Post/Author/DateTime	Post
warrior-poet 09-11-06, 02:47 PM	I bought Dragons of Faerun a little while ago. Glanced through it, liked what I saw, but didn't review it in depth... Unfortunately a review of it has been posted recently (you can find it HERE (http://www.enworld.org/reviews.php?do=review&reviewid=3055805)) which has detailed just how flawed a product it is. There are NUMEROUS stat block errors. This is very sad---stats are a very important part of D+D. To have so many errors in an official D+D product is very disheartening. I hope WoTC provides a THOROUGH errata (or better yet a strongly discouted second printing for original purchasers) for this essentially broken product.
Snotlord 09-11-06, 03:42 PM	Why trust some guy on the internet, if YOU liked the book?
warrior-poet 09-11-06, 03:44 PM	Knew I was opening myself up for that one. I liked it, but I hadn't read it thoroughly. If I had, I would have not liked it at all. I cannot enjoy a book that is deeply flawed. Read the review if you have any questions/doubts about it. It is a fair, but accurate review.
Snotlord 09-11-06, 03:59 PM	I read the review just before reading your post actually, and was annoyed by it, hence my snappy reply. Sorry;) I don't mind John Cooper reviews, frankly the wotc managers needs to read them, but it really bugs me that lots of folk out there make their buying decisions based on John Coopers math skills. I think DoF is a awesome book and the stats are the least important part of it. And even if it was: its a freaking game! Ok, I'm done.
Besshalar 09-11-06, 05:11 PM	I don't get the whole importance of all the stats ? Stats are probably the easiest part of the game to come up with whereas new and interesting lore requires a lot more time and effort to create. So with that in mind I'd give Dragons of Faerun atleast 4 stars. But I do agree with Cooper about the fact that the book should have been proofread better and this should include the stat bars . Just don't see all the whining about a great resource book.
BobROE 09-11-06, 07:25 PM	And you know, I've read it cover to cover and didn't notice a single one of those errors (well I skimmed the review so I could have notices a few of them). So I'm still giving the book a solid 4/5, would have gotten 5/5 but it had to many stated out dragons in it.
Steve Russell 09-11-06, 07:32 PM	This goes beyond a 91% statblock rate error (or 60% which should get you fired). Or the inexcusable error of drawing a brown dragon instead of a fang dragon. Eric Boyd wrote willy nilly, and just plugged pieces of the forgotten realms lore errata that they wanted to fix (like tiamat being killed off for the third time in the setting). He did not stick to subject or understand the concept of a word count simply by the # of Web Enhancements (an entire chapter was cut) He stated as much at GenCon. I wish, I had bought this before I went to the seminar and I would have asked both eric boyd and mr perkins to explain I don't like having to read cult of the dragon again for the 3rd time (your in the lords of darkness, your in your own book 2nd edition book, the lords of darkness was your update move on) I don't want to hear about the thrice martyred cult of tiamat, because the people you let write FR products could not bother to know thier realms lore, or be edited by someone who did. I don't want magical items in the books that have nothing to do with DRAGONS! I wanted at least one planer dragon (besides shadow)to make his home in the realms, it would have been nice! What about epic dragons on Fearun? I mean of all places not to have an epic dragon detailed. I did not neeed yet another example of the books dominating FR gaming. I really like the idea of the Dracorage. Yet guess what the heroes in the book are solving the problem so forget about it. I like the idea of two types of dragons in a roleplaying terms: predators and schemers, but you got the predators stat blocks wrong so that is useless to me, and their is not enough meat on the bones to impress me with a schemer like "The Creeping Doom" did in Wyrms of the North (and later cult of the dragon), I did enjoy the use of other source material and I think this is the best example of it being done the right way. I also enjoyed the format the dragons were laid out it but it felt cut short, with nothing of the flair, flavor or even crunch of the Wyrms of the North. I would have rather had the whole book be in the format of detailing the unique dragons of faerun. I would have like stats on even dead dragons like the last king of justice, many of the dracoliches that have been destoryed but no one destroyed thier phylactary. The book was ambitious but in doing so fell far short of what I wanted. Just my opinion, I could be wrong. (goes and rereads wyrms of the north)
BrianCritchley 09-11-06, 08:40 PM	this thread just goes to prove you can't please everyone. I liked the inclusion of information about dragon related orginizations, thats IMHO important.
