Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ankhwearer 11-30-07, 04:43 PM	If nationality/region of character origin is an element of character creation, as it was in 3E Forgotton Realms, I think it would be cool to have some countries open and others limited. Initially, reward cards could open access for specific countries to become character backgrounds. At least I think that would be cool. With only core books to start, there really isn't anything to mark as limited at the start of the campaign, except, perhaps, nationality of origin. Wouldn't it be cool to play a Shou racial type human in the Unapproachable East, or someone from Silverymoon in Waterdeep? I'm not even sure that regional feats would be needed, as I know that some players that are more familiar with the Realms than I am are strongly attached to specific regions. Although a rule mechanism, like unique regional feats in the 4E Forgotton Realms Campaign Setting would be a flavorful incentive.
tombollis 12-01-07, 09:14 AM	If nationality/region of character origin is an element of character creation, as it was in 3E Forgotton Realms, I think it would be cool to have some countries open and others limited. Initially, reward cards could open access for specific countries to become character backgrounds. At least I think that would be cool.. I hate the concept of creation cards. Race/origin should be open to all or to none, regardless of how much they have played or the rewards they have earned/bought/traded for. What I would rather see is all intelligent creatures and nationalities that may be used as NPCs/monsters in the campaign available as PCs. I would also like to see characters eventually creatable at higher than 1st level (though this should exclude them from low level play), including races (such as centaurs) that aren't really suited for low level play, and even awakened animals. (I don't like the "It's an X, kill it on sight!" mind set that has been promoted in current and past campaigns, and would like to see a less prejudiced approach to interracial encounters. I also want to see more freedom of choice in choosing which types of fantasy character to play.) Tom Bollis
Vamroc 12-01-07, 10:21 AM	Just think of the chaos when people start making 4.0 Kobolds because from what I understand the reward's will not expire when LFR becomes active. There are just some mechanics that won't be used so those cards become unplayable not invalid or banned. You may not see Snow Elves in 4.0 but you bet there will be Kobolds oh yeah way to frak the system. :incog:
Vamroc 12-01-07, 10:43 AM	I hate the concept of creation cards. Race/origin should be open to all or to none, regardless of how much they have played or the rewards they have earned/bought/traded for. What I would rather see is all intelligent creatures and nationalities that may be used as NPCs/monsters in the campaign available as PCs. I would also like to see characters eventually creatable at higher than 1st level (though this should exclude them from low level play), including races (such as centaurs) that aren't really suited for low level play, and even awakened animals. (I don't like the "It's an X, kill it on sight!" mind set that has been promoted in current and past campaigns, and would like to see a less prejudiced approach to interracial encounters. I also want to see more freedom of choice in choosing which types of fantasy character to play.) Tom Bollis That's a fine view and when the Owl-Bear with the WERE-CROC and Half-Dragon templates kill you I "GreyHawk" the body hahahahahhahaha.
tombollis 12-01-07, 11:16 AM	That's a fine view and when the Owl-Bear with the WERE-CROC and Half-Dragon templates kill you I "GreyHawk" the body hahahahahhahaha. At what level of play would you encounter that? If a creature is appropriate to the level, what it is should be of minor importance. The key is appropriate power, not specific race. Tom Bollis
Vamroc 12-01-07, 08:30 PM	At what level of play would you encounter that? If a creature is appropriate to the level, what it is should be of minor importance. The key is appropriate power, not specific race. Tom Bollis I was just kidding you know as in a liberal is a conservative whose never been mugged
Cobain 12-03-07, 01:34 AM	I like the idea of creation cards. I know its mighty "Western World" of me, but I like being recognized for all of my incrimental achievements. I LIKE to have things that other people don't, especially if its because I worked harder than them and earned it. I don't think all races should be open to everybody, however, I agree that including enough options for character uniqueness is a most important part of 4.0. If I get a card unlocking a certain race and its a rare card, I appreciate the resulting character concept even more.
Verenal 12-03-07, 09:43 AM	I don't care much for creation cards. Why should I play something I don't like before playing something I like?
Cobain 12-04-07, 04:20 PM	One more benefit of creation cards... it helps to curb the trend of 6 drow elves at a table, or whatever the current popular race may be. Of course, when the drow elf creation card comes out, we may see that very thing, so hopefully the creation cards wouldn't be given out like candy on Halloween. Thay should be tough to earn, like as a reward for conquering a tough special in a particular manner or at least WOTC should not print as many creation cards as other reward cards. As for playing a character you don't like to earn the right to play one you do... why would you ever do that? Can you seriously tell me that you don't like any of the core race/class combinations? Not a fan of the halfling barbarian? If that is really true, maybe try to find a race you can at least tolerate for a bit. In the meantime, try to imagine what it would be like if everybody wanted to play a PC of a rare race.
NiTessine 12-04-07, 11:44 PM	I dislike creation cards. They breed a false sense of entitlement among the players and bring in idiocy like the kobolds or the centaurs. One was too annoying and hated to fit in a party and the second one too big to fit in a dungeon. On the whole, they detract from the playing experience rather than adding to it, and thus should be scrapped. Creation cards that open up merely regions of origin and not new races I could live with, but as I recall, they've stated that the 4E Realms will scrap the region system. They've also stated that they're moving away from the monsters-as-PCs thing, so hopefully there will be no need to have the kobold argument again in August 2008. Also, Cobain and Verenal, if the game feels like work or you don't enjoy any of the character options available in the core books, you probably should find a different hobby.
