Creature Incarnations wrote:
which would mean worthless to me.
yes we did, and it would be point of darkness underdark with eberron, FR, and GH sidebars.
which would mean worthless to me.
Just curious...why would it be worthless to you?
I assume he runs a custom world in which the Underdark is either nonexistent or fully fleshed-out. Personally, I think the inspiration and good ideas that might be there would be worth checking out. Never hurts to open up options!
Well, that's kind of where I was going with that question...unless, perhaps, he/she is in a FR or other specific setting and is looking for a FR Underdark book, not just sidebars.
However, like you have said, I think having the book to glean ideas, even if it is not used whole cloth, would potentially be a great resource, regardless of the world and even if a true "Underdark" exists vs. just a few caves and maybe an underground civilization or two.
I am interested to hear the reply!
If the Underdark book is chock full of monsters and other **** i can steal for my game, i wouldn't care if it had a sidebar on how to use the Underdark in a my-little-pony campaign.
I don't run FR or Eberron but i have some of the books for the options. I don't use the default fluff in the core books in the first place, so i don't see why i should be constrained by the fluff of the setting books when there are perfectly good mechanics there.
If the Underdark book is chock full of monsters and other **** i can steal for my game, i wouldn't care if it had a sidebar on how to use the Underdark in a my-little-pony campaign.
Same here! That's why I am not sure why it would be "worthless." I am not sure any book is completely useful, but at the same time, I would be hard-pressed to say any book is worthless.
I just hope that the drow don't steal too much spotlight away from the illithids and other aberrant creatures.
but for now, its all a moot point until more is known.
I am like everyone else, allowed to take up our own opinions
I'd want maps of faerun's underdark, not points of light. so side bars doesnt cut it.
but for now, its all a moot point until more is known.
I am like everyone else, allowed to take up our own opinions
Use the 3.5 Forgotten Realms:Underdark book, the rules won't help per se, but the fluff helps, the monsters are worth converting and it had a complete map. I pulled mine off the shelf the other day and it has been a blessing, I am using the current FR map for the surface and comparing it to the underdark map to "lure" my PC's down, down DOWN.
Personally, I am looking forward to the new book, anything that can help me either be inspired to run a better, more entertaining game or inspire my players to think outside the box is worth the money.
I'd want maps of faerun's underdark, not points of light. so side bars doesnt cut it.
Unrealistic expectations much?
It's not like the book would be likely to contain a detailed map of the entire underdark, regardless of whether it is setting neutral or not. Any maps to be included will likely be of specific adventure locations and designed for easy inclusion in any setting (like the stuff in the center of Draconomicon and Open Grave).
but for now, its all a moot point until more is known.
I am like everyone else, allowed to take up our own opinions
This, however, is always true.
[indent]
Use the 3.5 Forgotten Realms:Underdark book, the rules won't help per se, but the fluff helps, the monsters are worth converting and it had a complete map.
Edit: A complete map, seriously? Given the number of grand caverns and the twisting labyrinth of tunnels connecting them, I should have thought such a map would be nearly impossible.[/indent]
[indent]
Edit: A complete map, seriously? Given the number of grand caverns and the twisting labyrinth of tunnels connecting them, I should have thought such a map would be nearly impossible.[/indent]
It was an overview map with all the locations on it, cites, lakes and the like. For the individual locations, sometimes a map was provided in the individual sections, Menzoberanzan is a perfect example.
It's hard to see it, but here is the map gallery:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20031019a
Also, an internet-savy person could find the PDF for Forgotten Realms: Underdark
It was an overview map with all the locations on it, cites, lakes and the like. For the individual locations, sometimes a map was provided in the individual sections, Menzoberanzan is a perfect example.
It's hard to see it, but here is the map gallery:
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20031019a
Yeah, I went looking after posting and found it quickly enough. I can see how it correlates to the overworld map. Also it helps that the Forgotten Realms map is a semi-localized area, rather than a full world map, a fact that I had forgotten.
Still it seems such a small representation of the underdark, which from my understanding is supposed to be many layers deep.
Still it seems such a small representation of the underdark, which from my understanding is supposed to be many layers deep.
It is, but you have to think 3 dimensionally while looking at a 2 dimensional map, the areas are represented, just overlapping each other.
Well, I'm always up for an Underdark installment. It'll be tough to top the quality of the 3.5 Underdark Realms book. Perhaps, without releasing it with The Forgotten Realms suppliments, they're generalizing the Underdark. Afterall, alot of DMs use the Underdark- whether in a Realms game or not.
...Perhaps, without releasing it with The Forgotten Realms suppliments, they're generalizing the Underdark. Afterall, alot of DMs use the Underdark- whether in a Realms game or not.
