Forgotten Realms - What happened to Tilverton in DR 1372?

[Arnwyn]

I might understand if someone said that there are too much of them,

Good. Let me know when there aren't too much of them in the Realms... because that certainly hasn't been the case so far.

All the complaints about RSEs are quite valid and understandable, IMO.

But he also has no idea of what's in the North, when we mention something common knowledge ("Well, Lady Alustriel is lady of Silverymoon, she's a good example of a charismatic wizard" ) he doesn't know, and then says his FR isn't going to be like normal FR...

Meh. You'll live. Assuming a minimal level of competency, he'll just correct you and then tell you want the common knowledge really is, and you continue playing. Just like what would happen in the myriad of homebrews out there. (Besides, what can be considered "common knowledge" is up for debate...)

and really that's the main purpose behind choosing a pre-gen world, a common ground to start from.

Wow. I disagree. The main purpose behind this DM choosing a pre-gen world is to save him time.

 

[Faraer]

To add to slawyer's objections to RSEs: they squander long-running hooks for the sake of some quick novel sales, and fail to replenish those with equally good seeds; they make the Realms look like a passive sequence of overriding main events rather than a web of local intrigues for your PCs; they happen so quickly and often with little precedent or logic that the history gets cumulatively less plausible; they force sourcebooks to play catch-up rather than printing new lore; they pander to the neophiliac urge for the newest, biggest gimmicks; the very idea of a Realms 'present' shift the feeling from a timeless fantasy world to a grindingly progressing historical world of 'here is the news'; and all this when we still after 17 years don't have a single merchant sourcebook or novel starring Mirt.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Good. Let me know when there aren't too much of them in the Realms... because that certainly hasn't been the case so far.

Damn' straight!

Meh. You'll live. Assuming a minimal level of competency, he'll just correct you and then tell you want the common knowledge really is, and you continue playing. Just like what would happen in the myriad of homebrews out there. (Besides, what can be considered "common knowledge" is up for debate...)

I agree with this, although it seems like the problem with Vocenotum's DM is that he's using this "my Realms is different" excuse as a pretext to cover his lack of knowledge rather than an honest effort to run his game. That has nothing to do with technique, but more to do with laziness, IMHO.

Wow. I disagree. The main purpose behind this DM choosing a pre-gen world is to save him time.

Darn straight.

To add to slawyer's objections to RSEs: they squander long-running hooks for the sake of some quick novel sales, and fail to replenish those with equally good seeds; they make the Realms look like a passive sequence of overriding main events rather than a web of local intrigues for your PCs; they happen so quickly and often with little precedent or logic that the history gets cumulatively less plausible; they force sourcebooks to play catch-up rather than printing new lore; they pander to the neophiliac urge for the newest, biggest gimmicks; the very idea of a Realms 'present' shift the feeling from a timeless fantasy world to a grindingly progressing historical world of 'here is the news'...

Absolutely, Faraer. RSEs have an inordinate tendency to unseat well-crafted, interesting material for less interesting stuff. To wit:

1) Netheril: A mysterious, ruined empire providing a wealth of adventure hooks in the form of buried cities, ancient, inconceivable, powerful magic, and rumors of insane or undead survivor-archwizards. Now somewhere that you can basically visit, thanks to the Shades.

2) The phaerimm: Going from the mysterious, inhuman, imprisoned manipulators of people and places far from Anauroch to an openly visible group of monsters on the run from the Shades in... what? Two years of real time between the publication of Anauroch and RotA?

3) The drow: From Ed's excellent portrayal in Drow of the Underdark to "drow can be found right in the middle of the Dalelands so that the Drizzt fanboys don't have to leave home to play one!" Hmm...

And the list goes on. Dwarven population in decline, elves leaving the mainland, the schemes and intrigue of Zhentil Keep, et cetera et cetera, all unseated by RSEs.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You and I may not be using the same definition of "canon," KaeYoss. "Canon," to my mind, is the notion that the Realms is a shared universe with many authors AND that everything that "happens" in a Realms sourcebook or novel is meant to be applied literally to the development of the setting by all DMs who subscribe to the Realms franchise.

Generally, this is my definition of canon, too: The stuff that happens in sourcebooks and novels is official. But then again, "official" in D&D means "use it if you want, discard it otherwise", and of course, they don't force you to buy - they even make almost all of the stuff independant. So tilverton is meant to be destroyed, just as weapon finesse is meant to have the Prerequisite BAB +1. If you don't like it, change it.

