This thread is so that Tombollis, Dexter Blacktyde, and Lowtech can continue their argument and let the Ask a Designer thread be free for, well, questions for the designer and his responses. So please, move your arguments here. Thank you.
Perhaps you could further facilitate this discussion by transferring the relevant posts into this thread? Thanks.
Perhaps you could further facilitate this discussion by transferring the relevant posts into this thread? Thanks.
I don't know how to do that, but if someone does, that would be awesome. I can sum up the conversation how I saw it....
Dexter_Blacktyde: 4ed has done it's best to destroy the usefulness of lore, and dumbed the game down.
Lowtech: I agree.
Tombollis: Nuh-uh, there are no sooooo many more things to kill.
Dexter_Blacktyde & Lowtech:
Now FIGHT!!!!
Old players who hate the 4E stuff can use whatever rule system they like and continue the Realms in the 1300s and not have to worry about anymore RSEs or writers "ruining" their game. If you were a fan of new novels and supplements that were about the 1300's though you are boned.;)
People playing the 4E stuff and DMs can use much of the old lore and ideas from past editions. Some of it will be null and void but other bit may not be. Hell there is lots of ideas you can get just from the old stuff and you can twist it into new ideas for 4E FR.
Old players who hate the 4E stuff can use whatever rule system they like and continue the Realms in the 1300s and not have to worry about anymore RSEs or writers "ruining" their game. If you were a fan of new novels and supplements that were about the 1300's though you are boned.;)
I'm not disagreeing with you, but what I read from the discussion was, well, let's just say it was not a decent discussion about the pros and cons of 4ed's affect on FR Lore.
Well, I'll agree with tombollis on one thing, which is were not losing lore, and if we are, its a neglible amount. The old lore isn't going away, which has never been the case, but the utility of said lore has greatly diminished if one intends to play in the 4e Realms. Its only real utility is perhaps for a few 'ancient kingdom' plot hooks and as historical reference, but that's about it really. As to whether that's good or bad, well, that's ultimately up to the individual.
its bad
The old lore isn't going away, which has never been the case, but the utility of said lore has greatly diminished if one intends to play in the 4e Realms. Its only real utility is perhaps for a few 'ancient kingdom' plot hooks and as historical reference, but that's about it really.
I disagree inasmuch as (in my estimation) a DM can pull out Volo's Guides and use them to rattle off area-appropriate names, places, historical events and produce credible NPCs.
Those of us that have been around for awhile know that names are used and re-used in the Realms. Some people are even named after Deities. (Torm, for example.)
Additionally, DMs can find much to build 4E adventures around from any number of older products. The trick will of course be the rules.
But I figure once a DM gets a grasp of them, then it's truly game on.
I disagree inasmuch as (in my estimation) a DM can pull out Volo's Guides and use them to rattle off area-appropriate names, places, historical events and produce credible NPCs.
-And, I disagree with that. As Stigger said, the utility of such sourcebooks become diminshed. He didn't say that they are no longer useful in any way, or wholly contradicted. They are simply less useful now. And, that is 100% true. When Volo goes on a theoretical four page discussion about the mayor of XYZ, and how he approves/disapproves of what he/she is doing, those are four pages that don't particularly matter in the 4e, 100+ year, "new" Forgotten Realms, and thus, in effect, are four less pages in Volo's Guide to XYZ that are relevant to the 4e Forgotten Realms.
I disagree inasmuch as (in my estimation) a DM can pull out Volo's Guides and use them to rattle off area-appropriate names, places, historical events and produce credible NPCs.
Those of us that have been around for awhile know that names are used and re-used in the Realms. Some people are even named after Deities. (Torm, for example.)
Additionally, DMs can find much to build 4E adventures around from any number of older products. The trick will of course be the rules.
But I figure once a DM gets a grasp of them, then it's truly game on.
You basically just reworded everything Stigger said.
And I didn't either. Watch the hay in your shoes...makes your feet itch and causes you to lose concentration.
