I can can guess some of them, and I know there won't be exact translations for EVERY region, but as a DM who likes to immerse my suck.. erm... players in everything around them, it would be helpful, so that I can go research little tidbits to bring to the game. As the title also says I'm looking for 3.5 setting around DR 1374-5
e.g. Calimishan - Medieval Arabia/middle east; Sword coast North - Norse/Viking influence
Regards
JWLL
I advice you to take a look at Races of Fearun for an indication what all the faerunian cultures are like. The Players Guide to Fearun and the Campaignguide has a list of feats and items that are a good indication of the technological level of the goods in a region.
After taking all that into account you could take some influence of real world cultures to liven up the roleplay and exposition of an area broadly like this:
Northern West Fearun - anglo-saxon and viking influences
Northern East Fearun - viking and rus
Southern West Fearun - frankish-saxon and moorish
Southern East Fearun - frankish-saxon, moorish, egyptian, mesopotamian
Calimshan - Ottoman Turkey (later, more decadent era)
Amn - a bit of Spanish Renaissance greed, some of Italian city states (particularly the trade), also in Chondath
Monshaes - celtic/pre-Arthurian Brittish Isles/Earthsea
Ruathym, northmen - vikings
Shaar - African savannah
Mulhorand and Unther are obvious
Chessenta - a little Greek and Roman
Rashemen - a bit inspired by early slavic realms, particularly Kiev with varyags
Damara has slavic names and Chult african but not much else
I can can guess some of them, and I know there won't be exact translations for EVERY region, but as a DM who likes to immerse my suck.. erm... players in everything around them, it would be helpful, so that I can go research little tidbits to bring to the game.
If you want to get a quick first-glance approximation of places, seeking for Earth comparisons is understandable. But Suin is right -- Ed Greenwood eschews Earth analogues in his worldbuilding. If you want to understand parts of the Realms, researching places on Earth will only mislead you, because any given transferred detail is likely to be wrong. You need to research places in Faerûn.
Isn't Calimshan Arabic, not Turkey?
someone told me that Cormyr is France, you can't do nothing
From Ed:-
I created Cormyr to have the Sherwood Forest/Arthur and his galloping knights of the Table Round “feel,” but to be a distinct kingdom with quite a different history. Imagine the fictional court of Camelot - - all the bickering knights, that is - - and see what happens if a royal line manages to hold the throne for centuries. Quite different from all of the fictional depictions of Arthur, who creates his own great kingdom, far more powerful than what existed before him - - a kingdom that either declines (through Constantine) or is swept away entirely after his death or departure, depending on which sources or versions of the Arthurian mythos one embraces most closely.
The various approaches to Arthur (the Christian king; the Celtic or Welsh king of England repelling or withstanding Germanic foreigners; the Celt holding together civilization after the departure of the Romans; the predestined king who fulfills his destiny, and so on) are all quite different from the concept of the Dragon Throne of Cormyr and the Obarskyrs who’ve held it. (Elves take land from dragons, arriving human settling family manages to establish a settlement, and holds it almost continuously for over a thousand years, withstanding all challenges in various ways and in the process building a strong kingdom.)
The term “Imperial Britain” of course refers to the far more recent, historical British empire (wherein the English sailed wooden ships all over the world to conquer, occupy, and exploit distant territories such as India, Canada, the colonies that later became the United States, and so on), and of course Cormyr has never had imperial ambitions. Its armies stay at home, beyond temporary occupations of pirate ports such as Teziir, patrols along its fringes (Tunland, the West Reaches, the Stonelands), and naval skirmishes with Westgate and Sembia that arise only when Cormyr is trying to keep those two rivals from cutting off access to Marsember and Suzail. So Cormyr has no correspondence whatsoever to “Imperial Britain.” Sorry.
Isn't Calimshan Arabic, not Turkey?
During Steven Schend's later development of the region, he focused on making Calimshan less Arabian and more Turkish/Ottoman Empire [since there was the AL-QADIM setting covering the Arabian stuff quite well].
Steven equates Calimshan with Medieval Turkey and the Byzantine Empire.
That places all the 'Middle-Eastern' style cultures in the same general vicinity.
someone told me that Cormyr is France, you can't do nothing
Isn't Calimshan Arabic, not Turkey?
I mentioned Calimshan's similarity to Turkey cause the author of EotSS said that
personally don't think they're that alike when you go into details (had a class in college dealing with the area), and there are elements from other historical caliphates
a little similar to RL cultures are
Just a little? ;)
Dragonwall (Great Wall...), Maztika (conquistador rip-off), f'ing Muhorand?
Don't get me wrong, this is my fav go-to setting (3.5 ed anyway), but we'd be lying if we said that nuances and blatant in-your-face overtones of Earth didn't exist.
You list looks awfully familiar ;) on 2 fronts. I think I threw out something like this quite some time ago, and one to the language/regions during the whole Common, Wtf is It? debate. Anyway, this is fairly accurate, nj.
