Error In WotC Style Guide For The Realms

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

In the Forgotten Realms Style Guide (available for download on the DMs Guild), Wizards of the Coast appears to have shifted the months of the year in the Realms's calendar.

Hammer has always been equivalent to January, but now...



According to Brian Cortijo (posting as Garen Thal) on the Candlekeep forums:

The Style Guide reflects an in-house decision at WotC to align the winter and summer equinoxes (which are called "Midwinter" and "Midsummer" in our world) with the Midwinter and Midsummer celebrations in-world. I vocally opposed this decision, but refused to make it the hill on which I'd die, which is why the text about the seasons possibly/probably falling back to their previous cycle follows (SCAG, 15).

Basically, the shift of the winter equinox went from Nightal 20 to Hammer 31/Alturiak 0, which is a shift of 40 days. The same for the summer equinox. This would have wrought unholy havoc on crop cycles, and if it becomes a permanent change, will just result in the migration of the annual festivals—which don't care one little bit about the synchronicity of Faerûnian and Earth Midwinter, but absolutely wouldn't keep celebrating a holiday like Greengrass on a date when it's unlikely that there is any actual green grass. (emphasis as the original)

Color me unhappy.

This kind of change does zero for me as a DM. It doesn't help me run the game. If anything, it makes things harder.

 

[Azzy]

Not so much an error as an intentional poor choice.

 

[Umbran]

Hammer has always been equivalent to January, but now...

Well, it depends - what does "equivalent of January" mean to you?

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Well, it depends - what does "equivalent of January" mean to you?

It means "Hammer" to me.

For about 32 years now.

********

With any change to a campaign setting or rules system, you can look at different levels of interaction with the change to see what effect it might have.

At the campaign level, if all the players and DM are new to the Realms and using Guild material, probably nothing. This change is for a Realms style guide, after all.

For older players, the change can be ignored (and should be).

At the level of someone writing for the Realms on the DMs Guild, it might not be much of an issue if they aren't looking to get published. The Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide (SCAG) has the months correct, so that's what folks will probably use for their Guild writing.

I have two products on the DMs Guild that are calendar related. No way I'm going to change them.

If someone wants to get noticed by WotC, well they don't have a choice. Ignore the Calendar of Harptos printed in the SCAG, and be sure to double check everything with a date on it published prior to the SCAG (including all 159 pages of The Grand History of the Realms and nearly every Realms novel) that they might use as a reference or for inspiration.

Why double check? Because if you want to include the date for, say, the return of Thultanthar to the Realms (i.e., the City of Shade) in something you're writing for the Guild, well, that event occurred on Hammer 1, 1372 DR (Year of Wild Magic).

You'll have to revise your entry in your work to 1371 DR.

<sarcasm> I'm sure that won't be confusing to anyone </sarcasm>

[EDIT] On second look, that may not be true. The style guide says Hammer = December, but the new year starts Hammer 1. So we're supposed to think of the months as different, but the years for events are technically the same. Ugh...too confusing!

And then there's concern for management of the IP. It begs the question: what problem does this change solve? How does it help?

To me, trying to parse this change is like trying to parse WotC's decisions for the Realms during the 4E era: the change made someone inside WotC happy, but all it does is cause the setting problems.

I think George Krashos says it best:

If WotC had the IP for Middle Earth they’d make the one ring a bracelet.

 

[Demetrios1453]

It means "Hammer" to me.

For about 32 years now.

********

With any change to a campaign setting or rules system, you can look at different levels of interaction with the change to see what effect it might have.

At the campaign level, if all the players and DM are new to the Realms and using Guild material, probably nothing. This change is for a Realms style guide, after all.

For older players, the change can be ignored (and should be).

At the level of someone writing for the Realms on the DMs Guild, it might not be much of an issue if they aren't looking to get published. The Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide (SCAG) has the months correct, so that's what folks will probably use for their Guild writing.

I have two products on the DMs Guild that are calendar related. No way I'm going to change them.

If someone wants to get noticed by WotC, well they don't have a choice. Ignore the Calendar of Harptos printed in the SCAG, and be sure to double check everything with a date on it published prior to the SCAG (including all 159 pages of The Grand History of the Realms and nearly every Realms novel) that they might use as a reference or for inspiration.

Why double check? Because if you want to include the date for, say, the return of Thultanthar to the Realms (i.e., the City of Shade) in something you're writing for the Guild, well, that event occurred on Hammer 1, 1372 DR (Year of Wild Magic).

You'll have to revise your entry in your work to 1371 DR.

