Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thrilljack 11-10-07, 09:56 PM	I used to love FR. The detail's incredible and the flavor of groups like the Zhentarim and Thay is admirable. I was keenly attracted to FR, and then I discovered Shar, the single greatest entity to ever hit a WotC published realm. Sure, Vecna's lich-who-became-a-god schtick is cool, and Malar's savagery deal is intriguing, but they're a far stretch from measuring up to Shar. Honestly guys, what could possibly be cooler than a goddess who kills another god secretly, and then doesn't tell anybody so that his followers worship a dead god? Shar's dogma is pretty extreme (extremely awesome, that is), but I definitely share her opinion on one thing: Mystra ruins all the fun. Everything that even mentions her name, or Elminster, or any of the Sisters, for that matter, is immediately and irrevocably painful to read. Mystra, as Ed has said so often, is the all-powerful, end-all, be-all, harder-to-keep-dead-than-a-cockroach goody-two-shoes. FR has all of this incredibly involved and unique evil organizations, but a lot of the times it feels like they just exist so that these good groups can beat them down and look powerful by comparison. What's it matter if the Zhentarim is a world-threatening force if Elminster can destroy it with a thought? Give me some good news about 4th edition. I thought I heard somebody say that Mystra is going to kick the bucket. Is this absolutely amazing possibility actually likely? And is her death anything more than an oppurtunity for one of Mystra's Chosen to step up and become the new, infinitely more annoying God(dess) of Magic? Overall, just tell me that the FR pantheon is making some kind of change for the better.
DreamStalker 11-10-07, 10:19 PM	Mystra is dead in 4E and Correllon is generally considered the patron god of magic users. The Chosen are a thing of the past though Elminster still lives on of course. The deity list is being culled even further. Some are outright dead but most are now Divine Servants of the Greater Gods instead of being gods in their own right. Does this convince you?
Thrilljack 11-10-07, 10:21 PM	I looked around the rest of the board (I've been out of the loop for a long while) and I'm seeing a lot about Gods dying off. This will probably be more awesome than not. Do we know what event is causing this? A second Time of Troubles?
Dark Wizard 11-10-07, 11:12 PM	The Drow deities entered into a cosmic game that risked their own existences, so a number of them died from that. The Dwarven deities crusaded against the Duergar ones, the Duergar pantheon is no more and along with them two dwarven gods. Helm died at the hands of Tyr over the affections of Tymora. The entire ordeal was instigated by Siamorphe's departure from the House of the Tried and by Sune's suggestion of Tyr courting Tymora as a balance of sorts. The manipulation of Cyric is suspected. Mystra died by the hand of Cyric on her own plane (almost certainly with heavy involvement by Shar, albeit indirect). Savras dies when Mystra's plane destructs. Azuth and Velsharoon are thrown into the Astra plane (MIA). All of this is summarized in the last two pages of Grand History of the Realms. That is about as much as anyone knows. The designers have been rather tight-lipped about the whole thing until sometime in early 2008 when the previews for FR 4E start premiering.
Thrilljack 11-10-07, 11:23 PM	Mystra died by the hand of Cyric on her own plane (almost certainly with heavy involvement by Shar, albeit indirect). That's the hottest thing I've ever heard. Are you coming on to me?
Red_Wizard 11-10-07, 11:58 PM	:rolleyes: *Grumbles at thread, but keeps mouth shut*
MarkusTay63 11-11-07, 01:06 AM	Isn't it all so 'awesomely COOL'? :rolleyes: I think the rest of planet Earth should sue WotC because they have used up all of the alotted 'coolness' for the next 20 years. ;)
Stigger 11-11-07, 01:32 AM	Smells like baiting to me... which I do so very much hope is ignored.
MarkusTay63 11-11-07, 01:38 AM	:D I might even go so far as to say it's "Groovy". :cool:
Dark Wizard 11-11-07, 02:34 AM	Abeir is the Evil Dead universe? Ash as the Chosen one? The Necronomicon, Deadites, ancient evils, Far Realmsian madness?
captaincarot 11-11-07, 03:23 AM	The original thread was written by some one who does not speak english as their first language, consequaently they have made some of the usual basic errors on sentence structure that people teand to make when writing in a language which is not their native toungue. consequently far from saying Convince me to play FR in 4.0 what they actually meant to say is Convince me to play 4.0 in FR which is a far more sensible and also the only logical correctly structured way that these words could be arranged in the english language.
Pyrogen 11-11-07, 06:21 AM	Just seen the bit about Corellon. Is that definitely in the Grand History - that he gets promoted from just being god of elven magic to god of magic for everyone? Or is it that only elves are going to be able to access magic? I would really like clarification on this one because my favourite characters that I play tend to be elves and my campaign storylines involve elves much of the time, so it is relevant to plot development. Also does the Grand History actually confirm that the drow gods assumed dead (from the novels) actually are or is it left open (because knowing would spoil the 3rd part of the Lady Penitent series?
johnkretzer 11-11-07, 06:59 AM	Convincing you to play FR in 4.0...or 4.0 in Fr whatever you meant is not my job. Unless WotC starts wanting to pay me. It also goes against my believe that people should seek the infomation out themselves and then decide.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 05:48 PM	What's it matter if the Zhentarim is a world-threatening force if Elminster can destroy it with a thought? Is that true, or is that just what naysayers (of Elminster) like to believe?
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 05:50 PM	Just seen the bit about Corellon. Is that definitely in the Grand History - that he gets promoted from just being god of elven magic to god of magic for everyone? Or is it that only elves are going to be able to access magic? Neither. Corellon is being talked about because of what was said about him as a CORE deity. We don't know what his role in the FR is going to be.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-11-07, 05:52 PM	Convincing you to play FR in 4.0...or 4.0 in Fr whatever you meant is not my job. Agreed 100%. Do your own damned research, Thrilljack. It's really not that difficult.
Fingoldfin 11-11-07, 09:23 PM	Hey Thrilljack, Yo dude! The Realms in 4e are totally cool!!! Evil did a super rad kick flip and smashed good in the face with its skateboard!! Awesome! Rad! The new Realms are just like a Mountain Dew commercial!! Shar drives a monster truck over the seven sisters and Busta Rhymes raps in the background!! Is that what you wanted to hear? :rolleyes:
18DELTA 11-11-07, 09:58 PM	Hey Thrilljack, Yo dude! The Realms in 4e are totally cool!!! Evil did a super rad kick flip and smashed good in the face with its skateboard!! Awesome! Rad! The new Realms are just like a Mountain Dew commercial!! Shar drives a monster truck over the seven sisters and Busta Rhymes raps in the background!! Is that what you wanted to hear? :rolleyes: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :clap: :clap: :heehee :D
Stigger 11-12-07, 12:58 AM	:rofl: That sold me Fin... I can't believe I didn't see it before...
Suin Bahhar 11-12-07, 10:29 AM	Hilarious!
Diffan 11-12-07, 10:38 AM	Busta Rhymes raps in the background!! Ahh skeet skeet skeet skeet! Dat's off da hook!
Fingoldfin 11-12-07, 05:54 PM	Ahh skeet skeet skeet skeet! Dat's off da hook! Any time I write the word pi-ss-ed it gets censored, but skeet is ok? I guess the moderators don't know what skeet means.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-12-07, 07:29 PM	Yo dude! The Realms in 4e are totally cool!!! Evil did a super rad kick flip and smashed good in the face with its skateboard!! Awesome! Rad! Fo' sho'!:cheer:
Red_Wizard 11-12-07, 08:21 PM	I understand that Fanbois get more than a might annoying with their uneducated opinions of what is super cool, and what is "lame", "stupid", or "shouldn't be in existence", But I honestly get a little annoyed at also seeing time and again this being shoveled onto those who honestly don't like "good" characters. Perhaps some people here think I too then am a fanboi who "hatez" Drizzt and Elminster, and thinks the Drow are "l337 wiket sweet un-pwned cool" and that's fine. At least then I'll feel like I'm getting clumped with the rest of the newbs legitimately. :rolleyes: However, to clear things up, preferring the "Bad guys" most of the time to the good ones, doesn't mean I hate Elminster, or Drizzt, or relish the idea of 4E changing the Realms -- for better or worse is to be seen. I don't leap for joy at an RSE, nor feel the need to ask "who do you think would win..?" questions. I DO however read and own all the novels, collect the sources, and pour over the lore in my occasional free time -- even if perhaps I should be doing something better with said time ;). Do I hate anything in the Realms? No. Do I think things are at times lopsided, or that the authors favour their main characters, making developed NPC's into whining Fanbois in their own right? Yes. Do I understand that the author is going to favour his Protagonist/ Main character? Absolutely. DO I begrudge other people for having favourite characters? Not unless they are running around with fingers in their ears yelling "Kill drizzt, he is a weiner in the bum type of guy". Ultimately what I'm trying to say is I spend as much time in the setting as the rest of the avid posters here, and preferring the bad over the good shouldn't leave me with a foul taste in my mouth whenever someone comes along and starts running their mouth before reading a source. Maybe I'm the only one, and maybe I'm just tired and cranky. Then again, I'm also sure many others at some point in time feel alienated by both imaginary, and RL slights that happen here. *Reads over post* I'll leave my rant there. :P -RW
Meldread 11-12-07, 08:31 PM	RW- You aren't the only one.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-12-07, 09:13 PM	Do I hate anything in the Realms? No. Do I think things are at times lopsided, or that the authors favour their main characters, making developed NPC's into whining Fanbois in their own right? Yes. Do I understand that the author is going to favour his Protagonist/ Main character? -RW By the way, I would like to add that I'm no advocate of "author's darlings" even though I tend to favor goodly characters. Although, an "author's darling" need not be good-aligned, he/she simply must have an excessive amount of protection from the author. Author's darlings and Mary Sues should be squished.
selunatic2397 11-12-07, 10:27 PM	Convince you to play 4ED???:confused: Why should I do that???:thinks: I want to convince you to play FIRST EDITION! :evillaugh
Meldread 11-13-07, 03:25 AM	Author's darlings and Mary Sues should be squished. If you feel that way, then I don't understand why you are so avidly against 4th Edition. With the information we have currently, it seems to be the biggest assault against the Mary Sue characters since... well I don't think there has been a time when such a large assault has been made. The only two characters we know for certain who make it are Drizzt and Elminster. Although those two are the largest Mary Sue's of all, we both know why that is - they are both critical icons of the Forgotten Realm's franchise and are both money makers for the setting. If both of those were not true there probably would have been a very real chance of them getting the axe. Even those who find themselves liking the cliché super heroes of Mystra have to admit that the Chosen were getting too numerous in number. Even though some of them have died before 4th Edition, we have to keep in mind that there are an unknown number of Chosen that we do not even know about yet. Seriously, it is and was getting ridiculous.
Stigger 11-13-07, 10:12 AM	Not sure about that... seems like they were just the energizer whipping dogs at times. Were I to go through even a quarter of the trials and tribulations of Elminster, I'm pretty sure I'd have folded like a napkin... not much uber, a lot of pain and suffering as far as I could tell. I usually had this perception that enduring hardship and massive experience/academics as being his real strong points, rather than awesome spells. But that was kinda his job, along with the rest of the Chosen, to survive and make magic grow, not to hand out liberal helpings of magical beat downs to the local bad guys... if anything I got the impression they were supposed to avoid things like that so as not to risk the Silver Fire they carried.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 10:18 AM	If you feel that way, then I don't understand why you are so avidly against 4th Edition. With the information we have currently, it seems to be the biggest assault against the Mary Sue characters since... well I don't think there has been a time when such a large assault has been made. The only two characters we know for certain who make it are Drizzt and Elminster. Although those two are the largest Mary Sue's of all, we both know why that is - they are both critical icons of the Forgotten Realm's franchise and are both money makers for the setting. If both of those were not true there probably would have been a very real chance of them getting the axe. Even those who find themselves liking the cliché super heroes of Mystra have to admit that the Chosen were getting too numerous in number. Even though some of them have died before 4th Edition, we have to keep in mind that there are an unknown number of Chosen that we do not even know about yet. Seriously, it is and was getting ridiculous. That is funny it is exactly that reason why I am against 4th edition is because of the Mary Sue characters like Cyric. The 7 Sisters or Mystra aren't that annoying to me. Cyric has recieved more author fiat then any character in the FR novel lines combined. Also I generaly ignore the novels so I really don't care how some author treats a character or a power group. They usualy do it badly with good or evil characters.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-13-07, 10:23 AM	If you feel that way, then I don't understand why you are so avidly against 4th Edition. Because, obviously, I'm not as annoyed by certain NPCs as other people are.
Fingoldfin 11-13-07, 10:57 AM	Red Wizard, I also like to run evil games. I run a good elf game in the High Forest now, but one of my players moved and can't play every week. I decided to keep that game going once a month, and start an evil game for the people who can make it more often. Don't get me wrong; I don't have a problem with people who favor playing evil PC's. I just like to make fun of the, "evil is way cool supper rad" people. Reading Thrilljacks post made me think he was one of the people that Stigger said was only interested in, "dings, phat lootz, and ownage." I don't even have a problem with that kind of gaming. I did it when I was in middle school. I'm just a little on edge because the setting is being trashed to appeal to the evil is cool crowd. Happy Gaming!:D
captaincarot 11-13-07, 12:52 PM	It also goes against my believe that people should seek the infomation out themselves and then decide. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: my point was i can't see why anyone would need convincing to play in the realms, but i haven't yet seen any convincing reason to play 4ed
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 01:46 PM	:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: my point was i can't see why anyone would need convincing to play in the realms, but i haven't yet seen any convincing reason to play 4ed I agree I haven't been sold on 4th edition either as of yet.
Meldread 11-13-07, 04:13 PM	John- I have to agree with your last remark regarding the novels and the way authors treat the characters. We aren't allowed to "bash" the novels on the forums, but suffice it to say I refuse to buy them and lobby for them to be made non-canonical at every opportunity. For all the faults of Eberron they at least have very good meta-design rules. If you want my honest opinion the problem is not so much the characters but the D&D System and the way it treats "power". If I were to be stated out for a D&D character I'd probably be a level 1 or level 2 commoner or expert as would the vast majority of people. No matter how hard I tried I'd -never- be able to kill a level 10 Fighter. I couldn't shoot him, I couldn't stab him, I couldn't poison him, he might even survive an explosion. In real life I have no combat training. However, if you give me a gun I can still stalk and kill the best military trained man in the world. This is not possible in D&D. D&D as a whole becomes heroic fantasy around level 6, and past that you've entered the realm of epic fantasy - the realm of Conan the Barbarian. Past 15th you've entered the realm of super heroes - the likes of Superman, literally. Once you pass 20th you're basically a god among mortals. The D&D system is a linier progression system. Most of the character's that cause problems are near or over level 20. In order to create appropriate challenges for them you must do one of two things: 1. Create more powerful enemies. For good aligned characters this requires equally powerful super / god-like villains. 2. Create a Realm's Shaking Event that the character must end or prevent. Thus, we stand where we stand now because of the way power works in D&D. People scoff at the fact that Drizzt has the power to basically wipe out a hundred orcs alone. However, by the rules - if the orcs are around the levels they should be - throw a few buffs on him and he has the power to do it. The more you examine things it is like realizing that there is a man behind that curtain, and that the world - because of the system it is based off of - is broken. It simply can't sustain itself. We end up with constant RSE's and the Spellplague because of this. Eberron realized this problem and worked hard to limit NPC characters keeping most very low in level. If the DM needed a BEGG for his campaign he had the power to create it. If he wanted a certain NPC to have more power he could give it to them. It is much easier to give power than it is to take it away. You can't easily keep Elminster as he is in cannon but turn him into a level 10 Wizard. It simply doesn't work. It is my belief that the primary reason behind this reset (and that is what it is) is not because of a dislike of the setting, but a realization that the world cannot sustain itself as it is currently. However, in order to fix things they have to basically kill off everyone over level 5 to do it. D&D is a fun system to play in because it is abstract. However, this same abstraction causes problems when being integrated into novels which are then placed into cannon. The D&D System as a whole is the physics of the Forgotten Realm's. When it is changed or modified the Realm's is changed and modified with it. The pitfalls of the system are likewise reflected in the setting and in the novels.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 06:40 PM	John- I have to agree with your last remark regarding the novels and the way authors treat the characters. We aren't allowed to "bash" the novels on the forums, but suffice it to say I refuse to buy them and lobby for them to be made non-canonical at every opportunity. For all the faults of Eberron they at least have very good meta-design rules. Yes...I have also stopped buying them for much the same reason. If you want my honest opinion the problem is not so much the characters but the D&D System and the way it treats "power". If I were to be stated out for a D&D character I'd probably be a level 1 or level 2 commoner or expert as would the vast majority of people. No matter how hard I tried I'd -never- be able to kill a level 10 Fighter. I couldn't shoot him, I couldn't stab him, I couldn't poison him, he might even survive an explosion. In real life I have no combat training. However, if you give me a gun I can still stalk and kill the best military trained man in the world. This is not possible in D&D. I disagree it is possible for a low level character to kill a higher level one. As a matter of fact I would give it the same chance as a you stalking the world's best military man. Also can I point out in the West alot of the most feared gunfighters were shot down by ambushes from normal people. To reflect this I institue a rule called "A hundred commoners with pointy stick kill anything" D&D as a whole becomes heroic fantasy around level 6, and past that you've entered the realm of epic fantasy - the realm of Conan the Barbarian. Past 15th you've entered the realm of super heroes - the likes of Superman, literally. Once you pass 20th you're basically a god among mortals. I disagree with this power scale but get your point. Thus, we stand where we stand now because of the way power works in D&D. People scoff at the fact that Drizzt has the power to basically wipe out a hundred orcs alone. However, by the rules - if the orcs are around the levels they should be - throw a few buffs on him and he has the power to do it. Actualy in my game he would've lost that battle...because I play with something called the one in twenty rule. Which means for every twent he would have been hit once...thus lets say he can kill 10 a round. He will get hit (figure math real quick) 22 times...first level orcs( with most shooting arrows...let make them atleast smart) that would be about 99 hit points over ten rounds. As of the FRCS he has 25 HP left...hardly a clear cut victory, and if I use a formation that has them use reach weapon and regular melee weapons he is dead. Heck if I just spread the archers out so he can only kill about 5 every two rounds he is dead. I have this house rule for two reasons. 1) It keeps a repetive long ass fight from happening. 2) There is real danger in taking on a 100 opponents at any level which keeps the super man complex down. I suggest you try it out. I agree with you that D&D can becxome riduculous but there are ways to prevent this or atleast keep it from being a major problem.
Meldread 11-13-07, 08:30 PM	John- I also have rules in place to prevent such silliness, but WotC doesn't - and that's why we end up where we stand currently. Does the Simbul live in fear that some commoner is going to put poison in her food? (A lot of people in Aglarond don't seem to like her as their ruler.) Does she have the slightest bit of concern that the Captain of the Palace Guards will arrange a coup d'état? Of course not. However, in the real world people would have those fears because they can actually happen. In the Realm's the Simbul has the power to single handedly destroy and eliminate almost any conceivable threat placed before her. In fact, according to Ed Greenwood she has enough power to single handedly destroy the ENTIRE Nation of Thay. The only thing preventing her from doing it is her respect for Mystra, who requested that she reframe from making the attempt. That is a single character against an entire nation of wizards who possesses enough power to destroy them all. That is the type of power scale we are dealing with here, and the reason we have RSE's like the Spellplague. It is the only way to get rid of these immortal god-like NPC's.
The_Shaman 11-13-07, 09:25 PM	Meldread: So say you. Mind you, not every noble in the Realms and elsewhere lives in constant fear, nor is anyone - including the Symbul - immune to failures. Certainly, Ed Greenwood has statted some very powerful NPCs. Their levels, however, can be varied for the game as long as their relative power is preserved. As iirc he said regarding Larloch, whether he's in the 30's or 40's, "Just don't go there." Or, at least, don't kick in the door and show off just because you've got your first epic feat and think you've caught Ao for the *******. They are the hidden or not-so-hidden movers and shakers, and if your party wants, they can eventually enter their labyrintine schemes. If not, then they don't need to bother with them. There's a lot that happens in Aglarond and that the Symbul is not directly involved with. Just as you can adventure for years in the North and not meet Drizzt, especially if you weren't looking for him. So it's not as if they necessarily have to dominate any game that takes place in their respective regions - they have enough to take care of playing their own games against one another. However, as iconic NPCs, they should not be within the easy reach of any adventuring party to just start knocking off casually. Likewise for the Symbul. Yes, she's obscenely powerful: as one of the foremost scions of Mystra, it would be surprising if she were not. It's a world of liches and great wyrms, archfiends and evil gods, and on Toril, she can hold her own. Besides, if she and her forces were not at least a threat to Thay, then just how could we explain Thay not having conquered the entire region already? Rashemen isn't interested in much beside its borders, and the Golden Way cities... hmph. Yet for all the impressive numbers, power in the Realms is not so stable - if it has ever been. It is still possible for a low-ish level character to accomplish great deeds, if they show great cunning or skill. The high level NPCs are what you make of them. They have been and can be defeated; their impressive stat blocks simply remind you that it will not be easy, and it should not be. Is it so bad that there are things the PCs cannot accomplish with brute force? Things for which they may need artifacts from ancient times or pacts with allies once unimaginable? To summarize it, high level NPCs have some very useful roles. They provide the DM with a ready set of limits or props, should s/he need them. They also provide depth to the setting by offering deeper layers of conflict in which the players may want to immerse themselves - or which the DM can involve them in. Finally, they offer a challenge for high-level and epic-level players - something that is beyond their immediate grasp, something to keep their ambition burning. They can be, have been, and will be foiled - it will simply take extraordinary feats and a little luck to do so. They should not intimidate the players, merely cause them to become a little more aware and careful in their actions. Cyric, a low-born cutthroat, rose to become one of the greatest powers in the Realms, despite mortal and immortal enemies. Your PCs can do it, too - and while it won't be an easy road, the rewards will be so much sweeter.
Meldread 11-13-07, 09:59 PM	Shaman, The discussion is not about my PC's. Dealing with specific NPC's isn't that difficult, because you can always have them be elsewhere at the time. If it becomes a serious problem you can simply have them killed off or missing indefinitely. The problem that I have, personally, is the sheer number of them. It becomes a lot to juggle because the problem isn't just iconic characters. They alone are not the biggest problem, it's their vast number of less powerful allies in the level 10 to 15 range. After all, why does a city need adventurers to deal with a massive goblin army when there are at least 15 NPC's who could single handedly wipe them all out (Drizzt Style) within a few days walking distance. On top of them you then have to worry about the invested interests of iconic NPC's like Elminster and the Simbul. However, it isn't even about that problem. That is a minor problem compared to the real problem they represent. The fact that these characters are the center of novels which are then made cannon is the real problem. The biggest complaint on these forums is the vast number of RSE's in the Realm's with the Spellplague is being the latest in a long line. However, these "obscenely powerful" characters, as you put it, can only be challenged by these types of events. The Spellplague is and obvious ploy to reduce their numbers and therefore reduce the ridiculousness we experience with having one RSE after another. It is my most sincere hope that the 4E FR takes some of the meta-design goals from Eberron and applies them to the setting.
Meldread 11-13-07, 10:00 PM	Shaman, The discussion is not about my PC's. Dealing with specific NPC's isn't that difficult, because you can always have them be elsewhere at the time. If it becomes a serious problem you can simply have them killed off or missing indefinitely. The problem that I have, personally, is the sheer number of them. It becomes a lot to juggle because the problem isn't just iconic characters. They alone are not the biggest problem, it's their vast number of less powerful allies in the level 10 to 15 range. After all, why does a city need adventurers to deal with a massive goblin army when there are at least 15 NPC's who could single handedly wipe them all out (Drizzt Style) within a few days walking distance. On top of them you then have to worry about the invested interests of iconic NPC's like Elminster and the Simbul. However, it isn't even about that problem. That is a minor problem compared to the real problem they represent. The fact that these characters are the center of novels which are then made cannon is the real problem. The biggest complaint on these forums is the vast number of RSE's in the Realm's with the Spellplague is being the latest in a long line. However, these "obscenely powerful" characters, as you put it, can only be challenged by these types of events. The Spellplague is and obvious ploy to reduce their numbers and therefore reduce the ridiculousness we experience with having one RSE after another. It is my most sincere hope that the 4E FR takes some of the meta-design goals from Eberron and applies them to the setting.
johnkretzer 11-13-07, 10:29 PM	I also have rules in place to prevent such silliness, but WotC doesn't - and that's why we end up where we stand currently. Ah great minds think alike....what WotC does do and they do to is of little importance for the any invidual game. What they should shoot for is a middle ground. While you and I might not like one person taking on 100 people and surviving without a scatch...others eat that up as fun. We will always have to fine tune the rule to fit what we want. Why we are wer we are is because WotC as been moving from a more central position in the rules. If you read the 4th edition previews it seems like D&D characters will be killing foes in the masses at lower levels. Does the Simbul live in fear that some commoner is going to put poison in her food? (A lot of people in Aglarond don't seem to like her as their ruler.) Does she have the slightest bit of concern that the Captain of the Palace Guards will arrange a coup d'état? Of course not. However, in the real world people would have those fears because they can actually happen. In the Realm's the Simbul has the power to single handedly destroy and eliminate almost any conceivable threat placed before her. Actualy the Simbul does live in fear of that...that is why she wears a item that protects vs poisons...atleast in my game she does...:) Also if you continue with the theory a 100 normal people can take down someone imagine what a 100 of wizards can do...she'll loose. What keeps Thay from doing this is that she is crazy enough that she'll take down alot of them before she does go. Added to the fact they are very fractionalize it is hard to get a concerted action on their part. No ones is willing to weaken themselves due to the fact that one of their peers will sweep in a take thei victory. In fact, according to Ed Greenwood she has enough power to single handedly destroy the ENTIRE Nation of Thay. The only thing preventing her from doing it is her respect for Mystra, who requested that she reframe from making the attempt. That is a single character against an entire nation of wizards who possesses enough power to destroy them all. One can you quote where you saw that? Did he just say that outright or was it in a novel represented from a characters point of view. She might believe she can and Mystra talk her out of it because she didn't want her to die... Also who is running your game Ed or you? That is the type of power scale we are dealing with here, and the reason we have RSE's like the Spellplague. It is the only way to get rid of these immortal god-like NPC's. Yes we are...but then again imagine people like the Simbul...and the other really powerful characters...like nuclear bombs...and currently the Realms is balanced on on the MAD policy. The Realms with it's high and powerful NPC where powerful wizards can't just go out and own the world because there are other powerful people out there who will fight them. In this resultant fight the world would srverly damaged(probably destroyed). To me the fact that the powerful must resort to more subtel tactics is a very great part of the world. Also Eberron has the same 'problem'(again this is only a problem to some not all) in that what keeps Vol from conquering the world? Simple their is a whole island of Dragon that will descend on her and kill her. They are also just as many 10 to 15 level characters in Eberron they just haven't stated them out yet..
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 12:46 AM	[QUOTE=Meldread;14326889]Shaman, However, these "obscenely powerful" characters, as you put it, can only be challenged by these types of events. The Spellplague is and obvious ploy to reduce their numbers and therefore reduce the ridiculousness we experience with having one RSE after another. I agree with most of your post, but there is one problem with your logic. Many of the novels with the largest and most disruptive RSEs don't have the old iconic NPCs in them. Newly created "obscenely powerful" characters are the ones dealing with the RSEs. I will just list a few. The Draco-Rage The Last Mythal War of the Spider Queen
Meldread 11-14-07, 01:21 AM	Fingoldfin- I'm aware of that, but my comments aren't directly aimed at the iconic characters of the setting. As I said to Shaman they are only a small portion of a larger problem. My comments are aimed directly at any character in the setting that is above level 10, because after that point you've pretty much placed yourself in the 0.01% percentile range of powerful individuals. You have to keep in mind that 98% of the world is filled with level 1 common folk. John- I don't have the quote on hand, but I believe it is on Candlekeep. Someone else here may be able to direct you to it. I believe it was in response to something that happened in a novel where the Simbul wanted to research/create an epic spell that would literally destroy Thay. Mystra stepped in and asked her not to, not out of concern for her safety, but because she wanted the Red Wizards to survive. After all Mystra is the Goddess of Magic, and encourages her clerics and her Chosen to spread knowledge of magic throughout the world. The Red Wizards new scheme for world domination is through their trade enclaves, which puts magic and magic items into the hands of a great number of people. Out of respect for Mystra the Simbul decided against it, but there was never any doubt that she could have accomplished it.
Stigger 11-14-07, 02:10 AM	I don't think I've ever considered 10th level characters as truly powerful... that usually started at 15th+ for me, at the lowest. Suppose we have different perspectives and opinions on what constitutes true power... and different styles of gaming it seems as well. Ah well, such is life, and we're both entitled to our own views of the matter.
Fingoldfin 11-14-07, 02:22 AM	Meldread, My point is that 4e will have all the same problems in a few years. They will keep creating high level NPCs with over the top RSEs to make money on the novels. Then people will want to see the stat block for their favorite novel hero. You end up with the same mess. The novels should not be canon. That solves 90% of the problem. No need for yet another RSE.:)
The_Shaman 11-14-07, 07:20 AM	@Meldread: The way I see it, class levels are simply indicative of a certain level of power with respect to the PCs, not other NPCs. Drizzt and his like are supposed to be NPCs that no PC should be able to easily challenge and kill. However, for that to be the case they need to have a lot of levels or other powers that make them obscenely powerful with regards to the 1st level commoners or orc warriors. There has probably been something like power creep over time, but it has involves projected PC levels as well: if you balance the world-important NPCs to be out of the reach of mid- to high-level characters, then their power as compared to low-level ones becomes, indeed, obscene. It is, at least partly, a problem of the system: mechanically a properly equipped lvl 15 fighter can take care of over 20 properly equipped lvl 4 fighters, and probably many more even if completely surrounded - heck, and with one arm tied behind his back. Same with nearly any other class - high levels and expensive equipment are just that much more powerful. If you want to put a NPC out of the immediate reach of your high-level PCs, then said NPC becomes powerful enough to waste not-very-small armies. To be honest, with the current mechanics the only way not to do this is to fudge rolls and invent spells on the go. So the question is, for what level characters you try to balance the game. From what little I know, Eberron seems to give players a free hand past some level, at least as far as regular NPCs (not monstrous ones) are concerned. That's okay, I guess, but I prefer the FR approach of having something to gun for at higher levels - and not to forget that other humans, dwarves or elves could pose a credible threat. I'm not saying either is better or worse, just which one I like more.
Meldread 11-14-07, 09:56 AM	Shaman, That is what I said: it is a problem of mechanics. The progression system is so linier that even someone with a handful of levels vastly outstrips 99.99% of the world in terms of sheer power. In the real world anyone of any skill can be killed by a determined individual of less skill. In D&D there are very defined levels of skill that will always out perform those of lesser skill. I want my PC's to be extraordinary people, but I don't want them to be masters of the universe. Conversely, I don't want NPC's of that power either. It is much easier to give a NPC's, especially an Iconic NPC, levels than it is to take them away. If I want to use Drizzt as a challenge to my PC's then I can make him a challenge, I don't need him to be a uber character out of the box. By making Drizzt (just as a well known example) an obscenely powerful character it raises the bar of what PC's should expect. People read those novels then come to D&D and expect to be able to do what Drizzt can do out of the box. This is a complete bane to true role-playing. I think back to older editions of D&D and look how long it took to level up a character compared to now. That level of power was about right for the setting, but as a whole D&D has moved on toward an obsession and love affair of uber characters who can destroy entire armies alone. I love fantasy, but there comes a point where the feats preformed are so unbelievable as to completely break immersion. For me we have hit and are now exceeding that point. This is the reason I have embraced the 4E FR because it allows me to remain within the Realms, while at the same time giving me the ability to easily depart from cannon. It is difficult to do so now and not be adversely affected in some way when new source material is released. However, in the new FR I can finally "shape" it the way I want it more easily. It makes the entire setting much more manageable over all to someone like myself who finds things about it unappealing, but to remove them would require drastic change. WotC has provided the needed drastic change and in turn has given us a canvas on which we can modify to suit our needs and desires.
The_Shaman 11-14-07, 12:51 PM	Shaman, That is what I said: it is a problem of mechanics. The progression system is so linier that even someone with a handful of levels vastly outstrips 99.99% of the world in terms of sheer power. In the real world anyone of any skill can be killed by a determined individual of less skill. In D&D there are very defined levels of skill that will always out perform those of lesser skill. I want my PC's to be extraordinary people, but I don't want them to be masters of the universe. Conversely, I don't want NPC's of that power either. It is much easier to give a NPC's, especially an Iconic NPC, levels than it is to take them away. If I want to use Drizzt as a challenge to my PC's then I can make him a challenge, I don't need him to be a uber character out of the box. By making Drizzt (just as a well known example) an obscenely powerful character it raises the bar of what PC's should expect. People read those novels then come to D&D and expect to be able to do what Drizzt can do out of the box. This is a complete bane to true role-playing. Unfortunately, that is the problem with any expectations/stereotypes. Anime-based characters in D&D have the same problem: even when they have a good character concept, they are supposed to perform feats that require epic levels in D&D. NPCs are, as I said, as powerful as you stat them - and while it takes a bit longer to take a level or two off an NPC than to put it on, I still think it's not such a big problem. However, there's a very good reason for them to be more powerful and closer to world domination than for the PCs: they've been there first and done it longer. First of all, I don't know if it is such a problem if there are powerful NPCs somewhere out there as long as they don't impact the game. Drizzt has enough power to match a, say, marilith in combat. So what? It shows that it's possible for a hero and a champion to match demonic or angelic foes. I don't understand, honestly, how this is a bane to role-playing. Do your characters expect to match them? Maybe they will - but first, they need to have gone through the same thing the iconics have. Drizzt is a prodigal swordsman, trained by easily the greatest blademaster in a major drow city (and drow, to survive and thrive in the Underdark like they have, have to be strong), who has honed his skills to near perfection before even leaving his clan. Then, he was toughened up by years of survival in the Underdark and even greater challenges in the Realms above. To put it simply, he's had 40+ years of first-rate training and experience on the PCs, and in any believable setting, this should count - big time. Elminster? He's had talent, determination, and literally thousands of years, not to mention a priviledged relationship with Mystra. A reasonably mature player should recognize that all of these matter. If after all his age and experience Elminster is anything less than an archmage of epic proportions, than what does it take to be one? Five years on the road exploring ruins and skirmishing with the Zhentarim or the neighboring orc tribe? If your PCs don't care about how the "Big Boys" got where they are, then they are the ones at fault for not roleplaying properly. Because if they do know what Drizzt or Elminster have done to get where they are, they can't accept to be their equals with a year or two in the town guard or a short apprenticeship to a local mage. Chances are, they will be the ones obtaining incredible power in an inordinate amount of time, not the NPCs. If anything, I consider it a good thing that a PC can't make kingdoms shake and emperors fall on the clap of their hands after some measly two years of adventuring when people before them have dedicated entire lifetimes to it. Faerun works on the presumption that the PCs do not work in a vacuum - there have been heroes before and there are other heroes - and villains - of note even now, elsewhere. Personally, I don't see this as a bad thing, and I think it helps with the immersion of the players in the setting. This makes the characters more real, believable and easier to get into imo. I think back to older editions of D&D and look how long it took to level up a character compared to now. That level of power was about right for the setting, but as a whole D&D has moved on toward an obsession and love affair of uber characters who can destroy entire armies alone. As I said, it may be because there are simply more high-level characters. I haven't played during the AD&D and 2nd edition age, but I got the impression leveling up was slower and there were fewer high-power PCs as well. Now just check the character boards - almost every build supposes 20 levels. Still, you get a cookie for the nostalgia.:cookie:
MarkusTay63 11-14-07, 01:34 PM	You want to know why you should play in FR? Because it's the bestest setting EVA! :dancin: You want to know why you should use 4e rules? Because despite how much most of us complain, every single iteration of the rules has been better then the last. I have faith that once again they will be able to provide us with an interesting and logical rules-set. Should you play 4e FR? :confused: How the HELL should I know? None of us has seen it yet, and it could be anything from a masterpiece to a piece of sh...... :censored: I don't think I've ever considered 10th level characters as truly powerful... that usually started at 15th+ for me, at the lowest. Suppose we have different perspectives and opinions on what constitutes true power... and different styles of gaming it seems as well. Ah well, such is life, and we're both entitled to our own views of the matter.In my games, 15 would be 'high-end'. I run the world as presented in the Old Grey Box - it referred to 5th level characters as 'powerful'. ;)
elondir 11-14-07, 02:39 PM	IMHO, the only Forgotten Realms worth playing is the 1st edition gray box using 2nd edition rules (including MC3 & 11), set in 1356 DR, with THAC0 and AC fixed to work like 3.x. I have not seen 4e, but it doesn't sound that appealing to me. Do not use any other campaign supplements than the Gray Box (except maybe the Interactive Atlas CR-ROM - I made some maps for that :D, and it's just the maps with very few details on inhabitants and no crunch to speak of). Fill in the details yourself.
Meldread 11-14-07, 03:13 PM	Shaman, First of all, I don't know if it is such a problem if there are powerful NPCs somewhere out there as long as they don't impact the game. The problem is that they are not "somewhere out there" they are everywhere. Remember, we're not just talking about Elminster or Drizzt. We're talking about relatively minor NPC's possessing enough power to more or less conquer an entire nation without breaking a sweat. It isn't a question of "should they hold this much power" it's a question of how that power works within the rules of D&D and what it means for the setting. If you're a level 18 Wizard in a backwater city, and the next highest leveled NPC is 10th level - you can own that city. No one there in that city can stop you. In the real world the best sharpshooter ever to walk the face of the planet can still be shot by someone who is untrained. In D&D this is not the case. I call this "broken" because Elminster and Drizzt should be powerful but they are still mortals. If Drizzt existed in the real world few would be able to match him in close combat, but one or two well placed archers shooting arrows at him would still be enough to kill him. This is not so in D&D. There is a serious lack of believability when a character becomes so powerful that things that challenge 99.9999% of the population they can do in their sleep. When you can face a hundred or even hundreds of opponents, surrounded, and walk away without a scratch there is something wrong. When entire armies tremble at the mention of your name, because they know to fight you is certain death there is something wrong. No one man (who is not arcane, divine or psionic magic user) should be able to stand against an entire army. Yet it is completely possible. How does the world balance itself? What does it mean for military conflict? Why have a military when a single man can wipe out an entire nation? What does it mean for the economies of the world when labor can be performed with simple magic? How do people react when one of these god-like mortals walk into their town? Should they fear them or even worship them? These problems are much less noticeable at lower levels. You are powerful, yes, but you can still die. As you grow in power the flaws of the system become much more noticeable on the setting. You can wave your hand and ignore it, but if you have any inclination to dig deeper it cannot be ignored. The effect that these people have on the world is real. Their numbers are many, and the effects they have are - in my opinion - detrimental to the settings integrity.
johnkretzer 11-14-07, 03:15 PM	John- I don't have the quote on hand, but I believe it is on Candlekeep. Someone else here may be able to direct you to it. I believe it was in response to something that happened in a novel where the Simbul wanted to research/create an epic spell that would literally destroy Thay. Mystra stepped in and asked her not to, not out of concern for her safety, but because she wanted the Red Wizards to survive. After all Mystra is the Goddess of Magic, and encourages her clerics and her Chosen to spread knowledge of magic throughout the world. The Red Wizards new scheme for world domination is through their trade enclaves, which puts magic and magic items into the hands of a great number of people. Out of respect for Mystra the Simbul decided against it, but there was never any doubt that she could have accomplished it. All this proves to me is Ed Greenwood doesn't know anything about the rules for Epic spells. A 30th level caster couldn't possibly design, research, or cast such a epic spell. It is not that surprising though considering ED still plays 2nd edition.
18DELTA 11-14-07, 05:56 PM	Why do I keep hearing Busta in the background? Maybe Shar is his Janet Jackson duet in 4E!:D
Stigger 11-14-07, 06:22 PM	You know Meldread, in a lot of respects I do agree with you, but I don't think you're ever going to find a decent answer for it in any d20 ruleset. Kinda why I prefer the Storyteller system in a lot of respects, even if it has several flaws to it... feels more reflective and adds a lot more uncertainty to things I find.
Meldread 11-14-07, 09:19 PM	Stigger- Yeah, I know. :( I really like D&D overall. It's simple and fun to play - combat wise. However, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty hardcore role-playing it begins to lack. On the bright side, I am considering switching systems - perhaps even devising my own. The 4E FRCS gives me the opportunity to explain away any changes in the "game physics" of the world. I'd just love to find a system that finds a balance between "realism" and fun. I hate systems that bog you down in lots of complicated rules that take forever to resolve things, but at the same time I dislike systems that throw realism out the window and expect the game world to make sense. FR as it currently exists does not make sense because of the game rules, that is to say it could not logically exist the way it is portrayed.
The_Shaman 11-15-07, 08:30 AM	Meldread, I hope I'm not coming off as aggressive by doing this, and I mean it purely in good faith. Still, I would like to point out why I disagree: in short, in terms of power every ECL character can rival, if not outdo, Drizzt. An ECL, oh, 28? character with similar contacts can rival Elminster. If anything, FR tries to balance such characters by having more active gods and more NPCs of comparable, if not the same, level. The main problem for you, as I see it, is the d20 mechanics, which are the same on Eberron, Faerun, Dragonlance and for all i know, Star Wars d20. Some of your complaints seem in fact to apply less for the Realms than most other settings - simply because the Realms have a higher number of powerful NPCs which can balance each other out. BTW, how can I hide the below in a spoiler block? I don't want to black it out, but to compress it for those who don't want to see it. Shaman, The problem is that they are not "somewhere out there" they are everywhere. Remember, we're not just talking about Elminster or Drizzt. We're talking about relatively minor NPC's possessing enough power to more or less conquer an entire nation without breaking a sweat. Ok, I think that's too much. Many, if not most large towns do not have an active-duty NPC with more than, say, 12 levels. If they do, there are usually a few of similar level that balance it out. Plus, as NPCs, they are often much more poorly equipped than PCs of the same level, as well as enmeshed in political and other considerations. This effectively limits their options and provides ways for DMs to incorporate them safely. It isn't a question of "should they hold this much power" it's a question of how that power works within the rules of D&D and what it means for the setting. If you're a level 18 Wizard in a backwater city, and the next highest leveled NPC is 10th level - you can own that city. No one there in that city can stop you. That is, at least partly, true. Certainly, a high-level character could come to dominate a small community - if s/he cares. Many NPCs simple don't have the time and desire to do so, as I see it. It could be laziness, morals, political beliefs - but usually a character reaches a high level because of their devotion to some pursuit. For characters of such high level, dealing with politics can be simply a distraction. A lvl 18 wizard can do with a small city whatever he wants, but he's probably just fine where he is and can meet all of his needs, living comfortably from simply practicing his craft. There are, of course, wizards - and others that do vie for power and that are either in positions of power or as the brains behind the throne. The zulkirs, the Symbul, Manshoon, Fzoul Chembryl, etc. It is possible if one decides to do it and overcomes the competition. Most archmages, though, could care less who "rules" as long as they are free to do what they want. In the real world the best sharpshooter ever to walk the face of the planet can still be shot by someone who is untrained. In D&D this is not the case. I call this "broken" because Elminster and Drizzt should be powerful but they are still mortals. If Drizzt existed in the real world few would be able to match him in close combat, but one or two well placed archers shooting arrows at him would still be enough to kill him. This is not so in D&D. If that's a problem with the system in general, one could use variant rules to make combat more deadly - IIRC I've heard that some have adopted much lower threshold and progressive DC for Massive Damage Death saves (from d20 modern, iirc), and I could certainly support that - I think it's weird that an unarmored character (player or non-player) survives a critical hit from a greatsword that could cut a horse in two. The armor as DC thing, MDD modification, spell failure/backlash - no problem, I would like to see more of these myself. But it would be for PCs and NPCs alike. If you want Drizzt to die from an arrow in the eye or from bloodloss from 5 different injuries, then so should Misho the 16th level barbarian. Agreed? However, a setting also has to be balanced for same-level characters and higher-level ones, and one way to do so is simply to have more medium or high-level characters to create a balance of power. This is, I think, the philosophy that FR espouses. While many of these characters will not care about world domination as long as they are left alone, they are likely to oppose the ambitions of anyone who tries to do it. When outsiders and deities are more involved and have their own schemes (and FR has more active deities than other settings afaik), even powerful NPCs are forced to tread carefully. Two sentences can make the Symbul or even Larloch stop in their tracks - if they are uttered by Mystra. These problems are much less noticeable at lower levels. You are powerful, yes, but you can still die. As you grow in power the flaws of the system become much more noticeable on the setting. You can wave your hand and ignore it, but if you have any inclination to dig deeper it cannot be ignored. The effect that these people have on the world is real. Their numbers are many, and the effects they have are - in my opinion - detrimental to the settings integrity. No, I don't think so. If anything, low levels are imo where the integrity can be compromised as this is where the characters can learn of powers so far beyond their reach that they may be unreal. At higher levels, the only way the setting can be damaged is if high-level abilities can not be checked. In the current d20 system, the only limitation for a high-level character are other high-level characters - if a mage magicks iron, another can dispel it. If anything, I am more curious to see how a low-power setting handles the issue. Just how do you stop, or at least challenge, your lvl 15 party who have wrecking a huge city and butchering a million-man army if the highest level NPCs in it are level 8 or so? How fearsome - heck, how bothersome - are arrows you know can't hit you, or spells you know you'll save against? And while you have a point that judicial use of high-level NPCs can damage a setting's integrity, their presence itself can only enhance it. If a PC can become an archmage or a master thief in the course of 5 or 10 years, then why aren't other characters similarly powerful? Is everyone else in a setting an unimaginable moron, that they spend their lifetimes to get 5-6 levels that the PCs acquire in the course of a few years, if not else? Heck, any NPC that deserves an above-average mental scores should be able to put 2 and 2 together and realize that a much quicker way to power is to go loot ruins and kill goblins, not stay at Pelor/Lathander's temple and heal its fellow townsmen. I am sorry if that comes off rude, but if your character with 3-4 years of adventuring has become stronger than a dwarf or elf champion who spend centuries training and fighting, this setting has NO integrity to speak of. If I were the DM, I could not honestly explain such a situation to my players and I could not expect them to take this setting seriously.
Todesherr 11-18-07, 03:12 AM	The original thread was written by some one who does not speak english as their first language, consequaently they have made some of the usual basic errors on sentence structure that people teand to make when writing in a language which is not their native toungue. consequently far from saying what they actually meant to say is which is a far more sensible and also the only logical correctly structured way that these words could be arranged in the english language. That, sir, is total and utter nonsense.
ORC_Paradox 11-18-07, 04:11 AM	Thus, we stand where we stand now because of the way power works in D&D. People scoff at the fact that Drizzt has the power to basically wipe out a hundred orcs alone. However, by the rules - if the orcs are around the levels they should be - throw a few buffs on him and he has the power to do it. The difference is the fact a novel isn't playing by the rules, and the authors don't use the rules when writing the novels. They don't have character sheets in front of them, nor do they roll dice. Heh, could you imagine it? "WHAT? The orc scored a critical hit, and now Drizzt is DEAD? I can't believe he failed his Save of Die roll! What do I do now?" I could write a novel and have my favorite FR character (Kricklen) totally wipe out every major NPC in the world and assume control. In a game, not so much. :D
FRBRAZIL 11-18-07, 04:54 PM	I'm TOTALLY lost here. Since my last visit (that is, JANUARY, 14th, 2007--as show me that little thing in the top of my page), the current major events were Lolth's silence and the death of HRMH, Mr. Blackstaff. And now, you guys come with this shocking news! The whole thing about Mystra slain by Cyric/Shar/---. I'm wondering when I'll be free to be fully-back to RPG and dig deeply this forum, to find out other news. I hate studies. By the way, this post was made just to express my excitement about what's coming--on the main subject of this thread, all I got to say is, the new information about FR 4th ed. I was able to gather around here is amazingly interesting, and would probably result in a great campaign.
Zireael 11-19-07, 09:43 AM	Eh, 4. Ed. is baaad... and I will stick with 3.0/3.5. Too many dramatic changes. And I don't mind Mystra dead.:)
The_Shaman 11-19-07, 09:57 AM	I don't know why all the Mystra hate, really. I don't mind her, еxcept that avatar picture in F&P. Most everyone else gets an inspiring image, and she? Sheesh. The only one who came off worse was Chauntea, who looked like a cartoonish version of someone who's had a ton too many sweets.
elondir 11-19-07, 03:42 PM	I don't get it either. Then again my FR never had meddling gods or the ToT. I like the Avatar trilogy but didn't like the impact on the campaign. Anyway, Mystra is just another goddes. FR is about bands of adventurers looting Myth Drannor, Dragonspear Castle, Durlag's Tower, and similar places, and hanging out in taverns in the big cities. The best adventures I remember were ironically video games: the gold box games (especially Pool of Radiance and Secret of the Silver Blades) and Baldur's Gate I & II.
RazAl_Dazzle 11-19-07, 09:28 PM	I think Wizards is just trying to spice it up. If thats what your into, you can run the game anyway you want. Thats what being a DM is all about. YOU make the World, YOU set the rules. I could do exactly the same thing that 4e is doing in my campaign right now.(Or at least what they have talked about.) The problem is people follow the books like they are the source, when in reality YOU are the source, and everything else is a supplement. In the Realms I run anything that happens after The Year of Wild Magic is all the PC's doing, or lack of doing. Poop;)
Keryth 11-21-07, 04:21 PM	If you feel that way, then I don't understand why you are so avidly against 4th Edition. With the information we have currently, it seems to be the biggest assault against the Mary Sue characters since... well I don't think there has been a time when such a large assault has been made. The only two characters we know for certain who make it are Drizzt and Elminster. Although those two are the largest Mary Sue's of all, we both know why that is - they are both critical icons of the Forgotten Realm's franchise and are both money makers for the setting. If both of those were not true there probably would have been a very real chance of them getting the axe. Even those who find themselves liking the cliché super heroes of Mystra have to admit that the Chosen were getting too numerous in number. Even though some of them have died before 4th Edition, we have to keep in mind that there are an unknown number of Chosen that we do not even know about yet. Seriously, it is and was getting ridiculous. Really? So authors writing about thier heroic characters that exist in the Realms is BAD? Uh, aren;t they hired to do just that? As for the Seven Sisters and the Chosen, no, it wasn;t getting ridiculous. The only people who think that are those who favor evil characters. Guess what? The Realms wasn;t abotu being evil, but about defeating it. Evil had plenty of bastions and existed fine - Thay, Zhentil Keep, Shade, etc. Even with Elmister, Khelben, the Sisters, and such, Evil was still prevalent and powerful in the Realms. Personally, I am against these drastic changes being made and will probably not incorporate them into my campaigns
Stigger 11-21-07, 05:47 PM	I think Wizards is just trying to spice it up. If thats what your into, you can run the game anyway you want. Thats what being a DM is all about. YOU make the World, YOU set the rules. I could do exactly the same thing that 4e is doing in my campaign right now.(Or at least what they have talked about.) The problem is people follow the books like they are the source, when in reality YOU are the source, and everything else is a supplement. In the Realms I run anything that happens after The Year of Wild Magic is all the PC's doing, or lack of doing. Poop;) Great thought, unfortunately by the looks of it, the rules for 4e aren't going to make that really feasible by what I know of them, so the upcoming fluff and crunch are going to be effectively useless for the near future... what's not to be upset about there exactly, if in order to continue your hobby you have to abandon the upcoming edition for the forseeable future? Or are we supposed to sit back, essentially formulate how those missing classes work, come up with the crunch to support them ourselves, figure out how to integrate that crunch into the Realms, etcetera and so forth. Why even bother with 4e if that's the case, when you already have it in 3.x, or earlier editions in someone like Selunatic's case? From all appearances, there will be next to nothing of use, crunch or fluff, in 4e unless you go along with the new setting changes... how difficult is that to understand? And by the by, I didn't think there were too many Chosen, so... sorry, but that's just an opinion, not some objective fact there Meldread. This is kinda coming off as grumpy... not intended to, but I'm too lazy to change it.
Asgetrion 11-21-07, 08:11 PM	I could write a novel and have my favorite FR character (Kricklen) totally wipe out every major NPC in the world and assume control. In a game, not so much. :D Don't worry -- in 4E you actually *can*, because the spotlight is on the PCs and the whole setting ('Points of Light'-concept) revolves around them! There are no pesky high-level NPCs to prevent you from world domination anymore! ;)
GreenKnight 11-21-07, 09:25 PM	Or is it that only elves are going to be able to access magic? It always amazes me how some people can take a snippet of information, apply it to something that it has nothing to do with, and then draw the most inane and mind numbingly idiotic conclusions. Only elves using magic is definitely up there with some of the stupidest assumptions people have made based on snippets of information so far.
Fingoldfin 11-22-07, 12:13 AM	Don't worry -- in 4E you actually *can*, because the spotlight is on the PCs and the whole setting ('Points of Light'-concept) revolves around them! There are no pesky high-level NPCs to prevent you from world domination anymore! ;) :rofl: It's funny because it's true.:D
msatran 11-22-07, 04:15 AM	Quite frankly, I'd like to have them write one hundred thousand times on a blackboard: I will concentrate on quality instead of maintaining a set of numbers mandated by the accounting staff. You know, people do actually buy things when they're well written, clear, and properly proofread.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 11-22-07, 03:51 PM	Don't worry -- in 4E you actually *can*, because the spotlight is on the PCs and the whole setting ('Points of Light'-concept) revolves around them! There are no pesky high-level NPCs to prevent you from world domination anymore! ;) Perfect for a new generation of gamers who believe "It's all about me!"
Mula 11-22-07, 11:58 PM	Perfect for a new generation of gamers who believe "It's all about me!" God forbid the heroes were actually in the spotlight.
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 12:08 AM	God forbid the heroes were actually in the spotlight. um...the PCs are always in the spotlight(unless of course they have a really bad DM, then there is nothing WotC can do to change that...unless they start DM reeducation camps). You really don't have to be the most powerful being in the universe to have the a spotlight...also why does they have to one spotlight? I just don't get some people....:confused:
GreenKnight 11-23-07, 12:18 AM	Exactly. The existence of Elminster doesn't suddenly mean that your PC is Teh Suck. Man, I don't know how these people can bear to play in ANY campaign setting, as there's always somebody in that setting more powerful than the PC's. God forbid anyone try to suggest playing in an Arthurian campaign, or a super-hero campaign in the DCU. Forget Elminster. How's your PC supposed to make a name for himself if he has to compete with the likes of Lancelot, Merlin, Superman, and Batman? :rolleyes:
Dark Wizard 11-23-07, 01:05 AM	Guenevere, Morgan Le Fey, Kryptonite and ... umm ... hmm you have a point there. This has me entertaining thoughts of Batman vs. Bane (FR Bane).
MarkusTay63 11-23-07, 01:46 AM	You know, they should stick $100 dollar bills in a few copies of the new FRCG - that might sell a couple of 'em. What does that have to do with the topic? Well... that would convince me to at least by the book. ;)
GreenKnight 11-23-07, 03:45 AM	Guenevere, Morgan Le Fey, Kryptonite and ... umm ... hmm you have a point there. One can only imagine the high pitched whining that would occur should the people complaining about powerful NPC's in the Realms try to play in an Arthurian campaign, only to find out that all the most powerful magic items are reserved for the big name NPC's. Excalibur? That belongs to the One True King, and that ain't you, suckah foo'! Want to sit in the Siege Perilous? Tough luck, only Galahad can do that. And only he can wield the Sword of David. Want to find the Holy Grail? To bad. Only Galahad and two other guys can get it, and neither of them are named 'You'. Or when they find out that not only can they not have a character as powerful as Superman in a DC RPG, but they can't play a Kryptonian, either. ("Why can't I play a Kryptonian?!? That's completely unfair." "What part of 'LAST SON OF KRYPTON' do you not understand?!?") At least in the Realms you have the possibility of eclipsing those NPC's. Yeah, Drizzt is pretty scary... until you have an 18th-level character who's miles tougher then he is (And that's taking into account that Drizzt's stats are far above 28 or 32 point buy, which is what you probably built your character with). I've got one character who at 18th-level could turn Drizzt into kibble if he felt so inclined. Hell, play long enough, and you can create a character who can make Elminster cry like a little baby. This has me entertaining thoughts of Batman vs. Bane (FR Bane). Bane would break the back of the DCU Bane just for kicks before breaking the back of every super hero in the DC Universe... except for Superman, who'd kick his ass. Then he'd take all of Earth's superheroes to a planet with an orange sun, develop "Super Healing Vision", and use it to heal all of their broken backs. Except for Barbara Gordon, for some reason. Tough luck, Babs. We like you better as Oracle, anyway.
Bluenose 11-23-07, 08:45 AM	Great thought, unfortunately by the looks of it, the rules for 4e aren't going to make that really feasible by what I know of them, so the upcoming fluff and crunch are going to be effectively useless for the near future... what's not to be upset about there exactly, if in order to continue your hobby you have to abandon the upcoming edition for the forseeable future? Or are we supposed to sit back, essentially formulate how those missing classes work, come up with the crunch to support them ourselves, figure out how to integrate that crunch into the Realms, etcetera and so forth. Why even bother with 4e if that's the case, when you already have it in 3.x, or earlier editions in someone like Selunatic's case? From all appearances, there will be next to nothing of use, crunch or fluff, in 4e unless you go along with the new setting changes... how difficult is that to understand? I think what's actually been said is that you can't directly convert your 3E characters to 4E, which is exactly the same as when 2E became 3E (yes, I know there was a conversion booklet, but it didn't work). If there isn't some way to create most or all of the characters you want, it's likely to be because the original was not a normal 3E PHB character anyway. As for figuring out how to fit the crunch into the Realms people had to do that for all sorts of things in 3E, and a lot simply rejected things they didn't like. After all, plenty of people argued and still argue that ToB classes don't belong in the Realms, but they can be included.
Stigger 11-23-07, 10:02 AM	So how's that gonna work for the new arcane caster class with all that apparently built-in fluff, that we'd have to essentially rewrite to use by what we know so far? No sorcerers or druids either by all appearances as well... but we do get warlocks and warlords who have no history in the Realms... sure, that sounds easy to do, when the PHB becomes kinda... oh, I don't know... something you basically have to rewrite whole sections of to use properly. That's a bit of an exhaggeration, I know, but you should get the idea.
Fingoldfin 11-23-07, 10:15 AM	You know, they should stick $100 dollar bills in a few copies of the new FRCG - that might sell a couple of 'em. What does that have to do with the topic? Well... that would convince me to at least by the book. ;) Not me. I would sit in the bookstore and search all copies of the FRCG page by page to get the loot. I'd spend whatever money I found on 2e source books.:D
Stigger 11-23-07, 10:16 AM	That's a much better idea one has to admit... well done you Fin.
Bluenose 11-23-07, 10:26 AM	So how's that gonna work for the new arcane caster class with all that apparently built-in fluff, that we'd have to essentially rewrite to use by what we know so far? No sorcerers or druids either by all appearances as well... but we do get warlocks and warlords who have no history in the Realms... sure, that sounds easy to do, when the PHB becomes kinda... oh, I don't know... something you basically have to rewrite whole sections of to use properly. That's a bit of an exhaggeration, I know, but you should get the idea. I don't think any of the built-in fluff is compulsory, or even entirely necessary. I think (hope) that it's being used more as an example of how things can be done rather than being prescriptive. It's not as if previous PHBs for any edition were written around FR games, so I don't believe it's going to be harder than previously. To be honest I expect that within 48 hours of the 4E PHB going on sale there will be threads on these boards with examples of how to fit the fluff in the Realms and with FR 'traditions' like Thayan wizard or Halruuan spellcaster to appear - though I'm not certain that's exactly how they work. In fact if there aren't I'll probably end up writing one myself, although when it appears will depend on whether the release date in the UK is the same as elsewhere. And losing the sorcerer seems a slightly odd complaint since they weren't around at all in earlier editions. It's not that I'm particularly looking forward to 4E, but a lot of the complaints about it seem to be influenced more by people disliking new fluff, which is most of what we've seen so far. I just don't think complaints about the mechanics are yet justified since we've seen relatively little about them.
Stigger 11-23-07, 11:42 AM	Sorcerers won't really impact the Realms much, but I still like them a whole lot more than I like warlocks. Besides, I thought they did a lot to really distinguish the seperations between the Churches of Azuth and Mystra. Warlocks I just find... stupid. I'd much rather have a druid than I would a warlock. Which is not to say everyone finds them that way, but one must admit that druids are far more iconic than warlocks, a very recent addition to the D&D lore. From what I've read, the 4e fluff and mechanics are fairly heavily intertwined, and that they are trying to achieve a 1-size-fits-all approach to the core classes in terms of all of the settings. Which says to me that while the various 'traditions' of wizards (that's making my teeth hurt with the WoD connotations) might have different names, they're all basically going to be the same groups. Which strikes me as an incredibly stupid move from the start that sounds as if its going to limit what a wizard can and can't be conceptually from the beginning. Sure I can work it out so that this isn't the case, but all of the fluff and mechanics that come later are going to be written from the perspective of those traditions/divisions existing and so its that much more work everytime something comes out for wizards. I really can't see the point to upgrading to 4e with all the work that it looks like its going to take to convert it. Easier just to stick with 3.5e.
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 01:06 PM	I don't think any of the built-in fluff is compulsory, or even entirely necessary. I think (hope) that it's being used more as an example of how things can be done rather than being prescriptive. It's not as if previous PHBs for any edition were written around FR games, so I don't believe it's going to be harder than previously. To be honest I expect that within 48 hours of the 4E PHB going on sale there will be threads on these boards with examples of how to fit the fluff in the Realms and with FR 'traditions' like Thayan wizard or Halruuan spellcaster to appear - though I'm not certain that's exactly how they work. In fact if there aren't I'll probably end up writing one myself, although when it appears will depend on whether the release date in the UK is the same as elsewhere. And losing the sorcerer seems a slightly odd complaint since they weren't around at all in earlier editions. It's not that I'm particularly looking forward to 4E, but a lot of the complaints about it seem to be influenced more by people disliking new fluff, which is most of what we've seen so far. I just don't think complaints about the mechanics are yet justified since we've seen relatively little about them. That is not true the flavor(I perfer flavor over the word fluff) change do effect mechanics alot. One of the things I liked about 3.x was that for the most part flavor reflected mechanics. While it is true we can change and edit the flavor and mechanics to fit what we want it is alot more work then just to stay with 3.x. Just two examples: 1) Demons ans devils and the planes: I really like how this was...to use it in 4th edition I am going have to rewrite the stats of alot of monsters...and maybe the planes themselves. 2) The pantheon: I am going to keep the old pantheon(I.E. Mystra is going to live, Helm is going to live, Gods are going to remain gods not become servants, etc). So to update to 4th edition I am going have to create new mechanics to properly represent cleric os all the gods. Also you are wrong in that you'll be able to make any normal D&D character in 4th edition with the PhB. A Druid is a very normal D&D character, a gnome is a very normal D&D character, a Illusionist is a normal D&D character, a Necromancer is a normal D&D character...yet you won't be able to make or convert them till they come out in the PhB2 or PhB3. Yeah I know they have said you'll be able to make a gnome out of the MM...but you'll have a lot less options. Also sure you might be able to make a within 4th edition balanced version of all the class but later you'll be contradicted when they do come out with versions of said classes. Also lets discuss the examples of mechanic we have seen in the Design & Development articles and some of things I have seen with talent trees in Star Wars Saga: I hate static saves. I like saving throws alot better. I dislike the Skill System in Stars Wars Saga it actualy seems more of a step back. I really dislike Talent trees in Stars Saga as they seem to overly specialize a character...converting a noble character I had I could do about half about the things I could do. Now if they use the same design method in D&D instead of playing a rogue you will be playing either a combat rogue, or a social rogue or a stealthy rogue...like I said hate specialization. Yes I know the last two are theories based on the Star Wars Saga system and I really hope they heavily modified if they do find their way into 4th edition. But I sorta doubt it.
Bluenose 11-23-07, 01:54 PM	That is not true the flavor(I perfer flavor over the word fluff) change do effect mechanics alot. One of the things I liked about 3.x was that for the most part flavor reflected mechanics. While it is true we can change and edit the flavor and mechanics to fit what we want it is a lot more work then just to stay with 3.x. Of course it is. But changing from 2nd to 3rd was at least as big a change in terms of converting the mechanics. It was still possible to convert. Frankly, people playing in FR have it a lot easier than people using homebrew settings, who have to do ALL the work themselves. I've been through it with OD&D, 1st, 2nd and 3rd editions, and I'm not looking forward to doing it again. Yet if the rules are better - from my perspective only - then I will do the work. Also you are wrong in that you'll be able to make any normal D&D character in 4th edition with the PhB. A Druid is a very normal D&D character, a gnome is a very normal D&D character, a Illusionist is a normal D&D character, a Necromancer is a normal D&D character...yet you won't be able to make or convert them till they come out in the PhB2 or PhB3. Yeah I know they have said you'll be able to make a gnome out of the MM...but you'll have a lot less options. Also sure you might be able to make a within 4th edition balanced version of all the class but later you'll be contradicted when they do come out with versions of said classes. I haven't seen anything yet which makes me think specialist wizards are out of the question, but a lot will depend on how wizards work anyway. And while gnomes almost certainly (it's not confirmed, as far as I know) won't be in the PHB, people have used races in 3E straight from the MM with no problems. 4E may add options to other races, but if you really want to you could run a gnome without. Also lets discuss the examples of mechanic we have seen in the Design & Development articles and some of things I have seen with talent trees in Star Wars Saga: I hate static saves. I like saving throws a lot better. Saving throws are a lot more work for the DM, rolling saves for a dozen targets of a PCs spell. Though from a players perspective I've got mixed feelings. I dislike the Skill System in Stars Wars Saga it actualy seems more of a step back. Depends how they work it, but I do prefer the additional detail of the current system somewhat. I really dislike Talent trees in Stars Saga as they seem to overly specialize a character...converting a noble character I had I could do about half about the things I could do. Now if they use the same design method in D&D instead of playing a rogue you will be playing either a combat rogue, or a social rogue or a stealthy rogue...like I said hate specialization. So don't specialise. That sounds glib, but frankly I look at talent trees as being somewhat similar to prestige classes, in that they make a character more specialised at the expense of their versatility.
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 02:22 PM	Of course it is. But changing from 2nd to 3rd was at least as big a change in terms of converting the mechanics. It was still possible to convert. Frankly, people playing in FR have it a lot easier than people using homebrew settings, who have to do ALL the work themselves. I've been through it with OD&D, 1st, 2nd and 3rd editions, and I'm not looking forward to doing it again. Yet if the rules are better - from my perspective only - then I will do the work. Yeah but the change to 2nd and 3rd atleast kept the same flavor. Pretty much playing a druid in 2nd was the same as playing a druid in 3rd. I haven't seen anything yet which makes me think specialist wizards are out of the question, but a lot will depend on how wizards work anyway. And while gnomes almost certainly (it's not confirmed, as far as I know) won't be in the PHB, people have used races in 3E straight from the MM with no problems. 4E may add options to other races, but if you really want to you could run a gnome without. They have said Illusionist and necromancers will be their own core classes to be released later. Sure you can run a gnome but two things will happen. Other characters will be more powerful or flexable in design as they have said you will gain racial abilities as you go up in level and have choices(which I don't get and think is pretty much the dumbest thing from a flavor standpoint) which you will not posess and when they do come pout with a full treatment on gnomes there will be retconning your abilities... Saving throws are a lot more work for the DM, rolling saves for a dozen targets of a PCs spell. Though from a players perspective I've got mixed feelings. Personaly I don't consider it work and I like a varied result from magic. It seems too much all of nothing to me. Depends how they work it, but I do prefer the additional detail of the current system somewhat. As I said it is based off on what Stars Wars Saga has done...so yes hopefuly they won't go with it. So don't specialise. That sounds glib, but frankly I look at talent trees as being somewhat similar to prestige classes, in that they make a character more specialised at the expense of their versatility. Except I do play characters with no PrCs because they don't specialize...and if the Talent Tree system looks like it does every time I see it then you'll be forced to specialize at 1st level. Again this speculation...hopefuly they won't go with it either.
msatran 11-23-07, 02:43 PM	Bane would break the back of the DCU Bane just for kicks before breaking the back of every super hero in the DC Universe... except for Superman, who'd kick his ass. Then he'd take all of Earth's superheroes to a planet with an orange sun, develop "Super Healing Vision", and use it to heal all of their broken backs. Except for Barbara Gordon, for some reason. Tough luck, Babs. We like you better as Oracle, anyway. Uh...haven't you forgotten something? Bane Crosses the Dimensional Barrier. The Spectre arrives. He doesn't have a back. He's the Spectre. Spectre: "Tiny Godling. Go home or I will turn you into a weeping flowerpot growing in elephant poo." Bane: "You can't be serious." The Spectre waves his hand. Flowerpot: "You suck! And what's that smell?" Spectre: Remember that part about the elephant... Bane (Interrupting): You will PAY for this! My legions of tyranny will.... Spectre (Also interrupting): Replace you. You're only a flowerpot in elephant poo. Now promise to go home and be a good boy, or I'll let you meet Zatanna.
Fire_Wraith 11-23-07, 03:53 PM	All this proves to me is Ed Greenwood doesn't know anything about the rules for Epic spells. A 30th level caster couldn't possibly design, research, or cast such a epic spell. It is not that surprising though considering ED still plays 2nd edition. Actually, the scene is a little misrepresented. It's from "Elminster's Daughter", and IIRC, had nothing to do with any Epic Spells intended to eradicate the Red Wizards en-masse. Rather, it was Mystra, in the context of a larger conversation with Elminster and the Simbul, telling the Simbul that she should lay off killing the Red Wizards, because Thay is doing work that is pleasing to her (Mystra) by expanding the use of magic in Faerûn through their enclave sales. No mention was made of Epic Spells, or of genocidal level intentions - more of a "you're going to have to give up/cut back on your favorite hobby, Alassra." :D