Post/Author/DateTime	Post
18DELTA 10-04-07, 07:10 PM	Well Eberrons James Wyatt posted this (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?p=13989886#post13989886) today.:rolleyes: Its funny when the Eberron guru will talk honestly about the Realms.Wtf!;)
Gray Richardson 10-04-07, 09:22 PM	I thought that was a really sweet and heartfelt blog. And I appreciate his candor and enthusiasm. His blog I think shows that the designers really care about the Realms and have a lot of good stuff in store for us. I am hopeful and excited to see what is coming down the pike. Actually, I feel like Rich Baker has also been very candid and forthcoming about impending plans for the Realms. It is indeed a shame he has gotten raked over the coals by some myopic fans who are fearful of change.
Thinblade 10-04-07, 09:39 PM	It's not change in itself many of us dislike. It's changing things for no purpose, invalidating everything that's come before, throwing out that which has been proven good as well as that which needs replacing. Frankly, WotC has always seemed to change things simply because they can, not because they need changing. Pure power trip (invalidating Planescape, anyone?). 4e is simply the culmination of a long trend.
MerrikCale 10-04-07, 09:56 PM	Actually, I feel like Rich Baker has also been very candid and forthcoming about impending plans for the Realms. It is indeed a shame he has gotten raked over the coals by some myopic fans who are fearful of change. Its not a shame if, all these rumors are true, and he and the rest of the team ruins a great (easily the best) setting there is and destroying every single campaign going. Not they everyone involved getting raked over the coals is just about right. Now, if they don't make the ridiculous mistake of jumping ahead 100 years to 1471, then he's getting raked over the coals for nothing.
Kid SixXx 10-04-07, 10:13 PM	This is the third thread on this board with Wyatt's blog in it. I think most of the discussion is occurring in the "Thanks for Destroying the Realms" thread.
Rauric 10-04-07, 10:15 PM	I thought that was a really sweet and heartfelt blog. And I appreciate his candor and enthusiasm. His blog I think shows that the designers really care about the Realms and have a lot of good stuff in store for us. I am hopeful and excited to see what is coming down the pike. Actually, I feel like Rich Baker has also been very candid and forthcoming about impending plans for the Realms. It is indeed a shame he has gotten raked over the coals by some myopic fans who are fearful of change. Glad you said it. If any other poster had said this we would be called a ninny and then all the other whiners.... uhhh myopic fans would come out of the woodwork and pounce.:D I keed,I keed. Anyway if Rich would just shelve the high lvl NPCS without killing them or reducing their power I think this would appease the group that hates uber NPCs and the group that loves them.
GothicDan 10-04-07, 10:50 PM	I'll gladly call Gray a ninny. He's a smart guy, but I think his purposeful ignorance of peoples' intentions and desires (that is 'people who are afraid of change') is a plainly stupid thing to make. It's just so glaringly wrong that it makes me question Gray's ability to actually communicate with the people on these boards. We do not fear or dislike change - some of us fear or dislike what changes are MADE, however.
MaskedOne 10-04-07, 10:53 PM	I thought that was a really sweet and heartfelt blog. And I appreciate his candor and enthusiasm. His blog I think shows that the designers really care about the Realms and have a lot of good stuff in store for us. I am hopeful and excited to see what is coming down the pike. Actually, I feel like Rich Baker has also been very candid and forthcoming about impending plans for the Realms. It is indeed a shame he has gotten raked over the coals by some myopic fans who are fearful of change. On this we disagree, mainly because I'm feeling cynical. These people are working for a company trying to sell a product. Statements that could provoke nastier reactions than those already in play is bad form. Doing so in full view of the public where several thousand might have a chance to record said statements before the bright idea of editing comes up is worse form. Since typing up text for a blog can take hours or days and we'll never see more than text or know how much time was put into it, there would be no acceptable excuse for presenting anything overly offensive. Now admittedly I'm cynical and cranky at the moment and for the foreseeable future will remain so in relation to these boards but my opinion on the linked blog and Baker's statements is "put up or shut up" and since I have no reason to believe they can do the former in the near future, I'm just as happy with the latter. Until they show me something halfway decent, the utter crap that they tacked onto the end of GHotR vastly outweighs 1000 vague assurances.
Dark Wizard 10-04-07, 10:56 PM	I think most people already realize that Rich Baker cannot take the sole to blame/credit for the changes, he made very clear early on that the changes were made by committee. That does not mean he himself is not a valid reference person as long as the discussions aimed at him are civil, it does not mean he cannot be mentioned, it does not mean he cannot be blamed or credited specifically. When people refer to him, they also mean the other guys for the most part. As the "face" for the new Realms he is unfortunately place in this uncomfortable position, but that is his job as lead designer for the Realms. He's basically the manager of the Realms from what I gather. When customers feel there is something wrong with a product, they often and eventually end up speaking to the manager. Even when they say Ed Greenwood was in on this (which I'm not doubting), it does not mean the entire team cannot be held accountable, along with Ed. He, despite being the creator, is not immune from criticism, gods know how much of it he already gets for the majority of the things supposedly wrong with the setting already. Just putting Ed out amongst the designers is not going to alleviate the problem that a major fundamental change has occurred with the published Realms. One of the things I've felt different about James Wyatt's approach and Rich Baker's approach is that James Wyatt seems to engage more with the Eberron fans. Rich Baker generally has shorter, seemingly more regulated posts when answering fans questions, almost as if he's afraid of showing too much personality or revealing too much about his own thoughts on the Realms. James in comparison seems more relaxed. What he said in his post addressing Eberron fans concern and this most recent one is very similar to the tone and wording of Ed's posts to Realms fans on Candlekeep. James Wyatt also frequently references discussions and meetings he's had with Keith Baker. Rich Baker rarely mentions similar dialogs with Ed Greenwood or other respected FR freelancers. Rich Baker mostly stays in the Ask the Designer thread (don't blame him, he's already generous enough by even appearing). I recall James Wyatt adding a few posts to the actual Eberron 4E discussion forums. In a sense it seems Rich Baker (and by extension the entire FR design team) appear more like mysterious and powerful beings hidden away in their ivory towers. I'm not saying they are, but I think they have a growing public relations problem. Couple this with James Wyatt being the front man for Eberron who gradually announces generally well liked 4E plans for Eberron compared to the Rich Baker who to deal with the major changes stated in a book all at once and then has to face the fan reaction. It's no wonder why James is having a slightly easier time and an improved image. I blame the set up of 4E's release schedule more than the actual difference between these two designers. It doesn't make sense to me why they had to lock themselves into the Spellplague and a minimum 10 year jump so early on. They could have pushed FR 4E back a few months, used these vital months between the editions to send out more feelers to the fans. Most of whom don't disagree with change just these specific changes and the rapid advancement of them. Saying this, I disagree with James Wyatt on a lot of what he said about the differences between the Realms and Eberron. I don't see how many of the actual game design decisions for Eberron are all that tied to the flavor of the setting. The Realms designers haven't changed the design mentality of the Realms (we're getting more RSEs, more epic magical catastrophes, more senseless pantheon decisions). As a result of the design decisions, they're changing much of the flavor, the little fluff things we're familiar with, which has nothing to do with why the Realms appears to fail as a game setting. That James Wyatt mentioned the novels by Rich and Bruce as a major way to carry across the flavor of the setting is the same sort of flaw that takes the setting out of the hands of the players and all into the game designers/novelists. With the rate the time line advancements are going, the designers are telling their stories then moving the setting forward. How are players supposed to have a place to play. Nothing is stable enough for people to settle in for any period of time. By diverging the canon Realms from the majority of old player's long running games, they further reduced the Realms as a viable game setting. For a long time now, most groups had to enact their own changes to the Realms due to the many RSEs that shook up much of the setting on a near constant basis. Perhaps this is why it is hard for a new gamer to enter the Realms, many established group have a list of house lore. Very soon there will be even more differences between the REalms run with many groups of players and the published Realms. I also disagree with James Wyatt on this line: "There aren’t a ton of high-level NPCs running around, doing the things that PCs should be doing." That sort of mentality is the main reason why the high-level NPCs seem like they're taking the spotlight from the PCs. They never have to overshadow the players if the designers don't say they are, but it seems the designers say so every chance they get. @Gray Richerdson - I'm actually somewhat offended by the myopic comment. As an opponent of the changes and the general direction of the new Realms, I hoped that I've pointed out enough inconsistencies and peculiarities in the designers' words and actions to show why the changes aren't the best and why to bring about a true change in the Realms the designers must realize the little biases and self-made problems they drop into their posts and publications.
Rauric 10-04-07, 10:58 PM	I'll gladly call Gray a ninny. He's a smart guy, but I think his purposeful ignorance of peoples' intentions and desires (that is 'people who are afraid of change') is a plainly stupid thing to make. It's just so glaringly wrong that it makes me question Gray's ability to actually communicate with the people on these boards. We do not fear or dislike change - some of us fear or dislike what changes are MADE, however. Whatever. You just proved my point. I loves me that RPG drama. Stupid eh? Not nice, but you really are not that nice to those you disagree with are you? Plus when you guys just repeat youselves over and over and over it just appears to be whining. End of story and sorry if that hurts. Heck, even Ubbergeek appears to be whining when all he says is "why don't you grognards blah, blah, blah." This is how I am perceiveing most of these repeat threads and repeat posts. I am sure there are several Lurkers out there who feel the same way but are afraid to express their opinions for fear of getting "zapped" or "zinged" by the reapeat offenders, or the vocal minority. Again I hope that the designers keep the high level NPCS "in one piece" but shuffle them off to the side so all gamers can enjoy the Realms. I can understand why people are upset about you nuking their favorite NPCs. I would have felt the same way when I was a teenager or 20 something. I was a FR fanatic then. So maybe you could do some Damage control like Wyatt and meet some of the fans somewhere in the middle. Please? For the love of all that is holy please? ( I hope that last part was dramatic enough.)
godbeepit 10-04-07, 11:07 PM	Dan, though your point is truly valid, it is easy to see how one could misinterpret what is being said on these boards. Whenever fourth edition is brought up in a Forgotten Realms discussion it often immediately breaks down into several complaints and then just downright slander. On top of that, I have seen instances where somebody lists off everything they dislike about the current Realms and it just seems like everything that has ever happened in the history of this lovely campaign setting since its original printing. Most often, the views posted on these boards are pessimistic in nature simply because those who are negative tend to also be the loudest. There is in fact another thread that was 'what do you like about the Realms' specifically intended to prove this wrong and it degenerated into complaints and whining. I understand that these are not necessarily the views held by posters on these boards (though with some people it may seem like it), but what is actually put forth on these boards is almost completely negative. Just because it's constructive criticism doesn't mean it's not criticism, and communication across the internet is severely hampered by the pure nature of it. After having said all that. I know there are going to be people who misinterpret it.:) Cheers.
Rauric 10-04-07, 11:17 PM	Right on!. OMG, are the lurkers that are tired of the FR elitists coming out of the woodworks. Will this be like the Eberron forums where you can say that you want Elminster dead or admit that you actually like Drizzt and not be burned at the stake. On a side note I like El and used to like Drizzt but think he is a little shortsighted with his opinions and views about how things work. Plus I need him to stop brooding. He was Emo before Emo was Emo. ;)
GothicDan 10-04-07, 11:30 PM	Whatever. You just proved my point. I loves me that RPG drama. I don't. I'm already rather fed up with drama from my fraternity. I'm perfectly calm and pretty much apathetic about everything at this point. Stupid eh? Not nice, but you really are not that nice to those you disagree with are you? If they prove to be illogical, not at all. We're not trained to be 'nice' in debates. But on here, I'm actually only not nice to a VERY few people - Ubber is one of them. I've disagreed with quite a lot of people pretty civilly - even my discussions with Mr. Miscellany remain fairly civil, considering how strongly each of us feels. I disagree with Merrik a lot, but we remain civil and joke around; I disagree with Zandilar at times, and I'm not mean to her. Debating has no room for sentiment - however, getting to know people as people, does. Plus when you guys just repeat youselves over and over and over it just appears to be whining. End of story and sorry if that hurts. Weird digital pixels on a computer screen don't personally wound me much - not unless they're pixels posted by someone I've already gotten to know as a person. So whatever you say isn't going to mean much to me, one way or another. :) Heck, even Ubbergeek appears to be whining when all he says is "why don't you grognards blah, blah, blah." This is how I am perceiveing most of these repeat threads and repeat posts. I am sure there are several Lurkers out there who feel the same way but are afraid to express their opinions for fear of getting "zapped" or "zinged" by the reapeat offenders, or the vocal minority. Firstly, we have no clue who the local minority is. WotC doesn't tell us that, specifically. Secondly, I'm going to whine if I feel like it. I think I've been doing it a heck of a lot less than most people on the subject though. Again I hope that the designers keep the high level NPCS "in one piece" but shuffle them off to the side so all gamers can enjoy the Realms. They already said they weren't doing that. I can understand why people are upset about you nuking their favorite NPCs. I would have felt the same way when I was a teenager or 20 something. I was a FR fanatic then. So maybe you could do some Damage control like Wyatt and meet some of the fans somewhere in the middle. Please? For the love of all that is holy please? ( I hope that last part was dramatic enough.) Sorry, atheist. That being said, I have very few, if any, 'favorite' NPCs, largely because I've read very few novels. My favorites include a lot of Elaine's, who are hardly ever touched by anyone, since they tend to be Elves, and tend towards the west, so to speak. But, as far as literary/criticism license goes, as long as a character is well-written, consistent, and representative of lore in some way, then I'd be upset if he/she was treated as another dollar being moved about or destroyed, rather than a character. If he happens to be a hot blond guy with nice muscles, then I'll be more PERSONALLY upset, but I'm not going to let that personal sentiment factor into my overall analysis. PS: I will never allow elitism to fail while I'm alive. Elitism is almost always one of the many reasons for cultures, technology, art, etc., advancing.
Gray Richardson 10-04-07, 11:31 PM	It's not change in itself many of us dislike. It's changing things for no purpose, invalidating everything that's come before, throwing out that which has been proven good as well as that which needs replacing.Honestly, such gnashing of teeth smacks of melodramatic hyperbole. The designers have explained their purposes (to give an in-game explanation for the mechanics changes for 4th edition, and to give new Realms fans a good jumping on point) so we know they have a purpose and it is a noble one. And we know they are not invalidating everything that has come before, they are preserving continuity, simply advancing the timeline somewhat. And despite some changes, they are not throwing out that which is proven good. Frankly, WotC has always seemed to change things simply because they can, not because they need changing. Pure power trip (invalidating Planescape, anyone?). 4e is simply the culmination of a long trend.Psshaw! You are now just jumping on a bandwagon of belligerence in order to impress the "cool kids". You have no idea whereof you speak. WotC bought out a bankrupt TSR and revived a moribund game, turning it again into one of the most beloved pastimes of our generation. They applied science, sound principles of game design, a strong foundation in statistics, in combination with good writing, and some very effective market research to create the best iteration of D&D so far. I have felt strongly for seven years that this is the best D&D could ever be, but listening to what the designers have explained about 4th edition, I now see that there are some things that could be better about the game, and am cautiously optimistic that 4th edition could potentially be wildly better than I had even dreamed. Not only have the mechanics of the game improved with 3rd edition, but they have put out some sublimely wonderful lore, beautifully crafted books, and many, many wonderful game supplements that I will treasure for years to come. There has been some amazing and wondrous Forgotten Realms lore published over the last 7 years. The 3e FRCS campaign setting itself is a truly fantastic thing to behold and to read through. Consistently over the last 7 years, my gamers imagination has never been so sparked. All along, the FR designers have proved themselves caring, thoughtful and worthy stewards of the Realms. They have continued to employ Ed Greenwood and many noteworthy Realms designers of longstanding (Eric Boyd, Steven Schend, Thomas Costa and many others) while fostering new talent such as Will Upchurch, Ed Bonny and Eytan Bernstein, all of whom have added their sizable talents and fine writings to the growing body of Realmslore. WotC has never just changed anything simply because they can. They have demonstrated that they care about their fanbase. They are deliberative, thoughtful, and they do lots of surveys, focus groups and market research to back up what they change. And as a result they have greatly widened and increased the fanbase. Clearly they are doing many, many things right! Look, an economically successful Forgotten Realms and D&D game is the very best thing for all of us. It ensures that the Realms rolls on and that new lore is crafted, and new books are written for us to enjoy. It also pays the bills for our beloved designers and authors, allowing them to make a living at what they do and continue to treat us to what's contained in the storehouses of their boundless imaginations. Sure, you may not have liked some of the choices they have made as designers. But they have never made those choices willy-nilly or with any disregard of the fans or the setting. And for the most part, they get it right way, way, way more often than they get it wrong. I have never been more in love with the Forgotten Realms, and I am enthused as heck (if admittedly a little trepidatious) to see what they have in store for us in 4th edition. You know, the Realms is not some precious little chachki to be shellacked and placed high up on a shelf, to be gazed at from a distance but forbidden to ever touch. The Realms I play in is a living breathing thing. My Realms has nicks and dings from all the romping around myself and my players have put it through. You should expect to see characters die from time to time, and the Realms Shaking Events are now a major tradition of the Realms. It has weathered many, many of those (as the GHotH has chronicled!) and it is still around after several decades. And I revel in the prospect of reading new Realms books and running my Realms games every week for many more decades to come! And so I say to all you sad-sack sourpusses, "Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau: ‘tis all in vain! You throw the sand against the wind, And the wind blows it back again. And every sand becomes a Gem, Reflected in the beam divine; Blown back they blind the mocking Eye, But still in Greenwoods’ paths they shine! :g:
GothicDan 10-04-07, 11:37 PM	In regards to my first statement... I do think 'stupid' was perhaps a crude term. I respect Gray too much as a person and gamer, and I've remained fairly civil even when I've disagreed with him (and disagree with him on at least half of his previous post above mine ;)). I think I'd rather say it's an... Oversimplified thing to say. Or unobservant. But I have Eutropius to translate in the morning. It's bedtime.
18DELTA 10-04-07, 11:37 PM	It seems that James Wyatt is excited about Eberron. We should be saying dead realms walking. ;)
Dark Wizard 10-04-07, 11:45 PM	Frankly I'm tired of getting called a grognard or an archaic change-fearing elitist every time I try to say anything. So who's being the snobby elitist, who's whining? Maybe if someone actually did a good job of shooting down my points, completely and utterly stomped me into the ground by showing me the true light of these new changes and how much previous thinking was utter and hopelessly flawed. I don't see that happening since I think I'm actually arguing from a point of moderation. I asked why the changes had to be an all-or-nothing situation instead of some more in the middle-ground. I asked why can't the bad parts of the Realms fade into the background because for a while there WotC sure felt it was a suitable policy for entire continents but not a few problematic characters and gods. I asked why there could be a more gradual change rather than yet another RSE. Why was Khelben's death more accepted by the fans, because while the author took away a very famous iconic character from the Realms, he added to it, he set up the next generation (the returned city, the twins, an apprentice). The Spellplague itself is all doom and gloom, WotC worded it so that there seems to be no viable future for many aspect of the old Realms. How can they expect people to think of the changes as positive when all they've done is negative (reinforce negative stereotypes of the Realms, killing off characters and gods, destroying the magical foundation of the world). If they want us to think positive, they better start showing something positive in the new Realms, it's that simple. Besides a sense of loss what have they added to the Realms? A sense of out with the old, in with the new? They've gotten the out with the old part done, where's the new? If the new isn't due to arrive until August 2008, well then, they basically set themselves up for a whole year of negativity and "whining" by fans. Until WotC replaces the old Realms with something as good or better, this is how it's going to go down.
Rauric 10-04-07, 11:50 PM	I don't. I'm already rather fed up with drama from my fraternity. I'm perfectly calm and pretty much apathetic about everything at this point. If they prove to be illogical, not at all. We're not trained to be 'nice' in debates. But on here, I'm actually only not nice to a VERY few people - Ubber is one of them. I've disagreed with quite a lot of people pretty civilly - even my discussions with Mr. Miscellany remain fairly civil, considering how strongly each of us feels. I disagree with Merrik a lot, but we remain civil and joke around; I disagree with Zandilar at times, and I'm not mean to her. Debating has no room for sentiment - however, getting to know people as people, does. Weird digital pixels on a computer screen don't personally wound me much - not unless they're pixels posted by someone I've already gotten to know as a person. So whatever you say isn't going to mean much to me, one way or another. :) Firstly, we have no clue who the local minority is. WotC doesn't tell us that, specifically. Secondly, I'm going to whine if I feel like it. I think I've been doing it a heck of a lot less than most people on the subject though. They already said they weren't doing that. Sorry, atheist. That being said, I have very few, if any, 'favorite' NPCs, largely because I've read very few novels. My favorites include a lot of Elaine's, who are hardly ever touched by anyone, since they tend to be Elves, and tend towards the west, so to speak. But, as far as literary/criticism license goes, as long as a character is well-written, consistent, and representative of lore in some way, then I'd be upset if he/she was treated as another dollar being moved about or destroyed, rather than a character. If he happens to be a hot blond guy with nice muscles, then I'll be more PERSONALLY upset, but I'm not going to let that personal sentiment factor into my overall analysis. PS: I will never allow elitism to fail while I'm alive. Elitism is almost always one of the many reasons for cultures, technology, art, etc., advancing. Good times. This was one heck of a response and I am happy glad you did not use your falming powers to burn my tookus. ;) Let's try and tell the disigners what we want. Let's try to meet somewhere in the middle maybe. The gods thing isshot to hell it appears. Mystra especially, so we might need to get over it. The high end NPC deal is something people can try to fight for. Plus I only want the TLA to be 10 years and not 100.
GothicDan 10-04-07, 11:55 PM	Also: I want to marry Dark Wizard, a bit.
Markustay 10-05-07, 12:00 AM	Right on!. OMG, are the lurkers that are tired of the FR elitists coming out of the woodworks. Will this be like the Eberron forums where you can say that you want Elminster dead or admit that you actually like Drizzt and not be burned at the stake. Clarification: When it comes to Elminster, I'm kinda neutral, truth be told. I've grown to like the old coot over the years, but I also pity him. Perhaps it is time for him to pass on, one way or another - but make it a noble death;none of this juvenile cr@p the gods are being hit with. The man deserves better... :cool: I like Drizzt, and I'm not afraid to admit it. Its Drizzt fans I hate... and I'm not feeling too good about the author ATM. I was always an Elric fan, so I enjoy reading about his cheap knock-off as well. I'll take a miserable self-pitying emo near-Elf over a self-righteous Paladin A-hole anyday. :P Now - I applaud James Wyatt. Why is it the man can say nearly the same thing to us and it sounds so much less frightening? I guess it's true what they say - it's all in the delivery. ;) To Rich Baker and others - Drop the Buzzwords, they're a turn-off. You guys sound like politicians, with flowery speeches that tell us very little. Just some heart felt truth like Mr. Wyatt delivered is all we ask. Save that cr@p for the ads I'm sure you guys are going to run like crazy when 4e hits the shelves - not HERE. We love the Realms - give us something we can hold onto. A lot of what I'm reading in the design columns sounds very interesting, and many of us here don't really have too much of a problem with 4e - it was inevitable. The Real Problem - The last ten years in the GHotR came across as a 'face slap', although I'm sure it was not intended to be so. We get 159 pages of Realmsalicious love, and then wipe it all out in a single paragraph. It was like writing a best selling novel, and then killing the heroes in the epilogue. The Orc King spoiler I understood, because creating 'buzz' is part of advertising, but the 'future bits' in the GHotR was a bitter pill, and the decision to include that info may not have been the best judgement. Not in something we were so looking forward to embracing. :(
Dimensional_Drifter 10-05-07, 12:04 AM	Hopefully, the changes really won't be all that bad. They haven't necessarily destroyed the realms completely, we should wait and see what is done. Then if it is indeed ruined, nothing is stopping everyone from just ignoring the changes and playing the game as they wish. I for one, am actually wondering where they are going with all this, and am still interested in what stories will be revealed behind the changes that are taking place. Some of it might sound really stupid, but until August of next year, we'll just have to wait. Then you all can complain with the new FRCS book that you'll probably buy.
Rauric 10-05-07, 12:06 AM	I do not like the 100 year deal in Orc King either. Perhaps it is a "possible" future? Plus this thread is getting better. What is the one big thing you want kept in the Realms people? No whining, just say "I want blah, blah, blah" and lets see what happens. Let's stop the bashing and use your brains and your passion for the FR to maybe save a few sacred cows. Not all of them, some are definitly going to the slaughterhouse, but maybe a few can be spared.
Fire_Wraith 10-05-07, 12:07 AM	I'll take up your example of Khelben's death, and contrast it to another recent one: Halaster's. I was saddened by Khelben's passing, but it was a 'good' death. I understood it, and it made perfect sense, both in terms of the character himself, and the world around him as a greater whole. It did indeed open up a series of future opportunities, and while I would have liked a little more time to get to know some of the members of the 'new generation' he was turning matters over to, the things that he sacrificed his life for were noble in the extreme, and worthy of a character of his stature. On the other hand, cracking open "Expedition to Undermountain" left me absolutely floored. I'd always loved the idea of Undermountain ever since the first boxed set, and Halaster has always loomed large in any experience with that dungeon. To open the new adventure and find that he was supposedly dead and gone - permanently - was shocking in the extreme. What was worse than that, was discovering that he had died under mysterious circumstances that were left largely unexplained. Frankly, it felt to me as if he had become a liability that prevented full exploration of the dungeon complex, due to his power level and control over it, and had been removed as a result. To me, though, that was exactly what made him such an interesting and useful NPC, and a vital part of the dungeon. It felt cheap and artificial, as if someone had just taken a giant eraser to him and rubbed him out of existence because he was inconvenient. This is the sort of thing I am afraid the Spellplague will be. This is the sort of thing I am afraid the deaths of the various gods and other NPCs will be, because I have a great deal of trouble seeing that many deaths of such individuals all being given the proper story treatment and explanation deserved - nevermind what the motivation behind the death feels like. Khelben's death felt like it was part of the story - Halaster's, and now these upcoming deaths, feel like they're being introduced artificially, for the purpose of killing/removing, rather than the purpose of enriching the story. Granted, for all I know, the difference is just in my mind. These two events could have even come up in the same breath, from the same designer: "Hey, what if we killed off Khelben and Halaster?" But the execution left a vastly different impression... And that's where I have a problem with it.
Markustay 10-05-07, 12:15 AM	Also: I want to marry Dark Wizard, a bit.I don't feel that strongly, but yeah, I meant to say 'Ditto' concerning his post.
18DELTA 10-05-07, 12:17 AM	No offence people, the only way this crime against the realms wont happen is if we dont use it in our games. Someone will figure out the 4E stats for Mystra. We can recreate all our favorite characters in 4E. Its coming and the only thing we can do is get ready for it.WotC is going full speed ahead with its plans for the Realms in 4E. We need to band together and make this edition as painless as possible ok. Think about it people we can make this work!:) The writings on the wall, how do we adapt to it?
Rauric 10-05-07, 12:21 AM	After hearing Hallaster got killed I realized that they were going to try and limit uber NPCS in the new Realms. Here is the reason. Every person I ask about the Realms always throws in a nasty comment about how every barkeep or inkeep is a retired 15 to 20th level adventurer. This is a throwback to 2E times I think but it must have really left an impression on gamers, and not a good one. "No offence people, the only way this crime against the realms wont happen is if we dont use it in our games. Someone will figure out the 4E stats for Mystra. We can recreate all our favorite characters in 4E. Its coming and the only thing we can do is get ready for it.WotC is going full speed ahead with its plans for the Realms in 4E. We need to band together and make this edition as painless as possible ok. Think about it people we can make this work! The writings on the wall, how do we adapt to it?" Right on brutha!
