Official 4th Ed campaign setting oversteps bounds [Archive] - Wizards Community

Official 4th Ed campaign setting oversteps bounds [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Geyhada
10-19-07, 02:19 PM How dare Wizards tell us how our new campaign worlds are to be laid out. As a DM, I know I have the right to house-rule anything I want about the game, and I never have to use a rule if I don't want to. But there is a big difference between creating a house-rule to make 3.5 half-elves a playable race, and making a house-rule about what kind of world my players live in. The DM and the players create the story. Go ahead and give me deities to work with, and create fun sounding spell names like Agannazar's Scorcher. That kind of stuff takes a little bit of the work away from me, and if I don't like it, I can change it. But don't tell me that the default campaign setting is underwater. Or on the moon. Or on a massive tree populated with laser-toting orcs. That's the kind of stuff the DM makes up.

If Wizards wants to make all of their published take place in a world where every town is separated by 200 miles of Bulette infested ground, they can go right ahead and do that. But they should not tell me that that will be my setting too.
Naderion
10-19-07, 03:43 PM They don't.
ssvegeta555
10-19-07, 04:56 PM You do know the default setting for 3.5 was Greyhawk? I'm assuming that didn't stop you from making a world for your own games. So I doubt 4e will be any different.
Hochiu
10-19-07, 05:28 PM How dare Wizards tell us how our new campaign worlds are to be laid out. As a DM, I know I have the right to house-rule anything I want about the game, and I never have to use a rule if I don't want to. But there is a big difference between creating a house-rule to make 3.5 half-elves a playable race, and making a house-rule about what kind of world my players live in. The DM and the players create the story. Go ahead and give me deities to work with, and create fun sounding spell names like Agannazar's Scorcher. That kind of stuff takes a little bit of the work away from me, and if I don't like it, I can change it. But don't tell me that the default campaign setting is underwater. Or on the moon. Or on a massive tree populated with laser-toting orcs. That's the kind of stuff the DM makes up.

If Wizards wants to make all of their published take place in a world where every town is separated by 200 miles of Bulette infested ground, they can go right ahead and do that. But they should not tell me that that will be my setting too.

Uh....

What brought this up? Was there some announcement I missed?
turalisj
10-19-07, 06:22 PM He wants to get this post out here first, before WotC actualy announces anything :P
Heros_Backpack
10-19-07, 07:09 PM Uh....

What brought this up? Was there some announcement I missed?

I rather think Geyhada's talking about the Points of Light (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20070829a) article.
Grod_The_Giant
10-19-07, 07:33 PM well...uh...given how little was in the 3.5 PHB and DMG about setting (not even a map!), I doubt this will have much of an effect. And making your own rough, generic world isn't hard either- you said you did it before. And, I hate to tell you, the "isolated islands of civilization" thing is what often seems to be the case in fantasy literature.
Urmar
10-19-07, 08:53 PM I think you're overreacting. Nobody says you can't create "established" worlds with large, safe, civilized areas.

The point of the article is to give DMs a starting point in thinking about their campaign so as not to be overwhelmed by the task. Kudos to you if you can come up with a fully-realized world.
Geyhada
10-19-07, 10:34 PM I was responding to the "Dungeoncraft: It's Never Too Early" article, as well as the "Points of Light" article that appeared at the end of August. I dislike the presumptuousness of it all.

From Dungeoncraft:

"Your players' characters will start in one of those points of light."
"This idea of the world as a vast sea of darkness, with only feeble, flickering points of light keeping civilization alive, is a core idea of 4th Edition D&D."
"In 4th Edition, the danger is large and the safe zones are small."

From Points of Light:

"One of the new key conceits about the D&D world is simply this: Civilized folk live in small, isolated points of light scattered across a big, dark, dangerous world."

Doesn't this sound like a proclamation about to how to run the game?

I know Greyhawk is the default world of third edition, but it isn't shoved down our throats. The only thing indicative of the Greyhawk campaign setting in the PHB is the pantheon. And those deities are in their for more than flavor. They are an actual part of the game mechanic. For new players and old, rolling up a cleric is a lot easier if you have access to ready made gods.

