FR Podcast is up

[Desdichado]

So wait, if two epic magic users battle it out, there will be permanent damages to the Weave, but if the goddess of magic gets gutted to a filet by a uber-crazy god with possible help from another dark goddess from the dawns of time who has worked on her own Weave-copy, and the home plane of the Mystra 3.0 (or is she even already the fourth one?) gets smashed, something like the Spellplague happening would be improbable?

Yeah; what was it he said? Realmslore is based on detailed, self-consistent elements just like that.

 

[Primal]

Yes. Of course, your point doesn't make any sense, but it is now very clear.

And I fail to see why it doesn't make any sense, because isn't it quite clear that those FR preview articles contradict current canon lore?

 

[Primal]

Yeah; what was it he said? Realmslore is based on detailed, self-consistent elements just like that.

Read the whole thread, please -- I think I've addressed this subject in many posts.

 

[Desdichado]

I find it odd, frankly, that this is ever argued over. There have been many, many adaptations, game and film and otherwise, of Tolkien's LOTR, but no one questions that what Tolkien wrote was "canon" or not.

Ah, how refreshing! Someone who's never entered the trench warfare of Tolkieniana and argued whether details published in The Book of Lost Tales can be given any credence, and if so how much, or how much the nascent complete revamping of the Silmarillion can be credited, etc.

People argue over whether what Tolkien wrote was canon or not all the frikkin time. Heck, there's even arguments about how much details of The Hobbit can be considered canonical. About the only thing that nobody argues about is the text of Lord of the Rings itself. Everything else is up for grabs.

 

[Desdichado]

Read the whole thread, please -- I think I've addressed this subject in many posts.

I have, much to my chagrin. And you have addressed it, just not satisfactorily. You're spinning around in circles trying to pretend that the Realms is consistent, but let's face it; it's notoriously not so.

Heck, even YOU've given plenty of examples yourself. In this thread. Of blatant inconsistencies.

Now, how about you read the whole thread please, and rather than skip over my meatier posts—about which I suspect you can't satisfactorily argue—address them. You've managed to cut through three of them and simply focus on my flippant one-liner instead, thinking that perhaps you had a chance with that one.

 

[Mirtek]

Sourcebook and page number. I've seen this claim before, and seen Rich Baker openly ask someone for a published citation (since he also knew that Ed had said it at Candlekeep) and noone provided one. So until there's a published, canon citation, it's just fan wankery.

The "inhabitants" part is debatable, since I've yet to see a published canon citation for it's validity.

Magic of Faerun, page 9

So Rich Baker doesn't even know some of the newest 3.x supplements? It's not as MoF is some obscure 1e/2e lore (and even that I expect them to know since it's the job they get paid for)

But there was still a god of magic (since the spell transferred divinity from Mystryl to Karsus),

Which was actually not what the spell did, even in it's first flawed incarnation. From it's frist printing in N:EoM it only was supposed to be a temporary merge between the caster and the deity. The limited duration was mentioned several time in the paragraphs preceding the actual rule write up. Only at on line in the rule write up someone made a misstake and wrote unlimited duration rather than the limited duration mentioned earlier in the supplement (the misstake was already corrected in the spell's second rule write up in Powers&Pantheons which did set it's duration to limited)

 

[The Historian]

Greenwood is Canon

Perhaps FANS do, Hobo. Judging by this thread, fans seem to love arguing over everything, all the time.
However, critics, academics, and lawyers do not. Unless hired to do so.

 

[Mirtek]

So the Weave is what, then? Duct tape?

Actually the Weave is a condom. Raw magic of Realmspace is instandly lethal to mortals. Even the greatest archmage would burn himself to ash if he tried to cast a mere cantrip without using the weave as a shield between him and the raw magic he wants to channel.

This was how it has been pre-4e. So maybe the spellplauge weakened raw magic and allows mortals to use it without protection

No, it was a bad idea to make deities dependent on mortal worshipping, and that was a mechanic introduced by the Times of Troubles, which we can all agree are dumb in every way imaginable.

