Basically what I'm seeing is the Realms at the sort of critical stage that Dragonlance was under the 5th age crud or Greyhawk ran into after Gygax left.
I'm speaking of the Realms here both as a creative endeaver as well as an intellectual property.
4E has divorced itself from its past both in terms of history and in terms of the fan base.
New fans and those cannibalizing the sourcebooks for their own homebrews are the new market. Is this a group that will support the realms as a seting into the future?
All fans of whatever generation of the game really have going into the future are the novels, which WOTC doesn't seem too clear on how they will use, and the digital stuff.
Same concern, is this enough to keep the Forgotten Realms around?
I can see a situation very clearly where by the next edition, the Forgotten Realms have gone the way of Greyhawk and faded into obscurity or, thinking more positively a little, shrunk down to just an intellectual property with a novel line like Dragonlance.
How do you guys and gals see this? Am I way off base here?
... scary, no?
On a more serious tone, I don't think its going anywhere and it doesn't have anything to do with the novels (though RA Salvatore could single handedly keep it alive from book sales, which as you said is more like Dragonlance).
No, I think it has more to do with the fact that currently, the best games coming out based off D&D (computer and console wise) are based there.
Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 were just amazing, and THAT was done on the horrible system of 2nd edition (sorry guys, I loved 2nd edition as much as the next guy but the system was totally screwed up).
Neverwinter Nights 1 then came out to flagship 3rd edition ( I am NOT counting icewind dale 2 as 3rd edition, and sticking to that ruling.) and it was a VERY fun game ... well sorta. I mean the expansions were great IMO and the online capability really made it great, but the original story was less then engaging. Aribeth was a babe though.
NWN2 Worked up 3.5 edition and did so rather well. Buggy as crap and system requirements too steep for what you got (they eventually fixed both) but the story was just immersive and made me feel like I was playing BG2 again with how engaging it was. Even the expansion was remarkable with another in depth, involving story line. PLUS, NWN2 had the duelist !! (They totally ruined their best class ability, Elaborate parry, but thats something I'll cry over silently, thank you).
And I'm sure they're working on a 4th edition game too, though THATS going to prove odd to work mechanical wise with interrupts and such. Of course it would make an excellent turned based RPG ( ... ya know ... cause it is one?) I'm willing to bet my left testicle (which i can do safely since their soundly secure in my wife's purse) its going to be in Forgotten Realms. Familiar title, ya know? I can't really think Greyhawk OR Dragonlance did much to offer the gaming community in the media aspect, so its less of a big deal (except to those fans) if it fades away. FR has become more then a D&D gaming world though, its a friggen franchise.
Now do I agree with the changes made? Meh, can't say. I liked old realms and see this new thing as a bit extreme, but maybe they DID need to do some house cleaning. A lot of FR fans are angry over it while others aren't.
What the ones who ARE angry need to keep in mind (myself included) is that despite how much we don't like it, they at least chose to keep FR alive (I can already here people shouting "This Franken-campaign isn't MY Forgotten Realms!!). They COULD have just pushed Eberron to the forefront even more so and made it the next big thing, leaving FR to stale away in normality. Sure many of the hardcore fans would like it ... until they stopped publishing for it at all.
If it keeps selling, it stays alive. As it stands now, despite anger from many, its selling. When the next comp game with FR plastered on it comes out, that will sell too.
Heck, put a drow or even Drizzt on the cover of any of the FR stuff and it will sell double that.
My bet, FR isn't going anywhere unless Ed Greenwood himself says "This is pure crap and more then I can stand. I would rather see it disappear then turn into this nonsense."
Does he have any technical say? Nope. But it might cause the biggest fans to boycot if FR's Daddy asked them too. Not saying he should or would, but just saying.
And, no, the Realms have a bleak future
Just judging from these boards, there is less interest already
The way WotC is being run right now, it's hard to tell.
Just judging from these boards, there is less interest already
Nonsense. If interest is dropping here it's because the atmosphere is so discouraging of 4e stuff that it's hardly worth posting here.
They COULD have just pushed Eberron to the forefront even more so and made it the next big thing, leaving FR to stale away in normality. Sure many of the hardcore fans would like it ... until they stopped publishing for it at all.
Surely this is what they are doing with the "1 setting a year" policy, with Eberron coming next? FR gets to be at the forefront for a year (with the 3 books for it already published) and then it is relagated to DDI content, which a number of people doesn't seem to be buying, unless a DDI compilation is published which may or may not be well supported by the customer base.
Under the current business plan I cannot see anything that FR can do but fade even with the possible release of a game featuring it.
4e does, the realms not so much.
you can use the 3.x FR materieal, and the 4e phb.
some have stated this.
some are using pathfinder rules as well.
I say perceived because in the five sessions my weekly FR campaign has had so far the History skill has been of extreme importance, more specifically older history as in pre-spellplague lore. None of my players are FR fanbois, and only one has regularly read the novels, but they are all enjoying the allusions to the past. It's working better than in any prior FR campaign where I have tried to do the same simply because of the ready availability, incredible degree of detail, and density of the lore of the years leading up to the disaster. Based off my experiences with 4E Realms so far I don't see how it won't survive, it still has everything it used to and a way to use it all.
Some fans who do not like the change will either deal with it an play or go somewhere else. New fans will be brought in like they were in 2E and 3E and carry on as long as WOTC supports it. That is the ticket, support from a company. Greyhawk disappeared because TSR wanted to dump it and support FR. Eberron does not have a traditional D&D feel so it will never be the "Flagship" setting like FR will be. FR sells video games and pc games. It sells books. If sales are fine than it will be fine.
Boards like these mean nothing in the end, one way or the other.
It falls now on the fans to keep it alive.
Actually it is the company that owns the rights to the property that decides to keep it alive or not IMO. There are many fans of many things that are pretty much dead now. I liked the garoyle cartoon but it is pretty much dead now. Why? No company will produce it.
That's actually not totally true. Fans have or can have an impact. Fans brought back the orignal trek and interest led to the movies (discussion of the relative strength of Star Trek I aside).
Nonsense. If interest is dropping here it's because the atmosphere is so discouraging of 4e stuff that it's hardly worth posting here.
The hate is pretty much gone as far i can see. The vitroil seems to have gone down quite a bit from July and August. I just think there isn't a lot of people who are here anymore. At least not as regularly as they used to be, myself included. I am not around here railing against the terrible things Cordell and Baker have done anymore. You get an occassional, "I don't really care about the new Realms" post but nothing like it used to be.
Many of the old posters have no interest in the 4e realms and they have not been replaced by a bunch of pro 4E people. In fact, now they that are not publishing anymore Realms stuff except for an occasional Dragon article, it would seem that the Realms are dying
the realms are dead.
its become nothing more than a novel world, where it has some very good novels, but sux to play in.
the hate has died down, it is however still there.
and only pops up now and then a bit more mellow becuase everyone is and has predicted issues of lament with it.
and we sure got it.
changes made for the sake of changes wether for good or ill is a bad idea.
and putting a fan of eberron in charge of the realms was even worst.
either way, its nothing to be pessimistic or optimistic about.
the realms are dead.
its become nothing more than a novel world, where it has some very good novels, but sux to play in.
Please call my players and tell them it sucks to play in. Have you even tried or is opinion completely clouded by a blind adherence to the old.
the hate has died down, it is however still there.
Really, died down? It is definitely still there. The very premise of this topic proves it.
and only pops up now and then a bit more mellow becuase everyone is and has predicted issues of lament with it.
and we sure got it.
Well I look everyday on the forums and there is always some negative, hateful comment being made, and yes you did get it. I for one got something that works just fine, much like its predecessors just different.
changes made for the sake of changes wether for good or ill is a bad idea.
Agreed, problem is they were made for a reason not for the sake of being different.
and putting a fan of eberron in charge of the realms was even worst.
So because you like Old FR you should not be in charge of say writing Greyhawk material. If your job is to design games and write content for games, chances are you are professional enough to not make it the same as the setting you like. Based off your comment every setting should resemble another, because you know WOTC is full of unprofessional babies who just want everything to be Eberron, or Cthulhu, or WOD, or Exalted, or WOW...seriously
and i wouldnt do a good job of it anyway.
ps, i like greyhawk, dragonlance, and the old fr, but eberron does not sit well with me.
might be that every thing and everyone always seems to play a political angle there...
its become nothing more than a novel world, where it has some very good novels, but sux to play in.
My 4E Realms game is a blast. I'm sorry your sucks (assuming you tried a 4E Realms game and aren't just generalizing).
I agree with you that WotC's selection for the design lead for the 4E Realms was -in retrospect- a bad choice. I don't think his like of Eberron (such as it is) was a big impact, though, save for perhaphs porting over Dragonmarks.
I loved that time...
The realms dieing? Nah. The Realms are made by and selling to a new audience. Good for oldtimers to wax on about how it was and tell them (through play, internet or otherwise) where all the lore came from. That interaction of the old with the new isn't gone (only in 15th century the old empires really are surrounded in the new ones). Lots of examples of people who even prefer to play 2nd or 1st edition games. But 3.5 for me still makes the most gritty and easy to imagine edition to play the realms in. That campaignsetting book was at least complete.
