Post/Author/DateTime	Post
pblogic 04-03-04, 04:15 PM	I checked it out in my hobby store. Pretty short for 33$ It didnt seem to offer much, most of the updates could be had for free. I read the "why do you need this book" page and it sounded like the authors were trying to justify to themselves why it was necessary
Tempus665 04-03-04, 05:04 PM	Thank God for freedom of choice! :cool: I for one, do like the book!
pblogic 04-03-04, 05:22 PM	Well, I wasn't trying to make anyone feel bad for buying it, just wanted to register my dislike, not that hasbro will care :P
Ranger REG 04-04-04, 01:53 AM	I have never known anyone who would distribute a rules update more than 100 pages ... for FREE. And no, I don't count 3.5e SRD as a rules update. It's a game designer's toolkit. But since you have a dislike -- and I hope it is not the price tag -- what is it you find lacking in the Player's Guide, pblogic?
fergsta2 04-04-04, 09:35 PM	I like all the FR books, but I think there are some things that would make this one better(easy for me to say now that it is done and out). My martial PC's were dissappointed in the lack of descent martial PrCs and the plethora of arcane and clerical PrCs, and their other comments were about the lack of magic items(for a high magic world like Faerun, this seems odd), and the feats were less than insipreing to them, but I did not expect much there with all the feat books out now. Personally, I had hoped for more detail on the FR nine hells and the abyss, and more spells, the compilation was good though. I would have liked to seen an up to date synopsys on all the major cities from the novels for a player( a la Volo), perhaps a page for each, I know this is done, but to have it rewritten for the player, and compiled in one books would have been nice to have. Otherwise I was pleased with it, I am not sure if it is really needed, but interesting none-the-less. I was dissappointed with the artwork, which seems to have gone downhill in all the recent Wiz books. There are tonnes of fantastic artists out there(including the cover artist) who could have done the interior art more justice. my 2cp. thanks.
Ehran 04-04-04, 11:21 PM	The saving grace of the book to me was the updated regional feats. They actualy were changed and made impressive enough that my players want them now. They also did a good job returning to the flavor of the Harper Agent and the Hathran. Having said that though, the rest of the book was a little weak. It concentrated far too much on cleric PrC's and magic and gave very little information on the world itself. I have been running the Realms now for over 10 years, so I know the world, but its always nice to see stuff printed in detail, especialy stuff to update 3.0
Kain's avatar 04-05-04, 01:02 AM	I thought it was worth it.
druid berrymore 04-05-04, 03:42 AM	Originally posted by fergsta2 I was dissappointed with the artwork, which seems to have gone downhill in all the recent Wiz books. Except the new psionics book. That stuff looks great.
Helmo 04-05-04, 06:14 AM	Originally posted by Ehran The saving grace of the book to me was the updated regional feats. They actualy were changed and made impressive enough that my players want them now. They also did a good job returning to the flavor of the Harper Agent and the Hathran. Having said that though, the rest of the book was a little weak. It concentrated far too much on cleric PrC's and magic and gave very little information on the world itself. I have been running the Realms now for over 10 years, so I know the world, but its always nice to see stuff printed in detail, especialy stuff to update 3.0 Well, it is not like FRCS, it a Player“s Guide. You don“t need to know that Waterdeep has 132,000 people or that Suzail is Sembia“s capital. Those things hasn“t changed. The different cultures, customs, people living... for these sort of stuff the FRCS is still the book. I think this one is just to update things that need to be updated, is not FRCS 3.5, with some new stuff.
Klyden 04-05-04, 06:44 AM	The only thing I find lacking about PGtF is that no monsters were included like they were supposed to be.
Klyden 04-05-04, 06:46 AM	I really wanted to see the new stats for several new monsters too. Instead WotC again forces me to do their job for them and update the monsters from Monsters of Faerun. Don't get me wrong, I like PGtF but I think it would have been more worth it's cost (money wise) if Wizard's had just included the monsters as planned.
Ravashack 04-05-04, 07:01 AM	You didn't see this? (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20040313a)
Klyden 04-05-04, 07:11 AM	Yes I did and I think it's crap. I have to update the monsters myself with the update provided by the web enhancement. Wizards forces me to do the work for them. PGoF could have been a lot better than it is. The book is nice but not worth $33.00 Bucks in my opinion! I don't care how easy it is for me to update the monsters. I don't buy products as a consumer just to do the work for a company that I buy the products from.