Verenal 12-05-07, 06:51 AM	As for playing a character you don't like to earn the right to play one you do... why would you ever do that? Can you seriously tell me that you don't like any of the core race/class combinations? Playing a less desirable race or class when I could be playing a more desirable race or class takes the fun out of D&D for me. Kobolds, centaurs and snow elves I can live with, because they don't bring much to the table that can't be done with races open to everyone. Mark of heroes required a card to be psionic or use incarnum. That was too far for me. I'd hate to sit in a table playing human wizard when I want to paly a kalashtar psion, especially if someone else is playing said kalashtar psion. This is why I never bothered with MoH. Edit: D&D should be about options, not restrictions. Creation cards create restrictions for those who don't have them.
MatteBlack 12-05-07, 10:00 AM	I wouldn't mind seeing reward access to races as a lead in to open access to them. They could send them out as reward cards and then perhaps 6 months or a year later those races would become open access. It would allow them sometime to be new, unique and exclusive but still eventually trickle down to everyone. You could even use this it as a limited testing period to see if that race might need some adjustment to fit the campaign. On a side note, I would expect the LFR rules document to include some language on which, if any, previous rewards cards will be allowed. I wouldn't expect Kobolds to be automatically allowed just because the language on the card does not preclude it.
Kithran 12-05-07, 01:10 PM	I wouldn't mind seeing reward access to races as a lead in to open access to them. They could send them out as reward cards and then perhaps 6 months or a year later those races would become open access. It would allow them sometime to be new, unique and exclusive but still eventually trickle down to everyone. You could even use this it as a limited testing period to see if that race might need some adjustment to fit the campaign. On a side note, I would expect the LFR rules document to include some language on which, if any, previous rewards cards will be allowed. I wouldn't expect Kobolds to be automatically allowed just because the language on the card does not preclude it. There shouldn't need to be any special language, both the Snow Elf and the Kobold card spefically say 'Living Greyhawk' on them. You would need explict rules saying any of the Living Greyhawk (or Legacy of the Green Regent, Mark of Heroes or Xen'drik Expeditions) cards _are_ allowed. None of the rewards cards say they are open to all campaigns, they all have a campaign name on them. Kithran
Butterface 12-05-07, 01:28 PM	Let's bring this into the context of Forgotten Realms. What race creation cards would they be wanting to introduce? It's all about the FR lore for me. RPGA needs to keep in mind that these games (or at least the major story arcs) are going to be considered canon for FR. Introducing a creation card for Drow would probably result in about a million Drow PC's running around all over Faerun, and that's damaging to the FR lore in my opinion. Actually, now that I think about it, I can't think of a single good use for creation cards in LFR. What do you think would make a good creation card for this game?
MatteBlack 12-05-07, 02:11 PM	There shouldn't need to be any special language, both the Snow Elf and the Kobold card spefically say 'Living Greyhawk' on them. You would need explict rules saying any of the Living Greyhawk (or Legacy of the Green Regent, Mark of Heroes or Xen'drik Expeditions) cards _are_ allowed. None of the rewards cards say they are open to all campaigns, they all have a campaign name on them. Kithran More than just the LG cards are usable so there is bound to be some confusion. What damage is going to occur by devoting a few words to make it clear. The campaign logo on the card is far from a clear rule on whether it is usable in another campaign.
Vamroc 12-05-07, 02:50 PM	More than just the LG cards are usable so there is bound to be some confusion. What damage is going to occur by devoting a few words to make it clear. The campaign logo on the card is far from a clear rule on whether it is usable in another campaign. Look at the back of all the cards they all say Dungeons & Dragons. In 4.0 there will be only one living campaign and that's LFR but certain mechanics will disappear. So rather than pi$$ off ever gamer who wants to use this or that but can't because there all retired or banned. They said hey you earned those cards you have every right to use them in the new setting. The only ones that are going to be affected are the cards that use abandoned mechanics or races that's it. Will it suck that you can't make a Snow Elf yes. But Feint Surprise, Second Wind, Right Scroll For The Job will all be allowed :ayyyy!:
Butterface 12-05-07, 05:06 PM	I'm pretty sure I heard Chris Tulach say that old campaign cards will not be used in Living FR, mostly due to mechanics changes from 3.5 to 4E. Besides, this is LFR, not LG. We don't need a bunch of kobolds running around the Realms. And there are no Snow Elves in FR. There's Star Elves, Lythari, Moon Elves, Gold Elves, Green Elves. . . but still, the Snow Elf card won't make any sense anyway most likely, after they make the changes with Elves/Eladrins.
danhenneke 12-08-07, 11:15 AM	How about a set of generic cards that is usable if you have a rewards card, a "Bane of my Enemies" type effect? The rule could be something like, if a player has a campaign card from a different RPGA campaign, then he can use it to generate the following effect instead of its listed abilities. Then pick out some useful, but generic abilities to allow the players to use.
cetiken 12-08-07, 07:59 PM	Here's some of the ideas I'd like to see in the initial set: Orcs (presumably of the High Forrest) Elven Subraces Dwarven Subraces (I recall Gold Dwarves being fairly neat) Gnomes Asimar Gensi (or Mephlings - i actually like the planer handbook guys better) Kobalds (though the Dragonborn race may take up most of these guys' cool space) All that presumes that there's rules for these races (presumably the FRCS will incorporate some rules for some of these).