These are only allusions, not maxims per examples.
Hordelands - Mongolia during, you know...
Wa & Kozakura - Imperial Nippon
Shou lands - Imperial China
Estagund or one of it's neighbors (can't recall namesake) - India
Zakhara (and a nod to Anauroch [same ppl] - Arabian pennisula/gulf
Icewind Dale, Illusk, etc - Scandanavia (lot of celt-ish names there though)
Sembia - Wanna' say renaissance Italy given all the wealthy commerce, etc. Unsure.
Matica - Yucatan penninsula/northern South America
Spine of the World/polar North - Arctic, Innuit & Athabaskan lands
Tethyr - brain buster. Wanna' liken it to Eastern Europe (Hungary/Romania) as the gateway to the Middle East (Calimshan), particularly w/ the civil war, but it has a decidely more Western feel. Then again, the Wealdath (Carpathian forests w/out such a gothic-horror vibe?). French maybe? Unsure. Vegeance Knights and constant fighting kinda' fit the motif of prior.
Chult - Ivory Coast/Congo
Tashalar - Amazonia or as above (big ass jungle by any other name...:rolleyes
etc. etc.
Then you get into the "I have no clue" territories of...
Thay (when it was original), Aglarond, Lantan, Thesk, Borderlands, etc.
It's good to emphasize ''a little similar'' cause I experienced plenty of times when you say ''it's like Egypt'' people tend to narrow their imagination. Ed said that the Realms aren't based on historical analogies. You always need a bare point of reference but that's it.
Good point about the Inuit analogies, the Great Glacier book is full of them. The rest of the Cold Lands not much, except having cold in common.
I can't say about the Eastern Realms, cause I have stuff like Riedra and Tsurani there, instead of Kara-Tur.
The Shining Lands, I'm hardly an expert, are similar cause the Adama faith has some hinduistic elements, think it's pretty different other than that. Indian feel is more to the south, towards Malatra.
Sembia depends on trade like some Italian city-states and the aristocracy is not that different in basics. This is where the similarities end.
Tethyr, not really, wars of the nobles were everywhere. Maybe Asturias, even that is a stretch.
Chult/Tashalar, only in climate and vegetation, but lacks major rivers. There's an amazonian island of Ixinos in the Vilhon Reach.
It's good to emphasize ''a little similar'' cause I experienced plenty of times when you say ''it's like Egypt'' people tend to narrow their imagination. Ed said that the Realms aren't based on historical analogies. You always need a bare point of reference but that's it.
-Everything has a "bare point of reference", because, being fantasy, we need to have something it's all vaguely based on. With most of Faerûn, things have been developed enough, thankfully and luckily, that the amount of original information has given the place it's own sense of identity, instead of "[Insert Faerûnian place] is like fantasy [Insert real place]." That's why Kara-Tur is both corny to some, and has so much potential to others. For those who see it as corny, they just see a rip-off of of Asia. For those who see it as having so much potential, they see the obvious Asian influences as a starting point to give it it's own identity, but as a basis for more unique information.
Kara-Tur, I can't explain why, just doesn't fit into the overall picture I have about the world. Don't care for anything in the book, maybe Tabot.
Forgot about another analogy
Turmish - their beards are somewhat mesopotamian/persian
It's good to emphasize ''a little similar'' cause I experienced plenty of times when you say ''it's like Egypt'' people tend to narrow their imagination.
Because of personal predispositions namely, not necessarilly text-based data (canon) tempered w/ a modicum of creative vision or thematic flexibility.
Ed said that the Realms aren't based on historical analogies. You always need a bare point of reference but that's it.
Ed says a lot of things...
Great guy, Hell of a visionary, but to presume the Realms, or, parts of the Realms weren't based on the previous, well, c'mon. The atlas, FRCS, a slew of DMs & PCs, novels, and bla bla bla would claim otherwise in some aspects. Not a carbon copy, but a good many facets flirt w/ us out here IRL.
I can't say about the Eastern Realms, cause I have stuff like Riedra and Tsurani there, instead of Kara-Tur.
Unfamiliar. Enlighten plz.
The Shining Lands, I'm hardly an expert, are similar cause the Adama faith has some hinduistic elements, think it's pretty different other than that. Indian feel is more to the south, towards Malatra.
The Shining South, though often glossed over in 3.x in many households, is incredibly compelling w/ a lot of originality. Big fan of the Shaar(s), Dambrath, etc. The Adama further South, is part of it, but I'm surprised a heavier nod wasn't given to synch up w/ Indian mythoi let alone the culture as a whole. Unfamiliar w/ Malatra. That a 4th ed thing?
Sembia depends on trade like some Italian city-states and the aristocracy is not that different in basics. This is where the similarities end.