They should, its bad enough they continue to stuff Drow into FR like it belongs to that setting exclusively (they should have gotten placed in a generic PHB), even though nearly every DM uses them in thier settings. But thats another gripe.
I have it, and yes, the Underdark is many layers deep, which is why the map is color-coded to reflect an approximate depth the location is being shown. For example, a red triangle means an Upperdark City, a red dot a Middledark City, and a red inverted triangle is a Lowerdark one. Lakes are similarly colored.
HOWEVER
This does little good to someone running a current FR game. Toril's geography was altered pretty severely, and, except for certain areas, such as Menzoverused-enzan, the Underdark was affected as well. There is, as I recall, a gaping hole in the surface somewhere that drained most of a sea into the UD.
This does little good to someone running a current FR game. Toril's geography was altered pretty severely, and, except for certain areas, such as Menzoverused-enzan, the Underdark was affected as well. There is, as I recall, a gaping hole in the surface somewhere that drained most of a sea into the UD.
Yes, well this is where that little part of our brains called "imagination" comes in. It didn't take much (maybe 20 mins) to print the map from the book and make notes on it based on the new FR map and information from the setting book. The one thing I've noticed with 4E, it leaves more up to the imagination of the player and DM, the way it should be. All we need is the framework, the rest should be up to us. Have fun!
I really hope it remains setting neutral. When they get setting specific many times it ruins some of the material by linking it too strongly to that settings mythology, and basically if I have to refluff most of the material I want to use I'm better off just writing it all myself. So I gotta say that if it is a FR or Ebberon sourcebook I'll be skipping it (along with about 2 dozen other DMs I know).
They should, its bad enough they continue to stuff Drow into FR like it belongs to that setting exclusively (they should have gotten placed in a generic PHB), even though nearly every DM uses them in thier settings. But thats another gripe.
Apparently you missed the part last year where they announced that there will only be 3 books for each setting they release (Campaign Guide, Player's Guide and Adventure) and all other books would be core.
And Drow haven't been stuffed into FR exclusively (maybe in 2E) because they were accounted for heavily in 3.5 Eberron and were included in the MM1 last year, but were fleshed out for PC use in the FRPG because that was, traditionally, where they became famous. But even then, they have repeated over and over, if it's in an official D&D book or magazine, it's considered "core" and usable in any game.
Underdark I: main stuff, and bits of POL
UnderDark: II Forgotten realms
etc.
I doubt they would consider doing it this way.
although they could do it in chapters.......
well they could do:
Underdark I: main stuff, and bits of POL
UnderDark: II Forgotten realms
etc.
I doubt they would consider doing it this way.
although they could do it in chapters.......
My guess is that they are going to stick to the 3 book rule on the settings and be generic as possible with each book, including FR and Eberron sidebars, anything else , including future settings, would be updated with the DDI magazines.
which means I still wont buy it, I dont like POL
well if they mention anything from the phb, and dmg, then it becomes POL instead of campaign neutral, which would only imply they do no maps, and list no deities....
which means I still wont buy it, I dont like POL
That's cool if you don't buy it; nobody says you have to, although to say you do not like PoL is kind of odd...all the campaign settings are based on the premise of PoL. FR (and soon Eberron) are fleshed out, but they still follow the basic tenets of the PoL concept.
I would argue that PoL is campaign neutral. It is the set of generic rules, with a sample locale and examples in other books that fit with that sample for the sake of extrapolating said sample across supplements. Even the adventures are only loosely tied together in campaign format, and the locales are easily renamed to wherever you would like them to be.
In the Underdark book, if they have a sample of the "PoL" Underdark opening in under Hammerfast (the Dwarven kingdom), you could have it open in any mountain range or under any settlement. They are just examples. To have the Underdark fully mapped would defeat it's mystery and sense of overbearing size; let it be a mystery or map it out if you really need it. Most of it is lifeless caves. the important parts can be dropped in regardless of the original intended locale (if any).
well if they mention anything from the phb, and dmg, then it becomes POL instead of campaign neutral, which would only imply they do no maps, and list no deities....
which means I still wont buy it, I dont like POL
You seem to imply that the PHB and DMG themselves are useless to you with a statement like that. Any default flavor presented in the upcoming underdark book should be no different than what's in any other "core" (non-setting) book.
Furthermore, PoL is not a campaign setting, it's a campaign style and the basic foundation of all 4e adventures regardless of setting. It has nothing to do with the fallen kingdoms of Arkhosia, Bael Turath, and Nerath or with locations such as the Nentier Vale. PoL means that civilization (the light) is surrounded by constant threats (the darkness) that only the players (the heroes) can stop. In the vaguely outlined (and still unnamed) world that passes for the current default setting those concepts are embodied literally; the world is made up of isolated settlements with vast stretches of untamed wilderness; but that's just one way of going about it. Each setting, from Forgotten Realms to Eberron and beyond puts its own twist on the concept of PoL. I even saw one poster who outlined how to implement a PoL style campaign entirely contained with in a single modern metropolis (I think he used New York as his example).