Vamroc 12-08-07, 11:12 PM	I'm pretty sure I heard Chris Tulach say that old campaign cards will not be used in Living FR, mostly due to mechanics changes from 3.5 to 4E. Besides, this is LFR, not LG. We don't need a bunch of kobolds running around the Realms. And there are no Snow Elves in FR. There's Star Elves, Lythari, Moon Elves, Gold Elves, Green Elves. . . but still, the Snow Elf card won't make any sense anyway most likely, after they make the changes with Elves/Eladrins. What I understood was all the cards would be carried over but some of them won't work due to the fact they would follow an abandoned game mechanic. This decision was made out of respect to the millions of gamers who don't want to feel like they've wasted their time collecting the sets. Only to find out all the cards they're going to get from now until next year are worthless. Why throw out everything it's only a couple of cards here and there that would be religated to the recycling bin
Kithran 12-09-07, 04:58 AM	What I understood was all the cards would be carried over but some of them won't work due to the fact they would follow an abandoned game mechanic. This decision was made out of respect to the millions of gamers who don't want to feel like they've wasted their time collecting the sets. Only to find out all the cards they're going to get from now until next year are worthless. Why throw out everything it's only a couple of cards here and there that would be religated to the recycling bin I don't know where you heard that but here's the quote from the September RPGA member's chat from Chris Tulach: <tfkee> Chris, will any of the LGR cards be useable in LFR? ga <WotC_Tulach> Since they're all based on 3.0 or 3.5 rules, no. Next year, months before the campaign launches, players will start receiving 4E Living Forgotten Realms cards, so that by the time the campaign begins, there will be a number to choose from. ga The reason for LG cards being unusable is that they are based on 3.0 or 3.5 rules and this obviously also applies to Xen'drik, Mark Of Heroes and Legacy of the Green Regent cards. Also note that Chris states people will be getting 4E LFR cards ebfore the campaign starts. Elsewhere (can't remember if it is the September or October chat) Chris states that the current mailing will be the last to contain LG cards. This means people receiving cards will have over 6 months of new LG modules to use them in (assuming they have played everything up till now) and over a year in which to use them. Kithran
The_Jester 12-09-07, 10:39 AM	What I understood was all the cards would be carried over but some of them won't work due to the fact they would follow an abandoned game mechanic. This decision was made out of respect to the millions of gamers who don't want to feel like they've wasted their time collecting the sets. Only to find out all the cards they're going to get from now until next year are worthless. Why throw out everything it's only a couple of cards here and there that would be religated to the recycling bin If they didn't make an effort to do that for large, expensive books, why would they do that for free cards.
draxynnic 12-09-07, 06:42 PM	I hate the concept of creation cards. Race/origin should be open to all or to none, regardless of how much they have played or the rewards they have earned/bought/traded for. Personally, I hate reward cards in general. Philosophically, because it brings out-of-character benefits to a table - why should one person's level 5 character be better than another person's level 5 character because the former happens to have been a member of the RPGA longer? The more experienced player's character is likely to have enough of an advantage through having a better build and the player having more experience without adding cards into the picture. (It's worth mentioning at this point that I've maintained this attitude despite having a stack of LG-usable cards a couple of inches thick) Practically, it's one more thing that you have to remember to bring to a game. If providing limited access to unusual races is a goal, I'd probably recommend doing this in-game - require them to play a particular module as their first game (just make sure there are enough incentives to play other things in that module, unless you WANT it to be played by a homogenous party) or have it be earned by the player's primary in-game (possibly through giving the module two ARs - one for the primary, one that can be used as the unusual character's first AR). At least through a system like this getting an unusual character wouldn't be happening by lottery.
MatteBlack 12-09-07, 07:02 PM	I wouldn't be a fan of having specific adventures around to support the beginnings of characters of a given race. I'd like some sort of gating mechanism to keep certain races rare but, for reasons I can't seem to put words to, racial starting mods just rub me the wrong way. I think requiring a player to have one less reward card available to them in order to have their racial card in play makes for enough of a deterrant to help keep given races rare. While I intitially thought rewards cards were imbalancing in theory, I find most veteran players are pretty happy to share their cards with players that might not have suitable ones available to them. In practice, they mostly just give players a good feeling about the time they have invested and don't really seem to tip the balance toward any one character although I know some get annoyed by their impact at times. For the record, I only have two usable cards that aren't really optimal for the characters I play.
draxynnic 12-09-07, 10:04 PM	Yes, there's certainly an incentive for veterans to hand their cards out - stronger allies means you're also probably going to be better off (if only because that's one less raise to pay for afterwards...) However, that requires there's someone at the table that has the cards, and it's still one more thing that you need to remember to pack for a con. However, if you insist on having cards, it might be worth having 'virtual' cards as a control - you don't actually need to have a physical card to have a particular creation effect, but having a strange race means one less card you can use without being a lottery to get the specific one you want. Of course, that could lead to encouraging people to start with strange races because hey, they don't have any cards to use anyway... Of course, with the (apparent) intent to regularly introduce new races through new PHBs, this may be irrelevant: WOTC will probably require that the races in a new supplement be available ASAP to encourage purchases of that supplement, just like most of the new base classes from Miniatures Handbook, the Complete series and 3.5PHB2 eventually made their way in.
