I'm also confused about something. I have read here that WotC is not planning on any FR4 resource publications other than the main FR guides. Is that true? How is that possible if they've changed so much in the Realms?
Thanks.
.
-All in all, it's what you want to make of it. If you still want to use those specific NPCs, or businesses, or whatever, then go ahead. Everything has a story.
-A Grand History of the Realms, a chronology of the setting, is 100% useful (in any era you play in), and should be on your list of things to get.
-It is true that there will only be three published books, as of right now. There's the Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, the Player's Guide, and an adventure, that has to do with Spellguard. After those, all of the support for the setting (along with all other WotC settings) will be DDI material. Of course, it's not like the business plan has not ever changed before, so all of this is what's going on, for right now. It's possibly subject to change.
Not all of your pre-4E Realms books are invalidated.
The actual game mechanics rules in those books won’t be that useful. Nor will information on areas of the Realms that have been changed completely in 4th Edition.
But the books you have with information about Cormyr and Waterdeep should still be of use. Books covering other areas will depend ultimately on what we learn has or hasn’t changed once the 4E Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide is released next month.
As to future FR sourcebooks: Look to the WotC D&D website for the online versions of Dragon and Dungeon Magazine. These are the places where we'll get future setting information.
In fact, we're due to see (for free) an article on Cormyr this month in the new Dragon. Should be worth reading!
As to future FR sourcebooks: Look to the WotC D&D website for the online versions of Dragon and Dungeon Magazine. These are the places where we'll get future setting information.
I still hate this.
WoTC is trying to force you to buy Dragon and Dungeon.
Maybe your best bet is to stay in the 3.5 era
As to future FR sourcebooks: Look to the WotC D&D website for the online versions of Dragon and Dungeon Magazine. These are the places where we'll get future setting information.
In fact, we're due to see (for free) an article on Cormyr this month in the new Dragon. Should be worth reading!
Well, it's got to be better than the Zhent Headless Horseman, right?
As for expecting any kind of significant outpouring of Realms information through DDI: Rich Baker just mentioned in the "Ask the Realms Designers" thread that he's "hoping" that we'll see 1 or 2 FR articles a month in DDI. Given that he also mentioned that the original plan was for an arc of 10 FR preview posts, and we haven't gotten close to that, I'd take even his hope with a grain of salt.
-Well, since the online DRAGON and DUNGEON and DDI and whatever else all that stuff is is supposed to be a monthly thing, I'm sure there will be a regular Forgotten Realms article. The published format of DRAGON, I know, had a regular Forgotten Realms article that was present basically every single month.
I confess I'm not terribly comfortable with that assumption. Dragon #365 has the Cormyr article, which (no offense intended toward Brian James) I'm assuming is essentially a preview from the FRCG. #364 & #363 had no Realms-specific features. #362 had the Grand History of the Moonshaes and 3 preview features. And then, again, nothing in #361 or #360.
And I must have missed it, but the Zhent Headless Horseman was in there somewhere, too.
My point: That's not a lot of FR content that we've been getting in the "preview" or "beta" release of online Dragon. While I have seen many promises that online content will grow and get better, I've seen no evidence to believe that to be true, so far. Maybe I'll be proved wrong, but most companies try to entice subscriptions with the good stuff first.
To bring this back to the topic: Regardless of how much or little Realms-specific content DDI provides, a considerable portion of the older Realms products will remain viable. If you haven't already, download some of the free PDFs WOTC has provided on their site from Second Edition. A lot of that flavor can be imported into any Realms game, regardless of the time. A book like Lost Empires of Faerun can still provide tons of adventure hooks and ideas after the Smellplague, etc.
Our group is about to start D&D4. We'd like to take up residence in FR4. I understand that there are significant changes to FR. But, does that invalidate all the pre-FR4 resource books? Can I still use them? Are they worth buying? Or, is there no point now because the pre-FR4 resource material will contradict FR4 in many ways?
Most of it will still be useful, except in the places where they've utterly obliterated an area - the Maztica stuff might be worth skipping! On the other hand, and especially if you haven't played in the old realms, you'll be able to use the settings and just scribble out the changed bits, ignoring the fact that in the canon that innkeeper would be 200 years old. Mechanics won't be all that useful, but I've always felt that the mechanical parts were the least useful parts of the published FR stuff anyway.
Personally, I'm planning to use stuff all the way from 1e, and I just bought some of the 3e books as PDFs last night. Trying to keep up with canon is a full-time job and not necessarily conducive to maintaining your sanity ...
Stuff that focuses on the nitty-gritty, like the Volo's Guides, will be near-useless.
Why would Volo's guides be useless?
-Near useless is being a bit extreme, but, their utility is lessened for the exact thing you brought up: In the span of 100+/- years, numerous people/places/things mentioned would not exist anymore.
-Near useless is being a bit extreme, but, their utility is lessened for the exact thing you brought up: In the span of 100+/- years, numerous people/places/things mentioned would not exist anymore.
Well, they might not officially exist anymore, per se, but then, if there's no canon lore to contradict it, there's no reason a DM can't yank substantial parts out of the Volo's Guides verbatim.
I mean, who's to say that the Gentle Mermaid (from VGtWaterdeep) has changed at all? Obviously, if you've already run the PCs' proverbial great-grandfathers through it, it could be awkward, but for a group that's just starting playing with the Realms? I don't see the problem with reusing perfectly good lore just because WoTC decided to bump the storyline.