From what has been said so far, I am concerned that the "Campaigns" chapter of the DMG is going to say more than how to build a campaign. It's going to tell us what the campaign world is. I'd be content if they presented a sample campaign setting the way the DMGII gives us a sample city: "Here's a cool little campaign idea we had. Feel free to use it if you don't have anything better." But, thus far, they present this official setting as though the 4th Ed. rules couldn't function equally well. Wouldn't you be scratching your head if, eight years from now, they were telling us that "In 5th Edition, every city is on its own island and players have to travel in submersible sahuagin vessels to reach points of interest."

This isn't the 4th Edition campaign setting that they are talking about. This is the new <insert fantasy name here> setting, which may just happen to be the one for which they start publishing adventures. 4th Edition is just the set of rules that tell me which dice to roll when I swing my sword.
GoriceXII
10-20-07, 10:42 AM I realize it can be frustrating to feel pigeonholed, but I think nearly all game systems do this. However you buy it, you use it. That's how I feel anyway--I mean it's one thing if you intend to publish some work of yours, then you will probably have to find some way to at least compromise to fit what they are doing, but otherwise you are free do to whatever you want with the game system and setting, including scrapping most of it and doing your own thing.
turalisj
10-20-07, 10:58 AM When/If I get 4e, I'll still be using the same campaign setting I've been using. I'll just update the monsters to 4e. Simple as that, no need to start crusading.
Delfedd
10-20-07, 10:58 AM This isn't the 4th Edition campaign setting that they are talking about. This is the new <insert fantasy name here> setting, which may just happen to be the one for which they start publishing adventures. 4th Edition is just the set of rules that tell me which dice to roll when I swing my sword.

Exactly. I'm pretty sure that's what people have been saying.

Anyway, Its just using an example idea for a setting and showing how he'd build a world around it. I don't know if you ever bought dungeon magazine, but that's pretty much how it worked.

What I got from this article is that there won't be a basic campaign setting. There will probably be more advice on making your own setting, probably filling the campaign chapter with ideas like Points of Light. I can imagine this helping new DMs.

You're obviously a 4th edition Naysayer. I am quite excited on the other hand.

Anyway, they promised that there won't be any new ruleset. 4th edition is it.
Geyhada
10-20-07, 01:23 PM I'll admit that I was overzealous in that first post. In part because I hadn't quite pinpointed what I was upset about. Now I know: it's the language that they are using. I think they could be more careful in their word choice. Don't say, "This is how the game is going to be played." Say, "this is an idea we had that we think will be conducive to fun play." That might be the intention of what they are saying, but it isn't the actual way they are saying it.

I'm not a 4e naysayer. This is one of the few 4e things to which I've taken exception. I'm excited about a lot of other things.

That said, I think it's unrealistic to say that there will not be any future editions. They're fixing a lot of the problems of 3.5 (e.g. the 20min adventuring day, grappling). But they're still doing new things, and there are bound to be some problems. And eight to ten years from now, when they've learned from their mistakes, they'll put out a new system that plays even better. Besides, what else are they going to do when they reach the "Tome of Magic" stage? The quality of late 3.5 material is leagues above late 2e, but they still reach a point where the new, fun ideas don't flow quite so readily.
Aneutralshadeofblack
10-20-07, 02:04 PM Doesn't this sound like a proclamation about to how to run the game?

And making a game which is only balanced for a set level of magic items doled out to players isn't?

And making a game where morality is objective, and genocide is acceptable as long as the target of said genocide is arbitrarily designated as "Evil" isn't?

And making a game in which gods are tangible beings and frequently come into contact with their worshippers isn't?

D&D has always told you how to run your game; so does every game in existence. You've just never had a problem with what you were being told before today.
CombatMedic
10-22-07, 08:29 AM originally posted by Delfedd

Anyway, they promised that there won't be any new ruleset. 4th edition is it.

I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;)
turalisj
10-22-07, 04:34 PM I still see people playing 1st ed online on rpol.net. Good games never die or fade away. They just retire to rocking chairs. In a few years, when 5e comes out, you'll have just as many people p+b'ing about how WotC is going to ruin the game.
Thevail
10-23-07, 02:20 AM WotC can't ruin the game, the new FR setting can't ruin the game, the boards can't ruin the game...only the DM or really bad players can ever ruin the game.

And they can be replaced if necessary!:D
Ecalsneerg
10-23-07, 02:20 PM I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;)

Can we put 'Old School' in our sigs? Or should we get the noobies to put "Not Old School" there?
Hochiu
10-24-07, 11:32 AM I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;)

I'll point out that Wizards has stated (to my knowledge) that the OGL will not be affected by the change to 4e. I'm interpreting this to mean that they will continue to license out the 3e/3.5e d20 system to third party producers and those people will continue (for the first year or two, at least) to produce 3.5e system books.