I'm happy if the events set forth in the setting offer me guidelines as to possible developments rather than hard-and-fast happenings that influence vast areas in my campaign world.

You have to see that from a timeless point of view. Sure, if you consider all of it based on 1372/73 as the "presence", the events of the Archwizards Trilogy, of the War of the Spider Queen Series, and so on, change the stuff as you play it. (Unless you ignore the books when they mess with stuff that happens in the area you play in). But if you started in 1380, these events would be part of the background story. If you start a campaign in 1350, the Time of Troubles will mess up with the stuff that happens in your campaign (say, you play in Tantras, Shadowdale or Waterdeep, and one of the characters is a cleric of Bane).

You see it as a bad thing that the events of the Realms continue. I see it as a good thing - that way, it isn't stuck in the year 1372 (or any other), frozen in one moment (as if the Auditors got frustrated with Earth and came to Toril ;-)), life in the Realms goes on even beyond that what the Characters do. I really don't want to keep 1372 as the "present" for several years, until the FRCS 4.0 is released

My point isn't that people shouldn't write novels and sourcebooks that take place after 1356, or that change the setting, but that a philosophy that states that all of this is "official" and thus to be swallowed whole is not a good one. IOW, "canon" is an absurd idea because of what it traditionally means: That there is a right and orthodox set of campaign materials, including, sadly enough, the novels, and a wrong take on the campaign, which is everything else.

there is no wrong take. D&D knows no wrong takes (unless we decide to give the cleric 8 skill points, d12 and bonus feats every level ;-)). Sure, the official setting includes all information from the sourcebooks and all events from the novels, but wizards won't sue you when you don't buy and read them all.

And I'm happy to do that minus the ToT, the RotA, the unification of Tethyr, and anything else I don't want, thank you. What I don't appreciate is an attitude, whether on the part of meddlesome players or other DMs, that it's somehow "wrong" if I do so, which is where I think the whole idea of "canon" goes.

Ah. Now I understand you. You don't have a problem with the concept of canon in itself. You have a problem with those players who want to dictate the DM's behaviour by saying stuff like "no, you MUST let Cyric kill Bhaal because it's in the novel!" I have a problem with players like this, either - and I don't think this is the intent WotC has when they make a canon version of the realms (since they themselves advocate the tools-not-rules-attitude). It is OK to tell about the events in the novels, as long as you don't demand that the DM uses them. On the other hand, you can expect from the DM that he at least reads the FRCS entries that apply to the area and the organizations he intends to use.

Of course, if the DM says that in his campaign the Time of Troubles happened, the Shades came back, and Tethyr is united, you can't do anything about it - he has the same rights as you were you DM.

It's a problem when (a) there are too many of them;

I don't think so, unless they all apply to the area you want to play with, and even then you can discard them

(b) they're difficult to work around for DMs;

Huh? Just say "didn't happen" and it's ok.

and (c) they lead to the proliferation of things that are already over-abundant in the setting (gods, magic, drow);

Gods: We had new ones, but old ones died, so it's only the new shift coming in
Magic: the FR are magic rich, though not so rich as they were some centuries ago, when 10th-level and better magic was still possible
Drow: Since most of it takes place in the underdark, far away from any surface locale, you can ignore them most easily

(e) they take place as monolithic, vast offstage events in which your own PCs can't really involve themselves, rather than providing opportunities for greater adventure. (The ToT is a notable exception to the last, because at least you could have run your PCs through the modules.)

So all you're concerned about is that they have no modules for the stuff? It should not be too hard to tailor the events to your campaign (if you play in the respective areas) and institute the players as the heroes.

By the above standards, there are a great number of RSEs that bother me, including the RotA, the ToT, and the emergence of the Cormanthor drow, none of which I feel help the setting, and all of which radically alter it.

The ToT did alter the Realms radically and had a lasting effect (divine spellcasters must worship gods), but that's not soo bad IMO.
The city of Shade just means that anauroch is more dangerous than before (but no normal people would venture there, anyway) and that the assortment of random encounters now includes some shade in the process of unearthing arcana.
The Cormanthor are actually a good evolvement IMO. Without surface drow, Vhaeraun and Eilistraee don't make that much sense (both deities of surface drow). It also gets rid of the "Drow can only live underground or they turn to dust" garbage.
The fact that they're only to be found in cormanthor means that it isn't really a Realms shattering event. They annoy some locals in the forest, and have some ventures into Myth Drannor. They're no global players that threaton to invade all Faerûn...

