Forgotten Realms "Canon Lawyers"

[Keefe the Thief]

A lot of posters usually claim that Elmister and the other Chosen are Ed's "power trip" DMPCs who exist as omnipotent railroading plot devices, or to prevent player abuse and to strenghten the DM's authority. That is not an accurate description (I recommend reading the 'Silverfall' which depicts all the Chosen in a different light) in my books, and tells me that the poster just doesn't "get" the "spirit" of the Realms.

The "if you don´t like it you don´t really understand the realms" defense. I´ve been waiting for that one.

Dude. I´ve read the Elminster novels. And the FR books. And the introductory adventure where Elminster "accidentialy" heals injured PCs by using a wand of cure light wounds as a throwing stick. I can criticize. The problem with your argument is: to criticize canon-lawery elements of FR you have to be a canon lawyer yourself, but if you were a real canon lawyer, you would get it and not criticize FR and / or ED in that way, so read more FR.

Sorry, but that just doesnt work. And it won´t win people over to your side.

 

[Primal]

The "if you don´t like it you don´t really understand the realms" defense. I´ve been waiting for that one.

Dude. I´ve read the Elminster novels. And the FR books. And the introductory adventure where Elminster "accidentialy" heals injured PCs by using a wand of cure light wounds as a throwing stick. I can criticize. The problem with your argument is: to criticize canon-lawery elements of FR you have to be a canon lawyer yourself, but if you were a real canon lawyer, you would get it and not criticize FR and / or ED in that way, so read more FR.

Sorry, but that just doesnt work. And it won´t win people over to your side.

No, I haven't said you can't criticize the Realms or that negative comments imply you are not "getting" the Realms; I *did*, however, note that when someone is talking about specific modules/characters/regions, I expect that he's done the research... *especially* if he's making statements along the lines of "Designer/Author X sucks and NPC Y is just his DMPC" or that "Module Z sucks big time". For example, the adventure you're referring to is not (to my knowledge) written by Ed, and therefore that (horrible) scene with Elminster and the dog should not be attributed to his portrayal of El. It's canon, but then again, so is 'Once around the Realms' (which manages to misspell just about every other name in it, including Ao).

I consider myself to be a "canon lawyer", but I'm not above criticizing FR or changing the canon for my own campaigns (or accepting deviations from canon in other DMs' campaigns -- as long as there's more to it than just "Silverymoon exploded a year ago and now there's a new city called Greyhawk built on top of it"). I just hate it when people make statements on basis of prejudice and/or less than trustworthy internet sources.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

For example, the adventure you're referring to is not (to my knowledge) written by Ed, and therefore that (horrible) scene with Elminster and the dog should not be attributed to his portrayal of El.

Ok just so everyone is clear...I dislike the characters...not the writers..any of them..

Elminster has become (along with midnight/mystra and the chosen in general) a focal point for those of us that see a problem. Ironicly enough They are not the only problem...

the fact that if you read all the novels and adventures and have an awsome memory (Like my roommate who can praticly quote exact words from the times of trouble) you know a metric but load about the realms...If you are asumeing even 1/10th of it is cannon in any given game you could easyly be in for the biggest rudeest awakneing...becuse Your DM might now less then 1% of all the realms lore...

It's canon, but then again, so is 'Once around the Realms' (which manages to misspell just about every other name in it, including Ao).

good canon, bad canon...I just want less canon. I want one shared world that allows me to start at A and make my own stuff up without stepping on other peoples "known canon"...oh wait that would be 4e realms and LFR...

I consider myself to be a "canon lawyer", but I'm not above criticizing FR or changing the canon for my own campaigns (or accepting deviations from canon in other DMs' campaigns -- as long as there's more to it than just "Silverymoon exploded a year ago and now there's a new city called Greyhawk built on top of it"). I just hate it when people make statements on basis of prejudice and/or less than trustworthy internet sources.

O lets ttake silverymoon. If I told you the Lord Mayor of silvery moon is a half elf named Rain, and he and his lover the shifter Fiona have ruled there for 6 months after displaceing X (X equaling who ever the canon says is there I realy don't know, but I know I herd it is a drizt setting city so I asume someone here does) what would you think?