It may not be canon, but then, I think a number of us are giving up on following the canon Realms anyway.
Edit: Sorry Colman, should have refreshed the page before posting almost exactly the same thing that you did.
If I wanted to run a non-canon game, I could run anything, and I wouldn't need the books to begin with.
Strangely, I would have NO problem using them in another world (like Golarion), but I refuse to use 'dead people' in an FR game.
Well, they might not officially exist anymore, per se, but then, if there's no canon lore to contradict it, there's no reason a DM can't yank substantial parts out of the Volo's Guides verbatim.
-The canon lore, in this case, would be the part where X NPC is Y age, and the FRCS states that those of X NPC's race don't live past Z. When Z equals 10 + Y, X NPC doesn't make it 100 years into the future.
I mean, who's to say that the Gentle Mermaid (from VGtWaterdeep) has changed at all? Obviously, if you've already run the PCs' proverbial great-grandfathers through it, it could be awkward, but for a group that's just starting playing with the Realms? I don't see the problem with reusing perfectly good lore just because WoTC decided to bump the storyline.
-Notice that I said that the utility of the product is lessened, not that it is outright nullified. By having a descendant of X NPC in charge now, the paragraph about X NPC is no longer relevant, and thus, the book is one paragraph less relevant.
It may not be canon, but then, I think a number of us are giving up on following the canon Realms anyway.
-Right, but when we're talking about things here, we need to talk in absolutes, in canon, so we're all on the same page, unless noted elsewhere. In your own game, you do whatever you want, I don't care.
-Right, but when we're talking about things here, we need to talk in absolutes, in canon, so we're all on the same page, unless noted elsewhere. In your own game, you do whatever you want, I don't care.
This last part really hit home (nice).
If I wanted to use lore that was no longer official, why even bother with FR material? Using stuff from Scarred lands, or Golarion, or Eberron would all be just as valid as using a hundred-year outdated sourcebook.
If you are considering FR because it is the first official one to be published, I guess you should go for it. But personally I think the core POL setting is quite a nice place to start and the adventure series on it sounds above average at least.
Also take in mind that FR is being retrofitted into the 4E mentality. Even with the best of designers it will be hard for it to capture the 4E feel. One of the most important things about a setting is for its gaming system to work well with it, and that is far better done at initial design rather than conversion (though Eberron I guess seems to have had a very 4E feel since the beginning).
Stuff that focuses on the nitty-gritty, like the Volo's Guides, will be near-useless.
But this isn't true.
There's no point to discarding good Realmslore simply because you're playing in an era different from the era the lore was written for.
I'm not going to stop using inn names, tavern names, festhall names, street names, NPC names, encounter locations, etc...from the Volo's Guides for the sake of following Canon.
There’s no good reason to.
-Right, but when we're talking about things here, we need to talk in absolutes, in canon, so we're all on the same page, unless noted elsewhere. In your own game, you do whatever you want, I don't care.
Karsus, you may not realize this but people often find this attitude towards people and “their own games” disrespectful, impractical, inflexible and frankly unnecessary.
Most games aren’t on the same page to begin with. People use the lore of the Realms to build their own stories. Games always deviate from what’s written.
In fact, that’s what the sourcebooks are written for, so people can add, subtract and build on the setting information and lore to suit their game’s needs.
What we have in common is the starting point. There’s no good reason to assume conversations should be limited to just that. It’s wasteful.
The “I don’t care” attitude pushes people away and does a disservice to those of us who want to take what’s written and create new things with it to share with others online.
Finally, there is no great danger in people opening up with their own information. So long as we promote the idea that people simply mark their stuff “custom” or whatever, it’s all good.
:
Karsus, you may not realize this but people often find this attitude towards people and “their own games” disrespectful, impractical, inflexible and frankly unnecessary.
Well, I don't see that at all. What he's saying is simply true. Your game is not canon. period. We have to begin here on these boards with canon. If you want to talk about your game. fine. great. love too. But you need to point that out
If you want to talk about your game. fine. great. love too. But you need to point that out
I agree. I think it's a good idea and a measure of politeness to start out by indicating what's being shared is custom material.
But not doing so won't cause a train wreck on the forums, either. It's not a bad thing for someone to take a tidbit of info from a sourcebook, build up some cool idea or story around it, then share it on the forums in hopes that someone else might enjoy it or even use it.
Some people generate stuff from scratch and plunk it down in the Realms. That works too.
Most people can already parse when a conversation is focused on what’s found in the setting lore versus the game rules versus what someone did in their own campaign.
I just think it’s a mistake and a waste of time to emphasize that we ‘must’ begin with canon information.
My apologies to the OP. My response to Karsus should have been in the form of a Private Message.
-Notice that I said that the utility of the product is lessened, not that it is outright nullified. By having a descendant of X NPC in charge now, the paragraph about X NPC is no longer relevant, and thus, the book is one paragraph less relevant.
If my players have never been to Waterdeep, then I don't see any reason why I shouldn't have NPCs from Volo's Guide to Waterdeep and they can even be the same age as they are in Volo's Guide. Canon isn't something you need to slave over, it is something there to enhance your game.
If I wanted to use lore that was no longer official, why even bother with FR material? Using stuff from Scarred lands, or Golarion, or Eberron would all be just as valid as using a hundred-year outdated sourcebook.
If an NPC in Volo's Guide fits the 4e FR realms as well as using Karrnath from Eberron would fit, then I'm not going to use that NPC. However for a lot of NPCs, they'd actually fit a darn sight better.
