Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="eamon" data-source="post: 5932603" data-attributes="member: 51942">I'd be interested in an advancing timeline.I'm not too bothered about it conflicting with stuff I've come up with.&nbsp; I don't mind a bit of mild retconning, and neither do I mind changing a few key points in the version I use.&nbsp; For example, I thought the eladrin feyspires were a neat idea, but I never actually got around to using them.&nbsp; In any case, my campaign was about averting disaster (sustaining the status Quo) and any changes caused by it are unlikely to be in conflict with new published material.In any case, the &quot;truth&quot; is flexible notion.&nbsp; It's just what everyone thinks, right?&nbsp; If published history conflicts campaign truth, that just means there's some uncertainty in the account <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :-)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />.I'd love to see a new version with some evolution.&nbsp; I voted for a few years, but a few decades would be fine too <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :-)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />.&nbsp; Though the past would be interesting, there's perhaps a bit of a problem in that it'd look like the then future is fixed (to the current present).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="eamon, post: 5932603, member: 51942"] I'd be interested in an advancing timeline. I'm not too bothered about it conflicting with stuff I've come up with. I don't mind a bit of mild retconning, and neither do I mind changing a few key points in the version I use. For example, I thought the eladrin feyspires were a neat idea, but I never actually got around to using them. In any case, my campaign was about averting disaster (sustaining the status Quo) and any changes caused by it are unlikely to be in conflict with new published material. In any case, the "truth" is flexible notion. It's just what everyone thinks, right? If published history conflicts campaign truth, that just means there's some uncertainty in the account :-). I'd love to see a new version with some evolution. I voted for a few years, but a few decades would be fine too :-). Though the past would be interesting, there's perhaps a bit of a problem in that it'd look like the then future is fixed (to the current present). [/QUOTE]

Verification