Steve Russell 09-11-06, 09:18 PM	I like the NEW organizations, they were great, just the fact that only one chapter deals with THE DRAGONS OF FAERUN.
Dark Wizard 09-11-06, 09:37 PM	The errors and typos do sound disconcerting. Even if the book does not offer the information that everyone wants, it should try to present what information it is trying to convey in the clearest, cleanest manner possible.
Teh_username 09-11-06, 09:59 PM	I have never heard of John Cooper before, but utter cocks like him are why I left the hobby for half a decade. Quit looking for the slightest typographical error (oh ye gods no, they misspelled it "Tiama" once! WHAT COULD IT POSSIBLY MEAN?!?) so you can be a "big man" on the internet and try actually playing the game for once. That is, if you can find a group that won't throw you out after you start arguing with the DM two minutes into character creation. In Selvetarm's name, people. :rolleyes:
Alaphondar 09-11-06, 11:05 PM	The book was ambitious but in doing so fell far short of what I wanted. That's a shame. Hopefully the next FR product will meet your exacting requirements precisely. But I doubt it. I thought the book was excellent. The focus on the Old Empires was very welcome, the explanation and game mechanics given to the Rage was great, and the list of dragons was awesome. It lets me use these dragons to suit MY campaign and stat them up as I want. I was thrilled to see that the Wyrms of the North columns weren't re-hashed and doubly thrilled to see that the actions of these dragons during the Rage was given some detail. The stat errors are unfortunate but not surprising. It's a reflection on the needless complexity of the modern D&D game and clear signal as to the direction that 4E needs to go. I would expect that the matter will be dealt with in official errata, as is the normal case with all such products. As for the quoted poster, it's clear that he hasn't given sufficient weight to the fact that the Realms are a shared world environment. Errors and discrepancies between authors are always going to happen. Thankfully writers like Eric Boyd know the respectful way to deal with such matters: accept what others have written and come up with a fix that doesn't exclude or dismiss someone else's creative effort - no matter what subjective attitude you might have on its FR merit. I was encouraged by the work Eytan Bernstein did in this, his FR debut. As a Realms writer, he seems to be switched on and his work and writing lend themselves to the setting. I hope he gets more opportunities. To the OP who now thinks he shouldn't buy the book: if all you ever wanted was stats and stat blocks, you'll never need anything other than the Monster Manual for your dragon information. If you want draconic material featuring solid realmslore, good adventure ideas and possibilities, and the tools to run your own adventures during the Rage, then this book will greatly please you. Alaphondar of Cormyr
KnightErrantJR 09-12-06, 11:04 AM	Okay, lets think about this one for a moment. I always love it when people really liked something until someone else decides to dedicate their lives to making sure everyone else hates it as much as they do. First off, I read a similar thing about Erik Mona and James Jaccobs Fiendish Codex book. The same reviewer savaged their stat blocks and declared it a mess, and then several other people on the boards came back and noted that some of his calculations were off. Sometimes when we are predesposed towards a given outcome, we are biased to make our data correspond to our preferred outcome. If you really have decided you hate WOTC, then I guess its easier to overlook your own mistakes when trying to prove theirs. James mentioned on Paizo's site that stat block errors can come from so many different places, and its not as simple as you may think it is. If WOTC hired a specific Stat Block editor, not only would that add to the price of the books, in order to not add prohibitively to the price it would likely cause a bottleneck to the books, since they would likely have to hire SEVERAL statblock editors, which would be more expensive than most of us would like. Eric Boyd has done an excellent job for YEARS of tying up loose ends in Realmslore, and making dispartiate products make sense with one another, and I have never seen him do anything "willy nilly." Eytan did an excellent job in his first FR outing, and I hope to see more of him.