And, to reiterate it: the presence of a Realms canon doesn't mean that wizards requires you to incorporate it all, or is mad at you if you don't. Don't blame it on canon if some players are overzealous and yell at you for not letting Eldath and Mielikki appear in the time of troubles, summoned by Elminster, to stop a crazed eldath-priest who wants to kill some mielikki rangers. No, just hit them over the head with a rolled up splat book, tell them to shut up, and keep doing it your way

 

[Dark Jezter]

Without surface drow, Vhaeraun and Eilistraee don't make that much sense (both deities of surface drow).

Eilistraee dosen't make much sense to me anyway; why can't good-aligned drow simply go back to worshipping the deities of the Seldarine (or make like Drizzt and pick a patron from the Faerunian pantheon)? Why do they need an entire patron deity devoted to good-aligned, surface-dwelling dark elves?

I just don't know what Ed Greenwood was thinking when he came up with that particular Goddess. Was he trying to make it more plausable for players to make good-aligned drow PCs by giving them a deity to rally behind, or does he simply enjoy fantasizing about drow women who dance naked in the moonlight?

 

[Len]

Was he trying to make it more plausable for players to make good-aligned drow PCs by giving them a deity to rally behind, or does he simply enjoy fantasizing about drow women who dance naked in the moonlight?

Or, did he realize that all the Drizz't wannabes enjoy fantasizing about drow women who dance naked in the moonlight?

 

[Vocenoctum]

Meh. You'll live. Assuming a minimal level of competency, he'll just correct you and then tell you want the common knowledge really is, and you continue playing. Just like what would happen in the myriad of homebrews out there. (Besides, what can be considered "common knowledge" is up for debate...)

I'll live? I should hope so, but you seem to neglect the fact that it's a game, designed for folks to have fun in. If the players are frustrated by the DM, it's no fun. If the DM ignores this, it's not much of a game.

Wow. I disagree. The main purpose behind this DM choosing a pre-gen world is to save him time.

to save time, in that they do not have to form a game world, they do not have to provide the baseline and explain it to everybody.
If you're saving time by using a gameworld, perhaps using it is a better idea than just ignoring it? If your players can't count on knowing anything that their characters should know, then you've failed to provide a rich environment to them.

You can't provide all the details that a PC would know, by any means, but by using a pregen, you're telling them that those details are the standard. When you change them arbitrarily and only tell the players after the fact, it's a disservice to the players. Dismissing their objections as "it's my FR" or "you'll live" doesn't really help the players much.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Ah. Now I understand you. You don't have a problem with the concept of canon in itself. You have a problem with those players who want to dictate the DM's behaviour by saying stuff like "no, you MUST let Cyric kill Bhaal because it's in the novel!" I have a problem with players like this, either - and I don't think this is the intent WotC has when they make a canon version of the realms (since they themselves advocate the tools-not-rules-attitude). It is OK to tell about the events in the novels, as long as you don't demand that the DM uses them. On the other hand, you can expect from the DM that he at least reads the FRCS entries that apply to the area and the organizations he intends to use.

The problem is that the existence of sourcebooks, novels, etc. is sufficient to create the idea of a shared world. There's no need to graft something so rigid as "canon" to it.

Of course, if the DM says that in his campaign the Time of Troubles happened, the Shades came back, and Tethyr is united, you can't do anything about it - he has the same rights as you were you DM.

Yup. Agree completely.

I don't think so, unless they all apply to the area you want to play with, and even then you can discard them

Huh? Just say "didn't happen" and it's ok.

Sure. I can always say they didn't happen, but that doesn't justify the sheer proliferation and generally poor sensibility of 'em.

Gods: We had new ones, but old ones died, so it's only the new shift coming in

Except of course that most of the "dead" gods came back and then we were stuck with new gods that in certain cases were completely out of sync with the feel of the setting.

Drow: Since most of it takes place in the underdark, far away from any surface locale, you can ignore them most easily

Er, what? Two words: The Dalelands. I'm not talking at all about the Lolth's Silence and inter-city conflict stuff; I'm talking about armies of drow on the surface.

So all you're concerned about is that they have no modules for the stuff? It should not be too hard to tailor the events to your campaign (if you play in the respective areas) and institute the players as the heroes.

I think you might have missed my point, which is that these events DID happen with no particular lead-up or attempt to really integrate them into the adventure framework or feel of the setting. The ToT was at least subject to a desultory attempt to do so. Again, the fact that I can do the work to write these events into my setting is totally self-defeating; wasn't your point that these events drive the setting forward without requiring work on the DM's part to write a progressive flow of events?

The ToT did alter the Realms radically and had a lasting effect (divine spellcasters must worship gods), but that's not soo bad IMO.

