D&D 5E 5th edition Forgotten Realms: Why can't you just ignore the lore?

[SirAntoine]

One of the founding pillars of 2nd Edition D&D was "If it's in D&D, it's in the Realms."

Of course, the Realms predates Greyhawk as a fantasy setting, and the Realms creator is responsible for adding a great deal to the game beyond just his Realms work, so be careful when assuming everything came first in Greyhawk.

Ed Greenwood is the best.

 

[Mirtek]

So, it's not a retcon because there's a justification given for it?

It's a retcon when it retroactively changes the story. Changing the game rules is not, since the
game rules don't matter for the novel canon. They are just an imperfect attempt to quantity the story under the current game rules.

Call it a retcon, call it a reveal,

There's a difference between a retcon and a reveal.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Kossuth still, than the current game rules for what a cleric of Kossuth is don't matter for the lore. The novels don't follow them anyway.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric who just pretended to be a cleric of Kossuth, that's a reveal. He still did his past deeds with everybody thinking that he was a cleric of Kossuth when he did them.


If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric and we everybody is assumed to have always know he was a cleric of Cyric back then and nobody ever thinking anything about him being a cleric of Cyric, that's a retcon.

 

[Hussar]

It's a retcon when it retroactively changes the story. Changing the game rules is not, since the
game rules don't matter for the novel canon. They are just an imperfect attempt to quantity the story under the current game rules.
There's a difference between a retcon and a reveal.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Kossuth still, than the current game rules for what a cleric of Kossuth is don't matter for the lore. The novels don't follow them anyway.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric who just pretended to be a cleric of Kossuth, that's a reveal. He still did his past deeds with everybody thinking that he was a cleric of Kossuth when he did them.


If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric and we everybody is assumed to have always know he was a cleric of Cyric back then and nobody ever thinking anything about him being a cleric of Cyric, that's a retcon.

I do believe you are missing the point.

It is a retcon from the game side of things, and I've already said I don't care about the novel side. If I could do X and not Y yesterday, and today I cannot do X but now I can do Y, then that's a retcon. Since I don't play games in the novels, and the novels don't follow mechanics anyway, what's your point?

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Since I don't play games in the novels, and the novels don't follow mechanics anyway, what's your point?

I believe what Mirtek is saying is that from an objective point of view, what you describe isn't a retcon.

If I am following your logic, then what you describe your cleric being able to do in 2E was itself a retcon from 1E, yes?

Personally I think the term is overused; it's application has grown well beyond its original definition.

 

[Hussar]

I believe what Mirtek is saying is that from an objective point of view, what you describe isn't a retcon.

If I am following your logic, then what you describe your cleric being able to do in 2E was itself a retcon from 1E, yes?

Personally I think the term is overused; it's application has grown well beyond its original definition.

Fair enough. It's not a big issue anyway. The point is, the setting has a boatload of inconsistencies and had always been a shoe horn setting where every idea of D&D being dragged in as much as possible.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It's a retcon when it retroactively changes the story. Changing the game rules is not, since the
game rules don't matter for the novel canon. They are just an imperfect attempt to quantity the story under the current game rules.
There's a difference between a retcon and a reveal.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Kossuth still, than the current game rules for what a cleric of Kossuth is don't matter for the lore. The novels don't follow them anyway.

If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric who just pretended to be a cleric of Kossuth, that's a reveal. He still did his past deeds with everybody thinking that he was a cleric of Kossuth when he did them.


If Fiery McBurn was stated to be a cleric of Kossuth back then and is stated to be a cleric of Cyric and we everybody is assumed to have always know he was a cleric of Cyric back then and nobody ever thinking anything about him being a cleric of Cyric, that's a retcon.

so if Fiery McBurn was chosen to fight the Ice trolls because of his superior fire magic, and once burnt down a church of Azuth with a fireball, but no can not (and never could by new rules) throw a fire ball or have superior fire magic... is that access to those spells and ablilities a retcon?

 

[Parmandur]

Fair enough. It's not a big issue anyway. The point is, the setting has a boatload of inconsistencies and had always been a shoe horn setting where every idea of D&D being dragged in as much as possible.

That's the fun part! And Ed Greenwood is kind of scary good at giving a veneer of sensibility to that smorgasbord, which seems to me was lacking in 3E when they tries that with Greyhawk.

 

[aramis erak]

Again, I'm sorry, but the irony of this is just staggering. One of the biggest, most well known deities in Forgotten Realms started in Greyhawk. Lolth and all things Drow is a Greyhawk invention that was ported, pretty much whole cloth, from Greyhawk into the Realms. The most popular character in FR owes his entire schtick to Greyhawk.

Since when didn't FR beg, borrow or outright steal material from other settings? So much of Greyhawk and other settings - never minding things like Kara Tur which is just rebranded Oriental Adventures, straight from Greyhawk, or Al Quadim (sp) which is ported directly into FR, or heck, even Waterdeep borrows pretty heavily from the City of Greyhawk (hidden leaders, for example) - have been dropped into FR that it's pretty impossible to claim that you could undermine anything.

FR has been the baseline setting for D&D for about thirty years now. Certainly since the day Gygax left TSR. Virtually everything that was made by TSR eventually got dumped somewhere in the Realms.

I always thought that was the main draw of the Realms to be honest.

Kara-Tur was in the the first ed of OA. No "rebranding" until 3E (2E didn't have an OA), and 3E presented the L5R setting instead of Kara-Tur.

And it's not specified in OA for AD&D 1E which gameworld it's in; no references to Greyhawk/Oerth nor the FR/Toril, nor DL/Krynn (the then three published settings by TSR), nor (for many more reasons) any 3pp.

Since I wasn't an FR fan, the first I saw showing Kara-Tur was in the FR was in 3E OA...

 

[Jeremy E Grenemyer]

Didn't the 2E Kara Tur boxed set make it pretty clear it was set in the Realms?

 

[Hussar]

Didn't the 2E Kara Tur boxed set make it pretty clear it was set in the Realms?

My point is that the Oriental Adventures set Kara Tur pretty much anywhere. It was "the other side of the world" and that could be any world. Kara-Tur was then ported into Forgotten Realms and became a Realms thing complete with Horde and all the other goodies. Not that it's a bad thing mind you. Kara-Tur is very cool and I like it better than Lot5R to be honest. But, it was not a FR setting to begin with. ((Apologies for my bad memory thinking it was a Greyhawk thing))