I beg to differ. Like IRL, trade generated wealth is massive, port cities and rampant piracy in those waters as well, dubious houses of nobility (can you say Medicis or Sforzas?), great abundance of mercenary power/clout, alliances of convenience w/ suspect 3rd parties, discrete & not-so-discrete attempts at destabilization of neighboring geographies, etc.
Tethyr, not really, wars of the nobles were everywhere. Maybe Asturias, even that is a stretch.
From 3.x, super huge bloody civil war. Not isolated nobles skirmishing here and there in proxy battles, etc. That's a hard locale to zero. Unsure.
Chult/Tashalar, only in climate and vegetation, but lacks major rivers. There's an amazonian island of Ixinos in the Vilhon Reach.
Thematically. Not necessarilly a perfect clone right down to river 'x', silver mine 'y', or indigenous people 'z'. The whole "wild, savage jungle lands of 'wherever', packed w/ mystery & danger, etc." It's a popular trope/stereotype for good reason. Just a colorful backdrop for intrepid PCs...
Plus, there would have to be rivers, lots of rivers (perhaps not major ones) to support such abundant biomass. Rainfall alone, even during year round monsoons wouldn't cut it. You'd need little mangroves, deltas, subterranean & Underdark ravines, etc. Plus, w/ the volcanic activity/geograhpy in the area, that tends to support the premise moreso.
Lord Karsus: Everything has a "bare point of reference", because, being fantasy, we need to have something it's all vaguely based on.
Very true, well said.
ex)
That's why Kara-Tur is both corny to some, and has so much potential to others. For those who see it as corny, they just see a rip-off of of Asia. For those who see it as having so much potential, they see the obvious Asian influences as a starting point to give it it's own identity, but as a basis for more unique information.
That's probably the best geogrpahic example of this mindset in terms of dynamic opposites (corny/starting point). Especially being westerners ourselves. We often pigeonhole other culture 'x' more readilly instead of taking the raw (or RAW really) materials and having the courage and creativity to run w/ it per good DM'ing a little forethought and dissection.
I guess the RL comparisons make it easier for players to identify w/ the possible theoretics of land 'y' and help to inspire from that familiar jump point. Easier to innovate and create if you're a little more comfortable w/ foreign territory, no pun intended.
I think some posters need to read [or re-read, as the case may be] certain comments made by Ed.
Especially, I have a particular fondness for two very important replies from Ed in April '06 that not only serve to illustrate how the core elements of Ed's original Realms [first conceived in 1967] came about, but also, how his ideas evolved over time to become purely "Realmsian."
The original, core part of the Realms is not analogous to our world, and our-world norms can't be assumed to apply. Some of the places mentioned however, like Kara-Tur, are among those exceptions that are based on Earth, in their published forms, for various reasons... excepting the Shaar. Ed even discussed a little about his original Moonshae/LeGuin-styled islands at Candlekeep.
His thoughts on the sources of inspiration for some of the areas mentioned here are required reading for any particular Realms devotee who wishes to have access to accurate facts as they've been determined by Ed himself. I suggest you all read through them, rather than rely on some of the information that will likely be posted here by certain supposed fans making nonsense comments about such comparisons even when there is direct Realmslore clearly proving how invalid their comments are. And finally, consider this, from Ed's '06 replies:-
"...but it should always be remembered that the Realms is NOT an analogy or copy of Earth; what we may see as medieval in some ways, and Renaissance in others, when looking at Faerûn, is inevitably seeing things from our point of view: the Realms may develop in very different ways than the real world did."
Ed says a lot of things...
Great guy, Hell of a visionary, but to presume the Realms, or, parts of the Realms weren't based on the previous, well, c'mon. The atlas, FRCS, a slew of DMs & PCs, novels, and bla bla bla would claim otherwise in some aspects. Not a carbon copy, but a good many facets flirt w/ us out here IRL.
When he says that, he means his original intent. Of course he notes the other continents of Toril and indeed many parts of Faerun have had other authors and designed by what the company wants/needs. That is also not to say the Realms (even the parts where Ed did most of the design) are absolutely void of real world influences. It does mean that, like you said in reply to Lord Karsus, those areas took the raw information, inspiration and vibe and forged something hard to pin down, something distinctly Realmsian about it. Those areas made took their influence and made it their own. You can tell what those areas are.
I beg to differ. Like IRL, trade generated wealth is massive, port cities and rampant piracy in those waters as well, dubious houses of nobility (can you say Medicis or Sforzas?), great abundance of mercenary power/clout, alliances of convenience w/ suspect 3rd parties, discrete & not-so-discrete attempts at destabilization of neighboring geographies, etc.