Also I feel that given today's amount of information exchange, compared to that when 3e rolled around (far more people have cheap internet access now than they did in 1999/2000), the technologies available for long-distance gaming have improved well past IRC or other chatrooms, that 3.5 will never really die. That, and the marketing that Wizards put into 3.5 - the sheer number of people that ended up becoming players during the system's run - is another large factor. Creation of an SRD and releasing information to the SRD, helped to give out 3.5 information to the masses, and that won't change. It won't have first-party support, though, until Wizards feels that they want to sell that license, but I don't think you're going to have such a shift away from 3.5 until people start wanting lots of new material for their campaign settings.
Artifact
10-24-07, 01:03 PM I'm not worried that they will force this Points of Light thing down our throats; I think it more a concept than an actual setting (although I agree, the wording could be better-- tricky thing words, 'specially when English is a second language, so I understand).

Consider also that WotC will publish the Eberron Campaign Setting for 4e, which is very un-Points of Light-ish, more cosmopolitan (I think). So there would appear to be exceptions to any "rule" implied by the Points of Light article.

On the other hand, it does look like they will "re-imagine" the Forgotten Realms as a Points of Light setting. Personally, I'm interested to see how this turns out. I'd really like see the end of some ubber-NPCs, since I never had much direct use for 'em in my games anyway. It would be nice to see somethig official for a change. I vote Elminster Goes To Hell-- and stays there this time (he's been dead for years in our home games, so hah!)

:)
--Art
Hochiu
10-24-07, 02:28 PM On the other hand, it does look like they will "re-imagine" the Forgotten Realms as a Points of Light setting. Personally, I'm interested to see how this turns out. I'd really like see the end of some ubber-NPCs, since I never had much direct use for 'em in my games anyway. It would be nice to see somethig official for a change. I vote Elminster Goes To Hell-- and stays there this time (he's been dead for years in our home games, so hah!)

Weird. How are they doing that, do you think? Have they said anything about it? Maybe some big event's coming to Forgotten Realms with the change over from 3.5 to 4e..that'd be interesting. Wizards doesn't do enough event-suppliments as it is that advance the settings they have, like AEG does for their L5R series.
Artifact
10-24-07, 03:37 PM Weird. How are they doing that, do you think? Have they said anything about it? Maybe some big event's coming to Forgotten Realms with the change over from 3.5 to 4e..that'd be interesting. Wizards doesn't do enough event-suppliments as it is that advance the settings they have, like AEG does for their L5R series.

Something called the Spellplague. I don't have any details or specifics other than the name and that apparently its a "Realms Shaking Event" or RSE (very similar in scope to the Time of Troubles, which transitioned the setting from 1st edition into 2nd). There's bound to be details aplenty on the Forgotten Realms boards, both the v.3.5 forums and 4e forums.

--Art
Salla
10-24-07, 03:40 PM Consider also that WotC will publish the Eberron Campaign Setting for 4e, which is very un-Points of Light-ish, more cosmopolitan (I think). So there would appear to be exceptions to any "rule" implied by the Points of Light article.

Actually, Eberron is very points-of-lightish. The population density of Khorvaire is much smaller than you'd expect (100 years of war does that), there are huge sections of uncivilized terrain teeming with monsters like the Eldeen Reaches, Shadow Marches, and Demon Wastes (and of course, the Mournland), and there's plenty for PCs to do.
Hochiu
10-24-07, 04:10 PM Also, in response to the Eberron joining this points of light thing:

Given the general makeup of the 3.5 system and how they present encounter monsters, like large monstrous brutes that exist outside of civilization, all they're really doing is saying, "We actually have a title for this kind of game play now!". Most people don't want to play D&D in thoroughly settled regions of civilization, for whatever reason. In my experience, its because they don't seem to be as threatening if its in a civilized encounter.

Civilization vs. Barbarity/wilderness is one of the oldest themes in roleplaying, literature, and fiction, too.