The only future I see is the DDI, but that has to function a lot better than what we\ve seen thus far for that to even be possible.
Looking into the future, I see the Realms dying as a RPG setting.
They've alienated the old guard in the hopes of attracting new blood.
But they're not doing anything to keep the new guys around.
New fans and nonfans are the admitted target audience of 4E FR. What in their business model thus far will keep the new guys loyal and playing the Realms? They've already released all they said we're going to get barring the internet content.
Since I only have to buy as a DM 2 books and a subscription it's easy to stay up to date with a setting whether I play it every week or once in a while.
The only future I see is the DDI, but that has to function a lot better than what we\ve seen thus far for that to even be possible.
Has there been a problem with Dragon or Dungeon on DDI? I don't think so, and when it comes to content for FR or any setting that is the only part of the subscription that matters.
Looking into the future, I see the Realms dying as a RPG setting.
They've alienated the old guard in the hopes of attracting new blood.
But they're not doing anything to keep the new guys around.
And I see the exact opposite. Oh...and guess what apparently that is what WOTC is also seeing or they would never have risked their best property.
They've already released all they said we're going to get barring the internet content.
IMO this is wrong. The following books they're releasing for FR campaigns include:
* Martial Power
* Draconomicon I: Chromatic Dragons
* Manual of the Planes
* Open Grave: Secrets of the Undead
* Player's Handbook II
* Arcane Power
* Monster Manual II
* Adventurer's Vault II
But seriously, IMO Manual of the Planes, Draconomicon and everything else will be perfectly useable with FR.
The only difference between 4e and 3e is that these books will also be usable with other campaigns.
So long as there are dedicated individuals like Brian James to pave the way to future 4e Realmslore that doesn't solely ignore previous setting material, I'd have to say yes.
Brian can paper over the cracks all he wants, but it's still ignoring the iceberg that's been driven through the side of the good ship FR.
That said, the Realms died a death with the release of The Grand History. This current incarnation is a rough beast Slouching towards Bethlehem, hopefully to be still born.
I wouldn't go that far... what you seem to be equating to death I would characterize more as maintaining the status quo. From what I've gathered, many people seemed to be frustrated with the stream of books coming out, which apparently drove them away... so publishing fewer books doesn't necessarily mean the setting is dying, simply that its a new approach to presenting the setting.
its not a question of publishing fewer books but instead they are publishing none from now on.
They've alienated the old guard in the hopes of attracting new blood.
If I can borrow one of Therise' favorite remarks, "Please don't speak for me."
Mr. Misc. = card carrying old gaurd.
All you've got is a house of cards, HobbitFan.
Depends on sales more than anything else I would say. As long as there is financial incentive to do so, the Realms will survive in some manner. Probably not in a form I'll be interested in, as I've already lost interest in the 4e version, but in some version as long as the sales hold up.
Well, if the fans are lucky, WotC sales of FR stuff will be so bad that they will sell the license to a 3rd party that actually cares about the setting, allowing them to rebuild it and erase the travesty that has been passed off as FR.
One can only hope...
Looking into the future, I see the Realms dying as a RPG setting.
They've alienated the old guard in the hopes of attracting new blood.
But they're not doing anything to keep the new guys around.
hear, hear
If I can borrow one of Therise' favorite remarks, "Please don't speak for me."
Mr. Misc. = card carrying old gaurd.
All you've got is a house of cards, HobbitFan.
you are, an exception that proves the rule
its not a question of publishing fewer books but instead they are publishing none from now on.
Which is the function DDI is supposed to be addressing... while I would prefer hardbound books myself, as I'm not interested in the 4e Realms, its still producing material for the Realms, which is what will ultimately keep the Realms 'alive', at least if things go according to what seems to be WotC's plans. Like it or not, that's the new business model that has to be dealt with.
As to selling the Realms to a 3rd party company... I wouldn't hold my breath over the issue unless the setting really tanks. Which doesn't seem likely at this point really.
Nonsense. If interest is dropping here it's because the atmosphere is so discouraging of 4e stuff that it's hardly worth posting here.
-Well it is only .5% of the fan base raising a big old stink about what has happened in the Edition change. I support the Forgotten Realms no matter the edition. In Ed Greenwood and Brian R. James I trust.
18DELTA (The Chosen of Cyric is back from a little vacation over at the friendly candlekeep. Nice folks over there if I do say so myself. May Cyric bless them.)
Brian can paper over the cracks all he wants, but it's still ignoring the iceberg that's been driven through the side of the good ship FR.
Brian's work is about more than that. In the few discussions I've had with him regarding elements of previous Realmslore being carried into the post-Spellplague period, I have come to appreciate just how truly like the old guard of "lore lords" [such as Steven Schend, Eric Boyd, and George Krashos] he is.
It'll be *because* of Brian's [among some others] Realms work that the Realms we know and love will be somewhat maintained in the post-Spellplague 4e Realms.
I'm sorry the thread was not more useful to most of you.
Continue to think critically.....
good journeys
Brian's work is about more than that. In the few discussions I've had with him regarding elements of previous Realmslore being carried into the post-Spellplague period, I have come to appreciate just how truly like the old guard of "lore lords" [such as Steven Schend, Eric Boyd, and George Krashos] he is.
It'll be *because* of Brian's [among some others] Realms work that the Realms we know and love will be somewhat maintained in the post-Spellplague 4e Realms.
Name dropping a few NPC's from the Realms doesn't cut it. Unless Brian's going to set his lore in the Realms (I.e. 1375 DR), which allows him to bring back Mystra, various countries and the likes of Alusair and the Seven Sisters, he is just papering over cracks.
However, he's already said he's not doing that. Shame.
18DELTA (Cyric approves of this post!)
Originally Posted by HobbitFan
"They've alienated the old guard in the hopes of attracting new blood. "
I have been a an since 87 so as MR M states please do not speak for all of us. Plus you knew what this thread was going to possibly start.
Beyond that, most people access the Realms through novels, and Wizards seems to be keeping to its busy schedule of ten or twelve new titles per year there.
You don't need to remain in the 1375 DR time-period in order to generate worthwhile Realmslore that still resonants with pre-Spellplague references. Steven Schend's Blackstaff Tower is proof enough of that.
A few references to the time when the Realms was the Realms hardly inspires me to go out and buy a book. Put it this way, would you buy a book that is 90% offensive to you, just for the 10% of average lore?
Sure the Realms have a future.
As a rough beast that has about as much in common with the Realms as Kelly's Heroes does with Saving Private Ryan.
As others have said, new articles in DDI will continue to appear, but even leaving that aside, new Living Forgotten Realms adventures are appearing at the rate of once per week.
And these LFR adventures are freely available? Or does one have to jump through multiple hoops to get simple adventures for, again, that rough beast?
Beyond that, most people access the Realms through novels, and Wizards seems to be keeping to its busy schedule of ten or twelve new titles per year there.
So it's a Novel Setting. That's great.
18DELTA (Chosen of the Master, Cyric.)
I can see a situation very clearly where by the next edition, the Forgotten Realms have gone the way of Greyhawk and faded into obscurity or, thinking more positively a little, shrunk down to just an intellectual property with a novel line like Dragonlance.
How do you guys and gals see this? Am I way off base here?
It's possible, but who the heck knows? None of us are prognosticators after all.
Really, died down? It is definitely still there. The very premise of this topic proves it.
No it doesn't--this topic may be pessimistic, but it is still not "hateful".
Name dropping a few NPC's from the Realms doesn't cut it. Unless Brian's going to set his lore in the Realms (I.e. 1375 DR), which allows him to bring back Mystra, various countries and the likes of Alusair and the Seven Sisters, he is just papering over cracks.
However, he's already said he's not doing that. Shame.
That's because he can't do that. He has to work with what he has (and on top of that, he's "only" a freelancer, not an in-house designer).
Also, be fair here--no one's saying you have to buy any particular book, they are just arguing that the Realms has a future because of the work of people like Brian.
Its as good as dead, and I have a very reliable, fool-proof method of determining that.
But I'm not willing to share. :P
Nope.
Its as good as dead, and I have a very reliable, fool-proof method of determining that.
But I'm not willing to share. :P
Why not McMarkus? ;)
A few references to the time when the Realms was the Realms hardly inspires me to go out and buy a book. Put it this way, would you buy a book that is 90% offensive to you, just for the 10% of average lore?
That is an inaccurate assumption. Steven used more than just "a few references." The entire tale of Blackstaff Tower is shaped around past events in the Realms.
You do both Steven Schend and quality Realms fiction an injustice by not checking this novel out for yourself.
Why not McMarkus? ;)
I judge interest in parts of the Realms by the sheer number of requests I get on a daily basis (from FR sites all over the world, including the Wiki).
