Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mr_Miscellany 11-04-07, 12:59 PM	Borrowed from Clobber's Some Things the 4e Realms Will Do Right! (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=14245375#post14245375) thread: ...albeit a very risky one if it doesn't work out and they end up alienating their hardcore fan base. Stigger’s post got me thinking about what/who composes the hardcore fan base of D&D and the Realms. Hardcore gamers (at least as I understand them) are the people who are just a little too invested in the game and the setting. For them it's more than just whether a new splatbook will be good for their Realms campaign; that splatbook had better conform to canon and "not change things too much!" or it's no good and won't be purchased. Thus: hardcore. These are the kinds of people WotC would like to please, I'm sure, but won't lose sleep over if they don't. The bigger population WotC is targeting are the mainstream gamers, who generally like to have fun and are more concerned with that, then with what this or that splatbook will 'do' to the Realms as a setting. Should the good things about 4E and the 4E Realms outweigh the bad things in the minds of the hardcore fanbase, I don't think that will be a bad thing for Wizards of the Coast. ::::::: As an aside: I think the concept of fun, especially having fun gaming in the Realms, is a concept anathema to some hardcore Realms fans (not specifically hardcore Realms gamers). If something is fun, it’s also cool. To some hardcore Realms fans, a game designer saying something about to be released is “cool” is really code for “bad, canon- or Realms theme-breaking things are going to be done to the Realms!” The best way to have fun in the Realms is to keep it at a safe distance, people. ;) :::::::::: So, how would you define a hardcore Realms gamer? And do you think they 'matter' in the sense that their lack of purchasing future 4E products will hurt D&D and the Realms as a setting?
Myssa Rei 11-04-07, 02:12 PM	Treading on dangerous ground here... These are the types of threads where the hot-headed normally overwhelm the level-headed folks. That said, let me throw in my two-centavos, this once. My definition of the so-called 'hardcore' gamer in the Realms is the DM/Player who inserts their campaign into one of spaces in the Realms timeline, deviating in some little details (or a lot--in our campaign's case, the company that confronted Zhengyi), but still following the general 'frame' of the canon timeline (Elminster hasn't been permanently killed off, the Zhents are a visible threat in the Moonsea area, etc.). Often times these players are the types that love the lore and flavor of the settings more than the actual gaming aspect of the current rule set. When something drastic happens all of the sudden that doesn't make sense when refered to the pre-existing background, well, it's bound to raise some hackles. The same goes with drastic events happeneing again, and Again, and AGAIN over a short period...
GothicDan 11-04-07, 03:18 PM	This is an interesting thread, in that it seems specifically made to provoke aggressive responses without actually being insulting - an invisible troll, sort of. That being said, I think hardcore Realms gamers are those that respect the setting itself as well as the game-play. Otherwise, you're just a hardcore gamer.
Dark Wizard 11-04-07, 03:56 PM	The company hinted that Realms sales are slipping, but at the same time I don't think they've catered to these "hardcore" Realms gamers (in fact they seem to go against their wishes more often than not). I don't think any one view amongst the fans has ever been favored by the company more than another, the main and (really) only goal has and will always be what policies and plots lead to the most sales. However, it seems the company has lost sight of what makes the Realms sell and they're trying to find it again. I hope they find what they're looking for.
Mr_Miscellany 11-04-07, 04:13 PM	This is an interesting thread, in that it seems specifically made to provoke aggressive responses without actually being insulting - an invisible troll, sort of.I learned that skill from you. Swear to God. But....in many of your posts, as in my opening post for this thread, there's a kernel of truth based off of observation and some conclusions that are well reasoned. Albeit not generally likeable conclusions. This is my giving you a compliment....I can't believe it. ::::::::::::::::::::::::: Anyway, I know this thread will **** some people off (How can it not? This is the WotC FR Forums.) so that can't be helped. Still, I think we ought to look at ourselves seriously and take stock of some of what we're saying. If we're a slice of the hardcore Realms gamer and Realms Fan population, are we a big slice? Or are we a smaller part of an already small population? How close are our opinions to what most hardcore FR fans think? Are we that far off from mainstream fans that don’t take the setting as seriously as we do? Do we have an accurate understanding of what most other fans are thinking or will do in response to 4E? Do we know how most Realms fans like to use the Realms nowadays for their D&D gaming purposes? Do most people follow canon as much as possible? Or do they just pick the Realms and start playing D&D in it, canon be damned? A little introspection doesn’t hurt. Especially in a time of transition between rules sets and all that entails for the Realms. :::::::::::::::::::::: I think Myssa Rei’s point is a good one. Some Realms DMs take a region of the Realms and use it as a kind of structural framework to build their own campaign around, but they don’t like it when/if the publisher of the setting nukes some or all of that region. It’s like they’re throwing down the gauntlet and challenging a DM to either conform and re-work his/her game, or not conform but risk not finding anything useful in future products on that region. I don’t know that I would personally define this type of DM as a hardcore gamer, but I can certainly live with Myssa Rei’s point of view.
Mr_Miscellany 11-04-07, 04:17 PM	<snip> WotC makes a product that people consume for the purpose of having fun. Really, that's it. If a product meant to be used for fun instead makes someone get a little (or a lot) whacked out, maybe it's time to step back and take a break. I may not like everything WotC is doing, but I sure as heck am not going to get my hate on because of it. What are the words to that song? Slow ride.....take it easy.....
Lord Karsus 11-04-07, 05:53 PM	-I don't see the point to this thread, asides for igniting passions on both sides. -We already know that "hardcore" gamers are in the minority. We know that any entity (be it WotC, the United States of America, the United Nations, etc.), serves those who make up the majority. The United States of America "serves" the majority of the populace. The United Nations "serves" the majority of the international community. In the case of WotC, it would be "mainstream" gamers who play the game as a hobby, or whatever you'd call it. They buy the most products, for the most reasons, blah, blah, blah. -Changing editions in and of itself isn't a bad thing. Changing/adding to the Realms in and of itself isn't a bad thing. However, the way that these changes are being done, or are being handled is what is causing the most "disappointment" among the "hardcore" gamers.
Stigger 11-04-07, 07:01 PM	Not quite the interpretation of "Hardcore" I had in mind there... if someone were 'too invested' in pretty much anything, then I'd recommend seeking professional help, despite my generally low regard for mental health care professionals. As to my own definition, that was more in reference to the older fan base who's as interested in the story and lore as they are in playing the game, and who wish to see it grow and thrive. Let us put this in the analogy of a tree, as it seems amusingly appropriate... Some take a look at the tree, see disease and such, and perceive that the new direction the devs are taking in 4e as pruning off dead or diseased bits to make way for the healthy stuff and to keep the tree growing. Sounds like a good idea really. However, there are some that take a look at it, don't see anything wrong, and just see the devs taking the 4e chainsaw to the tree, digging up the roots, and sticking a new tree in its place, all the while saying its the same tree and that it shouldn't really matter. From my perspective, and to continue the tree analogy, I can see a bit of rot, but that rot was put there by the same methods that are being proposed for making things 'better', ie yearly RSEs for the sake of novels (which I see as the majority of the problem to be honest), strange ideas like the Shadow Weave, ill-conceived uses for iconic NPCs that should never have been used the way they were in the first place, etcetera and so forth. Who's correct? Who knows? It doesn't really matter, as it's entirely subjective in the first place. What matters to WotC ultimately is whether or not they make money and meet or exceed sales and profit goals, which is what a business should worry about really. Usually, that means putting out a product that people want, and the risk I was referring to was that they have a setting that's seemingly working pretty well judging by all of the novels and games they are producing for it, and now they are altering the presumably successful formula for something that's likely untested and unknown, hoping that the changes pay off. If they do, then good for them. If they don't however, the never acquire the new players and run a heavy risk of losing the ones they already had but alienated in the process of trying to get new ones. As to whether those old fans matter or now, somehow I suspect that they do. Those books didn't start selling themselves afterall. How many of those novel sales were gained because some 'hardcore' fan recommended them to someone who had never even heard of the Realms? How many were gained off of video games who weren't even aware of the Realms until they read something posted by those 'hardcore' fans on a PC gaming forum? If you alienate them, I think WotC runs the risk of getting the same word of mouth advertising they were likely getting turned against them and getting quietly trashed in the process if they aren't careful. As to your own definitions of what constitutes a 'hardcore' gamer Mr. Miscellany, I won't go into my thoughts on the matter, as none of them are going to be helpful to the thread in the slightest. However I will say that perhaps your own biases and dislikes are perhaps getting the better of you when it comes to interpreting what others say, and that perhaps giving others the benefit of the doubt in the intentions of their posts would serve you better. <addendum> To clarify, my contention is that the novels being canon and the scope they attempt to cover is the part I see as the problem, not just the RSEs they bring.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 07:50 PM	double post
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 07:50 PM	If something is fun, it’s also cool. To some hardcore Realms fans, a game designer saying something about to be released is “cool” is really code for “bad, canon- or Realms theme-breaking things are going to be done to the Realms!” What's annoying to me (and I'm not including myself in this group you came up with) about the word "cool" is that it's being used so often--it's as if certain people can't describe something articulately, so they just use the word "cool", and we are just supposed to take that for granted. If X is cool, tell us why it is cool.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 07:56 PM	-I don't see the point to this thread, asides for igniting passions on both sides. Nor do I. That's just my gut feeling on the matter.
Blibbering_Humdinger 11-04-07, 08:11 PM	What's annoying to me (and I'm not including myself in this group you came up with) about the word "cool" is that it's being used so often--it's as if certain people can't describe something articulately, so they just use the word "cool", and we are just supposed to take that for granted. If X is cool, tell us why it is cool. Well, it is a blessedly generalized term for something that is fun to do/play/watch/look at/think about/etc. So yeah, people use it a lot. But I really do wish people would expand on that term more often. Seems I can't initiate a conversation with anyone these days about a movie we watched or a game we played or a book we read and get anything more than a brush-off, "Yeah, it was awesome," in response. -_-' Why was it awesome?! What did you like, what did you not like?! For the love of Deneir, do you even remember the main character's NAME?!?! :mad:
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 08:29 PM	But I really do wish people would expand on that term more often. Seems I can't initiate a conversation with anyone these days about a movie we watched or a game we played or a book we read and get anything more than a brush-off, "Yeah, it was awesome," in response. -_-' Why was it awesome?! What did you like, what did you not like?! For the love of Deneir, do you even remember the main character's NAME?!?! :mad: Precisely. People should try to articulate...especially when they are trying to sell us something, like WotC.
Charles Phipps 11-04-07, 08:38 PM	Anyone here read Star Wars Expanded Universe novels? Some of the luminaries of Star Wars fiction upon acquisition by Del Ray included R.A. Salvatore, Troy Denning, and Elaine Cunningham. R.A. Salvatore still gets some death threats for killing Chewbacca the Wookiee at the climax of his novel. One of the interesting things about Del Ray's series was that they wanted to distinguish themselves from the Bantam novels that had come before. This was done by "updating" The Star Wars universe. The enemies were more violent and alien than the Galactic Empire, the violence more graphic, and the plotlines much more morally ambigious. Luke Skywalker was an individual they wanted to kill at the start because they wanted to make a permanent mark on the setting while also removing the idea that as long as the "Big Hero" was there that everything would be alright. George Lucas, either because he had a personal attachment to the character whom made him wealthy beyond belief or a recognition that the property's success depended on not removing beloved icons of American mythology, nixed that idea. Suffice to say, the results were decidedly mixed with a lot of fans. Del Ray's Star Wars brought a substantial number of new fans to the property, while causing a large number of previous fans to drop off. Star Wars novels, overall, saw a mild drop in readership even though that was still a ridiculous number of sales for Del Ray books. It seems an interesting comparison to make.
WhrenKehrsyn 11-04-07, 08:53 PM	If I had to define someone as 'hardcore' fans I would say people who not only enjoy the setting but respect it. To many people the fluff of the Realms, that is the novels and discussions of various Realms stuff on the RP books, are as much part of their enjoyment, or fun, as the game. I dont think one is better than the other and many many, like myself, enjoy both. I think for many of these people the issues with the update isnt that theyre 'too attached' but that they see things that were to them definitive of the setting being removed. Charles Phipps comparison is a good one, but Id say tthe transition from Bantam to Del Rey was more in step with the Time of Troubles for the Realms. There was a lot of change and certainly things fans didnt like, but when the dust settled the flavor and defining elements and themes were still there. Del Rey didnt rip the force out of the setting entirely. They offered new perspectives on it, which they also left up to the fan base to decide on (meaning while many of their characters have different views of the Force than we were presented with in the movies, many other characters also still hold to the more traditional views of it), but they didnt redefine it or remove it entirely.
WizO_Unicorn 11-04-07, 09:02 PM	I have done a little trimming here of really unnecessary baiting. There's merit in the remarks that this entire thread is really an invitation to flames and bashing, but I'm leaving it open for now, since most of the discussion has been reasoned so far. But we'll be keeping an eye on it. WizO_Unicorn
Charles Phipps 11-04-07, 09:03 PM	Yes, well the people who heard the "There is no Dark Side" argument by Vergere pretty much complained MUCH WORSE than the Realms. Frankly, I considered Del Ray non-canon because of that myself. I considered it MUCH WORSE (x1000) than anything done to Mystra. Magic will still exist in the Realms but the Weave was never so important as the Force. But it could be worse, no matter how bad the 4E Changes could turn out to be. They'll never be as bad as Dragonlance's changes to the 5th Age. In Dragonlance, they removed... * The Gods * High Sorcery * Radically altered Climates. * Epic God Rulers I think we should take note that the Realms changes are far less radical than the ones Weiss and Hickman enforced on their own setting after they left TSR.
