I've come to this conclusion after buying the FRPG. What it lacks in detail it makes up for in total emersion in vagueness for the changed lands.
Since I know the developers really don't care about the FR fans in general (look at what they did with 4e Realms), they probably won't take this suggestion to heart that I am going to make.
Make FR stuff non-edition specific (get rid of the spectacularly fail-filled 4e) and bring back what we looked forward to in our FR suppliments - real content, like backstory, history, and all kinds of crunchy goodness.
We want to know the who, the why, when, etc. not if some npc can slide another pc/npc 3 squares or whatever constitutes their new 4e blahness.
To use an example of why this would make them money (since that is what they are gunning for, not happy customers anymore in my opinion), car manufacturers do not quit making parts for or supporting older model cars with the latest models. They still make parts for, and offer service to their older cars. A lot of the parts are made to fit on multiple models of cars, so, they make money from someone driving last year's model, and this year's model when part X breaks down.
Same philosophy (modular parts) could go for non-edition specific FR suppliments, or alternatively in each suppliment, have the 3.5 version and 4e version for whichever is needed.
Instead, WotC took the MicroSoft Xbox approach to 4e/FR. Kill all new material for previous editions instead of continued support. Way to go.
(At this point you could try to argue they are giving all their support to the new edition to make it the best it can be, and I'll point out it isn't hard to include 3.5 stats since you just spent the better part of a decade using the system, and you'd be able to sell your bloody products to everyone, not just the 4e fanboys.)
Now, you can like the new FR all you want, you can like 4e all you want. I think both are junk, I've had time to read through the PH, DMG, MM, FRCG, and FRPG, and to me, they are not worth the money they want for them, and I unfortunately paid for them. I tried to give WotC a chance, but if I wanted to learn a new game, it would have a new name attached with it, not some game pretending to be the game I like and have enjoyed for 20+ years.
For all you supporters of 4e and the new FR, don't waste your breathe or time typing why I am wrong, or why it isn't the way I feel it to be, because, well, you would be wasting your time. I am not changing my mind on the matter, and you're definately not going to convince me otherwise.
Instead, this will be my last post here at WotC, I'll say thanks for the fun I've had so far, but this is where I say adios. The 4e game format isn't good in my opinion, and I'll be giving my support now to Paizo and wherever Ed Greenwood ends up with his new stuff, except for what he makes for here.
So long, see you in maybe 5-10 years when a new edition comes out hopefully more like the ones I enjoy.
To sum up, you have problems with the new edition and the overhauling (or is it keelhauling?) the FR have received. Right-o. Your argument is lessened by the fact that you have already purchased most of the FR books to be printed. 3 4E books were all we got, FRCG, FRPG, and the module, unless you subscribe to DDI (only for the articles, I swear!).
The history and depth of FR is still available through the wonders of Candlekeep, serious posters on this board and your own library of FR loot. I doubt WotC will devote any development to FR, other than novels, until a new edition (if then). Articles for Dungeon and Dragon are a good, edition lite option. Brian R. James and (gasp, He Who Must Be Stopped) Rich Baker have been producing solid work post-4E.
Unfortunately, we, the Hardcore FR gaming fans do not represent a serious RoI for Wizards. We are a vocal minority and it looks like FR will get the treatment Greyhawk received in 3E.
-So...You immensely dislike what was done to the Forgotten Realms in the new edition, and yet, you purchased all of the books, knowing that you didn't like it?
It begs the question of how much WotC can "ruin" the Forgotten Realms and still have people pay for it.
I don't think he really read the new FRCG or FRPG when they hit the stores, i know in perious editions of FR you could just count on the goodness of materail in the books and just pick them up and read them later. With just how mad he is about the changes seems to me that is the case as it was with me......i don't have my copy its ashs.....not worth even to keep.
burn babby burn.
I'm not reading all of that. Someone please give me a summary.
1. They killed FR. I may be back if they bring back 1E-3.5E FR.
2. I bought the FRPG, and it sucked.
3. The Developers obviously don't care about FR.
4. Ruining flavor by making things not Realms-specific.
5. Killed all support for previous editions.
6. 4E is junk, and FR is now junk.
7. He purchased the 4E core set and the FRCG and FRPG.
8. Pretending to be D&D, which 4E isn't.
9. I'm off to follow Paizo or Ed Greenwood
10. See you in 5-10 years hoping the next edition will be more like the last.
It begs the question of how much WotC can "ruin" the Forgotten Realms and still have people pay for it.
I sympathise with the OP. Having been initially sceptical about 4E I got the books and was converted (not to mention impressed). I therefore gave 4E FR a chance despite serious reservations. I have the Campaign Guide and am not impressed.
The changes to the setting make no sense and IMO butcher what was a brilliant, well-developed setting. New continents, a huge hole in the ground and new realms of genasi and others ruined the 4E setting for me. Since I like the 4E system, I will still get the Player's Guide for the rules material in there since it should be adaptable to an earlier time period.
That, personally, is why I have paid for the books but I will not be buying any of the new novels or any future FR supplements should there be any. I would love to know what made Ed Greenwood agree to this rubbish (IMO) but I suspect we will never find out.
anyway, so you didnt like it.
after the frpg and frcg , i did feel that it was depressing, and a few other words that start with d.
I do feel that it was missing alot, i cant remember looking through rhe cg and noticing any merchants in any of the cities, and waht not.
its so bad, that I predict that any more fluff and crunch that comes out for the FR will either be, DDI, dragon, and dungeon and any more details on various cities will be through living FR.
which blows, i wont buy anymore splat books, and im iffy on the ddi as im not sure i can afford any of them or even if it would be worth it.
and the living FR idea is like the living gh one, both were bad.
per say though the swordmage class was good.
per say though the swordmage class was good.
If you consider that neither it nor the drow belonged into a Player's Guide, maybe so. Just another version of the archetypical D&D Elven Fighter/Wizard. We had about half a dozen in 3e, so why not one in 4E. Of course, it strikes you that the first race mentioned utilizing this class are "returned" genasi.
