Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Duke Lenethar 03-14-06, 03:02 PM	I just came over from the Eberron boards, reading their opinions that Forgotten Realms was too overpowered. I didn't reply there, because I would be called a troll, but I figured that their perception of the world is somewhat skewed. 1. 45+ level dragons: Where are they? Because according to the Eberron boards there are hundreds of them. 2. Elminster always saves the day: This is simply a mark against bad DMing, and not the fault of the campaign setting. From what I remember, there is a mini-essay "written" by Elminster that explains why he does not go out and solve the world's problems. Elminster saving the day in FR is no different than a level 8 fighter saving the day in Eberron (since that is basically an epic hero in that setting). I'm sure it's happened before. 3. Vorpal swords and holy avengers are just 'laying around': At least in my high-level campaigns, they have to pay for these things. Again, allowing them to be strewn about like leaves on the wind is a mark of bad DMing. 4. Clear-cut good and evil is dumb: Come on. We have moral ambiguity in the real world already. Can we please have a place where red dragons are evil and good gods have good clerics? 5. "All of these ancient civilizations coming back": Wrong. One: Shade. Mulhorand is simply experiencing a revival. Myth Drannor is toast, and Netheril proper is destroyed beyond repair. I could spin this off into a criticism of Eberron, but the FR boards seem to be a little more grown-up than that. So, what are your thoughts/perspectives? Edited to fix an ironic spelling error.
jwanderer5 03-14-06, 03:19 PM	Forgotten Realms High-Powered? You betcha. Forgotten Realms Low-Powered? You betcha. Forgotten Realms Overpowered? Only if the DM has screwed up some how. It is easy in FR to adventure at any level, in almost any type of campaign. The excuse of Eliminster always saving the day, probably comes from people who have read maybe a handful of the novels. Which is also funny, because El isn't reffered to as a saviour so much as a meddler by at least half of the people that he deals with in the Realms. IMO.
Mordakay of Thay 03-14-06, 04:18 PM	Considering that lets say a campaign lasts i dunno a few game years....and the PCs get epic and stuff.There are almost no lvl 20 NPCs in eberron(i mean the highest lvl NPC in an ancient mageguild is 9th lvl oO).So tehnically the PCs in a few years surpass all the NPCs in the world,and their more powerfull than all.Hell,they can atempt to conquer Sharn :P. I like Eberron allot,i just tweak the NPCs a little,cuz cmon 9th lvl mage the leader of a mageguild over 500 years old :/,doesn't make sense.
Alac Luin 03-14-06, 04:37 PM	1- never saw a 45+ level dragon in the realms, but I have seen a dragon with 5 sorc levels. Over powered? Not in a high power game, and this dragon would not interact with low level chars anyway. 2- It can be seen this way by bad DMs, or if one reads only Ed Greenwood's novels. I read Realms novels for at least a decade before I even saw Elminster. I wasn't playing in the Realms and I only knew who Elminster was from the "wizards three" articles from Dragon. 3- So, Eberron DM's don't use treasure like the standard rules? Sure, a Vorpal sword or holy avenger may be "laying around", but is located in the hidden store room where the lich keeps the rest of the treasure you gain for defeating it. There is a standard "wealth by level" guideline that is used in "core D&D", the Realms, even Eberron. 4- The Realms is not as clear cut good and evil as some think, or it needs not be. There was a good aligned Red Dragon living in Myth Drannor in it's time. The tools are in place if a DM wishes to play a shades of gray game. 5- There is a little more them just Shade. The Imiscari (sp?), the Star elves, the orogs (an orc clan that went into the underdark but are now returning to the surface), the Fey'ri. This is something that bothers several FR people. But to me the idea of a world having various civilizations that can come back is more believable then the entire continent is from One civilization.
Kid SixXx 03-14-06, 07:39 PM	I just came over from the Eberron boards, reading their opinions that Forgotten Realms was too overpowered. I didn't reply there, because I would be called a troll, Trolls are people that post and look for an argument. Customarily if you present your POV respectfully & are not the originator of static, you won't be the recipient of static. As far as the topic of discussion, Eberron has it's share of high level encounters such as the Dragons of Argonessen who manipulate world events via the Draconic Prophesy and uber-nasty entities such as the Lords of Dust and the Daelkyr. Eberron is no less a potentially epic setting than the FR is. The snipe at overpoweredness probably stems from the number of high level iconic NPC's, but that's an unfair criticism. In all honesty, I think you've probably taken sarcasm & overexaggerated comments and assumed that they were gospel truth opinions. Quite a few folks who enjoy Eberron (like myself) also game in the FR & we don't hate the FR setting as much as folks think we do. I could spin this off into a criticism of Eberron, but the FR boards seem to be a little more grown-up than that. Grown up? Spoken like a man that likes the Great Wheel. Obviously none of the old timers here have ripped into you for daring to like the new FR cosmology. ;)
Krash 03-14-06, 08:23 PM	Let Eberron get 20 years of published products under its belt and then see if it isn't 'overpowered' as well. As people's campaigns mature and progress, they will be seeking bigger and better challenges which will automatically boost the power levels in the setting. Wait till people start complaining about the lack of epic content in Eberron because their characters are now 20+ level and have no challenges. Of course, my feeling is that the true downside to an Eberron campaign may well be when characters hit level 12-16 and they realise they can walk into King Bob's throne room and cut him down and take over - because they are the biggest boys in the kingdom. PCs don't run roughshod in an FR campaign because there's always someone quicker, bigger or nastier than them: if DMed correctly, it helps give them a sense of perspective, is always a challenge and doesn't let a campaign go stale. DISCLAIMER: My knowledge of the Eberron setting is totally superficial. I'm likely way-off base here re my comments and probably totally wrong. If so, apologies in advance. Oh, and ... FR Forever! :D -- George Krashos
Kid SixXx 03-14-06, 08:48 PM	Of course, my feeling is that the true downside to an Eberron campaign may well be when characters hit level 12-16 and they realise they can walk into King Bob's throne room and cut him down and take over - because they are the biggest boys in the kingdom. The whole point to the Eberron setting is that the PCs are supposed to be the premier heroes of the planet. Tarzan never had to share the stage with John Carter, Warlord of Mars. Flash Gordon never had a to be rescued from Ming the Merciless by Buck Rogers or The Green Hornet. Whether or not the PC's ride roughshot over local government or continue to serve the public trust as paragons of heroism is a metagame issue that's not regulated to any one system. That is an issue of DM's allowing Players to do whatever they want. I'm not so sure that I agree with the notion that the epic scale makes players better respect the pecking order of the setting. Otherwise I think that I'd see fewer "How do I become a Chosen of Correlon Larethian"-style threads on this board. That being said, as an Eberron player, I also think that other Eberron critics falsely assign munchkinism to the FR, when it is also a metagame issue that can exist in any setting. If Eberron folks think that players don't build munchkins in that setting, they are kidding themselves.
GothicDan 03-14-06, 09:44 PM	See, I don't WANT some delusion that I'm the biggest fish in the pond. I want realism (as much as is possible within the bounds of the fantasy setting) - I don't want my hand patted, a cookie given to me, and being told that I saved the day. :) Maybe it's the physicist in me, who enjoys Quantum just as much as Astro. On a side note, let's look at a genre that hits D&D closer to home: - Elric was one of the most powerful characters in the world, but was next to nothing compared to the full-blown glory of the Lords of Chaos and Law. - The Hobbits were puny compared to the rest of the Fellowship and Gandalf and the Witch-King of Agmar, etc. - The Pevansies weren't much compared to Jadis and Aslan and the like. The best fantasies, in my opinion, are those that really show just how subjective power is. Which is probably why I like Planescape so much.
Kenzuki 03-14-06, 11:35 PM	I like both Campaign settings myself, but I agree pretty soon Eberron players will want Epic material. I do, however, like the Daelkyr and think they are VERY interesting :P
Berzerker_prime 03-14-06, 11:37 PM	Maybe it's the physicist in me, who enjoys Quantum just as much as Astro. With you there! Of course, in the program I went through, they were like Bosons; couldn't really tell them apart. ;) Personally, my enjoyment of the Realms comes from its grandness. It's so beautifually detailed, cultures so well established, it just makes the setting come to life. You can spend considerable amount of your campaign actually outside of dungeons and caves and still have an amazing adventure. The newness of Eberron makes that harder to do in that setting since not as much is established about what lies in forest X between city A and town B. Also, for me at least, the entire concept of Eberron as it was presented to me about a year ago seemed rather ho-hum. I participated in an adventure for D&D World Games Day and the GM described the setting thusly; "Basically, they use magic to do things that we do in the modern world. So, like, instead of an elevator, they have levitating platforms in shafts." My brain said "Oh, it's like J. Gregory Keyes' Age of Unreason novels." Granted, that was what I was reading like a fanatic at the time so I had it on the brain, but it's the same concept. Been there, done that. But the strangest thing was that the adventure, one published in conjunction with Games Day and one that had the Eberron logo on it, proceeded to make use of the idea not at all. :confused: Perhaps, one day, I will give it another shot. But, TBH, I'm just not terribly impressed by it, at this point. I shall reserve final judgement for the day I can play under a GM I know will make use of the concept. Here's another thing, though. My FR character is currently level 8. Given that the D&D core books define level 20 as epic, it means that she's just this side of getting noticed as a slightly larger small fish. The idea that she would be an all-out big fish if transplanted to Eberron is baffling to me. And given that my group seems to be on the extreme slow end of level progression when compared to other groups (it's taken us over two years, real-time, to reach level 8!)... well, I guess I'm just wondering what the attraction to being epic level so quickly is. Whatever happened to earning your epic status? Not only that, but I guess I don't get the appeal of being the "big movers and shakers of the setting." When the setting story lines get advanced by WotC, there's the alarming potential to invalidate these medium-level campains. I mean, let's say that the group does reach level 10 and the PCs become the big fish. Even if they're not running things, per se, it wouldn't make a whole lot of sense for the Eberron NPCs to not call them up to help fix problems. I dunno. I guess it just seems less problematic to me to play in a home-brew world if you want to be the movers and shakers. It's all a matter of taste though, I guess. I want a world where all of history doesn't center on my character, others don't. But, at least when my character hits epic levels, I know she'll be epic! :D Sweet water to you! Berz.
Dark Wizard 03-15-06, 12:19 AM	Flash Gordon did hang out with Mandrake the Magician and the Phantom in the animated series Defenders of the Earth. Team ups and crossovers are a common occurance in comics, Justice League (Batman, Superman, Wonder Woman, Green Lantern, Flash) and the Avengers (Captain America, Thor, Iron Man). The Green Hornet did team up with Batman (and they fought as well). All the constituents have successful series of their own, but crossovers and cooperation between them provided some of the best stories with those characters (some of the worst as well, but that's the fault of the individual writers and editors). 1. 45+ level dragons: Where are they? Because according to the Eberron boards there are hundreds of them. The advanced Red Dragon Inferno comes close at CR 40, but he's legendary/mythical as it is. Even then he's nothing more than using the dragon advancement rules in the Epic Level Handbook. Most of the other great wyrms seem to peak out at their respective maximums, like Klauth at CR 25 for a Red Dragon. There is one, Daurgothoth great wyrm dracolich Wiz20/Acm5, but he's appropriate in that he could be used as a main drive force of evil for an entire campaign from Level 1 to epic. What's the problem with that? Drop the spellcasting levels to bring him down to early epic, an appropriate and deadly foe for a group just breaking into level 20+. What's more important than the levels and CRs of these dragons is that each of them has very well defined histories and motivations, things of greater worth than superficial stats and abilities. 2. Elminster always saves the day: This is simply a mark against bad DMing, and not the fault of the campaign setting. From what I remember, there is a mini-essay "written" by Elminster that explains why he does not go out and solve the world's problems. Elminster saving the day in FR is no different than a level 8 fighter saving the day in Eberron (since that is basically an epic hero in that setting). I'm sure it's happened before. You answered that yourself. Elminster only saves the day in novels about him, and only some of the time. Sometimes he breaks even, sometimes he comes out with a few more scars, just like every other character who has earned what they're worth. 3. Vorpal swords and holy avengers are just 'laying around': At least in my high-level campaigns, they have to pay for these things. Again, allowing them to be strewn about like leaves on the wind is a mark of bad DMing. I have never encountered an abundance of magic items in the games I've played, the opposite was true in fact. This also goes in the face of legendary NPCs having only NPC wealth levels. Of all the epic mages out in FR, less than a handful have a Headband of Intellect. If there were Holy Avengers laying around, I'm sure those 12 paladins of Lathander would have had an easier time taking down Sammaster, most of them died as I recall, and that was with the help of an avatar. 4. Clear-cut good and evil is dumb: Come on. We have moral ambiguity in the real world already. Can we please have a place where red dragons are evil and good gods have good clerics? This annoys me the most. Some Eberron folk have made a big deal about the moral ambiguity of the setting. FR was the first to have lawful bards in the 2e days, and I think the first D&D setting to have elven druids (druids were restricted to humans only I think). There have been Orog and Saurial paladins, good liches, evil elves, and good drow (for better or worse). Few NPCs and monsters have clear cut schemes and plots, especially as you look at higher CRs and Levels. To muddle the waters anymore would bring FR away from epic fantasy and into the realm of sword and sorcery. This has made it into the mechanics as well. In Champions of Ruin there is the Touch of Benevolence feat that allows evil characters with the feat to express occasional acts of goodness without compromising their morals (lose their evil based abilities). Champions of Valor (FR's Book of Exalted Deeds) redefines the typical goodness in their game term Valorous to be less shiny paragonic than Exalted. Then there's that bunch of fallen Paladins in Waterdeep that think they're still serving Tyr. Moral ambiguity, heck they don't even know what they're doing or who they're following. 5. "All of these ancient civilizations coming back": Wrong. One: Shade. Mulhorand is simply experiencing a revival. Myth Drannor is toast, and Netheril proper is destroyed beyond repair. It's somewhat true, there are a decent number of revivals, and some have voiced concerns. I view most of it as realistic. The Romans looked to the Greeks for their example. The Byzantine Empire tried to revive the glory of Rome. The Holy Roman Empire purposely used that name to invoke the power of fallen Rome. Russia tried to push forth the idea that it was the third Roman empire. There has been a land called Persia on maps for millennia, up until the last century, when the people living there have significantly changed from the days of the Persian Empire. Even in Eberron there are probably groups trying to restore the glory of Galifar, or revive Karrath or repair Cyre. Some people are innately fascinated and obsessed with the great deeds and civilizations of the past. It is why the legend of Atlantis, Lemuria, etc. have persisted and in fiction these people have the power to restore these long fallen empires to life. I could spin this off into a criticism of Eberron, but the FR boards seem to be a little more grown-up than that. So, what are your thoughts/perspectives? I wouldn't say everyone here is above making rash judgements on a setting we haven't really given a look at and made arguments against without proper support provided. I have dropped by to skim the comments at the Eberron boards, as well as those here. I noticed there are far fewer snide remarks against Eberron on the FR boards than there are against FR on the Eberron boards. Anytime someone makes a reference to FR material at the Eberron boards, someone will respond with a very strong negative comment or three. It seems far more likely that Eberron ideas will be at least considered in the FR forums, and if they are rejected, it is not out of pure disgust, but valid reasons are given. I'm hoping the negative commentators are just a few, some who have had bad experiences. But some of their disgust seems very irrational and poorly supported given a deeper look at the setting. I'm sure there are just as many rabid, foaming, anti-Eberron FR fans, but they seem to frequent the Wizard boards less than their anti-FR, Eberron-loving counterparts.