The Simbul 09-12-06, 01:43 PM	James mentioned on Paizo's site that stat block errors can come from so many different places, and its not as simple as you may think it is. If WOTC hired a specific Stat Block editor, not only would that add to the price of the books, in order to not add prohibitively to the price it would likely cause a bottleneck to the books, since they would likely have to hire SEVERAL statblock editors, which would be more expensive than most of us would like.I would edit NPC stat blocks for federal minimum wage, or the lowest amount you could pay someone without violating labor laws...with another 4 hours per day of free-work done in my off time. Moreover, if the amount of time I spent griping over NPC statistical errors on these boards were re-allocated to actually editing those stat blocks, then I dare imagine I could do the work of four stat block editors between working hours and hours of leisure. Meanwhile, there are other members on these boards (Green Giant) who consistently churn out accurate and reasonable stat blocks for NPCs, and who do so for FREE.
BrianCritchley 09-12-06, 05:08 PM	I don't get the focus on stat blocks, I mean not too many people are going to use those stats anyway, and even if they do, a few minor errors likely aren't going to effect things anyway. the fact is stat blocks for characters in gaming WILL have errors in them, no matter the gaming system, and as they get higher in complexity more will creep in (thus why errors seem more common with high level characters) D&D is hardly unique in published errors. I can think of other gaming systems quite easily that have had some pretty bad and obvious errors in em
Steve Russell 09-12-06, 09:00 PM	STATBLOCKS! First about John Cooper, and weather or not he is a rooter, personal attacks are childish. -I may not agree with John that statblocks are important but if I am PAYING for a product you should be able to do basic math, stat blocks are not calculas and anyone with an understanding of basic EXCEL SHEETS can do it right, so you have every right to expecft WotC to do the job of a 3rd party publisher like expeditious retreat presss which had a staff of 3 people doing the 800 stat blocks for the monster geographica series, Wotc could pay some one once to make the program and use it for the life of the game. explain to me why that is not so and I will shut up. "That's a shame. Hopefully the next FR product will meet your exacting requirements precisely. But I doubt it." My exacting requirements? a book called the dragons of faerun that was acturally about dragons? I mean serpent kingdoms was a great book because it was exactly what it said it would be. I looked throught the first chapter is was dragon after dragon after dragon I was happy then I got to every chapter after that. Seprent Kingdoms did not put in MAJOR ARTIFACTS (as cool as they were) that were not about the serpent kingdoms. "The focus on the Old Empires was very welcome, " Except this was not dragons of the old empires, you focus on the dragons of Fearun not the old empires, (I am personally am sorry christopher perkins said no more regional sourcebooks) "the explanation and game mechanics given to the Rage was great, and the list of dragons was awesome. " I agree. "I was thrilled to see that the Wyrms of the North columns weren't re-hashed and doubly thrilled to see that the actions of these dragons during the Rage was given some detail." I agree with an exception. I did not want what was on the net or from magazines redone but it would have been nice to see new dragons done in that style rather than the half a page style they were done it (ala no meat) a wyrms of the north article was a minimum 3 pages with no stat blocks. "The stat errors are unfortunate but not surprising." It should be considering my 12 year old cousin can do stat blocks for free that don't have errrors. It's not "needlessly complicated" to ask that you be able to to add 20+1+1+2 and get 24. Every time I see a BASIC MATH error it makes me wonder why I can't give WotC. 3.99 for the book I just forgot to put the decimal in the right place. "I would edit NPC stat blocks for federal minimum wage, or the lowest amount you could pay someone without violating labor laws" This simple statment proves my point. You could hire some one for minium wage to do this hell you could hire an INTERN to do it for FREE. "As for the quoted poster, it's clear that he hasn't given sufficient weight to the fact that the Realms are a shared world environment." A published product is a product, no your homebrew realms, it is not a shared world. It has a continuity WotC proves my point with launching The Timeline of the Realms next year as a