If you only use official lore, I hope you also only use pre-written adventures. Because any adventure you run that isn't pre-written isn't official lore, and could affect your game in massively unofficial ways. If you wanted to run your unofficial adventures, wouldn't you just make a homebrew world?
I'd also recommend you avoid the regions of Forgotten Realms that have been left blank, so that people could put their own stuff in there. Because anything you put in there is going to be massively unofficial.
-Right, but when we're talking about things here, we need to talk in absolutes, in canon, so we're all on the same page, unless noted elsewhere.
Someone asked "how useful are the Volo's Guides?" and someone responded "less useful because you can't use the NPCs." This is completely untrue and it lessens the quality of discussion to talk in such absolutes.
Right, and any of the arguments in favor of using out-dated lore can also be applied to 3rd party lore, making the fact that it was FR to begin with irrelevant.
You can also homebrew your own areas which also makes it irrelevant that it was FR to begin. Except it doesn't make it irrelevant. Here is a campaign set in Lone Rock City. Its been a terrific Forgotten Realms campaign, despite the fact there is no such thing in official canon as Lone Rock City.
If my players have never been to Waterdeep, then I don't see any reason why I shouldn't have NPCs from Volo's Guide to Waterdeep and they can even be the same age as they are in Volo's Guide. Canon isn't something you need to slave over, it is something there to enhance your game.
-Which doesn't change the points that I brought up. If you don't want to adhere to canon, go right ahead, but the fact that someone doesn't want to adhere to it doesn't invalidate what was said, in regards to the continuity of the setting.
Someone asked "how useful are the Volo's Guides?" and someone responded "less useful because you can't use the NPCs." This is completely untrue and it lessens the quality of discussion to talk in such absolutes.
-By canon, this is completely true. As I said, X NPC is Y age, and the FRCS states that those of X NPC's race don't live past Z. When Z equals 10 + Y, X NPC doesn't make it 100 years into the future. If someone doesn't want to follow that, that's their own prerogative, what they do in their spare time is their own business, but adhering to continuity, the above is what happens.
-By canon, this is completely true.
They didn't ask "If I slave over canon can I use the supplements" they asked "are the supplements useful." By insisting they can't, you're telling them an untruth.
They didn't ask "If I slave over canon can I use the supplements" they asked "are the supplements useful." By insisting they can't, you're telling them an untruth.
-By canon, their serviceability is diminished. I have never suggested that they aren't useful. The change in mechanics also presents additional text within the book that becomes less relevant. Where is the untruth?
-but the fact that someone doesn't want to adhere to it doesn't invalidate what was said, in regards to the continuity of the setting.
Ah, but setting continuity isn't being discussed.
Usefulness is.
As JohnLynch so aptly showed, maintaining setting continuity for the sake of that continuity is not necessary.
What matters is the shared perception of setting continuity for a particular gaming group.
That level of continuity naturally varies and is ultimately what guides a Realms Dungeon Master in his choices of what NPCs, etc...to use in play.
-By canon, this is completely true.
Even then it's not. That's because "canon" is by no means a complete thing.
There does not, nor will there ever exist a complete, 100% accurate document filled with all the details of the Realms.
This means there are far more things unknown about the fates of NPCs post-Spellplague than there will ever be known about them.
It doesn't follow that most short-lived NPCs should survive, but some can and some will.
As I said, X NPC is Y age, and the FRCS states that those of X NPC's race don't live past Z. When Z equals 10 + Y, X NPC doesn't make it 100 years into the future.
Granted, many NPCs will pass away by sheer dint of age within the regular continuity of the setting. That’s a given.
But it doesn’t follow that Realms DMs shouldn’t use these NPCs or their write-ups. Remember, it’s not about the specific individual, it’s about using a good NPC.
Again, we’re talking usefulness, not continuity.
All you need to do is add “the Second” to an NPC’s name or simply decide they are the great grandson/granddaughter of so and so, and you’re back on track.
And if they’re a long-lived race, you don’t even need to do that much.
Regardless, you can always use an NPC if your players have never encountered them before.
Again, Realms DMs don’t answer to canon. They answer to their players.
Realms DMs are not responsible for maintaining continuity with the published setting. They are responsible only for maintaining continuity within the confines of their own game.
Where is the untruth?
Information about a specific NPC who shouldn't be able to live for those 100+/- years, without some kind of "story", or whatever, this is going to be less useful.
You suggest they need some story to be able to live for the next 100 years or else its less useful, they don't. Suggesting they do is the untruth as the person didn't say "By slavishly adhering to canon, can I still use these books."
Usefulness is.
-And, as mentioned, in regards to the continuity of the setting, the usefulness of the information within the products is diminished.
As JohnLynch so aptly showed, maintaining setting continuity for the sake of that continuity is not necessary.
-Right. And, nobody has challenged that someone can do whatever they want, regardless of rules, the setting, whatever other factors. This doesn't change the fact, as I said, that if someone doesn't want to adhere to it, they don't have to, but it doesn't invalidate what was said, in regards to the continuity of the setting.
All you need to do is add “the Second” to an NPC’s name or simply decide they are the great grandson/granddaughter of so and so, and you’re back on track.
