From The Realms to Golarion


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

First and foremost: I enjoy Forgotten Realms as a setting. I dislike how novel-driven the setting's canon is, but the great thing about house rules is you can overrule/override/overrun all of the things you don't like, right? That, and I like pretend that the timeline between 3rd and 4th editions never happened. At any rate, my purpose here isn't to lavish praises on Mr. Greenwood's progeny. I have been teetering on a decision for a little while now, and I'm looking for some feedback and advice from those who have gone before.

How is Golarion? I ask this primarily to longtime fans of Forgotten Realms. I have no qualms with non-Realmers offering insight; I just don't want this thread to devolve into a heated Realms vs. Golarion flame war. My enjoyment of Faerun hasn't diminished any over the years, but I like to branch out and try new things. I absolutely love everything from Paizo that I've purchased, so I've started giving serious consideration to undergoing a setting switch.

As I mentioned previously, I am going to probably put more stock in the opinions of people who have actually played or continue to play The Realms. I do this mainly because I feel like their experience with the transition to a new setting would probably more closely resemble mine, should I decide to make that leap - a decision I'm hoping can be reached with more peace of mind pending comments from those in the know. Thanks in advance!

Grand Lodge

Kagehiro wrote:
I like pretend that the timeline between 3rd and 4th editions never happened.

Whatever are you talking about???

It's 1382 DR, man. Year of the WotC Haters.

What did you think?

.
.
.
.

Heres my feeling for Golarion:

So many of the regions seem to fit nicely into predetermined setting ideas -- you know, there's a region of "Vikings" called the Lands of the Linnorm Kings and a region of "Ancient Egypt" called Osirion and a region of "Diabolists" and a region that feels like Ravenloft and one that feels like a High, Swords & Sorcery Fantasy version of Medieval France and another of Nazi Germany, etc., etc. There's an African Jungle called The Mwangi Expanse and a region called The Realm of the Mammoth Lords. Heck, there's a frontier nation that screams American Revolution in a High Fantasy, Sword Sorcery medium, the cover illustration being guys wearing American revolution-like uniforms wielding homemade polearms and swords in a skirmishing line being led by Lady Liberty carrying a Flag. There's even a soldier with one of those drums, keeping the beat.

That's what I love about Golarion.

Well, and that there's current material being published (unlike FR) and that it's high quality (unlike WotC).

. . . .

See, with FR you've got a world rich in detail from novels so if that's what I'm in the mood for...

And in GH you've got a spectacular, pure D&D campaign setting when that's what you want.

I still play in all three. Love all three.


W E Ray wrote:
Kagehiro wrote:
I like pretend that the timeline between 3rd and 4th editions never happened.

Whatever are you talking about???

It's 1382 DR, man. Year of the WotC Haters.

What did you think?

My first glance at the 4th edition timeline involved Helm, Azuth, and Velsharoon all biting the dust. At that point, I washed my hands with it, haha! Those three were almost always my go-to guys for religions.

Quote:

Heres my feeling for Golarion:

So many of the regions seem to fit nicely into predetermined setting ideas -- you know, there's a region of "Vikings" called the Lands of the Linnorm Kings and a region of "Ancient Egypt" called Osirion and a region of "Diabolists" and a region that feels like Ravenloft and one that feels like a High, Swords & Sorcery Fantasy version of Medieval France and another of Nazi Germany, etc., etc. There's an African Jungle called The Mwangi Expanse and a region called The Realm of the Mammoth Lords. Heck, there's a frontier nation that screams American Revolution in a High Fantasy, Sword Sorcery medium, the cover illustration being guys wearing American revolution-like uniforms wielding homemade polearms and swords in a skirmishing line being led by Lady Liberty carrying a Flag. There's even a soldier with one of those drums, keeping the beat.

That's what I love about Golarion.

Well, and that there's current material being published (unlike FR) and that it's high quality (unlike WotC).

. . . .

See, with FR you've got a world rich in detail from novels so if that's what I'm in the mood for...

And in GH you've got a spectacular, pure D&D campaign setting when that's what you want.

I still play in all three. Love all three.

Right. I should clarify I have no intention of ever outright abandoning Forgotten Realms. I'm just looking to potentially add something else to the lineup. I even liked Greyhawk, but I simply don't have the source material to try and support a decent campaign therein. Sounds like Golarion is similar to 7th Sea (albeit to a much lesser extent) in that it mirrors Europe with high fantasy thrown into the mix.