published product, you and I dont' get to write "cannon" work. "Errors and discrepancies between authors are always going to happen. " Not if you actually pay people who know the subject matter to edit or oh my gods write, the book. "Thankfully writers like Eric Boyd know the respectful way to deal with such matters: accept what others have written and come up with a fix that doesn't exclude or dismiss someone else's creative effort" Great fine, but put that in the Old Empires book, or the Religions book. Not in the DRAGONS OF FEARUN BOOK, but even if you must becaue you have decided on a draconic holy war, then fix it in a sentance. You only gave the talons of justice a segment and they have only been covered in the original draconomicon and they are the other side of that holy war. "If you want draconic material featuring solid realmslore, good adventure ideas and possibilities, and the tools to run your own adventures during the Rage, then this book will greatly please you." If you want a book with soldi realmslore, good adventure ideas and possiblites, the tools to run your own adventures during the rage, about the DRAGONS of FAERUN read the introduction, then the first chapter and finally the chapter on monsters where you get three udpated 3.5 dragons (and no new dragons of faerun), then go read Wyrms of the North. Steve Russell More later
Steve Russell 09-12-06, 10:15 PM	" I mean not too many people are going to use those stats anyway," acually it is pretty obvious that people who actually run the adventures out of the book, use the stat blocks especially for the npcs, I admit I tend to cusotmize monsters but I rarely like to customize anything but the BBEG when it comes . " and even if they do, a few minor errors likely aren't going to effect things anyway. " Example: (average) hp should be 518, not 391. I am sure if I took 127 hp away it would not effect anything anyway. lests see every missed a save by two or more, ever missed a pc by 5 or more every been at -3 hp from a dragon attack? These things matter because even if only 100 games use this material 60 to 91 of those game could have gone better and it is WotCs fault. "D&D is hardly unique in published errors. I" What is unique is people who publish using the EXACT SAME game system with the same or higher level of complexity, make less errors, when your the flagship I expect you to make less errors not more.
Davidw 09-13-06, 08:47 AM	Overall, I quite liked the book and felt there were some interesting pieces in it. As my grasp of the rules is basic at best (I come unstuck trying to calculate Challenge Ratings accurately), I didn't notice any of the stat block errors. I must have missed the typos as well, but then I don't check each word I come across with a dictionary by my side so maybe the mistake is mine. Saying that... I *do* find the sheer number of errors frustrating. If this was some fanboy project that was given away free of charge, I could accept them. But a huge number of errors in a commercial project is another thing entirely. Whoever gets paid to check these things clearly isn't doing a good job and ought to be shown the door. EDIT: just to say I find the sheep mentality quite amusing. "I liked this book but someone else didn't, therefore I've changed my mind about it." What someone else thinks about a book is irrelevant. It's what *you* think that matters.
folletrap 09-13-06, 10:30 AM	two things (obviously IMHO): 1) stats ARE important..especially when you don't have the time to create your own NPC, and want to run your gane in the right way 2) if I am paying for a product you should be able give a good quality and well tested item....even a errata should be not so well accepted: think about a session...the dragon appears..ok ROLL INITIATIVE..the dragon breaths and....hey guys stop yourself...i don't find the sheet with the right stats...not this....mmm i've to print it again..but where's the file....and so on
BrianCritchley 09-13-06, 02:12 PM	as for the church of tiamat, old empires focus and the cult of the dragon focus there's a reason those where added in. yes the book focuses on dragons but dragons need minions. thus the book is going to give info on minions. and yes evil orginizations are going to get the most attention. strangely I can't see as much a need for massive details on the church of bahamut as I do need on the church of tiamat ;)
BobROE 09-13-06, 03:45 PM	two things (obviously IMHO): 1) stats ARE important..especially when you don't have the time to create your own NPC, and want to run your gane in the right way Only in adventures, I don't really care for any of the dragon stats (just short hand versions would have been fine, and allowed for more lore).