No one is going to tell you whether you should like PoL, but at least learn what it is your talking about.
well if they mention anything from the phb, and dmg, then it becomes POL instead of campaign neutral, which would only imply they do no maps, and list no deities....
which means I still wont buy it, I dont like POL
FYI, EVERYTHING that is 4E is POL, including the PHB DMG and MM. Also, the PHB and DMG list deities, and the DMG has maps, making it POL which you don't like, so you won't buy them, which means you haven't read them, so how do you play the game? If you read any of the preview material from before the release, as well as the support material after the release, you would know this.
I looked at the mm1 and 2, and lack the funds to get either of them.
looked at ther 4e manual of the planes and wasnt impressed.
I do plan on getting the 2 dragon book.......
it's considered "core" and usable in any game.
This couldn't be more true. I'm using half of the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (drow, genasi, swordmage, warlock pact, spellscarred, paragon paths, feats) in an Eberron campaign. All of that is easy to drop into any setting you like.
actually, I did buy the phb, and the frcg, and the frpg.
I looked at the mm1 and 2, and lack the funds to get either of them.
looked at ther 4e manual of the planes and wasnt impressed.
I do plan on getting the 2 dragon book.......
Then you've just undermined your own comment, the PHB is POL, as is the Draconomicon (any) and the MM (any). Forgotten Realms (and I'm sure Eberron as well, even though it was almost there) was re-tooled to make it POL, hence the big Spellplague and major geographical changes. The only difference is they gave us more FR cultural "fluff" and the POL makes you come up with it on your own. (oh darn) It's like saying "I'm a vegetarian" but having a hamburger every so often and thinking it's tofu.
I assume he runs a custom world in which the Underdark is either nonexistent or fully fleshed-out. Personally, I think the inspiration and good ideas that might be there would be worth checking out. Never hurts to open up options!
in the near future assume nothing please, first 3 letters of that word, assuming makes one out of two people, the one who assumes and the one being assumed about.
fleshed out underdark no, oh and no, believe it or not the underdark exists in most dnd campaigns, it just may not called underdark but underground cavern complexes etc...
and on that noteL my views of the POL and the 4e ruleset are different, no matter how color coated it may become, POL is a setting, FR,GW, DL, DS, are all settings, anything could be switched out from one to the other, so telling me this, wasnt telling me anything new, thats how I always looked at it.
I however dont want to use the overhead map of Oerth's underdark if Im traveling out of Ched Nesad in Toril's underdark headed to the surface, to raid ....
anyway. dont reply to this, its gotten off topic enough, So Im leaving it here.
I however dont want to use the overhead map of Oerth's underdark if Im traveling out of Ched Nesad in Toril's underdark headed to the surface, to raid ....
If this is the kind of thing your afraid of, then you have nothing to worry about. There is no way they are going to give us a big overhead map of the Underdark. The whole concept of PoL is to not give out a large, fleshed out map. People are supposed to come up with their own.
POL doesn't have a name for the planet, or continents, that's left up to the (supposedly) creative DM to make their own.
POL=style, not setting.
If it's brown, smells like an outhouse and has flies buzzing around it........it's not a cupcake.
If it's brown, smells like an outhouse and has flies buzzing around it........it's not a cupcake.
Perhaps it's a
??? ;)in the near future assume nothing please, first 3 letters of that word, assuming makes one out of two people, the one who assumes and the one being assumed about.
The only way discussion works is based on assumptions we all make about those around us. This is especially true on the internet. Now the logical person states up front that this is based on assumption about what the person was trying to get at. The illogical on assumes something and states it as fact. Since the person you quoted was the former and not the later you are being unreasonable in this request.
fleshed out underdark no, oh and no, believe it or not the underdark exists in most dnd campaigns, it just may not called underdark but underground cavern complexes etc...
Which is exactly why one that is a PoD (read generic or "settingless") is important. This is pretty much the entire 4th edition philosophy.
and on that noteL my views of the POL and the 4e ruleset are different, no matter how color coated it may become, POL is a setting, FR,GW, DL, DS, are all settings, anything could be switched out from one to the other, so telling me this, wasnt telling me anything new, thats how I always looked at it.
I however dont want to use the overhead map of Oerth's underdark if Im traveling out of Ched Nesad in Toril's underdark headed to the surface, to raid ....