WhrenKehrsyn 11-04-07, 09:29 PM	Yes, well the people who heard the "There is no Dark Side" argument by Vergere pretty much complained MUCH WORSE than the Realms. Frankly, I considered Del Ray non-canon because of that myself. I considered it MUCH WORSE (x1000) than anything done to Mystra. Magic will still exist in the Realms but the Weave was never so important as the Force. But it could be worse, no matter how bad the 4E Changes could turn out to be. They'll never be as bad as Dragonlance's changes to the 5th Age. In Dragonlance, they removed... * The Gods * High Sorcery * Radically altered Climates. * Epic God Rulers I think we should take note that the Realms changes are far less radical than the ones Weiss and Hickman enforced on their own setting after they left TSR. I agree with you on that regarding Star Wars. My point was though that while some characters do embrace that new idea of the force, many more dont. In world characters also disagree as much as you or I do. 'There is no Dark Side' is not fact, simply an in game idea some characters embrace. They didnt redefine the Force. I never liked the 5th age Dragonlance myself and stopped reading it very early on after that. But I do see all this with the Realms as very much a similar occurance. For my part many of the things that were difinitive about the Realms are the things the designers dont like and are trying to get rid of. The Weave was always something that made the setting unique to me and I liked the idea of it. I liked the amount of gods and I would have rather had more than less. The NPCs are what breathed life into the setting for me, there was people living in it. In any case I do see where your comparison comes from. Dead NPCs, rewriten locales, outright gone locales, reexamining of the metaphysical aspect of the setting, etc. Added as an edit: I work part time at a book store for the extra income on top of my normal job (grad school is expensive =0( ), and I have been asking people I see in the fantasy section if theyre familiar with the Forgotten Realms. If they are I ask them if theyve read the Grand History of the Realms. If so I ask them for their thoughts on the last two pages. Ive heard some interesting things, and its made me think that this is something WotC should consider doing. Honest opinions from a variety of Realms readers/players.
Charles Phipps 11-04-07, 09:33 PM	Frankly, I'm interested in finding out what will replace the Weave. Will magic be an independent force that draws straight from Raw Spellfire or will it come from a number of magical Gods that have their own mini-weaves?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 09:40 PM	Anyone here read Star Wars Expanded Universe novels? Some of the luminaries of Star Wars fiction upon acquisition by Del Ray included R.A. Salvatore, Troy Denning, and Elaine Cunningham. R.A. Salvatore still gets some death threats for killing Chewbacca the Wookiee at the climax of his novel. Obviously, that's uncalled for and immoral. Of course, apparently there are people in this world who will call for a person's death over the most trivial things. Luke Skywalker was an individual they wanted to kill at the start because they wanted to make a permanent mark on the setting while also removing the idea that as long as the "Big Hero" was there that everything would be alright. George Lucas, either because he had a personal attachment to the character whom made him wealthy beyond belief or a recognition that the property's success depended on not removing beloved icons of American mythology, nixed that idea. Good for him!
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-04-07, 09:42 PM	Anyway, I know this thread will **** some people off (How can it not? This is the WotC FR Forums.) so that can't be helped. I think it could be helped. You didn't need to give this thread a title that pretty much asks to start a fight.
GothicDan 11-04-07, 11:04 PM	Agreed. The title is blatantly offensive, for no reason. In fact, I clicked on this thread expecting something MUCH more aggressive and inflammatory than I found.
johnkretzer 11-04-07, 11:31 PM	Hardcore gamers (at least as I understand them) are the people who are just a little too invested in the game and the setting. For them it's more than just whether a new splatbook will be good for their Realms campaign; that splatbook had better conform to canon and "not change things too much!" or it's no good and won't be purchased. Thus: hardcore. These are the kinds of people WotC would like to please, I'm sure, but won't lose sleep over if they don't. The bigger population WotC is targeting are the mainstream gamers, who generally like to have fun and are more concerned with that, then with what this or that splatbook will 'do' to the Realms as a setting. Should the good things about 4E and the 4E Realms outweigh the bad things in the minds of the hardcore fanbase, I don't think that will be a bad thing for Wizards of the Coast. I am not a hard core Realms fan...as I play in Eberron, and have made homebrew worlds. I also have other interest then D&D or even RPing games...yet I found the changes very bad. They are very baddly thought out, inconsistent, and are counter to running a RPG. I also on a more literary note found these changes and the recent swarms of RES to be also vewry badly thought out. And in the end I guess you are right maybe WotC doesn't care about fans like me who would perfer realistic and more moderate changes but that is fine as I really don't care if WotC or even Hasbro stays in bussiness. I don't care that the game designers are 'creative' people trying to tell their story as of right now it isn't a story I care to read. As a RPG they are going to produce products that probably going to be around 90% useless to me as in my view they are narrowing the options of the FR too much to be enjoyable as a RPG setting for me to continue supporting them. I understand that the comic universes do this regulary(hitting a reset button) but I'll simply put a RPG setting is very different from a comic book universe. And in my many years of watching the RPG industry I can't think ofg it ever being successful. Also just a little sidenot on the 'mainstream'. In my opinion it is impossible to make RPGs appeal to the mainstream audience as it requires qualities I don't think you find in the average person. (Please not I am not saying gamers are superior to the average person just different) As an aside: I think the concept of fun, especially having fun gaming in the Realms, is a concept anathema to some hardcore Realms fans (not specifically hardcore Realms gamers). If something is fun, it’s also cool. To some hardcore Realms fans, a game designer saying something about to be released is “cool” is really code for “bad, canon- or Realms theme-breaking things are going to be done to the Realms!” The best way to have fun in the Realms is to keep it at a safe distance, people. ;) I do not like the use of the word 'cool' when things are being described to me for 2 reason... 1) To me using the word cool shows a lack of volcabury. It is like using curse words. It is immature 2) The word cool means superior to something uncool...I have just seen this use to much to dehumanize people as uncool. As others have said tell me why it is so great...don't just use the latest hip catch phrases. So, how would you define a hardcore Realms gamer? And do you think they 'matter' in the sense that their lack of purchasing future 4E products will hurt D&D and the Realms as a setting? I think anyone who plays a RPG is a hard core gamer. As I pointed out RPG is currently and never will be mainstream. And yes I think ignoring your fans will hurt the game.
Mr_Miscellany 11-04-07, 11:44 PM	Ive heard some interesting things, and its made me think that this is something WotC should consider doing. Honest opinions from a variety of Realms readers/players.You're on to something that I think is worth expanding. And FWIW I live with two med students and a grad student, so I'm sure you're strapped for time as well as money. That said, if you could just take a moment to summarize some/all of what you received in terms of responses it would be most appreciated and useful.
Mr_Miscellany 11-04-07, 11:48 PM	The title is blatantly offensive, for no reason. Hardly. You pass off the cuff remarks that leave the worst I can manage in the dust. But off the cuff isn't what I was after; the thread title is my position, conclusion and belief. And I'm willing to listen to alternative points of view. :P
Lord Karsus 11-04-07, 11:53 PM	Yes, well the people who heard the "There is no Dark Side" argument by Vergere pretty much complained MUCH WORSE than the Realms. Frankly, I considered Del Ray non-canon because of that myself. I considered it MUCH WORSE (x1000) than anything done to Mystra. Magic will still exist in the Realms but the Weave was never so important as the Force. -Heh, I got back into reading Star Wars novels (I always followed the comic series', though) because of those kinds of 'revelations'. I, of course, enjoy..."transcendentalistic" themes such as that, though. But, that just goes to show that what horrifies one "hardcore" fan brightens the day of another "hardcore" fan. I consider myself a hardcore Star Wars fan (though, not so much now, as I have other things to spend money on...but, still).
Charles Phipps 11-04-07, 11:53 PM	And by contrast to Kretzer, I find the changes to be interesting because they shake up the Realms and create new story opportunities. There's two kinds of fans there and catering to one risks damage to the other. Those who like Metaplot and those Who Don't. Those Who Don't are very vocal and the most offended by Metaplot changes. Those who do like Metaplot tend to not necessarilly have the same "brand loyalty" as the later as they tend to have their attention grabbed and move on.
Charles Phipps 11-04-07, 11:54 PM	-Heh, I got back into reading Star Wars novels (I always followed the comic series', though) because of those kinds of 'revelations'. I, of course, enjoy..."transcendentalistic" themes such as that, though. But, that just goes to show that what horrifies one "hardcore" fan brightens the day of another "hardcore" fan. I consider myself a hardcore Star Wars fan (though, not so much now, as I have other things to spend money on...but, still). Yes, I swear on these boards it's like I'm the High Priest of Cyric in a Temple of Lathanderites. Yet, oddly, everyone usually agrees with me on the Force.net boards.
Lord Karsus 11-05-07, 12:03 AM	Yes, I swear on these boards it's like I'm the High Priest of Cyric in a Temple of Lathanderites. Yet, oddly, everyone usually agrees with me on the Force.net boards. -Come on. You're not that bad. Maybe a priest of...Beshaba. :P
Lord Karsus 11-05-07, 12:04 AM	-Mr. Misc, where's Mrs. Misc?
Mr_Miscellany 11-05-07, 12:15 AM	See PM.
johnkretzer 11-05-07, 01:04 AM	And by contrast to Kretzer, I find the changes to be interesting because they shake up the Realms and create new story opportunities. There's two kinds of fans there and catering to one risks damage to the other. Those who like Metaplot and those Who Don't. Those Who Don't are very vocal and the most offended by Metaplot changes. Those who do like Metaplot tend to not necessarilly have the same "brand loyalty" as the later as they tend to have their attention grabbed and move on. Two points.... 1) I don't mind new story opportunities...I just don't see the need to kill the many before that..or ones that DMs and players have created themselves. Which major shake ups will do. 2) I disagree those who like the current changes were very vocal about it before it was announced that they got their way....and they did get their way.
WhrenKehrsyn 11-05-07, 01:48 AM	You're on to something that I think is worth expanding. And FWIW I live with two med students and a grad student, so I'm sure you're strapped for time as well as money. That said, if you could just take a moment to summarize some/all of what you received in terms of responses it would be most appreciated and useful. I am strapped for that as well. Fortunately my main job is in my department at my university and that helps a lot. It seems the responses I get depend on the nature of interest in the Realms the person has. Novel readers seem to not like the changes at all (in many cases these havent read the Grand History and I show them the book and let them read the two pages). When I watch them read it I usually get a lot of "Why would they do this?" "That doesnt make any sense" and stuff like that. They tend to be very unhappy with the changes. The people who play the game and read the books seem to have largely the same reaction. People who only play the game, and dont read any novels are a bit more receptive to it all. They tend to be largely indifferent to it all. Ones who play specifically in the Realms I would describe as cautiously intrigued while ones who dont or only rarely play in the Realms are usually indifferent to it all. They dont seem to be any more or less inclined to play in the setting than before. An interesting group is the ones who hate the Realms. This seems to be exclusively a group that plays D&D. I have not encountered a person who reads fantasy novels, doesnt play D&D, and hates the Realms (a few who have read a book or two and are indifferent but none who have negative opinions about it). They seem to be ecstatic about the changes. I think this is a group WotC is targeting but I find that if I ask them if theyre more inclined to play in the Realms with these changes they universally are not (thus far. I may encounter one tomorrow who is). Of all the people Ive interviewed in this way the very large majority of people who are familiar with the Realms were introduced by other Realms fans, by picking up a novel, and a few through things like Dragon articles and adds. I havent encountered anyone yet who just picked up a splatbook out of curiosity. Just to let you know, I do try very hard to keep my own bias out of the interviews. I ask a person if theyre familiar with the Forgotten Realms. If they say no thats all I have for them. If they are I ask if they have read the Grand History of the Realms. If not I pull a copy off the shelf and ask them to read the last two pages and then ask them their opinion. If they have I just ask their opinion. I also ask how they were introduced to the Realms. If they play D&D and if so do they play in the Realms. As an aside I do also ask them what they like least about the setting and what they like most. In the most department its almost universally an NPC or locale. In the dislike category I was suprised that the powerful NPCs almost never comes up, (I was suprised mostly because it comes up here so much and the designers have flagged it as a major issue). However the overwhelming amount of information to absorb is far and away the most common response. Im very tired right now so I hope this came out in at least a vaguely intuitive way. Hope it helped =0)
Lord Karsus 11-05-07, 01:52 AM	An interesting group is the ones who hate the Realms...They seem to be ecstatic about the changes. I think this is a group WotC us targeting but I find that if I ask them if theyre more inclined to play in the Realms with these changes they universally are not (thus far. I may encounter one tomorrow who is). -In your opinion, are they estatic because these changes are giving them a genuine reason to start liking the Realms, or are they estatic because something (seemingly) bad is happening to the setting, and their maliciousness is causing them glee?
WhrenKehrsyn 11-05-07, 01:54 AM	-In your opinion, are they estatic because these changes are giving them a genuine reason to start liking the Realms, or are they estatic because something (seemingly) bad is happening to the setting, and their maliciousness is causing them glee? Because thus far they have universally replied that this does NOT encourage them to play in the Realms I suspect its a malicious response.
Charles Phipps 11-05-07, 02:06 AM	I swear, I feel alone in guys interested in returning to the Realms because of this. of course, I was posting on the Eberron boards when I heard. I don't know how many former Realms folk are interested in coming back until they do hear about it through other channels.
WhrenKehrsyn 11-05-07, 02:12 AM	I swear, I feel alone in guys interested in returning to the Realms because of this. of course, I was posting on the Eberron boards when I heard. I don't know how many former Realms folk are interested in coming back until they do hear about it through other channels. I feel like I should point out that its a large chain bookstore about five blocks from a gaming store so most are 'casual' gamers or only recently introduced to gaming. Also my sample size is very small, not to mention plenty of other variables like the mindset of people in the area and so on. In any case it was mostly out of my own curiosity. I started doing it after reading a few posts talking about the silent majority. I do think it would be an interesting way for a company like WotC to gather feedback if theyre able to send a person or two out to various locations anonymously. Its certainly neither comprehensive nor definitive and it should not be taken as either.
