted) in sourcebooks. Novel information is not for crunchy, factual bits about the "Realms shaking" events of FR. Of course, a campaign set in the current FR timeline that has Azoun as king would be odd to players that have read Death of the Dragon, the same way a campaign set in Shadowdale during 1372 DR that has Elminster hail and healthy would be odd to players who have read Elminster in Hell. Major information from novels is important, but novels also aid in breathing that bit of intangible life into a campaign, and when both the DM and the players are reading the novels, everyone can experience the world that is FR on a much larger and broader scale. At least that's what I've experienced. I again ask why? It's my world and I have DM'd in FR for to many years to let novels, sourcebooks, and other RSE's mess up my game. Azoun lives in my world as does his eldest daughter, because at the time of those novels I had a party of PC's who were in Cormyr and one of them was a Wyvernspur. That PC married Alusair and they have children together, so those novels conflicted with my time line, and so they were disregarded and never happened. The Spider Queen novels also do the same, and I don't care for the Shades return so Evereska and Tilverton in my FR still exist and El in Hell didn't happen either. If Elaine ever is allowed to write a novel about the new nation with the Tree of Souls, that will be ignored by me also, since the Tree has already been planted by a PC and it was before the Evermeet novel was written.
Darkmistress 11-26-03, 11:16 PM	Originally posted by Lashan The level of detail given to many of the elven races and their sub-culture fills many pages of material. Detail of human cultures was scant until the arrival of Races of Faerun. Eek, no way! Waterdeep boxed set? Lands of Intrigue? The various Volo's guides to XYZ? To name but a few?
Wooly Rupert 11-26-03, 11:43 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Azoun lives in my world as does his youngest daughter, Uh, 'twas his eldest daughter that died. Originally posted by Kuje31 That PC married Alusair and they have children together, so those novels conflicted with my time line, and so they were disregarded and never happened. Other than Alusair having to settle down a bit earlier than in the novel, I don't see a serious conflict... There is some, but it can be worked around...
Kuje31 11-26-03, 11:53 PM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert Uh, 'twas his eldest daughter that died. Other than Alusair having to settle down a bit earlier than in the novel, I don't see a serious conflict... There is some, but it can be worked around... You are right, sorry my mind slipped on that detail, and i'll fix it. :) Well I forgot to mention that Azoun retired and suceeded his crown to the PC and the PC and Alusair rule. Tanalasta didn't want the crown, and Azoun and Filfaeril retired from the court and Suzail. It doesn't need to be worked around, since I don't use the novel or the module at all. :)
Wooly Rupert 11-27-03, 12:02 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Well I forgot to mention that Azoun retired and suceeded his crown to the PC and the PC and Alusair rule. Tanalasta didn't want the crown, and Azoun and Filfaeril retired from the court and Suzail. It doesn't need to be worked around, since I don't use the novel or the module at all. :) Ah, okay. Since I didn't know the part about Azoun retiring, that was why I said that. :) As an aside, for some reason, I never liked Azoun IV all that much. I was kinda glad to see him die -- he just bugged me.
Kuje31 11-27-03, 12:09 AM	Originally posted by Wooly Rupert Ah, okay. Since I didn't know the part about Azoun retiring, that was why I said that. :) As an aside, for some reason, I never liked Azoun IV all that much. I was kinda glad to see him die -- he just bugged me. I do, hehe. He has kids all over the darn place and he is a interested character, at least I think so.
sanishiver 11-27-03, 05:50 AM	The events in novels are very important to my campaign. About a year and a half ago, I encouraged two of the four players in my group (who read FR novels at that time) to read the War in Cormyr series; the first novel before the war started in my game, the second novel while we were playing during the war, and the third just after the war ended. I wanted those players to have the mental images conjured up from the reading of each novel firmly rooted in their minds when we played during each stage of the war. A little description on my part and BAM!, it's like they're reading the book again. However, back then the boards were rampant with strife as boards members fired back and forth at each other over what constituted canon (Sourcebooks only? Novels only? Both?), whether DMs were supposed to adhere to canon in their game all the time, and (worst of all) wrote cruel tirades aimed at supposedly uncaring authors who -with each paragraph written- “thoughtlessly” crafted un-researched and poorly fact checked stories without a care for the almighty Canon. This gave me pause. Were my players going to assume novels=fact in my game? So I laid out some ground rules to my novel-reading players: I made them aware that the novels (every novel, not just the War in Cormyr series) would describe a lot of events that the PC’s would never directly interact/intercede with in-game, and some that they would. Also, my players were told not to ever assume that the novels could be taken for granted. Each novel was to be treated as incomplete re-tellings of bard’s tales or oft-repeated speculation on the part of well traveled merchants and traders, and nothing more. What real truth there was in a novel could only be found out in-game. Thus, my players never once made the mistake of putting canon ahead of what occurred within our game, which is why they did not interrupt the game to question me about why character X from the novels was here when she should have been there. This, I think, is an assumption (and a somewhat disrespectful one at that) which many players make (that being: “If a DM doesn’t present the setting precisely as found in the novels, then dangit this aint the Realms!). This is a problem players would do well to address by remembering that each Realms campaign is its own animal. No game is beholden to the events of each and every novel, nor each and every sourcebook After all, the point of playing in the FR setting is not to re-create canon (although for some it is), but to experience the Realms first-hand in-game. The truth of things is always –and can only ever be found– in game. :whatsthis PS: A DM assuming his right to create and expand the Realms to his tastes are robbed from him if a novel destroys his favorite city or otherwise contradicts his game in some way is committing a major cop out. Deal with it!
Crust 11-27-03, 10:48 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 I again ask why? It's my world and I have DM'd in FR for to many years to let novels, sourcebooks, and other RSE's mess up my game. Azoun lives in my world as does his eldest daughter, because at the time of those novels I had a party of PC's who were in Cormyr and one of them was a Wyvernspur. Wonderful. However, if you're playing with a group who is well-read and keeps up with the lore, those players might find it odd that Azoun is alive, when he was clearly killed fighting an advanced red dragon.