Vamroc 12-11-07, 12:16 PM	There must have been some game breaking conflict caused by a chain of cards that work together. This is the only reason I can think of for a total ban. Unless Chris was referring only to those cards marked as Living Greyhawk Campaign cards which is only one set. It just doesn't make sense are we not going to use scrolls for those that have Right Scroll for the Job. Are we not going to have Surprise rounds to eliminate the need for Feint Surprise. What about players who go -10 Second Wind has saved my arse more times that I can count is that mechanic being removed as well. :fight!:
aljergensen 12-11-07, 01:11 PM	There must have been some game breaking conflict caused by a chain of cards that work together. This is the only reason I can think of for a total ban. The problem with existing cards is that we're assuming that they will translate correctly. Will we use scrolls in 4e? Do you continue to bleed when you drop hp to -1 or more or do you automatically stabilize? Will my card that grants a bonus to charisma for my paladin for his Lay on Hands make any sense? Until we know more about how 4e works, I think it's safer to assume that only a few (if any) of the old cards will be allowed. I assume that some will be allowed ... but it will be on a case-by-case basis. If cards are even allowed in LFR. Allen.
mmockus 12-11-07, 04:34 PM	There must have been some game breaking conflict caused by a chain of cards that work together. This is the only reason I can think of for a total ban. Unless Chris was referring only to those cards marked as Living Greyhawk Campaign cards which is only one set. It just doesn't make sense are we not going to use scrolls for those that have Right Scroll for the Job. Are we not going to have Surprise rounds to eliminate the need for Feint Surprise. What about players who go -10 Second Wind has saved my arse more times that I can count is that mechanic being removed as well. :fight!: Well if they are not marked Living Greyhawk, they are marked Eberron, or Xendrik or Green Region, so would make just as little sense. But you make a lot of assumptions on 4e. Such as Will there be scrolls Will there be surprise rounds will there be negative hit points So in honestly there may only be a half-dozen of the existing cards that even make sense with the 4e mechanic. Most of the cards have a limited shelf life, maybe a couple years while that campaign is actually running, while a few have carried over between version. With 4e, the is just a more defined concrete line, 3e cards and 4e cards.
kennew 12-13-07, 12:39 AM	I dislike creation cards. They breed a false sense of entitlement among the players and bring in idiocy like the kobolds or the centaurs. One was too annoying and hated to fit in a party and the second one too big to fit in a dungeon. On the whole, they detract from the playing experience rather than adding to it, and thus should be scrapped. I agree. There are not enough words in the English language to express how much I hate the idea of creation cards. If a race is open in the campaign, it should be open to all players, without regard to what cards they've collected. Some people don't want to play at a table full of drow. Then don't. The worst experience I ever had in LG was sitting down at a table of all halflings. (Although sitting at a table of sex-crazed Larissans in LA was a very close second). If the campaign staff want to disallow drow, by all means go ahead. I for one will likely never play anything but a human (maybe a tiefling, but I doubt it), so my play experience will not be affected. Creation cards are elitist at best. One of the reasons I stopped playing Mark of Heroes was because of the creation cards. The very concept is offensive to many players. Look at the sense of entitlement in some of the posters. Some people seem to be giddy with the idea that they can play something others can't because they earned the card. Exactly how does receiving a certain card in a random selection count as earning anything? To quote Inigo Montoya, "Somehow I think that word does not mean what you think it means."
Dempster 12-13-07, 02:11 AM	Maybe if we are lucky there will be a creation card that lets us play a gnome in 4th edition. Wouldn't that be keen. Honestly I have never used any of the creation cards that I have so I would prefer not to see them in favor of more cards I would use.
ankhwearer 12-13-07, 02:37 AM	I agree. There are not enough words in the English language to express how much I hate the idea of creation cards. If a race is open in the campaign, it should be open to all players, without regard to what cards they've collected. I don't think that you have much to worry about there. In order to have classes or races granted by creation cards, they would have to be restricted from normal play. There is no way in hell that anything in the first PHB is going to be limited, closed or in any other way disallowed as a player choice in LFR. Which is why I suggested that a starting region, some place where (if you choose to) you can potential select a regional feat. That seemed like something that was reasonable to offer as a starting enticement. As for the very idea of creation cards: first, they are a marketing gimmick that is meant to excite a player about the possibility of playing a new character type. A kobold is exciting to some players, so is the idea of using an Incarnate or Psion. But it is taxing on DMs to have to be familiar with every book in existance. Putting character classes on creation cards limits the possibility that a DM will have to crash-learn the rules for Incarnun or Psionics. As for people treating LG race creation cards as god-given-rights, well we must play in different regions. I have not heard anyone express an atitude like that and, in fact, I have never played with a kobold or snow elf. Even in Xendrik Expeditions I have only played with three people that decided that a creation card's hit on your action point pool was worth the cost (one of these people was me, playing a Kalashtar Soulknife). After all, that's once less Feign Surprise or Second Wind you can bring to the table. I've never seen evidence of the attitude you seem to think that creation cards generates. But, instead of taking about the merits and faults of creation cards, I'd like to redirect the conversation to the starting topic: If everything is open from the PHB, what would be interesting to players for new creation cards? The only option I heard so far was asking for a rumored Monster Manual race to be allowed for PC use: the Gnome. That's even assuming that the details needed for a PC race can be reduced down to a MM listing, which developers hints suggest is not the case.