Ravashack 04-05-04, 07:17 AM	Oh I see, so you're saying you wish they did a copy of the Monstrous Manual and reprinted all the monsters they updated in it completely, instead of only listing what got changed. Wouldn't that be a waste of money though? Or is it really that much more convenient? I kind of wish they did that for the Monstrous Manual, but since the SRD is there it doesn't matter.
Klyden 04-05-04, 07:22 AM	Maybe it would have been a waste of money in some people's eyes but in my view a 3.5 update to a product with new artwork isn't a waste of money. Adding the monsters to PGtF would have made the $33.00 bucks totally worth it. I do however respect your opinion Ravashack.
Darius the Barbarian 04-05-04, 08:14 AM	Originally posted by Helmo You don“t need to know that Waterdeep has 132,000 people or that Suzail is Sembia“s capital. Those things hasn“t changed. Oh, I guess they have because from what I know, Suzail has always been the capital of Cormyr, not Sembia :D As for the book, I'm slowly beginning to feel kinda... oversaturated with WotC-published material. It's getting old and boring. All those updates, updates to updates, etc. OK, I appreciate the details on FR cosmology, some facts from recent history and the revised Incantatrix ;) but on the whole, the book seems quite bland to me. Regional feats are really nothing too thrilling. PrCs, spells, items, blah blah blah... the usual meat a considerable part of which is served re-cooked for the n-th time. Don't take me wrong, I'm not trying to say that PGtF is utter crap but I expected more. As usual. In other words, I do not consider this book an essential source of FR 3e lore - don't treat it as an indispensable update or 3.5 patch of FRCS.
Ravashack 04-05-04, 09:17 AM	Originally posted by Klyden Maybe it would have been a waste of money in some people's eyes but in my view a 3.5 update to a product with new artwork isn't a waste of money. Adding the monsters to PGtF would have made the $33.00 bucks totally worth it. I do however respect your opinion Ravashack. I don't mean for US. I mean for them. :) That would have added a ton of pages to the book, or possibly have warranted a separate book by itself.
Arduin 04-05-04, 11:27 AM	At first I was a little disappointed, mostly due to the lack of length in the sections that interested me. I basically wanted more of what was already there. More feats, a better regional feats system, more spells (a complete list of spells for 3.5 actually), more focus and info on the Initiate system, more prestige classes and a bigger Journal section. I got what I wanted, true enough, I just wanted more of it ;) I like it now however :)
Doran Kess 04-05-04, 01:13 PM	I like the PGtF a lot! The cosmology section and regional feats are two great reasons to buy it.
Yokinobu 04-05-04, 02:20 PM	I was hoping it would present changes to the genasi, whom I am still unsatisfied with.
Urbannen 04-05-04, 02:24 PM	Specific nitpicks: -Regional feat section lists Tethyrian as a language, sometimes as an automatic language. According to FRCS and RoF, there is no such language. Edit: It's just the Western Heartlands region description that is messed up here. They messed up both the subrace and automatic language section for this human region. -There is little advice on how to incorporate Races of Faerūn ethnic feats and the new regional feat system. Some of the ethnic feats are now official regional feats, so how do you treat the ethnic feats that weren't mentioned? -The feats section is poorly organized. The list of feats doesn't even include all the feats that are described. The Initiate feats are included in the spells section, which I found confusing. -Underdark characters can only take Daylight Adaptation at 1st level? -The Initiate of Nature spell list includes spells to create brown mold and shoot poisoned thorns? Shouldn't those spells be associated with Talona (Moander's successor by default) instead of good and pure Eldath and Mielikki? -The Arcane Devotee was mightily hosed. It was already a prestige class of questionable value. Consider: -Loss of alignment focus. It was of questionable use, but it was interesting, and potentially cool for a conjurer. -Nerfing of Divine shroud. The shroud now grants a flat SR of 17, instead of 12+character level. This for a character that has to be at least 12th level. Maybe that's useful for fighting hordes of low-level spellcasters, but otherwise it's pretty useless. -Gained Divine synergy, whose only effect I can determine is to give you 1.5x healing whenever a cleric of your faith heals you. A flavorful, but very limited, benefit compared to the former choice from a list of feats. -Shadow Adepts' SR from their shadow shields is also nerfed, although not as bad Arcane Devotees'. -Divine Disciples no longer take on a physical aspect of their deity? -The Purple Dragon Knight in CW and in PGtF are different. Frankly I wish they had dropped the Leadership feat requirement for the class as they did in CW. I've seen this in play and it doesn't make a lot of sense since no rules says the cohort also has to be a member of the Purple Dragon Knights. Is the cohort supposed to be a lieutenant? If so, doesn't that imply that all Purple Dragon Knights were once cohorts themselves? The Leadership feat implies informal leadership qualities, while a high ranking Purple Dragon Knight gains followers through his official group membership. -The Shadow Weave Magic feat no longer requires the loss of 2 points of Wisdom. This significant change should have been noted in a sidebar, as it implies the retconning of characters' stats. (But did I notice that it still buffs your spell DCs? Wow, they let one through!) -In the descriptive text of the PrC section, the names of spell-like class abilities are not italicized. This makes it look like the descriptions of spell-like class abilities are part of preceding descriptions of supernatural class abilities. This is a legibility issue. There was a lot of stuff I thought was good, but these are my nitpicks so far. I was glad to see the Yathrinshee class converted to 3.5. Except for Initiate of Nature, I was impressed overall with how they did the Initiate concept. I also liked the fact that they incorporated BoVD and BoED into FR, especially the worship of fiends.