-And, that's fine. By doing so, the person doing it is accepting that the information within the pages is less useful than it would have been without the 100 +/- year increase in the setting's timeline, by needing to come up with an explanation (however minor) to incorporate the information.
the person doing it is accepting that the information within the pages is less useful
Wow, you're using some really fine values of "less useful." When using such fine gradations, you may wish to inform others first, because I can say now, I certainly don't expect people to use such minuscule gradations when I ask for some information.
-And, that's fine. By doing so, the person doing it is accepting that the information within the pages is less useful than it would have been without the 100 +/- year increase in the setting's timeline, by needing to come up with an explanation (however minor) to incorporate the information.
I don't think they're actively accepting it as less useful.
On the contrary, one would be accepting the idea that a product can be used in ways outside of what it was originally intended.
I think we're basically both right. By using a product like the Volo's guides in the 4E setting, one recognizes that they don't exactly have a 4E canon (read: Era of Time) specific product in their hands, but they do recognize the product is infused with Realms-flavored goodness that can be easily ported into the 4E Realms with little or no fuss.
Some things will be dated and will have to be tweaked and some can probably fit in no problem. The Volo guides will be good just because of the flavor that is given. It will save you time as a DM. It will possibly inspire you to come up with some fun adventures. Old books can always be useful IMO.
If your PCs are canonphiles and Lore fanatics of the FR then the books might not be too useful. They may get upset if you use the names of certain places that are dead or ruins in the current timeline. You can still fool around with the names of certain locales and maybe steal old plothooks but those players may somehow catch on and make a stink. Such is the risk of playing with certain fans of the setting.
Of the 3E stuff, off the top of my head, I'd suggest Shining South and maybe Unapproachable East are no longer relevant, but you could continue to find use for all the other accessories released by WoTC, even Waterdeep and Mysteries of the Moonsea (Lost Empires, Underdark and Serpent Kingdoms in particular probably make the transition pretty well).
I don't think they're actively accepting it as less useful.
-Semantics, truthfully. By changing things, the person who is doing the changing accepts that what's in the book, as is, isn't optimum for him/her anymore.
I suspect the better question is what supplements are no longer useful?
-The places that have been most drastically changed, of course, are going to have the most amounts of material that are "outdated".
-Semantics, truthfully.
Not true.
More like a bit of persnicketiness (on your part).
I consider non-Realms products such as the fiction of Alexandre Dumas, art books by Boris Vellejo and Julie Bell and products from Paizo like the Pathfinder Chronicles to be optimal sources for playing in the Realms.
And these aren't even actual Realms products.
But then that's the point.
Whereas you appear to consider a Realms product "optimal" if and only if it is being used in an era of Realms time commensurate with what's written in the product, I consider anything that can inspire campaign ideas (for encounters, memorable NPCs, traps, monsters, plots and story arcs) to be "optimal".
This is why -for me- using Volo’s Guides out of phase with the Realms timeline is a non-issue.
Since we appear to have such divergent views on what a DM could use in an FR game, as well as the actual level of usability of such (right down to what “usability” means to each of us) I don’t think it’s safe to generalize what a random DM will or won’t “accept” when they go about sourcing ideas and information from a Volo’s Guide.
Officially, the usefulness of the these products is diminished because of the 100 +/- years the setting is going to be jumping.
"Officially" according to who?
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Thank you.
I see that point, because it's so obvious.
I guess I'm just not seeing the significance of the position you're arguing from.
From my POV, it's kind of like listening to someone take pains to point out that in order to walk, all people need to put one foot in front of the other.
We already know that.....so?
:shrug:
No, the books can't be considered anything other than historical reference from a canon point of view, and so their utility is diminished in that sense, since its a century out of date.
Yes, the books can be considered sources of inspiration and that's the only thing that matters, not the date attached to them, as they give you a wealth of ideas and potential hooks to draw upon at the least.
You're both correct from your points of view, but not from the others. Not so much semantics as what each of you seem to value more highly being radically different.
I suspect the better question is what supplements are no longer useful?
Of the 3E stuff, off the top of my head, I'd suggest Shining South and maybe Unapproachable East are no longer relevant, but you could continue to find use for all the other accessories released by WoTC, even Waterdeep and Mysteries of the Moonsea (Lost Empires, Underdark and Serpent Kingdoms in particular probably make the transition pretty well).
Thank you.
I am concentrating heavily on DMing technique. I don't have the time at all to come up with content of my own and, to be frank, I don't have the talent to do so anyway. I'm very happy to buy all content. In that light I had a mind to run H1-Hn. But then Dungeon's new adventure path, Scales of War, seems to fit the bill perfectly.
But, I have always really liked FR and I thought to make a home there for my new group of new players. I have a hodge podge of FR content going back to the initial campaign setting box.
I really don't wish to have to reverse engineer each bit of content. It seems to me that we have been stuck half way from here to half way to there. The new FR guides will have the new base but most of the current content will not synchronize. Moreover, there will not be new versions of the resources.
I'm looking for a relatively painless path forward in FR. This is key. Because if I had a mind and the inclination to do the work myself, I wouldn't need a pre-packaged setting in the first place.
Can you guys chime in and tell me if I have this right:
I get the new FR4 guides. I can supplement them with maps and locales from past resource publications where they fit. For example, my Maztica boxed set no longer fits. Characters and hooks from resources no longer apply. The new guides will probably have such content though. So, I can continue in the Realms but I should expect to have to cobble things together.
Any other advice would be great.
Thanks.