Lord Karsus 11-05-07, 10:15 AM	Because thus far they have universally replied that this does NOT encourage them to play in the Realms I suspect its a malicious response. -That's sad, then. If something "bad" happened to Eberron, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or some other setting that I have some vague knowledge in, but don't follow because I don't like particular points of the setting, I wouldn't be happy. If anything, I'd be weary, because it just shows that things like that can happen to anyone's setting. They're gloating when they really shouldn't.
Alediran 11-05-07, 10:27 AM	-That's sad, then. If something "bad" happened to Eberron, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or some other setting that I have some vague knowledge in, but don't follow because I don't like particular points of the setting, I wouldn't be happy. If anything, I'd be weary, because it just shows that things like that can happen to anyone's setting. They're gloating when they really shouldn't. My thought exactly. Did I say what you needed master?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-05-07, 12:35 PM	-That's sad, then. If something "bad" happened to Eberron, Greyhawk, Dragonlance, or some other setting that I have some vague knowledge in, but don't follow because I don't like particular points of the setting, I wouldn't be happy. If anything, I'd be weary, because it just shows that things like that can happen to anyone's setting. They're gloating when they really shouldn't. Agreed, totally. I don't really get these "setting wars" to begin with, though.
Blibbering_Humdinger 11-05-07, 12:44 PM	Oh, but what don't you get? It's the old two-year-olds' "Anything you can do, I can do better!" sexism song, except it's a setting song, running something like, "Anything Ed can do, Eberron can do better..." or vice-versa. In short, it's simply people being simple, and they should all be ignored.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-05-07, 01:08 PM	Oh, but what don't you get? It's the old two-year-olds' "Anything you can do, I can do better!" sexism song, except it's a setting song, running something like, "Anything Ed can do, Eberron can do better..." or vice-versa. In short, it's simply people being simple, and they should all be ignored. Yeah, you're right.:)
Lord Karsus 11-05-07, 03:07 PM	-Hey, competition does..."beget" better quality products and all. But, being unecessarily mean? No.
bobsan 11-05-07, 03:39 PM	I swear, I feel alone in guys interested in returning to the Realms because of this. of course, I was posting on the Eberron boards when I heard. I don't know how many former Realms folk are interested in coming back until they do hear about it through other channels. Well rest easy Charles. You're no longer alone in your opinion. I would have to consider myself a Hardcore Realms fan by part of Myssa Rei's definition. In my own campaign, I've made alterations to suit what it was I wanted to do, while trying to keep some of the canon intact. I've no problem with altering the setting to suit my needs mind you. I just look at it as less to have to do (Keeping canon intact that is). However, I would have to say I'm not one of those who's dedication to the Realms is waning because of the radical change to the setting (Please note: I do respect the opinions of those who are against such radical changes as well. "To each their own" I always say.). Change is inevitable and helps to create new and sometimes interesting storylines IMO. Do I question a few of the methods used in this paticular case to reach this change? Yes. For example, I do raise an eybrow to some of the storylines involving the gods (Tyr Vs Helm - Only on Crystal Ball Pay-Per-View!!!). But then, I always look at it as mostly unimportant since as characters, they're probably not going to know what happened anyway. Do I wonder why they're taking such a large jump in the timeline? Sure. But then, I don't know the backstory as to why, so I'm reserving my opinion on that matter for later (It was about 100 years wasn't it? Please correct me if I'm wrong). In the end though, I am looking forward to the new direction the Realms is taking and what kind of stories will come about such changes. On a related note, about the only thing that would turn me off from the new realms is what Rei stated interested Hardcore gamers; the fluff. To me, 2nd Edition had some of the best fluff material printed. I mean a whole book dedicated to just shopping (Aurora's Wholesale Realms) that was, for the most part, not needed (meaning you could easily play without it as it added no rules to the game). But it added a certain touch to the setting to make it seem more 'real' (As real as fictional settings can be that is ^_^). I saw a bit of a decline in 3rd Edition with many a book filled with unnecesary rules and adding very little in terms of that 'old-days' fluff. Sure there were good bits in the books and they were not a waste of money per se. But they lacked that certain feel that the details in the old books had. (But then came History of the Realms and much of my faith in fluff was restored). But I'm deviating a little. My hopes are that 4th edition realms will not lose that feeling of Fluff. I would love to see books (and boxsets? ^_^) like Aurora's or Volo's Guides. Books that add more to the setting and less to the rules than 3rd did. There we are. My 2cp
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-05-07, 03:55 PM	-Hey, competition does..."beget" better quality products and all. But, being unecessarily mean? No. I mean the irrational hatred fans of certain settings have of other settings. I don't get the hatred of Eberron among some FR fans, for example. I don't know if it's competition or some weird notion that one setting "ruins" things for another (ie. people claiming that the FR somehow "ruined" Greyhawk).
Stigger 11-05-07, 04:44 PM	Zero Sum games is what it boils down to. If FR is getting funding for devs to tinker with, then that's funding that GH or Ebb isn't getting, and if some dev that many people really like decides to go work on Ebb from FR, then that means that FR is being phased out since the 'real talent' is being moved over to the new favorite setting. Toss in the idea that some people don't feel validated or secure in their opinions unless everyone agrees with them and that mentality gets really screwy...
Zanan 11-05-07, 06:08 PM	The company hinted that Realms sales are slipping, ... Hm ... that's what happens if you produce a rival setting and flood the RPG market with all the cool stuff of it ... as opposed to still updating the FR to 3E (never mind 3RE) rule- and timeline-wise. :allalone: As a novel setting, I'd assume that the Realms still sell fine.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-05-07, 08:16 PM	Toss in the idea that some people don't feel validated or secure in their opinions unless everyone agrees with them and that mentality gets really screwy... *laughs* That's probably the main reason!
Dark Wizard 11-05-07, 09:07 PM	Despite wanting to give WotC the benefit of a doubt, I can't shake the feeling that they're only taking into account the raw sales numbers without considering the actions they as a company took to promote, define, or plan the Realms as a game/novel setting (or lack thereof). Lasting change can only come through a real long term effort not a shortcut using a cataclysm (those only give short-term gains and losses). I pray that FR hasn't become like Star Trek during the later years under Brannon and Braga, where the creative people started blaming the franchise and the fans for their slipping ratings rather than their own burn out (one of them worked on Trek in one form or another for something like 17 years straight).
WhrenKehrsyn 11-06-07, 01:48 AM	Two interesting people today if any of you are interested still. The first Ill call Bob because I forgot to ask if I could use his name on a forum. Hes an old gamer of 28 years now. Doesnt play in the Realms, and doesnt like the Realms. But he is familiar with it. His dislike for it comes from mostly being in bad FR games. He sited almost verbatum the reasons the designers have given for his reasons in not liking the setting. He had not read the Grand History and he agreed when I asked him if hed mind reading the last two pages and telling me his thoughts on it. He said the stuff he read sounded like it would make the setting more newbie friendly. That with this they dont need to worry about feeling left behind by the other gamers knowledge of the Realms, they dont have to worry about NPCs overshadowing them and theres not an overwhelming amount of fluff to be learned in order to play. He also said it would not entice him to give the Realms another try because he is far too entrenched in the 'will never play FR again' camp, but that he believed it probably would not chase as many new players away as the old Realms did. He also admitted that his frustration with the Realms was likely due more to poor DMing and bad groups than the setting but also made the very valid point that when in those groups its often the setting that takes the blame. Later on I met Bill and Sam (also not their real names but, like with Bob I didnt think to ask). Bill was extremely new to both the Realms and to D&D. Sam is a gamer of 15 years and a FR fan for 20ish he said. Bill had read the House of Serpents trilogy of books and had enjoyed them. He wanted other books by the same author and Sam, who was a friend of his, had shown him a copy of Heirs of Prophecy. Bill liked it so much he bought the entire War of the Spider Queen and Sembia series. He liked those so much he bought all the Elminster books, the Spellfire books, the two available Knights of Myth Drannor books, and the Erevis Cale trilogy. Today they were there to buy Shadowbred and Shadowstorm. He had become interested in the gaming portion of the Realms through these books. Interestingly enough the only RP book he owned yet was Faiths and Pantheons because he had an interested in the Realms deities. Sam was with him because he wanted to buy RP books about certain areas he was interested and novels involving certain deities and Sam was going to tell him what to get. Sam claimed to own every FR book printed and even listed off his collection of FR comics, including both volumes of the Forbidden Sands of Anauroch. I asked them both to read the last two pages of Grand History and tell me their thoughts. Sam said he had the book and had already read it but he wanted to let Bill go first. I suspect he didnt want to influence Bill who was sort of expecting him to take the lead. Bill read it and the first thing out of his mouth was a question about why those deities were being killed off. He expressed a lot of confusion and frustration about it all and I suspect most of that was because he was just now falling in love with the old Realms. When I asked Sam for his thoughts he shrugged and said hes been a big fan for a long time and when the 4e book comes out hell come into the store, sit down and look at it, but that he thinks he wont be buying it. The best description for the way he responded was resigned. In the end Bob bought some Eberron novels and never even glanced at the FR stuff aside from the copy of Grand History I handed him. Bill bought the two novels but was so distraught that he decided not to buy any RP books, but as they were leaving I did hear him ask Sam to borrow his copy of Grand History and Sam said sure in a way that let me know that resignation was gone and he was about to show someone something he really loved. So I suspect that even if they dont like the new Realms, the fans will continue to show others the setting they love and maybe those new fans WILL like the new Realms. I dont think the Realms will die. If I decide to part ways with it when I see the 4e book, I think I can do it like Sam, a bit more gracefully than I thought a few days ago.
Zanan 11-06-07, 03:54 AM	The main problem still is that we have no real clue about the "new Realms". Two and a half lines on two pages paint a picture of Apocalypse and Armageddon having a field day within Realmspace, but not much more. IMHO, the Wizards would have done themselves and the fanbase a great favour if they had left these pages all white.
Yaeri 11-06-07, 06:51 AM	As an aside: I think the concept of fun, especially having fun gaming in the Realms, is a concept anathema to some hardcore Realms fans (not specifically hardcore Realms gamers). So, how would you define a hardcore Realms gamer? And do you think they 'matter' in the sense that their lack of purchasing future 4E products will hurt D&D and the Realms as a setting? When I hear the words 'hardcore Realms gamer', I think of an avid fan of the realms. Someone who is really invested in them. Someone to whom things happening in/with the setting can release pretty powerful emotions (good or bad). In the case of the upcoming changes to the realms this can result in disappointment, sadness, ... (All of which are cool :P). Or it can result in angry mob "burn the witches" behaviour. (Which is uncool :P) To me 'hardcore Realms gamers' doesn't hold any inherent negative connotations. Fanatic does however, as do immature, knee-jerk, etc...
Lord Toast 11-06-07, 08:14 AM	Hm ... that's what happens if you produce a rival setting and flood the RPG market with all the cool stuff of it ... as opposed to still updating the FR to 3E (never mind 3RE) rule- and timeline-wise. :allalone: As a novel setting, I'd assume that the Realms still sell fine. I’m sure the FR novels are selling quite well. As for the FR rpg material slipping in sells, I like to see links to the company persons that say this along with the actual sell figures. Why would WOTC/Hasbro make the first setting for 4E be something that is slipping in sales?
Stigger 11-06-07, 08:43 AM	Yes, that does beg the question a bit... could be for the purposes of a big, dramatic entrance for 4e that leaves the mark of the devs firmly on the Realms while at the same time wiping away that which has come before... Sounds very office-politics and 'new sheriff in town' to me really, but I have to admit, that view could be very much inspired by some things happening on the semi-home front, so take that with a grain of salt.
GothicDan 11-06-07, 09:26 AM	I know I don't matter, personally, in WotC's market schemes. That's absolutely why I vent myself on forums - misery loves company, perhaps? Well, and I do genuinely enjoy helping people understand about the Realms and providing facts concerning canon. I'd be more likely to create my own setting then severely alter the canon of ANY existing setting.
DMD 11-06-07, 11:13 AM	Just for the hell of it a definition: hard-core adj 1: stubbornly resistant to change or improvement; "hard-core addicts" [syn: hardcore] 2: intensely loyal; "his hard-core supporters" [syn: hardcore] 3: extremely explicit; "hard-core pornography" [syn: hardcore] Source: http://dict.die.net/hardcore/ :)
Rauric 11-06-07, 11:21 AM	"adj 1: stubbornly resistant to change or improvement; "hard-core addicts" [syn: hardcore]" Interesting.