BadCatMan 03-15-06, 12:31 AM	I worry that I'll make an Eberron character with such and such a cool concept that won't come into effect until middish levels (say level 10), and then when the character finally starts to come into their own (ie level 6), they'll have to retire. Why does Eberron have all these prestige classes if no character is ever likely to get past level 1 of them? In Forgotten Realms, there is adventure to be found at level 1. There is adventure to be found at level 5. Again at level 10, then 15, then 20 and up. There is adventure to be found the whole way through a character's career. Regarding powerful items just lying around, I once found a pair of +1 vorpal battleaxes on an undead minotaur at level 3 (Blame the DM. They never vorped anyway). An in Neverwinter Nights, it is possible to find powerful weapons in a rubbish bin (random treasure generator). :D
Lord Karsus 03-15-06, 01:29 AM	-Feh, Eberron has nothing on the 'Realms. Like George Krashos said, give Eberron another 20 years, and then let them speak. -Personally, the Realms are a much better campaign world simply because of the massive amounts of lore that has accumulated over the years. There is no other campaign setting that has the same amount of raw lore that the Realms has. And, of course, as long as Ed Greenwood is around, that amount of lore will be growing and growing. -I've never played Eberron, and never will, so I can't name any specifics about the setting. But, from what I can tell, Eberron doesn't have that medieval fantasy feel to it. Instead, I see some kind of dark anime, like Cowboy Bebop, or Trigun perhaps. In my opinion, I want to play in a world that remembles the archetypal fantasy setting. Many share my sentiments, I am sure... -And, the Forgotten Realms has Sun Elves. Anything that has Sun Elves is alright in my book...
Ryltar Swordsong 03-15-06, 04:04 AM	Both settings are good, but I prefer FR. It's annoying to see so many Eberron posters bash FR, as it reeks of jealousy and childishness IMO. But they are entitled to their opinion.
Zanan 03-15-06, 05:02 AM	Well, with regard to the dragons, they most likely refer to Ed Greenwood's "Wyrms of the North". Yes, there are quite a few of them and one wonders about the Wyrms of the South et al. But these dragons are by no means all "wyrms" or even running around these days. What you get every now and then is the epic battle any Eberron chap will dream about, like the return of Shade and the involvement of the Chosen, or the battles of the elves vs. the fey'ri, phaerimm etc.. But this is not common, even in Realms "full" of epic characters. While the novels sometimes suggest otherwise, those who read the sourcebooks carefully will note that many epic characters keep to themselves and hardly ever become involved into history that much. They do keep an eye that it does not all go down the drain, but that is what you would expect in Realms with a clear cut definition of good and evil. Good thing about the Realms is that you will always find places devoid of any high level magic users and even if you lack this, there is nothing which will stop you sending your party back a 1000 years and start a campaign there. So in essence, it is all about DMing and knowledge of the sources.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 05:47 AM	See, I don't WANT some delusion that I'm the biggest fish in the pond. Let me get this straight, Dan. You don't want the delusion that you're the big fish of the pond, yet your favorite setting has the precedent of mortals ascending to godhood, therefore providing the framework where you can, in fact, be a big fish if you so desire. Oookay... I personally don't see what the problem is. Few folks seem to have issues with reading & enjoying Conan novels with the knowledge that he's arguably the best swordsman on the planet, so what's the issue with transferring that feeling to a game setting? From a metagame perspective I'd ask the following: If anyone deserves to be the top dogs in a game setting, shouldn't it be the folks you're DMing? Why pass that superiority over to NPC's? Are you fostering proper perspective, or are you telling your players to settle for silver & bronze medals, because they shouldn't hope to have parity with The Blackstaff or any other iconic? Both settings are good, but I prefer FR. It's annoying to see so many Eberron posters bash FR, as it reeks of jealousy and childishness IMO. But they are entitled to their opinion. Like munchkinism, that type of behavior is also universal. If the Search feature worked, I'm sure you'd find all of the "We Hate Eberron And It's Not Even On The Shelves Yet" threads that FR posters put up, for fear that FR might not get the splatbook support folks assumed it deserved because focus might shift to jumpstarting Eberron. No one in either camp can claim the moral high ground in this issue. We've all behaved badly... and continue to do so. I should know about bad behavior. I've sunk to that level on more than one occasion, regrettably. -Feh, Eberron has nothing on the 'Realms. -I've never played Eberron, and never will, so I can't name any specifics about the setting. Normally I'd think it was odd that you say that Eberron has nothing on the Realms, and then say that you haven't tried the other system therefore admitting that you've got no logical point of reference to actually qualify your preference. Then again, I don't have to try brussel sprouts to know I hate 'em already, nor do I have to try brussel sprouts to know that I think green beans are better than brussel sprouts. I agree with your sentiment, and have no problem with people having strong preferences.
Another Gnome 03-15-06, 08:31 AM	Vorpal swords and holy avengers are just 'laying around' Reading Volo's Guides, one does get a feeling that every innkeeper and their cousin has helmed horrors as bouncers and an archmage or two watching over their backs. However, most of that's been toned down in 3E, along with the cities the size of New York at every corner of the land and twice that number underground. Anyway, to me FR is ideal for gritty low-level games where daily survival (and killing kobolds) is of more importance than saving the world and trying to convince yourself that grave-robbing murderers (called 'adventurers' by some) have anything to do with heroism.
Mordakay of Thay 03-15-06, 09:01 AM	I think both settings have their strong points though i prefer the Realms more.In Eberron the magic being technology is pretty cool imo,while in the realms you have that strange feeling of familiarity that makes u hope the DM will take u in the places u whant to explore in the realms :).Eberron is new,so it didn't have the time to aquire that feeling. I mean,after i played the Baldur's Gate series i couldnt wait to start a campaign in the western heartlands and then in Amn :D.I think u guys get the point.
Lord Karsus 03-15-06, 09:06 AM	If the Search feature worked, I'm sure you'd find all of the "We Hate Eberron And It's Not Even On The Shelves Yet" threads that FR posters put up, for fear that FR might not get the splatbook support folks assumed it deserved because focus might shift to jumpstarting Eberron. -You'd be surprised. Being on the Boards for a while, I remember there was some anti-Eberron sentiment around here when the setting was first being released. It was because, as you say, we were worried that Eberron would take up the majority of WotC's time, and leave us hanging with FR supplements. That was a while ago, and as we can all see, not true. -I was crusing the Eberron Boards last night, and I did see a few Anti-FR threads, and a plethora of Anti-FR comments. Here, however, I have yet to see a thread dedicated to 'Why Eberron Sucks" (Since it advent of the release of the setting, anyway). Sure, every once and while, there may be a small quip against Eberron, but nothing in the magnitude that there is on the Eberron boards. Normally I'd think it was odd that you say that Eberron has nothing on the Realms, and then say that you haven't tried the other system therefore admitting that you've got no logical point of reference to actually qualify your preference. Then again, I don't have to try brussel sprouts to know I hate 'em already, nor do I have to try brussel sprouts to know that I think green beans are better than brussel sprouts. I agree with your sentiment, and have no problem with people having strong preferences. -Exactly. I don't like Brussel Sprouts, and I've never eaten 'em before. :P
soulthief 03-15-06, 09:10 AM	FR is only overpowered if a DM makes it so. I have enjoyed every session I played in the Realms form 1st level to 16th. I have dealt with ionic NPC's but our DM always ran it so our characters were always the main focus.
Faraer 03-15-06, 09:41 AM	The short answer is that the 'power level' of the Realms is greater than that of most heroic fantasy, but on par with the norms of D&D, with perhaps a slightly greater presence, certainly a far greater variety, of arcane magic.2- It can be seen this way by bad DMs, or if one reads only Ed Greenwood's novels.Even in the novels he features in, Elminster only 'saves the day' in a couple of them. Most of the Elminster series isn't even set in the 'present' Realms. You could no more reasonably infer that Elminster always saves the day than any other protagonist. In fact, the sources recommend that if PCs look for him in his tower he not be in.In all honesty, I think you've probably taken sarcasm & overexaggerated comments and assumed that they were gospel truth opinions.That kind of comment, unfortunately, detracts from informed discussion -- the sarcasm is often mean-spirited and the exaggeration makes it hard to argue points ('Oh, I was just joking' -- while still perpetuating the canard).That being said, as an Eberron player, I also think that other Eberron critics falsely assign munchkinism to the FR, when it is also a metagame issue that can exist in any setting.For the record, Ed Greenwood's approach in creating the Realms is as far from munchkinism as could be.To muddle the waters anymore would bring FR away from epic fantasy and into the realm of sword and sorcery.It is principally sword and sorcery, the fact of TSR publishing novels starring characters intended as background sages notwithstanding. I was going to link to a passage from Ed that gives the reality of the Realms' moral unstraightforwardness, but couldn't locate it.Reading Volo's Guides, one does get a feeling that every innkeeper and their cousin has helmed horrors as bouncers and an archmage or two watching over their backs.Only if you ignore all the locations that aren't at all like that, and neglect the scale of the maps and the fact that Volo is highlighting the most visitworthy stuff he's found over vast, vast areas.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 10:01 AM	-I was crusing the Eberron Boards last night, and I did see a few Anti-FR threads, and a plethora of Anti-FR comments. Here, however, I have yet to see a thread dedicated to 'Why Eberron Sucks" Most "Why Eberron Sucks" threads masquerade as "Why Wasn't FR Chosen As the DDO MMOG Model?" threads these days, and there is at least one of those every couple of weeks. ;) The reason why you don't see the large number of anti-Eberron threads as you used to on the FR boards is directly linked to what we've already discussed. Eberron development hasn't taken place at the expense of FR development. The reason you see so many anti-FR threads is because the Eberron boards are routinely trolled. I imagine that anti-FR sentiments will subside as the amount of trolling decreases. If I had a dollar for every deliberately annoying & inflamatory "Why Can't I Worship (insert name of Faerun deity) In Eberron?" thread I've seen on our boards, I'd be a rich man.
White_Wizard 03-15-06, 11:08 AM	Woah! Please, everybody cool down. Reading this post gives the feeling of increasing heat. Now I'm nearly saying "Ouch! It hurts!" First of all: the entire matter "Eberron is better than Forgotten Realms" (as well as "Forgotten Realms is better than Eberron") is futile. They are two distinct settings with distinct aims. I do not know Eberron, so I will say nothing about it. But I do know pretty well the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting and I'm a DM of FR based campaigns since a time that lies distant in the past (ok, maybe I'm getting just a little bit evocative...). The Forgotten Realms have only one (1) official CR 25 dragon, wich is Klauth, a red dragon living in the North. I never heard of a 45+ (!) official dragon in the Forgotten Realms, let alone a whole bunch of them! They would have wiped the entire Toril and burned it into ashes long ago if there were a lot of them. Even just one CR45 dragon could easily beat Elminster into a roasted meatpie, and he is supposed to be one of the most powerful entities in Faerun. This leads to another point: Elminster saving the day every time. Well, sometimes it happens, but it's bad DMing and it could happen as well in any other kind of RPG, Eberron included. So that's bad DMing, not bad setting. Holy avenger and vorpal swords seem to grow on apple trees if one listens to what had been said. Nope. They are hidden and well guarded just as it happens in Eberron. And I don't think that a DM in an Eberron campaign loses the speech if he attempts to say "You find a vorpal sword". Or maybe a bard jumps out of the Eberron handbook and casts silence on the gaming table, so the DM can't say to his players that the treasure includes a Vorpal sword. This was ironic, and not meant to offend or insult anyone here. Just laugh at it if you like it or don't if you dislike it. Again we are speaking about bad DMing, not bad setting. Clear cut evil-good is dumb. Is it? Classic Fantasy (as well as mythology) is based upon that clear cut. One may like it or dislike it. I don't think that going around saying "that's dumb" just because we don't like it is a very clever behavior. Anyway this can be a valid reason for someone to play Eberron rather than Forgotten Realms (or vice versa), but it's not good or bad setting. Just different setting. All of these ancient civilization...........: of course, Forgotten Realms gives plenty of space for ancient civilizations to be revived or to come back as a threatening menace. It's part of a world which evolves in a continual flow (which is one of the fascinating things in FR). Imaskari were believed dead and lost, and then it comes out that a number of them survived in the Underdark, voluntary sealed, isolated and protected by their magic. Shades are heir to the ancient netherese survivors. Ancient empires come back as well as "modern" powers crumble, let's think to Zenthil Keep, former city under the power of Bane, then under Cyric's and then again under Bane's power. Deities die and come back to life. It's evolution. I think that in the next 20 years Eberron too will have it's share of evolution.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 11:09 AM	Let me get this straight, Dan. You don't want the delusion that you're the big fish of the pond, yet your favorite setting has the precedent of mortals ascending to godhood, therefore providing the framework where you can, in fact, be a big fish if you so desire. My favorite setting is Planescape. That being said, I didn't play any of those NPCs, did I? No. They are a part of fantasy, of mythology, of the culture of the setting, the wonder of FR... I have never played a high-level character in real life. Ever. In any setting. My PCs don't ascend to godhood all willy nilly, especially not in FR, where AO has a virtual iron grasp on divine situations. I personally don't see what the problem is. Few folks seem to have issues with reading & enjoying Conan novels with the knowledge that he's arguably the best swordsman on the planet, so what's the issue with transferring that feeling to a game setting? Never read Conan; probably wouldn't like it. From a metagame perspective I'd ask the following: If anyone deserves to be the top dogs in a game setting, shouldn't it be the folks you're DMing? Nope. Once the PCs are on the top, they win. I don't WANT anyone to "win" D&D. Why pass that superiority over to NPC's? Are you fostering proper perspective, or are you telling your players to settle for silver & bronze medals, because they shouldn't hope to have parity with The Blackstaff or any other iconic? Maybe a little bit of both. It's called humility, and it's called realism. In a world as ancient as FR, why the heck would the PCs happen to be the most powerful beings around? They've only been aroound for a few decades, or, if demihumans, a few centuries at best. I'm a history nut; I like psychology, sociology, religion, and I love the sciences. I'm not much one for unrealistic drama.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 12:03 PM	Maybe a little bit of both. It's called humility, and it's called realism. Or perhaps it's protectionism since you seem to think that no PC wizard should rival iconic wizards such as Vanderghast or Elminster? In a world as ancient as FR, why the heck would the PCs happen to be the most powerful beings around? Case in point. You use the age of the setting to justify why PC's shouldn't be the best around at what they do. Boxing has more or less existed as a sport since the dawn of pugilstic competition, therefore Muhammed Ali has no business being called the greatest boxer ever born, given that his career lasted but a twinkling when compared to the age of the sport as a whole: this is the parallel of logic I'm getting from you. If it's any consolation, I had the same feelings concerning iconics when I DMed FR, as I absolutely loved piloting the bad guys. Few settings can boast the quality of villanous opposition that the Realms can & FR has an abundance of facinating groups that exist to do mischief. As a result, from a metagame perspective folks like me sometimes get annoyed when their favorite bad guy has his plans foiled by do-gooders. I wouldn't be surprised if someone told me that Realms Of Villainy was written for the expressed purpose of placating the proud few folks, like myself, who occasionally pulled for the forces of ruin. I'm a history nut; I like psychology, sociology, religion, and I love the sciences. I'm not much one for unrealistic drama. Why not? Sometimes realism & heroism have no business being in the same sentence when you're dealing with fantasy storytelling. Sure, gravity should work when applicable, but if I'm a hero pursuing the BBEG across the rooftops of the city of Westgate, should I (as the hero) have a reasonable expectation of making some of the jumps that would send some members of local law enforcement crashing to the ground. After all, I'm the hero. That kind of comment, unfortunately, detracts from informed discussion -- the sarcasm is often mean-spirited and the exaggeration makes it hard to argue points ('Oh, I was just joking' -- while still perpetuating the canard) I concur & continue state that this type of behavior is universal. It happens on all boards and isn't justifiable behavior no matter the origin. For the record, Ed Greenwood's approach in creating the Realms is as far from munchkinism as could be. Point taken, but the end product (ie. game materiel) is what's being analyzed the most at the end of the day, not the approach behind the creation. As Another Gnome pointed out, at one point in time you could look at the materiel & get the impression that an archmage lived on every street corner in any given metropolis in the Realms. Again, if Eberron critics use that info to judge current incarnations, it would be an unfair assessment given that level stacking was the only way to reflect obscene personal achievement in older editions of the game.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 12:16 PM	Or perhaps it's protectionism since you seem to think that no PC wizard should rival iconic wizards such as Vanderghast or Elminster? What's your point? I have a right to protect the ideas I feel are correct. Case in point. You use the age of the setting to justify why PC's shouldn't be the best around at what they do. Oh noes, I'm making valid statements which support my point of view? ;) You're seeking to in some way deprecate something by pointing out examples of it, without actually convincing me there's anything wrong with the topic in the first place. Boxing has more or less existed as a sport since the dawn of pugilstic competition, therefore Muhammed Ali has no business being called the greatest boxer ever born, given that his career lasted but a twinkling when compared to the age of the sport as a whole: this is the parallel of logic I'm getting from you. And he's dead. Elminster and Larloch and Halaster have been around for thousands of years, and are effectively immortal, and their Art does not degenerate as time goes on, but only grows. Your analogy is simply nonapplicable in this situation. Why not? Sometimes realism & heroism have no business being in the same sentence when you're dealing with fantasy storytelling. Because I'm not an Artist; I'm a Scientist. It's a purely preference thing. Sure, gravity should work when applicable, but if I'm a hero pursuing the BBEG across the rooftops of the city of Westgate, should I (as the hero) have a reasonable expectation of making some of the jumps that would send some members of local law enforcement crashing to the ground. After all, I'm the hero. No. You're a hero. I'd like to point out Ed Greenwood's quote in my sig below, here: this me-me-me-me syndrome that 3E is propagating is causing the downfall of the very idea of the game itself. Eberron is simply not even in the same category; I don't like vegetables, but I like grains, so no one's going to tell me that vegetables are as tasty as grains.