18DELTA 10-05-07, 12:45 AM	Lets do this. Start a 4E spellplague memorial thread,recreate those killed in this senseless reboot. Their you go WotC IS HAPPY, AND OF COURSE WE ARE HAPPY. Make like the elven netbook. It can work. Just restat eveybody to 4e.:D Now I can :dancin: :lightbulb the night away!:D
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 01:59 AM	Frankly I'm tired of getting called a grognard or an archaic change-fearing elitist every time I try to say anything.I would never do that, except perhaps to point it out obliquely, if you were to express elitism and fear of change. Even then I would never call you a grognard. Calling people names is simply rude. So who's being the snobby elitist, who's whining?Well, um... is that a rhetorical question? ;) It doesn't make sense to me why they had to lock themselves into the Spellplague and a minimum 10 year jump so early on. They could have pushed FR 4E back a few months, used these vital months between the editions to send out more feelers to the fans. Most of whom don't disagree with change just these specific changes and the rapid advancement of them.What is there to understand? They made a choice. They could have done a lot of things, but they made the choice that they thought best. That's what editors and authors do. The bold make choices and leave the craven and the uninspired in their wake to criticize and second-guess.By diverging the canon Realms from the majority of old player's long running games, they further reduced the Realms as a viable game setting.Time will tell, won't it? My money is on WotC.For a long time now, most groups had to enact their own changes to the Realms due to the many RSEs that shook up much of the setting on a near constant basis. Perhaps this is why it is hard for a new gamer to enter the Realms, many established group have a list of house lore. Very soon there will be even more differences between the REalms run with many groups of players and the published Realms.Pish Tosh. Every single DM has always taken his own personal Realms in some direction different from canon and made the Realms his own. The timeline of each DM's Faerûn diverges from canon in some fashion once you start playing in the Realms. That is the nature of creativity. I myself try to stick to canon as close as I can, but my own Realms has had some shakeups; including a kidnapped Alustriel, a siege of Silverymoon, and certain key personages in Cormyr replaced by Nerra imposters. I do not need my Realms spoon-fed to me. I use what I like, and ignore what I don't like. I just appreciate the wealth of great material to draw on for my games. I am somewhat puzzled that anyone would demand that WotC not write plots or changes that would diverge from their home game. WotC cannot know what you are doing in your home game. Novels can't be written by the readers. And the readers always have the choice to be creative and adapt or diverge their games however it please them. Where WotC leadeth no one is compelled to follow.@Gray Richerdson - I'm actually somewhat offended by the myopic comment.Sorry you were offended. It wasn't aimed at you. I've never been aware of you or noticed your posts before now... But if the shoe fits... Myopic means short-sighted, not seeing clearly, which I think is an accurate description of some on these boards who are so quick to kvetch and moan without knowing the whole story or having the capacity to imagine the possibilities. An apt word to describe those who lack vision. You seem to offend very easily. You are a very sensitive fellow. The world must be a dark and difficult place for you.
Mr_Miscellany 10-05-07, 02:34 AM	Why was Khelben's death more accepted by the fans, because while the author took away a very famous iconic character from the Realms, he added to it, he set up the next generation (the returned city, the twins, an apprentice). The Spellplague itself is all doom and gloom, WotC worded it so that there seems to be no viable future for many aspect of the old Realms. Schend got to finish his story, while you can only assume the outcome of the Spellplague because that story isn't finished yet. This is the crux of it, and will be for several months to come. As in, "Every complaint made will be judged against the following simple maxim: Don't count your chickens before they're hatched (even if the eggs look a bit funny)." I see a lot of people whining unceasingly about eggs that've not yet opened. How can they expect people to think of the changes as positive when all they've done is negative (reinforce negative stereotypes of the Realms, killing off characters and gods, destroying the magical foundation of the world). If they want us to think positive, they better start showing something positive in the new Realms, it's that simple. This I can agree with. I know it’s going to be hard for WotC to act on this very salient point since Realms info can’t (and shouldn’t) outpace 4E info (or spoil it), but I hope they’ll at least try. If the new isn't due to arrive until August 2008, well then, they basically set themselves up for a whole year of negativity and "whining" by fans. I can see some don’t-post-that-much regulars and true lurkers sounding off that they don’t like the changes, which is fine, but you’ll still get the vocal minority (read: elitists) with their unending ‘Oh, my heart! It breaks for the Realms!’ posts in every thread. It’s the later that will reinforce the negativity and keep the forums low, I think, as it’s already happening on the Realms-L list. The elitists on that list were bona fide, hardcore Realms fans when most of you were entering puberty, and have only gotten worse with age. They managed to pigeonhole Rich Baker and blame him for everything that ‘went wrong’ with 3E and ‘will’ go wrong with 4E inside a week, are mostly (IMNSHO) responsible for Wyatt’s blog entry and managed in that short time to bring about the exact same negativity that killed that once profusely active (and highly useful) mailing list some eight years ago. Save yourselves now, oh comparatively youthful forum elitists! Misery may love company, but We want no part of it. These forums should not have to suffer your endless, wretched cries of anguish and woe, though Our heart goes out to you in sympathy for your very real pain. Or you could just quit these forums and go join the Realms-L mailing list. ;)
Dark Wizard 10-05-07, 02:39 AM	What is there to understand? They made a choice. They could have done a lot of things, but they made the choice that they thought best. That's what editors and authors do. The bold make choices and leave the craven and the uninspired in their wake to criticize and second-guess. I suppose if they know their usual fan-base well enough to expect this, they wouldn't need to test the waters out like Eberron. Time will tell, won't it? My money is on WotC. Time will tell, I only hope that WotC will soon reveal enough to make me eager for FR 4E rather than uninspired, which I suppose your previous statement is correct, though I think it's due to the product line failing for me. Hopefully it is only a temporary lapse before I pick it up again. Pish Tosh. Every single DM has always taken his own personal Realms in some direction different from canon and made the Realms his own. The timeline of each DM's Faerûn diverges from canon in some fashion once you start playing in the Realms. That is the nature of creativity. I myself try to stick to canon as close as I can, but my own Realms has had some shakeups; including a kidnapped Alustriel, a siege of Silverymoon, and certain key personages in Cormyr replaced by Nerra imposters. I do not need my Realms spoon-fed to me. I use what I like, and ignore what I don't like. I just appreciate the wealth of great material to draw on for my games. I am somewhat puzzled that anyone would demand that WotC not write plots or changes that would diverge from their home game. WotC cannot know what you are doing in your home game. Novels can't be written by the readers. And the readers always have the choice to be creative and adapt or diverge their games however it please them. Where WotC leadeth no one is compelled to follow. Every DM diverges, but all Realms originally started from the baseline of the Realms. The new changes seems to shake up that old baseline a lot and that might lead to more divergence between everyone's home games and the official setting. This might not necessarily happen or even matter, but I would be interested in seeing how WotC handles it other than just "We suggest you start a new game." I could of course ignore the changes, rework them, or find my own way to adapt them, but like you I appreciate the options that WotC could give even if I have my own way of doing things. Sorry you were offended. It wasn't aimed at you. I've never been aware of you or noticed your posts before now... But if the shoe fits... Myopic means short-sighted, not seeing clearly, which I think is an accurate description of some on these boards who are so quick to kvetch and moan without knowing the whole story or having the capacity to imagine the possibilities. An apt word to describe those who lack vision. I meant offended in a more general sense. I am tired of the few on these boards who hold similar views to yours but go about harshly denouncing those who disagree with the changes. They do the same thing you attribute to those you described. You seem to offend very easily. You are a very sensitive fellow. The world must be a dark and difficult place for you. That last part was unnecessary. I don't think you can make a proper judgment on just the few lines of mine you've read. I'll leave it at that, any more comments and these things can easily get out of hand.
Dark Wizard 10-05-07, 02:59 AM	Schend got to finish his story, while you can only assume the outcome of the Spellplague because that story isn't finished yet. This is the crux of it, and will be for several months to come. As in, "Every complaint made will be judged against the following simple maxim: Don't count your chickens before they're hatched (even if the eggs look a bit funny)." I see a lot of people whining unceasingly about eggs that've not yet opened. They've sold and slaughtered a lot of old workhorses and loyal oxen to buy those eggs. I hope they're worth it, that they do hatch and we get something good. This I can agree with. I know it’s going to be hard for WotC to act on this very salient point since Realms info can’t (and shouldn’t) outpace 4E info (or spoil it), but I hope they’ll at least try. Yeah, I know there has to be something they're dying to tell us but can't until 4E comes and then more when FRCS 4E is due to release. I realize it is very hard for the designers from a creative,wanting to share what they have. I am hoping for a Realmslore article here or there between now and then. I do want something to come out so maybe the fury on these threads can subside a bit. GHotR was the best place to release the changes, it got the word out better than anything. I do appreciate that the 4E transition only took up the last page or so, that was courteous to those who might not want it. I can see some don’t-post-that-much regulars and true lurkers sounding off that they don’t like the changes, which is fine, but you’ll still get the vocal minority (read: elitists) with their unending ‘Oh, my heart! It breaks for the Realms!’ posts in every thread. It’s the later that will reinforce the negativity and keep the forums low, I think, as it’s already happening on the Realms-L list. The elitists on that list were bona fide, hardcore Realms fans when most of you were entering puberty, and have only gotten worse with age. They managed to pigeonhole Rich Baker and blame him for everything that ‘went wrong’ with 3E and ‘will’ go wrong with 4E inside a week, are mostly (IMNSHO) responsible for Wyatt’s blog entry and managed in that short time to bring about the exact same negativity that killed that once profusely active (and highly useful) mailing list some eight years ago. Save yourselves now, oh comparatively youthful forum elitists! Misery may love company, but We want no part of it. These forums should not have to suffer your endless, wretched cries of anguish and woe, though Our heart goes out to you in sympathy for your very real pain. Or you could just quit these forums and go join the Realms-L mailing list. ;) I've never participated in the Realms-L list, though I recall reading it now in James Wyatt's blog. I guess I'm not missing anything. I try very hard to keep my comments away from naming anyone specific, since it really is a team effort, everyone gets some of the credit :clap: (and the blame :rant:). I do see how it is unfair to Rich Baker who has to see his name trashed thoroughly up and down the various Realms related internet venues. Hopefully he's okay with it, but I don't think the guy does this sort of thing for about as long as the Realms publication history and doesn't figure out how this all goes. I do think his most recent answers on the Ask the Designers thread have helped to address some concerns, hopefully that helps.
Storm_Silverhand 10-05-07, 03:12 AM	Heya, Or you could just quit these forums and go join the Realms-L mailing list. ;) Which is currently going through pretty much the same thing the Forums here are. ;) Last few topics have been about AGHotR, the changes (mostly people are angry), attacks on and defenses of Rich Baker, and the monitor stepping in when things get too heated... Oh, plus news of James Wyatt's blog.
Mr. Wilson 10-05-07, 03:26 AM	I have a serious question to ask everyone in favor of the reboot. How much change can a setting undergo before the setting is no longer anything like the original, in your eyes? I mean, the timeline jumps forward 100 years, many or most of the high level NPCs are dead or missing, the Gods no longer are acting as they have been presented in the past(lol, Sune "arranging" a marriage), Gods are being killed off and the cosmology changed yet again, the very fabric of the Realms is wiped out (i.e. the Weave) and replaced with something else not told to us yet, and there are hints that many kingdoms have gone the way of the dodo. I'm not quite ready to proclaim the Realms dead and 4.0 Realms a new setting, but it is getting dangerously close, IMHO.
SgtAnjay 10-05-07, 03:55 AM	I've posted versions of this several times, maybe I'll get a response in this thread.... The god of justice kills the god of guardians (odd), over an arranged marraige created by the goddes of love (odd), to the notoriously whimsical and unpredictable goddess of luck (lawful justice marrying chaotic luck? chaotic luck agreeing to a marraige? double odd), all because the goddess of nobles wanting to move disturbs a previously completely unmentioned "cosmic balance" (which is not only odd in itself, but doubly odd because the powerful Tymora for the lesser Siamorphe is far from "balanced"). Despite this craziness, the chaotic goddess of luck goes ahead and moves to this lawful plane, even though the craziness is enough to cause Ilmater, god of suffering and martyrs, and member of the Triad, to leave the House of the Triad. To compound the wierdness, the god of suffering and martyrs moves to Brightwater, the residence of love, happiness, joy, lust, etc. And not only is that odd in itself, but it gives us an end-state of two lawful deities from the House of the Triad, including an actual member of the Triad, moving to Brightwater instead of just one, plus another deity from the House of the Triad dead (Helm), and yet this somehow doesn't upset the same "cosmic balance" they had just introduced us to that caused this entire episode! Now.....what does this add to the Forgotten Realms, exactly? What in there should I be particularly excited about? How should this translate into confindence about the future? That was the Year of Three Streams blooded. The very next year, the Year of Blue Fire, Cyric kills Mystra and this causes unthinkable catastrophe. At least Cyric killing Mystra, with Shar's help, is something Cyric and Shar would do. How they managed to do it with Mystra in Dweomerheart, her own home plane shaped to her whims, which contained and was home to at least three other gods of magic is questionable, but I'm really hoping for a great story involving intricacies of deific plotting and actually accounting for the huge factors involved in such an act. But....killing the goddes of magic which trashes the Weave with a new age and new magic afterward? I'm sure Karsus could tell us why that sounds so familiar. Want to blow up the world for a reboot? Fine, but is a rehash of a previous event all they had to do it with, considering how many world-destroying plots are in play at any given moment by enormously powerful forces in the Realms? Thats the last two years we have solid info on. If those years are filled with things that are disappointing, should that then translate into confidence out of thin air? Then there's the repeated statements to the effect that the complexity of the Realms gets in the way, too many gods/NPCs/history. Fair enough, I know there are people who dont like things I like, and who like things I dont. This was a setting with things I like, and there were other settings with things other people liked. But this was, apparently, unacceptable. So, not only are things I like about the Realms stated as being on the chopping block, but its implied that there's something wrong with the things I like. The complexity I like in the setting is bad, and I'm a grognard, a whiner, and just out-and-out wrong for not wanting the complexity in this setting from going away. This should then translate into confidence out of thin air from me, and those who feel likewise? Something others have pointed out.....okay, calamities have occured. Where's the statements about the bright new age of magical experimentation in the wake of magical catastrophe? That would perk me up. Where's the statements about the new generations rising up in the face of horror? Saying "are your pc's up to the legacies of fallen champions?" instead of just "yeah, we're wiping out these NPCs, you probably wont like it" would probably get people talking about creating rather than the deaths. Where's the statements about Lathander's dawn to complement Shar's darkness? There is a dawn, isn't there? I'm no big fan of hype, but good grief, if they toss out some of that kind of positivity perhaps it'll be as infectious as the current somber mood. That isn't to say I dislike everything I've heard, or that I dont see this is a big opportunity to introduce exciting stuff. But posts about how I'm wrong for liking the Realms as they were, how I'm wrong for being negative despite the negativity being officially put out, and how everything's going to be great because the designers know what I like better than I do, just isn't going to cut it.
Zanan 10-05-07, 04:52 AM	I thought that was a really sweet and heartfelt blog. And I appreciate his candor and enthusiasm. His blog I think shows that the designers really care about the Realms and have a lot of good stuff in store for us. I am hopeful and excited to see what is coming down the pike. Actually, I feel like Rich Baker has also been very candid and forthcoming about impending plans for the Realms. It is indeed a shame he has gotten raked over the coals by some myopic fans who are fearful of change. While I haven't raked anyone anywhere I would still utter a word of caution here. It is not always the myopic people who are fearful of or ... let's call it stunned by the changes. People do not exactly need to follow all the guidelines or the official setting, but if you do, you suddenly face up to e.g. the following: - the whole drow pantheon goes bust (for whatever reason), leaving tons of PC and NPC in a very strange position (and, of course, much of the in-setting results will not be discussed for ages) - Spellplague, your mages may end up feebleminded, those Netheril cities you focus on in your campaigns may very well fall down again ... essentially, quite a bit about 4E FR sounds a like Ragnarök and Armageddon happenig on the same day. You simply have to expect people getting up into arms about this, the venting of emotions somewhere and somehow. Not all are apt enough to do this in a civilzed style, but then again, D&D is not exactly a game designed solely for the grown-ups. It's not that I condone such behaviour, but these chaps are not necessarily myopic or fearful of change. They simply see their long-nurtured plans go out of the window.
GothicDan 10-05-07, 10:20 AM	The very fact that I see some people I'd never expect to agree with, stating similar opinions as I've felt about all of this, makes me feel good. Misery loves company! Now, will someone do my thermodynamics homework with me? :(
18DELTA 10-05-07, 11:49 AM	Gothic Dan I am going to borrow part of your sig for this post. "... Some of it SEEMED unbalanced (it wasn't, but then the published Realms has never reflected the true balancing act between opposed power groups, cults, merchant trading guilds, and militaries and police forces), but then, I've always tried to teach adventurers that there's always someone more powerful than you are, there's always someone to aspire to be as accomplished and powerful as; just because you're the adventurers, don't expect to swagger through life knocking everyone over with your little fingers. :}" - Ed Greenwood WotC is destroying what I just quoted from Gothic Dan. In the ask the Realms designers/authors thread Rich(not attacking, just commenting) said that Mystra and her chosen were to powerful. So what WotC is doing is knocking the Gods and Npc down a notch. The Realms are no longer Eds(I understand that they havent been Ed for awhile) this just seal the deal. Eds Realms are dead its now WotC Realms.:(
GothicDan 10-05-07, 12:45 PM	I agree. I'm actually not all that convinced the Realms will die - the new version sure does appeal to the upcoming target audience more. WotC's a company, and companies need money. And more money. But that doesn't mean I feel comfortable giving them money to promote habits I don't personally like (the same reason I don't pay for parties my fraternity has - there's alcohol at them).
Lord Karsus 10-05-07, 01:03 PM	Will this be like the Eberron forums where you can say that you want Elminster dead or admit that you actually like Drizzt and not be burned at the stake. -Why are you talking about Elminster and Drizzt in the Eberron forums? The designers have explained their purposes (to give an in-game explanation for the mechanics changes for 4th edition, and to give new Realms fans a good jumping on point) so we know they have a purpose and it is a noble one. -Is this the same Grey that argued highly against- quite a while, now, mind you- allowing mechanics influence lore (ie, the Epic Magic system, and Elven High Magic)?
Markustay 10-05-07, 01:14 PM	@ Gray - Do you gamble much? I guess you like playing the longshots. They do pay off big when they come in, I suppose. ;) I think you're just giddy because they are using just about everything you and I discussed about the 'Shadoworld' for this 'Shadowfel'. :P (Not that thats a bad thing, I do like most of these rules changes) @ Miscellany - This is going to come off a wee bit harsh, so my apologies to everyone in advance. You talk about waiting for eggs to hatch - Do you know what usually comes out of really old eggs (think 50 yr old woman here)? Usually Something stupid and unattractive. There...I said it. In the words of Jonny Storm - "Flame on!" :mage: In General - I agree with DW for the most part, except for the thing about including the Spellplague in the GHotR. It ruins an otherwise near-perfect 3e Realms source. Keep the 4e cr@p in the 4e books please. Since most folks don't intend to move the timeline forward and are sticking with 3e, stop trying to force something down our throats. I have no problem with the NEW setting - just stop associating it with FR. The only things we have been gauranteed with 4th edition is everything you see on the cover of GHotR - Drizzt, Elminster, the logo, and lots and lots of empty Real Estate. :bored: If the stories that will be covering the Spellplague Years are going to be so awesome, then we should have been fed them slowly over the course of the next year. Including that stuff in the last paragraph was a bad decision - it's like skipping to the end of the book ruining the ending. You lose whatever good the story may have held. Boiling it down - Also, after reading that blog, I feel even more strongly that I am VERY right about what I've been suspecting. FR didn't need to be totally obliterated to work in the changes - posters here have come up with dozens of alternate scenarios that were pretty hardcore but didn't leave a desolate wasteland where the Realms used to be, and didn't need a century to do it in. Eberron isn't getting the 'century treatment', so obviously it is unneccessary unless there is an ulterior motive in there somewhere. What's different about the two main settings that sets them apart thusly? The novels!!! I've been saying all along the novels have been ruining the game world, and I was right. The biggest complaint from 'grognards' (;) ) around here has been the fact that all of the RSEs and major events are taking place one on top of the other. Read the following CAREFULLY - Similarly, he's not the sole architect of the changes to the Forgotten Realms. Over two years ago, Rich, Bruce Cordell, and Phil Athans from our book department sat down together and hashed out the plan that’s beginning now to bear fruit. At GenCon 2005, the authors who are writing the novels that describe these changes (including Ed Greenwood) came to a top-secret meeting to discuss them. And in the end, it was a plan that was formulated and executed by our whole department, all the way up to Bill Slavicsek, and in consultation with the D&D Brand team.The whole quote is important, but I emphasized that particular part. There was an obvious problem between the game and the novels - the authors simply ran out of room to write in. WE didn't need a century time-jump, the AUTHORS did. They are just using 4e rules as an excuse to make room for their more lucrative side business. They only needed 10, 15 or even 20 years to explain away rules changes, but now they've given RAS and company a hundred year playground to write in. And we can't even complain about authors deviating from 'canon' during this period, because there simply aren't any rules during it. Think about it - 3e ends in 1385 DR, and 4e begins sometime in the future... probably the far future. They can do whatever they like in that century and it won't matter at all IG. I liked it better when the authors were JUST designers, because now there seems to be a definate conflict of interest going on. :(
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 03:08 PM	We do not fear or dislike change - some of us fear or dislike what changes are MADE, however. I agree with this totally. It was a sweet and heartfelt blog. However, the design team can tell us how much they love the Realms until they are blue in the face, and in the end that has nothing to do with how effective they are in directing the setting and retaining it's essence. I'm hearing things from the design team that are just plain ridiculous and easily countered by the FR lore itself--stuff like Mystra's Chosen being implied as "omnipotent forces of good", and the Shadow Weave being necessary to "counter" Mystra's supposed absolute power. When designers trot out canards like this, they deserve whatever (polite) criticism they get.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 03:23 PM	I also disagree with James Wyatt on this line: "There aren’t a ton of high-level NPCs running around, doing the things that PCs should be doing." That sort of mentality is the main reason why the high-level NPCs seem like they're taking the spotlight from the PCs. They never have to overshadow the players if the designers don't say they are, but it seems the designers say so every chance they get. Yes, I've seen this many times myself. The NPCs of the Realms were never meant to take the places of the PCs. For James Wyatt to say that Realms NPCs are "doing the things the PCs should be doing" and therefore somehow stealing the spotlight from them is wrong, no matter how much he might love the setting. And it's not even really a problem, since it's up to the DM to control what goes on in each game!
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 03:29 PM	Again I hope that the designers keep the high level NPCS "in one piece" but shuffle them off to the side so all gamers can enjoy the Realms. I just don't understand how fictional, high level NPCs prevent people from enjoying the Realms. Granted, the novels (especially RSE novels) often tie off interesting plot hooks with NOCs (novel characters), but how is that a problem in a game? Isn't the DM supposed to be in control? Characters that no one likes never have to show up. I can understand why people are upset about you nuking their favorite NPCs. I would have felt the same way when I was a teenager or 20 something. I don't want to argue with you. But are you implying here that being emotionally attached to certain characters is immature? I know you said you were a fanatic at that age, but why does age matter in that case? I do love certain characters, I would like to see their stories not be cut off so abruptly (and arbitrarily), and I'm not ashamed to admit it.
Kieran_Immerdusk 10-05-07, 03:33 PM	Yes, I've seen this many times myself. The NPCs of the Realms were never meant to take the places of the PCs. For James Wyatt to say that Realms NPCs are "doing the things the PCs should be doing" and therefore somehow stealing the spotlight from them is wrong, no matter how much he might love the setting. And it's not even really a problem, since it's up to the DM to control what goes on in each game! Agreed. Bad DMs use the chosen as a crutch, but they should rarely come into play in a normal game. In very high level play (I have played in and DMed FR campaigns that went to Epic level) they can show up more, but not in any way that spoils the action. For me, the chosen and the iconic NPCs of the realms are kind of like the Inn of the Last Home in Dragonlance. If someone blew it up, knowing it's not there makes the world seem like a poorer place, even though I don't necessarily go there every day.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 03:55 PM	And so I say to all you sad-sack sourpusses, "Mock on, mock on, Voltaire, Rousseau: ‘tis all in vain! You throw the sand against the wind, And the wind blows it back again. And every sand becomes a Gem, Reflected in the beam divine; Blown back they blind the mocking Eye, But still in Greenwoods’ paths they shine! :g: I don't think mocking religion and the Bible (which is what the original quote was about) has anything to do with this.;) You see, I'm happy for you if you're excited about the changes (it's not a bad thing to be happily excited), but I don't think everyone who disagrees with you are "sad-sack sourpusses". Since I'm pretty happy with my life right now, I certainly don't consider myself to be one. Surely you can make your point perfectly without resorting to statements like that--it says a lot more about you than the people you are trying to mock.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 04:12 PM	You seem to offend very easily. You are a very sensitive fellow. The world must be a dark and difficult place for you. Dark Wizard seems to be one of the more even-tempered, reasonable people here. This comment was really unnecessary...and says more about you than it does about Dark Wizard. I'm disappointed in you. I'm not trying to start an argument with you (or anyone else here), but I expected a better attitude, especially from a person who is in a pretty good mood about the changes.
Markustay 10-05-07, 04:18 PM	Agreed. Bad DMs use the chosen as a crutch, but they should rarely come into play in a normal game.Truer words are rarely spoken. This is exactly what the designers are now catering to. Rather then asking DMs to hone their skills, they are 'dumbing-down' the game so any idiot can run it. I'm not worried though, for most of us the old Realms aren't going anywhere. ;)
BarothChissthoom 10-05-07, 05:12 PM	This blog entry of James Wyatt shows that either he or the whole group of designers do no really grasp the idea and flair of the Forgotten Realms setting. It is part of the flair of the setting that you have quite a few high-level NPCs which do NOT do the job of the PCs (that they do the job of the PCs is a common misconception). They are the people the readers know and love. Wyatt sums it up quite well: "It's a setting that new players can approach with wonder, enjoying what's there without worrying about what used to be. And it's a setting that you established fans can approach with a renewed sense of wonder, recognizing the Realms that you love so much in its newest incarnation." Do the established fans need a renewal of their sense of wonder? I do not think so. I still approach the realms with wonder. There is no need to change everything. I do not want to trade the long, rich and influencing history of the realms for a new setting that has a few bits in common with the realms. If I want a completely new setting, I will buy a new campaign setting. WotC just changes the setting to attract players who were afraid of the realms because of its long history and are not able to handle detailed worlds. All flavor changes announced so far (in FR and in general) are not necessary, WotC just changes things for no reason.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 06:31 PM	Do the established fans need a renewal of their sense of wonder? I do not think so. I still approach the realms with wonder. Same here. I'e never gotten tired of the Realms. In fact, for all I know about the setting, I'll still learn new things about it all the time, and be humbled about the fact that I've only scratched the surface of all there is to know. None of that requires any changes. The FR design team might well have good intentions, and if people like the new setting, good for them. But I'm not liking what I'm hearing so far, I'm skeptical, and I'm going to state my opinions about the subject. That is what a forum is for, and my opinions don't affect anyone else. Regarding Rich Baker: I have no special love or hate for him as a designer, nor any desire to rake him over the coals. My opinion of him as a designer and author of the Realms has always been either indifferent or unimpressed. I did enjoy his Shadowstone novel (and to be fair, I haven't read his City of Ravens novel yet), but that's about it. My dissatisfaction with his work predates this current controversy. Much the same goes for the other two designers mentioned, Phil Athans and Bruce Cordell. I had no opinion of Chris Perkins until his infamous comment about the Chosen of Mystra.
GothicDan 10-05-07, 06:41 PM	Te amo, Rino. Platonic-like. I love reading your posts. They make me all warm and squishy.
BarothChissthoom 10-05-07, 06:50 PM	Same here. I'e never gotten tired of the Realms. In fact, for all I know about the setting, I'll still learn new things about it all the time, and be humbled about the fact that I've only scratched the surface of all there is to know. None of that requires any changes. The FR design team might well have good intentions, and if people like the new setting, good for them. But I'm not liking what I'm hearing so far, I'm skeptical, and I'm going to state my opinions about the subject. That is what a forum is for, and my opinions don't affect anyone else. Hello fellow candlekeep member :-) It seems, they have purely marketing/money intentions, any other intention would not use such drastic measures. Firstly, they change the setting by killing eliminating/destroying most people/things/places that made the setting what it was. Secondly, they advance the timelime for 100 years which basically devaluates the existing history into nothingness. Thirdly, they change a lot of flavor (i.e. cosmology, elves, fey, evil outsiders, etc.) which again devaluates the current realms material to nothingness. Therefore, they basically swap out the current realms for a new setting that claims to be the realms and has some names in common with the original realms. Thus, they can profit from the name of Forgotten Realms to sell the setting and the new edition. Although, I doubt that this will actually work.