Kuje31 11-27-03, 01:58 PM	Originally posted by Crust Wonderful. However, if you're playing with a group who is well-read and keeps up with the lore, those players might find it odd that Azoun is alive, when he was clearly killed fighting an advanced red dragon. That's why I send out my list of house rules before the game starts. He hasn't clearly died fighting a red dragon in my games, because when I DM I only use MY canon, not TSR/WOTC's canon. (Even though usually when I post I use TSR/WOTC's canon.) As I said, I have read every novel to date, but I don't find it strange when the DM I play under doesn't use the novels. I asked my current FR DM at our last session, "Are you using the Silence of Lolth?" "No." We moved on, and it didn't seem strange since it's HIS game and he decided he didn't want to use it and I wasn't going to argue with him about it, since that is how I run my games also. Especially since I've DM'd in FR for to long to let sourcebooks and novels change my FR. As Lashan said I'm not trying to argue in this thread either. I was just posting my reasons why I don't use every novel, sourcebook and RSE. (Realm Shaking Event)
Lashan 11-27-03, 02:01 PM	Eek, no way! Waterdeep boxed set? Lands of Intrigue? The various Volo's guides to XYZ? To name but a few? Actually, human culture was not detailed too much in those books. The life or Waterdeep was described. The city of Waterdeep was described. The Lands of Intrigue had some culture, but mostly history and descriptions of current areas. I believe there is a fine difference between detailing an area geographically and historically and covering a human race as a cultural perspective. Before Races of Faerun, there just wasn't a description of what Chondathans were like. Nevermind what Damarans were like. I think there was about 1 or two sentances in a source book about how they looked similiar to Dalesfolk. This is in stark contrast to the amount of material given to elven culture alone. Just look at the info at the begining of the Cormanthyr book. A quick glance shows 53 pages in that one book alone. --- On another note, I can see that people who started to play FR due to the novels wanting to put that stuff in the game. Still, it isn't what happened in the novels that makes FR the FR. Those that say that if I don't like one change, then I can ignore it, that is what I do. What I don't like is that I have been playing for about 14 years now in FR. Over that time there have been many novels and many changes. If it was just one thing that changed, I would have not much of a problem. There have been a LOT of changes in those years. Most of them don't fit in with my personal game. It becomes a real nuisance when new products come out that refuse to detail a dead god, his religion, or any PrC's when that god isn't dead in your game world. And that is just one thing! Now, let me also clarify that I am not "whining" here. I am just informing those that don't know the problems of what happens when you have been playing in a game world that keeps changing every 6 months, even if you don't want it to. Sure, I can just ignore everything, which I ignore a lot. I can go to another game world. Sure. I am "getting by" in the FR by doing what I do. The poster of this thread asked how much of the novels I use in the game. I don't use hardly anything that happens in the novels. I don't like what happens in the modules. I am mearly voicing my opinion. I'm not starting a flame war and I am not trying to just "whine" about something I can't change. Someone asked a question in a thread and I am answering.
sanishiver 11-27-03, 02:08 PM	Originally posted by Crust Wonderful. However, if you're playing with a group who is well-read and keeps up with the lore, those players might find it odd that Azoun is alive, when he was clearly killed fighting an advanced red dragon. That doesn’t make any sense. I mean, why would anyone find it odd that Azoun is alive in their game, when that’s how the game has naturally progressed? Campaigns naturally move the timeline along faster than the novels do. The likelihood of Realmslore going in a direction other than what a DM has done in his game is high. Are DM’s supposed to bend over backwards and/or shoehorn novel events in after the fact, just to “preserve the feel”? The answer is: No, they are not. All Realmslore, whether Novels, Sourcebooks (of any rules edition), comic books, etc.. is meant to be used as a springboard for running a game. It’s not a straightjacket meant to forcefully bend campaigns back to the “norm” (read: canon). :whatsthis Oh, and happy Turkey Day! :turkey::turkey:
Crust 11-27-03, 03:06 PM	I suppose I have too much respect for the sourcebooks and novels to disregard them in my campaigns. Also, as I've stated, when players and DMs incorporate the novels into the game, the world is experienced on a much richer scale... from what I've experienced.
sanishiver 11-27-03, 03:19 PM	Originally posted by Crust ...when players and DMs incorporate the novels into the game, the world is experienced on a much richer scale... from what I've experienced. I could not agree more. I think the novels are great at laying the groundwork for realizing the setting in player's minds far better than I could ever do all by myself. :whatsthis
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-27-03, 04:36 PM	Different strokes for different folks, is all. And Lashan is right about human cultures. The old area sourcebooks and Volo Guides were wonderful, but they don't touch on human culture the same way Races of Faerun does.
Kuje31 11-27-03, 10:33 PM	Originally posted by Crust I suppose I have too much respect for the sourcebooks and novels to disregard them in my campaigns. Also, as I've stated, when players and DMs incorporate the novels into the game, the world is experienced on a much richer scale... from what I've experienced. And I'm not saying I never use novels or sourcebooks but I don't have the time nor interest in adding every detail that is changed from a novel, sourcebook, or edition shift. When a new sourcebook or novel comes out and if it doesn't conflict with my FR then and only then DO I use that information. I have a lot of respect (even though at time I guess it doesn't show) for novels and sourcebooks, when they don't conflict with other information or my game. After 130+ novels and 120+ sourcebooks there are many things that are ignored. Let me ask you some thing, since I am curious are you a DM or just a player? Page 297 of the FRCS says it best, "IT'S YOUR WORLD." So if your players read this book and try to dictate details of the world for you, stand firm. It's YOUR world. Don't be a slave to the map or this book, and don't be afraid to alter anything you want to."
