| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Brewhammer12-06-07, 06:36 AM | Having listened to the interview (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=grz) twice now... What's funny here is the simplistic, easy route they take in all this. Like when the 'Weave' was brought up - Perkins' explanation was laughable. "Well when we ditched Vancian magic... that meant we needed to kill Mystra." Actually Chris no, it doesn't necessarily mean that. Nor does it mean you have to "nuke" popular high level characters (more on that below). It could mean you'd need to redefine how magic works, even with Mystra, for your new 4th Ed. changes. He goes all over the place in this interview with the continuity. I've seen WotC use FR's continuity as a selling and marketing point before the 4th Ed. announcement, and then afterward I've seen them do a 180 and explain how FR is so old and busted with its long continuity -- but never in my life did I expect to see someone use BOTH lines in the same interview. Perkins started off saying "Well this long continuity is a downside and it's keeping people away" and then he brings up the continuity in a positive way when describing why people like the Realms - then goes right back to tearing it apart again when saying that the continuity is why it's not played as much by people in the WotC office. Now folks... if they're not playing it in the office then I sure as Hell don't want them making changes to it because it proves they don't know a damn thing about it to begin with. This is a lot like when a new writer comes onto a comic book yet can't be bothered with learning the character's history. "I don't care if Spider-Man doesn't kill people--! In my story he does, and he eats them too, so there!" Regarding Mystra's Chosen: I have missed the paragraphs in the previous FR sourcebooks saying that Mystra's Chosen or other high level characters should be used "to clean up PC messes" or to do the "epic bits" and leave the players in the cold on feeling like heroes. Why have I missed that? Because it's never freaking been in there! There is nothing saying that Elminster, Drizzt, the Simbul or any other 'famous' Realms NPC have to be in your own campaigns. If this was happening in home campaigns it was poor, poor DM'ing and not the fault of NPC characters completely controlled by said DM. This is about the most ridiculous argument I have heard concerning the 'need' for these bogus changes to FR. Gary Gygax: "The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." Man that becomes more and more true every frickin' day. These changes provide people the perfect opportunity to jump away from WotC and start doing their own things more. Don't like the idea of 4th Ed? Don't buy it - keep doing what you've been doing and have fun. Don't like the asinine Realms changes? Keep using your current FR materials - there is nothing saying we have to approve of this trainwreck with our cash. Perkins was right on one thing though: none of this is solely Rich Baker's fault. It's the fault of many and many deserve the blame here, but it's not solely Baker's fault. That being said, Rich Baker lets undocumented ogres rake his leaves and he must be stopped. :cool: |
| Alediran12-06-07, 07:23 AM | It's better to say: THE $ED FR TEAM MUST BE STOPPED! |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-06-07, 10:30 AM | I don't much to say other than that this interview ruffled my feathers all over again. I don't think I need to explain why. |
| Alediran12-06-07, 10:34 AM | I don't much to say other than that this interview ruffled my feathers all over again. I don't think I need to explain why. It's not needed, the true Realms followers are of one mind on this subject. It's like we almost developed a psychic connection the moment $ed was announced :D |
| Stigger12-06-07, 11:17 AM | Just made me ill again... |
| MatteBlack12-06-07, 12:11 PM | It's not needed, the true Realms followers are of one mind on this subject. It's like we almost developed a psychic connection the moment $ed was announced :D Or you define those you agree with as "true Realms followers". |
| Fingoldfin12-06-07, 12:38 PM | Or you define those you agree with as "true Realms followers". I'll agree with you on this point. There are true Realms fans on both sides of the 4e argument. I disagree with you, Mr. Micellany, and others on many issues, but you are all obviously true Realms fans. I don't believe that Chris Perkins is a Realms fan at all. If he can't be bothered to learn enough about the Realms to run a game in it then he is not a fan. He is designing source books for a setting he won't even play in. How can that give anyone any confidence in the "New" FR? :confused: |
| Alediran12-06-07, 12:43 PM | Or you define those you agree with as "true Realms followers". No, I define as "true realms followers" people who don't accept what is becoming of the realms so it can "fit" the $ed ideas (I include the Mystra and powerfull good NPCs haters & bashers on the group outside of the true realms followers) |
| Lord Karsus12-06-07, 01:20 PM | -I'm in the middle of listening to it right now (There's no visual, for whatever reason). Here's some what I'm thinking as I listen. One thing I can't get over is how silly Chris Perkins pronounces everything! :D He's dodging the question as to why a "new" Realms was needed. "Nuking" NPCs/places!? If nobody could absorb FR knowledge to the degree where running a game was possible, there obviously wouldn't be any campaigns being run. -Overall, like msatran said, the interview wasn't very enlightening. |
| Lord Karsus12-06-07, 01:22 PM | I don't believe that Chris Perkins is a Realms fan at all. -I know *I've* never heard of him before a few weeks ago... |
| Green Elven Vampire12-06-07, 01:27 PM | -I know *I've* never heard of him before a few weeks ago... I think I've heard of him before... I believe he's part of the Bush administration!! |
| Lord Karsus12-06-07, 01:33 PM | I think I've heard of him before... I believe he's part of the Bush administration!! -Then he'd have some sense. You don't see the United States nuking other countries... -And, no, GEV, it's not chic to randomly poke fun at the presidential administration without any context. We're an educated bunch, and above such pettiness. |
| MarkusTay6312-06-07, 01:49 PM | I think I've heard of him before... I believe he's part of the Bush administration!!Was he the one who accidently shot Gygax in the face while Stirge hunting? :confused: |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-06-07, 03:00 PM | I don't believe that Chris Perkins is a Realms fan at all. If he can't be bothered to learn enough about the Realms to run a game in it then he is not a fan. He is designing source books for a setting he won't even play in. How can that give anyone any confidence in the "New" FR? :confused: I know. At least the people at WotC seem really enthusiatic about the new 4E rules, as they say they love them and are using them. Granted, that's to be expected, but it's almost shocking how it is admitted that the people working on the new FR don't even like using the FR setting! Wow... |
| MerrikCale12-06-07, 03:06 PM | I'm still waiting for an actual reason they need to do all of this. Its becoming clear to me they have no real reason. They say "we needed to kill Mystra" with no explanation. Its sad really that they are able to ruin everything. |
| MatteBlack12-06-07, 03:12 PM | I know. At least the people at WotC seem really enthusiatic about the new 4E rules, as they say they love them and are using them. Granted, that's to be expected, but it's almost shocking how it is admitted that the people working on the new FR don't even like using the FR setting! Wow... I'll definitely agree that they would they say they like it good or bad but, 4th does seem to be an improvement on known flaws. I think you are blurring the line here for the sake of your argument. There is a difference between not liking working with FR and stating there are aspects of it that make it difficult to work with. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-06-07, 03:14 PM | I think you are blurring the line here for the sake of your argument. I don't think I am. I find it disappointing that the people working on the FR seem to have very little enthusiasm for the setting in itself. |
| Brewhammer12-06-07, 03:26 PM | I don't think I am. I find it disappointing that the people working on the FR seem to have very little enthusiasm for the setting in itself. Yeah I had mentioned that and it's particularly damning. I used to play Star Wars Galaxies (including the ill-fated launch day) and it was pretty clear a couple of months into the game that someone was asleep at the wheel. Not soon after it was obvious that the Devs were not even playing the game that they expected us to pay $15 per month for. On the SWG boards we couldn't even get the Developers to admit they played the game. Eventually a mass exodus occurred over some very unpopular changes. One of the reactions from SOE was promising players "We'll have our Dev's start playing the game more." |
| MerrikCale12-06-07, 03:34 PM | I find it disappointing that the people working on the FR seem to have very little enthusiasm for the setting in itself. I could not agree more. Its probably the biggest reason they are runining it. They say its too complicated. Thats only because they admittedly don't know it. Its so disappointing. |
| MarkusTay6312-06-07, 03:48 PM | So basically, they are part of that crowd that finds the lore "intimidating". When I worked at Home Depot, I spent a great deal of my time getting 'certified' in just about everything the place sold, by taking computer tests and learning during my lunch - there wasn't a product in the building I wasn't familiar with. I did not have to do that - it wasn't required - but it made me a more valuable employee and better able to serve MY customers. Word of advice, people - crack a book once in awhile. Learning isn't scarey, and it's a big part of YOUR JOB. |
| sfdragon12-06-07, 03:50 PM | somehow i remember an ancient phrase. If it isnt broke, dont fix it. so now my question is, why are they trying to fix what isnt broke? someone around here has a sig that states that the developers wont destroy a setting, the players will by not buying it or something like this. that statement in his or her sig is a half lie, they can destroy a setting by ******* off the fans of that setting. FR 4E sounds like it will fail, and with it GH,DL and ebberron along with. dnd will die out with it in time. a good idea illconcieved is still a bad idea |
| Fingoldfin12-06-07, 03:54 PM | MatteBlack, I think I brought up a very valid point. If someone likes a campaign setting they will play in it. It is a matter of taste. It is very subjective and there is no right or wrong. Some designers working on the changes don't seem to like the Realms. Forgotten Realms has a very loyal fan base. When WotC decided to put designers that don't like the Realms in charge of changing the setting they made a very big mistake. Would Hasboro put people who don't like playing Monopoly in charge of creating a new version of it? Why are fans of Eberron in charge of creating a new version of the Realms? It is a valid question. |
| 18DELTA12-06-07, 04:01 PM | They are too busy playtesting their $E Eberron games!:D Dont get me wrong I like Eberron, but what these :censored: are doing to the Realms is CRIMINAL!:rolleyes: |
| Alediran12-06-07, 04:02 PM | Why are fans of Eberron in charge of creating a new version of the Realms? It is a valid question. Because Eberron is the k3w1 1337 setting that every newbie is reading? Because WoTC want to give the realms to those same prepubescent players and use the developers of Eberron to change the realms to Eberron? |
| Fingoldfin12-06-07, 04:06 PM | It really shows in the GHotR that some of the desgners don't know about the Realms. The gods acted so out of character that it was obvious they were not fans.:( |
| MarkusTay6312-06-07, 04:11 PM | There should be some sort of test, one with a couple of hundred obscure questions, and if you get at least 90% THEN you should be allowed to work on the Realms. I fear scant few 'designers' would pass. I can think of at least a dozen people here and at CK who would, though. Of course, they've eliminated the need for this test by 'nuking' the lore and giving us 4e - I suppose it was the simpler thing to do, for THEM. |
| msatran12-06-07, 04:49 PM | Yeah. Apparently "Rich in History" to them meant "Richard Baker, make us a history." |
| Zanan12-06-07, 05:33 PM | Just made me ill again... I'll make that my "quote of the day"! :D |
| Faraer12-06-07, 05:57 PM | Zer0 asked good questions, as much as we'd expect in a promotional interview. My thoughts on some particular comments: ...30 years of baggage. A lot of it is good stuff to have around, some of it is not so good stuff to have around, and the question is how much of it is really worth hanging on to Standard doublespeak: we almost all agree the Realms has accretions to shed, but those who like Ed's Realms and those who don't aren't thinking of the same things. Still, "30 years of baggage"? Can they [someone coming to the Realms fresh] run a campaign in this world? Of course they can, many do. [we aren't going to] just assume that tieflings dropped out of the sky in balloons and kind of landed all over the Realms So (assuming Chris knows the Realms already has tieflings), Realms 2008 will have lots of them; so your weird, cool demonoid PC is not so unusual, but one of many. But hopefully a lot of that material [Ed's Realmslore backlog] will see the light of day in other forms, like maybe when we launch the FR wikipedia... Great to hear this at last acknowledged. Answering "what is it about FR that makes it so likeable and so popular", Chris mentioned multiplicity, magic, age and legacy. Isn't the Realms being changed so it's less complex for newcomers with less high-level intrigue, magic massively redone, and the setting written so DMs don't have to know the history, "enjoying what's there without worrying about what used to be"? Ed is taking the lead on this, and a lot of the work he's doing on the campaign guide is focused on places beyond Faerûn. That's something definite to look forward to. For instance, Mystra's Chosen, who are these sort of überpowerful beings, won't be around to save the day any more, and what that does is heightens the tension for the heroes in the world, it means that they're the ones who are actually accomplishing the epic goals. If "the heroes" means just your PC group across the whole world, that would mean massively thinning, simplifying, delocalizing, trivializing the setting. If it means all the heroes in the world, that's how things are now. Or will everything be done by adventuring bands rather than individuals and larger organizations? Which is it? This point seems to be incoherent rhetoric. we're nuking some of the high-level characters who can steal the PCs' thunder . . . But the high-level ones that we're adding, I think, aren't going to kind of get in the way of the story the way some of the current characters do. So Chris tells us he wasn't dissembling with the "omnipotent force for good" comment, and he really does believe this. Taking him at his word, then, he doesn't understand the Realms. . . . we had to make an argument for the change, and there were people in the room who were like "Mm, I don't know," and there were people in the room like "Yes, do it now, do it do it do it!" Wow. We understand what the Weave does and what the Weave has done for the setting in the past. But the rest of this answer has no mention of it as anything other than a magic system. ...that's one of the things I would love to be able to communicate more effectively to fans who are running non-FR D&D games on the outside, that there's a lot of stuff within the FR world that can easily be imported over. Yes! So don't pander to the idea that it's difficult by such means as branding Expedition to Undermountain as non-Realms and promoting the illusion of "generic" material. Talking of brands, that's what "FR" is. The Realms is an imaginary world. So currently there are no FR games running. This is interesting, but doesn't prove anything. And the people in the department who didn't run FR campaigns usually didn't run them for a lot of the same reasons why people on the outside don't run FR campaigns, and that's because they just can't absorb all the material that they think they need to run the campaign as a true FR campaign, because there's so much stuff built up. If a newcomer wants to run "a true FR campaign", and who knows how many people want that kind of authenticity, it no doubt is not trivial for many to get to what makes the Realms tick, with an encyclopaedic book like the 2001 FRCS which presents everything flatly whether it's fundamental spirit and lore or negligible TSR or WotC carelessness; with basic "non-adventuring" cultural material sometimes consigned to supplements and novels; and fundamental "how this works" information scattered in old articles and forum posts. I often advise new DMs to read the Old Grey Box, because it's a better introduction for the purpose of DMing the authentic Realms, even though there's much that it doesn't explain, instead leaving the reader to figure things out or make them up. Although there's more to cover now (thus I'd narrow the geographic scope rather than widening it), I'm quite sure that a pedagogically able book could be written that tells and shows what matters in the Realms, and how to run an authentic Realms campaign, including the joined importance and malleability of lore (the two epigraphs in the Old Grey Box), leaving DMs in no doubt about what the Realms is and how to use it, which is not a matter of how many supplements you've read. Do the Wizards designers like and understand the Realms? I don't doubt Rich Baker does, well enough, though he also has strong ideas of his own that I don't think always fit it too well. The other Wizards staff, maybe they like it, but there's no particular public sign that they do. |
| Fire_Wraith12-06-07, 06:28 PM | I do find the implication that those responsible for the design are not (or were not) playing games set in the Realms to be unnerving. It gives me the impression that the decisions being made about the Realms are being made by individuals that are not fully equipped to understand how many of those who are actually playing games set in the Realms would have problems with the radical changes they're applying to the setting. It vaguely reminds me of the reason I've always taken the position that DMs should play in the online games that they also run (which seems to be a recurring argument that comes up from time to time). I've seen too many instances of places where DMs did not play, and thus were unable to see problems that the players saw, were unsympathetic, or just couldn't grasp the scope of the problem. I've also seen it on an individual level, when a given DM from an online game did not play, even though others did. Bottom line is, it's key to be able to share the perspective of the player. I'd generally assumed before this that everyone involved in FR work at WoTC was also involved in games with FR. As a result, to hear, or even hear implications that it may not be the case, disturbs me a great deal. |
| Stigger12-06-07, 06:36 PM | What Farear and Fire Wraith said...probably others too, but my brain isn't working right at the moment. |
| Butterface12-06-07, 06:46 PM | It's not needed, the true Realms followers are of one mind on this subject. It's like we almost developed a psychic connection the moment $ed was announced :D Actually, I consider myself to be a "true Realms follower," and I like some of the changes coming. |
| Stigger12-06-07, 07:08 PM | Yes, but you probably also <insert some inflammatory standard accusation of heretics, unbelievers, and The Other here> too... so, you don't count. :P ;) |
| WFMaranto12-06-07, 07:54 PM | Good Lord, Faraer - what a well-done post. While, I have to say that I don't like a lot of the negativity I've seen on this board, you hit the nail on the head. I do look forward to the new material. I really hope that the writers can produce a quality REALMS product. I don't want to second guess them either. The best thing that could happen for ALL of us Realms fans is for them to turn out a great Campaign Guide that surpasses the quality of even the legendary Grey Box. Still, it really struck me as unnerving how casually Perkins said that none of them play in a Realms game. Like that's no big deal... It's a huge deal. It's an even bigger deal that they don't realize that it's a problem. I'm cautiously optimistic. But this all hinges on the developers of the 4E Realms delivering the goods. |
| Surgebuster12-06-07, 08:15 PM | I find it disappointing that the people working on the FR seem to have very little enthusiasm for the setting in itself. Yeah, that Ed Greenwood sure could use some more enthusiam for the Realms...:rolleyes: Joe |
| Brewhammer12-06-07, 08:30 PM | Yeah, that Ed Greenwood sure could use some more enthusiam for the Realms...:rolleyes: Joe Clearly she was speaking about the designers at WotC who are making FR changes... yet not running any FR 4th Ed. testing. But then you knew that. |
| Surgebuster12-06-07, 08:56 PM | Clearly she was speaking about the designers at WotC who are making FR changes... yet not running any FR 4th Ed. testing. But then you knew that. Clearly, she was taking a comment about people in the WotC office not playing much FR, let it swirl around her head and reasoned that it meant the FR design team were not playing much FR. There are a lot more people, much less designers in the WotC office that are working on projects other than FR than those working on it. I find it completely plausible that Chris would see that the non-FR WotC staff prefering not to use the setting for their games would be an indicator of the need to change. I find it completely implausible that the FR designers would not be enthusiastically playtesting FR. Thus the :rolleyes: Joe |
| Sol_Odlanier12-06-07, 09:08 PM | :rolleyes: Clearly, she was taking a comment about people in the WotC office not playing much FR, let it swirl around her head and reasoned that it meant the FR design team were not playing much FR. There are a lot more people, much less designers in the WotC office that are working on projects other than FR than those working on it. I find it completely plausible that Chris would see that the non-FR WotC staff prefering not to use the setting for their games would be an indicator of the need to change. I find it completely implausible that the FR designers would not be enthusiastically playtesting FR. Thus the :rolleyes: -Ray Joe |
| Dark Wizard12-06-07, 10:04 PM | Actually one of the new designers said in his blog that he was never into the Realms. Not that he hated the setting, just that it never caught his eye. Yet he's still one of the main mechanics designers for the 4E Realms. One of the D&DI editors noticed a surprising trend in Dungeon submissions, Eberron submissions beat FR submissions in raw numbers by far. He pondered on his blog whether it was because FR had most of its interesting stories already told or if FR still had much support amongst the current fan base. Then he went on to say if he had the time to DM he would go with Eberron. I've noticed several mentions of Eberron games in the designer blogs or a desire to play/DM in Eberron (this is as 4E playtesting was just gearing up). I can't recall any mention of FR games since the designer blogs went up. Chris' answer confirms what I guessed. For whatever reason, WotC staffers (even some of the FR design team) don't play FR games, some have never played, or haven't played in a long time. I'm sure they have their reasons, but I personally don't feel it inspires confidence and trust with people who do play in the Realms. |
| Faraer12-06-07, 10:07 PM | Thanks, WF.Clearly, she was taking a comment about people in the WotC office not playing much FR, let it swirl around her head and reasoned that it meant the FR design team were not playing much FR. . . . I find it completely implausible that the FR designers would not be enthusiastically playtesting FR.Chris said there weren't any Realms games in the office. All the authors of Realms 2008 are in the office except the freelancers, who aren't making the decisions. |
| Meldread12-06-07, 10:08 PM | I didn't listen to the interview because I have a headache, but I read the posts. In the beginning I was somewhat enthusiastic about 4E FR because it seemed new, fresh, and exciting. However, in the time since it's announcement I've come to the conclusion that a lot of the problems I have with the Realm's are not Realm's problems in and of themselves, but game system problems. A problem with the way D&D intrinsically works. I'm fairly certain that if I decide to game within the 4E Realm's it won't be with D&D. The system in many respects is broken and cannot coherently craft a believable game world. It looks like 4E D&D is only going to make it worse. When it comes to 4E I'm going to see how well Ed carries the changes with the new FRCS, but just in case I am going to begin building myself a homebrew world. |
| MatteBlack12-06-07, 11:43 PM | MatteBlack, I think I brought up a very valid point. If someone likes a campaign setting they will play in it. It is a matter of taste. It is very subjective and there is no right or wrong. Some designers working on the changes don't seem to like the Realms. Forgotten Realms has a very loyal fan base. When WotC decided to put designers that don't like the Realms in charge of changing the setting they made a very big mistake. Would Hasboro put people who don't like playing Monopoly in charge of creating a new version of it? Why are fans of Eberron in charge of creating a new version of the Realms? It is a valid question. I am not going to claim to have a finger on the pulse of these particular developers likes or dislikes. The thing here is that a number of posters want to demonize them just because they are unhappy with the changes. There perception that the devs "don't like" the Realms is based purely on the fact that the devs are making these changes and supporting the fact that they have. It's much easier to throw around loaded terms like "dislike", "true followers" and others to support an argument on a complete lack of facts than it is to find actual fact supported reasons to supplant the baseless drawing of potentially false conclusions. If we wanted to hear spin doctoring and repetition of biased soundbites, we can turn on the news and follow politics. The rope you are hanging him with is the fairly sensible practice of bringing in an outside person to head up changes. He doesn't necessarily dislike the realms, he just isn't an FR insider. I am an example of a player who likes the Realms and owns a fair amount FR material who doesn't play D&D in FR settings largely because of the reasons cited for these changes many of you hate. |
| Hanali-in-Love12-06-07, 11:48 PM | Why would they possibly change a magic/spell system that has been around since the mid-late 70's? To do away with the way spells are cast just so fighters seem more powerful is rubbish! I hate what they are doing with 4Ed. I believe that the people who actually are looking forward to playing 4Ed and all it's idiotic changes are those people who are new to the realms and D&D in general. No one I know (and i know many gamers from conventions) like the new changes to the rules and the way they are destroying a system that has worked, and worked well for 3.5 editions spanning thirty years! Bigots, idiots, money hungry wankers and fools! Sales for 4Ed here in Paris will be dismal indeed. |
| MatteBlack12-07-07, 01:12 AM | Why would they possibly change a magic/spell system that has been around since the mid-late 70's? To do away with the way spells are cast just so fighters seem more powerful is rubbish! I hate what they are doing with 4Ed. I believe that the people who actually are looking forward to playing 4Ed and all it's idiotic changes are those people who are new to the realms and D&D in general. No one I know (and i know many gamers from conventions) like the new changes to the rules and the way they are destroying a system that has worked, and worked well for 3.5 editions spanning thirty years! Bigots, idiots, money hungry wankers and fools! Sales for 4Ed here in Paris will be dismal indeed. I like the changes and have nothing to gain from it save what I see as improvements to issues that many others have been noting as flaws for some time. Melee and caster power levels swing as the levels pass and rogues and other classes seem to be underpowered through out. Scaling and class balance are also very sensitive to encounters per day and have integral problems that go down to their core. I think a change is needed but, can imagine how you might not. What does confuse me is how you can accept and hold forth all the previous editions and evolutions and act as if the latest change to a 4th edition is heresy? This 4th edtion is as much a part of this sytem you say has worked well for the last 30 years as any other edition. In fact, it may be a smaller change than from 2nd to 3rd. |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 01:27 AM | I am not going to claim to have a finger on the pulse of these particular developers likes or dislikes. The thing here is that a number of posters want to demonize them just because they are unhappy with the changes. There perception that the devs "don't like" the Realms is based purely on the fact that the devs are making these changes and supporting the fact that they have. You can't claim to know the likes or dislikes of the designers, but you do claim to know that I "want to demonize them.":rolleyes: It's much easier to throw around loaded terms like "dislike", "true followers" and others to support an argument on a complete lack of facts than it is to find actual fact supported reasons to supplant the baseless drawing of potentially false conclusions. If we wanted to hear spin doctoring and repetition of biased soundbites, we can turn on the news and follow politics. Speaking of 'loaded' terms. What about the terms demonize, baseless, spin doctoring, and biased. You even said, "the rope you are hanging him with." I think that is a loaded term. I didn't know that I was organizing a lynching. I thought that I was posting my opinion on a message board.:rolleyes: The rope you are hanging him with is the fairly sensible practice of bringing in an outside person to head up changes. He doesn't necessarily dislike the realms, he just isn't an FR insider. I am an example of a player who likes the Realms and owns a fair amount FR material who doesn't play D&D in FR settings largely because of the reasons cited for these changes many of you hate. Do you think WotC has people designing Magic cards that never play Magic the gathering? No, of coarse not. You have to play in order to know how new cards will effect the game. It is that simple. If someone doesn't have enough experience playing and DMing in FR they can't possibly know how all the changes will effect the setting. I don't think insisting that Realms designers play D&D in Forgotten Realms is asking too much. |
| Dark Wizard12-07-07, 01:47 AM | I didn't listen to the interview because I have a headache, but I read the posts. In the beginning I was somewhat enthusiastic about 4E FR because it seemed new, fresh, and exciting. However, in the time since it's announcement I've come to the conclusion that a lot of the problems I have with the Realm's are not Realm's problems in and of themselves, but game system problems. A problem with the way D&D intrinsically works. I'm fairly certain that if I decide to game within the 4E Realm's it won't be with D&D. The system in many respects is broken and cannot coherently craft a believable game world. It looks like 4E D&D is only going to make it worse. When it comes to 4E I'm going to see how well Ed carries the changes with the new FRCS, but just in case I am going to begin building myself a homebrew world. Well as much as I dislike the changes, I do encourage you to listen to the podcast when you feel better. Nothing like a primary source to make up your own mind. Seeing the final product will help us decide too. As rabid as many of the fans here appear, most are doing their best to give the new FR a chance. Still Wizards isn't doing themselves a favor by revealing nothing solidly old Realms-like in all the hints they've given. I've bunkered down myself with contingent plans for a divergent Realms and a homebrew. I am not going to claim to have a finger on the pulse of these particular developers likes or dislikes. The thing here is that a number of posters want to demonize them just because they are unhappy with the changes. There perception that the devs "don't like" the Realms is based purely on the fact that the devs are making these changes and supporting the fact that they have. It's much easier to throw around loaded terms like "dislike", "true followers" and others to support an argument on a complete lack of facts than it is to find actual fact supported reasons to supplant the baseless drawing of potentially false conclusions. If we wanted to hear spin doctoring and repetition of biased soundbites, we can turn on the news and follow politics. The rope you are hanging him with is the fairly sensible practice of bringing in an outside person to head up changes. He doesn't necessarily dislike the realms, he just isn't an FR insider. I am an example of a player who likes the Realms and owns a fair amount FR material who doesn't play D&D in FR settings largely because of the reasons cited for these changes many of you hate. A lot of the problems they cite about the Realms (and some of the designers even said they don't feel like these are significant problems) could be solved with smaller, less jarring actions. They choose a very disrupted route that affected large swaths of the setting while still leaving some of these problems. It's very frustrating to see the problem seemingly magnify due to these changes. The confirmation that the Realms has such massive problems that it requires huge patches also doesn't bode well for public perception. It merely furthers the belief that the setting is worthless, so disheveled even the designers had to take a bulldozer to the place for some drastic restructuring before the setting is viable again for the new edition. How many will open the new book and still find severe faults with the setting now that even WotC reinforces the notion that the setting has been broken for 20 years. I really don't see how killing a some NPCs and gods will remove that stigma, now reinforced by official lines from the company. I don't see how this is making things simpler, the gods fought a gods war prior to the Spellplague, they found a gods war in the Time of Troubles. How is a Realms outsider to tell the difference other than "the same crazy Realms gods are still at it, what people said about the setting is true after all." If these were such huge problems, we have to ask why didn't they do a lot more ground work in 3.5e to change this, so by the time 4E rolls around most of the work is done and we don't have to deal with drastic setting AND rules changes. If WotC is looking for new players for the setting, why couldn't they just implement the perception changes without completely disrupting the setting. How about many smaller events. So in 4E, Mystra is not a meddler, the Chosen are not all powerful and have severe limits to their powers complete with lower stats, the gods are less direct and more mysterious, "you only need the FRC to play in the Realms, all the other books are optional," etc. There were many ways they could have gone about this, but they chose the sensationalized route and in part the hype (not the actuality) about certain characters and aspects of the Realms is what led us to this mess in the first place. Why would they possibly change a magic/spell system that has been around since the mid-late 70's? To do away with the way spells are cast just so fighters seem more powerful is rubbish! I hate what they are doing with 4Ed. I believe that the people who actually are looking forward to playing 4Ed and all it's idiotic changes are those people who are new to the realms and D&D in general. No one I know (and i know many gamers from conventions) like the new changes to the rules and the way they are destroying a system that has worked, and worked well for 3.5 editions spanning thirty years! Many people don't like the rules system for magic. Many feel it does not suitably reflect the majority of magic found in fantasy literature. D&D is a game, so all classes should contribute reasonably to a party's success. An overly wide gap between the power of classes reduces one of the core concepts of D&D, a game where characters collaborate to achieve a goal. |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 02:02 AM | [QUOTE=Hanali-in-Love;14520645] Bigots, idiots, money hungry wankers and fools! I don't like the changes to the setting or the game system either, but there is no need for these comments. I read that someone even posted stuff about Rich Baker's kids. Please try to remember that the designers are people just like us. |
