Ages of Krynn - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Dragonhelm Dec 07, 2003 11:27:51	This quote by Ferratus originally appeared on the Taladan Wizard thread. I thought it would make for a good topic. Originally posted by ferratus I have to say as well, that the 4th Age is awfully short to make the calendar pleasing, when previous ages were thousands of years long. Personally, I would have rather had them called "Time of Despair" and "Time of Mortals" in the "Age of Catastrophe" or "Age of Dragons". Perhaps something to think about for 4th edition, when people aren't so attached to the 4th Age and 5th Age labels.
#2 zombiegleemax Dec 07, 2003 11:56:10	The thing is, the Stone Age and the Bronze Age were both far longer than the Middle Ages or Dark Ages. It would be far easier to simply accept the 4th Age as being a scant 383 years long. At least some elves could boast that they remember the 'good old days', when all these evil races weren't knocking down their doors. Literally. Except all the old elves are probably dead by now, what with the Ogre Titans, the minotaurs, Beryl, the life-draining Shield, the hobgoblin army in Qualinost, the War of Souls itself, the elven migration across the Plains of Dust, Gellidus, Mina's swearing to destroy the elves and so on. It's really quite surprising there are any left at all. What are the Ogre Titans planning on doing once the elves have all died after being drained of blood?
#3 jonesy Dec 07, 2003 12:02:31	The time periods are fine the way the are now. Changing them would just create more confusion (not to mention that almost every novel talks about the Ages).
#4 Dragonhelm Dec 07, 2003 13:31:53	Originally posted by jonesy The time periods are fine the way the are now. Changing them would just create more confusion (not to mention that almost every novel talks about the Ages). Oh, I agree. I think the SAGA team did a great job of taking prior works and weaving a comprehensive timeline. It really brought all that came before together as one whole.
#5 zombiegleemax Dec 07, 2003 18:50:37	Well, I don't konw for sure, but I don't think that in our historical reality that people acknowledged what time/age they were in. It was simply the modern era at that time. It was later termed the stone age/bronze age/dark age/renaissance etc. after that time had passed. So maybe a couple of hundred or thousand years from the modern era in dragonlance, this whole time may be called something else. Just to give a real world example of what I mean, we have in our own history recently (relatively recently anyways) had periods of time called the industrial revolution, and we talk about the space age. However, who's to say that five hundred years from now that this whole time period could be termed something else, like the computer age, or whatever(I think I've heard this term too, but usually referring to the mid 80's and 90's). Future historians will see our time differently than we do, and will name it as they see fit. Just something to think about... . . . Before reading any further, if you haven't read the War of Souls yet, there are SPOILERS below... SPOILERS . . . However, the only reason that the current time in DL became known as the age of mortals, was because Takhisis (disguised as Fizban) named it as so. I might be mistaken, but I don't think she sat down with the other gods and talked about what to name this new era when she stole the world. Now that she is no longer, who is to say that this time might no be renamed by the people of Krynn, or by the gods themselves (divine intervention makes this whole topic much more complicated).
#6 jonesy Dec 08, 2003 1:51:27	Originally posted by vivisect However, the only reason that the current time in DL became known as the age of mortals, was because Takhisis (disguised as Fizban) named it as so. I might be mistaken, but I don't think she sat down with the other gods and talked about what to name this new era when she stole the world. Now that she is no longer, who is to say that this time might no be renamed by the people of Krynn, or by the gods themselves (divine intervention makes this whole topic much more complicated). But regardless of what they would then call it, it should still be the "5th Age". Just like the labels inside the 3rd and 4th have changed, while the numbers themselves have stayed the same. I don't mind if it's called the "This time period when Takhisis was being extremely naughty and then these huge dragons were wrecking the place, but then the other gods came back and laid some whoopass on them" as long as it's still numbah 5.
#7 ferratus Dec 08, 2003 3:12:39	Originally posted by jonesy I don't mind if it's called the "This time period when Takhisis was being extremely naughty and then these huge dragons were wrecking the place, but then the other gods came back and laid some whoopass on them" as long as it's still numbah 5. Yeah, like I said, something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels. Frankly, the fanwar dragged on for so long and so persistently that many people are now more attached, perversely, to arguing the veiws of their particular camp than they are for the setting itself. I'm not trying to single out jonesy here. Its a trend that can be found among fans of both the 4th Age and the 5th Age. I imagine it was the same way for Taladas back in its heyday. Now though, the hardcore supporters for Taladas have faded away a bit, and we can talk about how to best integrate Taladas and Ansalon together.
#8 jonesy Dec 08, 2003 5:15:00	Originally posted by ferratus Yeah, like I said, something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels. Frankly, the fanwar dragged on for so long and so persistently that many people are now more attached, perversely, to arguing the veiws of their particular camp than they are for the setting itself. I'm not trying to single out jonesy here. Its a trend that can be found among fans of both the 4th Age and the 5th Age. Just to clarify: I'm not supporting the current Age number-labels because of a need to support any given Age (which would be quite impossible as I no longer have a favorite Age). I'm supporting them for clarity's sake. If the numbers were suddenly changed, the new players and readers (who seem to have been your point here) would have a hard time separating what people meant by the Ages before with what they would call them after the change. In other words, backwards compatibility to the previous novels and gaming material is what I see as important here. Another reason is simplicity. It's much easier to say 'early 5th Age' then any label you might stamp it with. Then of course there is this what you just said: "something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels". If they are no longer attached to them, why change them at all? If they no longer feel so strongly about them, what's the problem exactly? Why remove a problem after it no longer exists? And no, I don't see a problem with how the labels are now.
#9 ferratus Dec 08, 2003 12:46:58	I think it is also pretty much like the Forgotten Realms' Time of Troubles. At that time it was a pretty distinctive split, due to the conversion to 2e, the introduction of wild magic and dead magic zones, and the removal of certain character classes. However, the Time of Troubles is now a distant memory and isn't really a big deal anymore. It is still the genesis of the church of Cyric and such, but it isn't a distinctive split anymore. I think the same thing will be true of the 4th Age and the 5th Age. Without a distinctive split, there really isn't much reason for cutting the pre-Chaos and post-Chaos war into seperate eras. It just doesn't feel right when the Chaos War was less of a tragedy than the dragon purge, the gods didn't really leave, and the rise of new magic was the only lasting storyline that occured during that time.