Also what if there was a PC drow who walked into town, and I decided that I don't want to deal with prejudice right now, and I think drizt has been here (as above I do belive that is how I herd this I may be wrong) so they don't think twice of it.

what would you say to me as a DM you were playing under...and what would you think (Lets be honnest even if you hated it you might not say anything so the second part is to make sure we are all ont he sam epage...)

 

[Primal]

Ok just so everyone is clear...I dislike the characters...not the writers..any of them..

Elminster has become (along with midnight/mystra and the chosen in general) a focal point for those of us that see a problem. Ironicly enough They are not the only problem...

the fact that if you read all the novels and adventures and have an awsome memory (Like my roommate who can praticly quote exact words from the times of trouble) you know a metric but load about the realms...If you are asumeing even 1/10th of it is cannon in any given game you could easyly be in for the biggest rudeest awakneing...becuse Your DM might now less then 1% of all the realms lore...

If you dislike most/all major FR NPCs (or deities), I don't know why you would want to run your games in the Realms. And I've yet to meet a FR DM who did not do any "homework", or used only marginally Realmslore in his FR campaigns.

good canon, bad canon...I just want less canon. I want one shared world that allows me to start at A and make my own stuff up without stepping on other peoples "known canon"...oh wait that would be 4e realms and LFR...

Honestly, I might be wrong, but I think a shared setting might not be ideal for you, if you don't like researching the setting or using any canon lore. It's far more easier to homebrew, if you're practically going to use your own stuff anyway -- just "steal" ideas here and there and write the rest yourself.

O lets ttake silverymoon. If I told you the Lord Mayor of silvery moon is a half elf named Rain, and he and his lover the shifter Fiona have ruled there for 6 months after displaceing X (X equaling who ever the canon says is there I realy don't know, but I know I herd it is a drizt setting city so I asume someone here does) what would you think?

Also what if there was a PC drow who walked into town, and I decided that I don't want to deal with prejudice right now, and I think drizt has been here (as above I do belive that is how I herd this I may be wrong) so they don't think twice of it.

what would you say to me as a DM you were playing under...and what would you think (Lets be honnest even if you hated it you might not say anything so the second part is to make sure we are all ont he sam epage...)

Well, I just replaced a canon ruler of a town in my own current FR campaign because I thought he was too "bland" (plus I didn't like his name). I just rewrote the poor guy's history a bit (changed his alignment, for a start) and then had him assassinated in the campaign backstory. Although my players are very "FR-savvy", they thought it was a logical switch.

And that brings me to your Silverymoon example... first of all, I *would* have a problem with names like 'Rain' (too "bland" in my books, and sounds like a nickname) and 'Fiona' (it's a RW name), just as any Eberron fan likely would if you used them as the 'King and Queen of the City of Sharn'. Whether it's 'George' or 'Fritz' or 'Ivana' or 'Bruce' or 'Fiona', I don't see these names belonging in a typical D&D setting, even less in FR than some others (Mystara is a different matter altogether). Secondly, if you used a logical, coherent reason why Lady Alustriel would be replaced by another ruler, I would accept it (a failed assassination attempt which yet manages to take her out of the picture, the creeping insanity caused by powers of the Chosen finally starting show, an important quest she had to undertake for Mystra, etcetera).

But if you expect to take a published setting and run your campaigns without reading *any* material, I suggest homebrewing, because that way nobody can comment about lack of adherence to setting's canon. And, frankly, as a player I feel that a DM who doesn't want to do any research/worldbuilding should not expect me to seriously immerse myself in my characters or to overall invest my time in his campaigns.

 

[Obryn]

If you dislike most/all major FR NPCs (or deities), I don't know why you would want to run your games in the Realms. And I've yet to meet a FR DM who did not do any "homework", or used only marginally Realmslore in his FR campaigns.

Honestly, I might be wrong, but I think a shared setting might not be ideal for you, if you don't like researching the setting or using any canon lore. It's far more easier to homebrew, if you're practically going to use your own stuff anyway -- just "steal" ideas here and there and write the rest yourself.

I don't see why, though. I think there's a lot of appeal to minimalist settings, and likewise a lot of appeal to working with a setting only using minimal information.