Doran Kess 04-05-04, 02:33 PM	The Shadow Weave Magic feat bothered me too. In fact, all of the Shadow Weave feats changed but they do not appear in any sidebar explaining the changes. I'm thinking of having two kinds of Shadow Weave prestige classes in my next campaign. Each has it's own distinct advantaqes and disadvantages. Namely, the FRCS gives you spell power that boosts your save DCs but you have serious disadvantages (like losing 2 points of Wis.). The PGtF does not have the same drawbacks, but it also dosn't have the Spell Power boost. Maybe the two versions of the prestige class come from two different Sharran schools of thought?
Arduin 04-05-04, 02:43 PM	Nope ;) They simply felt like changing the whole thing :P
Kuje31 04-05-04, 03:10 PM	Originally posted by Arduin Nope ;) They simply felt like changing the whole thing :P And this surprised people how? :) Seems to be that way since the FRCS hit the shelves......
Mystery Man 04-05-04, 03:23 PM	Pretty happy with the book so far. Frankly I'm more happy they released the web enhancement for the monsters than anything. Why they didn't do this at the same time as the rest of the updates makes me wonder who's bonehead idea it was to include them with the FRPG in the first place. :)
Klyden 04-05-04, 10:28 PM	Originally posted by Ravashack I don't mean for US. I mean for them. :) That would have added a ton of pages to the book, or possibly have warranted a separate book by itself. For them? A waste of money for WotC? I have to disagree. The book is too thin for my liking and it needs beefing up. The new artwork for the revised monsters and the actual stats for the revised monsters wouldn't have beefed it up to the point of over taxing WotC in my opinion. Could be wrong on that though. Heck, Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting was beefier than anything and Wizards made a profit didn't they? I'm sure Wizards of the Coast kinda cheapened out on all of us this time around. Maybe I'm wrong on this but I kinda think I'm right. Guess we'll never know WotC's reasons for ourselves unless they respond directly on this issue.
J. Grenemyer 04-06-04, 02:53 AM	Hello, Originally posted by Klyden Guess we'll never know WotC's reasons for ourselves unless they respond directly on this issue. Or you could visit this FR designer's website (http://www.seankreynolds.com) and educate yourself on your own, without relying on WotC to do it for you. ;)
Ranger REG 04-06-04, 04:18 AM	Originally posted by fergsta2 I was dissappointed with the artwork, which seems to have gone downhill in all the recent Wiz books. There are tonnes of fantastic artists out there(including the cover artist) who could have done the interior art more justice. Okay. :uh-huh: ASIDE FROM ARTWORK -- I'll leave that to The Queer Eyes for the Realm Guys -- which contents (feats, PrCs, spells, epic-level, etc.) do you find lacking?
Cunning Linguist 04-06-04, 09:24 AM	I got mine today, and I must say.. It's not half bad, for a index book. As a DM I found it lacking with stories behind alot of the spells and such, but I know my players will love it. And it is after all the PLAYERS guide to Faerun, and not the DMs guide to Faerun.
