To what degree is the Realms still Greenwood's?

[Ruin Explorer]

Does this mean that Mr. Greenwood is a poor writer or that you just don't like his style? If you've never managed to finish Moby Dick or Ulysses or War and Peace does this mean that Herman Melville, James Joyce, or Leo Tolstoy are bad writers or that you just aren't fond of their style? Just because you don't like someone's work doesn't make them a bad author, just like my dislike of anise doesn't mean it's a bad flavor - it's just not the one for me.

I think, as someone who has finished plenty of Mr Greenwood's books (when I was thirteen, literally), it's safe to say that, if there are in the world of published authors, say "good writers", "mediocre writers" and "bad writers" than he falls very firmly into the last catergory. Plotting, characterization, pacing, writing elegance and style, really anything you care to rate him on, even consistency with his own world, he's gonna score badly.

He's good at setting design and detailing, when he's not jerking it to some dubious female sextoy he's created (don't make me link that stuff), and I'm sure he's a good GM, but there is no way you can honestly consider him a "good writer" unless you have standards so appallingly low that it depresses me even to think about it.

Edit - Just to clarify, I'd catergorise Ed Greenwood as the same sort of creator as George Lucas. Great at envisioning things, great at coming up with tonnes of useful material, good at background and general plots (when he's not indulging himself), but as you get down to a smaller scale, his talent increasingly breaks down, resulting in Lucas' unbelievable/comic-book characters and frequently terrible dialogue, or Greenwood's unbelieveable/fan-fiction characters and frequently terrible lines in his books. I like him as someone to help create a setting, but I'm glad he's not the only one writing it any more.

On topic, I think the FR is maybe 30% Greenwood's nowdays, but that's okay with me.

Cmarco - If you're hoping to be "half the writer Ed Greenwood is", please never try to get published.

 

[Ranger REG]

So back to my question: How much of the Realms is Ed Greenwood, in the past and now? My assumption is that the first box set is 100% Greenwood, with that percentage going down the years. But how much is he involved with in this new darker Spellplagued Realms?

Not even the grey boxed set is 100%, but I believe the product is written in Greenwood's style with Jeff Grubb's help.

Later products have less and less of Greenwood's flair, though it has returned somewhat in the Powers of Faerun book.

Who cares? The gray boxed set is enough to start my interest back in 1987, and since then my own FR campaign have grown somewhat distant yet parallel from Greenwood's over even TSR/WotC's takes, yet I still make an effort of putting Greenwood's flavor into it.

I may or may not disagree with WotC's latest undertaking of Faerun, but it still hasn't change my interest in FR. It's a game-based franchise that I can play in it, not a TV franchise like Star Trek (which Berman and Braga pretty much nearly ruined my taste for Trek).

 

[The Little Raven]

(don't make me link that stuff)

Sorry, but I gotta. Otherwise, it just sounds like an empty insult. I agree he may have a degree of female-fascination, much like Joss Whedon does, but what you said goes a little deeper than that, so a link would be much appreciated.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Sorry, but I gotta. Otherwise, it just sounds like an empty insult. I agree he may have a degree of female-fascination, much like Joss Whedon does, but what you said goes a little deeper than that, so a link would be much appreciated.

You want him to link to a passage in one of Ed's novels?

Besides, what RE said may have been a little over the top, but Ed's "female-fascination" and poor writing is well established. There's really no reference necessary other than the corpus of novels itself.

 

[Irda Ranger]

A couple months ago, when I heard that 4e was coming out, my interest in RPGs was re-perked. When I read the Dragon article "Forgotten Realms: Year of the Ageless One", I was surprised just how far the apple fell from the tree. I like the new setting, but I do wonder how much of it--if any--is Ed Greenwood.

Besides the proper nouns? I'm thinking: not much.

Ed's involved; there's no doubt about that. But he doesn't control the direction, or the themes they want to push. Of the things we think of as "defining" the Realms, none of them are really Ed's any more. Elminster and the Seven Sister are gone; Drizzt defines the word "Hero" or "PC" for many people; Myth Drannor is repopulated with Elves; Netheril is back; etc. etc.

A Campaign Setting is ultimately about vision. "Whose vision is this?" is the important question. Whoever it is, and I fear it's a committee, it's not Ed.

 

[The Little Raven]

You want him to link to a passage in one of Ed's novels?

If the love scenes in Elminster: Making of a Mage or in Elminster in Myth Drannor are anything to go by, they're tame compared to what I see in Laurell K Hamilton novels, or compared to Piers Anthony's obsession with boobs.

Besides, what RE said may have been a little over the top, but Ed's "female-fascination" and poor writing is well established. There's really no reference necessary other than the corpus of novels itself.

There's a difference between someone with a fixation on headstrong female leads who are also hot (Jordan and Whedon are prime examples) and someone who writes their female leads to be sexual fantasies for themselves (the whole 'sextoy' comment). Now, I'll declare Ed guilty of the former, but I'll need proof of the latter. Otherwise, it strikes me as ascribing a motivation to another person (especially one that isn't here to defend himself).

 

[Irda Ranger]

If the love scenes in Elminster: Making of a Mage or in Elminster in Myth Drannor are anything to go by, they're tame compared to what I see in Laurell K Hamilton novels, or compared to Piers Anthony's obsession with boobs.

I certainly have not read enough EG novels to be any kind of expert, but my only real thought here is that defending any claims to quality with a Piers Anthony comparison is very shaky ground.

 

[Neil Bishop]

(snip) Anyway, I believe that contractually, the Realms are not Ed's anymore. He writes many products and novels for WoTC, and anything he writes is automatically considered canon (so his many answers to questions over at Candlekeep are FR Canon). WoTC could probably cut him out all together, but I wouldn't like to see the response to a move like that.

Ed still has certain rights to the Realms including, for example, if WotC decides to stop publishing ownership of the Realms returns to Ed. Rather than accepting my comment as "gospel", head to Candlekeep and read for yourself.

As for the uber-NPCs, also remember that Ed's home game is not so much about rules so power levels of NPCs are often irrelevant.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

"Whose vision is this?" is the important question.

"Who came up with this idea" is one of the least important questions I can think of in any context at all. "What kind of merit does this idea have" is the important question. The bad and mediocre can sometimes make great material (Lucas and The Empire Strikes Back) and the great can sometimes make miserable material (Spielberg and 1941). "Whose vision is this?" gives me an expectation, but ultimately says nothing about quality.

 

[slaughterj]

20%? I guess... and I'm happy about it. I've alwayes disliked (hated?) the uber-NPCs the Realms are full of... QUOTE]

What world/setting wouldn't have 20+ level characters? They all would!

And what world with them wouldn't have them involved in significant matters? They all would!

But none of that matters unless they have a direct impact on the PCs, which they don't unless the GM elects to have them do such.