Good morning, gentles!
A few weeks ago, I was fortunate enough to be invited, along with a number of my fellow lore-lords of the Realms—those being Eric Boyd, George Krashos, Brian James, and Erik Scott de Bie—to chat with members of the story team over at Wizards of the Coast (including D&D Creative Director James Wyatt, Matt Sernett, and ex officio non-employee but kinda sorta, Ed Greenwood) about the future of the Forgotten Realms. We got a sneak peek at some of the secrets that are going to be revealed at this Gen Con’s D&D Keynote and the ‘What is the Sundering?’ panels that will follow it, as well as a glimpse at how the Realms will be treated in the coming years and edition(s).
There is good reason for us all to be excited.
None of us can talk all that much about what’s going to happen over the next week and a half, but I encourage you all to stay tuned. On Thursday, Friday, and Saturday of next week, information’s going to come out that will affect what you think about the state of Realms publishing. In a good way, I think.
If you can make it to Gen Con, you’ll want to make sure to be at the "The Future of Dungeons & Dragons" keynote (Thursday night), and at least one of the Sundering panels (Friday afternoon and Saturday morning). If you can’t make it, the links below will help you get as much exposure as you can.
The full slate of Gen Con D&D Panels is listed here.
The D&D keynote will be live streamed here.
The ‘What is the Sundering?’ panels will be posted here. No word yet as to whether they will be live, or edited and posted later.
Also not to be missed—and following immediately after the D&D keynote—is our own panel, Candlekeep Presents: 25 Years of the Forgotten Realms. If you’re going to be at Gen Con, you should not miss this event, where we’ll be discussing the revelations of the address, speculating about the future of the Realms, and possibly welcoming a surprise guest or three. From what I hear, there will also be a fun giveaway at some point in the night, which we already expect to go well past our scheduled end time of 10 pm.
These are exciting times for the Forgotten Realms, folks. Get ready. Get excited.
Get to Gen Con (or, you know, to a computer...).
Brian
But, I don't think Ed would be down for that. He just doesn't seem like anywhere near that much of a jerk.
regardless ladies and gentlemen, I do ahve a request.
For those of us who cant make it to gencon, whatevercon, will you please tell us what they said?
We'll know after the GenCon...
Didnt the "Sundering" happen like a 1000 years ago? I is cornfused
That isn't hard to do Silver...;)
The problem with a split timeline is the potential for one of those timelines to get more emphasis than the other. For example, if WotC sees a non-spellplague timeline getting 30% more sales than the spellplague timeline, they'd probably publish more books from the latter. Eventually, the timeline that gets more published products becomes the defacto official timeline while the fans of the other timeline are left out and their world is seen as "alternative" or "alternate".
^ The same would happen with multiple eras support. If one of the eras sells more, well you can guess what will happen...
So, a split timeline would be even better than sourcebooks/novels set in the past, IMHO, because it would remove the ''set in stone ending'' ugliness for many of the storylines/characters/deities etc... (published Realms-wise, ofc. Again, as I said, personal games can ignore everything deemed bad/boring/unfitting etc...), while providing the same kind of support.
The problem with a split timeline is the potential for one of those timelines to get more emphasis than the other. For example, if WotC sees a non-spellplague timeline getting 30% more sales than the spellplague timeline, they'd probably publish more books from the latter. Eventually, the timeline that gets more published products becomes the defacto official timeline while the fans of the other timeline are left out and their world is seen as "alternative" or "alternate".
^ The same would happen with multiple eras support. If one of the eras sells more, well you can guess what will happen...
So, a split timeline would be even better than sourcebooks/novels set in the past, IMHO, because it would remove the ''set in stone ending'' ugliness for many of the storylines/characters/deities etc... (published Realms-wise, ofc. Again, as I said, personal games can ignore everything deemed bad/boring/unfitting etc...), while providing the same kind of support.
It looks like alienation either way, so this is probably the least controversial. At least there would be continuation for other eras. Since what they've revealed is vague, there could be other possibilities as well... Some less savory than others (soft-reboot, eXtreme reboot, alternate universe, abolish timeline, etc...) Seeing as the flavour of 5e is modularity, these probably won't happen (except erasing the timeline, which would make novelists' heads explode)... Well, as long as I can have my pantheon and realms pre-Plague and other players get what they want, I'm content
It looks like alienation either way, so this is probably the least controversial. At least there would be continuation for other eras. Since what they've revealed is vague, there could be other possibilities as well... Some less savory than others (soft-reboot, eXtreme reboot, alternate universe, abolish timeline, etc...) Seeing as the flavour of 5e is modularity, these probably won't happen (except erasing the timeline, which would make novelists' heads explode)... Well, as long as I can have my pantheon and realms pre-Plague and other players get what they want, I'm content
Why would it be alienating? Splitting the timeline at some point is like having multiple eras support, the only difference being that pre-Plague fans can have their pantheon, NPCs and Realms back without the clause that in X year some god/NPC disappears or some nation turns into zombieland/explodes/gets flooded/whatever. This is a very modular approach (even more than standard multiple eras support) because it can open space for a real modular development of plots which have been rushed or interrupted, rather than one with an already definite ending, while still being able to provide support for ''modern'' era, or for the wailing years, or pre ToT, or Crown Wars era etc... (and not invalidating any work, since it'd be still canon in one of the timelines).
Anyway -personally- I'll be interested only if they split the timeline (any time pre drowpocalypse), or if they bring back the flavorful and characterizing deities that were unjustly removed from canon because ''too much lore'', and nations/organizations that add flavor to the setting, but that were turned into shadows of themselves. I won't buy material which covers an already largely detailed era, or which develops stories/characters destined to end in a few years in a horrible way. I want to see such plots (or new plots with people/organizations/deities I like) developed in new ways which aren't constrained by old destructive canon (and which don't kill/destroy stuff because it feels cool). If I wanted to just run a game set in the past, I would have a lot of material available for use and wouldn't need WotC at all to do so. Seeing again the setting I like growing is another matter, one that can't be solved with a multiple eras support.
Having read both threads, I'm excited about the team and the feedback for this new version. Like everyone, I'm scared of a time split (the whole sundering thing does sound like this), and I'm equally scared of the "one edition to rule them all" lingo that hangs around D&D Next.
My only hope is that the Realms continues to move forward. I know that gamers have nostalgia as part of their core DNA, and so change is harder for gamers than it is for most. Personally, I'm not even sure I can invest in a gaming product (D&D Next) that could face a reboot again in 5 years.
Still, I'm a long-time fan of the Realms, and I would support any effort that is going to bring us more Realms game material, novels, and online content. Although the novels have been there in 4th edition, the game material pales in comparison to what we saw in 3rd, so I'm hopeful that the fresh energy aimed at the product can bring it back to the forefront of the product line. I'll continue to support Realms products with my wallet, regardless of how D&D Next turns out from a gaming standpoint.
I'm excited to hear about the Realms story moving forward. I'm enjoying the running storyline of the current drow Encounters season and the hints that are in the blurbs from the next two connected seasons of Encounters.
Sounds like an exciting GenCon. Good luck to everyone working to keep the Forgotten Realms the best fantasy setting out there.
I could be wrong, but I'm guessing that DocNecro's getting at the idea of no matter what WotC does, they're going to upset/alienate someone, so they're best off doing it to the least number of people possible. Now what they actually do is another matter entirely, as 4e showed us...
Yup, I'm pretty much being cynical again. With a split approach, one will inevitably fade into dust. This would essentially be a retcon without the immediate slap on the Shatter... I mean Plague-Era Realms fanbase (Phew, that was a close one
) So yeah, I don't think any approach is perfect. The "One Realms" idea is a bunch of idealistic concepts that look good on paper, as the damage is ignored. A retcon would be a direct slap in the face, saying what you liked didn't happen... Even though the devil on my shoulder would looove that, it's still not right.So, for the time being a split/multi-era would probably be the best bet. If there's enough participation from both parties, then perhaps it wouldn't be alienating. So, I withdraw my overt cynicism. I blame the fact it's been raining since last afternoon, lol (I hate New Jersey!!) Also, I support the idea of multi-era. That way, exploring content from the past would feel fresh and you can delve into things you haven't thought of or looked into before.