<sarcasm> I'm sure that won't be confusing to anyone </sarcasm>

[EDIT] On second look, that may not be true. The style guide says Hammer = December, but the new year starts Hammer 1. So we're supposed to think of the months as different, but the years for events are technically the same. Ugh...too confusing!

And then there's concern for management of the IP. It begs the question: what problem does this change solve? How does it help?

To me, trying to parse this change is like trying to parse WotC's decisions for the Realms during the 4E era: the change made someone inside WotC happy, but all it does is cause the setting problems.

I think George Krashos says it best:

Why would it change anything in the more distant past? It sounds like a post-Second-Sundering situation, when, as SCAG states on page 18, the seasons seemed to have drifted a bit as a result of the chaos.

"As the year drew to a close, there were nights when the heavens seemed to hang motionless. Throughout much of Faerun, the winter of 1487 and 1488 lasted longer than any on record. The solstices and equinoxes had somehow drifted. Later seasons followed suit, with each starting and ending later than expected."

So with the seasons starting later, what was once expected for Nightal/December is now presumably what is observed for Hammer/January, and so on.

 

[gyor]

In the Forgotten Realms Style Guide (available for download on the DMs Guild), Wizards of the Coast appears to have shifted the months of the year in the Realms's calendar.

Hammer has always been equivalent to January, but now...

View attachment 104021

According to Brian Cortijo (posting as Garen Thal) on the Candlekeep forums:



Color me unhappy.

This kind of change does zero for me as a DM. It doesn't help me run the game. If anything, it makes things harder.

It's shows disrespect the the setting and it's advise should be ignored.

 

[LordEntrails]

If someone wants to get noticed by WotC, well they don't have a choice. Ignore the Calendar of Harptos printed in the SCAG, and be sure to double check everything with a date on it published prior to the SCAG (including all 159 pages of The Grand History of the Realms and nearly every Realms novel) that they might use as a reference or for inspiration.

I doubt that. I doubt this conversation would ever happen;
WotC Employee 1: "Did you see this writer on the Guild? S/he's got a dozen products up and they are all pretty awesome. We should consider them for Project Starburst."
WotC employee 2: "Yea, they are awesome. The best writing we've seen in twenty years. But they are still referring to the old calendar timeline in one product so screw them. "
#1: "Oh your right, I missed that. Can't use them then, as we might actually have to edit their work after they write it."

 

[Parmandur]

Why would it change anything in the more distant past? It sounds like a post-Second-Sundering situation, when, as SCAG states on page 18, the seasons seemed to have drifted a bit as a result of the chaos.

"As the year drew to a close, there were nights when the heavens seemed to hang motionless. Throughout much of Faerun, the winter of 1487 and 1488 lasted longer than any on record. The solstices and equinoxes had somehow drifted. Later seasons followed suit, with each starting and ending later than expected."

So with the seasons starting later, what was once expected for Nightal/December is now presumably what is observed for Hammer/January, and so on.

Almost like it is a consistent pattern or something. Shocking.

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

I doubt that. I doubt this conversation would ever happen;

I was talking in terms of WotC's practice of looking at the content of DMs Guild to add to the Guild Adept program. Likewise for Adventurer's League content.

There are plenty of "do this/don't do that" posts and tweets that tell creatives what mistakes not to make and what things to look out for in terms of common errors.

Not following the Realms Style Guide is right up there.

 

[LordEntrails]

I was talking in terms of WotC's practice of looking at the content of DMs Guild to add to the Guild Adept program. Likewise for Adventurer's League content.

There are plenty of "do this/don't do that" posts and tweets that tell creatives what mistakes not to make and what things to look out for in terms of common errors.

Not following the Realms Style Guide is right up there.

I know what you were referring to.

From all of the current and past Adepts and those artists/writers who have recently been brought in to work contract on parts of things like WDDH & DOMM, and from all the discussion on the DMsG Creator's Circle, never once has anyone ever hinted that not following the (new) style guide is of importance. And if you look at all their past work, very little of it would be considered "compliant" to any one criteria. In fact, most of it is unique in it's own style. For instance, Dyson and the DoMM cartographer both have styles very different from Blando and Schley and previous 5E cartographers.

Now, since its logical to know that criteria change, it is certainly possible that future Adapts or contract contributors could be held to such a criteria. You really think that such a banal requirement would ever outweigh creativity and quality?

BUT, it never really matters, because we could only ever speculate about such a thing unless and until someone involved in the process actually makes a comment on it. Until then, it's only speculation. So go for it, but I'm not interested in engaging further.