| MatteBlack12-07-07, 02:40 AM | You can't claim to know the likes or dislikes of the designers, but you do claim to know that I "want to demonize them.":rolleyes: My opinion here is based on a much larger body of work than these same posters are basing their opinions of the developers likes and dislikes. I need only to take some of their quotes at face value to assume their dislike. None of the devs have berated the Realms like many of these "true followers" have berated the devs. Again, changing a thing is not disliking it. Insulting a thing very well could. Speaking of 'loaded' terms. What about the terms demonize, baseless, spin doctoring, and biased. You even said, "the rope you are hanging him with." I think that is a loaded term. I didn't know that I was organizing a lynching. I thought that I was posting my opinion on a message board.:rolleyes: Guilty as charged. Loaded language was used to highlight the point about using loaded language. Even so, my use of loaded language and metaphor is less of twisting of the facts than those who want to stretch "dislike" out of changing the world as hired to do. "Biased" is a loaded term? Do you think WotC has people designing Magic cards that never play Magic the gathering? No, of coarse not. You have to play in order to know how new cards will effect the game. It is that simple. If someone doesn't have enough experience playing and DMing in FR they can't possibly know how all the changes will effect the setting. I don't think insisting that Realms designers play D&D in Forgotten Realms is asking too much. First, I'll ask if we have it for certain that Chris Perkins hasn't played or read any of the FR material. Secondly, I am willing to bet there have been people picked to design magic cards before having played the game. Maybe not specifically with the rules on the cards but, certainly those responsible for some of the art. I am confident that understanding the major themes of the Realms is part of the process and that those more familiar with the nuances have been consulted or included in some fashion. |
| Spirithawkfellow12-07-07, 02:53 AM | Rebuttal to the interview of Chris Perkins I happened to hear the audio interview in which Chris Perkins tried to answer many of the question posed to him about the oncoming Fourth Edition of Dunegeons and Dragons as well as the Forgotten Realms. Upon hearing what his views on the Forgotten Realms are I was dismayed by many of the things he mentioned. So for the people that have not heard the audio interview, Mr. Perkin spoke of Nuking several mainstay characters within the Forgotten Realms, as well as several mechanical choices which would be going into the setting as a whole. Now I for one have been on the side of letting the new Realms come out first before I pass judgment, and I have discussed the changes with many of my fellow gamers within the forums about the changes that will be brought about Fourth Edition. Ever since, the mention of the system and how it relates to the Realms has brought up a heated debate amongst us and many others. Until now and hearing what Mr. Perkins had to say, It has slowly changed my mind to how good this new Forgotten Realms Setting will be. What bothers me the most was the lack of respect to the Realms of old compared to the new Realms that will appear in August. Mr. Perkin speaks about the how the Forgotten Realms is loved for it grand lore and history, and yet goes on to say due to that very fact it is hard to bring new players into the world for that very reason. My problem with idea is the thought new gamers can’t grasp the idea of playing in a large world presented to them, because of lore and history. I think of this as flawed thinking and design. In 2002 Wizards of the coast crafted a survey that showed at that time base role playing to be at 2 million people, of this core group the survey brakes down the years in which gamers tended to play Table Top RPGs. The age group that tended to play the most is the age of 13-19 basically those in junior and senior school and the number tended to drop between the age groups of 20-29, with the assumption of college and work, and family life. The survey also showed that most gamers came back to the game about the age of 30 and on. My point being that the age groups we speak about are knowledgeable and well read and should have no trouble being able to understand the Forgotten Realms as it is. The grasp of the material is likely based more on a learning curve of the rules set given. This also means that people that would be interested in playing the Realms would have the ability to play the game, if they are able to understand the Rule set. The assumption that a 13 year old new player, or a 30 year old new player can’t understand where to start a game because it is complicated or weighed down by lore or mechanics, I believe serves as a injustice to all that might by these products. No game should be looked upon as unplayable by any group or demographic. The answer to this was very simple. Create either fast rules, of the rule sets or create a brief synopsis of the Realms in which new players don’t feel bogged down, as well as simplifying some of the lore and history. The idea that new players can’t get a grasp of all the information that has come before undercuts itself, because what you might think will be a easy game to run in this new FR setting might be the most difficult, thus still alienating your new audience. It usually has never been the game but eh mechanics that have driven or brought people to the table. The same thing happened to Dragonlance when they went to the fifth age Edition. The change was too drastic, and it core players left the setting. Mr. Perkin spoke of a FR Wiki, which is a step in the right direction, yet doesn’t do enough for those who have been running the Setting for years now. What I gleaned from the audio recording was that the coming rule set different rules for magic was the reason for the killing of Mystra, and the Nuking of the chosen. Frankly I like the Spellplague idea and many people in the forums have come up with great suggestions, my problem is the Killing if Mystra and the Way Mr. Perkin described it. In order to bring the 4th edition of magic within the Realms, Mystra had to die. I thought at first it was a mistake, I was wrong. That’s like saying kill Superman because he to powerful, and we got a new way of drawing him. Every time this thinking comes into being I gag. It speaks of Lazy Design. It was as if they couldn’t come up with a better way of making the magic system fit the game. I don’t agree with it. Its an easy pass. Simply it could have been said that magic had simply evolved to the next stage, or Mystra had changed, or a host of other reasons. The dismantling of the weave took an idea that was original to the setting and now makes it seem like any other fantasy world, which the Forgotten Realms is not. The idea is like stripping the away the middle of middle earth and leaving it Earth. Why now would I want to play this game when I can play any other game. Where is the uniqueness? The Realm is by far the largest fantasy world in literature at this moment, and slowly the things that make it Forgotten is being stripped away, For what a new game? Perhaps a closer copy of Eberron? Which the Realms if no Eberron. It can never be with the amount of history and flavor, which Eberron doesn’t have. When asked why most of the designers hadn’t run a Forgotten Realm Campaign in the offices, Mr. Perkin said that a lot of the design elements went into their other homebrews, or many of the designersran Eberron. I have no Problem with the designers playing Eberron, Heck I’ve run. I do have a problem when the designers haven’t had a Realms Sessions as Mr. Perkins noted in about a year and a half, and anew Edition is coming out in August. My question is this. Who is play testing all this new Lore for the game that out in August? Are the designers just writing it? And why will I buy this book? It seem to me that your flag ship title should be the most played and developed, and if it isn’t why not use the community at large, and ask for their help. I’m not talking about the RPGA, I’m talking about people who are constant playing the Realms like many folks in the Forums. I have run the Setting since 1992, and have been reading the novels since 1989 so to be apart of that would have been an honor. I believe the there are a core group of people like myself who would have jumped at the chance to help design a new FR Setting, using both lore, and mechanics to make it accessible to younger and older players. I think the Problem Is coming to from the design stand point of where the Forgotten Realms Setting is and should be. It is not warcraft, it is not like any other world, it is unique, with a unique blend of adventure, epic quests, heroes and villains. Mr. Perkins states as many of the designers do that the reason of getting rid of many of the high Level Characters is to give the regular players a chance to make an impact in the World. Bad design thinking once again rears it head. Elminster Drizzts, and the Chosen, Are NPC (Non Player Characters) they should have no bearing in a person home Campaign except as story hooks, or worthy mentions within the game. They always fit better within the confines of a novel in which they play a better part. To say that people or groups don’t like their presence within a setting is ridicules at best. At the most they shouldn’t even be used, because yes they can over balance a game, in the hands of a Dungeons Master that doesn’t understand the characters are NPC . The case can be made though that this isn’t the designer arena to decide what is powerful in a setting or not, it should be left up to the Dungeon Master who is buying the material. Lazy design says lets just get rid of them. I believe every hero has to meet his maker one day, it is the story of the hero end that make he or she a hero, but to simply say they are to powerful let get rid of them, smacks of Lazy design. Instead of destroying them or making them disappear like Mr. Perkin alluded to, wait I meant Nuking them, simply depower them with Mystra’s apprarent death. Mainly it was the designer’s intent for making them as powerful as they are now, as their characters grew, now it is simply time to bring them closer to humanity, and make them adventures as they were in a First Edition. Thus it doesn’t alienate the fan base, and simplifies it for new players. As for Mystra death I remember AO the over god during the Time of Troubles saying that each God would grow in stature and power as long as that god held the faith of their clergy and gained more faithful, So the question has to be asked how would Mystra a greater god, even though she might be snuffed out by another greater god truly be dead. The belief of Mystra isn’t just going to be snuffed out. The Clergy that prays to her if they are faithfully would try to bring her back, she would still exist as long as she has some worshippers; this means the weave still exists in some form or way. This would hold true for Bane, and several other dead gods that have come back to life. The main Problem I believe that The Realms suffers from is lack of marketing. This is a huge game and there are no commercials, no items worth buying, no word of mouth, no new people besides those interested in D&D who will by the product. There are no Actions Figures (besides the minis) no Movies (I don’t count the Movie or the Dragonlance animation I won’t digress that for another day), No recent cartoons, no nothing. So when I here people say well we are trying to bring something new to a new audience, what audience are we talking about. Where is the marketing? I don’t see Hasbro donating these books to High Schools, or Colleges. These are places are where they are surely needed and bring about new gamers to the Realms and D&D; they help with communication, working with others, Reading, Writing, and Math; the list of what a RPG Can do is amazing . Yet how we find out about the game is still world of mouth. There 4th edition game comings, woooohooo the rest of the world doesn’t even know about it. How can you push a game to new players if they don’t know what the game is? In 90 I saw the picture of Drizzts, Wulfgar, and Bruneor , from the Icewindale trilogy in ad in a comic book. To this day Larry Elmore painting leaps to my mind, it made me want to play that game. If you’re not going to market the Realms… D&D why bother making a new edition and if your core audience is all you have why alienate them? Mr. Perkins people play Warcraft and other MMO’s because it serves as a chance to play a game and meet new people. The Realms and D&D serve the same function. The game brings people together for the evening to have a laugh, play exciting adventure and to escape the real world for a few hours. This is why the Forgotten Realms is so appealing. The same lore you say drags down the setting, really doesn’t because, most people are playing are players not the Dungeon Masters, and the Dungeon Master greatest ability is to give information in doses, so that the player can see the picture that the D.M. is trying to convey, and be able to respond and play. By using mechanics and bad design to say that the setting needs to be updated or changed on the drastic level speaks to me of simply taking the easy way out. Do not get me wrong, to any of the designers that have begun putting this setting together. It should have been played on a regular basis without a gap of a year and a half. To me if your not playing it how are you sure this is going to work? If you were playing this I would be more secure in the knowledge that you have a fine game coming out in august. The one thing I can say that gives me a urge to buy this game is Ed Greenwoods contributions, and Rich Bakers work on It. Please don’t tar and feather me. I don’t hate Rich’s work like many others, but Mr. Perkins you sure have me wondering. Spirit Hawkfellow |
| Zanan12-07-07, 04:48 AM | In short, there seems to be a feeling among many posters on here that we are facing a 4E-Forgotten Realms which is to a large extend re-created by a band of designers not that familiar with FR tradition and lore, designers that are essentially Eberron (etc.) supporters ... who, in essence, re-create the Realms into a low-high-level-setting like ... ahem ... Eberron? Instead of having a setting with a long standing in-setting tradition and thus a definite reason to have high-level movers and shakers*? A setting which is a step upwards (magic-wise) from Eberron? As it is, the new Realms will soon end up being a direct competitor to Eberron in the sales figures and given public opinion and all (not least amongst those very same designers), you don't need to be an Einstein to understand which setting will get chucked sooner rather than later. In essence ... the more you hear this, the easier it is to understand the fears of those who proclaimed that they nuked the Realms as such pretty early on. To me, this sounds much like the Vatican shall be freshened up a wee bit, but not by (young / modern day) Catholics, but ("level-headed") Protestants. Aye right! That'll work equally well. (No insult or pun intended.) *Obviously, you wonder about the high priests, high level fighters and whoever there is not that closely attached to the Weave. Will they get nuked too? Drawn up-/downwards by their deities? |
| msatran12-07-07, 06:09 AM | I've been running the Realms since 1987 and I pretty much feel the same way. Every time a new edition comes out, I'm forced to backdate, edit, rearrange, and tell people what the heck is going on. You're making the cost of labor too high for older gamers. While I realize that the pushbutton philosophy of World of Warcraft and speedy levelling and all that stuff mean something to twelve year olds, you fail to realize that the Realms doesn't just appeal to twelve year olds. This October will be the 20th anniversary of my gameworld. I have lots of fun stuff planned. I'll be wrapping up a bunch of things, and be making a decision about whether or not to convert sometime in those months. I was severely disappointed in the quality dropoff between the 2e and 3e Realms products. I still bought the 3e realms products because they jived with the 2e lore, and over time, they got better, with less crunch and more fluff. Ironically, the books that needed more crunch (Faiths and Pantheons) didn't get it, with some gods getting two PRCs and other gods getting NONE. If Wizards had published a book that was nothing but deities, their dogma, lore, and diety specific PRCs for each deity, and published one of those each year, we would have snapped those up like demons in preference to some of the sourcebooks that Wizards DID publish, like Mysteries of the Moonsea, Cormyr, Shadowdale, and Anauroch. They could have spent a year giving us useful information. Instead, they spent a year giving us big superadventures. The problem with the theory about downsizing the pantheon is that no one bothered to cover it, not that there was confusion about it. Anything can be solved if you write something about it. Confusion comes from no information at all. Wizards CREATED this confusion by not upgrading Deities and Demigods, Powers and Pantheons, and Demihuman Deities. So now we have a downsized pantheon because no one bothered to read the old sourcebooks and update them. I guarantee you every Realms aficionado would have bought those books because they were useful, and a lot of people would have bought them for the crunch of 50 or so Divine PRCs for specific deities. And then, they come to us and say "Well, we feel this is too confusing." And the big superadventures were useless to anyone who had a long running game, because my PC's would look over at Shadowdale, blink, and say "Fzoul Chembryl. You have gone too far this time." And when they found Shades, I have far more confidence in my PC's abilites to take the fight to the shades and win than I do in the designers. The Realms used to be for smart people. We felt good about being smart. Now, our world is being chopped apart through negligence, failure to read, failure to love, and naked self interest and callous cash payment. |
| dimonic12-07-07, 08:41 AM | I'll agree with you on this point. There are true Realms fans on both sides of the 4e argument. I disagree with you, Mr. Micellany, and others on many issues, but you are all obviously true Realms fans. I personally have about a dozen 3.x FR sourcebooks, I have read most of them, about the same in 3.x novels. I love most of the ideas, certainly like the production values and quality of FR product. I don't believe that Chris Perkins is a Realms fan at all. If he can't be bothered to learn enough about the Realms to run a game in it then he is not a fan. He is designing source books for a setting he won't even play in. How can that give anyone any confidence in the "New" FR? :confused: The argument I am hearing here is not logical. Not running a realms game does not automatically equate with not learning enough about the realms to do so. It can mean (as it has in my case) that the level of detail and complexity present in Realms source material is not in some way what we want in our "home" games. Give Chris some credit - he has after all written stuff for your realms games, some of which you obviously enjoy. He has stated that he uses a lot of realms stuff in his games, as do many of the other wotc staff. They just don't use it "whole cloth". What they are now trying to do, is to release an edition of the realms that people like themselves can play in whole cloth, or continue to cherry pick bits and pieces from, as they like. You probably don't know how many people out there have tons of FR source and read it and use it but don't play in a "realms" game, because they probably don't hang out on threads like this. I personally know more gamers who use it this way than who actually play "true realms" games - but I wouldn't know if that was in any way "normal" or typical. It is just the way it is around here. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 08:47 AM | Give Chris some credit - he has after all written stuff for your realms games, some of which you obviously enjoy. -Like? I'm not trying to bash the guy. Like I've said, until a few weeks ago, months ago, whatever it's been now, I've never even heard of this guy before. |
| Rauric12-07-07, 09:19 AM | somehow i remember an ancient phrase. If it isnt broke, dont fix it. so now my question is, why are they trying to fix what isnt broke? someone around here has a sig that states that the developers wont destroy a setting, the players will by not buying it or something like this. that statement in his or her sig is a half lie, they can destroy a setting by ******* off the fans of that setting. FR 4E sounds like it will fail, and with it GH,DL and ebberron along with. dnd will die out with it in time. a good idea illconcieved is still a bad idea When I heard about the changes I thought like this as well, for like a minute. Then I thought that the real reason this is happening is due to sagging sales with FR RPG products. I think it is a gamble that they are trying to improve sales. I also think that they will bring back NPCs and the Weave in a few years one way or the other. I do know alot of people who switched from FR to EB are talking about giving FR another shot. I talked to people that I know that play the Realms and they too will give it a shot. Even the one or two canon-lovers I know will try it out. Basically I know alot of people who will still play or at least buy some FR products after 4E. I also know that pretty much means jack squat since it is really not an accurate survey of the many FR fans out there. Neither are these boards though. |
| Fire_Wraith12-07-07, 09:31 AM | It is a bit of a jump to presume that someone who is not actively playing knows nothing at all about the Realms, yes. Certainly, I expect they know more than the average person off the street ("Forgotten What?"). However, nothing beats firsthand experience. You may have read every single possible book and report on what it is like in Iraq, but you won't fully understand it unless you've been there yourself - you just won't have the proper mindset to do so. That no one in their office plays games set in the Realms, if I understand Chris Perkins correctly, gives me the impression that they lack the proper frame of reference to understand the mindset of the Forgotten Realms fans, no matter how familiar they are with the histories and personalities of the Realms. That is more what I've been getting at. This sort of thing is why a DM who doesn't play in the online game they oversee (a la Star Wars Galaxies, or any number of others) will likely not understand the problems their players have, or be insufficiently sympathetic. They don't know that leveling your character has become an intolerable time sink, or that certain encounters are horribly unbalanced, et cetera, because they haven't had to go through it as players, and don't see it from the players' side - only the side of the customer service rep that has to deal with whiny annoying customers. :P |
| Rauric12-07-07, 09:40 AM | Nevemind. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 10:16 AM | Then I thought that the real reason this is happening is due to sagging sales with FR RPG products. -I really do think that they have no one but themselves to blame here, to a degree. Ignoring A Grand History of the Realms (Which, A) Just came out recently, and B) Isn't "their" product, as 4/5 of it was compiled by Brian on his own), what was the last real good Realms product? Dragons of Faerûn, by my reckoning, which came out...August 2006. Since then, all of the FR sourcebooks published (excluding AGHotR) have been adventure-lorebooks, with the Moonsea book, and the Super-Adventure trilogy. These kinds of products aren't going to interest everyone- only those interested in running the adventures are really going to bite. Thus, sales are going to lag. |
| Fire_Wraith12-07-07, 10:59 AM | I've been kind of disappointed in the narrowness of the scope of the recent products as well. When I first saw that there was a hardcover sourcebook called "Cormyr" coming out, I was elated. Finally, I thought, we'll get a Cormyr supplement to give my favorite region the kind of in-depth treatment that the Silver Marches, the East, the Shining South, and others had already received. I'd bought all of these, despite the fact that most of them weren't my primary areas of interest. I was rather disappointed though with what I got. The adventure was alright, but nothing I could use in my campaign, and after the expectations I'd built up, it's little surprise that I judged it harshly. Mysteries of the Moonsea was slightly better, in my view, in that it did at least attempt to provide both adventures and basic campaign overview information. However, I do agree that we really haven't had any good sourcebooks since perhaps Dragons or Power of Faerûn. |
| MatteBlack12-07-07, 11:04 AM | We won't pretend that profit isn't the prime motivator here but, I think the people involved are legitimately trying to put forth the best possible gaming package they can. FR is a profitable brand/world, Ebberon has many aspects that make it good for gaming specifcally, 3.5 has been very popular but has some very identified flaws and LG has been a successful campaign. Pooling the best from all of these and addressing common complaints really seems to be the procedure is here. Fans of any one part as they stand will of course be resistant to change but, I feel like this combination of "the best of WotC" may work out in trying to regain alot of ground the hobbie has lost over past years. |
| Fire_Wraith12-07-07, 11:36 AM | Just because lots of people like the taste of Coca-cola doesn't mean that Coke should make all of its products taste like Coke. There are people who like Sprite, too. If one day Sprite was change to taste more like Coke, do you think the people who used to drink it would be upset? Likely they would. Some of them might keep drinking the new Sprite, but others would turn to a competitor. Profit generally involves having the largest customer base possible, and the most diverse - which means having a wide array and variety. Diversify - don't homogenize. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 12:04 PM | Just because lots of people like the taste of Coca-cola doesn't mean that Coke should make all of its products taste like Coke. There are people who like Sprite, too. If one day Sprite was change to taste more like Coke, do you think the people who used to drink it would be upset? Likely they would. Some of them might keep drinking the new Sprite, but others would turn to a competitor. Profit generally involves having the largest customer base possible, and the most diverse - which means having a wide array and variety. Diversify - don't homogenize. -Sproke, FTW! |
| Spirithawkfellow12-07-07, 12:14 PM | Matte Blank We won't pretend that profit isn't the prime motivator here but, I think the people involved are legitimately trying to put forth the best possible gaming package they can. FR is a profitable brand/world, Ebberon has many aspects that make it good for gaming specifically, 3.5 has been very popular but has some very identified flaws and LG has been a successful campaign. Pooling the best from all of these and addressing common complaints really seems to be the procedure is here. Fans of any one part as they stand will of course be resistant to change but, I feel like this combination of "the best of WotC" may work out in trying to regain a lot of ground the hobby has lost over past years. I agree with you on several levels Matte Blank. This is about money, and bringing new players to the fold. The way there going about it is folly, though. The realms by nature would be a profitable/brand if the marketing of its product were well known, and pushed. Ebberon has been pushed more because it was a created with a 3.5 gaming mindset from the get go, unlike the Realms. It would be deemed easier to recreate Realms for 4.E rather than updating the entire back catalouge, which honestly could be updated some what. The 1.E and 2.E material is still valid and I use it all the time. This smacks of design Laziness. If I'm designing this game, for my customer, I'm making damn sure My designers, and myself are playing it. It about making sure everything is working such as lore and mechanics as to not go back and have to do errata, and rewrites and have all types of typos and errors. It seems the designers want to take the easy path, In simply starting from scratch, instead of using everything that has come before to make a even better game. The idea that there trying to make the best game they can doesn't fly, if you listen to Mr.Perkins. The designers aren't playing The Realms. Then my thought would be why should I buy a product the designers don't even play and don't seem to be giving there all to. That like saying here, buy this new car, which I haven't driven, and it really good, but I really don't know how it was created. Now would you buy a car from this person? The Idea that the Realms is their most profitable brand, seems to go out the window when Hasbro (wotc) designers say "oh yes we might not play the realms but we import a lot of the stuff into our homebrew games." If that the case well you know don't make the Realms. If you don't push it and get it known it don't matter how many gamers are going to play it. TSR the company prior might have had many problems financially, but when they put down Realms products everything always felt fresh, and there was a confidence that the designer always had the best interest in the franchise, and the material being layed down. I have a better idea, if the new designers aren't playing it let Ed hand pick the list of great realms designers. Bring back James Lowder, Steven Schend (to this day his mythdrannor follow ups rock) bring back Troy Denning, Douglas Niles, etc. As I stated before The Realms is not Ebberon, nor should it be. I've run Ebberon, I won't bash it. It has some good stuff. As far as meat on the bone, it doesn't come close, the world has no cohesion except the The last War even though there is a brief history it suffers from the fact that it doesn't seem to exciting, to me anyway in the way of DMing the game. It is to new to feel like a old friend. Also I can honestly say I've seen this type of thing happen before. TSR in the early 90 came to this fork in the road with Dragonlance. The setting was slowly phased out because people didn't play. The thinking was similar to what Mr. Perkins spoke about. It wasn't accessible, as a game. So what did they do they created a card game and labeled it the third age. with a complete different mechanic, and magic system. This seems familiar no. The real problem wasn't that the setting wasn't a excellent setting. In many ways it helped revolutionize gaming, the problem is that besides the books, there was nothing else being talked about the game. The marketing sucked, then add in the mechanics that sucked, it became a stinker. Another problem was the novels, to their own benefit they were to good. The novels never left room for players own adventures to at least fit within the world along side them. That has been a complaint about the Realms which I believe is different than Dragonlance. The Realms novel line from the beginning always made you feel that you could play next to Elminster, and the seven sisters, instead of just rehashing the novels. They were separate snap shots of the world in which the PC adventured. So here we come to 4E Realms and funny they talk about history being the cause of people not playing the Realms, and I guess there no different than TSR when it comes to making what seems to be death dealing moves to there settings. By the way my friend was a Dragonlance lover, and when third age came out, he never played again even when 3E Dragonlance came out. |