As to new content, DDi sounds like it might be an option if you don't mind the subscription fee, so despite the economic sting, seems it would be fairly painless if the content for FR flows as freely as it is hoped... though I'd advise caution there, considering the scarcity of Realms information the last few months (though its understandable, considering the flak it generated).
As to characters and hooks, shouldn't require too much modification really, beyond dates, unless the area has radically changed or something. Same with characters (should be the easiest to migrate really), just alter a first name or something and a maybe a note or two, and it should be good enough. Depends a lot on how radical the differences are though really, and we're not going to know that until next month.
Really, not much more we can do, any of us, but wait, and see how potentially compatible the old stuff might be, and then go from there.
*Snip*
I get the new FR4 guides. I can supplement them with maps and locales from past resource publications where they fit. For example, my Maztica boxed set no longer fits. Characters and hooks from resources no longer apply. The new guides will probably have such content though. So, I can continue in the Realms but I should expect to have to cobble things together.
Any other advice would be great.
Thanks.
Not to be too persnickety myself :evillaugh but you may want to use the term FR4E when asking these kinds of questions. There's already been an FR4 - the Magister supplement back in the good ole' days.
Of course, there has also already been an adventure module H1. And H2-H4.
I recommended checking out some of the free online downloads. If you've never really been a Realms fan before, they can be very helpful in giving you a sense of tone and feel for what makes the Realms different from other settings (Eberron, Greyhawk, any generic setting, etc.)
Some of it (your pardon, LK) I would feel comfortable dropping straight into your campaign. If you need an inn, and there's nothing in the area from the 4E Realms, steal one from one of the Volo's guides and drop it in.
But.....that's what all games do, 100% of the time.
I see that point, because it's so obvious.
I guess I'm just not seeing the significance of the position you're arguing from.
From my POV, it's kind of like listening to someone take pains to point out that in order to walk, all people need to put one foot in front of the other.
We already know that.....so?
:shrug:
-As you yourself said, it's not safe "to generalize what a random DM will or won’t 'accept'". As such, I go by the line, and it's up to them do actually follow the line or not.
Can you guys chime in and tell me if I have this right:
I get the new FR4 guides. I can supplement them with maps and locales from past resource publications where they fit. For example, my Maztica boxed set no longer fits. Characters and hooks from resources no longer apply. The new guides will probably have such content though. So, I can continue in the Realms but I should expect to have to cobble things together.
-Right. Different elements, for various reasons, will no longer be relevant in 1479 DR, in the sense that the 1479 DR world is different from what is presented in the sourcebooks from the past. Odds are, in the new books, there will be things to cover these elements. For example, with Maztica, there is a new landmass replacing it. So, the information on this new landmass...
Our group is about to start D&D4. We'd like to take up residence in FR4. I understand that there are significant changes to FR. But, does that invalidate all the pre-FR4 resource books?
No.
Can I still use them?
Yes.
Are they worth buying?
Up to you.
Or, is there no point now because the pre-FR4 resource material will contradict FR4 in many ways?
Up to you.
I'm also confused about something. I have read here that WotC is not planning on any FR4 resource publications other than the main FR guides. Is that true? How is that possible if they've changed so much in the Realms?
Thanks.
There will be Realms articles on D&D Insider.
Trying to keep up with canon is a full-time job and not necessarily conducive to maintaining your sanity ...
That's a point that I think is definitely worth repeating, with regards to the games people create using the FR setting.
That's a point that I think is definitely worth repeating, with regards to the games people create using the FR setting.
sure, no one needs to know all the lore. We can't all be Lord Karsus
I'm constantly surprised by what I don't know.-Like I said, he can just say something that has never been mentioned, and *poof* it's canon. No one else can do that. In the Forgotten Realms, anyway. I do that in my own setting, when I'm playing D&D, but I hate when a detail I make up on the spot doesn't match with what I already have written.
In some ways I worry that this (improvisation) is becoming a lost art among DMs. If there is anything I find I dislike about playing in the Forgotten Realms (generally speaking), it is when DMs (or other players) insist on slavish devotion to canon, even to the point that it is a detriment to the fun of the game. Granted, in many cases it takes time for people to get to a level of experience with the game where they feel comfortable to do that. I also tend to think that many of the problems others cite devolve back to this, or something related to it.
I doubt even Ed could site every detail of canon at a moments notice,
I'm sure he couldn't either.
However, there is far more not written about the Realms that still exists as notes in his basement and ideas in his head.
We get tidbits of these things from time to time when people ask him the right questions atn Candlekeep.com.
And with the 100 year time jump, I figure much of what he wrote about the Realms that wasn't ever published is now set in stone, as the setting's focus (and thus any attempts by WotC to publish information about it) have moved a century into the future.
So current canon is not worth much anymore. The future publications are what really counts. And I doubt that WotC will hesitate to radically reorganize FR in order to suit to their changed goals and to 4e perfectly. First examples of such a reorganization is the introduction of the dragonborn in unther, the replacement of old gods with new 4e gods etc. These changes will not be the only ones. I would not wonder if the geographical maps are different and everything else too.
Dont get me wrong. I am not negative about this. As a newcomer in D&D and FR I rather appreciate that I dont have to buy dozens of obsolete old books for FR. I just think that some here dont see the right signs on the wall.
That's not entirely true... All those old books are still canon, just not as relevant to play.
If the old books are not relevant for playing, then for what are they for? The question is for what is canon if not for support the authenticity and deeper quality of your groups play?