And I can tell you that interst in 4e maps is NOWHERE in the ballpark of 3e stuff. I think I've gotten 4-5 requests for 4e maps total, and the ones I'm doing now are getting no 'hits' on my site (I can judge things by what is being looked at and downloaded and what is not).
There just isn't all that much interest in 4e, from what I see.
You do both Steven Schend and quality Realms fiction an injustice by not checking this novel out for yourself.
And as much as I love Steven Schend and everything he writes, I've made a decision and I'm going to stick to it. We need to draw a line in the sand and send WotC a message about how much we like their post-3e world.
In every war there are casualties, and I'm afraid Steven is a victim of friendly fire.
Which is the function DDI is supposed to be addressing... while I would prefer hardbound books myself, as I'm not interested in the 4e Realms, its still producing material for the Realms, which is what will ultimately keep the Realms 'alive', at least if things go according to what seems to be WotC's plans. Like it or not, that's the new business model that has to be dealt with.
don't like it. won't get it. hope it fails miserably. But the material you get there pales in comaprison to what you used to get. And not enough to keep the Realms from dying on the vine as they say
So it's a Novel Setting. That's great.
unfortunately they have even ruined that to some extent with the hatchet job they did to the lore. At least there are some good authors still writing in the realms, so there should be some good stories even though they might be set in this nonsense
don't like it. won't get it. hope it fails miserably. But the material you get there pales in comaprison to what you used to get. And not enough to keep the Realms from dying on the vine as they say
Neither do I, nor will I, but I can't say I hope it fails. And hoping that it fails miserably is just pure spite and malice. As to how it compares, the base isn't my taste, so I see no reason to think the supplemental material should be otherwise. But really, the volume is presumably the amount they feel is needed to keep the setting alive. Whether they are right or wrong is something we don't find out until its time for 5e.
I don't really believe it will work, but I'm still hoping it will. I love the Realms too much to hope for it to die... even after the butchery it's undergone.
That's because he can't do that. He has to work with what he has (and on top of that, he's "only" a freelancer, not an in-house designer).
And thank you for proving my point.
Also, be fair here--no one's saying you have to buy any particular book, they are just arguing that the Realms has a future because of the work of people like Brian.
As some Cordellian monstroity, sure. As the Realms? Nope. That's gone.
That is an inaccurate assumption. Steven used more than just "a few references." The entire tale of Blackstaff Tower is shaped around past events in the Realms.
You do both Steven Schend and quality Realms fiction an injustice by not checking this novel out for yourself.
I would, but firstly my purchase would be used by WoTC as proof that people actually don't mind the destruction of the Realms. Further, between Star Wars Saga (see, I don't hate WoTC in general!), my Superscription to Paizo, Mirror's Edge and college, my money is pretty tight at the moment.
Personally, I hope it succeeds, because otherwise the Realms are dead for good.(
They are dead already
and its not malice to hope that if fails miserably, I am hoping it will lead to retconning and returning to the publication of sourcebooks
I think if the DDi fails, that will be the end of FR.
Then again, when Eberron 4.0 hits shelves next year, it will be the end of FR on the DDi anyway, so either way it is doomed.
I really hope the few people who have actually subscribed don't honestly think there will be any FR lore post-4e Eberron.
I feel sorry for them if they do. WotC has already made it abundantly clear that their game-plan is "one setting a year", and that's it.
I really hope the few people who have actually subscribed don't honestly think there will be any FR lore post-4e Eberron.
As one of those people my answer is "No, I don't expect FR lore after Fourth Edition Eberron (Feberron?) is published". That may also be why my subscription is being handled in less-than-yearly chunks... so that I can bail the moment the FR stuff dries up.
Although I have to admit to currently having some enjoyment out of the Character Builder.
I would, but firstly my purchase would be used by WoTC as proof that people actually don't mind the destruction of the Realms.
But you know it wouldn't be. And isn't that more important? You could simply spin it as a Realms-fan-of-old purchasing a Realms tale for the sake of quality Realmslore.
Further, between Star Wars Saga (see, I don't hate WoTC in general!), my Superscription to Paizo, Mirror's Edge and college, my money is pretty tight at the moment.
Certainly understandable. I'll say no more.
If Brian can fill even half those formidable shoes, the Realms will indeed do well in the times to come.
You know, the Realms were greatly improved upon and carried by the superior freelance work of Eric L. Boyd for years.
If Brian can fill even half those formidable shoes, the Realms will indeed do well in the times to come.
with just an article every couple of months, Brian won't have the chance
I think what Stigs is trying to say is that we are both hoping for what you are, but we just don't see it happening.
neither do I, but as I see it, I have 2 choices, hope that WoTC comes to their senses or just give up completely on the Realms
with just an article every couple of months, Brian won't have the chance
Silly wabbit. With an article, "every couple of months," Brian will have exactly that chance.
The lore will be precise. Throw in the game mechanics and we're all set.
Silly wabbit. With an article, "every couple of months," Brian will have exactly that chance.
The lore will be precise. Throw in the game mechanics and we're all set.
its hardly enough when compared to sourcebooks, especially since the articles are limited to DDi subscribers. so I will never see them
but then lore is essentially meaningless and undesirable in the 4-Gotten Realms right?
It feels alot to me like the horrible state of Dragonlance post Dragons of Summer Flame.
It took Weis and Hickman coming back and doing the War of Souls to try and salvage that.
And, somehow, I don't see that happening here.
but then lore is essentially meaningless and undesirable in the 4-Gotten Realms right?
As to the other comments since yours.....I just don't see the fanbase as "fractured and divided." That is to say I don't see a great divide beyond the tiny number of people who are advancing the idea (either sincerely, as Stigger and HobbitFan believe [and which I respect, even though I disagree with them both] or maliciously, for whatever reason) on this forum and over at Candlekeep.com.
One of the players in my Monday game is a big Dragonlance fan who reads the novels like clockwork. Another isn't such a huge fan, but he reads the novels too.
Both of them generally have at least one conversation per game that goes along the lines of, "Did you read the latest novel? Yeah? It's crap, isn't it?"
Then the conversation moves to statements repeating the idea that sure, the change for Dragonlance was a bad idea, but trying to go back and fix it is just as bad or even worse.
Taking that lesson to heart, I don't want to see the Realms go through another big transition.
An enduring future, that will keep the setting as loved as it has been? Perhaps not. We will see.
Being a major dragonlance fan myself, I have to note that the changes that killed Dragonlance are a lot less drastic than the ones that have happened in the Realms lately. This has certainly caused a diminishment (not loss, diminishment) in my own interest. We will have to wait and see whether or not this is widespread.
its hardly enough when compared to sourcebooks, especially since the articles are limited to DDi subscribers. so I will never see them
but then lore is essentially meaningless and undesirable in the 4-Gotten Realms right?
same here, i wont buy the ddi as well so far on the table of content for each month i havnt seen anything i liked.
so why do i want to buy for a year, and not see anything i liked on it, or enough to make it worth the money
the realms are dead for me, i only will read Steven shends, Ed greedwood's and eric scot debies work anyway.
elaine is gone and out and i forgot the other i'd read. dead i tell you dead
It doesn't have to heal the wounds... that's not really the function of either. Sure, the fanbase is fractured and divided, but... so what? Eventually, the ones who really hate the new Realms will move on to something more interesting, or get themselves banned with the venom and vitriol, so one way or another, the problem gets fixed.
Right. I like the new stuff and 4E and Stigger does not. Stigger is cool though and does not really whine or complain when he makes his comments so many people who are "pro4e" are fine with any negative or constructive thing he has to say. Others just comes off as broken records so they get a different reaction. So neither of use see eye to eye with 100% of what is going down but we do it in a way that doesn't make use hate each other. We act like grownups (most of the time) and not like kids towards each other or with our opinions (I am trying to do this).
We are all gamers and if you are a gamer since the 80's you know these games change. You can still play it any way you want. These boards should be more for new ideas and not the "Oh woe is me, the sky is falling posts" that some threads are.
I don't even want to respond anymore because most of the people that used to annoy me don't anymore. I am over them. I see their point and either just ignore them or see that they too have changed in how they respond to other posters. I do respond only to show some pro4E lurkers out there that this board is not just filled with one type of gamer. I post because I hope other new fans read these threads a realize that many different people are interested in the Realms and many different styles can be represented through the setting.
I just don't see the fanbase as "fractured and divided." That is to say I don't see a great divide beyond the tiny number of people who are advancing the idea (either sincerely, as Stigger and HobbitFan believe [and which I respect, even though I disagree with them both] or maliciously, for whatever reason) on this forum and over at Candlekeep.com.
So we're all being happy and friendly with each other in here then? ;)
Seriously though, I'm fairly sure a lot of this is going to vary region by region, or even town by town. Over at my LGS, 4e hasn't moved much at all, and the FR stuff barely at all, but at another I occassionally go to, they can barely keep the stuff in stock. That would suggest at least some division to me, although I don't know if its necessarily an adversarial division. In places like these forums, it certainly is rancorous at times, but 'on the street', as it were, I've never seen any evidence of that being the case. Usually, its more of a 'cool, whatever' attitude as far as I've seen it, at least face to face. So, I guess I would say it depended on the arena as to how contentious the issue really was with the fans.