Now, seeing canon given a different look would be pretty cool. Like, what if Cyric was destroyed before completely ascending to godhood (I WOULD LOVE THAT!) or what if one of the drow houses killed Drizzt while he was an infant. All interesting concepts that could be dabbled with.
Why would it be alienating?
Becaue it's not longer one Forgotten Realms.
Splitting the timeline at some point is like having multiple eras support
It is not, because they are then non-canon to each other.
With novels set in the past I can ready every novel, just like now, and all contribute to the Forgotten Realms.
With a split we have novels contributing to Realms A and Realms B and they will be non-canon for each other.
No sense in following both and for me no more sense in following any FR products at all.
All this means is you're getting double the Drizzt. Ponder on that.
No, I am getting no Drizzt at all. I get a freak Drizzt A and a freak Drizzt B with no reason to follow either of them
Splitting the timeline at some point is like having multiple eras support
It is not, because they are then non-canon to each other.With novels set in the past I can ready every novel, just like now, and all contribute to the Forgotten Realms.
With a split we have novels contributing to Realms A and Realms B and they will be non-canon for each other.
No sense in following both and for me no more sense in following any FR products at all.
The fact that they're not canon to each other doesn't mean that people don't get the material they want and like, so I don't see any problem here, provided that the distinction between the two timelines is done carefully. Why wouldn't it make sense for you to follow any FR product at all? If you enjoyed all the eras of the current timeline, you could follow the original one (with all canon intact). The ones who want to see the setting they like grow without the shackles of a canon which destroyed much of what they enjoy can follow the other. If they only support multiple eras, then there's no reason for me to follow, as I explained in my other post.
While I can read a novel about some character/storyline of a past era, I know that the end of all of that -as long as the Realms as a setting are concerned- is set in stone, and it's horrible, and this reduces my whole interest in it to 0. I won't see any actual future possibility for the characters/lands/stories removed from current canon.
About the one timeline fading into dust matter, it'd happen with multiple eras approach as well. The era which sells more gets more and more books, while the others fade into dust. That's exactly the same.
Now -as I said- I don't think that a split timeline is necessary, it's a solution that would work, as I see it. However I could get on board if WotC continued to develop the current era (plus supporting past ones), while restoring in it many of the characterizing and unique deities/lands/organizations, so that new stories about them, which can make them flourish without being constrained by an already defined ending, can be written and enjoyed. Publishing material about older eras alone can't provide this.
The fact that they're not canon to each other doesn't mean that people don't get the material they want and like,
Except when they like to follow the development of the one setting.
While I can read a novel about some character/storyline of a past era, I know that the end of all of that -as long as the Realms as a setting are concerned- is set in stone, and it's horrible, and this reduces my whole interest in it to 0.
And for me it's the excat opposite. I won't read a novel about some character/storyline of a past era if I know that it's not part of the one canon timeline but splits off in an alternate future.
about the one timeline fading into dust matter, it'd happen with multiple eras approach as well. The era which sells more gets more and more books, while the others fade into dust. That's exactly the same.
It's not the same, because no matter which wins, it's the same setting. With a split setting it's not.
I don't even care which one wins, as long as it fits seemlesly into the one canon timeline without retconning or splitting anything that come before away.
If they want to start again in 135X and continue with parallel stories[*] to the events leading up to 14xx I don't care as long as it's clear that this is just a different view on the same timeline that will eventually end where we are now.
If they want to just focus on stories set in 15xx going forward that's just as well for me.
As long as it stays one Realms.
[*]which would also solve the "why doesn't Elminster solve this" issue, since if they focus on events happening parallel to the already known events we know where Elminster was currently busy at that time.
The fact that they're not canon to each other doesn't mean that people don't get the material they want and like,
Except when they like to follow the development of the one setting.
While I can read a novel about some character/storyline of a past era, I know that the end of all of that -as long as the Realms as a setting are concerned- is set in stone, and it's horrible, and this reduces my whole interest in it to 0.
And for me it's the excat opposite. I won't read a novel about some character/storyline of a past era if I know that it's not part of the one canon timeline but splits off in an alternate future.about the one timeline fading into dust matter, it'd happen with multiple eras approach as well. The era which sells more gets more and more books, while the others fade into dust. That's exactly the same.
It's not the same, because no matter which wins, it's the same setting. With a split setting it's not.
1) They would still get to follow one setting, just pick the timeline they enjoy. They'd still have the current one with all the canon stuff and continuity preserved, just as it is now, but there would be also another one for the (many) people who dislike the current status of the Realms.
2)Novels about a character/deity/storyline who will disappear from canon in X year because ''too much lore'', barring any actual possibility of development beyond what's set in stone just hold no interest to me. Whatever happens there, the ending is decided, and it will feel ugly, rushed and unfitting for many stories. With a split timeline, you would still get your canonical novels in the original timeline, and other open-ended still canonical stories in the other one. This could also be solved by restoring the elements of the past who were unjustly removed because ''too much lore'', and it would work for me, as long as novels are concerned. For game materials, supporting all eras looks like a fine approach. Honestly, I don't care if they split the timeline or simply go with the restoring things route, as long as stories about what I used to enjoy, and whose endings are not ultimately decided (and not so unpleasant) get published.
3)Err... I don't get this. Why would you care if one era is ''still considered canon'', if the support for it fades into dust? It'd be a soft retcon too, because -say- 1300s gets most of the development resources, and 1400s -while ''being still there''- become ''distant'' and, with the passing of time, basically forgotten. Anyway, either with 2 timelines or multiple eras, it's up to WotC to not let this happen. So this argument doesn't really hold against a split.
alienate one fanbase??
well they already did that so....
All this means is you're getting double the Drizzt. Ponder on that.
That's quite possibly the worst news I've heard in the last year.
both eras are canon.
But they are entirely different settings. No reason to call both FR.
alienate one fanbase??well they already did that so....
And now they can alienate even more fans. Why ever care for some protagonist and his heroics again if the damocles sword of him being shoved of in some alternate universe with the next edition has been hung up.
One of the great thing about the Realms was that it was a living developing setting. One cared about what happed to it because when it happened it happened and the Realms were changed for better or worse.
If they split the Realms nothing matters anymore as anything could just be shoved into some alternate Realms version any time. What happens no longer matters because there is no guarantee that it will stay to have happened in X years from now.
If someone remember my post in the old forums prior to 4e he knows that I hated the spellplague and 4e Realms with a passion. Yet now I have to defend them because the now suggest way of handling the Realms is even worse, a thousand times worse.
I'd rather be stuck in a Realms I like less and be on board to see how they change and maybe get back to a state I like then being presented with two bizzard Realms, even if I would have normally liked the new bizzaro version better
And now they can alienate even more fans. Why ever care for some protagonist and his heroics again if the damocles sword of him being shoved of in some alternate universe with the next edition has been hung up.One of the great thing about the Realms was that it was a living developing setting. One cared about what happed to it because when it happened it happened and the Realms were changed for better or worse.
If they split the Realms nothing matters anymore as anything could just be shoved into some alternate Realms version any time. What happens no longer matters because there is no guarantee that it will stay to have happened in X years from now.
If someone remember my post in the old forums prior to 4e he knows that I hated the spellplague and 4e Realms with a passion. Yet now I have to defend them because the now suggest way of handling the Realms is even worse, a thousand times worse.
There's no threat of characters being shoved into an alternate timelines. You have two of them, equal up to X year, and separated after it. Some events could fit nicely in both, but many others are independent. Besides one can still care about what happens in the Realms, because it will have effects. If your want to have the feel of ''one Realms'' just follow the original timeline, it'd be still there, unaltered. If you want to see what you like developed without the barrier of an ugly canon which says in X year a character/nation/deity that you like is going to disappear, follow the other timeline. Either way, what happens in stories will keep having impact on the Realms, so there will be reasons to follow the development.