There are places like Cormyr where they will provide a lot of detail that might not be covered for years if you only wait for official 4e releases.
I guess any places which will not be covered in the FRCG the next month or any other future 4e publication (if there are any for FR) will never be covered except by some lovely but unimportant fan products. They are simply lost. Addtionally they are not important for 4e because this new game has a different playing concept. The extensive lore which is a trademark of old FR does not really suit to this new concept which prefers a more lighter and easy to use approach to the game (setting included)
To illustrate this claim. How much sense does it make for WotC to redesign this vast old FR world with hundreds of city states and nations and whatever, if a party is just 10 levels (maybe 7-9 months average playing time) in the heroic tier where it is their job to save such nations? From level 11-20 they are in paragon tier with different adventures environments like elemental planes and shadowfell dungeons (which does old FR not offer that much) From level 21-30 (after another 7-9 months) they are adventuring in far realms like the Astral Sea which is also not a typical old FR concept. So mundane Nations or even continents as FR traditionally offers are mostly for level 1-10. Do you really think that a game where it is officially planned that the players just play 30% of the gaming time in heroic tier justifies the developement of a similar detailed world as FR was in the past ? I dont think so. No they will develope 30% mundane environments (like FR), 30% environments for paragon playing (unlike FR) and 30% for epic god and demonslaying (or whatever else such superheroes do at this level). So yes I guess that 1 book will be enough for new FR. If it sells well then they will do a few others the next years. But thats it.
Imagine reading a 100 year old history book, it would still give you some knowledge, but some of it (very little hopefully) would have been rethought, and it wouldn't cover recent events. Is it worthless then? No, in fact it would be useful in new ways, you could learn the take on history the people 100 years ago had.
IMO the comparision with real history is not very valid. Real historical writing is stringent and is built on past events. But WotC shows that the new FR is not stringent and will be altered as much as it is necessary to support the new game. FR is a tool which WotC owns for selling roleplaying rules not a free living world. If WotC thinks that this tool has to be modified by modifying nations, eradicating and creating whole new continents, creating new planes and killing gods to fit 4e then they will do it as much as it is necessary. And if 5e is introducing flying islands everywhere, FR will change again and eg. cormyr will conisist of 100 flying shards.
Likewise older FR give campaign ideas, and with the time shift, you can plot out where they led to, and what ongoing effect they have on the new realms.
Yes I agree for inspiration the old books are good. They have many ideas inside. And of course you can always consider these old books as historical background for your private campaign.
We will see it next month, but I am sure that the FRCG will be a new beginning and there is not much real lore except ideas and inspiration to get from the old FR books.
That's not entirely true... All those old books are still canon, just not as relevant to play. There are places like Cormyr where they will provide a lot of detail that might not be covered for years if you only wait for official 4e releases. Imagine reading a 100 year old history book, it would still give you some knowledge, but some of it (very little hopefully) would have been rethought, and it wouldn't cover recent events. Is it worthless then? No, in fact it would be useful in new ways, you could learn the take on history the people 100 years ago had. Likewise older FR give campaign ideas, and with the time shift, you can plot out where they led to, and what ongoing effect they have on the new realms.
Totally would agree with you. I personally believe that any new player should probably start with the FRCS and the 4e stuff and just ignore the older stuff for now. But one should not let Retcon ruin potential and once you become more aquainted with the present state purchasing older material would be wonderful. Many of the events and conditions in the current Realms are the results of the actions of the past and I don't think WoTC will go as far as to destroy history and oversimplify canon, because I think that as gamers, they would want the material to be avaliable and therefore woun't touch it. Plus canon or no canon if you are a true Realms fan you would get the material just because you love the Realms and exploring its many aspects.
At the very least, at least buy the Grand History of the Realms as your 2nd Realms book.
So current canon is not worth much anymore.
I disagree quite strongly. I'm reading Volo's Guide to Cormyr (because its free and we have the most information on Cormyr so we have a good idea of what will and won't be detailed in the 4th edition FR books) and I'm finding it an invaluable source for Cormyr information. I've gone from avoiding this country to seeing what ideas I can come up with for this place.
I'm only up to page 20 and so far I've learned about:
* Several festivals and the fact that they're so common and important in Cormyr.
* The Deneir library
* Council of Mages
* 4 magical swords that are very important to Suzair.
* The Crystal Grot and the important role it plays in the Cormyr economy.
* The World Serpent Inn (of which I'll say no more).
and this book is 216 pages long (excluding the appendixes). Is some of the information no longer valid in the book, most definitely. For example the Council of Mages will have been disbanded in my own FR game. However everything else I listed is still valid for a 4th edition FR game.
If the old books are not relevant for playing
That's not what he said.
All those old books are still canon, just not as relevant to play.
Emphasis mine.
Well now the FR fans do have their impressive old canon. This ends next month. The new FR book will be the core of the new canon and measurement of all things to come for the setting. Next month the old books will be nice and sometimes an inspiration for the GM but every DDI article and every official adventure in the setting will be built up from the 2 new FRCG books and not from the many old books. So the stories and content of the old books what now is called "canon" will fade away in some years. No D&D player will notice them except from bargain bins or ebay auctions.
So current canon is not worth much anymore. The future publications are what really counts. And I doubt that WotC will hesitate to radically reorganize FR in order to suit to their changed goals and to 4e perfectly. First examples of such a reorganization is the introduction of the dragonborn in unther, the replacement of old gods with new 4e gods etc. These changes will not be the only ones. I would not wonder if the geographical maps are different and everything else too.