And thank you for proving my point.
I guess I was just trying to say that Brian R. James is doing his level-best in spite of things (he's even trying to get us involved with his work, to an extent), and I think that's a good reason for people to be defending him.
But you know it wouldn't be. And isn't that more important? You could simply spin it as a Realms-fan-of-old purchasing a Realms tale for the sake of quality Realmslore.
*shrug* Maybe I will pick it up sometime. Used copies might be an option.
I guess I was just trying to say that Brian R. James is doing his level-best in spite of things (he's even trying to get us involved with his work, to an extent), and I think that's a good reason for people to be defending him.
He is indeed. But as it's impossible for him to do anything to actually fix the Realms, he is just papering over the cracks. Not even Michaelangelo could work wonders on the Sistine Chapel if the Pope insisted on doing it in a cave painting style.
Right. I like the new stuff and 4E and Stigger does not. Stigger is cool though and does not really whine or complain when he makes his comments so many people who are "pro4e" are fine with any negative or constructive thing he has to say. Others just comes off as broken records so they get a different reaction. So neither of use see eye to eye with 100% of what is going down but we do it in a way that doesn't make use hate each other. We act like grownups (most of the time) and not like kids towards each other or with our opinions (I am trying to do this).
Aye, well. It's been proven that whining on these forums gets results!
And these LFR adventures are freely available? Or does one have to jump through multiple hoops to get simple adventures for, again, that rough beast.
Fairly easy, and free, to obtain if you are a RPGA member. Organsize a game, order an adventure, and download.
Yes, they are brief adventures, but they are not devoid of lore, and not all of them are 'simple' (have you tried them?).
I think the Realms are going to do fine, given the turn out for Weekend in the Realms (even though the special adventure was a bit hit-and-miss...).
LFR will likely bring interst back, and a motivation to produce content.
Gomez
Aye, well. It's been proven that whining on these forums gets results!
Think that largely depends on if the devs/designers actually agree with you to some extent or not...
It was conducive to the designers own goals to side with the 'naysayers' whilst creating 4e; it is NOT in their best interest to side with the "more is better" crowd or the pre-4e lovers.
Having to know less information and still pull down the same paycheck is a pretty sweet deal, after all. ;)
Fairly easy, and free, to obtain if you are a RPGA member. Organsize a game, order an adventure, and download.
Yes, they are brief adventures, but they are not devoid of lore, and not all of them are 'simple' (have you tried them?).
I think the Realms are going to do fine, given the turn out for Weekend in the Realms (even though the special adventure was a bit hit-and-miss...).
LFR will likely bring interst back, and a motivation to produce content.
Gomez
I've had a look at the RPGA page, specifically the information regarding downloading events. In order to get these adventures, I'd need to pass the Herald GM Test, wait a few weeks, then download a maximum of two (if its a home game) or four (if its public).
I'm sure that's fine for existing RPGA members, but its still jumping through hoops. Further, for myself, I'd need to be running adventures in a setting I hate, for a system I dislike, in order to get a bit of lore.
All I'm saying is that perhaps RPGA adventures shouldn't be held up as one of the pillars of Shattered Realms lore, given that its not easy to get them.
Dont forget we arent allowed to copy large chunks from DDI. We can only use general points and a few quoted lines.
Note this is in many ways no different than discussing FR subject matter found in a paper only product provided by a subrcription service.
I do see the larger point that subscribers will be the only people to get this product first hand, though.
Note this is in many ways no different than discussing FR subject matter found in a paper only product provided by a subrcription service.
I do see the larger point that subscribers will be the only people to get this product first hand, though.
Even if you want to take the DDi stuff into account, you still have the notion that the material is nowhere near the same amount as before.
We may get what, 8 articles a year on the FR. Each article is perhaps 10 or so pages. Thats 80 pages of material. Thats hardly the same as 2 to 4 160 page sourcebooks a year. And I am not taking into account the page variance. There are at least twice as many words on a sourcebook page as that in the DDi, I suspect its more than that. Thats even being generous to the current state a good 1/12th of the material
deleted
is that a comment on the future of the Realms?
is that a comment on the future of the Realms?
No, I had responded to a post that got deleted, so I just deleted mine for consistency.
Most assuredly, at least in my campaign. Yes, I do subscribe to DDi mostly for access to Dragon & Dungeon magazine, but partially for the Character Builder also. The idea that post and pre-4E are mutually exclusive is pure hogwash as far as I'm concerned.
Bel
Pre-4e players got nuttin'.
Thats not at all 'mutual'.
Not mutually exclusive - 4e players have stuff to look forward to, plus all the old lore to build their games upon.
Pre-4e players got nuttin'.
I'm a pre-4E player and I have plenty to look forward too, both in 4th Edition (which I'm also a fan of) and in my long running 3E game, which has several miles left on it.
Mechanically, 3E is already spent, so there's not much reason to fret there. Plus, we've got all that old lore you mentioned already, so it's not like there's some great need for more of it.
If you assume division, then you have a problem.
If you accept it all as part of the Realms, then you're golden.
If you accept it all as part of the Realms, then you're golden.
I am then far from golden
but both views are a matter of opinion.
so regardless on which boat your in, both sides dont float the boat.
i wont dish out the money fo the ddi, and if thats where the FR stuff is coming from now, than the realms have no future. cant afford to pay for it, even if i go and pay for the year.
and if you think that it has a future, and you have the money to buy the ddi content, then your still screwed because guess what, you have to go and either explain it to the person at your gaming table or print it off which in the end costs you money to do so..( not to mention toner and ink cartridges if you do it yourself)
either way, bad business as it will haper wotc's income.
-Lets not forget the Novels either.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) ;)
-I think people tend to forget that the Living Realms is going to be producing lore. I think the Realms wont need DDI with the Living Realms going strong.
The RPGA means absolutely nothing to most players. They don't play and don't have access to it. Its lore production is therefore of minimal importance to the FR community as a whole
Lets not forget the Novels either.
True. The Realms are becoming more and more a novel line than a game setting. The question then becomes as the FR setting slowly fades away over the next year or so and interest in the campaign setting dries up, will the novels continue to sell?
I guess we are going to find out
-I think people tend to forget that the Living Realms is going to be producing lore. I think the Realms wont need DDI with the Living Realms going strong.
-Lets not forget the Novels either.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) ;)
and the novel that kills Cyric as a god, and turns him into a pawn of someone who the realms thought perished long ago......
before the dark times, before the empire.
and yes lets forget the novels, as the opinions of some of them here recently are getting a little unreadable as of late.
...because guess what, you have to go and either explain it to the person at your gaming table
Where is the problem in that?
DMs talk to players all the time. Besides the regional content is mostly for use of the DM anyway, with players using the rules content.
We've seen from the Cormyr article that such rules content doesn't take up all that much space. Easy peasy to pass on to a player.
or print it off which in the end costs you money to do so..( not to mention toner and ink cartridges if you do it yourself)
...or you just bring your laptop and hand it over to the player.
But then you have to figure the cost of the food you need to eat first in order to derive the energy to fuel your body to run your brain and have it direct your muscles to move. Can we blame that excess cost on WotC too?
:P
Good natured ribbing aside, I agree that WotC was not very smart to put what amounts to a stranglehold on any future setting content by making it digital only and then charging a fee for it.
People still read books and in this day and age computers are simply not as pervasive in all households (much less readily available to their youthful target audience) as they seem to have assumed.
My money is still on them releasing a hardcover FR book in the next year or so.
People still read books and in this day and age computers are simply not as pervasive in all households (much less readily available to their youthful target audience) as they seem to have assumed.
My money is still on them releasing a hardcover FR book in the next year or so.
To me, thats the only way to continue interest in the Realms. I understand the magazine stuff. Many magazines and newspapers are going online due to the cost
...or you just bring your laptop and hand it over to the player.
I don't like laptops at the gaming table myself. So I personally don't think that's an acceptable alternative.
By the way WotC has said if they believe a setting-specific book will be financially worth it to them, then they'll produce it. Thing is, WotC has a finite amount of resources. Those resources include:
* A limited amount of money its customer base can give them.
* A limited amount of quality writers.
* A limited amount of money to speculate on whether or not a book will be commercially successful.
* Other stuff I haven't thought of.
So given they can only produce X number of books in a year based on the above limitations, WotC has to be convinced that a setting-specific book will outsell a non-setting specific book.
IMO this is wrong. The following books they're releasing for FR campaigns include:
* Martial Power
* Draconomicon I: Chromatic Dragons
* Manual of the Planes
* Open Grave: Secrets of the Undead
* Player's Handbook II
* Arcane Power
* Monster Manual II
* Adventurer's Vault II
But seriously, IMO Manual of the Planes, Draconomicon and everything else will be perfectly useable with FR.