Dark Archive

Golarion, to me, feels like a more contained version of the Realms. It has the same sorts of extremes, but compressed into an area that feels smaller. Unlike the Realms, it also feels much more developed, with just about every inch of territory claimed by a nation (with exceptions in the Mwangi Expanse and Varisia), whereas the Realms had fairly large swathes of land that were 'unclaimed.' You could travel from Cormyr to Waterdeep without being in any 'country,' for instance.

As a result, and this may simply be my visceral reaction to the map and sourcebooks I've seen, Golarion feels more 'settled' and old and 'tamed' than the Realms or Greyhawk did. The prodigiously long timeline, the Taldan Exploration thingie, etc. makes it feel less points-of-light-y than the Realms or Greyhawk (and more like Eberron, in that sense, a place with millenia of history going back, and very few mysteries or wild places or unexplored lands left).

There aren't perfect parallels to most Realms nations. Cormyr and Andoran, for what similarities they have, are quite different. The closest thing to a wizard-dominated land, like Thay or Halrua, is Nex, and it's more high-magic than either, even if the setting itself is less magic-dominant.

Like the Realms, Golarion has a faux-asian section, a faux-persian/arabic section, etc. I'm an insane fan of both Kara-Tur and Al-Qadim/Zakhara, so it's gonna be hard for me to let go of that and embrace Tien Foo and whatever sort of 'Greater Kel' exists to the east of Qadira. (Just as I never really gave Rokugan a fair shake, probably, because it was never half as interesting to me as Kara-Tur was.) The Mwangi Expanse, on the other hand, seems to be about the same as Chult. A fantasy 'Africa' that is about the size of Wyoming, and almost as relevant to the setting. :)

I think 'Drizzt-reaction' led to the Drow of Golarion being very explicitly evil and, like the Drow of Greyhawk, exclusive worshippers of demon lords, with no good, or even morally ambiguous, Drow dieties or communities.

Elves and humans pretty much dominated the Realms. If something major was going on, either in the past or in the present, it's generally safe to assume dwarves, gnomes and halflings, save for the occasional adventurer, weren't involved, and, apart from the Great Rift, none of the 'stunties' had their own lands or kingdoms. That's pretty much the same in Golarion. The elves have Kyonin, and only belatedly have the dwarven 'Five Kingdoms' been included on the most recent maps of the Inner Sea, while the gnomes and halflings pretty much get sprinkled about human and elven dominated lands like croutons.

There is no Ed Greenwood for Golarion, who provides a single consistent voice or 'characterization' for the setting. It's more of a committee-designed project, and that shows. The Realms became, over a decade or so, a 'kitchen-sink' setting that had a heck of a lot of very exotic stuff that bore little resemblance to that first map of the Dales region that showed up in Dragon, all those years ago. Golarion, on the other hand, pretty much started out with all the bells and whistles. Magic-dead area with guns? Right there from the opening day. Land ruled by undead? Check. Country run by a dragon? Check. Evil nation threatening all around it? Check. It's less like growing up with the Realms, which expanded in all directions around us, and more like being plunked down into the Realms years after the Grey Box, with all the funky stuff like an island nation run by illusionists and a southern nation ruled by horse-riding half-drow priestesses of Loviatar.

Ed Greenwood also seemed to prefer to say 'yes,' in response to 'does this exist in the Realms?' Paladin and Monk multi-classing restrictions were side-stepped in all sorts of ways, depending on race and faith. Paladins could even worship Sune, a Chaotic Good goddess. In Golarion, there's a tendency for that answer to be 'no.' As a writer, I generally admire that sort of discipline. As a messageboard poster, I specifically dislike how certain 'me-too!' posters will accompany a dev response with derision and insults to the intelligence of whoever asked the question in the first place, and will be encouraged and supported by the moderators and developers for doing so. I suspect that has more to do with Flag abuse than any sort of sinister Paizo agenda, 'though. :) From my own experience moderating a BBS, back in the day, it did seem that about 80% of the time, someone reporting 'abuse' was, in fact, the source of the problem, making it a useful way to identify people who were going to be problems...

I think the number one thing to do, when embracing a new setting, is to accept that the stuff you loved about other settings, like the Scarlet Brotherhood or Mulhorand or Karnath or Zakhara or Glantri or Hollowfaust or Norga-Krangel, are simply not going to exist, or be easily replicated, in the new setting.