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 07:21 PM	Is this the same Grey that argued highly against- quite a while, now, mind you- allowing mechanics influence lore (ie, the Epic Magic system, and Elven High Magic)?I don't think that was me. I don't have strong feelings about either of those things. And I don't remember any thread like that. But it is hard to tell without some kind of context. There was another "Grey" something or other on the boards awhile back, but my name is spelled "Gray" not "Grey". My personal take is that I am pro-designer and author. The folks at WotC have crafted some of my favorite lore over the last several years. They have shown me such wonders. And D&D has become one of my main hobbies. It is something that bonds me with some of my closest friends who I have gamed with every week for many years. So I have a big soft spot in my heart for WotC and the designers, some of whom I have even come to know online by corresponding with them on the boards. I realize that it can be a difficult task to create mechanics that model a fantasy world and that the mechanics can sometimes conflict with how things work in the novels, but I think the designers have done a pretty good act of walking that tight-wire. It's funny that with 3e, they didn't try to explain some of the changes in-game, and a vocal faction of fans threw a hissy-fit. One that has not subsided much in 7 years. Now the designers have expressed an interest in writing the changes into the storyline, and have been open and forthcoming about their plans. And again a vocal faction of fans (many of them the same ones!) are complaining about the mechanics changing the storyline. I guess the folks at WotC are damned if they do and damned if they don't. But I have always felt their heart has been in the right place. I feel that WotC has taken great care to write lore that is in the spirit of Ed Greenwood's original conception. And for the most part they have delivered like gangbusters. I have been very pleased with all the books I have bought from WotC. Most recently, the Grand History of the Realms, which is an amazing, top notch book, despite what people may feel about a couple of paragraphs on the last page. :)
GothicDan 10-05-07, 07:28 PM	I sure wish I could be as 'good snuggly feeling' as you about everything, Gray. What are you smoking, and can I have some? ;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 08:08 PM	Te amo, Rino. Platonic-like. I love reading your posts. They make me all warm and squishy. Thank you! I like reading your posts too.:) I love you too...as a friend.;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-05-07, 08:16 PM	Hello fellow candlekeep member :-) Hello there.:) It seems, they have purely marketing/money intentions, any other intention would not use such drastic measures. Can't blame them for wanting to make money (as a company, that's going to be their top priority), however, I do find it hard to believe that introducing such drastic changes would increase revenue. Granted, I'm no marketing expert and I don't have access to information that WotC probably has, but at the same time that doesn't mean I have to just take for granted that the proposed changes (which aren't only proposed, but will happen no matter way) are the only way to bring in new Realms fans. Firstly, they change the setting by killing eliminating/destroying most people/things/places that made the setting what it was. I can definitely saw that the changes I have seen so far are demoralizing for me. I liked many of the gods that are being killed off, or at least found them interesting. And WotC's attitude towards the Chosen of Mystra is, um, highly divergent from my own.
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 08:23 PM	I don't think mocking religion and the Bible (which is what the original quote was about) has anything to do with this.;)Well, now, if you re-read the quote, you will see that it is not the author who is mocking religion or the bible but rather defending it. The quote is from William Blake's defense of his faith and the bible (something Blake obviously takes great joy and feels great passion for) against the mockings of a couple of "too cool for school" elitist pundits, who he saw as attacking something that was very precious to him. Something of quality whose value he felt would outshine their petty persiflage in the fullness of time. While I have no opinion about the conflict between Blake and Voltaire, I admire Blake's passion, and his writing. And I thought the poem captured admirably the sentiment I feel for those who would attack something that I feel a great passion for. And paradoxically something that probably does not need me to come to it's defense, as I think the Realms, under the auspices of the good folks at WotC who tread in Greenwood's paths, will shine just as brightly with the passing of time. :)I don't think everyone who disagrees with you are "sad-sack sourpusses". Since I'm pretty happy with my life right now, I certainly don't consider myself to be one.Nor do I think that you are one, and I am saddened that you thought my comment directed at you. I really don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is a sadsack sourpuss. Heck, one can agree with me and still be a sadsack sourpuss. But there truly are some on these boards, and their negativity is really quite shrill and reactionary. I swear, reading their posts is like opening one of those mad letters in Harry Potter that the angry mothers send to their kids. A little epistolary explosion that shrieks and clucks loudly in a public place, casting a pall over the room and forestalling any polite conversation. No, the sadsack sourpusses are those who, like Chicken Little, get hit on the head by an acorn (or read a couple of sentences in the back of a book) and blow it all out of proportion, proclaiming "the sky is falling" or that "WotC is destroying the Realms", talking of boycotts and abandoning the hobby and the setting that they love. And most offensive of all, those who deride and scorn the really very nice, intelligent, and capable authors and designers who have been bringing us great Realmslore for years and hopefully years more to come.
GothicDan 10-05-07, 08:25 PM	They started destroying what I saw was the Realms, years ago. I don't need any MORE books to show the linear fit and extrapolate future data. ;) I think Rino's largely in the same boat. Also: why is elitism viewed with such deviltry on these boards? I don't get it.
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 09:27 PM	They started destroying what I saw was the Realms, years ago. I don't need any MORE books to show the linear fit and extrapolate future data. ;)Case in point. Take Dan here. For years he has lambasted pretty much every new release that WotC has published in 3rd edition. I believe he once bragged pridefully that he hadn't purchased any Realms book that WotC has published since 3rd edition and did not plan to ever again. He has excoriated most of the good designers at WotC, he discourages other forum members from buying their products, and for post after post through the years his tune has not varied. It's not that he hates the changes that they are making for 4th edition, he seems to hate any change they have ever made to the Realms since the Grey Box came out. I count myself one who loves the Realms. I have loved her many moments of glad grace, her pilgrim soul and the sorrows of her changing face. But, while Gothic Dan may be equally passionate, I would not count him a Realms "fan" exactly, a fanatic perhaps, yes. He does not love the Realms, so much as stalks it obsessively with the hatred of a spurned lover. It's that kind of negativity which I feel is threatening to make these boards a toxic place. It is destructive to the community. It discourages new fans from coming here. It causes old fans to leave. It turns people off of the hobby. It discourages designers and authors from "hanging out" here and it makes them feel bad and defensive about the good writing they do. It discourages friendly conversations. It impedes the free flowing of ideas and it makes people afraid or at least tentative of expressing themselves. It decreases the signal to noise ratio of information on these Forums, thereby making these forums of less value to all of us and extinguishing a little spark of wonder in our hearts. While I am aware of the irony that this post itself is pretty negative in tone, (I am not normally prone to such outbursts) and it pains me greatly to single out our mischievous scamp, Dan, who I am fond of, despite his surly demeanor. I think the thought I am expressing needs to be said. Someone needs to say it. There, I said it.
Rauric 10-05-07, 09:29 PM	[QUOTE=Lord Karsus;13996960]-Why are you talking about Elminster and Drizzt in the Eberron forums?QUOTE] Lol. Good call. It must have been a late night when I posted that.
GothicDan 10-05-07, 09:43 PM	My street cred would be tainted if I didn't reply in kind, Gray! Case in point. Take Dan here. For years he has lambasted pretty much every new release that WotC has published in 3rd edition. I believe he once bragged pridefully that he hadn't purchased any Realms book that WotC has published since 3rd edition and did not plan to ever again. I never said that. I HAVE bought a few - including LEoF (after Phialexandros talked me into it, basically), Waterdeep, Shining South, Serpent Kingdoms, Player's Guide to Faerun, FRCS... He has excoriated most of the good designers at WotC, The very fact that you make this an objective statement automatically discredits any attempts you may have to present yourself as an unbiased analyst of the data at hand. I am going to assume, thus, that you mean 'designers who I think are good at WotC.' he discourages other forum members from buying their products, and for post after post through the years his tune has not varied. I sure do like consistency! It's not that he hates the changes that they are making for 4th edition, he seems to hate any change they have ever made to the Realms since the Grey Box came out. I wouldn't even know all the changes. I didn't get into the game until 3E was almost here. I liked the change to the Elven High Mage 'kit.' I count myself one who loves the Realms. I have loved her many moments of glad grace, her pilgrim soul and the sorrows of her changing face. That sounds scarily dogmatic and religious to me. I do not hold loyalty to something that doesn't deserve it. But, while Gothic Dan may be equally passionate, I would not count him a Realms "fan" exactly, a fanatic perhaps, yes. He does not love the Realms, so much as stalks it obsessively with the hatred of a spurned lover. The funny thing is, your above post seems far more fanatical than any of mine ever have, in my opinion. I analyze each product I see, balance the pros and cons (by MY standards, not what's best to make money), and then make a decision. You espouse undying love and loyalty almost regardless of content. That blind fealty is far more fanatical than my analysis. It's that kind of negativity which I feel is threatening to make these boards a toxic place. It is destructive to the community. It discourages new fans from coming here. It causes old fans to leave. It turns people off of the hobby. It discourages designers and authors from "hanging out" here and it makes them feel bad and defensive about the good writing they do. It discourages friendly conversations. It impedes the free flowing of ideas and it makes people afraid or at least tentative of expressing themselves. It decreases the signal to noise ratio of information on these Forums, thereby making these forums of less value to all of us and extinguishing a little spark of wonder in our hearts. There's some truth in that, and maybe some if it has been intentional on my part. I'm not going to proselytize and tell people how they should feel about what I say. I don't have THAT much hubris. I'll say what I feel, as cogently as possible, and others can draw what they want from it. As long as I'm still willing to make insightful and informed statements regarding peoples' questions, I feel I'm doing my 'duty' on these boards. You do the exact same thing - only you spin your more positive opinion on it. As Nietzsche put it, there is no 'right' way. While I am aware of the irony that this post itself is pretty negative in tone, (I am not normally prone to such outbursts) and it pains me greatly to single out our mischievous scamp, Dan, who I am fond of, despite his surly demeanor. I think the thought I am expressing needs to be said. Someone needs to say it. There, I said it. I applaud you for having the candor to tell me as much. Oddly enough, I think we'd have amazing games together, despite our differences - but those differences go way beyond game design methodology. They're philosophies about life, evolution, society, psychology, and so on. So, really, this isn't the proper forum to discuss which of us is "living the good life" - and without doing that, our methods of posting on these forums are meaningless and out of context. The very fact that I approve, wholeheartedly, of elitism, while many others (yourself included) do not, sort of proves my point. We're basically trying to talk on different frequencies.
Rauric 10-05-07, 09:44 PM	I just don't understand how fictional, high level NPCs prevent people from enjoying the Realms. Granted, the novels (especially RSE novels) often tie off interesting plot hooks with NOCs (novel characters), but how is that a problem in a game? Isn't the DM supposed to be in control? Characters that no one likes never have to show up. I don't want to argue with you. But are you implying here that being emotionally attached to certain characters is immature? I know you said you were a fanatic at that age, but why does age matter in that case? I do love certain characters, I would like to see their stories not be cut off so abruptly (and arbitrarily), and I'm not ashamed to admit it. When I talk to people about what they dislike about the Realms they all say the same thing. They all say "I hate that every innkeeper is a high level, retired adventurer." I would tell them this really isn't so then they mention a bunch of 2E books that say it is so. Even if they are wrong there is a feeling that all of the Realms are filled with high level NPCs. This was never the case in "My" realms but that is the general feeling for soem folks. I would usually scale the NPCs around the player most times. With the other NPC attachement issue, I just remember I was really into the NPCs when I was a teenager and a 20 something. Now I realize the plays matter more. The NPCs matter less to me now than when I was a real fanboy. I love the game and do like most of the NPCs, but if some of them were to disappear I would not get too bent out of shape over it. I would either use them anyway or just deal with it. I worry about real life stuff and the only drama in my life comes from my work and if my wife and boys are healthy. That is where I am now with my life. Things change and so do attitudes. I am sure my wife is glad I am not the same person I was in my 20s. Heh, that was cool then but all good things...
Mr_Miscellany 10-05-07, 09:51 PM	SPOILERS for the novel Blackstaff. Ye have been warned. It's not necessarily what the designers say the Chosen are, as it is what the public (and not the wee cross-section of over-informed, but sadly lacking in logical conclusions types to be found here) perceives the Chosen to be. The 'fault', such as it exists, rests squarely on TSR (and a bit on WotC) for demanding novel products that featured the Chosen post-ToT through the early part of this decade. I daresay Phil Athans is the Last Great Boogeyman in that regard. (Makes you wonder what the heck went on inside WotC’s walls to get the games side to convince the book department to separate itself from sure-money draws like the Chosen, eh?) However I believe WotC is beating a dead horse, inasmuch as they sought with the 3E FRCS and the novel line to bring the Chosen down a notch and (IMO) succeeded. We’ve seen Elminster driven to near death and insanity and Khelben Blackstaff is dead, while in the FRCS at the very beginning Elminster goes on at some length about all the evil in the Realms and finishes by saying quite clearly that the Realms, “...needs its heroes.” Normally I’d trust WotC to have properly gauged its fan base with regard to this perception about Mystra nd her Chosen, but I actually don’t this time around. In fact, I’d wager they’re getting their information from the message boards, which if true is **really** unfortunate as these forums are just no substitute for a proper sampling of the (real) fan base. The end result is this: WotC is taking one of Ed’s rules for the Realms (Mystra, as Goddess of Magic, is THE most powerful of all the gods) and deleting it. Now I can certainly work with this. I can run a campaign with this rule removed...certainly a helluva game, in fact. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it, because I don’t. ::::: Dan, the worse kind of innocence is fake innocence. Tsk-tsk. (Strap on your body armor, please.) Elitists are self-important jerks who presume to know far more about a subject then they actually do, have little or no respect or patience with those who don’t hold or adhere to the elitist’s extreme views and possess little or no capacity to see outside of the haughty little castles they’ve erected for themselves. Elitists are the kind of people that hold the Realms back by holding Realms message board forums hostage with their ever-lurking over everyone else’s shoulder sort of posting habits. Of course without elitists I’d have nobody to turn their tactics against and take to task. So I guess they serve some useful purpose (that being to keep me happily occupied). :p
GothicDan 10-05-07, 09:57 PM	Dan, the worse kind of innocence is fake innocence. Tsk-tsk. (Strap on your body armor, please.) Ah, my arch-nemesis, Mr. Miscellany! Elitists are self-important jerks who presume to know far more about a subject then they actually do, have little or no respect or patience with those who don’t hold or adhere to the elitist’s extreme views and possess little or no capacity to see outside of the haughty little castles they’ve erected for themselves. I'm pretty sure if you look that word up, it's not what you'll get. :) Elitists are the kind of people that hold the Realms back by holding Realms message board forums hostage with their ever-lurking over everyone else’s shoulder sort of posting habits. Rather reminds me of Ubbergeek. Of course without elitists I’d have nobody to turn their tactics against and take to task. So I guess they serve some useful purpose (that being to keep me happily occupied). :p Have at it then! (I don't need body armor. I have Prismatic Spheres.)
Rauric 10-05-07, 10:04 PM	I agree with Gray. I posted something last month about being careful what you say around FR forum people because some were elitist or some such thing. It was a feeling I got years back when I would post an idea that wa non-canoical and got blasted for it. Any I thin Green Elven Vampire then responded with some nasty negative barb at me. I was just like "Well there ya go, this guy just proves my point." There are a ot of people on these boards that love the Realms which is great, but you should let other people voice their opinions as well. Not saying every old school FR forum person is elitist or nasty or a drama lord/lady. It just has always seemed to me enough of them were to just make me skip the forums most times. I get nicer responses to crazy idea from Eberron boards, hell even the CO people are pretty nice even when they tell you your character build is crap. I hate gamer elitism. It is crazy. Like when a WOW player calls a D&D player a loser, or when a D&D player calls a WOW player fat and pimply. Do these people realize what they are saying or even bother looking into a mirror. Gamer on gamer elitism is the biggest crock of ;) and it should really stop. We are all kind of geeky with our like of all these games folks. Down with elitism. Your really no better than that person playing Halo3 right now. Rant off
Mr_Miscellany 10-05-07, 10:04 PM	It's that kind of negativity which I feel is threatening to make these boards a toxic place. It is destructive to the community. It discourages new fans from coming here. It causes old fans to leave. It turns people off of the hobby. It discourages designers and authors from "hanging out" here and it makes them feel bad and defensive about the good writing they do. It discourages friendly conversations. It impedes the free flowing of ideas and it makes people afraid or at least tentative of expressing themselves. It decreases the signal to noise ratio of information on these Forums, thereby making these forums of less value to all of us and extinguishing a little spark of wonder in our hearts. QFT I think Gray just hit the nail on the head so hard and so fast that the nail shot through the earth and even now is floating in the ocean just off the coast of India. It's too bad WotC didn't have the budget or the time to train its moderators to weed-out people that kill the forums, when these forums were first opened up. I hope that with the advent of 4E WotC will finally realize that they need to change how this place is set up and (with any luck) make it a more Realms Dungeon Master-friendly place to be. :whatsthis
GothicDan 10-05-07, 10:06 PM	I hate gamer elitism. It is crazy. Like when a WOW player calls a D&D player a loser, or when a D&D player calls a WOW player fat and pimply. Do these people realize what they are saying or even bother looking into a mirror. Gamer on gamer elitism is the biggest crock of and it should really stop. We are all kind of geeky with our like of all these games folks. Down with elitism. Your really no better than that person playing Halo3 right now. Hypocrisy is not the same as elitism. :)
Mr_Miscellany 10-05-07, 10:08 PM	(I don't need body armor. I have Prismatic Spheres.) But how do you take them out of your pants to defend yourself with? No underwear and loose fitting shorts? ::::::::::: ...sorry, I just could not resist. Mr_I'm Dan's Big Bear*_Miscellany *...not a bad magazine, if you like to be totally shocked by big, hairy, they-bat-for-the-other-team men. ;)
GothicDan 10-05-07, 10:10 PM	I would reply to that, but it would only go even MORE off topic. ;) Crap. I have a rugby game to go to tomorrow. ... That wasn't off topic.
Old Sage 10-05-07, 10:27 PM	But, while Gothic Dan may be equally passionate, I would not count him a Realms "fan" exactly, a fanatic perhaps, yes. He does not love the Realms, so much as stalks it obsessively with the hatred of a spurned lover.A curious statement. Can I ask, Gray, how you would define a "Realms fan?"
Asgetrion 10-05-07, 10:31 PM	After hearing Hallaster got killed I realized that they were going to try and limit uber NPCS in the new Realms. Here is the reason. Every person I ask about the Realms always throws in a nasty comment about how every barkeep or inkeep is a retired 15 to 20th level adventurer. This is a throwback to 2E times I think but it must have really left an impression on gamers, and not a good one. I actually commented on this "problem" in Candlekeep, and I'll repost my (slightly edited) comments here: James Wyatt also noted in his latest blog entry how FR has too many "high-level NPCs that are doing the job the PCs should be doing". It seems that they indeed seem to see this as a genuine problem (which I don't), although I just cannot understand *why*, because they *themselves* created this "problem" . Let's take a look at this issue from a high-level player character's viewpoint: would you rather go chasing after some 2nd level bandits or a small goblin tribe (i.e. no XP and very little material rewards) if there's a dragon's hoard to plunder? Or would you stop a Zhent invasion (which would cost perhaps some hundreds of lives) if it prevents you from stopping Szass Tam or Manshoon from gaining a spell or artifact of apocalyptic power levels? I think the answers are quite clear to any player -- why waste time to go after a low-level threat if you stand to gain almost nothing from it? This same "simplified" logic may be applied to high-level NPCs -- indeed, why would they do it? After all, there are so many low-to-mid level adventurers who can handle the job perfectly well. So, whenever you think "This town has a 20th level archmage, so I cannot run this 5th level module here, because he could handle that adventure without needing the PCs." try to think of them as PCs. Would your 20th level archmage *Player Character* bother to get involved in an adventure that rewards him with no XP and practically very little treasure? Yes, players don't want to waste valuable *time* on such trivial matters but then again, I tend to think that 20th level NPCs (or 15th level retired barkeeps) do not want to either. Also consider that most of the "scheming" and "power play" (by NPCs) takes place "behind the curtains" anyway, and in time your PCs actually grow to have that very same influence and power, but they do it "in the spotlight" (as the main characters). Removing powerful NPCs means that DMs lose important "movers and shakers" that may guide the campaign and your PCs (i.e. act as a "mentor" and provide potential adventure hooks for them). I never saw the existence of powerful NPCs being "deprotagonizing" for the PCs, but rather as potential story elements.
MerrikCale 10-05-07, 10:31 PM	The end result is this: WotC is taking one of Ed’s rules for the Realms (Mystra, as Goddess of Magic, is THE most powerful of all the gods) and deleting it. Now I can certainly work with this. I can run a campaign with this rule removed...certainly a helluva game, in fact. But what they are doing is so much more. Just from GHoTR they are refacing the Realms, destroying certain areas, bringing Netheril back, etc etc. But whats worse is if the first few pages of the Orc King are true they are ruining everyone's campaign.
Rauric 10-05-07, 10:47 PM	I actually commented on this "problem" in Candlekeep, and I'll repost my (slightly edited) comments here: James Wyatt also noted in his latest blog entry how FR has too many "high-level NPCs that are doing the job the PCs should be doing". It seems that they indeed seem to see this as a genuine problem (which I don't), although I just cannot understand *why*, because they *themselves* created this "problem" . Let's take a look at this issue from a high-level player character's viewpoint: would you rather go chasing after some 2nd level bandits or a small goblin tribe (i.e. no XP and very little material rewards) if there's a dragon's hoard to plunder? Or would you stop a Zhent invasion (which would cost perhaps some hundreds of lives) if it prevents you from stopping Szass Tam or Manshoon from gaining a spell or artifact of apocalyptic power levels? I think the answers are quite clear to any player -- why waste time to go after a low-level threat if you stand to gain almost nothing from it? This same "simplified" logic may be applied to high-level NPCs -- indeed, why would they do it? After all, there are so many low-to-mid level adventurers who can handle the job perfectly well. So, whenever you think "This town has a 20th level archmage, so I cannot run this 5th level module here, because he could handle that adventure without needing the PCs." try to think of them as PCs. Would your 20th level archmage *Player Character* bother to get involved in an adventure that rewards him with no XP and practically very little treasure? Yes, players don't want to waste valuable *time* on such trivial matters but then again, I tend to think that 20th level NPCs (or 15th level retired barkeeps) do not want to either. Also consider that most of the "scheming" and "power play" (by NPCs) takes place "behind the curtains" anyway, and in time your PCs actually grow to have that very same influence and power, but they do it "in the spotlight" (as the main characters). Removing powerful NPCs means that DMs lose important "movers and shakers" that may guide the campaign and your PCs (i.e. act as a "mentor" and provide potential adventure hooks for them). I never saw the existence of powerful NPCs being "deprotagonizing" for the PCs, but rather as potential story elements. I think the 20th lvl fighter/innkeeper arguement is bunk. That is just the complaint I get from gamers I talk to about FR. It is all up to the DM. Dan, sure the comments I made are about hypocrisy, but the people who think them are at times thinking themselves superior than other gamers. It's silly. Maybe I should call them and certain people on the boards gaming snobs instead, who knows? Anyway gamers acting this way are pretty funny. They should try the game they are bashing maybe.
GothicDan 10-05-07, 10:51 PM	Dan, sure the comments I made are about hypocrisy, but the people who think them are at times thinking themselves superior than other gamers. It's silly. Maybe I should call them and certain people on the boards gaming snobs instead, who knows? Anyway gamers acting this way are pretty funny. They should try the game they are bashing maybe. Well, the thing is, you are only isolating the hypocritical versions of elitists - not everyone is like that. I use elitism as a way to push the boundaries of who I am, my ambitions, my abilities - to create a cycle of never-ending improvement. I suppose it's the German in me. ;) I've tried WoW. Several times, actually. I hated it. :) Of course, the only campaign setting I've ever disliked was Birthrite. I haven't played in Mystara, but from what Markus tells me, I'd love it. So I like to pretend I'm not one of the hypocritical elitists/snobs...
Old Sage 10-05-07, 11:09 PM	Of course, the only campaign setting I've ever disliked was Birthrite.Birthright. ;) So what didn't you like about it, GD?
GothicDan 10-05-07, 11:12 PM	I spell how I want! Honestly, it was so long ago, I barely remember. I was like... 12. And I bought Dragon Mountain instead - in the same day. There were too few deific figures - I know I didn't like that. Not enough higher level ones. The history seemed a little lacking. There was not a lot of UNIQUE magic to the place, either, which is one of the major reasons I was drawn to the Realms and Dragonlance. I did like the vast number of kingdoms and the like, though.
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 11:18 PM	Can I ask, Gray, how you would define a "Realms fan?"Sure! According to Dictionary.com, a fan is: "an enthusiastic devotee, follower, or admirer of a sport, pastime, celebrity, etc. —Synonyms supporter, enthusiast, partisan, booster, addict." To me, a Realms fan enjoys the Realms and takes great pleasure from running games in the setting or reading the sourcebooks and/or novels. A Realms fan looks forward to the next game, or novel, or sourcebook. I would think some level of devotion, enthusiasm, and admiration is also required. I also think of myself as a Realms supporter, enthusiast--definitely a booster--and I may also fit into the addict and partisan categories. ;) Conversely, I think one who is pained by the Realms, does not enjoy it, does not look forward to the next novel, game or sourcebook, someone who takes no pleasure in them or finds a great deal of fault, is constantly disappointed by them, or who lacks enthusiasm or admiration for the Realms, would not qualify as a fan. Someone who is not supportive of the Realms or who derides the setting or its works is not a Realms supporter. One who does not promote the Realms or actively discourages people from it would not count as a Realms booster. And people who threaten to quit (well, succeed in quiting, anyway) would not count as Realms addicts. An addict doesn't quit. ;)
GothicDan 10-05-07, 11:20 PM	What was that you were saying about a 'fanatic,' Gray? Because, honestly? People with your mindset - about ANYTHING - creep me out a little. Just a little.
Gray Richardson 10-05-07, 11:47 PM	I likewise find your mindset, and the intense negativity and vitriol espoused by some of the people on these boards to be creepy and distasteful. I think it is cute that you are attempting to paint me as "extreme" and trying to marginalize what I hope I have presented as a well reasoned position in support of a setting I love and the designers who craft it. Did you see the movie "Thank You For Smoking"? It is a nice tutorial in selling evil. If I recall, one of the tactics was to make the argument about your opponent rather than the message. I see you have learned that lesson well. :schemes:
Old Sage 10-06-07, 03:42 AM	To me, a Realms fan enjoys the Realms and takes great pleasure from running games in the setting or reading the sourcebooks and/or novels. A Realms fan looks forward to the next game, or novel, or sourcebook. I would think some level of devotion, enthusiasm, and admiration is also required. I also think of myself as a Realms supporter, enthusiast--definitely a booster--and I may also fit into the addict and partisan categories. ;)Curious. Gray, I ask you to consider the following hypothetical individual:- This particular individual has followed the Realms since the publication of the Ol' Grey Box. He or she has maintained a significantly happy and healthy mindset with regard to ALL the Realms products published for both 1e and 2e -- even looking forward to each and every sourcebook, novel, article, etc. released. The Realms quickly became the primary focus for this individual's hobby time. With the coming of 3e, this individual, again without even having to choose to maintain the same level of devotion to the Realms as he or she had displayed in the past [it had simply become an instinctual desire], accepted most aspects with a certain degree of intense interest. However, at the same time, this individual also began slowly growing unaccustomed to several of the changed core elements of the Realms setting. This individual began to feel left out, especially when it came to realising that knowing particular things about the Realms, as it had always been, weren't as certain anymore. What was once known, had changed, and now needed to be re- learnt. And suddenly, this individual began to question certain aspects of the changed setting. He or she even began to experience particular doubts about what could potentially be revealed with the publication of certain Realmslore in 3e, fearful that previously unexplained changes would become a design trend in future source material. This individual now started expressing frustration, coupled with a weary sense, about apparently ill-conceived changes to the Realmslore. This individual soon felt his or her anticipation for future select Realms products dwindle, as more and more of the aspects he or she cherished from previous Realmslore were altered -- often without justified explanation, or simply because consistent lore was a secondary concern. Others aspects, left largely undeveloped from earlier editions, continued to be ignored, while tiresome, and sometimes unjustified, changes were further expanded upon. Now, this individual, who has recently learned of the few "official" comments made available, which includes published Realmslore, is experiencing concerns which relate solely to the further extensive changes being made to core elements of the Realms in 4e. This individual finds even more reason to grow unaccustomed to the Realms. Despite all that, this individual still maintains the same deep and elaborate devotion to the Realms, as it was, since the publication of the Ol' Grey Box. How would you define this particular individual?
GothicDan 10-06-07, 09:34 AM	I think it is cute that you are attempting to paint me as "extreme" and trying to marginalize what I hope I have presented as a well reasoned position in support of a setting I love and the designers who craft it. Did you see the movie "Thank You For Smoking"? It is a nice tutorial in selling evil. If I recall, one of the tactics was to make the argument about your opponent rather than the message. I see you have learned that lesson well. You started it. ;) And no, I haven't seen it. I tend to avoid silly extremist propaganda.
Gray Richardson 10-06-07, 11:25 AM	You started it. ;)Actually, no, you started it. Please read your post, number 7. That is where you began by attacking me and calling me names.
Gray Richardson 10-06-07, 11:31 AM	How would you define this particular individual?I would say that person is in a dysfunctional relationship with his hobby. I would tell this person to get over himself. Either adapt to the changes or find himself a new hobby. I think he should learn to love the Realms for what it is rather than what it isn't, but if he can't, then certainly there are other hobbies that might be more rewarding for him. As Shakespeare said, sometimes the fault is not in our stars but in ourselves.
GothicDan 10-06-07, 12:09 PM	Actually, no, you started it. Please read your post, number 7. That is where you began by attacking me and calling me names. Actually, I said I WOULD call Gray a ninny. I never actually DID. And the rest wasn't supposed to be insulting. You could interpret it as that, but when someone attacks my communication skills, methods of discussion, etc., I am not so much insulted, as much as I'm challenged to open a better discourse with people. Anyway, it's really painfully obvious that you're living in entirely different worlds than the rest of us. I hope you have fun with 4E. Sage and I will have fun with our dysfunctional hobbies. ;) I think the key word in Shakespeare's quote is SOMETIMES.