But that thread was not about the FRPG, so I'll keep it out of this.
For all you supporters of 4e and the new FR, don't waste your breathe or time typing why I am wrong, or why it isn't the way I feel it to be, because, well, you would be wasting your time. I am not changing my mind on the matter, and you're definately not going to convince me otherwise.
Perhaps you should not have posted this here, if you didn't want anyone to come along and disagree with you.
I might be back if, and when, WotC remakes ... I'll be giving my support now to Paizo and wherever Ed Greenwood ends up with his new stuff, except for what he makes for here.
So long, see you in maybe 5-10 years when a new edition comes out hopefully more like the ones I enjoy.
BYE!
-So...You immensely dislike what was done to the Forgotten Realms in the new edition, and yet, you purchased all of the books, knowing that you didn't like it?
Aye. It is something many gamers do. Check out my sig.;)
That, personally, is why I have paid for the books but I will not be buying any of the new novels or any future FR supplements should there be any. I would love to know what made Ed Greenwood agree to this rubbish (IMO) but I suspect we will never find out.
Greenwood has pretty much gone on statement that he dislikes most of the changes as well. Oh well, not his campaign setting anymore. He sold it way back when, releasing any legal say he has over it.
BYE!
For all you supporters of 4e and the new FR, don't waste your breathe or time typing why I am wrong, or why it isn't the way I feel it to be, because, well, you would be wasting your time.
I won't try, because doing so would disrespect you and your opinion.
I'm sorry you feel the way you do, Vharyg_Sorrow, but I hope you find some good times down the road with the 3E or older Realms or by doing whatever it is that makes you happy.
During the wait for my 4th Edition Realms, I bought a few other games to burn time. I was incredibly impressed with what my money would buy with these other systems/companies. I'm not sure how kosher it is to mention other RPG's on this board, but in comparison with what these other books show, and the obvious labors of love given to the lore sections and flavor texts, it actually damaged my opinion of the FR books, as I was expecting them to be at LEAST that level. I mean, it's D&D, if there's a flagship P&P product, it's this.
What it comes down to is the bottom line. If and when the former fans of the Realms stop buying the product, and if that causes a measurable drop in product sales, things won't change. Best idea might be to take the 3rd edition Realms that you like better, affect it in some way that allows for the changes (if you care for that at all) and keep playing.
It's nice to see so many people wishing the OP to get smacked by the door on the way out.
Greenwood has pretty much gone on statement that he dislikes most of the changes as well. Oh well, not his campaign setting anymore. He sold it way back when, releasing any legal say he has over it.
-Not 100%, no. If you read the statement, he is very diplomatic about what he says (but, who would bash the people paying your paycheck?), but I can certainly detect some undertones of annoyance, based on certain words and things that he says.
If for every one like the OP that they lose, they gain somebody like me who disliked previous editions but likes the 4E Realms, the Forgotten Realms should be fine in the long term.
I agree there, I never liked Forgotten Realms before, (love me some Eberron) but now it actually kind of intrests me. I might even run or play LFR.
So see ya, i'll be having all your fun. :P
Greenwood has pretty much gone on statement that he dislikes most of the changes as well.
No, he hasn't made such statements (at least publicly).
Don't forget to write...
I agree there, I never liked Forgotten Realms before, (love me some Eberron) but now it actually kind of intrests me. I might even run or play LFR.
So see ya, i'll be having all your fun. :P
Does this mean WotC should make Eberron 4E more like the Old Realms so we can ... "CHANGE PLACES!!!"
Does this mean WotC should make Eberron 4E more like the Old Realms so we can ... "CHANGE PLACES!!!"
The only way they could do that is if they took everything that makes Eberron cool and threw it out making it into a generic fantasy setting. Then they would have to populate the world with five million heroic characters that are all better than my characters.
I'll apologize for this statement now. :D
The only way they could do that is if they took everything that makes Eberron cool and threw it out making it into a generic fantasy setting. Then they would have to populate the world with five million heroic characters that are all better than my characters.
I'll apologize for this statement now. :D
It's repeat statements like this that kills retired-adventurers-turned-barkeeps... and celestial dire kittens.
The PG is something I would expect to see alot of edition specific items in, since the PCs are the most important part of the game. Powers, feats, items, rituals, all of that was expected in this book, lore on exactly what happens everywhere? If the players already know whats happening, why adventure? Let the DM weave the tale, let the DM make the Realms his world where your characters live.
So I've addressed your valid concern. The PG is a book of crunch for players to bite into, the FR Campaign Guide is a book of fluff for the DM to spin into an entertaining yarn! (Wooo for bad puns!)
okay thanks and good bye, do scy on us and we wont scry on you
Aye. It is something many gamers do. Check out my sig.;)
Yeah, but if we can't groan and moan about canon, then what should we do with all our spare time?
The FR Campaign Guide was actually one of the fluffiest products I've seen in ages. Compared to the 3.0 FR book this one has the most use in any edition. You've got your Realm's lore in that book. Pretty sure that the only edition specific items in that book is the Threats chapter with the monster stats, and a few rituals and magic items/artifacts. Less than a third of the book probably.
The PG is something I would expect to see alot of edition specific items in, since the PCs are the most important part of the game. Powers, feats, items, rituals, all of that was expected in this book, lore on exactly what happens everywhere? If the players already know whats happening, why adventure? Let the DM weave the tale, let the DM make the Realms his world where your characters live.
So I've addressed your valid concern. The PG is a book of crunch for players to bite into, the FR Campaign Guide is a book of fluff for the DM to spin into an entertaining yarn! (Wooo for bad puns!)
No, he hasn't made such statements (at least publicly).
Actually, his exact words were "I wouldn't use it..."
I'll have to find it... it was one of his first posts (through THO, I believe), at CK after the 4e announcment last year.
Considering he has since played in games at cons (I wonder how much he was paid?), and also didn't use 3e either (he is still running his own Realms, and not the published version, with tons of houserules), the sentence can be taken out of context.