To me, the solution is either a split timeline or continuing the current story, while bringing back what added depth, variety and characterization to the Realms, but that was lost with the simplifying and the streamlining of the setting. As I said, multiple eras support can do well only from a gaming PoV, but it won't solve much if one wants to see his/her favorite elements of the setting they like developed without the constraint of canonical ''impending doom''. Only those two possibilities can provide it without alienating whole fanbases (something that a reboot or simply continuing with the current Realms, without restoring anything, would do).
Do we even know what the sundering is yet???
or are we just speculating and getting a little to hot under the collar??
Dual timelines, yeah that would be the first opionion, it works and it does not.
a reset button and thus retconning everything back to tthe grey box era could also work and mind you it resets everything making every novel obsolete. This also works, but only partially.....
Sundering away from the 4e mess of 4e relams and abeir it could also mean....... anyway, as I said pointless as we could put our colective heads to gether and still only be eating porriage
or continuing the current story, while bringing back what added depth, variety and characterization to the Realms, but that was lost with the simplifying and the streamlining of the setting.
That would be my favorite announcement from GenCon.
As I said, multiple eras support can do well only from a gaming PoV, but it won't solve much if one wants to see his/her favorite elements of the setting they like developed without the constraint of canonical ''impending doom''.
Well, the "doom" is only impending if they did something that is explicitly rendered void by the spellplague (e.g. negotiating a better trade agreement between Amn and Matztica), otherwise the spellplague is just annother event happening to them. Being hit by the spellplague is not a death sentence, a great lot of people where hit and not slain and not mutated and simply left to cope with the changed Faerun around them.
Unless their previous adventure was about something that was explicitly destroyed, the spellplague is just a bad day or month and then on to the next adventure.
And the FR could really need some novels set in the years during and after the spellplague to fill the gap between end of 3e and start of 4e.
Uhm, we're just speculating, discussing what a split timeline would bring... but none's getting hot, I guess. If it sounded like I was getting angry, well.. I apologize about it, but I didn't mean to be hostile or aggressive.
Well, I am actually getting a little hot. Not at the fellow posters here but at WotC and 5e in general.
So far I felt fairly secure in the eye of approaching 5e. Sure, so far the rules alienated me, but that's OK, I don't have to actually play the game, I can be content with just reading the sourcebook and novels for lore without ever playing a round of 5e.
And from what WotC has stated so far I felt fairly secure that I could continue to enjoy the stories and lore. But this thread now gave me the dread feeling in my stomach that "I might lose it all". That their fix to the FR will turn it into something I just can't stomach anymore.
I was so close to having read all FR novels ever published (at least temporarily until the next one comes out), after 14 years I am now at 230/265* read and still reading faster than Wotc publishes and I have the fear that they completly ruin the setting for me before I can say that I have at least once for a short time catched up to the bleeding edge of new releases.
Although, I do agree with you Irennan knowing the ending often times does ruin the book / movie.
But you don't know how it ends. You know the heroes will eventually run in the spellplague (unles the novel set even deeper in the past and the heores won't live to see the spellplague a 200 years in the future anyway), but whatever that actually means is open.
They could die, a lot people did. They could be horribly mutated, also a lot of people did. They could only gain some minor mutation with beneficial powers, some people did. Or they could survive unscathed and be left to deal with the afermath, most people had to.
back to tthe grey box era could also work
Could it really? How many of the current FR fans even know the Grey Box? Sure, the oldest hard core of FR fans, but for most fans FR gained over the lifetime (e.g. during the time of great PC games like Baldur's Gate) wouldn't recognize it and simply see that many things they have taken for granted about the FR, since they were in the FR since they started following them 20 years ago, would suddenly not be there anymore.
I mean sure, the Motorwagen 1 was the first car, but I certainly would not buy it if Mercedes decides to re-offer it as their next new model
*as of 15th of Juli, some new novels might have been announced now that raise the total count a little higher
Well, the "doom" is only impending if they did something that is explicitly rendered void by the spellplague (e.g. negotiating a better trade agreement between Amn and Matztica), otherwise the spellplague is just annother event happening to them. Being hit by the spellplague is not a death sentence, a great lot of people where hit and not slain and not mutated and simply left to cope with the changed Faerun around them.Unless their previous adventure was about something that was explicitly destroyed, the spellplague is just a bad day or month and then on to the next adventure.
And the FR could really need some novels set in the years during and after the spellplague to fill the gap between end of 3e and start of 4e.
^Yeah, and that's my point. All the stories/characters/nations modified/removed by the Spellplague (and by events in the late 1300s, like the Zentharim getting ''pwned'', Eilistraee and Vhaeraun undergoing the ''drowpocalypse'', Thay turning into an undead-fest, with Tam supreme and unrivaled by anyone) would get the canonical ''impending doom'', barring effective further development for any stories about them, and these are characterizing elements of the setting. But I still want to see stories about them (besides new stories), and that's a thing that only a split timeline or restoring many elements and tweaking some others could provide. And I agree with you that support for the wailing years would be welcome.
But you don't know how it ends. You know the heroes will eventually run in the spellplague (unles the novel set even deeper in the past and the heores won't live to see the spellplague a 200 years in the future anyway), but whatever that actually means is open.They could die, a lot people did. They could be horribly mutated, also a lot of people did. They could only gain some minor mutation with beneficial powers, some people did. Or they could survive unscathed and be left to deal with the afermath, most people had to.
No, I wouldn't know the conclusion of a particular story, but I would know that things are going to end badly, and that the ending isn't something that enriches the setting, but some deus ex machina to remove flavorful elements from it, because too much lore. This surely would ruin the fun, at least to me, because it is hugely different if compared to reading about the past of someone who died achieving something relevant and in a way that was fitting for his/her goal in life, improving the Realms instead of depriving them of soemthing cool.
or continuing the current story, while bringing back what added depth, variety and characterization to the Realms, but that was lost with the simplifying and the streamlining of the setting.
That would be my favorite announcement from GenCon.
This.
or continuing the current story, while bringing back what added depth, variety and characterization to the Realms, but that was lost with the simplifying and the streamlining of the setting.
That would be my favorite announcement from GenCon.
This.
+1
the split timeline is a good idea, but its flawed just like a reboot.
But honestly at this point I don't care whether they split the story or restore what was lost in the current era, I just want to see the organizations/nations/deities I like back in action to shape the story of the Realms, without the constraints of a canon which establishes that they're going to disappear in X years
Or, to make matters worse, if they split the time line then the Post-Spellplague Realms will pretty much be the "breeding" ground for crazy, off the wall schemes any freelance designer or author wants to plop into the setting because it's "alternate" or "different" from traditional Realms and thus, more easily messed with because who cares?
Of course, no one's saying thats what will happen and I'm holding out hope with Erik Scott de Bie's influence that he speaks for the fans of the Post-Spellplague Realms who don't want to get shelved into the "crazy, limbo-Realms" section and forgotten entirely.
A split timeline itself can easily satisfy many fans, if performed carefully and without discrimination, because the people who like the Spellplague would get their original timeline unaltered and still developed as before (plus sourcebooks for the past, if they wish, since the two timelines would be equal up to the ''fork'', and would differ for how the events are developed in novels during 5e), while the ones who don't would get another one, which allows the development of the stories that they enjoy and that were sadly and brutally interrupted, or ended before their time, without canon that establishes when and how they're going to end, which really sucks.
As I've already said in this thread, I don't think that the game material is the main cause of the issue. They may tell me that ''Realms are modular, you can use any organization/deity/NPC in your game as you see fit, and here are examples of how to do it'', but I already know it (actually many, many people know it) and don't need someone to tell me that, and If I was running a campaign, I'd surely do so. Modularity and material for all eras is good, but they won't cut it alone for the ones who are interested in the Realms as a setting and disliked the changes happened in the late 1300s and 1400s. As I see it, WotC have 2 choices if they want to bring back such fans: either they fix the 1400s Realms (this seems to be the best course of action at this point), or provide and support a different version of the setting.