MarkusTay63 11-06-07, 03:19 PM	A couple of things - Cool is SO subjective that it shouldn't be used to describe products. Its completely un-informative in that regard. In fact, if I happen to disagree with a certain designer about many things, then him considering something 'cool' will make me hate it before I even know what it is (having so low opinion of his opinion of what is 'cool' of not). The 'Hardcore' definition reminds me of the 'Trekker' and 'Trekkie' arguments back in the day. See, I'm much to OLD to couch things in a Star Wars framework. :P A Trekkie is a big fan of the setting - they love Star Trek and have seen every episode. They will gladly get in line for every movie, no matter how bad it is. A Trekker is Mr. Hardcore - he sits and watches the movies, and comments on everything that is 'wrong'. He can't enjoy the setting anymore, because he 'knows' they are making mistakes and it sickens him. I remembered laughing when a fellow fan told me he couldn't see First Contact because of the continuity problems - The Andorians were supposed to be the first people Earthers met, NOT Vulcans! :eek: I started out a Trekkie, went to my first ST Con in '75 and thereafter became a Trekker. Most Trekkers didn't WANT TO enjoy ST:tng because it was NEW and DIFFERENT. I didn't watch it when it was out. Years later I caught it on re-runs and realized it was pretty damn good, and was mad at myself for being so closed minded. So what if the latest series (Enterprise) has Gene Rodenberry rolling over in his grave - I enjoy it for what it is and the franchise be damned. :cool: I have been a fan of FR since about '92 (FR Trekkie?). Since I've become a regular on these boards I have found myself slowly slipping into the Grognard/Hardcore mindset as I have learned more and more. I will admit at this point my knowledge of the Realms is now interferring with my enjoyment of the Realms. There... I said it... are you happy now? :ahem: The title is blatantly offensive, for no reason. In fact, I clicked on this thread expecting something MUCH more aggressive and inflammatory than I found.I avoided it until now - I was going to click on it when I read the title, and then when I saw the creator I realized it was baiting, and I was in no mood to 'bite'. ;) So now to continue my train of thought - I have argued with many of the regulars here at least one time or another. In the ebil Illythiir thread I went back-and-forth with Dan and Alex-something-or-other until I was blue in the face - but NEVER lost respect for either one of them. They made valid points and proved me wrong at least once (probably more :D ). Recently, I and Charles Phipps wound up on opposite sides of the fence amid the 4e fallout. Without rehashing old arguments, let us just say he was 'pro' and I was 'con'. After weeks of discussion, I have slowly come around and now see some of the good that 'may' come out of all of this. He, on the other hand, appears to now see some of the 'bad'. The amazing thing is that we are now sounding very much alike in our concerns. Two intelligent people both able to enlighten the other to his side of a discussion, and meet somewhere in the middle. I don't know how he feels about me, but my opinion of him is nothing but respect. He never stooped to baiting, even when things got heated. These are EXACTLY the kinds of things that SHOULD be happening on a board composed of reasonably intelligent people. :) On the other hand, there are at least two people I can think of off the top of my head that 'come off' as insulting and demeaning. No matter how polite they try to be, they come off as if they are 'talking down' to the rest of us. Everyone does that on occasion - we are all bright folks that feel strongly about what we believe in - But some people here do this SYSTEMATICALLY. They profess innocence, but I doubt anyone could actually be THAT arrogant. :bored: Anyhow, I enjoy these discussions, and love learning stuff about the Realms. No matter how much we think we know, there is always something else... some stone unturned. I'm glad this thread has remained civil thus far - I truly believe we ALL have something to share, and can learn from each other and grow as a community. So many other fan-groups have split over issues and caused their franchises to dwindle in the fallout. I've been there and seen it - multiple times. Weather we play in 1e or look forward to 4e, we are all here for the same reason. Lets not lose sight of THAT. ;)
ClobberinTime 11-06-07, 03:44 PM	I think that Marketing wise FR and D+D in general is in a weird place right now. When I was a kid the technology that my brain, and the books brought to bringing a world like the realms to life, was much better than anything that could be produced in a video game. Also my entrance to the FR was through D+D. Actually 3e, since I was a Greyhawk fan. However now, people come to the pen and paper game from the video games, not vice versa. Almost every kid has played some D+D based videogame from Stormreach, Neverwinter, ToEE or whatever. I think the problem that WoTC is finding is that this audience is probably: 1, Not very math savvy 2, Not very patient and 3, Broad, and by this I mean not just pimply faced geeks that would fall within the catebory: **** inferiorus geekus. Girls play MMO's, and so do people with social skills. In the end 4e is WoTCs attempt to take D+D out of the sub-genre and make it ordinary and everyday. Imagine family dinners where afterwards instead of playing Monopoly, people play D+D. Part of doing this is the table top. The biggest growth in D+D related sales has to be the miniatures game. Honestly I'm sure most of us are shocked that it is as HUGELY popular as it is. So the plan seems to be to simplify, and make the whole thing miniatures compatible. Anyways, not sure how tangential this was.
ClobberinTime 11-06-07, 03:50 PM	Funny, it kicked out the scientific term with that begins with an h, ends in o, and has a om in the middle. Guess in some cultures this is still used in a derogatory manner. :)
Rauric 11-06-07, 04:17 PM	I really hope 4E gets a borader base of gamer to come to the table. It also takes the likes of the longtime RPG player to bring MORGERs into the tabletop version. I recently got my buddy involved, and he was a Frat guy who only played MMORPGs and PC games. He read some novels but never did tabletop. He seems to be having a blast since the tabletop can really be less linear than a PC game. If these people get into FR then that should be a good thing. I too was a FR snob/grognard a few years ago. I would get upset when I saw the "Kill the Chosen/El/Drizzt" thread or got bent out of shape when someone offered an idea that I thought was impossible to do in the Realms. That is not how it should be. The game should be fun one way or the other, even if the gamers want to destroy Toril itself. Make it fun.
ClobberinTime 11-06-07, 04:41 PM	Don't forget the repetetiveness, I just bought WoW, its fun, and I like it but I cannot imagine taking more than 1 char to 70.
Rauric 11-06-07, 05:06 PM	I have played it from the beginning but after the 1st 2 years I had to tone it down. It hooked me too deep. I also couldn't play in any tabletop games in that amount of time so it was a good outlet to get my geek on. It's biggest problem is you need to team up with a guild of 30 or 40 strangers to do anything. That should stop. Meh, oh well.
MarkusTay63 11-06-07, 07:53 PM	Funny, it kicked out the scientific term with that begins with an h, ends in o, and has a om in the middle. Guess in some cultures this is still used in a derogatory manner. :) Personally, I think that if I were a member of said group, I would be insulted by the fact that the filters here think that is an offensive term. I might even want to tack a "phobic" after the term, to describe said filters. :P I also think it's ludicrous that the filters won't let you use the slang term for urination, wich p__ses me off no end. ;) Don't forget the repetetiveness, I just bought WoW, its fun, and I like it but I cannot imagine taking more than 1 char to 70.I played 4 up 'till 60, and three more into the 50's, plus at least a dozen others at various levels. I stopped playing just before the expansion came out, because I realized all I was loooking forward to is leveling everyone up 10 more levels. Not that it would be fun, but rather like it was something I was obligated to do. I stopped playing with a month left on my account, and never looked back. I never even bothered to say goodbye to my guildies, because I knew they would talk me out of it.
Rauric 11-08-07, 08:06 AM	I keep stopping and starting now, especially since I started running games again. I just hop on to do battlegrounds. The whole game should be about teaming up with 5 or 10 of your buds though. Not "hanging" out with 60 to 100 strangers that don't give a crap about you. Tough 10 mans is what I was always looking for really.
Mr_Miscellany 11-09-07, 08:18 PM	Im very tired right now so I hope this came out in at least a vaguely intuitive way. Hope it helped =0) Yes, absolutely it did. It's always nice to get real opinions that don't come from the 'personalities' on these forums. And thank you for taking the time. If you happen upon anyone else who shares their opinion with you about the coming Realms, I hope you'll jump in and let us know what was said.
Jodin-of-Highgate 11-09-07, 10:16 PM	Yes, I'm an RPG hardcore gamer. I guess we don't matter. So enjoy your new video game called 4e and when YOU get tired of it YOU'LL leave and then WE can get things back the way we like it with whoever buys up the licenses.
GothicDan 11-09-07, 11:43 PM	It's always nice to get real opinions that don't come from the 'personalities' on these forums. The idea that our opinions aren't "real" just makes me laugh. I guess I have too much honor to infer those who disagree with me have sentiments that are inherently disingenuous. PS: <3 you, Whren! It's good to see you active again!
Mr_Miscellany 11-10-07, 12:35 AM	The idea that our opinions aren't "real" just makes me laugh. I guess I have too much honor to infer those who disagree with me have sentiments that are inherently disingenuous. You, honerable? Did hell freeze over while I was gone? But yeah, I'd consider you a 'personality' on the forums. So keep laughing. :P
johnkretzer 11-10-07, 12:40 AM	You, honerable? Did hell freeze over while I was gone? But yeah, I'd consider you a 'personality' on the forums. So keep laughing. :P Um what is a 'personality'? I mean do you think we aren't real people or something?
MarkusTay63 11-10-07, 12:47 AM	I'm pretty real... all three hundred loveable pounds of me. :dancin: It don't get much realer then that, baby. :P
johnkretzer 11-10-07, 12:53 AM	I'm pretty real... all three hundred loveable pounds of me. :dancin: It don't get much realer then that, baby. :P Maybe we are not real...maybe we only exist in Mr_Miscellany's mind to give him easily to beat opponents so he can feel better about himself....;)
Rauric 11-10-07, 01:02 AM	Yes, I'm an RPG hardcore gamer. I guess we don't matter. So enjoy your new video game called 4e and when YOU get tired of it YOU'LL leave and then WE can get things back the way we like it with whoever buys up the licenses. Wrong topic. The anti 4E is on the 4E forums. This is a FR 4E dispute. Plus you really made no sense. ;)
Mkhaiwati 11-10-07, 03:23 AM	A couple of things - I have been a fan of FR since about '92 (FR Trekkie?). Since I've become a regular on these boards I have found myself slowly slipping into the Grognard/Hardcore mindset as I have learned more and more. I will admit at this point my knowledge of the Realms is now interferring with my enjoyment of the Realms. (snip) On the other hand, there are at least two people I can think of off the top of my head that 'come off' as insulting and demeaning. No matter how polite they try to be, they come off as if they are 'talking down' to the rest of us. Everyone does that on occasion - we are all bright folks that feel strongly about what we believe in - But some people here do this SYSTEMATICALLY. They profess innocence, but I doubt anyone could actually be THAT arrogant. :bored: Hey! I resemble that last remark! I actually agree with the first item you mentioned, about knowledge interfering part. Ignorance is bliss. (repeat that mantra, I do often. The more you know, the more people expect out of you for the same pay. ... wait, not real life and job here... forget the last part.) I was a member of a re-creation group (yes, I was a member of SCA) and the more I got into it, the more I was involved, the less fun I seemed to have. Too many responsibilities, expectations, general cr** from others. I cut back on what I was involved in, only did what I really, really wanted, and began to have more fun. Sometimes getting in to deep to a hobby can make it less like a hobby, and less fun. My definition of hardcore is very similar to what others have said, with the emotional attachment/investment. I would also add that a hardcore FR person would probably always purchase the latest book as soon as it comes out. Checking with the FLGS on due dates "Is it there, yet?", gotta get my fix, gotta catch them all. They need the latest supplement for the game, or the fluff if there is any, or just want to beat the others in the group and read the latest fiction in some other area.
WhrenKehrsyn 11-10-07, 03:52 AM	Yes, absolutely it did. It's always nice to get real opinions that don't come from the 'personalities' on these forums. And thank you for taking the time. If you happen upon anyone else who shares their opinion with you about the coming Realms, I hope you'll jump in and let us know what was said. Im glad it was useful information. Pretty much what I said in the post you quoted is still true and I think Ive reached that point where the sample size is large enough that Im not going to get anymore real deviation in responses than what I already have. Anyhow its enough to satisfy my curiousity regarding the 'silent majority' so I probably wont be doing many more interviews. The breakdown is (and before anyone comments that theyre in x category but dont conform to my assesment of their group, these are the most common responses and of course dont define everyone in said group): Novel readers and people who both read novels and play D&D in the Realms hate it. People who play D&D in the Realms but dont read the novels are cautiously intrigued. People who play D&D but not in the Realms are indifferent, and may or may not pick up the campaign setting. People who hate the Realms love the changes but most likely wont bother with the Realms any more than before. People who are new to the Realms and enjoying it are confused and a bit put off by the changes. People who are new to D&D but have no previous experience with the Realms are intrigued but no more so than with other settings (its ALL new and interesting to them). My conclusion is that WotC IS appealing to most of the groups they hope to with the new Realms. Established fans are, for the most part, not happy about it. WotC probably expects some of these to jump ship, but to gain more than they lose. I also think WotC is expecting more of us established fans to roll with it than to jump ship. From what Ive seen in this little project though, I dont think as many will accept it as they were hoping. 4e FR is truly being aimed at an entirely new audience. <3 you, Whren! It's good to see you active again!Thanks Dan =0) Its good to see you too! Ive been lurking but I dont have all that much time to devote to posting these days.
Blibbering_Humdinger 11-10-07, 04:00 AM	My definition of hardcore is very similar to what others have said, with the emotional attachment/investment. I would also add that a hardcore FR person would probably always purchase the latest book as soon as it comes out. Checking with the FLGS on due dates "Is it there, yet?", gotta get my fix, gotta catch them all. They need the latest supplement for the game, or the fluff if there is any, or just want to beat the others in the group and read the latest fiction in some other area. And then they complain about the money they wasted on crap products. :D Kidding, kidding, don't draw your daggers just yet. (Wait 'til my back is turned, if you really want to get me. :P ) But there is one point worth mention. "Hardcore" is "hardcore" for a reason... and that is, hardcore (insert person here) are called thus because their involvement/talent/obsession/whatever in whatever they're hardcore at is above the norm. I.E. they're hardcore because they're peculiarly dedicated. They are not the norm, else "hardcore" wouldn't be "hardcore" at all--that term would be given to some higher/grander/more unbelievable level of dedication. So no, I don't think there are enough hardcore Realms gamers to "matter," at least not to the point where they have all of Abeir-Toril under their thumbs with their Iron Throne economic advantage. Wizards of the Coast takes into account the entire target audience, of which hardcore fans are but a part, and a part that accounts for (I would guess) no more than one third of the whole. They take into account--NEED to take into account--the less-involved buyers, the potential new buyers, the people who previously wouldn't have given them the time of day but maybe, just maybe, might be swayed into checking their stuff out... in short, the general public within the fairly broad age group of approximately kid-age to just shy of elderly--anyone who can and would play a game or read a book and if needed garner their parents' permission regarding the content. It's not all about pleasing existing customers--they need to charm in new ones--Dire Charm them if possible. The key is balance. What sort of juggling act can Wizards of the Coast put on, I wonder? We'll have to wait for the actual product to see...