In terms of politics and economics, sure. In terms of history or culture, not really. That is where the real world influence ends. Those Sembian characteristics similar to the Italian city-states are there because given those situations involving wealth and power, people do use their money and power in that way. Superpowers do the same sort of meddling in neighbors, from ancient powers like Rome to modern superpowers like the US and the USSR. Port cities and pirates aren't unique to that city-state concept. The pre/early-modern era was the golden age of piracy. Renaissance Italy wasn't the only city-state heavy area or time period, there was the peninsula during the early Roman days, or the Greek city states. City states seem to be a fairly common occurrence at various times around the Mediterranean.
Sembia is also not the only place in the Realms with city-states, the whole Western Heartlands has a similar set up (though even less unified). Thesk is essentially the same, though nominally a nation under one king. Chondath and the Vilhon Reach as well (not surprising since Sembians came from there).
Sembia catches the flak for being like the Italian city states because it's the most readily made example. Some of it might be true, but it's probably more accurate to say Sembia takes inspiration from any series of city-states with abundant wealth, corruption, and a ruthless streak with expansionist drives. You can catch a little of everything here and there. It's not wholy and only the Italian city states.
From 3.x, super huge bloody civil war. Not isolated nobles skirmishing here and there in proxy battles, etc. That's a hard locale to zero. Unsure.
Tethyr is one of those areas where a mix of influence, divergence and totally unrelated ideas came together to form something that has more of it's own character.
Thematically. Not necessarilly a perfect clone right down to river 'x', silver mine 'y', or indigenous people 'z'. The whole "wild, savage jungle lands of 'wherever', packed w/ mystery & danger, etc." It's a popular trope/stereotype for good reason. Just a colorful backdrop for intrepid PCs...
Plus, there would have to be rivers, lots of rivers (perhaps not major ones) to support such abundant biomass. Rainfall alone, even during year round monsoons wouldn't cut it. You'd need little mangroves, deltas, subterranean & Underdark ravines, etc. Plus, w/ the volcanic activity/geograhpy in the area, that tends to support the premise moreso.
Chult, I believe, was supposed to have a very pulpy vibe, inspired by Tarzan type stories, deepest darkest Africa style. That is why it's hard to place an exact cultural influence for it. It was inspired by a secondary source, a fictional source, rather than an entry in a history book.
With regard to supposed connections between the Realms and Earth history...
Mulhourand. There, I said it. Sorry.
Unther, The Dragonwall, state religions, celt-esque island nations, Calimsham, etc, etc.
This is not to say there isn't a ton of truly impressive and original text & ideas and so forth in the canon (namely why I love 3.x Thay for example), but to presume "supposed" connections in the face of such sure and certain proof of a good many facets (not the whole)...?
I think some posters need to read [or re-read, as the case may be] certain comments made by Ed.
I'm good w/ my 3.x FRCS, Grand History of..., and a ton of other WotC on my shelves though, thanks. That's the published text I have to work w/, so, that's what I use.
...core elements of Ed's original Realms [first conceived in 1967] came about, but also, how his ideas evolved over time to become purely "Realmsian."
I, myself, am very curious to know the difference between his theorized versions, original proposals, and so forth, vs. the final, printed stuff.
The original, core part of the Realms is not analogous to our world, and our-world norms can't be assumed to apply.
If you could kindly post some, that would be enlightening. Surely though, some RL bits bleed into it. Pretty much every writer on the planet, at some point, has borrowed, unwittingly or not, to add to their recipe for 'x'.
His thoughts on the sources of inspiration for some of the areas mentioned here are required reading for any particular Realms devotee who wishes to have access to accurate facts as they've been determined by Ed himself.
Required reading?
What's accurate? His original works or the ones they took and ran w/ to print?
I suggest you all read through them, rather than rely on some of the information that will likely be posted here by certain supposed fans making nonsense comments about such comparisons even when there is direct Realmslore clearly proving how invalid their comments are.
Ah, I see where this is going...
Why personal?Nice. Your unwarranted rancor, thinly veiled, doesn't help. Why take this position? The OP point was just to see the bits 'n pieces we, the designers, and so on, borrowed and cannibalized into campaign setting 'x'. Everyone does it on some level, so I guess I fail to see the need for animosity. Parts of the whole are borrowed or accent other parts of 'x'. Some discrete adding flavor, others pretty b/w copies.
"...but it should always be remembered that the Realms is NOT an analogy or copy of Earth; what we may see as medieval in some ways, and Renaissance in others, when looking at Faerûn, is inevitably seeing things from our point of view: the Realms may develop in very different ways than the real world did."
No one said it was analogous IIRC. It's not an arguement of polar opposites so much as an understanding of the grey area in between where particular earthen concepts, geography, culture, whatever may, and have been used to highlight or breath life into this theorized one. A footprint, nothing more (IMO)
Dark Wizard: When he says that, he means his original intent.
See, this would've sufficed (nj DrkWzd). Clearer, more succinct, objective.
Mulhourand. There, I said it.
