Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Yamo 12-14-03, 06:45 PM	Just got done watching the first two Lord of the Rings movies in anticipation of the upcoming Return of the King and it got me thinking: Many campaign worlds get a lot of milage out of putting the "good guys" in the position of underdog. The forces of evil are strong and getting stronger and everybody else is on the run. There's a real feeling that good might not triumph after all. Offhand, Greyhawk, Dark Sun, Ravenloft, and Midnight come to mind. Now, as a GM, this sort of setup appeals to me. In a world where the forces of light have the upper hand or where a stable balance exists, there's not really much room for heroes. Adventurers, maybe, but not heroes. Tolkien's Middle Earth when Sauron was on the verge of recovering his One Ring is another example of a world on the verge of destruction that desperately needs its heroes. During the TSR years, Forgotten Realms had something of a reputation for fostering the exact opposite. The good guys were powerful, proactive and clearly outclassed all their opposition. The bad guys were incompetent louts and little more than punching bags for the good guys, who regularly dispatched them with sarcastic ease. They popped-up, made some fancy comic book supervillain speeches, and promptly got stomped into submission by Elminster and company. Even Mystra, the setting's most powerful and important god, was portrayed as firmly on the side of good and more than willing to create as many meddlesome superpowered lackeys as she needed to keep evil more of an occasional annoyance than a real threat to anything important. The Red Wizards embarked on countless campaigns of conquest...but never succeeded. Humanoids tried to overrun Cormyr...but didn't succeed. Everybody and his brother's neighbor's dog tried to sieze the secret of spellfire...but were incinerated with ease. And so the trend repeated again and again and again. Blah. The relaunch of the FR line by WotC seemed to take a few tentative steps to resolve these problems. The Red Wizards were a little less buffoonish, the Shades set up shop in Anauroch and the Zhents seemed to clean up their act a bit. Furthermore, the Shadow Weave offered a clear challenge to the goody two-shoes Mystra's domination over the most potent force in the Realms (magic). To this, I say: Good start! But at the same time, it's only a start. There's still something missing before FR will truly stand out as a world in dire peril, where the fate of all goodly folk is balanced on a razor's edge and only your brave band of heroes (the PCs) can save the day. Personally, I'm hoping that the designers take the setting down a road toward a more "epic showdown of good and evil" scenario. Maybe a titanic war between the Shades and their hoards of summoned shadow beasts that threatens to engulf the entire continent. I'm talking real strife, real danger. Something that shakes up enough preconceptions and slaughters enough sacred cows to really make the people take notice. Waterdeep in ruins, Elminster slain, anything goes! Does anyone else agree that the status quo needs to go? That Faerun needs a real sense of danger and impending armageddon to take Realms PCs beyond mere adventuring and into true heroics? An ultimate climactic stand against seemingly-unstoppable evil? Something that totally reimagines the setting in a darker, more epic light? I certainly hope so. The day the "canon" Realms can support a Lord of the Rings-style campaign is something I very much look forward to.
Straploknight 12-14-03, 07:19 PM	thats about 4th Ed. off. There have been more than a few RSE's in recent time (well novel time anyway). The seeds are there to do as you wish. IMO, If you wanted an apples to oranges comparison rather than an apples to toilet paper comparison. I would say the events in Middle Earth ranked right there with the end of Netheril and the death on Mystryrl. Each event defined the end of an age and the beginning of a new one. I think the most intruiging idea from this would be to plant some sort of doomsday scenario in the product line and weave it through every product and advance it as products come out so say when 4th Ed. hits the shelves Faerun will be in peril and the fate of all will rest in "insert race/class/ect here" . However the trick would be to make it almost imperceptible by reading or using say Magic of Faerun alone, but say if you had Races of Faerun, Magic of Faerun and the Unapproachable East, one could piece together a portent of things to come. Cheesey, maybe? A vile trick of those marketing types to force you to buy campaign setting expansions, could be? However I think it would be neat.
Amoun 12-15-03, 07:17 AM	I agree that FR has an abundance of "good" and it is rather powerful... but thats why you play evil characters and challenge the status quo by bringing about your own domination. In my campaigns all that every party does is permanent and recorded in history (an on going timeline... its really freaking long now). I've DMed and played multiple evil PCs and the different players set up a much more "even" situation between good and evil. Then with the new found threats we then shift to playing good pcs and try to undo what our evil pcs do... its really fun and your enemy always has a distinctive face :) Its just one method of running :D
Masakado 12-15-03, 09:17 AM	The thing about Middle Earth is that it has a very "We vs. They" feel to it. Sure there are plenty of "good" aligned nations in the FR, but these nations do not always get along, nor do they always associate with one another. You will not see an army of Purple Dragons running to the aid of hinter villages in the Silver Marches that are beset by an orc horde, and the Waterdeep militia will toss the good-aligned participants of a tavern brawl into the clink just as fast as they would anyone else. Even the Harpers have split on the basis of principles, and are thought of as meddlers by most governments. To look at the powerful forces of good & come to the conclusion that there is "too much good" in Faerun is only looking at half the picture, IMO.