ashramry 11-28-03, 01:16 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 I guess?. hehe shrug. :) Once Around the Realms Brian Thomsen 1995 1367 1367 Volo Novel; unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! heh...though keep in mind the sequal to Once Around the Realms, The Mage in the Iron Mask deals with events that later sourcebooks claim happened (the writeup of mulmaster in the FR3e book) so that adds some credence to the idea that Once, volo does menzoberanzan, and the publishing house prelude/epilogue to realms of magic would be canon. silly as they all are. :) Ashy
Kuje31 11-28-03, 01:35 AM	Originally posted by ashramry heh...though keep in mind the sequal to Once Around the Realms, The Mage in the Iron Mask deals with events that later sourcebooks claim happened (the writeup of mulmaster in the FR3e book) so that adds some credence to the idea that Once, volo does menzoberanzan, and the publishing house prelude/epilogue to realms of magic would be canon. silly as they all are. :) Ashy True enough, but according to WOTC the Mage in the Iron Mask is canon and it's not really part of the Once Around the Realms, since the Mage in the Iron Mask is part of the Nobles series. Even though its by the same author and includes Volo. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/fictionlist&tablesort=1 The Mage in the Iron Mask Brian Thomsen 1996 1368 1368 Nobles Book IV
Alzrius 11-28-03, 01:44 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 What Wooly said. :). There's only a few novels that are not considered canon and part of the FR line. Once Around the Realms and the Double Diamond novelettes, are both considered fancy chapbooks written by Volo. The Double Diamond books are indeed considered to be Volo's fiction (which may only be due to them taking place several years in the future from where the timeline is currently)...but in regards to One Around the Realms I do not concur. Let's look at some of the evidence to begin with: WotC has three lists comprising their official dating of most of the novels: http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/lists http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/lists2 http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/unknowntimelinelist Now, Once Around the Realms itself isn't on any of those lists...however, that isn't definitive either way. It's just a curious omission. That said, we look at the next piece of evidence, the Realmslore Note in the beginning of Once: Reader, be forewarned! This book was not written by the legendary Volothamp Geddarm, nor has it been authorized by him for publication. It is based entirely on rumor, unsubstantiated reports, and speculation. Though many real and famous characters of the Realms appear within these pages, they do so without their consent or authorization. The dark conspiracy described within is also unconfirmed, and dismissed as 'poppycock' by many esteemed leaders in high places, but then again, isn't this the fate of all such conspiracies? Now, while it may seem like it at first glance, this note is not in any way a declaration of non-canonity. It's just saying Volo himself didn't write this story, not that it didn't happen. Ergo, nothing about this note makes this novel non-canon. Now, let's turn our attention over to http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/lists2 for a moment. If we look under the entry for the Nobles series, we can see The Mage in the Iron Mask listed, obviously canon and having happened. This book is also the direct sequel to Once Around the Realms. This would seem to be a strong indicator that Once (and, by extension, the Prologue and Epilogue in Realms of Magic) are canon, since it's rather hard for The Mage in the Iron Mask to reference events that didn't officially happen. Ergo, the evidence seems to overwhelmingly suggest that Once Around the Realms is indeed a canon novel.
ashramry 11-28-03, 01:52 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 [B]True enough, but according to WOTC the Mage in the Iron Mask is canon and it's not really part of the Once Around the Realms, since the Mage in the Iron Mask is part of the Nobles series. Even though its by the same author and includes Volo. ] also note that Passepout is a main character in them as well as volo....and the two reference things from Once as well as make in jokes with the audience. Ashy
Kuje31 11-28-03, 02:11 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius The Double Diamond books are indeed considered to be Volo's fiction (which may only be due to them taking place several years in the future from where the timeline is currently)...but in regards to One Around the Realms I do not concur. Now, Once Around the Realms itself isn't on any of those lists...however, that isn't definitive either way. It's just a curious omission. Now, let's turn our attention over to http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/lists2 for a moment. If we look under the entry for the Nobles series, we can see The Mage in the Iron Mask listed, obviously canon and having happened. This book is also the direct sequel to Once Around the Realms. This would seem to be a strong indicator that Once (and, by extension, the Prologue and Epilogue in Realms of Magic) are canon, since it's rather hard for The Mage in the Iron Mask to reference events that didn't officially happen. Ergo, the evidence seems to overwhelmingly suggest that Once Around the Realms is indeed a canon novel. You can argue with me all you want but again I point to this list. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/fictionlist&tablesort=1b And where it says, Once Around the Realms Brian Thomsen 1995 1367 1367 Volo Novel; unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! So because of this WOTC has not decided if it is or is not canon. Mage in the the Iron Mask is canon, and yes there are some of the same characters in both novels. So to the other poster I was not argueing that fact, but again according to WOTC they haven't decided if or if not Once Around the Realms is canon. Mage in the Iron Mask is not really a sequel, since Once Around the Realms is a seperate stand alone novel, while Mage in the Iron Mask is part of the Noble series Book#4.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 02:29 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 You can argue with me all you want And I shall...oh how I shall... ;) but again I point to this list. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=books/fr/fictionlist&tablesort=1b And where it says, Once Around the Realms Brian Thomsen 1995 1367 1367 Volo Novel; unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! So because of this WOTC has not decided if it is or is not canon. Which definitively proves...nothing. You know as well as I do Kuje that the modus operandi here is that we assume novels are canon unless specifically told otherwise. This notation is indecisive, too much so to rule it out. Combine this with the fact that the sequel references it directly (more on this below) and you have a very strong case for it being canon. Mage in the the Iron Mask is canon, and yes there are some of the same characters in both novels. So to the other poster I was not argueing that fact, but again according to WOTC they haven't decided if or if not Once Around the Realms is canon. Again, it is until definitively proven otherwise...the above notation isn't enough, since it could go either way, plus the supporting evidence, etc. Mage in the Iron Mask is not really a sequel, since Once Around the Realms is a seperate stand alone novel, while Mage in the Iron Mask is part of the Noble series Book#4. Incorrect. The Mage in the Iron Mask is most definately a sequel. Just because the series' titles are different means exactly nothing. This is like saying that The Veiled Dragon is not the sequel to The Parched Sea because the latter was book #1 of The Harpers series, and the former was not. Is Hand of Fire not the sequel to Crown of Fire, despite the fact that the latter was Harpers number 9, and the former wasn't a Harpers book at all? It's what the books deal with that makes them a sequel or not, not the series listing. The Mage in the Iron Mask is most definately the direct sequel to Once Around the Realms, which is itself a canon book.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 02:50 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius You know as well as I do Kuje that the modus operandi here is that we assume novels are canon unless specifically told otherwise. This notation is indecisive, too much so to rule it out. Combine this with the fact that the sequel references it directly (more on this below) and you have a very strong case for it being canon. Again, it is until definitively proven otherwise...the above notation isn't enough, since it could go either way, plus the supporting evidence, etc. Im done debating this. It's not canon as far as WOTC is concerned since they haven't made up thier mind, and so as far as I am concerned I go by what they said and that's enough for me. And it's not a sequel, it's a seperate stand alone novel with the same characters. Just like the Elminster novels, they are not all "sequels" of each other, but they contain the same character. However, it's ironic that WOTC can't decide if Once Around the Realms is canon or not, since Brian Thompsen was at one time TSR's Director of Books and Periodicals.