Granted, I had been away from the FR since about the mid-90s I'd say and came back to D&d with 3E.
My question, did any of this exist in previous editions, or was it made up for 3E?
I know, sounds like an odd question now but the 4E travesty has me thinking about change over time and I really didn't remember....
As for the confusion, no worries. We're all in that state at this point. ;)
I remember when I got the 3E campaign book reading through about the weave and shadow weave and being confused. Where did this come from?
Granted, I had been away from the FR since about the mid-90s I'd say and came back to D&d with 3E.
My question, did any of this exist in previous editions, or was it made up for 3E?
-Where did the Weave come from? That was always there. It was Mystryl/Mystra metaphorically incarnate. The Shadow Weave? That was added in the FRCS, and then retroactively added into different things here and there since then.
-Where did the Weave come from? That was always there. It was Mystryl/Mystra metaphorically incarnate. The Shadow Weave? That was added in the FRCS, and then retroactively added into different things here and there since then.
Sure, in the sense that once we were told it was always there, it was always there (similar to the existence of Abeir--just because we didn't know the details before they were revealed in the FRCG that doesn't mean it wasn't always out there).
But, Hobbitfan asked "did any of this exist in previous editions, or was it made up for 3E?" And I believe that the direct answers to those questions, addressing the sense in which they're clearly asked (appearance in print), are "no" and "yes."
Now, having provided clear and direct answers to the questions that were asked, I will support my answers, being honest about what I am sure of and about what I'm less sure of.
As far as I know, the Weave was an addition to the lore in 3rd edition, at least in game terms. It may have played into novels I don't remember or haven't read. I vaguely have the impression it was done to support the existence of the Sorcerer class, but that's vague with a capital V.
Finally, I will lend my answers further credence by showing that I took the time and trouble to check my sources before typing the first thing that sprang to mind. Since I know that I'm more likely to let my own opinions and biases color my answer if I type off the cuff--thus possibly causing me to omit or even misrepresent things that don't support my biases--it's important to me that I take this step in order to maintain my honesty and integrity.
Mentions of weaves and weaving in the first and second edition campaign boxes almost always came in association with good old Tulba of Shadowdale, may she rest in peace.
So the third edition did introduce the Weave then?
EDIT: Very good question, HobbitFan!
As far as I know, the Weave was an addition to the lore in 3rd edition, at least in game terms.
-The Weave, as in Mystra's Weave, and not the Shadow Weave, has been a part of the setting since the before setting was printed by TSR. Ed Greenwood's replies at Candlekeep, concerning Mystra and her nature as the Weave incarnate demonstrate this.
-In game terms, there is no special benefit of the Weave. There are no 'game terms', in that I am reading it as some kind of mechanical formula something. The Weave is, and is the source of mortals' ability to utilize ambient magic.
So the third edition did introduce the Weave then?
-No. Only the Shadow Weave.
Weave has been around much longer than 3e, 2e's Faith and Avatars, The Magister, and The Seven Sisters should be more than ample evidence of that... Shadow Weave (All hail the Mighty Shar! *yawn*)however, that was new for 3e, despite being retconned into the past.
Cool, cool. Do you know what it's first appearance in print was?
The Shadow Weave first appeared in the FRCS 3e, but there were some instances of more generic shadow magic that had appeared earlier and were retroactively tied into to it.
Supposedly when Mystra was created... ;)
Ah..."supposedly." How, by sweet Bejeebuz's nasty farts, did I miss that?
Yea, I was really asking when people re3membered seeing the idea in print as I didn't remember it from any of my 1st or 2nd edition stuff.
Hence the question.
And the Shadow Weave, honestly, doesn't add that much to the setting other than special rules to make bag guys more "special". Seems real tacked on.
And the Shadow Weave, honestly, doesn't add that much to the setting other than special rules to make bag guys more "special". Seems real tacked on.
-It was. It never existed until the 3e FRCS. As Stig said, it was something that would have had a better home in Birthright than the Forgotten Realms. Since it debuted, it has had lore explaining it more in-depth and so on, but with the amount of inconsistencies and reversals and retcons and retcons of retcons...At the end of the day, it comes off as a cliche "If the 'good guys' have something, the 'bad guys' need one too, only evil!".
The shadowweave is a tool. It tickles the imagiation of players and DM's alike. Nothing wrong with throwing a tool (wrench) to add to the meriad of darkness tainted options for magic. The rules headaches it can bring are a pain though.
