[FR] Dungeon of Swords (suspected Error in FRCS 3e)

[jester47]

Ok, just read the description of the Dungeon of swords from the FRCS 3e. It is a completely different place than the dungeon of swords in all previous publications... Have they gotten it confused with a different dungeon?

I can only suppose so.

Anyone have any clarification on this?

 

[Alzrius]

Could you mention in what previous products the Dungeon of Swords was written up in, and how it contradicts what's written in the FRCS? That'd be helpful.

 

[jester47]

Ok, it was mentioned in Elminsters Ecologies Appendix II and the 2eFRCS box.

Both describe a sort of burial complex of a magic sword collector. While some of the chambers have been found, the main burrial chamber has not.


The FRCS 3e says it was a Gnome silver mine with a few rooms and a big mine shaft and guarded by floating magical swords.

I am thinking that the FRCS has gotten it confused with another Dungeon. And I am thinking that this may need to be erratad.


Aaron.

 

[Mr Fidgit]

Re: [FR] So the Dungeon of Swords got all messed up hugh?

Have they gotten it confused with a different dungeon?

that could very well be...it also could be that two dungeons have the same name (it's possible )

i also noticed in that same section that Martek's Tomb (FRCS p295-6) is now in the Realms, and i don't believe it was before 3e. (Martek's Tomb is part of the 1e Desert of Desolation series of mods, I3-5, IIRC)

 

[jester47]

Actually I am starting to remember vaguely a Sword Dungeon. (and I think it was near the Serpent Hills too) I am not sure, but I think they have it confused with somthing else.

Also, The Desert of Desolation Series has been in the realms since 1e. Its like Vassa and Damara, it got tacked on when the realms were in development. Originally found in independant modules the desert of dust and raurin were tacked on.

I have put a post on Sean's boards asking. I figure some Realms dude there might know, heck, sean might know.

Aaron.

 

[Oaken25]

A lot of the realms in 3E have been changed from what was in the old material.

For example (and I got into a minor arguement about this with Rich Baker), Silverymoon now has a Mythal, when Sean has said that it shouldn't. One of the NPC's in Silverymoon is now NE instead of NG and her familar is changed. Rich said he changed the NPC cause Silverymoon had to many good NPCs, no idea why they couldn't have made up a new one instead of changing what was in the North box set.

There have been a few other errors that conflict with the old source material. I guess those of us who have the old material have just got to live with the errors or house rule out the stuff that conflicts with the new realms material of 3E books or keep the old material instead (this is what I pretty much do, since I dont care for most of the changes in 3E. Especially the new realms maps, after almost 20 years of maps it is pretty nasty thing to do and change the world and cut out half the world and shift it to the west and invalidate all the old maps.)

 

[Alzrius]

I can't really offer any helpful advice, since I'm bereft of my books and products, but I can mention one thing that may help in terms of in-game rationale for why things have changed.

The two "Apocalypse adventures" for converting 2E to 3E were The Apocalypse Stone and Die Vecna Die. The former was meant for your personal campaign, and the latter was meant to affect the holistic, 2E-multiverse.

I won't talk much about the actual events of Die Vecna Die save to say that at the end, reality is saved, but gets irrevocably altered in the process, with the very structure of the cosmos being shifted and rearranged just a bit. Given that, its natural that smaller changes could be small things like the nature of that odd dungeon changing, or the way Faerun is shaped rearranging itself. No one might even notice, since they'd be affected also.

Hope that helps.

 

[jester47]

I like the new maps and the little changes don't bother me all that much, my FR campaign uses canon in a wild way. Its the big changes. The only one I have found that really glares is the Dungeon of Swords. I am keeping it the way I like it.

Thats the thing about canon in RPGs, it isn't. Its just a collection of big suggestions. I have said many times before that my FR looks like a train wreck of WHFRP, The last Unicorn, Elements from Time Bandits (the age of wonders and the fight scene with the Minotaur), The original Greyhawk, Dragonslair, and elements from the D&D cartoon(the locations and weirdness in that were great). So all in all you get this very dark wierd and brutal high fairytale fantasy.

For example, I dont look at the pictures in my FR stuff. (unless the art hits the nail on the head, which it does for the most part in 3e for the monsters and the NPCs. Lockwood and many of the other illustrators for FR do a good job with tier people. 2e art is right out. 1e art is a mixed bag.

However for everything else, pictures of cities, layouts of places, terrain... most of it gets thrown out the window. I read the descriptions and come up with what I see in my mind. Like what I did with darkhold in the plots and places. I do like the city layouts though, those are good.

So the differences don't really bother me all that much. I do like the new maps however. Makes the place look less boreing.

But the dungeon of swords actually fit somthing that I designed when my campaign was in greyhawk, almost to a T. And so I was disappointed when I found they changed it.

Oh well. Still, I would like to know if that is a mistake or not.

Aaron.

 

[jester47]

Alzrius,

We typed our posts at the same time. I really dont care for following canon when it does not suit me. But, this looks like it is more a mistake than an intentional change. I remember the description of the current description of the dungeon of swords being attributed to another dungeon. And I think it had a similar name.

IMC the dungeon of swords stays the way it was. This is just more of a design learning what happened exercise.

Aaron.

 

[Oaken25]

Yup, use what you want. As I said I do that all the time, since I don't care for most of the realms changes in 3E cause it conflicts with the changes players have done in my games over the years, that's why I keep the old maps also cause some of the cities and other areas players built up would have to be moved around and it's a pain to figure out new locations for them.

It might be a mistake, not sure, that's what I thought about that NPC also but turns out I was wrong so I just keep the old one.