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 02:54 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 It's not canon as far as WOTC is concerned since they haven't made up thier mind, That's not true and you know it. WotC never once said it wasn't canon. They simply said they were undecided. You are the only one saying that therefore makes it non-canon, which means you're wrong. And it's not a sequel, it's a seperate stand alone novel with the same characters. Just like the Elminster novels, they are not all "sequels" of each other, but they contain the same character. It is a sequel because it takes place shortly after the second one, referencing previous events and generally picking up where Once Around the Realms left off. If that isn't a sequel, what is? and so as far as I am concerned I go by what they said and that's enough for me. Which would be a nicely succinct point if you were actually doing what you said; you aren't.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 03:04 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius That's not true and you know it. WotC never once said it wasn't canon. They simply said they were undecided. You are the only one saying that therefore makes it non-canon, which means you're wrong. Which would be a nicely succinct point if you were actually doing what you said; you aren't. No I'm not wrong, since they haven't said either way so it might be canon or it might not be canon. So technically I'm not wrong, since they haven't made up thier minds, and I quote what I said from the list, it is Volo fiction that might be true or not, and so it might be canon or it might not. As far as WOTC is concerned they don't know so that is good enough for me to say it isn't canon.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 03:12 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 No I'm not wrong, since they haven't said either way so it might be canon or it might not be canon. But you stated that it wasn't canon. Since it's still uncertain, and the de facto answer is that novels are canon unless told otherwise, we can assume it still is until firmly stated it isn't. As far as WOTC is concerned they don't know so that is good enough for me to say it isn't canon. See, that's where you err. You can't just jump from WotC being hazy to you definitively saying its non-canon. That's introducing personal choice into what should be an objective judgement call. That's not what measuring canonity is all about. And I added more to my above reply, since you didn't let me finish getting all my thoughts in order. :) Hey, you were finished enough to hit the "Submit Reply" button. ;) And I went back and added more to my above post to compensate.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 03:24 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius But you stated that it wasn't canon. Since it's still uncertain, and the de facto answer is that novels are canon unless told otherwise, we can assume it still is until firmly stated it isn't. See, that's where you err. You can't just jump from WotC being hazy to you definitively saying its non-canon. That's introducing personal choice into what should be an objective judgement call. That's not what measuring canonity is all about. It is a sequel because it takes place shortly after the second one, referencing previous events and generally picking up where Once Around the Realms left off. If that isn't a sequel, what is? And I still say it's not canon, and we can debate it back and forth, but as far as what is listed on the WOTC link I posted they do not consider it canon or not. Also considering TSR and RAS have had arguements before over his characters (Drizzt and a few other chars of RAS's are listed as being used in Once Around the Realms) that is another reason why WOTC might be hesitant to say if it is canon or not. And if memory serves, this is also the author/editor who asked another author to write a Drizzt novel that never saw the light of day because of the buy out and WOTC and RAS came to a agreement. Now about this sequel comment, Once ends when they are in Suzail. Iron Mask starts out with them in Mulmaster. So no it isn't a "sequel" except for the same characters are in the book. Again like the Elminster novels they are "sequels" but not really.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 03:30 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 And I still say it's not canon, and we can debate it back and forth, but as far as what is listed on the WOTC link I posted they do not consider it canon or not. True enough, but that still leaves its currently-considered status to debate, which I say if canon for all intents and purposes. Also considering TSR and RAS have had arguements before over his characters (Drizzt and a few other chars of RAS's are listed as being used in Once Around the Realms) that is another reason why WOTC might be hesitant to say if it is canon or not. And if memory serves, this is also the author/editor who asked another author to write a Drizzt novel that never saw the light of day because of the buy out and WOTC and RAS came to a agreement. They certainly had no problem using secondary characters in other books (i.e. Gromph in Daughter of the Drow, etc). Also, I'm not concerned with why it may or may not be canon; I care only for debating its status in the canonity, the why's are irrelevant. Now about this sequel comment, Once ends when they are in Suzail. Iron Mask starts out with them in Mulmaster. So no it isn't a "sequel" except for the same characters are in the book. Again like the Elminster novels they are "sequels" but not really. And again, this is a paper-thin reason that doesn't hold up to examination. A sequel need not pick up immediately after the previous books ends. Time is allowed to pass. The Veiled Dragon didn't begin exactly where The Parched Sea left off, but it was still definately a sequel.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 03:36 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius True enough, but that still leaves its currently-considered status to debate, which I say if canon for all intents and purposes. They certainly had no problem using secondary characters in other books (i.e. Gromph in Daughter of the Drow, etc). Also, I'm not concerned with why it may or may not be canon; I care only for debating its status in the canonity, the why's are irrelevant. And again, this is a paper-thin reason that doesn't hold up to examination. A sequel need not pick up immediately after the previous books ends. Time is allowed to pass. The Veiled Dragon didn't begin exactly where The Parched Sea left off, but it was still definately a sequel. And I say it isn't. :) And yes they do and have used shared characters but with the bad blood between RAS and TSR and RAS's other publisher, WOTC might not feel they want to claim Once as a canon novel to stir up that mess again. And yes Volo and some of the same characters that are in Mage of the Iron Mask are the same and that book is canon. But as far as I am concerned since WOTC can't decide either way then I say Once isn't canon. It holds enough to me, since it's a different series and Once is not canon. (Yes yes you say it is, I say it isn't). So let's just agree to disagree and leave it alone because neither of us are going to change our minds http://www.candlekeep.com/library/rumors/rumor6.htm "Regardless, Brian Thomsen, then Executive Editor at TSR, approached me to write a new novel starring Drizzt. Brian was of course familiar with my writing, as I had done several novels for TSR, and I he had previously assigned me to write a novella set in the Drizzt milieu as a sort of test, which I apparently passed ("The Fires of Narbondel" in REALMS OF THE UNDERDARK). I'll be honest--writing about Drizzt was not my idea, and it was not something I would have sought out myself, but Brian asked me, and so I accepted. I wrote what I thought was a fun and interesting novel, trying to be as sensitive to the characters and worlds Bob Salvatore had created as I possibly could. It was without doubt the most difficult book I had ever written for TSR, as I worked hard to stay true to Bob's earlier novels. It was also made difficult by the fact that Bob was clearly unhappy that someone else was writing a novel about Drizzt. Not that I could really blame him--but therein lies the danger of writing in a licensed world like the Forgotten Realms."