Urbannen 04-06-04, 09:56 AM	About artwork: I'm of the opposite opinion as Fergsta2. I thought this book had some of the best artwork I've seen in a long time. I agree with Cunning Linguist - I'm still disappointed that there was no backstory given to the named spells, but never FRCS nor MoF gave any backstory (or even a bio of the spell's authors), so it was unlikely to change here. FR magic can't hold a candle to Scarred Lands Relics & Rituals in this regard. I am happy that they decided to limit the spells that were originally deity specific to clerics of that deity. I thought that MoF was lame when it converted some of the 2E deity-specific spells and then made them available to all clerics.
Ssussunriyh 04-06-04, 11:09 AM	When I heard about a "Players' Guide to Faerun," I thought it would be like a "Volo's Guide to [wherever]," updated to the current time frame of the Realms. I saw it at the bookstore yesterday and paged throught it - and was sorely disappointed. It's all crunch and no fluff. I'm sick and tired of all the crunch and splatbooks. Personally, I don't give a rat's arse about new regional feats, prestige classes, clerical domains, etc. Enough, already!
Da real goblin 04-06-04, 11:34 AM	ohla! looks like be time for new edition. no one interested in crunch 'nymore. but me agree. not much fluff to help it. but me likes morning lord and hammer of moradin. but screw everything else. though update to 3.5 necessary was.
Mystery Man 04-06-04, 11:57 AM	I don't think this book was ever meant for fluff. It has more crunch than any player can use in a lifetime so hopefully the future regional books (yeah right) will have less. It seems no matter how many of us beg for less crunch in the regional books the more they seem to put in.
Mirtek 04-06-04, 12:21 PM	Well, when WotC said 45% all new content I thought "Oh, what a nice way to say that more than half of this stuff is nothing more than repeating things we already have and updating them to 3.5e". I thing the PGtF is a nice book, but indeed a little bit expensive for a book which is less than 50% new stuff.
FourBlackWings 04-07-04, 02:32 AM	The only real problem I have with the book is that it's terribly and haphazardly put together. It seems that stuff was just put in places randomly through out the book. Why where there prestege classes and feats in the appendix? WHY? as a graphic designer in training it made me twitch.
Arduin 04-07-04, 02:37 AM	I agree, it's kinda difficult to find your way around that book compared to FRCS for example. Luckily it isn't so big, so you can just flip through till you find the stuff you need... if that's a good thing?
Palin_IV 04-07-04, 01:57 PM	I thought it was great. I got the FRCS used and then picked this up and it covers everything I need as a FR player, while the DM has the entire line for the utmost detail. Much more cost effective than getting Magic of Faerun, Races, and Faiths. Now I can spend the rest of my money on supremely good fluff in Ravenloft
Lashan 04-07-04, 02:12 PM	I wish that there were more INITIATE feats for most of the gods. Otherwise, it was exactly what I exepcted. I'm glad it didn't push the storyline forward. I'm glad it wasn't filled with stats for useless NPCs. It's about what I expected.
Faraer 04-07-04, 02:13 PM	I don't see the basis for being disappointed in the book if you checked what was going to be in it. If you went by the title, then yes, it isn't anything like what I would call a player's guide.
Reefy 04-07-04, 02:17 PM	As a DM I've not got too much out of it, but my players are pretty pleased with it. There is some useful information in there, though it's not the most in depth read ever. Then again, I wasn't expecting it to be. I know it only covers two large events but I found the campaign journal useful and the index for all of the spells was handy, for example.
Pun 04-07-04, 02:17 PM	Overall I really liked the book. One of the main reasons I was looking forward to the book was for the appendix. I wanted to see how Wizards were going to incorporate psionics, exalted, and vile things into the Realms. The cosmology section was really nice too. The "initiate" feats were nice. I like them because I think they really help customize clerics. Personally I didn't care for alot of the new artwork but whatever it's still a good book. My only little gripe and like I said I like the book so it doesn't really matter is the fact that the pictures of the three dwarven subraces is mislabled in my copy. The gold dwarf is labeled as a grey dwarf and vice versa. In conclusion let me repeat that I thought it was a great book. It had a few flaws in my eyes but nothing's perfect.
Urbannen 04-07-04, 02:28 PM	Well, they also mislabeled the Tethyrian, Mulan, Iluskan, and Chondathan humans. The Red Wizard had to be Mulan, the red-headed woman with braids was probably an Illuskan barbarian, the Purple Dragon Knight almost certainly was a Chondathan, leaving the paladin of Mystra as a Tethyrian. I guess the problems come when they send the stuff to the typesetter (?).