I think the Points of Light setting type is going to be a lot more pronounced than it really is. In most cases, its a simple "We live on the frontier. It's dangerous out there, but we're safe here." mentality. I think we're going to see something a lot worse.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Geyhada 10-19-07, 02:19 PM	How dare Wizards tell us how our new campaign worlds are to be laid out. As a DM, I know I have the right to house-rule anything I want about the game, and I never have to use a rule if I don't want to. But there is a big difference between creating a house-rule to make 3.5 half-elves a playable race, and making a house-rule about what kind of world my players live in. The DM and the players create the story. Go ahead and give me deities to work with, and create fun sounding spell names like Agannazar's Scorcher. That kind of stuff takes a little bit of the work away from me, and if I don't like it, I can change it. But don't tell me that the default campaign setting is underwater. Or on the moon. Or on a massive tree populated with laser-toting orcs. That's the kind of stuff the DM makes up. If Wizards wants to make all of their published take place in a world where every town is separated by 200 miles of Bulette infested ground, they can go right ahead and do that. But they should not tell me that that will be my setting too.
Naderion 10-19-07, 03:43 PM	They don't.
ssvegeta555 10-19-07, 04:56 PM	You do know the default setting for 3.5 was Greyhawk? I'm assuming that didn't stop you from making a world for your own games. So I doubt 4e will be any different.
Hochiu 10-19-07, 05:28 PM	How dare Wizards tell us how our new campaign worlds are to be laid out. As a DM, I know I have the right to house-rule anything I want about the game, and I never have to use a rule if I don't want to. But there is a big difference between creating a house-rule to make 3.5 half-elves a playable race, and making a house-rule about what kind of world my players live in. The DM and the players create the story. Go ahead and give me deities to work with, and create fun sounding spell names like Agannazar's Scorcher. That kind of stuff takes a little bit of the work away from me, and if I don't like it, I can change it. But don't tell me that the default campaign setting is underwater. Or on the moon. Or on a massive tree populated with laser-toting orcs. That's the kind of stuff the DM makes up. If Wizards wants to make all of their published take place in a world where every town is separated by 200 miles of Bulette infested ground, they can go right ahead and do that. But they should not tell me that that will be my setting too. Uh.... What brought this up? Was there some announcement I missed?
turalisj 10-19-07, 06:22 PM	He wants to get this post out here first, before WotC actualy announces anything :P
Heros_Backpack 10-19-07, 07:09 PM	Uh.... What brought this up? Was there some announcement I missed? I rather think Geyhada's talking about the Points of Light (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20070829a) article.
Grod_The_Giant 10-19-07, 07:33 PM	well...uh...given how little was in the 3.5 PHB and DMG about setting (not even a map!), I doubt this will have much of an effect. And making your own rough, generic world isn't hard either- you said you did it before. And, I hate to tell you, the "isolated islands of civilization" thing is what often seems to be the case in fantasy literature.
Urmar 10-19-07, 08:53 PM	I think you're overreacting. Nobody says you can't create "established" worlds with large, safe, civilized areas. The point of the article is to give DMs a starting point in thinking about their campaign so as not to be overwhelmed by the task. Kudos to you if you can come up with a fully-realized world.
Geyhada 10-19-07, 10:34 PM	I was responding to the "Dungeoncraft: It's Never Too Early" article, as well as the "Points of Light" article that appeared at the end of August. I dislike the presumptuousness of it all. From Dungeoncraft: "Your players' characters will start in one of those points of light." "This idea of the world as a vast sea of darkness, with only feeble, flickering points of light keeping civilization alive, is a core idea of 4th Edition D&D." "In 4th Edition, the danger is large and the safe zones are small." From Points of Light: "One of the new key conceits about the D&D world is simply this: Civilized folk live in small, isolated points of light scattered across a big, dark, dangerous world." Doesn't this sound like a proclamation about to how to run the game? I know Greyhawk is the default world of third edition, but it isn't shoved down our throats. The only thing indicative of the Greyhawk campaign setting in the PHB is the pantheon. And those deities are in their for more than flavor. They are an actual part of the game mechanic. For new players and old, rolling up a cleric is a lot easier if you have access to ready made gods. From what has been said so far, I am concerned that the "Campaigns" chapter of the DMG is going to say more than how to build a campaign. It's going to tell us what the campaign world is. I'd be content if they presented a sample campaign setting the way the DMGII gives us a sample city: "Here's a cool little campaign idea we had. Feel free to use it if you don't have anything better." But, thus far, they present this official setting as though the 4th Ed. rules couldn't function equally well. Wouldn't you be scratching your head if, eight years from now, they were telling us that "In 5th Edition, every city is on its own island and players have to travel in submersible sahuagin vessels to reach points of interest." This isn't the 4th Edition campaign setting that they are talking about. This is the new <insert fantasy name here> setting, which may just happen to be the one for which they start publishing adventures. 4th Edition is just the set of rules that tell me which dice to roll when I swing my sword.