mmockus 12-13-07, 02:03 PM	I don't think that you have much to worry about there. In order to have classes or races granted by creation cards, they would have to be restricted from normal play. There is no way in hell that anything in the first PHB is going to be limited, closed or in any other way disallowed as a player choice in LFR. And the first splat book will be the Forgotten Realms books, so I doubt any restrictions to that either. Which is why I suggested that a starting region, some place where (if you choose to) you can potential select a regional feat. That seemed like something that was reasonable to offer as a starting enticement. No Feats in 4e. But it is taxing on DMs to have to be familiar with every book in existance. Putting character classes on creation cards limits the possibility that a DM will have to crash-learn the rules for Incarnun or Psionics. It is the player's responsibility to be familiar with the rules and to have materials the judge may need. But I can't totally wave off that it does at time burden the game. I also believe that 4e will correct much of this confusion. The only option I heard so far was asking for a rumored Monster Manual race to be allowed for PC use: the Gnome. That's even assuming that the details needed for a PC race can be reduced down to a MM listing, which developers hints suggest is not the case. The Dev staff have already commented that monsters are not even built using the same mechanic as a characters so it will not be as simple as a stat block in the MM. Race will have much more impact in 4e, more than just a starting stat set and level adjustment. Races will have powers as they advance through levels. Just based on the Races and Classes, I expect a racial section to be much larger in 4e, several pages per race.
draxynnic 12-14-07, 02:46 AM	No Feats in 4e. Yes there are. In fact, there's a Design & Development article on 4E feats which includes a few samples.
mmockus 12-14-07, 07:40 AM	Yes there are. In fact, there's a Design & Development article on 4E feats which includes a few samples. My bad yes. Rereading Races and Classes it dawned on me to come back and fix my post. Thanks for the correction. All the early stuff had been refering to POWERS, but they may be using them interchangably now or a feat is just a type of power. Again, my bad. Though I do believe the distribution of feats is going to be different.
gomeztoo 12-17-07, 04:22 AM	It's really way to early to speculate on anything in 4th ed. At any rate, if there are cards, I hope they will be focusing on flavor and such, rather than on game mechanics. Personally I think it is time for something different, though I have no idea yet as of what that should be.
draxynnic 12-19-07, 01:21 AM	My bad yes. Rereading Races and Classes it dawned on me to come back and fix my post. Thanks for the correction. All the early stuff had been refering to POWERS, but they may be using them interchangably now or a feat is just a type of power. Again, my bad. Though I do believe the distribution of feats is going to be different. The impression I'm getting is that powers are class abilities like spells and manouevres, while feats are much the same as they used to be... except that some of the more active feats may be folded into powers.
ankhwearer 12-23-07, 02:53 PM	Well, now the new Elf article from Dragon magazine just announced that rules for playing Drow as a player race will be in the Forgotten Realms Player Guide. Does this mean it will be open to players, limited or what?
bitznarf 12-24-07, 12:36 AM	Well, now the new Elf article from Dragon magazine just announced that rules for playing Drow as a player race will be in the Forgotten Realms Player Guide. Does this mean it will be open to players, limited or what? I would think that it means just what it says it means. No more no less. And any LFR related rules will have to wait till the LFR campaign guidelines discussion begins.
xredmenacex 12-24-07, 12:44 AM	I hope gnome PCs are allowed in LFR in one way or another.
cetiken 12-25-07, 02:48 PM	It will be hard to allow gnomes without any rules for them. And lets be honest folks, how much will the setting be reduced w/o gnomes?
ankhwearer 12-26-07, 01:19 AM	I would think that it means just what it says it means. No more no less. And any LFR related rules will have to wait till the LFR campaign guidelines discussion begins. So you wouldn't care to speculate? After all, there are only a limited number of options: It will be available to all players as a starting race It will only be available to players with a Creation Reward Card It will only be available to players that have played such-and-such a mod (such as the previews at DDXP, perhaps) It will not be available to players at all. Then, examining these options, one might speculate a variety of plausible If...Then comments. One might say, "If drow are available to all players at the start of the campaign, then I'll be surprised if there isn't one at every table I play with." Or perhaps, "If the RPGA does not want a flood of drow players, then they should consider some form of limiting their usage. I would say, "If there are drow racial stats for players in the FRPG, it would suggest that there are other player races as well." That's what this annoucement means to me. And I think that for the initial start of the campaign, using character creation cards for the Forgotten Realms races, with those races being opened to all when the second FRCS is released makes for an interesting way to intially generate interest in the rewards program without permanently alienating the player base. Although I would prefer that regional feats, or perhaps regional powers for the PHB clases be the means by which they use creation cards. I think that restricting 1 in 8 of the races from the general pool of players is too great a limit. But if it is 5 out of 40 for the country of origin/regional feat, there are so many other options that players are not significantly limited.