FourBlackWings 04-07-04, 05:23 PM	Yeah, and I think they miss a lot of things, i believe some of the dwarf pictures are labled wrong too. My guess it was eigther the typesetter or whoever compiled the info in the first place. Still, shouldn't the editor have caught things? It seemed like the book was really rushed.
primemover003 04-07-04, 05:54 PM	I just got mine from amazon today... Grrrrrrr!!!!!! However I really like the Cosmology section. Even as diehard a PS fan I am it was well put together. I also liked the Psionic organizations and it's inclusion into the World... now if only they'd detail the Sea of Night and include some psuedo-spelljamming...:ayyyy!: The regional system is interesting. I know a lot of my players aren't going to like some of it though. Of my 9 I have 4 or 5 that want to be planetouched (aasimar or tieflings) and we're in the Western Heartlands... a Far cry from Mulhorand, Unther, or Chessenta! Though the tiefers are easy (Hellgate keep and Dragonspear Castle!) the Aasimar will be tougher to place!
Sylvos 04-08-04, 12:36 AM	the only change i didn't like was Innate Spell was changed to 3/day vs. once a round for 8 spell slots higher. Which made it a handy feat to have in the higher level epic game. Other than that I loved the book, especially the attention to detail with the Cosmology.
Estelindis 06-02-04, 10:08 AM	I bought this book as a treat for myself, as I hadn't pick up anything from FR since Unapproachable East (where my campaign is set). I can't say it's great fun to read, though. Some of the crunch is very, very nice - I love the Morninglord of Lathander, as I've wanted to see a WotC 3e prestige class for Lathanderites for ages. And I liked the cosmology section, although I would've liked it to be bigger. Overall, however, there was too much crunch and not enough fluff. I know they provided story updates from a couple of novel series, but I would have loved more of that, rather than lots of feats and PrCs. We already have enough of those to last us a lifetime!
Mumm-Ra 06-02-04, 10:40 AM	Yeah there are labelling mistakes all over (the red wizard being illuskan for example..duh). Netherese archwizard is either totally POO or they forgot to put caster level advance. Shadowadept lost spell power:+1 caster level, even though I read richard baker's reply that the spellpower would be changed from DC increase to +1 caster level. Epic hathran gets an epic feat every 2 levels. Pardon? more than a wizard? rubbish. I could continue on the mistakes for a while too.
mahaxxx 06-05-04, 03:18 AM	[/B][/QUOTE]Heck, Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting was beefier than anything and Wizards made a profit didn't they? I'm sure Wizards of the Coast kinda cheapened out on all of us this time around. Maybe I'm wrong on this but I kinda think I'm right. Guess we'll never know WotC's reasons for ourselves unless they respond directly on this issue. [/B][/QUOTE] Actually think of the core book as a "loss leader" or the hook to but everything elce they put out. Really i love most of the FR stuff this book included. Perhaps some of the 3 to 3.5 changes are a bit odd but most {of what changed} was dirived from these boards. the FRPG has some cool stuff i think it was worth the 33 bucks, the origional was worth more
RogerWilco 06-05-04, 03:28 PM	Sorry if this post is somewhat long and incoherent, but I do think I am on topic. I just bought the Player's Guide to Faerun. I am still a 2nd Edition player, and I have just pruchased the 3.5 core rules and this book to see if I could convert. I like the 3.5 core set for the most part, but I have some points about the 3.5 specifically, that I hope the PGtF would fix, but it has only made it worse. Note I have not played more as 2 evenings of 3.5rd edition. Next to that I have some specific points with this PGtF: - It gives the appearance to be very hastily put together, with lot's of editorial mistakes. Some are already posted here, I'll just add one that I think is also a mistake: On p.25 Amn and Calimshan are mentioned as Halfling Regions, but they do not appear in Table 1-7 on page 26. I am playing a halfling rogue from Amn currently, and therefore find this a real problem. I was hoping to be able to report this problem somewhere and the closest thing I could find was this thread. Therefore I created an account and am now posting this message. - I am used to playing Halfling Rogues and I find very little of use in this book, as I do in all of 3.5. I find a lot is geared towards magic users. Maybe it's because in 3.5 you have warriors (fighter, monk, barbarian), magic users (bard, cleric, druid, sorcerer, wizard), fighter/magic users (paladin, ranger), and then somewhat separate the rogue. I find the rogue very much the odd one out, and therefore a lot of stuff is uninteresting, only the skills section is realy interesting for me. Same thing happens for the little folk, in Second Edition they were the only ones to share a book (The complete book of Gnomes and Halflings) all other races had separate books. In 3.5 I again find little mention of them, even though they are supposed to be the most common race after humans. What ever happened to the homely, fatbellied barefooted halflings of second edition? What I do like about 3.5: - the d20 system, everything is much more straightforeward. - the new multiclass system, I see it as a replacement for the 2E kits, and toghether with the cc skills it fills that role quite well. My 2nd edition level 8 halfling rogue with custom kit translates into a ranger2/rogue6 character quite nicely. - more options fore evil aligned characters, even though I beleive that a party of evil aligned characters would fall apart if role-played corectly, at least that's my experience.