Alzrius 11-28-03, 03:47 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 And I say it isn't. :) If you only consider sequels to be where the story picks up in the exact same scene the previous work left off in, then you must find that not many true sequels exist. And yes Volo and some of the same characters that are in Mage of the Iron Mask are the same and that book is canon. But as far as I am concerned since WOTC can't decide either way then I say Once isn't canon. And that last part is the error. "As far as you're concerned" is all well and good, but it isn't what's official. It holds enough to me, And apparently not as much to WotC's, since they have no problem changing series titles (i.e. Elfshadow was a Harpers book, and now is a Songs & Swords book). So let's just agree to disagree and leave it alone because neither of us are going to change our minds What, and quit just when its getting really fun? ;) http://www.candlekeep.com/library/rumors/rumor6.htm "Regardless, Brian Thomsen, then Executive Editor at TSR, approached me to write a new novel starring Drizzt. Brian was of course familiar with my writing, as I had done several novels for TSR, and I he had previously assigned me to write a novella set in the Drizzt milieu as a sort of test, which I apparently passed ("The Fires of Narbondel" in REALMS OF THE UNDERDARK). I'll be honest--writing about Drizzt was not my idea, and it was not something I would have sought out myself, but Brian asked me, and so I accepted. I wrote what I thought was a fun and interesting novel, trying to be as sensitive to the characters and worlds Bob Salvatore had created as I possibly could. It was without doubt the most difficult book I had ever written for TSR, as I worked hard to stay true to Bob's earlier novels. It was also made difficult by the fact that Bob was clearly unhappy that someone else was writing a novel about Drizzt. Not that I could really blame him--but therein lies the danger of writing in a licensed world like the Forgotten Realms." Well obviously, whoever wrote this passage is correct - you write for a shared world, and you know you're letting other people play in your sandbox. It always irks me no end when authors raise a fuss over this. They knew what the deal was when they signed on. In regards to Once not being totally canon due to RAS's possible displeasure...I doubt it. For one thing, it was a cameo, a tiny camoe. Secondly, I doubt he'd care whether the work is "canon" or "canon-in-doubt"...more likely he'd be upset if it was just published (which is was). Thirdly, it's not like he can truly do anything about it; Drizzt doesn't belong to him, he belongs to WotC.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 04:03 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius [B] And that last part is the error. "As far as you're concerned" is all well and good, but it isn't what's official. [QUOTE]I said: And I say it isn't. And yes they do and have used shared characters but with the bad blood between RAS and TSR and RAS's other publisher, WOTC might not feel they want to claim Once as a canon novel to stir up that mess again. And yes Volo and some of the same characters that are in Mage of the Iron Mask are the same and that book is canon. But as far as I am concerned since WOTC can't decide either way then I say Once isn't canon. You said: If you only consider sequels to be where the story picks up in the exact same scene the previous work left off in, then you must find that not many true sequels exist. My new text: This has nothing to do with what I said above..... Once is not canon since WOTC says its unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! So going by that it is not canon, even though you claim the opposite and again i'll agree to disagree.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 04:07 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 My new text: This has nothing to do with what I said above..... Once is not canon since WOTC says its unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! So going by that it is not canon, even though you claim the opposite and again i'll agree to disagree. It has everything to do with what you said above. Likewise, going by what WotC said does not make it non-canon, since they don't say that. But it's late, I'm tired, so okay, we'll agree to disagree...for now. :angel:
Kuje31 11-28-03, 04:11 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius It has everything to do with what you said above. Likewise, going by what WotC said does not make it non-canon, since they don't say that. But it's late, I'm tired, so okay, we'll agree to disagree...for now. :angel: Ah but it does not make it canon either. :) So two different views and as I said neither of us are going to change our minds. I read that little blurp as it isn't canon and you read it as it is.
Alzrius 11-28-03, 04:14 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Ah but it does not make it canon either. :) So two different views and as I said neither of us are going to change our minds. I read that little blurp as it isn't canon and you read it as it is. That and I feel I have other supporting evidence. But as you said, neither of us will change our minds.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 04:16 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius That and I feel I have other supporting evidence. But as you said, neither of us will change our minds. And I listed mine also. :)
Alzrius 11-28-03, 04:17 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 And I listed mine also. :) No you didn't, that Salvatore thing is completely unrelated.