You're right about PoL being a "setting". There are gods and place names. However, it is the most open-ended a setting can be without providing no information to get started on. The whole point of it is to provide information on a generic "underdark" without giving you maps of Oerth's or Faerun's. Again the entire philosophy is built around this. The Underdark book, when it comes out, will most likely have no map and allow for DMs to create their own underdark with the tools provided.
If you can't come up with a map on your own then I suggest ignoring the need for a fully realized map. It is not actually a necessity of play. Knowing where this underdark goes at this point in time is important. Knowing the exact trail to get from one side of the world to the other and every tunnel going off of that path isn't for most campaigns. However, if it is, then you either make it all before the campaign starts or in small chunks as your party goes from point A to point B.
...And Drow haven't been stuffed into FR exclusively (maybe in 2E) because they were accounted for heavily in 3.5 Eberron and were included in the MM1 last year, but were fleshed out for PC use in the FRPG because that was, traditionally, where they became famous. But even then, they have repeated over and over, if it's in an official D&D book or magazine, it's considered "core" and usable in any game.
They can use any spiffy slogan they want, but the truth is most people (particularly during these tough economic times) will see setting specific books and reason "We don't play a (fill in setting name) game so I can skip that book." . If for no other reason then to save money. Now if its a generic book, far more folks are going to pick it up (those same folks won't miss a MM or PHB). Which means when it comes to Drow they use the MM block or maybe the Character Builder (if they aren't too anti-DDI), but never the info in the FR guide (because they never purchased it).
So no matter how many times they want to say "everything is core", material in setting specific books do not see as much universal use (they are also historically their worst selling books). My problem is Drow have existed since long before FR, and nearly every DM thats has Elves in their world has Drow as well. Because of this I think the crunch should have been placed in a generic guide, with the setting specific fluff being placed in the FR guide. That would have been more in line with what the Drow really are; a standard race that most use regardless of setting. Its a shame that Minotaurs (Dragonlance) and Tieflings (Planescape) got absorbed into generic PHBs while Drow are still treated as monsters with a stat write-up in FR supplements.
So again they can say "everything is core", but by marketing Drow in the FR setting they have segragated the information into something that appeals to a narrow audience. Therefore they really are only purchased by those with an interest in FR. When given their wide appeal and usage they should be placed in a supplement that contains material all DMs/Players may use.
Its cute that they want to sell everything to everybody, but that just dosen't happen, and putting Drow in the FR book will not ensure sales just ensure most people use the most generic lackluster entry there is for the race, because its all they have access to.
Drow could still remain a central part of FR, but in being fair this common race should have been in a PHB.
Drow could still remain a central part of FR, but in being fair this common race should have been in a PHB.
But this is also a business, if there wasn't something exclusive to the FR book, then it's all fluff and no reason to buy it. Drow have been around in the other settings, yes, but when you list off the Icons for FR, Eberron and all the other settings, how many famous Drow are there? One, Drizzt from FR, so that is why Drow were in the FR books, just like it was in 3E. So (que the Rolling Stones) you can't always get what you want, there has to be some incentive for everyone to buy all the books...........they call it marketing.
Maybe I should go find the thread where they are whining about Assassin being a DDI exclusive and tell them this as well........
They can use any spiffy slogan they want, but the truth is most people (particularly during these tough economic times) will see setting specific books and reason "We don't play a (fill in setting name) game so I can skip that book." . If for no other reason then to save money...
So if the book was titled "Core Book with Drow, Swordmage, and lots of cool feats" then it would have been ok? Why do you care if someone else doesn't buy a book with drow in when you can use it in your game, especially when it gets full support in other books (like Martial Power) anyway?
So again they can say "everything is core", but by marketing Drow in the FR setting they have segragated the information into something that appeals to a narrow audience. Therefore they really are only purchased by those with an interest in FR. When given their wide appeal and usage they should be placed in a supplement that contains material all DMs/Players may use.
I dont understand this complaint. You, personally, are apparently aware that there is a book with drow in it (along with a lot of other useful options)...whats stopping you from using the information in your game without caring if any other person in the world owns the book?
Its cute that they want to sell everything to everybody, but that just dosen't happen, and putting Drow in the FR book will not ensure sales just ensure most people use the most generic lackluster entry there is for the race, because its all they have access to.
What do sales matter to you though? You can buy the book with drow. You can use drow in your home game, no matter what setting you use. It doesnt matter in the least what title happens to be on the cover of the book.
That would have been more in line with what the Drow really are; a standard race that most use regardless of setting. Its a shame that Minotaurs (Dragonlance) and Tieflings (Planescape) got absorbed into generic PHBs while Drow are still treated as monsters with a stat write-up in FR supplements.