Gimric 06-05-04, 07:37 PM	Well, I agree with most, if not all of you, I have the same questions, concerns and plain "what were they thinking?" going on myself. -Dayligh Adaptation: What!? Come on... only at first level... Totally removes any and ALL posibility of RPing gaining the feat... truely SAD. :sad: -Organization: something else that is sad about it. I seem to recall days past where some of the same concers were being raised, then calmed about the disorganized nature of the books and yet here we go again... Come on guys, you can do better than this. -The Vow of Purity thing for the Celebrants of Sharess... how many REAL cat people are out here on the boards, on the design team? As one, I know my cats have tended to bring myself and my parents little "gifts" that would play havoc with that Vow... I realize not everyone eats meat out there but cats do... (mayhaps I should find the BoED board for the rest of this question...) Overall, despite the lack of organization I think I will not only keep it, but hand it off to my players as their main reference for what it can give and Rule Zero what I dont like/cant stand/etc. Besides Hasbro/WotC already has my money for it... ;) I just hope that some of this stuff is not hard coded in the new release of E-tools, but that is another issue and board altogether! :) Gim
RogerWilco 06-06-04, 04:28 PM	I agree with you on the daylight adoption, how could Drizzt ever exist otherwise? I don't know about the vow as I do not have the book of exhalted deeds. RogerWilco
Sancus 06-06-04, 05:06 PM	I really like the new Shadow Weave magic feats, because the drawbacks in the old ones were just a waste of time and a pain. Having to roll umpteen checks every time your Shadow Weave magic user comes into contact with a weave user is just lame. They reduced the number of checks by half by removing the drawbacks.
ruleslawyer 06-09-04, 12:53 PM	Originally posted by Urbannen [B]Specific nitpicks: ... -There is little advice on how to incorporate Races of Faerūn ethnic feats and the new regional feat system. Some of the ethnic feats are now official regional feats, so how do you treat the ethnic feats that weren't mentioned?I believe the sidebar on p.33 answers this. If it's not a listed PGtF regional feat, you just remove the region requirement and it becomes a normal feat, occasionally with a racial prereq. -The feats section is poorly organized. The list of feats doesn't even include all the feats that are described. The Initiate feats are included in the spells section, which I found confusing. To each his own, I guess. I thought the feats were organized much better than in the FRCS, actually. -Underdark characters can only take Daylight Adaptation at 1st level?Yeah, kinda silly, and clearly only the case because they felt (with some justification) that it had to be a regional feat. I guess it doesn't have to be a regional feat at all, which would solve the problem. -The Initiate of Nature spell list includes spells to create brown mold and shoot poisoned thorns? Shouldn't those spells be associated with Talona (Moander's successor by default) instead of good and pure Eldath and Mielikki?Er, not necessarily. Those spells are old-school druid spells from Ed's Pages from the Mages work. Mold and thorns are nature stuff; red in tooth and claw and all that. -The Arcane Devotee was mightily hosed.Yup. The big problem with the AD was that it was a prime candidate for a 1-level dip (to get the Enlarge Spell ability). The revision didn't change that. Overall, though, I found PGtF great, because it is a book designed for a single concrete purpose: to provide 3.5 updates to FR material. A job, IMHO, that it did quite well. The mislabeled artwork and similar typos don't really bother me; I'll take a mislabeled gray dwarf over the Spelldancer class description wording any day.