Faraer 03-15-06, 12:39 PM	I concur & continue state that this type of behavior is universal. It happens on all boards and isn't justifiable behavior no matter the origin.I agree. I don't actually think it's that common anywhere; disliking campaign settings is obviously a pretty stupid waste of time.Point taken, but the end product (ie. game materiel) is what's being analyzed the most at the end of the day, not the approach behind the creation.I don't think the people who pay attention to the sources are the people who cry 'munchkin' re the Realms. There are cases where the Realms' design intent has been changed or not made it strongly into the books, but this isn't one.As Another Gnome pointed out, at one point in time you could look at the materiel & get the impression that an archmage lived on every street corner in any given metropolis in the Realms.You could misinterpret things that way, but I doubt a large number of people ever got that impression independently.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 12:56 PM	What's your point? I have a right to protect the ideas I feel are correct. And there's nothing wrong with that. It's just something I wouldn't do for fear of sending the message to the folks at my gaming table that no matter how hard they try, they'll never be better than (insert name of iconic) when it comes to (insert name of skill iconic where the iconic excels). Oh noes, I'm making valid statements which support my point of view? ;) You're seeking to in some way deprecate something by pointing out examples of it, without actually convincing me there's anything wrong with the topic in the first place. If I appear to be doing that, I apologize. It's not my intent to devalue your opinion. No. You're a hero. Indiana Jones never shared the spotlight with Rambo. Why can't I be the hero? Try as I might, I don't get the need to establish a heroic pecking order that is somehow supposed to humble players into accepting some lesser niche in the fantasy landscape. It's almost like telling your PC's, "You can save this town if you want, but only Hero X is allowed to pull Silverymoon's fat out of the fire." Michael Moorecock had no problems letting everyone know that Elric was better than everyone (which is why Elric was the premier hero and villain in so many of MMs novels), so I don't see the issue with allowing the players to fill that same niche. I guess my opinions & ideas are driven by the abundance of pulp fantasy I've read over the years. I'd like to point out Ed Greenwood's quote in my sig below, here: this me-me-me-me syndrome that 3E is propagating is causing the downfall of the very idea of the game itself. So now you're saying that the mechanics of the setting should take precedence over the involvement of the players in the setting? Eberron is simply not even in the same category; I don't like vegetables, but I like grains, so no one's going to tell me that vegetables are as tasty as grains. Pretty much my feelings as expressed to Lord Karsus. Nothing wrong with having strong preferences. You could misinterpret things that way, but I doubt a large number of people ever got that impression independently. Even if they did, as I said before, it would still be an unfair assessment. The old school listings of prominant figures shouldn't be assumed to be an indicative representation of the entire citizenry of any one area.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 01:11 PM	And there's nothing wrong with that. It's just something I wouldn't do for fear of sending the message to the folks at my gaming table that no matter how hard they try, they'll never be better than (insert name of iconic) when it comes to (insert name of skill iconic where the iconic excels). I insinuate that it's going to take a hell of a lot more than 8 or 9 levels to get there, when I DM. That's only a few years of in-game experience; it would take centuries, if not more, for players to reach the level of expertise needed to hob-nob with the big leaguers. If I appear to be doing that, I apologize. It's not my intent to devalue your opinion. No need for apologies. I wasn't meaning to sound offended - I was simply confused, because you were pointing out things as if they proved something was in any way false about my opinion. One has to first point out why there is something wrong or inaccurate with the original statement. Indiana Jones never shared the spotlight with Rambo. Why can't I be the hero? Because Rambo did not exist in the Indiana Jones universe. D&D is not a self-containeed microcosm - it's an expansive multiverse. Try as I might, I don't get the need to establish a heroic pecking order that is somehow supposed to humble players into accepting some lesser niche in the fantasy landscape. This psychologically molds better players, in my opinion, by showing them that they can't be immediately appeased and win. It's almost like telling your PC's, "You can save this town if you want, but only Hero X is allowed to pull Silverymoon's fat out of the fire." It will keep them from being arrogant (which oh-so-many 3E players are, in terms of actual roleplaying) without reason. I say without reason, because as far as I'm concerned, some people certainly do have certain reasons to be arrogant, or at least proud, and I do not think that playing for a year in real life to get to 9th level in a world is a reason to be arrogant. Michael Moorecock had no problems letting everyone know that Elric was better than everyone (which is why Elric was the premier hero and villain in so many of MMs novels), so I don't see the issue with allowing the players to fill that same niche. And he was also swift to point out how horrendously weak Elric was without Stormbringer to counter his albinism, thus severely humbling him and still making him a likable character. I guess my opinions & ideas are driven by the abundance of pulp fantasy I've read over the years. And I don't think I've ever read any pulp fantasy. Which novels would you consider pulp fantasy, out of curiosity? So now you're saying that the mechanics of the setting should take precedence over the involvement of the players in the setting? No, but rather the mechanics of the game help to encourage certain mindset which are injurious to the game overall. 2E and 3E both had its flaws, but in the end I think that 2E made the better players (and I've heard the same thing from 3E players who 'apprenticed' under 2E players, several times). Eberron is... Very 3E.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 02:33 PM	Because Rambo did not exist in the Indiana Jones universe. D&D is not a self-containeed microcosm - it's an expansive multiverse. Last time I checked, both Rambo & Indiana Jones were Americans, so they did indeed exist in the same universe from a certain perspective. They did not, however exist in the same period in history, genre, or movie if that is your meaning. As far as connectivity goes, Eberron is not officially linked to any other setting, or at least that's what I've gathered from my library. The only cross-reference I've seen in Eberron books is the Easter Egg photo from the Sharn splatbook featuring the PGtF placed in plain sight. ;) Of course, there is the ever-present panic button known as the Shadow Plane present in Eberron cosomology for those DM's that need a release valve to justify existance of a multiverse. Since major flame wars have erupted over planar mechanics, I'd imagine that Keith threw that caveat into his setting as a personal aside to the marketing guys. Even the marketing guys realize that there are some players that are so attached to character sheets, or used to some level of play, that they have an irrational loathing of starting over at 1st level. Hence the Shadow Plane: the swap file of D&D cosmology. This psychologically molds better players, in my opinion, by showing them that they can't be immediately appeased and win. So this is a metagame issue. Understood. And he was also swift to point out how horrendously weak Elric was without Stormbringer to counter his albinism, thus severely humbling him and still making him a likable character. But at the end of the day, Elric was the primary figure of the mythos. When things happened, it was Elric that usually ended up being the prime mover. And I don't think I've ever read any pulp fantasy. Which novels would you consider pulp fantasy, out of curiosity? Primarily most works by Edgar Rice Burroughs (Tarzan, John Carter), Robert Howard (Conan, Kull the Conquerer) and Fritz Lieber. Michael Moorcock's Elric novels have some pulp elements, but at the end of the day they have too many high fantasy elements to be truly considered pulp. No, but rather the mechanics of the game help to encourage certain mindset which are injurious to the game overall. I'd argue that the mindset is cultivated by DMs that don't know when to stand by their chosen limitations for fear that no one will sit at their gaming table & not necessarily a product of the mechanics itself, but that's a discussion that could take up a whole 'nother thread. Suffice to say that I don't buy the argument that a DM needs internal mechanisms inherent in a setting, such as a heroic pecking order of elite iconics, to teach his players some semblance of humility or how to accept defeat.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 02:42 PM	So this is a metagame issue. Understood. Of course. What's the point in any discussion unless we discuss how it affects the people who play the game? :) But at the end of the day, Elric was the primary figure of the mythos. When things happened, it was Elric that usually ended up being the prime mover. Except for the fact that he was only ONE aspect of the Eternal Champion, and that in the end his "winning" meant the destruction of his entire civilization and his very memory, and ultimately the "end" battle was between the Lords of the Higher World. Yeah, he was the "hero" alright... ;) Primarily most works by Edgar Rice Burroughs (Tarzan, John Carter), Robert Howard (Conan, Kull the Conquerer) and Fritz Lieber. See, I've never heard anything particularly good about any of the above with the exception of Fritz Lieber, and the fact that the vast majority of Robert Howard's works never actually made it into print, and they were originally far more lore-based and detailed. :) I'd argue that the mindset is cultivated by DMs that don't know when to stand by their chosen limitations for fear that no one will sit at their gaming table & not necessarily a product of the mechanics itself, but that's a discussion that could take up a whole 'nother thread. Suffice to say that I don't buy the argument that a DM needs internal mechanisms inherent in a setting, such as a heroic pecking order of elite iconics, to teach his players some semblance of humility or how to accept defeat. Too bad, psychologically, the world never works perfectly. :) Too bad society doesn't learn without rules or experiences, and without rules, there's no one to learn the "right way" to do things, and thus no one to give the newer gamers the right experiences. Thus, once more, pointing to Ed's quote - that D&D is no longer a game about cooperation but rather a game about me-me-me-winning.
od_vjesala 03-15-06, 03:18 PM	A paladin with two smites per round?!! (not to mention double spells, so on and on). I'm not quite thrilled with that setting. It makes PC a hero, and an NPC a predetermined looser. Only PCs get action points (If i cared for this setting this wouldn't be the case). I think I'll shift my frustration to Ebberon boards.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 03:24 PM	Of course. What's the point in any discussion unless we discuss how it affects the people who play the game? :) Just sayin' is all. I always saw my role as a DM as storyteller / referee / entertainer, not someone who used D&D as a tool to drill my own personal or philosophical beliefs into my player's skulls via object lessons conveyed through the setting. My players already know about loss just by living life one day at a time. At least D&D gives them a chance to win every once in a while, or at least be rewarded for teamwork or a job well done. Except for the fact that he was only ONE aspect of the Eternal Champion, and that in the end his "winning" meant the destruction of his entire civilization and his very memory, and ultimately the "end" battle was between the Lords of the Higher World. Yeah, he was the "hero" alright... ;) All that aside, when things needed getting done from the plot perspective, Elric was the agent of change. That is the crux of the matter. See, I've never heard anything particularly good about any of the above with the exception of Fritz Lieber, and the fact that the vast majority of Robert Howard's works never actually made it into print, and they were originally far more lore-based and detailed. :) So you've never actually read the books based on the negative opinions formed by others, as well as perhaps a possible pre-disposition against pulp fantasy novels based on your own personal tastes. This seems to be a recurring theme and again, there's nothing wrong with liking what you like, nor do you necessarily have to justify your likes & dislikes. Thus, once more, pointing to Ed's quote - that D&D is no longer a game about cooperation but rather a game about me-me-me-winning. Again, I think that depends on the DM & the players involved. Ed is pretty much paraphrasing the well-known and annoying new renaissance of Monty Haul gaming, but MHG has been around as long as D&D has existed. I'd agree with the notion that crunch emphasis and player creation mechanics (Does anyone play a plain ol' human anymore? Does it really matter if my rogue "wastes a feat slot" on Monastic Training?) would seem to contribute to a resurgance of MHG, but I can't back the school of thought that completely blames 3ed for that. If you've got a metagame issue with players who don't share some real sense of teamwork, then it doesn't matter what game they play: if success is dependant on working together, then that unit will fail.
Another Gnome 03-15-06, 03:36 PM	Only if you ignore all the locations that aren't at all like that, and neglect the scale of the maps and the fact that Volo is highlighting the most visitworthy stuff he's found over vast, vast areas. My point was just that -- people most vocally claiming Realms to be "overpowered" are likely ones who never looked deeper than the skin in the first place. Even so, I certainly don't mind the 3E facelift.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 03:38 PM	I always saw my role as a DM as storyteller / referee / entertainer, not someone who used D&D as a tool to drill my own personal or philosophical beliefs into my player's skulls via object lessons conveyed through the setting. I have a holistic view of reality. I think every piece is connected in some way to every other, and to ignore any aspect of it is to willingly delve into ignorance. My players already know about loss just by living life one day at a time. At least D&D gives them a chance to win every once in a while, or at least be rewarded for teamwork or a job well done. I agree. But they better be willing to fight to get on top for a long, long time, to let little successes build up into very large ones. I am not an easy DM. Perhaps that was formed from my personal experiences in the game, though. The first game I ever played in was DMed by a Shakespearean Drama teacher, who was utterly amazing, and we were repeatedly beaten, thrown into slavery, and were never able to hold onto a magic item for more than a few games before it was somehow destroyed, lost, or taken away. All that aside, when things needed getting done from the plot perspective, Elric was the agent of change. That is the crux of the matter. Sure, on one world, in one reality, of the multiverse. I really don't see how this is helping your point. I think that the PCs are subjective heroes, just as Elric was a subjective hero, on one plane of existence, in one timestream. Again, I think that depends on the DM & the players involved. Ed is pretty much paraphrasing the well-known and annoying new renaissance of Monty Haul gaming, but MHG has been around as long as D&D has existed. I'd agree with the notion that crunch emphasis and player creation mechanics (Does anyone play a plain ol' human anymore? Does it really matter if my rogue "wastes a feat slot" on Monastic Training?) would seem to contribute to a resurgance of MHG, but I can't back the school of thought that completely blames 3ed for that. If you've got a metagame issue with players who don't share some real sense of teamwork, then it doesn't matter what game they play: if success is dependant on working together, then that unit will fail. This is the exact argument I see in every one of these threads: 3E doesn't MAKE people do X or Y. I am not saying it does. People have free will. It does however greatly facilitate such gameplay. And that's what matters to me, because I look at the long-term. Already, as far as I'm concerned, looking at the new generations of roleplayers, 3E has failed in my eyes. It's become a video game, for the most part, and I hate video games. Just looking at the people posting on these boards turns my stomach. This conversation has really made me seriously consider leaving these boards altogether, or at least retiring to a lurking and rarely posting mode. No melodrama here, just a sort of quiet contemplation.