Faraer 10-06-07, 01:16 PM	Good grief. None of us is any less a fan for liking different aspects of the Realms, defining it in different ways, or being a fan also of the current in-house designers or not, or of mainly Ed or not so much, or for being flexible or exacting, and we needn't abandon the Realms if we don't like all of what's published under its banner in the past or future, and, stressful as this time may be, we all look pretty ugly if we start insulting or psychonanalysing or whatever each other hypothetically or otherwise and telling each other what we ought to do.
Alediran 10-06-07, 02:34 PM	How would you define this particular individual? Although this thread was for Gray I'll say that this individual is the true fan of the realms. And like it has been said many times by many true fans of the realms "...it's not change the thing we don't like, but how the changes are made. They are destroying the most fundamental aspects of the setting just for the sake of attracting new blod at the expenses of the fanbase" Gray, how it can be that even board posters who almost always disagree with some aspects of the realms are now united against the changes that we know will happen. We know that the high lvl npcs, good Mystra and the aspects that FR haters use to bash the realms aren't wrong. It's the things made to counter those "mistakes" what have been destroying the realms (like the SW, that not even Richard Baker thinks now was a good idea for the realms). What WotC is doing is akin to a couple that begins a relationship because of mutual love for each other. But then one member of the couple begins to be hated by somebody else, and that member tries to change to not be hated by that person. At the end, the only thing that person acomplishes is not only to be still hated, but his mate now doesn't like what that person became, and abandons that person too. This results in a person who is left by both sides, the one that loved him/her and the one that hated him/her. The realms should not try to change to begin to like the FR bashers (they still hate it no matter what is done, 20 years of story aren't erased by one new edition) because the changes needed are going to be hated by those who loved the things that where changed. For example I wouldn't mind that the changes in magic where handled like this: Mystra finally achieves to absorb the SW, taking it from Shar. But the "thing" with the SW is that is slowly changing Mystra, not in mindset, but in her magical link with the Weave. This makes magic to begin functioning erraticaly for a time, until one Wizard learns what he needs to do now to make magic work correctly and, being a follower of Mystra, starts teaching this technique to other spellcasters. Doesn't that sounds more like the realms? And it corrects one big mistake being made during 3ed and justifies the changes in magic without destoying anything, but actually constructing something new from what already existed in printed lore.
Asgetrion 10-06-07, 02:37 PM	I think the 20th lvl fighter/innkeeper arguement is bunk. That is just the complaint I get from gamers I talk to about FR. It is all up to the DM. Agreed! :) You know, I wasn't trying to hint that you'd personally have any problems with this issue -- I just noticed that you talked about such people in your post and replied to it, because I had already discussed it on Candlekeep and I thought to repost my comments here. :)
SgtAnjay 10-06-07, 02:55 PM	There is nothing wrong with liking the Realms and enjoying them for years and years, and yet not mindlessly liking everything they throw at me associated with the Realms. To use a little crude metaphore......just because they can put the FR logo on a turd, doesn't make it gold, nor does it oblige me to like it. And inevitably, even the best designers and creators will put out turds. Furthermore, lets speak a little of paradox. I love the large pantheon, I love the epic NPCs, I love the gobs and gobs of lore. I love these things and they are found in the Realms. Others think large pantheons are confusing, cant handle the NPCs, and dont appreciate what they consider too much "required reading" to get into the world. By definition, and doubly so by your definition, these people do not like the Realms. Now this comes along, and they want to shrink the pantheon, wipe out NPCs, and reset the setting to a tabula rasa. These change are calculated to accomodate the very people that by your definition dont like the Realms while removing things that fans of the Realms did like. And yet if you dont like the changes then you're not a fan of the Realms? You, my friend, are peddling in paradox. There may be nothing wrong in wanting these changes, but likewise there's a solid case to not like these changes if you've always been a fan of the Realms. And while there are definately extremists feeding off the negativity, it wasn't really those fans who created it; it was all those who didn't like the Realms and insisted that the Realms change to accomodate them, and damn all those who like what the Realms are.
Gray Richardson 10-06-07, 06:42 PM	Although this thread was for Gray I'll say that this individual is the true fan of the realms.Dial that back a bit. I do not purport to be the judge of who is a fan of the Realms and who isn't. I don't believe I have ever said I am some sort of paragon of Realms fandom, I certainly don't think I am the best or biggest fan of the Realms. I am not better than anyone. I just count myself as a fan. What can I say? I love the Realms! Sage just asked me to define what I thought a fan was. I replied that I think a fan is someone who enjoys the Realms, as opposed to finding pain and unhappiness in it. Then Sage went on to describe a "hypothetical" person (who I am sure was not the Sage himself or anyone else on the boards) who once loved the Realms but no longer takes great pleasure in it, and asked me how I would characterize this "hypothetical" person. And I characterized that as being in a dysfunctional relationship with his hobby. Other appropriate characterizations might be an "ex-fan" or "former fan". If the hypothetical example were instead a guy and his girlfriend, I would advise him that they had grown apart and maybe it was time to break up, move on and find a more rewarding relationship rather than holding on to something, that had long since slipped away, out of a sense of nostalgia or habit. Your definition of this person is a "True fan"? I don't see it.:rolleye2: They are destroying the most fundamental aspects of the setting just for the sake of attracting new blod at the expenses of the fanbase"Sweet lord! If I read one more person say "They are destroying the Realms!"... well, I don't know what I will do, probably call them on the floor for repeating such hackneyed balderdash. Look, they are actually trying to preserve the Realms. Give them the benefit of the doubt. Give it a chance. You don't have to, of course, but when the books come out, you may just realize they aren't half bad. You might like it. You might come to think the Realms were in safe hands all along.Gray, how it can be that even board posters who almost always disagree with some aspects of the realms are now united against the changes that we know will happen.Let me get this straight: you are asking me how a group of people who always disagree with some aspect of the Realms can be united in in their disagreement with impending changes? I guess I agree with you there.The realms should not try to change to begin to like the FR bashers (they still hate it no matter what is done, 20 years of story aren't erased by one new edition)I wholeheartedly agree with you in that sentiment. I also believe it should not change back just to please people who are not happy with the changes.the changes needed are going to be hated by those who loved the things that where changed.Possibly. Things change. Sometimes people come to appreciate the changes. I think a worse crime would be to not allow the Realms to change. Still waters become stagnant. And a Realms constrained from changing may also run the risk of a dwindling fanbase and an economic death from lack of sales.For example I wouldn't mind that the changes in magic where handled like this: Mystra finally achieves to absorb the SW, taking it from Shar. But the "thing" with the SW is that is slowly changing Mystra, not in mindset, but in her magical link with the Weave. This makes magic to begin functioning erraticaly for a time, until one Wizard learns what he needs to do now to make magic work correctly and, being a follower of Mystra, starts teaching this technique to other spellcasters. Doesn't that sounds more like the realms?It sounds like a wonderful solution for your home game. Or anyone else that wants to implement it. Rich Baker has already articulated his reasons for that change in another thread. His reasons are sound, even if you do not agree with his choices. But no one has to incorporate WotC's solution into their own Realms if they don't want to. Doubtless priests of Mystra may continue to worship her and hold that she is not dead, regardless of the official answer or not. So there will be clergy of Mystra in the Realms for years to come, and mortals may not know one way or the other of her true fate.
Dimensional_Drifter 10-06-07, 06:59 PM	Question: The Realms changing, or the Realms ending due to lack of sales... What would be worse?
Faraer 10-06-07, 07:14 PM	If the hypothetical example were instead a guy and his girlfriend, I would advise him that they had grown apart and maybe it was time to break up, move on and find a more rewarding relationship rather than holding on to something, that had long since slipped away, out of a sense of nostalgia or habit.Nostalgia and habit isn't the scenario Sage gave. Your analogy holds only if you identify the Realms-as-imaginary-world with the Realms-as-published, whereas it's exactly the breach between the two that causes distress.Question: The Realms changing, or the Realms ending due to lack of sales... What would be worse?You're doing the same thing.
Gray Richardson 10-06-07, 07:24 PM	There is nothing wrong with liking the Realms and enjoying them for years and years, and yet not mindlessly liking everything they throw at me associated with the Realms.I agree.I love the large pantheonMe too!I love the epic NPCsMe too!I love the gobs and gobs of lore.Me too!Others think large pantheons are confusing, cant handle the NPCs, and dont appreciate what they consider too much "required reading" to get into the world. By definition, and doubly so by your definition, these people do not like the Realms.By my definition they would not be Realms fans. I can't really say whether they like the Realms or not.Now this comes along, and they want to shrink the pantheon, wipe out NPCs, and reset the setting to a tabula rasa.I don't accept your premise, but for the sake of argument I will agree that they have named about 9 gods or so that they intend to kill off, have mentioned a few NPC's that won't be around, although I never got from anywhere that they are going to reset the setting to a Tabula Rasa. From what I gather they intend to preserve continuity aside from the specified changes. Everything that was in the Realms before will still be in the 4e Realms--except for the changes of course.These change are calculated to accomodate the very people that by your definition dont like the Realms while removing things that fans of the Realms did like.I don't accept that premise either. The primary purpose of the changes is to give an in-game explanation for the rules changes necessitated by the implementation of 4e. A secondary goal for them is to expand the fanbase by bringing in new fans, so some additional adjustments in their estimation seem warranted, over and above the changes necessary to bring it in line with the mechanics of 4e. I don't for a moment believe that they are trying to trade out old fans for new fans. Just trying to bring new fans into the fold. And yet if you dont like the changes then you're not a fan of the Realms?I never said that. I said if you take no pleasure from the Realms, or if the Realms pains you greatly, or if you quit the Realms, then you are not a Realms fan. There are many posters threatening to quit the Realms over these changes, and I say to them: you are not a Realms fan. There are those posters who profess that every new book causes them such agony, they complain long and loudly that the Realms designers are causing them such pain with their books. To those people I say:you are not a Realms fan. Clearly, people can dislike a few changes and still be a Realms fan. You can still enjoy the Realms even if a few things cause you pain. I would think there has got to be a line somewhere where if the pain exceeds the joy at somepoint you would drop into the ex-fan category, but that is certainly not for me to judge.There may be nothing wrong in wanting these changes, but likewise there's a solid case to not like these changes if you've always been a fan of the Realms.Agreed, make your case. Post away. Just don't act all shocked if someone also feels free to post an opposing viewpoint.And while there are definately extremists feeding off the negativityagreed!it wasn't really those fans who created it; it was all those who didn't like the Realms and insisted that the Realms change to accomodate them, and damn all those who like what the Realms are.I don't know anyone who ever said or posted anything like what you have just attributed. Do you mind me asking who is it exactly that said that? Can you link to a post? I mean, I could probably link to a few hundred posts where posters have bashed the designers or been generally negative about the Realms and various products. But I am totally unaware of any post where someone "insisted that the Realms change to accomodate them, and damn all those who like what the Realms are." If you could point me to such a post I would be grateful.
johnkretzer 10-06-07, 07:28 PM	I would say that person is in a dysfunctional relationship with his hobby. I would tell this person to get over himself. Either adapt to the changes or find himself a new hobby. I think he should learn to love the Realms for what it is rather than what it isn't, but if he can't, then certainly there are other hobbies that might be more rewarding for him. It is funny about a month ago( or when ever they revealed the crap in GHotR) this could have been said to those fans of the FR who disliked Mystra, The 7 Sisters, etc. Yet for some reason it only apllies now....sigh. I find your arguements empty for just accepting the changes...and you defination of a fan is also just as empty. You get upset when those of us(though I try really hard not to) dismiss those people who like the way things are going as not being 'true' fans. Yet in the same breath you call us whiners and not 'true' fans. Can we say hypocrite? Personaly I am a fan of the Forgotten Realms always has been and always will be. Though as I said I don't mind changes, all I ask is that they don't go killing off my campaign which is 100% more important to me then the 'stories' they want to tell. As it should be any gamer. Also the fact is they could have made the changes the felt were neccessary without destroying aspects of the world people loved...unfortunaly I think the root of the problem is that their changes in 4th edition to D&D lore means they have to changes the Realms to fit their ideals. Instead of fitting D&D to the FR. I also think that the root of all the problems they precieved is tied directly to novels being canon...which they are not stopping so in maybe 5 years they will have to another reboot to fix the same problems. Also it is funny most of the changes seem to be setup for stories they want to tell...what about the stories we or want to tell? That is why I think they have a major ego problem. I mean sure I hate Cyric as a character but I can recognize he has a fan base and wouldn't kill him off in the base setting...but shouldn't fans of Mystra, the 7 Sisters, Eilistraee, Helm, Tymora, Tyr, etc fans get some consideration? I mean the great thing about the Realms( and RPG in general) is that they atre soo many stories to tell that it can appeal to soo many people. And lastly personaly I consider Gothicdan, Gray Richardson, and many people who post on this board in general to be true fans of the Realm. Just because we disagree with the changes and propably will just go play the FR as we want doesn't mean we aren't fas. Or that we can disagree with other aspects of the FR. For instance I think at times Gothicdan is some time too much of a purist...but to degrade is opinion as 'elitist' or to call him a 'Realm's nazi' is to close your mind. Personaly though I never had the problems that the designers seem to have and some fans do doesn't mean I don't care about them...but I would perfer a more inclusive solution the destroying things that other people love about the Realms.
SgtAnjay 10-06-07, 07:30 PM	Question: The Realms changing, or the Realms ending due to lack of sales... What would be worse? Now who's being dramatic and reactionary? Care to back up that question with any kind of evidence showing that if the Realms aren't blown up they'll die? Change can be good, and the Realms have always changed. But there is such a thing as too much change, and here's the key part: there's a line between change and destruction. They can be intertwined, but in order to change you dont always have to destroy. So far, all they're showing is how things are being destroyed. These deities are dying. This magical construct is going away. These planes are being destroyed. These NPCs are dying. Maybe so many fans wouldn't be so gloom and doom if we weren't hearing about so much doom and gloom? Even worse, they're instituting all these changes with a regurgitation of Karsus's Folly (goddess of magic gets killed, weave goes down, world goes kablooey, magic gets changed). The end changes of the new Realms may be a good place to adventure in, but I'm still gonna call them out on that bit of lameness.
Mr_Miscellany 10-06-07, 07:31 PM	How would you define this particular individual? I'd define this person as exceptionally misinformed and incapable of reading and comprehending all the available information on Realms design decisions that exist and are/have been open to public for years. If they didn't get it then, they're probably not going to get it now so they need to cut with the negativity and either move on or limit themselves to interacting (in a positive manner) online with people that are in teh same boat.
Rauric 10-06-07, 07:37 PM	Agreed! :) You know, I wasn't trying to hint that you'd personally have any problems with this issue -- I just noticed that you talked about such people in your post and replied to it, because I had already discussed it on Candlekeep and I thought to repost my comments here. :) No worries. ;) I am a fan of the Realms in whatever form it takes. My player are the true stars ofmy game, not the NPCs. Doesn't mean I exclude them or kill them off in a silly way. If they are gone, oh well. This is how I look at it though. I would just hand wave and keep em in MY Realms.
Panurg 10-06-07, 08:04 PM	I'll gladly call Gray a ninny. He's a smart guy, but I think his purposeful ignorance of peoples' intentions and desires (that is 'people who are afraid of change') is a plainly stupid thing to make. It's just so glaringly wrong that it makes me question Gray's ability to actually communicate with the people on these boards. We do not fear or dislike change - some of us fear or dislike what changes are MADE, however. I - lately and obviously very late (in Austria its 2:03 at night) - second the whole statement! But the most important sentence is the last one; it's all I feel concerning this problem.
Gray Richardson 10-06-07, 08:46 PM	I find your arguements empty for just accepting the changes...and you defination of a fan is also just as empty.Fair enough. I was asked to give my definition of the word. I based it on the definition from the dictionary, but you are free to disagree. Please tell us what your definition of a fan is. And I am curious what you think a "True Fan" is, as distinguished from a fan. I would be happy to consider revising my definition if yours is better. ;) You get upset when those of us(though I try really hard not to) dismiss those people who like the way things are going as not being 'true' fans.No, it doesn't upset me at all. But it bothers me when people are mean to other posters, when they aren't civil, and I am especially troubled when they bash the Realms and the designers.Yet in the same breath you call us whinersYou are putting words in my mouth. I have not used the word "whiner" or "whine" anywhere in this thread. Not even sure if I have ever posted that word anywhere on the boards. Go back and read carefully. However, since you suggest it, I am sorely tempted to use the word now. ;)Can we say hypocrite?Sure! If you think it applies. I feel strongly that I should be held to the same standards (if not higher) that I expect of others. If you think I have been less than fair in self-evaluating my own behavior, well then, I think you should call me out on the carpet. But since I didn't say the words you attribute to me, what is your reasoning exactly for calling me a hypocrite?Personaly I am a fan of the Forgotten Realms always has been and always will be.Glad to hear it!Though as I said I don't mind changesGlad to hear that too!all I ask is that they don't go killing off my campaign which is 100% more important to me then the 'stories' they want to tell. As it should be any gamer.I don't know about that, I think upon reflection you would find you have asked for quite a bit more than that, but I will take you at your word. As for your campaign, I do not quite get how you think they are killing off your campaign. It's not like they are coming over to your house and burning all your notebooks. WotC can never kill anyone's home Realms. Feel free to make it as different from the official sourcebooks as you like! But if you are asking WotC to never write anything that deviates from the lore in your home game, how in the world do you ever expect them to do that? You want them to send you galleys of the books before they are published? Let you strike out the new lore that offends you? No, I think it is best if you run your game how you want to and let WotC write the books the way they think best. You don't have to buy anything you don't like. And if it turns out that you do like it, then the stars will have aligned and it will be a happy occasion for everyone.Also the fact is they could have made the changes the felt were neccessary without destroying aspects of the world people lovedI agree with you, that is a fact. They could have made a lot of varied choices. They selected the choices they made for sound reasons. You don't have to like them. You might have made different choices, but you do not work for WotC. The burden of ensuring the continued economic viability of the Realms is not in your hands. And frankly, I am glad of it. Based on their track record, I think the Realms is in the right hands and that they are doing things that will ultimately be good for the setting and the fans.I think the root of the problem is that their changes in 4th edition to D&D lore means they have to changes the Realms to fit their ideals. Instead of fitting D&D to the FR.I don't see that as a problem. They are creating a new iteration of the game rules. Rich Baker already explained to you in another thread how either they have to pretend the rules were always this way, which would conflict with prior lore, or they need to create an in-game story to explain why the rules work differently now. They made their decision, and I think it was probably the only good one they could make. In 3e, there was no in-game explanation, and the supposed "True Fans" screamed just as loudly. So really, my tentative conclusion is that there are a lot of supposed "True Fans" who will probably scream at WotC no matter what WotC does. Some people just love to hear themselves scream. ;) Also it is funny most of the changes seem to be setup for stories they want to tellI do not accept your premise that they are making changes to the setting just to be able to tell stories that they couldn't before. But I have liked a lot of the stories they have told, and am eager to read more.what about the stories we or want to tell?What about them? What is the story you think you won't be able to tell? In your home game you can tell any kind of story you like, you are allowed to diverge from canon if you like. No one will stop you. If you want to post FR fan-fic on a web-site somewhere, I am sure someone will read it and it will garner whatever attention it merits. I don't get how this will affect your storytelling at all.I mean sure I hate Cyric as a character but I can recognize he has a fan base and wouldn't kill him off in the base setting...but shouldn't fans of Mystra, the 7 Sisters, Eilistraee, Helm, Tymora, Tyr, etc fans get some consideration? I mean the great thing about the Realms( and RPG in general) is that they atre soo many stories to tell that it can appeal to soo many people.Well you are misinformed there. They are not killing off Cyric, I don't know how many, if any, of the 7 sisters will be killed off, they haven't mentioned,but I surmise they will still be around, some of them at lest. Eilistraee is not being killed off. Nor is Tymora or Tyr. So most of your "facts" seem to be in error there. As for whether the fans should get some consideration, yes I think they should. But I also believe that WotC does give them a great deal of consideration. I think WotC takes the best interests of the fans to heart. And then makes the best decision they can for the fans and the setting as a whole. The fact they have made some choices that you don't agree with is no evidence that they did not give our feelings due consideration.And lastly personaly I consider Gothicdan, Gray Richardson, and many people who post on this board in general to be true fans of the Realm. Just because we disagree with the changes and propably will just go play the FR as we want doesn't mean we aren't fas.Well I actually agree with that. People who take joy in playing in the Realms are fans, no doubt.I think at times Gothicdan is some time too much of a purist...but to degrade is opinion as 'elitist' or to call him a 'Realm's nazi' is to close your mind.Again, I have never used those words to describe him, you seem to keep putting words in my mouth. I never called anyone an elitist. I did use the word to describe how Blake felt about Rousseau and Voltaire, but I never called anyone that. I certainly never called anyone a nazi. That's the definition of evil! Did you read the latest OotS where Belkar's evil was measured in units of "kilonazis"? I try not to call people names. (Not sure if I always succeed, but I try) But I will point out when Dan's opinion is wrong and call him on the carpet when his behavior is bad. I hope you don't think that I should remain silent if I disagree with Dan? I think to plead "freedom of speech" for those who you agree with and advocate censorship for those who disagree would be a good example of hypocrisy.
SgtAnjay 10-06-07, 08:48 PM	I don't accept your premise, but for the sake of argument I will agree that they have named about 9 gods or so that they intend to kill off, have mentioned a few NPC's that won't be around, although I never got from anywhere that they are going to reset the setting to a Tabula Rasa. From what I gather they intend to preserve continuity aside from the specified changes. Everything that was in the Realms before will still be in the 4e Realms--except for the changes of course.Luckily, you dont have to accept my premise, because it isn't my premise. They've only named a few gods, but have called pantheon-shrinking as a stated goal; frankly, the list of gods we know are safe is smaller than the known hit-list. The reduction in NPCs so as to remove their supposed pervasiveness is something else the designers have specifically stated; in other words they agree with the folks who think you can't toss a rock without hitting a 15th lvl so-and-so. As for "tabula rasa", I was rather vague with that term; I'm speaking of the design goal, which again has been mentioned by the designers, that PCs are the movers and shakers and the forces for good in the bleak world of danger. In other words, the points of light. And by the way.....its a good thing this is the internet. I cant imagine "everything will still be the same except for the changes" coming out of anyone with a straight face. I don't accept that premise either. The primary purpose of the changes is to give an in-game explanation for the rules changes necessitated by the implementation of 4e. A secondary goal for them is to expand the fanbase by bringing in new fans, so some additional adjustments in their estimation seem warranted, over and above the changes necessary to bring it in line with the mechanics of 4e. I don't for a moment believe that they are trying to trade out old fans for new fans. Just trying to bring new fans into the fold.Again, you dont have to accept it as my premise, because the premise isn't mine. Shrinking the pantheon has nothing to do with new rules. Killing NPCs has nothing to do with new rules. A shift to the points of light scenario isn't neccesary to shift to new rules. But, what a coincidence, these changes do match up with alot of complaints people who aren't fans of the Realms say all the time. Bringing in new blood is great; but at a certain point, there's one thing to remember. You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you cant please all of the people all of the time. Trying to is a sure recipe for failure. Clearly, people can dislike a few changes and still be a Realms fan. You can still enjoy the Realms even if a few things cause you pain. I would think there has got to be a line somewhere where if the pain exceeds the joy at somepoint you would drop into the ex-fan category, but that is certainly not for me to judge.That's true enough, but there's a difference between slowly drifting away from where the setting is going, and being told "yeah, that stuff you like? Its a problem and we're getting rid of it." I don't know anyone who ever said or posted anything like what you have just attributed. Do you mind me asking who is it exactly that said that? Can you link to a post? I mean, I could probably link to a few hundred posts where posters have bashed the designers or been generally negative about the Realms and various products. But I am totally unaware of any post where someone "insisted that the Realms change to accomodate them, and damn all those who like what the Realms are." If you could point me to such a post I would be grateful.Well lets see. Detractors of the Realms have long stated the pantheon's too big, Mystra's stupid, the NPCs overpowering, and theres so much lore and so many novels it takes the equivalent of an Associate's Degree to play. They're bringing out new stuff for 4th edition. What's on the plate? The pantheon shrinks, Mystra's dead, NPCs gone, and a handy little apocalypse restarts the world. What a grand coincidence, it couldn't have anything to do with all those who spoke, and continue to speak, so negatively of the Realms as they have been. :rolleyes:
Old Sage 10-06-07, 08:55 PM	Good grief. None of us is any less a fan for liking different aspects of the Realms, defining it in different ways, or being a fan also of the current in-house designers or not, or of mainly Ed or not so much, or for being flexible or exacting, and we needn't abandon the Realms if we don't like all of what's published under its banner in the past or future, and, stressful as this time may be, we all look pretty ugly if we start insulting or psychonanalysing or whatever each other hypothetically or otherwise and telling each other what we ought to do.Which is, essentially, why I asked Gray to define his particular definition of what a "Realms fan" was. I was curious. And rather than attempting to fit particular individuals into specific "Realms Fan Categories," my intention was actually aimed at illustrating that each and every Realms devotee who posts to these boards, will have their own personal definition of what makes a "Realms Fan" -- based, likely, on their own experiences with the published Realms and how they chose to respond to the "hypothetical individual" I put forth. The opposing interpretations offered by both Alediran and Mr Miscellany, do indeed suggest that may be the case. And Faraer is definitely on the mark. There are just as many definitions for "Realms fan," as there are Realms fan themselves. And none should be considered any less of a fan simply because their own definition... may differ from another's.