I haven't seen too many (aside from Misc and a few others) who were FR fans before, and remain fans. Most of the 4eFR lovers are from the 'Hater' camp.
Early in this thread someone (theCasualOblivion?) made a comment about "for every person they lose, they gain a new fan".
True enough... but are they the type of fans they stick-around for twenty+ years? And since these new fans prefer a lore-lite world, wil they be buying up all the novels the way 'Grognards' use to (mostly for the lore)?
Only time will tell.
Considering he has since played in games at cons (I wonder how much he was paid?), and also didn't use 3e either (he is still running his own Realms, and not the published version, with tons of houserules), the sentence can be taken out of context.
Yeah, the players in Ed's campaign take a vote on what changes to accept, and they voted that the Time of Troubles never happened. So, Ed's version of the Realms doesn't even include the ToT.
Yeah, the players in Ed's campaign take a vote on what changes to accept, and they voted that the Time of Troubles never happened. So, Ed's version of the Realms doesn't even include the ToT.
Thankfully. I really had issues with everything after ToT. Now with 4eFR I have a reason to delve into the official line again.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people were turned off to FR by the horrid novels.
Was it so hard to just enjoy the game-world and ignore everything else? Was someone at your home forcing you to use material you didn't like?
I'm just not getting this attitude of "Now I can finally enjoy FR!"
The same people who are tauting the new world's lack of lore because it allows them to unfetter their creativity, found it impossible to do so before?
Whats the difference, seriously, between reading something you don't like and ignoring it and coming up with your own stuff, and not reading ANY detail about the same thing, and coming up with your own stuff?
Did the existance of a few words on paper become some sort of physical barrier in the RW to your own imagination?
This attitude that the world is somehow better because there is less of it is just so WEIRD to me. I'd personally rather have bad lore (that I can spin any way I want), then no lore what-so-ever (giving me nothing to work with). Even bad ideas usually have a litttle something that can be spun into something cool.
No ideas is just laziness on the part of the design team. I see more and more 4e players asking questions about towns and locales detailed in earlier editions, because there is NO info on them in 4e.
Make it up... that's what you bought into.
In my opinion, having to ignore or rewrite lore is objectively a hassle. To a hardcore fan, this hassle is trivial, as love for the setting outweighs the trouble. To a prospective fan or a non fan, this hassle is a hassle.
I guess I must be some sort of freak of nature, because I, too, hated the ToT, and was still able to ignore it.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people were turned off to FR by the horrid novels.
Was it so hard to just enjoy the game-world and ignore everything else? Was someone at your home forcing you to use material you didn't like?
Simply put the weight of lore in the setting produced the problem of rules lawyer players questioning everything I would do to the setting, and every tweak that ignored some obscure lore. This happened more than once to me, and honestly the last thing I want at a table is hostility. Admittedly this generally occurred to me when I was much younger, and perhaps some of the players I was dealing with were less than mature, regardless it left a sour taste in my mouth.
I'm just not getting this attitude of "Now I can finally enjoy FR!"
Why is it amazing? Now I don't have to deal with someone obsessed with the Forgotten Realms arguing with me at my table.
The same people who are tauting the new world's lack of lore because it allows them to unfetter their creativity, found it impossible to do so before?
No. Quite simply doing so was a hanging offense to some of the people I had the misfortune of dealing with in the past.
Whats the difference, seriously, between reading something you don't like and ignoring it, and coming up with your own stuff, and not reading ANY detail about the same thing, and coming up with your own stuff?
Is there a difference? No except for the expectations of others. Just because metagaming is not desirable does not mean it does not occur.
Did the existance of a few words on paper become some sort of physical barrier in the RW to your own imagination?
No. Gaming does not occur either in a perfect world, or with perfect players, without non game related issues affecting the game. What's confusing about not wanting to deal with problem players, or when in a situation where players are scarce knowing that if you avoid something you won't have a problem. It is simply situational awareness.
This attitude that the world is somehow better because there is less of it is just so WEIRD to me. I'd personally rather have bad lore (that I can spin any way I want), then no lore what-so-ever (giving me nothing to work with). Even bad ideas usually have a litttle something that can be spun into something cool.
Don't get me wrong by and large I liked the lore, I just did not like dealing with some of the whack jobs I dealt with because of it.
No ideas is just laziness on the part of the design team. I see more and more 4e players asking questions about towns and locales detailed in earlier editions, because there is NO info on them in 4e.
Make it up... that's what you bought into.
No. Actually it is called the first sound business plan I have seen WOTC make as regards the D&D property, and the future of the hobby. The entire purpose of the setting books is to get you to buy DDI period. Also is it so difficult to convert old modules, general town descriptions etc. from previous product? Is there some sort of real life wall preventing its use?
I enjoyed all enditions but the last one. Just seems to lack flavor - everything is more or less a cookie cutter :/
As for FR - I also dont understand how folks can say NOW they can enjoy it. What was stopping them before?
I think a serious lack of imagination and adaptation. Seems to me that what folks see in writting they take as "unalterable"
There is a well known rule that alot of you newer folks may not be aware of. It's called Rule 0.
Simply put, if yo dont like it - dont use it or change it so you do.
I dont like most of 4.0 but what I do like I keep and use - my 3.75 game is working just fine thank you very much
I read through the new FR stuff before buying. I would by the new map - but not the book. Sell the map seperatly please
Our group tryed 4.0 in the low level game and mid level and didint get past that. Only one was what you would call a "4.0 Avenger" and even he had to roll his eyes at the mid level game with how cumbersome all the upkeep and abilities can get.
I love the melee abilities, but hated what they did to casters. Everyone now might as well pick from the same powers list - no real variety. BUt I digress.
For those who dont like what you purchased, I suggest that you look again. Take what you like, leave the rest. Its YOUR game. This material is a suggestion that you simply paid for. Thats all.
They are more than welcome to sit alone at home with 'the way they like it' or they can curb their disruptive tendencies and enjoy the game. I'd hazard to say there are very few games that do not deviate from lore/rules in some way.