A mistake I've made a dozen times (and will likely make a dozen times more) in my life, when starting up a new game, whether RPG or MMO or whatever, is thinking, 'Can I make my favorite character from X in this system?' and then trying, and pretty much failing, until I figure out the way *this* setting and *this* system works, and begin designing characters that are designed from the ground up to work within the new paradigm.

And I never learn. I still use stuff from Mulhorand and Hamunaptra in Osirion, and I suspect, until I let go of all the lushly-detailed stuff I've loved in the past, I won't be able to truly appreciate Osirion for what it is. (Granted, since I've got ten times as much information on Mulhorand & Hamunaptra, or on Kara-Tur, or on Zakhara, I think I'm still on pretty firm ground to be using that stuff over the sparse information currently available on Osirion or Tian Foo or Qadira!)

Dark Archive

Oh, and I didn't jump from the Realms when the Spellplague, etc. happened.

I jumped when the Time of Troubles ganked off Myrkul, Bane, Bhaal (okay, I didn't care about Bhaal, truthfully), Mask and Lleira. :)

Too much meta-plot change, for my tastes.

When the Spellplague thing did it all over again, I just felt bad for the new wave of Realms fans having their setting trashed.


Set wrote:

Golarion, to me, feels like a more contained version of the Realms. It has the same sorts of extremes, but compressed into an area that feels smaller. Unlike the Realms, it also feels much more developed, with just about every inch of territory claimed by a nation (with exceptions in the Mwangi Expanse and Varisia), whereas the Realms had fairly large swathes of land that were 'unclaimed.' You could travel from Cormyr to Waterdeep without being in any 'country,' for instance.

As a result, and this may simply be my visceral reaction to the map and sourcebooks I've seen, Golarion feels more 'settled' and old and 'tamed' than the Realms or Greyhawk did. The prodigiously long timeline, the Taldan Exploration thingie, etc. makes it feel less points-of-light-y than the Realms or Greyhawk (and more like Eberron, in that sense, a place with millenia of history going back, and very few mysteries or wild places or unexplored lands left).

There aren't perfect parallels to most Realms nations. Cormyr and Andoran, for what similarities they have, are quite different. The closest thing to a wizard-dominated land, like Thay or Halrua, is Nex, and it's more high-magic than either, even if the setting itself is less magic-dominant.

This sounds like a nice alternative here and there. As it stands, we've got myself and another "old-timer" FR player, one "middle-aged", one "youngster", and a "new guy" (to system and setting alike). I think me and the "old-timer" would probably be a lot more resistant to the switch than the others, whereas I feel like the "youngster" and the "new guy" would enjoy it more, as it would give them a chance to get in on the ground level of a developing campaign. I'm just trying to be open minded, and not let nostalgia strangle what would otherwise be an awesome prospect. It's a lot like 2nd edition for me. I can see why some of the mechanics were terrible, and when people start blasting them apart, I find myself agreeing with a lot of their sentiments, but at the end of the day I loved the hell out of 2nd edition. Anyways, it sounds like a ripe opportunity to spearhead a change in scenery, and that might make it easier to get me out of the GM chair and into a Player seat for a change. I haven't been able to actually PLAY in a D&D/PF game in a while. :\

Quote:
Like the Realms, Golarion has a faux-asian section, a faux-persian/arabic section, etc. I'm an insane fan of both Kara-Tur and Al-Qadim/Zakhara, so it's gonna be hard for me to let go of that and embrace Tien Foo and whatever sort of 'Greater Kel' exists to the east of Qadira. (Just as I never really gave Rokugan a fair shake, probably, because it was never half as interesting to me as Kara-Tur was.) The Mwangi Expanse, on the other hand, seems to be about the same as Chult. A fantasy 'Africa' that is about the size of Wyoming, and almost as relevant to the setting. :)

This is going to be a large tangent, pertaining exclusively to Rokugan, so bear with me. Rokugan is an amazing place. The problem is that it is a horrible, horrible candidate for a d20 system. The original system for the setting, L5R, was superb. It was tailored to fit the lethality of a purely samurai setting, and the game's mechanics translated that well. I won't get too deep into it, but I have a deep, deep love for L5R, and was disgusted with the d20 imitation. The storyline for the setting was admittedly bad. The driving force behind the progression of canon story was the results of their L5R Card Tournaments, which was neat, but a terrible platform for establishing large, sweeping changes to the RPG version.