Perhaps another way of looking at it, and this is purely my speculation, is that if they were going to put the Drow in a PH, they seem to fit nicely with the shadow power source, and since that was years away from the release of 4E, they would have rather gotten the race out within the first year than wait for PH3 or 4.
Perhaps another way of looking at it, and this is purely my speculation, is that if they were going to put the Drow in a PH, they seem to fit nicely with the shadow power source, and since that was years away from the release of 4E, they would have rather gotten the race out within the first year than wait for PH3 or 4.
I'm happy to see reprints from the back of the monster manual. I'll survive with seeing reprints from the dragon magazine.
But I would not be able to accept reprints from campaign books.
I'm happy to see reprints from the back of the monster manual. I'll survive with seeing reprints from the dragon magazine.
But I would not be able to accept reprints from campaign books.
I concur. Of course, I feel that the MM write-ups are for NPCs, so creating adding them to a PH or a PG at a later date is fine with me. I do think reprinting the full race write-ups from Dragon dilutes the value of my subscription somewhat, but not enough for it to make a difference or to stop me buying the book or renewing my subscription. Reprinting from a PG to a PH is a waste, especially with the statements of everything being core. Like has been said here, if you want Drow in your campaign, pick up the FRPG, use the CB, or, if you allow it, use the MM. There is no use in complaining that it is not in a core book - it is!
So no matter how many times they want to say "everything is core", material in setting specific books do not see as much universal use (they are also historically their worst selling books).
Actually it's my understanding that the first 2-3 books in a setting specific line usually sell about as well as non-setting material, because of the curious and those looking to steel any unique/interesting elements for their own worlds. It's all the subsequent releases that see reduced sales, even by those that do play the setting (typically because as a setting gets flushed out official material increasingly comes into conflict with homebrew material). As such WotC now only releases 3 products per setting (Campaign Guide, Player's Guide, and an adventure). Seems to me that WotC actually is pretty on the ball about this.
I could understand such complaints if drow was the only mechanical option in the FRPG, but it's not. Swordmage, dark pact warlock, genasi, spellscars, 25 new paragon paths, and 57 feats; around half the pages in the FRPG are easily portable to any campaign. The biggest chunk of setting specific material in the book is the section on the various regions, and even that could prove a source of inspiration for new locations in any setting.
it's all Drizzt's fault
Great, another Underdark book
it's all Drizzt's fault
There are other 4E Underdark books? Where?
I concur. Of course, I feel that the MM write-ups are for NPCs, so creating adding them to a PH or a PG at a later date is fine with me.
Hence why I'm happy to see them ;)
So if the book was titled "Core Book with Drow, Swordmage, and lots of cool feats" then it would have been ok? Why do you care if someone else doesn't buy a book with drow in when you can use it in your game, especially when it gets full support in other books (like Martial Power) anyway?
I dont understand this complaint. You, personally, are apparently aware that there is a book with drow in it (along with a lot of other useful options)...whats stopping you from using the information in your game without caring if any other person in the world owns the book?...
This has nothing to do with me careing (except in that I care that Drows seem to have gotten the off-hand treatment), or if I know where the information is, or even if anyone uses it at all. It just has to do with the smart place to have put them. They could put them in any book they wish...but really given the general use of Drow I believe they are a far more universal race then many that were put in PHBs. They either placed them in the FR book to boost sales, or they actually believed everyone would be buying everything. Drow deserved a place in a PHB, thats all I'm saying. They are their most purchased books, because they contain information for all (or at least thats what the package seems to convey).
What do sales matter to you though? You can buy the book with drow. You can use drow in your home game, no matter what setting you use. It doesnt matter in the least what title happens to be on the cover of the book.
Again so true, and I'm not arguing that at all, you are 100% right. But the reality is many folks won't buy a setting specific book if they are not running that setting. So by proxy the "official" Drow PC race is something many gamers will miss out on, even though they may be a staple race in their world. So I must counter with; it dosen't matter in the least whats inside the book if the initial marketing appears to target a particular group (in this case those who are running a FR game), no matter what sales pitch they use the package still sends that message. And again I don't care what people can or can't do when it comes to buying a book, I just think Drow should have been given a more general, generic treatment. People will not pick up a 35 dollar hardcover for one race.
To sum up, my "complaint" is that because Drow are a race used in nearly all campaigns they should have gotten a spot in a PHB. Regardless of slogans, and people repeating the same "its all core" mantra, setting specific books are the least distributed (ie. used for playing) of all the guides. So by placing Drow in a setting specific guide as opposed to a general PHB, they have unintentionally placed their information where many DMs will never have access to them. And its just a shame...thats all, no huge issue. It just seemed like common sense to put a race people use as often as Dwarves, Elves, and Halflings, into the same place with them.