Rauric 10-06-07, 09:15 PM	Glad you said it. If any other poster had said this we would be called a ninny and then all the other whiners.... uhhh myopic fans would come out of the woodwork and pounce.:D I keed,I keed. Anyway if Rich would just shelve the high lvl NPCS without killing them or reducing their power I think this would appease the group that hates uber NPCs and the group that loves them. Yeah, I was the one who used whiner in MY post. Gray did not. He is being pretty cool about it all and many people are really trying to blast him. He called some people myopic and did not state any names, but then we see certain people responding to the word he used and take offense to it. SO maybe you are myopic in your visions. Maybe not. It is his opinion and at least he did not call anyone stupid like someone did. I don't see any people telling Dam he should not have called Gray stupid. Why? Because Dan is part of the FR purist club? Because Gray made some comments that struck a nerve? People could post things about me from some things I have said and they may be right if they said I can jump the gun or go overboard with some of my posts (not here but usually the 4E boards). If I saw Gray being really nasty to someone I would speak out about it just as if I saw someone say something really nasty to Gray, Geek, or Rino. Hopefully we are all FR fans. I think it is fine to dislike some of the changes. Maybe WOTC did a marketing campaign and found that more people wanted to see FR lessen its NPCs or pantheon. Only the sales will tell if it works. I bet it will due to the fact that Eberron books will not be coming out for another two years and I know old FR fans that are going to switch back to FR after 4E comes out. Then they may alternate when 4E Eberron comes out. Curious, do the novels do better $$ wise than the RPG products? On the whining issue I just feel that if people post the sames things over and over on multiple threads on multiple sites, well to me that is whining. Sorry. My opinion. Please don't rip me a new one.
johnkretzer 10-06-07, 09:40 PM	Fair enough. I was asked to give my definition of the word. I based it on the definition from the dictionary, but you are free to disagree. Please tell us what your definition of a fan is. And I am curious what you think a "True Fan" is, as distinguished from a fan. I would be happy to consider revising my definition if yours is better. ;) No, it doesn't upset me at all. But it bothers me when people are mean to other posters, when they aren't civil, and I am especially troubled when they bash the Realms and the designers.You are putting words in my mouth. I have not used the word "whiner" or "whine" anywhere in this thread. Not even sure if I have ever posted that word anywhere on the boards. Go back and read carefully. Actualy I have seen it alotof it. On the Important Letter to WotC board...you pretty much called it whining(sure you used something like petulant child but it means the same thing) I think if you has read my post you would know what I think a fans is and a 'true' fan is. Though let me be clear I think a 'true' fan is somebody who believes is way is the only wat to go. I don't consider myself a true fan. However, since you suggest it, I am sorely tempted to use the word now. ;)Sure! If you think it applies. I feel strongly that I should be held to the same standards (if not higher) that I expect of others. If you think I have been less than fair in self-evaluating my own behavior, well then, I think you should call me out on the carpet. But since I didn't say the words you attribute to me, what is your reasoning exactly for calling me a hypocrite?Glad to hear it!Glad to hear that too!I don't know about that, I think upon reflection you would find you have asked for quite a bit more than that, but I will take you at your word. Sure you have as pointed out above... Maybe you don't use the word as 'whine' but you do infer them. As for your campaign, I do not quite get how you think they are killing off your campaign. It's not like they are coming over to your house and burning all your notebooks. WotC can never kill anyone's home Realms. Feel free to make it as different from the official sourcebooks as you like! Have you ever ran a ongoing game for any great length opf time? Those games need new blood more than any other type of game...now with the edition change that is more than just the mechanics it will be alot harder to find new players. So yes eventualy it will kill my Realms game. But if you are asking WotC to never write anything that deviates from the lore in your home game, how in the world do you ever expect them to do that? You want them to send you galleys of the books before they are published? Let you strike out the new lore that offends you? Actualy again no I am not. They have done that alot and I have ever been changing things in my game. I think I have said many times I don't want my Realms to be the official Realms any more that I want Mr. Baker or even Mr. Greenwoods realms to become the official changes. No, I think it is best if you run your game how you want to and let WotC write the books the way they think best. You don't have to buy anything you don't like. And if it turns out that you do like it, then the stars will have aligned and it will be a happy occasion for everyone.I agree with you, that is a fact. They could have made a lot of varied choices. They selected the choices they made for sound reasons. You don't have to like them. You might have made different choices, but you do not work for WotC. The burden of ensuring the continued economic viability of the Realms is not in your hands. And frankly, I am glad of it. Based on their track record, I think the Realms is in the right hands and that they are doing things that will ultimately be good for the setting and the fans.I don't see that as a problem. They are creating a new iteration of the game rules. Rich Baker already explained to you in another thread how either they have to pretend the rules were always this way, which would conflict with prior lore, or they need to create an in-game story to explain why the rules work differently now. They made their decision, and I think it was probably the only good one they could make. Everthing Richard Baker as explained to me smacks that they only care about the story they tell. The 'sound reasons' was to give authors freedom. To those are very bad reasons for a RPG setting. Also like I said I would like to buy the new edition and the new Realms but I can't because it isn't D&D to me. And I disagree it wasn't a good decision as I think their egos got caught up in it. People keep saying their bussiness people...I don't get how it will be good for bussiness to cater to a extreme point of veiw. In 3e, there was no in-game explanation, and the supposed "True Fans" screamed just as loudly. So really, my tentative conclusion is that there are a lot of supposed "True Fans" who will probably scream at WotC no matter what WotC does. Some people just love to hear themselves scream. ;) I do not accept your premise that they are making changes to the setting just to be able to tell stories that they couldn't before. But I have liked a lot of the stories they have told, and am eager to read more.What about them? What is the story you think you won't be able to tell? In your home game you can tell any kind of story you like, you are allowed to diverge from canon if you like. No one will stop you. If you want to post FR fan-fic on a web-site somewhere, I am sure someone will read it and it will garner whatever attention it merits. I don't get how this will affect your storytelling at all.Well you are misinformed there. They are not killing off Cyric, I don't know how many, if any, of the 7 sisters will be killed off, they haven't mentioned,but I surmise they will still be around, some of them at lest. Eilistraee is not being killed off. Nor is Tymora or Tyr. So most of your "facts" seem to be in error there.. Actualy if you read those books that you love so much Eilistraee is going be either gone or absorbed by Lolth. Also Tyr and Tymora should as well be dead because the way they are being written doesn't even bear a resemblace to how they were written in the past. Also with Cyrics action by all sense of logic and consustency he should have been killed by the other gods. But he was saved by author fiat. And I am sorry author fiat can't be a part of a true RPG world. As for whether the fans should get some consideration, yes I think they should. But I also believe that WotC does give them a great deal of consideration. I think WotC takes the best interests of the fans to heart. And then makes the best decision they can for the fans and the setting as a whole. The fact they have made some choices that you don't agree with is no evidence that they did not give our feelings due consideration.Well I actually agree with that. Sure they might have given people like me opinions a consideration and then threw them out. I mean you seem a intelligent enough guy so you really like what you have seen? I mean characters acting inconsistent with what has gone on before? Completely ignore previous lore to tell a story? Tearing down the history of one race to build up another? I mean if I didn't have that freedom as a Role-player I would have stopped caring about the Realms a long time ago has even as literature it fails. But that is just it I have been a good sport and got things to fit in my Realms soo many times that I can't even count them. But this change is just to massive to me even complentate trying...They have decided to operate with a chainsaw instead of a scapel...that is never a good idea. Also I can actualy appreciate that they have their own creative ideas they want to express. But instead of forcing the Realms to conform to them couldn't they just have created they own campaign world?
johnkretzer 10-06-07, 09:54 PM	I would say that person is in a dysfunctional relationship with his hobby. I would tell this person to get over himself. Either adapt to the changes or find himself a new hobby. I think he should learn to love the Realms for what it is rather than what it isn't, but if he can't, then certainly there are other hobbies that might be more rewarding for him. You also just ignored what I said about this particular quote so I'll be more elaborate in it... So according to you we the people who don't like these changes have a 'dysfunctional relationship' to Realms. Though before the changes were annouced I would infer from your statement that those who are now for the changes had a 'dysfunctional relationship' with the Realms becasue they couldn't learn to love the Realms for what it is rather than what it isn't. So now we have this situration of instead of the designers fixing the Realms so that neither group as a 'dysfunctional relationship'. They just had people trade places. And you think this a good change for the health of the setting and for gamers?
Rauric 10-06-07, 10:12 PM	I think he is talking about one or two people in particular who you would think hate the Realms since they are always negative about them but claim to be a fan.
Markustay 10-06-07, 10:39 PM	Unfortunately, this thread simply proves that Realms fans, who were once united in their love for something they hold dear, are now divided. We've always had levels of Grognard, fan, and fanatic on these boards, but I think this time the split will be a far more physical one then the usual 'friendly disagreements'. Like several settings before it, the fan-base has now split and I doubt anything will be able to save it after this. History has proven that splitting fans in a niche hobby always leads to that niche disappearing - in this case, the Realms. I wish it weren't so, but I've seen it at least a dozen times before. Who knows? Maybe this time wiill be different... :rolleyes: First, several people have used the 'bad relationship' analogy, but I think they have used is rather poorely (no offense). My Dad, who may not have had a college education, was one of the smartest guys I knew. He had 'horse sense', or what folks would call good old fashioned wisdom. When I was about to be married, he told me "the first time she farts, the Honeymoon is over". Sorry if that sounds gross, but I'm trying to make a point. On the surface, that little kernal of 'wisdom' sounds pretty crude, but you can apply it to just about anything you care about. I have to admit, when the Old Grey box came out I hated it. Not because it was bad, but because it was competing with my beloved Greyhawk. Then I read it, and got to know it and admire it. When 2e came along, that like grew into love, and I dumped my 'ex' (GH) and moved on. The setting was deep, and rich, and full of so many possiblities that it sent my imagination racing (just like a good woman ;) ) Then, when 3e came out - the Realms 'farted'. :( Just like dear old Dad said, "the Honeymoon was over". Don't get me wrong, I still loved it, but there were a few new things about it didn't really care for (like the Tree). However, like any relationship, you adapt and continue to grow into each other. Change isn't bad - it just takes some getting used to. My wife only dyed her hair several times over the cours of my 18 year marriage, and I hated it at first EVERY time. Then I hated it when she changed it back a few months later. thats normal, and we get over those kinds of things. Then all the 4e announcements came out, and our hearts were in our throats. It was like hearing that your loved one was in a car accident. We get some info in the Orc King, and it was like hearing that same loved one is in intensive care. Then we got GHotR, and we found out that our 'love' needs major surgery. The Realms comes out of surgery, and after a few months the bandages come off. Its fine, and its healthy... and it also got a sex change!!! :eek: How do YOU feel now, Grey? Do you still love HIM? You loved who he WAS, but this isn't what you signed up for. We were told it was the only way to save it's life, but we have to now step back and question our own feelings about this. Then, to add insult to injury, we find out the sex-change part wasn't even neccessary! It had nothing top do with the life-saving surgery. Now we have been betrayed, besides... Sounds SICK, huh? I'm a nut-job, right? James Wyatt has stated in his blog the Eberron's timeline will NOT move forward, and there will be minimal changes to the setting to incorporate the new rules. But wait... weren't we Realms fans just told that a complete overhaul was neccessary? Why is it that Eberron, with its completely different Cosmology and quirky magical traditions (Dragonmarks) is able to fit so seemlessly into the new rules, when FR, which is somewhat more 'generic' when it comes to it's fantasy, has to be torn down to the ground? In fact, Mystras Weave should make it so FR is the easiest setting to explain magical changes in. That is where the 'lie' came in. :headexplo Something had to happen with Mystra, but EVERYTHING else was unneccessary. It was not for US, it was for THEM. The novels were starting to interfere with the game, so they moved the timeline forward away from the novels so all of the RSEs that authors (and authors ALONE) seem to love so much wouldn't happen one after another, as they have been. Eberron's novels are NOT canon, and that setting will have NO problems converting to 4e. When the thing you love becomes something else entirely, and you find out it was for all the wrong reasons, then yes, perhaps it IS time to move on. :allalone:
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 12:20 AM	Well, now, if you re-read the quote, you will see that it is not the author who is mocking religion or the bible but rather defending it. Er, I knew that. I didn't say William Blake (I knew it was his quote) was mocking the Bible. He was quite the religious man, or so I've heard. I guess my comment just wasn't clear. Nor do I think that you are one, and I am saddened that you thought my comment directed at you. Eh, I didn't think it directed *at* me, but I figured I'd clarify things. :) I really don't think that everyone who disagrees with me is a sadsack sourpuss. Heck, one can agree with me and still be a sadsack sourpuss. But there truly are some on these boards, and their negativity is really quite shrill and reactionary. There are people here who are, well, more over-the-top than I would be, certainly. And most offensive of all, those who deride and scorn the really very nice, intelligent, and capable authors and designers who have been bringing us great Realmslore for years and hopefully years more to come. Are the authors and designers all nice, intelligent, and capable people? As far as I've seen, they are. But have they been bringing us great Realmslore? Well, I think that's a matter of opinion. I've mentioned before, I've been dissatisfied with the work of some of the designers whose names have been mentioned long before I ever even thought about 4E. The changes that have been announced are just a few new straws to a steadily increasing pile. So I personally don't have any particular reason to be optimistic about their work, since I've been dissappointed by them more than once in the past. I don't think everything they've made is bad, but I can't honestly say I love their creative work. As I said before, if you enjoy their work and are looking forward to what they are going to bring to the table in the future, I'm glad for you. But not everyone has reason to feel the same way.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 12:32 AM	When I talk to people about what they dislike about the Realms they all say the same thing. They all say "I hate that every innkeeper is a high level, retired adventurer." I would tell them this really isn't so then they mention a bunch of 2E books that say it is so. Even if they are wrong there is a feeling that all of the Realms are filled with high level NPCs. This was never the case in "My" realms but that is the general feeling for soem folks. I would usually scale the NPCs around the player most times. That be may a common (wrong) perception, but still, if the DM is in control, how is it a problem? Isn't it up to them to make the game how they want it to be. With the other NPC attachement issue, I just remember I was really into the NPCs when I was a teenager and a 20 something. Now I realize the plays matter more. The NPCs matter less to me now than when I was a real fanboy. I love the game and do like most of the NPCs, but if some of them were to disappear I would not get too bent out of shape over it. I would either use them anyway or just deal with it. I worry about real life stuff and the only drama in my life comes from my work and if my wife and boys are healthy. That is where I am now with my life. Things change and so do attitudes. I am sure my wife is glad I am not the same person I was in my 20s. Heh, that was cool then but all good things... *laughs* Well, I have a life too! I am in my mid-twenties (not telling my age!:P ), have a full-time job, and I've been through serious life issues, which I won't go into. I'm not married with kids, and I agree that if I were things would be a lot different for me. I still know that what happens with a fictional setting isn't the most important thing in my world. I'm not losing sleep over these changes (mainly because I've renounced them). But I think I'm the type of person who will always have a sentimental attachment to characters I love (and not just FR ones).
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 12:38 AM	However I believe WotC is beating a dead horse, inasmuch as they sought with the 3E FRCS and the novel line to bring the Chosen down a notch and (IMO) succeeded. We’ve seen Elminster driven to near death and insanity and Khelben Blackstaff is dead, while in the FRCS at the very beginning Elminster goes on at some length about all the evil in the Realms and finishes by saying quite clearly that the Realms, “...needs its heroes.” Good Lord, you've written something (as of late) that I actually agree with! Elitists are the kind of people that hold the Realms back by holding Realms message board forums hostage with their ever-lurking over everyone else’s shoulder sort of posting habits. Who is holding whom hostage? I'm not bound and gagged as far as I can tell.:P And I'm not holding a gun to anyone's head, either. I take it you're one of those negotiations people?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 12:50 AM	Despite all that, this individual still maintains the same deep and elaborate devotion to the Realms, as it was, since the publication of the Ol' Grey Box. How would you define this particular individual? I'm not Gray, but I'd call that person a fan. I don't think that being a fan means you can never feel dissappointed, or never express doubt. I'm a fan of Mystra and her Chosen, and I consider them to be a very important part of the Realms setting. That's why I'm upset with many 4E changes--it has been announced that Mystra will die (no going back on this) and the fate of the Chosen is likely make their fans "unhappy with [WotC]". But I don't plan to renounce the Realms, just WotC's version of it. The Realms is something that goes far beyond WotC, even if they own the setting.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 12:52 AM	Sage and I will have fun with our dysfunctional hobbies. ;) Me too!:cheer: ...we all look pretty ugly if we start insulting or psychonanalysing or whatever each other hypothetically or otherwise and telling each other what we ought to do. *agrees with Faraer*
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 01:03 AM	Question: The Realms changing, or the Realms ending due to lack of sales... What would be worse? False dichotomy. Try again.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 01:04 AM	I'd define this person as exceptionally misinformed and incapable of reading and comprehending all the available information on Realms design decisions that exist and are/have been open to public for years. Huh? How do you figure that? Bear with me here, people, I'm trying to catch up!;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-07-07, 01:11 AM	If I saw Gray being really nasty to someone I would speak out about it just as if I saw someone say something really nasty to Gray, Geek, or Rino. Thanks, I appreciate hearing that.:) Hopefully we are all FR fans. I think that's the case. Otherwise, what would we be doing here?
Rauric 10-07-07, 08:30 AM	Thanks, I appreciate hearing that.:) I think that's the case. Otherwise, what would we be doing here? Trolls happen. ;) Plus I was just saying the older you get the more things change. Your attachments become different. Your feelings about things lessen and new attachments or feelings start to pop up. My wife and I got two dogs five years ago and we used to treat them like they were our kids (sort of). At least that is how we felt at the time. Then we had twin boys and everything was thrown out the window. Whole new perspectives opened up. New problems popped up and the old ones (the very small and insignificant ones apparently) vanished. If I was in my 20s still and they tried to do what they are doing I might act as some of the posters on the boards act. I would be angered and put off and pretty dramatic. I look back at myself then and realize how much I have changed as a person and a gamer. *Shrug* Just saying.
White_Wizard 10-07-07, 11:49 AM	One thing is sure: without saying the usual "down with Baker" (which is unfair, because, like JW says, he is not the only responsible), Wyatt is better in dealing with people. The post from Baker's blog seemed to exclude pretty much any point of discussion (even if it wasn't his intention to), while Wyatt hints that we are not left apart. I hope that's there is still the chance of coming to an agreement.
Markustay 10-07-07, 12:20 PM	Yup, there is a definate lack of 'people skills' there. Mr. Baker uses the tried and true "I'm not being defensive, buuut...." Thats like saying "I'm not prejudice, buuut...." You should never have to deny being something you're not. Except in a court of law. :P Anyhow, I've been re-reading some Realms novels, and enjoying them, the last few days. Even the 'bad' ones. ;) I been going through the Five Stages of Grief since Gencon and the Orc King Spoiler, so now I think I'm just about done (unless some new news sets me off again). The five stages are - 1. Denial 2. Anger 2. Bargaining 3. Depression 5. Acceptance I think I hit 'Acceptance' sometime early this morning. IT's over, and nothing we say or do is going to change anything - Time to move on. As I think about all the new possibilities (a homebrew?), I think I may be entering a hitherto-unknown stage - 6. Who gives a f__k? :smirk: I have the strangest feeling of 'liberation' now, so perhaps it was time. :cool:
18DELTA 10-07-07, 01:57 PM	Welcome to the darkside. All this because of some novels!:rolleyes:
The Ubbergeek 10-07-07, 02:32 PM	Does the Realms HAVE to have El? Does it HAVE to have Mystra? Does it have to have... ? If they removed EVERYTHING or CHANGED EVERYTHING and MORE IMPORTANT,. the basic metaphisic, theme, inner working, etc.... Like, if it have a no-god-on-earth effect like in Eberron, maybe it would not be FR. But as Earth is still alive and still Earth after all we passed on, it wills till be FR. All those things here are NOT necessarly needed to make FR, FR.
johnkretzer 10-07-07, 04:52 PM	Does the Realms HAVE to have El? Evidently yes as Elminster will still be around, despite the fact of all the choosen he should be the one that should be the most likely to die with the fall of the Weave Does it HAVE to have Mystra?[/QUOTE] Not this partucular one but that was before such a inherent part of the Realm there has been 3 different ones. Does it have to have... ? Certain thinbg you bet...or atleast if they want to change them can we have atleast bit of logic and consitency in the changes. If they removed EVERYTHING or CHANGED EVERYTHING and MORE IMPORTANT,. the basic metaphisic, theme, inner working, etc.... Like, if it have a no-god-on-earth effect like in Eberron, maybe it would not be FR. To some of us the things they aare changing...especialy the way they are changing them yes it is no longer the Realms. But as Earth is still alive and still Earth after all we passed on, it wills till be FR. All those things here are NOT necessarly needed to make FR, FR. Not really because everything that happern on Earth has a consistency with the history of the world. Even surprises that happen could have been predicted if we knew all the facts. Buy in the Realms we know all the facts...or atleast we did till they started contradicting the past. That is why I don't like the changes in part.
Lord Karsus 10-07-07, 06:24 PM	-I was going to type some responses to various points raised by various people. But, I don't feel like it anymore. -Man, is this a depressing thread, or what? -Look at us fighting, brother against brother, sister against sister...Remember that "self-important nastiness" that appeared on another RPG messageboard, in regards to s specific subject? I think I'm seeing a little of that here. -I'm not usually the peacemaker or anything, but can't take off the blinders, get off the high horses, and realize that, whether you blindly support the various changes being made, or are against them, due to past bad experiences, we are all fans? -This, here, is a demonstation of political polarization in the extreme. This is the exact reason why I got out of following politics (and, for those who don't know, I loved politics). You can't be moderate, anymore. Either you are, or you aren't. And, either way, to the other group, you're damned.
MerrikCale 10-07-07, 09:17 PM	-Man, is this a depressing thread, or what? Everything has been depressing since they made the 4e annoucement. At least for FR fans. It just has not been good. plain and simple.
Lord Karsus 10-07-07, 11:03 PM	Everything has been depressing since they made the 4e annoucement. At least for FR fans. It just has not been good. plain and simple. -I meant behavior-wise.
Storm_Silverhand 10-08-07, 01:20 AM	Heya, Does the Realms HAVE to have El? Does it HAVE to have Mystra? Does it have to have... ? If they removed EVERYTHING or CHANGED EVERYTHING and MORE IMPORTANT,. the basic metaphisic, theme, inner working, etc.... Like, if it have a no-god-on-earth effect like in Eberron, maybe it would not be FR. But as Earth is still alive and still Earth after all we passed on, it wills till be FR. All those things here are NOT necessarly needed to make FR, FR. Interesting point you raise. To answer you... Yes (but they're not killing him anyway), Yes (I feel that so strongly, that Mystra won't die in my Realms), Yes (unspecified things that matter to me and are being changed, of course). To me the Realms are El, Mystra, and all the rest. Without them, it's not the Realms... But that's MY VIEW. People don't have to agree with me, and that's fine. Everyone has their own point of view, no two people would share identical visions of the Realms - of that, I'm sure. On Mystra: The Weave is a fundamental part of the Forgotten Realms. It's how spell casters can access the raw essence of the arcane without being destroyed in the process. Mystra happens to be the embodiment of the Weave - she is its mind, heart, and soul. Without Mystra, and by necessity, without the Weave, Magic in the Realms lacks anything to distinguish it from countless other generic-esque fantasy settings, IMHO. This is the worst change they could have made to the Realms, even though I hate what they did with Tymora/Sune/Tyr/Helm more... The only thing that saves the Mystra story arc in AGHotR from least favorite status for me, is that it is something that is in character for both Shar and Cyric. The Tymora/Sune/Tyr/Helm arc is just totally out of character for all involved, and I refuse to believe that Cyric is so powerful that he can easily trick them all into dancing to his tune (on top of killing Mystra as well). Rich Baker talks about moving on to tell more stories about Cyric (now his betrayal is complete) and Shar (now she's killed her main rival)... But what about Mystra's story? Her story just got cut short, and there's no going back for canon Realms now. It's too bad, boo hoo... We're told we just have to like it or lump it. It's hardly fair, IMHO. Anyway, I think that if they told us something good (constructive) about 4e Realms (without giving too much away about them, of course), that might actually go far to appeasing some people. Tell us something about 4e Realms that will distract us from Mystra, Eilistraee, and the Brightwater and House of the Triad deities.
MaskedOne 10-08-07, 02:36 AM	Does the Realms HAVE to have El? Does it HAVE to have Mystra? As a matter of personal taste, El while I greatly enjoy is not quite vital in my view. Mystra is vital. I judge and define fantasy settings to a massive degree by the inherent magical systems and the spellcasters using them. It would be closer to accurate than you care to know to say that I'm not so much a fan of FR as a fan of the magic inherent to it. The Weave and its standing guardian have always factored massively in FR's magic. Removing them along with several thousand spellcasters at the same time is tantamount to lining up the key elements that hold my interest in the setting before a firing squad. There are admittedly a handful of other factors in FR that if handled perfectly might be enough to hold my interest for a little while but barring divine backing, WotC won't manage it.
Yaeri 10-08-07, 04:59 AM	-I was going to type some responses to various points raised by various people. But, I don't feel like it anymore. -Man, is this a depressing thread, or what? -Look at us fighting, brother against brother, sister against sister...Remember that "self-important nastiness" that appeared on another RPG messageboard, in regards to s specific subject? I think I'm seeing a little of that here. lol. I actually found this thread warming. While I was reading this thread I got the feeling that everyone seemed to have calmed down a bit, and deep down it's one big family. Aside from the occasional miscommunication I found the whole discussion very civil despite complete disagreement on the subject. Or maybe Gray's rainbow coloured posts put me in an optimistic mood so I saw only the "okay we disagree but we're all fans" and "you're an elitist snob but I like you. Yeah we'd have great games together *hug*" and my mind dismissed the bad things as occasional miscommunications quickly resolved in follow up posts. Maybe I just expected a lot worse. :D Anyway, I give this thread my blessing. :thumbsup: Don't worry, I'll keep the contingency plan ready, just in case.* *Ask some eberron fans over to bash the realms so that all fans can forget their internal disagreements and unite against the common enemy.
Yaeri 10-08-07, 05:53 AM	Does the Realms HAVE to have El? The way I see it, Elminster is to the Forgotten Realms somewhat like Mickey Mouse is to Disney. Both can easily survive without, while at the same time, they are the symbol of their ...thing. How much is too much differs from person to person of course. To me, the changes anounced so far (a few deities and NPC's are gone, the way magic works is changed, time jump of possibly only 10 years) do not make the realms not the realms anymore. The changes can turn out to be more profound than this, but we don't know. I'm in the wait and see camp. I probably won't be buying 4th edition realms stuf either way, unless the books do not double the ones I already have from 3rd. And that's not because I dislike the realms or decided to dislike 4th edition realms. I just don't see the need to buy the same thing twice. I bought 2nd edition planescape books from paizo two months ago. I don't need my material to be up to date with what's in store at the moment.
White_Wizard 10-08-07, 06:08 AM	The way I see it, Elminster is to the Forgotten Realms somewhat like Mickey Mouse is to Disney. Both can easily survive without, while at the same time, they are the symbol of their ...thing. I find this sentence quite amusing. I agree with it, btw, though I too don't like Elminster so much. Btw the fact that the Realms have so powerful NPC didn't prevent PCs to be main characters in any of the games I joined (except one, but even then it wasn't official NPCs' fault, it was a DM custom -overgodly- NPC). I think that wiping out official high level NPCs is useless: it is DM's fault if NPCs rob PCs of the main action and a DM that does so will do so even if official High Level PCs are wiped away. He'll simply create his own. They always try to solve game-style related problems with rules.
GothicDan 10-08-07, 06:45 AM	Hypocrisy abounds, eh. That's not directed at anyone in particular, or any one 'side' of this discussion. I simply find some peoples' standards on quality, delineation, and perhaps even 'ethics,' so alien to my logic circuits that it seems like we're all trying to translate a different version of the Torah, with local Hebrew variances. The sheer level of fanaticism I've seen in Gray (JUST in this thread, mind you - it's not a remark on his character as far as I know) really does disturb me. I was not trying to demonize the credibility of the opposing opinion (though I do fully support credentials). It was a totally sincere, somewhat awed expression of confusion, grief, and curiosity. To me? A fanatic is someone who follows a dogma - typically moral, or otherwise having some occult, hyper-cultural, spiritual, or philosophical - in such a way that he or she is not able to analyze its proclamations, both taking into account introspection and outside sources. People like to say that I haven't liked much (or anything) that's been put out recently. While that's simply in part false, I also would ask: So what? If I did not like things simply because I blindly followed a dogma (all WotC employees are evil/terrible - the end) that told me it was 'the way' to go (not necessarily written down or anything), then I would be a fanatic. I have liked perhaps a quarter to a third of the sourcebooks, and there are a few which I bought and didn't end up liking - most notably Underdark and Player's Guide to Faerun. But, see, I am buying products which appeal to me, and I judge them individually based on their own merit. WotC puts them all out, but I don't reject them all for that fact. As I pointed out, Philalexandrios convinced me on these very boards to buy LEoF, and I felt myself liking it. He did this buy telling me about it, with little apparent personal bias. He didn't maniacally squeak out how amazing this or that was, and he didn't tell me that what I liked was outmoded, 'grognardy,' ossified, or stale. He simply gave me the facts (some of which I had wrong), and let me look at them - and it turned out the facts in the book by themsleves held enough of what I like about the Realms for me to buy it. I don't respond well to anyone zealously praising or proselytizing - heck, I even tend to avoid products (not RPGs) that have names or advertisements that blatantly plaster 'awesome!' onto them ('Super Hair Remover!' or 'This will change your life!'). This is a pretty old and obvious tool of the advertising industry to make you feel good enough about a product to buy it without knowing the facts. I'm sorry. I don't want you to tell me how good or bad a product is. I want you to tell me the facts, and I'll look into it if I have the time/random inclination (I've also bought Forsaken House, though I haven't read it - but then again, I've only read one of Elaine's and Ed's novels each!). Then we can discuss things like rational human beings who have emotions that all don't work exactly the same. Again, I don't like things because of blind, artificial mental constructs. I have never even seen the original Grey Box. Long before I realized any of the grognardy chatters existed (from where I've picked up a lot of knowledge), I found myself picking up a few old 2E books in the 90s, and a 1E now and there. I read the Avatar Trilogy FIRST, and disliked it, before I knew anything else about the Realms. I read of all of the deities in Faiths and Avatars soon after - and genuinely didn't find myself liking Kelemvor and Cyric (pretty much neutral on the NG Mystra too, mind you). I liked Myrkul and Leira, and the LN Mystra, before I ever was aware they had existed for about 2 1/2 times longer than I had. That's not fanaticism. I'm sorry. You can call my personal tastes obtuse, elitist, misguided, and whatever other half-insulting words you can think of, but it doesn't matter, since it's opinion. It's art and entertainment. I sure do run my mouth about what I like and don't like (when I'm not going crazy), but what I say is based on my feelings and what I've developed as valid logic to support those feelings. WotC liked retconning, for a long time. I didn't, because in what I look for in a game world, is continuity of history and culture, in the overall world view. WotC liked the Shadow Weave, and I never did. It turns out Rich Baker didn't like it much, either. I didn't like Eric's take on the new Planetouched or the statting of Song Dragons either, despite me almost always enjoying his material. But despite that preconception, I read it, and judged that I didn't like it. So, many people want to remove all negativity and criticism. They want to remove complaints, and promote only optimism and happy chorus singers. While I'm hardly an anarch troll hell-bent on pushing my agenda, forums are meant for people to discuss things with each other, to voice all opinions, good or bad, and for WotC in this case to get some more information. Okay. I spoke negatively about the SW early on, as many others did. And Rich admitted that it never really fit in, and that it was more trouble than it was worth. This is one of the posts I respect the most of his, because he's admitting fault. Now, if only he/WotC had listened to some people in the first place who decried the Shadow Weave, they could have saved themselves a lot of time and trouble. Dogmatic positive feedback to someone (or organization, or whatnot) is just as bad as negativity. That's why formal debates have had Negatives and Positives for years. I'll be positive about what I feel positive about, and negative about what I feel negative about. I may be pretty misguided (gay atheistic physicist in a fraternity? Buh?), and genuinely get incredibly frustrated when people don't stick to established terminology for things (I think it's easier in the long run just to amalgamate or make new words, phrases, etc.), but I'm not a fanatic.