As for lore being a hassle, there have been more and more threads on the forums of players and DM's asking for clairification and additional information on areas that, in previous editions, was supplied. The burden of supplying that knowledge to new players, DM's and returning players,DM's falls upon the fanbase/player base here. Both the FRCG and FRPG could have contained a bit more fleshing out of areas and have better accomplished breathing a bit of life into some of the regions. Perhaps this task will be accomplished by future DDi articles perhaps not. I am interested in seeing if the cry of I can't run the Realms now because of too many DDi articles of lore sets in or not and by the same token if there is even more dissent that will arise.
I think a serious lack of imagination and adaptation.
There is a well known rule that alot of you newer folks may not be aware of. It's called Rule 0.
This goes both ways. The setting is different now and people must adapt. Whether that means dropping the setting, staying with the Pre-Plauge Realms or adapting the new Realms to suit their needs, they need to adapt.
I was able to ignore what I did not like but when I first DMd I found it hard to do so. I cannot explain a logical reason for it. I liked the setting and the game enough to change though.
Perhaps the Realmslore and NPCs were the biggest sore spot among many non-FR fans and the designers found out about it and wanted to do something about it.
I've never understood the issue with rules lawyer style players. Once they rear their heads and establish they are going to be problematic and disruptive of the fun and enjoyment of the other players and the campaign they are quite simply shown the door.
They are more than welcome to sit alone at home with 'the way they like it' or they can curb their disruptive tendencies and enjoy the game. I'd hazard to say there are very few games that do not deviate from lore/rules in some way.
In a player rich environment sure no problem, but when you are not living in or near a major urban center, or are stuck on a ship for six months out of the year, your pool becomes much more limited. Things you are unwilling to deal with under normal conditions suddenly become more palatable.
One would hope that the 'rules lawyers' would also be in the same boat as others and be willing to 'shut it!' just for the chance to engage in an activity they enjoy. Currently I'm running a game with only two players with a third to be added soon. I dislike game store environments so it is challenging to find players that aren't 'touched' in some sort of way. We all recently left a year long plus game due to finally having enough of a rules lawyer type of mentality at the game table.
Not playing with those sorts gives me a chance to catch up on my reading and enduring 'barrens chat'. Not sure which is worse, rules lawyers or in game chat of a video game. I guess at least in the video realm I can turn on certain filters.
Definitely understandable, I've actually had several years worth of non gaming gaps as I'd rather not deal with particular styles of players and end up frustrated after what should have been a good time.
One would hope that the 'rules lawyers' would also be in the same boat as others and be willing to 'shut it!' just for the chance to engage in an activity they enjoy. Currently I'm running a game with only two players with a third to be added soon. I dislike game store environments so it is challenging to find players that aren't 'touched' in some sort of way. We all recently left a year long plus game due to finally having enough of a rules lawyer type of mentality at the game table.
Not playing with those sorts gives me a chance to catch up on my reading and enduring 'barrens chat'. Not sure which is worse, rules lawyers or in game chat of a video game. I guess at least in the video realm I can turn on certain filters.
I was looking at no gaming for six years or dealing with the occasional idiot. Dealing with the occasional idiot worked out in the long term because I did manage to either guide them away from the annoying tendencies, or convince them that they were not really compatible with the rest of the group. Unfortunately most of my FR related issues stemmed from my attempts in college (another restricted setting, fool that I was going to school outside the city (NYC)) to get groups together.
As far as video game chat I don't mind it much, my players now are friends I have had since my Marine Corps days (yes they moved here because they missed gaming so much ;) ), and naturally we don't get to hang out enough outside of gaming so conversation inevitably meanders.
I was looking at no gaming for six years or dealing with the occasional idiot. Dealing with the occasional idiot worked out in the long term because I did manage to either guide them away from the annoying tendencies, or convince them that they were not really compatible with the rest of the group. Unfortunately most of my FR related issues stemmed from my attempts in college (another restricted setting, fool that I was going to school outside the city (NYC)) to get groups together.
As far as video game chat I don't mind it much, my players now are friends I have had since my Marine Corps days (yes they moved here because they missed gaming so much ;) ), and naturally we don't get to hang out enough outside of gaming so conversation inevitably meanders.
In addition to the pain of dealing with rules lawyers and "that's not the way it happens in the novels" people, having experienced those people can color your general gaming lifestyle. I've met the novels freaks, and I've gamed with them. The problems they caused now bother me on general principle, regardless if I am dealing with them in the game I am currently involved with or not.
4e's version is a little better but I feel it is missing a lot of stuff still - stuff I am sure will later be filled with even more books to buy. However, I was disappointed in the Campaign Guide and returned it for a refund. And I haven't bothered to buy the Player's guide.
Oh, and here's the conversation with my LFGS about the return:
"Okey, we'll give you credit for it, but we'll need to charge a restocking fee."
"Restocking fee? The display of them is just 7 feet away. I'll restock it myself."
"Let me be a little more precise then. We'll need to charge you a 'I bought it, read it and decided to return it fee.'"
"Oh, well that I can understand."
From what both are you are saying, I gather it doesn't come down to a problem with the way the setting was, but rather the way in which many of the 'die-hard' (rabid?) fans approached an FR game. Its a shame that the very same people who latched onto FR so fiercely are the ones who ultimately caused its demise.
Irony indeed.
I was blessed with players who know nothing about FR except what I tell them, so I was able to change stuff in a huge way without any complaints. I have encountered those kinds of people who say things like "you can't do that", or "it wouldn't happen that way" - I tend to avoid them (usually at the LGS).
I don't have a problem with 4e's new presentation - I understand it's approach. In a way, I am embracing it myself, and I have created a lot of lore to fill in the holes...
even though I have no intention of using it. :P
Weird that... I have lost my 'emotional attachment' to FR completely (so no novel reading anymore), but I still like to 'tinker' with the setting itself (its the 30+ years of DM in me). I have always spun my game-version of the Realms differently then the canon one, so for me, my love of the canon Realms was a different animal then my gaming. I guess I was just lucky enough to be able to mentally do that - argue about 'canon facts' here on the boards, and yet do whatever the hell I wanted at home. They were alway seperate worlds to me, and if everyone had approached the two FR's that way, we probably wouldn't have had to have such a major shake-up.