For example, it's perfectly possible to use only the original grey box to run a Forgotten Realms game. (And, in fact, I would love to do so.) Ditto, Greyhawk. I've done similar with the Diamond Throne setting, which is one of my favorites despite the fact that each region has maybe a paragraph or two of description, and vast tracts are left completely undetailed.

-O

 

[GMforPowergamers]

If you dislike most/all major FR NPCs (or deities), I don't know why you would want to run your games in the Realms.

becuse I liked what I read...in my case 1 2e box set, the base 3e book,some suplments and some parts of a novel...

And I've yet to meet a FR DM who did not do any "homework", or used only marginally Realmslore in his FR campaigns.

well hello you meet me now...I read the books I owned...

Honestly, I might be wrong, but I think a shared setting might not be ideal for you, if you don't like researching the setting or using any canon lore.

funny, no one tells me that in any other setting...

It's far more easier to homebrew, if you're practically going to use your own stuff anyway -- just "steal" ideas here and there and write the rest yourself.

In 2e I ran realms, darksun, birthright, ravenloft...and red steel Only one of those worlds was the base book not enough...guess witch...

And that brings me to your Silverymoon example... first of all, I *would* have a problem with names like 'Rain' (too "bland" in my books, and sounds like a nickname) and 'Fiona' (it's a RW name),

actualy I took the names from two PCs who we ran in ebberon (and rain was the nick name, but the only name he used)

Secondly, if you used a logical, coherent reason why Lady Alustriel would be replaced by another ruler,

Ok first I think I was wrong about silvery moon, but I know nothing of this lady alustriel...

I would accept it (a failed assassination attempt which yet manages to take her out of the picture, the creeping insanity caused by powers of the Chosen finally starting show, an important quest she had to undertake for Mystra, etcetera).

Wow I guess I was REALLY wrong she is a chosen..really how many rulers are chosen? Symbol, black staff, this chick...

But if you expect to take a published setting and run your campaigns without reading *any* material,

Once again I read the campaing guide for 3e, some of the pocket novels, and part of spell Fire...I also have skimmed a few other suplments...how much "Research" must I do to be able to run this game?????

I suggest homebrewing, because that way nobody can comment about lack of adherence to setting's canon. And, frankly, as a player I feel that a DM who doesn't want to do any research/worldbuilding should not expect me to seriously immerse myself in my characters or to overall invest my time in his campaigns.

wow the eltiest is strong in this arguement...I do spend time world building, notice you don't care WHY I changed it though...so let me now tell you some more...

The eberon game these two character were from was an evil game, and there main goal was to take over a big city, then settle down there and rule. I figured I could use them as a quick plot thread to introduce a plot about 'retuerning justice tot he city'...how ever like many canon lawyers you don't care becuse I made a change to your setting...

I don't see why, though. I think there's a lot of appeal to minimalist settings, and likewise a lot of appeal to working with a setting only using minimal information.

can someone please tell me why the main book of the setting is not enough???

For example, it's perfectly possible to use only the original grey box to run a Forgotten Realms game. (And, in fact, I would love to do so.) Ditto, Greyhawk. I've done similar with the Diamond Throne setting, which is one of my favorites despite the fact that each region has maybe a paragraph or two of description, and vast tracts are left completely undetailed.

the problem is if you have a person who is heavyly invested in the setting like Primal seams to be, they don't like change...




I did finaly give up on published setting in 3.5...infact I said when 4e was announced I would not only not buy said setting, but nothing from them would be used. Then I herd about the 100 jump/fix to ferun, and the swordmage. I love BOTH setting relased so far, and wonder why the realms was allowed to become so boged down to beging with...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Secondly, if you used a logical, coherent reason why Lady Alustriel would be replaced by another ruler, I would accept it (a failed assassination attempt which yet manages to take her out of the picture,

I want to touch on this again...before I Knew she was a chosen (heck before I new it was a she) I assumed these two could take out the ruler easily...at 14th level she is a druid 14, he is a rogue X, Shadow dancer Y, Assasin Z (I would need to take some time to reporduce that character...and there way of being evil assasins was for him to sneak in, her to come in as a bird, wait for the person to be alone, she codzilla the person for 3 rounds, and if (Normaly a big if) the enemy was still up they got hit by his death attack....

now as in any other setting I assumes that would sucseed as an assasination attempt...but you assume any assassination would fail...why???