The only difference between 4e and 3e is that these books will also be usable with other campaigns.
Do you understand what core material actually is supposed to mean?
Those are GENERIC sourcebooks. If it works with any setting it is NOT Forgotten Realms material. Only the most liberal interpretation of thought would consider such a thing.
Those are GENERIC sourcebooks. If it works with any setting it is NOT Forgotten Realms material. Only the most liberal interpretation of thought would consider such a thing.
Non Realms books have been informing gamers of what can be found in the Realms since the setting was first released, msatran.
You of all people should know that, just as you ought to know JohnnLynch isn't saying those core products are Realms sourcebooks.
JohnLynch's point is perfectly valid. We're going to see a lot more non-Realms logo books coming down the pipe that Realms gamers will buy up and use in their Realms games.
It's another way of saying, "Keep your eyes open."
Describing something in Core does not make it automatically part of the Realms. I can indeed say that there are gas giant planets in the universe... but how from this information do you work out that it can be applied to Jupiter? Sure, let's not forget those harder folks in MADDER (Movement Against DM Distress from Extraneous Realmslore), but there is a line here for me. Pure Core would be too dry for use and it has been said that pure Setting would be unprofitable. Is there a middle ground and are we likely to see it?
I have a saying that "Just because it can be, doesn't mean it is." Useful in both physics and Realms, I feel.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric)
Where is the problem in that?
DMs talk to players all the time. Besides the regional content is mostly for use of the DM anyway, with players using the rules content.
We've seen from the Cormyr article that such rules content doesn't take up all that much space. Easy peasy to pass on to a player.
...or you just bring your laptop and hand it over to the player.
But then you have to figure the cost of the food you need to eat first in order to derive the energy to fuel your body to run your brain and have it direct your muscles to move. Can we blame that excess cost on WotC too?
:P
Good natured ribbing aside, I agree that WotC was not very smart to put what amounts to a stranglehold on any future setting content by making it digital only and then charging a fee for it.
People still read books and in this day and age computers are simply not as pervasive in all households (much less readily available to their youthful target audience) as they seem to have assumed.
My money is still on them releasing a hardcover FR book in the next year or so.
it is worth mentioning that the cormyr article was free, the next back drop will not likely be.
so that is pointless
and as the above a few mentioned no laptops it is still not there.
and if the dm or a player doesnt have it either then it is still not there.
If it works with any setting it is NOT Forgotten Realms material.
Wait, you can't use the Bloodghost Syndicate (a bugbear gang from a few Dragon issues ago) which would fit well in Amn, because it would also fit well in Sharn of Eberron?
That's the strangest thing I've ever heard. It also makes no sense.
I shall be more than happy to apply the material in these books to my Realms (especially as I am now in the planning stages of Running a Realms game)... as and when I see the sections in them that suggest how this material might fit into the Realms.
I imagine most people here have been interested and reading about the Forgotten Realms long before me. As such wouldn't you know where it fits in your campaign and world by reading it?
For example I think the Bloodghost Syndicate would be perfect in Amn. The way I came to this conclusion was I read the entry on Amn and a few weeks/months later I read the Bloodghost Syndicate article and thought "hey, they would fit in Amn well." If I hadn't read the Amn article I might have thought it fit in Baldur's Gate. Or I might not have thought of a place to put it, so I would have put it aside to plug in when I wanted to/saw a good fit.
I can indeed say that there are gas giant planets in the universe... but how from this information do you work out that it can be applied to Jupiter?
Well the difference is FR is fictional, unlike Jupiter. As the DM you can apply anything you want to FR. Does it fit the feel of the Forgotten Realms? Well only you can say that as what you think the feel of FR is might differ from what I think is the feel of it.
Pure Core would be too dry for use and it has been said that pure Setting would be unprofitable. Is there a middle ground and are we likely to see it?
Articles in Dragon? Its a lot cheaper for WotC and you get your setting-specific lore.
-Like saying the Fighter and the Wizard Classes are not allowed due to them being in a non-realms book? (The Core Rulebook) ;)
...both of which are referenced specifically in a Realms book: The Forgotten Realms Player's Guide. As I said, if there is material to tie it in (which is going to have to be in the book itself in future as no setting-only books are planned at this time) then it is all well and good. I even went as far as to say that I hope the material is there.
I imagine most people here have been interested and reading about the Forgotten Realms long before me. As such wouldn't you know where it fits in your campaign and world by reading it?
Know where it goes? On the first read? When it is an entirely new element? No, I wouldn't know. Which is why I asked that there be suggestions. Not cold hard "This is how it is" but is a suggestion or two really asking that much?
Or I might not have thought of a place to put it, so I would have put it aside to plug in when I wanted to/saw a good fit.
A job that would or would not have been easier if they had enclosed a suggestion of "By the way, there have been rumours of this popping up in where ?
Well the difference is FR is fictional, unlike Jupiter. As the DM you can apply anything you want to FR. Does it fit the feel of the Forgotten Realms? Well only you can say that as what you think the feel of FR is might differ from what I think is the feel of it.
Indeed and actually as a scientist I can, within reason, apply anything I want to Jupiter... certainly if it is only a discussion between a few friends and I (i.e. I am not attempting to apply changes to the setting as a whole but my Jupiter or my Realms.) The point stands.
Articles in Dragon? Its a lot cheaper for WotC and you get your setting-specific lore.
I have been reading Dragon and am enoying much of the information in it, but using Dragon as a patch for something that I feel should be addressed in the books themselves (especially considering the brevity of some) is not what I am talking about.
I shall be more than happy to apply the material in these books to my Realms (especially as I am now in the planning stages of Running a Realms game)
That's good to hear. I hope you have fun!
Describing something in Core does not make it automatically part of the Realms.
If it's a mechanical aspect, then yeah it's part of the (4E) Realms.
Lore is of course different, but really we're not seeing much in the way of creative generic storytelling lore stuff (yet) from WotC.
But again that speaks to the underlying idea JohnLynch was getting at eariler: D&D is a game that you play and that relies on rulebooks. That's just as much a part of the experience as anything else.
But when I think off it in terms of it being my FR's future, thats when I start to want to pull wings off of butterflies. :P
But when I think off it in terms of it being my FR's future, thats when I start to want to pull wings off of butterflies. :P
It doesn't have to be of course. Just run a campaign where the players stop Cyric. Or run some unrelated campaign and have the butterfly effect cause Mystra's death to go averted OR have the butterfly effect cause her death to be delayed by by an hour, so the Spellplague doesn't happen ;)
I don't like having things set-in-stone that way (which was supposedly the whole problem with pre-4e lore), so I'd rather just think of it as 'one possible future' out of many.
Wait, you can't use the Bloodghost Syndicate (a bugbear gang from a few Dragon issues ago) which would fit well in Amn, because it would also fit well in Sharn of Eberron?
That's the strangest thing I've ever heard. It also makes no sense.
Unfortunately, your interpretation of his meaning doesn't make much sense in the context of Msatran's post... he didn't say you couldn't use it, he simply said, in so many words, that there's a difference between Realms specific lore and Core material which could be used anywhere.
he simply said, in so many words, that there's a difference between Realms specific lore and Core material which could be used anywhere.
I'm not sure what that has to do with my point then. I've tried making a few responses and I've deleted them all because they're just repeating what I said in the post msatran quoted.
So... msatran (or someone else) want to clarify?
Although yes I do understand the difference between Core and Setting-specific books. Many core books are usable in campaigns set in a WotC setting, whereas setting books aren't as easily usable in a "core" campaign ;)
The Forgotten Realms Setting has a very bright future, imo.
You mean the bright lights of the oncoming train? :P
Well, the boards for them anyway... :D
Thank you.
Chaos
Got it! :lightbulb
Define 'Future'.
As in, will this game still be around next Month? Next year? Two years from now?
We need to quantify the question before a reasonable assumption can be made.
If we are talking just into next year, I think Eberron 2.0 will give it a much-needed boost, but after that, who knows?
Let's please get it back on track and keep personal attacks out of it, thank you.
I am not part of the LFR but I know that that and books and D&DI (which I think I am going to proboly get) are things that I can get. How can I get the LFR things and be up to date without being a LFR member? Can I?
You have to be an RPGA member, or at least play in a group with an RPGA member. RPGA DMs can download the LFR adventures, which are what contain most of the lore information. Though in Living Greyhawk, some regional groups put out quite a bit of lore of their own, some of which was available even to non-members.
-Yes I believe that the 4E FR has a future! :D
18DELTA (Cyric really likes his handy work!)
I am not part of the LFR but I know that that and books and D&DI (which I think I am going to proboly get) are things that I can get. How can I get the LFR things and be up to date without being a LFR member? Can I?
-Exactly.
Non Realms books have been informing gamers of what can be found in the Realms since the setting was first released, msatran.
You of all people should know that, just as you ought to know JohnnLynch isn't saying those core products are Realms sourcebooks.