Quote:
I think 'Drizzt-reaction' led to the Drow of Golarion being very explicitly evil and, like the Drow of Greyhawk, exclusive worshippers of demon lords, with no good, or even morally ambiguous, Drow dieties or...

Haha, screw Drizzt. That one character (and Elminster even moreso) embodies the biggest flaw within the Realms; no matter where you go, you can't throw a rock without hitting at least 20 NPCs who are capable of schooling you at any level.


Set wrote:

Oh, and I didn't jump from the Realms when the Spellplague, etc. happened.

I jumped when the Time of Troubles ganked off Myrkul, Bane, Bhaal (okay, I didn't care about Bhaal, truthfully), Mask and Lleira. :)

Too much meta-plot change, for my tastes.

When the Spellplague thing did it all over again, I just felt bad for the new wave of Realms fans having their setting trashed.

The Time of Troubles was an excellent idea, it was just executed poorly. There was a period in time where the writers were incapable of abandoning the "Good guys rule!" mindset. There never seemed to be a middle ground, just the Good guys, the good guys calling themselves Neutral (Hello Harpers!), and the Evil guys. I could never wrap my head around why Torm was brought back, but not Bane. Anyways, there was one book released right before 3e launched, Cloak & Dagger. I swear by that book. It was the best thing WotC released for that setting. I'll have to go check who wrote that one so I can give them a mental pat on the back.

Edit: Well, son of a buck. Sean K. Reynolds, haha! There's some irony for ya.


As a Realms fans I have to say I really like Golarion( it is as good as the FR before WotC took it outback and shot it and replaced with a badly formed clone of other campaign settings that the upper managment did not think would sell).

I love the Player's Companions and the Pathfinder Campaign setting books...as they provide infomation at a cheap price. They remind me alot of the early FR supplements.


Speaking as a Golarion fan from the get-go...

I played and ran games extensively in the Forgotten Realms (from 2E on), but when Golarion was introduced almost five years ago, I immediately fell in love with it. It scratched all the itches that I like in a campaign world—dabbling in the strange and weird while still recalling the old TSR campaign settings that made me love roleplaying games in the first place. The creators of Golarion have decades of roleplaying game experience between them, and as the world has been expanded upon, their love of what has come before shows.

Now, since you're an FR fan, here are some analogues I have in my head for some regions (and cities):
Waterdeep = Magnimar
The Sword Coast = Varisia
Spine of the World, Icewind Dale = Land of the Linnorm Kings
Halruaa = Nex
Mulhorand = Osirion
Calimshan = Katapesh, Qadira

One of the big differences between FR & Golarion is that the gods don't have a direct hand in events, if at all, and high-level NPCs are fairly easy to ignore (if they exist).

Grand Lodge

Lilith, all this fun talk about FR and Pathfinder is tickling my sweet tooth, any cookies or brownies fresh from the oven you'd care to share?...

.
.
.

Recently I've been playing in GH and Pathfinder -- one group is like me, old grognards who grew up in GH and just love to play there. But I also DM and run PCs in conjunction with our LGS, often with "strangers" or people new to the game -- in such cases we always do Golarion because it helps the LGS promote Pathfinder.

It's been a good 4 years or so since I've done FR but I do love playing on The Sword Coast and in The North & Silver Marches.

I think the thing I like best about gaming in FR is the abundance of high level NPCs who we all know where and what they are. It sure as heck isn't something I want in every Campaign I'm in but it is fun for some campaigns.

Pathfinder, on the other hand, I love because it's so easy to associate where the Campaign will be with what kind of Campaign it will be: Taldor is the crumbling, decadent feudal empire; Cheliax is the devil-run LE empire; Molthune is Nazis; Land of the Linnorm Kings is Vikings; Galt is a Red Revolution and anarchy, etc., etc. It makes it easier to get into in the beginning and learn the new setting. And as for the few aspects that sane gamers hate (guns in Alkenstar, crashed spaceships in Numeria -- well, like the OP says, sane gamers can Houserule those out of the game.)


W E Ray wrote:


I think the thing I like best about gaming in FR is the abundance of high level NPCs who we all know where and what they are. It sure as heck isn't something I want in every Campaign I'm in but it is fun for some campaigns.

I like the depth they bring to the setting. I feel like they got blown out of proportion though; as if writers of the various regions were trying to outdo one another. For me, it created too much of a barrier between PCs and reaching that plateau of epicness.