Dont get me wrong. I am not negative about this. As a newcomer in D&D and FR I rather appreciate that I dont have to buy dozens of obsolete old books for FR. I just think that some here dont see the right signs on the wall.
-Having skimmed that, I don't think there is a single point in there that I agree with.
Well now the FR fans do have their impressive old canon. This ends next month. The new FR book will be the core of the new canon and measurement of all things to come for the setting. Next month the old books will be nice and sometimes an inspiration for the GM but every DDI article and every official adventure in the setting will be built up from the 2 new FRCG books and not from the many old books.
I agree with you that the ‘core’ of the setting will be the new FR Campaign Guide and Player’s Guide.
However I disagree that the older books will not be of much relevance to new articles that come to us by way of DDI.
We know for a fact that James’ work on the Cormyr article was informed by Garen Thal (his online name, don’t know his real one) and Ed Greenwood, and that it shares many details from older products that set the baseline for Cormyr as a nation in terms of social norms, crown policies regarding adventurers and its monarchial makeup.
That article didn’t come from scratch.
I also wanted to mention I liked your comments about Heroic, Paragon and Epic Level Play in the Realms. I think you’re the first person to structure ideas and opinions about the overall Realms from this point of view.
That is very refreshing. As are your statements about the (4E) game trying harder to get people playing the game right away via a, “....lighter and easy to use approach to the game.”
However I believe it’s a little too hasty conclude this will be applied to the setting wholesale. Having played with H1: Keep on the Shadowfell I see how WotC took pains to inform DMs that they can do more than just run the adventure as series of combats strung together.
The H1 adventure tries to teach DMs to think about setting, mood, pacing and what’s going on in the player’s minds.
Without having read the FR Campaign Guide from cover to cover, I can’t say it’s a fact WotC will try equally hard to get DMs to extend this idea one step further with regard to ways DMs can get players to ‘feel’ like they are in the Realms at the gaming table.
But I have high hopes. ;)
Separately, and based in large part on my own experience playing and DMing in the 1E and 2E Realms, and DMing an Epic Level campaign in the 3E in the Realms, I do not believe the Realms will follow the core rules structure in terms of what level of adventures can be found where.
I believe Paragon and Epic Level adventures can be run in the 4E Realms proper, not only on the planes.
:D
I believe Paragon and Epic Level adventures can be run in the 4E Realms proper, not only on the planes.
-Of course. All levels of play are represented, and always have been. There's no difference there.
Well now the FR fans do have their impressive old canon. This ends next month.
Not really, because the history of the setting isn't going to change.
Sorry.
Not really, because the history of the setting isn't going to change.
Sorry.
-Right. There's just more being tacked on (the new stuff).
Not really, because the history of the setting isn't going to change.
Sorry.
Maybe this is true. But until the FRCG appears noone knows this for sure.
Separately, and based in large part on my own experience playing and DMing in the 1E and 2E Realms, and DMing an Epic Level campaign in the 3E in the Realms, I do not believe the Realms will follow the core rules structure in terms of what level of adventures can be found where.
And why do you assume that they will force an adventurer to stay grounded in the realms 66% of his career instead of traveling constantly from abyss to astral sea and vice versa as it is mentioned in the 4e books? Alot of players which like this aspect and looking forward to battle mighty and godlike beeings on a regular schedule and tramping through the planes will feel betrayed if they have to stay mainly on FR mundane plain during their career..
I think what many players of older editions dont recognize is that play in highest levels is nothing special and nothing which is far away in 4e. Maybe the first players which play now H1 or H2 will be level 20 in march 09 and end their campaign in winter 09 at level 30. High levels from 15-30 are totally integrated in 4e like never before and have the same importance like level 1-15. Its not like 3e where only some selected and hardy Pc come after 3-5 years to level 15. Many who play weekly the official campaign will be level30 in the next 18 months. WotC cannot afford to ignore the promises they made just because some people think that FR should be played in a different way than vanilla D&D. (or FR will be in future a "low fantasy" setting in the eyes of 4e players)
Maybe this is true. But until the FRCG appears noone knows this for sure.
-No, we know this for sure.
And why do you assume that they will force an adventurer to stay grounded in the realms 66% of his career instead of traveling constantly from abyss to astral sea and vice versa as it is mentioned in the 4e books?
-I'm pretty sure his point wasn't that premade adventures aren't necessarily going to do this, but if they didn't, there are plenty of individuals/organizations/etc. in the Realms that fit any level of play, 1-20, 1-30.
I think he meant the opposite, that the Realms, by their nature, are filled with gates to oter planes, and even lower level characters may find themselves occasionally in say the Shadowdeep or in the Feydeep.
Really? Is FR so full of gates? I read some old 3e books and while there are gates, they appear not nearly as many and as accessible easy as 4e requires for its new approach. The most of the gates as I understand it are explored and have guards around them in order to regulate the travel. This is not in the philosophy of 4e. So I assume there will be some big changes in FR4 to solve this problem. Eg. it has no sense that I have to travel per horse from Silverymoon to Waterdeep if I want a planar gate now! 4e promises a fast and uncomplicated way to travel between the planes or between the different realms on the homeplane ("adventure is where the players are and not the other way round" ) at least, once you are paragon or higher, so there have to be a lot more rifts into the shadowfell, feywild overlappings, stairs to the underdark, planar gates or whatever is necessary to enable the group switching planes without too much effort.