'Arry 11-10-07, 09:30 AM	I don't know if I count as a hardcore Realms gamer or not, as the only D&D I play thesedays is in the Realms. However Mr Miscellany I fear that your thread title is correct. I know that WotC must continue to make a profit in order to survive, and that they want to make as much profit as they can. That's the nature of business. I am not opposed to change in the FR per se, but the nature of the changes that WotC have revealed so far does little to convince me that I want to buy 4E FR. One of the caveats that WotC have put out, that Elminster and Drizzt both survive, convinces me that the novel market is more important to WotC than RPG players. I have no idea what proportion of D&D players play FRs but I can quite believe we are in the minority. How many people, like me, feel that the changes announced and the rationale for them destroys my willing suspension of disbelief, I have no way of knowing. Taken together the numbers involved probably are not enough to count in WotC's calculations. They are gambling that the number of new FR fans brought in will outweigh the number that they lose. We will see if that is correct or not. Unfortunately, from what I have already seen, I probably won't be along for the ride. BTW I'm glad I'm not the only one to find new FR and 4E being described as 'cool' very irritating. WHY is it 'cool'? Come on WotC, explain more fully!
GothicDan 11-10-07, 09:44 AM	My conclusion is that WotC IS appealing to most of the groups they hope to with the new Realms. Established fans are, for the most part, not happy about it. WotC probably expects some of these to jump ship, but to gain more than they lose. I also think WotC is expecting more of us established fans to roll with it than to jump ship. From what Ive seen in this little project though, I dont think as many will accept it as they were hoping. 4e FR is truly being aimed at an entirely new audience. That pretty much sums up what a lot of us felt from the beginning, but it's good to have some sort of stats to back it up. Good job, Whren. :)
Mr_Miscellany 11-10-07, 12:17 PM	From what Ive seen in this little project though, I dont think as many will accept it as they were hoping. 4e FR is truly being aimed at an entirely new audience. ...so far, I would agree with you on you conclusions. WotC gambled (with success) on the transition of FR gamers from 2E to 3E, and picked up new fans as well. IMO it will hinge on the new mechanics as much as the latest FR Campaign Guide. When I talk to people at my gaming table and at my FLGS, they say they're upset at having purchased all the books (FR and non-FR) over time, only to have to start over. However, most say they will cerainly take a look at the new core rules once they hit the store shelves....if those rules are good, they will end up purchasing the 4E PHB, DMG and MM...and likely get dragged right into the new edition and will take it for a spin at the gaming table. IMO there are more hardcore non-Realms gamers than Realms Gamers (the former being people that've played D&D with more than one rules-set, and who actively play other gaming systems). I think these are the people that will carry 4E D&D forward to success, but I don't know if they'll carry the Realms forward. The Realms needs to showcase the 4E mechanics. Without that the Realms has an even chance of being a flop.
Mkhaiwati 11-10-07, 02:02 PM	Another item I forgot to add to my post before. Many people against the Realms do so because of bad past experiences. That is true with any RPG or setting. I find that the reason a person hates such-and-such game is a bad GM. A good GM can usually make a game fun enough that bad rules become a small annoyance. A bad GM can make a cadillac game seem like a yugo. I am against 4e FR. I hate the changes. However, I also know that if I get with a group that we are enjoying ourselves and having fun, and we dip into the 4e FR, I will probably play in it. Same goes for 4e in general. From what I have seen, I think it could be a good system. I say could because there is a lot of marketing spin out there, and I will need to see the finished product. I also have most 3.5 books, so I can happily keep gaming with those till I turn 100 years of age. But again, the right group can turn that around.
MarkusTay63 11-10-07, 02:45 PM	IMO there are more hardcore non-Realms gamers than Realms Gamers (the former being people that've played D&D with more than one rules-set, and who actively play other gaming systems). I think these are the people that will carry 4E D&D forward to success, but I don't know if they'll carry the Realms forward. The Realms needs to showcase the 4E mechanics. Without that the Realms has an even chance of being a flop.Well said... :clap: First, I've been on the same page for a week or more with Charles Phipps, and now I'm agreeing with Miscellany. :eek: Will wonders never cease? :P But you're right, I'm more of a Hardcore Gamer (D&D) then a Hardcore FR guy. I HATED FR when it was first released by TSR, because it took the spotlight off my beloved Greyhawk - then the same thing happened when Eberron starting taking attention away from FR. I like the idea of new rules - I feel the 3e rules are the best to date, and truly feel that the rules just keep getting better and better. I don't like the idea that they are 'dumbing things down', which it does sound like, but I will wait and see before I make any judgements regarding the rules. In some ways, simplification may enhance game-play, since my table is more about RPG then mechanics anyway. I eagerly await the new rules and hope they live up to my expectations. But FR.... :nonono: Even you have to admit that some of the things we're hearing are a bit 'frightening'. I'm not saying the new setting won't be good - I'm just saying that if the changes are dramatic as we expect them to be then it may not really BE FR anymore. I have mixed feelings about the Realms being the 4e 'showcase setting' - I LOVE that FR is in the spotlight again, but I hate the idea that we are the Guinea Pig (they will work out most of the bugs in the first year, which means Eberron will get the 'corrected' rules). I do agree that this is some kind of last desperate attempt to breath new life into a setting that has been 'falling-off' with new gamers, and for that alone I applaud the designers. It is definately something worth saving, and I think that is the ONE THING all of us here on these boards would like to see happen. No one here wants to see FR go the way of GH... :( I was a member of a re-creation group (yes, I was a member of SCA) and the more I got into it, the more I was involved, the less fun I seemed to have.Perfect example! I was 'involved' in the SCA as well, back in College and then later when I found out my in-laws (of all people!) had gotten involved. My Father in-law became an archer for the Kingdom, and my Bro-in-law a Knight (he was the only one who could afford the armor!). I used to go shooting with the old man on occasion, and I was pretty good back in my college days. He wanted to know if I wanted to join the 'Royal Archers', but I wasn't looking for that kind of commitment. I just wanted to go to events and drink the Mead. :D So you're definately right on the money with that one - the group kept expecting more and more from them (they had a HUGE house with tons of property) - even hosting stuff at their home, and members would just 'drop -by' and expect to be 'put up' (They met tons of folks at Pennsic). After a time it became a chore and they dropped out all-together. That what happens when you turn 'fun' into 'work'. :cool:
DreamStalker 11-10-07, 05:50 PM	I do agree that this is some kind of last desperate attempt to breath new life into a setting that has been 'falling-off' with new gamers, and for that alone I applaud the designers. It is definately something worth saving, and I think that is the ONE THING all of us here on these boards would like to see happen. No one here wants to see FR go the way of GH... :( I consider myself a hardcore FR player but I suppose I am a hardcore DnD player in general since only about a third of my DnD experiences has been in FR. Everything in 3.x is on a bookshelf or in a box just short of GHotR, and quite a bit from earlier editions as well. I have played tabletop in FR since '89 though only sporadically at first since I was a bit young, yet I also read the novels and played some video games early on. At this point though I think I would prefer FR to end as a commercial product. It had a good run and will regardless see a near endless amount of fan support from both creators and the regular fans. To a point I do not mind products changing, evolving, attempting to bring in a new fan base. However after a certain degree I have to ask why not make something new rather than completely alter this? 4E may catch my interest or it may not. FR doesn't appear it will do so in its new incarnation as it had greatly done so in the past. Personally I just wish WotC would say they have enjoyed the product and it is time to end on a high note and let the fans do with the Realms what they will. The novel lines could continue, just on a smaller scale. Even many of the recent novels while well written have reached a point of fatigue in the sheer number of RSE in a short number of years. Beyond that some of the known events from GHotR diminish my enjoyment of a few of the current books. It is not so much the predictability of outcomes as it is the inevitability of outcomes. This taint even spreads to the recent adventure modules. The big Weave trilogy of adventures intrigues me yet it feels ultimately as if the players have lost no matter what. This can be true of any fictional events that players will be around of course. My point is that this time it feels so overreaching. As I have said elsewhere I will reserve final judgement after seeing the final product. However at this point I am less than enthused and doubt WotC will be seeing as much of my money or a few of my friends money as they would hope. Not that I wish WotC to fail in general, but I do hope this version of the Realms is the last and does a bit poorly. This is selfish I agree.
Mr_Miscellany 11-10-07, 08:28 PM	Well said... :clap: First, I've been on the same page for a week or more with Charles Phipps, and now I'm agreeing with Miscellany. :eek: Will wonders never cease? :P :eek: :embarrass
OrderofUhlrik 11-10-07, 11:43 PM	I'm new-er to the FR setting than most of you assuredly. I actually got my start and have continued to play within Greyhawk these last two years I've been playing. I'm 18 and a newly appointed college student so I am right in that demographic Wizards wants to attract. I'm looking forward to 4e and 4e Realms. I've been reading the new novels recently and all of the events have this cliffhanger feel to them, even before GHotR came out you could piece together the idea that the sava (pardon the terrible reference) pieces were falling into place for major events. Its exhilirating. However, I'm from the school of thought that a story should continue despite the characters who are involved. Sort of like real world history (I'm a history major and all). I like being able to trace the why of present to something in the past. FR as it was had alot of "fail-safes". Many gods and powerful npcs could act as deus-ex-machina at whim. It is entertaining in novel form, and it allows for one to easily become attatched to these heroes/villains due to their various forms of charisma. Yet, on the table, I can see how some people woud be daunted thinking "I'll never be like Elminister" or "My goddess is just useless next to so and so." I'm not one to think that way, all epics started as lvl 1s and whatnot, but I can see how that would happen. I'm excited, I want to know how all of these plots in the new novels resolve themselves. The world has to implode to really begin (I know, a vague big-bang reference is tired, right?). I don't post much here, as I see it as more of an insulated community where new comers aren't given much thought unless they post often or have something damn good to say. So, I hope this counts. I think people would like 4e FR better if they read the dialogue of one of the main characters from the new unclean book. He talks about how throughout history everything changes, gods die, civilizations blossom and crumble. I've cried my eyes out and threw books down when characters I loved died. I've swore never to finish the books in very ferverent anger, but I find myself always coming back for the conclusion and then wishing for more afterwards. So maybe we shouldn't be so jaded about the ending of the characters as long as the story goes on. I don't know, just a thought.
Mr_Miscellany 11-11-07, 12:13 AM	I don't post much here, as I see it as more of an insulated community where new comers aren't given much thought unless they post often or have something damn good to say. So, I hope this counts. Consider yourself welcomed and accepted. Which is to say, "Well said and a pleasure to read." :::::::::::::::: Would it interest you to know that I've read remarks by one other gamer (one with 30+ years experience) that mirror your own? People of all stripes are starting to see the light.
johnkretzer 11-11-07, 01:24 AM	I'm new-er to the FR setting than most of you assuredly. I actually got my start and have continued to play within Greyhawk these last two years I've been playing. I'm 18 and a newly appointed college student so I am right in that demographic Wizards wants to attract. I'm looking forward to 4e and 4e Realms. I wish you many years of enjoyment with the new Realms. I just wished to enjoy it to. I've been reading the new novels recently and all of the events have this cliffhanger feel to them, even before GHotR came out you could piece together the idea that the sava (pardon the terrible reference) pieces were falling into place for major events. Its exhilirating. However, I'm from the school of thought that a story should continue despite the characters who are involved. Sort of like real world history (I'm a history major and all). I like being able to trace the why of present to something in the past. I can see your point (being a former history major and still reading history books) but that is my problem is that the way they have written the Realms isn't a history it is more like a story( a very inconsistent story at that). I like it because it felt like a actualy realistic history. Now with all the MAJOR EVENTS it is loosing sight of the human story of history. FR as it was had alot of "fail-safes". Many gods and powerful npcs could act as deus-ex-machina at whim. It is entertaining in novel form, and it allows for one to easily become attatched to these heroes/villains due to their various forms of charisma. Yet, on the table, I can see how some people woud be daunted thinking "I'll never be like Elminister" or "My goddess is just useless next to so and so." I'm not one to think that way, all epics started as lvl 1s and whatnot, but I can see how that would happen. What you called 'fail-safes' just adds to the history...also the fact that it does happen doesn't mean that it is bad. I mean in all honesty it is the fault of the invidual DM or players. And getting rid of them won't change a thing for them. I'm excited, I want to know how all of these plots in the new novels resolve themselves. The world has to implode to really begin (I know, a vague big-bang reference is tired, right?). I don't post much here, as I see it as more of an insulated community where new comers aren't given much thought unless they post often or have something damn good to say. So, I hope this counts. I actualy welcome all opinions unlike some on both sides of this debate. And while you care about the plots in the novels I could care less about them as they stopped being interesting when characters started to act out of character. The reason why I don't like these changes are three fold. 1) I found them promoting characters I never really cared for(Like Cyric) over those who I found interesting like(Mystra/Midnight). 2) Letting the changes happen just invalidates all the campaigns I have been running or playing in. 3) I think the changes will fail ultimatly in their goal. The thing is people have differtent taste. It is impossible to have one setting that will appeal to all people. The FR is very close to that as it was...now they are changing so it is less so. I think people would like 4e FR better if they read the dialogue of one of the main characters from the new unclean book. He talks about how throughout history everything changes, gods die, civilizations blossom and crumble. I've cried my eyes out and threw books down when characters I loved died. I've swore never to finish the books in very ferverent anger, but I find myself always coming back for the conclusion and then wishing for more afterwards. So maybe we shouldn't be so jaded about the ending of the characters as long as the story goes on. I don't know, just a thought. That is the point a RPG allows you as a player or DM to shape these events...now it seems like it is a annoyance for them to do let us. I just think gradual and more logical changes are a better to develope a RPG setting. Also it is definitly better for a world for shared novels.
Stigger 11-11-07, 01:27 AM	Some of us however are clinging to our outmoded ways of gaming and refusing to push forward into the brave, new Realms. Speaking as one of those, I say, welcome, good luck, and I really do hope you enjoy the new course the Realms are setting. Perhaps I should have offered some invective on how blind you are to the greatness that was the past Realms, and how you're selling yourself short by buying into 4e, but I'd have to actually believe that for me to say it with a straight face. To each their own is what I say, and if it works for you, that's great. I hope you're kind enough to offer others the same courtesy, rather than categorize, denouce and dismiss out of hand, as others on both sides of the arguement have done. So, again, welcome. :)
Charles Phipps 11-11-07, 01:31 AM	The Changes of 4E Realms to Charles Phipps http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abqAwKLpeqs
MarkusTay63 11-11-07, 01:43 AM	Never fear, boys and girls. I have every intention of using the NEW rules in the CURRENT setting, ergo disproving WotC's insistence that such is impossible. A good set of RPG rules should be able to function in ANY environment. I'm sure every fan-site worth a damn will have ways of adapting the rules to 'old school' FR a week after the 4e rules comes out - and LONG before the FRCG hits the shelves. I'm thinking the time difference in the release dates might work HEAVILY against them in this - we will have the rules and no place to play? People will do their own thing and then be unwilling to switch to the new setting after they've already been using the rules just fine.