Now I know I'm alone in this thought, but with luck over the years the Drow may see their rightful spot in a PHB (maybe in 5e). Thats all I'm saying.
It just has to do with the smart place to have put them. They could put them in any book they wish...but really given the general use of Drow I believe they are a far more universal race then many that were put in PHBs.
But it was the smart place to put them, seems like you just don't want to see it that way. If you look at the 3E PHB, they wanted something fresh over 2E so they included half-orcs. (gnomes too I think, don't have my 2E PHB here, so I'm not sure) Now they did the same with 4E by adding dragonborn and tieflings. So, since there wasn't room in PHB1 that would mean (following your logic about "core vs. setting" races) it would have to wait for PHB2 or PHB3. Since Forgotten Realms was due out shortly after the core books, the choice was simple: upset the few and far between customers who feel as you do, or upset the vast majority of FR fans who will be expecting to play a drow in their campaign. As I said before, you are right in that drow are in all settings of DnD, but Forgotten Realms made them "famous" (thanks Drizzt!) and it was far more appropriate to make it a PC race in the FRPG than wait for the next PHB. Besides, if people were that much of a fan of drow and not FR (or really that broke since I paid the same for both FR books on half.com as I would for one retail), 5 minutes in Borders with a pen and paper and you have everything you need.
People will not pick up a 35 dollar hardcover for one race.
Fortunately that's not all they get for their $30. The FRPG contains not one but two races (drow and genasi) in addition to a new class (swordmage), a new build for warlocks (dark pact), a unique multi-classing option (spellscared), and a whole bunch of feats and paragon paths; all easily portable to any setting.
The Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide might not have much use in other settings, but the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide is undeniably useful in any setting.
Fortunately that's not all they get for their $30. The FRPG contains not one but two races (drow and genasi) in addition to a new class (swordmage), a new build for warlocks (dark pact), a unique multi-classing option (spellscared), and a whole bunch of feats and paragon paths; all easily portable to any setting.
The Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide might not have much use in other settings, but the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide is undeniably useful in any setting.
I see both sides of this. On the one hand, saying that someone won't pick up FRPG for drow is the same as saying they won't pick up PHB2 for gnomes. It's not like drow were the only thing in the book. However, there may still be people who don't understand that Player Guides are especially useful no matter what setting you play in.
To sum up, my "complaint" is that because Drow are a race used in nearly all campaigns they should have gotten a spot in a PHB. Regardless of slogans, and people repeating the same "its all core" mantra, setting specific books are the least distributed (ie. used for playing) of all the guides. So by placing Drow in a setting specific guide as opposed to a general PHB, they have unintentionally placed their information where many DMs will never have access to them. And its just a shame...thats all, no huge issue.
I think forcing people to rethink what they allow in their game is a side-effect of WotC's strategy and is a good thing. I've seen too many DMs over the years that would allow X and not allow Y just because of the title of the book, not because the material couldn't fit in their game or because it would genuinely detract from the integrity of the setting. Now, if people want drow in their non-FR game they actually have to look at the FR book! Uh oh, now they are now exposed to cool ideas like the swordmage, genasi and a mess of other options that their players might enjoy too! ;)
I think i would more upset if the drow was stuck in a book that consisted mostly of FR fluff, with only a tiny amount of crunch. While the player's guide does have some regional fluff, a lot of the pages are dedicated to new races, classes, PPs, feats, etc...stuff that tends to show up in PHBs anyway. I'm not too bothered that the drow showed up in a non-PHB book since ive found it to be a valuable purchase for players/DMs of any setting because of the volume of mechanics. (I don't play FR btw)
I see both sides of this. On the one hand, saying that someone won't pick up FRPG for drow is the same as saying they won't pick up PHB2 for gnomes. It's not like drow were the only thing in the book. However, there may still be people who don't understand that Player Guides are especially useful no matter what setting you play in.
True but I think most intelligent players who don't have personal biases will look at every book that comes out and buy it if it has material they want, no matter if it's labelled as part of a setting or not. WotC I'm pretty sure is aware of this so hopes to put something useful in every book. They know not everyone will buy every book but since 'everything is core' other than setting-specific fluff there's no reason that material can't be in ANY product.
3e players (and maybe older edition players as well) are the ones that seem most likely to write off a book just because it's got a setting label on it. I didn't see that much friction between 'core' and 'setting' back in the 1e days as even the campaign setting boxes had lots of material that could be used.
I think WotC is going the right path by putting setting support mostly in Dragon/Dungeon articles with only 2 books and 1 adventure in print. The Campaign guide for FR was a lot of fluff and setting-specific but did have some setting-neutral monsters and other info that could be useful in any setting. The player's guide was about half totally setting-neutral and the majority if the rest was modular enough to easily be put into a world other than Faerun.
