Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Khybers_Hunger 04-05-06, 08:55 AM	A long long time ago, in a galaxy far away... Well, actually, it was here on planet earth, but it was almost a decade ago... Anyway, when I first got into role-playing games, I was in love with Forgotten Realms. After a while, I started to get bored with buying the infinite supplements that were the only way to learn something I hadnt memorized. So I started looking around the RPG market, and to make a long story, shorter, but by no means short, after much experimenting and good times, I want to give FR a try again. Unfortunately, nothing is as simple as we would like it. Despite my nostalgia, there are a few things I cannot stand about the Realms. Need some help dealing with them. Any ideas would be much appreciated. First off, having read the all five Godswar books, I know quite a bit about the FR gods. And I dont like them for many reasons. Not only are they omnipresent, they function more along the lines of a bickering bureaucracy than a pantheon. I'm a fan of the Greek myth approach, and want to see more of that. Also, the immense amounts of high-level characters saturating the landscape. I'm not sure how to handle them. Black-and-white morality also bugs me, and it seems to be the norm. Finally, my last item is a problem with D&D in general--too item-centric! Any solutions people have come up with?
Lord Karsus 04-05-06, 09:28 AM	First off, having read the all five Godswar books, I know quite a bit about the FR gods. And I dont like them for many reasons. Not only are they omnipresent, they function more along the lines of a bickering bureaucracy than a pantheon. I'm a fan of the Greek myth approach, and want to see more of that. -Well, then as a DM, alter the Faerûnian pantheon to have the gods and goddesses "play nicely". I for one like the "bickering bureaucracy". If a pantheon represents all aspects of life- good, evil, life, death, pink, blue- there are going to be disagreements. The gods/goddesses of good and the gods/goddesses of evil are not going to get along very well, simply because of what they all represent. Also, the immense amounts of high-level characters saturating the landscape. I'm not sure how to handle them. -Simply, don't factor them into anything. Players want to meet Elminster? He's out, saving the day somewhere else? Want to visit Drizzt? Oh, he's away right now. Want to drop by and see how The Srinshee is doing? Oh, she's been missing for a while now... Black-and-white morality also bugs me, and it seems to be the norm. -D&D is supposed to be a game where the good guys slay the bad guys. This "moral ambiguity" thing that has been comming up lately is annoying. Good guys slay the Goblins. Good guys slay the Drow. They are all evil at heart. Evil is bred into them. Genetically, they are not very nice people. Some moral ambiguity is interesting, I think, but entire campaigns shouldn't be centered around this. Is that goblin tribe really evil, or just misunderstood? Are they truly bad, or just lashing out at a world which shuns them? Meanwhile, they sneak up on your camp in the night, and slaughter you all... Finally, my last item is a problem with D&D in general--too item-centric! Any solutions people have come up with? -Again, as a DM, try not to make things so item-centric. Place less of an emphasis on material things, and place the emphasis on whatever it is you want to be emphasized. As the DM, you have full swing of the world. If you don't want magical scrolls, or magical potions, or magical items to exist, then make them cease to exist. You know what I mean?