JohnLynch's point is perfectly valid. We're going to see a lot more non-Realms logo books coming down the pipe that Realms gamers will buy up and use in their Realms games.
It's another way of saying, "Keep your eyes open."
That would be 1987, so I'm just going to tell you you're wrong, because Dragon was not a "Book."
Its very hard to design for two seperate settings with a limited amount of talent, so by nuking the FR setting into the void, they hope everyone will go running to Eberron, making their jobs much easier.
One rules (and setting) to rule them all...
and in the darkness bind them.
Too bad they didnt realize it would drive everyone to Pathfinder/Golarion instead. :P
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric)
-They didn't plan on Pathfinder/Golarion being around. Which is a good thing, at least it gives people a choice in what to play. :D
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric)
do we have any idea how well Pathfinder is selling?
i bought elves of golarion, the pathfinder CS.
plan on buying gods and magic.
i bought elves of golarion,
how is that? I like the Khorvosa and the Gaz books
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) :P
the new campaign setting is nothing like that. 4gotten realms reads like a homebrew. an awesomely expansive and creative homebrew but it totally doesnt have that box world feel to it.
it used to be that running the realms involved too much reearch so people didnt like it. i feel the opposite in that now theres too much creativity required and id rather spend my creative energy towards my own campaign setting. there is just as much homework involved in running the new realms as opposed to the old just a different variety. but to me the need for creativity completely negates the purpose of buying a setting. the whole point of which was to get a world in a box.
what i think youll see is new players come in play realms once and then move on to thier own setting or a different one. defining and developing thier creative strengths as they go along. i dont think weve seen the end of the relams but we have seen the end of the realms player.
its a shift in the subculture where a player wont simply find a setting they like and stick to it but rather changes settings frequently and periodicly revisit them. it makes for a better business model as wizards doesnt have to worry about a customer not being interested in an eberron book because they play realms or vice versa. if all players play all settings then you can revisit your customer base over and over again. wheras in previous editions a realms player and a greyhawk player where two different customers with some small overlap now there is simply the 4th edition player.
do we have any idea how well Pathfinder is selling?
I'd have to say pretty well. The Beta Ruleset sold out at GenCon by Saturday morning, even with it being a free PDF download on their web site (still is). Says a lot about something that people are willing to pay for it in hardcopy when they can get it for free electronically. ;)
how is that? I like the Khorvosa and the Gaz books
i rank it 8 out of 10.
i think the prc in it was garbage, but the rest of it was very good.
would of been 9 out of ten, but i had to go out of my way to get it
Gaming is more or less dead. That no further FR books are planned for this edition seals that fate.
Novels will be the main FR article from now on unless the sales drop, something which might happen when the gaming interest in FR declines.
On the PC front FR will likely survive, although with some problems. As WotC nuked Neverwinter Atari either has to build up a new franchise, ignore it and use the name anyway (not that unlikely) or deviate from the canon realms (depends on the contract).
The recent NWN2 addon already hints at the spellplague, so it is likely that they will produce an 4E game.
-They didn't plan on Pathfinder/Golarion being around. Which is a good thing, at least it gives people a choice in what to play. :D
Well, people had other choices even before Golarion came along...
Well, people had other choices even before Golarion came along...
-
...What I meant is WotC probably thought that everyboby would jump on the 4E Bandwagon. Alot of companies did but Paizo said noway jose! I guess WotC didn't figure that people still love their "Sacred Cows"(I know I love my "Sacred Cows" ) so to speak. Cause you know how broken 3e really is Chris Perkins said so....:D18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) :D
- I am kind of pessimistic towards the future of the realms.
I have been playing since 93, and all tthe sudden, for the first time since then, my interest is totally gone.
More than that, I have been playing in 3 different groups for almost a decade now, and none of the players involved has enjoyed FR4e.Some are playing pathfinder, others are playing gurps... and oters just gave up entirely.
Maybe it is just my personal experience, but who knows.
Hope I am wrong.
I think FR has the same future that Dragonlance had after Summer Flame.
Gaming is more or less dead. That no further FR books are planned for this edition seals that fate.
Novels will be the main FR article from now on unless the sales drop, something which might happen when the gaming interest in FR declines.
dragonlance was in a different market position then. most of what they were pushing with second edition wasnt really compatible with dragonlance. it was low magic world so you didnt need to buy 5 volumes of the encyclopdia magica. there were limited monsters no psionics etc. the push towards saga was more about finding a system that worked for that world. it also happened to really suck. saga got poor reaction and poor sales and no further support the exact opposite of whats happening with 4e. everything being put out will be fully compatible with the realms.
RedX, that's an interesting point about the player base change. If this is true though, will this sort of more casual fan really be that loyal to consitantly buying D&d products? I'm not sure they would...
that would be another shift in culture. if there is one thing about gamers its that we are horrible completists. i know i for one want all the options available for my characters and adventures that i can get. i think once that "oh cool now i can do this" factor kicks in that instinct will surface in your new gamers. and with each new setting being "core compattible" you wont have to worry over whether or not you can do that in whatever setting you play.
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
no your not. I think its laughable now though
the way i saw it, is regardless od what book it was in, it could be used in any world, requirements could be removed
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
Well, people are still rolling their eyes about warforged PCs in the Realms, or PCs playing gnolls or minotaurs.
So if it wasn't true before, it certainly isn't true now.
Gomez
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
Yeah, the concept certainly isn't anything new.
Nope, I find it silly myself. It was always the case really, though consider how often something like "that PrC/Feat/Whatever is for Eberron (or wherever) and doesn't really belong in the Realms" came up in conversations around here. Technically true, since its origins are certainly not 'native' to the Realms, but it does give the impression that its bad form to import them over if you feel like it. I can think of several instances reading something to that effect, and while I didn't think much of it at the time, I doubt anyone did, since it was true in a technical sense, I can see in retrospect where it might have supported a setting-exclusive mindset to creep in with some.
Well, people are still rolling their eyes about warforged PCs in the Realms, or PCs playing gnolls or minotaurs.
So if it wasn't true before, it certainly isn't true now.
Gomez
-That's not the "Everything is Core!" mantra, however. That's "You can use Core things in the Forgotten Realms", which is going to have a degree of certain things don't exactly fit, because some things don't exactly fit. The "Everything is Core!" mantra entails that you can use things from the Forgotten Realms setting in your 'Core' game (which is your own Homebrew, since there is no 'Core' world), you can use things from the Dragonlance setting in your 'Core' game, you can use things from the Eberron setting in your 'Core' game, and so on and so forth. Which is the part that is comical, as such things were never limited to those specific settings to begin with, especially when the individual has full artistic development of the homebrew of his/her choice (in 3e, the 'Core' world was based on Greyhawk, but was still quite ambiguous). Not that I have anything against them, but I do hope that other people out there "see through" their 'new' message. Not that they sell less products, but so that they stop with the stupid phrase, acting like it's all revolutionary and groundbreaking.
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
Matter of fact, the Complete XYZ Handbooks of AD&D were "Core" and used quite often in FR material afterwards, be that spells or kits or the whatever.
As for the topic, the main problem for the 4E Realms will be to recruit those who will be future heralds of the game, i.e. DMs. Most of the FR DMs I know loved the Old Realms and won't touch anything Spellplaguish or post-Apocalyptic FR.
I ... well, I've got 30odd FR and 3,x books and am happy with that. Lots of lore in books and novels of previous editions too. Why would any sane person put this on a scrapheap and start buying a virtually entirely new setting about which the players will most likely know more than the DM?
Right now I enjoy getting the missing 3,5E books at discount prices, you know ...
-That's not the "Everything is Core!" mantra, however. That's "You can use Core things in the Forgotten Realms", which is going to have a degree of certain things don't exactly fit, because some things don't exactly fit. The "Everything is Core!" mantra entails that you can use things from the Forgotten Realms setting in your 'Core' game (which is your own Homebrew, since there is no 'Core' world), you can use things from the Dragonlance setting in your 'Core' game, you can use things from the Eberron setting in your 'Core' game, and so on and so forth. Which is the part that is comical, as such things were never limited to those specific settings to begin with, especially when the individual has full artistic development of the homebrew of his/her choice (in 3e, the 'Core' world was based on Greyhawk, but was still quite ambiguous). Not that I have anything against them, but I do hope that other people out there "see through" their 'new' message. Not that they sell less products, but so that they stop with the stupid phrase, acting like it's all revolutionary and groundbreaking.
Works both ways there though... they are going for the idea that everything is interchangeable everywhere, so use those PrC's from the Realms in Eberron, those Eberron feats in Greyhawk, those Greyhawk adventures the Realms, etcetera and so forth. See, the thing with the idea is that if everything is 'core', then everything is interchangeable everywhere else, be it the Realms, Eberron, Grayhawk, Planescape, or whatever.
However, if you just say that "this powerful Rod is an artifact of the sun-god", you now have a generic doohicky that can work anywhere.
As Stigs said, FR-Haters didn't want to use "FR-junk" in their games, and Pro-FR people abhorred most things non-Realmsish.