gomeztoo 12-27-07, 07:08 AM	The old (3.0) campaign setting had stats for drow, genasi, aasimar, and half-drow. So I guess either one or more of these could occur in the new one. And more, such as gnomes, orcs, or half-orcs. But it is all speculation. Funb to do, but little use so far. Though, if drow do make it as PCs in LFR, that may give some oddball effects. We woudl need to take it into account when writing scenarios. While we need to keep scenarios playable and keep the 'drow in the party' from becoming too distracting, one possibly might still want to include penalties in some scenarios or regions.
bitznarf 12-27-07, 05:15 PM	Well, now the new Elf article from Dragon magazine just announced that rules for playing Drow as a player race will be in the Forgotten Realms Player Guide. Does this mean it will be open to players, limited or what? So you wouldn't care to speculate? After all, there are only a limited number of options: Speculation is one thing, asking what it *does* mean is something else entirely. I was just answering your question as asked ;) But no, personally I don't really have any speculative thoughts on the matter at the moment.
Hardolaf 12-31-07, 09:03 AM	Creation cards do one thing, they make me annoyed. I went in XE in the beginning of Summer. I found, I couldn't play anything I wanted to. I had PHP, DMG, ECS, and whatever the faction gave me. Then I found at, oh you don't have so and so card so you can't utilize this race to its full-advantage. Then I found out all of the original race/class combos, didn't do much in terms of how powerful they are. Sure you can play em, but you still had to stick with the basic feats, which doesn't give many options. If I had to have a campaign card just to use any "advanced" options in game, and the only way to get em is play multiple times a week, and order the ones you don't get off Ebay, then what is the point of playing when you have one available day a week? If everything is tied to campaign cards, then shouldn't I just quit? If I can't play the options I BOUGHT when I buy a book then whats the point of buying books??? If I have to buy a book, THEN get a dumb card saying I can even use the book, doesn't the point of buying a book to enhance the game kinda go away? This is just my two cents.
Surgebuster 01-02-08, 07:54 PM	Creation cards do one thing, they make me annoyed. I went in XE in the beginning of Summer. I found, I couldn't play anything I wanted to. I had PHP, DMG, ECS, and whatever the faction gave me. Then I found at, oh you don't have so and so card so you can't utilize this race to its full-advantage. Then I found out all of the original race/class combos, didn't do much in terms of how powerful they are. Sure you can play em, but you still had to stick with the basic feats, which doesn't give many options. If I had to have a campaign card just to use any "advanced" options in game, and the only way to get em is play multiple times a week, and order the ones you don't get off Ebay, then what is the point of playing when you have one available day a week? If everything is tied to campaign cards, then shouldn't I just quit? If I can't play the options I BOUGHT when I buy a book then whats the point of buying books??? If I have to buy a book, THEN get a dumb card saying I can even use the book, doesn't the point of buying a book to enhance the game kinda go away? This is just my two cents. Yeah, what is the point of playing when you can't make the most powerful race/class combination possible - it's not as if you like socialising with anyone you play with, right? :rolleyes: Remember that XE allows you to select these so-called advanced options in expansion slots, so your character can likely be as cheesy as you like with little/no use of campaign cards. LFR is a living campaign and as such, will be fundamentally different to XE. Using examples from the latter and applying them to the former is ridiculous IMHO. Joe
ankhwearer 01-02-08, 11:42 PM	LFR is a living campaign and as such, will be fundamentally different to XE. Using examples from the latter and applying them to the former is ridiculous IMHO. I wouldn't call it ridiculous; that's a little strong to be throwing around in a civil discussion. But I do think that your point is valid. After all, Xendrik had about three creation cards per set, which is a lot. But I think this results from two issues: There were about 50 base classes at the time XE started, plus hundreds of PrCs and several hundred feats. And there was no mechanism in the campaign to grant access to player options as you played, just the expansion slots and creation cards. In fact, each card had to unlock multiple "related" options in order to fully express the theme of each card. One feat or race just wouldn't have done it. In LG, all players have exactly the same access list, plus whatever randomness they unlock through play. (And that is often very random.) The only two creation cards released for the LG campaign were the Snow Elf and the Kobold (which also unlocked some race-specific options). But in LFR, there will not be ranks of books from which to select items that are restricted, and thus unlockable. Starting adventures will not offer feats or powers or PrCs as rewards, because they all start unlocked. The only option for restricted items, in my opinion, would be a few select items from the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. And while we don't have a lot of information on this book, I'd say that restricting one or two "player" races in this book and slowly turning them out as reward cards makes sense to me. It does the double duty of offering an enticement to faithful RPGA players in order to encourage their continued involvment with the campaign, while also putting a filter on racial options that could twist the themes of the campaign if overused (e.g. even one in nine players, an even split, with a drow character would be odd, storywise.)