I'm glad we are able to discuss this in a civilized manner. I try not to let my love of the old Realms cloud my participation in 4e Realms discussions, but it is very hard sometimes.
I have made the comparison to human relationships before - when you get someone new, you can't help but compare them to the old. Time tends to mentally wash-away all the problems with the old one, and at the same time make all the foibles of the new stand out so much more. In a way, its because of how great the Realms are that made so many of us form an emotional attachment.
I'm just not getting this attitude of "Now I can finally enjoy FR!"
Why is it amazing?
For me mostly because when I see that line what Im seeing is "I didnt like the setting before and there were plenty of others I could choose from, but Im glad they ruined something you enjoyed for you, so that I could have it."
For me mostly because when I see that line what Im seeing is "I didnt like the setting before and there were plenty of others I could choose from, but Im glad they ruined something you enjoyed for you, so that I could have it."
Oh. My. God.
I am *very* glad that opinions like this are in the extreme minority in this forum.
By the same token, I find the United States insistence that our culture is the 'correct' one disgusting. Take dav's post and pretend it's George Bush talking to say, Saddam Hussein, and it still works. :P
Oh. My. God.
I am *very* glad that opinions like this are in the extreme minority in this forum.
How many posts in this very thread are of the "I didnt like it before but I do now so dont let the door hit you on the way out" nature? Thats how I interpret those comments because as far as I can tell thats what theyre trying to say.
IIRC, the 4E book suggests purchasing the Grand History of The Realms for those who want a more comprehensive timeline of events.
Also, why would you need 3.5 stats to use ideas taken from the core 4E books?
...it's weird being on this side of the fence...I usually have a reason to defend the reasons that I like 3rd (not saying that I dislike 4E; I play 4E, but I do honestly miss a lot of things which 3rd had to offer.)
I was just comparing my old grey box set to the FRCG and FRPG, and frankly the FRCG and FRPG have more information than the grey box set. 4eFR is not the old FR, it is new at least judge it fairly. Taken as the starting point for new lore it is actually quite good. Taken as a continuation of the old FR it clearly falls on its face, because well that was not the designers intent. Regardless for me nothing in the new invalidates the old, all it does is reset to zero. New tales, new lore without the direct burden of the old. All in all a move that will hopefully help open up the FR to more casual fans.
For me mostly because when I see that line what Im seeing is "I didnt like the setting before and there were plenty of others I could choose from, but Im glad they ruined something you enjoyed for you, so that I could have it."
That is a really negative attitude to have. Regardless of what you feel about what was done, this is how it is now and this will be the future. This sort of negativity poisons the atmosphere and poisons the future of the Realms. If disgruntled old-time fans chase away all the new players who like the current edition, there might as well not be a Forgotten Realms anymore.
That is a really negative attitude to have. Regardless of what you feel about what was done, this is how it is now and this will be the future. This sort of negativity poisons the atmosphere and poisons the future of the Realms. If disgruntled old-time fans chase away all the new players who like the current edition, there might as well not be a Forgotten Realms anymore.
Who's to say YOU'RE not being negative here about the love many of us have for the realms that the new material throws in the garbage? There is no easy answer here, barring Wizards selling FR back to Ed Greenwood or something equally unlikely. The dislike many of us have for the 4E realms is valid and we have the right to post about it on these boards.
If disgruntled old-time fans chase away all the new players who like the current edition, there might as well not be a Forgotten Realms anymore.
The point being - and I'm not saying I agree with it - is "why should we care?"
If the new fans don't care that the old fans got ousted, then why should the old fans care weather or not a setting they do not like falls on it's face?
It was okay for the new fans to have the old Realms "just go away", but its not okay for old fans to want the new one to do the same?
I'm not agreeing with that logic - merely pointing out how the argument can be turned on it's head.
Personally, the only 'winner' I see coming form these silly 'edition wars' is Paizo.
Who's to say YOU'RE not being negative here about the love many of us have for the realms that the new material throws in the garbage? There is no easy answer here, barring Wizards selling FR back to Ed Greenwood or something equally unlikely. The dislike many of us have for the 4E realms is valid and we have the right to post about it on these boards.
I'm not saying you don't have the right to be angry, or say so. I'm just saying that it certainly is not necessary to take it out on those of us who like what they've done. You're issue is with the Forgotten Realms and its designers, not us. I don't see any necessity in treating positive opinions of the 4E Realms or liking the new edition after not liking the old as some sort of insult, threat, or fallacy that needs to be disproven.
The point being - and I'm not saying I agree with it - is "why should we care?"
If the new fans don't care that the old fans got ousted, then why should the old fans care weather or not a setting they do not like falls on it's face?
It was okay for the new fans to have the old Realms "just go away", but its not okay for old fans to want the new one to do the same?
I'm not agreeing with that logic - merely pointing out how the argument can be turned on it's head.
Personally, the only 'winner' I see coming form these silly 'edition wars' is Paizo.
You are inserting a strawman into this, that somehow we are at fault for this. we didn't change FR. WotC did.
Its not about caring or logic, its about reality. I'm just reacting to the reality life has presented me. FR was changed, and I like it now where I didn't before. That simple statement has nothing to do with you or other existing FR fans.
They really need to add the /beating a dead horse emotive to the forums. Alas for now I have to settle for :coolcthul
When they start thinking about 5e (which is only a little over a year off, if they keep on-schedule - it took three years to create 4e), what happens if they decide they made a mistake?
Thats highly unlikely - more probably they will have decided they like creating 'less lore' for the setting - so much so, that they decide to re-package 1e and call it 'Classic Realms'. The fact that the original Grey box has little in the way of crunch makes it a perfect candidate to have 5e rules attached to it.