Stigger: The old lore isn't going away, which has never been the case, but the utility of said lore has greatly diminished if one intends to play in the 4e Realms. Its only real utility is perhaps for a few 'ancient kingdom' plot hooks and as historical reference, but that's about it really...Well, yes, that whole "plot-hooks and as historical reference" bit up there would presumably include most of that... but at best that's inspiration, and the DM is still going to have to do quite a bit of work to get all the pieces to fit together with the new edition, hence, not as useful as it would otherwise be
Mr. Misc: I disagree inasmuch as (in my estimation) a DM can pull out Volo's Guides and use them to rattle off area-appropriate names, places, historical events and produce credible NPCs.
-The emphasizes' are mine. Is it me, people?
So your argument is predicated on the assumption that a DM can’t just plug that NPC into his 4E game, Volo’s musings and all, and let the book guide him just as it would for any 3E, 2E or 1E game?
Tsk, tsk.
-Just as yours is also grounded in assumptions that DMs can. Tsk, tsk. It is also hampered by the fact that it is a lot more difficult to do this in regards to the 4e Forgotten Realms.
-Being as that a great deal of these specific details, locales, individuals, and so on have no place existing in +/- 100 years into the future, the utlity of the book drops, as the DM cannot simply hand-pick details, locales, individuals, and so on that have no place existing +/- 100 years into the future and insert them into his/her campaign, if he/she wants to stick to canon, without having some kind of answer as to why these details, locales, individuals, and so on are no invalidated with the passage of +/- 100 years of time. Going by real world precident, how many people are currently alive, that were alive 100 years ago? Very few. Going by real world precident, how many businesses are not defunct today and still do business, that still exist today? Very few. How many, say, cultural details can be simply lifted some +/- 100 years ago, and inserted seamlessly into today's culture? Not even 100 years ago, but 50 years ago, Bed-Sty was a middle/working-class, white neighborhood. What is it now? To quote Star Wars, a hive of scum and villainy, for the most part. Now, tell me, what relevant cultural details can be gleaned from 1950s Bed-Sty, and inserted into the Bed-Sty of today? Would it make sense to tell a tourist to look at an image the Bed-Sty of the 1950s, in preparation for the Bed-Sty of today?
Would it make sense to tell a tourist to look at an image the Bed-Sty of the 1950s, in preparation for the Bed-Sty of today?
If you are really mean....
If you are really mean....
-That would be mean...:P
-To further elaborate, as I recall someone raising this exact point, how much utility would a book about what Russia is like in 1910 be in 1911? The entire book would be extremely current, and, as a whole, you are going to get the most usefulness out of the book at this period of time. The more time passes, however, the less use you are going to get from the book. Fast forward, and how much utility would a book about what Russia is like in 1910 be in 2008? Well, some parts may still be relevant, but that entire chapter about how to live under the Czar? Not anymore. That entire chapter about how to properly pogrom? Not anymore. That entire chapter about "Westerizing"? Not anymore. And so on and so forth.
-Looking back, in a historical perspective, such things retain their use. One can easily use the book as a look back into the past, citing people and places in the past tense. To use such a book contemporarily? Much more difficult, as so much is no longer relevant.
-Just as yours is also grounded in assumptions that DMs can. Tsk, tsk. It is also hampered by the fact that it is a lot more difficult to do this in regards to the 4e Forgotten Realms.
You keep saying that last statement, but you don’t offer any proof to support it.
That’s why I’m referring to it as an assumption.
So will it really be “a lot more difficult” to plug in NPC descriptions from Volo’s books into a 4E game? In my experience with 3rd Edition, this wasn’t the case. In 4E, I don’t see how it will be either.
Consider: Volo's Guide to Cormyr was released in 1995 and was a Second Edition product (as any game rules included in that book were of the 2E type).
In 2002 or thereabouts, I started using a friend's copy for my Third Edition FR game (as my old FR sourcebooks were five states away, locked up in a storage shed).
Appendix 1: Folk of Cormyr on page 217 of that book gives a small assortment of notable NPCs in Cormyr that a DM can use in his or her campaign.
