Xanathar is not a single beholder. It's a sort of title that was taken by different beholders during the history of Waterdeep. The Xanathar guild is currently active--very active--tho, in Ed's latest book (Death Masks).
D&D 5E New D&D product listed on Amazon
Xanathar is not a single beholder. It's a sort of title that was taken by different beholders during the history of Waterdeep. The Xanathar guild is currently active--very active--tho, in Ed's latest book (Death Masks).
Thanks
Sad to hear about a possible return of Halaster. I was happy to finally have him gone. It was like ... well, like someone didn't want to let go of the past and couldn't move things into the future in a creative way.
I'm really happy to see him back, honestly. Going forward in a creative way doesn't require to take every single iconic character of a setting (except Drizzt and Elminster) and remove them. That only leads to situations like the pseudo in-world reboot that is 5e FR.
They could, you know, explore and expand other areas of the Realms, instead of doing the same thing over and over with the same handful of places. Plenty of room for creativity without blowing anything.
Prakriti
Hi, I'm a Mindflayer, but don't let that worry you
This is sort of correct. To begin with, there was a beholder named Xanathar. After it was killed, another beholder took its place, claiming that "Xanathar" was just a title. Not surprisingly, no one felt like arguing with it.
LordEntrails
Hero
I did not know that. Ok, I'm fine with that. Though I've been trying to staying away from explicitly naming Ed, he's the one that I feel has refused to give up or allow change to his sacred cows. This is all part of the attitude that I think turns myself and many other off from the FRs.
Reboot doesn't have to be done poorly. It was done poorly in 4E. Reverting back to some bastardized status for 5E isn't creative, its... a business decision to revert to what was more widely accepted. The psuedo in-world reboot that is 5E, as you correctly put it, is a ... imo, a business to play it safe. It's an attempt to re-claim former FR fans and recognizing to make no attempt to earn new FR fans or to gain those of us that sit upon the fence.
If a reboot is done correctly, it can keep old fans and earn new fans as well. A half-assed reboot may keep your existing fans, but it won't earn new ones.
Sure. It could have been done this way, but it hasn't. Perhaps it's because they (whoever "they" are) want to leave the rest of the world for the fans to use and create. Or, as it appears more likely each moment, there are certain personalities, perhaps Ed, Mike or ? who simple can't bear to see the demise of their amazing creations.
It used to be like so many TV shows in the US. Can't kill off the main characters, oh no, those are sacred cows. If you kill off the main character you will lose your fans. Which if done poorly you will. Many people would rather doom their creations to a limited life span than risk changing major pieces of it (i.e. killing off main characters).
But, more TV shows are finally starting to break this paradigm. Spies did it a decade ago in the UK and it ran for a decade or more. Game of Thrones is doing it now. It's hard to argue that this willingness to kill off main characters detracts from fan base, rather it seems to build loyalty. In part because, imo, if the main character is not a sacred cow, then the writers and actors have to put more attention into the other characters too. So rather than having a few sacred cows, dozens of character get developed, creativity flows, all ships rise on the dead bodies of the few
4e wasn't really a reboot. It only moved the timeline forward and removed a lot of stuff of the Realms. It was a clean slate more than anything else. Strangely enough, they targeted a lot of things that FR fans enjoyed, so they now decided that "Ehm... Ao brought everyone back, ok?" for 5e. If they had to bring essentially everyone back, then it means that probably removing them didn't work in first place, and that their new setting (because it basically was) didn't attract as many as they thought.
From what I can see, there were some characters and gods that Ed wanted to see back, and brought back, in his latest novels, but I guess that WotC take their decisions aiming for maximum profit. If a character or god or organization comes back, it's likely because they think that it can bring in more customers, not because they are attached to that character (and WotC have the last say on changes made to the setting, not Ed).
The things about removing elements of a game setting in the Realms, is that when they--say--remove a deity, they aren't just taking away a character, but a whole culture and faction related to it (and things like "oh, but a dead deity can bring a lot of plot hooks" don't really work, because--following that example--FR already has a lot of dead deities just for that. Same as fallen empires and so on). They are making the world poorer, with less depth and characterization. And when you do that to a world whose selling point is the depth of its lore and characterization (since FR is generic High Fantasy), then it starts to look less and less appealing.
If they just removed some characters, I don't think that it would have been that bad. But they went way further than that with 4e (although some other cool characters came out of it, so yay for creativity. But most of those characters didn't need the destruction of parts of the setting, in order to exist).
From what I can see, there were some characters and gods that Ed wanted to see back, and brought back, in his latest novels, but I guess that WotC take their decisions aiming for maximum profit. If a character or god or organization comes back, it's likely because they think that it can bring in more customers, not because they are attached to that character (and WotC have the last say on changes made to the setting, not Ed).