| MerrikCale12-07-07, 12:26 PM | -Like? I'm not trying to bash the guy. Like I've said, until a few weeks ago, months ago, whatever it's been now, I've never even heard of this guy before. yeah. what has written on the Realms? |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 01:00 PM | http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/bio/perkinschristopher Christopher Perkins joined Wizards of the Coast in 1997 as Editor of Dungeon Magazine, a bimonthly periodical that publishes adventures for the Dungeons & Dragons roleplaying game. He also served as Associate Editor of Dungeon's sister publication, Dragon Magazine. After a successful stint holding down those positions, Chris was promoted to Editor-in-Chief of both Dungeon Magazine and Star Wars Gamer, a bimonthly magazine that publishes articles, adventures, and fiction for fans of the Star Wars gaming universe. Before long, he found himself Editor-in-Chief of Star Wars Insider as well. Recently, Chris left the magazine world to take a new position as the Design Manager of the Star Wars Roleplaying Game team. -That gives him a total of 0 Forgotten Realms pieces credited to him, specifically. |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 02:19 PM | The argument I am hearing here is not logical. Not running a realms game does not automatically equate with not learning enough about the realms to do so. It can mean (as it has in my case) that the level of detail and complexity present in Realms source material is not in some way what we want in our "home" games. Give Chris some credit - he has after all written stuff for your realms games, some of which you obviously enjoy. He has stated that he uses a lot of realms stuff in his games, as do many of the other wotc staff. They just don't use it "whole cloth". I think the argument is logical. There is a big difference between putting pieces of FR into your game and running a Realms game. You can take a monster, an adventure, or even a whole town from FR and plug it into a home game. That doesn't mean you know what it's like running a game in the Realms. I'm not saying he didn't, "learn enough about the Realms to run a game." The designers don't play in the Realms. They haven't formed an attachment to the people, places, and gods in FR. That's why they don't have a problem destroying half of the setting to fit it around their new ideas. They don't use the Realms pantheon so they don't care if the gods act out of character or get killed. If someone in the WotC office played in the setting they would have noticed long ago how big a problem all the RSEs in the novels were for home games. The RSE problem wouldn't have grown to such epic proportions. I think the fact that they play in Eberron games gives them a deeper understanding of the setting and makes them care more about the setting. They seem far more responsive to the Eberron fan base and are much more careful about making changes to that setting. When they make changes in Eberron they use a scalpel and when they make changes in Forgotten Realms they use a chainsaw. What they are now trying to do, is to release an edition of the realms that people like themselves can play in whole cloth, or continue to cherry pick bits and pieces from, as they like. You probably don't know how many people out there have tons of FR source and read it and use it but don't play in a "realms" game, because they probably don't hang out on threads like this. I personally know more gamers who use it this way than who actually play "true realms" games - but I wouldn't know if that was in any way "normal" or typical. It is just the way it is around here. We have no way of knowing how many people buy Realms books to pick out pieces to use in other worlds. My guess is that the people who come to these boards buy a much higher percentage of Realms products than people that just want to steal a few ideas. Many of the avid Realms fans are clearly very upset. |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 02:26 PM | http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/bio/perkinschristopher -That gives him a total of 0 Forgotten Realms pieces credited to him, specifically. He was design manager of several Realms books including Dragons of Faerun and Powers of Faerun. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 02:31 PM | He was design manager of several Realms books including Dragons of Faerun and Powers of Faerun. -Which doesn't mean he authored anything. Being design manager does not mean in any way that said person had any actual imput into the information contained within something, barring saying "this goes here", and "We don't have room for this". I would know, my girlfriend is a design editor-in-chief for one of her school magazines. She doesn't actually write any articles in it, or draw any of the artwork. Know what I mean? |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 02:41 PM | -Which doesn't mean he authored anything. Being design manager does not mean in any way that said person had any actual imput into the information contained within something, barring saying "this goes here", and "We don't have room for this". I would know, my girlfriend is a design editor-in-chief for one of her school magazines. She doesn't actually write any articles in it, or draw any of the artwork. Know what I mean? Ok. Now I get your point. 'He may have worked on FR, but that doesn't mean he really knows anything about the setting.' |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 03:16 PM | Ok. Now I get your point. 'He may have worked on FR, but that doesn't mean he really knows anything about the setting.' -Eh...Not exactly. There's a difference between doing something and doing something. I really don't know how to put it into words so eloquently. There's a difference between actually writing the material, and making sure that the publishing of a book runs smoothly. He may have worked on the Realms, but that doesn't mean he really has worked on the setting. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 03:45 PM | Okay, now having listened to the interview I really don't understand what all the hoopla is about. It reveals only one thing that has not been revealed yet, which seems to have gone overlooked, and I will point it out below. We knew they were going to "nuke" a lot of high level NPC's. We knew they were going to kill Mystra. We knew pretty much everything in that interview. To the two major points: - From Wizard of the Coast's perspective the new edition isn't about people like us. Well, perhaps I shouldn't say "us" because I don't include myself in the category. More specifically, it's about people like myself and others like me, as well as new players. What all this shows us is that FR Game sales have slumped far enough that they needed to act, and that there are simply not enough "hard core" fans left to justify putting out more and more source books. They are looking to try and keep people like myself, who are considering leaving the Realm's behind, within the setting, and at the same time attracting new blood. They are hoping to balance all of this out and keep the current FR players by keeping enough of the old feel, style, locations and such in tact. They want a setting that you can pick up, play, and KNOW and FEEL like you are unmistakably in the Forgotten Realm's, but without the baggage the setting holds. - The fact that many, if not most of the WotC people do not use the FR as a whole (they only use bits and parts) should speak volumes, but not in the way most people here seem to be interpreting it. If the WotC people cannot take the setting as it is, as a whole, then why would the non-hard core FR players? Even many prominent posters on this forum, Markus for example, does not use the setting as is and he is not the only one. There are many people on this forum who have made drastic changes to the setting to suit their particular flavor and tastes. More directly, if you want me to push the point home, Ed Greenwood himself does not game in the current version of the FR and in his home game the Time of Troubles has not happened. That more or less means that Ed is still gaming with First Edition Material. So if the CREATOR of the FR cannot be bothered, or does not enjoy, the current version of the FR then why should a new player hook themselves into the setting? If the setting was so great, then everyone, including Ed, would be playing it. - There is a misquote on what Chris said here in regard to high level NPC’s such as the Chosen. He said that they contributed to a FEELING that the players were overshadowed, and that they were trying to remove that aspect from the setting, while retaining high level characters that can be integrated into your campaign but will not overshadow PCs. That is something I certainly feel is true. Most of the characters in question were novel based characters. They really are not background fluff type characters or side-kick type characters. They have dominate personalities overall. If you try and integrate them into your game in anyway it will instantly dwarf PC’s by comparison. Anyone who thinks bringing Drizzt, or one of Mystra’s Chosen into a game for less than the briefest of cameo’s will not have them overshadowing the PC’s they simply are not playing those NPC’s as they were written (and therefore meant to be played). Additionally, there is a sense that NPC’s will come up and clean up your mess. In fact, Ed Greenwood has given out that very suggestion as a use for Elminster. If you are playing true to the game world, realistically speaking, those NPC’s would do exactly that. They are not going to let Cormyr fall apart if you fail to stop the goblin horde. One of the Chosen will pencil in 15 minutes into his or her schedule. He or she would then teleport over to Cormyr and then proceed to enact goblinoid genocide, killing off the entire army within a few moments. Then he or she teleport back home. Because they hold that much power, because distance is no bar to their abilities, and because there are so many NPC’s like them (we are not just talking about the Chosen anymore) it is really unrealistic to fathom that somewhere out there no one else is trying to stop or solve the same problem as you. The most fleshed out areas of the setting have become too crowded with heroes. This problem was run into and explored in a thread in the Magic and Cosmos forum, where there is debate over whether or not Daelegoth - the head of the Risen Sun Heresy - would have been able to successfully pull off all that he has without getting smote by higher level and more powerful NPC's. However, basically, for plot reasons Daelegoth was allowed to get away with it. To me that is a major problem. If I have to justify something happening because of plot reasons and ignoring the internal consistency of the setting (to drive forward a story) there is something wrong with the setting, not my plot. As a DM you run into many problem's like this if you TRY and game in the FR as a whole, which is why many people at WotC I'd imagine only take bits and parts. The best places to game without this problem are in the less explored area’s of the setting, and that brings you back to the first point... if you are gaming in Turmish for example, what need do you have of a Waterdeep Sourcebook? Finally, there is the new information revealed. No one has pointed it out yet, that I have seen so I will do so. While they have elected to get rid of Mystra and the Weave, up until now there has been the assumption that it will just leave a gaping hole in the setting. Chris stated that something WILL be replacing the Weave. That is a big news development. It will not be the Weave, but it will be something else, something more in tune with the new magic system. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 04:02 PM | What all this shows us is that FR Game sales have slumped far enough that they needed to act, and that there are simply not enough "hard core" fans left to justify putting out more and more source books. -Like I said before, that doesn't mean very much. That simply means that people are disinterested with the current selection of sourcebooks out there- I don't think that reflects very much on the setting as a whole, but WotC, for choosing to release said products, be it Mysteries of the Moonsea, a Generic D&D Undermountain product, or whatever... |
| Alediran12-07-07, 04:28 PM | - From Wizard of the Coast's perspective the new edition isn't about people like us. Well, perhaps I shouldn't say "us" because I don't include myself in the category. More specifically, it's about people like myself and others like me, as well as new players. What all this shows us is that FR Game sales have slumped far enough that they needed to act, and that there are simply not enough "hard core" fans left to justify putting out more and more source books. It's their own fault if FR sales have been droping, people like us (true realms fans) don't buy crapy sourcebooks just because it has the FR's logo on it. They are looking to try and keep people like myself, who are considering leaving the Realm's behind, within the setting, and at the same time attracting new blood. They are hoping to balance all of this out and keep the current FR players by keeping enough of the old feel, style, locations and such in tact. They want a setting that you can pick up, play, and KNOW and FEEL like you are unmistakably in the Forgotten Realm's, but without the baggage the setting holds. They WILL loose more players that they'll get, I've lurked during this months in many RPG boards of different countries and the most common feel about the realms are: "see we knew the realms was t4 cr44pz0Xr, it not then they'll never had the need to do what they do", and nobody said that they'll try the realms after seeing their opinions backed by the designers - The fact that many, if not most of the WotC people do not use the FR as a whole (they only use bits and parts) should speak volumes, but not in the way most people here seem to be interpreting it. If the WotC people cannot take the setting as it is, as a whole, then why would the non-hard core FR players? The realms are for the elite players, if players can't be bothered to read even the basic book then I don't want them on my playground. Go play Eberron. Even many prominent posters on this forum, Markus for example, does not use the setting as is and he is not the only one. There are many people on this forum who have made drastic changes to the setting to suit their particular flavor and tastes. It's because Markus has been DMing the Realms even before WoTC bought D&D from TSR, it's obvious that many things will be different. More directly, if you want me to push the point home, Ed Greenwood himself does not game in the current version of the FR and in his home game the Time of Troubles has not happened. That more or less means that Ed is still gaming with First Edition Material. So? He is still playing on the realms. So if the CREATOR of the FR cannot be bothered, or does not enjoy, the current version of the FR then why should a new player hook themselves into the setting? If the setting was so great, then everyone, including Ed, would be playing it. He doesn't play the current realms because he preffered to continue what he was doing instead of retconing every single change it was made to the realms. IMC I run the realms starting from 1372 DR and I ignore many awfull changes made by WoTC after that time. - There is a misquote on what Chris said here in regard to high level NPC’s such as the Chosen. He said that they contributed to a FEELING that the players were overshadowed, and that they were trying to remove that aspect from the setting, while retaining high level characters that can be integrated into your campaign but will not overshadow PCs. That is something I certainly feel is true. Most of the characters in question were novel based characters. They really are not background fluff type characters or side-kick type characters. They have dominate personalities overall. If you try and integrate them into your game in anyway it will instantly dwarf PC’s by comparison. Anyone who thinks bringing Drizzt, or one of Mystra’s Chosen into a game for less than the briefest of cameo’s will not have them overshadowing the PC’s they simply are not playing those NPC’s as they were written (and therefore meant to be played). Elminster is meant as a plot hook dispenser, sage and provider for characters. It VERY clearly written in his entry on the FRCS that he preffers to act through younger adventurers, because he feels that if he is the only one saving the world the one time he fails the world would be doomed. Additionally, there is a sense that NPC’s will come up and clean up your mess. In fact, Ed Greenwood has given out that very suggestion as a use for Elminster. If you are playing true to the game world, realistically speaking, those NPC’s would do exactly that. They are not going to let Cormyr fall apart if you fail to stop the goblin horde. One of the Chosen will pencil in 15 minutes into his or her schedule. He or she would then teleport over to Cormyr and then proceed to enact goblinoid genocide, killing off the entire army within a few moments. Then he or she teleport back home. Instead of teleport, deal with the problem and teleport again what should be done is: telepor, deal with the problem and berate the PCs for their failure so the next time they do better, after that teleport again. Because they hold that much power, because distance is no bar to their abilities, and because there are so many NPC’s like them (we are not just talking about the Chosen anymore) it is really unrealistic to fathom that somewhere out there no one else is trying to stop or solve the same problem as you. The most fleshed out areas of the setting have become too crowded with heroes. Does Portos Fitz-Empress was blasting Technocrats left and right with his Archmastery over forces? Did Merlin constantly washed Arthur's armor and bathed him? This problem was run into and explored in a thread in the Magic and Cosmos forum, where there is debate over whether or not Daelegoth - the head of the Risen Sun Heresy - would have been able to successfully pull off all that he has without getting smote by higher level and more powerful NPC's. However, basically, for plot reasons Daelegoth was allowed to get away with it. To me that is a major problem. If I have to justify something happening because of plot reasons and ignoring the internal consistency of the setting (to drive forward a story) there is something wrong with the setting, not my plot. As a DM you run into many problem's like this if you TRY and game in the FR as a whole, which is why many people at WotC I'd imagine only take bits and parts. You completely missed the point. The problem was trying to find a way to kill Daelegoth without making it an ebil act and not havin Elversult's entire population on your backs. The best places to game without this problem are in the less explored area’s of the setting, and that brings you back to the first point... if you are gaming in Turmish for example, what need do you have of a Waterdeep Sourcebook? WRONG, the best developed part of the Realms are the best to play. I consider DMs who can't resolve the "problems" to be unimaginative, lazy and uncreative. Finally, there is the new information revealed. No one has pointed it out yet, that I have seen so I will do so. While they have elected to get rid of Mystra and the Weave, up until now there has been the assumption that it will just leave a gaping hole in the setting. Chris stated that something WILL be replacing the Weave. That is a big news development. It will not be the Weave, but it will be something else, something more in tune with the new magic system. They'll not replace any kind of mechanic that give the realms some kind of mechanical difference from other settings. They want: One Rule to Rule Them All. |
| MatteBlack12-07-07, 04:28 PM | -Which doesn't mean he authored anything. Being design manager does not mean in any way that said person had any actual imput into the information contained within something, barring saying "this goes here", and "We don't have room for this". I would know, my girlfriend is a design editor-in-chief for one of her school magazines. She doesn't actually write any articles in it, or draw any of the artwork. Know what I mean? Now you are just being argumentative. You need to be a writer for FR to be able to understand it? Where do we set the bar to "like" the Realms, writing a trilogy? How many published FR projects have those complaining here worked on? The more that is revealed about Perkins, the more right he sounds for the job. |
| Lord Karsus12-07-07, 05:10 PM | Now you are just being argumentative. You need to be a writer for FR to be able to understand it? Where do we set the bar to "like" the Realms, writing a trilogy? How many published FR projects have those complaining here worked on? -No I'm not. -Firstly, I never claimed that he doesn't "understand" the setting. Secondly, as I pointed out with an example, there is a difference between activley participating in something, and being in charge and being able to slap one's name on something. And lastly, I, myself, am involved in two FR projects (none of them "official", but are projects nonetheless). |
| dimonic12-07-07, 05:19 PM | It's their own fault if FR sales have been droping, people like us (true realms fans) don't buy crapy sourcebooks just because it has the FR's logo on it. Think for a second before putting fingers to keyboard. Go over what has been published for the realms in 3.x. There are the general books, FRCS, PGtF, Magic of Faerun, Monsters of Faerun, Faiths and Pantheons etc. Then there are the regional specific books, such as Unapproachable East, Shining South, Silver Marches, Underdark etc. Then there are adventure books, such as City of the Spider Queen, Undermountain etc. If you had to produce new best selling realms books after what has been published, what would you choose? I am sure they are selling less and less with each new publication, simply because any title they pick will be more and more a niche publication, either too specific, or too narrow to appeal to the general realms audience. They WILL loose more players that they'll get, I've lurked during this months in many RPG boards of different countries and the most common feel about the realms are: "see we knew the realms was t4 cr44pz0Xr, it not then they'll never had the need to do what they do", and nobody said that they'll try the realms after seeing their opinions backed by the designers Sorry, my english is not good enough to make this one out. The realms are for the elite players, if players can't be bothered to read even the basic book then I don't want them on my playground. Go play Eberron. Which is why you are a fanboy and they are the designers, He doesn't play the current realms because he preffered to continue what he was doing instead of retconing every single change it was made to the realms. IMC I run the realms starting from 1372 DR and I ignore many awfull changes made by WoTC after that time. So you too recognize that the realms has acquired too much baggage to be readily playable. Elminster is meant as a plot hook dispenser, sage and provider for characters. It VERY clearly written in his entry on the FRCS that he preffers to act through younger adventurers, because he feels that if he is the only one saving the world the one time he fails the world would be doomed. Which you may not recognize as being extremely condescending - "well, boys I am leaving you to save the world (which I could do at the drop of a hat) because I am tired of being the only one around here who ever does anything properly". Instead of teleport, deal with the problem and teleport again what should be done is: telepor, deal with the problem and berate the PCs for their failure so the next time they do better, after that teleport again. Ah, yes, excellent. Not only can the NPCs do a far better job than my character, but they pop in to tell me that regularly. Wait a minute - I am sorry, you must be speaking ironically. Your post was a humour piece, mocking FR fanboys at every step, and I fell for it completely. Dohh. |
| msatran12-07-07, 06:17 PM | Uh, dude, failure is part of the story. Having an NPC come and pick up the pieces afterwards is fine. If all the PC's DIE, who cares what happens afterwards? People are too attached to uberheroic fantasy where their PC's are invincible and no one ever dies. Now, they're taking saving throws out of the hands of the PC's and placing them into the hands of the DM. This is !@#$!ing deplorable. I want my fate in MY hands when it comes time for me to kick the bucket. I don't want it in the hands of anyone else. This edition will have no RISK. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 06:37 PM | Alediran- You are simply proving my points: He doesn't play the current realms because he preffered to continue what he was doing instead of retconing every single change it was made to the realms. IMC I run the realms starting from 1372 DR and I ignore many awfull changes made by WoTC after that time. That is exactly my point. If Ed and yourself do not wish to run a FR game as it is currently, why do you expect and demand WotC employees to do the same? Did you think for a moment that maybe they share your opinion? Did you think for a moment that this is why they are making these changes? This is my opinion: There is nothing wrong with you, Ed, Markus, myself or anyone else. We can't make the setting do what we want, unless we ignore certain parts. That doesn't make us any less "true Realms fans" and it doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with what we are doing or trying to do. It means that there is something wrong in either the setting or the system. WotC realizes this, acknowledges it, and is trying to fix it. We will not know how successful they are until we get the final product. The realms are for the elite players, if players can't be bothered to read even the basic book then I don't want them on my playground. Go play Eberron. It is elitism like that which drives many away from these forums and the FR Setting as a whole, and more than any change WotC can make it is that line of thinking that will kill the setting. They WILL loose more players that they'll get, I've lurked during this months in many RPG boards of different countries and the most common feel about the realms are: "see we knew the realms was t4 cr44pz0Xr, it not then they'll never had the need to do what they do", and nobody said that they'll try the realms after seeing their opinions backed by the designers I have seen plenty of people who have written off FR deciding to take a second look. The changes interest them, and many of them are former FR players but some are people who have never picked up the setting because of perceptions like your elitist comments above. Elminster is meant as a plot hook dispenser, sage and provider for characters. It VERY clearly written in his entry on the FRCS that he preffers to act through younger adventurers, because he feels that if he is the only one saving the world the one time he fails the world would be doomed. Instead of teleport, deal with the problem and teleport again what should be done is: telepor, deal with the problem and berate the PCs for their failure so the next time they do better, after that teleport again. It is my opinion that if you have ever used one of those plot characters in such a fashion, you have shown bad DMing skills. The players actions should matter. If they fail at something, there needs to be consequences for that failure. If they fail to stop the goblin army, then the goblin army wins it is as simple as that. No one should come in and rescue them, because in the future the players will expect OOCly for the same to happen. It will damper every victory they achieve from that point forward. After all, what is the point of stopping the goblin army, what is the urgency, if they know failing will result in Elminster jumping out from the shadows and saving the day? However, sadly, that is specifically what these NPCs are there to do, and they are so powerful and their presence so far reaching and deeply ingrained into the lore of the setting that they are practically impossible to ignore. You completely missed the point. The problem was trying to find a way to kill Daelegoth without making it an ebil act and not havin Elversult's entire population on your backs. Stopping Daelegoth, even killing him, would not have been an evil act. Riots of level 1 commoner NPCs should not concern level 20 or higher characters, who can take on entire armies single handedly at that point. However, that in and of itself is the problem and is why I stand where I stand. I believe that most of the perceived problems with FR are not problems with FR at all, but intrinsic problems with the D&D System. I have given it a lot of thought, and really the problem comes from the way power scales. The level system is what is ruining FR. In my mind, I do not care how bad ass you are, a mob of angry commoners can take down Elminster. That Zhent Assassin can still stick a dagger in his ribs and kill him before he has a chance to react. Newly created characters if they are crafty and catch him off guard can and should be able to deal with almost any NPC within the setting. And ALL power should remain somewhat relative. What that means is that while Elminster may be able to do all those crafty things and has all these cool powers, he is still mortal and killable by mortal standards. Just as in real life you may be the best martial artist in the world but anyone with a gun and either lucky or good aim can still shoot you dead. An army of goblins should ALWAYS be a threat to everyone, always. Elminster may be able to craft an epic-level ritual spell to destroy them, but such will take time and be complicated with chances of failure that could be disastrous. If FR worked like that then suddenly you could use all those wonderful NPCs in your game, even have them be frequent and common appearances with your PCs without having to worry about them overshadowing them in terms of power. Sure, Elminster accomplished a lot in his life, but at the end of the day he is still a mortal and still on the same scale as everyone else. Drizzt should not be able to go out and single handedly kill an army of Orcs, but as the rules currently stand he can do exactly that. This is why D&D in my opinion is broken and not FR. |
| Stigger12-07-07, 06:51 PM | Which is why I prefer the OWoD Storyteller systems in general... I'd have to agree with Meldread that the basics of the HP/level system is fundamentally broken when it comes down to it, especially when it comes to widely seperated levels. |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 07:10 PM | Uh, dude, failure is part of the story. Having an NPC come and pick up the pieces afterwards is fine. If all the PC's DIE, who cares what happens afterwards? People are too attached to uberheroic fantasy where their PC's are invincible and no one ever dies. Now, they're taking saving throws out of the hands of the PC's and placing them into the hands of the DM. This is !@#$!ing deplorable. I want my fate in MY hands when it comes time for me to kick the bucket. I don't want it in the hands of anyone else. This edition will have no RISK. See I'm the same way with that. If something bad is going to happen to the character I'm playing and its down to a roll of the dice, I want my dice being rolled by my hand to do it. (because my dice are lucky and everyone elses dice are cursed) I've never understood the need for invincibility and coddling of players. Your playing fricken adventurers. Thats not exactly the safest profession to take. It has a deplorable health plan and an extremely high turnover rate. Thats part of the reason why PC's are considered to be above average from the common folk (stat and ability wise). Because its supposed to be dangerous and life threatening. Otherwise everyone would be doing it. Risk is part of the allure. The excitement. And sometimes the sheer terror. Its supposed to be a fricken challenge. If you're safe and you're always going to win and never get hurt or be in any sort of real danger, whats the point of playing becasue nothing you accomplish is going to have any meaning. |
| dimonic12-07-07, 07:16 PM | Uh, dude, failure is part of the story. Having an NPC come and pick up the pieces afterwards is fine. If all the PC's DIE, who cares what happens afterwards? People are too attached to uberheroic fantasy where their PC's are invincible and no one ever dies. Now, they're taking saving throws out of the hands of the PC's and placing them into the hands of the DM. This is !@#$!ing deplorable. I want my fate in MY hands when it comes time for me to kick the bucket. I don't want it in the hands of anyone else. This edition will have no RISK. I presume you are responding to my post? If so, then I should let you know I am not so concerned about having my PC die (I too happen to enjoy some level of risk, and I fail to see where my post would indicate otherwise). What I am concerned about is suspension of disbelief, condescension and arrogance. What the poster I was quoting was referring to is the idea of having an uber NPC come in to patch things up, lecture the PCs and buzz off (presumably he would be lecturing live PCs). Now, about the saving throw nonsense: saving throws are to be replaced by attack rolls (made by the caster), which finally places spells on par with combat - after all, when was the last time you got a save when a fell giant whopped you down to -11? Not within the rules, you didn't. He attacked, rolled the dice, and you took the damage indicated. no save. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-07-07, 07:19 PM | Give Chris some credit - he has after all written stuff for your realms games, some of which you obviously enjoy. To echo Lord Karsus: Such as? I could have sworn Chris Perkins was described by Rich Baker a while back as a newcomer. PS: Thanks to those who defended me earlier (on page 2). |
| dimonic12-07-07, 07:24 PM | To echo Lord Karsus: Such as? I could have sworn Chris Perkins was described by Rich Baker a while back as a newcomer. PS: Thanks to those who defended me earlier (on page 2). I see his name in a few covers - I don't know the level of contribution. Am I to presume that is the only part of my posting you can take issue with? |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-07-07, 07:27 PM | I see his name in a few covers - I don't know the level of contribution. Am I to presume that is the only part of my posting you can take issue with? Not necessarily, no, it's just the only part of your post that I chose to address. I don't have the time or the inclination to respond to every single point I take issue with or agree with, here. |
| Fingoldfin12-07-07, 07:28 PM | Which is why I prefer the OWoD Storyteller systems in general... I'd have to agree with Meldread that the basics of the HP/level system is fundamentally broken when it comes down to it, especially when it comes to widely seperated levels. Yup. That is part of why I think the changes are worse. In the 4e D&D rules the PCs get more power quicker. It will make these problems more pronounced. I like the system for the first star wars RPG. It ran on d6 system and HP never went up. the problem with it is you could end up with some cheesy PC deaths. Lucky hit from a single kobald kill high level Paladin. The system for the Firefly RPG is similar. If you (Meldread) plan to convert you Realms to a different system you should check into Firefly and old star wars rules sets. I don't know anything about world of darkness. I guess I should look into WoD because one of the freelance designers goes to my local gaming store and wants to start a WoD campaign. |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 07:37 PM | Alediran- However, sadly, that is specifically what these NPCs are there to do, and they are so powerful and their presence so far reaching and deeply ingrained into the lore of the setting that they are practically impossible to ignore. No that is not what they're there for. Think of it like this, and I believe it was mentioned in a book or two though I'm not really sure which one, Elminster and all them are actually prevented from doing a great deal of things that people seem to think they rush about doing because its a matter of mutually assured destruction. Sure Elmisnter could drop into Thay and if he's lucky take out Szass Tam provided he got him by surprise, and the same for the reverse. But its a roll of the dice (figuratively) to what the outcome would be. They arent certain what the outcome would be. Hell, the REd Wizards have tried several times en masse to take down Larloch and found its actually harder than it sounds. The point is, Elminster isnt going to worry about every little thing. He's to busy worrying about the big thing like Szass Tam and Larloch (though not so much larloch cause well frankly he could care less about the world in general. Elminster or even the Simbul may be able to jump in and kill Tam, but then what. Someone is going to take his place who they have no idea about and in the end they'll be back to square one except with someone they don't know well enough to counter. Its why (in my opinion) that Cyric was so difficult to deal with. Everyone was used to going against Bane. They knew Bane and what his methods were. Then Cyric showed up and everything changed. ITs the same thing. Not only that, none of the higher level NPCs are going to worry over things outside their areas becasue it would be a distraction, maybe enough so that people like the Red Wizards or Zhentarim would take advantage of it. Oh look, Elminster is over in Baldurs GAte dealing with a bunch of orcs, good time to invade and destroy Shadowdale. NPC's arent going to worry about things that other people can deal with, because they're to busy with things that other people CANT. While you and your friends are dealing with the local goblin problem, they're out there making sure you don't have to deal with whatever Manshoon or Fzoul have been working on. Besides, their way of dealing with the local goblins, is to have you do it. Its like this, Gandalf could have probably dealt with most of the problems in Middle Earth himself without needing to get other peopel to do it. Problem is that if he did use his power to do that, the bad guys of his power would do the same thing and there goes the world. Thats what Elminster is good for. If he didnt exist, there would be no risk for the various high level bad guys not to go all out. His mere existence limits what the bad guys are willing to risk to accomplish their goals. If Bane himself were to appear in Suzail and start blasting things other gods would have to jump in and appear in Suzail and start blasting back which would eventually mean no more Suzail. Evil isnt stupid, no point in ruling over a destroyed world or not being able to rule at all because you got ahead of yourself and decieded to risk a direct confrontation with someone you arent 100 percent sure you can beat. Thats why everyone, EVERYONE uses minions and intermediaries. Thats why the high level NPC's arent like people like saying they are. They arent just stat blocks, and they arent suicidal. Evil has other people to do the dying and take the risks, the good guys have their own people (knowingly or not) to go and stop them. Its a balance of power. Like Russia and the US using other countries to fight each other during the cold war. In my mind, I do not care how bad ass you are, a mob of angry commoners can take down Elminster. That Zhent Assassin can still stick a dagger in his ribs and kill him before he has a chance to react. Newly created characters if they are crafty and catch him off guard can and should be able to deal with almost any NPC within the setting. And ALL power should remain somewhat relative. Thats how I play it. No matter how tough you think you are against a mob you may kill alot of them but eventually they'll kill you. Hell, no one is invincible. And no one, not even Elminster or Fzoul are immune to a knife in the back. An army of goblins should ALWAYS be a threat to everyone, always. Elminster may be able to craft an epic-level ritual spell to destroy them, but such will take time and be complicated with chances of failure that could be disastrous. That and like I said, while he's doing that, someone else is going to take advantage of his distraction and either attack him or do something else he'd rather they didnt do. Drizzt should not be able to go out and single handedly kill an army of Orcs, but as the rules currently stand he can do exactly that. This is why D&D in my opinion is broken and not FR. Drizzt has an invisible shield over him anyways. I fully expect him to eventually in the future when Salvatore loses the rest of his creativity to have him end up a god or something. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-07-07, 07:41 PM | Additionally, there is a sense that NPC’s will come up and clean up your mess. In fact, Ed Greenwood has given out that very suggestion as a use for Elminster. If you are playing true to the game world, realistically speaking, those NPC’s would do exactly that. They are not going to let Cormyr fall apart if you fail to stop the goblin horde. One of the Chosen will pencil in 15 minutes into his or her schedule. He or she would then teleport over to Cormyr and then proceed to enact goblinoid genocide, killing off the entire army within a few moments. Then he or she teleport back home. Does anyone have a link to that awesome post The Simbul wrote about this subject? Of course, tons of posts by Faraer have addressed it as well. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-07-07, 07:49 PM | No that is not what they're there for. Think of it like this, and I believe it was mentioned in a book or two though I'm not really sure which one, Elminster and all them are actually prevented from doing a great deal of things that people seem to think they rush about doing because its a matter of mutually assured destruction. That bit you are talking about, "The Concerns of the Mighty", is in a sidebar in the FRCS itself. |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 07:55 PM | That bit you are talking about, "The Concerns of the Mighty", is in a sidebar in the FRCS itself. Well its there too, but there are other books where things liek that is mentioned. Going back to 1st Edition if I remember correctly. Its why I don't get and think the "High level NPCs do everything" is just an excuse. So many places contradict that yet its still taken as gospel. Don't know why people bother honestly. Even mentioning something that shows Elminster isnt superman flying around the realms solving every little problem and rescuing kittens out of trees is ignored. Repeatedly |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-07-07, 08:05 PM | Well its there too, but there are other books where things liek that is mentioned. Going back to 1st Edition if I remember correctly. Probably. Its why I don't get and think the "High level NPCs do everything" is just an excuse. So many places contradict that yet its still taken as gospel. Don't know why people bother honestly. Even mentioning something that shows Elminster isnt superman flying around the realms solving every little problem and rescuing kittens out of trees is ignored. Repeatedly So it seems.:( |