I've used that section extensively (as well as the rest of the book), ignoring the 2E rules bits, for the last six years or so in my 3E game. Note this game was set during and continues after the war in Cormyr vs. Nalavarra and her Ghazneth minions.
In 4E, I can do the same thing, by ignoring the 2E rules lore (which is itself only a small blurb on class and level for the NPCs listed) and plunking those NPCs right into my game as needed.
The reason this is possible is because all but two or three of the NPCs listed in the Cormyr book are specifically tied to the era the book was written in. The rest of the NPCs could exist in Cormyr during any time from several hundred years ago in the setting through 4E itself.
And even then an enterprising 4E Realms DM with players that simply don’t know any better (more like don’t care one way or the other, so long as the game is fun) can use Maxer Hlarr (Defender of Suzail) and Barandos Hawklin (head of the Hawklin noble family) at will in a 4E game.
-Being as that a great deal of these specific details, locales, individuals, and so on have no place existing in +/- 100 years into the future,
“....have no place”? Are you really sure about that?
Are you actually arguing that it's not OK for a DM to take, say....the richly detailed description of a human merchant like Maerun Stoutbold and use him in a 4E FR game because he would have had died already and so his description is off limits?
And what of the elves, half elves and dwarves that are still alive?
Let’s consider specific details and locales. You’re saying a “great deal” of details, locales and so on in Volo’s Guide to Cormyr have no place existing in the 4E future.
So, in Suzail there is no Society of Stalwart Adventurers? The Stag Transfixed no longer exists? The Wailing Wheel Inn no longer stands opposite the Six Candles Inn?
In Marsember you’re saying DMs should ignore the details about The Platter of Plenty? They really don’t serve Blentra’s Oysters and Wild Rice in Mushroom Soup anymore. No homage to Blentra Whaelbuckler, then?
As we move into greater Cormyr, you’re saying the Falling Tower should not stand? Nor the Wormtower?
You’re saying a Realms DM can’t use the Spellplague as ample reason these fun adventure sites might exist in 4E and so introduce them in his or her campaign as having been a result of the Spellplague with his players none the wiser?
Why?
The truth of it is the 100 year jump gives Realms DMs a wonderful number of choices when it comes to the Volo’s Guides. They can choose to use locations, NPCs and details provided by the Volo’s guides as is in their 4E games, or spice things up with a bit of history and ‘age’ the locations to suit the DMs creativity and game needs.
...the utility of the book drops, as the DM cannot simply hand-pick details, locales, individuals, and so on that have no place existing +/- 100 years into the future and insert them into his/her campaign,
The rest of the paragraph that the above quote leads into only serves to show how Canon is a Crutch.
Most Dungeon Masters (Realms DMs or otherwise) have enough to do with knowing the rules and handling their players. They don’t need or want to worry about rationalizing everything away so it ‘fits’ cannon.
In closing, the Volo’s Guides series is and will continue to be a valuable resource for 4th Edition Realms Dungeon Master to use extensively in their 4E games. The lore and information contained in these classic Realms products is authentic and true to the setting and have proven themselves time and again in helping bring the Realms to life at gaming tables year after year.
I encourage new (and old) DMs to find them online and download them. Please visit the Previous Edition Downloads here on the WotC site, where you can find several Volo's Guides for free!
:D
You keep saying that last statement, but you don’t offer any proof to support it.
-I'm simply parroting your own statemnt, there.
So will it really be “a lot more difficult” to plug in NPC descriptions from Volo’s books into a 4E game? In my experience with 3rd Edition, this wasn’t the case. In 4E, I don’t see how it will be either.
Consider: Volo's Guide to Cormyr was released in 1995 and was a Second Edition product (as any game rules included in that book were of the 2E type).
In 2002 or thereabouts, I started using a friend's copy for my Third Edition FR game (as my old FR sourcebooks were five states away, locked up in a storage shed).