Not me - I always used everything, as did anyone with half a brain, but people didn't get that and there was a very bad attitude about 'them' and 'us'.
So 4e set out to correct all of that with it's 'One rules to rule them all' mantra... and wound up creating a whole new cross-section of 'them' and 'us'.
Anyhow, what TSR accidently did by creating multiple settings, WotC s trying to fix - once again, they aren't addressing a 'real' problem, but rather a 'perceived' one, which I agree becomes a real one if enough people believe it.
Personally, I always preferred a little chocolate in my peanut-butter, but the 'purists' out there were the group WotC was trying to eliminate with this supposedly new approach. If you look at the end of the 3e product line (mostly the last 2-3 years), you can see a definate trend in making FR sources core, and providing multi-setting references in the MMs (something I thought was a great idea).
This is one of the few of their decisions I am behind 100% - FR lore is great and all, but when we are actually playing the game anything goes, and it's all about having fun. I only wish that they would keep that approach they had and continue providing SEPERATE lore for each setting they support. One set of rules is great, but we should get seperate ways of using it (like what Eytan did in his wonderful articles, or what Paizo did with its setting-specific adaptions of their campaign-arcs).
I think WotC's mistake is that they swung too far in the other direction, and are keeping things TOO generic for the games own good.
But thats just my opinion, and I'm sure everyone has their own, so whatever... it's all good.
And Markus, I agree with just about all of your last post. Beleive it or not.
A few of the rest of you mentioned the Eveything is core argument as being silly. I agree. It approaches the silliness of the "the DM has his/her power and freedom back with 4E!" and "less is more!" arguments.
Not that I have anything against them, but I do hope that other people out there "see through" their 'new' message. Not that they sell less products, but so that they stop with the stupid phrase, acting like it's all revolutionary and groundbreaking.
If we focus on the idea that gamers are able to adapt rules, we gloss over quite a bit of underlying information about the history of Third Edition D&D.
There have been countless discussions on the (then) 3E character optimization and other boards that led with the line, "...if your DM allows," when discussing rules content for the next splatbook that just came out.
This is because those rules were optional and not always balanced.
The rules for Realms Prestige classes at the outset of the FRCS were designed to be played in the Realms, because they reflected mechanically the lore of the setting (which is how prestige classes were supposed to be written).
These rules were not necessarily meant for a homebrew game.
Could they be adapted? Yes, sure.
Was the design intent that they could be adapted? No.
If you dropped prestige classes and feats into your game (such as rules content from the 3.0 FRCS), you could easily end up with unbalanced, overpowered characters. The FRCS prestige classes were well designed, but the power disparity (Spellpower comes to mind) was obvious.
Plus, not all prestige classes were designed equally.
WotC is doing away with all of this.
There are two key ideas. 1) Changing the way the game is designed and played. 2) Marketing to and against customer perception regarding the structure of the game and how it's designed.
WotC does not appear to want people to see their products as specific to a setting or as "core" or "non core", to the degree that this would cause a consumer to view one or more products as incompatible with another.
They have also changed how the game plays. They've captured the themes of a setting like the Realms through Paragon Paths found in the Forgotten Realms Player's Guide, but those PPs are designed to fit within the existing structure of the rules set so as not to be game breakers if used outside of a Realms game*.
From my point of view this is a new message and a new way of doing things for WotC.
I hope this does not come off as too argumentative or "attacking." If so I apologize. My goal was to share some ideas in such a way that they stand on their own.
* Note I've not played or had one of my 4E players use a FRPG Paragon Path.
Works both ways there though... they are going for the idea that everything is interchangeable everywhere, so use those PrC's from the Realms in Eberron, those Eberron feats in Greyhawk, those Greyhawk adventures the Realms, etcetera and so forth. See, the thing with the idea is that if everything is 'core', then everything is interchangeable everywhere else, be it the Realms, Eberron, Grayhawk, Planescape, or whatever.
-Which isn't exactly the "Anything can be used in 'Core' World now!" mantra that I am noting, but...This, then leads right back down the road that TSR went down, and regretted. We've got Defiler Magic working in Faerûn now...Well, in order for that to happen, we need to have the Dark Sun Campaign Setting published, complete with rules and all. And, Spelljammer. And, Planescape. And, and, and...
Right - that is why they are pushing the 'lore-light' approach. If an artifact is steeped heavily in FR lore, its kind of hard to explain-away in GH, or DL, or even Eb.
However, if you just say that "this powerful Rod is an artifact of the sun-god", you now have a generic doohicky that can work anywhere.
As Stigs said, FR-Haters didn't want to use "FR-junk" in their games, and Pro-FR people abhorred most things non-Realmsish.
-I'm not interested in the dilution of lore, per se. What you are highlighting above is already something that happens in Core products. Sidebars with "In the Forgotten Realms..." and "In Eberron..." do that, turning the Rod of Pelor into the Rod of Lathander, or the Rod of [Insert Eberron deity here]. I am discussing more of the...Red Wizardization of things. Coined, of course, for having the Red Wizard inserted into the 3.5e DMG, making him "Core", because, apparently, he couldn't be used when he wasn't Core.
As to the Red Wizard case, I suspect that was their first shot at getting people to think of setting specific features as something that could be used anywhere if they put a bit of imagination to it. At least that was how I interpreted the inclusion of the Red Wizard PrC.
To be honest, I don't see a difference. Everything is 'core' now, which by extension means that 'core' can be used in everything... sort of an a=b, which means b=a situation to my mind.
As to the Red Wizard case, I suspect that was their first shot at getting people to think of setting specific features as something that could be used anywhere if they put a bit of imagination to it. At least that was how I interpreted the inclusion of the Red Wizard PrC.
It's rather more Boolean for me. All D&D material, of which "core" is a subset, and FR is a smaller subset. Core and FR intersect with each other but I wouldn't say everything in Core should be within FR, although I think the idea is that FR is a subset of Core.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled algebra.
Amazing how their comapany continues to grow in this economy, isn't it?
To be honest, I don't see a difference. Everything is 'core' now, which by extension means that 'core' can be used in everything... sort of an a=b, which means b=a situation to my mind.
As to the Red Wizard case, I suspect that was their first shot at getting people to think of setting specific features as something that could be used anywhere if they put a bit of imagination to it. At least that was how I interpreted the inclusion of the Red Wizard PrC.
-Which, then, leads us to the conclusion that everything already is/was "core", causing the current catch-phrase claiming it to be something new wrong. Which is all I am saying.
It's rather more Boolean for me. All D&D material, of which "core" is a subset, and FR is a smaller subset. Core and FR intersect with each other but I wouldn't say everything in Core should be within FR, although I think the idea is that FR is a subset of Core.
-That sums things nicely, where Core consists of whatever it is that you want it to be, by virtue of being a nonexisting world of your (the DMs) choosing.
And Paizo is always looking to pick-up new talent.
Aye, as freelance. I am sure many people working for WOTC in the months to come will be made to do freelance with other companies as well as WOTC.
And Paizo is always looking to pick-up new talent.
Amazing how their comapany continues to grow in this economy, isn't it?
I'm thinking of throwing my lot in with them
Good support for their campaign world
Well, people had other choices even before Golarion came along...
not any good ones
Sure there were, just not ones you were interested in. :P
-Right. Personally, Golarion does nothing for me. The map is nice, on their website, but other than that...
Can't say Golarion does much for me either... rules are interesting abstractly, but not much else. Homebrew is looking better and better, and
I like Golarion. More than I do the Realms at this point
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
You mean the Red Wizard Prestige class in the 3E Dungeon Master's Guide wasn't available outside the Realms?
[/sarcasm]
And one more thing to remember about the Realms... Lots of Portals to lots of worlds. There's a Kender running around Faerûn out there, so who's to say that a Warforged or Changeling might not end up in Waterdeep?
-Am I the only one who finds the "Now everything is 'Core' compatible!"...mantra(?) silly? As in, it wasn't before?
previously many settings were defined by what they didnt have more than by what they did. making each campaign setting feel less like a setting and more like a wholly different game.
-Am I the only one who finds the "Everyone responding to me" thing a little weird?
...guess you attract weirdos.
-Speak of the devil...
previously many settings were defined by what they didnt have more than by what they did.
Can't say that I agree.
previously many settings were defined by what they didnt have more than by what they did. making each campaign setting feel less like a setting and more like a wholly different game.
That's an interesting point. IMO, I thought the way magic worked defined many of the previous settings and made them unique. For example, DL had the 3 moons, Darksun had defilers and preservers, FR had the Weave, Ravenloft games were affected by the Dark Powers, etc.
I think the main problem is the fact that everything unique in each setting has been eliminated in order for every supplement to be equally appealing to every game. While that may make economic sense in a time of poor economy, in the long run I think it's detrimental as people will lose interest in any setting book and instead make their own homebrew settings. After all, with the less is more view of 4e, Dungeon Masters have to make up most of the game to fill in the gaping voids that exist. The same trend can be seen in the new novels as well.
