Forgotten Realms "Canon Lawyers"

[Brother Richard]

My Thoughts

You know, i would probably consider myself fairly knowledgeable in FR lore. Until the books approached 4e (as in like a little before lat year), i had read nearly every FR book, including those that were out of print by the time I could really read well. However, when I play in FR games, I make sure I only 'know' what my character knows. Also, I have been confused a few times and made false comments, that were then corrected by the DM, but it was not that bad. My DM has read almost as many books as i have, until he sort of stopped. So when I enter the Realms with my character, I am approaching it as the realms of what ever date the last book my DM has read. He is also my brother, so i know this really well. Also, the players I play with know the Realms nearly as well as i do anyhow, so its not that much of an issue. The biggest problem is when I played an Inquisitor of Azuth from Halruaa, and my DM wasn't using those books by Elaine Cunningham about Matteo and Tzigone even though he dis read them. Many of my facts were off until i realized my mistake, but one of the reasons I love FR is because of its rich history. This means that I play Halruaa before those books I don't care, I still really like it. even if I had to play FR several hundred years in the past to null novels, i would still love it because i still have some idea of what it was like, but FR becomes a more generic setting like Greyhawk with only some locations truly fleshed out and others only mentioned in passing.

So basically what I am trying to say is that the large amount of info being centralized in one individual should not really be a problem unless that individual does not handle it well. The DM can easily just say: before those novels, if there is any issue, unless the DM is taking some late novels and didn't really read most of the others, which in my opinion is not a good idea in general; however, it could still work if nobody really knows the setting well. Using 1/2 of the canon doesn't make sense and as an avid FR fan, I would not be happy. I would probably even rather the DM just say: i changed some random FR stuff, its somewhat different, then i'm gonna try to use half of the lore, which makes no sense and causes problems because of a possible ripple effect not seen by the DM. For example, the Zentarim are becoming mroe mercantile and less pure evil, and if this was ignored; some of what is going on in the Dales or whatever they are called wouldn't really happen ebcause of constant pressure from the Zentarim.

(I apoligise for incorrect names. I am really bad at remembering the names of both places and people)

I don't know, thats just how i feel.

 

[Doug McCrae]

And have you read the Elminster novels? All of them?

None of them.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So basically what I am trying to say is that the large amount of info being centralized in one individual should not really be a problem unless that individual does not handle it well. The DM can easily just say: before those novels, if there is any issue, unless the DM is taking some late novels and didn't really read most of the others, which in my opinion is not a good idea in general; however, it could still work if nobody really knows the setting well.

what if the GM read those old pocket novels, about half way, then about half of spellfire, and has only 1 or 2 suplments other then the main book???

Using 1/2 of the canon doesn't make sense and as an avid FR fan, I would not be happy. I would probably even rather the DM just say: i changed some random FR stuff, its somewhat different, then i'm gonna try to use half of the lore, which makes no sense and causes problems because of a possible ripple effect not seen by the DM.

yea notice the problem...if I use the base timeline...and the main book, and magic of fairun, and one setting book...I don't even know half the stuff I am being acused of changeing...

For example, the Zentarim are becoming mroe mercantile and less pure evil, and if this was ignored; some of what is going on in the Dales or whatever they are called wouldn't really happen ebcause of constant pressure from the Zentarim.

how am I as a DM to know that"

I don't know, thats just how i feel.

you are not alone...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Personally, "Canon Lawyers" of any kind trying to use anything not in the game books generally don't do well in my campaigns. (Conan Lawyers are a different matter.)

If the RPG is based on some kind of IP- a novel, a movie, a TV show or the like- I'll set parameters that I will use as canon for the game. Usually, it will include the "classic" sources that inspired the game...and not much else, if anything.

For instance, were I running a Star Wars game, I'd use the original 3 movies and ignore the books, cartoons, holiday specials, and of course, the 3 most recent movies.

OTOH, if the RPG existed before derivative IP (like the FR setting), anything from those derivatives is out unless I specifically rule it in. Now, I'm willing to listen to players' justifications for ruling something in from those sources, but it better be dang good stuff. IOW, the default is "Out," but a persuasive argument can change that.