The things about removing elements of a game setting in the Realms, is that when they--say--remove a deity, they aren't just taking away a character, but a whole culture and faction related to it (and things like "oh, but a dead deity can bring a lot of plot hooks" don't really work, because--following that example--FR already has a lot of dead deities just for that. Same as fallen empires and so on). They are making the world poorer, with less depth and characterization. And when you do that to a world whose selling point is the depth of its lore and characterization (since FR is generic High Fantasy), then it starts to look less and less appealing.
If they just removed some characters, I don't think that it would have been that bad. But they went way further than that with 4e (although some other cool characters came out of it, so yay for creativity. But most of those characters didn't need the destruction of parts of the setting, in order to exist).
Last edited:
LordEntrails
Hero
[MENTION=6778119]Irennan[/MENTION], You said it better than I. I think we agree on the key points;
- Changes made for 4E were done poorly
- Changes for 5E are most likely driven by a desire to obtain former profitability
The two things I would say may differ;
- Even though WotC has the final say, it's not like business decisions are always based on profit and I'm sure that Ed still has influence.
- I don't think allowing some characters to die detract from the depth. They can easily be replaced with other creative characters and then result in more depth (and psuedo-realism), not less.
- Changes made for 4E were done poorly
- Changes for 5E are most likely driven by a desire to obtain former profitability
The two things I would say may differ;
- Even though WotC has the final say, it's not like business decisions are always based on profit and I'm sure that Ed still has influence.
- I don't think allowing some characters to die detract from the depth. They can easily be replaced with other creative characters and then result in more depth (and psuedo-realism), not less.
Charles Rampant
Explorer
Is there an overview somewhere of what changes were made to the Realms for 4e, and why they were made? It sounds interesting, but I only understand snippets here and there.
I will say that rolling back the changes led to some of the less convincing parts of the SCAG - endless rainfalls and whatnot.
I will say that rolling back the changes led to some of the less convincing parts of the SCAG - endless rainfalls and whatnot.
[MENTION=6804070]LordEntrails[/MENTION]
As I said, I don't believe that removing a character *automatically* makes a setting poorer, it depends on what that character is to the setting, and what they brings to the table, and how and why the character is removed. When you make a drastic change to a setting, you need to think if it makes the setting richer, and if it adds more than (or at least equal to) what it took away, and if makes the setting lose some iconic feature. Differently from a novel (which GoT mainly is, although it was also used as a game setting) a world setting isn't a story already told, but it's a sandbox where people place their stories. It's good for it to evolve, but not at the price of its defining traits.
I wouldn't have been turned away from 4e FR if they just--say--removed Elminster, Drizzt, Halaster and Storm. However they took away characters (like gods, as many of them in the FR are essentially character) and organizations as a whole that define whole pieces of the setting, and for a lot of those, they proceeded to replace them with nothing. And even worse, for a lot of those, WotC just went "I think that this is too much, so lets just take away some of it". It didn't feel a natural evolution of the story of the world (even for characters off'd in novels), it didn't feel that removing those things made room for other characters to blossom, because it wasn't needed for that.
Not to mention all the stories and characters that WotC chose to off/leave in the dust all of them with a 100 yrs fast-forward. This is why I don't believe that all the characters that the Realms lost are part of a good story or pseudo-realism (just of a strong desire to create a clean slate)--their stories were abruptly cut--and why I'm fine with all those gods and characters coming back (like the Xanathar returning, or a character that could have been explored more (like Halaster) getting another chance).
Ofc, just my 2 c.
As I said, I don't believe that removing a character *automatically* makes a setting poorer, it depends on what that character is to the setting, and what they brings to the table, and how and why the character is removed. When you make a drastic change to a setting, you need to think if it makes the setting richer, and if it adds more than (or at least equal to) what it took away, and if makes the setting lose some iconic feature. Differently from a novel (which GoT mainly is, although it was also used as a game setting) a world setting isn't a story already told, but it's a sandbox where people place their stories. It's good for it to evolve, but not at the price of its defining traits.
I wouldn't have been turned away from 4e FR if they just--say--removed Elminster, Drizzt, Halaster and Storm. However they took away characters (like gods, as many of them in the FR are essentially character) and organizations as a whole that define whole pieces of the setting, and for a lot of those, they proceeded to replace them with nothing. And even worse, for a lot of those, WotC just went "I think that this is too much, so lets just take away some of it". It didn't feel a natural evolution of the story of the world (even for characters off'd in novels), it didn't feel that removing those things made room for other characters to blossom, because it wasn't needed for that.