My Take on the "Drow being in the FRPG" Issue
I don't see why, if someone is only interested in the drow, they don't either:
A) Just get the CB, which gives you EVERYTHING with a 1-month subscription, if my info is correct, or...
B) Go to Barnes & Nobles or your FLGS or whatever, with a pen and notebook, and copy out the drow stats. That's probably illegal, but, I doubt the B&N employees would really notice if the store was a decent size. A FLGS is probably smaller, and they'll know you aren't doing "research" or something (though how, exactly, someone could pass of copying info from a book from the "Roleplaying" section seems like a tough sell to me), and would give you a swift boot to the door.
Or... Make your own drow! Use the MM stat block as a base, and build on it! Use home-brew feats that give them some of the powers available to the Monster-Type drow; heck, even make a Drider PP if you want.
Or, make them Eladrin with the Lolthtouched ability instead of fey step.
Doesn't seem too hard to me... *shrug*
A) Just get the CB, which gives you EVERYTHING with a 1-month subscription, if my info is correct, or...
B) Go to Barnes & Nobles or your FLGS or whatever, with a pen and notebook, and copy out the drow stats. That's probably illegal, but, I doubt the B&N employees would really notice if the store was a decent size. A FLGS is probably smaller, and they'll know you aren't doing "research" or something (though how, exactly, someone could pass of copying info from a book from the "Roleplaying" section seems like a tough sell to me), and would give you a swift boot to the door.
Or... Make your own drow! Use the MM stat block as a base, and build on it! Use home-brew feats that give them some of the powers available to the Monster-Type drow; heck, even make a Drider PP if you want.
Or, make them Eladrin with the Lolthtouched ability instead of fey step.
Doesn't seem too hard to me... *shrug*
Or... Make your own drow! Use the MM stat block as a base, and build on it! Use home-brew feats that give them some of the powers available to the Monster-Type drow; heck, even make a Drider PP if you want.
Or, make them Eladrin with the Lolthtouched ability instead of fey step.
Indeed. At their most fundamental core drow are just black skinned elves that live underground and are often associated with dark or sinister gods. Most of what makes drow what they are is fluff. As such it would seem entirely reasonable to just use elf stats for drow from the underdark and eladrin stats for drow from the feydark (or possibly shadowdark). It's nice to have separate racial stats stats, but hardly required.
Heck even the racial powers could be easily re-fluffed into iconic drow abilities. Elven Accuracy becomes Faerie Fire, a supernatural light that confers greater accuracy with attacks. While Fey Step becomes Shadow Creep (re-imaged cloud of darkness), a supernatural darkness that allows the drow to move swiftly and undetected.
If you look at the 3E PHB, they wanted something fresh over 2E so they included half-orcs. (gnomes too I think, don't have my 2E PHB here, so I'm not sure)
2E PHB had gnomes in it.
I'm just sayin'.
2E PHB had gnomes in it.
I'm just sayin'.
Thought so, my 2E PHB is in storage for the time being so I couldn't look it up.
There are other 4E Underdark books? Where?
Considering how many people play in the Underdark there are way to many books about it, there are far more important parts that require a sourcebook, at least it's not another ''Year of the Drow''
Considering how many people play in the Underdark there are way to many books about it, there are far more important parts that require a sourcebook, at least it's not another ''Year of the Drow''
OooooooooooK, again I ask......There are other 4E Underdark books? Where?
And there was only one 3E Underdark book it was for FR (since Eberron drow were on their own continent), but if you want to go all the way back into 2E, then there are more to include on your list. However, since this is the 4E forums, we are only talking about one book.
But the reality is many folks won't buy a setting specific book if they are not running that setting.
According to my FLGS, the FRPG has been a big seller. Not quite up to the level of the * Power books, but nearly there. The FRCG, ehhh, not so much.
Which implies that the customers are in fact rather well informed about what's in each book, and make smart choices about what they need to buy.
Then again, maybe gamers in our city are smarter than the average, who knows. :P
According to my FLGS, the FRPG has been a big seller. Not quite up to the level of the * Power books, but nearly there. The FRCG, ehhh, not so much.
Which implies that the customers are in fact rather well informed about what's in each book, and make smart choices about what they need to buy.
Then again, maybe gamers in our city are smarter than the average, who knows. :P
It makes sense, plus there (logically) is a ratio of 5 players to 1 DM, and the FRGC is mostly DM rules and flavor, so I can see why it doesn't sell as much.
According to my FLGS, the FRPG has been a big seller. Not quite up to the level of the * Power books, but nearly there. The FRCG, ehhh, not so much.