Stigger 11-11-07, 01:48 AM	So Uber-Cheesy, with bad costuming, and worse hair is your take on it Charles?
Charles Phipps 11-11-07, 01:51 AM	Just imagine Richard Baker doing the monologue about his being picked as the next developer of D&D. ;-) And he's addressing the fans.
Stigger 11-11-07, 01:58 AM	Hmmm... I dunno if his hair and clothes are really gonna be that bad. Gotta give the man some credit at least....
Charles Phipps 11-11-07, 02:02 AM	OOC: I'd more wonder about the man's health. He looks almost undead.
DreamStalker 11-11-07, 04:52 AM	Welcome to the debate OrderofUhlrik. Another point of view is welcome and new blood is invigorating. Be wary and don't take it personally when some of us go for the jugular though. Some like their infusions very fresh. I hope you enjoy the 4E Realms and get what you want out of it, I seriously do. Still I hope your opinion is in the minority as I would rather you were given something new to fit your tastes rather than something old chopped into smaller pieces and put in a new package. My hopes is that a lesson is learned and variety is the theme of 5E. If not it is not as if I will lose any sleep over anything. I still have my gaming books and I certainly do not need any more. Just want. Your comments on fail safes within the FR I must disagree with. Those very same fail safes are still going to be there. Elminster will still remain. Deities will always have situations in which they are not the front runner in relevent puissance. To many Elminster is a boring and over used character. He is such to me. However Elminster has always seemed to me an example of what a truly prodigous PC can achieve in FR. Other FR characters have and presumably will continue to work their ways into his level of power. Personally when as a player myself or discussing with another player goals of a character, saying I want to reach that npc's (applies to any NPC, Elminster, Drizzt, Gareth Dragonsbane, et al) impressiveness should not be met with a no. Such a declaration should be met with appropriate challenge that makes the journey worth while in success or defeat. Perhaps it is my play style or that of my regular gaming friends. When I sit down in a setting to play or run, such luminaries are not looking down at us through a glass ceiling. They are looking down in dread that some day just maybe we will be looking down at them in mirth as they were left in the lurch. Or maybe they maybe they throw us off the cliff when we get up there with them. Either way it should be fun for all. Now on to your point about the Unclean novel. Almost picked that one up the other day. Instead I picked up the Empyrean Odyssey because I love planar adventures and mixed bloodlines. That and American Gods but that really has no relevence. No disagreement on the comment by the character in the book. To me one problem is that many of the changes feel in some cases to be arbitrary to the designers' personal likes rather than serving the community. These very changes feel heavily inconsistent with the verisimilitude of the FR world as written to date even accounting for past hiccups errors and contrivances. It is not about characters big or small, divine or mortal, nation or culture fading evolving or being crushed. To me it is about FR no longer being the FR and instead being a less unique setting that only calls forth on the secondary trappings of what made FR enjoyable. I am a huge proponent for everyone making the game their own. I can see where some dislike the Weave and think it is a good thing to have discussions on how to alter the world to run without it. However the Weave is one of the many features of the FR that has been important to its identity and usefulness. Removing its presence from the finished commercial product is a lessening in my eyes. It would be as if the next version of Windows not only did not come with a text editor/reader but that the OS was written without the ability to run such a program and required anyone who wanted such a classic feature to either write in the support themselves or search online for a hopefully reliable yet unofficial source. Again welcome to the fun of message board debates, it would not be as fruitful or as worth while with out you.
Charles Phipps 11-11-07, 04:54 AM	Elminster isn't exactly that impressive a Failsafe anymore, alone, and the equivalent of a 19th level Wizard.
johnkretzer 11-11-07, 05:51 AM	Elminster isn't exactly that impressive a Failsafe anymore, alone, and the equivalent of a 19th level Wizard. Um where do you get the fact that Elminster is the equivalent of a 19th level wizard in 4th edition? I know they have said pretty much a 20th level character in 3.x is about equal to a 20th level character in 4th edition... So did they say they are going to drain his levels or something?
Charles Phipps 11-11-07, 06:42 AM	I know they have said pretty much a 20th level character in 3.x is about equal to a 20th level character in 4th edition.. They also stated that it takes about the time that a player character reaches 20th level to be the time to reach 30th.
johnkretzer 11-11-07, 06:48 AM	They also stated that it takes about the time that a player character reaches 20th level to be the time to reach 30th. Yeah but they also said that leveling up will be alot quicker.
DreamStalker 11-11-07, 07:38 AM	Him being less of a fail safe is more the rules having a better handle on that level of power than his stance in the setting. Ironically, now most settings are going to have this bigger presence of higher level characters. So now the basic ruleset and fluff of other campaigns is essentially going to match the FR's fluff on where these characters have been. Gods are almost always fail safes in my games because it is a power set that I generally do not allow players to tap into. A few exceptions have happened however. Such dignitaries as Chosen and millenia old liches are not fail safes in my games because in games that such characters are a feature are games in which PCs can possibly achieve such power sets as well. I am still fully in the camp that believes Elminster type characters are only restrictive if used wrong. Is the correct use presented in the books...? Perhaps not or at least not consistently or clearly so. Really, it seems to me that an attempt to fix the issue of these fail safes they fixed both the mechanics and the fluff... when really once the mechanics are fixed the fluff is no longer broken. *shrugs*
Stigger 11-11-07, 10:35 AM	Elminster is whatever the level the DM or author needs him to be, no more, no less... trying to fix a specific number is kinda pointless there. ;)
johnkretzer 11-11-07, 12:52 PM	Elminster is whatever the level the DM or author needs him to be, no more, no less... trying to fix a specific number is kinda pointless there. ;) Agreed and seconded.
MarkusTay63 11-11-07, 01:28 PM	Agreed and seconded.Absotively and Posalutely. :D
Shade_Hunter 11-11-07, 05:25 PM	This is an interesting thread, in that it seems specifically made to provoke aggressive responses without actually being insulting - an invisible troll, sort of. That being said, I think hardcore Realms gamers are those that respect the setting itself as well as the game-play. Otherwise, you're just a hardcore gamer. "Invisible troll", I don't think so. It's kind of annoying when someone comes out with the refreshing truth and is labelled a troll of some sort.
Stigger 11-11-07, 06:06 PM	Don't take it personally there, Dan and Mr just kinda have it in for each other. Standard fare from both of them really. ;)
Lord Karsus 11-11-07, 06:32 PM	Maybe we are not real... -The only thing we can know for certain is that we exist as things that can think. That's all. So, I know that I exist. But, I don't necessarily know that you exist. Yet, on the table, I can see how some people woud be daunted thinking "I'll never be like Elminister" or "My goddess is just useless next to so and so." I'm not one to think that way, all epics started as lvl 1s and whatnot, but I can see how that would happen. -The problem with this, though, is that if it's not Elminster, it's someone else. If it's not the Epic Character, it's the 20th level character, or the 15th level characer, and so on. Someone will always be overshadowing you (until you attain such levels yourself). It's kind of annoying when someone comes out with the refreshing truth and is labelled a troll of some sort. -Mr. Misc has a track record of saying, doing and posting things just to aggrivate someone or another. Who doesn't, though? Most of us do that, to an extent.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 06:34 PM	I think people would like 4e FR better if they read the dialogue of one of the main characters from the new unclean book. He talks about how throughout history everything changes, gods die, civilizations blossom and crumble. Don't know about that--I read that novel, and recall that bit of dialogue, but the announced changes to the setting still rubbed me the wrong way.:)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 06:44 PM	Some of us however are clinging to our outmoded ways of gaming and refusing to push forward into the brave, new Realms. Speaking as one of those, I say, welcome, good luck, and I really do hope you enjoy the new course the Realms are setting. Perhaps I should have offered some invective on how blind you are to the greatness that was the past Realms, and how you're selling yourself short by buying into 4e, but I'd have to actually believe that for me to say it with a straight face. To each their own is what I say, and if it works for you, that's great. I hope you're kind enough to offer others the same courtesy, rather than categorize, denouce and dismiss out of hand, as others on both sides of the arguement have done. So, again, welcome. :) Well said, and I agree. I've seen the light, myself...I've decided my money would be better spent on more CHANEL than sourcebooks I won't have a use for. :) The changes may be fine for some people, but they don't fit with the plans I have for MY Realms, so I'm not going to use them.
Stigger 11-11-07, 06:45 PM	The main problem I have with that is that the change, growth, and destruction is usually gradual, with years and years of decline or upsurge... not 6 seconds in Dweomerheart to break The World As We Know It. If someone had said we're jumping the Realms 100 years ahead, because we're having Shar overtake the Weave with her Shadow Weave and taking away Mystra's worship base with gradual corruption of spellcasters, I wouldn't have liked it, but I could live with it since at least it would make considerably more sense than this Cyric from behind stuff.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 06:50 PM	They also stated that it takes about the time that a player character reaches 20th level to be the time to reach 30th. As I said before, it's entirely possible that Elminster's level will simply be readjusted for 4E, leaving him as relatively powerful compared with the rest of Faerun as he is in the current edition.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 06:56 PM	-The problem with this, though, is that if it's not Elminster, it's someone else. If it's not the Epic Character, it's the 20th level character, or the 15th level characer, and so on. Someone will always be overshadowing you (until you attain such levels yourself). Not that I'm trying to take over this thread (:embarrass ), but again, I agree. To me, the whole point of this game is about becoming a hero, not starting off as one. I get the impression, sometimes, that certain people wouldn't be satisfied unless their PCs were the most powerful and important people wherever they went! Then where is the challenge?
Stigger 11-11-07, 06:59 PM	Challenge? Feh, just want dings, phat lootz, and ownage, don't care about challenge. :P ;)
Lord Karsus 11-11-07, 07:50 PM	Challenge? Feh, just want dings, phat lootz, and ownage, don't care about challenge. :P ;) -Yeah, what he said.
Mr_Miscellany 11-11-07, 11:40 PM	I'm thinking the time difference in the release dates might work HEAVILY against them in this - we will have the rules and no place to play? People will do their own thing and then be unwilling to switch to the new setting after they've already been using the rules just fine. I used the 3E Core Rulebooks to get started in the Realms with WotC's very first 3E adventure The Sunless Citadel, without ever having to use the FRCS. Having the 4E rules available but not the 4E Campaign Guide won't be a barrier or a problem, IMO. On the contrary this will allow players and DMs a chance to take the rules for a spin and see what they think. I daresay WotC's plan is to get people stoked about the 4E core rules before FR and Eberron come out...but those rules better be damn good rules....I like 3E just fine.
Lord Karsus 11-12-07, 12:19 AM	I daresay WotC's plan is to get people stoked about the 4E core rules before FR and Eberron come out...but those rules better be damn good rules....I like 3E just fine. -Having the rules out before the setting, I think, is a good idea. It allows the bugs to be worked out of them slightly, saving the Campaign Settings from having to straighten rules out. That means more space for setting-specific things.
Dark Wizard 11-12-07, 12:41 AM	Though with FR 4E coming out just months after 4E itself, the two are probably under concurrent development so we'll likely not see any level of rules refinement beyond the initial 4E release in the FR books.
johnkretzer 11-12-07, 12:56 AM	Not that I'm trying to take over this thread (:embarrass ), but again, I agree. To me, the whole point of this game is about becoming a hero, not starting off as one. I get the impression, sometimes, that certain people wouldn't be satisfied unless their PCs were the most powerful and important people wherever they went! Then where is the challenge? I agree with her...and him (meaning Stigger).
MarkusTay63 11-12-07, 02:09 AM	I used the 3E Core Rulebooks to get started in the Realms with WotC's very first 3E adventure The Sunless Citadel, without ever having to use the FRCS. Having the 4E rules available but not the 4E Campaign Guide won't be a barrier or a problem, IMO.However, The Realms remained relatively unchanged betwen 2e and 3e - it was the rest of the universe that changed (the Cosmology). We were able to take the rules and insert them into the Realms we know. Unfortunately, it has already been stated that this 'new' FR will be under different constraints, and many of the new rules are dependent upon 'traditions' - traditions that simply DO NOT exist in 1375 DR. Weather they do a 'time-jump', or 'alternate history' - the rules of the world will change, and without knowing what the world is going to be like, how do we run things in it? It's just not going to be the same place. So if everyone either converts the rules to 3e FR, or 'jumps ship' for a new setting or a homegrown, then they will be set already by the time the information we need comes down the pipe. The only thing I can think of is that people will continue their 3e games even after they buy the rules and prepare for the changes, and then just implement the rules when the FRCG comes out. I may be wrong, but it seems you really need the new setting to use the new rules - something we haven't really faced before. But I could be very wrong about that. ;)
Vaeliorin 11-12-07, 04:17 AM	I'd first like to point out that I'm not a Hardcore Realms Gamer, though I am a hardcore gamer (whatever that means.) In fact, I almost think you could put me in the category of a Realms hater (though I guess it's more indifference.) I own many, many Realms splatbooks (both 2nd and 3rd edition) mainly for poaching ideas from. I have played in several realms campaigns, and even early on in my career DM'ed a few. That being said, my knowledge of the realms is far from encyclopedic (and I've only read maybe 7 or 8 Realms novels, as I avoid game-related books like the plague nowadays.) That being said, these changes to the Realms interest me quite a bit, to the point that I'm considering actually running a game in the Realms once the new rules/campaign setting is in effect. In fact, I think some of the changes don't go far enough. This, of course, relates to the reason that I dislike the Realms. They didn't kill off enough of the NPCs (and, as I've only read a few novels, the Realms character's I'm intimately familiar with I either hate (Drizz't and crew) or am fairly fond of (Danica and the Bouldershoulder brothers. Cadderly's okay, but meh.)) I like to have at least some semblance of realism to my games, and when my players or my character seriously irritated one of the power groups in the Realms (usually the Zhentarim) there really didn't seem to be a good reason for them not to send out a party of high-level adventurers to eradicate my 8th or so level characters. I am, however, rather miffed that they killed Mystra. Mystra and the Weave are the one thing about the Realms that I absolutely adore. Anyway, just the rambling thoughts of someone who loved FR when I first started playing, grew to hate it, and now am thinking about coming back. Oh, and I realize I'm new to the FR boards, so hi. I've lurked a lot (mainly on the DM and Player forums, as well as Char Ops(seriously, does anyone know the rules better than the people on this forum?)/Char Dev) but this is my first time here :)
johnkretzer 11-12-07, 03:47 PM	I like to have at least some semblance of realism to my games, and when my players or my character seriously irritated one of the power groups in the Realms (usually the Zhentarim) there really didn't seem to be a good reason for them not to send out a party of high-level adventurers to eradicate my 8th or so level characters. Just a point...they are not getting rid of the high level evil NPCs just the good aligned ones. So you'll still haver that...but without the explanation that they have to hold those forces in reserve because of said high level good NPCs.