Zanan 11-28-03, 04:33 AM	Just stumbled over this thread, thus I can be counted as a latecomer :D Anyway, I am just half-way through the 3rd book of the Return of the Archwizards series and although it is really good novel-wise, the amount of dead phaerimm, beholders and dragons as well as shades is far too much to the trained DM's eyes. If it holds true what is said about the Enclave in Lords of Darkness and in those novels, about half of the 200 shades living in the city must be dead by know. I hardly consider this to be canon. I for one keep to the sourcebooks and if novel-stuff appears in those, I will use it as canon as well. Remember as well that some novels were written after the timeline was already out for the novel's setting & plot, e.g. Evermeet from EC. Yet, while the novel on the whole might be considered canon by some, the trained DM will reckognize a few errors in EC's interpretation of the rules which put the canon thing into question once more. Which is not to say that the novel as such is bad, far from this.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 04:40 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius No you didn't, that Salvatore thing is completely unrelated. It was more then that thing. :) Besides according to "Books of the Realms." That Steven Schend wrote up, Volo was in Cormyr from 1367 to 1368 writting up Volo's Guide to Cormyr and Volo's Guide to the Dalelands from 1368 to 1369. Also Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast from 1366 to 1367. Pretty busy guy to just up and leave and head every where through Faerun, Maztica, Kara-tur and other places, when he has all those to print but it doesn't matter though since Once Around the Realm's isn't canon. :)
Alzrius 11-28-03, 04:43 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 It was more then that thing. :) Besides according to "Books of the Realms." That Steven Schend wrote up, Volo was in Cormyr from 1367 to 1368 writting up Volo's Guide to Cormyr and Volo's Guide to the Dalelands from 1368 to 1369. Also Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast from 1366 to 1367. Pretty busy guy to just up and leave and head to Mulmaster when he has all those to print but it doesn't matter though since Once Around the Realm's isn't canon. :) Actually, since it is, it fits perfectly with that since Volo even talks about writing his Guide to Cormyr in Once. Likewise, a loss of a few weeks won't really be felt, and he certainly won't put that into his Guide. Ergo, no conflict, no foul, no lack of canonity.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 04:47 AM	Originally posted by Alzrius Actually, since it is, it fits perfectly with that since Volo even talks about writing his Guide to Cormyr in Once. Likewise, a loss of a few weeks won't really be felt, and he certainly won't put that into his Guide. Ergo, no conflict, no foul, no lack of canonity. Actually since it isn't, it doesn't fit perfectly and you have to be kidding. A few weeks! It takes more then a few weeks just to even get to Kara-Tur! He heads to Maztica, and other places also, sorry no way does it take a "few weeks." To sail to the Sword Coast from Maztica is at least 60 days, that's more then a "few weeks." This doesn't even include him wandering around Faerun and then heading to Kara-Tur. Even with a printing press there is no way he can take "a few weeks." off to go wandering Toril. And it's even worse if he hand prints the chapbooks. But actually I was curious about that bit of text that is in that link and so I asked Cust Service. Maybe then I might change my mind but it depends on what thier answer is. But it might take them a few days to get to my email.
Crust 11-28-03, 09:13 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Let me ask you some thing, since I am curious are you a DM or just a player? Page 297 of the FRCS says it best, "IT'S YOUR WORLD." So if your players read this book and try to dictate details of the world for you, stand firm. It's YOUR world. Don't be a slave to the map or this book, and don't be afraid to alter anything you want to." I'm a DM. I never get a chance to play. My players take the reigns of DM every once in a great while, but they're skills and knowledge are severely lacking, and none of us has much fun. I was lucky enough to run a dragon disciple for the City of the Spider Queen module, but that ended quickly enough. Too bad. As for my players, some of them haven't read a single FR novel. Some of them have read a bunch. None of them have read as much as I have. I'm the only one who really has a holistic knowledge of the Realms, so it really doesn't matter a whole lot whether I use novels, sourcebooks, or whatever. My players don't dictate the world to me through the novels they've read (quite simply because my storehouse of knowledge is far greater than theirs, so there's no point in it). The problem with this argument is that when I say I use the novels in my campaign, folks seem to think that I'm using every single detail, and that my campaign must shift and change constantly to accomodate those changes. That's completely not true. I DM in the Dales (Shadowdale and Daggerdale), so of course, novels like Spellfire, the Avatar books (all 6 of them), and a few others are strong sources of Dalelands life, disposition of inhabitants, and appearance of well known NPCs (Elminster, Storm, the Knights, Mourngrym, etc.). In fact, I plan on using some of the individuals from City of the Spider Queen in my campaign. I have Volo's Guide to the Dales at my side all the time, and the maps of the Twisted Tower in the old gray box have been used time and again for a number of reasons. I do not use every little tidbit in my game. However, what the novels allow me to do is to paint a picture at the gaming table that my players can relive in another form through the novels. Some folks here seem to have the impression that I have a novel opened behind my DM screen, as if it's a module I'm running. Not the case at all, not even remotely. Perhaps it's the teacher in me that demands that the whole experience of gaming takes place on a number of levels, using a couple different mediums (the tabletop, the sourcebooks, the novels, and even the computer games). My very first FR DMing experience was in Shadowdale, and by that time I had read 20 FR novels, Spellfire included. I wasn't about to take up the reigns of DMing a new campaign world without reading the novels. It's a respect thing, and it's a common sense thing. It's like trying to DM a Star Wars campaign without ever having watched the movies (and that comparison is dead on accurate, I must say). Hey, some people do, some people don't. Quite often, the people who don't are the people who haven't tried. ;)
Crust 11-28-03, 09:16 AM	I don't understand the confusion with canon. It seems to me that if the product has "Forgotten Realms" stamped on it somewhere, it's a new addition to the world. Period.