Adrian Moonbow 12-15-03, 09:55 AM	One major plus for FR is that it does not have that 'all on one line' feel as DL and LOTR has. (See note) The Realms is a shared world and there has to be a place for all. If you (the DM) wants to make a plot that spans all of Faerun, do it. But not all DMs want their PCs to be The Heroes (TM). Mayhap they just want to explore... Note: FR still has a lot of RSE/Cataclysmic events, though: The Kasus debacle, the Avatar crisis, the threat from the sea, the return of Shade, and son on. Plus it got Zhents and Red Wizards out every hole/keep/enclave.
Wooly Rupert 12-15-03, 10:07 AM	Originally posted by Masakado The thing about Middle Earth is that it has a very "We vs. They" feel to it. Sure there are plenty of "good" aligned nations in the FR, but these nations do not always get along, nor do they always associate with one another. You will not see an army of Purple Dragons running to the aid of hinter villages in the Silver Marches that are beset by an orc horde, and the Waterdeep militia will toss the good-aligned participants of a tavern brawl into the clink just as fast as they would anyone else. Even the Harpers have split on the basis of principles, and are thought of as meddlers by most governments. To look at the powerful forces of good & come to the conclusion that there is "too much good" in Faerun is only looking at half the picture, IMO. Truth... Especially that last line. The Zhents are looking good to improve their strength. The top ranks are now a lot more solidified than ever before, and Fzoul is one strong leader... The Shades may not have succeeding in rebuilding Netheril, but they have definitely affected the balance of power -- just look at Evereska. The Thayvian wars of conquest may have failed, but now their economic expansion is doing a lot more for them then warfare ever did. It'll be a while, but they're positioning themselves to become a major problem. And Cormyr... Previously it was a strong nation, with a powerful military and a strong and well-respected king. Now it's military has been shattered. The country is run by a regent who doesn't have the loyalty of all the nobles. Add the war with the Death Dragon and her forces, then the fun and games Shade pulled with messing up the weather, and now they're left having a hard time trying to feed themselves... About the Harper Schism: Once the biggest force for good in the Realms, the Harpers are now split. They've lost some of their most powerful members: Khelben, Laeral, and Alustriel. Even with those that stayed in the Harpers, there's still something of a schism: there's now three different groups in the Harpers. One is looking for more traitors. One trusts Khelben. The last group just doesn't care about all that, and want to continue the mission. Bran Skorlsun is now on something of a witch-hunt, and some of the other Harpers won't stand for that. Oh, and don't forget that one of the Mashoon clones became a vampire under Westgate, and that he wants to make himself King of Westgate.... Drow are popping up in increasing numbers in Cormanthor... The Daemonfey are still kicking... The Rundeen, the Twisted Rune, Eldruuth Veluthra, the Churches of Shar, Cyric, and Bane, the Shadow Thieves, these guys are all still around, and some of them are stronger than before... There's a lot more evil groups in the Realms than there are good groups. Evil seems to be ascendant in this version of the Realms.
Morka 12-15-03, 10:21 AM	There will always be people to complain. If Thay invade Rashemi once and for all, there will be people to complain about it, while other who search a Big Bad Evil Entity will rejoyce. Also, there is as much people who compare Faerun to the Middle Earth than people who compare Faerun with Medieval Europe. There was no true evil in Medieval Europe (unless you see the Crusades as a fight between good and evil), only battle between nations. Also, the difference between Faerun and the Middle Earth is in the Middle Earth, the evil was Sauron, while in Faerun, there is a long list of evil Entities.
DwarvenBrew 12-15-03, 11:15 AM	Yamo, I think that one of the great strengths of the FR setting is that the developers have taken the time to set up "localized" conflicts. Seriously, think how easy it is to set up the classic good vs evil showdown. What they have given us is options, and thus endless hours of potential gaming. FR is a huge place, don't forget that. Any one of the threats mentioned by the previous posters probably is an apocolyptic threat to the peoples living under such threats. Don't treat FR as a "small world" setting, and your perspective might change. Evil is plentiful and powerful, but geography remains a significant barrier in such a world. Thus, there is no single, overarching evil presence.
Selgaunt 12-15-03, 01:06 PM	I have to agree with many of Dwarvenbrew's comments. Faerun is a huge continent! THere is evil lurking around everywhere!!! The REd Wizards, the Cult of the Dragon, the Churches of Bane, Shar, Cyric, Malar, Talos etc., The Zhentarim. The Sythilisian Army which invaded Amn, and manged to take control of one of its port cities!! The numerous pasha's of Calimshan(Calimport), The Hosttower of Arcane(Luskan)!!! Not to mention all the evil Goblinoids who reside all over Faerun. Also, there are the Dragons, the giants, the trolls, the undead etc. I don't think there is any evil lacking in Faerun. It's just that we don't hear much of the evil races(groups) compared to the good ones!