BrennonGoldeye 04-05-06, 10:20 AM	What exactly is a saturation point. If you took every NPC ever printed for the Realms and placed them evenly about Faerun a person could live 10 lifetimes and never encounter one. Long ago TSR made a place where you don't have to interact with cannon NPC's if you don't want to, it's called Forgotten Realms. There is enough landmass to hold 4 different D&D cultures(Faerun,Zakhara,Kara-Tur,and Maztica) and still leave 60% of the globe for the DM's own use. If you want to enter Waterdeep or Shadowdale then you have to deal with the people who already live there. Sometimes I feel like the argument against the higher-ups in the Realms has only one base, someone else wants the job. Well, this pond has some awfully big fish in it, and if you swim into thier corner you might get thrown into the frying pan. If you behave yourself most of them will leave you alone, they have bigger fish to fry so to speak. ;)
Mecha_Pope 04-05-06, 10:41 AM	The point to the high level npcs is to make a realistic world. No matter how big you get, someone will always be bigger. I made the game less item- depentant by giving my players treasure from the table two levels down. Then they receve feats every odd level and a stat increace every three levels. The only problem is you have to redo the monsters like this too to make things fair, but it doesnt take too much work. The players do get frustraited when all the monsters seem to have power attack though... :P
Faraer 04-05-06, 02:53 PM	Luckily for you, the things you can't stand abut the Realms aren't real. The Avatar books shouldn't be taken as a literal or accurate depiction of Realms gods (or, at least for the first three, anything else). Faiths & Avatars and the religion section of Power of Faerûn (an excellent book which will also clarify your third problem) are a better guide. If you look at the population figures and the scale of the maps, the number of known high-level characters is not particularly high. They wouldn't reasonably crop up in your game any more than equivalent politically powerful people of Earth feature in your life. What problems do you envisage dealing with them? As for morality, it's not so. As Ed Greenwood said,the ‘home’ Realms campaign (and as much as I can possibly make it, the published Realms) has always abounded in ‘shades of gray,’ with even the good guys differing in approaches and judgements of other players, and many, many examples of people just trying to get along in life, or doing ‘good’ things that had terrible consequences, or disagreeing on matters of style. Many of the struggles in Cormyr, for example, haven’t really been to unseat an Obarskyr monarch so much as they have been to get whoever is monarch, one way or another, to make Cormyr more like THIS, or that, or the other.On item-centricity, I agree about the 3E rules, but once you've noticed the problem you can fix it: give out fewer items, use slightly weaker monsters to compensate, don't have magic shops, and stress the history and lore of items over their pluses the way Ed's early Dragon articles pioneered.
Evergreen_Aldaron 04-05-06, 03:37 PM	Very simply put, I always fall back to one thing - It is YOUR world, not mine, not anyone else's. If you want to change something, go for it! Make it what you want it to be. Too much magic? No problem, tone it down across the board. Don't like high level NPC's? Poof, they're gone. All the information created is given as suggestion only, in the end you, the DM, are the only one who writes your own canon. Have fun.
Khybers_Hunger 04-05-06, 07:18 PM	Ok, you guys are reaffirming my nostalgia for FR. But I think my comments about the gods were taken the wrong way. I dont want them to "play nice." In fact, they play too nice. They stick within their portfolios and dont conflict seriously outside of proxy wars with their churches. By "greek myth approach" I meant that the gods should be irritable, grumpy, buut almighty people.
Faraer 04-05-06, 07:47 PM	Well, the real, ultimate nature of the gods is mysterious. In the official Realms, they act mostly through their clergy and occasional direct manifestations. But if you want to play up the Homeric angle, you can see that wouldn't be a problem. You'd have to make up most of what they're up to, but the same is true with everything else going on in the Realms.
Alac Luin 04-05-06, 08:55 PM	Black-and-white morality also bugs me, and it seems to be the norm. This is one of the things that bothers me, that people feel this is the way it is. (This isn't directed at you solely, it's that this is the feeling many have) Sure, the realms may at first sight, be black and white. And it doesn't have written in the FRCS a dozen times how "moral ambiguous" it is. Remember that Trade Caravan you were hired to protect back at first level? That was a Zent owned business. Remember that large gem you were hired to retrieve at 5th level? Well, you're patron was a member of the Cult of The Dragon. Now, you're (PC's) name has made it rounds within the Harpers who have you listed as a Zent and/or Cult of The Dragon agent.. Oh, and the Harper Agent that has been following you just sold your names and locations to an information dealer, who sold it to the Red Wizards who have been looking for you since you ended the Drug trade they started in the Dalelands.
GothicDan 04-05-06, 10:01 PM	Also, the Greek Gods of legend were fairly finite in comparison to D&D deities. The Faerunian pantheon is limited by the orders of AO and by divine politics. The Greek pantheon was the same; we see Zeus holding back the full might of the various Olympians in trying to defend Troy. There were obviously notable exceptions to this, when deities tried to sneak around him, but all were hesitant to do so, and some were punished for it. And none of them really made a direct significant impact on the battle; they moved mortals around, they gave hints/advice, they stopped a river from killing Achilleus, and perhaps most importantly, they bestowed aristea on various mortals. All of these things are pretty much just what the deities of Faerun do. And lastly, the Olympians were effectively immortal. They could be wounded, bu it was nigh-impossible for them to be utterly destroyed, even by each other. This is certainly not the case in Faerun, so the deities have to be less directly antagonistc. Also, the Olympians' powers were not dependent on their number of worshippers - which is another reason why the Faerunians have to "play nice." So, basically, the two pantheons share more than you think in terms of personalities, higher-ups, and structure. The Faerunian deities, however, while being overall more powerful than the Greeks, still have their key weaknesses which, when exploited, can devastate them permanently.