| msatran12-07-07, 08:18 PM | Yeah, exactly. HE attacked. HE rolled. My SAVING THROW is not in my hands. It's in the hands of my attacker. This is THE most player unfriendly system ever. At least if YOU roll a bad saving throw, you can say...damn. I rolled bad. But you don't feel so good when the shoe's on the other foot. |
| Sol_Odlanier12-07-07, 08:21 PM | todos estos cambios son estupides, estan cagando todo lo que Hace FR FR, Mariconerias y antojos de los dise~adores para hacer un juego que la gente concidera un juego de "nerds" menos "nerd", pero es lo mismo por que tampronto la gente vea "D&D" en la portada del libro lo vana dejar hay y van a decir "Bah, eso es de nerd" y como dicen en mi isla se "van a quedar sin la soga y sin la cabra"..... There, I can go sleep now |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 08:36 PM | Yeah, exactly. HE attacked. HE rolled. My SAVING THROW is not in my hands. It's in the hands of my attacker. This is THE most player unfriendly system ever. At least if YOU roll a bad saving throw, you can say...damn. I rolled bad. But you don't feel so good when the shoe's on the other foot. Yeah see if I roll bad I go "Damn I died" but if the DM rolls everything (especially behind a screen) "Hey why'd you kill me you prick" followed by the hurling of sharp pointy 4-siders :D todos estos cambios son estupides, estan cagando todo lo que Hace FR FR, Mariconerias y antojos de los dise~adores para hacer un juego que la gente concidera un juego de "nerds" menos "nerd", pero es lo mismo por que tampronto la gente vea "D&D" en la portada del libro lo vana dejar hay y van a decir "Bah, eso es de nerd" y como dicen en mi isla se "van a quedar sin la soga y sin la cabra"..... Spanish would be a much easier language if there werent so many dialects of it. I don't think just having D&D on the cover of the book says anything anymore. It used to have a perception of being nerdy and all that, but I think for the most part (while there may be a few holdouts) that perception is largely ignored these days. Though I could be wrong. And whats this about being without the goat and the rope? Thats an expression I've never heard before, though I think I understand the meaning...I think. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 08:37 PM | Sir_Shadow- The problem is not Elminster. Elminster is only a single character. You brought up Baulder's Gate. Off the top of your head how many level 15+ (Drizzt range in power) NPC's exist within that area? I can name three off the top of my head. You stated that such NPC's tend to focus on their area of influence, well it shouldn't be shocking to learn that there are level 15+ NPC's within that region who could single handedly wipe out the entire orc tribe. The only difference between them and Elminster is that Elminster can leave at dawn, kill the entire tribe, and then be back before time for breakfast. The Zhent's won't even know he left, thus they would not have time to invade. Almost every single region in the Realm's has at least one level 10+ NPC who can handle every single low level threat thrown at them. That NPC no doubt also has connections to even higher level NPC's should they find themselves in over their head... which leaves the question where do the PC's fit in? However, those are minor problems compared to how much of a pain it is for a DM. That is the real issue. If I want to design a plot or adventure in a certain region I shouldn't have to ask questions like, "Okay, how many epic level NPC's are around here and what type of connections do they have?" However, if you want to go to the root of the problem it is not the fact that these NPC's exist. They serve a purpose. The problem is not with the NPC's at all, but with the D&D system as a whole. In every single circumstance a level 20 will always defeat a level 5. Elminster does not live in fear of commoners or Zhent Assassins. Why should he? Even if they attacked him he'd have enough HP to survive the attack, assuming they even caught him off guard to begin with. Of course, they'd also have to hit him, which they probably won't unless they roll a 20. It is important to keep in mind that 99.9% of the Forgotten Realm's are level 1 Commoners. They have no method of dealing with those uber NPC's, and even a level 5 NPC with a PC Class will out strip them in every way imaginable. The world is not internally consistent because of this. The field of play is not equal. The system is broken because of the way power scales. Thus we have these problems being blamed on the setting instead of the system. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 08:47 PM | Stigger & Fingoldfin- While I don't think anyone can deny that there are a few things in the current version of FR that need to be smoothed out, as I said I am certain that MANY of the problems directed at the setting are at their root a problem with the D&D system. After all it is certainly true that a level 29 NPC like Elminster will ALWAYS overshadow your level 5 PC's. That's the way the system was designed. The setting could use someone to smooth out its rough edges. Lots of things, such as Maztica were just shoehorned into the setting. A clearer, crisper and more concise picture could have been painted of the setting. If you took away the D&D rules and just printed out the lore, over all it would be fine. Sadly, that's not how it works. I had high hopes for 4E Realm's but after coming to the conclusion that it was the D&D System causing the problems and not the setting, and seeing the 4E D&D... I think it will only get worse. Eberron tried to deal with it as best they could, but they only had moderate success. I thank you both for your suggestions for a different system. |
| Sol_Odlanier12-07-07, 08:53 PM | Yeah see if I roll bad I go "Damn I died" but if the DM rolls everything (especially behind a screen) "Hey why'd you kill me you prick" followed by the hurling of sharp pointy 4-siders :D Spanish would be a much easier language if there werent so many dialects of it. I don't think just having D&D on the cover of the book says anything anymore. It used to have a perception of being nerdy and all that, but I think for the most part (while there may be a few holdouts) that perception is largely ignored these days. Though I could be wrong. And whats this about being without the goat and the rope? Thats an expression I've never heard before, though I think I understand the meaning...I think. :rofl: yeah I know, mexicans have a hard time talkin to me in spanish, but if you talk Proper(as in no slang) spanish (witch I do with a lot of effort) everyone should understand you. and what I mean with therope and goat thing is that "if you want every thing you end up with nothing" |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 09:05 PM | Sir_Shadow- The problem is not Elminster. Elminster is only a single character. You brought up Baulder's Gate. Off the top of your head how many level 15+ (Drizzt range in power) NPC's exist within that area? I can name three off the top of my head. You stated that such NPC's tend to focus on their area of influence, well it shouldn't be shocking to learn that there are level 15+ NPC's within that region who could single handedly wipe out the entire orc tribe. In game mechanics yes thats true they might be able to (if none of the orcs had class levels themselves but thats irrellevant). The problem being that they can't be everywhere at once and they don't exist in a vacuum either. Not ony is it wrong to think that they would be aware of every little thing going on, but its also wrong to assume that they would be in a position to do anything about it. The NPC's arent there to do everything, thats why they're NPC's and not PC's. They're there to tell people that this is happeneing etc etc if they arent otherwise occupied with other concerns they might have. Have to understand that just because X lives in the Western Heartlands, doesnt mean he actually is going to care or do anything about anything that doesn't effect their area. Look at Elturel and the Hellriders. They arent there to run around and stop plots. they're there to keep the trade routes open and even though they're relatively close to other cities doesnt mean that the Hellriders are going to mount up and rush off to Beregost. They have other things they HAVE to take care of. Hellriders don't care about Beregost and truthfully neither would Lord Dhelt. Look at it another way. Elminster could have stopped Zhentil Keep from overrunning Daggerdale but he didnt. Because as much as he might not like those events, Daggerdale isnt his responsibility and its one man against an army. He may by mechanics be able to stop them, but how he views things , he cant. Especially being that he's a chosen, his main responsibility is Magic itself so that kinda limits what he can actually do. Even if someone was going to create a spell that would wipe shadowdale off the map in one fell swoop, he actually couldn't do anything to stop that spell being made. Which is actually why none of the chosen go after someone like Larloch. Point is, NPC's arent just sitting around waiting for something to happen, they have their own responsibilities that preclude them doing things. That and even though by game mechanics they can do something, NPC's DO NOT think in game terms. While mechanically Drizzt could wipe out a horde of orcs alone, he doesnt becasue he doesnt think in D&D terms. He sees a horde of orcs and thinks "Ok to many for me alone I'd get killed" and runs off to get help. While NPC's in game terms may be able to do things, they don't think like that. They neither know nor act like they can take out whole armies by themselves. Thats the problem. Seeing them as just stat blocks and not seeing the actual NPC personality and person thats supposed to be there. The NPC's act and think like they CAN be killed by a dagger from a level 1 commoner. Just because by game mechanics they can do something, doesnt mean they actually do in the game. They don't have the rulebooks, the players do. It is important to keep in mind that 99.9% of the Forgotten Realm's are level 1 Commoners. They have no method of dealing with those uber NPC's, and even a level 5 NPC with a PC Class will out strip them in every way imaginable. The world is not internally consistent because of this. The field of play is not equal. The system is broken because of the way power scales. Thus we have these problems being blamed on the setting instead of the system. Its more of a problem with meta-thinking and not thinking about how the characters themselves see things. Elminster and Drizzt don't play D&D (of any edition) so all the rules and mechanics are irrellevant to how they actually are and the way they view themselves and threats. |
| Fire_Wraith12-07-07, 09:11 PM | If you think about it, the distribution of NPCs with levels is really just a function of the system itself. In a given world, the place isn't going to be universally full of level 1 characters aside from the PCs. Out of a given population, a certain percentage will be level 2, level 5, level 10, etc... it's just pure statistics, really. This isn't so much a design problem of the Forgotten Realms, it's just an extrapolation of the nature of the D&D system. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 09:19 PM | Sir_Shadow- FYI, While I do not read the Drizzt Books, I have been informed that Drizzt has indeed battled 100 Orcs or so in one of the novels. For the NPC's not to think in terms of game mechanics would be the same as you or I being afraid gravity is suddenly going to stop working. Game mechanics are like the physics of the FR. While they don't think in terms of "Oh gosh, I rolled X with the dice." They can realistically know what they can achieve and what they cannot. A level 20 Wizard will realistically know that he can wipe out an entire Orc Army with relative ease. Numbers are irrelevant. He doesn't think of himself as a level 20, but he doesn't have to for his power to be real and tangible to him. Of course, the Novels and such don't use D&D Mechanics, but we aren't dealing with the novels which are a whole different can of worms. We are dealing with a game system which does use mechanics. If Drizzt can take out an entire Army, then he can take out an entire army - it is as simple as that. Trying to think of it otherwise is to cover up a hole in the system that makes it implausible and unreasonable for the setting to exist and remain stable. Because once you look at things from that perspective it really ruins the entire setting. However, in order to understand the problem that people have with these uber level NPC's you must look at things from that perspective because it is the source of the problem. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 09:41 PM | If you think about it, the distribution of NPCs with levels is really just a function of the system itself. In a given world, the place isn't going to be universally full of level 1 characters aside from the PCs. Out of a given population, a certain percentage will be level 2, level 5, level 10, etc... it's just pure statistics, really. This isn't so much a design problem of the Forgotten Realms, it's just an extrapolation of the nature of the D&D system. Exactly. The problem isn't that there are NPC's out there more powerful than the PC's, the problem is that there are NPC's out there that realistically only one or two other people IN THE ENTIRE WORLD can ever hope to challenge outside of equally powerful outsiders and gods. If you take a scrutinizing look at the system and the way power scales it is directly linked to levels. A level is a vast increase in power on all fronts, and each time you gain one you become more and more distant from the common people. The entire system exists to drive players to higher and higher levels, thus distancing them from more mundane life. Eventually, the PCs reach a level of power equal to that of Elminster, and then surpass even him. Then they reach the power of Larloch, and surpass even him. Once they reach a certain level of power, what is to stop them outside of the gods and powerful outsiders from simply conquering the world? Even Bane, the highest level Deity is only level 60ish. What happens if the PC's achieve level 80+? There is nothing stopping them at that point from simply conquering the world because outside of the gods and powerful outsiders (most of whom they could also destroy if challenged) there is no one there to stop them. While that is true for the PCs the same is also true for the NPCs. FR tries to balance this out by creating equally powerful enemies of high level characters, so as to effectively create a cold war like situation. However, this is only a cover-up for the real problem, and that is that a single individual if he or she obtains enough power can go forward unchallenged, even if the entire world banned together against that individual. After a certain point numbers, tactics and strategy do not make a difference. |
| Sir_Shadow12-07-07, 09:42 PM | Sir_Shadow- FYI, While I do not read the Drizzt Books, I have been informed that Drizzt has indeed battled 100 Orcs or so in one of the novels. Wouldn't know, stopped reading those books long ago and have tried to block them out of my mind. For the NPC's not to think in terms of game mechanics would be the same as you or I being afraid gravity is suddenly going to stop working. Game mechanics are like the physics of the FR. While they don't think in terms of "Oh gosh, I rolled X with the dice." They can realistically know what they can achieve and what they cannot. A level 20 Wizard will realistically know that he can wipe out an entire Orc Army with relative ease. Numbers are irrelevant. He doesn't think of himself as a level 20, but he doesn't have to for his power to be real and tangible to him. Ok a wizard is a bad example, because thats generally the whole point to becoming a wizard in the first place is for either knowledge or ungodly power. More to the point though, Elminster, Manshoon, Fzoul, any other wizard hasnt the first clue how many hit points he has or what his armor class is. As far as they know a single arrow shot by a common warrior is going to kill them and they act like it. to think otherwise falls into the same situation where a high level PC fighter jumps off a cliff, gets up and starts fighting. PC's can and will do stuff like that because they know mechanics and that they'll survive. An NPC will never jump off a cliff expecting to live unless he has a FEatherfall. They know jumping off a cliff is going to squish them. You can't expect or be under the assumption that NPC's think and act like players. Of course, the Novels and such don't use D&D Mechanics, but we aren't dealing with the novels which are a whole different can of worms. We are dealing with a game system which does use mechanics. If Drizzt can take out an entire Army, then he can take out an entire army - it is as simple as that. Thats the point. Drizzt isnt in a game or in a book as far as he's concerned. He just lives in Faerun. Thats what the whole fourth wall is about. Drizzt doesnt know he's jsut a figment of someones imagination, he doesnt know that he's got a plot shield on and will never actually be in any real danger. He's never seen his stat block, he's never heard of RA Salvatore or Ed Greenwood, so while he knows he can take care of himself he doesnt know, and therefore will not act in that regard, that the mechanics say he can walk up to a dragon, get hit by its breath weapon at point blank range and barely have a scratch and then kill the thing. He's not going to look down at a village being attacked by orcs, jump off the cliff half a mile up, land in someones garden , dust himself off and save the day. His world doesnt include game mechanics. Ours does. So it is people using information that no one in the actual Realms has any idea about to complain about. Trying to think of it otherwise is to cover up a hole in the system that makes it implausible and unreasonable for the setting to exist and remain stable. Because once you look at things from that perspective it really ruins the entire setting. huh? However, in order to understand the problem that people have with these uber level NPC's you must look at things from that perspective because it is the source of the problem. I already know what the problem people have with the NPC's and its generally not what they say it is. They dont want anyone to be more powerful than they are period. They could be fith level NPC's and they'd still not like them because they could beat up their first level characters. They want to be just as powerful as Elminster at first level and everything else they say is just an excuse and attempt at justification for this. You take away all the levels and mechanics and jsut have Elminster described as a powerful wizard thats stronger than they are they're still going to complain about him. Thats the bottom line with the whole "The PC's matter now" talk. Even if Elminster was a level one wizard they'd still complain about him for one reason or another. The mechanics don't matter when it comes to the NPC's. The mechanics are just used as a surrogate for their argument that no one should be more powerful than they are. |
| Meldread12-07-07, 11:04 PM | Sir_Shadow- That is just flatly wrong. It isn't about the PC's it is about the world itself. You can make any type of argument that you want, and you can have Drizzt or Elminster pretend that they are level 5, but it does not make it so. They still have the ability to wipe out entire armies single handedly. Have you ever thought what this does to the scales of power and to the setting as a whole? Why do nations need armies when a few high level adventurers will do? Furthermore, why aren't all the rulers of nations epic in level? After all, if King X is only a level 5 Aristocrat with his next highest levels being a level 8 Wizard companion and Fighter 2 / Warrior 3 Captain of the Royal Guard... what is to stop a single adventuring party (especially one which is 10+ in level) from simply walking in and taking over? Nothing. Of course, you could argue that they'd just call on higher level friends... like who? Elminster? It's rather unbalanced throwing a level 29 Archmage at a group with the highest level being 12th! What you do not seem to understand is that the sword cuts both ways. What affects the NPCs also affects the PCs and vise versa. You know in the LotR Movie, where in the introduction Sauron was doing battle almost single handedly against the forces of Elves and Men? That is more or less an epic level Fighter in battle against your standard army. Five or ten men dying from a single blow. Arrows flying toward you and bouncing off your magically enchanted armor, without even leaving a scratch. Do you know how in the LotR movies the main characters always went up against an insane number of foes, almost single handedly and won again and again? That is the type of "reality" that exists in FR. It is possible and achievable. Aragorn didn't say, "Oh no! They have archers! We better run, I don't want to get hit by an arrow!" He just charged forward and cut them down dodging arrows left and right. That is the same mindset high level NPC's have in the FR and by the rules - that is exactly the type of mindset they have. I am reminded of someone on these forums who was disgusted by two high level Wizards. They decided to just go kill a horde of Undead for fun. They just blasted away, trying to see how many the other could kill. (This was in the novel.) It was a game to them. They did not have any fear of the undead, and the undead could do nothing to them. It is the same with the living. They could do that to commoners, and even if an entire city mobbed them all at once, they would be able to easily fend them off. The same is true for Players as it is for them, and it is jarring to any sense of reality. It also has other consequences that reach deeper into the logic of the setting itself. |
| Stigger12-08-07, 01:36 AM | Never actually seen the LotR movies... nor read anything past the first few chapters of that hobbit book... never plan on it either, as Tolkien just strikes me as literary... well, to be polite, nothing I want to involve myself with. Part of the reason I avoid most of the Realms novels. A lot of them seem to defy common sense and logic, and promote the idea that these NPCs are near-godlike in their abilities, know it, and act accordingly. Sure, some might have that sort of quasi-suicidal, near-deathwish gung-ho attitude, but sooner or later, the odds catch up and they end up dead. 50 goblins may seem like a cakewalk to a 20th level fighter, but when they ignore the idea that only a few can attack you at once, start grabbing arms and legs, dragging you down with sheer weight of numbers, that cakewalk quickly turns into a funeral. That's just common sense, which should never be trumped by mechanics or rules that defy all reason. Which really, is the golden rule for any gaming system, or should be at any rate. |
| Dark Wizard12-08-07, 01:40 AM | To be fair to Chris Perkins, he only said there are no current FR games running in the WotC offices. The last game ended about a year ago, so there were FR games. That doesn't say too much of anything, but it is disappointing to hear nonetheless. There just seems to more interest amongst the designers towards Eberron. Not that I'm jealous of the designer love for Eberron, in fact I think its great, there should be an interest in the setting for those who work on it. Their job really can't be done as some 9-to-5, clock in/clock out, bored-out-of-your-mind desk job. Whatever their attitudes may be, there just doesn't seem like an appropriate amount of interest in the setting for some of the designers. Sure you can cite some of the problems people bring up, but at the same time the setting works for many others and has for 20 years, so something is there. The problems come when the designers try to dissect the setting, extract what is good and discard what is bad. It is really subjective as they say. They could be right, FR could be rotting from the inside from all these supposed problems, or the grognards could be correct that we've past the point of no-return, the setting is dead for all intents and purposes, the New Realms really are new. I think it probably lies somewhere in the middle, but we probably will not be getting that halfway point. The 4E transition could have been a good way to address the problems brought up. With new rules, there is no explanation needed to reduce the level inflation. Under the new rules, the NPCs have always been Level X, it's as simple as that. I think that would have removed a large portion of the problems. Another fix could have been making the novels not automatically canon, but still allow sourcebooks to confirm which events are canon or not. I read a post on the 4E FR forums where someone commented: if the most obvious course of action to not have to deal with the Chosen and company is to remove them from the game, then why would their disappearance in 4E bother anyone. I have to admit, he has a point. I think non-canon novels is a good compromise between the two approaches. In a way WotC can have their cake and eat it too. Most people who read the novels probably don't care that the Realms is also a D&D setting. What matters most is that they tell a good story and draw from the richness of the Realms setting (as opposed to a D&D setting). That is not to say the novels shouldn't follow canon, a rough framework of the D&D rules, or internal consistency between novels. I just don't think both novels and the game setting should be freely open to each other without a strong system of checks and controls. I think the main trouble with the 4E FR changes is that the designers expect a big magical catastrophe to instantly wipe away all the problems (even with a century jump). They expect to change too much too quickly, so we get this very overblown event to account for everything. Then they find out the Spellplague probably can't do it all, so we get some retcons. Really, I think enough is enough. These problems developed from years of similar events, it will probably take years before the setting reaches the goal WotC desires given proper management, it will not happen over night (which WotC expects is sometime in August 2008). |
| Meldread12-08-07, 02:00 AM | Dark Wizard- I think you sum up how I feel at the moment. Thank you for your well thought out post. Stigger- I actually agree with you about the Lord of the Rings. I tried to read the books and I just could not do it. I thought the movies were good, aside from some of the battle scenes. (Though the worst of them seems to mostly be in the first movie. It's a real cliché of how D&D looks on screen. Uber powerful characters vs a large number of monsters and beating them effortlessly. Hell! The Dwarf and the Elf even count their kills.) That's just common sense, which should never be trumped by mechanics or rules that defy all reason. That is my problem with levels and the system. They defy common sense. No, I don't want something simulationist, but I want something that can better manage power between the weakest people of the world and the most powerful. I don't want to see Random Commoner X walk up and just gank Elminster, but if Random Commoner X plots and plans for long enough, is patient enough, then yeah - I want him to have at least some chance of success. Everyone should be vulnerable to everyone else in the setting. There is a difference between being powerful and being invulnerable. |
| Redrake12-08-07, 02:21 AM | The idea that wizards are just too powerful and they have be reduced in efficiency by making their spells available only through wands and things like that is not very well thought off. I'm strongly against transforming them in Harry Potters running around and yelling "Shazam!". It is true that wizards are very powerful in 3E, but this has nothing to do with their spells, but with the leveling up system. A much better idea would have been to bring back the class level up system from 2E as opposed to racial level up system from 3E. Meaning a character starts with 0 XP, but when it hits 2000 XP he/she can level up to a fighter or he/she can wait until hits 2500 XP so that a wizard level could be picked. This should make the leveling up for wizards much slower make them less efficient without hitting the class where it hurts the most. |
| Meldread12-08-07, 02:28 AM | 50 goblins may seem like a cakewalk to a 20th level fighter, but when they ignore the idea that only a few can attack you at once, start grabbing arms and legs, dragging you down with sheer weight of numbers, that cakewalk quickly turns into a funeral. How many PCs would scream bloody murder and proclaim you the worst DM to ever walk the face of the earth if you allowed something like that to happen? "Your level 25 Epic Paladin charges forward toward the small goblin tribe. With a swing of your blade you easily dispatch the first one. The other goblins, however, turn and begin running toward you at full speed shouting in their strange tongue. You are certain they are calling to their dark gods and are cursing your name. You swing your blade again, killing two others effortlessly. Suddenly, however, you realize that they are surrounding you. Some of them grab your legs. You swing your blade, killing three more, but as you did so four of them grabbed your sword arm, pulling it from your hand. You begin to struggle, as they begin to grab your arms, and then suddenly, from the weight of the goblins you fall over onto your back. Yellow eyes stare back at you. It is the last thing you see as they cut your throat." How many PC's would accept that as a reality in their game? Not many. They'd demand rolls for each and every one of those goblins. They would proclaim that the goblins couldn't do X because their character's AC is Y. Thus they couldn't touch them. That is how such an encounter SHOULD play out with an epic character who simply charges forward like a madman. Yet it doesn't. Not in the novels and not in games. |
| Dark Wizard12-08-07, 02:30 AM | Dark Wizard- I think you sum up how I feel at the moment. Thank you for your well thought out post. Welcome. I would like to think if WotC met more people halfway this whole thing would have gone over infinitely smoother, perhaps not only a revival of the Realms but an expansion. Enthusiastic support from the vast majority of the old fans, the designers mild changes to fix the rough parts of the setting, a version of the setting that can draw in new fans, new players, and (seemingly important for WotC) convince those turned off by the Realms to give it another chance. Those are the people who WotC should convince to love the Realms over again. I feel that to do that they have to highlight the strengths of the setting rather than draw attention to the flaws. Many of the posters who frequent this board were already in love with the setting as Rino said in another thread. WotC shouldn't trade one set of fans for another. They may not mean it as such, but I think there is definitely a portion of the fans who feel that way. I can't say how large a slice of the total they represent, but they're there. Stigger- I actually agree with you about the Lord of the Rings. I tried to read the books and I just could not do it. I thought the movies were good, aside from some of the battle scenes. (Though the worst of them seems to mostly be in the first movie. It's a real cliché of how D&D looks on screen. Uber powerful characters vs a large number of monsters and beating them effortlessly. Hell! The Dwarf and the Elf even count their kills.) That is my problem with levels and the system. They defy common sense. No, I don't want something simulationist, but I want something that can better manage power between the weakest people of the world and the most powerful. I don't want to see Random Commoner X walk up and just gank Elminster, but if Random Commoner X plots and plans for long enough, is patient enough, then yeah - I want him to have at least some chance of success. Everyone should be vulnerable to everyone else in the setting. There is a difference between being powerful and being invulnerable. That actually reminds me of an OA game I once played. The DM used all the harsher optional rules in the DMG, save or die for massive damage, save or die on a confirmed natural 20; all the rules that force players to make those nasty saves, thus making the party far less 'invincible' even to opponents lower in level than us. I have to say, while it was annoying, it was fun. There was a real element of danger from sudden death, much like those old chambara films. We made copious use of social skills and diplomacy to avoid combat at all costs, then when fights did break out, striking fast and striking hard was the only alternative, which worked well in the fictional philosophies of the setting. When one of us did make one of those save or die checks, we could roleplay accordingly that our characters received a severe wound. Unfortunately the game lasted only a few sessions. |
| Sir_Shadow12-08-07, 02:35 AM | Stigger- I actually agree with you about the Lord of the Rings. I tried to read the books and I just could not do it. I thought the movies were good, aside from some of the battle scenes. (Though the worst of them seems to mostly be in the first movie. It's a real cliché of how D&D looks on screen. Uber powerful characters vs a large number of monsters and beating them effortlessly. Hell! The Dwarf and the Elf even count their kills.) Well Legolas and Gimli actually did that in the books. Unfortunately the movie over exaggerated it. If I remember correctly Legolas 'won' with a kill count of 20. Thats not unheard of to kill that many yourself in a pitched battle. By the books they actually did more running than anything and only fought when they were either ambushed (frequently. seriously the Ranger class was based on Aragorn and everyone was sneaking up on him) or they had an army with them. And Tolkien was a professor and wrote these books in the 20's. Back then, actual books that werent dime novels werent really meant for mass consumption. Even Dickens wasn't actually meant for the public per se. BOOKS back then were meant for their peers not the common rabble. *shrugs* I have a hell of a time reading Tolkien and I consider myself highly literate. That is my problem with levels and the system. They defy common sense. No, I don't want something simulationist, but I want something that can better manage power between the weakest people of the world and the most powerful. I don't want to see Random Commoner X walk up and just gank Elminster, but if Random Commoner X plots and plans for long enough, is patient enough, then yeah - I want him to have at least some chance of success. Everyone should be vulnerable to everyone else in the setting. There is a difference between being powerful and being invulnerable. See there is an easy way around all of that. Its actually real easy to do. Don't give them stats. Period. Unless you're meant to kill them, do you really need to know what level they are, what spells they have memorized and what they have in their pockets? Its the same with the gods (why oh why do they need class levels) You could near remove all the problems by just removing the stats completely from them. Does many things. One, if the PC's are dumb enough to attack someone who lore says s a powerful archmage, you're free to pretty much determine how powerful in any game terms they actually are. It solves the "why arent they doing it all" too. Seriously, if all you have is a description of who this guy is sprinkled with information about his goals, methods and things of that nature, you're good to go. Wouldn't even detract from the character to not stat them. I mean, do you really need stats for King Azoun? How many times are you going to need to know what level he is, and would he be less of a King without stats. You could make hima 1st level expert and he'd still be Azoun. I was going to reply to your earlier post but I erased and did some thinking, and while I still think most of the problems you hear about with the NPC's are jsut whiny players not wanting anyone else to be more powerful as their former pig farmer Joe the level 1 fighter (same reason they complain that wizards in general are to powerful but different subject), but its also I think because like the gods, theres this weird need to stat people that don't need stats. What does it amtter what level Elminster is. He's known as an archmage and a sage. That should be enough. And even though I havent read any of Salvatores works in some years, I don't recall Drizzt or anyone elses levels being mentioned in the novels, so why have them in the game. They're a part of the background. Not something out of the monster manual. Would just be easier not to stat them at all, have them in the game with paragraphs or something telling about them, but thats it. |