Faraer 12-15-03, 01:18 PM	The Realms is a world of swords and sorcery, not high fantasy. It can be used for the latter, but it would be totally arbitrary to change the published setting to that, and a gross failure of duty to Ed. The idea of the Realms being good-dominated was never more than Internet hearsay. The changes you cite as 'resolving these problems' I see as pandering to those misconceptions rather than doing justice to what was already there.
Freakboy 12-15-03, 01:53 PM	I agree with all the other posters in that if there were a Sauron type evil in the Realms, you would have to take it into an account in any campaign you ran. I have been running a purely underdark campaign for almost a year now, and my players could care less about what is going on on the surface. That is the beauty of it. I am running them through a parellel campaign to the events in the War of the Spider Queen, and even had them bump into the group from Menzoberranzan that is trying to find out whats going on (Thanks again for that Rich!!!!!). In any case, my point is that I don't want to be burdened with a Sauron level villain in planning everything my players do. I have more than enough to work with using Mind Flayers, Beholders, the Drow, Thayvian Enclaves, Slave Rackets, and the Zhentarim. If you want a super villian behind it all, it would be easy enough to make. Maybe you could use one of the archfiends in Vile Darkness with a plot of them being released on all Faerun. There are lots of possibilities but I agree with my peers that the setting should be left open like it has been to allow DM's better creative license.
sanishiver 12-15-03, 02:02 PM	Originally posted by Faraer The idea of the Realms being good-dominated was never more than Internet hearsay. Really? I wonder why the designers went to such lengths to have Elminster re-emphasize the dangers inherent in the Realms in the opening to the FRCS? If the vocal few who made their feelings known online were really the sum of such complaints, I don't think the designers would have taken the extra step of re-emphasizing "all that is evil" in the Realms. The fact remains that the preponderance of previously published material gave too much credence to the Chosen et all as the problem solvers for the Realms. Even if evil existed en masse in the Realms, it's credibility as a threat is meaningless if a small group of NPC's is all it takes to put a stop to it. As for what's been done to change things, I like the idea of localized/regional threats. We don't need anymore RSE's (Realms Shaking Events) anytime soon. Better to have a wide mix of good and evil spread around. :whatsthis
Faraer 12-15-03, 02:22 PM	The idea of a good-dominated Realms has been debunked thoroughly and often -- including by Ed, and by me (I had this out not long back in the Deities forum). The only thing that could give the impression of 'the Chosen et all as the problem solvers for the Realms' is the fact that there are novels starring them (for no other reason than TSR/WotC commissioned them for name value) and they succeed in them (as protagonists of commercial heroic fantasy always do); as well as certain of the Code of Ethics restrictions and a few missteps by TSR such as those Ed talks of in this post (http://oracle.wizards.com/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind0311B&L=realms-l&P=R7172). Even those novels don't show evil taking major and permanent damage, just another chapter in the struggle down the centuries. Again: the plots shown in the novels are a tiny fraction of what goes on in the Realms, and it's not hard to get a picture of the overall context -- the many parallel long schemes, the politics and psychology of the mighty -- from Ed's sourcebooks and a careful reading of the novels. The answer to your first question, in my view, is just what I said above, to pander to that misconception in order to sell to those suffering from it. WotC had no way of knowing how widespread it really is/was. ________________ If WotC did kludge in an overarching evil, does anyone think for a minute the books people would leave its resolution to individual roleplaying campaigns?
Lashan 12-15-03, 05:37 PM	From what I recall about 3E FR is that they realised that people had this impression and were trying their best to stop it. So, they have evil making advances on all fronts and they will focus less on the famous NPCs that are featured in the novels. I like to hear that!
Yamo 12-15-03, 09:47 PM	From what I recall about 3E FR is that they realised that people had this impression and were trying their best to stop it. So, they have evil making advances on all fronts and they will focus less on the famous NPCs that are featured in the novels. I like to hear that! Precisely. It's a damn good start and I'm eager to see where it's going. :smirk: The idea of a good-dominated Realms has been debunked thoroughly and often -- including by Ed, and by me (I had this out not long back in the Deities forum). Debunked by Mr. Greenwood? Hardly. Here's a telling quote from the very post you linked (emphasis mine): That TSR design decision led to too many gods, and to leaving the forces of good as big and bold in a balanced world, rather than shining champions against a dark-dominated world. It's clear from this post that Mr. Greenwood never intended for the 2nd Edition-era Realms to follow this route (which I personally believe), but that despite his wishes, the powers that were decreed that it would. So you can debate all you want over whether the "good guys as unrivaled top dogs" Realms of the 1990s was a good thing or a bad thing or whether the new plan is better or worse, but you cannot dispute that the paradigm itself existed in TSR's published material of the time.
Lashan 12-15-03, 10:06 PM	But even if 2E had the good guys being too uberpoweful, it has changed with 3E. All the 2E NPCs are being ignored or written out somehow (or at least a lot of them). The bad guys have reorganized and made advances. Therefore, things are looking grim again. What is the point of debating how 2E sucked because the novels turned the game crappy? I fully agree with this thought, but there is no point in going over it again and again.