As far as the time line goes, I think they will continue from their current spot, and include material if not already covered by previous products in the timeline.
Speculating is fun, and I am going to throw my hat in the ring. I believe this sunderling will involve a separation of the Forgotten Realms from whatever the next iteration of the D&D rules are going to be. Therefore there will be no more Time of Troubles or Spellplauge type of events needed. WOTC will just produce lore, plot ideas, and other interesting facts and will let players decide what rule system to use.
It'd be about time...
As far as the time line goes, I think they will continue from their current spot, and include material if not already covered by previous products in the timeline.
This would be fine, if they brought back all the good and interesting elements that they thrown out of the window.
The ''one portion of fanbase gets forgotten'' could very well happen with multiple eras support as well: the era that sells more gets supported, while the others fade into dust, or -as you said- get used as ''breeding ground'' for crazy ideas. It's up to WotC to not let this happen. Also, a split timeline is as resource draining as publishing sourcebooks/novels for every era, because by setting the ''crossroad'' at -say- 1372 DR WotC would have to develop stories set in that time, just like they would do if the timeline wasn't split, the only difference being that in the former case the possibilities are not limited by random destruction.
Lets hope WotC won't let this happen, by publishing ALL aspects of their intensions (be it split or Multi-era). And sure, I think it would use up as much resources to do a multi-era approach, but at least it remains consistant within the entirety of the setting.
A split timeline itself can easily satisfy many fans, if performed carefully and without discrimination, because the people who like the Spellplague would get their original timeline unaltered and still developed as before (plus sourcebooks for the past, if they wish, since the two timelines would be equal up to the ''fork'', and would differ for how the events are developed in novels during 5e), while the ones who don't would get another one, which allows the development of the stories that they enjoy and that were sadly and brutally interrupted, or ended before their time, without canon that establishes when and how they're going to end, which really sucks.
I have yet to encounter a setting with a split timeline that I've enjoyed. Marvel and Star Trek both being paramount. I think more people who hate the Spellplague use the Split timline route as a sort of consolation prize for Post Spellplague fans. And i don't want to see how things differ for 5E, because anything that's going to get 5E treatment is NOW going to have to receive 2 distinct variations, possibly intermingling the two as it's supposed to be a parallell. That gets confusing. At least with a multi-era approach there is the possiblility of having those stories play out in novels.
As I've already said in this thread, I don't think that the game material is the main cause of the issue. They may tell me that ''Realms are modular, you can use any organizations/deity/character in your game as you see fit, and here are examples of how to do it'', but I already know it (actually many, many people know it) and don't need someone to tell me that, and If I was running a campaign, I'd surely do so. Modularity and material for all eras is good, but they won't cut it alone for the ones who are interested in the Realms as a setting and disliked the changes happened in the late 1300s and 1400s. As I see it, WotC have 2 choices if they want to bring back such fans: either they fix the 1400s Realms, or provide and support a different version of the setting.
And in both situations, I lose. Sorry but I won't accept that. I've had an extreamly minimal experience with the 4E realms (a whopping 4 years) compared to what.....21 years of non-spellplague, "traditional" Realms. Alienating fans is the last thing WotC wants to do and they should've learned their lession the first time (with 4E). And even though it only has 4 years under it's belt (well, probably 5 by D&D:Next's debut) they've created a lot of fans that enjoy the Spellplague Realms, how it evolved from the pre-Spellplague Realms, and hopes to see it continue. A split timeline will most likely kill this version, IMO, and revert 99% of the Realms back to the way it's been operating for the past 25 years. Some of that was good, I dare say GREAT, but a lot was crap, utter utter crap IMO.
Speculating is fun, and I am going to throw my hat in the ring. I believe this sunderling will involve a separation of the Forgotten Realms from whatever the next iteration of the D&D rules are going to be. Therefore there will be no more Time of Troubles or Spellplauge type of events needed. WOTC will just produce lore, plot ideas, and other interesting facts and will let players decide what rule system to use.
As far as the time line goes, I think they will continue from their current spot, and include material if not already covered by previous products in the timeline.
This is, simply, awesome. Even if I come to HATE the next iteration of Dungeons and Dragons, I could still contribute to the Realms material and use that information with any edition I feel it's needed. This is what they should be doing and I whole-heartedly agree.
A split timeline itself can easily satisfy many fans, if performed carefully and without discrimination, because the people who like the Spellplague would get their original timeline unaltered and still developed as before (plus sourcebooks for the past, if they wish, since the two timelines would be equal up to the ''fork'', and would differ for how the events are developed in novels during 5e), while the ones who don't would get another one, which allows the development of the stories that they enjoy and that were sadly and brutally interrupted, or ended before their time, without canon that establishes when and how they're going to end, which really sucks.
And i don't want to see how things differ for 5E, because anything that's going to get 5E treatment is NOW going to have to receive 2 distinct variations, possibly intermingling the two as it's supposed to be a parallell. That gets confusing. At least with a multi-era approach there is the possiblility of having those stories play out in novels.
It wouldn't be confusing if done carefully: events that differs from each other wouldn't get intermingled, characters wouldn't be shoved into ''alternate reality pockets'' or something like that. Only stories that can apply to both timelines would be shared. And no, even if you wrote novels about characters or organizations or deities from the past, canon would drastically limit their development. The end is already established. I've already said this, so I'll just quote myself.
All the stories/characters/nations modified/removed by the Spellplague (and by events in the late 1300s, like the Zentharim getting ''pwned'', Eilistraee and Vhaeraun undergoing the ''drowpocalypse'', Thay turning into an undead-fest, with Tam supreme and unrivaled by anyone) would get the canonical ''impending doom'', barring effective further development for any stories about them, and these are characterizing elements of the setting. But I still want to see stories about them (besides new stories), and that's a thing that only a split timeline or restoring many elements and tweaking some others could provide.
[...]
I wouldn't know the conclusion of a particular story, but I would know that things are going to end badly, and that the ending isn't something that enriches the setting, but some deus ex machina to remove flavorful elements from it, because too much lore. This surely would ruin the fun, at least to me, because it is hugely different if compared to reading about the past of someone who died achieving something relevant and in a way that was fitting for his/her goal in life, improving the Realms instead of depriving them of soemthing cool.
Multiple eras support isn't going to fix this.
And in both situations, I lose. Sorry but I won't accept that. I've had an extreamly minimal experience with the 4E realms (a whopping 4 years) compared to what.....21 years of non-spellplague, "traditional" Realms. Alienating fans is the last thing WotC wants to do and they should've learned their lession the first time (with 4E). And even though it only has 4 years under it's belt (well, probably 5 by D&D:Next's debut) they've created a lot of fans that enjoy the Spellplague Realms, how it evolved from the pre-Spellplague Realms, and hopes to see it continue. A split timeline will most likely kill this version, IMO, and revert 99% of the Realms back to the way it's been operating for the past 25 years. Some of that was good, I dare say GREAT, but a lot was crap, utter utter crap IMO.
I don't see why would you lose if they decided to restore the flavorful and cool elements that were unjustly removed, for the sake of simplicty, while keeping what's good in the 4e Realms (this is what I meant for fixing things), so that organizations, nations and deities that many people like would still be able to be in action to shape the future of the Realms, without canon to limit them (actually I still fail to see how would you lose with a split timeline that would keep integer what you enjoy in the Realms, considering that, as I said, what you worry about can easily happen with an all eras spanning support...). The Realms (as a setting, not only as a game) shouldn't satisfy only one fanbase, but at least try to do so with all. In order to achieve this, clearly many things have to be restored in the current era, if a split timeline is considered a so ugly and evil idea.
as I said flawed
split timlines= sooner or later one of them will win out on hte support and the other fades into the shadows and becomes the property of Shar, or it becomes the cheeseball setting where everything gets thrown into.
mutliple era support= see above
comeplete reboot: alienates the new fanbase, not that it will matter the fanbase is already split, not to mention see reset to 1415
reset to 1350: see above
reset to 1415 and rewrite the deal with the spell plague and other issues: which issues you want removed, replaced and or fix will have to come at the permission of each individual author. While it's good for us, its bad for them and it might cause some ahrd feelings and be even harded to find authors to write in the realms.
continue with teh setting: this is best, the plague happened it ended, drop it to a footnote and move on, and write out the POL trash of 4e's core lore and fix and or undo the unpopular issues of the 4e realms .
all flaws......
but the realm shaking event for 5e will be the return of the TRUE Lady of Mysteries, PRaise the art for magic is life...