So they re-launch the original setting... and stop creating any lore for the new settng. By this time many of the 'Grognards' will have moved on, but some will be enticed back by this (a brilliant marketing strategy - flip-flopping the fanbase every five years or so). Add to that all the newbs that start getting interested in P&P RPGs (and not just kids, BTW), and you have a product that has a good chance of doing quite well, with very little in the way of investment for the parent company.
Now all of us 'Old-school' fans are happy that they ditched the setting that didn't work for us... even though it made many of you happy as hell.
Now how do you feel?
Do you think that can't happen? That as long as you faithfully keep buying their products they (WotC) will stand by you?
If you do, I have some swampland to sell ya'. ;)
Once again, I'm not saying either side is right or wrong, since that isn't really possible when emotions and opinions are involved. I'm just trying to give an example of how we feel right now.
Its like finding out the most popular kid in school threw a big party, and you were the only kid in your class not invited.
Do I see WOTC going back, with 5th edition or future incarnations of FR? Not if DDI takes off. If DDI and the concept of subscription payments works for WOTC as regards D&D you will not see this happen because drastic changes would cost them more than any prior edition change has just in the infrastructure changes. When people suggest that 4e will last a short period of time, or that it will follow 3.x lifespan, I laugh to myself and say "Only if DDI does not make them enough money."
The beauty of their new business plan is that it provides for sustainable income. Will they still print books? Yes. Will the books be the primary means of income? No. D&D has diversified with miniatures, and in the near future with a constant stream of online content, and gaming related services. In the long term this will go a long way to insuring the health of the hobby. Many people forget that the designers love the game too, and way too often suggest a level of capricious behavior which is counter to good business sense. In short WOTC will do what it deems profitable, and for once from what I can discern they have a real plan to grow the game, and their business. There are plenty of other classic settings that are going to receive the revisionists touch to bring them in line with the new business plan, and ultimately that is what drove their changes in the setting.
Will they still print books? Yes. Will the books be the primary means of income? No.
Your basis is hinged upon the fact that DDI will take off. I personally don't see people paying $15/mo for the service as is. All of that material is available through other means electronically. Only the printed items will bring the monies because currently it is a bit of a hassle/eyesore to read every book via a computer. By overhauling the system and keeping it generic, simple and having little detail of other things, it has guaranteed a continued market to purchase all the splat books that will follow as people grasp for more diversity and individuality for their character builds.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that some people will invest in it - at least for a little while but I do not see the sales of DDI + minatures overshadowing that of the books. With DDI, you don't need minatures as you can build your exact character to play in the Gaming Table whereas if you don't have DDI, you'll need the mini's - it splits the market there.
Oh, and WotC has an automatic out if they decide to rehaul the system again. "The players were unhappy with the change from 3.5 to 4 so we combined the two to make version 5."
Its like finding out the most popular kid in school threw a big party, and you were the only kid in your class not invited.
It seems to me that kid was invited, he just chose not to go because he didn't like what was going on at the party. ;)
From what both are you are saying, I gather it doesn't come down to a problem with the way the setting was, but rather the way in which many of the 'die-hard' (rabid?)
Yes and no.
In my experience, rules lawyers aren't always the same thing as die-hard fans.
They treat whatever lore from sourcebooks and novels they take in like they do the game rules and insist everything be down to the letter, on both fronts.
It's a gaming style that can be curbed, but it causes confrontation, especially when (as someone mentioned) you have a limited pool of people.
The sum of the setting lore aggravates the situation. Sort of an indirect addition to the problem.
Your basis is hinged upon the fact that DDI will take off.
I think I qualified my comment appropriately. :P
Do I see WOTC going back, with 5th edition or future incarnations of FR? Not if DDI takes off.
As many have stated elsewhere only time will tell.
So they changed the only thing they did have direct control over. The lore.
Obvious, logical and about as useful as a chocolate teapot to someone who doesn't like the changes...
One could also argue that the setting was "too big" for its own sake.
This sort of negativity poisons the atmosphere and poisons the future of the Realms.
You're sounding like a broken record. Seriously, you keep repeating this over and over again.
You've made your point already.
Honestly I can't really imagine how some of the fans feel about the changes because I have never been so attached to a setting, or a system for any of this to cause true emotional distress.
"True emotional distress?" Come on, that is ridiculous. Are you really going to make a point by misrepresenting people like that?
I've lost people in my life. One of my close relatives died only a few days ago, and today I went to his funeral. Do not dare equate my opinions about a fictional setting to "true emotional distress".
- Accept that WotC has changed the FR;
- Allow people who like the 4E FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the new realms suck" in their conversations;
- Allow people who like the old FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the old realms suck" in their conversations; and
- Realize that other people liking a different version of the FR has no effect on your liking of a version of the FR.
This doesn't apply to all of the posters, only a small number who are doing a decent job of making it difficult for others to enjoy discussing the realms.
I wonder if it ever really occurred to people to
- Accept that WotC has changed the FR;
- Allow people who like the 4E FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the new realms suck" in their conversations;
- Allow people who like the old FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the old realms suck" in their conversations; and
- Realize that other people liking a different version of the FR has no effect on your liking of a version of the FR.
It's occured to some people, yes.
Can't speak for everyone though.
It's occured to some people, yes.
Can't speak for everyone though.
I realize my previous post may be painting with a fairly broad brush that isn't warranted for all members.
I apologize for painting so broad and will edit my post to make that clear.
That's just one bit of it though, Iluvrien.
One could also argue that the setting was "too big" for its own sake.
On what basis?
It is an interesting idea but on consideration it seems to be just that, an interesting idea. Almost impossible to actually apply.
Let's try it...
For a setting to be "too big" for its own sake that suggests other states, for example there must be a zero point a point where it is effectively "too small to be run". And whatever relation there is between the two there has to be a relation. Somewhere on that surface (assuming multiple dimensions of variabilty) is the fabled "just right" of Ursine Lore.
The problem with applying the concept is that finding the "just right" of even one person, let alone one gaming group let alone "the hobby" is an undertaking that doesn't make sense. There are too many variables. One person's "just right" can change on an hourly/daily/weekly basis. Ten people's? One hundred?