That wasn't because of Ed. Here's Ed's view on Mulhorand:-
"Correct. I wanted Mulhorand to be a land of dusky-skinned Set worshippers, because I postulated the worship of Set to have spread through the planar links from earth. When it was developed in print by other designers than me, it had become “Egyptians from our real-world Earth resettle in the Realms, and bring all their gods and worship with them,” so there is direct modeling. Not by me, and it’s not how I would have handled Mulhorand, but that’s what other designers did, and they did it well."
This is not to say there isn't a ton of truly impressive and original text & ideas and so forth in the canon (namely why I love 3.x Thay for example), but to presume "supposed" connections in the face of such sure and certain proof of a good many facets (not the whole)...?
I don't presume. Ed's words are clear. And please identify this "certain proof" with respect to Ed's original material?
I'm good w/ my 3.x FRCS, Grand History of..., and a ton of other WotC on my shelves though, thanks. That's the published text I have to work w/, so, that's what I use.
Fair enough. But you're missing some incredible material.
I, myself, am very curious to know the difference between his theorized versions, original proposals, and so forth, vs. the final, printed stuff.
You need only read through the replies I indicated. As well as search through the "So Saith Ed" archives. Both Ed and the Lady Hooded One have spoken about the differences between his original conception of parts of the Realms, and what came to be in the printed material. And Ed's not alone in those comparisons. Both Steven Schend and Eric Boyd have made similar comparisons. Their replies are also collected at Candlekeep.
If you could kindly post some, that would be enlightening. Surely though, some RL bits bleed into it. Pretty much every writer on the planet, at some point, has borrowed, unwittingly or not, to add to their recipe for 'x'.
A worthwhile point.
Required reading?
What's accurate? His original works or the ones they took and ran w/ to print?
Which is why I suggested they're required reading. Ed himself addresses this point.
Ah, I see where this is going...
I didn't make it personal. I didn't quote you. I was speaking in general to the whole thread. I'd suggest you desist in making this something it's not.
Nice. Your unwarranted rancor, thinly veiled, doesn't help. Why take this position? The OP point was just to see the bits 'n pieces we, the designers, and so on, borrowed and cannibalized into campaign setting 'x'. Everyone does it on some level, so I guess I fail to see the need for animosity. Parts of the whole are borrowed or accent other parts of 'x'. Some discrete adding flavor, others pretty b/w copies.
'Twasn't rancour. It's simply an observation generated from my previous experiences during similar past discussions here at Wizards. I apologise if you read it in a way that I did not intend.
That's true.
Kara-Tur, I can't explain why, just doesn't fit into the overall picture I have about the world. Don't care for anything in the book, maybe Tabot.
-Ironically, and this is neither here nor there, despite the blatant mirroring in names ('Tabot' and 'Tibet'), the geography, and a few cultural concepts (powerful theocracy, "holy land"), Tabot and Tibet have so many differences. I had to work to create parallels between Tabot an Tobet in the Kara-Tur Re-Dux, actually, concerning some minor points (money, burial of the dead, among others), because they didn't exist in the very vague Tabot material.
That's probably the best geogrpahic example of this mindset in terms of dynamic opposites (corny/starting point). Especially being westerners ourselves. We often pigeonhole other culture 'x' more readilly instead of taking the raw (or RAW really) materials and having the courage and creativity to run w/ it per good DM'ing a little forethought and dissection.
I guess the RL comparisons make it easier for players to identify w/ the possible theoretics of land 'y' and help to inspire from that familiar jump point. Easier to innovate and create if you're a little more comfortable w/ foreign territory, no pun intended.
-I don't really think that it has much to do with cultural attitudes or biases, supporting or against other cultures. I'm an American 23-year-old male of Italian-Austrian-Ukrainian descent living in New York, in a lower-middle-class, mixed Black/White/Hispanic neighborhood, and I find Kara-Tur interesting enough, as it is, to a degree, but unrefined and chock full of possibility. Markus, someone who I know shares that opinion, is about double my age. RangerREG, someone else who likes Kara-Tur, is around my age, but is Hawaiian (or is of similar descent, living in Hawaii). When it comes down to it, I think it has to do just with preferences, and the amount of time you are willing to invest in things, or possibly invest in things.
Mulhourand. There, I said it. Sorry.
Unther, The Dragonwall, state religions, celt-esque island nations, Calimsham, etc, etc.
This is not to say there isn't a ton of truly impressive and original text & ideas and so forth in the canon (namely why I love 3.x Thay for example), but to presume "supposed" connections in the face of such sure and certain proof of a good many facets (not the whole)...?
-In invoking Ed Greenwood's name, specifically, many of those places weren't created by him, and were later added in by TSR/WotC, and can't have their genesis tied back to him (for good or bad). He can't take the credit, nor can he take the blame. That's just being objectively fair. Chris Perkins said, way back when, to blame him when bits were released about the new Forgotten Realms that people didn't like. When you know that it was Ed Greenwood, or Bruce Cordell, or whoever else, though, that was the author of whatever the offending material was, blaming the person in charge ends up being silly.