Edit: Ok, so I stole my roomates FR CG 3.5 to look up Lady Alustriel...and she is a CR28 chosen wizard/sorcer so if anything I just proved my point...by running a game with only the book I looked up the city and it said nothing about her being chosen or uber epic...it was only when my roommate told me to look her up int he index I found the stats (about 100 pages after the city)...

SO anyone here not see a problem? anyone?

 

[SKyOdin]

If you dislike most/all major FR NPCs (or deities), I don't know why you would want to run your games in the Realms. And I've yet to meet a FR DM who did not do any "homework", or used only marginally Realmslore in his FR campaigns.

Honestly, I might be wrong, but I think a shared setting might not be ideal for you, if you don't like researching the setting or using any canon lore. It's far more easier to homebrew, if you're practically going to use your own stuff anyway -- just "steal" ideas here and there and write the rest yourself.

...

But if you expect to take a published setting and run your campaigns without reading *any* material, I suggest homebrewing, because that way nobody can comment about lack of adherence to setting's canon. And, frankly, as a player I feel that a DM who doesn't want to do any research/worldbuilding should not expect me to seriously immerse myself in my characters or to overall invest my time in his campaigns.

I felt like replying to the idea that someone shouldn't be running an established setting if they are going to change details of the setting. I will start by pointing out that I am not a Forgotten Realms fan, nor have I ever played in or run a FR campaign. However, I am a big fan of Eberron, and have followed it since its original release.

I for one think that Eberron has more setting detail than I would care to research or care about if I was DMing a campaign in it, and that is even ignoring all of the novels. I haven't even purchased Secrets of Sarlona, the Xen'drick books, or Dragons of Eberron. Yet, I would feel perfectly comfortable DMing an Eberron campaign, and I would even claim that my campaign world was Eberron, and not some pseudo-Eberron. That is because a campaign setting like Eberron is much more defined by its themes than by any specific setting detail.

A campaign setting is built around a relatively limited number of central aspects and over-arching themes: its mood and tone, major countries, religions, cosmology, central conflicts, villains, and campaign level plot hooks. As such, smaller details can easily be changed without impacting the overall feel of the campaign setting. For example, I could get away with changing the name of the leader of House Deneith without affecting the rest of the setting pretty easily. House Deneith itself would continue to have its same influence on the rest of the setting. That is why I find latter splatbooks and novels to be unnecessary; they add more detail to the setting without really changing any of the central themes of the setting. While knowing that Khalashtar don't marry and that Khalashtar children join the clan of the parent they share a gender with is interesting and can be useful, it simply isn't important compared to the much more pertinent detail that the Khalashtar are fighting a generations-old conflict against the Quori.

 

[jdrakeh]

For example, it's perfectly possible to use only the original grey box to run a Forgotten Realms game.

Yes, yes, it is. For me, FR is that grey boxed set (and one or two of the FR X supplements). Anything past that is completely optional. Anything that occurs past that initial point on the FR timeline hasn't happened yet (and may never happen). The dozens of novels, hundreds of supplements, modules, and so forth all portray possible futures or rumoured pasts, not guaranteed certainties or established fact. They absolutely aren't canon in any FR game I ever have run (or will run).

 

[S'mon]

Yes, yes, it is. For me, FR is that grey boxed set (and one or two of the FR X supplements). Anything past that is completely optional. Anything that occurs past that initial point on the FR timeline hasn't happened yet (and may never happen). The dozens of novels, hundreds of supplements, modules, and so forth all portray possible futures or rumoured pasts, not guaranteed certainties or established fact. They absolutely aren't canon in any FR game I ever have run (or will run).

This would certainly be my preferred approach to running FR, although fear of Primal-esque canon lawyers might deter me from actually running the game.
I find this "You shouldn't be running FR if you aren't going to stick to canon and read tons of novels & supplements" thing odd. I'm interested in FR because I think the setting has lots of value, going by my 1e grey box, as well as elements I dislike. There are plenty of settings without anything of value or interest for me - eg Kalamar. You might think people would be glad that others are interested in their favourite setting, rather than saying that only canon lawyers should be using it.