Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nymrod" data-source="post: 8097733" data-attributes="member: 7026230">And that would have been solid for Planescape (and perhaps needed for some factions, especially the Mercykillers whose philosophy attracted people on extremely different ends of the spectrum). But the truth is that so many settings got nuked during editions transitions (in FR with the "Realm-shaking events" occuring annually was pretty much a joke at some point).Honestly for me the best thing would be for all settings to work a bit like Eberron. Find a great point in time, take the setting there for canon, let a few things be mysteries and do not officially move it forward, letting novels and adventures be POSSIBILITIES. If possible include ways to play the game at several points in time (As e.g. Dragonlance did in 3E). It gives everyone, including the writers, the most freedom. If someone wants continuity for their fiction, well this is fantasy and we have many an example of multi-novel stories in the same setting. As for GMs, them and their players can decide ahead of time when they want to play in a setting and what they want to have there. If in my FR the kings of Impiltur and Cormyr marry, then that's how it is in my FR after all.The issue of course would be if there is any consensus on what the best time (and place) for a setting is. Some settings imo had fairly reasonably timelines were catastrophes did not happen just to fit an edition-ending campaign. I could see keeping Greyhawk as it is for instance. But beyond Planescape with its Faction War, what about e.g. Ravenloft and the Grand Conjunction?</blockquote>

Verification