Another solution is that they introduce such effects only in the official campaign and after this place them anywhere in FR with the DDI conversion.
And that there are plenty of high level adversaries to deal with for epic level heroes, without ever leaving the comfort of your home plane.
But not leaving the home plane is not paragon and epic 4e. As you surely know is the 4e homeplane also the shadowfell and the feywild. And its the Underdark.In these homeplane realms you play mostly during 1-10. After this at paragon you go more beyond and visit Elemental plane and Abyss till level 20. From 21 at epic you goto Astral Sea and battle or save the gods and their servants directly.
Lurking around on the homeplane in paragon or epic mode may be typical for FR adventures in 3e, but its not 4e D&D.
Really? Is FR so full of gates?
-Yes.
Lurking around on the homeplane in paragon or epic mode may be typical for FR adventures in 3e, but its not 4e D&D.
And what extra-planar entity (and his/her army) is going to show up and railroad my game off the home plane?
I like that about 1-3e realms and I am keeping it in 4e.
And what extra-planar entity (and his/her army) is going to show up and railroad my game off the home plane?
-Richus Bakus. Very powerful, very scary. He strikes out a lot, though, only has one championship to show for over a hundred years in being in existence, and has the most losses in professional sports, so you might squeak out alive.
And why do you assume that they will force an adventurer to stay grounded in the realms 66% of his career instead of traveling constantly from abyss to astral sea and vice versa as it is mentioned in the 4e books?
I didn’t really assume anything.
I wasn’t arguing that game products from WotC will “force” adventurers to stay in the Realms.
Instead, I was saying that the Realms proper will provide Paragon and Epic tier adventure possibilities in addition to Heroic tier adventures.
This means that DMs will still be able to do whatever they want on the planes and beyond.
A lot of players which like this aspect and looking forward to battle mighty and godlike beeings on a regular schedule and tramping through the planes will feel betrayed if they have to stay mainly on FR mundane plain during their career.
It’s really up to each DM to figure out what their players want in an adventure.
I think WotC is going to give us adventures that fit the three-tier progression you initially described and I know a lot of DMs will convert those adventures for use in the Realms.
Don’t know about you, but I’m looking forward to see what they cook up for us.
I think what many players of older editions don’t recognize is that play in highest levels is nothing special and nothing which is far away in 4e.
I don’t think you can generalize it that much.
We have a blast playing high level D&D in our Third Edition Realms game. It’s always been a fun --and yes, special-- experience.
WotC cannot afford to ignore the promises they made just because some people think that FR should be played in a different way than vanilla D&D. (or FR will be in future a "low fantasy" setting in the eyes of 4e players)
I agree with you that WotC should build adventures along the three-tier path they laid out in the DMG and PHB, and I’m sure that’s just what they will do.
However I don’t think publishing outside of that linear setup will hurt WotC either.
In my opinion there’s room to do both. Easily.
Really? Is FR so full of gates?
Check out this link here for an archive of web articles about portals in Faerûn:- http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/pg
The Perilous Gateways series of articles detailed scores of portals that you can use in your campaign and which contain much wonderful lore about portals and the history of Faerûn.
Maybe this is true. But until the FRCG appears noone knows this for sure.
It is true, beyond doubt. There will likely be retcons here and there, but this is not a true reboot. The basic history of the world is not changing, it's just that time is moving forward.
It is also true that the Realms has challenges for very high level characters.
The basic history of the world is not changing, it's just that time is moving forward.
-Yes. Extra history, on top of the history that already exists.
-Yes. Extra history, on top of the history that already exists.
Which a lot of newer players will pretend does not exist so that they don't have nightmares of being forced to study infinite amounts Realmslore by Elminster at night.;)
Which is ok for players, now there is no excuse for a good Realms DM to ignore all that is there?
Which a lot of newer players will pretend does not exist so that they don't have nightmares of being forced to study infinite amounts Realmslore by Elminster at night.;)
-Pretend, or not realize. The former seems...insidious, almost, while the latter seems much more innocent.
Which is ok for players, now there is no excuse for a good Realms DM to ignore all that is there?
-DMs use whatever they want. That's how it's always been, in any setting. None of the Star Wars games I've been in shoehorned every single little Star Wars detail into them. Half of the time, we were on a planet the DM made up, giving him free reign over everything (The Star Wars equivalent of the Border Kingdoms, or anywhere in the Forgotten Realms that isn't detailed).
-DMs use whatever they want. That's how it's always been, in any setting. None of the Star Wars games I've been in shoehorned every single little Star Wars detail into them. Half of the time, we were on a planet the DM made up, giving him free reign over everything (The Star Wars equivalent of the Border Kingdoms, or anywhere in the Forgotten Realms that isn't detailed).
True, still, its always nice to know the details and at the very least, not to deny them.
True, still, its always nice to know the details and at the very least, not to deny them.
-Of course. It's better to have too many layers of clothes on, than not enough. You can always take off a shirt. You can't magically conjure one to make you warmer when you're cold.
-. You can't magically conjure one to make you warmer when you're cold.
Well, we are in the Realms aren't we, so...;)
Well, we are in the Realms aren't we, so...;)
-I'm talking about reality.
-Geeze. :P
-I'm talking about reality.
-Geeze. :P
Who said the Realms aren't real? I'm still looking for portals in my basement and setting up Elminster traps during christmas:P
:P