Appendix 1: Folk of Cormyr on page 217 of that book gives a small assortment of notable NPCs in Cormyr that a DM can use in his or her campaign.
I've used that section extensively (as well as the rest of the book), ignoring the 2E rules bits, for the last six years or so in my 3E game. Note this game was set during and continues after the war in Cormyr vs. Nalavarra and her Ghazneth minions.
In 4E, I can do the same thing, by ignoring the 2E rules lore (which is itself only a small blurb on class and level for the NPCs listed) and plunking those NPCs right into my game as needed.
The reason this is possible is because all but two or three of the NPCs listed in the Cormyr book are specifically tied to the era the book was written in. The rest of the NPCs could exist in Cormyr during any time from several hundred years ago in the setting through 4E itself.
And even then an enterprising 4E Realms DM with players that simply don’t know any better (more like don’t care one way or the other, so long as the game is fun) can use Maxer Hlarr (Defender of Suzail) and Barandos Hawklin (head of the Hawklin noble family) at will in a 4E game.
-You seem to be ignoring the fact that the 4e Forgotten Realms are taking place 100 +/- years into the future from the current Forgotten Realms.
-The reason why most 2e products can be seamlessly used with most 3e products is because there was very little change, in terms of society, and time. Second edition began at the Time of Troubles, which was 1358 DR, I believe and 3rd edition began in 1372 DR. That is 14 years worth of time. How much has the world around you changed in the past 14 years? People change fairly quickly, the immediate location a bit slower, an even larger geographic location even more slower, society as a whole a whole lot slower, and the world itself even slower.
-The timespan between 2e and 4e is a lot larger. 1358 DR to 1479 DR is...121 years. Let's take a trip back 121 years, to 1887. How was our world different? Do I really need to get into this? I don't think so.
-And, of course, all of that is not factoring the massive societal upheaval, and physical changes to the map caused by the Spellplague.
“....have no place”? Are you really sure about that?
Are you actually arguing that it's not OK for a DM to take, say....the richly detailed description of a human merchant like Maerun Stoutbold and use him in a 4E FR game because he would have had died already and so his description is off limits?
-A DM, in his/her own game, can dowhatever tickles their fancy.
-Concerning canon, if you want some sembalance of sense, yes. There's plenty of wonderful NPCs in my own game that I am quite fond of, and put a lot of time/effort into creating. Same thing with organizations, items, and so on. They, however, are dead, or somehow incapacitated, no longer exist, destroyed, and so on. Thus, I do not use them.
And what of the elves, half elves and dwarves that are still alive?
-And, they will still be alive, some of them. Elves, Half-Elves and Dwarves do not make up the majority of information found in such sourcebooks as the Volo books, however.
Let’s consider specific details and locales. You’re saying a “great deal” of details, locales and so on in Volo’s Guide to Cormyr have no place existing in the 4E future.
So, in Suzail there is no Society of Stalwart Adventurers? The Stag Transfixed no longer exists? The Wailing Wheel Inn no longer stands opposite the Six Candles Inn?
In Marsember you’re saying DMs should ignore the details about The Platter of Plenty? They really don’t serve Blentra’s Oysters and Wild Rice in Mushroom Soup anymore. No homage to Blentra Whaelbuckler, then?
As we move into greater Cormyr, you’re saying the Falling Tower should not stand? Nor the Wormtower?
You’re saying a Realms DM can’t use the Spellplague as ample reason these fun adventure sites might exist in 4E and so introduce them in his or her campaign as having been a result of the Spellplague with his players none the wiser?
Why?
The truth of it is the 100 year jump gives Realms DMs a wonderful number of choices when it comes to the Volo’s Guides. They can choose to use locations, NPCs and details provided by the Volo’s guides as is in their 4E games, or spice things up with a bit of history and ‘age’ the locations to suit the DMs creativity and game needs.