Bloodtide_the_Red 04-06-06, 01:25 AM	First off, having read the all five Godswar books, I know quite a bit about the FR gods. And I dont like them for many reasons. Not only are they omnipresent, they function more along the lines of a bickering bureaucracy than a pantheon. I'm a fan of the Greek myth approach, and want to see more of that. I'd say the Realms gods are very Greek like. They have thier fingers in all kinds of plots all over the world. I don't see bureaucracy at all. I don't think you can say they are omnipresent, plenty of stuff happen without them. To compare to Greek myth- -See the Chosen as the children of the gods as in Greek myth. -You also get plenty of heros that only get a light touch from the gods and do their own thing. -There are gods that are trying to kill each other...look at all the deaths in the Godswar. For some good 'greek' look to Bhaal and later Talos going after the Moonshae Isles or Ivim's attempt to kill Tyche(though this is a bit more complacated story here). BT
Michaelaw 04-06-06, 09:49 AM	i always kinda thought that though there was a definite structure or hierarchy in the greco-roman pantheon that the gods and goddesses where always trying to be a pain in eachothers arses. such as Hera interfering in mortal lives in order to get back at Zeus for some indescretion with a mortal woman. not quite the bickering beurocracy of the Fearunian pantheon but quite willing to **** eachother off and gain worshipers anyway possible. i really dont think there are too many high level characters populating Fearun, i see well experienced characters who have enough power to be daunting but enough weaknesses to exploit if need be. Take Drizzt for instance or even Elminster, Possibly the oldest character in Fearun who hasnt taken on lichdom, Drizzt is calm cool and collected but he is trusting of those percieved to have good intent and still a bit niave. Elminster is a powerful archmage but also an old coot who if youre resistant enough or just smarter than him you can defeat him. two best examples i could think of. and the rest of your complaints i think are wholly valid
Vanamir 04-06-06, 01:01 PM	If you don't like the high power NPCs so what's the problem? No GM has the obligation to have Elminster show up every other session so just leave them out of your games. And if you are still bothered by them have the players find out that those glorious celebrities are in reality nothing more than some big-mouthed braggarts with an inflated ego and public relations way above their actual skills. Some Gilderoy Lockheart rip-offs so to speak. :P Concering items all i can say is that this is less a problem of FR but of D&D 3E in general. But in the end you lone decide how much and what kinds of treasure you give your players.
Johnny_Cancer 04-13-06, 03:55 AM	My DM had a solution to the item-centric (I'm not going to say a novel solution as it's been done before), quests that gave small bonuses to various skills or abilities, especially when our FR party started going planar (no doubt inspired by the various bonuses obtainable in Planescape: Torment). He hasn't ever done any outright stat increases in this way but +2 bonuses of varying types to skills have been a common reward, for example when our party's dwarven fighter found an antique book on Imaskari architecture he got a bonus to knowledge of architecture and engineering.
Lord Karsus 04-13-06, 10:57 AM	My DM had a solution to the item-centric (I'm not going to say a novel solution as it's been done before), quests that gave small bonuses to various skills or abilities, especially when our FR party started going planar (no doubt inspired by the various bonuses obtainable in Planescape: Torment). He hasn't ever done any outright stat increases in this way but +2 bonuses of varying types to skills have been a common reward, for example when our party's dwarven fighter found an antique book on Imaskari architecture he got a bonus to knowledge of architecture and engineering. -That's a good idea, but I just see one problem. The party would gain skills too rapidly. Take the same situation, and the party finds books in the imaskari library about religion, combat, architecture, alchemy, rockclimbing and a whole bunch of other things. As soon as the party gets some downtime, they can all read those books, and get +2 bonuses on all of those subjects.