Faraer 03-15-06, 03:39 PM	See, I've never heard anything particularly good about any of the above with the exception of Fritz Lieber, and the fact that the vast majority of Robert Howard's works never actually made it into print, and they were originally far more lore-based and detailed. :)All three are very important writers. Leiber and Howard -- major influences on both Gary Gygax and Ed Greenwood -- are widely revered by readers of fantasy/horror/SF, and amassing growing 'mainstream' critical praise. I would guess at least half of Howard's prolific output was published during his lifetime, almost all the rest has appeared since, and I'm not aware of anything behind your last comment.
BrianCritchley 03-15-06, 03:40 PM	There's nothing saying you can't be more powerful then Elminister, Elminister is only a 35th level char or so, with his chosen of mystra template jumping his CR up to 39. there's nothing saying you can't become a 40th level PC, it just takes a lot of time and experiance. and the thing is, this is because FR is a scaleable setting so to speak. In Ebberon you're an incrediably powerful character, at level 12. which is cool, however once you hit that level, and save the day the GM has a problem, "my players all really like their characters, but how do I contiune from here while mantaining the setting. as others have noted give ebberon 20 years and you'll see a gradual increase in the power level of characters rise, so as to allow GMs to contiune playing Ebberon through higher levels. FR has had this happen already. should your PCs be the central heros? sure but this doesn't mean they are the only or the most powerful heros. Sure, gravity should work when applicable, but if I'm a hero pursuing the BBEG across the rooftops of the city of Westgate, should I (as the hero) have a reasonable expectation of making some of the jumps that would send some members of local law enforcement crashing to the ground. sure you are, and I'll let you do things that a normal person might, if your a monk with high ranks in jump or something, but if your a fighter in full plate with no ranks in jump sorry buddy your outta luck. Batman is the hero of his comic books, yet even he's got his weaknesses, and he has to find ways around em.
Jiggawha 03-15-06, 03:55 PM	Some parts are overpowered. I think that some authors tried to compete their NPC's with Elminster. Examples : Twisted Rune, Princes of Shade, many NPC's of Bloodstone Lands, many drow NPC's, Shurrupak, Shoon VII, some characters below Waterdeep (not Halaster) and some serpents. Other is well balanced. Also FR has a much more logical historical depth than Eberron and its rakshasa lords and goblinoid great empires (laugh) ... Eberron just ain't got soul.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 03:59 PM	All three are very important writers. Leiber and Howard -- major influences on both Gary Gygax and Ed Greenwood -- are widely revered by readers of fantasy/horror/SF, and amassing growing 'mainstream' critical praise. I would guess at least half of Howard's prolific output was published during his lifetime, almost all the rest has appeared since, and I'm not aware of anything behind your last comment. Faraer, I greatly respect your opinion, so I'll take this information with thought. And look into possibly getting a book or two of the above authors. :) I just am not sure, though, how such authors would lead to a world like Eberron as opposed to FR. To me, FR has what Eberron has, only better, and far more variety, and more logical. But.. I don't know. I won't go any further into it since, as I said, I haven't read any of the above authors, and thus do not wholly comprehend their influences on the game.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 04:06 PM	I have a holistic view of reality. I think every piece is connected in some way to every other, and to ignore any aspect of it is to willingly delve into ignorance. I think that there is a time & place for all things. There's a time to quietly reflect on higher aims, & then there is a time to call some friends over, order a pizza, further the storyline, have some fun, & pray that your dice rolls are good. I take the "Have fun & if you're not careful you might learn something" approach to gaming. I don't see gaming in & of itself as a tool to deliberately club life's lessons into the heads of my players. Then again, I deal with a pretty mature bunch of folks to begin with. The first game I ever played in was DMed by a Shakespearean Drama teacher, who was utterly amazing, and we were repeatedly beaten, thrown into slavery, and were never able to hold onto a magic item for more than a few games before it was somehow destroyed, lost, or taken away. Jeez, that almost sounds like a psycological, Sadomachistic relationship. Did you guys ever win at all, or was D&D the tool used to teach you that nothing in life is ever fair? You could have learned the "Life sucks, so buy a helmet" nugget of wisdom just by getting up every morning & going to work. Sure, on one world, in one reality, of the multiverse. I really don't see how this is helping your point. The point is that in Elric stories where Elric is the primary character, Elric was the prime driver of the plot. This is the literary aspect of the issue: it's got nothing to do with the mythos of the novels. Dare I say that it is also the Eberron way. When the poison arrows fall, the populace looks to the PC's. Neither the Knights of Myth Drannor, nor the Circle of Eight, nor the Justice League of America will arrive to pick up the ball if the PCs fumble it. Just like in the movies & in the novels. Enforcement of failure is up to the DM and that has nothing to do with what edition of the game he's using. Already, as far as I'm concerned, looking at the new generations of roleplayers, 3E has failed in my eyes. It's become a video game, for the most part, and I hate video games. Just looking at the people posting on these boards turns my stomach. No offense, but who are you or I to judge what is or isn't a failure, or what does or doesn't constitute proper enjoyment of the game? I'm not fond of min/maxing but who am I to tell them that they're not playing the game properly, if the end result is thaty they're having fun doing what they do?
Faraer 03-15-06, 04:11 PM	'Pulp fantasy' means either fantasy that was published in the pulp magazines (and maybe dime novels) or, dubiously, fantasy in the supposed mode recently stereotyped as 'pulp'. (Imagining that the fiction of the pulps was a single genre is the same kind of ignorance that sees Western comics and manga as genres rather than mediums.) It did amuse me, before Eberron's release, to see 'pulp' roots cited as a distinctive feature of that world, given that these authors were as influential on Gygax and Greenwood as Baker. But it's no surprise that different generations take this material and turn it into new, different things.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 04:17 PM	I think that there is a time & place for all things. There's a time to quietly reflect on higher aims, & then there is a time to call some friends over, order a pizza, further the storyline, have some fun, & pray that your dice rolls are good. I'm more systematic than that. :) I plan for days and weeks and sometimes months, which is why I don't have time to DM anymore, despite the fact that I have people begging me to start my game again. Too much schoolwork. Jeez, that almost sounds like a psycological, Sadomachistic relationship. Did you guys ever win at all, or was D&D the tool used to teach you that nothing in life is ever fair? You could have learned the "Life sucks, so buy a helmet" nugget of wisdom just by getting up every morning & going to work. I loved it. He awarded XP for roleplay and problem-solving, very little, if any, for combat. He made us use our heads rather than rely on magical items. And in the end, my character ended up with a Libram of Silver Magic in the last session. It was bittersweet, because it was the last session, but it felt.. Right.. As if my character had a future to go on to. It ended on a high note, so to speak. The point is that in Elric stories where Elric is the primary character, Elric was the prime driver of the plot. This is the literary aspect of the issue: it's got nothing to do with the mythos of the novels. I like the series because of the mythoi. So in this case it has everything to do with it. :) That's why I like FR, too. Dare I say that it is also the Eberron way. When the poison arrows fall, the populace looks to the PC's. Neither the Knights of Myth Drannor, nor the Circle of Eight, nor the Justice League of America will arrive to pick up the ball if the PCs fumble it. No, because they're dealing with their own poison arrows. That's what happens in a real world - there are hundreds of people doing hundreds of things. Time does not stand still for the PCs. Just like in the movies & in the novels. There aren't many movies I likee, and there are fewer movies that I enjoy in more than very shallow ways. And I don't play D&D solely for entertainment in shallow ways - I play it to think, to create, to imagine, to experiment, to compare, to reveal... As far as novels go, I already named some of my favorites. Others include A Song of Ice and Fire and the Dragonlance books, neither of which are particularly "me-me-me-centric." Even in Dragonlance, the characters were more often than not pawns of higher powers, and they had a real reason why there were no high level characters - because the deities themselves removed characters who got too powerful. Enforcement of failure is up to the DM and that has nothing to do with what edition of the game he's using. I believe it is, because the current edition rarely writes in plain black and white that the DM is right, always. And the fact is, the amount of text in a 3E source is so much centered around mechanics and crunch that few players even glance at the other stuff. Just take a look at a few of the threads here. An Example is the thread about the player binding Efreeti and Wishing for new rings of Three Wishes, as if this was just fine and dandy. I have never, ever heard of such a tactic from any 2E player before; none of them would have the audacity to think of doing such a thing. No offense, but who are you or I to judge what is or isn't a failure, or what does or doesn't constitute proper enjoyment of the game? I'm not fond of min/maxing but who am I to tell them that they're not playing the game properly? I'm the DM. I'm the guy with all of the books and the knowledge, and with all of the imagination and organization and forethought to actually DM, when I have the time. Being sentient beings, it is up to all of us to judge what is and what isn't, and that's what I'm doing. You don't have to agree with me, but that doesn't mean I'll feel any less justified.
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 04:22 PM	(Imagining that the fiction of the pulps was a single genre is the same kind of ignorance that sees Western comics and manga as genres rather than mediums.) Sadly, IMO, there are definitely distinguishing characteristics (some cultural elements, some plot based elements, etc.) that differentiate most manga from Western comics, or pulp fantasy from high fantasy, or gothic horror from splatter horror. By your logic, there's no such thing as Cubism, Expressionism, or Baroque art: it's all paint on a canvas.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 04:22 PM	'Pulp fantasy' means either fantasy that was published in the pulp magazines (and maybe dime novels) or, dubiously, fantasy in the supposed mode recently stereotyped as 'pulp'. (Imagining that the fiction of the pulps was a single genre is the same kind of ignorance that sees Western comics and manga as genres rather than mediums.) It did amuse me, before Eberron's release, to see 'pulp' roots cited as a distinctive feature of that world, given that these authors were as influential on Gygax and Greenwood as Baker. But it's no surprise that different generations take this material and turn it into new, different things. I suppose I should give some of the books a read just to get an idea about what the modern mainstream considers "pulp" to be, then. :)
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 04:39 PM	I like the series because of the mythoi. So in this case it has everything to do with it. :) That's why I like FR, too. Point taken. I can accept the "diff'rent strokes" rebuttle. No, because they're dealing with their own poison arrows. That's what happens in a real world - there are hundreds of people doing hundreds of things. Time does not stand still for the PCs. Why shouldn't it? If "Tune In Tomorrow For The Next Exciting Episode of Babylon 5" worked for writers & viewers, why can't it work for the PC's? Did life really go on in Krynn in between Dragonlance novels? I'd argue that time definitely stands still for the PC's if you only game every other Friday. :D Temporal mechanics are one of the primary tools of the DM: he alters or advances time as he sees fit to. There aren't many movies I like, and there are fewer movies that I enjoy in more than very shallow ways. There is something to be said for having guilty movie favorites that you enjoy in a horribly shallow way. Old school Shaw Brothers kung-fu movie junkie here: Kid With The Golden Arm & Masked Avengers are the cornerstone of action cinema. You don't have to agree with me, but that doesn't mean I'll feel any less justified. Oh, rest assured that I don't agree with you, but I also respect your right to your own opinion and I won't judge you harshly because I don't agree with you. I'll even have issue with anyone who thinks that you aren't entitled to your opinion, despite the fact that I disagree. How about sharing that sentiment with your lesser, min/maxing bretherin who have apparently lost their way? ;)
GothicDan 03-15-06, 05:21 PM	Well, Kid SixXx, I suppose it does all boil down to what each person likes, eh? I do hope that I am wrong, actually - I hope that 3E will be able to re-foster and continue an environment that encourages roleplaying. It is rare that I am wrong about so profound a thing, with so many variables to analyze, but it's possible. :) Guilty pleasure, hm? Well, I suppose I DO like some of the WB shows primarily for the hot guys... Does Eberron have hot guys? :D
Faraer 03-15-06, 05:26 PM	Sadly, IMO, there are definitely distinguishing characteristics (some cultural elements, some plot based elements, etc.) that differentiate most manga from Western comics, or pulp fantasy from high fantasy, or gothic horror from splatter horror. By your logic, there's no such thing as Cubism, Expressionism, or Baroque art: it's all paint on a canvas.You're misunderstanding me. What I'm criticizing is the attitude that sees something like the pulps or manga, looks briefly at a few examples, then assumes everything published in the same way is the same kind of thing, where in fact these modes of publishing encompass a broad range of kinds of thing. I'm not conflating Western and Japanese comics, or saying that you can't draw the categories you mention.
Duke Lenethar 03-15-06, 05:29 PM	Wow, didn't think I'd get this many replies. Thanks for all of the input. For the record, I shouldn't have knocked the maturity of the Eberron people. The fact remains though, that they have a knee-jerk dislike of FR that I just don't get. I gave Eberron a chance, and I didn't like it. Too much Final Fantasy influence (Airships? Dragonshards/materia? Magical technology? Just add a feat called "OMNISLASH" and you're all set), and it just felt like it was shoved down our throats. They come out with an RTS and the coveted MMO, and put the new books on a fast-tracked production line. Also, the whole "world of swashbuckling action and dark adventure" is getting kinda annoying. They attach it to everything with the Eberron name in a press release, interview, everything it seems. Its like they have a macro to enter it after every mention of the word Eberron. There are things I do like about the world, but they are mostly superficial, things like architecture, artwork, and the fact that my favorite WoTC artist (Wayne Reynolds) does the covers. Warforged are nice too, but are fairly easy to transplant into FR. But back on topic (and I know that was a cheap shot). In inevitably comes down to the DM's good or bad choices. There is plenty of reference material out there to add variety to newbie "save the village from the orcs" campaigns, or super "ascend to godhood" campaigns, although those are annoying (why did they have to stat out the gods?) I agree with what everybody says. Let Eberron have 20 years and see what it looks like. As it stands, it reminds me of a fresh out of college business major thinking he knows how to better do the job of a man who's been doing it for 20 years.
GothicDan 03-15-06, 05:37 PM	I like that analogy. :)
Dark Wizard 03-15-06, 06:16 PM	Pulp is treated like any "sub-genre" within the Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Horror mega-genre. The fact that experts and critics lump things into a genre that is roughly described as Sci-Fi/Fantasy/Horror shows that it is the *Other* to the mainstream. I see the same when people make blanket statements about anime or cartoons in general. The typical view being that it's meant for kids and that ALL the material amounts to nothing more than juvenile self-pleasing power trips. Comicbooks are often assigned the same view. I was not aware that Ed Greenwood was so influenced by Howard's works, but I guess it's pretty apparent if one looked. I knew Ed liked Narnia. I find it interesting how Robert E. Howard was friends with H.P. Lovecraft and Clark Ashton Smith, all of Weird Tales fame. Tolkien once said in an interview that he "rather liked" Howard's Conan stories. No writer is an island. One last note, after looking at both 3e FR sourcebooks and Eberron books, I think that the art and layout in FR books lacks atmosphere and cohesion, certainly not to the extent of the Eberron books. This is not a criticism of the artists, most of whom are talented, and both settings share artists on occasion anyway. I'm commenting more on the use of the art, the placement, color choices, arrangement of images and page decorations. While I'm not the greatest fan of the Eberron layout and color scheme, it is very atmospheric and fitting for the feel they are trying to elicit for the setting. The FR books feel like they took the generic D&D layout and slapped a miniscule splat of Realmsianess between the covers. Layout was pretty dynamic for the FRCS, but seems to have declined with later books. Maybe it's just me... And why isn't the Champions of Valor art gallery up yet?