The logic of this suggests to me that if you aim for this point you will always miss and success will be measured by how "near" a miss it is for the largest proportion of the intended population.
This suggests two primary possibilities to me. One, the extensive Market Research approach is based around trying to sum up the qualities that those in the hobby are most interested in, or the second which is just build it as big as you can in an effort to have something somewhere appeal to each kind of person.
My problem with the first possibility is the fact that the limitations imposed by who you are surveying pose too many statistical questions for me to be able to have it sit comfortably in my mind. Of course, as I am sure you will point out, the problem with the second approach is that by aiming at everybody you might get nobody.
Personally I prefer the second, WotC seems to prefer the first. Different strokes.
I realize my previous post may be painting with a fairly broad brush that isn't warranted for all members.
I apologize for painting so broad and will edit my post to make that clear.
Heh, good idea. Thanks.
"True emotional distress?" Come on, that is ridiculous. Are you really going to make a point by misrepresenting people like that?
I've lost people in my life. One of my close relatives died only a few days ago, and today I went to his funeral. Do not dare equate my opinions about a fictional setting to "true emotional distress".
It's not ridiculous.
I too have lost people in my life; 2 weeks ago I lost my father in fact.
Guess what?
From some of the responses on the forum over the changes to the Realms, if you didnt know better, you'd think that people HAD lost someone close (as opposed to a fictional setting).
"True emotional distress?" Come on, that is ridiculous. Are you really going to make a point by misrepresenting people like that?
I've lost people in my life. One of my close relatives died only a few days ago, and today I went to his funeral. Do not dare equate my opinions about a fictional setting to "true emotional distress".
And I have lost people too in my life. The sad and sorry statement I have to make is that some people on these boards equate the change from 3e to 4e with real loss. Do not **** on me for calling attention to something that is pretty obviously true, based on their behavior. So in simple language if the shoe fits wear it. I never called anything you said into question, but if you want to do so, feel free to do so.
I think your big brain is getting in the way. ;)
Do you know the story (not sure if it’s an urban myth or not) of the engineers who were trying to get a truck trailer unstuck from under a bridge that it had been driven into by a driver not paying careful attention to the maximum height of the bridge vs. his trailer’s max. height?
The engineers fretted for quite some time over the problem, until a little kid came along and asked them why they didn’t just let the air out of the truck tires.
Likewise, we can analyze to death the zero point and extrapolations from there of what the median “just right” is for you me and everyone else (something vaguely similar to that was done almost a decade ago by WotC prior to the release of 3E) in order to maybe find that mythical perfect balance point for all users of the setting.
Or we can simply stack every single FR boxed set, sourcebook, novel, Dragon and Dungeon magazine article, comic book, computer game box, video game and FR Interactive Atlas CD one atop the other and realize that hey, this nearly floor to ceiling pile is rather precarious and formidable....so maybe we should just start over.
I don't believe such massed lore, even in portions, is all that appealing to the average kid gamer.
Sure, the fun is definitely there to be had in all that media and kids these days are just as stoked as I was when I was there age to have that fun, but it’s just not all that obvious where the heck the fun is at in the giant stack.
But as you rightly say, different strokes. Maybe I could be wrong.
I too have lost people in my life; 2 weeks ago I lost my father in fact.
I'm sorry to hear that. I've lost mine too (though not recently).
From some of the responses on the forum over the changes to the Realms, if you didnt know better, you'd think that people HAD lost someone close (as opposed to a fictional setting).
I don't take back anything I said. If people are overreacting, talk to them specifically about "true emotional distress". I don't appreciate it when people who prefer the old Realms are spoken to (or about) as if we are all emotional fragile.
And I have lost people too in my life. The sad and sorry statement I have to make is that some people on these boards equate the change from 3e to 4e with real loss. Do not **** on me for calling attention to something that is pretty obviously true, based on their behavior. So in simple language if the shoe fits wear it. I never called anything you said into question, but if you want to do so, feel free to do so.
Please see my previous post. The statement from you that I quoted was pretty condescending, and that is why I called you out on it.
I didn't have a problem with anything else you said.
moving on
well, I can't say that I like 4E FR but I will take what I like and throw out the rest, just like I have with ever other product. that said I fond the FRCG is dull and flat (Ed's stuff not withstanding) and the FRPG seemed well light for lack of a better word on the FR specific fluff/crunch. I am amazed how ever that they where allowed to make such massive changes to such a valuable peace of Intellectual Property
They were allowed to do such because they own the property.
Whether or not it was a good idea is the cause of controversy.
Please see my previous post. The statement from you that I quoted was pretty condescending, and that is why I called you out on it.
I didn't have a problem with anything else you said.
The statement you are referring to stated "how SOME of the fans feel" so I certainly was not suggesting every old FR fan is a delicate flower. For the rest of it to be patronizing it would require some degree of intent on my part, whereas it was a simple statement of fact for me. I really don't understand their feelings, (i.e. degree of intensity over a fictional character, setting etc.) and have no real frame of reference to compare it to. To say I feel sympathy or empathy for their situation is all I can do, because to say I truly understand would be a lie.
The statement you are referring to stated "how SOME of the fans feel" so I certainly was not suggesting every old FR fan is a delicate flower.
All right, perhaps I jumped the gun here. I'm sorry.
I wonder if it ever really occurred to people to
- Accept that WotC has changed the FR;
- Allow people who like the 4E FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the new realms suck" in their conversations;
- Allow people who like the old FR to discuss it without inserting various versions of "the old realms suck" in their conversations; and
- Realize that other people liking a different version of the FR has no effect on your liking of a version of the FR.
This doesn't apply to all of the posters, only a small number who are doing a decent job of making it difficult for others to enjoy discussing the realms.
The same could be asked when there was only the Old Realms. Lots of people interjected random hate on the setting. The Old Realms endured it for 20 years. It's interesting that some think that things would change for the 4E Realms.
The same could be asked when there was only the Old Realms. Lots of people interjected random hate on the setting. The Old Realms endured it for 20 years. It's interesting that some think that things would change for the 4E Realms.