Surgebuster 01-03-08, 01:04 AM	I wouldn't call it ridiculous; that's a little strong to be throwing around in a civil discussion. But I do think that your point is valid. After all, Xendrik had about three creation cards per set, which is a lot. That's fair and I apologise for the tone. It occasionally gets difficult when there's so much vitriol on these boards. :) There's even people calling for the head of the RPGA to be fired over the GM glitch in another thread, even though it's already been fixed. Maybe I should direct my attention there? ;) Joe
qstor 01-04-08, 09:44 AM	There's no more level adjustment in 4e. Dragonborn? and tieflings are core races so the PHB will have more races than dwarves etc. It would be good for a card to play a gnome but I seriously doubt that will happen. :) Mike
MatteBlack 01-05-08, 01:58 PM	I get the argument against the randomness of how the racial cards are distibuted but, I really do think there needs to be some mechanism in play to keep some races rare. As far as I know the reward cards can be traded or at least lent to other players. With a little bit research and/or trade most people who really want to play a given race should be able to get access to a card. I think the limited access and having one less reward card avaialble for play do a good job at maintaining the racial rarity of some races that should be present in the Realms.
tombollis 01-05-08, 07:23 PM	I get the argument against the randomness of how the racial cards are distibuted but, I really do think there needs to be some mechanism in play to keep some races rare. As far as I know the reward cards can be traded or at least lent to other players. With a little bit research and/or trade most people who really want to play a given race should be able to get access to a card. I think the limited access and having one less reward card avaialble for play do a good job at maintaining the racial rarity of some races that should be present in the Realms. In game disadvntages, such as fewer feats, upkeep costs ( bribes, etc. to deal with in game racial prejudice), a surcharge on purchases, etc, can keep down the number of PCs of "rare" races. The cards won't do the job as well, they just reward those who play a lot or who trade/buy cards. penalizing new players/those who can't play often/those who don't buy cards. I hate their use for racial access. restrict card use to limited once per adventure benefits. Personally, I see no reason to limit access to any race that is allowed at all - no access or open access only. The number of PCs of any type in the campaign is irrelevant, as most have no impact only ay PC they don't adventure with - at any given table there are no more than 6 PCs in the campaign (more at interactives), each with contradictory histories if they don't always adventure together. Tom Bollis
MatteBlack 01-06-08, 02:28 AM	In game disadvntages, such as fewer feats, upkeep costs ( bribes, etc. to deal with in game racial prejudice), a surcharge on purchases, etc, can keep down the number of PCs of "rare" races. The cards won't do the job as well, they just reward those who play a lot or who trade/buy cards. penalizing new players/those who can't play often/those who don't buy cards. I hate their use for racial access. restrict card use to limited once per adventure benefits. Personally, I ree no reason to limit acces to any race that is alloed at all - no access or open access only. The number of PCs of any type in the campaign is irrelevant, as most have no impact only ay PC they don't adventure with - at any given tab;e there are no more than 6 PCs in the campaign (more at interactives), each with contradictory histories if they don't always adventure together. Tom Bollis I'd be lying if, I didn't state that I fear there could be one Drizzt at every table. What is cool about alot of the more exotic classes is that they are rare, providing some sort of gating for their access preserves that and helps preserve more correct racial composure within the campaign. I don't feel like any of the cards are that hard to get a hold of. I have seen them all for sale at one point or another for next to nothing compared to what we spend on books and dice nevermind convention expenses. A little bit of socializing or well-placed plea could likey get you one for free from someone not using theirs.
LGMoses 01-06-08, 02:38 AM	we all fear the rise of the "Drizzt" clones. Thats the worse thing about FR, every big fan of the books I've ever sat with seems to play basically a character. Artemis's are popular, Drizzt clones numerous, Elminster, Elminster, Elminster. Off the FR bashing and back on topic: Do we really need campaign cards? What do campaign cards do? Why are they necessary? Maybe we should look at why we need them. Other than to validate this gigantic stack of them sitting beside me that I've never used. I guess they're garbage now.
gomeztoo 01-06-08, 06:23 AM	Campaign cards are a way of promoting RPGA play, they are advertisement. They are 'cool things to collect'. They are extra powers that can (and gave) turned combat to one's advantage. Whether cards are a good or necessary idea? I think we can do without. Certainly the usefulness or fairness of giving access to races through cards is a bit doubtful. Then again, I would rather not see whole tables of drow. But that counts for thieflings too. And even with cards, you won't be able to avoid that entirely.
tombollis 01-06-08, 10:28 AM	I'd be lying if, I didn't state that I fear there could be one Drizzt at every table. I think this an unfounded fear. It would require that at least 1 in 6 players play such a character. In the extremely unlikely event that this qere true, those thousands of players should ce supported and alowed to play those PCs. What is cool about alot of the more exotic classes is that they are rare, providing some sort of gating for their access preserves that and helps preserve more correct racial composure within the campaign. I disagree. 1st, it is the character concept rather than the rarity that makes them cool. 2nd, racial composition within the campaign is irrelevant to your PC; only composition of the tables at which you play is relevant. If you play with a unique PC type or a common one doesn't matter, your experience should be the same. I don't feel like any of the cards are that hard to get a hold of. I have seen them all for sale at one point or another for next to nothing compared to what we spend on books and dice nevermind convention expenses. A little bit of socializing or well-placed plea could likey get you one for free from someone not using theirs. A card being easy to get hold of just supports my contension that card requirement doesn't limit the number of such PCs significantly - the cards don't ensure rarity of such PCs. The mechanism for supporting rarity won't work. We have no need for creation cards. Tom Bollis
Surgebuster 01-06-08, 06:03 PM	The fear of Drow doing to LFR what Warforged did for Mark of Heroes is without merit IMHO. There's plenty of cool new stuff in 4E to play with that that sterotype won't overwhelm every table. Any more than Dragonborn or Tieflings will anyway and the fact that there are three renders the argument redundant. Even if every 13 year-old boy plays a Drizzt clone, is that so bad? At 13, I wanted to play Bilbo as my first D&D character come hell or highwater and so did all of my friends... Joe
LGMoses 01-08-08, 01:34 AM	lol, if there are thousands of Drizzt clones running around, maybe we DM's can get together and work out a bounty system :D Cleanin' up the world one encounter at a time.