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 06:53 PM	What I'm criticizing is the attitude that sees something like the pulps or manga, looks briefly at a few examples, then assumes everything published in the same way is the same kind of thing, where in fact these modes of publishing encompass a broad range of kinds of thing. I can agree with that sentiment. Anyone who thinks "manga is manga" isn't taking category or type of audience (Shônen vs. Seinen vs. Kodomo) into consideration, nor are they even considering the nationality of the audience. It's pretty well known that there is a significant portion of the pop culture of both Japan & the States that have develped a fetish-scale idolization of the pop culture of the other nation. Hence you have manga that read like Western comics because: 1. Authors are writing for a Japanese audience that likes all things American, especially the gritty, hard-edged stories found in most Western comics. (ie. your 3G manga: guns, girls, gadgets) or, 2. Authors are writing for an American audience that likes all things Japanese, yet cannot wrap it's head around the heavy metaphysical concepts or cultural crossroads found in most manga geared towards Japanese adults. (ie. Your watered down versions of DBZ, Naruto, or Inuyasha being prefered by a slight majority of younger, American consumers over the heavily metaphysical sci-fi work of Masamune Shirow). Guilty pleasure, hm? Well, I suppose I DO like some of the WB shows primarily for the hot guys... Does Eberron have hot guys? :D I've been told by some that Halkhad (ie. the iconic Kalashtar Soulknife / Atavist seen in this pic (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/moe_gallery/91452.jpg) battling the Warforged Titan) is indeed a deliverer of "that fuzzy feeling." ;)
Krash 03-15-06, 07:03 PM	This has been a very civil and reasoned discussion - kudos to you all (not that you need kudos from me, but I shall bestow them anyway; such is my regal wont! :D ). The idea that always impressed me regarding gaming in the Realms was that PCs didn't operate in a vacuum. If they ignored the plot hooks sent by the DM re the goblin caves outside of town and instead elected to sit around in a tavern for weeks on end chatting up the staff, then they might find that when they do get to the goblin caves, the Company of the Shining Banner is exiting with the loot. Things happened. Constantly. Whether your PCs were part of it or not. Hence it became to me a living, breathing world, not a static landscape that faded to gray as soon as the PCs left a particular locale. To me, for what it's worth, this seemed more 'realistic' (although we must use such a term with care when dealing with a made-up, fantasy world). Probably more correctly from my (subjective) point-of-view such an approach seemed 'right'. Similarly, the idea that there was someone bigger, stronger, more powerful, more experienced or more clever than the PCs seemed 'right' also. Maybe this fit in with my personal life experience. Being a big fish in a small pond at primary school; seeing that pond get way bigger in high school; the pond becoming an ocean by university. My out-of-game FR experiences are similar also. I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about the Realms. It is one of my chief life activities (sad, isn't it ...?). I pride myself on 'knowing stuff' about the Realms. There would have been a time when I thought I was pretty much 'up there' in terms of FR knowledge worldwide. Now thanks to the Old Sage, I'm not sure I'm even the biggest fish in the pond called Australia! ;) People like Faraer and Kuje often astound me with their depth of knowledge and application of analysis when it come to the Realms - in many cases, far superior to my own. With that on board, the concept that I'm number #1 in anything - especially when considering a world situation (whether real life or fantasy, made-up) is something that doesn't sit well. It's not 'real' in real-life, and somehow doesn't seem 'real' when gaming in the Realms. If my brother-in-law can be a ten-times better soccer player than me in real-life, why is it so bad or negative that Khelben can be my superior in magecraft in the Realms. It's bad only if I want to be the big fish again. It's fantasy roleplaying - if that's what I want and my DM gives it to me, then all is fine. If it's not what I want then I game in the Realms (or a bunch of other, similar settings). If it's what I want and I game in the Realms then from a metagame point-of-view the DM changes the setting to suit me or doesn't (which then likely entails disgruntlement). What Ed Greenwood has done is enshrined the concept of big and little fish in his pond. His pond. If you don't like it, dig one of your own. That's not meant in an aggressive "if you don't like this country, you can leave" way, but rather a comment on people not liking something, criticizing it accordingly but continuing to partake of it. That's like me hating my mother's cooking (I don't - she's a great cook) but fronting up every second night for dinner and telling her it's crud as I stuff my face. What's the point of that? Answer: There isn't one. Move on (Homebrew. Try Eberron or Scarred Lands or World of Warcraft or DL or GH or heck, just about a gazillion other campaign settings ...) or make the Realms 'yours' (i.e. change it to your satisfaction). So, to conclude, the in-built powerful iconics and checks and balances in the Realms are there because the builder of the sandbox thought that for his world and his style of DM-ing and for his gamers, that this was 'right'. Your thought may mirror his or disagree totally. But don't say that it didn't have to be like this or that it is in some way 'wrong'. The Realms has never been wrong. It's just sometimes its DMs and players haven't been right (for it). Oh, and I hate brussel sprouts too. Never tried them though. :D ;) -- George Krashos
Kid SixXx 03-15-06, 07:09 PM	I shouldn't have knocked the maturity of the Eberron people. Why not? I love the Eberron boards, but I freely admit that we've got just as many elitist fanboys as any other setting. I should know. I'm one of them. :embarrass They come out with an RTS and the coveted MMO, Ask yourself: Do I really want to see "LFG" or have the words, "guild zerg," associated with the FR? If you're honest with yourself, probably not. Some Eberron fans weren't too thrilled with the RTS. Greyhawk got the ToEE RPG (a damn fine game once the patch came out), & the BG games for the Realms are arguably the best computer RPG's ever developed. (ie. if you didn't cry tears of joy upon discovery that David Warner did the voice for Irenicus, you should check to see if you have a pulse.) Eberron? We got a RTS & no immediate plans for an RPG. Thanks, Atari. Airships? *cough* in the FR, Halruaas had Airships long before Eberron was ever conceived. *cough* Then, there are Spelljammer ships, but that's another discussion. Dragonshards/materia? Perhaps an oversimplification, but I'll grant you that there are identifiable parallels in the concepts. Magical technology? Spelljammer ships? FR firearms that only work with smoke powder? (ie. if gunpowder isn't magical on Aber-Toril, it doesn't work.) I suppose the point I'm trying to make is that there are tons of concepts found in any given setting that can be considered to be deriviative of some other concept (ie. grumpy, elder wizard archaetypes: Merlin -> Gandalf -> Mordenkainen -> Elminster) & I don't think that's an indictment of Eberron: it just means that Keith Baker has a fondess for those concepts & put them into his game. Ed likes Narnia, so he incorporated Aslan into his own mythology & named him Nobanion. No harm, no foul. Ed shows his fondness for Michael Moorcock as well: ever wonder where the idea for the "cold elemental gods" like Grumbar came from? ;) Eberron is no exception. Keith freely admits that if you find literary parallels between the Lord of Blades and a certain armored dictator of a nation known as Latvaria, they are probably not there by accident. :cool:
TonyMontana1638 03-15-06, 09:28 PM	Indiana Jones never shared the spotlight with Rambo. Why can't I be the hero? Try as I might, I don't get the need to establish a heroic pecking order that is somehow supposed to humble players into accepting some lesser niche in the fantasy landscape. It's almost like telling your PC's, "You can save this town if you want, but only Hero X is allowed to pull Silverymoon's fat out of the fire." Because FR is too big to be for you to be the hero: you can be one of the heroes. It's not a "pecking order" unless you want it to be, but the fact remains that you aren't going to be saving everyone because there will be others working to do it themselves. That's one of the things I like best about FR: it's big enough that you're never done. No matter how powerful you are, no matter how many people you save/slaughter there's always more to be done and the fact of the matter is you aren't going to be the only one doing it.
ElGrecoETAC 03-15-06, 10:18 PM	I just wanted to piggy-back on a point made earlier on, regarding the ability of the PC to be either the protagonist in the Realms, or the catalyst of great change. 1) Making the PC the protagonist has, and always should be, the province of the DM. If your DM is constantly overshadowing you with the greater deeds of older, more experienced heroes, well, guess what: he's a bad DM--regardless of the setting. The mere existence of greater beings, however, and the PCs possessing knowledge of it doesn't take away from them the title of protagonist. To use an earlier example, Indiana Jones is the protagonist of the IJ movies, but that doesn't preclude more powerful men from co-existing with him on Earth. People understand, just as Indy did, that, during "Last Crusade", Joe Louis could have beaten him within an inch of his life and Erwin Rommel was running around N. Africa with a legend a mile long behind his name. 2) Many examples exist in the Realms of how a "small-time" character can be the catalyst of change. One of the most stiking, recent, examples was the Return of the Archwizards Trilogy, wherein a single elf finds himself in the center of a titanic war between civilizations and beings of monstrous powers. Despite his initial lack of power, he remains the focal point of events told through the end of the story. But again, this is all about good DM'ing. Saying that Eberron is more focused on the concepts described above than other settings is true only insofar that it came pre-packaged with a stated emphasis on them. But that's something that we (FR fans) have long understood to be a given. We never felt it was necessary for it to be spelled out to reinforce it to us. Maybe we, and the designers as well, are wrong in that regard. I certainly see no shortage of people complaining about Elminster stealing all the spotlight and such, when that's the last thing a DM should be doing to them.
BadCatMan 03-15-06, 11:06 PM	I think what a lot of people forget is the difference between epic adventure and Epic setting*. FR authors regularly trump each other with ever increasingly "epic" adventures, because the Realms isn't just an RPG setting, it is just as much a novel series and a setting for popular computer games, and as such must also follow the rules and conventions of fantasy literature. Tolkien did the epic adventure in LotR, a grand quest to defeat Sauron. Raymond E Feist does it now with the Conclave of Shadows warring against the god Nalar and the forces of evil, and Eddings had Belgarion battle Torak, a god. None of the worlds of these authors are particularly Epic - they're all fairly low magic, and even the highest level characters in them can't be all that high in power. What makes for the best and most enjoyable fantasy adventure is, when done right, the sorts of the epic adventures I described above, on one scale or another. (Okay, I find Feist to be getting a little tedious with his latest novels.) Whether that scale is saving the kingdom, or saving the world, or saving the multiverse, the epic adventure is what every DM should aim to give his PCs, because it will be the most memorable and enjoyable. And the PCs don't need to have Epic levels for this to happen. * Not Epic as in Level 21+ rules, but epic as in huge, long storylines dealing with the fate of the world and fighting god-like powers.
Lord Karsus 03-15-06, 11:15 PM	-Oh, can't we all just get along?
GothicDan 03-15-06, 11:20 PM	Hippie! :D
Lord Karsus 03-15-06, 11:28 PM	Hippie! :D -I am allowing my hair to grow much longer than usual, listen to The Beatles, and watch Boomerang almost constantly. But, on the other hand, I am a conservative Republican. I think the two balance out... -Think about it though. If us "Realmsians" united with the "Eberronites", we could wipe out those infernal "Grayhawkese"... :evillaugh
Zsych 03-16-06, 04:58 AM	I've never seen the Eberron campaign setting, just didn't seem interesting from what i heard. Anyway, from what i remember about Eberron, it was designed to be sold to other people(computer game companies and such). Stands to reason that your hero is supposed to become THE hero, since most computer games aren't really meant to be running for a long time, or have a lot of depth. -- As for your characters being the biggest fish in the pond.... The average person does not become a god 10 days into play. It's not supposed to happen, if it did you'd stop having fun on the 11th day. You can always be the hero, within the scope of your own campaign, but a 5th level fighter is never going to change the face of Faerun(or if it happens once by accident, it certainly shouldn't happen again any time soon). Heck even guys like Elminster don't manage to significantly change the face of Faerun. A large part of the pleasure of FR is exploring the world and experiencing new and different things(preferably for years). Once you're the greatest, and can casually fix any problem(that requires brute force), soon there's not much left to be done, and you're walking around like an idiot because everyone around you has become insignificant Not that a good roleplayer and a good DM might not somehow manage to survive that, but come on.... there's a reason that people start plane hopping when Toril starts to feel small to them.
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 05:10 AM	Because FR is too big to be for you to be the hero. Why is that so, but Earth wasn't too big a place for Doc Savage to be the hero, or for Indy Jones to save the world from dastardly Nazi plots? I just don't buy the "I have to share my heroic space" argument as a general concept, when popular & classic literature are practically brimming over with examples to the contrary. The only reason folks have a rough time seeing past it in the FR is because the iconics are already established. I've never seen the Eberron campaign setting, just didn't seem interesting from what i heard. Hm, first GothicDan, Lord Karsus, and now you. This "forming opinions based on other heresay or other people's opinions, and not by direct experience" is more pervasive than I thought. :) Probably means that we're all only human. Me? I hate brussel sprouts. Never tried 'em. Don't plan to.
Fabius Maximus 03-16-06, 05:24 AM	About that argument that in Eberron the PCs are overpowering when they hit level 12: There are the dragons, the Dreaming Dark (psionic supremacists from another plane) , the Daelkyr (fiends, each one has hat least CR 20), the Lords of Dust (insanely powerful rakshasa lords) the Dragons and the Blood of Vol/Emerald Claw (fascist undead lovers). All these organizations are much more powerful than the PCs at any level below level 20 (except the Emerald Claw maybe), and they all have designs on the world. If the PCs start to mix things up, at least two of the above would try to crush them very soon. So, Eberron is indeed scaleable. It just has a lot more low level stuff than the FR, and is more believeable. I like both settings. Each has its up- and downsides. The FR have a lot high level stuff. But they are not overpowered. Crowded, yes. But not overpowered.
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 05:29 AM	There are the Dragons, the Dreaming Dark (Psionic supremacists from another plane) , the Daelkyr (fiends, each one has hat least CR 20), the Lords of Dust (insanely powerful rakshasa lords) the Dragons and the Blood of Vol/Emerald Claw (fascist undead lovers). Our party is having trouble enough fighting street crime in Sharn. I shudder when I think about getting sent to Ashtakala. I like both settings. Each has its up- and downsides. But the FR have a lot high level stuff. But they are not overpowered. Crowded, yes. But not overpowered. Probably better than anything I've said.