| Sir_Shadow12-08-07, 02:42 AM | How many PCs would scream bloody murder and proclaim you the worst DM to ever walk the face of the earth if you allowed something like that to happen? "Your level 25 Epic Paladin charges forward toward the small goblin tribe. With a swing of your blade you easily dispatch the first one. The other goblins, however, turn and begin running toward you at full speed shouting in their strange tongue. You are certain they are calling to their dark gods and are cursing your name. You swing your blade again, killing two others effortlessly. Suddenly, however, you realize that they are surrounding you. Some of them grab your legs. You swing your blade, killing three more, but as you did so four of them grabbed your sword arm, pulling it from your hand. You begin to struggle, as they begin to grab your arms, and then suddenly, from the weight of the goblins you fall over onto your back. Yellow eyes stare back at you. It is the last thing you see as they cut your throat." How many PC's would accept that as a reality in their game? Not many. They'd demand rolls for each and every one of those goblins. They would proclaim that the goblins couldn't do X because their character's AC is Y. Thus they couldn't touch them. That is how such an encounter SHOULD play out with an epic character who simply charges forward like a madman. Yet it doesn't. Not in the novels and not in games. :D I've done things like that. Simply because I personally feel that if you rush in like an idiot against overwhelming numbers, you deserve what you get. Can't remember where, but I'm sure there were rules for ..., think it was called bullrush or something like that. Maybe overbearing where sheer numbers irregardless of level would take you down and put you on the ground. I only had to do it once too and the players learned to be smarter and more cautious. You could be the best swordsman in the world but try to take on an army by yourself and you're gonna get dogpiled eventually. You might take alot of them down but eventually they'll get you. |
| Stigger12-08-07, 02:56 AM | How many PCs would scream bloody murder and proclaim you the worst DM to ever walk the face of the earth if you allowed something like that to happen? "Your level 25 Epic Paladin charges forward toward the small goblin tribe. With a swing of your blade you easily dispatch the first one. The other goblins, however, turn and begin running toward you at full speed shouting in their strange tongue. You are certain they are calling to their dark gods and are cursing your name. You swing your blade again, killing two others effortlessly. Suddenly, however, you realize that they are surrounding you. Some of them grab your legs. You swing your blade, killing three more, but as you did so four of them grabbed your sword arm, pulling it from your hand. You begin to struggle, as they begin to grab your arms, and then suddenly, from the weight of the goblins you fall over onto your back. Yellow eyes stare back at you. It is the last thing you see as they cut your throat." How many PC's would accept that as a reality in their game? Not many. They'd demand rolls for each and every one of those goblins. They would proclaim that the goblins couldn't do X because their character's AC is Y. Thus they couldn't touch them. That is how such an encounter SHOULD play out with an epic character who simply charges forward like a madman. Yet it doesn't. Not in the novels and not in games. In 20 plus years of DMing I've done, I've done that at least 15-20 times when my PCs did something stupid, and have yet to hear a complaint about it (well, none that lasted more than a minute anyway). Usually, I brought up army ants, and even the most fearsome of predators running from a horde of them on the march, and they shut up pretty damned fast. Only had to toss a player for it once, years and years ago, and all of the other players agreed that I was right to ditch him. But I've been extremely lucky with my players from some of the horror stories I've heard around here, so that could be helping some. |
| Meldread12-08-07, 03:10 AM | Sir_Shadow- Not giving named NPC's stats would go a long way toward helping the setting I think, actually. I wholeheartedly agree. Instead they could say something like, "Elminster should always be at least five levels above your PC's." Then if the DM wants to bring Elminster into their game they can stat him out themselves, with an appropriate amount of power relative to their PC's. However, we still run into the problem of such NPC's in novels which are cannon. However, thankfully I believe 4E might actually help with the worst of it. Even so, we're still left with the PC's. I still do not like the concept of a cities militia not being able to defend itself against a group of renegade PC's, and truthfully I could not justify giving city guards an average level only slightly below the PC's. (That would be insane if the PC's were over level 20. Level 15 City guards on average? Heh, welcome to Union.) |
| msatran12-08-07, 03:12 AM | The problem is not the swarming and grapple rules. Rules as written, unless your opponents have swarmfighting and improved unarmed combat, the simple expedient of combat reflexes will be more than sufficient at levels 18+ to win most of those opposed checks vs. low level hordes. Once they see the first five or six people get cut down, people are going to be EXTREMELY reluctant to grapple you. They'll draw weapons, and then the "Kill Bill" scene starts. The real flaw in fighting hordes is something that I've used for years. It's called the 1 in 20 rule. So if 40 Orc Archers fire 80 arrows total, that's 4d8+8 damage. Sure, it only slows down the PC a little bit...right...? Plus, it speeds up combat. The problem is, in large part, that there are people who are unwilling to accept the limitations of the genre in the first place. 1) The duel. When was the last time you SAW one? 2) The BBEG who stood a real chance of winning? 3) The joust....WHAT? You've gotta be kidding, right? And that's just the tip of the iceberg. |
| Meldread12-08-07, 03:17 AM | Ah, yes I should also point out that the people who seem to have a need to defeat everything ("I need to kill Elminster / Ao / Drizzt / Lolth / Beshaba / Whatever") are more or less doing exactly what the system wants them to do. In D&D you get the bulk of your power from killing things. It is as simple as that. The more powerful things you kill, the better loot / XP you get. It is only logical, after being conditioned to think in such a way, that people will turn their eyes to bigger prizes such as Elminster / Drizzt / Mystra / Ao / Etc. A lot of people here on the forums blame it on MMORPGs, but it is really the D&D model that they use again and again. They simply have perfected it and focused it in such a way as to create a very clear and defined treadmill. However, almost all of them can draw their game system roots directly to D&D. |
| Reneshat12-08-07, 03:31 AM | -And, no, GEV, it's not chic to randomly poke fun at the presidential administration without any context. We're an educated bunch, and above such pettiness. Above such pettiness? Ha, shows how much you know. Rich Baker voted for Bush, twice. |
| msatran12-08-07, 03:36 AM | Actually, I'm an ass, but even I'm not going to discuss political views with people. :) That's just uncivilized. |
| Sir_Shadow12-08-07, 03:38 AM | Sir_Shadow- Not giving named NPC's stats would go a long way toward helping the setting I think, actually. I wholeheartedly agree. Instead they could say something like, "Elminster should always be at least five levels above your PC's." Then if the DM wants to bring Elminster into their game they can stat him out themselves, with an appropriate amount of power relative to their PC's. However, we still run into the problem of such NPC's in novels which are cannon. However, thankfully I believe 4E might actually help with the worst of it. Wouldn't get your hopes up on that. They (the 'authors') have had pretty much free reign in that regard for to long. I can see it halting for a while but by the time 5E comes along Realms will have been repeatedly hammered again and again. Even so, we're still left with the PC's. I still do not like the concept of a cities militia not being able to defend itself against a group of renegade PC's, and truthfully I could not justify giving city guards an average level only slightly below the PC's. (That would be insane if the PC's were over level 20. Level 15 City guards on average? Heh, welcome to Union.) Well there is legitimate historical reference to look to for things like this. Especially in less 'civilized' areas. Even now in some places you get a few guys with rifles walking into villages and taking over in some spots of the world so even in a real world context its possible. Have to remember that aside from Roman legions, Professional soldiers outside of wandering mercenarys are a modern construct. Militia by definition is just regular people, farmers and the like, called up as a last resort. Unskilled and barely trained if trained at all. even still there are instances you could look to for inspiration of farmers successfully beating up people and defending their homes against more skilled opponents just by using what they know. Like Terrain and things of that nature. ...like Ewoks (just came to me as a good example) The problem is not the swarming and grapple rules. Rules as written, unless your opponents have swarmfighting and improved unarmed combat, the simple expedient of combat reflexes will be more than sufficient at levels 18+ to win most of those opposed checks vs. low level hordes. Once they see the first five or six people get cut down, people are going to be EXTREMELY reluctant to grapple you. They'll draw weapons, and then the "Kill Bill" scene starts. You mean the attack one at a time thing they do in all the movies. More than likely if the first en masse charge didnt take the guy down they'd fall back and probably pepper the guy with arrows till he went down. . Besides, you'd be surprised at how easily a man in armor can be taken off his feet if you dive into his legs and then your buddies dogpile him and keep him down. Or just not even letting him get that close and just peppering him with arrows. Unarmored people can outrun people in armor usually. I like the 1 in 20 idea though, even if I would lower it to 1 in 10. People who use bows are generally very proficient with them just for the reason that when they arent killing stupid adventurers with them they're using them to hunt and all that. Even the spartans got taken out at the end by a large arrow volley. |
| Sir_Shadow12-08-07, 03:41 AM | Rich Baker voted for Bush, twice. You want to be really cruel, theres that list thats been floating around for a few years on the importance of voting, (can probably find it on snopes) about supposedly all these dictators all throughout history won their elections by one vote etc etc. If you wanted to take it that far you could intimate that the designers were that one vote. But maybe I jsut have a twisted sense of humor. I blame it on Fawlty Towers |
| Reneshat12-08-07, 03:43 AM | By the way, for those that didn't realize, I was trying to make light of the situation. The views mentioned in that post, might or might not relate in any manner to my own personal views. I'm not trying to start a political discussion here. P.S. Vote Ron Paul! |
| Mr_Miscellany12-08-07, 03:51 AM | That is how such an encounter SHOULD play out with an epic character who simply charges forward like a madman. Erm, I wouldn't agree with that. Epic characters are epic for a reason. Now, if the paladin in my Epic FR campaign charged an army of orcs all alone (say, to defend his keep in the Stonelands, or even just to attack the orcs before they got near his keep, etc...) he'd mow down lots and lots of orcs. But....eventually he'd run out of his Lay on Hands and the orcs would get smart about it. They'd use pack tactics (i.e. the Aid Another action, right out of the PHB) and pick the terrain for the next fight. They'd have their veterans (say Orc Fighter 4 or 6) lead with hit and run tactics. They'd try to disarm and trip. Then grapple. And eventually they'd succeed. Then....the paladin would be dead. Anyway, back to the thread. |
| Zanan12-08-07, 04:53 AM | I'm still utterly flabbergasted how people takes issues with 15+ level NPCs. And how WotC want to change that, since Spellplague will not result in mass genocide/homocide/high-level-NPCide amongst anyone not connected to the Weave - apparently. So many will not simply go away ... unless there is a sudden rush of powerstruggles all over the Realms and they all kill one another off. All these High-level chaps and lasses never bothered me, since my players and characters hardly ever met them, unless the DM decided to use them as contacts, patrons, or enemies ... at the appropriate time. Just having them there does not mean that they all get involved. Elminster and go don't teleport about like there is no tomorrow, unless you want to believe the Spellfire novels, which were, AFAIK, written with a bit of tongue in cheek. Powerful NPCs keep themselves in check, and if someone like a chosen of XYZ does something too critical, there are things (e.g. avatars) which tell them to stop messing too much with Realmsian affairs. The real conundrum though is that while there is that big moaning and groaning about these high-level chaps here, 4E will better that in no-time. 'Up to 30th-level more powerful than ever' - chaps might be the norm there. So what, if I may ask, will they do once Spellplague has eradicated the tough-punchers (archmages and what have you). Hunt each and every great wyrm? Subdue large realms? Will suddenly out of no-where the influx of mighty CR 25 monsters increase? Or do they just retire? Come on! This scenario is even worse for Eberron, which features pretty powerful character options (PrCs), but hardly a challenge beyond the Monster Compendium at higher levels. So what the 4E does ruleswise is pretty much opposed with what happens to the Realms. Unless you want your PCs to become kings and demigods themselves. Welcome to the world of the 13-year olds then ... |
| 'Arry12-08-07, 07:31 AM | But maybe I jsut have a twisted sense of humor. I blame it on Fawlty Towers What about Fatty Owls, or Warty Towels? :D And beware of people carrying large garden gnomes :eek: |
| MerrikCale12-08-07, 09:35 AM | -That gives him a total of 0 Forgotten Realms pieces credited to him, specifically. That seems about right |
| Lord Karsus12-08-07, 10:01 AM | Above such pettiness? Ha, shows how much you know. -Erm...Most of us are above such pettiness? There. Most is a catch-all that's ambiguous enough to work. |
| Jarred_Garrison12-08-07, 12:09 PM | Disappointing. Very disappointing. Between this, and the whole "merging of human deities and non-human deities" that Rich Baker has been hinting at in the "Ask the designers" thread, I am on the brink of not even giving the 4th ed. Forgotten Eberr... er... Forgotten Realms a chance. |
| msatran12-08-07, 02:56 PM | In the immortal words of Marvel Comic's Mighty Thor... Villain!!!! Thou hast done ENOUGH! I say thee NAY! (If only I had the power to make it rain and storm on Wizards every da...oh, wait. Corporate headquarters is in Seattle. NO WONDER!!!!) |
| Lord Karsus12-08-07, 03:22 PM | In the immortal words of Marvel Comic's Mighty Thor... Villain!!!! Thou hast done ENOUGH! I say thee NAY! -Translation: RICH BAKER MUST BE STOPPED!!! :D |
| 18DELTA12-08-07, 03:35 PM | :rofl: :bow: |
| Faraer12-08-07, 04:07 PM | Elminster and go don't teleport about like there is no tomorrow, unless you want to believe the Spellfire novels, which were, AFAIK, written with a bit of tongue in cheek.Well, they depict an unusual situation in which Elminster is trying to protect (without effectively imprisoning) a being of great potential importance and danger to the Realms, and of great matter to the power he serves (the only bearer of spellfire, it's thought, in her generation). And in those novels he does it mainly by... sending others, as is established elsewhere. But Elminster and some other archmages do use translocation magic quite a bit, just often incognito, and rarely to open up with blasting spells. |
| msatran12-08-07, 06:20 PM | Yeah. I had Elminster show up once when some jackass said his name 300 times in two minutes, and he was just thinking "Someone really needs to learn respect for their elders." |
| Kenzuki12-08-07, 06:47 PM | I've always wanted to kill off Elminster just for spite.....:D |
| Zanan12-08-07, 07:16 PM | Well, they depict an unusual situation in which Elminster is trying to protect (without effectively imprisoning) a being of great potential importance and danger to the Realms, and of great matter to the power he serves (the only bearer of spellfire, it's thought, in her generation). And in those novels he does it mainly by... sending others, as is established elsewhere. But Elminster and some other archmages do use translocation magic quite a bit, just often incognito, and rarely to open up with blasting spells. What might have put people off was the way the Chosen "handled" the Shade return. when they single-handedly messed about with dragons and that whole city. Sure, such kind of lavish use of the "good" big guns by the author pushed quite a few over the edge ... but it is simply not the case that this is the FR norm. At least from what I gather from those umpteen sourcebooks I own. (And we all know that authors tend to do it their way - which is not always the FR-in-setting way.) Still wondering what will happen to the non-arcane spellcasting high level folk. |
| msatran12-08-07, 07:33 PM | But they didn't HANDLE anything. Otherwise, the city would be GONE, and it's NOT. Apparently, the Chosen are actually ineffectual. |
| Fingoldfin12-08-07, 09:49 PM | But they didn't HANDLE anything. Otherwise, the city would be GONE, and it's NOT. Apparently, the Chosen are actually ineffectual. There you go again trying to use logic and reason to get people to admit the chosen aren't all-powerful. Haven't you noticed logic and reason have no place in this argument... duh. :rolleyes: :P |
| MarkusTay6312-08-07, 11:45 PM | Still wondering what will happen to the non-arcane spellcasting high level folk.My best guess? Most of THEM will be killed off trying to protect 'innocents' from the high-levs that go nuts. I expect we will be reading about many a great and glorious 'heroic' death on the part of many FR NPCs in the next year, in novels and in source. It's gonna be a regular "Khelbenfest". :rolleyes: BTW, thats a new piece of terminology for our FR dictionaries. :D |
| DreamStalker12-09-07, 01:25 AM | On the topic of sales. I don't know if WotC posts their overall sales so I cannot look there. However Amazon tracks sales. Lets see. Keep in mind these are current figures, not totals. Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting- #38,304 in books. 6 years old. Eberron Campaign Setting- #65,476 in books. 3 years old. Anauroch, Empire of Shade- #25,653 in books. #67 in Roleplaying and Fantasy. FR's most recent book. Dragons of Eberron- #31,515 in Books sales. #88 in Roleplaying and Fantasy. Eberron's most recent book. Forgotten Realms Campaign (2ED Box set)- #716,892 in books. 14 years old. Faiths and Avatars- #491,530 in books. 11 years old. 2ED DND. Faiths and Pantheons- #418,779 in books. 5 years old. 3rd DND. So each of us can interpet this differently. Myself, I see that FR is being bought into at this moment by more people than Eberron. More people are keeping up to date on FR than Eberron. Even after over a decade 2ed FR is relevant in sales. In fact, there are 2ed FR books that are twice as old as 3ed FR books covering the same subject that are in the same league of sales. So unless I see sales figures from WotC that paint a different story (or some other reputable source as Amazon isn't the best source, but it is a fairly reputable one) I do not see "FR is broken because it is losing sales" holding much water when the "better selling" campaign is seemingly (from the info I can find) selling worse... I think lagging sales in FR are in reference to specific poorly constructed books. Truthfully I am not too familiar with Eberron, but I have not picked up and looked at a sourcebook and thought "this was poorly done." I have thought that with a few 3ed FR books. It may look different if see how much money is put into FR currently versus total sales figures of all books and comparing the same to Eberron. It is quite possible that Eberron is selling better without selling more. |
| Lord Karsus12-09-07, 09:41 AM | -That's some nice sleuthin'. |
| Fingoldfin12-09-07, 11:28 AM | -That's some nice sleuthin'. Indeed. Good Job. :detect: |
| dimonic12-09-07, 03:52 PM | Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting- #38,304 in books. 6 years old. Faiths and Pantheons- #418,779 in books. 5 years old. 3rd DND. This alone tells me that this data is not terribly useful - who the heck would buy Faiths and Pantheons without first owning FRCS? So most of the purchasers of F&P probably bought their FRCS somewhere else. What would be useful would be recent sales trends, rather than total sales over arbitrary, variously overlapping periods. |
| Dark Wizard12-09-07, 04:41 PM | This alone tells me that this data is not terribly useful - who the heck would buy Faiths and Pantheons without first owning FRCS? So most of the purchasers of F&P probably bought their FRCS somewhere else. What makes you think that people who brought F&P from Amazon didn't buy the FRCS from Amazon? Note the Sales # is not the actual number of books sold, but the relative rank amongst all the books Amazon sells. So it the number between the FRCS and F&P shows that more people purchased the FRCS from Amazon than F&P. What would be useful would be recent sales trends, rather than total sales over arbitrary, variously overlapping periods. I do agree with this however, Amazon is a useful source but far from complete or totally accurate. Also, I feel WotC really shouldn't only consider changes to the Realms in accordance to the recent performance of the product line. Even they admitted the most recent books were more of an experimentation in format [Regional Adventures (Mysteries of the Moonsea), a Mega-adventure trilogy (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anauroch), themed books (Dragons of Faerun, Power of Faerun) vs. regional books (City of Splendors: Waterdeep)]. At least I hope they aren't looking at just that. |
| dimonic12-09-07, 04:54 PM | What makes you think that people who brought F&P from Amazon didn't buy the FRCS from Amazon? Note the Sales # is not the actual number of books sold, but the relative rank amongst all the books Amazon sells. So it the number between the FRCS and F&P shows that more people purchased the FRCS from Amazon than F&P. Ah, rankings, not books sold. I misread the data. So really, these numbers are pretty hard to make any sense of at all, especially the older edition sales. I feel WotC really shouldn't only consider changes to the Realms in accordance to the recent performance of the product line. Even they admitted the most recent books were more of an experimentation in format [Regional Adventures (Mysteries of the Moonsea), a Mega-adventure trilogy (Cormyr, Shadowdale, Anauroch), themed books (Dragons of Faerun, Power of Faerun) vs. regional books (City of Splendors: Waterdeep)]. At least I hope they aren't looking at just that. But I think that this is the real problem - they have run out of less "experimental" format books, and so have had to get creative to develop new books, and over time, this problem would only get worse. |
| Dark Wizard12-09-07, 05:41 PM | Ah, rankings, not books sold. I misread the data. So really, these numbers are pretty hard to make any sense of at all, especially the older edition sales. No, it does show that even some older edition material is actively traded in the market. The ranks do give a rough idea, which is useful, but shouldn't be taken as authoritative of the whole. But I think that this is the real problem - they have run out of less "experimental" format books, and so have had to get creative to develop new books, and over time, this problem would only get worse. Again, just like the many implications about WotC, we cannot assume that just because they chose to publish different formats for FR means the setting ran out of sales viable material in more traditional formats. As much as I'm personally apathetic towards their adventure releases (and think they could have tried a more balanced approach at the last two years of 3e/3.5e FR), I understand that figuring out what formats sell is part of their job. Besides, WotC is rather contradictory in their statements between staffers. One of the D&DI editors questioned whether the lack of FR adventures submitted to Dungeon meant that FR had most of its stories already told at the same time that the Mega-Adventure trilogy was still coming out and recently Chris Perkins said the Realms was a setting of a thousand or a million stories. So I don't think all of the designers are on the same page. I think those designers on the right page should try to find ways to get the other designers and players to turn to the right page rather than rewrite their pages to fit those on the wrong page, but that's just my opinion. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-09-07, 07:17 PM | My best guess? Most of THEM will be killed off trying to protect 'innocents' from the high-levs that go nuts. I expect we will be reading about many a great and glorious 'heroic' death on the part of many FR NPCs in the next year, in novels and in source. It's gonna be a regular "Khelbenfest". :rolleyes: I can see it all right now.:pbbbtt: :rolleyes: |
| DreamStalker12-09-07, 08:04 PM | Sorry I wasn't clear. These are current sales rankings as opposed to total book sales. Also I agree that this isn't an authoritative look at the issue, but it does show at least a trend among one of the major markets (Amazon.com). Through Amazon.com, Forgotten Realms outsells Eberron. Second Edition Forgotten Realms products over a decade old still have a viable sales figure. I think comparing past edition products to current edition products is useful in seeing if there appears to be an improvement in popularity or a decrease. Mostly I was just trying to show with what is publically available that FR in general isn't selling poorly as that seems to be a common claim as proof for the need of fixing "problems." White Wolf as been caught making similar claims before, saying that a book sold "poorly" yet the book sold out. A small limited print run equals poor sales totals. Also the poor sales claim doesn't appear to be WotC's official stance, more of an assumption brought up by peripheral and fan based arguements. Certain FR books are selling poorly. They tend to be sourcebooks that many here have complained about regularly. On the other hand, the super adventures seem to be selling fairly well even though those have been complained about here quite often as well. More in the focus than the quality however. I think the lesson here is that quality seems to trump format. Make quality books over multiple formats and sales will stay strong. Make some quality and some poor books over multiple formats, the quality will sell the poor will lag. Again, my opinions others may interpet differently. |
| MerrikCale12-09-07, 08:54 PM | -That's some nice sleuthin'. Agreed. Though I think we all know FR sells better than Eberron. Aren't there more FR hits on these boards? |
| Dark Wizard12-09-07, 10:16 PM | Another thing to look at might be a narrower ranking within amazon specifically for D&D products. There is a link to it for most of the D&D related books, under where it lists the books' overall ranking amongst books sold at Amazon in general. ***Going into this knowing it all probably means nothing since some of the narrower rankings don't consider all books in the category.*** As if the writing of this post on the main D&D ranking (Top 100) Books > Science Fiction & Fantasy > Gaming > Dungeons & Dragons http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/16215/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_b_2_4_last In the Top 100 there are 6 FR sourcebooks, 6 Eberron sourcebooks, and 1 Dragonlance sourcebooks. FR sanwiches Eberron with some good sellers early on and some to close out the Top 100. The Dragonlance CS makes its sole game book appearance in the middle. Otherwise, the other items on the list are mostly DL novels (with Weis and Hickman on original trilogy characters dominating), FR novels (mostly Salvatore with Drizzt and some Cadderly, some of Greenwood's Elminster and a bit of Elaine Cunningham's stuff) and Core D&D supplements (Rules and Item compendiums, Core Rules, Monster manuals, Completes/class, etc). The general sub-category removes the novel from the ranking for the most part: Books > Science Fiction & Fantasy > Gaming > Dungeons & Dragons > General http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/468172/ref=pd_ts_b_nav #18 - Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3e [FR] #30 - Dragonlance Campaign Setting 3e [DL] #33 - Lost Empires of Faerun [FR] #34 - Secrets of Xen'drik [Eb] #37 - City of Splendors: Waterdeep [FR] #43 - Secrets of Sarlona [Eb] #54 - Player's Guide to Eberron [Eb] #55 - Explorer's Handbook [Eb] #56 - Voyager of the Golden Dragon [Eb] #65 - Races of Eberron [Eb] #71 - Dragons of Faerun [FR] #77 - Power of Faerun [FR] #79 - Freeport - Tales of Freeport [Freeport, third party setting] #80 - Champions of Ruin [FR] #81 - Tasselhoff's Map Pouch - Age of Mortals [DL] #86 - Grasp of the Emerald Claw [Eb] #89 - Volo's Guide to All Things Magical [FR] #90 - Corsairs of the Great Sea [Al-Qadim] #91 - Dragonlance Tasselhoffs War of the Lance [DL, maps] #92 - Golden Voyages [Al-Qadim] #95 - Warcraft RPG [Warcraft] #96 - Five Nations [Eb] In the Top 100, 7 books for FR (not counting Al-Qadim), 8 for Eberron, 3 Dragonlance, 2 Al-Qadim, 1 for Freeport, a third party setting supplement Again, these ranking lists are far from substantial let alone comprehensive. For instance on a broader ranking list: Books -> SciFi & Fantasy -> Gaming (which includes more non-D&D gaming books, such as third party books and even video game strategy guides) http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/16211/ref=pd_zg_hrsr_b_2_3_last (Picking out some Core and other setting stuff for comparison. This rank list seems more "recent") #5 - Star Wars RPG Core Rulebook, SAGA edition [Star Wars] #6 - Rules Compendium [3.5e Core] #7 - Core Rules, 3 book set [3.5e Core] #8 - Magic Item Compendium [3.5e Core] #14 - Players Handbook 3.5e [3.5e Core] #15 - Grand History of the Realms [FR] #16 - Wizards Presents: Classes and Races [4E Preview book] #18 - Star Wars: Ships of the Galaxy [SW] #32 - Anauroch: The Empire of Shade [FR] #35 - Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk [GH] #51 - FRCS 3e [FR] #66 - Eberron CS [Eb] #75 - Dragons of Eberron [Eb] #77 - The World of Darkness [WoD, though other supplements were higher on list] #80 - Shadowdale: The Scouring of the Land [FR] #97 - Dragonlance CS [DL] I'm sure someone can find a rank list that favors one setting compared to another a bit somewhere on the site. So again, this probably means nothing, but still interesting to look through. Ultimately to WotC, the only sales that really matter are the total book sales for the company. |
| Gannis12-09-07, 11:38 PM | i know everyone on this thread seems to be dissenting the new FR in 4thE, but change is the only constant, so FR had to change at some point, i am perfectly fine with killing off all those good epic NPC's. mystra had to many anyway, it will be kidna fun to play in a FR that is becoming a little darker and more dangerous to live in. i do however see how the dumbing down on the FR info can be very pernicious to the game. |
| Alediran12-10-07, 08:09 AM | i know everyone on this thread seems to be dissenting the new FR in 4thE, but change is the only constant, so FR had to change at some point, i am perfectly fine with killing off all those good epic NPC's. mystra had to many anyway, it will be kidna fun to play in a FR that is becoming a little darker and more dangerous to live in. It won't be, FR has it's specific flavour, which is a perfect balance of forces. If I wanted darker and more dangerous I would play WoD. |
| DreamStalker12-10-07, 10:52 AM | One of the main issues for me of removing all of the high end good aligned NPCs is that I have played about 50/50 good to evil games in the Forgotten Realms. Now the good guys are not always the antagonists in these evil games, such as an Undedark drow game I had going for about a year and a half that featured mostly other drow as antagonists. However when the party consists largely of Sharrans, it is nice to have some powerful Mystrans and Selunites to thwart with great difficulty. In an urban campaign where the characters were a mercenary company committing crimes in Waterdeep, the lack of a threat by the higher level npcs would have cheapened the experience. Not that I cannot do something similar in a homebrew or another campaign. However FR has a well balanced and extremely varied set of Heroes, Villians, Organizations, goals, challenges, gods, locations ect to do games based on any slide of the alignment spectrum and feel like you are dealing with a complete and living world. Not that I do not enjoy a game where Evil is largely in control or triumphant. There are sections of Faerun that fit that. And there are complete campaigns out there like that. It is not like it is a niche that needs filled by forcing FR to fit a new mold in seemingly (final judgement is still out until the finished product is in front of me) unfitting ways. |
| Lord Karsus12-10-07, 10:56 AM | Agreed. Though I think we all know FR sells better than Eberron. Aren't there more FR hits on these boards? -At least on our side, we don't really have a "feud" with Eberron anymore. We need to devote our time to "protecting" our setting, not worrying about someone elses. |
| MatteBlack12-10-07, 11:36 AM | One of the main issues for me of removing all of the high end good aligned NPCs is that I have played about 50/50 good to evil games in the Forgotten Realms. Now the good guys are not always the antagonists in these evil games, such as an Undedark drow game I had going for about a year and a half that featured mostly other drow as antagonists. However when the party consists largely of Sharrans, it is nice to have some powerful Mystrans and Selunites to thwart with great difficulty. In an urban campaign where the characters were a mercenary company committing crimes in Waterdeep, the lack of a threat by the higher level npcs would have cheapened the experience. Not that I cannot do something similar in a homebrew or another campaign. However FR has a well balanced and extremely varied set of Heroes, Villians, Organizations, goals, challenges, gods, locations ect to do games based on any slide of the alignment spectrum and feel like you are dealing with a complete and living world. Not that I do not enjoy a game where Evil is largely in control or triumphant. There are sections of Faerun that fit that. And there are complete campaigns out there like that. It is not like it is a niche that needs filled by forcing FR to fit a new mold in seemingly (final judgement is still out until the finished product is in front of me) unfitting ways. As FR used to be more of an unexplored frontier than it is now and Ebberon has sort of picked up theat mantle, I like seeing the Realms take the role of the lands in need of saving from the forces of darkness. I suppose that would be the influence of LotR at work. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-10-07, 11:50 AM | As FR used to be more of an unexplored frontier than it is now... I'm against the setting being "too filled in" the way plenty of other people are, but it really isn't that hard to find "unexplored frontiers" in the Realms if you take the time to look. I'm thinking of the Shaar, the Western Heartlands, the Border Kingdoms (the southern lands in general), among other places. They aren't many sources on those places...but what you want is frontier, isn't that precisely the way it should be? |
| Rauric12-10-07, 11:59 AM | Agreed. Though I think we all know FR sells better than Eberron. Aren't there more FR hits on these boards? So why are they making FR a bit more like Eberron? |