Yaeri 04-13-06, 11:25 AM	If you don't like the high power NPCs so what's the problem? No GM has the obligation to have Elminster show up every other session so just leave them out of your games. Actually: Forgotten realms campaign setting book page 5: "Elminster has to show up at least once every 1D4 sessions. On sundays and holidays it's ok to replace him with the simbul." Oh no, wait, that's my own hand writing... Nevermind then. About the items thing. I actually like the bonuses from various things, such as the book example. I've included several such occasions (also mostly through books) in my own campaigns. -That's a good idea, but I just see one problem. The party would gain skills too rapidly. Take the same situation, and the party finds books in the imaskari library about religion, combat, architecture, alchemy, rockclimbing and a whole bunch of other things. As soon as the party gets some downtime, they can all read those books, and get +2 bonuses on all of those subjects. But that would be completely up to the DM. Just because one tome is extremely packed with usefull information and grants a skill point, doesn't mean they all have to be. (In my own games I actually stuck to the rules and made those skill granting books magical) But it's easier to control it if the bonus skill points come through interaction with an NPC who teaches the PC's something. In our current game (run by another DM) we're quite low on magic items. We're levels 9-10 and everyone has about a +2 equivalent weapon and armor, and then 1-3 minor magic items or so. We don't run into adjusted monsters. We just fight lower level encounters and level up slower. (We're also bad at teamwork and our characters are whatever's oposite of 'optimised', so we fight even lower level encounters than just required by our low equipment) Anyways, I find the slower leveling up at higher levels actually more realistic.
Johnny_Cancer 04-13-06, 11:41 AM	-That's a good idea, but I just see one problem. The party would gain skills too rapidly. Take the same situation, and the party finds books in the imaskari library about religion, combat, architecture, alchemy, rockclimbing and a whole bunch of other things. As soon as the party gets some downtime, they can all read those books, and get +2 bonuses on all of those subjects. Not at all, the DM controls the flow of such bonuses. We couldn't just sneak into Candlekeep and leave as uber-gods of everything after reading all the books. In general these kind of items or NPC's who can train the characters are the goals of a quest.
Lord Karsus 04-13-06, 11:25 PM	Not at all, the DM controls the flow of such bonuses. We couldn't just sneak into Candlekeep and leave as uber-gods of everything after reading all the books. In general these kind of items or NPC's who can train the characters are the goals of a quest. -That is true. The DM needs to regulate properly!
The_Levitator 04-14-06, 08:32 PM	I too used FR in 2Ed. I made adjustments in that version to suit our groups' tastes and I've found it equally easy to do it with the 3.5 version of FR. I'm almost afraid to admit this in fear of being flamed, but in my campaign, there is NO absolute evidence of the existence of Gods. Mechanically, everything is exactly by the rules. The clerics have powers and spells and can create potions, etc. The difference is more of flavor. Our clerics perform certain rituals and prayers to get the results they want, they just don't know EXACTLY how or why their ways work the way they do. My players have just never liked feeling like inconsequent pawns (their perception, not necessarily mine). The thing that always bothered me is that, if the gods make themselves known, then there is no need for belief or faith. People wouldn't have to rely on faith, they would just know. By keeping them up in the clouds, clerics are rewarded with special "powers" because they have strong faith that their god is listening to and helping them. I honestly don't know how most DM's run their gods, but the few groups I've been able to be a player in make their gods excessively intrusive, meddlesome and plainly known by the average commoner in most cases. I would also love to hear from more experienced DM's here also on how they handle their gods' interaction with the world, and how obvious or invisible they are to the general population. :D
Karsus the Mad 04-15-06, 09:16 AM	I would also love to hear from more experienced DM's here also on how they handle their gods' interaction with the world, and how obvious or invisible they are to the general population. In mine, they don't. People are generally aware of them, in a similar way that virtually everyone on Earth is aware of the major religions, whether they believe one or not. I keep the gods out for simplistic reasons. I simply have no reason or desire to have them actually interact in my game. I also have the wall of the faithless being just a tactic of churches in order to persaude people to worship. I do keep the punishment for the false however :devil:
JaiaDrottsingr 04-15-06, 09:52 AM	About the DM thing, in my game, you'd have to donate well over 3,000 gold to get a minor blessing. For examples of the different help, Tymora would bring help along your quest, while Waukeen would have your day be one of your best.