Actually, it's a real pain in the rear. It required shuffling around organizations in a way that didn't really make sense (are all the Zhentarim going to shift their natures to NE/CE because Cyric's now in charge?), required a radical adjustment in attitude (so the power of the deities is now dependent upon worshipers, eh? Why then do such little-worshiped deities as Mystra and Talos retain their power?), and created storylines that just spun around themselves without any real progression (writing in Iyachtu Xvim's deific ascension because the designers realized that there was no LE deity of tyranny(!) any more, then resurrecting Bane). Of course people differ on whether this was a good idea, and of course I can ignore it, but it creates a pattern of RSEs, all of which curiously stem from the same pen.

The city of Shade just means that anauroch is more dangerous than before (but no normal people would venture there, anyway) and that the assortment of random encounters now includes some shade in the process of unearthing arcana.

No. What it means is that the distinction between past and present, especially the mystique of the past that provides so much of the Realms' flavor, is eroded; it means that the formerly interesting Netherese archwizards are now more common than skilled wagoneers; and it means that the carefully-built, interesting environment of a phaerimm-ruled Buried Realms prison was obliterated beyond recognition only two years after it was put into print.

The Cormanthor are actually a good evolvement IMO. Without surface drow, Vhaeraun and Eilistraee don't make that much sense (both deities of surface drow).

You have read Drow of the Underdark, right? The activities of "surface" drow contained in that book make much more sense than the backstory for the Cormanthor drow. Besides, we already had the Dark Dagger, the hidden settlements of the Forest of Mir, the drow of Skullport, the Chosen of Eilistraee, and various surface drow "sightings" in the Realms. Dumping thousands of drow in the middle of the Dales just takes away the mystique and precious rarity (again) and makes them mundane.

The fact that they're only to be found in cormanthor means that it isn't really a Realms shattering event. They annoy some locals in the forest, and have some ventures into Myth Drannor. They're no global players that threaton to invade all Faerûn...

That's because they're not written with the deviousness that they rightfully deserve as drow; yet another downside.

And, to reiterate it: the presence of a Realms canon doesn't mean that wizards requires you to incorporate it all, or is mad at you if you don't. Don't blame it on canon if some players are overzealous and yell at you...

Yet "canon" is the entire justification and philosophy for this sort of harping. I'll say it again: Canon, in my understanding, is a measured adherence to the idea that the setting must be played as written in "official" material. The fact that the material exists should be enough to create a shared world based on it; there's no reason to push an external philosophical construct forcing strict interpretation.

 

[Vocenoctum]

No. What it means is that the distinction between past and present, especially the mystique of the past that provides so much of the Realms' flavor, is eroded; it means that the formerly interesting Netherese archwizards are now more common than skilled wagoneers; and it means that the carefully-built, interesting environment of a phaerimm-ruled Buried Realms prison was obliterated beyond recognition only two years after it was put into print.

DIdn't they also melt an ice cap and change the weather patterns for all of northern FR or something?

The problem with most of the FR major events for me is that they're so large, they can't be ignored if you want to keep up with new stuff. What I mean by that is that saying the Time of Troubles never happened doesn't end your work. All future FR work assumes the ToT did happen, and will require modification. If suddenly every new book assumes that the environment changed because of the Shades, it requires more and more modification.

 

[jester47]

I rmember reading somewhere that the novels and the CS are two entirely independant creatures. Basic ideas cross over but largely the actual details are different. I think it might actually be in the FRCS where they say the Novels might do stuff or interpret things in the forgotten realms differently than the way they are portrayed in the CS materials. And on close inspection you will find that the CS material has fewer contradictions than the Novels.

The novels will do stuff to sound good. The CS will do stuff to give you a plot hook and allow you to customise. In the Players Guide they make it clear that this is the novel continuity and that it should not disrupt anything that you have done.

Case in point. If you read Realms of Shadow, there are two characters from Cormyr that are investigating the remains of Tilverton. There are still buildings, etc. The place is infested with shadows. The characters from Cormyr have no clue what happened.

Then in Dennings RotA there is an alliance and a huge battle in Tilverton. Funny that someone from Cormyr would not know about this. Leave the novels out of it, and you get somthing that is manageable.

Another case in point. If you look up the CS write ups for the Heros of the Hall (Drizzt and all) you will notice certain inconsistancies. These are intentional. The Drizzt of the CS is not the Drizzt of the Novels. Technically the novels are not canon. They are just designed to be good reads while you are on an airplane.

Aaron.