Blibbering_Humdinger 11-12-07, 03:55 PM	Just a point...they are not getting rid of the high level evil NPCs just the good aligned ones. So you'll still haver that...but without the explanation that they have to hold those forces in reserve because of said high level good NPCs. We'll still have *ahem* some high-powered good NPCs (*knock on wood*), but yeah, the bad guys are going to be seriously less opposed. But that's where the adventurers come in! Get to gaining those ever-lovin' experience points, heroes, and don't you dare die before you're powerful enough to replace Khelben! :P
Dark Wizard 11-12-07, 05:15 PM	That is a problem with D&D, RPGs and plots in general. Why doesn't the villain in every game worthy of being a threat in the first place send their most powerful team of evil minions to stomp out the heroes the moment the glimmer of the quest shine in their eye? Why does the Level 20 bad guy wait until the Level 1 heroes reach level 18-20 before confronting them? If they didn't have the resources before, why suddenly by the time the heroes reach level 20 do they have hordes of CR 20 baddies to throw at the good guys. If there were no Level 20 good guys before the PCs for the bad guys to kill and loot, where did the bad guys get their experience and equipment to make them Level 20 so they can match the Level 20 PCs by the time they're ready?
Lord Karsus 11-12-07, 07:33 PM	That is a problem with D&D, RPGs and plots in general. Why doesn't the villain in every game worthy of being a threat in the first place send their most powerful team of evil minions to stomp out the heroes the moment the glimmer of the quest shine in their eye? -Because they are arrogant, haughty, conceited, egotistical, overconfident, smug beings. In short, they're villains! :)
Vaeliorin 11-12-07, 07:43 PM	Just a point...they are not getting rid of the high level evil NPCs just the good aligned ones. So you'll still haver that...but without the explanation that they have to hold those forces in reserve because of said high level good NPCs. Hmm...I wasn't aware of that. I don't actually have GHotR, I've just read various things on the internet talking about the infamous last two pages, and was under the impression that pretty much most of the NPCs were going to end up dead (either from cataclysm or old age.) That is a problem with D&D, RPGs and plots in general. Why doesn't the villain in every game worthy of being a threat in the first place send their most powerful team of evil minions to stomp out the heroes the moment the glimmer of the quest shine in their eye? Why does the Level 20 bad guy wait until the Level 1 heroes reach level 18-20 before confronting them? If they didn't have the resources before, why suddenly by the time the heroes reach level 20 do they have hordes of CR 20 baddies to throw at the good guys. If there were no Level 20 good guys before the PCs for the bad guys to kill and loot, where did the bad guys get their experience and equipment to make them Level 20 so they can match the Level 20 PCs by the time they're ready? You're assuming the BBEG was level 20 when the PCs are level 1. Usually, that's not the case in my games. When the PCs are level 1, the BBEG is probably at most level 5. Bad guys, after all, can level up too. As for the CR 20 baddies to throw at the good guys...most of them tend to be monsters who the BBEG can intimidate into working for him. Other actual adventurer types are either his former party members, or other adventurers he's hired or that simply agree with him who started off at level 1 just like everyone else. When you get down to the question of where the loot came from...same place the adventurers got it. They either had it made, or looted it from some old ruins. Evil people don't necessarily only kill good guys. They'll depopulate an entire goblin civilization to get there hands on the ring of uber or whatever it is they want if they have to. Where did all this loot come from in the first place, you ask? Well, in every game world, it seems that there must have been super-advanced ancient empires that mass produced all this stuff that is so valuable now. Really, there's generally no good explanation for why the +5 sword of flaming death is in that old tomb, so that's the one that generally gets employed.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-12-07, 08:20 PM	-Because they are arrogant, haughty, conceited, egotistical, overconfident, smug beings. In short, they're villains! :) Yeah, that's the usual reason--they don't see the hero as a real threat until it's too late. Although, then they still sort of qualify as "stupid villain" material.
Dark Wizard 11-12-07, 08:55 PM	Whether the party antagonists are 20th level or 2nd level, the fact remains that they're a feasible threat to not only the PCs but to the society, environment or something else they hold dear. Even from your answer you noted that the characters do not exist in a vacuum, whether NPCs or PCs. The reason the Zhentarim don't send out a group to eradicate your 8th level party is because of plot/game caveat and not any inherent unrealism of the setting beyond the unrealism of any setting. Now if you disagreed with the way NPCs of the Realms have their levels relative to what is actually useful to a regular Level 1-20 gaming group I would be more inclined to agree with you. The new 4E system seems to provide for up to Level 30, which would actually make the vast majority of Realms NPCs fit into the system without ad hoc epic rules and all that nonsense, but it remains to be seen if WotC will actually keep many of the characters around. They have been unable to give us any real hints.
Lord Karsus 11-12-07, 10:21 PM	Yeah, that's the usual reason--they don't see the hero as a real threat until it's too late. Although, then they still sort of qualify as "stupid villain" material. -Well, I wouldn't say that they are "stupid". Not planning for everything, or not covering every single base doesn't necessarily make someone dumb.
Ebrion 11-13-07, 06:02 AM	-Well, I wouldn't say that they are "stupid". Not planning for everything, or not covering every single base doesn't necessarily make someone dumb. Thats why the evil overlord list says you need a 5 yr old in to point out all the holes in you evil schemes. ;)
Lord Karsus 11-13-07, 11:22 AM	Thats why the evil overlord list says you need a 5 yr old in to point out all the holes in you evil schemes. ;) -Exactly. Wasn't there a book, or a movie, or something where something to that effect happened...?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 11:43 AM	-Well, I wouldn't say that they are "stupid". Not planning for everything, or not covering every single base doesn't necessarily make someone dumb. True, true...
DMD 11-13-07, 03:59 PM	In my game currently, the villain is powerful enough to wipe out the heroes. He send some minions after them generally to test their strength in case he needs to face them himself at some point. However, he is busy with other things that occupy his time. He is an arch villain, a busy guy, does not have time for these heroes. If they come around and confront him he will deal with it, until then he is content to focus on his other pursuits. Time management is one reason the BBEG does not kill my heroes. Another reason is that how much fun would the game be if he showed up and wiped out the party? ________________________________________ ____________________ Anyway I am probably a hardcore gamer. I focus on this hobby instead of pursuing other interests regardless of the fact that pursuing them would probably help me in my profession. I believe and have stated in other threads that 4E is geared towards a new audience. It is always about the bottom line in business. Numbers are down, there needs to be some way to bring the numbers back up. [I am sure Hasbro along with Mattel have had some toy reacall issues in the past 12 months which does not help their bottom line at the moment. (I hope there is no lead in my GHotR).] Therefore a new product to boost sales. I will not be purchasing 4E which is in part because of where I am in life right now and also in part because the new changes being revealed do not make me happy. I will probably continue to read the FR fiction unless I can't stand the stories anymore. I am sure the new 4E FR will be "interesting" :) whether it will be "cool" :D I suppose in in the eye of the beholder. I am kind of interested to see how much the world is changed but change for the sake of change does not make me happy. Thus as a consumer I will make my voice heard with my wallet, it speaks louder more than a billion posts on these message boards.
Lord Karsus 11-13-07, 05:10 PM	(I hope there is no lead in my GHotR). -You know those shiny letters on the cover? Yeah...
Ebrion 11-13-07, 07:09 PM	-You know those shiny letters on the cover? Yeah... As long as you don't lick them, I think your ok? At least I hope....
Stigger 11-13-07, 07:14 PM	Make yourself feel better and don't look too closely into the cabinetry industry in the US... though if you do, the lead won't seem nearly as bad. ;)
Lord Karsus 11-13-07, 08:10 PM	As long as you don't lick them, I think your ok? At least I hope.... -Lead is absorbed through the skin... -Wait! It all makes sense! :lightbulb -WotC is looking to attract new fans, right? In the process, they are getting many of the established fans pretty angry. Now, who are the people who are buying and using AGHotR the most...?
Ebrion 11-13-07, 09:35 PM	This plot smells like doom.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 10:39 PM	-Lead is absorbed through the skin... -Wait! It all makes sense! :lightbulb -WotC is looking to attract new fans, right? In the process, they are getting many of the established fans pretty angry. Now, who are the people who are buying and using AGHotR the most...? Now personaly I think they treated 3.x products in a special substance that will cumbust exactly the day 4th edition comes out...thus destroying our massive libariess of 3.x books and possibly take out our non-3.x FR's libaries in the progress...so separate your 3.x books out now....;) :P :D
Stigger 11-14-07, 02:11 AM	:blink: *runs for bookshelf in near panic*
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 02:35 AM	Now personaly I think they treated 3.x products in a special substance that will cumbust exactly the day 4th edition comes out...thus destroying our massive libariess of 3.x books and possibly take out our non-3.x FR's libaries in the progress...so separate your 3.x books out now....;) :P :D I did that as soon as I heard about 4e.:cool: :P
Mr_Miscellany 11-14-07, 02:45 AM	However, The Realms remained relatively unchanged between 2e and 3e - You’ve (unwittingly, I hope) written a massive understatement. Here is why: We were able to take the rules and insert them into the Realms we know. Hah. What about the (then) rumored Red Wizard enclaves? What about news of the map shrinkage? What about Tilverton’s demise? What about Shade and its effects on Anourach? What about fricking dwarves casting spells? What about drow magic items that all of a sudden work in sunlight? What about no race/class level limits? What about seemingly unlimited multiclassing? What about infravision going away? Who’s going to explain all this, etc....? Everyone of these subjects was a **hot** topic back in the day. They spawned all kinds of immensely well informed statements like, “This isn’t even D&D anymore! You’re ruining the Realms! How dare you!? What’s going to happen to all of our campaigns!? Third Edition is going to fail! Why are you forcing us to decide between editions of the game?” And on and on.... Truth is, nobody knew for sure how these changes were going to effect the Realms, but nobody (that I knew of in RL or online) decided to let that stop them. As the sales figures for the core rules show, people bought the core rules in droves. The people I knew either adopted the 3E core rules for their FR games when those rules were published because they liked what they found, or kept playing 2E (the later not an insubstantial number, mind). Unfortunately, it has already been stated that this 'new' FR will be under different constraints, and many of the new rules are dependent upon 'traditions' - traditions that simply DO NOT exist in 1375 DR. Weather they do a 'time-jump', or 'alternate history' - the rules of the world will change, and without knowing what the world is going to be like, how do we run things in it? Buy the 4E core rules. Not trying to be smart. Just by the 4E core rules. Further, I think you’re overemphasizing the concept of traditions. We know of ‘magical’ traditions, but even Baker has stated they may have spoke to soon on that concept. We **do** know you still roll a D20 to hit. We know there will be character classes. We know players will get to cast spells....like most any other game system and game setting, you’ve got the rules and a world to play in. So go play the game. There’s no need to wait to be told what to do.
Stigger 11-14-07, 02:49 AM	So go play the game. There’s no need to wait to be told what to do. Priceless in its irony...
Mr_Miscellany 11-14-07, 02:59 AM	Did you hear that sound? That was the sound of the airplane flying way over my head. A little help?
MarkusTay63 11-14-07, 04:26 AM	Funny thing is, that I had most of that stuff in my game BEFORE 3e came around (except for wizard-Dwarfs - I STILL don't have those). Thats probably why the changes didn't impact on my game hardly at all. Changing what is to come is fine, and I can work with that. As you point out, we all did between 2e and 3e - but this time I have a feeling its going to be VERY differnt. I hope I'm wrong, fo all our sakes. If they erase the past, then it's a differnt world entirely.