Required reading?
What's accurate? His original works or the ones they took and ran w/ to print?
-Anything that was published is all that "matters", per se. Other bits (primarily things that have been changed, like Thay, for example, from it's original conception, until now) is apocrypha, and nothing more.
With some nations though, nothing comes to mind. What country do you think of when you play in various FR nations?
Also, what would you compare Sembia to?
If you look beyond the OA rules, you'll see that K-T itself is pretty original in most respects.
As for the rules... thats the biggest way in which K-T differs from RW, believe it or not.... China NEVER had Samurai or Ninja. What the designers (back then) did was roll ALL Oriental flavor together into one 'neat package', instead of trying to showcase the differences between each. The entire continent is an amalgam of cultures and religions, none of which resembles any RW one (I'd say Wa & Kozakura are the closest, being very similar to Japan).
The 3e designers tried to fix that, but unfortunately they took a short-cut... they used Rokugon and it's 'clans' to highlight the differences in Oriental culture. Its a shame, because 3e, with all its PrCs and feats, could have really made OA and Kara-Tur shine, because we could have actually had regional differences between Ninja, Samurai, Spellcasters, etc, etc...
FR suffered from some bad design decisions in the beginning (none of them Ed's), and the guys who came later spent a lot of time and effort re-imagining those regions which were RW analogies. I give them their props for that, but if I were in charge of 4eFR, I would have taken an even more drastic step then WotC, and not the half-hearted one they did.
I would have went back to Ed's original design, and had a (good) team work with Ed to build a proper and cohesive Toril from the ground-up, ignoring and throwing-out any of the silly stuff that made it in over the years.
Yup... I would have given us a TRUE continuity re-boot, set in 1357 DR, and I really doubt I would have gotten half the backlash WotC did... and I would have accomplished their goals far better then they managed to (those feelings of entitlement they used to like to bandy-about... they would have been gone completely with a history-wipe).
If your going to do something drastic, then you have to take it all the way. Instead we got a half-hearted attempt at a 'new' setting, and almost three-years of back-peddling. Its not that they did too much, they didn't take it far enough. They should have re-booted the Realms, and leveled the playing field.
It was really that simple.
Because of personal predispositions namely, not necessarilly text-based data (canon) tempered w/ a modicum of creative vision or thematic flexibility.
Yea. Tough I eventually turned Mulhorand into an undead realm with the River of Blood, Stygia and Tomb Kings (WH) theme.
Ed says a lot of things...
Great guy, Hell of a visionary, but to presume the Realms, or, parts of the Realms weren't based on the previous, well, c'mon. The atlas, FRCS, a slew of DMs & PCs, novels, and bla bla bla would claim otherwise in some aspects. Not a carbon copy, but a good many facets flirt w/ us out here IRL.
That parts were added by TSR, not initially a bad decision imo, but it needed more twists.
Unfamiliar. Enlighten plz.
The only ''eastern'' campaign I run included parts of Riedra, Adar (from Eberron), Thassilon (fallen empire of Golarion, but I orientalized it and made them giants-adityas) and Tsuranuanni from Raymond Feist's novels. The other DM of the group had more canonical games in Taan and Yal Tengri. That's how I view the eastern realms should be, it just seems the entire continent is out of place, not possible for it to exist beside Faerun, too much cut off. Sorry to the Kara-Tur fans.
The Adama further South, is part of it, but I'm surprised a heavier nod wasn't given to synch up w/ Indian mythoi let alone the culture as a whole. Unfamiliar w/ Malatra. That a 4th ed thing?
Well there is some in the Utter East. The Shining Lands are more transitional, a melting pot eastern and western cultures.
Malatra is a plateau, the land of the Living Jungle (described in a few Polyhedron articles), far south of Kara-Tur. Mahasarpa is an indan setting (from 3e OA web enhancement), MT placed it nicely between Malatra and Yehimal.
I beg to differ. Like IRL, trade generated wealth is massive, port cities and rampant piracy in those waters as well, dubious houses of nobility (can you say Medicis or Sforzas?), great abundance of mercenary power/clout, alliances of convenience w/ suspect 3rd parties, discrete & not-so-discrete attempts at destabilization of neighboring geographies, etc.
Still, I think that's not much considering the differences. Primarily the absence of the Church, there's no conflicts between the imperials and the papists. No major plagues, different historical background and origins (Chondathan settlers clearing elven forests vs. Roman legacy, Ostrogoths/Langobards, Franks/Holy Roman Empire, Normans, Saracens etc.), cities of Sembia don't conquer strategic points all over the Sea of Fallen Stars like Venice or Genova did. Sembians are merchants but should also be exploiters. Different systems of government, e.g. comparing the councils of Venice and the Sembian ruling council. There is no titled nobility in Sembia, all are self-proclaimed, only wealth matters. And Sembia is politically united. Piracy, mostly different circumstances.