Rauric 04-15-06, 10:00 AM	I don't worry about the high level people. The Realms are big and those high level folk have problems of their own. They can't always interfere with situations because of politics and such. I am trying to not worry about Alignment. I like "heros fighting the bad guys" situations but I like to have my gamers playing real people being heros then just cardboard cutouts. Plus I like it when evil isn't the twisting its mustache variety. Some of my villains turned out to be somewhat decent people to folks they liked :devil: . In my game the Moonstars, which is an offshoot of the Harpers, are about protecting the Realms at any cost. Meaning Manshoon will deal with any sort of indvidual if it helps the Realms in the long run. THis goes for his agents as well. This means manipulating adventurers (good or evil) to do his will, hiring assasins to kill certain untouchable folk, and other things that some goodly organiztions may frown upon. I'm wonder if Ed used an alignment system in HIS Realms? Sometimes with how he writes his characters in his novels I would say he really isn't concerned with the Good Evil thing.
GothicDan 04-15-06, 09:31 PM	I'm wonder if Ed used an alignment system in HIS Realms? Sometimes with how he writes his characters in his novels I would say he really isn't concerned with the Good Evil thing. Ed has stated on a number of occasions that the Realms were never designed with a definative Good vs. Evil alignment system in mind, and that it does not operate in such a way. It is based more on individual cultures and religions, not alignments.
Rauric 04-16-06, 12:52 AM	Nice. I run my Realms with lots of gray areas mixed with good and evil for some flavor. Where did the Alignment system come from? Gygax? If so, why did he come up with this little rule. I think it is fine when your dealing with kids and trying to direct them in a certain way but adults can and will play the game in a diffferent way. More like real life and not a comic book.
Lord Karsus 04-16-06, 01:01 AM	...More like real life and not a comic book. -Though, there is nothing wrong with comic books...
Rauric 04-18-06, 08:53 AM	-Though, there is nothing wrong with comic books... Meh. I've read comics since I was a kid around '85. I try and pick up the books I read back then and find alot of the same stories with characters with the same mentality. Kinda bored with it. Except with Spiderman. Hope they never make him "grim and gritty" ever. Anyway people mature and want a different style of play after a while. That is why games like Vampire and Deadlands found fans in the 90s. Some folks that don't read any FR novels might think FR is a typical D&D Good vs Evil game with Black and White morality. I don't beleive it is. It can be run that way but I think Ed made a game that can be run with lots of Shades of Gray. Elminster is potrayed that way in the books I beleive due to his insanity. Look at what Vangy was gonna do recently with his whole plot to help Cormyr. I run a heroic North game based around the Marches. I am fine with the party members switching from good alignment and going toward neutrality. They still do heroic things but are tempered with practicality. A few party members knkow they may have to do some nasty things coming up to protect the town they live in. One party member was part of the Blood Wars. He knows about gray espeically after seeing supposed angelic beings manipulate others to do their bidding. When my boys are old enough I will definitly use the alignment system with them. Then when I think they are mature enough to play the game without it I will drop it. I actually changed the detect good and evil spells in my games as well. I made them 7th level spells. Heh. I don't like the whole, "Ohhh he's evil, we shouldn't listen to him" plotbreaking nonsense. I gave pallys an ability to sense hostility in others instead of their detect evil ability. I am not a putz of a GM though. Some evil or shady people that interact with my PCs don't automatically want them dead because of their heroic exploits. They just want to keep them away from their little plots. Low levels that could just "see" who was evil whenever they wanted would go running around telling the town guards or leaders in most towns making doing anything illicit or nasty that much tougher. It just doesnt make sense to me to use that ability at real low levels. The makers of the game probably used it because their DMs were total jerks and any evil NPC they encountered would be out to get them.
GothicDan 04-18-06, 10:54 AM	Where did the Alignment system come from? Gygax? If so, why did he come up with this little rule. I think it is fine when your dealing with kids and trying to direct them in a certain way but adults can and will play the game in a diffferent way. More like real life and not a comic book. As far as I know, it was based largely due to the inspiration he received from Michael Moorcock's Elric Saga. Which is, by far, one of the best - if not the best - fantasy series I've ever read. The Alignment system, I think, has deviated a lot from what it was originally supposed to be - it seemed more to represent the cosmic struggles of philosophy, moreso than acting as straight jackets for individual PCs.
JaiaDrottsingr 04-18-06, 06:20 PM	Wait, do you still have these contradicting feelings even though you are jumping back up?