Lashan 11-28-03, 10:53 AM	I wasn't about to take up the reigns of DMing a new campaign world without reading the novels. It's a respect thing, and it's a common sense thing. It's like trying to DM a Star Wars campaign without ever having watched the movies (and that comparison is dead on accurate, I must say). So, you are saying that those DM's who don't read the novels are not respecting the Forgotten Realms? I think the analogue about Star Wars is off. The fiction that Ed Greenwood wrote back in 1965 is not exactly easy to find (as far as I understand it). When the original grey boxed set came out, there weren't all these novels out then. So, if I had been reading Ed Greenwood's Dragon magazine articles for years and then bought the grey boxed set to play, would that be disrespecting the FR? Especially since there really weren't novels out? OK, so what if I start getting into FR and like it. I read all the source books and have no problem making the world detailed and fun for my players. Life is good. Some FR novels come out, but I really don't like them. I especially think that the FR they present is not the same FR that I have been reading about in the gaming supplements. Am I disrespecting the FR?
ashramry 11-28-03, 03:21 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 My new text: This has nothing to do with what I said above..... Once is not canon since WOTC says its unknown if factual or apocryphal; needs Elminster notes! ok the point being that the basic story of Once is canon, even if it does need elminster notes. Otherwise huge sections of Mage would not be canon. Oh the TSR spring 1996 catalogue has an ad for Mage in it with the description: "Volo does Mulmaster! The much anticipated sequal to Brian Thomsen's Once Around the Realms!" ashy
ashramry 11-28-03, 03:43 PM	Originally posted by Kuje31 Actually since it isn't, it doesn't fit perfectly and you have to be kidding. A few weeks! It takes more then a few weeks just to even get to Kara-Tur! He heads to Maztica, and other places also, sorry no way does it take a "few weeks." To sail to the Sword Coast from Maztica is at least 60 days, that's more then a "few weeks." This doesn't even include him wandering around Faerun and then heading to Kara-Tur. Even with a printing press there is no way he can take "a few weeks." off to go wandering Toril. And it's even worse if he hand prints the chapbooks. But actually I was curious about that bit of text that is in that link and so I asked Cust Service. Maybe then I might change my mind but it depends on what thier answer is. But it might take them a few days to get to my email. Please keep in mind that the travel time you are describing is conventional on foot or horseback travel. Most of the traveling Volo did made use of extremely fast moving magical air devices, Maztican air devices, portals including those in myth dranor and undermountain and of course on ship. The large distances were covered by other means than conventional ones. it is interesting to note that Once is muchly based on Jules Vernes Around the world in 80 days...a feat which at the time was theoretically possible though difficult and unlikely. Admittedly parts of said book read more like Guliver's Travels...another book which Once is somewhat patterend after. Guliver's was met with skepticism that it was factual by many but accepted by the masses as being a true travelogue... i think it is this aspect of many of the relatively unknown custums etc of the different cultures encountered in that book are what really need the Elminster's notes. ashy
Crust 11-28-03, 04:13 PM	Originally posted by Lashan So, you are saying that those DM's who don't read the novels are not respecting the Forgotten Realms? To a certain extent, yes. Of course, there are bound to be folks who don't understand, or who don't agree, and I understand that. If I were to write a major Realms novels, and I knew that there were gamers out there who disregarded it in their games, I would be, at the least, disappointed, and at the very worst, insulted. I think the analogue about Star Wars is off. The fiction that Ed Greenwood wrote back in 1965... Fine. If we compare it that way, as in, compare the very beginning of these worlds and their literature, than the comparison is off (thus, the inevitable misunderstanding of the posts here). However, if someone DMs the FR world and has no real grasp of the living, breathing world that is the people of FR, the way they act, live, and grow amongst each other and the conflicting races and creatures around them, then the DM is not only disrespecting FR. That DM is disrespecting the creators of that world, the writers of the novels who show us that living, breathing world, and they are also disrespecting their players by depriving them of that panoramic view of the Realms... a view that, in my never-so-humble opinion, can only be learned, and in turn, shown, by reading, using, and incorporating the novels. Sourcebooks can only show so much. The novels are literary pieces that show us how the information in the sourcebooks works when it is given life by the author... or, in this case, the DM. Ta da!! ;) When the original grey boxed set came out, there weren't all these novels out then. So, if I had been reading Ed Greenwood's Dragon magazine articles for years and then bought the grey boxed set to play, would that be disrespecting the FR? Especially since there really weren't novels out? Well, if I were to say that yes, you are disrespecting the Realms, what would be your response? You certainly wouldn't agree with me, and at the very least you'd make an attempt to give me the, "Now now, that's your opinion" speech, or at the very worst, you'd get angry. Yes, I suppose Greenwood's Dragon articles are the beginning of the Realms, just like A New Hope is the beginning of the Star Wars universe. I understand your points. However, the Realms didn't really become a campaign setting until after we were introduced to the Realms through those Dragon articles, so, in that regard, the comparison you make is off. OK, so what if I start getting into FR and like it. I read all the source books and have no problem making the world detailed and fun for my players. Life is good. Some FR novels come out, but I really don't like them. I especially think that the FR they present is not the same FR that I have been reading about in the gaming supplements. Am I disrespecting the FR? No, you're not disrespecting the Realms in that case (I imagine you'd agree with me on that, of course). There are tons of FR novels I despise. The Shadow Stone, The Arch Wizards books, Sands of the Soul, Sea of Swords, etc. etc. They have no place in my campaign, and the events that take place in those novels are far removed from my campaign. Why? Because I refuse to use them in my campaign? No. Because those events are completely removed from the Dales (where my campaign is set), and the regular folk living there have no idea that Evereska was besieged, or that Aeron Morieth is a shadow sorcerer, or that Drizzt killed a female elf because he saved her life for whatever reason RAS made up. I'm confident that future novels will back that information up, and I imagine that folks will agree that those events are mutually exclusive to one another. It's up to the DM to use as much material he or she can use to make his/her campaign as detailed, or, as alive as he/she can. To disregard one source is to short change the campaign. Of course, there is someone out there that will disagree, even though my point is very clear, and should be understood by all who wish to make their campaigns as rich as possible. Help doesn't hurt, and the novels only help, and never hinder. Use certain novels and exclude others as your campaign dictates. As someone already mentioned, it's your world. As a teacher, I find that to leave out a mode of instruction is to short change at least one of my students. I feel the same way about gaming. If I think that one of my players will (or is, as is the case) enjoy reading the novels, then my campaign MUST include the novels in order to ensure that player's optimal enjoyment. And I must say, when my gamers tell me that my games run like a novel, I feel like a million dollars. That's reason enough to use the novels. :cool:
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-28-03, 06:05 PM	Kuje, Alzrius...why not just email Wizards about this? Sometimes things that get posted on the website are wrong. Tom Costa's Guenhwyvar was Neutral Evil until someone pointed out to him that that didn't make sense. In the email, bring up all points that were mentioned in this thread.