Asgetrion 10-08-07, 06:55 AM	I find this sentence quite amusing. I agree with it, btw, though I too don't like Elminster so much. Btw the fact that the Realms have so powerful NPC didn't prevent PCs to be main characters in any of the games I joined (except one, but even then it wasn't official NPCs' fault, it was a DM custom -overgodly- NPC). I think that wiping out official high level NPCs is useless: it is DM's fault if NPCs rob PCs of the main action and a DM that does so will do so even if official High Level PCs are wiped away. He'll simply create his own. They always try to solve game-style related problems with rules. I agree with you. Why do people think Elminster, Dove, Alustriel, Khelben or any other local high-level NPC would be interested in "low-level" threats, when there are low-level adventurers who are fully capable to deal with them? Whenever I DM in the Realms, I tend to think that "Would a 20th level *Player Character* bother chasing a bunch of goblins, or prevent a Zhentarim invasion that should challenge 5th level characters?". I mean that there's no XP, treasure and magic to be gained -- thus, it's a bit hard to believe that *any* PC archmage would be interested in such a session (it'd be more or less waste of time and resources). There are epic adventures and threats to deal with, anyway -- maybe Szass Tam is developing a potentially apocalyptic Spell, or Manshoon is about to gain a powerful artifact that would help him conquer the Realms. Thus it is quite reasonable why Elminster wouldn't emerge from his tower every time a Zhent agent is scheming a plot in Shadowdale (if the threat was more Epic in nature, then it'd be a different thing, but most "movers and shakers" prefer to work through agents anyway). And you could always just decide that Elminster is travelling on the planes, or in far-away Aglarond or Thay.
GothicDan 10-08-07, 07:09 AM	It just always seems weird to me that people could conceive of worlds in which magic was fairly steadily, powerful, and continuous for hundreds/thousands of years, free to develop on its own, would not slowly acquire a respectable repertoire of upper level spellcasters who effectively played shadow chess with each other. Only things that really were magic-wide threats (ToT doesn't count - Spellplague does) would really winnow down such characters in any great number. Typically, your typical magus is calm, cool, logical, preparatory, very intelligent (if not always wise), and paranoid. Of course, they're also weak and prone to players who roll badly. So, they die within the first 5 levels about three times as often as the other classes (even in 3.5). But, I just fail to see how, once they hit their mid-upper levels, non-magical threats are.. Well, a threat to them. And being as those holding such magical power were those same sly, sneaky, greedily logical self-preservationists, with immortality and an endless world of innovations ahead of them, why would they ever put themselves in danger if they could avoid it? And recall in previous editions (in the Wizard's Handbook, at least), there were specific rules for gaining XP for the creation of new spells, magic items, and resarch - basically, well, you were learning about magic through intense study, rather than picking up spellbooks along the way. For your - again - traditional magus, this was how it was done. Just looking at the core books, I hardly see the logic in this. We don't need Elminster's Evasion, Manshoon's Stasis Clone, or the Simbul's Spell Sequencer to make such lofty, nebulous archmages untouchable. All you need is the PHB and a few compendiums. Why are people so worried about what these NPCs COULD do? NPCs CAN do anything your DM wants them to, and in the case of many of the Epic level spellcasters WotC seems to be targeting, your DM would have to be specifically going against (or at least altering, slightly) the sort of personalities many of the most powerful and experienced of magi in the Realms. (I'm looking at you, Larloch, the Simbul, and Ioulaum.) The Realms is really only an extension of what the D&D rules, under 1E and 2E, would logically have been given the cultural and historical development. (That's a general statement. I heartily agree there's some level inflation). If they plan on actually keeping the new atmosphere of Archmages-Don't-Rule-Faerun, I can see why they actually would have had to have completely redesigned the magic rules.
Stigger 10-08-07, 07:48 AM	Interesting stuff... to be honest, I don't really recall a time when Gray hasn't been pretty much four-square pro-developer, the fan actually has it wrong and should wait until we see the final product... don't recall him ever coming off as quite as condescending as I've read him in this thread, but that's neither here nor there... But a lot of tempers seem to be frayed here of late, and while I find it no surprise that Dan can rise to any arguement, since he does that, I do find one thing kinda troubling. I was expecting, after I read something about styling D&D more after the MMO approach with the fast level-uber specialized character thing to find a lot more about that being blown up over than anything they might have done to the timeline... was actually one of the things that pulled me back here out of a haze of painkillers. Really surprises me that I haven't seen more vitriol decrying little punks and the WOW mania that has seeped in and poisoned their D&D... To be honest, I haven't even gotten a chance to read the whole GHOTR bit yet, as no one in town actually has had a copy since the first day it came out. Been really depressing me actually... now I'm not so sure I actually want it. Not that I won't buy it anyway for the other stuff, but from what I've read, that last bit sounds like utter tripe so far. Afterthought: It kinda occurs to me that the whole MMO mentality could explain the hatred of Mystra and her Chosen... people bred on MMOs coming into D&D and wondering why they can't form up raids on the Chosen or other powerful NPC and go bash them when their spawn timers come up to collect some uber loot and the right to say they've 'Done' Elminster or the Simbul...
Alediran 10-08-07, 08:57 AM	Unfortunately, this thread simply proves that Realms fans, who were once united in their love for something they hold dear, are now divided. We've always had levels of Grognard, fan, and fanatic on these boards, but I think this time the split will be a far more physical one then the usual 'friendly disagreements'. Like several settings before it, the fan-base has now split and I doubt anything will be able to save it after this. History has proven that splitting fans in a niche hobby always leads to that niche disappearing - in this case, the Realms. I wish it weren't so, but I've seen it at least a dozen times before. Who knows? Maybe this time wiill be different... :rolleyes: First, several people have used the 'bad relationship' analogy, but I think they have used is rather poorely (no offense). My Dad, who may not have had a college education, was one of the smartest guys I knew. He had 'horse sense', or what folks would call good old fashioned wisdom. When I was about to be married, he told me "the first time she farts, the Honeymoon is over". Sorry if that sounds gross, but I'm trying to make a point. On the surface, that little kernal of 'wisdom' sounds pretty crude, but you can apply it to just about anything you care about. I have to admit, when the Old Grey box came out I hated it. Not because it was bad, but because it was competing with my beloved Greyhawk. Then I read it, and got to know it and admire it. When 2e came along, that like grew into love, and I dumped my 'ex' (GH) and moved on. The setting was deep, and rich, and full of so many possiblities that it sent my imagination racing (just like a good woman ;) ) Then, when 3e came out - the Realms 'farted'. :( Just like dear old Dad said, "the Honeymoon was over". Don't get me wrong, I still loved it, but there were a few new things about it didn't really care for (like the Tree). However, like any relationship, you adapt and continue to grow into each other. Change isn't bad - it just takes some getting used to. My wife only dyed her hair several times over the cours of my 18 year marriage, and I hated it at first EVERY time. Then I hated it when she changed it back a few months later. thats normal, and we get over those kinds of things. Then all the 4e announcements came out, and our hearts were in our throats. It was like hearing that your loved one was in a car accident. We get some info in the Orc King, and it was like hearing that same loved one is in intensive care. Then we got GHotR, and we found out that our 'love' needs major surgery. The Realms comes out of surgery, and after a few months the bandages come off. Its fine, and its healthy... and it also got a sex change!!! :eek: How do YOU feel now, Grey? Do you still love HIM? You loved who he WAS, but this isn't what you signed up for. We were told it was the only way to save it's life, but we have to now step back and question our own feelings about this. Then, to add insult to injury, we find out the sex-change part wasn't even neccessary! It had nothing top do with the life-saving surgery. Now we have been betrayed, besides... Sounds SICK, huh? I'm a nut-job, right? James Wyatt has stated in his blog the Eberron's timeline will NOT move forward, and there will be minimal changes to the setting to incorporate the new rules. But wait... weren't we Realms fans just told that a complete overhaul was neccessary? Why is it that Eberron, with its completely different Cosmology and quirky magical traditions (Dragonmarks) is able to fit so seemlessly into the new rules, when FR, which is somewhat more 'generic' when it comes to it's fantasy, has to be torn down to the ground? In fact, Mystras Weave should make it so FR is the easiest setting to explain magical changes in. That is where the 'lie' came in. :headexplo Something had to happen with Mystra, but EVERYTHING else was unneccessary. It was not for US, it was for THEM. The novels were starting to interfere with the game, so they moved the timeline forward away from the novels so all of the RSEs that authors (and authors ALONE) seem to love so much wouldn't happen one after another, as they have been. Eberron's novels are NOT canon, and that setting will have NO problems converting to 4e. When the thing you love becomes something else entirely, and you find out it was for all the wrong reasons, then yes, perhaps it IS time to move on. :allalone: You surely wrote what I wanted to tell much better (it's so hard to translate my thoughts in spanish to english :( )
Zanan 10-08-07, 09:47 AM	Please, if you adress or comment on someone with just a sentence, do not quote the whole post. It is easy enough to understand that you refer to the poster's last article anyway.
MarkusTay63 10-08-07, 12:50 PM	You surely wrote what I wanted to tell much better (it's so hard to translate my thoughts in spanish to english :( )Thank You. :bow: And just to clarify - I dislike the Chosen and could give a cr@p about Drizzt. Elminster is cool, but I don't use him IG, and if they kill him INTELLIGENTLY then I wouldn't mind. I think they turned Mystra into a clown - she should have never made so many novel appearances. They claim that Mystra was 'broken' so they got rid of her... but THEY are the ones who BROKE HER!!! Truth be told, I didn't like Helm either, and Cyric being locked up sounds about right. I never used the Dwarven pantheon... I happen to like most of what I'm reading about the 4e rules, and since I have younger players who play MORPGs, making the new rules into an amalgam of P&P and video games is something I can live with. I have always felt that D&D was the 'starter RPG' anyway, and as players mature they can move on to better worlds and rules. If this brings more players over, then more power to it. It's really all about the RP anyway, and I could care less about what rules I use. I'll make sure I train the kiddies right. :P Now, after reading that, you are probably wondering why I am so negative about the new setting. I posted that stuff so you see where I am coming from - I'm not a grognard or curmudgeon or 'Realms Nazi' or anything else we've been called lately. I change MY Realms quite a bit, and even move countries around. I know Dark Wizard does the same, yet like me, he is against many of the things we are reading about with 4e FR. So, why are people who like change against this? Its being done for all the wrong reasons, and with ridiculous story-lines. Everything that is occurring sounds like it was thought of by my 10 year old. Even the novel set in Erlkazar is a complete and total rip-off of the movie Krull - the evil overlord steals the princess?! WTF? Could you get anymore juvenile? The setting isn't being aimed at the MORPG crowd - they happen to be intelligent gamers. It is being aimed at CHILDREN. :ahem: Hasbro IS a TOY company, afterall - they are just aiming this product at their primary demographic. I have no problem with change - Mystra, Chosen, Drizzt, even Elminster... kill 'em all for all I care! Just give us reasons that use common sense and are 'epic', not silly. If I want silly, I'd be playing Pokémon, not Forgotten Realms. I am NOT a grognard, I am just a mature fan that hates seeing his favorite setting violated this way. I don't want to argue with anyone, and it's true that I don't own any 4e Realms products. But what little has been 'leaked' to us is pretty poor quality, so THAT is all we have to go on at this point. I sincerely hope I am dead wrong and they produce something of superb quality by August - I will gladly eat my words.
Alediran 10-08-07, 01:05 PM	That is why WotC should listen more to what we say. IMC I love those things you hate and both of us think the same about this 4ed FR.
Hopeless 10-08-07, 02:38 PM	-Why are you talking about Elminster and Drizzt in the Eberron forums? -Is this the same Grey that argued highly against- quite a while, now, mind you- allowing mechanics influence lore (ie, the Epic Magic system, and Elven High Magic)? Eberron is the only place El would be safe from the spellplague and Drizzt is the only person who could keep him safe whilst he's there... after all he'll probably be dead drunk most of the time and can you think of anyone other then Storm Silverhand who could keep him safe there? Hey maybe she did avoid the fate of the other chosen after all!
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-08-07, 04:21 PM	Rich Baker talks about moving on to tell more stories about Cyric (now his betrayal is complete) and Shar (now she's killed her main rival)... But what about Mystra's story? Her story just got cut short, and there's no going back for canon Realms now. It's too bad, boo hoo... We're told we just have to like it or lump it. It's hardly fair, IMHO. Yes, what about Mystra's story? I was more interested in new stories about her than new stories about Shar or Cyric.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-08-07, 04:32 PM	Why are people so worried about what these NPCs COULD do? I don't have the answer to this, but I have the feeling it comes down to the narcissistic conceit that the PCs should be the most powerful and important characters anywhere they go. That is, it's the "it's all about the PCs" mantra taken to it's logical extreme. Nevermind that there are other adventurers out there, and that there have been adventurers who were successful before they came on the scene.
Stigger 10-08-07, 05:07 PM	There certainly does seem to be a lot of extremes of late... guess the contagion of the Real-World's extremisms have hit FR full on in the face.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-08-07, 07:19 PM	Well, it's hard for changes like those that were announced not to be divisive and controversial.:)
Mr_Miscellany 10-08-07, 07:52 PM	It just always seems weird to me that people could conceive of worlds in which magic was fairly steadily, powerful, and continuous for hundreds/thousands of years, free to develop on its own, would not slowly acquire a respectable repertoire of upper level spell casters who effectively played shadow chess with each other. Fair enough. Now make that world a game setting for D&D and explain to the players of that game that no matter what their characters do, numerous other NPCs will always overshadow them, having accomplished deeds much greater than the PCs will ever achieve. While each DM is free to 'set the scale' of things, as it were, once a game world-turned-D&D-product starts picking up a negative inertia born partly in truth and partly in negative stereotype, then players and DMs start carrying this inertia with them in their heads about that setting. So as a company owning that world, do you try and slowly mitigate the drag (as they tried with 3E) or do you decide once and for all to cut it loose (no matter how much of the world has to be cut off in the process) for the betterment of the setting as a whole? :::: The argument can't just be about what's in teh setting, it has to include gamer and fan perceptions of the Realms as well. :whatsthis
Stigger 10-08-07, 08:06 PM	If you're cutting apart the world 'for the betterment of the setting as a whole', and ditching great swaths of it in the process, it's hardly the same setting anymore... perhaps a smarter thing to do would be to combat the perceptions of the setting with more reconciled and updated lore and doing your best to educate DM's and players alike, perhaps even demonstrating the beauty and complexity of the setting rather than taking a chainsaw to it and plopping a brand new setting on top of the Realm's maps...
Dark Wizard 10-08-07, 08:07 PM	The way I see it they aren't trying to change the fan and gamer perceptions at all. In fact the designers seem to actively promote the negative perception despite lore that says otherwise by confirming the setting has gotten too much of something or another. They're making people think the setting is so bad that they absolutely needed a massive cataclysm and a possibly large time line jump to distance themselves from the problems. I'm not sure how other gamers might take this, but if I was new to the Realms it seems the designers made the setting seem far too messy for me to be interested. Especially when you have a mix of older players saying things like: "What the hell happened to the setting I liked" to "Good riddance, about time they put down that ridiculous setting like a lame horse."
SgtAnjay 10-08-07, 09:18 PM	Fair enough. Now make that world a game setting for D&D and explain to the players of that game that no matter what their characters do, numerous other NPCs will always overshadow them, having accomplished deeds much greater than the PCs will ever achieve. And there, exactly, is where the disconnect lies. They haven't accomplished deeds much greater than the PCs will ever achieve; by their nature as former adventurers, they show the PCs what they are capable of over time. For an NPC to overshadow a PC, the DM has to actually be using them to overshadow a PC. That's bad DMing, not a problem with the setting. But let's not be coy, here; a huge part of the problem the problem isn't that NPCs are so mighty, its players that resent not being the best there's ever been from the start.
Gray Richardson 10-08-07, 09:50 PM	The sheer level of fanaticism I've seen in Gray (JUST in this thread, mind you - it's not a remark on his character as far as I know) really does disturb me. I was not trying to demonize the credibility of the opposing opinion (though I do fully support credentials). It was a totally sincere, somewhat awed expression of confusion, grief, and curiosity.Please quit characterizing me as a fanatic. I am not one. That is as inaccurate a description of me than if I were to describe you in every post as a "Realms Hater." I am willing to accept you at your word that you are a fan of the Realms in your own way. I am a fan, sure, but I am not a "Faerûn, Love it or Leave it" reactionary. I think I have acknowledged again and again that I accept people can be Realms fans and still have issues with changes or problems that they see in the Realms. My love of the Realms is not blind or unwavering. I just simply find that the majority of Realms lore published in the last few years has been pleasing to me and consonant with my own vision of the Realms. While there may be the odd bit of lore here and there that seems ill-conceived, silly or wrong to me, I don't dwell on that. For the most part I find those few flaws to be unremarkable. That is to say, I don't feel especially moved to write volumes of posts on these forums criticizing such things ad nauseum. I just ignore the lore I dislike, or try to find an explanation that rehabilitates that lore, making it more palatable for me. I find bad lore to be a challenge to improve on or to explain it away. But the gist of the message I have been trying to put across in this thread is to advocate for civility and against being mean, and especially against alarmism and hysteria. There seem to be a lot of people shouting for us all to grab up pitchforks and torches to storm the castle. But I think some restraint is now in order. Clearly there are big changes in store for the Realms. And I understand that many fans have questions, are afraid, or may not like the changes. But I think there are civil ways to express one's dissatisfactions, calm and thoughtful ways of expressing fear, and productive ways of influencing the designers and signaling one's dissatisfaction to WoTC. Constructive criticism and reasonable discussion certainly have a place on these forums. Behavior that I think is inappropriate is bashing the designers, expressing jingoistic and extreme statements, trashing WotC and it's products, fear mongering, and promulgating incorrect statements about things WotC has published, or not actually published, as the case may be.To me? A fanatic is someone who follows a dogma - typically moral, or otherwise having some occult, hyper-cultural, spiritual, or philosophical - in such a way that he or she is not able to analyze its proclamations, both taking into account introspection and outside sources.I hope that I have demonstrated that I do not espouse a dogma, and am able to analyze statements both introspectively and take objective criticism. While I think I have tried to communicate that all along, if I have not succeeded, then I will try to be more clear in future. And if you will go back and read what I have actually said I think you will see it is not dogmatic.People like to say that I haven't liked much (or anything) that's been put out recently. While that's simply in part false, I also would ask: So what?I don't actually like to say it. I think I have held my tongue about it for several years. But I thought it was germane to this thread (since you did volunteer yourself to be singled out) to point out that you are not someone who has only recently become upset with the proposed changes for 4e. Rather, for many years you have pretty frequently expressed profoundly negative posts about a great many of the sourcebooks released in 3e and many of the designers that have written them. But I do agree with you, "So what?" It is a free country, feel free to say what you want. I offered the information only in the interests of full disclosure to the gathered crowd. I thought it was only fair that people should know you have been "crying wolf" for years. If you recall the tale, the little boy who cried wolf was not truly afraid of a wolf, he just liked all the attention he got from stirring the villagers up. I think it fair that people know that about you, just as you have made it clear that I have long been one to express a positive view of the Realms and its published works.He didn't maniacally squeak out how amazing this or that wasA dig at me I take it?and he didn't tell me that what I liked was outmoded, 'grognardy,' ossified, or stale.I like old Realms stuff too, so I can't remember ever calling you a grognard, or liking outmoded, ossified or stale lore. My positive attitude about new lore has never been an indictment of you or the old lore. Just an honest expression of how I feel.I don't want you to tell me how good or bad a product is.You say you don't want anyone (I take it me specifically) to express positive reviews of a product? to express how they feel? how much they like a product? but you feel compelled to express vocally, and often, your own negative opinions of products? I feel that if you reflect on that you will see it lacks a degree of introspection and marks a failure on your part to apply to yourself the standards you set for others. If anything, I regard negative criticism as an invitation to express opposing viewpoints. That is the purpose of discussion, right? When people feel free to express their negative views, I figure it is fair to express a positive viewpoint if I have one. Why is it that you only want to hear people's opinions that agree with your negative viewpoint? A forum is supposed to be an open place for the free exchange of ideas. I think you should reexamine your views about whether you believe in freedom of speech for all or only freedom of speech for Dan and the guys he agrees with.So, many people want to remove all negativity and criticism.No. I think negativity has its place. I just think it should be balanced, thoughtful, and civil. And when it falls short of that, it should be called out, or challenged by a heartfelt expression of an opposing viewpoint. Same with criticism. There is constructive criticism, the kind that might actually have an impact on the people you are trying to persuade, and then there is the bad kind of criticism that is uninformed, reactionary, and mean-spirited. The one has a place in these forums, the other is perhaps more appropriate for the alley behind the schoolyard. I come to the forums to discuss ideas. Not to hear people express negative comments about the Realms, or dis the books I like and the hobby I enjoy. But I tolerate the negative posts. The fact that I get a hefty dose of negativity when I come to these forums is the price I have to pay of sifting through the dross to find the gems, those good ideas and discussions that make it worth coming here. I just would hate to see the negativity scare off the people with the cool ideas and the quieter, friendly voices. If that happens it will be a loss for all our community.They want to remove complaints, and promote only optimism and happy chorus singers.No, I would just like you to dial it back a bit. I haven't heard any such outcry. And lately it strikes me that the negativity far outstrips the optimistic voices. And the moderators have shown surprising restraint. No one has been censored. I don't think there is any danger of any "tyranny of the happy chorus singers" compelling sweetness and light any time soon.While I'm hardly an anarch troll hell-bent on pushing my agenda, forums are meant for people to discuss things with each other, to voice all opinions, good or bad, and for WotC in this case to get some more information.I agree. You preach tolerance for complaining and negativity, fair enough, but you don't seem to exhibit much tolerance for people expressing positive opinions or support for the designers. Moreover, I get the impression you like to criticize designers, products and other forum members, but you seem somewhat thin-skinned to have people offer you criticism, complain, or express negative thoughts about yourself in return.Dogmatic positive feedback to someone (or organization, or whatnot) is just as bad as negativity. That's why formal debates have had Negatives and Positives for years. I'll be positive about what I feel positive about, and negative about what I feel negative about.Fair enough, although it strikes me that you seem to view all positive opinions as "dogmatic." Above, you stated that you only wanted to hear "facts" not opinions. And you expressed intolerance for positive opinions. But then a little later you plead for tolerance for your negative opinions. You should expect that I will also be positive about what I feel positive about, and will express negative opinions about what I feel negative about. I think I have demonstrated that I am not some dogmatic, rose-spectacled Pollyanna. I am certainly capable of expressing negative criticism (but I hope constructive criticism) when it is warranted, but I bet you didn't expect it to be leveled at you, though, did you? ;)
Lord Karsus 10-08-07, 10:43 PM	Eberron is the only place El would be safe from the spellplague... -Presumably, Elminster could 'flee' to any other Crystal Sphere or Plane to escape it. Please quit characterizing me as a fanatic. I am not one. That is as inaccurate a description of me than if I were to describe you in every post as a "Realms Hater." I am willing to accept you at your word that you are a fan of the Realms in your own way. -Dan specifically mentioned "in this thread". If you take a look back at your first post (#14), I'm going to have to agree that it is on the borderline of fanaticism. You present much of your argument through very rosy colored glasses. Not that that is bad, in and of itself, but that is a characteristic of fanaticism. If you doted a little more on the things that WotC 'dropped the ball on', then I'd not be accusing you of this.
johnkretzer 10-08-07, 10:44 PM	But I do agree with you, "So what?" It is a free country, feel free to say what you want. I offered the information only in the interests of full disclosure to the gathered crowd. I thought it was only fair that people should know you have been "crying wolf" for years. If you recall the tale, the little boy who cried wolf was not truly afraid of a wolf, he just liked all the attention he got from stirring the villagers up. So let me get this straight you want us to accept that they have been doing a good job for the past edition. And that your likeing of the new realms is you honest opinion. I can accept though I doubt you had much respect for previous lore. But since Gothicdan has never like the changes the snuck in and expressed his opinion about that was just "crying wolf"? That Dan is just trying to get attention....wow. And that it isn't his opinion it is just to get the attention of a bunch of strangers on the boards. I have disagreed with Gothicdan on some issues of Realm Lore interpertation alot of times. It wasn't just to get people angry he felt it was important to the Realms. Now here you come and preach "I have faith in the design team, they have done good in the past 8 years." You haven't actualy expressed what they have done that was so good...you haven't even tried to defend the changes in the GHotR. All you have done is come in and pretty much said nothing of value..."wait and see" sure and look where that got us with the stupid Spellplague. And anybody who has express a different opinion you said we don't have all the facts( I got enough to know that Cyric kills Mystra because it was a 'good' ending that story) and other nonsense that pretty proves to me that they won't actualy fix what is wrong. Yet I believe you will just say...wait. I have waited for 8 years watching it get worse and worse...finally 4th editon comes out and what do we get is not only the same crap they have been giving us it just was too big to ignore this time. Yet you continue to tell us to wait and tell us to ignore Dan because he just wants the attention. Yup I am a poor debater but I see you went to the current politcal idealogy of debate...say nothing and attack you opponents... If you want to actualy make a point for the changes please do so...but till you do I will just consider you 'crying wolf' and ignore you.
Gray Richardson 10-08-07, 11:23 PM	I'm going to have to agree that it is on the borderline of fanaticism. You present much of your argument through very rosy colored glasses. Not that that is bad, in and of itself, but that is a characteristic of fanaticism. If you doted a little more on the things that WotC 'dropped the ball on', then I'd not be accusing you of this.Do you really feel that there is a dearth of negative criticism on these boards? No one needs to hear my voice added to the lynch mob, it is loud enough already. And I just don't have anything negative I feel like saying about WotC. Is expressing negative criticism of WotC the only shibboleth you require for admission to the treehouse? No thanks, I don't want to be a member of that club. I do not accept your statement that "optimism" is characteristic of fanaticism. In fact, fanatics are always promoting retribution against some "Great Satan" or other. Fanatics are always mad at someone. Who is demonizing WotC I ask you? Some of the negative voices on these forums are so shrill, strident and hysterical as to strike me as fanatical. But hey, your mileage may vary.
msatran 10-08-07, 11:32 PM	Sigh. The original box is Green, not Grey. It's still first edition and it's got a 1987 print date. I still have a shrink wrapped copy in my basement. :)
SgtAnjay 10-08-07, 11:46 PM	I do not accept your statement that "optimism" is characteristic of fanaticism. In fact, fanatics are always promoting retribution against some "Great Satan" or other. Fanatics are always mad at someone. Who is demonizing WotC I ask you? Some of the negative voices on these forums are so shrill, strident and hysterical as to strike me as fanatical. But hey, your mileage may vary. Fanatic is always a two-way street; humans are like that. People polarize to both sides. One side is negative about the changes, and are shrill, strident, and near-hysterical. Fanatical, in short. The other side is champions the changes; they are no less shrill, no less strident, no less hysterical. They are just as fanatical, and the fact that they oppose people being negative doesn't make them any less fanatical. The end key is what they are saying of substance, though. Are they saying "this sucks, I hate it", or are they saying "this sucks, because of this, and you can see this, and therefore this"? Are they saying "this is great, I like it", or are they actually saying "This is great, because of this, and you can see this, and therefore this"? If they're saying either of the formers, they're not saying much regardless of how long or numerous their posts are or which side they're on. If they're doing the later, it doesn't matter whether they're happy or negative, the statements have merit and substance.
Lord Karsus 10-08-07, 11:46 PM	Do you really feel that there is a dearth of negative criticism on these boards? No one needs to hear my voice added to the lynch mob, it is loud enough already. -Had you done so, then we would be not sitting here discussing the possibility of your possible WotC fanaticism. I do not accept your statement that "optimism" is characteristic of fanaticism. In fact, fanatics are always promoting retribution against some "Great Satan" or other. Fanatics are always mad at someone. Who is demonizing WotC I ask you? Some of the negative voices on these forums are so shrill, strident and hysterical as to strike me as fanatical. But hey, your mileage may vary. -As has been pointed out, the definiton of fanatic is someone who expresses an "extreme and uncritical viewpoint" of something. Again, in this thread, your viewpoint of the Realms, and the direction that they are heading in, has been "extreme and uncritical". Things have not always been rosy (nor have they been horrible). Things are not going to go "sailing into the sun, happily" (nor will the setting come crashing down on itself). -Promoting retribution has nothing to do with the definition of fanaticism. By definition, fanatics are not always mad at someone. Do not try to muddy the waters.