Not to mention all the stories and characters that WotC chose to off/leave in the dust all of them with a 100 yrs fast-forward. This is why I don't believe that all the characters that the Realms lost are part of a good story or pseudo-realism (just of a strong desire to create a clean slate)--their stories were abruptly cut--and why I'm fine with all those gods and characters coming back (like the Xanathar returning, or a character that could have been explored more (like Halaster) getting another chance).
Ofc, just my 2 c.
This might be helpful: http://forgottenrealms.wikia.com/wiki/Spellplague
By comparison, this is the greater part of what the Sundering brought:
[sblock]Sources: the Sword Coast guide, Ed's answers, various novels. The Sword Coast guide doesn't really explain how the changes happened. It just says ''the Sundering happened, and this is how the FR and its pantheon look like now'').
The Sundering basically consists of Ao rewriting the tablets of Fate, bringing back many gods, and separating Abeir and Toril again.
By rewriting the Tablets of Fate, Ao seals the various gods power and portfolios and establishes new rules to avoid further divine conflicts and the cataclysms that they brough (in fact the gods are supposed to be more distant now).
The various deities invest power in mortal chosen, trying to expand their influence before Ao could finish rewriting the tablets. However this gamble goes badly for most deities, except for a *large* group of deities that people believed gone, but that actually managed to return thanks to Ao (and other contingencies, in some cases), mostly to how they were in the 1370s DR. Most of those chosen are no longer such as of the 1490s, as their deities have withdrawn their power.
Cyric no longer is the god of murder, Bhaal returned claimed that portfolio, Myrkul returned and claimed the portfolio of death, while Kelemvor currently is the judge of the dead. Leira and Mask also returned (Mask has returned through the ascension of Drasek Riven, though), so Cyric mainly is the god of lies now.
Other deities that have been restored are Helm, Tyr, and Azuth (we know that the latter is back, but that story isn't complete yet). The elven, dwarven and halfling pantheons are back to how they were. The drow pantheon is back too, with the difference that Eilistraee and Vhaeraun are no longer enemies now, and might be working together. Eilistraee in particular has personally appeared to mortals, and seems to be trying to build stronger relationships with other races. She has manifested near Waterdeep, and now her followers are building a glade/temple within its walls, to replace the fallen Promenade.
About Shade/Myth Drannor: during the Sundering the Shadovar attempt to kill the various chosen created by the gods and drain their power. They also attempt to drain the mythal of Myth Drannor. Larloch also attempts to drain the mythal and the wards of Candlekeep, in order to become a god. Elminster, Storm, Alustriel and Laeral and the Srinshee battle at Myth Drannor against Larloch and the Shades (these two are not allied), to protect the Weave and the elven city (yes, Laeral and Alustriel are alive: Khelben had foreseen all the mess of the Spellplague and various cataclsysms and had ordered Laeral to prepare to prevent the Wards of Candlekeep from being used by ill-intentioned individuals. Larloch however managed to absorb them as a part of his plan to ascend to godhood). Chaos ensues: the Srinshee sacrifices to take the energy that Larloch had drained from the wards and infuse it in the Weave; Elminster kills Tanthul and Shade crashes on Myth Drannor, severely damagin the city, but not destroying it. Currently most elves are in Semberholme and other settlements, with a little community still in Myth Drannor, gathered around the Tree of Souls (which was saved by a group of Baelnorns who had been informed of the imminent cataclysm by the Srinshee. Those balenorns are still there, guarding the Tree).
Other major events, mostly regarding geographic changes are:
-The Plaguelands are ''healed'' , the Earthmotes fall, the Sea of the Fallen Stars reforms, the Underchasm is filled.
-In Waterdeep downshadow is abandoned, and Laeral becomes open lord.
-Mulhorand and Unther return from Abeir, and so do their deities (the Mulhorandi ones rule as avatar; in Unther, even Gilgeam and others who had ''died'' long before the Spellplague returned. Apparently a reincarnated Gilgeam guided his people on Abeir). However a part of Tymanther remains, albeit the dragonborn have been driven away by the returned Untherites, whose goal apparently is to completely wipe what remains of Tymanther and the dragonborn civilization.
-Maztica is also back. Or seems to be.
-Evermeet currently touches three planes: Toril, the Feywild and Arvandor, and can be physically reached from Toril (as in, you can go there with a ship).
-Halruaa managed to shift to Abeir before the Spellplague, and now is back.
-Lantan re-emerged, but most of the gnomish wonders are gone.
-Luiren is no longer flooded.
-IIRC, at some point during the Sundering, there was a movement of living Red Wizards that was trying to take back Thay. I don't know what happened to them, but I guess that their efforts led to the situation described in the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide (i.e. the living can advance in rank within the Red Wizards).
I guess this is all. There could be mistakes, so correct me if I'm wrong.
This might be of help: http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=19630[/sblock]
Last edited:
Similar Threads