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

Dragonhelm

Dec 07, 2003 11:27:51

This quote by Ferratus originally appeared on the Taladan Wizard thread. I thought it would make for a good topic.

Originally posted by ferratus
I have to say as well, that the 4th Age is awfully short to make the calendar pleasing, when previous ages were thousands of years long. Personally, I would have rather had them called "Time of Despair" and "Time of Mortals" in the "Age of Catastrophe" or "Age of Dragons". Perhaps something to think about for 4th edition, when people aren't so attached to the 4th Age and 5th Age labels.

zombiegleemax

Dec 07, 2003 11:56:10

The thing is, the Stone Age and the Bronze Age were both far longer than the Middle Ages or Dark Ages. It would be far easier to simply accept the 4th Age as being a scant 383 years long.

At least some elves could boast that they remember the 'good old days', when all these evil races weren't knocking down their doors. Literally. Except all the old elves are probably dead by now, what with the Ogre Titans, the minotaurs, Beryl, the life-draining Shield, the hobgoblin army in Qualinost, the War of Souls itself, the elven migration across the Plains of Dust, Gellidus, Mina's swearing to destroy the elves and so on. It's really quite surprising there are any left at all.

What are the Ogre Titans planning on doing once the elves have all died after being drained of blood?

jonesy

Dec 07, 2003 12:02:31

The time periods are fine the way the are now. Changing them would just create more confusion (not to mention that almost every novel talks about the Ages).

Dragonhelm

Dec 07, 2003 13:31:53

Originally posted by jonesy
The time periods are fine the way the are now. Changing them would just create more confusion (not to mention that almost every novel talks about the Ages).

Oh, I agree. I think the SAGA team did a great job of taking prior works and weaving a comprehensive timeline. It really brought all that came before together as one whole.

zombiegleemax

Dec 07, 2003 18:50:37

Well, I don't konw for sure, but I don't think that in our historical reality that people acknowledged what time/age they were in. It was simply the modern era at that time. It was later termed the stone age/bronze age/dark age/renaissance etc. after that time had passed. So maybe a couple of hundred or thousand years from the modern era in dragonlance, this whole time may be called something else.
Just to give a real world example of what I mean, we have in our own history recently (relatively recently anyways) had periods of time called the industrial revolution, and we talk about the space age. However, who's to say that five hundred years from now that this whole time period could be termed something else, like the computer age, or whatever(I think I've heard this term too, but usually referring to the mid 80's and 90's).
Future historians will see our time differently than we do, and will name it as they see fit. Just something to think about...
.
.
.
Before reading any further, if you haven't read the War of Souls yet, there are SPOILERS below...
SPOILERS
.
.
.