-Let's look back around 100 years ago, in our own world. Of the many, many businesses, places, people, organizations, and so on that have existed over the years, how many exist today, in a fashion where they are still recognizable? Some currently exist still, a few dating back even further than 100 years. These instances, however, are anything but commonplace. Numerous businesses, organizations, and so on cannot last a single year, let alone two, a decade, two decades, twenty-five years, a fifty, a century, and so on.
The rest of the paragraph that the above quote leads into only serves to show how Canon is a Crutch.
-That's your perogative to believe that, just as it is mine to not believe that. Mind you, we are talking about the canon Forgotten Realms, and not someone's individual campaign. Someone is free to do whatever the hell they want in their own games.
In closing, the Volo’s Guides series is and will continue to be a valuable resource for 4th Edition Realms Dungeon Master to use extensively in their 4E games.
-Returning to the entire crux of the debate, their utility in 4e games will be limited.
-You seem to be ignoring the fact that the 4e Forgotten Realms are taking place 100 +/- years into the future from the current Forgotten Realms.
But it doesn't matter! You can still use those locales, NPCs, and details.
But it doesn't matter! You can still use those locales, NPCs, and details.
Be some damn old NPC's.
-You seem to be ignoring the fact that the 4e Forgotten Realms are taking place 100 +/- years into the future from the current Forgotten Realms.
How so? I referenced that fact in my last post and showed why it was irrelevant to the usefulness of the Volo’s Guides to 4E DMs.
I suggest you read my last more closely.
-The reason why most 2e products can be seamlessly used with most 3e products is because there was very little change, in terms of society, and time.
What, all the near-equivalent Realms Shaking Events (and the ToT itself--the only true RSE of its kind) had no effect on the Realms?
The Realms have seen considerable changes throughout in that time.
By your logic, in fact, the war in Cormyr should invalidate much of the information available on Arabel as that city was sacked and destroyed.
Yet a DM can quite easily assume Arabellans rebuilt much of what was lost, and so use the Volo’s info (including that on NPCs) as written for any FR campaign set after the war.
Second edition began at the Time of Troubles, which was 1358 DR, I believe and 3rd edition began in 1372 DR. That is 14 years worth of time. How much has the world around you changed in the past 14 years? People change fairly quickly, the immediate location a bit slower, an even larger geographic location even more slower, society as a whole a whole lot slower, and the world itself even slower.
And Cormyr, slower than that.
-The timespan between 2e and 4e is a lot larger. 1358 DR to 1479 DR is...121 years. Let's take a trip back 121 years, to 1887. How was our world different? Do I really need to get into this? I don't think so.
You obviously do, because you’ve committed the cardinal sin of using our real world as a comparative in an argument about the Forgotten Realms.
By your ‘how quickly things change’ logic Cormyr should have grown from a single city (Suzail) to a massive megaplex, complete with space travel and moon colonies in just four or five centuries.
FR and the real world do not and have never followed the same developmental track.
-And, of course, all of that is not factoring the massive societal upheaval, and physical changes to the map caused by the Spellplague.
Yet we know Cormyr still exists, as does Waterdeep.
If I’m a DM and I need place names, street names, interesting locations, the name of alleys, NPC names and so one, Volo’s Guides can be used quite readily.
-A DM, in his/her own game, can dowhatever tickles their fancy.
Condescendingly put, but still true. Good to see you accept that.
-Concerning canon, if you want some sembalance of sense, yes.
Semblance of sense vs. what, exactly? Canon?
Do you actually believe all DMs and players (or even a majority) follow canon so closely that they’d double check against lore almost a decade and a half old just to see if it ‘fit’ right?
The only semblance of sense that matters is what a DM presents to his or her players.
New players to the D&D game are simply not going to care that their DM is borrowing from a book that’s as old as most of them are.
Canon lore is meant to be used. It is not meant to be treated as a wall blocking Realms DMs off from using good Realmslore in their games, no matter where that Realmslore came from.
-And, they will still be alive, some of them. Elves, Half-Elves and Dwarves do not make up the majority of information found in such sourcebooks as the Volo books, however.
So?