It wouldn't be confusing if done carefully: events that differs from each other wouldn't get intermingled, characters wouldn't be shoved into ''alternate reality pockets'' or something like that. Only stories that can apply to both timelines would be shared. And no, even if you wrote novels about characters or organizations or deities from the past, canon would drastically limit their development. The end is already established. I've already said this, so I'll just quote myself.All the stories/characters/nations modified/removed by the Spellplague (and by events in the late 1300s, like the Zentharim getting ''pwned'', Eilistraee and Vhaeraun undergoing the ''drowpocalypse'', Thay turning into an undead-fest, with Tam supreme and unrivaled by anyone) would get the canonical ''impending doom'', barring effective further development for any stories about them, and these are characterizing elements of the setting. But I still want to see stories about them (besides new stories), and that's a thing that only a split timeline or restoring many elements and tweaking some others could provide.
[...]
I wouldn't know the conclusion of a particular story, but I would know that things are going to end badly, and that the ending isn't something that enriches the setting, but some deus ex machina to remove flavorful elements from it, because too much lore. This surely would ruin the fun, at least to me, because it is hugely different if compared to reading about the past of someone who died achieving something relevant and in a way that was fitting for his/her goal in life, improving the Realms instead of depriving them of soemthing cool.
Multiple eras support isn't going to fix this.
This is pretty much where we differ, because my characters don't know there is some sort of "end" to the game. And mostly, because my players change the end due to their actions. Lets take the example of the SUPER ADVENTURE (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anauroch). In here, we have an adventure to stop Shar's machinations for destorying the Weave and creating a perpetual shadow-source for magic. In 4E, Shar supposedly kills Mystra and the Spellplague happens, perhaps invalidating the SUPER ADVENTURE. To me, the SUPER ADVENTURE is still a ridiculously good time and I'd play through it again given the opportunity because it's fun even though I know the Spellplague still happens. A lot of people wouldn't because there's that metagame knowledge of it possibly being futile. I, howeve, disagree and see the same scenario with a ton of events throughout Faerûn's history. I think it'd be fun to run a game centered around the height of Netheril and Karsus's Folly or perhaps the Crown Wars or the fall of Myth Drannor. Except now my characters are changing the tide or saving such-and-such elven house from falling OR stopping Karsus at the nick of time, thus preventing him in stealing the mantle of the god of Magic.
But I'm far more of a guy who uses the Realms in a gaming capacity, and this might not work for people who just read the Realms for non-gaming purposes.
And in both situations, I lose. Sorry but I won't accept that. I've had an extreamly minimal experience with the 4E realms (a whopping 4 years) compared to what.....21 years of non-spellplague, "traditional" Realms. Alienating fans is the last thing WotC wants to do and they should've learned their lession the first time (with 4E). And even though it only has 4 years under it's belt (well, probably 5 by D&D:Next's debut) they've created a lot of fans that enjoy the Spellplague Realms, how it evolved from the pre-Spellplague Realms, and hopes to see it continue. A split timeline will most likely kill this version, IMO, and revert 99% of the Realms back to the way it's been operating for the past 25 years. Some of that was good, I dare say GREAT, but a lot was crap, utter utter crap IMO.
I don't see why would you lose if they decided to restore the flavorful and cool elements that were unjustly removed, for the sake of simplicty, while keeping what's good in the 4e Realms (this is what I meant for fixing things), so that organizations, nations and deities that many people like would still be able to be in action to shape the future of the Realms, without canon to limit them (actually I still fail to see how would you lose with a split timeline that would keep integer what you enjoy in the Realms, considering that, as I said, what you worry about can easily happen with an all eras spanning support...). The Realms (as a setting, not only as a game) shouldn't satisfy only one fanbase, but at least try to do so with all. In order to achieve this, clearly many things have to be restored in the current era, if a split timeline is considered a so ugly and evil idea.
Unjust is a very...............subjective term, but I'll just take that as your opinion. I see many of the elements removed as a good thing in some ways. As sfdragon mentions, at some point one aspect (be it the "alternative Realms" or the "traditional Realms") will receive more information than the other and that'll just build over time until the abberant version is left and forgotten or made into a amalgam of every crack-pot idea fit into a setting. We hope that won't happen, but I have a feeling that's exactly what will happen.
I really do not understand why fans of the spell plague realms absolute have to force everyone else to accept that new setting.
This is just the flip side of the same argument: "Why do the grognards of the old Realms have to always have their way and force their vision on fans that have supported the setting for the past 4 and a half years and probably even prior to that." For one, pre-Spellplague fans have 21 years of lore, books, supplements, dragon/dungeon articles, Ed's own words and writings, hundreds of books to draw from while I think post Spellplague fans have mabye 1/10th that information and lore. Furthermore, what I've found most pre-Spellplague fans desire is for more of the same (pre-Spellplagueness). Little changes, a story here and there, maybe a supplement that explains more of the same. I find that extreamly boring. If the direction of the Realms are more books filled with the same information on the Gods, on the organizations, on the notable people, on the regions that have been reprinted time and time and time again.....why am I bothering with this then?
How is producing something that the already alienated fans base wants to buy bad for wizards, so long as they also produce something else (or include both in the same book) that the current group wants as well? The split is already there, I know I don't buy any realms novels and haven't since I finished reading the 4e FR campaign setting.
The question is, what do they want to buy? Is it a books detailing.....what exactly? For example, I love my FRCS (3E) and I use it even with my 4E products, but I wouldn't buy a prettier version JUST because it had the FR logo on it. The book has to provided something new. It has to provide me with reasons to use that book specifically instead of regurgitated material I received 3 separate times?
Actually, I recently have read Elminster must Die to see if anything has been made more acceptable in the setting. Even with that I am not sold on the new Realms and Ed is definitely breaking one of the core concept of 4e realms in that book. Every Realms fan I know IRL has the same attitude of the new Realms is not the Forgotten Realms for us. If making changes to the current setting to be more inclusive is unacceptable and having alternate timelines is unacceptable, what solution do you propose? Honestly, this is all Academic anyway since wizards has already made their decision. If 4e realms is continued as is, the only product I would be interested in would be a book containing the classic and new realms specific mechanics.
And every Realms fan I know IRL actually enjoy much (I daresay most) of the changes presented within the setting. So where does that leave us? And if the Spellplague is relegated to an alternate timeline (because we all know it would be the Spellplague getting the treatment and not the "new shiney" version) then we'll most likely see products very rarely as they'll want to focus most of their efforts in changing, replacing, and confirming the old-new version. So after a year of possible productivity, the alternate, spellplague Realms might receive an article or two or maybe go so far as a supplemental book. And a year after that, as the focus remains on the "new-shiney", the Alternate version will be just........there and probably added to only via Dragon/Dungeon articles with little praise. Yea, no thanks.
dont mind me I'm ranting carry on
This is pretty much where we differ, because my characters don't know there is some sort of "end" to the game. And mostly, because my players change the end due to their actions. Lets take the example of the SUPER ADVENTURE (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anauroch). In here, we have an adventure to stop Shar's machinations for destorying the Weave and creating a perpetual shadow-source for magic. In 4E, Shar supposedly kills Mystra and the Spellplague happens, perhaps invalidating the SUPER ADVENTURE. To me, the SUPER ADVENTURE is still a ridiculously good time and I'd play through it again given the opportunity because it's fun even though I know the Spellplague still happens. A lot of people wouldn't because there's that metagame knowledge of it possibly being futile. I, howeve, disagree and see the same scenario with a ton of events throughout Faerûn's history. I think it'd be fun to run a game centered around the height of Netheril and Karsus's Folly or perhaps the Crown Wars or the fall of Myth Drannor. Except now my characters are changing the tide or saving such-and-such elven house from falling OR stopping Karsus at the nick of time, thus preventing him in stealing the mantle of the god of Magic.