Indeed, none of the players in my group play FR and most of them own the FRPG. I dont know anyone who owns the FRCG though, even among the LFR players.
OooooooooooK, again I ask......There are other 4E Underdark books? Where?
so what there aren't, I'm saying I'd rather see many other books released for 4e than the Underdark, with every edition it's wotc priority to overwhelm us with drow and dragons, it's obnoxious
And there was only one 3E Underdark book it was for FR (since Eberron drow were on their own continent), but if you want to go all the way back into 2E, then there are more to include on your list. However, since this is the 4E forums, we are only talking about one book.
3e also had Drow of the Underdark (not FR, core), and mega-adventures (CotSQ, The Expedition ...), Lords of Madness, and dozens of novels
We're getting other 'setting' books as well including books on the Elemental Chaos and Shadowfell (and presumably the Feywild).
so what there aren't, I'm saying I'd rather see many other books released for 4e than the Underdark, with every edition it's wotc priority to overwhelm us with drow and dragons, it's obnoxious
3e also had Drow of the Underdark (not FR, core), and mega-adventures (CotSQ, The Expedition ...), Lords of Madness, and dozens of novels
#1) don't like it, don't buy it, and don't whine about it.
#2) novels are fluff, not rules, again don't buy/read them
#3) did you actually READ Drow of the Underdark? It's about Drow, not Underdark as a civilization, which the book that this thread is about obviously is.
#4) Lords of Madness was about abberations, not the Underdark or the Drow, I'll bet money you saw the mind flayer on the cover and immediately dismissed it as "Underdark" material.
#5) If you want to get technical, almost all the core books mention the word "Underdark" somewhere, better not buy those!
When you would like to have a logical conversation, don't forget to bring the logic.
We're getting other 'setting' books as well including books on the Elemental Chaos and Shadowfell
A Shadowfell book? Link?
A Shadowfell book? Link?
There is we know, an Elemental Chaos book coming out, by the way.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Plane-Below-Secrets-Elemental-Dungeons/dp/0786952490
The Plane Below: Secrets of the Elemental Chaos (Dungeons & Dragons) (Hardcover)
There is we know, an Elemental Chaos book coming out, by the way.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Plane-Below-Secrets-Elemental-Dungeons/dp/0786952490
The Plane Below: Secrets of the Elemental Chaos (Dungeons & Dragons) (Hardcover)
D'oh! I thought you were saying there was a Shadowfell book not speculating that a Shadowfell book would be produced (its safe speculation I admit. But its still speculation that could be years away from bearing fruit).
#1) don't like it, don't buy it, and don't whine about it.
#2) novels are fluff, not rules, again don't buy/read them
#3) did you actually READ Drow of the Underdark? It's about Drow, not Underdark as a civilization, which the book that this thread is about obviously is.
#4) Lords of Madness was about abberations, not the Underdark or the Drow, I'll bet money you saw the mind flayer on the cover and immediately dismissed it as "Underdark" material.
#5) If you want to get technical, almost all the core books mention the word "Underdark" somewhere, better not buy those!
When you would like to have a logical conversation, don't forget to bring the logic.
1. apparently you don't understand why Wizards make a mistake by publishing this type of book
2. your're saying that fluff is irrelevant, go play chess then
3. and the drow live? above the clouds?
4. the same as 3.
5. missing the point
1. apparently you don't understand why Wizards make a mistake by publishing this type of book
2. your're saying that fluff is irrelevant, go play chess then
3. and the drow live? above the clouds?
4. the same as 3.
5. missing the point
Wow, how are things in the outer realm?
1) How do you go from "don't like it, don't buy it" to saying that I don't understand why WOTC made a mistake publishing this type of book? Are you even in the same conversation? Seriously, are you answering the voices instead?
2) Fluff is not as relevant to games as the mechanics are, make your own fluff and there won't be any whining about too much or too little, unless you are too lazy or not smart enough and need to rely on WOTC to do it for you.
3) Drow live everywhere........Xen'drik anyone?
4) Aberrations are not exclusive to the underdark, hence Lords of Madness is not an underdark book, nor was it part of the Year of the Drow, unless they do things differently in the outer realm.
5)Actually, based on 1-4, it's you who missed the point, you don't get it and you won't get it since you are anti-drow and will have nothing nice to say about anything related to the drow. And considering there are more people who want it than.......well, only you apparently....WOTC will make the smart move and provide something useful to their predominant customer base.
You forgot you logic again, tsk tsk.
Seriously, are you answering the voices instead?
Oh, I like you :D
Oh, I like you :D
lol, thanks
He will never get it. So it is not worth arguing with him.
Indeed.
Indeed.
You do know he was addressing me, right?