So two wrongs make a right? The fact that a few trolls bothered you in the past justifies jumping all over people who like the new edition? It bears saying that while before it was a bunch of trolls coming in here spewing this hate, now its the FR fans themselves.
So two wrongs make a right? The fact that a few trolls bothered you in the past justifies jumping all over people who like the new edition? It bears saying that while before it was a bunch of trolls coming in here spewing this hate, now its the FR fans themselves.
Never said it was right. It's just how things are. The Old Realms dealt with it for years, so obviously things still happened then despite the negative attitudes.
Or we can simply stack every single FR boxed set, sourcebook, novel, Dragon and Dungeon magazine article, comic book, computer game box, video game and FR Interactive Atlas CD one atop the other and realize that hey, this nearly floor to ceiling pile is rather precarious and formidable....so maybe we should just start over.
I don't believe such massed lore, even in portions, is all that appealing to the average kid gamer.
It's also daunting to long time D&D players as well. I don't have EVERY book. Heck, the reason I got most (not all) of the 3e FR game books was to have crunch/lore to build Neverwinter Nights scenerios. (Plus I used my 2e and 1e books for the lore.)
I could come to the FR boards today and always find something new (Or at least something I didn't know about) since I didn't track every detail, story or change.
It's also part of the reason (I'm guessing) for 4e in the first place. A new person starts on the boards with "what books do I get?" Within FR alone, there's such a huge library, where does one start?
While all that information on the Realms may be daunting to a new player, old players can continue playing in the "old Realms" with all the material they already have, either using 3e or 4e.
The other thing that I see as an issue is just how many times do you want to buy the same information? I mean, if you've already got a book on Waterdeep for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd edition, do you need one for 4e? While it would be invaluable to new players, I shake my head when I see old players wanting a new book with the same information. The same goes for adventures. Just how many times do we have to visit the Keep on the Boarderlands or the Tomb of Horrors?
That's what can be exciting about the new. The fact that it IS new. The Realms are always changing. It's part of the world's existence.
One major issue, I think, is this so called "cannon". Why does everything have to be "cannon"? Ed Greenwood and/or R.A. Salvatore most likely will not be coming to your house to your game, so it doesn't matter if you're not playing what's in the books. And while it would be nice to see your adventures in print, I doubt that you'll see "your" FR book unless you write it, or WotC buys it.
Your games are not cannon. It does not matter what is or what is not cannon. Every FR game is different. It's a huge world, and that's the way it should be. (Of course, there's the RPGA shared world, but that's something different.)
;)
The same could be asked when there was only the Old Realms. Lots of people interjected random hate on the setting. The Old Realms endured it for 20 years. It's interesting that some think that things would change for the 4E Realms.
It was wrong then, and it shouldn't have been allowed to happen. However, just because it happened to the old Realms doesn't then mean that it is right for the new Realms. 4E provides the opportunity to allow a whole host of players who, for whatever reason, were turned off to the old Realms or never experienced them, and gives them a chance to be part of the Realms. Every new player who plays in the Forgotten Realms, be it new Realms or old Realms, is another thread in the tapestry that is the history of the realms.
Embrace these people. Show them the beauty of the realms, both old and new. Don't jump on them and make it difficult/uncomfortable for them to discuss what they like. Find out why they like it. Encourage them to create and interact with people. Have discussions with them. After they get into the new realms, allow them to show you what they love about the new realms. At the same time, show them what you love about the old realms.
edit to add - Not implying that you are doing so. The last paragraph is meant to apply to the broader realms fans, not intended to point e-fingers at anyone
It was wrong then, and it shouldn't have been allowed to happen. However, just because it happened to the old Realms doesn't then mean that it is right for the new Realms.
Doesn't change that it did, setting a bad precedent. It's gotten easy and popular to bash the Realms for whatever reason (for many reasons across the spectrum). I'm not sure what about the 4E Realms exempts it from this.
4E provides the opportunity to allow a whole host of players who, for whatever reason, were turned off to the old Realms or never experienced them, and gives them a chance to be part of the Realms. Every new player who plays in the Forgotten Realms, be it new Realms or old Realms, is another thread in the tapestry that is the history of the realms.
Embrace these people. Show them the beauty of the realms, both old and new. Don't jump on them and make it difficult/uncomfortable for them to discuss what they like. Find out why they like it. Encourage them to create and interact with people. Have discussions with them. After they get into the new realms, allow them to show you what they love about the new realms. At the same time, show them what you love about the old realms.
Problem is that many who like the New Realms now didn't like it for the very reasons they changed it, the very reasons some liked the Old Realms. It is hard to reconcile the two groups of fans. It's not so much that they like different aspects of the Realms, it is because each group dislikes what the other likes.
It also doesn't help that the designers themselves bashed the Old Realms before the transition. It has become harder to convince people that the Old Realms were a worthwhile place to game. A lot of times any attempt to bring up the old Realms leads to people just dismissing it as a weaker setting than the current incarnations. That is difficult to defend against because their justification includes statements by the designers. There is now a lot more resistence for the Old Realms to overcome. The changes for 4E and the designer's statements just galvanized the view of the Old Realms being inferior.
Between the 4E changes, dropping support for the Old Realms, the new fans (sometimes incompatible with the old Realms), and the bashing by the designers against the old setting, the Old Realms is at a disadvantage. Unless one can find or already belongs to a like minded group, it will be more difficult to actually play in the Old Realms. Because of how the transition happened, it will be hard for some to cross over, for both sides. Honestly, I think a good number of 4E fans are just as averse to the Old Realms as vice versa. I lot of people who like the New Realms just can't stand the Old Realms, they too have made their opinion vividly apparent.
So I don't think things can be as ideal as you layout, unfortunately. The two settings do not start on even footing. As of now, the New Realms has an advantage over the Old Realms in terms of official support. The mentality that WotC seems to portray is not one of mutual cooperation and coexistence but one of new presiding over or overriding the old because the old is viewed as flawed in many ways.