| Alediran12-10-07, 12:09 PM | So why are they making FR a bit more like Eberron? Because the 4ed FR designers come from Eberron. |
| Rauric12-10-07, 12:25 PM | Because the 4ed FR designers come from Eberron. Why is that though? |
| MerrikCale12-10-07, 01:04 PM | So why are they making FR a bit more like Eberron? because they don't know what they're doing |
| Rauric12-10-07, 02:11 PM | I was thinking more like one campaign may be doing better than the other. Maybe EB is doing better than FR recently so they want to use some of what worked for EB in FR. I am not saying it is right or you have to like it, I am just saying it may be a reason for what they are doing. |
| Lord Karsus12-10-07, 02:35 PM | I was thinking more like one campaign may be doing better than the other. Maybe EB is doing better than FR recently so they want to use some of what worked for EB in FR. I am not saying it is right or you have to like it, I am just saying it may be a reason for what they are doing. -Sales data (from Amazon.com, at least), doesn't really show that trend, though. |
| Stigger12-10-07, 05:13 PM | Perceptions form the truth of many situations far more than objective fact does... people are very good at deluding themselves, finding figures to support their points of view, while ignoring ones that don't. That's just human nature as best I can tell, and certainly not limited to WotC. |
| MatteBlack12-10-07, 06:01 PM | So why are they making FR a bit more like Eberron? My personal opinion is that Ebberon is abit more nurturing of fun gaming and adventuring in it. Where the Realms have deeper more interesting story, they don't make for as good of a D&D playground. I'd much rather hear a tale of the Realms and play D&D in Ebberon. Massaging FR with an eye toward Ebberon's strengths, I expect to be great. |
| Stigger12-10-07, 06:48 PM | Couldn't stand Eberron to be honest... just didn't care for it thematically or lorewise. Which is not to say that others haven't found merit with it, as they certainly have. I don't want what I thought to be a lacklustre setting sneak its way into the setting I prefer. And I'm fairly sure that Eberron fans would probably feel the same way about stuff from the Realms creeping into their setting. I don't see why it would be such a horrible thing to maintain the two as very thematically different settings, rather than trying to homogenize everything with some PoL notion that certainly won't appeal to everyone. |
| Dark Wizard12-10-07, 06:52 PM | Perceptions form the truth of many situations far more than objective fact does... people are very good at deluding themselves, finding figures to support their points of view, while ignoring ones that don't. That's just human nature as best I can tell, and certainly not limited to WotC. Very true. I don't feel WotC is ignorant of this concept, in fact I think they know about it and are using it. Most of the changes are aimed at making FR fit into the perception of the potential audience that doesn't play in the Realms. They might just feel that hard solid, immutable, criticism stopping fact (in regards to the arguments of the typical anti-Realms viewpoint) is needed to solidify FR's place in their line-up (changes probably taken so far it may push towards the opposite end of the spectrum (imo), but we'll see). While the minuscule sales rankings we can dig up shows FR and Eberron don't have much of a difference. That doesn't matter because 1) Amazon is just a small sales sample, and more importantly 2) We don't know what sort of sales figures WotC *expects* from both FR and Eberron. Though I think they might be expecting too much. FR has it's bad moments and then some really bad moments. It's easier to get something more consistent from a single story in a comic, anime, movie, etc. even if overall the story is just average. That's the cost of a shared world. In terms of blatant 'coolness,' visual eye candy and the like, FR and D&D in general has a long way to go before it reaches the output of even mediocre examples of other entertainment media. My personal opinion is that Ebberon is abit more nurturing of fun gaming and adventuring in it. Where the Realms have deeper more interesting story, they don't make for as good of a D&D playground. I'd much rather hear a tale of the Realms and play D&D in Ebberon. Massaging FR with an eye toward Ebberon's strengths, I expect to be great. Taking an Eberron approach to some of FR isn't a bad idea. However, I'll feel better about it if they actually took the good techniques from the setting rather than just a smattering of minor things that seemed like they would work. - Eberron has no on-going metaplot. FR has a metaplot the size of Cyric's ego. - Eberron's epic bad guys are all locked up by ancient magics and supernatural prisons. FR doesn't (except for poor Cyric, but how long is that going to last?) and now there are fewer people around who can hold them off. - Eberron's gods are more hands off. FR's gods, while being reduced in number for 4E, have yet to give indication that its anything but business as usual. While the meddling of the FR deities is a bit overblown over the years, nothing about 4E has changed that perception, which as discussed before is one of the most important things. - Eberron spends many pages on bluntly stating its inspirations and tone/atmosphere. We'll see about FR. So far a few designers have given different "What is the Realms?" answers. None of them are really excludes the others' answers, but none of them seem to really peg enough of the setting down or present a clear statement. I'm not sure if they are unwilling or unable to really define the setting. Possibly for fear of cutting down the scope which they sold in previous editions as a positive. Well, I think they spent enough time cutting out many of the other pieces of the setting trying to figure that out. I think they captured the superficial aspects of what makes Eberron seem to more playable setting but none of the actual setting design techniques yet. |
| Lord Karsus12-10-07, 07:28 PM | So far a few designers have given different "What is the Realms?" answers. None of them are really excludes the others' answers, but none of them seem to really peg enough of the setting down or present a clear statement. -The Realms are the Realms. |
| Straploknight12-10-07, 08:07 PM | because they don't know what they're doing Reimagining the setting to suit thier style would probably be a more apt description. |
| MerrikCale12-10-07, 08:55 PM | -Sales data (from Amazon.com, at least), doesn't really show that trend, though. and neither does the activity on these Boards |
| Lord Karsus12-10-07, 09:20 PM | and neither does the activity on these Boards -Well, that just demonstrates that there are less Eberron nerds who actually took the time to register on these boards, and participate in a regular and semi-meaningful way than there are on the Forgotten Realms boards. Or, is it the other way? |
| Dark Wizard12-10-07, 11:43 PM | -The Realms are the Realms. Which says a lot to fans of the setting but next to nothing to those new to the setting. The designers don't need an excuse to toss Realms books into the trash bin so new players will not feel daunted by the setting. They need to organize the Realms in filing cabinets or labeled bookshelves with easy-to-use directories so the details of the setting can enrich the play experience rather than inhibit. |
| MarkusTay6312-10-07, 11:57 PM | But that would be WORK... something that people who are being paid usually do... Throwing things away is always easier then cleaning them up. At least, thats what lazy people tell me. :rolleyes: |
| Zanan12-11-07, 04:15 AM | and neither does the activity on these Boards Aye ... yet, these are the official boards and I don't think that it is home only to nerds and hardcore folk. Designers may disregard the input on here and mark it down as just a fraction of the actual gamers. But maybe these people on here are just the tip of the iceberg as well ... |
| Stigger12-11-07, 04:58 AM | Hard to say either way. It all depends on who you ask, where you ask, what you ask, and most importantly how you ask. Question structure can definitely influence the results, slanting the answers towards the result the asker wants, if done correctly. One could conceivably ask who everyone's least favorite character is, for example out of Drizzt, Erevis Cale, Artemis Entreri, Wulfgar, or Sylune... if Sylune ends up as the least favorite, simply because a lot of people have no idea who she is, its very easy to make the statement that everyone hates the Chosen and the Seven Sisters, but that's really only within a relatively narrow field of choice. Now I'm not saying that WotC has done anything like that, I have no idea either way, but its not exactly an uncommon tactic with those who take polls and formulate the questions for them. More raising a point that not all methods of market research are going to be entirely reliable, WotC or not. |
| msatran12-11-07, 06:06 AM | My favorite Realms character? My absolute favorite? Wow. That's a tough one. I'm actually a fan of Durnan and Mirt. |
| Alediran12-11-07, 07:49 AM | My favorite Realms character? My absolute favorite? Wow. That's a tough one. I agree, it's the beauty of the realms. You never get just one good taste, you get dozens. |
| Kenzuki12-11-07, 08:05 AM | Another point to add. Eberron's novels are not canon. |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 09:03 AM | Which says a lot to fans of the setting but next to nothing to those new to the setting. -To play D&D, a person is going to come with the expectation of playing in some kind of magical, pseudomedieval world, unless otherwise noted. A magical, pseudomedieval world is what the Realms is, only with it's own unique spin on it all. Thus, the Realms are the Realms. |
| Lord Toast12-11-07, 09:07 AM | Another point to add. Eberron's novels are not canon. Sad isn't it? To me there is nothing worse than a static game world. |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 09:12 AM | Sad isn't it? To me there is nothing worse than a static game world. -Agreed. I'd fight (if I had to, theoretically) to keep Realms novels canon. |
| Fire_Wraith12-11-07, 09:23 AM | I don't mind the events from the novels being canon, at least to a general degree. I do wish the pace of Realms Shaking/Shattering stuff would slow down a great deal, though. I've also gotten the impression lately that the designers are blaming specific problems of the Realms on things like high-level NPCs, when a lot of this seems to myself to be either caused by or exacerbated by the novels themselves. |
| Alediran12-11-07, 09:23 AM | -Agreed. I'd fight (if I had to, theoretically) to keep Realms novels canon. Yes, and we would also fight to return the Realms novels to quality pieces like Lost Library of Cormanthor and the Nether Scroll (loved both books, they reveal the flavor of the realms more than any RSE). In the last it was awesome to read when the Wizard guy (don't remember his name) read one line of the Nether Scroll and his knowledge about magic went beyond the limit of mere magicians to the peaks of true Spellcraft. |
| Stigger12-11-07, 09:28 AM | Funny, I'd fight to remove them from canon myself... well, not really fight per se, but I'd be pretty damned happy about it if they were. |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 09:31 AM | I do wish the pace of Realms Shaking/Shattering stuff would slow down a great deal, though. -Agreed. Yes, and we would also fight to return the Realms novels to quality pieces like Lost Library of Cormanthor and the Nether Scroll (loved both books, they reveal the flavor of the realms more than any RSE). In the last it was awesome to read when the Wizard guy (don't remember his name) read one line of the Nether Scroll and his knowledge about magic went beyond the limit of mere magicians to the peaks of true Spellcraft. -Funny, I didn't really like either novel. But, I know what you mean. Things need to be a little downsized in scale. |
| Alediran12-11-07, 09:35 AM | -Funny, I didn't really like either novel. But, I know what you mean. Things need to be a little downsized in scale. Both novels gave me the feeling of adventure and the thrill of discovery. They may not be the greatest masterpieces, but while I read them I felt I was part of that story in a way most recent novels couldn't give me. |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 09:37 AM | Both novels gave me the feeling of adventure and the thrill of discovery. They may not be the greatest masterpieces, but while I read them I felt I was part of that story in a way most recent novels couldn't give me. -Star of Cursrah, FTW. -My favorite Realms novel, asides for Evermeet: Island of the Elves. |
| Alediran12-11-07, 09:46 AM | -Star of Cursrah, FTW. -My favorite Realms novel, asides for Evermeet: Island of the Elves. I have it among my unread pile, guess I'll read it when I have time. Yesterday after work I continued my work on the FR website I'm developing. As soon as I end the core functionality (User Sessions, Forum/Wiki-like/Weblog functions) I can begin to make the design (the part I'm not so good at). One of the first pieces of the enciclopaedya will be the Elven Netbook, the first sourcebook for the site (I expect to have other kinds of sourcebooks like it on this web) |
| Alrunic Silverfyre12-11-07, 10:22 AM | Speculation speculation speculation speculation Eberron sucks speculation speculation speculation Random NPCs confirmed dead speculation speculation NPCS are NOT dead speculation speculation speculation. It really boils down to that, doesn't it? Until August of next year, we will have NOTHING solid to fall back on for our arguments, aside from some podcast or bit of posting from the designers. Until I have my hands on the book, I'll save my *****ing and moaning, even though I have already done my fair share. I own Grand History of the Realms, I was allowed my two months worth of moaning. I'm going with Ed on this one: Give it a chance and wait and see. I love the Realms for what it is right now and I don't want it to change...too much. There does need to be some changes but let's not re-write the setting here. Maybe I have too much faith in Mr. Greenwood, but I think his guiding hand might help here. If it doesn't, then please, lash me to a pole and rip my optimism from me. I'll deserve it then. If it sucks, then we have something to ***** about. Majorly. Otherwise, it's all heresy right now. |
| Rauric12-11-07, 10:45 AM | Alrunic is right on the money. This is what happens online though, tons of melodrama and complaining. Not just on these boards but ALL boards on every subject imaginable. I bought but could never get into Lost Library of Cormanthor and Nether Scrolls. Boring characters killed it for me. I skipped to the end of each to see if anything interesting happened. Nothing. There was a recent novel called Ghostwalker which was about a town close to Silverymoon but ripe with corruption and POL goodness. Small story but an ok one. The Finders Stone Trilogy is my all time favorite. Plus the quasi-Planscape one by Grubb about Finders 1st cleric. On a side note I was not a fan of EB since it came out. Then the only D&D group I could play with was running an EB game. I wanted to roleplay bad enough so I joined. I like the setting. I like that the novels are non-canon and It does what I was doign with the Realms, making it morally ambiguous. My Moonstars were alot darker than the Harpers. My npcs made tough decisions for the good of the town/city/nation. This is what EB does as well. Anyway I will run both FR and EB down the road, plus I will play in both whenever I get the chance. As long as the players and DM are good and the game is fun I really don't care what setting it is in. That may be what the designers are trying to do perhaps. |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 10:45 AM | Until August of next year, we will have NOTHING solid to fall back on for our arguments, aside from some podcast or bit of posting from the designers. -I would think that's a bit more than "NOTHING". |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-11-07, 11:06 AM | -I would think that's a bit more than "NOTHING". Especially considering that Rich Baker has stated that the FR design team will not be backpedaling on the facts set down in the GHotR. The Grand History is canon, and is beyond "speculation" at this point. |
| Fire_Wraith12-11-07, 11:46 AM | I enjoyed Star of Cursrah, as well as a number of the others mentioned. A lot of the books in the recent series such as the Wizards, the Priests, the Dungeons, etc, all really did seem to do an interesting job of showing what various parts of the Realms were like. I'd definitely recommend Stardeep, for instance. It dealt with momentous events, yet is not something that need force anyone's campaign to make any changes, unless you are playing in that very narrow area of the Realms, and even then, it will likely help you much more than it causes problems. Spoiler: For instance, it explains why the Nilshai have been specifically invading the realm of the Star Elves. I didn't like the Fighters series as much, mostly because they all seemed to end badly for the main character(s). I don't mind the occasional tragic ending, but I hate when it becomes the expected result. Given that none of the other classes' novels seem to have that trend, it makes me wonder if WotC just hates Fighters. :P Regardless though, these books all do a pretty good job of illustrating the Realms, adding interesting personalities (for instance, I like how Bruce Cordell has characters that cross over between otherwise unrelated books, thus creating a larger character arc between what would otherwise be standalone novels). Most of all, though, they accomplish this without massive, earth-shattering changes to the entire world. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-11-07, 01:30 PM | I didn't like the Fighters series as much, mostly because they all seemed to end badly for the main character(s). I don't mind the occasional tragic ending, but I hate when it becomes the expected result. Given that none of the other classes' novels seem to have that trend, it makes me wonder if WotC just hates Fighters. :P Well, I didn't think Son of Thunder had a tragic ending for the protagonist.:) |
| Alrunic Silverfyre12-11-07, 01:31 PM | I would think that's a bit more than "NOTHING". Well true. Perhaps my words were a little too harsh. It's still not much, though. I'm the kind of person who wants to see it all in writing first (in a published supplement and/or novel) before I really give it validity. That really only applies to this kind of stuff though. Especially considering that Rich Baker has stated that the FR design team will not be backpedaling on the facts set down in the GHotR. The Grand History is canon, and is beyond "speculation" at this point. Yeah, I was only vaguely familiar with that and well, it does scare the crap out of me. You are more than right there. I just think that there might still be a slight chance of hope here for the setting to please the majority of what has been called "true Realms fans", although I find the term and its definition to be highly subjective. We're all just throwing around opinions here anyways but I love the Realms as much as the rest of you. I just want something more concrete before I throw up my hands and declare the Realms dead and gone. But if the day does come, I'll be right there with you. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-11-07, 01:39 PM | Yeah, I was only vaguely familiar with that and well, it does scare the crap out of me. You are more than right there. I just think that there might still be a slight chance of hope here for the setting to please the majority of what has been called "true Realms fans", although I find the term and its definition to be highly subjective. No doubt! We're all just throwing around opinions here anyways but I love the Realms as much as the rest of you. I just want something more concrete before I throw up my hands and declare the Realms dead and gone. But if the day does come, I'll be right there with you. Just for the record, I personally haven't made any such declaration.:) I have declared that I most likely will not be using the 4E Realms setting, but I might like some of the ideas in it (for example, what Ed writes) and my decision that the 4E Realms isn't for me certainly doesn't affect anyone else. |
| Alrunic Silverfyre12-11-07, 01:48 PM | Just for the record, I personally haven't made any such declaration.:) I have declared that I most likely will not be using the 4E Realms setting, but I might like some of the ideas in it (for example, what Ed writes) and my decision that the 4E Realms isn't for me certainly doesn't affect anyone else. Yeah, same here. My own on-going game has been active and running since early 2000 and is based in Cormyr. Same players, same characters (plus or minus a couple dozen), and same setting. We run the gamet of Realms' fan "stereotypes": the casual lover of the Realms, the hardcore lore master (myself), the specialist of our "home region", and the like. We will be staying 3.5 for now, since most of the group (sans my wife) are old 2E players who were groaning when we switched to 3.0/3.5 and are now all set in our ways. We play with some house-ruled stuff but the system is predominantly 3.5 and it works for us. We will probably take some ideas that we like from the new version of the Realms as well as 4E (the skills look like they will work better) but it was pretty much ruled out by us all that most of the events in "A Grand History of the Realms" were just too "special" for us to really want to impliment. At least those last few pages... |
| Fire_Wraith12-11-07, 01:58 PM | Well, I didn't think Son of Thunder had a tragic ending for the protagonist.:) I don't believe I read that one. After the first three, I decided I mostly wasn't interested in the fourth, but I may well have been wrong. Overall though, this was merely my personal impression, and just a side note to the overall point. :) |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 02:00 PM | I don't believe I read that one. -That was probably the best one in the series. |
| Fire_Wraith12-11-07, 02:12 PM | That would just figure... Once, twice, three times, alright, forget this, I'm not bothering with what turns out to be the best one. ;) |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-11-07, 04:12 PM | I don't believe I read that one. After the first three, I decided I mostly wasn't interested in the fourth, but I may well have been wrong. Overall though, this was merely my personal impression, and just a side note to the overall point. :) Understood, but like LK said it was a pretty good book! I'd recommend it. |
| Stigger12-11-07, 04:44 PM | If it sucks, then we have something to ***** about. Majorly. Otherwise, it's all heresy right now. We're all a bunch of heretics now? Cool... gives me a lot of excuses to start doing very questionable things... :P :D |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 05:42 PM | We're all a bunch of heretics now? Cool... gives me a lot of excuses to start doing very questionable things... :P :D -Behave, Stig. Any one of those questionable things could catch up to haunt you. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-11-07, 06:53 PM | We're all a bunch of heretics now? Cool... gives me a lot of excuses to start doing very questionable things... :P :D Like anthropophagy.:) |
| Scathlock12-11-07, 07:08 PM | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy Hey!The majority of people were I'm living are heretics (me too) and we're doing really questionable things like allowing 16 year olds to drink etc. But knowingly eat human flesh? That's something the non-heretics do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation |
| Stigger12-11-07, 07:21 PM | Lots of things come back to haunt me, hasn't stopped me yet. :D |
| MerrikCale12-11-07, 08:49 PM | Understood, but like LK said it was a pretty good book! I'd recommend it. as do I. I feel it was clearly the best of that lot |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 09:55 PM | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy Hey!The majority of people were I'm living are heretics (me too) and we're doing really questionable things like allowing 16 year olds to drink etc. But knowingly eat human flesh? That's something the non-heretics do: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transubstantiation -Yeah, apparently my people kill little children, and drink their blood, and put it in our food. So, mind if I join you guys at the table there? |
| MarkusTay6312-11-07, 10:21 PM | -Yeah, apparently my people kill little children, and drink their blood, and put it in our food.Brooklynites? :eek: Damn, I knew NY was rough, but I thought they only mugged you... :rolleyes: |
| GreenKnight12-11-07, 11:17 PM | [QUOTE]I didn't like the Fighters series as much, mostly because they all seemed to end badly for the main character(s). I don't mind the occasional tragic ending, but I hate when it becomes the expected result. Given that none of the other classes' novels seem to have that trend, it makes me wonder if WotC just hates Fighters. :P Well, Fighters in 3E suck, so what did you expect? If those characters wanted to survive, then they should've played a Cleric or a Wizard. At the very least they should've taken a look at Tome of Battle, first. :P |
| Lord Karsus12-11-07, 11:39 PM | Brooklynites? :eek: Damn, I knew NY was rough, but I thought they only mugged you... :rolleyes: -Yeah, just mugging people is so 80s. Things've changed. |
| Stigger12-12-07, 01:22 AM | You know, I actually got accussed of trying to steal someone's soul once... That's senile dementia for you though. Of course she also said my 94 year old, wheelchair bound grandfather who could barely sit up in bed was trying to rape her at night, so... |
| Alrunic Silverfyre12-12-07, 08:26 AM | Wow, that's one hell of a spelling error! What I meant was "heresay" not "heresy". My bad. Damn heretics... |
| Scathlock12-12-07, 12:19 PM | -Yeah, apparently my people kill little children, and drink their blood, and put it in our food. So, mind if I join you guys at the table there? Absolutely not. Plenty of room at this table. Heretics FTW!:cool: |
| RanielK12-12-07, 01:39 PM | How many PCs would scream bloody murder and proclaim you the worst DM to ever walk the face of the earth if you allowed something like that to happen? What, for using the rules as written? "Your level 25 Epic Paladin charges forward toward the small goblin tribe. With a swing of your blade you easily dispatch the first one. The other goblins, however, turn and begin running toward you at full speed shouting in their strange tongue. You are certain they are calling to their dark gods and are cursing your name. You swing your blade again, killing two others effortlessly. Suddenly, however, you realize that they are surrounding you. Some of them grab your legs. You swing your blade, killing three more, but as you did so four of them grabbed your sword arm, pulling it from your hand. You begin to struggle, as they begin to grab your arms, and then suddenly, from the weight of the goblins you fall over onto your back. Yellow eyes stare back at you. It is the last thing you see as they cut your throat." Yept that is pretty much how it would go. How many PC's would accept that as a reality in their game? Not many. They'd demand rolls for each and every one of those goblins. They would proclaim that the goblins couldn't do X because their character's AC is Y. Thus they couldn't touch them. First go back and read the Mob template. It is basically the swarm template for small, medium or large creatures. It is brutal. The worst example of it I have ever heard of (it was at the next table over in a Battle Interactive) was a mob of Godblooded creatures. You know, Godblooded, where every creature of the same alignment as you gives you a +1 Sacred bonus to AC and +1 Sacred bonus to Saves in a group where there are at least 12 creatures. Now you've also seemed to forget about the hit AC 10 to aid another mechanic. Oh and layer up all you want but grapple is a touch mechanic and most folks don't (but should) have Combat Reflexes. So you're only going to get one AOO to fend off the literal horde of greenies out to kill you. Down you will go and dead you will be. That is how such an encounter SHOULD play out with an epic character who simply charges forward like a madman. Yet it doesn't. Not in the novels and not in games. That doesn't change the fact that most of the better written characters don't charge forward like madmen and meet fates like the above mentioned. That you have calculated that a one on eight encounter would generally go to the one higher level character and extrapolate that as the likely outcome of a higher to epic level character meeting with an army (what is an army anyway?) doesn't mean the rules support this. Just because players expect this outcome does not make it so. One of the reasons LG created mandatory retirement was the proliferation of 16th to 18th level characters who would speak to the 10th level king with a "you and what army?" attitude. Forgetting the king has an army and a navy and an archer corps and a mage school or two loyal to him and . . . and. . . and . . . . Sure an 18th level character is more than a match for a few 2nd to 5th level guys, but an army? The scale is just ridiculous. One or two guys facing down, say on the conservative side, 2000? Granted you could probably hit and run 'em, but most nations not on the verge of collapsing should have enough resources to eventually counter that. So even if you could create a scenario where Elminster could rule the world in three easy army-killing steps, why would he and what are all the other similarly leveled guys in Faerun doing? The Archmages' of Mage: The Ascension failure to act to just about every little thing due to the MAD principle was brought up way way earlier in the arguement. It still stands and is applicable to such noteworthy individuals as Elminster and the Seven Sisters. To put it another way, the President of the United States has the theoritical power to call a tactical strike on anyone over anything that catches his fancy. All he has to do is find the one like minded cabinet member who will back his play, peruse the "football"'s playbook to figure out just which scenario will net him the "right" silos. Contact those guys and tell them to launch. Missiles away and problem solved. For something like 90 days, he has the authority to call an emergency and send forces to pound on anything. So why doesn't he just invade and/or nuke Iran? We could always nuke the Eiffle Tower until it glows (or ceases to exist) in retaliation to some perceived slight some Frenchie might have said at some time in the last decade. And the list can go on. Hey Western Europe how about all those loans we gave you at the end of WWII to rebuild. You owe us. Pay or die. Russia? China? Great Brittain? Israel? Oh wait, they still maintain they have no arsenal. All of these countries don't matter because . . . well, we're only dealing with the US's ability to wipe something off the face of the map and that means they're overpowered and must go. The fact they're balanced out by other countries' ability to do the same is irrelevant. The fantasy novel The Drawing of the Dark has a quote from Merlin which I think is apropo. When asked by our hero (a reincarnated Arthur), why Merlin doesn't just blow the competition away with all his earth shaking power, Merlin replies "with a mage of equal ability on the other side, the most power I can muster up reliably could be used to blow a barmaid's skirt over her head." Miles |
| MatteBlack12-12-07, 02:45 PM | To put it another way, the President of the United States has the theoritical power to call a tactical strike on anyone over anything that catches his fancy. All he has to do is find the one like minded cabinet member who will back his play, peruse the "football"'s playbook to figure out just which scenario will net him the "right" silos. Contact those guys and tell them to launch. Missiles away and problem solved. Shh, Not so loud. Don't give him any ideas.:lightbulb |
| dimonic12-12-07, 03:55 PM | First go back and read the Mob template. It is basically the swarm template for small, medium or large creatures. It is brutal. The worst example of it I have ever heard of (it was at the next table over in a Battle Interactive) was a mob of Godblooded creatures. You know, Godblooded, where every creature of the same alignment as you gives you a +1 Sacred bonus to AC and +1 Sacred bonus to Saves in a group where there are at least 12 creatures. The Mob template was introduced in DMG II, so it is hardly a widespread rule (although a long overdue one). It is rather a patch job, so it might not stand up to rigorous inspection. As a DMG II rule it would not be used in, say, RPGA games, so RPGA characters could theoretically mow their way through armies of low level types with more or less impunity. Even with these rules, a classic party of high level individuals (or just a Wizard and a Fighter) could easily defeat an army using the Mob rules. Just a few terrain controlling spells, and some mass damage, and the fighter should be able to mop up what the Wizard leaves out. This is not a Realms fault per se, but rather a D&D rules fault (since 1st edition), and stems partly from the power disparity after a few levels, and partly from the incredible power of high level spells. One of the effects of the new rules is to allow more disparate encounters to be both feasible and challenging. Some of the more game-breaking spells will simply be gone. I would expect no more Forcecage, for example. Teleport Without Error will be gone. No more "save or die spells". All these things will reduce the feeling of fragility that anyone with a simulationist frame of mind will see a setting like the Realms. Ask yourselves this: why, with the power of magic, and the kinds of NPCs wandering all over the realms, does it still look quasi medieval? Notwithstanding many realms fans' loathing of Eberron, is it not more reasonable to expect that at least some magic using races and nations would have replaced man-power with magic-power?And if we don't like the world that this kind of thinking produces, then is it not preferable to scale back the level of magic, and reduce the power and number of standout NPCs to a more stable, less contrived level? All this being said, I am certain the new Realms will not please everyone: there are many who like jaunting about with enormous personal power, hobnobbing with famous heroes, being foiled (by deus ex machina^H^H^H^H^H^H careful DM machinations) in their attempts to knock off famous villains, but then assisted in the last moment by the aforementioned famous heroes, in true (of the more cheesy) FR novel style. These players will probably not be appreciative of any changes at all. However, I honestly suspect that more DMs than players enjoy this style of play. I have been "victimized" by it more than once, and I think it is more likely to be a feature of those campaign settings where there is strong support from novels with high level heroes, which tempt DMs into using these NPCs to steer things along. Alternatively, perhaps DMs of that style gravitate towards the setting, which then garners a bad name as a result - take your pick - and bear in mind that all this is just my opinion (albeit mostly shared by the gamers I surround myself with). There are also many who adjust the realms to their liking, and they will continue to do so, and many of them will be pleased by the new changes - they will perhaps have to do less customizations to use the setting. Then there are those who use Greyhawk, or home grown settings, who up till now have been feeling rather left out, and have probably shoe-horned realms stuff into their campaigns here and there. More of them may be able to use the Realms directly. Since it will be the first 4e published setting, one can anticipate a fairly high rate of adoption judging from past edition releases. I would expect that at the least, the new rules will be very compelling to most existing players. If they deliver on the promise of much faster game play, they will find favour with our group for sure. We have long been struggling to accomplish more than one encounter per hour, which is ironic since most encounters last only 2 or 3 rounds. I have read of 4e playtests with 30 round combats: I have not heard of that since 1st edition! They should deliver on the promise of ending the 5 minute workday. They should make the various races far more interesting to play throughout the level progression. Classes will be capable of far more diversity - no two fighters need be the same. Classes will not be as easily "situationally nerfed". Given success with 4e, players will have even better choices than before. DMs who really like existing Realms can do a bit of work to convert NPCs to the new format, or they can buy the new book and use the conversions and toss the fluff/canon, or they can use the new stuff the way it is printed. |