The Simbul 06-11-04, 02:00 AM	I never really understood the notion of having to pay for a product that is less effective than the original one you already possess, yet such is the case with 3.5, and hence the reason I still refuse to buy 3.5 books. I play 3.5, but I am not going to pay for something that could have been covered in a web enhancement or download. The Player's Guide to Faerun was to be the exception, but after seeing the feeback on amazon, feedback from gaming friends, and my own dislike for certain changes, I decided to add it to the list of books I wont be buying either. As a general rule, re-releasing the exact same product in a new and altered edition, and expecting people to pay for a nerfed revision because the original was "too good" really isnt a viable buisness policy. I cant imagine Henry Ford telling people that because their cars are capable to moving too fast and get too many miles to the gallon, that those cars are now "obscelete" and they need to go out and shell out more $$$ for a less effective version of the same original product. If a manufacturer doesnt get it right the first time, then that is not the fault of the consumer, and they shouldnt be expected to pay for someone else's mistakes for the errata intended to fix them.
Lashan 06-11-04, 12:44 PM	I will disagree with the above post by the Simbul. If a class, spell, feat, or PrC is overpowered and tending to wreak games, then I say "nerf" it. It's not that the class is "too good", but unbalancing. The DM has a tough job of balancing each game so that all the characters are of the appropriate power level and finding and creating adventures that are challenging to everyone. If one character is more powerful then the rest or easily vanquishes foes, then it can cause serious problems in the game. I believe that the Player's Guide was mostly "crunchy" as it was updating the rules of FR DnD to 3.5. I didn't expect a lot of new fluff in this book. That wasn't it's intention. Rogues are always in the shadows when it comes to FR, no matter what version you are playing. FR has a ton of stuff for spell casters and for elves. Everyone else does not get as much attention. I "kinda" agree with the assesment that 3.5 does not do much for the Rogue class. 3E has A LOT of stuff for spellcasters. There is a good amount of feats and PrC's for fighter types, too (finally, a non-boring fighter!). Rogues, in 3E, are all about SKILLS. If you look at the rogue, besides the sneak-attack and a few other "save their butts" abilities, all they get are skills. They are skill demons. Rogues are all about how and what to do with their skills. Once you have that list, there isn't a lot you can really beef up.
RogerWilco 06-20-04, 10:49 AM	I just have the feeling that 2e revolved more around the "adventuring party" idea. If you go into a Dungeon you needed a fighter, a wizard a cleric and a rogue. The sum was much more as it's parts. Everyone had unique things nobody else could do, that complemented each other, making sure everyone was needed and had a share of the fun. In 3e/3.5e I feel they sacrificed this to some degree to make the game adaptable to single-player computer games. This makes for much more all-round characters, especially with the multiclassing rules. The result is that you can now very easily form parties that do not need a rogue. I do like the 3e sneak attack above the old backstab. between level 1 and 8 I have only been able to use backstab once, doing a whopping 4 damage. In 2e you could feel usefull being a halfling rogue with infravision, in 3e I doubt a rogue halfling would be a very usefull character. If one needed the skills, berhaps someone would multiclass in it a little to avoid having to buy those as cc skills, but I do not see much reason why someone would choose a rogue as main or only class.
Chiba_Monkey 06-21-04, 12:28 AM	Originally posted by Klyden I really wanted to see the new stats for several new monsters too. Instead WotC again forces me to do their job for them and update the monsters from Monsters of Faerun. Don't get me wrong, I like PGtF but I think it would have been more worth it's cost (money wise) if Wizard's had just included the monsters as planned. I have to agree here. One look at the art gallery (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20040306a) shows that a bunch of monsters (important ones, like phaerimms), were supposed to be updated, and with better artwork than Monsters of Faerun, to boot. Also the PrC Master Transmorgrifist was removed. I myself never bought the Monsters of Faerun, b/c I took a look through it and decidded that it was mostly crap. Some of the stuff in the PGtF gallery looked really interesting, like that thing that appears to be 2 bony arms wielding a sword, that's a pretty cool undead. And that flaming skull, and lets not forget a 3.5 update to the deepspawn. Yes, I saw the web enchancement link, but I agree with Klyden. It simply did not cut the mustard. Don't get me wrong, I like the PGtF, I just want to know why they dropped a bunch of the stuff that was supoosed to go in it.
Link182 06-23-04, 06:05 AM	I found it a bit weak. They could have put a bit more into it.
warlockco 06-24-04, 02:40 AM	About Drizzt and Daylight Adaptation, despite being on the surface for as many years as he has, he is still not adapted. As to the prestige classes and other materials in the appendixes, it is because those items are not using "Core" Material, they are using Material from Book of Vile Darkness, Book of Exhalted Deeds, and Expanded Psionics Handbook.