MarkusTay63 10-08-07, 11:54 PM	Yours is moldy - mine was Grey. :P Strange, I can only find the bottom of the box ATM (the books were moved years ago to the newer box). Funny, but the picture on the back must be Ao, before there even was an Ao. :D Eberron is the only place El would be safe from the spellplague and Drizzt is the only person who could keep him safe whilst he's there... after all he'll probably be dead drunk most of the time and can you think of anyone other then Storm Silverhand who could keep him safe there? Hey maybe she did avoid the fate of the other chosen after all!I believe El has all 12 Dragonmarks on his behind. He may even have the evil 13th one, on his 'manly dagger'. ;)
Gray Richardson 10-09-07, 12:29 AM	So let me get this straight you want us to accept that they have been doing a good job for the past edition.I honestly do believe that. I don't care if you accept it. It is true that WotC has been doing a good job writing Realms Lore since they took over the setting. For you to say otherwise I think is dishonest and jingoistic. And whether you believe it or not, I just think someone should say it, because discussion involves presenting both sides, and not enough people are speaking out against the negative posters.that your likeing of the new realms is you honest opinion. I can accept though I doubt you had much respect for previous lore.Hey, now. That is pretty low! The way you attack people is the tactic of a schoolyard bully. Just so you know, I own something like 90% of all the Realms lore published since the begining of D&D. I don't profess to be as knowledgeable as Kuje or Old Sage, but I think my Realms chops are pretty well credentialed. I have written a number of articles for the fan-produced Candlekeep Compendium e-zine, and I think you will find what I write is very respectful of all the old lore. When I research my answers on the boards even, I usually dive way back in to 1st and 2nd edition books to make sure I have my facts checked before answering. So when you attack me as not being respectful of old lore, I can say quite honestly, you really don't have your facts straight.But since Gothicdan has never like the changes the snuck in and expressed his opinion about that was just "crying wolf"?I don't understand your question. :confused: You seem to have misunderstood the reference.That Dan is just trying to get attention....wow. And that it isn't his opinion it is just to get the attention of a bunch of strangers on the boards.That should not be so surprising to you, John. You yourself seem to also be looking for some kind of approval and affirmation. Heck, John, you seem to be just about every 3rd every third or fourth post in every thread on the board. I think we all are in some fashion looking for attention. We are trying to be heard and communicate with others out there.Now here you come and preach "I have faith in the design team, they have done good in the past 8 years."If you want to characterize it as preaching, go ahead. That sounds like a way of characterizing (or demonizing) what someone has to say in such a way as to dismiss the content of what he is saying. I would ask you to listen with more of an open mind. Yes, I do have faith in the design team. They are good people. They are really good writers. I really like what I have read from them. And they have been really nice and friendly about answering questions on the boards.You haven't actualy expressed what they have done that was so good...Since you need reminding, there have been a number of really wonderful sourcebooks that WotC put out. Most recently Grand History of the Realms then there was the Waterdeep City of Splendors, and Silver Marches was excellent. Lords of Darkness (have you read it? It's really good, I go back to it again and again) Unapproachable East. Dragons of Faerun. Power of Faerun. City of the Spider Queen. Draconomicon. Shining South. Monsters of Faerun actually has a lot of interesting lore in it. Lost Empires of Faerun. Serpent Kingdoms. There were the Volo's guide articles in the recent Dragon Magazine. And the 3e FRCS that started it all off for 3e is truly a dense and beautiful book, packed full of wonderful maps, lore and art. Have I listed enough things that WotC has done right? Or would you like me to go on?you haven't even tried to defend the changes in the GHotR.You are right. I don't think it needs defending. Brian put years of work into that marvelous storehouse of knowledge. Then, a lot of the top Realms designers got together and added even more wondrous things into it. And people are all in a tizzy over a couple of paragraphs on the back page? A tempest in a teapot if you ask me. All you have done is come in and pretty much said nothing of value...Sorry you feel that way. I feel you could take a great deal of value away with you if you would just be open to my message of civility."wait and see" sure and look where that got us with the stupid Spellplague.Now, now, calling things "stupid" isn't the mark of enlightened discussion. That's the schoolyard bully talking again. And anybody who has express a different opinion you said we don't have all the facts( I got enough to know that Cyric kills Mystra because it was a 'good' ending that story)No, no, it's possible to have your facts straight and disagree with me. It's just that you yourself don't have your facts straight and it would behoove you to do that before you post.finally 4th editon comes out and what do we get is not only the same crapWatch your language there, mister!Yet you continue to tell us to wait and tell us to ignore Dan because he just wants the attention.I don't remember telling anyone to ignore Dan. I said listen to both sides.If you want to actualy make a point for the changes please do so...but till you do I will just consider you 'crying wolf' and ignore you.I really wish you would. I don't think you have it in you though to ignore me. You seem to be afflicted with the compulsive posting bug. I expect you will continue to go on posting a response to every post I make, personally attacking me. But if you could muster such restraint as to ignore me, I think that would be very nice for all concerned. ;)
Kuje31 10-09-07, 01:16 AM	I just logging in, for a moment, to ask, please don't get me involved in this debate. No, this isn't directed at anyone in particular, I just am tired of my name being dragged around in posts that have nothing to do with me. That is all and now, I'll go back to 'Keep.
Dark Wizard 10-09-07, 01:20 AM	And whether you believe it or not, I just think someone should say it, because discussion involves presenting both sides, and not enough people are speaking out against the negative posters. So why does presenting both sides of an argument have to involve making statements against the personal characters of the opposing posters? Why are we letting this thing escalate and getting increasingly personal anyway? For a little while, it seemed the negativity might just die down a bit. Now it seems it rose to a whole new level.
johnkretzer 10-09-07, 01:38 AM	I honestly do believe that. I don't care if you accept it. It is true that WotC has been doing a good job writing Realms Lore since they took over the setting. For you to say otherwise I think is dishonest and jingoistic. Again you prove me right...rather or not they are doing a good job is a matter of opinion. And I disagree with so my opinion is dishonest and jingoistic....instead of actualy saying what they are doing you just insulted me for disagreeing with you. And whether you believe it or not, I just think someone should say it, because discussion involves presenting both sides, and not enough people are speaking out against the negative posters.. Again I am still waiting for you side of things....doubt I'll get it. Hey, now. That is pretty low! The way you attack people is the tactic of a schoolyard bully. Again dismissing by labeling me as a school yard bully. If you really respected the old lore then I don't see how you can like these new changes that ignore it. Just so you know, I own something like 90% of all the Realms lore published since the begining of D&D. So,I own everything. Not impressed I don't understand your question. :confused: You seem to have misunderstood the reference.That should not be so surprising to you, John. You yourself seem to also be looking for some kind of approval and affirmation. That is because I feel so strongly about this I am trying I have to vent it. I would ask you to listen with more of an open mind. Actualy if you have read my post I have been very open minded about this. I am just tired of being discounted by people like you. Since you need reminding, there have been a number of really wonderful sourcebooks that WotC put out. Most recently Grand History of the Realms then there was the Waterdeep City of Splendors, and Silver Marches was excellent. Lords of Darkness (have you read it? It's really good, I go back to it again and again) Unapproachable East. Dragons of Faerun. Power of Faerun. City of the Spider Queen. Draconomicon. Shining South. Monsters of Faerun actually has a lot of interesting lore in it. Lost Empires of Faerun. Serpent Kingdoms. There were the Volo's guide articles in the recent Dragon Magazine. And the 3e FRCS that started it all off for 3e is truly a dense and beautiful book, packed full of wonderful maps, lore and art. Have I listed enough things that WotC has done right? Or would you like me to go on? While those were ok books alot of it rewrote the lore of the Realms in minor ways. I disliked that. Also I pretty much automaticaly ignore modules as I don't like running them as the tend to be a bit too railroady for the way I run my game. Sure tell me what was so good about them? You are right. I don't think it needs defending. Brian put years of work into that marvelous storehouse of knowledge. Then, a lot of the top Realms designers got together and added even more wondrous things into it. And people are all in a tizzy over a couple of paragraphs on the back page? A tempest in a teapot if you ask me. Actualy I have directly complimented the author on his work...and recently told someone that they should buy it. I have also said that the last two years detailed did not detract at all from the book as a whole or should be a reflection on Brain. But those last two years were the signs of things to come. Now, now, calling things "stupid" isn't the mark of enlightened discussion. That's the schoolyard bully talking again. Would you perfer not well thought out? No, no, it's possible to have your facts straight and disagree with me. It's just that you yourself don't have your facts straight and it would behoove you to do that before you post. Ok so which facts do you think I have gotten wrong? Watch your language there, mister! How old do you think I am? Again with the belittling....sigh I don't remember telling anyone to ignore Dan. I said listen to both sides. But you felt the need to discredit anything Dan said as crying wolf...to me that means you are saying all that is just Dan crying wolf. It is the same thing you did at the start of you post with your calling me dishonset and jingoistic. Both comments tend to me that instead of actualy um discussing you are name calling. I really wish you would. I don't think you have it in you though to ignore me. You seem to be afflicted with the compulsive posting bug. I expect you will continue to go on posting a response to every post I make, personally attacking me. But if you could muster such restraint as to ignore me, I think that would be very nice for all concerned. ;) I have yet to personaly attack you. Though you treat my attacks on the changes as personal attacks. Aren't you taking this a little personaly? Are you one of the designers by chance? They seemd to be taking the critism really personal. I just answeared to clear up some mistakes you made...and also yet again to show what you are. Also I said if you came back with some fact about what was so great about either the changes that have been revealed or what they have done that is so good I would answeared. I figured you made a weak attempt at putting forth a list of books( which is very funny since they are even contradicting things in those books as well) that I'll see if maybe you might have some worth while thoughts to dd to this discussion instead of the normal invectness you seem to bring to the table. I do like to keep a open minded with people who are civil. Though I really think you don't have anything. Also if you are going to answear somebody please answear all their statements and quote all of what they are saying revelant to the quote.
Gray Richardson 10-09-07, 01:42 AM	There's that compulsive posting again. Poor John, I was just about to accept Dark Wizard's offer of a truce. But he couldn't keep his promise not to respond. ;) Actually, tell you what, let's let that be a freebie. I won't respond to that. I think people have enough info to judge what we have both been saying. I didn't start it but I don't mind ending it. Each one of my comments has been a response to someone who directed questions or personal comments to me. But if anyone is interested, I am offering a truce. If you refrain from making personal comments towards me, I will not make any personal comments towards anyone else. Deal? ;)
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 02:08 AM	Breaking apart people's posts is considered antagonizing by most intelligent readers. Even if done in a nice and polite way, it will still be misconstrued as beligerant. So everyone please stop it (the antagonizism). No one is going to change anyone else's mind, so we should all get on with our lives and do with 4e whatever we like. Nothing in any book we already own is going to change, so the only problem is if you feel you must follow official changes. Why anyone would feel that way about a made-up fantasy setting is beyond me. The only people whose live will be effected by any of this in the RW are the folks at WotC. Why should any of us get upset about that? We have always been able to use whatever we liked and toss the rest, so let's move on. The 4e threads are getting boring and repetative. Aren't there more fun things we can talk about, like having our teeth drilled? :bored: They want the HYPE - don't feed the trolls. ;)
johnkretzer 10-09-07, 02:10 AM	There's that compulsive posting again. Poor John, I was just about to accept Dark Wizard's offer of a truce. But he couldn't keep his promise not to respond. ;) Actually, tell you what, let's let that be a freebie. I won't respond to that. I think people have enough info to judge what we have both been saying. I didn't start it but I don't mind ending it. Each one of my comments has been a response to someone who directed questions or personal comments to me. But if anyone is interested, I am offering a truce. If you refrain from making personal comments towards me, I will not make any personal comments towards anyone else. Deal? ;) An yet you keep responding too.... But I agree to this truce. I have been actualy really good about not getting into personal attacks...but you bring out the worst in me... but Truce. This boards is big enough if we can't play nice we can go some where else.
Dark Wizard 10-09-07, 02:16 AM	After Rich's Ask the Designers post today, I think we're going to get through as much opinion as we're going to get through (that goes for both sides of the argument). What the designers do with the comments is their business (literally).
Mr_Miscellany 10-09-07, 02:34 AM	They haven't accomplished deeds much greater than the PCs will ever achieve; by their nature as former adventurers, they show the PCs what they are capable of over time. Numerous novels and sourcebooks beg to differ. The actions of the Chosen being at the forefront of a long list of NPCs who each singularly can outshine the actions of any number of whole groups of PC adventurers. For an NPC to overshadow a PC, the DM has to actually be using them to overshadow a PC. That's bad DMing, not a problem with the setting. Again, incorrect. For an NPC to overshadow a PC, all a player needs to do is read a novel with teh Chosen in it, then carry the memory of that reading with him when he goes to play a D&D game in the Forgotten Realms. But let's not be coy, here; a huge part of the problem the problem isn't that NPCs are so mighty, its players that resent not being the best there's ever been from the start. I know of many players who'd like nothing more than to off Elminster, so I can see just what you're saying. A'course, many a DM has done just that with a simple hand-wave. ;) :::::::::: It's the accumulation of these not-quite-false perceptions over time that hurts the Realms, insomuch as I'm daring to guess at the thinking of the current crop of game designers/their POV.
SgtAnjay 10-09-07, 04:27 AM	As I said in my previous post, its a disconnect. A complete disconnect, in fact, and all we can do is repeat our own points of view at each other ad nauseam because we're not going to come to an agreement here. Some see a problem. Some dont. Its entirely point of view and opinion. Those of us who haven't experience a problem aren't going to suddenly feel like we've been duped for years and be convinced how lame our PCs are in comparison to various NPCs, because we haven't and they weren't. Just so happens to accomodate one point of view, its felt neccesary to destroy alot of things unique and iconic to the Realms that have been there from the beginning. I, not having that point of view, am in the unenviable position of having to loose something I like because other people dont like it. Don't expect joy and optimism to ensue. Oh, and its pretty ironic Elminster to mention as an NPC that is wanted "off-ed".....since, you know, he's still gonna be around after these vaunted changes.
GothicDan 10-09-07, 07:16 AM	[EDIT: In rereading my post, I realized how misleading this first sentence is. I shouldn't be allowed to choose words any more in writing if all of the following blabbing constitutes an 'only.'] The only actual thing that I felt strongly enough to respond, after reading all of that, was something like this: I still don't see anyone tackling my main point. This being, fanaticism is not defined as being critical and analytic of an expression of art. When I said it included dogmatism, I simply meant dogma as a way of perceiving some establishment or rule as set in stone. That stone doesn't have to be written anywhere; it could be in your head, or your heart, or whatever. I criticize everything, even things I like - perhaps things I like the most, since they mean the most to me, so I have the strongest feelings about them. Sort of circular and obvious, but there it is. Many people think that there's too much negativity flying about. I don't think that at all, and nor do I think that there's too much positivism overall. What I think, is that there's a whole lot of people not being able to really communicate their reasons for feeling negative or positive, because at the root of it all, it's emotional. I am not a fanatic. (Except for Planescape. Oops.) It was made very clear what being a fanatic is currently defined as (one way, at least). It's a LACK of criticism about something, typically SOME form of social/psychological construct (what I called 'dogma'). Just because the majority of my sentiments happen to not coincide with those of certain designers or authors, doesn't mean that I'm fanatical to the cause - because I DO analyze those things that interest me. And, I was simply saying how I PERSONALLY get interested in topics. I'm not saying that there's some ethical or moral code behind that, which generalizes it to anyone else. I KNOW most people don't feel that way I do about positive/negative criticism (I also am immediately wary of people who give out free things...), so there's no point in me trying to treat everyone like they're clones of me. Also, Gray, I was not in ANY way saying you were CHARACTERIZED as a fanatic. Amazingly enough, I said it nearly word for word in what you quoted. I said, SPECIFICALLY, that in the previous posts, you gave the appearance of fanaticism. But I know some people who genuinely think that people with Disassociative Identity Disorder are really just lying to the psychologists. My comment was in no way insulting, given that one official definition of a fanatic was brought up which directly reflected on your representation on this thread far more than mine. Diction sucks like that. Also, I'd like to point out the irony here. You said this: But, while Gothic Dan may be equally passionate, I would not count him a Realms "fan" exactly, a fanatic perhaps, yes. He does not love the Realms, so much as stalks it obsessively with the hatred of a spurned lover. So, you felt personally offended at the (not fully correct) inference that your expressions on this board fit one accepted definition of fanaticism to near perfection. Read the definition again. Read your sentiments. Contrast and compare. Now, look at what I've said. How in the world am I supposed to think that trying to hold discourse with you will ever actually result in an exchange of ideas and THINKING (not just ideas!), when you've accused me of being something I'm basically the opposite of, FIRST, and took offense to me labeling you with a fairly accurate, dictionary-backed definition that you clearly showed you fit in NUMEROUS statements on the very same thread. I'm boggled, and I'm wondering what the world's coming to. Now, I'm going to thermodynamics. For some reason, it's so much easier to communicate with science. Or at least, it is now that there's been a modern standardization of terminologies and units and such, with very little room for personal opinion resulting in people having a conversation like, "But muons weren't originally called that..." A muon is defined. Done. Just like 'fanatic' is. It may be defined in a few different ways, but I don't think they vary so much from one another that it would really alter the course of events of the above discussion much.
Alediran 10-09-07, 08:54 AM	Fair enough. Now make that world a game setting for D&D and explain to the players of that game that no matter what their characters do, numerous other NPCs will always overshadow them, having accomplished deeds much greater than the PCs will ever achieve. While each DM is free to 'set the scale' of things, as it were, once a game world-turned-D&D-product starts picking up a negative inertia born partly in truth and partly in negative stereotype, then players and DMs start carrying this inertia with them in their heads about that setting. So as a company owning that world, do you try and slowly mitigate the drag (as they tried with 3E) or do you decide once and for all to cut it loose (no matter how much of the world has to be cut off in the process) for the betterment of the setting as a whole? :::: The argument can't just be about what's in teh setting, it has to include gamer and fan perceptions of the Realms as well. :whatsthis Isn't that what happens in the real world? Could you become greater than Albert Einsten or Isaac Newton? Well you can, but only if it is your destiny. In the Realms the player's characters CAN become the greatest, is just not the easy path. If the player's want to be the greatest in what they do, then they'll have to make their greatest effort to do that. Same as real life.
Zanan 10-09-07, 09:13 AM	GothicDan ... could we ... on a sunny afternoon in front of some shining scrying pools .. get together and I explain to you the use of quotations with the name of the person you actually quoted? I'll even leave the undead at home.
Lord Karsus 10-09-07, 10:09 AM	Breaking apart people's posts is considered antagonizing by most intelligent readers. Even if done in a nice and polite way, it will still be misconstrued as beligerant. -Only to those with thin skin. I actually prefer it, because it lets me know exactly what points in a post someone is adressing.
Stigger 10-09-07, 10:16 AM	Hmm.. was going to add something, but Alediran pretty much covered it looking back at it. *snickers about Zanan's comments there though* Don't recall Dan often doing that whole attribution thing. Kinda suspect he thinks it should be obvious, and if you can't bother looking it up then he has no time for you. Sounds like Dan anyway... :D
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 11:45 AM	-Only to those with thin skin. I actually prefer it, because it lets me know exactly what points in a post someone is adressing.True, if you or I or anyone else was discussing a game TOPIC and pointing out why we believe the other may be wrong. But in this case, it is being done because folks have differing OPINIONS, and opinions are something that CAN'T be wrong, because by their very nature they are subjective, and rely on the personality of the person having them. No one is going to change anyone's opinions on this subject, because there simply isn't enough 4e information available for ANY of us to base our arguments on. Once 4e comes out, we can scream at each other until we are blue in the face. ;)
Hopeless 10-09-07, 12:00 PM	Apologies if this has already been mentioned but i got wondering is the real reason for the appalling love triangle is because if Helm was actually slain in the course of his duties Ao would be forces to return Helm "to life" because he was doing his duty and that isn't what WOTC want. They want to kill off as many deities as they can and rewrite Faerun to match their perceived view on the setting regardless of the viepoint of anyone who actually LIKES the setting. And another definition of "fanatic" is someone who refuses to accept others may have a different point of view. And yes the plan as far as we can see does truly suck lemons... I'm not a Faerun die hard fan and I really don't care for what I'm hearing... and for the record I CAN DO BETTER. But so can lots of others even you if you tried. So DO IT ALREADY!
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 01:12 PM	I think Cyric and Sar planned the entire thing during Ao's vacation. Overgods get one year off every millenium, so they've been plotting for quite some time. :P
Gray Richardson 10-09-07, 01:32 PM	Apologies if this has already been mentioned but i got wondering is the real reason for the appalling love triangle is because if Helm was actually slain in the course of his duties Ao would be forces to return Helm "to life" because he was doing his duty and that isn't what WOTC want.I actually think that is a very interesting thought. I think you are right that Cyric probably saw he could not manoeuver Helm into dueling in defense of someone or something else, as his portfolio, or Ao's intervention, might actually see Helm survive the encounter. Setting Helm and Tyr to duel in defense of their own honors was probably pretty sneaky, and obviously effective.They want to kill off as many deities as they can and rewrite Faerun to match their perceived view on the setting regardless of the viepoint of anyone who actually LIKES the setting.I don't think it is necessary to impute motive to "them". They haven't said that is their desire. In fact, they have expressed the opposite. Where they have said what their desires are, it has been to 1) write an in-game explanation of the changes to 4th edition and 2) make the setting even more successful. Obviously maintaining the current fanbase is an important factor in maintaining the success of the setting, so it doesn't strike me as logical to think they are trying to alienate their fans. It's probably best not to say what you think they were thinking. Ascribing nefarious motives to people is not very civil.And another definition of "fanatic" is someone who refuses to accept others may have a different point of view.I think you probably mean "valid" point of view. Fanatics accept that others have different points of view, they just think those viewpoints are wrong. ;) And yes the plan as far as we can see does truly suck lemons...I think here it might have been better if you had said "as far as I can see". When you say "we" that includes me, and I would prefer that you not speak for me. Although, I am interested in why you feel the way you do about the plan. Please elaborate. ;)
msatran 10-09-07, 02:38 PM	But the point is...IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN!!! NEITHER TYR NOR HELM SENSES THE HAND OF CYRIC IN ALL THIS? You know, donkeys fly in the real world, too. The problem isn't just that it's implausible. It's that it's out of character for Helm and Tyr to fight AT ALL, FOR ANY REASON! Why would Tymora date either of these stick in the muds? Use logic when constructing things. None of this makes sense. It's like they all sat around with a bong, and inhaled some of the worst weed available. Please take this with the comedic grain of salt that it is intended. Ed: Man, this weed really stinks. :) George: Yeah. It's...pretty nasty. Rich: Ohh, man, my head hurts just inhaling the smoke. Where did you find this stuff. Steven: Wow...this is bad, I can barely figure out what words are. Rob: Dude...that's IT...let's have a spelling contest. Steven: That's cruel, Rob. Rich: No...problem...(Zoning out a little bit.) You go first, Rob. Antidisestablishmentarianism. Rob: That is NOT a word! Ed: Is so. I work in a library. Rob: A-N-T-I-D-I-S...!@#$$$@!! Ed: Well, no points for Rob, and now it's George's turn. George: Aren't we supposed to be discussing the new Forgotten Realms? Steven: Yeah. God, this is bad stuff. Rich, any ideas. Rich: Well...Rob can't spell....that's it. He can't spell. We'll have a spelling plague or something. No one will be able to understand each other, and people will go mad in local markets trying to eat food and buy bread. Ed: That's not fantastic enough. How about a Spell Plague. Wizards go nuts, you get to fudge the new magic system, and the looney mages become adversaries for PC's everywhere. Steven: What about existing games? Rich: !@#$$%@! em! They can love it or leave it! The check comes to my mailbox just the same. I like this idea, it has gravitas! Pathos.... Steven: Better weed? Ed: No. The Realms doesn't really give you better weed. Rich: Spellplague. Yeah...someone write this down! And George, stop eyeing my munchies!!!! So how do we get away with this? George: Dunno. Say, Ed. If you were Tyr, would you do Tymora? Rich: Oh, come on, George. There's not a god in the pantheon that wouldn't do Tymora. Even Helm.... Ed: Oh, for god's sake. Helm????? Give me another hit. Even bad weed is better than listening to this stuff. Steven: You could have Helm and Tyr do Tymora and have them fight over her! Sort of like The Two Noble Kinsmen for gods. Rich: Awesome. Hey, wait, doesn't one of them die? George: So what? People don't actually care about what we write. We get a lot of compliments, but you know, there's this guy msatran on the wizards boards, he can be a real jackass! He complimented me a couple times though. Weird. Rich: Dude, I know what you mean. He's volatile and bad tempered! But he buys lots of Realms products. I don't get it. Oh, well. He's only one man. There's no way he can do anything to touch us. Rob: Yeah. I'd hit Tymora so hard that when they pulled me out, I'd be the next open lord of Waterdeep. Let's do it! George: Can Helm actually kiss or is that helmet actually his head?..... Really, it probably didn't actually happen this way, but that's how a lot of the fans on these boards FEEL like it happened.
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 02:42 PM	OMG! Do you really think that the designers discuss YOU at their meetings? :uh-huh: Even my ego isn't THAT big. :embarrass And besides, they wouldn't be smokin' no dirt weed, they be able to afford Hydro. ;) <does Ed's pipe float nearby?>
Faraer 10-09-07, 02:48 PM	The actions of the Chosen being at the forefront of a long list of NPCs who each singularly can outshine the actions of any number of whole groups of PC adventurers.Apart from the fact that most of those characters act mostly behind the scenes, one of the notable, destratifying tropes of the Realms is the ability of adventuring companies to collectively overcome much mightier foes: in dragon-slaying, the exploits of many recorded adventuring groups, or the defeats of for instance Tyranthraxus, Xvim, Moander, Alokkair, and Zhent occupations of Daggerdale and Shadowdale. Also, there are no known active groups of 20th+ level adventurers in the 'present' Realms and very few of 15th, making this a unique gap (for those concerned with such) for PCs. TSR and Wizards never emphasized these facts, even when they said they wanted to highlight the roles of player characters -- one of many chances for 'mitigating the drag' that haven't been taken.Again, incorrect. For an NPC to overshadow a PC, all a player needs to do is read a novel with teh Chosen in it, then carry the memory of that reading with him when he goes to play a D&D game in the Forgotten Realms.What you claimed was that 'no matter what their [D&D players'] characters do, numerous other NPCs will always overshadow them'. The 'overshadowing' in the displayed quote is something that might happen, and is only a property of the character or the setting in the limited sense that every thing has the attributes of every response it might plausibly lead to, in which case almost every setting has many characters who 'overshadow the PCs' (and 'embarrass them', 'kill them', 'bore them', 'enlighten them', and so on and so forth).
18DELTA 10-09-07, 02:53 PM	OMG! Do you really think that the designers discuss YOU at their meetings? :uh-huh: Even my ego isn't THAT big. :embarrass And besides, they wouldn't be smokin' no dirt weed, they be able to afford Hydro. ;) <does Ed's pipe float nearby?> :rofl: :bow: :clap: Hey MarkusTay63 what was that? He just posted? OMG exactly!:D ;) :P
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-09-07, 03:48 PM	But since Gothicdan has never like the changes the snuck in and expressed his opinion about that was just "crying wolf"? That Dan is just trying to get attention....wow. And that it isn't his opinion it is just to get the attention of a bunch of strangers on the boards. Can't say I got the impression that Dan was just trying to get attention, myself. Based on what I know of him, I don't see why he, of all people, would care if strangers on a message board paid attention to him or not.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-09-07, 04:10 PM	Again, incorrect. For an NPC to overshadow a PC, all a player needs to do is read a novel with teh Chosen in it, then carry the memory of that reading with him when he goes to play a D&D game in the Forgotten Realms. My solution to that would be "don't read the novels", at least if a player can't handle the fact that novels are going to be written about official NPCs, and not PCs from home games. That's just the way it is. It's not like the Chosen are the only characters who ever do outlandish things that readers wind up complaining about (just read the Lady Penitent trilogy). There are still going to be novels coming out for 4E, after all, so if NPC exploits in novels are a problem, apparently it isn't going to be fixed. And that's coming from a person who isn't exactly a cheerleader for certain NPC novel heroes.
Lord Karsus 10-09-07, 04:32 PM	George: So what? People don't actually care about what we write. We get a lot of compliments, but you know, there's this guy msatran on the wizards boards, he can be a real jackass! He complimented me a couple times though. Weird. Rich: Dude, I know what you mean. He's volatile and bad tempered! But he buys lots of Realms products. I don't get it. Oh, well. He's only one man. There's no way he can do anything to touch us. -Makes you wonder what they do think of us. :)
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 04:41 PM	Uuuuuummmmm.... :rolleyes: I never posted THAT. :confused:
Lord Karsus 10-09-07, 04:52 PM	Uuuuuummmmm.... :rolleyes: I never posted THAT. :confused: -You're right. How the hell did that happen? I clicked to respond you something you wrote, and something that MSA wrote. -Well, lemme fix that.