| Stigger12-12-07, 04:01 PM | Didn't they say there wasn't going to be a conversion handbook for 3.x to 4e? That was my understanding of it anyway... Not that you really need one per se, but it would make life much easier if they did, should one choose to convert to 4e. Can't say I am, since I'm pretty much planning on converting my Realms to Storyteller as soon as the current campaign is finished. |
| Reneshat12-12-07, 04:09 PM | The Mob template was introduced in DMG II, so it is hardly a widespread rule (although a long overdue one). It is rather a patch job, so it might not stand up to rigorous inspection. As a DMG II rule it would not be used in, say, RPGA games, so RPGA characters could theoretically mow their way through armies of low level types with more or less impunity. Yet oddly enough, almost all of the implementation of mob rules I've seen have been in RPGA Living Greyhawk events. There was a battle interactive where over at the higher level table they were fighting a mob of advanced rust monsters with a template. It wound up being quite nasty and effective as I recall. I realize that it wasn't the point of your post, just thought I would point that out. |
| Alediran12-12-07, 04:15 PM | Can't say I am, since I'm pretty much planning on converting my Realms to Storyteller as soon as the current campaign is finished. Myself I'm waiting to see the 4th ed rules to see if they are worth the effort to convert the realms to it, if not I'll continue with 3.5. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-12-07, 06:43 PM | All this being said, I am certain the new Realms will not please everyone: there are many who like jaunting about with enormous personal power, hobnobbing with famous heroes, being foiled (by deus ex machina^H^H^H^H^H^H careful DM machinations) in their attempts to knock off famous villains, but then assisted in the last moment by the aforementioned famous heroes, in true (of the more cheesy) FR novel style. . Umm, that'd be a problem of how the game is designed and/or run, not the setting as it is. |
| Lord Karsus12-12-07, 08:30 PM | Didn't they say there wasn't going to be a conversion handbook for 3.x to 4e? That was my understanding of it anyway... Not that you really need one per se, but it would make life much easier if they did, should one choose to convert to 4e. Can't say I am, since I'm pretty much planning on converting my Realms to Storyteller as soon as the current campaign is finished. -Correct. There is no "streamlined" way to convert a character directly from 3e to 4e. Instead, you are basically going to have to rebuild the character from scratch using the 4e rules. |
| Mourn12-12-07, 08:55 PM | -I know *I've* never heard of him before a few weeks ago... http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php?op=showcreator&creatorid=420 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/bio/perkinschristopher The summary: He's been with Wizards since 1997, and worked with Dragon and Dungeon for a while until he lead the Star Wars RPG design team. He's also been the Design Manager of a number of Forgotten Realms and D&D products. His name appears in lots of books. |
| Lord Karsus12-12-07, 10:34 PM | http://www.pen-paper.net/rpgdb.php?op=showcreator&creatorid=420 http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=starwars/bio/perkinschristopher The summary: He's been with Wizards since 1997, and worked with Dragon and Dungeon for a while until he lead the Star Wars RPG design team. He's also been the Design Manager of a number of Forgotten Realms and D&D products. His name appears in lots of books. -Yes, yes, I cited the same exact link in a post shortly thereafter. The original point still remains- How did Chris Perkins, who's relative influence on the Realms was quite low, come to suddenly wield so much creative power? Or some paraphrasement of that. I'm going to take the liberty of speaking for the majority here, that before the proverbial "few weeks ago", no one had every really heard of him. |
| MarkusTay6312-12-07, 10:50 PM | It seems to be this same tiny little click of people making all the decisions, while at the same time patting themselves on the back. Self-delusion on this scale is frightening. I hope everyone else enjoys 4e FR... I've made my decision already. |
| Lord Karsus12-12-07, 11:00 PM | It seems to be this same tiny little click of people making all the decisions, while at the same time patting themselves on the back. -Two of them (at least) are major contributors to the Realms, however. Those two being Rich Baker and Brude Cordell. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 01:08 AM | Pity its not Grubb and Schend though... I really miss their stuff, personally. |
| Alediran12-13-07, 01:13 AM | Pity its not Grubb and Schend though... I really miss their stuff, personally. Elaine too, I've read all her novels (Song & Sword, Starlight & Shadows, Counselors & Kings, Evermeet: IoE) and I want more books from her. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 01:17 AM | Was referring to sourcebooks, not novels actually... |
| Lord Karsus12-13-07, 01:18 AM | Pity its not Grubb and Schend though... I really miss their stuff, personally. -Well, Steve Schend is back in a limited capacity, writing books. Take what you can, I guess. Elaine too, I've read all her novels (Song & Sword, Starlight & Shadows, Counselors & Kings, Evermeet: IoE) and I want more books from her. -The final installment of the Song & Sword Series is due out in April. After that, however, I don't know if Elaine had any plans to continue writing for WotC. Unfortunatley, I don't think so, as this final book (something that begins with an 'R') is set to wrap up the loose ends on her characters. |
| Mourn12-13-07, 01:23 AM | How did Chris Perkins, who's relative influence on the Realms was quite low, come to suddenly wield so much creative power? The same way anyone in a company moves up into a position of influence? Years of good and consistent work that prove you have what it takes to handle the job. It's not like you have to be knighted or taught the secret handshake or anything. If you need to have some longstanding, public relationship with the product line in order to lead design on it, then it would have never come out, since Jeff Grubb didn't have any relationship with it before he co-wrote the original box set with Ed Greenwood. And besides that, why does Wizards owe you any explanation of their internal workings? Why should they have to justify to you that the man they chose to head up the Realms is the right one? What makes your view more important than the people who have been writing it for years, some of whom have been working with the Realms for about 15 years (Rich Baker)? I'm going to take the liberty of speaking for the majority here, that before the proverbial "few weeks ago", no one had every really heard of him. Some of us pay attention to these things, just like we pay attention to favorite novelists and comic book artists. The guy has been around for a decade and has been incredibly involved in D&D and Star Wars, so it's not his fault you don't pay attention. |
| Alediran12-13-07, 01:33 AM | Some of us pay attention to these things, just like we pay attention to favorite novelists and comic book artists. The guy has been around for a decade and has been incredibly involved in D&D and Star Wars, so it's not his fault you don't pay attention. In D&D and Star Wars I give him credit, but in the Realms? My cat knows more about the realms than him (especialy considering the things he said) |
| Stigger12-13-07, 01:38 AM | True... that interview didn't make a very good impression with me either. Rather turned me off his efforts actually, though I don't necessarily think prior experience is an absolute must, so long as one is competant. And I don't necessarily think corporate survival and advancement is equal to competancy... gods know I've met plenty of corporate types who got ahead on their political skills rather than their actual merits. Which isn't to say that's true of Mr. Perkins, I don't actually know much of anything about him any way it goes. |
| Dark Wizard12-13-07, 01:41 AM | And besides that, why does Wizards owe you any explanation of their internal workings? Why should they have to justify to you that the man they chose to head up the Realms is the right one? What makes your view more important than the people who have been writing it for years, some of whom have been working with the Realms for about 15 years (Rich Baker)? I'm going to try a facetious answer: because the Realms are failing and they were at the helm. Okay, that's too harsh, it's not an easy job. How about because we're the customer. Meh, not that great an excuse, corporate confidentiality and all. Just 'cause we're bored and waiting for 4E. :D I mean this all in jest of course. @LK - Remember this whole thing was a team effort. Chris Perkins isn't solely responsible. I've noticed his name for a few years now, didn't know what he did until like a year ago, but I think he had a different title back then. He was the guy who asked if anyone at the Secrets of the Realms seminar at GenCon would buy a Waterdeep book the size of the Ptolus book. |
| Mourn12-13-07, 01:56 AM | In D&D and Star Wars I give him credit, but in the Realms? My cat knows more about the realms than him (especialy considering the things he said) Well, he has more Forgotten Realms credits to his name than either you or your cat, so I'd consider him a higher authority on the subject matter. And remember, he's the Design Manager for the setting, not one of the authors of the core book. With design in his title, I figure his job has more to do with the framework of the setting's release and mechanical intricacies than with plot. I'm going to try a facetious answer: because the Realms are failing and they were at the helm. Remember, they inherited the state of the Realms from TSR, who didn't leave the Realms in very good shape in it's last years. |
| Dark Wizard12-13-07, 02:15 AM | Remember, they inherited the state of the Realms from TSR, who didn't leave the Realms in very good shape in it's last years. They had all of 3e's lifespan to gradually shift that perception a bit. Instead they stat'ed up Elminster and the Simbul as CR 39 and 40 characters after a template when most games stop well before 20. They continued with the frenzy rate of RSE style novels, which changed the setting with each book. They bundled most of the deicides to within a decade of each other, often just a year or two. There was a lot they could have done to downplay the concerns, which are not new; we're just now figuring out the perception is so far reaching and deep set. There was a lot they could do to smooth the transition now, but they haven't done so yet. If things were so bad, they sure procrastinated a lot waiting until the last minute to get everything and the kitchen sink into the new Realms. They decided to go for a face lift before trying a facial. Though I said it before, theirs is not an easy job. |
| Meldread12-13-07, 02:31 AM | Remember, they inherited the state of the Realms from TSR, who didn't leave the Realms in very good shape in it's last years. I think that is what a lot of people are overlooking. WotC didn't design the Realm's hell - even Ed played a mostly backseat role - it was TSR. The problems they seem to be striving to eliminate and correct are mostly inherited by TSR. However, that being said it seems that people are acting as if Wizards wants the Realm's to fail. They're a company. They want to make money. It's in their best interest to not only see the Realm's succeed, but see it prosper beyond their wildest dreams. They have more incentive than anyone else to put out a good product that can drawn in old and new customers alike. That being said, only when the new product is put down in front of us can we say if it will be any good or not. I'm trying very hard to keep an open mind. I already know there will be some things I don't like and some changes I'll have to make, but on the bright side of things I think making those changes will be much easier. I certainly don't hold any hostilities toward the designers at WotC who I believe are simply doing the best job that they can, and are making the best of a relatively bad situation. dimonic- This is not a Realms fault per se, but rather a D&D rules fault (since 1st edition), and stems partly from the power disparity after a few levels, and partly from the incredible power of high level spells. One of the effects of the new rules is to allow more disparate encounters to be both feasible and challenging. Some of the more game-breaking spells will simply be gone. I would expect no more Forcecage, for example. Teleport Without Error will be gone. No more "save or die spells". All these things will reduce the feeling of fragility that anyone with a simulationist frame of mind will see a setting like the Realms. Ask yourselves this: why, with the power of magic, and the kinds of NPCs wandering all over the realms, does it still look quasi medieval? Notwithstanding many realms fans' loathing of Eberron, is it not more reasonable to expect that at least some magic using races and nations would have replaced man-power with magic-power?And if we don't like the world that this kind of thinking produces, then is it not preferable to scale back the level of magic, and reduce the power and number of standout NPCs to a more stable, less contrived level? I agree with you wholeheartedly 100%! I think it's a shame that most people seemed to just skip over your post. It sum's up my feelings on what is happening (and what is wrong) exactly. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 03:04 AM | Missed Dimonic's post for some reason. Personally, I'd say it wasn't contrived. Given the expense of magic and the costs involved in creating those "magic-power" items you seem to think would be so widespread, who's going to pay for it? Are rulers really going to pour that much of their realm's coffers into the hands of wizards when they can much more safely rely on engineers and peasant labor? Given the egos that most mages seem to exhibit, I'm not sure a ruler in their right mind would hand them that much gold... the only places I could see it happening are Cormyr, Halruaa, and Nimbral. And I don't really see that happening. Its a simple equation really, the more you rely on magic, the less of a role your average citizen has to play in the higher strata of society, and unless you want to unravel the societal structure, then you don't go and start messing with the foundations of your economy. Add in the temptation that it provides to hostile foreign nations to invade and take what you've worked so hard to build, and the options looks much less attractive. Sure they have a lot of magical power comparatively, but they also don't have the populations to stave off the inevitable invasions that will assail them. Certainly Halruaa could fend off an assault by the Lapal or the Crintri, but I doubt they could hold off a serious assault from both at the same time, which would be likely if they built up such a infrastructure, with both hoping to plunder them. They'd both like to anyway, so why add another reason? Why would anyone invite such a disaster on themselves? That's the way I'm looking at it anyway. |
| Xgirl36012-13-07, 04:37 AM | Okay, I'm looking forward to some changes, but I personally love having the major characters around. The major NPCs are a connecting force that a good dm can control without stiffling their players. Using high level NPCs to "clean up" is a sign of a lazy/poor DM. I disagree with them changing sooooo much. I know killing Mystra and changing so much is going to cause me to have to do MAJOR reworking with 6 different campaigns because my plans for the direction of the game is done. Sadly, I may just not ever change to 4th edition and keep with 3.5. I was worried about this when they announced the changes in magic...now I'm convinced that its just going to be something I'm not interested in. I've purchased every 3.5 FR book and almost all 3.5. That's a huge investment and to change things so drastically makes leary about investing that much more money into it. So, really, they will have a heck of a sell to get me to drop $40 a pop on new books that kill so many of my favorite characters. |
| Meldread12-13-07, 04:51 AM | Stigger- Given the expense of magic and the costs involved in creating those "magic-power" items you seem to think would be so widespread, who's going to pay for it? That is something I'd like to know as well, but all those Red Wizard Enclaves seem to be doing pretty damn good business (despite being evil slavers - go figure) so somebody is buying their wares. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 07:57 AM | Slightly different scenario when the items are being produced for a profit, as is the case with the enclaves. The profit involved in using them internally, for infrastructure or even defense, is not likely to be as immediate and only seen over the long term, so its not as attractive an endeavor. That they could find buyers I don't doubt. That they would produce it without seeing an immediate tangible benefit, I don't know about. Beyond that, given Thay's slave based agriculture, they really have almost no incentive to look for ways to make it more efficient beyond their weather controlling magic. |
| RanielK12-13-07, 08:47 AM | Shh, Not so loud. Don't give him any ideas.:lightbulb There is a newsletter called the Early Bird. It is made available throughout the US government. It is mostly press clippings where some bigwig's name is mentioned. I can just see my post showing up on the Prez's desk. "Hey sir take a look at this." "Damn, son! That's a fine idea. Let's get on that." "Ummm, okay sir." :eek: oops |
| Taurren12-13-07, 09:03 AM | Sadly, I may just not ever change to 4th edition and keep with 3.5. I was worried about this when they announced the changes in magic...now I'm convinced that its just going to be something I'm not interested in. I agree with you completely. WotC is doing a very bad job of explaining why all these changes are needed, and how they will benefit my FR game. Instead of being excited about what's being developed, I find myself grimacing at the extent of the "dramatic" changes taking place as I realize that if I wanted to play in the New-FR, that all of my classic FR material is now redundant and useless. I know that nothing has been "officially" released, but from the changes that have been announced, I see very little effort being made to maintain the flavor and style of classic FR. |
| RanielK12-13-07, 09:20 AM | The Mob template was introduced in DMG II, so it is hardly a widespread rule (although a long overdue one). It is rather a patch job, so it might not stand up to rigorous inspection. As a DMG II rule it would not be used in, say, RPGA games, so RPGA characters could theoretically mow their way through armies of low level types with more or less impunity. Actually, I just finished a year 6 LG mod this morning (at 1 am local) where there were two mobs. Played on BI where another table faced a mob (godblooded so totally cracked out), not my table thank God! At another con played a Regional where there was a mob. We managed to point them at the "bad guys" (Ketites who were there to retrieve "property" aka the soul of some poor schmuck). I was part of a mob (a dm conceit to end the three hour long combat with the cracked out half-dragon troll so we could actual finish the mod on time). This is not a Realms fault per se, but rather a D&D rules fault (since 1st edition), and stems partly from the power disparity after a few levels, and partly from the incredible power of high level spells. One of the effects of the new rules is to allow more disparate encounters to be both feasible and challenging. Some of the more game-breaking spells will simply be gone. I would expect no more Forcecage, for example. Teleport Without Error will be gone. No more "save or die spells". All these things will reduce the feeling of fragility that anyone with a simulationist frame of mind will see a setting like the Realms. I'd say there is level disparity in real life. Mostly in the form of "self-made" men who rise above their station. The polymaths of the world who push the bounds of what can and can't be done. Most other skill based systems (say WoD, West End's Star Wars, Fuzion, Palladiums stuff, GURPS, etc) rely mostly on the character being an established expert (or better based on power level of the campaign, newb, vet, real mover and shaker, etc). There is little movement and really just refinement as characters advance and gain xp. Kind of "you are what you are, just getting a little better." In a year's worth of steady play both in a Macross game (using a Fuzion ruleset) and a year's worth of steady play in a "cross-platform" WoD game (two mages, a werewolf, a changeling and a demon), neither of my characters really advanced to the point of being "the next level" so to speak. I refined some science skills (a little self study from stuff sketched out in background) and my leadership (got promoted to flight leader) for my Macross character. Picked up a little more understanding of the spheres (especially one's I didn't have before, but no real earth trembling let alone shaking stuff) for my mage. In less than a year of steady play, I will have moved my sorcerer in LG from 4th to 14th level. He will go from an interesting side kick (litterally as playing with my wife and some friends required playing waaaaaay up) to being their equal in power and a noted figure in Oerth (no lie there as he has played so many BI's and Core Specials to rack up an impressive number of commendations and rp style awards like being an honorary dwarven noble as a non-dwarf). The two are just different conceits. Which is preferred? An established professional who plies his trade or a young journeyman who grows to push the bounds of reality (aka the skill based a few XP points or the level system going from 1st to 21st). Either works. Ask yourselves this: why, with the power of magic, and the kinds of NPCs wandering all over the realms, does it still look quasi medieval? Notwithstanding many realms fans' loathing of Eberron, is it not more reasonable to expect that at least some magic using races and nations would have replaced man-power with magic-power?And if we don't like the world that this kind of thinking produces, then is it not preferable to scale back the level of magic, and reduce the power and number of standout NPCs to a more stable, less contrived level? Halruaa doesn't look quasi medieval. It has airships and magic industry and the like. Thay has trade outpost that deals in the magic item trade (and the slave trade in the back). But magic isn't at the industry (though one might say the cottage industry) level in any place but Halruaa. In Eberron it is taken to that extent. Also remember, that it took awhile to move from one "tech level" to the next here in the real world. We're not looking at that much advancement in the Realms. Eberron just had that excelerated, but more for plot device (gotta have planes and trains if you want to "ride the red line" ala Indiana Jones and other pulp movies). All this being said, I am certain the new Realms will not please everyone: there are many who like jaunting about with enormous personal power, hobnobbing with famous heroes, being foiled (by deus ex machina^H^H^H^H^H^H careful DM machinations) in their attempts to knock off famous villains, but then assisted in the last moment by the aforementioned famous heroes, in true (of the more cheesy) FR novel style. These players will probably not be appreciative of any changes at all. However, I honestly suspect that more DMs than players enjoy this style of play. I have been "victimized" by it more than once, and I think it is more likely to be a feature of those campaign settings where there is strong support from novels with high level heroes, which tempt DMs into using these NPCs to steer things along. Alternatively, perhaps DMs of that style gravitate towards the setting, which then garners a bad name as a result - take your pick - and bear in mind that all this is just my opinion (albeit mostly shared by the gamers I surround myself with). In all the years I have played in the Realms, I have only once come close to one of the Realms personalities. That was Halaster as he unleashed a horde of monsters in Waterdeep on High Harvestide. Otherwise, I've spent years in the Realms and never met nor been saved by any high level NPCs. I've never met any other gamers in the various places I've played (Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Maryland, Germany, California) who have needed or had forced on them similar "help." So needless to say, I am much confused when I see so many people trumpet this as a main reason to take hatchet to the Realms. |
| RanielK12-13-07, 09:30 AM | Missed Dimonic's post for some reason. Personally, I'd say it wasn't contrived. Given the expense of magic and the costs involved in creating those "magic-power" items you seem to think would be so widespread, who's going to pay for it? Are rulers really going to pour that much of their realm's coffers into the hands of wizards when they can much more safely rely on engineers and peasant labor? Given the egos that most mages seem to exhibit, I'm not sure a ruler in their right mind would hand them that much gold... the only places I could see it happening are Cormyr, Halruaa, and Nimbral. And I don't really see that happening. Its a simple equation really, the more you rely on magic, the less of a role your average citizen has to play in the higher strata of society, and unless you want to unravel the societal structure, then you don't go and start messing with the foundations of your economy. Add in the temptation that it provides to hostile foreign nations to invade and take what you've worked so hard to build, and the options looks much less attractive. Sure they have a lot of magical power comparatively, but they also don't have the populations to stave off the inevitable invasions that will assail them. Certainly Halruaa could fend off an assault by the Lapal or the Crintri, but I doubt they could hold off a serious assault from both at the same time, which would be likely if they built up such a infrastructure, with both hoping to plunder them. They'd both like to anyway, so why add another reason? Why would anyone invite such a disaster on themselves? That's the way I'm looking at it anyway. Yeah, Eberron had to have both House Cannith (sp?) and Magewrights to explain how magic went from a "cottage industry" to full blown base for a technology. And this was to better move into a 30's/40's ish pulp setting. The aftermath of the Great War and the ambiguity given in chucking out alignment is the noir side of things. The closest the Realms has is Halruaa, where everyone in the Magocracy knows at least one low level spell and use it in their daily lives and have some minor magic item (say a broom that prestidigitates to clean, or a seasoning spoon to cook) in the home. Everywhere else, it is a few mages crafting for themselves (either for personal power or profit off of adventurers) or their friends (be they adventurers or kings). |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-13-07, 11:32 AM | I agree with you wholeheartedly 100%! I think it's a shame that most people seemed to just skip over your post. It sum's up my feelings on what is happening (and what is wrong) exactly. I didn't skip over that post. I think the part I quoted regarding high level NPCs was totally wrong and illogical. |
| dimonic12-13-07, 04:18 PM | Missed Dimonic's post for some reason. Personally, I'd say it wasn't contrived. Given the expense of magic and the costs involved in creating those "magic-power" items you seem to think would be so widespread, who's going to pay for it? Are rulers really going to pour that much of their realm's coffers into the hands of wizards when they can much more safely rely on engineers and peasant labor? Given the egos that most mages seem to exhibit, I'm not sure a ruler in their right mind would hand them that much gold Actually, they don't have to. In most areas, wizards and clerics would completely eliminate traditional monarchies in short order. There are many spells that do not cost much to cast, that can completely tip the balance of power - and those wizards with ambition would themselves gather enough cash to create whatever they needed - after all, the goal is absolute power! Seriously - have you ever seen a Wizard played well, with the standard wealth levels? Even with "NPC" wealth levels, a high level wizard can kick ass directly or indirectly, and in a typical kingdom there would be little to stop him from seizing control. And this is from the perspective of a player who does not like playing wizards because they are too easy (I play rogues, rangers or even bards because they are the most challenging). |
| Alediran12-13-07, 04:41 PM | Actually, they don't have to. In most areas, wizards and clerics would completely eliminate traditional monarchies in short order. There are many spells that do not cost much to cast, that can completely tip the balance of power - and those wizards with ambition would themselves gather enough cash to create whatever they needed - after all, the goal is absolute power! Seriously - have you ever seen a Wizard played well, with the standard wealth levels? Even with "NPC" wealth levels, a high level wizard can kick ass directly or indirectly, and in a typical kingdom there would be little to stop him from seizing control. And this is from the perspective of a player who does not like playing wizards because they are too easy (I play rogues, rangers or even bards because they are the most challenging). The fact that few Wizards are in positions of power is that said positions tend to take too much time of the day, this means that a wizard who is in charge of a city has less time to study. |
| dimonic12-13-07, 04:50 PM | The fact that few Wizards are in positions of power is that said positions tend to take too much time of the day, this means that a wizard who is in charge of a city has less time to study. Sure, one can say that there are intangible reasons why the setting does not implode, but that is just hand waving, as are many of the objections to the posts I have made. The rules as written do not require this study you speak of. What I would hope for is a setting that does not require fluff or hand waving to support its existence. I do not want to have to ignore the man behind the curtain more than I absolutely have to. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 05:03 PM | Actually, they don't have to. In most areas, wizards and clerics would completely eliminate traditional monarchies in short order. There are many spells that do not cost much to cast, that can completely tip the balance of power - and those wizards with ambition would themselves gather enough cash to create whatever they needed - after all, the goal is absolute power! Seriously - have you ever seen a Wizard played well, with the standard wealth levels? Even with "NPC" wealth levels, a high level wizard can kick ass directly or indirectly, and in a typical kingdom there would be little to stop him from seizing control. And this is from the perspective of a player who does not like playing wizards because they are too easy (I play rogues, rangers or even bards because they are the most challenging). Doubtful on the first point. I'm not going to address the cleric point, beyond saying its usually in their best interest to maintain the status quo of those monarchies, it keeps the other clergies out there happy and in relative equilibrium. On the second, wizard point... again, in their best interest to support those monarchies, at least to their faces. Power behind the throne, sure, but direct rulership means time away from their research and lab time. Beyond that even though, certainly they could create anything that they needed, but where's the incentive for creating costly (in both gold and XP) magical items to build something that may or may not turn a profit (for them) anytime soon? As to seeing a competant wizard in action, indeed, I usually am that wizard. But for the reasons listed above (for a start anyway), direct rulership is hardly a desireable thing more often than not. |
| Stigger12-13-07, 05:09 PM | Sure, one can say that there are intangible reasons why the setting does not implode, but that is just hand waving, as are many of the objections to the posts I have made. The rules as written do not require this study you speak of. What I would hope for is a setting that does not require fluff or hand waving to support its existence. I do not want to have to ignore the man behind the curtain more than I absolutely have to. Those two new spells at each level don't just spring into the wizard's spellbook on their own. If we're talking about sorcerers, then maybe I could see your point, but their limited spell selection kinda forces them into a balancing act of focus that isn't necessarily as well suited to general item creation as a wizard is. Beyond that, how many are really going to invest in the item creation feats without those bonus feats that wizards get? |
| Lord Karsus12-13-07, 07:15 PM | The same way anyone in a company moves up into a position of influence? Years of good and consistent work that prove you have what it takes to handle the job. It's not like you have to be knighted or taught the secret handshake or anything. If you need to have some longstanding, public relationship with the product line in order to lead design on it, then it would have never come out, since Jeff Grubb didn't have any relationship with it before he co-wrote the original box set with Ed Greenwood. -None of which implies a broad understanding of the details of what is going on, or a certain competence. And besides that, why does Wizards owe you any explanation of their internal workings? Why should they have to justify to you that the man they chose to head up the Realms is the right one? -Corporate transparency? What makes your view more important than the people who have been writing it for years, some of whom have been working with the Realms for about 15 years (Rich Baker)? -Did I say that my view was more important (though, obviously, in my own mind, it is)? Some of us pay attention to these things, just like we pay attention to favorite novelists and comic book artists. The guy has been around for a decade and has been incredibly involved in D&D and Star Wars, so it's not his fault you don't pay attention. Well, he has more Forgotten Realms credits to his name than either you or your cat, so I'd consider him a higher authority on the subject matter. And remember, he's the Design Manager for the setting, not one of the authors of the core book. With design in his title, I figure his job has more to do with the framework of the setting's release and mechanical intricacies than with plot. -D&D and Star Wars isn’t the Forgotten Realms. Margret Weis has been involved with WotC on many levels. Would it make much sense to give her the responsibility of designing the Forgotten Realms? Gary Gygax created D&D, and Greyhawk. Would it make much sense to make him in charge of Realms R&D? -My girlfriend is the Design Editor and Director of one of her school's magazines. Her job is to physically design the layout of the magazine, and to determine the "direction" of the magazine. From what I've read of it, it's a magazine of poetry that is fairly liberal. Thus, her job is to make sure that the magazine continues to float to the left of center. I know for a fact that she knows nothing of politics, and probably wouldn't know a liberal from a neoconservative- such a sweet girl, though. But, simply having a position does not mean, in any way, that one is very familiar with that which he/she oversees. |
| Mourn12-13-07, 07:48 PM | -None of which implies a broad understanding of the details of what is going on, or a certain competence. Except that you don't know what he's done to get the job. You assume because you don't know this guy that he isn't suited to the job, as if you're some kind of expert on the subject. He has the competence to be working in an important position at the #1 RPG maker in the world. Some ignorant forumite calling that into question is insulting. -Corporate transparency? What fantasy world do you live in where non-stockholders get access to business workings? Because it certainly isn't this one. -Did I say that my view was more important (though, obviously, in my own mind, it is)? You're presenting it as such. Why does it matter that you've never heard of Chris Perkins? All that demonstrates is your inability to connect his name with the same Chris Perkins that has been in all kinds of WotC books since 1998. It says nothing of his abilities, and speaks more of your lack of observation than anything else. -D&D and Star Wars isn’t the Forgotten Realms. Way to conveniently ignore his name in a number of FR products. Margret Weis has been involved with WotC on many levels. Uh, no. She was an employee of TSR back in the 1980s, and did some of the 2e Dragonlance stuff during the 1990s (last TSR product was History of Dragonlance in 1995). She has never worked for Wizards of the Coast. She has written novels that they've published. Would it make much sense to give her the responsibility of designing the Forgotten Realms? Gary Gygax created D&D, and Greyhawk. Would it make much sense to make him in charge of Realms R&D? Well, considering neither of them work at Wizards of the Coast, nor work on Forgotten Realms (which Chris Perkins has been doing for at least 5 years now, since his name first appears in an FR book in 2003), it makes no sense for them to do that. Nice strawman attempt. But, simply having a position does not mean, in any way, that one is very familiar with that which he/she oversees. Except his Design Manager position is different from your girlfriends. He doesn't do visual design, he does game design. Totally different fields. |