I would have went back to Ed's original design, and had a (good) team work with Ed to build a proper and cohesive Toril from the ground-up, ignoring and throwing-out any of the silly stuff that made it in over the years.
Yup... I would have given us a TRUE continuity re-boot, set in 1357 DR, and I really doubt I would have gotten half the backlash WotC did... and I would have accomplished their goals far better then they managed to (those feelings of entitlement they used to like to bandy-about... they would have been gone completely with a history-wipe).
If your going to do something drastic, then you have to take it all the way. Instead we got a half-hearted attempt at a 'new' setting, and almost three-years of back-peddling. Its not that they did too much, they didn't take it far enough. They should have re-booted the Realms, and leveled the playing field.
It was really that simple.
Completely agree. I'd add the events that happened after 1357 DR as possible hooks, but very selectively, only the cool ones.
The 3e designers tried to fix that, but unfortunately they took a short-cut... they used Rokugon and it's 'clans' to highlight the differences in Oriental culture. Its a shame, because 3e, with all its PrCs and feats, could have really made OA and Kara-Tur shine, because we could have actually had regional differences between Ninja, Samurai, Spellcasters, etc, etc...
Rokugan existed before 3e OA. It was an IP WotC had control of at the time and decided to use instead of Kara-Tur thinking it would be more popular. Rokugan was meant to be more Japan than anything else, though some of the clans did have influences from other cultures. So in that regard, the Great Clans weren't meant to fix any problem from Kara-Tur or the previous OA.
Beyond lack of support, the way the classes were presented in OA is still weird. Where as regular D&D takes influences from many different western sources for it's classes (Druids from Celtic culture, Bards could be from Celtic, Norse or Greek, Paladins inspired by the Peers or the Arthur's Knights, Rangers from Tolkien and I guess English/Anglo-Saxon origin, Clerics inspired by the Templars), OA drew most of it's classes from Japan. It's not so much a hodgepodge as a very narrow sampling. Even 3e OA did little to update that. Kara-Tur skited around that problem. Most D&D settings embraced that hodgepodge, making something as specific as Paladins and Druids work for it, gave explanations for it, gave support material for it. Kara-Tur just had them in there without saying much of anything. Granted the line saw limited material. It just felt timid, not really working with the material they chose to incorporate.
The whole thing just seemed half-hearted with one too many lettered swapped historical names for places and persons to create immersion with suspension of disbelief. I guess for most it doesn't matter, but anyone remotely acquainted with Asian history could pick up the names fairly easily. (And with the influx of eastern entertainment media, one doesn't even need to read a history book, you could just play a video game or watch an anime).
Really if Faerun contained a Frence or Germuny, it would be a big turn off, even if Frence was actually something as radical as Halruaa or Germuny was as unreal as Evermeet. If Faerun had a Pope residing in Rume, Etaly, it would cause problems even if Rume, Italy was Shadowdale, the Pope was Elminster's name. Actually that would cause all sorts more problems. As we learned from 4E, perception matters. If the surface aspects of the setting fouls it for people, the great material inside never gets considered, no matter how good it is.
FR suffered from some bad design decisions in the beginning (none of them Ed's), and the guys who came later spent a lot of time and effort re-imagining those regions which were RW analogies. I give them their props for that, but if I were in charge of 4eFR, I would have taken an even more drastic step then WotC, and not the half-hearted one they did.
I would have went back to Ed's original design, and had a (good) team work with Ed to build a proper and cohesive Toril from the ground-up, ignoring and throwing-out any of the silly stuff that made it in over the years.
Yup... I would have given us a TRUE continuity re-boot, set in 1357 DR, and I really doubt I would have gotten half the backlash WotC did... and I would have accomplished their goals far better then they managed to (those feelings of entitlement they used to like to bandy-about... they would have been gone completely with a history-wipe).
If your going to do something drastic, then you have to take it all the way. Instead we got a half-hearted attempt at a 'new' setting, and almost three-years of back-peddling. Its not that they did too much, they didn't take it far enough. They should have re-booted the Realms, and leveled the playing field.
It was really that simple.
Seeing the changes compared to the intent of 4e. It really would have been better to reset to 1357, incorporate 4e from the start, and recreate a cohesive and expansive setting using the core areas as a framework. The designers could still work in things they feel work, like the drow (essentially unchanged from 1e/2e Realms), The Shade's Netherese empire with Sembia (originally undetailed anyway), changes to the Old Empires (also not really detailed in the first round), aberrations (the Realms has many) and Dawn Titans (could be the new Time of Troubles).
A reset worked for Bond, Batman and Star Trek. FR should be cake. Fans can still fill in missing background with old material since it would still be mostly compatible and of the same era. All the novels and events theoretically could take and are taking place. Reduce the upfront role of abrasive bits like Elminsters and Mystra (don't stat them or give them first billing in novels). Gloss over the rest with some Eberron style hand-holding and PC ego-stroking. "Oh you are the heroes, yes you are, my darling little adventurers."