But I'm far more of a guy who uses the Realms in a gaming capacity, and this might not work for people who just read the Realms for non-gaming purposes.
Yep, I tried to make it as clear as I could that I was talking about the setting itself, not the game. Trust me when I say that if I was to run a campaign, I wouldn't give a crap if my (and my hypothetical players') favorite organizations, characters, nations, pantheons etc... were not there in the current era of the published Realms. What I wish to see is new stories, sure, but also the things I like in the setting back in action, with the possibility to influence its future, without canon barring effective development. I think I've explained this quite clearly and extensively.
Unjust is a very...............subjective term, but I'll just take that as your opinion. I see many of the elements removed as a good thing in some ways. As sfdragon mentions, at some point one aspect (be it the "alternative Realms" or the "traditional Realms") will receive more information than the other and that'll just build over time until the abberant version is left and forgotten or made into a amalgam of every crack-pot idea fit into a setting. We hope that won't happen, but I have a feeling that's exactly what will happen.
When I said unjust, I meant it about things that are iconic of the setting (the Weave and Mystra, characteristic organizations like the Zhents or Thay), or that distinguish some elements in the Realms from how they are treated in other settings (like Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, and how they make the FR drow unique). Different approaches to them would have worked (like diminishing in power Mystra or OP NPCs) and, as I see it, things like these should return, but I think that we've already had the same discussion somewhere else, and IIRC you weren't hostile to this idea, so I don't see why you'd lose if they went this route.
As for the ''one version gets dusted'' thingy: well, going by what you say it looks like someone is going to lose anyway, it wouldn't matter whether they support all the timeline or two split timelines. However I think that a ''restored'' 1400s FR plus a multiple era support could make many people happy, and the risk for some particular Realms version to fade into dust would be reduced in this case. If not even this could work (and I fail to see any reason for this to not work quite nicely), then it's either one fanbase or the other, I guess...
This is just the flip side of the same argument: "Why do the grognards of the old Realms have to always have their way and force their vision on fans that have supported the setting for the past 4 and a half years and probably even prior to that."
Split timelines in no way forces the grognard's view of the realms on the 4e realms. In fact, it specific excludes that view of the realms from the 4e realms, which seems to be exactly what you want. Trying to make one setting and telling everyone to share does mean that the designers likely have to throw a bone or two to the grognards.
Furthermore, what I've found most pre-Spellplague fans desire is for more of the same (pre-Spellplagueness). Little changes, a story here and there, maybe a supplement that explains more of the same. I find that extreamly boring. If the direction of the Realms are more books filled with the same information on the Gods, on the organizations, on the notable people, on the regions that have been reprinted time and time and time again.....why am I bothering with this then?
I completely disagree, their are plenty of events that could occur that are new in the old realms that don't involve killing off a large portion of the npcs and deities. I would love to see the bhaal spawn further explored and possibly the death and replacement of Cyric among other things.
And every Realms fan I know IRL actually enjoy much (I daresay most) of the changes presented within the setting. So where does that leave us? And if the Spellplague is relegated to an alternate timeline (because we all know it would be the Spellplague getting the treatment and not the "new shiney" version) then we'll most likely see products very rarely as they'll want to focus most of their efforts in changing, replacing, and confirming the old-new version. So after a year of possible productivity, the alternate, spellplague Realms might receive an article or two or maybe go so far as a supplemental book. And a year after that, as the focus remains on the "new-shiney", the Alternate version will be just........there and probably added to only via Dragon/Dungeon articles with little praise. Yea, no thanks.
Then why are you assuming that the older verison of the realms wouldn't be the one that stops being published in a year? There is no way to tell which would have a large fanbase. There is also no reason why both settings couldn't flourish given the differences between them.
Yep, I tried to make it as clear as I could that I was talking about the setting itself, not the game. Trust me when I say that if I was to run a campaign, I wouldn't give a crap if my (and my hypothetical players') favorite organizations, characters, nations, pantheons etc... were not there in the current era of the published Realms. What I wish to see is new stories, sure, but also the things I like in the setting back in action, with the possibility to influence its future, without canon barring effective development. I think I've explained this quite clearly and extensively.
You have but sometimes it's hard to distinguish between "game" and "setting" espically when so much of the changes happend during a shift in game mechanics. And I'm all for new stories too and the biggest deal I have wit the whole split is that they'll probably going to be awesome stories in one "side" of the Realms that probaby will be great when used with elements from the other side, but that barrier will be there. Additionally, I have this belief that the alternate Realms will be subject to much greater changes in an attempt to differentiate them further from the new FR side and that could easily include MORE death of deities, changes to NPCs, changes to the world, all in the name of Difference. The Spellplague Realms will probably sport Drizzt with a beard (I kid, but just barely)
Unjust is a very...............subjective term, but I'll just take that as your opinion. I see many of the elements removed as a good thing in some ways. As sfdragon mentions, at some point one aspect (be it the "alternative Realms" or the "traditional Realms") will receive more information than the other and that'll just build over time until the abberant version is left and forgotten or made into a amalgam of every crack-pot idea fit into a setting. We hope that won't happen, but I have a feeling that's exactly what will happen.
When I said unjust, I meant it about things that are iconic of the setting (the Weave and Mystra, characteristic organizations like the Zhents or Thay), or that distinguish some elements in the Realms from how they are treated in other settings (like Eilistraee, Vhaeraun, and how they make the FR drow unique). Different approaches to them would have worked (like diminishing in power Mystra or OP NPCs) and, as I see it, things like these should return, but I think that we've already had the same discussion somewhere else, and IIRC you weren't hostile to this idea, so I don't see why you'd lose if they went this route.
I'm not hostile to certain things. Bringing back Mystra is a big ol' meh for me. I never really cared for her one way or another. The only thing that irritated me was her wishy-washy alignment and her supreme power of all magic. In my Realms, she was more of a Baccob of the Realms in that she facilitated the growth of magic (evil, chaotic, lawful, good) and had "Chosen" to promote magic in all it's splendor. So she also had approx 3-5 evil Chosen too. And I had the Weave be something she tended to, not a physical object that was ONLY connected to her and thus, not all magic worked through her. I also had Divine magic work through the Churches, faith, and the deities instead of the Weave. So bringin her back doesn't really change all that much IMO. I also never had Eilistraee die and ignored ALL the events of the LP series. I have really NO idea what went on in that series and I think ignornace is my saving grace here. But if they want to bring her back too, awesome. As for other things like deities being Aspects and Amaunator, those are things I would fight to keep here. I like Amaunator over Lathander. I like that deities have different sides to them and a bit more complexity. I think the Aspects things provides another layer in their personality that diminishes the whole "Use as an NPC" attitude I felt they got with 3rd Edition.
As for the ''one version gets dusted'' thingy: well, going by what you say it looks like someone is going to lose anyway, it wouldn't matter whether they support all the timeline or two split timelines. However I think that a ''restored'' 1400s FR plus a multiple era support could make many people happy, and the risk for some particular Realms version to fade into dust would be reduced in this case. If not even this could work (and I fail to see any reason for this to not work quite nicely), then it's either one fanbase or the other, I guess...
Actually, I like sfdragon's idea of moving forward with the 1400's, reduce the actual spellplague event to a footnote, and write new stories WHILE still making lore for pre-Spellplague Realms. I want to know what happens to Arilyn Moonblade, to Danilo Thann, to Lieral Banrae, AND to the heroes of post-Spellplague too. If the setting books limitedly represent the game mechanics, then I'll be much happer as I can use it to whatever era/edition I desire.
