D&D General The Purple Dragon Knights are tied to an Amethyst Dragon (confirmed)

[Zardnaar]

I don't care much for FR lore, but I feel they should change some aspects of it over editions.

I think they're no longer considering anymore that Dwarves couldn't be Wizards before and no longer acknowledge any lore about why they couldn't and why that changed.

And I wouldn't consider Amethyst Dragons to be that obscure, they're just outside the core 10 Dragons. They're less obscure than Deep Dragons.

Deep dragons have been in several novels and have made it into miniature games.

Probably better known than amethyst dragons.

 

[TiQuinn]

It's still bad storytelling and D&D was better about it than DC and Marvel comics.

Make new characters instead of endlessly reviving old ones.

Is D&D really a story at its heart? The novels are controlled by their various authors (most of the time but not always) but the foundation of D&D is that every table tells its own story because ultimately it’s a game. Not a story. Sometimes there’s an attempt at a collective story, sometimes there isn’t. None of it lends itself well to a firm canon, though.

 

[Zardnaar]

Im not getting to upset until I see final results.

If they retcon the old lore away it's a but different if old lore is still there but an amethyst dragon is a new purple dragon.

They can do what they want but I bought Cornyr a novel.
. After 4E I stopped buying novels because of retcons and stupid crap like spell plague. Didn't buy the 4E frcs either.

If enough people agree with you......

 

[Necropolitan]

Is D&D really a story at its heart? The novels are controlled by their various authors (most of the time but not always) but the foundation of D&D is that every table tells its own story because ultimately it’s a game. Not a story. Sometimes there’s an attempt at a collective story, sometimes there isn’t. None of it lends itself well to a firm canon, though.

The Forgotten Realms has established lore.

Your table is your table, but there are in fact established facts of the setting.

 

[Scribe]

If "anything" can happen because of time travel and the multiverse then there are no stakes.

D&D shouldn't be like DC or Marvel where no named character ever stays dead.

Its Saturday morning cartoons. Same as what 40K has been turned into really. You have the main protagonists, that now have models that GW wants to sell, and the main antagonists, that have their models that GW wants to sell.

The 'bad guys' have a habit of being able to resurrect, and so guess who loses the 'fight' to later return?

Its all so shallow and cheap.

 

[Parmandur]

It's still bad storytelling and D&D was better about it than DC and Marvel comics.

Make new characters instead of endlessly reviving old ones.

Nah, it's the same thing:

 

[ECMO3]

And I wouldn't consider Amethyst Dragons to be that obscure.

There are over 300 forgotten realms novels, dozens of forgotten realms adventures, at least three previous source books and I don't think there has been an amethyst dragon in any one of them.

It is very obscure.

 

[Demetrios1453]

There are over 300 forgotten realms novels, dozens of forgotten realms adventures, at least three previous source books and I don't think there has been an amethyst dragon in any one of them.

It is very obscure.

Several appeared in the 3e book Dragons of Faerûn and one was a character in the novel War in Tethyr.

That's actually on par or even better than brass dragon appearances, from what I can find. The only brass dragon appearance I can find (outside of Dragons of Faerûn, which features all types) is a taxidermy one in Dungeon of the Mad Mage!

 

[TiQuinn]

The Forgotten Realms has established lore.

Your table is your table, but there are in fact established facts of the setting.

The DC comic universe, or the Marvel comic universe, or the Star Wars universe all have an established lore as well. These are all decades old (like FR), and have numerous retcons, resurrections, multiple authors, but the one thing that makes Forgotten Realms unique is that, as far as it is used by us, it was to support a game in which we change what happens. And as you've noted before, the Forgotten Realms lore is not exact either - there's TSR and WotC's lore, and then there's Ed Greenwood's lore, and both live side by side; we actually know less about Greenwood's than we do TSR/WotC's overall. TSR/WotC have handled their lore about as carefully as one would juggling teacups. Why should they? It's designed to be mutable to whatever their needs are, and it's just as mutable for our needs. There's just no reason to treat this lore as sacrosanct as has been suggested.

 

[Necropolitan]

Nah, it's the same thing:

View attachment 414052

No it's not, as I've repeatedly explained, it's about the use of character death.

Important characters died in that comic and didn't come back because bringing them back would be bad storytelling.

If Batman got shot in the head everyone would just be waiting for him to get resurrected or for it to be revealed how he managed to survive. Or maybe he'd get replaced by a clone or a Batman from another universe.

When a character in the Forgotten Realms comics died there was every reason to wonder if they were gone for good.

the one thing that makes Forgotten Realms unique is that, as far as it is used by us, it was to support a game in which we change what happens.

Either that's true for every setting or it's not true for the Forgotten Realms.

The lore remained the same regardless of what individuals groups did and only changed when the company that owned the setting or Ed Greenwood decided it did.

Drizzt remains a hero in canon even if a DM decides he's a serial killer in their individual campaign.

Its Saturday morning cartoons. Same as what 40K has been turned into really. You have the main protagonists, that now have models that GW wants to sell, and the main antagonists, that have their models that GW wants to sell.

The 'bad guys' have a habit of being able to resurrect, and so guess who loses the 'fight' to later return?

Its all so shallow and cheap.

Exactly. Character death only has real meaning when it isn't undone and reviving a character can make them worse.

Like how Palpatine became a massive joke after The Rise of Skywalker.

If Sammaster had stayed dead he'd have been an epic villain whose schemes almost laid the entire world to ruin.

Now he's not even the only leader of the Cult of the Dragon. And if he's made the lackey of whoever brought him back he'll have been downgraded even further.