However it was also strange that Ao did mention that at all, because he actually did not newly introduce this rule. In the FR deities died of neglect long before the ToT and they also died of neglect outside of the FR

 

[Primal]

As a matter of fact, that's one of the things that attracts me most about the endeavor. I want to see a fresh take on FR. I'm not interested in a flat update; the FR wasn't an interesting enough setting to tempt me heavily before, and it certainly won't now.

You seem to be operating under the fallacy that those posting in this thread, and those who are the potential customers of the new FR book, have the same priorities for FR as you do.

I can assure you; that's not the case. You can say all you like what you want FR to be, but arguing with someone else's tastes? Waste of time, pal.

Ah, you missed the point there. I was criticizing how there seem to glaring "errors" in the "New Realms" (lore which contradicts current canon lore) which implies that the designers have not done their "homework". Even if you're reshaping the setting so that everybody can start from a "clean slate", you should make sure that you know the details. I could see Eberron fans being irritated if 4E Eberron Campaign Setting would contain information about, say, Dragonmarks, that is contradictory to 3E lore. Of course, the designers can always say "Uh, we forgot about that, but from now on it will work this way, because we're retconning it". But to me that speaks volumes about their lack of dedication, interest and respect towards the setting and its current fans.

Now, I'm not under any illusion that WoTC would consider the "old guard" their primary target demographic for 4E FR -- in fact, after reading those 'Countdown...'-articles, isn't it quite obvious that they're not? This is completely understandable from the business perspective, even though I don't personally agree with or like the nature and scope of the changes. In fact, I hate almost all the changes we've seen or heard of so far. However, I'm not arguing that they should cater only to my tastes -- as already noted, my problem with the 4E FR is that they're clearly not familiar with the traditional "feel" and "spirit" of the Realms *and* they don't seem to be interested enough in reading the previously published books. I'm also wondering why they didn't hire George Krashos, Eric Boyd and Steven Schend to work on the first 4E books, because those guys are all admired and talented designers who know the Realms inside-out -- why hire people who admit that they've never DMed or played in the Realms?

Nobody said that they couldn't be; although I personally believe very strongly that the chances of "Joe Blow DM" writing better RPG material than professional game designers is... not high. To put it charitably.

Well, I know many "Joe Blow DMs" who have DMed various systems and campaign settings for over twenty years. Some of them can do better maps and hand-outs than we've seen in any WoTC products ever, but they could not write a module with the same kind of routine than a professional game designer can. One or two can also write an adventure that rivals (storywise) even the best works of Chris Perkins, Ed Greenwood and Keith Baker -- who, in the end, were just your average "Joe Blow DMs" before their "rise to fame", right?

Yet some professional game designers don't have the same kind of passion your average "Joe Blow DM" has -- it's *work*, after all, and no matter how much you love it, your attitude towards it changes as it becomes your profession. It's hard to be creative or give your best when the deadlines pile on you, and this is true in any "creative" industry.

Ah, I see the problem already. You think Robert Jordan is a talented writer and Wheel of time is something other than a bloated, interminable fantasy soap opera.

No wonder you're so invested in the current iteration of Forgotten Realms.

Let me quote you: "...but arguing with someone else's tastes? Waste of time, pal."

So you don't think much of Robert Jordan and that's just fine by me -- it's your opinion. But tell me: have you actually read any 'Wheel of Time'-novels? I do agree that ever since Book 6 the series ground to a halt, but those first books are IMHO among the best fantasy fiction novels I've ever read.

 

[Desdichado]

Perhaps FANS do, Hobo. Judging by this thread, fans seem to love arguing over everything, all the time.
However, critics, academics, and lawyers do not. Unless hired to do so.

Critics and academics do indeed. Lawyers—of course—do not, because it is of no legal interest whatsoever whether or not a reference in The Book of Lost Tales to entire flights of balrogs means that by the time of the more modern Silmarillion story Tolkien still meant for balrogs to have literal wings and the capacity to fly.

For instance.