As for the ''one version gets dusted'' thingy: well, going by what you say it looks like someone is going to lose anyway, it wouldn't matter whether they support all the timeline or two split timelines. However I think that a ''restored'' 1400s FR plus a multiple era support could make many people happy, and the risk for some particular Realms version to fade into dust would be reduced in this case. If not even this could work (and I fail to see any reason for this to not work quite nicely), then it's either one fanbase or the other, I guess...
Actually, I like sfdragon's idea of moving forward with the 1400's, reduce the actual spellplague event to a footnote, and write new stories WHILE still making lore for pre-Spellplague Realms. I want to know what happens to Arilyn Moonblade, to Danilo Thann, to Lieral Banrae, AND to the heroes of post-Spellplague too. If the setting books limitedly represent the game mechanics, then I'll be much happer as I can use it to whatever era/edition I desire.
That can work for me too, as long as the good concepts/elements that were thrown out of the window are restored in the current era, so that new stories with them (as well as new stories with post-SP era elements), without the weight of canon barring their possibilities, could be developed.
This is just the flip side of the same argument: "Why do the grognards of the old Realms have to always have their way and force their vision on fans that have supported the setting for the past 4 and a half years and probably even prior to that."
Split timelines in no way forces the grognard's view of the realms on the 4e realms. In fact, it specific excludes that view of the realms from the 4e realms, which seems to be exactly what you want. Trying to make one setting and telling everyone to share does mean that the designers likely have to throw a bone or two to the grognards.
The very fact that they feel the need to split the timeline in such as way points to a desire to see older lore resurface and bring back the way it was prior to the changes to the Spellplague. And that's not entirely what I'd like. I like a unified setting without alternative timelines and fractions. As I said, I saw it with Star Trek and I hated it then. Even when they specifically said "hey, this event has caused a break in continunity, thus becoming something different from what should've happend". In laymans terms, it's a reboot without rebooting ALL of it. And I'm farily certain that such a split would occur prior to the Spellplague and probably prior to 1375 DR, that way any strong changes to the Realms could be brought back and reevaluated in the "new shiney". As for throwing old-guard bones, how many and what are they is the question, not that they're getting any to begin with.
And I'm not saying all the changes can't be undone. Bring back Mystra. Bring back Eilistraee and Vhaerun and Sevetarim(sp?) and Mask and Helm. Make the destruction of Halruaa not as significant as was once thought. Make Lantan an underwater city with advanced technologies in aquatic transportation and survivability. Bring back the Zhentarim to some prominance. Make the Harpers more popular again (but not Saturday morning cartoony). These all can be done without a split in the timeline or a two-version edition.
Furthermore, what I've found most pre-Spellplague fans desire is for more of the same (pre-Spellplagueness). Little changes, a story here and there, maybe a supplement that explains more of the same. I find that extreamly boring. If the direction of the Realms are more books filled with the same information on the Gods, on the organizations, on the notable people, on the regions that have been reprinted time and time and time again.....why am I bothering with this then?
I completely disagree, their are plenty of events that could occur that are new in the old realms that don't involve killing off a large portion of the npcs and deities. I would love to see the bhaal spawn further explored and possibly the death and replacement of Cyric among other things.
That would greatly depend on how far this split goes back. I've heard many people say they want it only back to 1375 or 1372 or 1379 and not 1350's. Which means that the whole Avatar crisis/ToT thing would still have happend in both timelines. Still, I too would like to hear more about the Bhaal spawn but i don't think that has to invalidate future lore. Which means a multi-era attempt is a better fit than split timelines.
And every Realms fan I know IRL actually enjoy much (I daresay most) of the changes presented within the setting. So where does that leave us? And if the Spellplague is relegated to an alternate timeline (because we all know it would be the Spellplague getting the treatment and not the "new shiney" version) then we'll most likely see products very rarely as they'll want to focus most of their efforts in changing, replacing, and confirming the old-new version. So after a year of possible productivity, the alternate, spellplague Realms might receive an article or two or maybe go so far as a supplemental book. And a year after that, as the focus remains on the "new-shiney", the Alternate version will be just........there and probably added to only via Dragon/Dungeon articles with little praise. Yea, no thanks.
Then why are you assuming that the older verison of the realms wouldn't be the one that stops being published in a year? There is no way to tell which would have a large fanbase. There is also no reason why both settings couldn't flourish given the differences between them.
I'm assuming that because the "new" version would most likely get information because it's new. It's not going to be the "alternate version" because it's traditional and, depending on when the possible split might occur, flows directly from 3E lore and thus remains more continunity with the D&D community than 4E does. Further, more people are going to be buying newer products than older products, quickly boosting initial sales that fall in line with the new edition. And this could last for up to a year, when things start to settle. Building on that is the fanbase and the possibility of their inability to facilitate two separate versions of the Realms, forcing them to choose one. Most people I know who buy products buy them with the current edition in action to be used quickly (barring the idea that the FR book is edition-neutral). And yes, I'm making the assumption that the possible Spellplague split will be brought up in the new FRCG but most of the book will probably focus on what's been happenin on the other side of the split.
As for throwing old-guard bones, how many and what are they is the question, not that they're getting any to begin with.
People who dislike many of the changes happened during the late 1300s and 1400s (i.e. the passage to 4e) are many, I won't tell more than 4e Realms fans -because I don't know if it is true- but enough to lead WotC to reconsider the design of the Realms, as we've seen. And I don't see why they shouldn't get a ''bone'' too, whether in the form of bringing back the old flavor, with changes like the ones you suggested (plus multiple eras support), or something else.
The ''one portion of fanbase gets forgotten'' could very well happen with multiple eras support as well: the era that sells more gets supported, while the others fade into dust, or -as you said- get used as ''breeding ground'' for crazy ideas.
Which wouldn't matter as long as both are ackknowledges as being part of the one and only timeline.
It wouldn't be confusing if done carefully: events that differs from each other wouldn't get intermingled,
That would require the new alternate line to not carry the FR logo. If there's a novel about the alternate FR with the same FR logo on it's spine as the existing logo it would be confusing if they are set in different futures
I don't see why would you lose if they decided to restore the flavorful and cool elements that were unjustly removed, for the sake of simplicty, while keeping what's good in the 4e Realms (this is what I meant for fixing things), so that organizations, nations and deities that many people like would still be able to be in action to shape the future of the Realms,
Which means having them return in 14xx.
It's not as if the Zhents haven't been crushed before, deities are notoriously hard to kill often just popping back up after centuries from some tiny remnant that was left over from their destructions and even Szass Tam could see that it was a misstake to reduce Thay to one single school and then the leaders of the other schools would naturally want more weight to their votes and killing them every XX years is more tiring then just re-instate the council of zulkirs with Tam a little more first among equals than before.
I really do not understand why fans of the spell plague realms absolute have to force everyone else to accept that new setting.
Because it was done. I would have prefared it never happened, but what was done was done. And if that simple fact is no longer a fact, than everything that is done in the future might not be done anymore in a little more distant future. Randomly undoing events and creating alternate timelines just mean that every event is suddenly not worth following since it could always be decided to be done away (in whatever fashion) in a few years hence.
without the weight of canon barring their possibilities, could be developed.
Here I have to disagree. Without it being canon it's just glorified fanfiction. That's the reason why I would never pick up an Eberron novel. Yes, it's an intriguing setting but when it's novels don't actually tell me things that really happen in this setting I use my spare time for reading novels for novels that actually advance their respective setting.
The ''one portion of fanbase gets forgotten'' could very well happen with multiple eras support as well: the era that sells more gets supported, while the others fade into dust, or -as you said- get used as ''breeding ground'' for crazy ideas.
Which wouldn't matter as long as both are ackknowledges as being part of the one and only timeline.
It would matter, a lot. It's the same from a practical PoV.