"Oh you are the heroes, yes you are, my darling little adventurers."
haha
That wasn't because of Ed....I don't presume. Ed's words are clear.
Never said it was. Where is this going anyway? Seems largely pointless to say, "Ed didn't has his finger in that pie, etc." when no one said he did. Quite simply, the OP lays it out as HISTORICAL COMPARITIVES, not maxims or blatant rip-offs. Some are more overt than others whereas some lands and FR concepts are completely alien to anything we know IRL.
MY POINT was just discerning, after the fact (publishing), who's are who's.
And please identify this "certain proof" with respect to Ed's original material?
Again, stay w/ me here, FR's final, printed material, not Ed's initial concept per the world building itself. Stop going back to that as it wasn't invoked on my end, just the game as it stands. Mulhourand (one facet of many) is the pink elephant in this capacity as IT READS, not necessarilly per his original vision thereof. That's what I'm speaking of.
There is no pedastle or holy lore, just original ideas and the ones that come out from editing and the print shop. Perhaps not as good as the original (Ed's), but those are the ones we use.
Fair enough. But you're missing some incredible material.
I wouldn't refute his original works are likely more inspired and thematically more in depth, but I'm swimming in Faerun books in my stax. I mean, more than I need (3.x) and likely, more than I should've bought.
You need only read through the replies I indicated. As well as...
If I'm poking around in that light, usually a question here fits the bill or I jog over to CandleKeep and it's satisfied quickly enough. Beyond that, at my own table/household, again, I'm good. Most of my game research is largely for the benefit of my players; cartography, mechanical aspects, XP/CR, things like that, not simply satisfying a penchant for original design/accuracy. Like when i got Grand History...awesome book. But, I have enough to pull out of my hat per FRCS @ the table when playing. Once in a while, yes, a citation or historical footnote is needed though.
Furthermore, I apply Rule 0 to more than just mechanical fare. Thematically, I leave most of FR alone, but more than once, I said, "Hmm, 'x' is retarded or unrealistic... I'll change it." But, once in a while, when you stumble upon the 1st incarnation of someone's intellectual property vs. the final "edited" version, yeah, it can be compelling. Usually, though, I'm confident enough to make variations from the final printed text to whatever I need it to become for what I (players really) need.
Incidentally, I'm curious what was cut, tweaked, or added vs. 2nd & 3rd ed's printed final versions. Simple curiousity as a fan, not a treasure hunt as a DM.
A reset worked for Bond, Batman and Star Trek. FR should be cake. Fans can still fill in missing background with old material since it would still be mostly compatible and of the same era. All the novels and events theoretically could take and are taking place. Reduce the upfront role of abrasive bits like Elminsters and Mystra (don't stat them or give them first billing in novels). Gloss over the rest with some Eberron style hand-holding and PC ego-stroking. "Oh you are the heroes, yes you are, my darling little adventurers."
Precisely.
They did a wipe, without accomplishing many of their goals, and instead managed to alienate a good chunk of the community and split the fanbase.
A 1357 reboot using 4e rules and eliminating all of those atrocious RSE's that turned the Realms into a steaming pile. We wouldn't need the ToT, since we would no longer need that 1e -to-2e transition. Shade could have returned a decade before the start of the campaign, as a new and growing menace (and Anuaroch could have went from a boring desert filled with Bedine to a magically-chaotic 'no-mans-land a'la the Mournland). Mulhorand could have lost it's Egypt-redux flavor and become more Stygia-like, etc, etc....
Everything that wasn't working could have been chucked, and everything that the FANS liked could have been emphasized and built-upon. Talk about your major opportunities missed.
Note the part I emphasized in the quote above - thats exactly how it has always worked (everything is canon until some other source contradicts and overwrites it), which means folks could have used older material for reference, if they so desired, or created completely new material themselves.
Just as they have done in so many other franchises, a complete continuity reboot would have given us something fresh and new, while at the same time given us back something familiar and comfortable. they could have eliminated all the bad decisions in one fell swoop - it could have been glorious.
Instead... it was anti-climactic.
And that notion keeps popping up every month.... why people don't get tired of comparing real world and FR?
Isn't Calimshan Arabic, not Turkey?
We are playing a campaign set predominantly in Tethyr, Amn and Calimshan, and in our campaign Calimshan is indeed Arabic... very much similar to the world set in 1001 Nights.
Schend said that he was trying to make Calimshan more Turkish (Ottoman) after the release of Al-Qadim, so it's is inspired by both cultures yet also quite different.
Isn't Calimshan Arabic, not Turkey?
We are playing a campaign set predominantly in Tethyr, Amn and Calimshan, and in our campaign Calimshan is indeed Arabic... very much similar to the world set in 1001 Nights.