Well, springboarding off of what seems to be a (thus far) overwhelming consensus, my next question would probably be: what book should I invest in first? Inner Sea Guide?

Grand Lodge

Yes.

But I'd also spend some time at the PatfinderWiki browsing. The Inner Sea World Guide has a lot of empty spaces, lots of place names and nothing else, next to the paragraph write-ups on other places. For example, in the chapter on Varisia you'll find a map with a bunch of names of communities. Magnimar and Korvosa each get a paragraph, Ilsurian and Brinewall don't. The whole book is like that, frustratingly.

The missing paragraphs are in various Adventure Path volumes or other softback books.

Get the Inner Sea book and use that in conjuntion with the Wiki to find the other supplements you want. (For example, for "real" info on Varisia get AP #3 -- while AP#49 is actually titled "Brinewall.")


W E Ray wrote:

Yes.

But I'd also spend some time at the PatfinderWiki browsing. The Inner Sea World Guide has a lot of empty spaces, lots of place names and nothing else, next to the paragraph write-ups on other places. For example, in the chapter on Varisia you'll find a map with a bunch of names of communities. Magnimar and Korvosa each get a paragraph, Ilsurian and Brinewall don't. The whole book is like that, frustratingly.

The missing paragraphs are in various Adventure Path volumes or other softback books.

Get the Inner Sea book and use that in conjuntion with the Wiki to find the other supplements you want. (For example, for "real" info on Varisia get AP #3 -- while AP#49 is actually titled "Brinewall.")

Groovy. I may have to go ahead and cave to the Viking lover in me and get the Lands of the Linnorm Kings while I'm at it. Are the Adventure Paths of equal quality? I thought it might be easier on GM and Player alike to ease into it with a published adventure, so there's not as much spontaneous world-knowledge required on any one's part.


Kagehiro wrote:
Groovy. I may have to go ahead and cave to the Viking lover in me and get the Lands of the Linnorm Kings while I'm at it. Are the Adventure Paths of equal quality? I thought it might be easier on GM and Player alike to ease into it with a published adventure, so there's not as much spontaneous world-knowledge required on any one's part.

If you want an Adventure Path that exposes you to some of the unique world elements of Golarion, I would suggest the Council of Thieves Adventure Path, but the Jade Regent Adventure Path (which we just released part 4 of) does contain a trip through the Lands of the Linnorm Kings. You may also want to consider the upcoming Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path Anniversary Edition, which was many people's introduction to the world setting.


Lilith wrote:
Kagehiro wrote:
Groovy. I may have to go ahead and cave to the Viking lover in me and get the Lands of the Linnorm Kings while I'm at it. Are the Adventure Paths of equal quality? I thought it might be easier on GM and Player alike to ease into it with a published adventure, so there's not as much spontaneous world-knowledge required on any one's part.
If you want an Adventure Path that exposes you to some of the unique world elements of Golarion, I would suggest the Council of Thieves Adventure Path, but the Jade Regent Adventure Path (which we just released part 4 of) does contain a trip through the Lands of the Linnorm Kings. You may also want to consider the upcoming Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path Anniversary Edition, which was many people's introduction to the world setting.

I'll probably steer clear of the Jade Regent. I've got enough L5R to tickle my fancy as far as asian-influenced gaming goes. I was already leaning towards the Runelords one, due to good reviews and its being the first of the bunch. I'll give the Council of Thieves a gander as well. Thanks for the tips!

Shadow Lodge

I'm gonna be honest: I didn't read all the replies due to time constraints.

I'm a long-time old school Realms fan myself. I've read all the books, prior to 4th Edition and made the switch to Golarion after the 4th Edition nonsense.

My two favorite comparisons:
**Varisia is a good comparative to the Sword Coast (lawless wilderness with rampant adventures to be had).
**Absalom is a good comparative to Neverwinter (sprawling epic city with multiple factions).
**Thassilon is a good comparative to Thay (granted, there is no Thassilon anymore).

Changes that I like between the two settings:
**No good drow. At best, there are a few chaotic neutral drow. This is going off of the AP, Second Darkness.
**The players are the plot device. Not the novels.
**There are no epic wizards roaming around in herds.
**Nethys is by far a better god of magic.

Liberty's Edge

I ran FR Campaigns from 1987 to 2007. It was my mainstay and favored world to game in. While we dabbled in Greyhawk, Midnight, Eberron and even my homebrew from time to time we always returned to the Realms.