JRBlasingame 09-13-06, 03:59 PM	The only thing I didn't like was that they had Tiamat's church, but not Xymore/Bahamut's church. That is what I really wanted. Besides that a great read and just all around great book.
TomCosta 09-14-06, 04:21 PM	As an fyi, several of the items (aside from any stat block errors) of contention in this discussion come from existing Realmslore, for which the writers would have taken a shellacking if they had ignored. Case in point (but not the only one), the prevalence of Dragons in the Old Empires has been sitting there since the very beginnings of 2E and has remained so since that time. In the 1E/2E Old Empires product we learned about Tchazzar and his two allies and the worship of Tiamat in the Old Empires. In Power and Pantheons, we learned of Tchazzar's consuming two other dragons to become the avatar of Tiamat. In Cult of the Dragon we learned about a powerful dracolich that was slowly coming to dominate the area called Threskel. In FRCS, we learned that the dragons consumed by Tchazzar had somehow returned (without explanation). In the novel Alabaster Staff we learned that the church of Tiamat was alive and well. In Serpent Kingdoms we learned the church of Tiamat was alive, well, and growing. Throw in the events of the Rage novels, and the need to explain what's going on, and well you see where I'm headed. When I think of dragons in Faerun, one of the first ares to logically think of is the Old Empires.
Imruphel 09-14-06, 09:56 PM	While I find the stat block errors annoying I still really enjoyed Dragons of Faerun but I also appreciate John Cooper's review. What I would like to see is a return to the 2E standard of no stat blocks. I would prefer an NPC to be written up as Ettrick, High Watcher of Helm (LN male Tethyrian human Cleric 16 of Helm) than have a full stat block. This is for several reasons: 1. Stat blocks for 3.xE take up too much space, space better served for more interesting things like Realmslore. 2. Chances are that the stat block is incorrect so let's save the WotC designers some time and trouble and just forget about them. Point 1 is more important to me than point 2.
KnightErrantJR 09-14-06, 10:15 PM	Now that I tend to agree with. Unless its an encounter, and adventure, or its a sample (i.e. High Level Red Wizard example stats), we don't really need to know how many points Khelben has in painting or things of that nature. It also helps to avoid situations like Elminster and Khelben not having epic spellcasting (when both have been involed in High Magic rituals). In fact, it may help signal to newer Realms fans that you aren't competing with Elminster or Khelben or the Simbul, that they are NPCs to interact with, not benchmarks or potential opponents.
Imruphel 09-14-06, 10:49 PM	And, KnightErrantJr, your argument also applies to why, IMO, the powers should not be statted up: why send a signal that they are uber-monsters that can one day, in theory, be beaten? Plus it wastes space that could otherwise have been given over to useful lore... (yes, Faiths & Pantheons, I am looking at you...).
KnightErrantJR 09-14-06, 11:08 PM	No arguement from me there. I agree. I don't mind avatars and aspect stats, but the god themselves, no point in doing that.
Sapp 09-16-06, 01:47 AM	Probably not as bad as the stat blocks for Explorer's Guide to Eberron. What takes the cake is that one of the dragons with the Half-Fiend template didn't actually get the template applied. He's simply listed as a "half-fiend wyrm black dragon" without any of the benefits. The stat blocks of Dragons of Faerun are, at worst, just annoying. Tchazzar isn't worth his CR 40... and why meteor swarm? A smart dragon like him shouldn't have gotten that spell. EDIT: More significantly, a smart RED dragon like him shouldn't have gotten that spell.
Gelcur 09-16-06, 11:06 AM	I might have missed it but I can't seem to find the Amulet of Draconic might in it either. The Ring of Dragons was there and it was cool seeing it printed but kind of sad that the amulet didn't make it in. =( Thos two are really meant to be a pair.