Puggle Halfwine 01-12-08, 11:03 AM	we all fear the rise of the "Drizzt" clones. Thats the worse thing about FR, every big fan of the books I've ever sat with seems to play basically a character. Artemis's are popular, Drizzt clones numerous, Elminster, Elminster, Elminster. I think this is a case of people seeing what they want to see. For example, in D&D it is now almost impossible to avoid the "Drizzt Clone!" accusation if you play a Drow or (heavens forbid) double-wield scimitars. Or have a character with a tortured past/different alignment to the stereotype. It actually makes me quite frustrated because I know that in writing almost all good plots/characters fall into certain archetypes. Humans have been writing stories for as long as we can write- we've found out what works and what doesn't. So, I get slightly annoyed how certain "things" from D&D get typecast like this. Scimitars are now a forbidden item because of the Drizzt stigmata, as are drow characters. Elven archers often have to endure Legolas comparisons. In fact, I dare say I could find a stereotype for almost *every* race/class/equipment combination in the core rules! Just... relax for a moment and accept the fact that your own characters are probably not 100% original either. Everyone draws inspiration from somewhere.
MatteBlack 01-12-08, 01:16 PM	I think this is a case of people seeing what they want to see. For example, in D&D it is now almost impossible to avoid the "Drizzt Clone!" accusation if you play a Drow or (heavens forbid) double-wield scimitars. Or have a character with a tortured past/different alignment to the stereotype. It actually makes me quite frustrated because I know that in writing almost all good plots/characters fall into certain archetypes. Humans have been writing stories for as long as we can write- we've found out what works and what doesn't. So, I get slightly annoyed how certain "things" from D&D get typecast like this. Scimitars are now a forbidden item because of the Drizzt stigmata, as are drow characters. Elven archers often have to endure Legolas comparisons. In fact, I dare say I could find a stereotype for almost *every* race/class/equipment combination in the core rules! Just... relax for a moment and accept the fact that your own characters are probably not 100% original either. Everyone draws inspiration from somewhere. Myself, I really only see the twin-scimitar Drow as the the fanboy Drizzt clone. It's not really the racially promoted combo like an elven archer, dwarven fighter or others are. The rules also support fighting with twin-scimitars and a tortured past is a common, if overused in D&D, backstory. The difference here is that when these elements crop up together it generally denotes a copycat player and not upholding one of the sterotypical builds that is supported by the rules and in-game culture.
ulfhirtha 01-12-08, 05:03 PM	Even if every 13 year-old boy plays a Drizzt clone, is that so bad? At 13, I wanted to play Bilbo as my first D&D character come hell or highwater and so did all of my friends... True enough. There's an Aragorn clone at plenty of tables where there's a Ranger and so on. I think basing characters off prominent models seems a might inevitable. Who didn't want to BE (insert cool character) at some point? The idea of limiting access strikes me as basically bizarre as I agree that for all practical purposes, the only PCs who exist are the ones at the table you are running. So how many of them decide a Drow or Gnome offers them the kind of play experience they are after is irrelevant. Moreover, it is the player's business to decide what they are trying to accomplish with their character and design it accordingly. With free memberships now, the need to offer enticements for membership in the form of creation cards seems rather questionable. Some of the other campaign card tricks, sure. The tracking system for campaigns like Xen'drik, ok. But what KIND of character you can play? Not that I don't like playing my XE Drow PC (whose echoes owe far more to B5's G'kar than Drizzt, if you want to know) but I shouldn't have to go card-hunting to do so.
GreenKnight 01-12-08, 05:23 PM	The fear of Drow doing to LFR what Warforged did for Mark of Heroes is without merit IMHO. There's plenty of cool new stuff in 4E to play with that that sterotype won't overwhelm every table. Any more than Dragonborn or Tieflings will anyway and the fact that there are three renders the argument redundant. Even if every 13 year-old boy plays a Drizzt clone, is that so bad? At 13, I wanted to play Bilbo as my first D&D character come hell or highwater and so did all of my friends... Joe I started playing 17 years ago, and after all these years I STILL want to play Galahad.
Sieylianna 01-12-08, 06:16 PM	Scimitars are now a forbidden item because of the Drizzt stigmata, as are drow characters. I don't think that word means what you think it means. Ed
Puggle Halfwine 01-15-08, 08:59 AM	I don't think that word means what you think it means. Ed As that post was written very early in the morning I will apologize for my retard moment. I obviously meant stigma.
LGMoses 01-15-08, 12:52 PM	Before dnd died at my local game store we had quite a few people playing drow but no male drow. Everyone wanted to play females. Don't know why, most of the drow were in eberron. Had 4 female drow running around at once i think.