I think in the 3ed era the shadow weave functioned as the "feared and shunned" type of magic the regular realms lacked in most areas. In my book a big plus in the storytelling tools for a DM. Necromancy is treated with fear and misunderstanding but it is well known, even by common farmers, lacking the mystery the shadowweave has.
*happily goes back to reading about Shar and the shadowweave in Paul Kemp's Shadowstorm*
Hail Shar!
The shadowweave is a tool. It tickles the imagiation of players and DM's alike. Nothing wrong with throwing a tool (wrench) to add to the meriad of darkness tainted options for magic. The rules headaches it can bring are a pain though.
I think in the 3ed era the shadow weave functioned as the "feared and shunned" type of magic the regular realms lacked in most areas. In my book a big plus in the storytelling tools for a DM. Necromancy is treated with fear and misunderstanding but it is well known, even by common farmers, lacking the mystery the shadowweave has.
*happily goes back to reading about Shar and the shadowweave in Paul Kemp's Shadowstorm*
Eh. You're a tool. But you are ejyookayteen yourself properly, so I'm cool with it.
Oh, and stop throwing your monkeywrenches at my 'undefutable' logic. As long as your wrench fixed something aswell I am cool with it, your honored.
As for my wrenches, do well to remember that logic is much like life--it only truly belongs to one person and is sure to get screwed up and snuffed during the course of time.
Hence the question.
And the Shadow Weave, honestly, doesn't add that much to the setting other than special rules to make bag guys more "special". Seems real tacked on.
At first glance, but not necessarily.
The Shadow Weave does provide a means for tying together lore from way back in the wayback (i.e. Shade enclave and the legacy of lost Netheril) and provides for a view at a super long lived divine plot and struggle (Shar vs. Mystra and Selûne) that’s also not an offshoot of the Time of Troubles.
I agree the rules mechanics behind the Shadow Weave were poorly executed (something like three feats for a DM to reference and figure out for Shadow Weave users, plus it enhanced some magic and weakening others = headache at the gaming table!!!!).
Note the design focus behind the Shadow Weave (eight or nine years ago, mind) had a real purpose: To take back some of the spotlight from Mystra’s Chosen. It was also part of a larger focus on trying to show that Faerûn’s evil doers and evil groups were not all imbeciles and incompetents.
All of this would probably not have been necessary, had TSR not put in place its “The Good Guys Must Always Win And Evil May Never Triumph” rule for its novel line some years before.
I agree the 'retcon' of the Netheril as Shar worshippers can taste a bit foul, but a complex and compelling goddes as Shar openly getting worship in at least some communities can give a DM bountifull ideas and plots to forge. Adding a Shar inspired layer to a vista of a city makes for compelling gaming grounds.
Beforehand it was very hard to find a temple for Shar.
Where were you when this 4e stuff came up? Your "darker side" may have saved us all.
I was advocating the stuff I like right here. And I like Cyric and Shar, so yeah. The promiss WotC made to us sounded promising. New improved magic in a dark renaissance of fearunian fantasy. I did not vote for nuking regions, NPC's, Races, Dieties and whatnot.
As for my wrenches, do well to remember that logic is much like life--it only truly belongs to one person and is sure to get screwed up and snuffed during the course of time.
Ah the futilety of logic... practising it tickles my funbone though.
Two and two is four and all...
I agree the 'retcon' of the Netheril as Shar worshippers can taste a bit foul, but a complex and compelling goddes as Shar openly getting worship in at least some communities can give a DM bountifull ideas and plots to forge. Adding a Shar inspired layer to a vista of a city makes for compelling gaming grounds.
Beforehand it was very hard to find a temple for Shar.
Despite opinion, I think the whole worship of Shar thing is a very valid and solid concept. As the "Lady of Loss" she very much could be compared to Ilmater for those who aren't in the know. And, as she is also the Lady of Secrets, it makes perfect sense for those unwitting followers to fall under such deception.
I was advocating the stuff I like right here. And I like Cyric and Shar, so yeah. The promiss WotC made to us sounded promising. New improved magic in a dark renaissance of fearunian fantasy. I did not vote for nuking regions, NPC's, Races, Dieties and whatnot.
Bad Suin Bahahahaha guy! Bad.
Ah the futilety of logic... practising it tickles my funbone though.
Two and two is four and all...
If you take in the fact of the effect of the space-time equilibrium, multiply it by the number of times my cat farts each day, then power that funk into my flux capacitor, then 2 + 2 actually equals 5.34.
You are definitely no math genius.
Now where were we?
And what's up with the damn smileys??!!!