It wouldn't be confusing if done carefully: events that differs from each other wouldn't get intermingled,
That would require the new alternate line to not carry the FR logo. If there's a novel about the alternate FR with the same FR logo on it's spine as the existing logo it would be confusing if they are set in different futures
Whatever, as long as what I've repeated countless times in this thread can happen (and split timeline is one of the most inclusive ways to make it possible)
I don't see why would you lose if they decided to restore the flavorful and cool elements that were unjustly removed, for the sake of simplicty, while keeping what's good in the 4e Realms (this is what I meant for fixing things), so that organizations, nations and deities that many people like would still be able to be in action to shape the future of the Realms,
Which means having them return in 14xx.It's not as if the Zhents haven't been crushed before, deities are notoriously hard to kill often just popping back up after centuries from some tiny remnant that was left over from their destructions and even Szass Tam could see that it was a misstake to reduce Thay to one single school and then the leaders of the other schools would naturally want more weight to their votes and killing them every XX years is more tiring then just re-instate the council of zulkirs with Tam a little more first among equals than before.
Precisely my point: this is one of the routes WotC can take, and at this point it seems to be the best to me.
without the weight of canon barring their possibilities, could be developed.
Here I have to disagree. Without it being canon it's just glorified fanfiction. That's the reason why I would never pick up an Eberron novel. Yes, it's an intriguing setting but when it's novels don't actually tell me things that really happen in this setting I use my spare time for reading novels for novels that actually advance their respective setting.
I wasn't clear here. I meant that I want new stories about the cool elements of the Realms that are not there in the canonical current era, but I don't want such stories to have something written in canon barring their possiblities of development. A thing that can be obtained as pointed out above, if splitting the timeline looks so bad.
Now, cynicism aside, Wizards needs to kick it in gear. They need to know how to give everyone a modular Realms without it spiraling out of control. As for glorified fanfic, the Spellplague will always feel like that to me. It was an attempt at feeding those who didn't like the Realms at the risk of those who did. And now, we're stuck with it. As mentioned before, all solutions are heavily flawed.
You may as well advance the plague and the POL stuff (including the awkward retcons introduced via 4e) and bring it to a footnote. But, there should still be some conversion of previous Realms/Sub-setting content. This way, 5e Realms kinda supports other eras, at least to make it easier in playing content relevent to previous eras. Or, why not sell PDFs of conversions of previous realms content to 5e? That wouldn't require too much maintenance and would at least give the illusion of multi-era support.
I do know that Ed will be pretty much running the Realms show for 5E, along with some other "sinister" (Those that post at candlekeep will understand what I mean.;)) freelance designers.
But I've alraedy had my say. I've had plenty of opportunity to air my opinion.
Whatever happens, happens.
Even a split timeline won't keep me from gaming in the Realms or making the most out of whatever new material WotC produces--and from the sound of things that appears to be a lot (see some of Ed Greenwood's hints on his discussion page at Candlekeep.com).
So whatever happens, I'm going to have a good time. I'll keep playing D&D in the Realms and having a blast with my friends. I'll keep enjoying the library of Realms products on my bookshelves and on my computer.
The amount of fun I have was ever predicated on what WotC does or doesn't do with the Realms for 5E.
Didnt the "Sundering" happen like a 1000 years ago? I is cornfused
That isn't hard to do Silver...;)
No but seriously, wasnt the Sundering when some High Elves performed some sort of High-Ritual and
sunk one of thier rival nations, wasnt it Jaundath or something? Some one help me out here!
It would matter, a lot. It's the same from a practical PoV.
Not for me. I only care about ONE realms, I don't care what this one realm is beside having one continuous timline. Whether the future is something the old-schoolers hate or something the 4e-fans hate or something both hate, I am happy as long if it's one single timeline.
Whatever, as long as what I've repeated countless times in this thread can happen (and split timeline is one of the most inclusive ways to make it possible)
Except for people who only care about FR's integrity as one single setting with an unbroken timeline.
Precisely my point: this is one of the routes WotC can take, and at this point it seems to be the best to me.
For me that is my only hope.
(including the awkward retcons introduced via 4e)
4e didn't do any retcons. It did (stupid) relevations that portrayed past events in a new light, but it didn't retcon any past events away.
Talos was Gruumsh in drag may be horrendously stupid, but it was not a retcon. Everything that was done in the past by Talos was still done by Talos, we just now know that it was one-eye under a costume, A retcon would have done away with Talos' and his deeds at a time.
But even that could be saved. Gruumsh overpowered Talos, has his essence imprisoned in Nishrek and is slowly sucking out his powers while he also maskered as him during the first time.
Didnt the "Sundering" happen like a 1000 years ago? I is cornfused
That isn't hard to do Silver...;)
No but seriously, wasnt the Sundering when some High Elves performed some sort of High-Ritual and
sunk one of thier rival nations, wasnt it Jaundath or something? Some one help me out here!
That was another group of evil elves...
The sundering created Evermeet.
forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Sundering
Didnt the "Sundering" happen like a 1000 years ago? I is cornfused
That isn't hard to do Silver...;)
No but seriously, wasnt the Sundering when some High Elves performed some sort of High-Ritual and
sunk one of thier rival nations, wasnt it Jaundath or something? Some one help me out here!
That was another group of evil elves...
The sundering created Evermeet.
forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Sundering
Ahhh right right, I knew evil elves played into somehow, so is this the same Sundering, or is this a whole new Sundering, or is that NDA?
A new Sundering? I bet those elves are behind it!
Nope, its the old Sundering - they are taking us way back in time, like Star Wars: Old Republic. ;)
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true">(including the awkward retcons introduced via 4e)
4e didn't do any retcons. It did (stupid) relevations that portrayed past events in a new light, but it didn't retcon any past events away.
I was referring to the awkward use of PoL tropes shoved into the Realms (I.E. Abeir/Returned Abeir, Dawn War, Primordials, PoL core races), but that happened to all the settings supported in the current run. But I digress, I'm still left with the bad taste from giving audience members that didn't watch the show what they want. As long as Wizards can compromise for both teams (perhaps without the need for tearing the Realms in two, which results in half the cake for each person!), then I can deal. Also, I kinda view Mystra as South Park's Kenny. Why did the current death of her cause the world to explode when it didn't before? But whatever, I just hate the writing used in the current iteration.
A new Sundering? I bet those elves are behind it!
Nope, its the old Sundering - they are taking us way back in time, like Star Wars: Old Republic. ;)
*cue The Time Warp from Rocky Horror*
no its going to be Elminster tag teaming up with the new arisien Mask and the True LAdy of mysteries.
And Helm.
Basically, your classic DnD party. You got the rogue, the Paladin, Red Mage and...well, ok you've got two wizards, but since Mystryl is a goddess, I'm gonna go ahead call her the cleric, anyway. Or White Mage...
A new Sundering? I bet those elves are behind it!
Nope, its the old Sundering - they are taking us way back in time, like Star Wars: Old Republic. ;)
I could actually get into that!
As to the suggestion of organizing the Realms the way they did Saga edition, I'd wholeheartedly support that idea.
The problem with a split timeline is the potential for one of those timelines to get more emphasis than the other. For example, if WotC sees a non-spellplague timeline getting 30% more sales than the spellplague timeline, they'd probably publish more books from the latter. Eventually, the timeline that gets more published products becomes the defacto official timeline while the fans of the other timeline are left out and their world is seen as "alternative" or "alternate".
Except the spellplague timeline has gotten like 5 game books total since it's release in 2008 hasn't it? Not alot of love as far as that storyline goes it seems.
It was only supposed to get two, but for whatever reason, WotC reversed course on it and stretched it to five. I wouldn't call that something to get excited about, given their original plan.
As I understand it one of the reasons those later three books were printed was because WotC decided to change course from their original plan and see if there was a market left.
I for one am glad they gave the Realms more in-print attention (even though it annoys the living heck out of me that the covers for these three books [Neverwinter, Undermountain and Menzo] didn't emphasize the Realms nearly as much as I'd prefer).
That and WotC spent far too much resources in my not so humble opinion on printing generic hardback D&D books anyway. It's about time the Realms got some love.
Except the spellplague timeline has gotten like 5 game books total since it's release in 2008 hasn't it? Not alot of love as far as that storyline goes it seems.
However a lot more novels since then. And novels have always driven the story and timeline faster than game books (something I don't mind at all)