| Lord Karsus12-13-07, 08:26 PM | You assume because you don't know this guy that he isn't suited to the job, as if you're some kind of expert on the subject. -No, I assume that he isn't suited for the job because his niche is Star Wars RPG, and Generic D&D, not the Forgotten Realms. He has the competence to be working in an important position at the #1 RPG maker in the world. -WotC is not the #1 RPG maker in the world, considering the genre has expanded to include video games. Some ignorant forumite calling that into question is insulting. -While I'm far from ignorant, if you consider that insulting, so be it. What fantasy world do you live in where non-stockholders get access to business workings? Because it certainly isn't this one. -You asked why I thought WotC should explain their internal machinations. I answered. Why does it matter that you've never heard of Chris Perkins? -See my point about Gygax, Weisman, and so on. Way to conveniently ignore his name in a number of FR products. -Which is why I brought up the point about 'Design Manager'. Uh, no. She was an employee of TSR back in the 1980s, and did some of the 2e Dragonlance stuff during the 1990s (last TSR product was History of Dragonlance in 1995). She has never worked for Wizards of the Coast. She has written novels that they've published. Well, considering neither of them work at Wizards of the Coast, nor work on Forgotten Realms (which Chris Perkins has been doing for at least 5 years now, since his name first appears in an FR book in 2003), it makes no sense for them to do that. Nice strawman attempt. -While my basic facts may be incorrect, the underlying point remains. Except his Design Manager position is different from your girlfriends. He doesn't do visual design, he does game design. Totally different fields. -How so? She decides the "direction" of her magazine. Chris Perkins decides the "direction" of the setting. |
| MerrikCale12-13-07, 08:31 PM | You're presenting it as such. Why does it matter that you've never heard of Chris Perkins? All that demonstrates is your inability to connect his name with the same Chris Perkins that has been in all kinds of WotC books since 1998. It says nothing of his abilities, and speaks more of your lack of observation than anything else. or perhaps it means he has done nothing to merit our observation |
| Dark Wizard12-13-07, 08:37 PM | If Chris is reading in on this, he must be having a blast. Heya, Chris! ::waves:: |
| Lord Karsus12-13-07, 08:41 PM | If Chris is reading in on this, he must be having a blast. Heya, Chris! ::waves:: -I don't believe he has a WotC account, unless it's "undercover". If he did, I'm sure he would pop up in the "Ask the Designer" thread. |
| Dark Wizard12-13-07, 09:21 PM | -I don't believe he has a WotC account, unless it's "undercover". If he did, I'm sure he would pop up in the "Ask the Designer" thread. He had an account (some form of his name) when he posted to the WotC proto-blog. The entire staff has since switched to the gleemax blogs, but activity seems lower than when they just used the modified forum threads. So far the only person to consistently give answers in the "Ask the Designer" thread has been Rich Baker. |
| MarkusTay6312-13-07, 11:19 PM | He's simply proving he WON'T BE STOPPED!!! :P |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 12:29 AM | He's simply proving he WON'T BE STOPPED!!! :P -Unless...Rich Baker has already been stopped, and msatran secretly hacked into Rich Baker's account, and has been giving us fake answers, trying to whip us up into a fervor, with the torches and pitchforks and everything. |
| Stigger12-14-07, 12:33 AM | It's a conspiracy! Oh goody! *scuttles off for popcorn* |
| Sol_Odlanier12-14-07, 12:34 AM | Except that you don't know what he's done to get the job. -Do you? :thinks: He might be "The Greatest Game Desingner Maneger in the Universe!!!" OR He's spended a few minutes under a desk.:nonono: He has the competence to be working in an important position at the #1 RPG maker in the world. Hmm:thinks: "position" and "competence" not necesarly go hand to hand, Just take a look at this "War"(it should be called fiasco IMO) that we are having, obviously some people in ImportantPosition are not Competent. And for the record I think Squarenix IS the #1 RPG maker in the world. :D Some ignorant forumite calling that into question is insulting. I'll show you and Ignorant,:shifty: read below.... Why does it matter that you've never heard of Chris Perkins? All that demonstrates is your inability to connect his name with the same Chris Perkins that has been in all kinds of WotC books since 1998. It says nothing of his abilities, and speaks more of your lack of observation than anything else. Again, this reminds me back in the day when Marvel Comics got Alan Davis to write the "X-Books" now Alan is a really good writer, writing Fantastic Four for a good while (8-12 years?) HOWEVER, he didn't know Jack $hit of "X-Men"( even though he's been with Marvel all that time) and the franchise lost a good amount of readers, so Marvel in its wisdom try to give the "X-Men" a "facelift" by making them "cool" (the same way that WOtC is doing to FR mind you) so they got "The Coolest OF Writers EVER!!!(Grant Morrison)" to write the book, and made it an ALL NEW X-MEN (see where I'm going with this?) and the book floped. Now Mr. Ignorant are you an expert in regards of Mr.Chris Perkins? What do you know? You wrote his biography? Hell Have you read his Biography? this is what you know JACK ****, that's you know, That's what WE know. No one here are experts and no one has claimed to be, what we are thiugh is CLIENTSso we have the priviledge of BITTCHING and complaining all we want becouse what he's doing is supposted to please us as clients. so do us all a favor stop the madness, stop foaming from the mouth and behave.(unless of couse that you are Chris's wife in witch case you can ignore this post and do as you please:cool:) |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 01:00 AM | -Whoa, whoa, whoa. Calm down there, Ody. |
| msatran12-14-07, 01:04 AM | Sadly, there is no conspiracy. I am Richard Baker's Ikiryo, the secret is out. :) Just kidding. There still is no conspiracy though. |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 01:16 AM | Just kidding. There still is no conspiracy though. -I had a feeling you'd say that...:shifty: |
| johnkretzer12-14-07, 01:20 AM | Maybe just maybe the designers should point the fingers at themselves for the lagging FR sales. I mean I can think of maybe 3 good FR books put out for the entire run of 3rd. The rest were either poor or ok. |
| Sol_Odlanier12-14-07, 01:25 AM | -Whoa, whoa, whoa. Calm down there, Ody. Sorry... Long day... but it really bothers me that people complain about people complaining, hypocrite at the very least |
| Stigger12-14-07, 02:00 AM | I can think of about 6 really great 3e books... maybe 5. Really only 3 when compared to the fluff stuff in 2e though... so, yeah. Not really a great track record in my book either. |
| Kojiro James12-14-07, 02:27 AM | Here's a good question: How the hell is magic going to function without the Weave? That's like trying to run a car without gas. |
| Fingoldfin12-14-07, 02:27 AM | Maybe just maybe the designers should point the fingers at themselves for the lagging FR sales. I mean I can think of maybe 3 good FR books put out for the entire run of 3rd. The rest were either poor or ok. Give them some credit John. There are more than 3 good books in 3e, but they did put out some complete crap. The Moonsea book and all of the super-shar adventures sucked (IMO). GHotR was a great idea, but it looked like the art budget for it consisted of a few pesos and a couple dollars worth of food stamps. Those maps. :yuck: They should have hired MarkusTay to do the maps. |
| johnkretzer12-14-07, 02:51 AM | Here's a good question: How the hell is magic going to function without the Weave? That's like trying to run a car without gas. Actualy the Weave isn't the magic anymore...it is more of a interface system(Yeah I know it was news to me too). So a better anaolgy is the FR used have DOS...now we are getting Windows 95'. Simplfied and a whole lot of bugs and blue screens of death.(Ok it might not be the bad) |
| msatran12-14-07, 02:53 AM | Give them some credit John. There are more than 3 good books in 3e, but they did put out some complete crap. The Moonsea book and all of the super-shar adventures sucked (IMO). GHotR was a great idea, but it looked like the art budget for it consisted of a few pesos and a couple dollars worth of food stamps. Those maps. :yuck: They should have hired MarkusTay to do the maps. Yeah. There really weren't any mysteries in the Mysteries of the Moonsea book. |
| Kojiro James12-14-07, 02:55 AM | Actualy the Weave isn't the magic anymore...it is more of a interface system(Yeah I know it was news to me too). So a better anaolgy is the FR used have DOS...now we are getting Windows 95'. Simplfied and a whole lot of bugs and blue screens of death.(Ok it might not be the bad) In other words, no one designing FR for 4e read the setting material and made **** up? :smirk: |
| Mr_Miscellany12-14-07, 02:56 AM | I mean I can think of maybe 3 good FR books put out for the entire run of 3rd. The rest were either poor or ok.In your opinion, of course. |
| johnkretzer12-14-07, 03:01 AM | In your opinion, of course. Yes it is...hence the "I Think" part. Though I'll say this alot of books had good infomation and good mechanics(PrCs, Feats, etc.) The problem was that they was alot not so good parts. Hence why I said ok books. Unless I cite a souce...even vaguely...it is always my opinion. |
| johnkretzer12-14-07, 03:03 AM | In other words, no one designing FR for 4e read the setting material and made **** up? :smirk: Actualy I think it was a conscience change in 3rd edition to depower Mystra a little....of course it played beautifuly in their hands. Of course I might be wrong here but I remeber the Weave being magic in earlier editions. Any Realms scholar want to correct me...or confirm this? |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 03:08 AM | Maybe just maybe the designers should point the fingers at themselves for the lagging FR sales. I mean I can think of maybe 3 good FR books put out for the entire run of 3rd. The rest were either poor or ok. -There were plenty of good 3e FR books. I mapped this out a while ago- the last "normal" sourcebook before AGHotR (and truthfully, that isn't a normal sourcebook, either) was Dragons of Faerûn, which was released over a year ago. Mysteries of the Moonsea, the "Three-Part Mega Adventure"...That's four product slots for modules that will interest a limited audience (the people who like premade adventures). |
| msatran12-14-07, 03:13 AM | Yeah. See My Big Fat Anauroch Twitchy Moment thread for a lot of the things I didn't like about that one. |
| dimonic12-14-07, 08:12 AM | Yeah, Eberron had to have both House Cannith (sp?) and Magewrights to explain how magic went from a "cottage industry" to full blown base for a technology. And this was to better move into a 30's/40's ish pulp setting. The aftermath of the Great War and the ambiguity given in chucking out alignment is the noir side of things. On the contrary, Eberron has magewrights to reduce the level of magic in the world. The percentage of NPC casters to the general population is reduced from the DMG averages, and some of these are substituted for the much less powerful NPC classes magewright and adept. |
| Alediran12-14-07, 08:25 AM | On the contrary, Eberron has magewrights to reduce the level of magic in the world. The percentage of NPC casters to the general population is reduced from the DMG averages, and some of these are substituted for the much less powerful NPC classes magewright and adept. Good way to screw any justification on how PCs become wizards! |
| dimonic12-14-07, 08:26 AM | Here's a good question: How the hell is magic going to function without the Weave? That's like trying to run a car without gas. Perhaps that is not a bad analogy: imagine gas does just run out. There would be this gap where there would hardly be transportation. Economies that depended heavily on cheap transportation would sputter. Perhaps world order would readjust, civilisations could collapse. Then all these weird and wonderful experimental technologies would come out, various types of electric car, people running diesel from cooking oil, whatever. Then eventually, one technology would dominate, and things would slowly return to equilibrium. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose - except that the intervening period of chaos may have changed a lot of things before stability returns. |
| Alediran12-14-07, 08:30 AM | Perhaps that is not a bad analogy: imagine gas does just run out. There would be this gap where there would hardly be transportation. Economies that depended heavily on cheap transportation would sputter. Perhaps world order would readjust, civilisations could collapse. Then all these weird and wonderful experimental technologies would come out, various types of electric car, people running diesel from cooking oil, whatever. Then eventually, one technology would dominate, and things would slowly return to equilibrium. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose - except that the intervening period of chaos may have changed a lot of things before stability returns. I would have preffered an equivalent of the Industrial Revolution instead of the Out of Gas involution. |
| Stigger12-14-07, 08:39 AM | How exactly is one to come to the conclusion that magewrights reduce the level of magic in Eberron? The stuff on page 9 and 251 of the campaign setting book seem to directly contradict that thought, as does the magewright write up on page 256. Certainly there are fewer wizards, sorcerers, and clerics, but I fail to see anything that says that reduces the level of magic in the world. If anything it seems to increase the level of magic in the world, although perhaps the 'level' of the magic is reduced. And I've seen nothing that says that the percentage of casters is reduced, just that the distribution of particular class types is shifted around. Given the settings equation of magic with technology, and suggestion that serious masters of their crafts resort to magical means to enhance their creations, I really cannot think how Faerun even comes close to that level of magical infusion, aside from the 'level' disparity between the two settings. |
| dimonic12-14-07, 09:05 AM | How exactly is one to come to the conclusion that magewrights reduce the level of magic in Eberron? Because Magewrights and adepts are less powerful than Wizards and Clerics. That and the fact that the text mentions many times that where in typical D&D worlds one can find Clerics to raise dead etc quite easily, in Eberron, many Clerics in established churches often have just a few levels of adept, or even expert, and cast perhaps a few low level spells. The stuff on page 9 and 251 of the campaign setting book seem to directly contradict that thought, as does the magewright write up on page 256. Certainly there are fewer wizards, sorcerers, and clerics, but I fail to see anything that says that reduces the level of magic in the world. If anything it seems to increase the level of magic in the world, although perhaps the 'level' of the magic is reduced. There are far fewer high level casters, so, yes, I am saying that the 'level' of magic is reduced. And I've seen nothing that says that the percentage of casters is reduced, just that the distribution of particular class types is shifted around. Towards less powerful casters with access to lower level spells. Given the settings equation of magic with technology, and suggestion that serious masters of their crafts resort to magical means to enhance their creations, I really cannot think how Faerun even comes close to that level of magical infusion, aside from the 'level' disparity between the two settings. What I am propounding is that FR should have even greater levels of magic infusion. It is illogical to expect cities to be lit by candles and oil lamps, freight to be hauled by mules, knights to ride on horseback etc. in a world where magic can be cheaply mass produced. Given a number of wizards, I am sure that some of them would rather use their power to make life easier, make money etc. than to go adventuring. |
| Stigger12-14-07, 09:21 AM | Well, I'd agree with you if its a question of sheer power of magic, FR has Eberron beat by a mile. For sheer breadth of magic, Eberron beats FR by a fairly wide margin. The problem I see with the logic of FR being more magical, is that you're approaching this from a very different point of view that rests completely in 3e. Eberron never had to contend with extreme costs to magic that came from 1e and 2e. Eberron was crafted from 3e rules entirely, so is much more 'enlightened' when it comes to the intricacies of 3e magic and item crafting, something which is new to the mindset when it comes to FR. There is a very different vibe running through them, and while you might look at the Realms and wonder where all that magical innovation is, others won't, simply because it was never there before. Magic prior to 3e was hideously expensive, and certainly wasn't something that PCs were capable of for the most part, with a couple of exceptions, and for its time, the Realms was far more magically infused than almost any other setting out there. There were very different mindsets in operation back then, and had someone proposed an idea for a setting like Eberron back in the 70's and 80's, they'd have likely been dismissed as some powergaming freak to be immediately ignored. There was a tremendously conservative viewpoint on magic at the time, and it seemed a lot of it was more focused on making every scrap of magic you got as precious as it could be. That's changed in the current paradigm, which overall I think is a good thing, but the Realms still hasn't quite adapted to that mindset just yet. Which actually, thinking about, is probably the whole reason for the massive changes to the setting... that makes them much more logical now I realize, as I'm writing this, although I still think they could have been handled in a much better fashion. So I guess we should chalk it up to a generation gap in design philosophy looking back on it. |
| dimonic12-14-07, 10:00 AM | The problem I see with the logic of FR being more magical, is that you're approaching this from a very different point of view that rests completely in 3e. Eberron never had to contend with extreme costs to magic that came from 1e and 2e. Eberron was crafted from 3e rules entirely, so is much more 'enlightened' when it comes to the intricacies of 3e magic and item crafting, something which is new to the mindset when it comes to FR. Yes, and as I learned more and more of how 3e worked, I moved away from FR as my preferred setting. It became apparent that the setting's magic level had not been adjusted to the new rules. The only way to "justify" the way the setting felt was to ignore the man behind the curtain. There is a very different vibe running through them, and while you might look at the Realms and wonder where all that magical innovation is, others won't, simply because it was never there before. Indeed, however, once my power-gaming kids got into it and started getting their characters into higher levels (12+), it became silly very quickly - if the characters were doing these things, so should the NPCs, and so it begged the question - why was the world such an anachronism? And if I changed the world as the character's levelled, why wasn't it that way all along? Magic prior to 3e was hideously expensive, and certainly wasn't something that PCs were capable of for the most part, with a couple of exceptions, and for its time, the Realms was far more magically infused than almost any other setting out there. That was the world I learned D&D in, but certainly not the way the rules support the game today. There was a tremendously conservative viewpoint on magic at the time, and it seemed a lot of it was more focused on making every scrap of magic you got as precious as it could be. That's changed in the current paradigm, which overall I think is a good thing, but the Realms still hasn't quite adapted to that mindset just yet. I think from the 4e discussions, that some of cookie-cutter profligation of magic is to be reduced in 4e. I am hoping that 4e and FR "meet in the middle". I would like magic to become a little more special and exceptional, and I would like my setting to better reflect what would happen given the actual rules. Which actually, thinking about, is probably the whole reason for the massive changes to the setting... that makes them much more logical now I realize, as I'm writing this, although I still think they could have been handled in a much better fashion. I think the devil is in the details, and it will all depend on how good the rules are, followed closely by how much new goodness they can include in the FR setting. I do think the new rules will be good (although they will be greatly improved by the first or second "service pack";) ). They are being built with both the advances in game design that have occurred since 3e, and knowledge of the various problems that 3e created. As for the setting, it is a good idea to broaden the scope of the main setting book - looking at more of Toril, with perhaps some more data on Maztica and Kara Tur as well as Faerun. Adding a complete Town is a nice touch, letting DMs get off to a roaring start right out of the gate with full FR flavour. Another thing I think bears mentioning: the designers have said, on the one hand - no 180 on matters of the big picture. On the other hand, from a corporate point of view, they do listen to their customers very well. I think the first main setting book will be a pretty high level view of the world. Players will have a lot of say as to how the details settle out. Particularly via the Living Forgotten Realms RPGA campaign, and even forums like this one (as long as it is more than "It sux" and "no, it rocks". |
| dimonic12-14-07, 10:26 AM | I would have preffered an equivalent of the Industrial Revolution instead of the Out of Gas involution. Wouldn't that result in Eberron? |
| MerrikCale12-14-07, 10:38 AM | I can think of about 6 really great 3e books... maybe 5. Really only 3 when compared to the fluff stuff in 2e though... so, yeah. Not really a great track record in my book either. I think you're being a tad unfair there, when you combine 3e and 3.5e there was some real good stuff. Lost Empires, Silver Marches, Lords of Darkness, Dragons of Faerun, Magic of Faerun, Power of Faerun, Serpent Kingdoms, Races of Faerun, etc |
| Alediran12-14-07, 10:38 AM | Wouldn't that result in Eberron? Not necesarily. I meant that the discovery of the Universal Spell Component (wands, staffs and orbs) should have been part of a discovery from one wizard that spread like wildfire, thus changing the nature of magic, it's a smoother way to explain the changes in 4ed magic without killing Mystra. |
| dimonic12-14-07, 11:01 AM | Not necesarily. I meant that the discovery of the Universal Spell Component (wands, staffs and orbs) should have been part of a discovery from one wizard that spread like wildfire, thus changing the nature of magic, it's a smoother way to explain the changes in 4ed magic without killing Mystra. I think it is hard to discuss why these details have been done this way without knowing the rest of the details. I do know that the change in magic is far further reaching than just choosing a universal spell component item. Wizards will get per-action spell, per-encounter spells, and lastly a few per day spells. This suggests such a different magic system that it made some sense to invoke a deicide and weave collapse to explain it (given the other design requisite which was to trim down the large number of deities in FR). Note that offing Mystra (this incarnation) has also removed cyric from the field of play, and other deities are dying as well. I would not be surprised if Mystra has been killed to make way for Elminster to ascend and oversee the new power source. He can even pontificate that he has changed the rules for access to magic to provide a new level of stability in the long run. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-14-07, 11:26 AM | My answer to this whole thread? Cherchez la femme. |
| dimonic12-14-07, 02:22 PM | My answer to this whole thread? Cherchez la femme. Are you thinking of a woman associated with Chris Perkin, Ed Greenwood, one of us posters - or perhaps just a meaningless pythonic joke? |
| msatran12-14-07, 03:01 PM | The other thing that I have to say is that I really DID love Power of Faerun. What a GREAT book that was for players and dungeon masters alike. Sure, it only had two or three PRCs, but "How to be a leader?" So unbelievably useful |
| Stigger12-14-07, 04:38 PM | I think you're being a tad unfair there, when you combine 3e and 3.5e there was some real good stuff. Lost Empires, Silver Marches, Lords of Darkness, Dragons of Faerun, Magic of Faerun, Power of Faerun, Serpent Kingdoms, Races of Faerun, etc Not by my method or measuring it, which is of course entirely subjective. Power of Faerun, doubtlessly a classic. Lost Empires of Faerun, can't go wrong there. Dragons of Faerun, only 3e book I thought was better than its 2e equivalent. A Grand History of the Realms, I can't believe I forgot to put this up the first time around. Silver Marches... I thought The North & Savage Frontier were superior in most respects. Magic of Faerun... good, but I still think Volo's Guide to All Things Magical was a much better product. Lords of Darkness... Cloak and Dagger was by far a superior book to my mind. Serpent Kingdoms... sorry, just wasn't all that hot and bothered by it. To be honest, I really hated the Grand Conspiracy thing it brought up. Races of Faerun... yes, it was a decent book, but it just didn't do all that much for me. Etcetera... Though I'll point out that I didn't bring the subject up in the first place. ;) <Thinking about it, I'm sorry, I'll have to amend that to four truly great books> |
| Meldread12-14-07, 05:22 PM | I have to agree with the above sentiment that Power of Faerun was an awesome book. In fact, I'd go as far as to say the two books required to run a basic game in FR is the FRCS followed by Power of Faerun. If you only have enough money for two books, those are the books you want. |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 05:31 PM | -Do you really even need PoF? Not really, I don't think. All you really need is the FRCS. Everything else after that is extra, technically. |
| Stigger12-14-07, 05:35 PM | Now you're just being argumentative for its own sake... :P |
| msatran12-14-07, 05:38 PM | Technically, Power of Faerun is useful in every edition of the game, with the exception of the limited mechanics. And it's even useful OUTSIDE the Realms. This information wasn't given this sort of treatment in 1st edition, when every class and their mother got followers. |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 05:50 PM | Now you're just being argumentative for its own sake... :P -No, not really. I'm just saying that, from a technical standpoint, all you really need to play is the FRCS. -That said, I don't even have PoF, so I can't judge the actual product. ;) |
| Meldread12-14-07, 06:40 PM | You don't technically "need" Power of Faerun, but it really helps a whole lot to have it. Here is what is contained within the book, from page five: Chapter 1: Order in the Court. Rulers might sit on thrones and thunder decrees, but courtiers do the work of turning royal decisions into daily rulership. This chapter isn't about playing king or queen, but about how to rise through the ranks of a ruling court, dealing with intrigues and other political matters. Common court ranks and "the way things work" in the formal rulership of a realm or city-state are explored, and a sample court hierarchy is provided. Chapter 2: Win the Battlefield. Disputes in Faerun all too often erupt into open armed conflict. This chapter deals with the many facets of military leadership, from battlefield command to logistics and the daily diplomacy of making various ranks work together. Chapter 3: Keep the Faith. Deities are very real in Faerun and their priesthoods wield tremendous power. This chapter describes how holy authority "works" and is used as well as how to rise in rank and influence within a priesthood. Conflicts both inside a faith and between faiths are explored. Chapter 4: Play the Market. Faerun of today is shaped by its mercantile trade, which literally makes it possible for populations in particular locations to exist (by providing food and goods from afar). Successful merchants and business magnates have been gaining ever more importance over the last thousand years in Faerun until, in many cases, they are more wealthy and powerful than rulers who have crowns and thrones. This chapter describes trade routes, costers, trade consortiums, and methods for controlling them or rising to dominance within or over them. Coins can be sharper than swords. Chapter 5: Tame the Frontier. The ever-changing political landscape of Faerun has its so-called "civilized" areas and its wilderlands, and wherever the two meet is a frontier area. Whether civilization is expanding or shrinking, such transitional locales are rich in adventure - and offer great opportunities for enrichment and rulership to ambitious adventurers. This chapter describes the challenges facing a frontier leader as well as how officials in rural domain deal with perils such as bandits and marauding monsters. Chapter 6: King of the Road. Between rugged frontier and glittering cities are the rural areas, where farms that feed those cities lie and outlaws (even local "robber barons") might lurk. This chapter explores the lives and campaign use of marshals and heralds, two very different arms of authority, who can be PCs opponents to PCs, or officials who serve PC rulers. Chapter 7: High-Level Challenges. Powerful PCs need powerful adversaries. The D&D game has seen a long line of published adventures featuring formidable villains, and this chapter explores how to use deities, great dragons, rival adventurers, and invading armies as PC challenges in a Forgotten Realms Campaign. Chapter 8: The Border Kingdoms. A legendary region of tiny, ever-changing kingdoms ruled by adventurers, outcasts, and misfits, this lush coastal area is "the" battleground for carefree adventuring mayhem. This chapter describes current conditions there and explores opportunities for PC heroes. Chapter 9: How To Rule. This section of the book explores the game mechanics that govern the situations explored in the proceeding chapters of the book, notably Leadership and Influence. The modifiers and tables herein can readily be used in any Dungeon and Dragons game. |
| johnkretzer12-14-07, 07:01 PM | -That said, I don't even have PoF, so I can't judge the actual product. ;) You should buy one. So it is all your fault for the lagging sales... ;) |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 07:08 PM | -PoF should be named 'Bureaucracy of the Realms'. :) |
| Stigger12-14-07, 07:09 PM | LK Must be Stopped! Or Started! Or Something! |
| Lord Karsus12-14-07, 07:26 PM | LK Must be Stopped! Or Started! Or Something! -I'd prefer the last two. |
| DreamStalker12-15-07, 01:01 AM | By and large I felt most of the 3ed books were quality. Some were not up to their earlier edition equivalents for various reasons, yet my opinions is that only a couple were poorly done. Faiths and Pantheons I felt was poorly done. The book attempted to be an amount of crunch that was unessecary and barely usable. There was some useful information, and decent player oriented crunch. These bits were int he minority. Even more painful was that by and large the book paled before the Holy Trinity from 2ed. Races of Faerun is a book I go back and forth on. There is much in this book that I like. Certain articles were wonderful and the crunch while a bit much was mostly decent. Most of the time I place this book in the poorly done category however. There is huge inconsistency within this book and with other parts of 3ed. So without even comparing to 2ed insconsistencies (which are different than updates and retroactive changes) there are some huge flaws in this tome that keep it from being a great book. In my opinion. Mysteries of the Moonsea and the super adventure trilogy haven't really caught my attention yet, so I cannot truthfully comment on those. LK, definitely take a look at Power of Faerun. Yes, in many ways it is all about bureaucracy in Faerun. The game really adds to any social based game. The other advantage of the book is that instead of reprinting rules (something that has bugged me about 3ed) it instead referenced them and focused on filling the book with rules additions, clarifications and of course fluff fluff fluff. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-15-07, 06:26 PM | -PoF should be named 'Bureaucracy of the Realms'. :) Heh! This may sound shallow, but I actually would have liked more in PoF on how to be the actual king or queen. Let's face it--more players probably aspire to that kind of position than they aspire to be a garden-variety court bureaucrat. |
| Meldread12-15-07, 09:01 PM | Rinonalyrna- I agree. Like I said above, to every DM out there who is considering running a FR game I recommend the FRCS followed by PoF. I would also have to throw in the Player's Guide to Faerun as well. Those are the three "core" books that should be used. After that, I would recommend a regional sourcebook based on the region where the DM wants to set his campaign. Power of Faerun gives many great ideas for many types of adventure hooks, and even if you don't use things as outlined in the book, it gives you many ideas and lots of "fluff" on the setting. It is insanely useful for "brainstorming" on how to generate campaign hooks and general campaign ideas. I really can't pimp the book enough. |
| Mr_Miscellany12-15-07, 09:13 PM | This may sound shallow, but I actually would have liked more in PoF on how to be the actual king or queen. Let's face it--more players probably aspire to that kind of position than they aspire to be a garden-variety court bureaucrat. I don't think you sound shallow at all. Your statement is right on, if you ask me. The stuff on starting a kingdom works great for me as I've got an Aasimar Paladin from Zhakara in my game that's become Baron of the Stonelands. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin12-15-07, 09:20 PM | Well, it's nice to know I'm not the only one who feels that way.:) |
| Lord Karsus12-15-07, 11:40 PM | Heh! This may sound shallow, but I actually would have liked more in PoF on how to be the actual king or queen. Let's face it--more players probably aspire to that kind of position than they aspire to be a garden-variety court bureaucrat. -Meh, everything in moderation. If you want to be king/queen, you need to be able to get by in the court, first. |
| msatran12-16-07, 03:01 AM | Well, Rhee, the thing is, that if you want that sort of level of rulership, you have to take a chunk of frontier and make it yours, so that's under the taming the frontier section. Most nations in the Realms don't actually use those sorts of honorifics, they use Lord or Lady, for a number of reasons. Reason #1: If someone else actually abuts your frontier, and considers the land to belong to their country, you can join them after declaring yourself lord and not get your head cut off. Reason #2: Calling yourself king is a sure invitation to every would be kingslayer around. These people will come and try to kill you in a variety of interesting ways. Sure, you can slay the would be murderers, but can you deal with stage poisons (Which I still don't allow a save for if there's enough stages) |
| Stigger12-16-07, 10:24 AM | More info along those lines would have have been useful, so I'd agree with Rino on that one. Still an excellent book despite that though. |
| MerrikCale12-27-07, 08:37 PM | Another thing to look at might be a narrower ranking within amazon specifically for D&D products. Thats all well and good, but are there FR sourcebooks for 3.5e that sell from secondary sellers as New for less than $1. There are at least two such cases with Eberron. That says to me the FR stuff is more "in demand". |