Then in 2007 I got the first book of the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path. “Hmm, Varsia huh?” I said. I told my players I’d find someplace to fit it in the Realms. By book two I had decided I would instead run it in this new world Galarion, and for the past four years have run nothing but Golarion campaigns!

I wouldn’t dare to make a comparison, ignoring the novel line in FR makes it a great world with a rich legacy, and Golarion is so well designed, new and yet familiar all the same. Last, we’d played in the FR for 20 years. This enabled a shift without jarring our play style or ideals.

Grand Lodge

Jeff,

Ye brought a tear to me eye wi' yer story, ye did.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Maps Subscriber

I also have been a long term Realms Player and DM. I believe we have played in the Realms since about 1988 or so. I like Jeff was starting a new campaign in the Realms and then Burnt Offerings came out. I dumped my campaign at about 5th level and we started a new campaign. Everything I have run since then has been in Galorian.

I have run Rise of the Runelords, The Curse of the Crimson Throne, A bit of Second Darkness, and currently both Carrion Crown and Serpent Skull.

And I am playing in Legacy of Fire.

I love the world and feel for me it is even better than the Realms. I also feel that if I was to play in the realms I would ignore all the novels.

I loved the Realms but I like Golarion better.

Sczarni RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I really loved playing in the Realms as a new player. I could read the books and feel like I had a better insight to what was going on. I started in the Realms in AD&D and didn't stop playing there till D&D 4th Edition was released. Not due to 4th Ed., but the Realms were heavily changed and I felt the Realms lost so much of what made the game important to me. My favorite world was ruined. We continued to play in the Realms prior to the new material, but I have not bought another book or RPG product for it since.

The first Paizo product I actually read (besides the magazines) was the 3.5 Pathfinder Chronicle Campaign Setting. I enjoyed the alternate classes presented within. After I read the background on Mendev and the Worldwound, I knew the next game I DMed would be based on that conflict. When the time came my players were a bit reluctant. They loved the world and I have never DMed another game in any setting since.


Kaelas Rilyntlar wrote:


Changes that I like between the two settings:
**No good drow. At best, there are a few chaotic neutral drow. This is going off of the AP, Second Darkness.
**The players are the plot device. Not the novels.
**There are no epic wizards roaming around in herds.
**Nethys is by far a better god of magic.

We didn't have good drow until Drizzt. It had to start somewhere. Now, I don't quite like the character or author, but he did what others were no doubt thinking. Were dual-wielding female drow elf cavaliers on unicorns any better?

And if there's one thing that really soured me on nFR, it's the death of Mystra. Countless settings had deities of magic, FR had a personification of magic that was a deity, which I thought was really cool. Instead, she was thrust into every half-baked scenario, from giving her a personality (Mystra, as opposed to Mystryl), then having a Midnight pick up the pieces. Now, I didn't mind all that much, Mystra 3 wasn't too stuck up on things and was reliable enough to accomodate the LE priests her predecessor had. Not because she liked it, but because she acknowledged that she was a position, not a Uber Powerful Character. Then again, novel after novel came out, and just enough smart guys wanted her gone (which I thought was due only to overexposire and snarkiness)... and now she's replaced with what, Corellon?

The transition to 4E FR really soured me on the Realms, as you may tell.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fun fact: Drizzt was an accident. The book was about Wulfgar and the editors at TSR told him he needed to add a sidekick. They bounced idea and "what about a black elf" stuck. And he became more popular then wulfgar.

And Salvortar(sp) has asked not to write about him in every book if I recall but he is the cash cow. Thats what they tell him to write and, well man's gotta eat so he keeps writing.

Dark Archive

seekerofshadowlight wrote:
And Salvortar(sp) has asked not to write about him in every book if I recall but he is the cash cow. Thats what they tell him to write and, well man's gotta eat so he keeps writing.

Popular characters take on a life of their own. Rumor has it that Ian Fleming and Arthur Conan Doyle had similar problems with publishers demanding that they write more James Bond and Sherlock Holmes stories, when they wanted to move on.

Shadow Lodge

Set wrote:
Popular characters take on a life of their own. Rumor has it that Ian Fleming and Arthur Conan Doyle had similar problems with publishers demanding that they write more James Bond and Sherlock Holmes stories, when they wanted to move on.

Both Bond and Holmes were "killed" in stories by their authors, and later brought back due to popular demand.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / From The Realms to Golarion All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion
God tier list