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 04:54 PM	Thanx. ;) I've been doing enough bashing of designers lately - I don't need to be accused of putting words (or weed) in their mouths. :P
Yaeri 10-09-07, 05:03 PM	My solution to that would be "don't read the novels", at least if a player can't handle the fact that novels are going to be written about official NPCs, and not PCs from home games. That's just the way it is. It's not like the Chosen are the only characters who ever do outlandish things that readers wind up complaining about (just read the Lady Penitent trilogy). There are still going to be novels coming out for 4E, after all, so if NPC exploits in novels are a problem, apparently it isn't going to be fixed. And that's coming from a person who isn't exactly a cheerleader for certain NPC novel heroes. I don't think it's about the novels not being about people's own PC's. Of course they aren't. I think it's about the power of those NPC's. What Mr Miscellany is trying to say -I think- is that the problem of said gamers may be that they see these powerful official NPC's at work in the novels. Those same official NPC's that are in the FRCS. The novels give them a good feel of what these characters do and are capable of, and they take this back to the game with them.
johnkretzer 10-09-07, 05:03 PM	-Makes you wonder what they do think of us. :) I know exactly what they think about us...get a job as awaitress or cashier and deal with customers regulary...your thought would proably start being exactly like theirs. :)
johnkretzer 10-09-07, 05:10 PM	I don't think it's about the novels not being about people's own PC's. Of course they aren't. I think it's about the power of those NPC's. What Mr Miscellany is trying to say -I think- is that the problem of said gamers may be that they see these powerful official NPC's at work in the novels. Those same official NPC's that are in the FRCS. The novels give them a good feel of what these characters do and are capable of, and they take this back to the game with them. To me they haves always been a goal...to become the great hero like x. And I have had characters who could propably take on half of the sisters(separetly of course) and give them a good fight. They definitly could own Drizzt in about three rounds. Etc. I think the problem with the books is that players(and DM) expect their games to be just like the book. Of course this is impossible as well players don't have the author fiat and even if they have a DM that wants to stroke their egos the dice can betray them. Sowhen the read about NPC x doing this or that they get jealous. I think this kinda sad in a way because I find D&D 100% better when you don't treat it like a book, movie, comic book, or even a story. Shrug will to each his or her own.
Yaeri 10-09-07, 05:23 PM	Heh, I'm not really a novel reader myself. I read the first book of the return of the archwizards trilogy and three parts of the war of the spider queen (I, V and VI). That's it. I'd state my reasons for not reading any more novels and skipping three parts of WotSQ, but such discussions are forbidden. :D In our campaign, we obviously started out as level 1 characters in a world where many powerful NPC's live. Now, after many years, we are becoming those powerful NPC's. (level 14-ish) Personnally I think it gives an interesting variety, a nice evolution of our characters place in the world.
Stigger 10-09-07, 05:36 PM	I'm not going to say what I think of people who expect their home games to be exactly like novels/movies/whatever... except to say its got to be one of the most unrealistic expectations I've ever heard of...
msatran 10-09-07, 05:55 PM	And no, Markus. I don't think they discuss me at the meetings. But I am trying to make a point about how we feel about our beloved Forgotten Realms and how when stuff like this happens, we say stuff like...WTF were they thinking, etc?
MarkusTay63 10-09-07, 06:31 PM	I know. You're not the only one who can post tongue-in-cheek. :P It was a wee bit long, though. ;)
Mr_Miscellany 10-09-07, 09:17 PM	My solution to that would be "don't read the novels", at least if a player can't handle the fact that novels are going to be written about official NPCs, and not PCs from home games. But that doesn't solve the problem. If TSR-then-WotC put out books that feature characters with Gods-Given abilities moving and shaking the Realms and (in some cases) saving it, that will continue to put these charcters on a holier than thou pedestal above all PCs. This isn't something you can get away from by pretending it's not there. Nor is it wise to assume some new gamer will have the wisdom to read the back cover of the book and deduce they'd be better off not reading it. Not great for sales, either. WotC has a product with many faces. They need to make sure one doesn't overshadow the other.
Stigger 10-10-07, 12:29 AM	However, the novels shows the exceptions, not the norm, even by the standards of adventuring, at least more often than not they do. If they want to get away from that, have the authors stop writing stories like that and switch focus to something more achievable. That's not the setting's fault, its the fault of bad ideas for publishing. Nothing will be solved if you kill the patient and then stick the same illness into the next patient...
msatran 10-10-07, 12:56 AM	Markus, did you laugh? If you laughed, it worked.
johnkretzer 10-10-07, 01:49 AM	If TSR-then-WotC put out books that feature characters with Gods-Given abilities moving and shaking the Realms and (in some cases) saving it, that will continue to put these charcters on a holier than thou pedestal above all PCs. While I am sure that you are corrected they are some players with this needless concerns and some DM enforce it on their players..I just object to all PCs. As there acrualy games out there that contradict you. 1)Being the games where the DM lets their players obtain that power level. not that this is a bad thing. 2) There are games center around more human type of stories...I mean to me a 1st level character that rescues a small girl from the depradtion of orcs are just as much heroes as the the uber NPCs who save the world. Sure the uber NPCs get more press but I think to that little girl(and her parents) your PC is a bigger hero then those uber level NPC will ever be. Personaly I perfer a campaign to start out as the second way and build up to the first way. Though you are right the game seems to be catering to those who want it now. This isn't something you can get away from by pretending it's not there. Nor is it wise to assume some new gamer will have the wisdom to read the back cover of the book and deduce they'd be better off not reading it. Not great for sales, either. WotC has a product with many faces. They need to make sure one doesn't overshadow the other. Not all new gamers feel that way though... Also I agree they have to balance the novels with the RPG setting. Which they are not doing.
Zanan 10-10-07, 04:08 AM	I have no problem with tons of high level folk, good, bad, or ugl ... neutral. You need them for politics within the setting, keeping "good" and "evil" in the balance, present "targets" or "patrons/esses" for the higher level PC etc. pp.. The problem the Wizards have is to make them fit in smoothly and keep them occupied within the setting as such. And to let them appear reasonable. How do you explain that your 5th level heroes at the table shall stop that orc horde, when a fourtnight earlier the archmage from Waterdeep and some of the sisters (possibly watched by the PCs) played a funny game with a flight of dragons. Why don't they come around the corner and firestorm / earthquake the Horde? Or the PCs know that the Simbul zips from one end of her realm to the next, slaying Red Wizards for fun, but has no time to check that ruin in the Yuirwood "where great evil lurks" - a job the PC are hired to solve? That is a problem the Wizards have and had to solve and removing the high ones or magic-slingers via a Spellplague* is apparently the easiest way, no doubt whatsoever. For it obviously "removes" the good and the bad from the table. But these are just the spellcasters. That death knight blackguard with 18 levels will still be around, won't it? So is it time for hack'n slay rather than fireball and healing spells? (Ooops, remind yourself to store enough potions pre Plague! The priests may get rare as well. Those able to cast a spell that is.) *That said, it is still all pure speculation, for we have no clue whatsoever about the Spellplague, its real effects and the duration. It might be over in a day, a month or ... after decade. Do we all like cliffhangers such as these?
Stigger 10-10-07, 07:09 AM	I wouldn't mind a cliffhanger if it was actually plausible... as to how to explain that orc horde to your players, if you're doing a decent job as a DM, that shouldn't even be an issue. If the players are thinking the way they're supposed to be, as aspiring heroes out to make a name for themselves, then generally they should be pleased as punch that they're the ones who get to step up to the plate instead of the vets... who're probably too busy to deal with the small potatoes crap they're doing at the moment. Then one day, they get to ignore the small crap and start tackling the big stuff themselves... or is that too bizarre and logical to take place anywhere but the games I run? ;)
Alediran 10-10-07, 08:38 AM	I wouldn't mind a cliffhanger if it was actually plausible... as to how to explain that orc horde to your players, if you're doing a decent job as a DM, that shouldn't even be an issue. If the players are thinking the way they're supposed to be, as aspiring heroes out to make a name for themselves, then generally they should be pleased as punch that they're the ones who get to step up to the plate instead of the vets... who're probably too busy to deal with the small potatoes crap they're doing at the moment. Then one day, they get to ignore the small crap and start tackling the big stuff themselves... or is that too bizarre and logical to take place anywhere but the games I run? ;) Not at all, I did the same thing in my campaign. In the first chapter Alustriel hired the PCs to investigate some minor disappearances in a logging camp near the High forest and they ended saving Silverymoon's Mythal by defeating a powerful Half-Shadow dragon cleric of Shar that wanted to destroy it to make the city vulnerable to an orc horde. Alustriel rewarded the heroes and made them Harpers (those who wanted to be).
Lord Karsus 10-10-07, 09:13 AM	I know exactly what they think about us...get a job as awaitress or cashier and deal with customers regulary...your thought would proably start being exactly like theirs. :) -I think that their jobs might be a bit more...'cushy', if you know what I mean. But that doesn't solve the problem. If TSR-then-WotC put out books that feature characters with Gods-Given abilities moving and shaking the Realms and (in some cases) saving it, that will continue to put these charcters on a holier than thou pedestal above all PCs. This isn't something you can get away from by pretending it's not there. Nor is it wise to assume some new gamer will have the wisdom to read the back cover of the book and deduce they'd be better off not reading it. Not great for sales, either. WotC has a product with many faces. They need to make sure one doesn't overshadow the other. -In these cases, I think the 'burden' is on the DM/Players, and not the company. It should be up to the DM/Players to decide why so-and-so isn't solving all of their problems, and why so-and-so is more powerful (theoretically) than the PCs. -I have no figures to back me up, except for my own knowledge, but I think that the people who have trouble explaining why powerful NPCs exist in any setting are in the minority. Most out there understand that they aren't necessarily the biggest fish in the pond, and that those who are the biggest fish aren't necessarily concerned with the same things the PCs are concerned with. -For example, Zanan mentioned the Simbul leaving a lurking "great evil" in the Yuirwood. The PCs might be interested in eliminating that great evil that is festering in Alglarond. The Simbul, on the other hand, might not be interested in elminating whatever "great evil" is lurking there because it dissuades others from entering the woods and snooping where they shouldn't be sticking their noses. -But, now I am digressing. I don't think that we all should be 'penalized' for a minority of people in the hobby, who have problems realizing that they are not the 'be-all-end-all' just yet. Any low-level character that feels that way is being unrealistic, anyway- though, depending on where they are, it could work. -Do you take away all video games because a few kids have trouble distinguishing fantasy from reality, and do bad things?
Bluenose 10-10-07, 09:21 AM	Not at all, I did the same thing in my campaign. In the first chapter Alustriel hired the PCs to investigate some minor disappearances in a logging camp near the High forest and they ended saving Silverymoon's Mythal by defeating a powerful Half-Shadow dragon cleric of Shar that wanted to destroy it to make the city vulnerable to an orc horde. Alustriel rewarded the heroes and made them Harpers (those who wanted to be). Were you prepared to destroy the mythal if they failed? If it's a problem only the PCs are available to tackle then if they fail you have to deal with the consequences. If after they fail Alustriel turns up and saves the city herself, then that cheapens everything the PCs did and all the sacrifices they made. At that point I'd be inclined to say something really rude about letting Alustriel sort out her own problems and going down to the beach.
Zanan 10-10-07, 09:24 AM	I wouldn't mind a cliffhanger if it was actually plausible... as to how to explain that orc horde to your players, if you're doing a decent job as a DM, that shouldn't even be an issue. If the players are thinking the way they're supposed to be, as aspiring heroes out to make a name for themselves, then generally they should be pleased as punch that they're the ones who get to step up to the plate instead of the vets... who're probably too busy to deal with the small potatoes crap they're doing at the moment. Then one day, they get to ignore the small crap and start tackling the big stuff themselves... or is that too bizarre and logical to take place anywhere but the games I run? ;) Maybe you missed my point? I have no problem explaining this to my players (well, essentially, I don't let them see these epic battles in the first place). The point is that it looks as if the Wizards have a problem explaining the existence of such characters within the setting. Why bother with poor adventurers when the world could be changed in an eyeblink by Elminster, Manshoon or the Simbul. For they have the power. To keep them occupied with their own "little" problems (a good start is the Haunted Lands, for example, where there is power-play from top till bottom, and very reasonably explained too) and the world as such in balance - this is a "problem" ever since the Realms appeared. A simple "they can't be asked" or "they don't bother" is good enough for the table, but within the game world as such, people want plausible explanations. And I would assume that even hereabouts there will be dozens of good storylines and ideas ahead of any Spellplague - Armageddon.
Alediran 10-10-07, 09:31 AM	I had all prepared. The Mythal wasn't going to be destroyed anyway. They knew they weren't the most powerful people in the city and accepted that fact, they where the right people for this problem. If they failed to defeat the BBEG when they did then Alustriel and the High Mages of Silverymoon would make a circle to keep working the Mythal while the party protected them from attack, and after that they would try to defeat the BBEG again. For example in one scene, Alediran's father, who is a High Mage, came to Silverymoon to help with a powerful weapon that would give them an edge with the second fight against the BBEG. The party discovered that the sword was created by a Tir'ent (Alediran's house) Bladesinger who lived and died in Faerûn (something that the family never new before) and they hadn't the means to cancel one protection, that only one of House Tir'ent could use it, which is ironical because Alediran is a Wizard and would never go toe-to-toe in a fight. Thanks to Alediran's father, the protection was lifted, albeit for only one use, after that the protection would appear again. And they felt (being all elves), the powerful nature of the High Magic. They felt that too with Alustriel. They never asked why other people didn't solved that problem if they were more powerful than them, because my player's aren't fifteen years old newbies, they are experienced players, and three of them are also DMs. In other moment of the chapter, they where asked to deal with a small group of goblins that terrorized a small town, and what they did was employ the low level followers of one of the players to solve that problem, while they dealt with bigger ones. They acted like any other mid level character should when they where asked to resolve a low lvl threat.
MarkusTay63 10-10-07, 11:47 AM	It all boils down to this - the novels should NOT be canon. I treat the novels as happening in an alternate (canon) Toril, whilst mine continues on without them. Once the novel events appear in a sourcebook, then I will say "such-and-such happened", but it doesn't effect my game because it already happened. I purposely set my sessions in areas that aren't involved in any current story-lines - it just works out easier that way. As far as I'm concerned, the novels have ruined the Realms as a gaming environment. They make the players feel like small fish, and the things they do inconsequential. My son, one of my players, wants to start reading the books, but I'm not sure if thats such a good idea. He is having fun now, but after he reads about Drizzt he may just decide he wants to head over to Mithral Hall. I don't want stuff like that happening. I control MY game, not some authors who are so full of themselvers that they change the Realms every time they write. The novels have brought us to this terrible turning point in Realms history, and the authors will more then likely just do it again. Most of them seem incapable of writing anything other then Realms-changing epic stories. It's almost like they have a competition going to see who can destroy more, or make the broadest changes. I suppose it must be an ego thing. I have to say, folks rag about RAS, but he has never made any changes that have effected the greater Realms - so far. His character's actions effect a very small part of the world, and the events of his novels can be mostly ignored, or even easily incorporated at any level of play (like increased Orc activity in the North -something it always had anyway). This might change in the near future, but I doubt he would have created an Orc Kingdom in Faerûn if the designers did not want one. Even something like that doesn't really change much overall - you're still gonna have 'bad' Orcs. In fact, it's easy to use that for some interesting twists, like an Orcish Scouting party saving the PCs from evil (Eldrith Veluthra, Demonfey, etc) Elves. What he writes does not change the world, it merely makes it more interesting. Shadowcrap, Godwars, cities getting destroyed or appearing out of nowhere - all of that changes the basic dynamic of the Realms and throws things out of balance. The Realms are broken because the authors broke it. And now we have to pay the price. :( I have no intention of gaming in a world with novels in 4e. [Please remember that masking words in order to bypass the language filters is a violation of the Code of Conduct. If you think the filter is going to pick something up, then attempting to get around the filter is only going to get you in trouble. So don't do it. -Althalus] I assumed using it in a completely different context then name-calling was Okay - sorry. While I'm on te subject, why is the slang word for urination not allowed? It means 'angry' in American, and 'drunk' in English - it just seems VERY silly to block THAT one. :bored:
msatran 10-10-07, 01:18 PM	Markus Says: Shadowcrap, Godwars, cities getting destroyed or appearing out of nowhere - all of that changes the basic dynamic of the Realms and throws things out of balance. The Realms are broken because the authors broke it. YES! This is EXACTLY my problem. The novels should NOT be canon, or should all take place in the glorious 12,000 years of backstory we just got. We don't need these things: 1) RSEs. 2) The tree. Give us back our wheel. 3) Random worldshifts. Keep the fershinlugger maps the same! 4) We don't want novels set in the present anymore. At all. Ever. Use the past, but DON'T kick us in the face like this. Too many times, I've sat there and said...what? It leads to DMs doing things that their players hate. And quite frankly, that's the best reason of all to not make novels canon. You want to deal with the people complaining about the Chosen of Mystra, etc? That's it. That's how you do it.
Lord Karsus 10-10-07, 02:22 PM	-Perhaps the reason I feel this way is because I don't have to deal with these problems as a DM, but the main reason why I like the Realms is because of the novels, and if they were no longer canon, I'd probably lose interest in the setting. The only reason why I buy FR sourcebooks is for the lore contained within. Again, it's the story of the Realms, as a whole. This was the reason I liked AGHotR so much. N+S=R
johnkretzer 10-10-07, 05:44 PM	-Perhaps the reason I feel this way is because I don't have to deal with these problems as a DM, but the main reason why I like the Realms is because of the novels, and if they were no longer canon, I'd probably lose interest in the setting. The only reason why I buy FR sourcebooks is for the lore contained within. Again, it's the story of the Realms, as a whole. This was the reason I liked AGHotR so much. N+S=R I don't get this feeling of the novels have to be canon to sell? Or people lose interst in the setting if they are not canon? Though maybe because I was hooked with the grey FRCS boxed set. The novels were just alittle nice extra that if I didn't make canon still give me a feeling of the Realms culture, personality, etc.
Yaeri 10-10-07, 05:48 PM	2) The tree. Give us back our wheel. 4th edition is going to have a tree on wheels. Everybody happy!
Stigger 10-10-07, 07:20 PM	Maybe you missed my point? I have no problem explaining this to my players (well, essentially, I don't let them see these epic battles in the first place). The point is that it looks as if the Wizards have a problem explaining the existence of such characters within the setting. Why bother with poor adventurers when the world could be changed in an eyeblink by Elminster, Manshoon or the Simbul. For they have the power. To keep them occupied with their own "little" problems (a good start is the Haunted Lands, for example, where there is power-play from top till bottom, and very reasonably explained too) and the world as such in balance - this is a "problem" ever since the Realms appeared. A simple "they can't be asked" or "they don't bother" is good enough for the table, but within the game world as such, people want plausible explanations. And I would assume that even hereabouts there will be dozens of good storylines and ideas ahead of any Spellplague - Armageddon. Nah, I got your point, I just don't agree with the basic conclusion. I tend to think of it as a state of cold war between the forces of good and evil, sure they're mighty and powerful, but the second one of the big ones sticks his neck out, its gonna get hacked off. The PCs are the wild cards in the balance of power, as they should be, when and if they get involved in it at all (presuming you get them to the levels where it starts to become an issue). The Concerns of the Mighty addressed all of that, which was a more than plausible explanation I thought. It just seems to be being ignored for the most part, by those who can't be bothered to read it, and apparently by the developers...
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-10-07, 09:38 PM	I don't think it's about the novels not being about people's own PC's. Of course they aren't. I think it's about the power of those NPC's. What Mr Miscellany is trying to say -I think- is that the problem of said gamers may be that they see these powerful official NPC's at work in the novels. Those same official NPC's that are in the FRCS. The novels give them a good feel of what these characters do and are capable of, and they take this back to the game with them. But like I said, NPC heroes in novels often wind up being pretty invunerable (most of the time, heroes survive to the end of the book, at least), and they sometimes do pretty "over the top" stuff. I think it's perfectly legitimate to complain about outlandish exploits in novels...but I have the feeling explosive heroic deeds are unlikely to vanish from WotC's novel line, and those aforementioned deeds are NOT exclusive only to the Chosen of Mystra (again, just check out the protagonists of the Lady Penitent series). So my point is, why single out the Chosen of Mystra as NPCs who "overshadow" the heroes?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 10-10-07, 10:15 PM	But that doesn't solve the problem. If TSR-then-WotC put out books that feature characters with Gods-Given abilities moving and shaking the Realms and (in some cases) saving it, that will continue to put these charcters on a holier than thou pedestal above all PCs. This isn't something you can get away from by pretending it's not there. Nor is it wise to assume some new gamer will have the wisdom to read the back cover of the book and deduce they'd be better off not reading it. Not great for sales, either. WotC has a product with many faces. They need to make sure one doesn't overshadow the other. Trust me, I'm all in favor of less RSE type novels and more of the smaller, more personal stories that tell a great tale without moving heaven and earth. I wish WotC would put out more smaller scale novels. In fact, if it's true that they plan to do so, good for them (that's ONE change I can cheer them for!). But still, my point is that the Chosen of Mystra get blamed for making players feel inadequate, when they are not the only characters in the setting who do amazing things. Also, my earlier point still stands. Why partake in an activity that's supposed to be fun and entertaining, but instead makes you feel bad? Is it the fault of the setting if WotC puts out novels with arguably overpowered protagonists (thinking that's what people want to read)?
Dark Wizard 10-10-07, 11:06 PM	Without getting rid of the Chosen and similar characters, they can simply emphasis the fact (yes, fact) that in a D&D game, the PCs are the stars of the story. Eberron isn't so phenomenally different, they just do a very clear job of stating that point. It's all in what the audience believes. Didn't Sharn have a 12th level Fighter for a mayor? When manure impacts the cooling apparatus wouldn't he get involved?
Lord Karsus 10-11-07, 11:46 PM	I don't get this feeling of the novels have to be canon to sell? Or people lose interst in the setting if they are not canon? Though maybe because I was hooked with the grey FRCS boxed set. The novels were just alittle nice extra that if I didn't make canon still give me a feeling of the Realms culture, personality, etc. -It's cause, as I said, I don't DM in the Realms. If they **** up all the rules to the D&D game, that doesn't really effect me. Me and my homebrew setting are staying in 3e. -If novels weren't canon, what would be the point? I read FR novels to see what's going on in the world. I don't want to read a novel that is simply a 'What If?' situation.
Storm_Silverhand 10-12-07, 08:29 AM	Heya, -If novels weren't canon, what would be the point? I read FR novels to see what's going on in the world. I don't want to read a novel that is simply a 'What If?' situation. I can sort of see where you're coming from here... But as others have kind of touched on (and I'll state plainly here), it doesn't matter who WotC puts in the novels, whether it be the Chosen of Mystra or Drizzt or characters we've yet to meet from 4th Ed Realms, the protagonists will always overshadow the PCs of a game... 'Cause you can bet your bottom dollar that the authors of Realms novels will not be able to/allowed to leave alone the old RSE trope. We'll get more novels with more RSEs in 4th Edition, anyone thinking otherwise is... well being overly optimistic IMHO. They won't solve anything while novels are canon. (I don't know how they can solve it, though... One thing novels do do is make the Realms dynamic. Without novels, the Realms won't move on and will become stagnant. So it's a vicious cycle - they put out novels, novels contain big events that move the realms on, people complain about the protagonists in the novels overshadowing their PCs, but no one at WotC seems to listen to that and more novels with RSEs are put out with more protagonists overshadowing PCs until they get to they point they are now, and do a complete reset so they can write more RSE novels with protagonists who overshadow PCs... err... yeah, I guess you see what I mean.)
Lord Karsus 10-12-07, 10:50 AM	I can sort of see where you're coming from here... But as others have kind of touched on (and I'll state plainly here), it doesn't matter who WotC puts in the novels, whether it be the Chosen of Mystra or Drizzt or characters we've yet to meet from 4th Ed Realms, the protagonists will always overshadow the PCs of a game... 'Cause you can bet your bottom dollar that the authors of Realms novels will not be able to/allowed to leave alone the old RSE trope. We'll get more novels with more RSEs in 4th Edition, anyone thinking otherwise is... well being overly optimistic IMHO. They won't solve anything while novels are canon. (I don't know how they can solve it, though... One thing novels do do is make the Realms dynamic. Without novels, the Realms won't move on and will become stagnant. So it's a vicious cycle - they put out novels, novels contain big events that move the realms on, people complain about the protagonists in the novels overshadowing their PCs, but no one at WotC seems to listen to that and more novels with RSEs are put out with more protagonists overshadowing PCs until they get to they point they are now, and do a complete reset so they can write more RSE novels with protagonists who overshadow PCs... err... yeah, I guess you see what I mean.) -People need to accept that there will always be a bigger fish in the pond, until they themselves are the biggest fish.
Bluenose 10-12-07, 01:06 PM	-People need to accept that there will always be a bigger fish in the pond, until they themselves are the biggest fish. My perspective is that I don't want my PC to be the biggest fish in the pond. That I really don't care about. I do like internal consistency, a game that allows me to suspend my disbelief. And I'm afraid that saying all the powerful NPCs are doing something more important sometimes stretches that suspension past the breaking point.
MarkusTay63 10-12-07, 03:17 PM	-If novels weren't canon, what would be the point? I read FR novels to see what's going on in the world. I don't want to read a novel that is simply a 'What If?' situation.You yourself constantly complain about a lot of the idiocy that happens in novels... Is that what you look forward to when you read them? :confused: I would agree, up 'till a point. Take Erk Scott De Bie's Ghostwalker - an excellent little story that doesn't topple nations. How about Elaine's much beloved E:IoE? Ed's novels? Even Blackstaff - I accept everything that happened (including the city) because it was well written and well thought out. But when people start replicating unique trees, I think they need to go back and read their sourcebooks... WE DO! And what about Shade? All of that was because we got stuck with a smelly remnant (The Shadoweave) from a failed setting. THOSE are the kinds of novels MY world can live without. I don't need to know whats going on, if I'm going to hate it anyway. Why should people buy cr@p they KNOW they won't like? Just because it has the FR logo on it? Thats the kind of thinking that got us 4e FR. :bored:
johnkretzer 10-12-07, 04:22 PM	-It's cause, as I said, I don't DM in the Realms. If they **** up all the rules to the D&D game, that doesn't really effect me. Me and my homebrew setting are staying in 3e. -If novels weren't canon, what would be the point? I read FR novels to see what's going on in the world. I don't want to read a novel that is simply a 'What If?' situation. Here is a solution...since you don't run FR would it bother that much if the novels were canon among them selves and had no bearing on the setting? Because as a DM and a player they are driving me crazy. Also personaly I think novels will always be a poor reflection of a RPG. They are a few exceptions. But too me atleast there are too many differences between the two for them to refect each other. They and players should just learn to love novels and RPG for what they are not try to combine them. Also I think novels are a terrible way to grow the setting. Because of the same reason. I think RPG setting should be grown graduely and slowly with lots of thought behind it. All novels can really do is give a look at the setting though a very small window.
Lord Karsus 10-12-07, 05:20 PM	My perspective is that I don't want my PC to be the biggest fish in the pond. That I really don't care about. I do like internal consistency, a game that allows me to suspend my disbelief. And I'm afraid that saying all the powerful NPCs are doing something more important sometimes stretches that suspension past the breaking point. -My policy is that the world works in mysterious ways. Elminster might not be doing anything about that tear in the fabric of reality because he- for whatever the reason- has a vested interest in keeping it open. The PCs, don't know that, of course, and wonder why Elminster isn't there to close it. Storm Silverhair might not know either, and would like to close it, but she is on the other side, fighting back some...Illithid. The Simbul? Well, she's nowhere to be found. And, while Drizzt might want to help, he's 1500 miles away in Icewind Dale, and can't do a thing. That low level sage who is nearby, and is trying to help? He's working on it. -Sometimes, though, you do need to stretch your disbelief, a little. Removing high level PCs doesn't solve this problem, though, because then you need to wonder where the middle level PCs are, and why they aren't doing anything, and so on and so on. You yourself constantly complain about a lot of the idiocy that happens in novels... Is that what you look forward to when you read them? -I do it because I care...How does that saying go? I would agree, up 'till a point. Take Erk Scott De Bie's Ghostwalker - an excellent little story that doesn't topple nations. How about Elaine's much beloved E:IoE? Ed's novels? Even Blackstaff - I accept everything that happened (including the city) because it was well written and well thought out. -Agreed. But when people start replicating unique trees, I think they need to go back and read their sourcebooks... WE DO! And what about Shade? All of that was because we got stuck with a smelly remnant (The Shadoweave) from a failed setting. THOSE are the kinds of novels MY world can live without. I don't need to know whats going on, if I'm going to hate it anyway. Why should people buy cr@p they KNOW they won't like? Just because it has the FR logo on it? Thats the kind of thinking that got us 4e FR. -I agree. Authors do need to do their homework, and oftentimes, don't do enough of it. But, the faulty research of whomever should not then cancel out all of the positive that someone else does to the Realms. Here is a solution...since you don't run FR would it bother that much if the novels were canon among them selves and had no bearing on the setting? Because as a DM and a player they are driving me crazy. -The novels would still have no impact on the setting itself, which is what I appreciate about the novels.
MarkusTay63 10-12-07, 11:10 PM	Lets just give Toril to the authors. As for me, I'm going out for Abeir.... :pint: ;)
Lord Karsus 10-13-07, 12:53 PM	-That's just all dumb, having two worlds in one, and whatever else...That's the idea I dislike the most, moreso than even removing the Weave, eliminating Elves, and killing off various deities.
18DELTA 10-15-07, 07:50 PM	old school gamer t-dog must be stopped!!!!!!!!!;) :P :rant: :banghead: :censored: :tantrum: :nonono: :uh-huh: :bored: :allalone: :pbbbtt: