Post/Author/DateTime	Post
msatran 11-22-07, 03:17 AM	As this has nothing to do with the module, other than my personal shock, let me say that this just proves that 4th edition is going to be lousy. The Chalice of Amaunator, a powerful, mighty artifact of a deity... Grants no special powers or abilities to anyone who takes the servant of the fallen feat for that deity. Is it just me or does this seem a little illogical?
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 11:01 AM	-Relics don't necessarily have to do anything. The Holy Grail is a relic of the Catholic Church. If someone found it, and drank from it, would they recieve any kinds of magical benefits? No. A relic can be a relic simply because it is important to the church(s) in question.
Reneshat 11-22-07, 11:02 AM	-Relics don't necessarily have to do anything. The Holy Grail is a relic of the Catholic Church. If someone found it, and drank from it, would they recieve any kinds of magical benefits? No. A relic can be a relic simply because it is important to the church(s) in question. Heresy! Haven't you seen Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?:eek:
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 11:34 AM	Heresy! Haven't you seen Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade?:eek: -Okay, okay...Replace 'Holy Grail', with...Noah's Arc. If anyone found Noah's Arc, and began sailing around on it (presuming it's seaworthy and real, or course), they'd recieve no special powers or whatever.
MarkusTay63 11-22-07, 11:51 AM	However, in a game environment, a relic SHOULD provide someone of the same religion with some sort of benefit, in the same way that 'Holy-swords' help Paladins. Thats pretty much the point of relics - it gives followers a direct connection to their deity. I don't think Noah's Ark would be a relic (no direct contact between god and the ship), but the Ark of the Covenant would definately qualify. Afterall, we know from Idiana Jones that it is just a cellphone with a direct line to God. :P I have some general rules for relics - I posted them once before - they give off a field effect that gives their followers +1 to spell level if within the radius of the Relic's power (usually just a room or building, but some Greater Relics can have a field of up to a mile or more). If touching the Relic, the follower gets a +2 to spell level. The really cool thing about that is that it effects EVERY devout follower of the god, not just priests, so a supplicant that stands before a relic and prayers for healing WILL recieve it, if they are faiithful. ;) Relics are rated on a scale of 1-20, and a god may not have relics totalling more then his own DvR. Ergo, A DvR 16 god can have one uber-relic at lev 16, or four smaller ones at four, or any other combination. The size of the field effect and spell levels granted are both effected by the power level, so a lev 20 Relic could theoretically sit at the center of an empire and encompass a good portion of it. However, ones of that magnitude are incredibly rare, not just in Realmspace, but anywhere in the universe. Relics function similar to avatars for gods (the god can focus their percaptions through one, just as they can with their avatars), and they do not invest their power in them lighty, and they take quite a bit of time to replace (just like avatars). Thats only a tiny part of my religion rules, if you can find the old post I had stuff about field effects of major churches and cathedrals, which function almost like 'mini-relics' unto themselves, giving priests of the god a really neat 'home-turf' advantage. ;)
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 12:07 PM	I don't think Noah's Ark would be a relic (no direct contact between god and the ship), but the Ark of the Covenant would definately qualify. -Alright, the Ark then. Holding the Ark wouldn't/doesn't magically give people supernatural powers.
Stigger 11-22-07, 12:12 PM	Actually it would if you take into accounts the legends that an army bearing it becomes invincible... presumably that would have some effect on the soldiers of the army... either that or it soots really big laser blasts, one of the two. ;)
Green Elven Vampire 11-22-07, 12:22 PM	Die 4ED DIE!!!
18DELTA 11-22-07, 12:51 PM	-Alright, the Ark then. Holding the Ark wouldn't/doesn't magically give people supernatural powers. Or it could give you hemriods(sp) just for touching it!:eek: :rofl:
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 02:15 PM	Actually it would if you take into accounts the legends that an army bearing it becomes invincible... presumably that would have some effect on the soldiers of the army... either that or it soots really big laser blasts, one of the two. ;) -Legends, that. -My main point is that a relic doesn't necessarily have to imbue people with magical powers, for it to be considered a relic. So long as something has great religious importance to the group, it can be considered a relic. Or it could give you hemriods(sp) just for touching it!:eek: :rofl: -Something is telling me that it never did that...
Mr_Miscellany 11-22-07, 02:51 PM	However, in a game environment, a relic SHOULD provide someone of the same religion with some sort of benefit, in the same way that 'Holy-swords' help Paladins. Thats pretty much the point of relics - it gives followers a direct connection to their deity. I disagree. (Not disagreeing just to disagree, OK?) The concept of worshippers of fallen gods striving to re-awaken their deity has been a big part of my campaign. While a player in my group finding just such a relic might be suprised if it didn't 'do' anything, they'd nevertheless be able to see the pure power (read: influence) just such an object would have if its discovery was made known. Karsus says it best: My main point is that a relic doesn't necessarily have to imbue people with magical powers, for it to be considered a relic. So long as something has great religious importance to the group, it can be considered a relic. If the PC Paladin in my campaign came out of Anourach with this relic, that alone would be enough to attract the few-and-far-between worshippers of Aumanator to his banner (and earn the ire of militant Lathandrites, too). I like that the game designers can still envision grander ideas and plots and not just think from an, "....oooh! Make it give a +8 to the wielder's ability scores and allow him to smite non-faithful at will with no save! That r0x0rZ!" And happy Thanksgiving, all.
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 02:55 PM	Karsus says it best: My main point is that a relic doesn't necessarily have to imbue people with magical powers, for it to be considered a relic. So long as something has great religious importance to the group, it can be considered a relic. -We agree. How's that for a holiday miracle? Wrong holiday(s), but still. :P
Stigger 11-22-07, 04:26 PM	To be honest, I never really liked uber-magic relics... I usually prefer something that would allow benefits like understanding the true meaning of Christmas, so to speak, rather than some mechanical benefit.
msatran 11-22-07, 10:41 PM	The problem with this view, Mr. Miscellany, is that the word "Relic" now has a set of rules associated with it in various 3.5 sourcebooks. On paper, and in terms of theory, you may be absolutely right, but as far as the RULES OF THE GAME are concerned, in order to wield and use a relic of a religion, you have to BELONG to it.
Lord Karsus 11-22-07, 11:39 PM	The problem with this view, Mr. Miscellany, is that the word "Relic" now has a set of rules associated with it in various 3.5 sourcebooks. On paper, and in terms of theory, you may be absolutely right, but as far as the RULES OF THE GAME are concerned, in order to wield and use a relic of a religion, you have to BELONG to it. -A word is a word is a word. In real life and in D&D. That something is considered holy doesn't mean that is is bestowed with the Holy descriptor. That a relic is called a relic doesn't mean is bestows any sort of powers. That a person is considered evil doesn't mean that their alignment is evil.
Todesherr 11-23-07, 12:26 AM	-A word is a word is a word. In real life and in D&D. That something is considered holy doesn't mean that is is bestowed with the Holy descriptor. That a relic is called a relic doesn't mean is bestows any sort of powers. That a person is considered evil doesn't mean that their alignment is evil. Word G! No Stop til Brooklyn! Flatbush yipee!
MarkusTay63 11-23-07, 02:05 AM	Karsus says it best: My main point is that a relic doesn't necessarily have to imbue people with magical powers, for it to be considered a relic. So long as something has great religious importance to the group, it can be considered a relic.But in D&D game terms, a relic IS an artifact of divine nature - I'd be pretty miffed if I found an artifact and it didn't 'do' anything. Hmmmm... I can't seem to find it in the 3e rules - it actually says that artifacts are legendary relics! I think it must have been 2e... Found it, in the 2e Book of Artifacts, pg. 4 - "One occasional point of confusion is that there are two different names for the same thing - artifact and relic. Artifacts are powerful magical items that have wizard, priest, or other powers and are made by gods, lichs, wizards, and other spellcasters. Relics are powerful magic items that have wizard, priest, or other powers, are made by gods and priests, and have some holy importance to a perticular temple." So you see, the 2e rules may be old, but they more clearly define the difference - which there really isn't any in power-level, only in usefulness as a religous sybmbol. That means in many ways a Relic should be even more powerful because of it's psychological benefits. Of course, this is purely in game terms, not real world where the benefit of a crying statue is arguable. Game, Set, Match. ;)
Mr_Miscellany 11-23-07, 02:17 AM	-We agree. How's that for a holiday miracle? Wrong holiday(s), but still. :P You have a point. Miss Miscellany said this means anything is possible. ::::::::: The problem with this view, Mr. Miscellany, is that the word "Relic" now has a set of rules associated with it in various 3.5 sourcebooks. On paper, and in terms of theory, you may be absolutely right, but as far as the RULES OF THE GAME are concerned, in order to wield and use a relic of a religion, you have to BELONG to it. Hey, M. Try walking up to someone in Faerūn and telling them that. ;) Think about it. Words don't all of a sudden get subtracted from teh vocabulary and knowledge base of the people in a fantasy setting just because in real life somebody uses one of those words to describe a magic item. Faerūn is a magical fantasy game setting where tales abound of objects both holy and magical (but not always both) that exist or are rumored to. From such are legends born (and adventure hooks, too). Just like in real life, in Faerūn a legend can take on mythic proportions above and beyond what the truth is underlying that legend. It's human nature and that's present in Faerūn. The game rules will never, ever trump this fact. It may irk you that such a seemingly mundane object might exist, but for me it's very refreshing. Hat's off to Greg A. Vaughan, Skip Williams, and Thomas M. Reid for getting this one right (IMNSHO). :tiphat: And strictly speaking, your interpretation of the rules of the game is factually in error. There's no 'on paper' or 'theory' here, because there’s no rules stating DMs are prohibited from using the world “relic” to describe anything other than the sort of magic items you are referring to. Good D&D games benefit from ambiguity and uncertainty. D&D doesn’t benefit from player or DM metagaming of game terminology into the lore-structure of a campaign setting. DMs need to be cognizant of the setting itself and not just limit themselves to mechanics.
Mr_Miscellany 11-23-07, 02:39 AM	Ahem. Check. Not checkmate. But in D&D game terms, a relic IS an artifact of divine nature - I'd be pretty miffed if I found an artifact and it didn't 'do' anything. And you’d be metagaming, but that’s beside the point. “Relic” can mean far more than “...magical object of divine nature found as treasure.” I know it. You know it. Msatran knows it. And who says it provides no benefit? Dragons of Faerūn has already established quite clearly that there exists a body of lore known by the various races in Faerūn involving lost objects of great value to those races/peoples, and what will happen if any one of these objects are found. How does it not follow that knowledge of the recovery of the Chalice of Aumanator will not galvanize the nascent followers of that faith into action? Or that the finder of such an object (assuming the finder is a follower of Aumanator) shall not rise in prominence and gain influence? The game rules are loose and flexible on this so DMs can assign their own ad-hoc modifiers to anything from Leadership to Diplomacy (etc...) because it makes sense for the wielder of a found relic and follower of the faith that relic is dedicated to, to have such expanded influence. The basic premise is that msatran thinks every old, ancient object that the worlds ‘relic’ or ‘artifact’ could be used to describe must also be an object of great magical power because he thinks that’s what the rules say. He’s just wrong is all. The game is more expansive and open-minded than that. This is why his conclusion that 4E will suck does not follow. If anything, the designer’s unwillingness to throw in yet another campaign altering object of über-power is a good sign, because they’re telling stories that require gamers to think about the campaign setting, and not just about twinking out their characters with another magic item. You can resign now, if you like. :P
18DELTA 11-23-07, 09:22 AM	:clap:
Stigger 11-23-07, 10:10 AM	This is why his conclusion that 4E will suck does not follow. I'd think I'd agree with most of what you wrote there up to this point. :P :D
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 01:22 PM	Who says the power has to be great? Who says it even has to be a artifact level? Personaly I would be happy to see some of the Relics rules from Complete Divine make it's way into the FR...but hey that is ok. It seems I'll just go back to writing them up...thanks WotC for again not erven come close to what I want. Got a question does this Chalice of Amaunator have any magical properties? Also a non-magical relic in the Realms is useless...considering others relgigions do have magical relics. A relic are said to have magical powers. So it makes sense that this would have magical powers...now if anybody can use it the deity is a moron as anybody could claim it and use it to increase the faith of other gods by changing it's name. Consider it as a copywrite protection. So if this Chalice as any magical properties I agree with msatran that it should only be useable by or offer more power to worshippers of Amaunator...if it is completely non-magical then it is just a nice artifact(defination of a ancient item of historical importance, not magical in nature) to put up on a mantle. Though it is simple answear for msatran if he wants it to be a magical relic in nature just make it one. We aren't in 4th edition yet so we can be creative with the rules...
Lord Karsus 11-23-07, 01:54 PM	You have a point. Miss Miscellany said this means anything is possible. -Let's team up to stop world hunger in a few days. Also a non-magical relic in the Realms is useless...considering others relgigions do have magical relics. A relic are said to have magical powers. So it makes sense that this would have magical powers... -No, no, no. Look at what Mr. Misc said above: "Words don't all of a sudden get subtracted from teh vocabulary and knowledge base of the people in a fantasy setting just because in real life somebody uses one of those words to describe a magic item...Just like in real life, in Faerūn a legend can take on mythic proportions above and beyond what the truth is underlying that legend. It's human nature and that's present in Faerūn...“Relic” can mean far more than “...magical object of divine nature found as treasure.”" ...as anybody could claim it and use it to increase the faith of other gods by changing it's name. Consider it as a copywrite protection -You think that doesn't happen, what, with the claiming to have religious artifacts? How many different churches/organizations claim to have the true holy grail? Word G! No Stop til Brooklyn! Flatbush yipee! -No Sleep til Brooklyn, and Flatbush isn't anywhere I'd want to be, unless it was before 1958.
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 02:09 PM	-No, no, no. Look at what Mr. Misc said above: "Words don't all of a sudden get subtracted from teh vocabulary and knowledge base of the people in a fantasy setting just because in real life somebody uses one of those words to describe a magic item...Just like in real life, in Faerūn a legend can take on mythic proportions above and beyond what the truth is underlying that legend. It's human nature and that's present in Faerūn...“Relic” can mean far more than “...magical object of divine nature found as treasure.”" Sure their can be non-magical relics in the FR but their importance in a fantasy world where magic is a fact and not a belief would be rather limited. I would say it would interest historians more then any reliogus person. -You think that doesn't happen, what, with the claiming to have religious artifacts? How many different churches/organizations claim to have the true holy grail? As far as I know none claim at having the actual Holy Grail...but that is besides the point. In the Realms the gods have a more tangible interest in making sure that this scam doesn't happen.
Lord Karsus 11-23-07, 02:28 PM	Sure their can be non-magical relics in the FR but their importance in a fantasy world where magic is a fact and not a belief would be rather limited. I would say it would interest historians more then any reliogus person. -Why would their importance be limited? Just because they don't grant powers? No, those are the kinds of things that would interest religious types. Artifacts that entice others with promises of power and whatnot are the things that everyone wants. The things that offer no benefits, except the knowledge that the item is very holy, is what attracts the true religious folk. As far as I know none claim at having the actual Holy Grail...but that is besides the point. In the Realms the gods have a more tangible interest in making sure that this scam doesn't happen. -Multiple churches in Europe claim, or believe that they have *the* holy grail. And, while things are more tangibile in Faerūn, sure, it's not like a "scam" like this could happen.
msatran 11-23-07, 02:36 PM	Well, it offers benefits, but ANYONE can use it. The artifact isn't intelligent, it doesn't try to bring back Amaunator, it grants no special powers to its worshippers above and beyond what it already does. To me, that's just a legendary item. It's not a relic of somebody's faith, even a dead faith.
Lord Karsus 11-23-07, 02:40 PM	Well, it offers benefits, but ANYONE can use it. -So it can offer magical benefits.
johnkretzer 11-23-07, 02:42 PM	-Why would their importance be limited? Just because they don't grant powers? No, those are the kinds of things that would interest religious types. Artifacts that entice others with promises of power and whatnot are the things that everyone wants. The things that offer no benefits, except the knowledge that the item is very holy, is what attracts the true religious folk. But in D&D holy items do have power...remember one of the concepts of D&D is religion is fueled by belief. Gods are powerfuyl because of faith, clerics cast magic because of faith...belief is the true religous poer. So if everyone believes a relic has power in D&D it does. -Multiple churches in Europe claim, or believe that they have *the* holy grail. And, while things are more tangibile in Faerūn, sure, it's not like a "scam" like this could happen. Sure this scam happens...I have done it...in D&D that is :incog: . But if a item is made magical by the collective belief of people then it followsd those rules. I guess I just see that magical items can be made though other means then those prescribed to me in the DMG. Most if not all Relics in my game are magical in nature...why it just how it works in my philosphy of D&D. It isn't always world ahattering powers it is sometimes very mundane but they do represent a miracle.
MarkusTay63 11-23-07, 03:37 PM	Since we seem to behaving like gentlemen in this thread, I'd like to continue this refreshing debate. :D I would agree that in the RW, a relic is just a word for an item with some religious significance. That is why I amended my statement by adding the last line about "crying statues". There are at least four known "Spears of Destiny" sitting in museums (I saw it on the history channel), yet not all four could be the real article (yet all four claim to be so). Now, if such an item ever actually existed (an argument for another time, but I would think it did), it does not mean it has ANY power what-so-ever. It was a simple Roman spear (Pilum), nothing more. It was what it was used for, and what it was covered with, that gives it all it's significance. The result of the history channel investigation shows that NONE of the four museum pieces are probably the original, yet ALL FOUR wars have been fought over, and the fate of entire nations decided. Here, we agree - an item does NOT have to have any special powers in order to change history - the legends surrounding them are sometimes themselves more powerful. From that point of veiw, I would have to agree with both Miscellany and Lord Karsus. However, if we look at said items from a genre-specific veiwpoint (the ones most gamers approach from), then there is much to be said about assigning certain abilities to ALL Relics, even ones without magical properties (artifacts). In Indiana Jones, the Ark of the Covenant was a a way of communicating directly with the divine - a BIG deal in the RW, but not so much in D&D with Commune spells floating around. In the movie Constantine, we see the Spear of Destiny used to create a 'rift' from the 'divine realms' (Outer Planes) that a certain someone could use to pass through. On the other hand, the same substance (don't want to mention any names and upset people, but it was HIS blood) is used as a barrier AGAINAST demonic intrusion in the film Tales from the Crypt: Demon Knight. Here I am using examples of modern folklore, but most of it is couched in traditional religous dogma and folklore/traditions. Any army with either the Ark of the Covenant or the Spear of Destiny was said to be undefeatable, yet neither one is said to have "lasers" shooting from them (what if two different armies had them, and were on opposite sides?):eek: Anyhow, you see my point? D&D is a fantasy game, and FR is a fantasy setting - fantasy set in folklore and traditions. It just fits the genre better if a Relic actualy did something - it is supposed to be on some level a connection between you and your god - to me that sounds like some pretty potent magic that transcends rules. What is the Relic itself doesn't create the effect, whatever it is, but rather the followers belief in the item? Like the way crosses only work against Vampires if the person wielding them has Faith, or from a meta-gaming standpoint, how priests (back in 2e) didn't really need their gods to grant them spells up to 3rd level, because it was their OWN INNER FAITH that did so? Ergo, a Relic would not neccessarily give off any dweomer, but in the hands of a True believer, miracles could happen. :) Thats why I posted an excerpt from my house rules above - the relic gives a bit of spellcasting boost, but that does not neccessarily means it stems from the object. It could be that they have gotten the attention of their deity, or that their own faith is giving them the 'added spiritual strength'. Its more of a 'flavor thing' really, and if you prefer religious items to 'do nothing', then thats your call. I like to make them just a little bit more special, though. :cloud9:
Mr_Miscellany 11-24-07, 12:49 AM	Hey Msatran: Since my favorite local gaming store is behind on their ordering, I'm not likely to get a copy of the adventure any time soon. Would you be willing to put up a spoiler tag on your next post, then give us the lowdown on the Aumanator book/relic-thingy and its purpose vis-a-vis the plot in the adventure? Inquiring minds want to know.
18DELTA 11-24-07, 01:47 PM	I agree with Msatran it is complete crud(the Relic).Its only use is to destoy a set of the Nether Scrolls and thus bring down the Sharn Wall!I think it is complete crud!:D
johnkretzer 11-24-07, 03:43 PM	I agree with Msatran it is complete crud(the Relic).Its only use is to destoy a set of the Nether Scrolls and thus bring down the Sharn Wall!I think it is complete crud!:D Oh it is a plot device designed to serve they're silly little story...not very useful.
Lord Karsus 11-24-07, 04:12 PM	Oh it is a plot device designed to serve they're silly little story...not very useful. -So we've been arguing about nothing!? -Nah, that's not true.
MarkusTay63 11-24-07, 04:14 PM	Why the HELL would destroying the Nether Scrolls bring down the Sharn wall?! Who thinks of this cr@p!? :uh-huh: If this is the 'creative direction' 4e is taking, it's looking worse by the minute. Sorry, Miscellany... I really was trying to keep MY opinions out of this so-far very polite thread, but that just doesn't sound right to me at all. :nonono:
Lord Karsus 11-24-07, 04:19 PM	Why the HELL would destroying the Nether Scrolls bring down the Sharn wall?! Who thinks of this cr@p!? :uh-huh: -Good question. I hope someone with the book can 'splain the logic there, according to the book.
Mr_Miscellany 11-24-07, 05:03 PM	If you guys read the Introduction (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20071105a) to the adventure (available as a .pdf download) you can see the bigger picture. Y'all just have no idea how well this plays into my campaign. I've always had faith that what one designer thought of would be built upon by another, and this just proves my faith was in good hands. Kudos to Eric Boyd (and Erik Mona??) for getting the ball rolling on Aumanator.
Stigger 11-24-07, 05:15 PM	Read it a while back, thought it was kinda stupid myself... but then again, I think that of most modules. Just doesn't suit the groups play style most of them. Feh, doesn't matter to me any way it goes, I'll likely be ignoring most of this mess as it is.
Lord Karsus 11-24-07, 11:41 PM	-Dark Diviners of Windsong Tower? Quest to destroy the Weave, and replace it with the Shadow Weave? Shades, who have the power of Karsus? The Terraseer prisoner? What's going on here!? If you guys read the Introduction to the adventure (available as a .pdf download) you can see the bigger picture. Y'all just have no idea how well this plays into my campaign. I've always had faith that what one designer thought of would be built upon by another, and this just proves my faith was in good hands. Kudos to Eric Boyd (and Erik Mona??) for getting the ball rolling on Aumanator. -That doesn't explain how destroying the Quess'Ar'Teranthvar destroys the Sharn Wall (at least, what the introduction provides).
18DELTA 11-24-07, 11:48 PM	There must be an Umber Hulk running around the offices of WotC!:rolleyes:
johnkretzer 11-25-07, 12:27 AM	If you guys read the Introduction (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20071105a) to the adventure (available as a .pdf download) you can see the bigger picture. Y'all just have no idea how well this plays into my campaign. I've always had faith that what one designer thought of would be built upon by another, and this just proves my faith was in good hands. Kudos to Eric Boyd (and Erik Mona??) for getting the ball rolling on Aumanator. What are you talking about? It makes no sense to me....it looks like one designers mistake building on top of the other one...Aumanator wasn't even mentioned. Also it is completely useless to me as the Shade City was wiped away within months of arriving....
MarkusTay63 11-25-07, 01:35 AM	Three things I like - 1) The involvement of Auguthra the mad 2) The Roll of Black Years 3) The 3rd set of Nether Scrolls.... All three of which I guessed at months ago. :D In fact, I even named the 'new' ones the copper set (since we had a Gold and Silver). After all, there were THREE races working on them... it just made sense. Still don't see what the Sharnwall has to do with Aumanator, but I see a whole "Light vs Darkness" scenario brewing - very original. :rolleyes: Hope they at least tie his involvement into the Dawn Cataclysm - it just seems pertinent to everything that is going on for some reason.
Mr_Miscellany 11-25-07, 04:09 AM	What are you talking about? It makes no sense to me....it looks like one designers mistake building on top of the other one...Aumanator wasn't even mentioned.If you choose to look at it negatively, well, what did you expect? A rule of thumb I learned via Ed Greenwood is this: Good FR sourcebooks always leave two more doors open for every one they close. I'll add my own rule: Great sourcebooks do the above plus build on loose ends in greater FR plots, while leaving plenty of room for DMs to insert their own plots and campaign arcs to 'ride the wave' of events. Just from the introduction I'm loving what I'm seeing. Now if I could just get my FLGS to hunt down a copy of the damned adventure....
Lord Karsus 11-25-07, 04:21 AM	If you choose to look at it negatively, well, what did you expect? A rule of thumb I learned via Ed Greenwood is this: Good FR sourcebooks always leave two more doors open for every one they close. I'll add my own rule: Great sourcebooks do the above plus build on loose ends in greater FR plots, while leaving plenty of room for DMs to insert their own plots and campaign arcs to 'ride the wave' of events. Just from the introduction I'm loving what I'm seeing. Now if I could just get my FLGS to hunt down a copy of the damned adventure.... -How does any of that explain how destroying the Quess'Ar'Teranthvar destroys the Sharn Wall!? That's all I want to know!
Mr_Miscellany 11-25-07, 04:26 AM	-How does any of that explain how destroying the Quess'Ar'Teranthvar destroys the Sharn Wall!? That's all I want to know! Tell you what....I'll go buy the adventure as soon as it becomes available at my FLGS, then I'll tell you. Until then, you're going to have to live with me being excited about this adventure and being able to divine much about it by reading the introduction. Enhance your calm, Lord Karsus. Mellow apologies for not having the answer you seek. Be well. :P
Lord Karsus 11-25-07, 04:34 AM	Tell you what....I'll go buy the adventure as soon as it becomes available at my FLGS, then I'll tell you. -I'll be waiting. G-dspeed. Until then, you're going to have to live with me being excited about this adventure and being able to divine much about it by reading the introduction. Enhance your calm, Lord Karsus. Mellow apologies for not having the answer you seek. Be well. :P -Too much caffine does that to ya. Within the past 24 hours, I've had at least a bottle of Coke, two medium Dunkin' Donuts coffees, and a small Starbucks cappuccino. I have school Monday, and I'm trying to reset my sleeping schedule to something more normal than waking up at 11 PM, and going to be circa 4 or 5 AM. It's tough. -Nah, but I'd be on top of you even if I weren't doing this to myself. Dan hasn't been on lately, so I need to pick up his slack! :cool:
johnkretzer 11-25-07, 04:56 PM	If you choose to look at it negatively, well, what did you expect? A rule of thumb I learned via Ed Greenwood is this: Good FR sourcebooks always leave two more doors open for every one they close. I'll add my own rule: Great sourcebooks do the above plus build on loose ends in greater FR plots, while leaving plenty of room for DMs to insert their own plots and campaign arcs to 'ride the wave' of events. Just from the introduction I'm loving what I'm seeing. Now if I could just get my FLGS to hunt down a copy of the damned adventure.... A module by defination closes more doors then they open. This is a module. It also cuts loose atrings...instead of developing them. Hence why I hate modules... Though I am glad someone who can create their own stories can get use out of this Shade book. But in my game the Shades have been dealt with...
Mr_Miscellany 11-25-07, 10:08 PM	A module by defination closes more doors then they open. By yours, maybe. By mine they (if they are FR modules) open up new possiblities for adventure and leave something for the DM to build on.
Lord Karsus 11-25-07, 11:48 PM	-Modules/adventures open door and close doors. The doors of the plotline are closed (but not necessarily locked), but the doors that contain possible impacts of said plotline open.
johnkretzer 11-26-07, 12:09 AM	By yours, maybe. By mine they (if they are FR modules) open up new possiblities for adventure and leave something for the DM to build on. Actualy it depends really...for me this whole line of modules is garbage because I already had things dealing with this in my game... The Shadow Weave was already absorbed by Mystra... The City of Shade got leveled and the Shades are a endanger species...it now I place where I can run about a dozen campaigns. Following these module would just be silly for my game. Then again I just hate the railroad tracks of modules to beging with.
Mr_Miscellany 11-26-07, 12:45 AM	I just wanted to say this thread's title gets my vote for best of 2007. Sounds like something miscellany would say.
RanielK 11-26-07, 02:46 PM	-Alright, the Ark then. Holding the Ark wouldn't/doesn't magically give people supernatural powers. Ah, but how do you know? Are you an Orthodox Rabbi of the correct tribe of Israel? And have you been in the presence of the Ark recently? The Ark (or more appropriately its contents) have been described as having some pretty awesome (in the correct sense of the word) abilities. Little things like allow a city's walls to be devestated with but a shout and parting a river. You know, little things.
Lord Karsus 11-26-07, 10:38 PM	Ah, but how do you know? Are you an Orthodox Rabbi of the correct tribe of Israel? And have you been in the presence of the Ark recently? The Ark (or more appropriately its contents) have been described as having some pretty awesome (in the correct sense of the word) abilities. Little things like allow a city's walls to be devestated with but a shout and parting a river. You know, little things. -The same book also said that G-d created Human beings out of nothing but clay and his breath. :rolleyes:
Stigger 11-27-07, 01:54 AM	Indeed... especially since we all know it was spilt beer in mud...
Lord Karsus 11-27-07, 03:21 AM	Note: I'm not bashing any particular religion or other- I'm fairly religious myself. However, I don't let my faith get in front of facts.
Stigger 11-27-07, 03:27 AM	Feh, can't be religious these days unless you cling to dogma like a drowning man to a log in a sea of secularism. :P :D
Lord Karsus 11-27-07, 03:39 AM	Feh, can't be religious these days unless you cling to dogma like a drowning man to a log in a sea of secularism. :P :D -Not to bring this topic further off-topic, or to get it locked, but it's true. Many specific religious stories, views, and so on are incorrect, plain and simple. That does't necessarily invalidate the religion, and it certainly doesn't negate any of the positives that following the religion can bring a person, or a group of people. But, bleh, I can't stand when facts are blatently ignored, in leiu of faith. One can be religious, but rational at the same time (ie, me, if I can be considered rational! :))
Stigger 11-27-07, 03:50 AM	It is kinda amazing how much of a "if it isn't all true, then it all must be wrong" attitude is out there these days, at least from what I've seen. But I empathize with you there LK. So yeah, any other divine chalices we can discuss out there, just to kinda stay semi-on-topic?
Lord Karsus 11-27-07, 03:56 AM	-The current character I am playing in a campaign is (was) a Spelljamming Morninglord of Lathander who is (was) questing for the Crown of the Corona, a Lathanderite relic that I made up specifically for this character's backstory. I was pretty miffed that when we did find it, my DM wouldn't let me use or keep the item, because he felt I made the item "too powerful" (even though, when he told me to make it, he told me to remember that this is an item that a deity would wear. So, I took his words to heart- powerful, but not unbalancing, or, dare I say, "munchkinizing").
Stigger 11-27-07, 04:00 AM	Well, if a deity was wearing it, wouldn't Lathander kinda want his lost hat back? :D
Lord Karsus 11-27-07, 04:10 AM	Well, if a deity was wearing it, wouldn't Lathander kinda want his lost hat back? :D -Well, I couldn't have brought it back until I returned to Realmspace, as I was somewhere else. My DM simply had the crown burst into flames as I took it from the BBEG's collection, and in a dream, an agent of Lathander informed me that it had been returned. I was just annoyed that I took the time to detail it, only to have it disappear. I don't assume that I'll see it again, in a future plot, either. My DM isn't creative like that.
Stigger 11-27-07, 04:25 AM	Think I'd go shopping for a new DM myself... but then again, I am the DM 99 out of 100 sessions... probably because I don't pull crap like that.
Lord Karsus 11-27-07, 07:18 AM	Think I'd go shopping for a new DM myself... but then again, I am the DM 99 out of 100 sessions... probably because I don't pull crap like that. -Yeah, I'm stuck with what I got, and prefer to DM myself, because I (obviously) play the style of gaming that most appeals to me.
Tigger11 11-29-07, 12:28 AM	Three things I like - 1) The involvement of Auguthra the mad 2) The Roll of Black Years 3) The 3rd set of Nether Scrolls.... All three of which I guessed at months ago. :D In fact, I even named the 'new' ones the copper set (since we had a Gold and Silver). After all, there were THREE races working on them... it just made sense. As far as I can tell the set of scrolls that show up in the adventure are those from Windsong, so the 3rd set of scrolls don't show up here, they are likely still behind Kraanfhaor's Door, and not in the hands of the Shadovar, or do two sets show up in the book? I'd also like to say I hate the idea that the shadovar can get the scrolls in a few day by accident while the city is in possession of the elves, when the Branded King tried for a decade to get them and failed despite having free run of the city, that just doesnt make sense to me. -Tig
Lord Karsus 11-29-07, 12:53 AM	...that just doesnt make sense to me. -Welcome to 2007. :)
Stigger 11-29-07, 01:47 AM	With 2008 promising little in the way of an improvement so far...
msatran 11-29-07, 12:06 PM	Well, in my game, the Eldreth Veluuthra tried to steal them first, and the tree was buried in a cavern underground. (They had to fight two evil Elf Death Knights) The system the EV used to guard the trees and make sure that their version of Elvenness was assured was to guard the trees with mercenary Death Giants. When a Death Giant died, the warding system turned their guardian souls into two angry dream vestiges. This fight was so awful they had to devote a 20th level sorcerer to erasing one sigil a round. So, now the path is pretty much opened for the Shades to highjack the tree, as the defenses are so weakened that there's no way this guy in the tower could stop them. Plus, the problem with this entire plot is the law of unintended consequences. I have just destroyed the Nether Scrolls and scattered them across the world. I have just angered... 1) The Seldarine Pantheon 2) The Church of Mystra (Ah, survive for ten years, then it doesn't matter anymore...wait...that's ridiculous, no one can survive steady persecution by the angry followers of the Goddess of Magic for ten years.) 3) The Eldreth Veluuthra (Well, lots of PC's are already enemies of the EV, but Tordynnath Rhaenvern is one of those "I have every Magic Item I need to deal with the PC's and then some" NPCs. They don't even know who he is.) 4) The church of Azuth: (See above with Church of Mystra) 5) The Followers of the Seldarine Pantheon. If I were a priest of Corellon Larethian, I'd be a little miffed that someone blew up one of the relics of my faith using the chalice of some dead human god, and then had the nerve to call it an act of desperation. Clearly the short-sighted humans did not think of asking Corellon for aid and advice. And if there is an elf in the group, a lecture on theological correction is in order.
selunatic2397 11-30-07, 10:04 AM	Where in the three modules does it say there is a third set??? I read all three and it only mentions the Windsong tower set as the one stolen by the shades. Can someone give me a specific page number that says there are three sets? I am suspecting that someone misread the exerpts posted before the third modules release and this confusion has lived on.
Tigger11 11-30-07, 01:53 PM	Where in the three modules does it say there is a third set??? I read all three and it only mentions the Windsong tower set as the one stolen by the shades. Can someone give me a specific page number that says there are three sets? I am suspecting that someone misread the exerpts posted before the third modules release and this confusion has lived on. Someone said it involved the Shades finding an unknown set of Nether Scrolls (which the windsong set really isnt) and its gone on since then. The set involved is the Windsong set, in actuality I would much rather have it been the semi-mythical 3rd set, rather then the windsong set, because the shadovar overcoming the protections to get that set doesnt make alot of sense to me, or they could have had the Shadovar collecting the scattered set would have made a much better story. -Tig
msatran 11-30-07, 04:43 PM	There are as many copies of the Nether Scrolls as there are Sarrukh liches involved in the process. Please remember that there have to be more because they were a random treasure item in 1st and second edition Realms magic item charts.
Tigger11 11-30-07, 06:05 PM	There are as many copies of the Nether Scrolls as there are Sarrukh liches involved in the process. Please remember that there have to be more because they were a random treasure item in 1st and second edition Realms magic item charts. At the present time, there are known to be two sets of 50 scrolls. There has long been a belief by some (including myself) that there actually are 3 sets (one for each of the races who created them), but canon at this time has there being 100 scrolls in total. -Tig
MarkusTay63 11-30-07, 06:43 PM	As far as I can tell the set of scrolls that show up in the adventure are those from Windsong, so the 3rd set of scrolls don't show up here, they are likely still behind Kraanfhaor's Door, and not in the hands of the Shadovar, or do two sets show up in the book? I'd also like to say I hate the idea that the shadovar can get the scrolls in a few day by accident while the city is in possession of the elves, when the Branded King tried for a decade to get them and failed despite having free run of the city, that just doesnt make sense to me. -TigBranded King: "You'll never get those scrolls! They have been locked behind that impenetrable Door since the dawn of time!" Shadovar: "Have you tried the Doorknob?" Branded King: "Eh?... There's a Knob?" :confused: You really got to love how hard the designers try to make everything work with previous lore. Kind of makes you suspicious of the REAL reason they think they need to get rid of the last twenty years of established canon - the new players aren't the only ones it intimidates. :smirk:
godbeepit 11-30-07, 10:25 PM	Kind of make you suspicious of the REAL reason they think they need to get rid of the last twenty years of established canon - the new players aren't the only ones it intimidates. :smirk: Low blow! Low blow! Five minute recess to catch a breath! ;)
msatran 12-03-07, 04:59 AM	There was a young lady named Dobby Who found most young men quite snobby She went out for a ride Vowed she'd ne'er be a bride... And so developed...that horse was her hobby. :)
Green Elven Vampire 12-05-07, 02:20 AM	There was a community poster who was a drag As boring and winded as an air bag And with a dumb grin He wiped the drool off his chin But his intelligence was even less than a dish rag! :rolleyes:
Lord Karsus 12-05-07, 02:26 AM	-I like the first one better.
Panurg 12-05-07, 03:53 AM	Branded King: "You'll never get those scrolls! They have been locked behind that impenetrable Door since the dawn of time!" Shadovar: "Have you tried the Doorknob?" Branded King: "Eh?... There's a Knob?" :confused: You really got to love how hard the designers try to make everything work with previous lore. Kind of makes you suspicious of the REAL reason they think they need to get rid of the last twenty years of established canon - the new players aren't the only ones it intimidates. :smirk: I prefer that one over both of the two. :D
Stigger 12-05-07, 07:04 AM	I liked the first limerick best myself...
msatran 12-05-07, 07:10 AM	Now that Green Elven Vampire has taken his tiny little shot, let me take mine. Mechanically, I don't stalk you. You simply have this habit of posting threads without brooking any room for disagreement. When I show up and say "There is no need for this PRC, the game already supports exactly what you want to do," that's not an insult. It's a statement. If I was taking shots at you personally, I would take aim at you instead of your opinion. You need to learn to understand the difference between a personal attack and a reasoned opinion based on an argument within the rules and/or written text. I got angry once. I demanded that Richard Baker be fired. We all saw the consequences of that action. Then I got political. Apparently, people don't like things when I handle them in the manner of ancient roman orators who I actually admire, either. You, sir, are not on my ignore list because every so often, I need to be reminded that I am not the only person in the world. However, I do ask that you read more carefully before you jump down people's throats. I really don't believe a subtly worded dirty joke is a reason for a cheap shot, and you shouldn't either. I've been running the Realms a long time. I have about 15 players playing characters all over it. And you know, the stories are pretty good, and players have a pretty good time. All I ask from you is that you time your cheap shots a little better. Really, that's all. This limerick of yours does not have the proper amount of syllables.. I'm sorry to have to tell you that. But because I'm a grammar nazi, I will rewrite it myself for you. They say that msatran's a drag A dirty old pompous windbag With a despicable grin He wipes drool from his chin And slobbers into an old rag. Now I feel better. Thank you. And, ladies and gentlemen, that's a cheap shot. Thank you, I'm here all week.
Lord Karsus 12-05-07, 08:56 AM	Now I feel better. Thank you. And, ladies and gentlemen, that's a cheap shot. Thank you, I'm here all week. -MSATRAN MUST BE STOPPED!! :D
GothicDan 12-05-07, 09:00 AM	You, sir, are not on my ignore list because every so often, I need to be reminded that I am not the only person in the world. <3 I want to grow up and be Msatran for one day. Roman orators for the win. GET TO THE ROSTRA!!
msatran 12-07-07, 06:44 AM	My personal favorite sin of omission in Anauroch is this: The sheikh's word is law, so long as he breaks none of the important traditions of the Bedine (The rules by which all live, including, for example, the requirements that water must be given to the thirsty, and that oaths must be kept). Well...what exactly ARE they, then? Would it have been so terrible to list them all?
Stigger 12-07-07, 06:51 AM	Think you're supposed to refer to the 2e version of Aunaroch if you actually want to go into detail... which amusingly references the Al-Qadim setting as well for some reason, if I recall correctly.
msatran 12-07-07, 07:00 AM	Uh, Stigger, they aren't listed there either. :)
Stigger 12-07-07, 07:12 AM	Not for the Bedine no, but I seem to recall them saying to look it up for the bedouin like Zakharans over in the Al-Qadim books... pretty sure they mentioned them in there somewhere, although it was somewhat abbreviated as I recall. Either that or I'm hallucinating it, since I haven't read those books in... maybe 10 years or so.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-07-07, 02:13 PM	My personal favorite sin of omission in Anauroch is this: The sheikh's word is law, so long as he breaks none of the important traditions of the Bedine (The rules by which all live, including, for example, the requirements that water must be given to the thirsty, and that oaths must be kept). Well...what exactly ARE they, then? Would it have been so terrible to list them all? *laughs* Great point.
msatran 12-07-07, 02:21 PM	The worst part is, as I HAVE a Bedine GMPC, and I AM sending them to Anauroch like...NOW...this is actually relevant. :) Poor Sha'lira Nec Adran. Two editions and still nothing but diss for the poor woman. :)
Mr_Miscellany 12-10-07, 01:51 AM	Just got my copy (finally). As it relates to this thread, all I can say is: Much ado about nothing.
Lord Karsus 12-10-07, 10:46 AM	The worst part is, as I HAVE a Bedine GMPC, and I AM sending them to Anauroch like...NOW...this is actually relevant. :) Poor Sha'lira Nec Adran. Two editions and still nothing but diss for the poor woman. :) -Wing it, and good luck.
Fire_Wraith 12-11-07, 12:48 PM	What really ticked me off about it was the ending... "Congratulations, you've stopped the Sharran plot and prevented them from killing the goddess Mystra!" "Oh, and just ignore the fact that it's totally pointless because we've already revealed that she'll die anyway in a few more years of the storyline." ....... While you're at it, why not pour some lemon juice to go with the salt being rubbed in the wounds? :pbbbtt: Incidentally, I think what you're looking for will be in the Al-Qadim source material (since the Bedines came to Anauroch from there, via magic). I distinctly recall such traditions being found there.
Lord Karsus 12-11-07, 01:54 PM	What really ticked me off about it was the ending... "Congratulations, you've stopped the Sharran plot and prevented them from killing the goddess Mystra!" "Oh, and just ignore the fact that it's totally pointless because we've already revealed that she'll die anyway in a few more years of the storyline." ....... -It does make you wonder what was going on, as apparently, the general 4e ideas were already being tossed around.
Fire_Wraith 12-11-07, 02:01 PM	Considering it was released after Grand History of the Realms, there's no possible excuse for not being aware of the planned changes. Furthermore, I'm relatively convinced the eventual plans were fully understood, because they even state something to the effect that "Mystra is saved for now, but the Sharrans will keep trying."
Stigger 12-11-07, 04:52 PM	Another paradoxical take on their stated aims... make the PCs the most important thing out there, and then turn around and prove they're not...
Lord Karsus 12-11-07, 05:23 PM	...because they even state something to the effect that "Mystra is saved for now, but the Sharrans will keep trying." -Uh oh. Eerie and cryptic foreshadowing...
msatran 12-11-07, 06:40 PM	Yeah. Only it's NOT eerie, or cryptic, because GOTHR was released first, so everyone who bought a copy of that who really loves the Realms got the opportunity to feel Knifed first. Is there ANY possibility that Wizards sarcasm was evident here, and that the choice of GOTH R was deliberate, and they've decided to make the Realms stupidly emo for no damned reason?
Stigger 12-11-07, 07:24 PM	I'm sure there's a reason... just not one anyone but them understands.
Lord Karsus 12-11-07, 09:50 PM	I'm sure there's a reason... just not one anyone but them understands. -'Cause that's when Corporate WotC said that a product should be released?
Stigger 12-12-07, 01:11 AM	I was actually referring to the second assertation of Msatrans post, the emo bit. Even if I do actually hate and loath that term...
Mr_Miscellany 12-15-07, 03:13 AM	C'mon you guys....haven't at least all of you been around long enough to know that development of products doesn't occur in a nice, neat little line? And even if there was concurrent development...so what? How is it that, in my campaign for example, that I'm 'required' or supposed to make it so that Mystra dies? That's several years away from potentially happening in game, if I even want it to. I just don't see anyone saying, "Oh, our party defeated the Shadovars and saved the Weave and now WotC is invalidating that" to themselves at the conclusion of the adventure trilogy. Waaaay to serious a take on playing a game, if you ask me. It's one thing to find irony/annoyance, another to try really, really hard to find it because you want it. C'mon people, lighten up for Christ's sake. :rolleyes
Lord Karsus 12-15-07, 03:32 AM	-Who cares about individual games? Personally, I don't care what you, or most other people, do in their own home campaigns. The canon plotline of the Realms is what matters.
Stigger 12-15-07, 04:48 AM	I care about individual games... if you're not doing it exactly the way I do it at home, you all suck. :P :D Seriously though, the canon plotline I still don't care for, even if I have come to see what they're trying to accomplish with this. But I have to admit, with the realization that they are indeed trying to 'modernize' the Realms, and bring it out of the limitations 1e and 2e built into it, which I actually agree with WotC doing, I still don't like the way they have chosen to do it, officially anyway. So, I've come to the conclusion that this is something that needs to happen in some respects, but my own methods for achieving it in my own game is going to be radically different from WotC's official storyline. And unfortunately, that's going to seriously limit a lot of the utility the official supplements are going to provide for me, since they're based on assumptions that won't be true in my own version of 4e Realms.
Lord Karsus 12-15-07, 01:09 PM	I care about individual games... if you're not doing it exactly the way I do it at home, you all suck. :P :D -Exxxactly.
Mr_Miscellany 12-15-07, 03:03 PM	-Who cares about individual games? Personally, I don't care what you, or most other people, do in their own home campaigns. Then why are you responding to a me? The statements made at the top of page to are irrelevant if not considered from a campaign point of view, because that’s what they are referring to. Those statements are generalist complaints that WotC is 1) burning the candle at both ends and 2) cheapening the efforts of players to complete the Cormyr-Shadowdale-Anauroch adventure arc. I’m simply showing that the second idea is wrong. The canon plotline of the Realms is what matters. Hell of a statement to make in a thread devoted to an adventure. It’s attitudes like yours that makes this place such a drag. Unless you’re in to bagging on WotC for lack of anything better to do, in which case there’s lots of fun to be had (other people’s enjoyment of the forums be damned, right?) Anyway, your statement also encompasses perfectly what is wrong with these message boards. The people who are 'worried' about the Canon Realms seem to think their opinions and assumptions are generally shared by the gaming population out there. Here's a hint: This isn't true. While it is ironic that WotC would put out an adventure series dedicated to saving the Weave for the current edition of the game, only to turn around and destroy it for the upcoming edition, that doesn’t detract from the fun people will have playing through the Cormyr-Shadowdale-Anauroch adventure arc.
Stigger 12-15-07, 04:09 PM	While it is ironic that WotC would put out an adventure series dedicated to saving the Weave for the current edition of the game, only to turn around and destroy it for the upcoming edition, that doesn’t detract from the fun people will have playing through the Cormyr-Shadowdale-Anauroch adventure arc. That I can't agree with. While it may certainly be true of some people, not everyone is going to agree with that sentiment, and in fact some people are going to be really bothered by that. Just among my group, out of six players, 3 wouldn't care, 1 would think it was funny, but the other 2 would be raging at me for pulling something like that on them. Some people really care about things like that, and I'm not going to dismiss their feelings as 'silly' or the like, simply because I have different feelings on the matter. Its not my or anyone elses place to judge someone elses emotional responses.
Fire_Wraith 12-15-07, 04:37 PM	I agree, it probably wouldn't bother some people. Others might find it funny. Me, I'd be pretty offended.
Mr_Miscellany 12-15-07, 05:36 PM	... but the other 2 would be raging at me for pulling something like that on them. Emphasis mine. This is my point: If a DM decides to advance the timeline of their campaign several years and encorporate Mystra's death, then there's a problem. How many of us who use the adventures within the general timeline they are set are going to have campaigns that run that long? And of the tiny amount that do, how many will feel obligated to stick with the GHotR events when we probably know our players won't like it and it makes more sense to either ignore the GHotR or have are (now Epic) players prevent Cyric from dealing the killing blow? Mountains out of mollhills, people. Its not my or anyone elses place to judge someone elses emotional responses. Oh please. Your making us Californians look bad with our 'liberal' ways. Someone getting overly emotional about events that haven't even and might not even happen in their campaign yet is being just that: Overly. Emotional. It's a game. Deal.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-15-07, 06:13 PM	It’s attitudes like yours that makes this place such a drag. Unless you’re in to bagging on WotC for lack of anything better to do, in which case there’s lots of fun to be had (other people’s enjoyment of the forums be damned, right?) Anyway, your statement also encompasses perfectly what is wrong with these message boards. If this place is "such a drag" for you, then why do you keep coming back here to interact with the people you seem to have contempt for? Just for future reference, I could not care less if my views are not that of the majority.
WizO_Mengde 12-15-07, 06:21 PM	Ok... thinks are getting a tad heated here... so let's calm down a twitch, shall we?
Mr_Miscellany 12-15-07, 09:09 PM	If this place is "such a drag" for you, then why do you keep coming back here to interact with the people you seem to have contempt for? <self-imposed snip> Because this place could become a mecca of sorts for Realms gamers...and maybe revitalize the setting in the process. Just imagine...people starting threads without prompting that are about their campaigns...what they do, what they don't do, what they like and don't like about the Realms, their custom material, how they view cannon and what they've done to shape the Realms to their liking. Ahh...dare to dream. :cool:
Lord Karsus 12-15-07, 11:38 PM	Then why are you responding to a me? -Because you were talking about how in your campaign, yada, yada, yada. From the perspective of the canon timeline, all this comes relativley quickly, and one wonders what the point of saving the Weave was, only to "trash" it a few years later. 2) cheapening the efforts of players to complete the Cormyr-Shadowdale-Anauroch adventure arc. I’m simply showing that the second idea is wrong. -If I were in a campaign that finished the adventure, and later followed the storyline, and had Mystra destroyed, I'd be ever so slightly disgruntled. Hell of a statement to make in a thread devoted to an adventure. -An adventure that's part of the canon storyline. It’s attitudes like yours that makes this place such a drag. Unless you’re in to bagging on WotC for lack of anything better to do, in which case there’s lots of fun to be had (other people’s enjoyment of the forums be damned, right?) :rolleyes: Anyway, your statement also encompasses perfectly what is wrong with these message boards. -There's a major lag, and I don't know why, but my statement doesn't seem to be causing it. The people who are 'worried' about the Canon Realms seem to think their opinions and assumptions are generally shared by the gaming population out there. Here's a hint: This isn't true. -And, here we care about the "gaming population out there"- the "gaming population out there" that cannot be quantified. Therefore, who's to say what the "gaming population out there" thinks. Just imagine...people starting threads without prompting that are about their campaigns...what they do, what they don't do, what they like and don't like about the Realms, their custom material, how they view cannon and what they've done to shape the Realms to their liking. -Uh, I'm pretty sure that's what we do already, except the part about prompting others that these are personal ideas (and, you need that part).
Stigger 12-16-07, 10:03 AM	Emphasis mine. This is my point: If a DM decides to advance the timeline of their campaign several years and encorporate Mystra's death, then there's a problem. How many of us who use the adventures within the general timeline they are set are going to have campaigns that run that long? And of the tiny amount that do, how many will feel obligated to stick with the GHotR events when we probably know our players won't like it and it makes more sense to either ignore the GHotR or have are (now Epic) players prevent Cyric from dealing the killing blow? Mountains out of mollhills, people. Speaking for myself... the current campaigns run about 5 years (realtime) with weekly sessions, with a few generational shifts for some of the PCs, so that's the only thing that really concerns me. If someone else is going to run them as shorts, then it would probably work for them. As for following canon, I know I certainly never have, but that's not really the point of the matter. Oh please. Your making us Californians look bad with our 'liberal' ways. Someone getting overly emotional about events that haven't even and might not even happen in their campaign yet is being just that: Overly. Emotional. It's a game. Deal. From your point of view, but not necessarily everyone elses. And I've no idea what being liberal or Californians would have to do with anything. The point is, that people have emotional reactions to things that upset them, or whatever, and its generally not rational. You getting upset over the reactions of others is likely not terribly rational, otherwise it would be easier to look at, accept, and then just move on with. You might think its silly, or stupid, or whatever, but were you truly being rational about it, it wouldn't be a topic to get into an arguement over... if you take my meaning there. ;)
johnkretzer 12-16-07, 11:35 AM	Because this place could become a mecca of sorts for Realms gamers...and maybe revitalize the setting in the process. Just imagine...people starting threads without prompting that are about their campaigns...what they do, what they don't do, what they like and don't like about the Realms, their custom material, how they view cannon and what they've done to shape the Realms to their liking. Ahh...dare to dream. :cool: Your dream has come true people are talking about their opinion about the current Realms canon...so what is the problem? Most posters right now seem to have major problems with the direction WotC has taken... We have even discussed how we are going to fix it in our campaigns. So why do get all upset when people do actualy give a opinion? I mean personaly those modules felt like a computer game going though...I think there are perhaps some the worst ones ever published by WotC or TSR.(though the modules that WotC have brought out are very weak compared to the ones put out by TSR) Also these adventures run counter to what WotC is saying. In 4th edition the PCs matter(though in truth this is nothing new as they have always mattered), but to set up a change they needed they but you through a series of modules where action mean next nothing because of what they do later. Now their GDPC comes along and reverses everything you just did. So why should we bother with WotC anymore? I mean like I keep saying I haven't lost my love in the Realms(I'll probably play in the Realms till the day I die), but I have lost faith in WotC as a game designing company....because it seems to me like they either never cared for the Realms or just never got it.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-16-07, 08:18 PM	Your dream has come true people are talking about their opinion about the current Realms canon...so what is the problem? Very good point...a lot of the stuff Mr. Miscellany listed is happening already, as far as I can tell.
Butterface 12-17-07, 10:55 AM	Well, speaking for my group - all 5 players know what will happen to Mystra come 4E, and they do not feel angry or cheated. For one thing, the adventures affect a lot more than just the fate of Mystra. If Despayr is allowed to go about creating the dead magic zone in the Vast Swamp unhindered, it is very likely the end of Cormyr. Think about it, an area right on Cormyr's border where the Sharrans and their dark allies can muster their forces unhindered? It's not like you can send the War Wizards in to take care of the threat. Purple Dragons? Sounds like more fodder to be turned into Shadowslain undead to me. In my campaign at least, had the PCs failed, Cormyr would've been unable to handle this threat given all the other problems the nation has faced recently. And it's not like Cormyr really has allies that can lend a hand, the Dales and Cormanthor are a tad bit busy at the moment (Last Mythal Trilogy), and Sembia might even see it in their interest to let the Monarchy fall. The point is, regardless of what does or does not happen to Mystra come 4E, the PCs just emerged from the Vast Swamp with about 25 people that they rescued from certain death. They brought a sense of hope to the people they rescued, and to the citizens of Wheloon. They are heroes, and nothing changes that or how their characters feel. These adventures affect waaay more than just the fate of Mystra, and so yes, they are still very fun. I would even wager that if my players knew about the 4E changes in game, they would still try to stop Shar in this adventure path. To let Shar have this sort of dominance in several different regions of Faerun would be disastrous to the people living there. "-Who cares about individual games? Personally, I don't care what you, or most other people, do in their own home campaigns." Wow - just, wow.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-17-07, 02:18 PM	"-Who cares about individual games? Personally, I don't care what you, or most other people, do in their own home campaigns." Wow - just, wow. Isn't that better (that is, less annoying) than trying to dictate what other people should do in their personal games? I think you may have missed LK's point there. I think you do make a good point about the PCs being "heroes" in the recent adventures in spite of what happens later in the timeline. I can't help but agree, because I've often said that even saving just a few people can count as heroism.
msatran 12-17-07, 02:59 PM	Well, the problem is when players feel that canon events interfere with their heroism, not the other way around. When I have to ask my players things like "So, Dave? Would Rizzen Starchaser, high druid of the Moonwood, allow this Orc Kingdom to exist?" and my player says he'll get back to me on it and I can't move things forward, that annoys me. I hate that "Is there?/Isn't there?" feeling. In general, my rule is "Unless the PC's would take action, I'm sorry, it's gonna happen." But this whole Tyr Romance thing? I have to think about that one a lot. Spellplague? Why?
Lord Karsus 12-17-07, 04:23 PM	...and Sembia might even see it in their interest to let the Monarchy fall. -At the time, Sembia is even in more of a crisis than Cormyr. Wow - just, wow. -Wow, just wow what? That you (the general you) wiggled something to make it work out or not to work out in your personal campaign has no impact on the canon storyline, provided by WotC novels, adventures and sourcebooks. As such, it doesn't impact me at all. If you were able to do all that, fine- but don't come telling me how, since you did it, everything will work out, and that any complaints, criticisms and/or praises are ungrounded.
Butterface 12-17-07, 05:41 PM	- -Wow, just wow what? That you (the general you) wiggled something to make it work out or not to work out in your personal campaign has no impact on the canon storyline, provided by WotC novels, adventures and sourcebooks. As such, it doesn't impact me at all. If you were able to do all that, fine- but don't come telling me how, since you did it, everything will work out, and that any complaints, criticisms and/or praises are ungrounded. Actually, I never said that your complaints, criticisms and/or praises are ungrounded. Let's get back to a real, practical conversation here, LK. There have been many posts on this thread with the attitude that, since Mystra gets axed in 4E, these adventures are no good or somehow invalid. I was merely pointing out that there are many other aspects to the adventure that are still important and potentially enjoyable for players. I used my own personal campaign as an example since that's what I know for sure. I could talk at length about the structure of the adventure and how, hypothetically, players would or would not feel slighted by these adventures. But I don't have to do that, because I know how real players react to it, at least the ones I play with. Besides, I think you and some others around these boards have the hypothetical pretty well covered already. I'm more interested in "where the rubber meets the road." My "Wow" statement meant that I simply didn't know how to respond to your statement but felt profoundly insulted and at odds with the concept in general. First of all, it's just plain rude. You try to call me out for what you perceive as me saying your "complaints, criticisms and/or praises" are not important, after making that statement? Hypocrisy much? Personally, individual games is what matters the most to me on these boards. Heck, the only time I even listen to what Msatran is saying is when he's talking about his own personal games. The rest of its just bs (no offense Msatran) - but I can't relate to hardly anything that guy says. But when he starts talking about his actual game and moves out of hypothetical, "let me tell you a parable" land, I actually really enjoy listening to what he has to say. The same goes for everyone else on these boards. It's the one place where everyone on these boards, be it Ubbergeek, Mr. Miscellany, Johnkretzer or anyone else, can come together and agree on one thing: we love this game, and have had truly fun experiences within the Realms that can be shared with others. I love hearing others' experiences in the Realms, and if someone played these adventures and their players felt slighted by it, to me that is a truly interesting post to hear why and under what circumstances. It gives me ideas what to do and not to do in my own personal game, which is what brought me to these boards in the first place. Hearing people talk about what they perceive to be problems with an adventure is fine, and of course has merit. But sometimes I wonder if the people who gripe on these boards even actually play in FR, or just cry about it. Don't get me wrong, I think everyone has a right to get on here and voice their opinion about whatever topic. But I'm sorry, saying that individual actual games are of no interest, and are somehow secondary to theoretical debates on which adventures are good for the Canon Realms is about as backwards as it gets.
Lord Karsus 12-17-07, 05:49 PM	Actually, I never said that your complaints, criticisms and/or praises are ungrounded. -Butter, the first thing I said was that I was using the 'general' form of you, not meaning you specifically, but the theoretical 'whomever' out there. Personally, individual games is what matters the most to me on these boards. -Keyword: "To [you]". But sometimes I wonder if the people who gripe on these boards even actually play in FR, or just cry about it. -I don't, and I've never made it seem like I do. That, however, has no impact on the validity or truth to things that I say- any of it, be it a snarky, on the snide comment to MT, or a complex theory as to what [Insert NPC] has in store. But I'm sorry, saying that individual actual games are of no interest, and are somehow secondary to theoretical debates on which adventures are good for the Canon Realms is about as backwards as it gets. -I never said that we should be debating about what adventures are good and which adventures aren't, and if you got that impression, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be an apologist, howver. In my mind, these boards are for the theoretical and actual discussion of canon- that's what I meant by that. That someone does such and such in their own campaign is nice and all, but at the end of the day, that doesn't change the fact that XYZ has happened in canon, and the entire grounds that we debate things on has changed.
Mr_Miscellany 12-17-07, 08:07 PM	... and that any complaints, criticisms and/or praises are ungrounded.If such are grounded on people's (erroneous) wide-ranging assumptions about how individual campaigns will react (as was stated by people above), then yes, you'll hear an earful --loud and clear. It just strikes me as dumb that people who don't own the adventure, or own it but haven't read it through (much less run it) feel 'smart' enough to pigeonhole said adventure and lump it in to their 4E complaints all at the same time. It's like the regulars around here are bored with harping on 4E, so they're trying to drag down a perfectly good 3.5 adventure for lack of anything better to do. I know how awfully important it is for you people to “express” yourselves, but can’t you at least limit it to this adventure and what it is you actually know about it? Heck, the only time I even listen to what Msatran is ...<snip> ... But when he starts talking about his actual game and moves out of hypothetical, "let me tell you a parable" land, I actually really enjoy listening to what he has to say. QFT #1 But I'm sorry, saying that individual actual games are of no interest, and are somehow secondary to theoretical debates on which adventures are good for the Canon Realms is about as backwards as it gets. QFT #2 That someone does such and such in their own campaign is nice and all, but at the end of the day, that doesn't change the fact that XYZ has happened in canon, and the entire grounds that we debate things on has changed. It's an adventure. The outcomes of it will primarily effect campaigns that us it, with deffaults results thrown in so people who haven't run them have a general idea of what's going on when they run their own campaigns and take the events of these adventure scenarios into account. If you can't fathom the validity and importance of discussion of the Realms (especially as it relates to published Realms adventures) by gamers, then you’re out of your league. May I suggest Candlekeep.com? That's what I've always hated about these forums as opposed to other Realms discussion lists: How this place is an absolute magnet for the canon freaks that always turn their noses up at the people who do the real work (i.e. Play the Game). Not to mention we're the ones purchasing most of WotC's products.
Stigger 12-17-07, 08:15 PM	I don't know if I'd lump it with 4e so much as I would lump with things that don't suit my tastes. Really, for me, I don't like the Shadow Weave, the Return of the Shades, or the whole Shar is great thing going on period, in or out of the modules, so something centered around (or at least concerning) all three just leaves me cold period, regardless of whether Mystra lives or dies, now or later. Others may like it, and they're certainly welcome to, but that doesn't mean I have to. I think what bothers me is that all three took up production space that could have been put towards something interesting, like updating regions we haven't seen anything about in 3e or 3.5e, at least as far as I'm concerned. I can see why they didn't do that mind you, I just would have preferred that they had.
Lord Karsus 12-17-07, 08:49 PM	DISCLAIMER: I really bit my tongue, here, and didn't necessarily respond the way I would in actual life. For example, even though I was flamed, I did not respond with one single curse, even though plenty came easily to my lips, and in turn, my fingers. All in all, it's a very civil post, all things considering. It just strikes me as dumb that people who don't own the adventure, or own it but haven't read it through (much less run it) feel 'smart' enough to pigeonhole said adventure and lump it in to their 4E complaints all at the same time. -You don't have to be a doctor to realize that ingesting poison is detrimental on your health. Nor do you have to adventure in the Realms to appreciate them. Nor do you have to have owned and played the adventure in order to criticise it. I was never on the Titanic, but I think that carrying such a limited amount of lifeboats was a pretty boneheaded idea. It's like the regulars around here are bored with harping on 4E, so they're trying to drag down a perfectly good 3.5 adventure for lack of anything better to do. -The adventure storyline, as a whole, when plugged into the grand history of the Forgotten Realms, is contrived, especially since the ultimate resolution of the adventure was published before the ending of this particular module. I know how awfully important it is for you people to “express” yourselves, but can’t you at least limit it to this adventure and what it is you actually know about it? -:rolleyes: It's an adventure, you dumbass. The outcomes of it will primarily effect campaigns that us it, with deffaults results thrown in so people who haven't run them have a general idea of what's going on when they run their own campaigns and take the events of these adventure scenarios into account. -These are official Forgotten Realms products, and as such, the events that take place within the span of the adventures effect the greater picture of the Realms- default or not. If the module specifies that the Lord of Shadowdale steps down from his post, then the Lord of Shadowdale steps down from his post in the actual FR storyline. If you can't fathom the validity and importance of discussion of the Realms (especially as it relates to published Realms adventures) by gamers, then you’re out of your league. May I suggest Candlekeep.com? -As I said, if someone wants to talk about the Realms, as it pertains to someone's individual camp, I don't care. That has absolutely no effect on me. My primary emphasis is discussing the canon Forgotten Realms, which is the base of the campaign setting, and influences your campaign, and most other peoples. The day these forums turn into a place where people go on and on about what they do in their campaigns, and indepth, scholarly conversation on the canon Realms stops is the day I leave. -And, for what it's worth, I don't like Candlekeep. I find these forums much easier to navigate, in addition to the fact that these aren't the only boards I visit here. That's what I've always hated about these forums as opposed to other Realms discussion lists: How this place is an absolute magnet for the canon freaks that always turn their noses up at the people who do the real work (i.e. Play the Game). Not to mention we're the ones purchasing most of WotC's products. -Then leave, if you don't like it. Go away. "We" don't need people like "you". :rolleyes:
Butterface 12-17-07, 11:14 PM	Mr. M - I'm glad you agreed with what I posted, but I wasn't trying to start a flame war on this thread. LK is quite intelligent as he has shown over the long period he has been posting on these boards. He just enjoys the Realms for different reasons. Which is cool, I just got a little hot under the collar when I read the bit about individual games, which was not really directed at me, but I took personally nevertheless, as it is at the core of why I visit these boards. That being said, there are some things I don't like about these adventures. I don't think "Cormyr: ToW" had enough Realmsian flavor, and had to add quite a bit of stuff to make it seem more FR. Also, it was very heavily combat-oriented. I'm curious, is there anyone running just a single one of these adventures as a standalone (as opposed to all three back to back)? The Shadowdale adventure seemed like it would be particularly good for that.
johnkretzer 12-18-07, 12:35 AM	I'm curious, is there anyone running just a single one of these adventures as a standalone (as opposed to all three back to back)? The Shadowdale adventure seemed like it would be particularly good for that. Well I have been thinking of running Shadowdale as stand alones and not related but I run into the problems I always do with published modules. 1) WotC I don't think has published any modules that I would deem as good. Most are poor.(This is my opinion you can disagree but that doesn't change the fact that I personaly just don't like how they write adventures.) 2) Modules take a base assumption about PCs and such that I have to heavily rework them so it doesn't get too railroady. So I will probably run a Zhentish invasion of Shadowdale at some point but it will bare little resembalance to the module. As for Cormyr and Anauroch in my games these events can't happen as. 1) Cormyr has something else living in the swamp that would stop this from happening. 2) As I said as soon as the Shades showed up they got leveled...ad my Anauroch bares little resembalance to this module. The thing is I wished they wouldn't do these modules as they are taking away DMs elbow room with each one. It is as bad as the novels in my opinion. I would perfer to see more open modules and adventure hooks.
Lord Karsus 12-18-07, 12:42 AM	It is as bad as the novels in my opinion. I would perfer to see more open modules and adventure hooks. -That was something I was looking for, a long time ago: A Book of Campaign seeds and hooks. I wasn't looking for FR specific things, but just a book in general. This was like, five, six years ago, when I first starting playing D&D, and in turn, started DMing. I haven't looked in the intrim, as I actually have a strong, ongoing campaign going on, but it would be a cool product to have. I bet there are netbooks on the subject.
Mr_Miscellany 12-18-07, 02:54 AM	I'm curious, is there anyone running just a single one of these adventures as a standalone (as opposed to all three back to back)? The Shadowdale adventure seemed like it would be particularly good for that. Like most adventures, I tend to lump two or three together at once and run parts of them concurrently. As you wisely point out, the Shadowdale adventure is a good starting point for a one-shot. I've introduced plot points from the Shadowdale adventure in my campaign already during downtime (when the PCs are locked into research, magic item creation, fortress building, etc...) so that peaks the interest level and gets 'em motivated. I’ve folded events from the Last Mythal Trilogy into my campaign as well, so my players will face a multi-front war with little or no help from the elves of Evermeet/Evereska. Since the PCs are Epic, this ought to push them to their limits. From there I can opt for Anourach or for Cormyr, depending on how things go down. And admittedly msatran has got me thinking about the Chalice of Aumanator.....that (dead) god’s resurgence features prominently in my campaign, so I think the Chalice should play a bigger role than what’s listed in the adventure. I dunno....maybe make it so destroying the Sharn Wall once and for all allows the Chalice wielder to gather that loose magical energy into the Chalice, then focus it through prayer to Aumanator to allow him to remove himself from his prison of sorts and re-attach his divine realm to the outer planes by the slimmest of tethers. Some kinda Epic Miracle like that....methinks.
msatran 12-18-07, 04:54 AM	The problem is that, quite frankly, the adventures don't WORK in the Forgotten Realms at all, especially not in a long running, established game. Here's what happens in my game. Okay, so the Sharrans do whatever they do in Tearing of the Weave. The Invasion of Shadowdale happens. My PCs react, the high level ones, the epic level ones. Shadowdale and it's environs are buried in dead Zhents within two hours of the news. Not a villain is left standing. Scyulla Darkhope won't be sent, because the overwhelming response from the angry characters will make Fzoul Chembryl turn pale. The heroes will then impress upon the Zhents their terrible mistake in their choice of allies, and probably give Manshoon money and magic items just to kill Fzoul and make sure this never happens again. Manshoon worships Mystra. He can be reasoned with. And he's been waiting for Fzoul to slip up anyway. The heroes backtrack, lay waste to the scheme of the Sharrans in Cormyr, and then go after the Shades wholesale. And as much as I've wanted to see every PC around my gaming table go after the City of Shade for years, I am not fully prepared to run the combat yet. :) Oh, well... In all honesty, I can't wait to ignore every single thing I see about the city of shade :) Also, lorewise, the adventure series can't happen in the canon realms. Where are a bunch of 4th level characters going to get a 25,000 GP charter to legally adventure within the boundaries of Cormyr without apprenticing themselves to one of the noble families of the Realm? And if they do, would that noble family venture a finger to save Shadowdale at all? The first thing the Cormyreans would do is WAIT. That's right. Without the mitigating influence of player characters of higher levels, the Cormyreans would say "No, let this sit for a while. Then when Cormyr saves them, we can consolidate our power and the Dales, at last, will return to their rightful ruler, Cormyr." So the PC's can either say "!*****@! you, Mr. Patron, we're going" in which case they will have made a powerful (Possibly good aligned) enemy, or they can obey their patron's wishes and wait.
Alediran 12-18-07, 09:35 AM	Where are a bunch of 4th level characters going to get a 25,000 GP charter to legally adventure within the boundaries of Cormyr without apprenticing themselves to one of the noble families of the Realm? And if they do, would that noble family venture a finger to save Shadowdale at all? The first thing the Cormyreans would do is WAIT. That's right. Without the mitigating influence of player characters of higher levels, the Cormyreans would say "No, let this sit for a while. Then when Cormyr saves them, we can consolidate our power and the Dales, at last, will return to their rightful ruler, Cormyr." So the PC's can either say "!*****@! you, Mr. Patron, we're going" in which case they will have made a powerful (Possibly good aligned) enemy, or they can obey their patron's wishes and wait. That's why the only module I'll ever run is CotSQ (and just once)
Butterface 12-18-07, 09:54 AM	Where are a bunch of 4th level characters going to get a 25,000 GP charter to legally adventure within the boundaries of Cormyr without apprenticing themselves to one of the noble families of the Realm? And if they do, would that noble family venture a finger to save Shadowdale at all? The first thing the Cormyreans would do is WAIT. That's right. Without the mitigating influence of player characters of higher levels, the Cormyreans would say "No, let this sit for a while. Then when Cormyr saves them, we can consolidate our power and the Dales, at last, will return to their rightful ruler, Cormyr." Actually, yeah, that's a problem that the adventure doesn't address at all. In my game the PC's didn't have a charter, but they were commissioned on a limited basis by Lord Redbeard to investigate the situation in the Vast Swamp. I don't know if theres precedence for that sort of thing, but otherwise the PCs are blatantly breaking the law, so I thought it was time to improvise. :) The Cormyr Adventure ended in my game just around Highharvestide, with a big celebration in Wheloon where Steel Regent Alusair presented the PCs with a royal adventuring charter (i.e. ripoff of "Swords of Eveningstar"). But yeah, that's one of my biggest beefs with the Cormyr adventure - it didn't take into account some pretty significant lore.
Fire_Wraith 12-18-07, 09:59 AM	I think part of the problem is that the three adventures were not written primarily as standalone modules that you can plug into a campaign, the way that (say) a Dungeon Magazine adventure might be. Instead, these adventures are largely written as a campaign unto themselves. It's epic in scope (not level, to clarify), and in a way that's very cool - but it's also very limiting. Even Mysteries of the Moonsea was written from the standpoint of a number of tenuously linked adventures that could easily be taken out and plugged into a standard campaign. The writers provided linkages, but they were not necessarily integral ones. I just don't feel like I could do that here, at least not nearly as easily. They do provide some source material, but I honestly would have been worlds happier with an actual source book, or even with MotM-esque style. I think the biggest complaint is that these were the primary FR hardcover products over the last few months. It just doesn't quite live up to what I'm looking for. Now, I'm certain that there are some people out there for whom these adventures dovetail perfectly with an existing campaign, and it's very easy to adapt them and make use of scenes, themes, and elements even with a higher level group. I strongly suspect that is not the case for the majority, though.
msatran 12-18-07, 12:22 PM	The problem is that once Lord Redbeard does that, Evil will do it, too. :) That's the flaw in the theory. Lord Redbeard's not going to take an action which could significantly imperil his own political position.
Stigger 12-18-07, 07:07 PM	Dunno about that... Sarp Redbeard was pretty much the sort to do whatever he thought was right, and damn the consequences... at least as far as I recall of his personality.
Mr_Miscellany 12-18-07, 08:08 PM	I think part of the problem is that the three adventures were not written primarily as standalone modules that you can plug into a campaign... :twitch: Other than some very tenuous links between adventures, there's no good reason a DM can't run these individually when his or her characters are of the appropriate level. In my experience, adventures not set in the campaign setting I’m using are that much harder to use because place names (and sometimes NPC names) have to be changed to fit what I’m using. That’s not to say it can’t be done, but I do think it’s much easier to integrate a Realms Adventure into an ongoing campaign than it is to integrate a non-Realms Adventure.
Mr_Miscellany 12-18-07, 08:11 PM	The problem is that, quite frankly, the adventures don't WORK in the Forgotten Realms at all, especially not in a long running, established game. You probably ought to limit that statement to your game only, since these adventures are starting out quite fine in my long running, established game. I can see the nitpick about obtaining an adventuring charter, but that doesn't mean the PCs necessarily need one. I could see PCs even being awarded with such a charter if they take it upon themselves to defeat the Sharans and return with many freed captives. :cool:
selunatic2397 12-18-07, 09:18 PM	Well Mr. based on the gamers in my local gaming store... out of the 25 I asked about their opinions on the three "super adventures", only 3 actually used them as written, the rest either had to do massive surgery to get them to work in a believable fashion to their gamers, or had a serious WTF moment and complained long and loud about "just what is WOTC trying to pull?" So, from my own corner of the world, you seem to be trying to talk for everyone when just like the rest of us you can only talk for yourself. I will not touch any 4ED products and from my own informal interviews with local gamers, most of them will probably not either. My gamers reacted pretty much just like msatran's would and I gave them what they asked for, they even gave me a month and a half to work it out. We had fun. I have sat in on games so complicated that each player had a high end scientific calculator and games that had characters whose levels were in the low triple digits...all of them had one thing in common. They were having fun. Those who switch to 4ED will have fun...but so will those of us who stick to what works for us. Never forget the reason that we play this game for...to have fun. :)
Vulpes 12-19-07, 12:03 AM	I don't actually roleplay (I'm kinda weird like that; I enjoy FR for the lore and the fluff, but have never even touched a pair of dice in my life), so I can't say how good/not good this module is from the perspective of actually playing it, but I will say from a lore perspective.... Well, frankly, it's just Not Very Good. There were some interesting pieces, but it just seemed to be trying too hard to hit certain things one right after the other (Windsong Tower, the Nether Scrolls, the Sharn Wall, Spellgard, the Terraseer, the Shades) that didn't all seem to quite gel together. Shadowdale seemed to be much more cohesive. Whether Anauroch was done that way for the purposes of laying 4E groundwork or not, I obviously can't say, but it would explain a few things.
Faraer 12-19-07, 10:51 AM	There were some interesting pieces, but it just seemed to be trying too hard to hit certain things one right after the other (Windsong Tower, the Nether Scrolls, the Sharn Wall, Spellgard, the Terraseer, the Shades) that didn't all seem to quite gel together. Shadowdale seemed to be much more cohesive.I haven't bought the Anauroch module yet, and I'm not sure if I will. On the one hand, I'd like to read about those places, and they might be useful separately from the plot, as is the case with Shadowdale: Scouring. On (part of) the other, I suspect the kind of foreshortening where a region is reduced to its tourist highlights, thus effectively contracting it, like the overuse of historical figures in the Shadowdale module, and constant dwelling on Tatooine in the Star Wars expanded universe.
Lord Karsus 12-19-07, 01:43 PM	...and constant dwelling on Tatooine in the Star Wars expanded universe. -Tatooine: The only backwater, armpit of the universe where everything happens.
Tigger11 12-20-07, 10:46 AM	You probably ought to limit that statement to your game only, since these adventures are starting out quite fine in my long running, established game. I can see the nitpick about obtaining an adventuring charter, but that doesn't mean the PCs necessarily need one. I could see PCs even being awarded with such a charter if they take it upon themselves to defeat the Sharans and return with many freed captives. Of course canon has been for better then 20 years that they need it before they adventure in Cormyr. The Windsong Scolls is just a silly hook that wasnt needed, noone has yet to explain to me how the Shades can get the scrolls out of windsong with the Elves there basically by accident, when the Branded King worked years in trying to get them when he controlled the city and had lots of minions there to assist him. If they didnt want the elves to have the scrolls or for the scrolls to be complete they could have wilted the tree when Mystra dies, that happened during the Karsus event so there is precedent there, had the Branded King or the Fey'ri take them have the reworking of the Mythral damage Windsong or the scrolls resting place. Jimmy the shade getting the scrolls in minutes when the exiled Archdevil failed for years is a pretty big leap to take. -Tig
18DELTA 12-20-07, 11:00 AM	-Tatooine: The only backwater, armpit of the universe where everything happens. Kinda like Oklahoma huh?:hides: ;)
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-20-07, 03:26 PM	The Windsong Scolls is just a silly hook that wasnt needed, noone has yet to explain to me how the Shades can get the scrolls out of windsong with the Elves there basically by accident, when the Branded King worked years in trying to get them when he controlled the city and had lots of minions there to assist him. -Tig Because Shar is WotC's favorite deity. *ducks!*
18DELTA 12-20-07, 11:37 PM	Because Shar is WotC's favorite deity. *ducks!* Right, plus they have this obsession with Shadowcrap.:rolleyes:
Mr_Miscellany 12-21-07, 12:12 AM	... noone has yet to explain to me how the Shades can get the scrolls out of windsong with the Elves there basically by accident, when the Branded King worked years in trying to get them when he controlled the city and had lots of minions there to assist him. -Tig Well, it's in there. And as Rinona is fond of saying, it's official. So....I challenge you to come up with a suitable answer for how the Shadovar pulled off what others could not. Note that "I shouldn't have to" is not an acceptable response. I suppose "I don't want to" is OK. But then we'll never get to see your creative side, will we? C'mon now, step up to the plate. Gi'me some Realmslore I can use.
msatran 12-21-07, 12:23 AM	I will rise to your challenge as the modules cannot actually happen due to lack of Charter. Using their phaerimm allies, the Shades on the side of Hhadrhune slowly worked to sabotage Malkazid's plans until the Branded King was gone, then sent a sending to their allies and said "It's time." I still think this is colossally dumb, but then, you and I don't agree on anything anyway.
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 01:10 AM	Kinda like Oklahoma huh? -What's in Oklahoma that's so special? Note that "I shouldn't have to" is not an acceptable response. -It really is, though. Not that we should have everything "hand fed" to us on a silver platter, but when people write novels/sourcebooks/adventures, there really needs to be some consistency. This is what I find most troubling about the 3e novels/sourcebooks/adventures that I don't like: no consistency. If the adventure has the Shadovar opening the sealed gateway to the Nether Scrolls in Windsong Tower with ease, when an Archdevil, whose relative power dwarfs that of any individual Shade, including, but not limited to Lord Shadow (Telamont) himself, I think they've got to include some inkling as to why this is, for the sake of not making themselves look silly, and winding up with an "oops" moment.
Stigger 12-21-07, 03:03 AM	Beyond that, why should we formulate rationales for a specific event that we didn't come up with ourselves? Thus far, everything says that those scrolls were inaccessible up til now. That's what we have to go off of. That some author went in there and altered that condition isn't something the previous lore said was possible by someone who wasn't a High Mage. Its not up to us to figure out how it was done, as that should have been explained by the author in the first place. At the moment, it simply looks like a case of author fiat that flies in the face of all we know about Windsong tower... the whole reason those scrolls are known to be there is because no one can get to them to move them somewhere else. Sure one could say, well what does it matter if no one can use them anyway, but that just reinforces the idea that its utterly non-sensical that the Shades could just waltz in and pick them up, when no one else has been successful in even getting close to them prior to that. Even then, the most likely answers point to uber-Shar intervention. And people say that Mystra could get over the top... she's got nothing on Shar in that department by all appearances. Or maybe authors, not sure of the credits on that module.
Alediran 12-21-07, 09:01 AM	Even then, the most likely answers point to uber-Shar intervention. And people say that Mystra could get over the top... she's got nothing on Shar in that department by all appearances. Or maybe authors, not sure of the credits on that module. I seccond that, I'm thinking that Mystra haters are Sharist in disguise because they can't be that partial. If a good god/ess does something like that they bash it, but if it's done by Shar, cool, she is so Ub33r... (give me a Sharist, I want to kill them)
18DELTA 12-21-07, 10:43 AM	-What's in Oklahoma that's so special? Nothing, really.:P
Butterface 12-21-07, 10:51 AM	Beyond that, why should we formulate rationales for a specific event that we didn't come up with ourselves? Maybe Rich Baker can answer the question about why the Shades succeeded where Malkazid failed. He worked on the adventure series after all, maybe he can offer some insight. Someone should pose this in the "Ask the Designers" thread.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 12-21-07, 11:01 AM	Maybe Rich Baker can answer the question about why the Shades succeeded where Malkazid failed. He worked on the adventure series after all, maybe he can offer some insight. Someone should pose this in the "Ask the Designers" thread. I agree. Although, Rich didn't necessarily design the plot of the module in question (was his name even on it?).
Lord Karsus 12-21-07, 12:18 PM	Nothing, really.:P -Oh, okay... Someone should pose this in the "Ask the Designers" thread. -Good idea. I'll do it, but only unless someone can confirm that Rich Baker participated in working on those adventures. Don't want to make myself look silly, after all. :embarrass
Tigger11 12-21-07, 04:40 PM	I will rise to your challenge as the modules cannot actually happen due to lack of Charter. Using their phaerimm allies, the Shades on the side of Hhadrhune slowly worked to sabotage Malkazid's plans until the Branded King was gone, then sent a sending to their allies and said "It's time." The Shades killed all (or virtually all) of the Phaerimm of Myth Drannor shortly after there return, and unless they make them allies in the new module, they are pretty big enemies last time I checked. If there is a reason they could get them, they should have explained it in the module. You just find out that Jimmy the Shade defeated the defenses of reclaimed Myth Drannor, the defenses of Windsong Tower (which luminaries such as Elminster, Srinshee and Arun helped create) and defeated the High Elven Mage who is magically preserved to protect the scrolls and steals them away easy as can be. Its a Maggufin and Hitchcock is much better at them then WOTC. There is no reason the scrolls need to be in the adventure, that leads us that WOTC doesnt want the Scrolls to be in Myth Drannor, fine, then actually come up with something that explains why there are gone (throw in they were scattered after Malkizid was driven from the city and the Gatekeeper crystal was used) that would make more sense. It likely the scrolls were used to create that, unlike the Sharn Wall <=> Nether Scroll hook they are throwing at us here. If you really needed the Nether Scrolls in the adventure the Shades recovering the 3rd set or reconstituting the Golden Set would make more sense then this effort. -Tig
Tigger11 01-03-08, 02:59 PM	My other issue with the adventures is I'm not sure averaging 2+ artifacts per adventure is really necessary. Do you guys put that many artifacts in your adventures, and that count is if we call all 50 scrolls as 1 artifact, it reality its 50, or at least 5 (1 per section). -Tig
Lord Karsus 01-03-08, 03:16 PM	My other issue with the adventures is I'm not sure averaging 2+ artifacts per adventure is really necessary. Do you guys put that many artifacts in your adventures, and that count is if we call all 50 scrolls as 1 artifact, it reality its 50, or at least 5 (1 per section). -Tig -I've been running the same campaign (Non-Realms) for a year and a half now, and the closest thing the PCs have gotten to an artifact is a +3 Ring of Protection, and/or a +1 Flaming Saber that bestows +1 to all INT abilities, and can cast Detect Magic at will.
Stigger 01-03-08, 04:21 PM	Think I've used a few as plot devices the PCs weren't meant to keep... that destroy the thing of evil sort of quest... maybe 10 times in the last... 15 years or so.
Mr_Miscellany 01-03-08, 08:10 PM	My other issue with the adventures is I'm not sure averaging 2+ artifacts per adventure is really necessary. Do you guys put that many artifacts in your adventures,... Of late, yes. But it's worth pointing out the average PC level in my Forgotten Realms campaign is 22. ....and that count is if we call all 50 scrolls as 1 artifact, it reality its 50, or at least 5 (1 per section). I don't recall what the official answer is....I'd count them as one 'set' of artifacts. :)
Mr_Miscellany 01-03-08, 08:16 PM	It's like trying to haul a recalcitrant donkey up a hill, but I'm slowly succeeding with you people. One step at a time. I like the idea that Shar 'showed the way'. I also wonder if Mystra herself didn’t allow it to happen? Perhaps for some (as yet) unknown other/higher purpose? I like that idea too.
Lord Karsus 01-03-08, 08:24 PM	I don't recall what the official answer is....I'd count them as one 'set' of artifacts. :) -Generally speaking, the entire set is considered one entity. It's like trying to haul a recalcitrant donkey up a hill, but I'm slowly succeeding with you people. One step at a time. -Suceeding what? Where?
Stigger 01-04-08, 12:15 AM	I'm curious about that one myself... gonna have to get all obstinate now just to prove him wrong. DIE 4ED DIE!!!! :P
Lord Karsus 01-04-08, 12:17 AM	-Pulling a GEV, I see.
Stigger 01-04-08, 12:20 AM	Well, it is the most identifiable battle cry I can think of. :D
Lord Karsus 01-04-08, 12:51 AM	-Yeah..."I'm on the fence about 4e, but thus far, I have serious misgivings, based on the hints that have been revealed thus far" really doesn't cut it.
Stigger 01-04-08, 04:14 AM	It does indeed lack a certain punch to it. Whereas DIE 4ED DIE! makes a very clear and unequivocal statement. Something you can really get behind and worked up over.
Alediran 01-04-08, 07:02 AM	I think I'll try it. DIE 4ED DIE!!!! Feels good DIE 4ED DIE!!!!
selunatic2397 01-04-08, 01:30 PM	Count Me In Too! DIE 4ED DIE!!!! DIE 4ED DIE!!! That Felt GOOD! :D
The Ubbergeek 01-04-08, 05:34 PM	Coffee is bad for your health, m'kay?
msatran 01-05-08, 02:59 AM	Mr. Ubergeek. Your signature is beginning to annoy me...just a little bit. How can I keep an open mind to the new edition when my players backstories are ruined by the new lore, and the company TELLS ME HOW MUCH I SUCK if I like 3rd edition clerics? I'm either a powergamer, or a healer monkey. That's a real civil way to get on the bandwagon, don't you think? So far the only change I like is Natural 20=Maximum Damage. Of course, I was doing this in second edition when Wizards of The Coast was a pie in the sky of the mind of Richard Garfield, so it really makes me wonder about the company's competence at this stage. You can say "It's a game." But the problem is, it's not fun if you have to fight with all your players about what to do and people aren't happy because the text of what's going on contradicts everything you've been doing. It's not the new edition that's the problem. It's the new lore which makes us think this is a piece of garbage. The mechanics, truth be told, will sink or swim on their own functionality. We don't LIKE that Mystra is gone. We think it sucks. We don't think Dragonborn belong in the Realms. We think that sucks too. We don't like Tieflings suddenly shifting their entire basis for existing, ruining entire campaign arcs that have affected the game. We don't like halflings that come up to our nipples. We don't like the mysterious exploding Seldarine. We don't like Tyr, Helm, Tymora, and Sune acting like they have the int scores of teenage donkeys. We don't like being treated like drooling idiots who will blithely accept the incredibly illogical, and/or stupid. Things need to make sense. We don't like being called "Grognards" or "Uncool" or "Unhip" because our views don't match that of the brooding cabal of evil that Wizards of the Coast has become. We don't like Deities in a centrifuge, or Tempus in a Battle Bikini (The Red Knight Cross Dressing Deity Trick) , or any of the other illogical religious changes that make clerics a COMPLETELY UNPLAYABLE CLASS IN THE FORGOTTEN REALMS! In order to have gods, you have to WANT to worship them! I wouldn't want to worship this bunch of retards! We don't like a Spellplague that isn't necessary when all you have to do is say "That's life, these are the rules, here's the Forgotten Realms, go!" All of these creative design team choices are largely unjustifiable. It's like Dan Didio suddenly took over the Forgotten Realms and said "Hell, you don't need that!" This whole thing is really a Joe Quesada One More Day moment. Obviously, someone read the DC Comics manual of how to handle continuity while standing on their head and loaded with speedball syringes. So before you say "It's the New Edition," may I remind you that it doesn't take an edition change to be a bad dungeon master, or a bad storyteller, and this story of the Forgotten Realms IS bad now, because right now, Richard Baker and the design team are playing Jenga with the Realms, and yanking out the bottom brick!
Lord Karsus 01-05-08, 12:26 PM	-Another funny, yet frighteningly enlightening and accurate post.
Mr_Miscellany 01-05-08, 06:24 PM	The Ubbergeek’s signature is perfect. It encapsulates the truth of things. The Realms are changing and growing. That can’t be stopped. And even in the unlikely event 4E FR tanks (which I doubt), the words printed about it aren’t going to go away. If people continue to try to create divisions in the Realms community (online or off) and refuse to embrace what’s coming for the sake of the Realms, then our experiences here will continue to be negative and the community will in fact fracture. And that won’t be Wotc’s fault. It will be ours. :::::::::::::::::::: Case in point: Back in the late 90’s, the kind of attitude Ubergeek is talking about infected the Realms-L mailing list, by means of a few people. Those few people led the charge against WotC by ranting against the company. They made personal attakcs on WotC staff, blamed them for ‘killing’ the Realms, blamed them for ‘disrespecting’ the fans, put words in WotC’s mouth to the effect of, “..WotC says we’re dumb, we’re stupid, etc...”, they claimed WotC was going to kill their Realms games. Worst of all they posted comments as though they were speaking for the community. In fact they were only speaking for themselves. The notion of a universal “we” didn’t exist. And so on and so forth. Sounds very much like what we’re seeing now. Anyway, that behavior was allowed to go on unchecked on the List....eventually it spread and the List died. If you ask the grognards who infected the List, they will blame 3rd edition for destroying it and not their own behavior. They would of course be wrong. :::::::::::: I understand some people don’t like the changes and don’t think they fit the Realms. **I** don’t like all the changes. What I don’t understand is why people keep blasting away in the various threads about it, or why they think they can speak for everyone else by using the word “we” when they post. Please, either wait and see with grudging acceptance of what we’ve already been told, or just go away.
MarkusTay63 01-05-08, 06:40 PM	msatran, I agree with most of your post as well, with the following exceptions/adds -We don't think Dragonborn belong in the Realms. We think that sucks too.I'd have to not only second this, but I probably feel even more strongly then you do. I disliked Dragonlance because of the Draconians, and these are just them with a spiffy new name (barely). First, DL took a cr@p in 3e Realms and we got Kender, and now it's taking another dump? WTF? I really hope they don't try to fit all of the core concepts into the Realms - it just seems like such a mish-mosh of poor ideas. We don't like Tieflings suddenly shifting their entire basis for existing, ruining entire campaign arcs that have affected the game. I personally don't see how this effects anything - either way Tieflings are descended from Fiends, so whats the problem? :confused: Then again, I don't ALLOW Tieflings IMG... We don't like halflings that come up to our nipples.Well, that could be interesting... :P We don't like the mysterious exploding Seldarine.Quite right - I've been trying to stuff them in a blender myself. But seriously, I HATE the Seldarine (for what they are), but I wouldn't just get rid of them that way. We don't like a Spellplague that isn't necessary when all you have to do is say "That's life, these are the rules, here's the Forgotten Realms, go!" Too true - I don't feel all these changes were neccesary for the rules at all. If that were in the slightest bit true, then why doesn't Eberron need to change? This whole thing is really a Joe Quesada One More Day moment. Obviously, someone read the DC Comics manual of how to handle continuity while standing on their head and loaded with speedball syringes.Crisis, anyone? :rolleyes: Of course, I was doing this in second edition when Wizards of The Coast was a pie in the sky of the mind of Richard Garfield, so it really makes me wonder about the company's competence at this stage.Do you think Richard Garfield is really an amalgam of Richard Baker and Garfield the cat? It would explain a lot.... :eek: We don't like being called "Grognards" or "Uncool" or "Unhip" because our views don't match that of the brooding cabal of evil that Wizards of the Coast has become.http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y178/MarkusTay/WotC_emporer.gif EDIT: Most of the above was tongue-in-cheek, so take it in stride.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 01-05-08, 10:14 PM	deleted
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 01-05-08, 10:15 PM	Coffee is bad for your health, m'kay? And your silly, made-up words are bad for our health too.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 01-05-08, 10:52 PM	What I don’t understand is why people keep blasting away in the various threads about it, or why they think they can speak for everyone else by using the word “we” when they post. So why do YOU keep repeating yourself, then? It's just as obnoxious. You've made your point countless times already. People shouldn't presume to speak for "everyone else", just as you shouldn't tell people to "just go away" because you don't like their opinions.
Lord Karsus 01-06-08, 12:12 AM	So why do YOU keep repeating yourself, then? It's just as obnoxious. You've made your point countless times already. People shouldn't presume to speak for "everyone else", just as you shouldn't tell people to "just go away" because you don't like their opinions. -The lady speaks the truth.
MarkusTay63 01-06-08, 02:33 PM	This whole debacle brings a song to mind - Let It Be When I find myself in times of trouble Mother mary comes to me Speaking words of wisdom, let it be. And in my hour of darkness She is standing right in front of me Speaking words of wisdom, let it be. Let it be, let it be. Whisper words of wisdom, let it be. And when the broken hearted people Living in the world agree, There will be an answer, let it be. For though they may be parted there is Still a chance that they will see There will be an answer, let it be. Let it be, let it be. yeah There will be an answer, let it be. And when the night is cloudy, There is still a light that shines on me, Shine on until tomorrow, let it be. I wake up to the sound of music Mother mary comes to me Speaking words of wisdom, let it be. Let it be, let it be. There will be an answer, let it be. Let it be, let it be, Whisper words of wisdom, let it be. Not that Rinonalyrna Fathomlin is 'Mother Mary' or anything, but it seems fitting with 4e on the Horizon. Let it be.... :(
Lord Karsus 01-06-08, 08:00 PM	The Realms are changing and growing. That can’t be stopped. And even in the unlikely event 4E FR tanks (which I doubt), the words printed about it aren’t going to go away. If people continue to try to create divisions in the Realms community (online or off) and refuse to embrace what’s coming for the sake of the Realms, then our experiences here will continue to be negative and the community will in fact fracture. -Um, guys, are our experiences here negative, as Mr. Misc is claiming them to be? Please, either wait and see with grudging acceptance of what we’ve already been told, or just go away. -Wow. Just wow.
msatran 01-06-08, 10:24 PM	The funny thing about that is that Mr. Miscellany is the best supporter of his own argument by behaving divisively.
MarkusTay63 01-07-08, 05:45 PM	-Um, guys, are our experiences here negative, as Mr. Misc is claiming them to be?I've been having a good time since I got here, even when I'm complaining about something. The number of ideas I get from people here is wonderful, even though the amount has slowed down to a trickle, as of late. ________________________________________ _____________________________________ I'm not going to fight about this anymore (at least, I'm trying not to). I think there is room for both camps now. Think about it, does it really matter? Are we going to change each other's mind? Some of us will stick with 3e, others will move onto 4e, and still others (myself included) will use some amalgam of both. This game has always been about choices, and no-one is holding a gun to our heads. Do whatever you want - 3e is over, there's nothing we can do about it, but we CAN enjoy everything we already have, and build upon it. We have Netbooks, the CK Compendium, Discussion Threads, fansites, ect, etc... 3rd Edition isn't going anywhere anytime soon, and 4e will just afford us options we can - but don't HAVE to - add to our games. If you liked 3e, just keep playing it; the books aren't going to evaporate come August. ;)
Mr_Miscellany 01-07-08, 08:31 PM	The funny thing about that is that Mr. Miscellany is the best supporter of his own argument by behaving divisively. Fighting for at minimum a general sense of unity is hardly behaving divisively. But, whatever.
Lord Karsus 01-07-08, 08:45 PM	Fighting for at minimum a general sense of unity is hardly behaving divisively. But, whatever. -Why does there need to be a widespread sense of unity, in either direction?
MarkusTay63 01-07-08, 09:06 PM	like I said, no one is going to change anyone's mind. Everybody just play what they like and stop fighting over it. I understand, LK, that because you are in the "I don't play, I just enjoy the lore" camp, it makes it harder for you - but think about... come August, we are getting more lore, and even if you don't like what the future holds, Ed will be detailing other parts of Toril! So the 4e FRCG will be of some use to everyone, regardless. msatran, I really feel sorry for... but most folks don't have to deal with that nightmare, fortunetly. All the thousands of small groups around the world will do what they want, regardless, and 99% of them are probably completely unaware of our existance here on the boards. However, thinking that we will all agree... thats a pipe dream, my friend. ;)
Butterface 01-08-08, 11:06 AM	I kind of got excited when I saw that there were new posts in this thread, I thought I might be able to read about someone's experiences with the Anauroch adventure or even the adventure trilogy as a whole . . . But no, it's more of this same old stuff. Boring, heard it all before.
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin 01-08-08, 12:32 PM	There doesn't need to be "unity" here, just civility.
msatran 01-08-08, 01:23 PM	Well, the problem is that it's always choice of language that determines how people respond to each other. And that's the truth. My biggest problem with these adventures, of course, is that running them in an established campaign is too difficult, especially a campaign with tons of high level people in it.