Mind you, we are talking about the canon Forgotten Realms, and not someone's individual campaign. Someone is free to do whatever the hell they want in their own games.
Uh, hello?
We’re talking about the usefulness of the Volo’s Guides to 4E Realms DMs. That pretty much touches on every potential use of the product for every game that’s going to happen.
The majority of Forgotten Realms games to not pay homage to canon lore anywhere near as slavishly as you imply.
-Returning to the entire crux of the debate, their utility in 4e games will be limited.
I have disproven or marginalized all of the arguments you have made in support of your claim.
There is no good reason to believe your conclusion.
You can just use them as presented.
My question would be: "how?"
How many could survive all this time? Or are you just talking about personifications?
It's the perception from the standpoint of the players in any given campaign that matters, not where NPC X stands in relation to what's printed in some FR book.
The NPCs have never existed if you haven't already used them. If you have, you might be able to get away with a simple name change.
Very true.
Yet, there are those that would argue.
The majority of Forgotten Realms games to not pay homage to canon lore anywhere near as slavishly as you imply.
Apperantlly they do, because we had to have the setting gutted and changed for that reason.
Apperantlly they do, because we had to have the setting gutted and changed for that reason.
Not so.
They moved the setting forward so gamers didn't have to feel obligated to know all that lore.
They moved the setting forward so gamers didn't have to feel obligated to know all that lore.
They did not have to feel so obligated before, as per the 3E FRCS.
People perceptions are not always real or make sense, but they exist and WOTC seems to think that enough fans left the setting that they needed to retool it.
People perceptions are not always real or make sense, but they exist and WOTC seems to think that enough fans left the setting that they needed to retool it.
For sure...especially on the first part.
For sure...especially on the first part.
Even if they are not real they exist. If this was hurting sales or they thought changing things will increase sales they would do it. They do not care for diehard fans who live and breathe the Realms, unless those fans are in the majority and will buy the most books. They change things because they believe that will help them sell the most books.
This does not mean people should not feel offended, but it is just one possible reason for the change.
Evidently the end of 2E really soured FR to some folks that I am friends with. They were diehard fans and the the uber NPCs that were in 2E and got more uber in 3e and much of the god nonsense from 2e to 3e bothered them so much they switched games or went to Eberron. It did not matter what the FRCS book said about making it their own and ignoring high level NPCs the whole gods and ubernpcs as protaganists just left a dirty taste in their mouth. Now they are all talking about the new book and hoping it is going to do what they hoped 3E would do: get rid of the things they dislike.
People perceptions are not always real or make sense, but they exist and WOTC seems to think that enough fans left the setting that they needed to retool it.
Just so I understand you: It was the amount of NPC uberness drove them to Eberron? The setting with laser-rope cranes and...these guys (that, for some reason, ride on these)?
But it doesn't matter! You can still use those locales, NPCs, and details.
-It all makes sense now...It's like, the pearly gates just opened and...
I have disproven or marginalized all of the arguments you have made in support of your claim.
There is no good reason to believe your conclusion.
-Only in your own mind, perhaps. Most of my arguments still stand, and the original point is still entirely true: The information in said books becomes less and less useful the more things diverge from the setting as presented when the book was published.
-I tire of running in circles with you. I do not feel like arguing nonsensica, in my current, virus-ridden state, especally with with you. When I feel better, I'll be back.
Ignoring the idea of using modern standards of societal change, which is just silly without things like media and global communications, the likelihood of having at least a significant societal change on at least some level is fairly high if one uses medieval/rennaisance Europe as a measuring stick. If one measures that likelihood with a fantasy setting point of view, that likelihood diminishes quite a bit, although I suspect it would still be at least marginally possible even then.
So, that pretty much leaves us with the only logical conclusion being... YMMV. Which was really the case all along. We really will argue just about anything around here sometimes... :D
LK - The usefulness of the 2e books has been diminished for DMs as you can no longer use certain parts if you want to run a canonical game.
Miscellany - It doesn't matter to any DM who doesn't impose upon themselves the idea they must run a completely canonical game.