Kuje31 11-28-03, 06:13 PM	Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin Kuje, Alzrius...why not just email Wizards about this? Sometimes things that get posted on the website are wrong. Tom Costa's Guenhwyvar was Neutral Evil until someone pointed out to him that that didn't make sense. In the email, bring up all points that were mentioned in this thread. I did email them. :) Besides it was late and no one else was around at the time, so we had our own little debate to keep us occupied since it was 2 or 3 in the morning. :)
Kuje31 11-28-03, 06:29 PM	Originally posted by ashramry Please keep in mind that the travel time you are describing is conventional on foot or horseback travel. Most of the traveling Volo did made use of extremely fast moving magical air devices, Maztican air devices, portals including those in myth dranor and undermountain and of course on ship. The large distances were covered by other means than conventional ones. Oh the TSR spring 1996 catalogue has an ad for Mage in it with the description: "Volo does Mulmaster! The much anticipated sequal to Brian Thomsen's Once Around the Realms!" It takes at least a year to get to Kara-tur by itself, so if he was using those things you mention it would still take at least half a year. By ship to the Sword Coast from Maztica it takes at least 2 months. Sorry it doesn't add up that he took a "few weeks." to go wandering around Toril when he had to write at least two different chapbooks for his Volo's Guides. Sorry reading over that novel it is the only novel thagt has a disclaimer in the back that says "Any thing and every thing that I as the writter messed up with Canon material is my own fault and not the original authors who used these characters." Bully for the 1996 TSR catalog, WOTC has decided it isn't canon, so the 1996 catalog doesn't matter. But as I said, I'll change my mind if and when I get a reply from WOTC's Cust Service.
Lashan 11-28-03, 08:20 PM	What I don't understand, Crust, is that to you the novels are required to bring the Realms to life. Is it not possible to be an inspired DM who is able to bring to life the game world without reading a novel? My players get excited about playing in my game. In fact, I have to turn people away from my campaign as I have too large a group as it is. I've had experienced gamers and new gamers have a thoroughly fun and enriching experience at my gaming table. I don't feel that I require the novels to "breathe life" into the game world. I understand that you feel it best to use every resource available at your disposal to help enrich your games. I can believe that there are little nuggest of FR lore that you can glean from reading the novels. I don't believe that it is a requirement to read the novels to really make the game special. Personally, I find it a chore to read bad fiction in an attempt to gain a slight insight for my game. I could easily spend the time it would take to read the novels to improve my game world in more productive ways. I've always read the sourcebooks and they have been enriching enough and found enough material for me to create an exciting and living world for my players. I also have to note that none of my players read the novels, too. I think that there were a few who read some novels, but none of my players were ever dedicated FR fans.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-29-03, 12:15 AM	Originally posted by Kuje31 I did email them. :) Besides it was late and no one else was around at the time, so we had our own little debate to keep us occupied since it was 2 or 3 in the morning. :) Oh that's good. :) And I can definitely understand really getting into a debate (I've done that myself). You've both made some good points, so when you get an answer to your email please post the answer here, or in a new thread. I'd really appreciate it.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-29-03, 12:20 AM	Regarding the topic: As I said, I love the novels, read them, and respect their additions to FR lore (for the most part). But which novels--and how many--does one have to read in order to truly respect Realms lore? This question is similar to the one that asked how many novels one most read before they "have the right" to judge them "bad" (my personal answer is "no one can judge each book until they've read it but you get my point). I read as many novels as I can get my hands on, but I haven't read them all yet, and lately they've come out at a fast rate. Oh well--I am a full-time college student, I have papers coming up as well as a social life. I love the novels but cannot and do not spend all my free time reading them.
Weaver95 11-29-03, 07:24 PM	Personally I don't like using novels as sourcebooks. As a long term DM I prefer sourcebooks. Here's why: What works in a novel won't necessarily translate into 'fair and balanced' rules for players. Sourcebooks start from a rules setting and give stats for things to prevent miscommunication. Sourcebooks are focused on the playablity of an area and/or setting, novels are not. Sourcebooks are created with an eye towards getting a gamer group up to speed on things that interest them and expand thier game interests. Novels, while entertaining, are focused on telling 'the story'. That means those all important details that DM's and players need often get glossed over. Novels as sourcebooks are a cop out. I've heard all the complaining from korporate klowns at WoTC/TSR about cost overhead and how much it costs to risk developing a sourcbook for an area and basically it all boils down to a load of carp. With on demand printing and web distribution, printing costs can be greatly reduced or even eliminated from the business model. The entire concept of letting novels stand in for area sourcebooks sound like an Upper Management decision of the worst kind. At the very least it shows a lack of understanding of the market! Just my .02 cents on the topic.
Folcoerr 12-01-03, 10:02 PM	Jeeze Louise, folks. As I see it, and even as what I think Wizards and probably even Ed Greenwood would think, even the FRCS isn't "canon." The campaign setting isn't a strict set of universal laws passed down by God himself that must be followed, and the novels definitely are not. Rather, the campaign setting is given as an alterable foundation for stories and inspiration to the DM. If the DM decides his players will witness the murder of Volo by Elminster before Volo's publishing of his Guide to the Dales and Elminster's subsequent fall to eternal evil in the service of Shar, so be it, and I'm quite confident that Wizards and Ed Greenwood himself would agree. When you buy the FRCS and anything else relating, it's like buying a house on an infinite lot of land. You can live in the house as is, you can decide to build additions later, you can tear the house down and build another one in its place. Do anything you need to enjoy your land. All this "canon" crap can be gone for good. There is nothing "canon" about any of the D&D material; the beauty of D&D is that it is a dynamic and ever-evolving world, open to infinite possibilities. Most of all, it is a gigantic inspiration for stories, and that's what roleplaying is, is living out stories of your own creation through the eyes of heroes and villains. That is all. You can thank me for my infinite wisdom later.