 

[S'mon]

OTOH, if the RPG existed before derivative IP (like the FR setting), anything from those derivatives is out unless I specifically rule it in. Now, I'm willing to listen to players' justifications for ruling something in from those sources, but it better be dang good stuff. IOW, the default is "Out," but a persuasive argument can change that.

For me, that's the best approach. As far as the FR goes, I think there are lots of nifty bits in the setting, going just by the 1e Grey Box (later stuff I've seen has not impressed me, though I hear the 3e version was good), but personally I've always found it too flawed overall to run a successful campaign, so I've stuck to swiping bits & pieces for my homebrews. I do wonder now though with 4e whether it might be possible to run a "Grey Box 4e" game, because that would make it much easier to eg ignore published character stats & capabilities. The image of Elminster teleporting into the dungeon to rescue the PCs may still be hard to overcome, but maybe beginning a campaign with "Elminster is dead!" could do it.

 

[Primal]

None of them.

Ah, yet you heavily criticize them on basis of... what? Internet reviews? Opinions of other posters/friends? Your own biased opinions that Elminster sucks? I honestly think you should *read* them before stating negative things about them without the usual "In my opinion (and note that I haven't read any of these books)" type of disclaimer.

 

[jdrakeh]

Ah, yet you heavily criticize them on basis of... what? Internet reviews? Opinions of other posters/friends? Your own biased opinions that Elminster sucks? I honestly think you should *read* them before stating negative things about them without the usual "In my opinion (and note that I haven't read any of these books)" type of disclaimer.

I read quiite a few of the Elminster novels on recommendations from friends. I kept waiting for them to get better. They didn't. In terms of literary genius, I'd say they rank right up there (down there?) with Gord the Rogue. Of course, with the exception of a few short story collections, that's where I place pretty much all D&D fiction (i.e., a notch above marketable and right below everything else).

 

[Doug McCrae]

Ah, yet you heavily criticize them on basis of... what?

I played in a few D&D games set in the FR back in the early 90s, read one of the novels (I think it was Curse of the Azure Bonds (which my friends wrongly told me was good)), played one of the computer games, read all the core campaign settings except the 4e one, quite a few scenarios and boxed sets such as Ruins of Undermountain, articles in Dragon magazine, interviews and message board posts by Ed Greenwood, wikipedia articles, some reviews of the novels and I've picked up a fair bit of info by reading ENWorld and other rpg boards. Really, it's hard to be any kind of geek and not know a fair bit about FR.

I think that's more than enough to have an informed opinion about the Realms. Note that even with my more limited knowledge I was able to find good counter evidence (Ed Greenwood on the Candlekeep forum) to Faraer's claim that Elminster and The Simbul are in a monogamous relationship, which I think shows one doesn't have to have read all the novels to make a useful contribution to a debate.

 

[Lurks-no-More]

The very definition of Mary Sue is a character that serves as the writer's avatar.

Pet peeve: No, it's not. Frequently, author avatars (let alone self-inserts) are Mary Sues, but it's not automatic at all. The best definition of a Mary Sue I've seen, and which I stick to, is that they're like black holes: their presence warps everything to be about them. Elminster, in the Elminster novels, does not qualify, because the story is about him in the first place.

I read quite a few of the Elminster novels on recommendations from friends. I kept waiting for them to get better. They didn't. In terms of literary genius, I'd say they rank right up there (down there?) with Gord the Rogue. Of course, with the exception of a few short story collections, that's where I place pretty much all D&D fiction (i.e., a notch above marketable and right below everything else).

Oh, yes. They're not good novels by any stretch of imagination, but neither are they "erotic fanfiction" as some people have claimed.

 

[jdrakeh]

Oh, yes. They're not good novels by any stretch of imagination, but neither are they "erotic fanfiction" as some people have claimed.

But Ed did say that they would have been erotic fiction if TSR hadn't restrained him (as Doug pointed out earlier, linking to direct author quotations at Candlekeep). That said, I agree that they aren't erotic fiction as they stand now. And thank goodness for that.