GoriceXII 10-20-07, 10:42 AM	I realize it can be frustrating to feel pigeonholed, but I think nearly all game systems do this. However you buy it, you use it. That's how I feel anyway--I mean it's one thing if you intend to publish some work of yours, then you will probably have to find some way to at least compromise to fit what they are doing, but otherwise you are free do to whatever you want with the game system and setting, including scrapping most of it and doing your own thing.
turalisj 10-20-07, 10:58 AM	When/If I get 4e, I'll still be using the same campaign setting I've been using. I'll just update the monsters to 4e. Simple as that, no need to start crusading.
Delfedd 10-20-07, 10:58 AM	This isn't the 4th Edition campaign setting that they are talking about. This is the new <insert fantasy name here> setting, which may just happen to be the one for which they start publishing adventures. 4th Edition is just the set of rules that tell me which dice to roll when I swing my sword. Exactly. I'm pretty sure that's what people have been saying. Anyway, Its just using an example idea for a setting and showing how he'd build a world around it. I don't know if you ever bought dungeon magazine, but that's pretty much how it worked. What I got from this article is that there won't be a basic campaign setting. There will probably be more advice on making your own setting, probably filling the campaign chapter with ideas like Points of Light. I can imagine this helping new DMs. You're obviously a 4th edition Naysayer. I am quite excited on the other hand. Anyway, they promised that there won't be any new ruleset. 4th edition is it.
Geyhada 10-20-07, 01:23 PM	I'll admit that I was overzealous in that first post. In part because I hadn't quite pinpointed what I was upset about. Now I know: it's the language that they are using. I think they could be more careful in their word choice. Don't say, "This is how the game is going to be played." Say, "this is an idea we had that we think will be conducive to fun play." That might be the intention of what they are saying, but it isn't the actual way they are saying it. I'm not a 4e naysayer. This is one of the few 4e things to which I've taken exception. I'm excited about a lot of other things. That said, I think it's unrealistic to say that there will not be any future editions. They're fixing a lot of the problems of 3.5 (e.g. the 20min adventuring day, grappling). But they're still doing new things, and there are bound to be some problems. And eight to ten years from now, when they've learned from their mistakes, they'll put out a new system that plays even better. Besides, what else are they going to do when they reach the "Tome of Magic" stage? The quality of late 3.5 material is leagues above late 2e, but they still reach a point where the new, fun ideas don't flow quite so readily.
Aneutralshadeofblack 10-20-07, 02:04 PM	Doesn't this sound like a proclamation about to how to run the game? And making a game which is only balanced for a set level of magic items doled out to players isn't? And making a game where morality is objective, and genocide is acceptable as long as the target of said genocide is arbitrarily designated as "Evil" isn't? And making a game in which gods are tangible beings and frequently come into contact with their worshippers isn't? D&D has always told you how to run your game; so does every game in existence. You've just never had a problem with what you were being told before today.
CombatMedic 10-22-07, 08:29 AM	originally posted by Delfedd Anyway, they promised that there won't be any new ruleset. 4th edition is it. I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;)
turalisj 10-22-07, 04:34 PM	I still see people playing 1st ed online on rpol.net. Good games never die or fade away. They just retire to rocking chairs. In a few years, when 5e comes out, you'll have just as many people p+b'ing about how WotC is going to ruin the game.
Thevail 10-23-07, 02:20 AM	WotC can't ruin the game, the new FR setting can't ruin the game, the boards can't ruin the game...only the DM or really bad players can ever ruin the game. And they can be replaced if necessary!:D
Ecalsneerg 10-23-07, 02:20 PM	I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;) Can we put 'Old School' in our sigs? Or should we get the noobies to put "Not Old School" there?