ElGrecoETAC 03-16-06, 08:13 AM	Why is that so, but Earth wasn't too big a place for Doc Savage to be the hero, or for Indy Jones to save the world from dastardly Nazi plots? Again (maybe you missed my post), Indy Jones saving the world from dastardly Nazi plots doesn't preclude more powerful people than him populating the world. It's understood by the audience that there are wealthier, more powerful, and tougher individuals out there. I just don't buy the "I have to share my heroic space" argument as a general concept, when popular & classic literature are practically brimming over with examples to the contrary. The "sharing" goes on all the time. The difference being that 2 hour movies and pulp novels can't afford to go through that level of immersion. How tedious would it be to go through a "who's who" during "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" simply to receive a lesson on the various colorful heroes and villains of the world? A campaign world, on the other hand, is an ongoing saga. Because it's meant to entertain several people for a greater length of time, a greater amount of depth is necessitated. That's not to say that it all needs to be apparent to the players from day one; it's just there to give the DM events to be put in motion, villains to stack up against the players, and political realities and the like to give it all meaning. It's nothing more than playing Indy Jones: the Roleplaying Game, and, as the DM, being aware that Joe Louis is out there, capable of beating Indy within of an inch of his life, or that Erwin Rommel is nearby that desert temple with a couple divisions of tanks and infantry. The only reason folks have a rough time seeing past it in the FR is because the iconics are already established. Actually, there's only 2 reasons for this phenomenon: 1) A DM is doing a bad job. 2) Players got immersed in largely DM-specific data and went through a growing process that can best be likened to seeing another kid with bigger and better toys. If you can't trust your DM to give you a good campaign centered on you, or, worse, if he's not doing that for you, then the game will fail. That holds true whether you game in the FR (where Ed Greenwood constantly reminds people not to trump the player-heroes), in a Dragonlance (where everything supposedly reels in the wake of Raistlin's actions), in a Greyhawk (shaken by the wars of greater individuals), or in an Eberron with purportedly built-in failsafes. :)
Faraer 03-16-06, 08:51 AM	ElGrecoETAC's point is that you can be the most heroic character, most central to the story, without being the highest-level. They don't have to correlate. This goes together with the fact that the Realms is about plural local stories and personal concerns -- the book department's wont for RSEs has produced 'fate of the Realms' stuff, but it isn't natural to the setting. The stage of Realms stories is not 'the Realms entire': that's a concept of 20th-century mass communication and transport, and megalomaniac villains (who are usually foiled for overreaching). It's people's lives and the communities they live in. Obviously this is not a right/wrong thing, just what the mode of the Realms is compared to some other settings. A player or character might covet the most political or magical power, but in the Realms that's usually a craving of evil people. It's easy to see the respective merits of a dense, populated, complex 'tier of the mighty', i.e. the stuff covered in Power of Faerûn, versus one that's relatively easily entered and mastered. Notably -- and I'm not sure I've ever seen this point made -- there are few really high-level (15th+) adventuring companies (in a sense, model PCs, far more so than lone characters) in the published Realms, and none of 20th+ that I can think of. So effectively that's a niche completely free for high-level Realms campaigns.
GothicDan 03-16-06, 09:29 AM	I really don't get the whole Indiana Jones argument. We have those in FR - it's called Drizzt and Co. or the like. They are mediums which are meant to single out NPCs or individuals in a world much vaster than they are. Of course they're going to focus on them. And when you play an actual game, that should be what it feels like, too. Indie didn't create the Ark of the Covenant; it's part of the mythos of the setting, just as FR is full of such things, remnants of the Imaskari Empire or the Netherese. Indie didn't have to share the stage because it was a movie about Indie - not about the world. I like to know what's going on between the lines. I don't need things capitalized, in bold and italisized, and screaming out at me from a sourcebook to see those things. Faerun is just as full of low-level opportunities as Eberron is, as far as I'm concerned, it's just that at low-level, events (usually, but not always) would not require as much planning, and would not have ripple effects the way high-level ones would, so there's no reason to have them built into the world. If you save a caravan from a band of marauding hobgoblins, that's something that doesn't really need to go into the FRCS under any specific nation. That's a waste of space and could be used for more lore, as far as I'm concerned.
Faraer 03-16-06, 09:35 AM	As a possible insight into the psychology of the 'FR has too many high-level characters' people, look at this EN World discussion of Magic of Faerûn (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=171276&page=1&pp=40): a book about PCs in roles of political and economic power, and so far the thread is largely about NPCs and their levels (a negligible part of the book; as well as purported errors in a prestige class). The subject just fascinates some people and they focus on it, then (not on this EN World thread specifically) project that focus onto the setting. (Same, I venture, as with the treatment of sex in Ed's work.)
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 10:54 AM	Indy Jones saving the world from dastardly Nazi plots doesn't preclude more powerful people than him populating the world. It's understood by the audience that there are wealthier, more powerful, and tougher individuals out there. If these other individuals are so wealthy, powerful & tough, why aren't they called upon to foil the Nazis & save the world? That's Indy's job, because he's the hero. I really don't get the whole Indiana Jones argument. Indie didn't have to share the stage because it was a movie about Indie - not about the world. You've answered your own question. You folks have tried to justify your rationale for the "iconic pecking order / absolute need for multiple heroes" school of thought with lines of logic like "the world is too big for one hero alone." The Indy Jones example is my rebuttle to that theory. It is a one-hero dynamic that works well. The entire Earth is apparently not too big for one guy to be called upon to pull it's bacon out of the fire. There is no setting that is too large for one hero (or in the case of D&D) or one party to be the premier heroes of the setting: those heroes being the PC's. It doesn't work for Faerun because Ed didn't design his world with the single hero dynamic in mind.
Faraer 03-16-06, 11:44 AM	I don't read Indie like that. He's isn't the world's only hero -- he doesn't take on Nazi Germany single-handedly, he just comes up against some while he plies his adventurous archaeological expertise. Other heroes are doubtless fighting the Axis powers and other villains elsewhere. Even in the movies there are other heroic archaeologists, including his father. It's easy to see him sharing a setting with other 1930s-adventure-story heroes. We mostly don't see these other heroes because they're not the focus of the Indiana Jones movies, and it would be dramatically wrong to call attention to them. When they aren't present in the story, they're dramatically irrelevant. But Indie isn't a regularly world-saving Superman or Doc Savage. This is related to the 'too many gods' thing: well, there are more than you need for any single story in the Realms, but not more than you need for multiple stories and campaigns. Which isn't, of course, to criticize the Eberron model.
Ripe 03-16-06, 12:31 PM	If these other individuals are so wealthy, powerful & tough, why aren't they called upon to foil the Nazis & save the world? That's Indy's job, because he's the hero. But Indy wasn't called to save the world and fight the Nazi's because there was no one else better. The reason he was involved in Quest for Holly Grail is because it was His father's work and he disapeared. Initially Indy went in search of his father, not the Grail. The Quest for Grail was secondary to Indy compared to his search for his father. And the only reason he was called to search for Ark of Covenant is because the main clue in finding it belonged to his ex-girlfriend/associate . Not to mention that he failed in both cases and only pure luck prevented Hitler from gaining both Ark of the Covenant and Holly Grail. If you wished for a hero who is called to save the world because of his qualities then you should go with James Bond. And even he was only one of the group of elite agents [hence his code name 007]. Fleming only put Bond to spotlight so he does not have to create 10 or so agents [and because readers would have much easier time identifying with a single character], but in one of the novels M state that the only reason they are sending Bond is because 005 is too far away and would not reach in time, even do he would be better man due to his background. Or let's take a look at Star Trek universe - you have three heroic crews working simoultaneously: Picard's, Sisko's and Janeway's and none of them is limiting the other, they simply operate in different parts of universe. And let's not forget Star Wars. Is Luke [I]the hero of the setting? Of course he is. But did he save the day in Return of the Jedi? No, the only thing he did is provide distraction to the Emperor so Han and Leia could blow up shield generator on Endor and Lando and Wedge could fly against and destroy Second Death Star. So who is the BIGGEST hero in Star Wars universe [post Episode VI]? Luke? He blow up a Death Star, but so did Lando. Wedge? He is the ONLY person who survived assault on TWO Death Stars. Han? He provided crucial assistance in destroying both Death Stars. The point is that single Hero works fine in stale invironment, but in a living and evolving universe you can't have only one Hero, you allways have more than one. Not to mention that single Hero concept is against the nature of D&D where you, as a DM, lead a GROUP of adventurers in their heroic efforts. So you allready have some sort of pecking order because you don't have a single hero. You have at least four or five of them within your group. And each member of that group is sharing the spotlight with other members of the group.
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 12:39 PM	he (Indiana Jones) doesn't take on Nazi Germany single-handedly. True, but he pretty much foils the big plots single-handedly. I only counted one guy hijacking the truck convoy carrying the Ark of the Covenant. That was Indy. Other heroes are doubtless fighting the Axis powers and other villains elsewhere. A complete assumption, but not an unreasonable one. Meanwhile on center stage, when it's 4th and long apparently Indy gets the ball. Indy's father is an interesting character, but he appears to really disapprove of Indy's adventurous streak. He's a heroic figure to be certain, but doesn't appear to be a normally daring one. Either that or perhaps danger is indeed Professor Jones Sr's trade, but he feels that he's "gotten too old for that kid stuff." We don't know because that because that information isn't revealed to us, sadly. This is related to the 'too many gods' thing: well, there are more than you need for any single story in the Realms, but not more than you need for multiple stories and campaigns. Funny thing is that I can accept the concept of "too many gods" because of established, historical, polythesitic societies. I can also accept the concept of the lone hero because of established literary & popular models concerning one single hero. But Indy wasn't called to save the world and fight the Nazi's because there was no one else better. Why would you leave the task of saving the world to the second-rate guy? That doesn't make sense. That's like pulling your star quarterback out of a football game when you need a miracle touchdown. I think I've already refuted this logic: If there were better people for the job, why weren't they sent given the importance of the situation? From the film: Brody: The Bible speaks of the Ark leveling mountains and laying waste in entire regions. An Army that carries the Ark before it... is invincible. Yep, with that scenario possibly looming on the horizon, it sounds like the right time to send in the second string. Indy downplays his own abilities & resolve, but the G-Men know he's the best man for the job. He's the hero. Star Wars is an interesting model, but it still pretty much has a fairly central figure. Just how well would the Rebellion have fared if Luke hadn't been around to confront Vader. Same with LoTR. The Fellowship had lots of heroic figures, but their contuned existance hinged on one hobbit to carry the Ring, and like Indy, Frodo succeded in his mission by arguably the luckiest break in literary history. Oversimplified to be sure (someone had to keep Frodo alive to make it to Mordor), but those points are still there. Not to mention that he failed in both cases and only pure luck prevented Hitler from gaining both Ark of the Covenant and Holly Grail. Fortune aids the brave. ~ Ancient Arabic proverb The point is that single Hero works fine in stale invironment, but in a living and evolving universe you can't have only one Hero, you allways have more than one. Interesting that you'd use the term "stale." Sub-conscious plug for your favorite, multi-hero setting perhaps? ;) Not to mention that single Hero concept is against the nature of D&D where you, as a DM, lead a GROUP of adventurers in their heroic efforts. Which is why in D&D a single party would be the ones tasked to serve the public trust. A variation of the same theme.
Ryltar Swordsong 03-16-06, 01:01 PM	Indy is a hero, not the hero. It could be Marty Stu and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Just because Indy is the hero of the story, it doesn't mean he is the hero of the entire world. As for him "foiling the big plots single handedly", well, that's what you get from Hollywood. In reality, he would have just been shot (kinda like when he shot the sword-swinging guy in the bazaar).
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 01:19 PM	It could be Marty Stu and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. But it wasn't Marty Stu, now was it? ;) Just because Indy is the hero of the story, it doesn't mean he is the hero of the entire world. *checks script* *notes that Indy keeps the Ark from falling into Nazi hands & therefore winning WWII by default, and exporting facism around the globe* *notes that as a result of Indy's victory, there are probably no swastika flags flying outside of the White House or any other capital in the world AI (After Indy)* Sounds like the hero of the entire world to me, Ryltar.
BrianCritchley 03-16-06, 01:25 PM	Indiana Jones was A hero sure, but he wasn't the ONLY Hero. In Fact Indiana Jones is a pretty good comparison, you have your evil bad guys, (note Indy didn't just fight the Nazis he also took on a cult of Thugees) with their dastardly plots. enter the hero of the story who foils one important plot. however, this doesn;t mean there's not room for many others doing their thing, such as B.J. Blazkowicz recovering the spear of destiny from Castle Wolfenstein , as, there's NOTHING in the Castle Wolfenstein games that would preclude them happening in the world of Indiana Jones. likewise Wolrd War 2 had MANY heros, (both fictional and real life) and Indy didn't stop Hitler, in fact save one scene, he never even met the guy. While Indy was off stopping the Nazis from the Arc (and just cause he was the best man for that job doesn't mean he was the best period, he was an archaologist not a commando after all) I'm sure nay others carried out just as important adventures. in short, FR is like the real world, in which there is room for MANY plots. and while others might be able to foil it, for a variaty of reasons.. the PCs are the best for the job, or just those most avaliable
Ryltar Swordsong 03-16-06, 01:37 PM	If there were better people for the job, why weren't they sent given the importance of the situation?There are countless reasons to explain why they weren't there: 1. The movie's writers wanted Indy to do it. 2. They were engaged in foiling a bigger plot that would've made Hitler a diety. 3. They took a wrong turn at Albequerque. Just because a world shattering event is about to happen, it doesn't mean everyone will know about it. Pre-WWII governments didn't have access to spy satellites, internet, or any other modern things that make knowing what's going on anywhere, anytime possible like it is today. Are you intentionally being obtuse, or do you really not get it? I can't tell if you seriously believe what you're typing. The whole Indy premise is flawed since it is a hollywood movie designed to entertain people for two hours. Two hours is not enough to show what the rest of the world is doing while Indy is doing his thing. And since Indy is the star of the movie, it stands to reason that he foils the bad guy and saves the day for the american way, mom, and apple pie. It doesn't mean that the rest of the world is sitting back, twiddling their thumbs while they wait for Indy to save their butts. Edit:*notes that Indy keeps the Ark from falling into Nazi hands & therefore winning WWII by default, and exporting facism around the globe*. I seem to recall that the germans did get the ark, and Indy was tied to a pole with Marian. The germans opened the Ark, it smote them, and Indy waltzed in after they were all dead and took it to the U.S. government. Real heroic. He didn't really do anything but win by default because everyone else there died.
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 01:40 PM	B.J. Blazkowicz recovering the spear of destiny from Castle Wolfenstein , as, there's NOTHING in the Castle Wolfenstein games that would preclude them happening in the world of Indiana Jones. That's an assumption. B.J. Blazkowicz recovering the spear of destiny from Castle Wolfenstein is a single-hero dynamic in another setting. If BJ doens't succeed, the world gets flushed & goes swirling. There is no Indy in BJ's world. likewise Wolrd War 2 had MANY heros, (both fictional and real life) and Indy didn't stop Hitler, in fact save one scene, he never even met the guy. I concur, but how far would other heroes have gotten if Indy had not prevented Hitler from getting the Ark? The correct answer is "nowhere fast." 1. (and just cause he was the best man for that job doesn't mean he was the best period, he was an archaologist not a commando after all) 2. I'm sure nay others carried out just as important adventures. 1. Again, posession of the Ark = Game Over. When the stakes are that high, you send the best period. That was Indy. 2. Just as important as preventing the potential total ruin for the free world? Come on now.
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 01:53 PM	Are you intentionally being obtuse, or do you really not get it? I can't tell if you seriously believe what you're typing. Ditto. I'm thinking that you've played FR for so long that the literary concept of one guy facing off against desperate odds & succeeding is an alien notion to you. Especially the filling in the blanks with hypotheticals about multiple heroes in the IJ films part, instead of noting what the films note: one guy, one mission, one victory. I seem to recall that the germans did get the ark, and Indy was tied to a pole with Marian. They didn't keep it for very long, did they? Like I quoted before, "Fortune aids the brave." And, Evil will always lose to good because evil doesn't read the fine print. Evil triumphs when good men remain idle. It doesn't mean that the rest of the world is sitting back, twiddling their thumbs while they wait for Indy to save their butts. Holding it's breath then? Who else acted to prevent the Ark from falling into Nazi hands? Nobody. Because the only guy that got sent was Indy.. because he was the best period. Since Ryltar wants to call folk "intentionally obtuse" now, in the interest of brotherly love, I hereby concede defeat to the powers that be, lest he really starts getting insulting (& before someone says something that the WizO's will find questionable) and return to the Eberron boards from whence I came. It's been real.