Stigger 11-14-07, 04:55 AM	Telling someone to go do something, and in nearly the same breath telling them not to wait to be told to do something... irony.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-14-07, 10:47 AM	And what if WotC's new products have lead in them? What then?:P
Lord Karsus 11-14-07, 12:46 PM	Priceless in its irony... -Ah, Stigger...:)
OrderofUhlrik 11-14-07, 01:57 PM	I just would like to post in reply to all of the kind and well worded replies to my original post and would like to clarify my statement and position (I know this is a little late, but college keeps me busy). What I meant was, I'm excited about following the story of the Forgotten Realms as it enters the Fourth Edition despite the fact that there are changes that are occuring that I do not entirely agree with from a gameplay standpoint and from a literary standpoint. I don't like the whole, Helm/Tyr debacle. I don't necessarily like Mystra being killed by Cyric, I always thought he was a ridiculous fop villain. I have literally no respect for him as a character. I absolutely abhor the implication of his involvement in the Helm debacle and the hints of how this may begin in the Empyrean Oddyssey book 1. Shar ascendant I do not like either, as nihilism in a god seems rather... odd. I absolutely hate the cosmology changes. I liked the great wheel, and I liked the majority of the gods within the pantheon. I'm even fearful about my favorite god (Mask) being eliminated from the realms, even though I'm hopefull he has plot immunity as a possible slayer of Cyric. I don't like the overtones that Lloth will come out on top of Ellistraee. (I loathe the Spider-Queen). I am a personal fan of the vancian system and D&D requiring math, yet I'll conclude my rant here. Nonetheless, if the story is going on, I want to at least see where the hell it is going. I've invested time and money to get this far along. I've read and felt strong emotions for characters and locations and I want to see these threads tied up. I may get there and realize I don't like the endings any more than I like the hints. But I'll give it a chance because I'm not firmly entrenched in the "Old Realms". I may never play 4e realms for whatever reason (My usual group likes Greyhawk for example), but I will probably dump more money in WoTC's coffers to follow the story a bit further. I want to also say that I never as a player was daunted by epic level NPC's because I realized that one day I could be that NPC. (Hell my PC's were the only ones to survive to be retired as NPC's). What I was saying is that Elminister is considered by many to be the ceiling of magical advancement for non-liches in the realms. He is entrenched in literature and given for the most part plot immunity. He is a marvelous character and I personally love him. Yet as a gamer, I can see how some people would see him as a insurmountable barrier to their advancement as PC's. Some people play to be the best, to become demi-gods in their own right. I don't, but I know many who do, therefore I can see the arguement that the fail-safes of the realms were a problem for attracting new players. I also realize that some of you will never abandon the Old Realms for the new, too much has changed for you to continue on with the novels and sourcebooks and enjoy them like you have. I understand this RSE is so much different from the ToT in scope and magnitude. I just want to ride it out long enough to see if they can put the pieces back together into something I still enjoy. I'm excited because I think they can do it. They have the talent and the resources to accomplish it, so I'm optimistic that they won't entirely sink one of their best selling franchises. Thank you for those who offered me well wishes to my future in the Realms, I just wished that you all weren't so pessimistic about 4e. It doesn't necessarily have to be terrible. To those of you who dismissed my arguements out of hand, I'm sorry I couldn't convince you to have a little hope for the future of the Realms. I understand the emotional and financial investment in the current Realms that you've put in, and the attatchment you've forged. It makes sense you'd want to walk away when they take it and "break" it. I just don't get why some of you refuse to even give it a chance? Its like in poker, if you bet until you're unable to play further without taking money out of the hand, you're potstuck and you have to play it until the end. So why not at least play this one to the end? That was really my big point and I think I didn't stress that enough. Once again, just a thought.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-14-07, 02:44 PM	I don't think I agree that choosing whether or not to follow the Realms into 4E is anything like what happens in poker... No offense.
OrderofUhlrik 11-14-07, 03:02 PM	I don't think I agree that choosing whether or not to follow the Realms into 4E is anything like what happens in poker... No offense. It was an analogy. I just meant you've invested so much into why not just see the change out long enough to see what happens? It just boggles my mind that you read the entire post, and found my analogy so offensive that you couldn't help but post on it but not actually touch on any other point I made. I'm not offended per se, just confused by that reaction. I know it probably makes D&D and the realms sound base by comparing it to poker or whatever, but the situation stands. You've invested alot into the realms, the situation looks bad but since you have invested so much into the game it would seem you would almost be forced to see it to the end. You by no means have to, as you always have a choice, but it would be illogical to abandon an investment of that magnitude without seeing it through until the end. So yes, it is in fact like something that occurs in poker, "like", not exactly, not entirely, just somewhat similar.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-14-07, 03:37 PM	It was an analogy. I just meant you've invested so much into why not just see the change out long enough to see what happens? I'm satisfied with my own version of the Realms. It just boggles my mind that you read the entire post, and found my analogy so offensive that you couldn't help but post on it but not actually touch on any other point I made. I'm not offended per se, just confused by that reaction. Uh, where did I say I was "offended" by it? That's ridiculous. I wouldn't be offended by such a thing. As for the rest of your post--it was fine, I just had nothing to say about it. I know it probably makes D&D and the realms sound base by comparing it to poker or whatever, but the situation stands. You've invested alot into the realms, the situation looks bad but since you have invested so much into the game it would seem you would almost be forced to see it to the end. You by no means have to, as you always have a choice, but it would be illogical to abandon an investment of that magnitude without seeing it through until the end. So yes, it is in fact like something that occurs in poker, "like", not exactly, not entirely, just somewhat similar. Well, since "my" Realms will always be how I want it to be, I don't see myself as abandoning an investment. Heck, there are still a lot of older pieces of lore I haven't checked out! There will always be something there for me even if I choose not to follow the official 4E Realms storyline.
OrderofUhlrik 11-14-07, 05:38 PM	I didn't say you were offended by it, that was just the word that came to mind. I was not trying to use an inflamatory word, it just seemed like the analogy was something that irked you, so it was in itself offensive, not that you were offended. Sorry for the trouble over semantics. The thing is, I understand that you are happy with your Realms. What I do not understand however is the attitude that you are not in the slightest bit curious to see where all of these plotlines up in the air fall. The Realms are rich in history as you pointed out and there is plenty of history from the beginning to the Spellplague for the unsatisfied people to play in. I can even agree with the standpoint of abandoning the Realms if the resolutions to these plots are unsatisfactory or if they fail to appropriately preserve continuity during the shift between 3e and 4e. But we really do not know much about what is going to happen in 4e or during the shift. I plan to wait until I know more before making a final judgement. I don't want to argue in circles, I'm sure you're certain of your decision, and I'm pretty much sure of mine. I've just seen alot of negativism on the boards and I wondered why all hope is seemingly lost...
Stigger 11-14-07, 06:47 PM	I don't think anyone here is absolutely 100% certain of their decision to be honest. Well, maybe some diehards are, but it's almost the same as that 20% in politics who you're just never going to change the mind of, no matter what. The rest of us are complaining, some more bitterly than others, some less so, and waiting to see if our worst fears come to pass and they really do take a chainsaw to the Realms and leave it a mangled, unrecognizable corpse... or if they produce something quality. As to the presence of negativism, and understand I can only answer this from my perspective and don't presume to speak for anyone else, to be honest, I see no reason not to be negative. The changes I've read about are not to my liking, some I loathe, and thus far I see nothing that I like beyond the continued existance of Elminster... at least as far as the Realms themselves are concerned. As to 4e, there are some things I see that make sense, but it seems a lot of lore is just being flushed for the sake of ease. Devils getting a fundamental workover, Eladrin being turned into elves after being one of my favorite planar races, druids not making it into the PHB by all appearances... the list goes on. I'll grant that the magic system sounds interesting, but that's about it. It just feels like several decades of lore and fluff is being flushed for the sake of expediency, and that we're not going to have much in the way of continuity with the past. And while that might be great for others, its not great for me. Call me anachronistic, call me whatever you want, but I have a comfort level that I enjoy and I'm not going to change it just because something new and shiny comes along. If 4e is superior and a quality product, then I'll invest in it. If its not, then I'll ignore its existance... and by what I currently know, the ignoring part is the most likely.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-14-07, 07:49 PM	I didn't say you were offended by it, that was just the word that came to mind. I was not trying to use an inflamatory word, it just seemed like the analogy was something that irked you, so it was in itself offensive, not that you were offended. Sorry for the trouble over semantics. Not a problem.:) The thing is, I understand that you are happy with your Realms. What I do not understand however is the attitude that you are not in the slightest bit curious to see where all of these plotlines up in the air fall. Again...where did I say I am "not in the slightest bit curious to see where all of these plotlines up in the air fall"? That's assuming quite a lot about me, don't you think? The Realms are rich in history as you pointed out and there is plenty of history from the beginning to the Spellplague for the unsatisfied people to play in. I've decided that for me, there's more time than that. Since the Spellplague will not happen in my Realms, I don't have to limit myself up to 1385 DR at all.
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 08:13 PM	OrderofUhlrik, I just want to ride it out long enough to see if they can put the pieces back together into something I still enjoy. I'm excited because I think they can do it. They have the talent and the resources to accomplish it, so I'm optimistic that they won't entirely sink one of their best selling franchises. I hope they do a good job with the new setting, and I hope it does well. :) I just wished that you all weren't so pessimistic about 4e. It doesn't necessarily have to be terrible. To those of you who dismissed my arguements out of hand, I'm sorry I couldn't convince you to have a little hope for the future of the Realms. I understand the emotional and financial investment in the current Realms that you've put in, and the attatchment you've forged. It makes sense you'd want to walk away when they take it and "break" it. I just don't get why some of you refuse to even give it a chance? I I am very pessimistic about 4e Realms. The announced changes are already game breakers for me, but it is not just the changes. I have played in Forgotten Realms for about 15 years. I have seen a long term shift in the Realms and D&D in general that I don't like. WotC now makes RPGs the way Hollywood makes movies. You don't really need to worry about quality as long as it's flashy and cool. They are designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Who cares about the plot. Just make sure there is a 15 minute car chase with a big explosion at the end. The Spellplague is just the latest "Big Explosion." :( The covers of the new books are great, but when you open them up the quality(not the glossy pgs or the art) doesn't even come close to the old 2e box sets. The maps are small and have very little detail.(if there are any maps):rolleyes: There is much less lore. I don't have a players section. All the DM info and player info is mixed together!?!:banghead: There is no equivalent to the 2e Volo's Guide books. The 3e source books are just a way to showcase the new PrCs. I could go on, but I don't want to rant any more. I hope I'm wrong about 4e, but I'm just not optimistic. Happy Gaming:)
MarkusTay63 11-14-07, 09:33 PM	What? You have a problem with shelling out nearly $40 for 160 pgs of large Fonts, re-used art-work, padded-out stat-blocks, and inferior storylines? But isn't it all SO "COOL"?! :cool:
Ebrion 11-14-07, 10:35 PM	Dont forget, thats after dropping almost $100 for the core 4E books, just to learn the rules to use for the Broken Realms.
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 10:55 PM	What? You have a problem with shelling out nearly $40 for 160 pgs of large Fonts, re-used art-work, padded-out stat-blocks, and inferior storylines? But isn't it all SO "COOL"?! :cool: The font is so large Ray Charles could read it and he's blind and dead.
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 10:59 PM	Dont forget, thats after dropping almost $100 for the core 4E books, just to learn the rules to use for the Broken Realms. Don't forget about the other $100 for the 4.5e core books and the $35 for the 4.5e players guide that will be out in 2009 to fix the mistakes in the new system.:rolleyes:
johnkretzer 11-15-07, 12:20 AM	The thing is, I understand that you are happy with your Realms. What I do not understand however is the attitude that you are not in the slightest bit curious to see where all of these plotlines up in the air fall. The Realms are rich in history as you pointed out and there is plenty of history from the beginning to the Spellplague for the unsatisfied people to play in. I can even agree with the standpoint of abandoning the Realms if the resolutions to these plots are unsatisfactory or if they fail to appropriately preserve continuity during the shift between 3e and 4e. But we really do not know much about what is going to happen in 4e or during the shift. I plan to wait until I know more before making a final judgement. I think we look at the Realms very differently so I'll try to explain it so maybe you have a clue from where I am coming from. I don't think you have to agree with me, but maybe you will understand better. To me the Realms is a framework to play our D&D games. Sure it makes a great setting for novels too and i don't begrudge them writing the novels at first. Then they started with a long chain of RSEs in the novels that started to make the Realms less a open framework and a more closed one. It is really not fun anymore to buy their soucebooks or novels. 1) Going though the soucebooks with a magic marker crossing out events that can't happen because of events in my FR game. And the way it looks like they are making these changes the soucebooks are going to be totaly useless to me. I used to be able to adapt them to my world...I just look at and say why bother? 2)Truthfuly I find the current plotlines and stories to be very dull and uninteresting as I think they are destroying inportant parts of the Realms. I hope you can atleast understand my p.o.v. a littler better. I don't want to argue in circles, I'm sure you're certain of your decision, and I'm pretty much sure of mine. I've just seen alot of negativism on the boards and I wondered why all hope is seemingly lost... Actualy if you really look at it the negativism started with their campaign that everything(or most of it) in 3.x is 'uncool' and everything in 4th edition is 'cool' marketing stragety. Now mechanics I can sorta ignore as they have never been that important to me(though I really haven't seen any new mecanics that will make me want to switch yet) but it is the flavor changes that offends me. They pretty much have said to me indirectly that if you like the way Demon & devils, the Great Wheel, Elves and Eldarin, Mystra, the 7 Sisters, etc. were up till this point you are uncool. Sorry maybe I'll stop being negative when they stop being negative. I hope you gained some understanding about why I atleast fell the way I do.
Mula 11-15-07, 01:15 PM	Don't forget about the other $100 for the 4.5e core books and the $35 for the 4.5e players guide that will be out in 2009 to fix the mistakes in the new system.:rolleyes:Actually it's $0 if you prefer to leave them on the shelf in the bookstore. Don't like, don't buy. That's what I do. :)
Stigger 11-15-07, 03:50 PM	Obviously the sublimnal ink isn't working on Mula... better up the dosage...
MarkusTay63 11-15-07, 06:40 PM	<Uping Dosage to 10,000 deci-bliminals> The font is so large Ray Charles could read it and he's blind and dead.But it's gonna be so "COOL" that it comes packed in a Freezer bag, and there's a 'Frostburn Warning' on the label.
Stigger 11-15-07, 07:23 PM	*groans* Wouldn't be shocked by it though...
Fingoldfin 11-16-07, 08:29 PM	Actually it's $0 if you prefer to leave them on the shelf in the bookstore. Don't like, don't buy. That's what I do. :) Oh, don't worry Mula. Their not going to get any of my Mula for that crap.;)
MarkusTay63 11-16-07, 11:28 PM	Nice :)