Hochiu 10-24-07, 11:32 AM	I don't believe 'em. I expect they'll put out 5th edition in a few years. This is not the end of 3E, though. People can play whatever edition they like best. I know people who still play AD&D. The nice thing is all the fan support on the Internet. 3E fans, welcome to grognard country- you're about to become old school. ;) I'll point out that Wizards has stated (to my knowledge) that the OGL will not be affected by the change to 4e. I'm interpreting this to mean that they will continue to license out the 3e/3.5e d20 system to third party producers and those people will continue (for the first year or two, at least) to produce 3.5e system books. Also I feel that given today's amount of information exchange, compared to that when 3e rolled around (far more people have cheap internet access now than they did in 1999/2000), the technologies available for long-distance gaming have improved well past IRC or other chatrooms, that 3.5 will never really die. That, and the marketing that Wizards put into 3.5 - the sheer number of people that ended up becoming players during the system's run - is another large factor. Creation of an SRD and releasing information to the SRD, helped to give out 3.5 information to the masses, and that won't change. It won't have first-party support, though, until Wizards feels that they want to sell that license, but I don't think you're going to have such a shift away from 3.5 until people start wanting lots of new material for their campaign settings.
Artifact 10-24-07, 01:03 PM	I'm not worried that they will force this Points of Light thing down our throats; I think it more a concept than an actual setting (although I agree, the wording could be better-- tricky thing words, 'specially when English is a second language, so I understand). Consider also that WotC will publish the Eberron Campaign Setting for 4e, which is very un-Points of Light-ish, more cosmopolitan (I think). So there would appear to be exceptions to any "rule" implied by the Points of Light article. On the other hand, it does look like they will "re-imagine" the Forgotten Realms as a Points of Light setting. Personally, I'm interested to see how this turns out. I'd really like see the end of some ubber-NPCs, since I never had much direct use for 'em in my games anyway. It would be nice to see somethig official for a change. I vote Elminster Goes To Hell-- and stays there this time (he's been dead for years in our home games, so hah!) :) --Art
Hochiu 10-24-07, 02:28 PM	On the other hand, it does look like they will "re-imagine" the Forgotten Realms as a Points of Light setting. Personally, I'm interested to see how this turns out. I'd really like see the end of some ubber-NPCs, since I never had much direct use for 'em in my games anyway. It would be nice to see somethig official for a change. I vote Elminster Goes To Hell-- and stays there this time (he's been dead for years in our home games, so hah!) Weird. How are they doing that, do you think? Have they said anything about it? Maybe some big event's coming to Forgotten Realms with the change over from 3.5 to 4e..that'd be interesting. Wizards doesn't do enough event-suppliments as it is that advance the settings they have, like AEG does for their L5R series.
Artifact 10-24-07, 03:37 PM	Weird. How are they doing that, do you think? Have they said anything about it? Maybe some big event's coming to Forgotten Realms with the change over from 3.5 to 4e..that'd be interesting. Wizards doesn't do enough event-suppliments as it is that advance the settings they have, like AEG does for their L5R series. Something called the Spellplague. I don't have any details or specifics other than the name and that apparently its a "Realms Shaking Event" or RSE (very similar in scope to the Time of Troubles, which transitioned the setting from 1st edition into 2nd). There's bound to be details aplenty on the Forgotten Realms boards, both the v.3.5 forums and 4e forums. --Art
Salla 10-24-07, 03:40 PM	Consider also that WotC will publish the Eberron Campaign Setting for 4e, which is very un-Points of Light-ish, more cosmopolitan (I think). So there would appear to be exceptions to any "rule" implied by the Points of Light article. Actually, Eberron is very points-of-lightish. The population density of Khorvaire is much smaller than you'd expect (100 years of war does that), there are huge sections of uncivilized terrain teeming with monsters like the Eldeen Reaches, Shadow Marches, and Demon Wastes (and of course, the Mournland), and there's plenty for PCs to do.
Hochiu 10-24-07, 04:10 PM	Also, in response to the Eberron joining this points of light thing: Given the general makeup of the 3.5 system and how they present encounter monsters, like large monstrous brutes that exist outside of civilization, all they're really doing is saying, "We actually have a title for this kind of game play now!". Most people don't want to play D&D in thoroughly settled regions of civilization, for whatever reason. In my experience, its because they don't seem to be as threatening if its in a civilized encounter. Civilization vs. Barbarity/wilderness is one of the oldest themes in roleplaying, literature, and fiction, too. I think the Points of Light setting type is going to be a lot more pronounced than it really is. In most cases, its a simple "We live on the frontier. It's dangerous out there, but we're safe here." mentality. I think we're going to see something a lot worse.