Ripe 03-16-06, 02:22 PM	Indy downplays his own abilities & resolve, but the G-Men know he's the best man for the job. He's the hero. And he was. The problem is that the job was finding Marion Ravenwood and convincing her to come to Washington with Amulet her father send her so the scientist there could try to locate Ark of the Covenant. Not finding the Ark itself. It became about finding the Ark after Nazi's came to Marion at the same time as Indy - and at that point it became a race to find it first, and there was no time for US Government to send Indy help in form of Marines.
Ryltar Swordsong 03-16-06, 02:25 PM	Ditto. I'm thinking that you've played FR for so long that the literary concept of one guy facing off against desperate odds & succeeding is an alien notion to you. Especially the filling in the blanks with hypotheticals about multiple heroes in the IJ films part, instead of noting what the films note: one guy, one mission, one victory.Nope, not an alien notion. But I don't equate a heroic effort by one person to him being the only hero in the world. They didn't keep it for very long, did they? Like I quoted before, "Fortune aids the brave." And, Evil will always lose to good because evil doesn't read the fine print. Evil triumphs when good men remain idle.Indy didn't do anything to take it away from them, did he? No, he just took the Ark after the Ark took care of the nazis. And I think you might like this quote: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"- Edmund Burke Holding it's breath then? Who else acted to prevent the Ark from falling into Nazi hands? Nobody. Because the only guy that got sent was Indy..Just as I can't prove that the rest of the world was doing something, you can't prove that they were just sitting around doing nothing. I hereby *snip* return to the Eberron boards from whence I came.See you there.
TonyMontana1638 03-16-06, 04:07 PM	If these other individuals are so wealthy, powerful & tough, why aren't they called upon to foil the Nazis & save the world? That's Indy's job, because he's the hero. You've answered your own question. You folks have tried to justify your rationale for the "iconic pecking order / absolute need for multiple heroes" school of thought with lines of logic like "the world is too big for one hero alone." The Indy Jones example is my rebuttle to that theory. It is a one-hero dynamic that works well. The entire Earth is apparently not too big for one guy to be called upon to pull it's bacon out of the fire. There is no setting that is too large for one hero (or in the case of D&D) or one party to be the premier heroes of the setting: those heroes being the PC's. It doesn't work for Faerun because Ed didn't design his world with the single hero dynamic in mind. But you're making the argument that the only thing threatening the world at that point in time was the Nazi plot: who's to say somebody wasn't foiling something similarly catastrophic in Indonesia at the same time? That's my point, that the FR are too big for only one person to be saving the lives of people at a set moment in time. While that dude was freeing the Phaerrimm and then trying to fix what he'd done, there was another dude foiling a plot to bring Gilgeam back from the dead in Unther. That's not in any sourcebook , but it was happening in my campaign. All I'm saying is the realms don't stand still for your Indian Jones hero to save Waterdeep: other plots are being foiled around Faerun at the exact same time whether they're more dangerous or not is irrelevant. I'm not arguing for a pecking order at all, just that you can't be the only hero: you can be one of them, maybe even the most powerful, but you aren't the only one. If that's what you want then... Become a God or something. Or create your own setting.
Faraer 03-16-06, 04:12 PM	Where's the wizards.com Indiana Jones forum when you need it? It's Indy, not Indie. All those of us who got it wrong, such as me, hang our head.
Ryltar Swordsong 03-16-06, 04:32 PM	Where's the wizards.com Indiana Jones forum when you need it? This is it. Didn't you get the memo?
Kid SixXx 03-16-06, 07:34 PM	See you there. Not if I'm lucky. ;) ... and Fortune aids the brave.
BrianCritchley 03-16-06, 09:14 PM	Ditto. I'm thinking that you've played FR for so long that the literary concept of one guy facing off against desperate odds & succeeding is an alien notion to you. if you really thionk that you're totally clueless as to what the realms is about. GET IT THROUGH YOUR HEAD! The Realms is a big world, sure elminister is there however he's a LONG LONG ways away and constantly busy. you see the realms isn't like a movie where the bad guys all line up single file to do their dasterdly deed. it's like comic books. Is Superman more Powerful then Batman? Yes he is Could Superman defeat the Joker? yeah almost certinly then why doesn't superman go beat up the Joker and elt Bruce Wayne retire the useless git he is? ohh wait could that be because while Joker is going on a crime spreee through gotham AT THE SAME TIME Lex Luthor is enacting some scheme in metropolis that needs to be stopped?
Gellion 03-16-06, 10:58 PM	Is Superman more Powerful then Batman? Yes he is But I thought batman beat Superman. :)
ElGrecoETAC 03-16-06, 11:36 PM	If these other individuals are so wealthy, powerful & tough, why aren't they called upon to foil the Nazis & save the world? That's Indy's job, because he's the hero I don't know if you're deliberately missing the point, or not. It's not that hard. No offense. An Indy movie focuses on one character by necessity. It's a 2 hour movie. A campaign goes on for weeks, months, even years. It requires a greater amount of depth--a larger cast of villains, supporting cast, etc. It's the DM's job to ensure that this depth is provided without taking the spotlight from the characters. The Indy Jones example is my rebuttle to that theory. It is a one-hero dynamic that works well. The entire Earth is apparently not too big for one guy to be called upon to pull it's bacon out of the fire. It's a bad rebuttal because you are specifically attempting to setup an unfair comparison. None of your "Indy argument" conclusively shows how the Realms preclude someone from operating in the same way as that hero. Just as Indy doesn't have to worry about Frank Merrill and his Marauders parachuting in to save the day and steal his thunder, so can heroes in the Realms rest easy knowing that Elminster and the like shouldn't be stealing theirs... as long as the DM does his job. I only counted one guy hijacking the truck convoy carrying the Ark of the Covenant. That was Indy. This is an example of you being deliberately obtuse, in my opinion. Do you honestly think FR heroes have people swoop in during their action shots to get the job done themselves? Come on. The other part of your argument is that Indy is the one foiling the major plans. When confronted with the notion that other people are doing other things you call that an assumption? Once more, the Indy movie focuses on Indy and his adventures. You have no clue what's going on in the rest of the world, and rightly so. What would be the point of watching Indy listen to the radio about, say, Ernest Hemingway, kicking butt and writing books in Spain? In the same way, there's no reason why the PCs from Elturel should be privy to what's going on in Evermeet, Thay, and the like. It doesn't work for Faerun because Ed didn't design his world with the single hero dynamic in mind. That is so unbelievably untrue; it also shows you didn't even bother reading the very first couple of paragraphs of the FRCS, during which the exact opposite is precisely spelled out. Your next arguing point wasn't even supported by your evidence. Why would you leave the task of saving the world to the second-rate guy? That doesn't make sense. That's like pulling your star quarterback out of a football game when you need a miracle touchdown. ... From the film: Brody: The Bible speaks of the Ark leveling mountains and laying waste in entire regions. An Army that carries the Ark before it... is invincible. ... Yep, with that scenario possibly looming on the horizon, it sounds like the right time to send in the second string. Uhm, there was no Army carrying the Arc before it. It was lost. Archaelogists find lost stuff. Hence Indy being sent in. If a Nazi army was carrying it before their ranks, do you really think Brody & Co. would have gone to Dr. Jones and sent him, whip and all to confront them singlehandedly? What makes Jones heroic is that, against all odds, he does follow the Nazis after they've secured the Arc, at considerable risk to himself. But it's a misrepresentation of the facts to assume that the US government would have called an adventuring archaelogist their #1 weapon to infiltrate a Nazi military base to seize the Arc. Also... 1. Again, posession of the Ark = Game Over. When the stakes are that high, you send the best period. That was Indy. The Nazis already had the Arc before Indy took it back. Quite obviously, it wasn't "game over." Heck, it probably wasn't "game over" even if they started parading it in front of their Panzer Divisions. This is just another example of you being deliberately narrow. Which is fine; it's just a by-product of having the narrow view that a world with depth and realism is a world that automatically steals the spotlight from the heroes. Another gem... Holding it's breath then? Who else acted to prevent the Ark from falling into Nazi hands? Nobody. Because the only guy that got sent was Indy.. because he was the best period. Indy was sent in an archaelogical capacity... No one from the American government at any point realized that the Nazis had actually walked off with the Arc. Indy acted independently at that point and afterwards. But I'm not sure what's worse about all these factoids: that they don't really support your argument when you look at them objectively, or that they don't show how the Realms preclude you from doing everything you've described. you see the realms isn't like a movie where the bad guys all line up single file to do their dasterdly deed. This is actually not a half-bad example: ...it's like comic books. Is Superman more Powerful then Batman? Yes he is Could Superman defeat the Joker? yeah almost certinly then why doesn't superman go beat up the Joker and elt Bruce Wayne retire the useless git he is? ohh wait could that be because while Joker is going on a crime spreee through gotham AT THE SAME TIME Lex Luthor is enacting some scheme in metropolis that needs to be stopped? And it's almost exactly what is described in the opening paragraphs of the FRCS I mentioned earlier (Elminster's introduction to the Realms).
Lord Karsus 03-16-06, 11:47 PM	-Well, that was all thoroughly unenlightening... -So, everyone, I ask: What is the moral of all of this?
ElGrecoETAC 03-17-06, 12:35 AM	Pot, meet kettle. What's the point of any difference of opinion being expressed in a discussion/debate on a message board? People present their points of view in an attempt to either simply make their case or to sway those on the other side. I would think Kid SixXx's arguing points were pretty clearly stated (if largely flawed ;) :D ), as were those of the people who disagreed with him.
GothicDan 03-17-06, 12:56 PM	Point: The Realms is dynamic, Eberron is entirely static unless focusing on one low-level party. Sounds like a sodding video game to me... Oops. That's why they made Eberron. ;) Now, I'm going to go listen to Apocalyptica. Music in which there is often a focus, but that focus changes, and in which there are dozens of other things going on at the same time which individually do not make the song, but as a whole help to shape it into something wonderful and evocative and complex and intelligent. ;)
od_vjesala 03-17-06, 01:15 PM	Ok people. Pack your fingertips and get on board of Eberron boards. That is if you think that there is a point to prove. I think that Eberron ppl have to break a sweat trying that. FRCS has just the right tempo for me. Eberron manages to keep the balance but has that tention in the air, the continuing presence of science and technology without any memories of the glorious, heroic past. (not to mention the fact that Eberron is harder novel material) I would definitely like to see that setting develope, becouse it has its flavour. But, fear grips my bones when I consider consequences of that development, and the possible neglect of my dear Toril. Eberron is a good playground for those H&S munchees, and I tend to point them in that direction, becouse that keeps them from thrashing my FR sessions.( the fact that made me a lonely DM for quite a while) :weep: So long...
Lawless 03-17-06, 02:40 PM	Turn my back for a month or so and wow what a topic? Had to stop and put in my 2cps. First off topic. The Indy analog, while everyone can easily agree that he is a hero, what seems to be the thought of contention, it Indy the Hero?!? I tend to agree with Dan on this FR isn’t meant to be like a game where the PC wins. It’s an evolving ‘thing’ the PCs/heroes can ‘win’ a quest, thwart an evil, survive an attack, etc. but there are other things going on with hero’s saving ‘other’ days. There will always be challenges for heroes to face, even if they ascend to godhood, well in FR at least gods die so attaining divinity isn’t without some risk. So again the hero turned god while winning deity status still has problems, whether it’s other deities or taking care of worshippers or gaining more influence and/or power, there will always be more to do. FR is meant to be more like life, there isn’t any winning to be done. Did Indy stop the Nazi’s from attaining the Grail and the Ark, yes of course. Did not having those items mean the Nazi’s were bound to lose the war? No. What about the Race to make the first atomic bomb, to find the Spear of Destiny, Thor’s hammer, Normandy, Montezuma’s tomb, create the first super soldier. Indy stopped two plans by the Nazi’s, not all of them. He did not single-handedly end all their efforts; he’s a hero that contributed to the overall goal of the Allies by stopping a part of the Nazi’s overall goals. Right now FR has rogue dragons on a rampage, demonfae wrecking havoc else where, and a mad mage bringing a moon down elsewhere all of which threaten Faerun, but there are heroes in those places trying to quell it all. Indy stopped 2 two plots in a large world where other things were happening. Now on topic. Is FR overpowered? No there it isn’t, FR is high powered which in sense may place it over the top but doesn’t mean it’s overpowered. I’m not even a big fan of high magic and I still don’t feel the FR is overpowered. In fact for a high magic setting its IMO is doing it right as far as the power of the NPCs. A thousand year old mage should be epic, as should the warrior king of a powerful country. I’m more confused by the 100+ year old vampire king in Eberron who isn’t epic. To not be epic makes him seem like a slacker to me. I understand the desire and intent of Eberron to not make everyone ‘epic’ which would be easier in a low magic setting, or even better if the number of epic NPCs were significantly lower than FRs, but in a high campaign where magic is the technology it doesn’t quite mesh. Not to say that Eberron is a bad setting just different.
Kid SixXx 03-17-06, 03:04 PM	-So, everyone, I ask: What is the moral of all of this? Next time I see a thread like this on this board, don't post. There are certain message boards where Bart Simpson's paradox does not apply, and you can indeed be more damned if you do as opposed to if you don't. Stay on the Eberron boards where folks are a bit more receptive.
GothicDan 03-17-06, 03:07 PM	Watch out, or you might get your post edited for even mentioning those words. ;)
Kid SixXx 03-17-06, 03:11 PM	Watch out, or you might get your post edited for even mentioning those words. ;) Novels? Aye, I edited my own post because there was a broader moral that I learned, but I do understand why RAS said that he'd rather jab himself in the eye with a sharp stick than post in the old Novels forum.