However, the only reason that the current time in DL became known as the age of mortals, was because Takhisis (disguised as Fizban) named it as so. I might be mistaken, but I don't think she sat down with the other gods and talked about what to name this new era when she stole the world. Now that she is no longer, who is to say that this time might no be renamed by the people of Krynn, or by the gods themselves (divine intervention makes this whole topic much more complicated).

jonesy

Dec 08, 2003 1:51:27

Originally posted by vivisect
However, the only reason that the current time in DL became known as the age of mortals, was because Takhisis (disguised as Fizban) named it as so. I might be mistaken, but I don't think she sat down with the other gods and talked about what to name this new era when she stole the world. Now that she is no longer, who is to say that this time might no be renamed by the people of Krynn, or by the gods themselves (divine intervention makes this whole topic much more complicated).

But regardless of what they would then call it, it should still be the "5th Age". Just like the labels inside the 3rd and 4th have changed, while the numbers themselves have stayed the same. I don't mind if it's called the "This time period when Takhisis was being extremely naughty and then these huge dragons were wrecking the place, but then the other gods came back and laid some whoopass on them" as long as it's still numbah 5.

ferratus

Dec 08, 2003 3:12:39

Originally posted by jonesy
I don't mind if it's called the "This time period when Takhisis was being extremely naughty and then these huge dragons were wrecking the place, but then the other gods came back and laid some whoopass on them" as long as it's still numbah 5.

Yeah, like I said, something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels. Frankly, the fanwar dragged on for so long and so persistently that many people are now more attached, perversely, to arguing the veiws of their particular camp than they are for the setting itself. I'm not trying to single out jonesy here. Its a trend that can be found among fans of both the 4th Age and the 5th Age.

I imagine it was the same way for Taladas back in its heyday. Now though, the hardcore supporters for Taladas have faded away a bit, and we can talk about how to best integrate Taladas and Ansalon together.

jonesy

Dec 08, 2003 5:15:00

Originally posted by ferratus
Yeah, like I said, something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels. Frankly, the fanwar dragged on for so long and so persistently that many people are now more attached, perversely, to arguing the veiws of their particular camp than they are for the setting itself. I'm not trying to single out jonesy here. Its a trend that can be found among fans of both the 4th Age and the 5th Age.

Just to clarify: I'm not supporting the current Age number-labels because of a need to support any given Age (which would be quite impossible as I no longer have a favorite Age).

I'm supporting them for clarity's sake. If the numbers were suddenly changed, the new players and readers (who seem to have been your point here) would have a hard time separating what people meant by the Ages before with what they would call them after the change. In other words, backwards compatibility to the previous novels and gaming material is what I see as important here. Another reason is simplicity. It's much easier to say 'early 5th Age' then any label you might stamp it with.

Then of course there is this what you just said: "something to consider when people no longer are attached to certain labels".
If they are no longer attached to them, why change them at all? If they no longer feel so strongly about them, what's the problem exactly? Why remove a problem after it no longer exists?

And no, I don't see a problem with how the labels are now.

ferratus

Dec 08, 2003 12:46:58

I think it is also pretty much like the Forgotten Realms' Time of Troubles. At that time it was a pretty distinctive split, due to the conversion to 2e, the introduction of wild magic and dead magic zones, and the removal of certain character classes.

However, the Time of Troubles is now a distant memory and isn't really a big deal anymore. It is still the genesis of the church of Cyric and such, but it isn't a distinctive split anymore. I think the same thing will be true of the 4th Age and the 5th Age.

Without a distinctive split, there really isn't much reason for cutting the pre-Chaos and post-Chaos war into seperate eras. It just doesn't feel right when the Chaos War was less of a tragedy than the dragon purge, the gods didn't really leave, and the rise of new magic was the only lasting storyline that occured during that time.