GothicDan 03-17-06, 03:32 PM	Good thing so many novelists still enjoy the company over at Candlekeep. :) People there tend to be a lot more mature and logical. A moral I learned: not everyone understands the point of preference. People can look at the same thing and come away with totally different ideas for totally differen reasons. Case in point: we all seem to get so mething different than Kid about the Indy movies, and I personally enjoy the Elric Saga for totally diffferent reasons than he does. :)
BrianCritchley 03-17-06, 03:52 PM	And it's almost exactly what is described in the opening paragraphs of the FRCS I mentioned earlier (Elminster's introduction to the Realms). I figure using super heros is a pretty good comparison as in many ways it's much the same question "why do we need character X when character Y is so much more powerful"
GungHo 03-17-06, 03:56 PM	Indy stopped 2 two plots in a large world where other things were happening. Yes. And in other parts of the world, you had Captain America. And Magneto. And Bugs Bunny. And, I don't see how that takes away from Indiana Jones. Or Captain America. Or Magneto. Or Bugs Bunny. The fact that Captain America exists doesn't make Indiana Jones any less Indiana Jones. There's no reason for them to meet except at the Annual Hero's Ball. I’m more confused by the 100+ year old vampire king in Eberron who isn’t epic. To not be epic makes him seem like a slacker to me. Well, (and this may not be completely a take shared by the designers, but I don't care, it works for me) Eberron isn't a world led by adventurers. It's a world led by guys who got mad at each other, went to war, and then left the war ands stayed mad. And a lot of them didn't even seem to do their own fighting. The vampire king had some zombies beat up his adversaries. It's a world run by guys with funny tattoos who hire other people who don't have funny tattoos to go die in their place. The funny tattoo people don't get a lot of "trigger time." The folks that do get a lot of "trigger time" tend to die off before they are much of a hinderance to funny tattoo people. (One of the things that I want to see them touch on in the future (and they are, in some respects with the warforged) is that they weren't able to get rid of all the people who did get a lot of "trigger time" during the war, and these people, who also may be sprouting Siberytic (sp?) marks, could be a big threat to the current power base, who individually cannot fight off their pawns once the pawns get too big for their uniforms.) Forgotten Realms, however, is a world led by adventurerers. Azoun (R.I.P.) was a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman because he was an adventurer and because he was taught to be a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman by other buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsmen who were also adventurers. Whenever you see all these 15th+ level characters, usually in their descriptions you don't see "and he sat on his kiester for most of his life." No, you see "he was an adventurer and killed a bunch of monster X in realm Y for 20 years, before getting really rich/getting a bum leg/falling for a hot elf babe, and settling down to take care of some sheepherders." The sheepherders are just sheepherders and couldn't fight off a giant rat. Their boss, however, has fought a lot of giant rats. You could get into a logical debate of "how are there so many adventurers and why is there anything left to stea...er liberate, after all, all the good Egyptian stuff is already in London," and I don't have an answer for that, nor do I really care. It's just the way that world works... I'm fine with it. I don't have more of a point than that. :)
TonyMontana1638 03-18-06, 12:34 AM	Good thing so many novelists still enjoy the company over at Candlekeep. :) People there tend to be a lot more mature and logical. *nods* I'm pretty much a lurker at heart and spend time here mostly because I like the GEV's Prestige class thread and Green Giant's NPC's, but Candlekeep is by far more receptive. This place is better for questions relating to the actual DnD game, but if you want to discuss campaign ideas or debate over realmslore... *gulp* :surrender
Lord Karsus 03-19-06, 12:34 AM	Ok people. Pack your fingertips and get on board of Eberron boards. That is if you think that there is a point to prove. I think that Eberron ppl have to break a sweat trying that. FRCS has just the right tempo for me. Eberron manages to keep the balance but has that tention in the air, the continuing presence of science and technology without any memories of the glorious, heroic past. (not to mention the fact that Eberron is harder novel material) I would definitely like to see that setting develope, becouse it has its flavour. But, fear grips my bones when I consider consequences of that development, and the possible neglect of my dear Toril. Eberron is a good playground for those H&S munchees, and I tend to point them in that direction, becouse that keeps them from thrashing my FR sessions.( the fact that made me a lonely DM for quite a while) :weep: So long... -We shouldn't even bother going to the Eberron boards. One criticism of the game, taken either in or out of context, will summon a chorus of, "See, I told you so"s, from those who say that FR players feel threatened by Eberron, who are prejudging the setting even before we've ever played it. Next time I see a thread like this on this board, don't post. There are certain message boards where Bart Simpson's paradox does not apply, and you can indeed be more damned if you do as opposed to if you don't. Stay on the Eberron boards where folks are a bit more receptive. -In retrospect, after all of the discussion was said and done, I really didn't see a point to this thread. Obviously, you are somewhat biased towards Eberron. That's fine. You post in the FR forums, criticising parts of it. Again, that's fine. But, obviously, everyone who regularly posts here is going to (somewhat) defend the Realms. The purpose of a debate is to sway those people who are undecided. You give your views, I give my views, and we are supposed to convince the undecided people that our respective sides are the correct positions. A person who regularly posts in the FR thread is going to already have their mind set, as will a person who has their mind set on Eberron on the Eberron boards. The best place for this kind of thread would be on D&D General, or something where, at least, some people would be somewhere in the middle. Understand what I mean?
Fabius Maximus 03-19-06, 10:38 AM	The best place for this kind of thread would be on D&D General, or something where, at least, some people would be somewhere in the middle. Understand what I mean? I think that KidSixx and me, we are in the middle. From what I've read on the Eberron boards, he likes both settings equally, just like me, but each setting for other reasons.
Faraer 03-19-06, 02:16 PM	Forgotten Realms, however, is a world led by adventurerers. Azoun (R.I.P.) was a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman because he was an adventurer and because he was taught to be a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman by other buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsmen who were also adventurers. Whenever you see all these 15th+ level characters, usually in their descriptions you don't see "and he sat on his kiester for most of his life." No, you see "he was an adventurer and killed a bunch of monster X in realm Y for 20 years, before getting really rich/getting a bum leg/falling for a hot elf babe, and settling down to take care of some sheepherders." The sheepherders are just sheepherders and couldn't fight off a giant rat. Their boss, however, has fought a lot of giant rats.I'm sure it seems that way to some adventurers. On the other hand, the merchants, court functionaries, soldiers, scribes, craftsmen, farmers, herders and labourers equally well know who it is who's really the backbone of civilized life in the Realms.You could get into a logical debate of "how are there so many adventurers and why is there anything left to stea...er liberate, after all, all the good Egyptian stuff is already in London," and I don't have an answer for that, nor do I really care. It's just the way that world works... I'm fine with it.It would be hard to debate because there aren't figures either for how many adventurers there are or how much old stuff there is. Except the canonical facts are that there aren't that many adventurers, and there are a lot of layers of fallen civilizations which were created in part precisely to give history and resonance to found artefacts.Next time I see a thread like this on this board, don't post. There are certain message boards where Bart Simpson's paradox does not apply, and you can indeed be more damned if you do as opposed to if you don't. Stay on the Eberron boards where folks are a bit more receptive.I don't think that's fair: seems to be quite a bit of perfectly reasonable discussion here. (Whether more than there'd be on the Eberron boards I don't know or care, but I'm sure more than there'd be on the general D&D boards, where you'd have vocal opinions from people who don't know either setting well.)
Julian_Grimm 03-19-06, 05:19 PM	I'm probbably going to hate myself for posting to this but I just have to: I'll only address a couple points that I keep hearing. 1. Concerning Eleminster and other supoposed 'uber-munchkins': To me they equate as Tolkiens Gandalf or other near immortal characters. Remeber Gandalf and the wizards were not human they were Istari. Kinda angelic like. El and others seem to me like the Greenwood version of Gandalf. So if Elminster is a muchkin then Merlin, Gandalf and other powerful legends were also. 2. The supposed power level of the Realms comes from over 20 years of support. Once Ebberon gets that there will be overpowered npc's and such. Don't believe that get the orginal Greybox Realms. There wasn't a hint of overpower and everyones favorite whipping wizard was presented more as a sage and a narrator than anything.
Lawless 03-19-06, 08:27 PM	Yes. And in other parts of the world, you had Captain America. And Magneto. And Bugs Bunny. And, I don't see how that takes away from Indiana Jones. Or Captain America. Or Magneto. Or Bugs Bunny. The fact that Captain America exists doesn't make Indiana Jones any less Indiana Jones. There's no reason for them to meet except at the Annual Hero's Ball. I didn't mean to take away from Indy's accomplishment. :embarrass I was commenting on the idea that only he could stop the Nazi threat. Which I'm sure wasn't the idea of the original thought but I felt like elaborating on it anyway. Captain American, Bugs, Magneto were too busy so, Indy saved that day. Still heroic, no less brave or important in the scheme of things. :) Well, (and this may not be completely a take shared by the designers, but I don't care, it works for me) Eberron isn't a world led by adventurers. It's a world led by guys who got mad at each other, went to war, and then left the war ands stayed mad. And a lot of them didn't even seem to do their own fighting. The vampire king had some zombies beat up his adversaries. It's a world run by guys with funny tattoos who hire other people who don't have funny tattoos to go die in their place. The funny tattoo people don't get a lot of "trigger time." The folks that do get a lot of "trigger time" tend to die off before they are much of a hinderance to funny tattoo people. (One of the things that I want to see them touch on in the future (and they are, in some respects with the warforged) is that they weren't able to get rid of all the people who did get a lot of "trigger time" during the war, and these people, who also may be sprouting Siberytic (sp?) marks, could be a big threat to the current power base, who individually cannot fight off their pawns once the pawns get too big for their uniforms.) Forgotten Realms, however, is a world led by adventurerers. Azoun (R.I.P.) was a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman because he was an adventurer and because he was taught to be a buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsman by other buttkicking, ham-fisted, elite swordsmen who were also adventurers. Whenever you see all these 15th+ level characters, usually in their descriptions you don't see "and he sat on his kiester for most of his life." No, you see "he was an adventurer and killed a bunch of monster X in realm Y for 20 years, before getting really rich/getting a bum leg/falling for a hot elf babe, and settling down to take care of some sheepherders." The sheepherders are just sheepherders and couldn't fight off a giant rat. Their boss, however, has fought a lot of giant rats. You could get into a logical debate of "how are there so many adventurers and why is there anything left to stea...er liberate, after all, all the good Egyptian stuff is already in London," and I don't have an answer for that, nor do I really care. It's just the way that world works... I'm fine with it. I don't have more of a point than that. :) Granted leaders lead and followers do. However in the case of said vampire king, he written as being no slouch in combat and a shrewed leader; so after a century of keeping his throne, leading his country, fighting off usurpers, whether directly or indirectly it just makes it seems like he was short-changed. He may not be Azoun, after a 100 years personally I'd think he would be closer. My 2 cps. I don't have anything against Eberron, it has some interesting concepts, but I don't think FR is 'perfect' either. They both have many more elements about them that I like versus what I don't like.
Lord Karsus 03-19-06, 11:07 PM	I think that KidSixx and me, we are in the middle. From what I've red on the Eberron boards, he likes both settings equally, just like me, but each setting for other reasons. -Well, for the most part, the people on the Eberron Boards, and on the Forgotten Realms boards are going to be somewhat biased. That's why I said that the D&D General Board would be the best, because of the lack of "Die-Hard" Eberron & Forgotten Realms fans there. The people there could really lean one way or another. Not that there's anything wrong with that, or them.
Kid SixXx 03-20-06, 08:15 PM	I don't know or care "Out of sight, out of mind" appears to be a good policy to adopt.
Lord Karsus 03-20-06, 10:59 PM	"Out of sight, out of mind" appears to be a good policy to adopt. -That quote by Faraer seems to be taken somewhat out of context.
Kid SixXx 03-21-06, 08:04 AM	-That quote by Faraer seems to be taken somewhat out of context. I suppose you could say that if you're under the assumption that I'm assigning some sort of negative connotation to Faraer's comment. On the contrary. There's nothing compelling anyone to seek out threads which may offend their sensibilities about which setting they prefer, nor is their anything compelling that person to post in such threads. The person that seeks conflict usually finds it. By adopting the "I don't know or care" mentality, I avoid ugly flame wars because I've either taken the position of neither lurking nor trolling. I think we can all agree that inter-setting bickering is silly and pointless anyway, so I think that not looking for conflict in the first place, or not saying anything if you can't think of something constructive to say, is the best policy to adopt. After all, negative comments from one side of the house cannot take away the sense of enjoyment you have for your favored setting, so there's no real reason to leap into threads like this and start a blood feud in the name of "defending your turf."
(Psi)SeveredHead 03-21-06, 11:53 AM	I don't think FR is so much overpowered as just not as easy to run. Problems I've had with the setting: 1) Unrealistic NPCs. The deities pull so many strings, every other villainous NPC seems interested in venerating their dark deities (or undead dragons), are often insane in some way, and are trying to take over the world, or at least kill all the elves. A DM can avoid these power groups, but it means you're leaving out part of the setting. 2) Deities pull too many strings. I don't like FR non-remote deities. Mystra is the worst offender in this regard, but Lolth and Azuth are quite bad, too. (I hate having a good-aligned goddess of magic.) A DM can avoid these plots, but it means you're leaving out part of the setting. 3) Too many high powered NPCs, coupled with the occasional terribly written "save the world" novel/adventure. Many high powered good NPCs have abilities not reflected in their class. Khelben's information network is so good he somehow knows if a random female drow is trying to infiltrate the city, and he send a mage to kill her. What kind of Gather Information check does it take to get information about a ship at sea? Other good aligned NPCs get spellfire, the Chosen of Mystra template or other abilities the PCs will never see (at least in a balanced campaign); why can't the authors write about NPCs who actually walk on the earth? Why wasn't Khelben around to take on Irae Tsarren from City of the Spider Queen? Because the DM came up with a good excuse for why Khelben thought something was more important than ... you know ... saving the world (or maybe just Tilverton). Or maybe Khelben said yes, if you'll do this if you do a favor for me, which means the DM just junked his adventure and had to have an alternate adventure ready in the first place. Or the players refuse the deal, so Khelben leaves and Toril (or just Tilverton) dies... oh yeah, that works out. I'd rather be in a setting where there's a consequence for failure beyond just PC death, and this consequence isn't "Khelben shows up to save the day and steal my glory, too". A real consequence would be the end of the world (or just Tilverton), which is more important even than a TPK. A good DM can avoid these issues, but it means more work. 4) Horribly written novels, and while Mr. Greenwood may claim Elminster is not a munchkin Mary Sue (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Sue), I think he has his own biases. (He wrote the character, after all. And has Mystra save him sometimes when he's in trouble, which had to be a conscious decision.) Then there's drow who can channel Lolth, and when it's inconvenient tell Lolth to just "go away" without consequence. Terrible novels are the hardest to avoid; even if the DM ignores everything that's in the novels, his players have probably read some of them. But it's doable. So a good DM can handle FR. But why bother? Running Eberron is a lot less work, and you can spend more time creating a good and fun campaign. At least that's my opinion, as a biased fan of Eberron. On a note about the FR hate on the Eberron boards: there's more there than Eberron hate here, I believe. Eberron is a newer setting. There are lots of FR fugitives who now run and play Eberron, and a lot fewer Eberron fans who have gone back to FR. The FR fugitives have the most FR hate.
Faraer 03-21-06, 12:14 PM	What a collection of unsubstantiated canards and misconceptions. That just isn't the Realms that the sources describe....every other villainous NPC... are trying to take over the worldAlmost no villains are trying to take over the world -- the Realms doesn't work on that scale. I have no idea what's unrealistic about villains worshipping evil gods, or being insane.Deities pull too many strings.No, the gods rarely intervene in mortal affairs.Too many high powered NPCsThere aren't that many compared to the land and population.Many high powered good NPCs have abilities not reflected in their class.This applies to every character, because D&D only approximately describes how the Realms works.Other good aligned NPCs get spellfire, the Chosen of Mystra template or other abilities the PCs will never see (at least in a balanced campaign); why can't the authors write about NPCs who actually walk on the earth?Are you being disingenuous? You know that the Chosen were made protagonists by TSR against Ed's preference, and that spellfire is a plot device to enable an inexperienced character to quickly tour lots of Realms locations.Why wasn't Khelben around to take on Irae Tsarren from City of the Spider Queen?Once more, you're simply choosing to ignore the elaborately worked out dynamics of high-level Realms intrigue, and the fact that many plots of this scale go on at any one time.Horribly written novelsFor your information, such novel discussion isn't allowed on these boards.and while Mr. Greenwood may claimPlease don't impugn the integrity of Ed Greenwood on a Realms message board.(He wrote the character, after all. And has Mystra save him sometimes when he's in trouble, which had to be a conscious decision.)He also created most of the other characters in the Realms (is that a reason to doubt his word about all of them?). The latter point is important: in the Realms, the success of good characters is about friendship and networks of information and help, not me-me-me personal 'power'.
Lawless 03-21-06, 12:14 PM	Following that definition of Mary Sue then any and all fictional characters are Mary Sue's. Even canon characters, as they are just more popular and loved characters than others. While in one context it maybe true it is also kind of on the harsh side.
WizO_Lyoness 03-21-06, 05:15 PM	That's enough, folks, sorry.