#2 - Another 'bragging-type' aspect was "my game is waaaaay better then yours". I saw gamers spending MORE time at the LFGS arguiing the finer points of FR and DL - and which was better - then I EVER saw anyone playing. With all things being equal, they have eliminated that rather entertaining aspect as well.
#3 - If all settngs are the same now, there is no reason for us to switch to other ones. If FR and Eberron are to be 100% compatible, why the hell should I shell out money for the Eb books when I already have pretty much the same thing with my FR setting? Once again, they've managed to curtail a part of their own revenue. If they thought FR players weren't buying them, they need to re-think their decisions. I never played Eberron, but I bought all the books: You see, I actually play this silly little game, not just talk about it.
#4 - Similar to the other points - with all things being equal, we've also lost the discussions about power-builds and broken PrCs/Feats. If my sword swing does the same damage at the same level as a mage's Magic Missile, or a Warlock's Blast, or a Priest's Holy Strike, or a Ranger's Arrow, etc, etc, etc... there really is no need to even bother with classes, let alone discuss them.
I could go on, but I'm really beating the same exact point to death - this game has always been about OTHER THINGS besides playing the damn game, and Wizbro has decided it didn't like that aspect. They don't want people talking about it or thinking about it or trying to collect all the books - they want people playing it.
Thats a perfectly reasonable assumption to make, given that they ARE a game company, but that just means they clearly do NOT understand D&D. I have said it before and I'll say it again -
"P&P RPGs are not just a game, they are a lifestyle."
By trying to change that, they eliminate a lot of the appeal the game had for many people. For instance, I bet at least half the people who come to these boards don't even play in an FR D&D game - they come here for the novels, or perhaps even the computer games.
Whatever the reason, they came here to have their minds stimulated, and discuss ideas and 'What-if' scenarios. Hasbro's teatment of D&D as 'just another game' spells doom for D&D, IMHO.
Not now, or even next year... but it is the end of an era.
I agree with the core of your ideas regarding the social nature of the game and the value that has, but I don't think you've accurately portrayed the 4E game rules nor the structure of the current Realms.
#2 - Another 'bragging-type' aspect was "my game is waaaaay better then yours". I saw gamers spending MORE time at the LFGS arguiing the finer points of FR and DL - and which was better - then I EVER saw anyone playing. With all things being equal, they have eliminated that rather entertaining aspect as well.
-Ew, people actually go to comic shops and such to play D&D, willingly?
But surely the novels and LFR will keep the setting alive. At some point 6-10 years down the line there will be 5E and a new take on the realms. If the new realms sell then they will keep it 4eish, if not they well retcon it back to the way it was. As memory serves FR has a new apocalyptic event every 3rd Tuesday. If people really like the current one, how hard is for a new apocalypse to change it back? For FR fans is the issue 4e or the new time period. If you like 4e but don’t like the current setting run the old one in 4e, it does seem that hard to convert. If you don’t like 4e and the current setting, there is like what, 20 different 3e FR splat books? Surely there is enough materiel to keep running FR. Intellectual properties that make money don’t go away, they may go fallow but sooner or later they get rebooted (James Bond, Batman, Star Trek etc.).
I am only lurking on this thread because passionate discussions of gloom and doom (regardless of topic) are interesting to me.
Hey, at least you're honest.:P
As memory serves FR has a new apocalyptic event every 3rd Tuesday.
See, in my opinion that is something that should not be. I'd rather just keep my Realms as I like it than accept the changes I dislike, then hope for yet another world-shaking event to put everything back as it was. It's just easier that way.
-Eww...
What's wrong?
Hey, at least you're honest.:P
See, in my opinion that is something that should not be. I'd rather just keep my Realms as I like it than accept the changes I dislike, then hope for yet another world-shaking event to put everything back as it was. It's just easier that way.
I was not saying that apocalypse of the week is good, or that a new apocalypse to fix the last apocalypse is good storytelling. I was just commenting that I seem to remember that apocalypse of the week was fairly common in FR in 2e and 3e, before the current timeline. My FR info comes from games I played 15-17 years ago, and from stuff I gleamed from the print version of Dragon and from this site, but it seems to me the FR is the most world-shaking-disaster prone setting in the history of gaming. FR makes Dragonlance and Dark Sun seem peaceful and serene by comparison.
I was not saying that apocalypse of the week is good, or that a new apocalypse to fix the last apocalypse is good storytelling. I was just commenting that I seem to remember that apocalypse of the week was fairly common in FR in 2e and 3e, before the current timeline.
You made a good point.
What's wrong?
maybe it's an Eww, another HobbitFan thread reaction
-Yeah, that's it.
-No, I'm still 'ewwing' about going to a comic store to play D&D. You know my feelings about playing D&D in public.
-Yeah, that's it.
-No, I'm still 'ewwing' about going to a comic store to play D&D. You know my feelings about playing D&D in public.
Oh yeah. I get it now, thanks.
Odd, that....
Markus I think you're stretching the idea of "generic" way too far when it comes to both the 4E rules and the setting.
I agree with the core of your ideas regarding the social nature of the game and the value that has, but I don't think you've accurately portrayed the 4E game rules nor the structure of the current Realms.
You are right, and I often exagerrate a point in order to drive home my point, so my apologies. People often tell me I'd make a good lawyer... I'm not sure if thats a compliment.
Anyhow, I'm glad you at least got the gist of what I was saying - it's always been more about the interaction of players then the actual playing, and I really feel we have lost something along the way.
So then we are all agreed that 4th edition FR was born out of a desire to please those people who didn't like FR?
Odd, that....
I don't know... there were some things about the old realms I really liked. Its just that the things I didn't like outweighed the things I did. The 4e realms gets rid of most of what I didn't like, and keeps what I did... I think its a huge success.
But, maybe the fact that the things I didn't like about the old realms outweighed the things I did means that I was one of those who didn't like FR, even though there were a lot of elements of the old FR I did... in which case you would be correct.
In any case, I personally am happy they did what they did with it. When I heard that FR was going to be the first setting released I was a little worried. I thought it would mean that I would not have a 4e setting book released for a setting I wanted to play until late 2009. Turns out I do...
I was not saying that apocalypse of the week is good, or that a new apocalypse to fix the last apocalypse is good storytelling. I was just commenting that I seem to remember that apocalypse of the week was fairly common in FR in 2e and 3e, before the current timeline. My FR info comes from games I played 15-17 years ago, and from stuff I gleamed from the print version of Dragon and from this site, but it seems to me the FR is the most world-shaking-disaster prone setting in the history of gaming. FR makes Dragonlance and Dark Sun seem peaceful and serene by comparison.
Care to share any exact event you refer to? That is, events of equally apocalyptic proportions as we have seen now?
AFAIK, there was a bit of a hubbub when during the Times of Trouble in 1358. And then there was a bit when Shade returned 20odd years later. Though the latter wasn't exactly Realms-shaking as far as I am concerned. All the rest, Myth Drannor and Netheril and what have you, all that happened hundreds if not thousands of years before the "timeline of the day"?
The current 'shake-up' makes all those RSEs look like 'hiccups' by comparison.
This one is what's known in the business world as "The Deal-Breaker".
Anyhow, I'm glad you at least got the gist of what I was saying - it's always been more about the interaction of players then the actual playing,(
I think this is where we're of differing views.
In my opinion it's always been as much about playing as interacting.
The way 4E is structured, a group of players needs to work together to survive. The mechanics support this and encourage teamwork, because you've got several class abilities spread out amongst all the classes that either effect other players or rely on other players to "set up" the ability.
In my experience players like leveling up, they like finding new treasure, they like learning new spells and gaining new class abilities. Putting this all together in the context of the larger campaign story is important too, but I don't think the former outweighs the later (IMO only, of course).
In a properly run campaign, everything should have equal time.
But in my personal experience, most of the gamers I know talk about D&D seven days a week, but only play one day a week.. and they spend most of the gaming session talking about other things!
I try to keep things on track, as I'm sure most DMs do, but that face-to-face social element is so very important to the 'D&D of old'.
Thats why I feel the DDi and the Gaming Table will never become big, unless some company feels like spending millions on bringing it on-par with MORPGs (both visually and in stream-linedness). The 4e rules are a major step toward the stream-lining, but WotC and Hasbro don't have the digital-savy to pull off the visual end.
I think only Blizzard has the cash-flow and wherewithal to make such an endeavor work - imagine WoW with Gamemasters!
But that would be counter-productive to Blizzard's business model. Right now they have the digital-RPG market pretty-much sewn up, so theres no reason for them to become experimental with new types of online-RPGing.
Without the social element or the eye-candy, I just don't see the draw of the Gaming table - it's a niche of a niche, and that's all it will ever be (until someone feels like plunking down a few million).
I've been thinking that given WoTC's new idea of one campaign setting a year, and nothing more, it'd be in their interest to kill off the LFR before next Gencon, replacing it with a Living Eberron.
After all, what better way to ensure large sales for the new Eberron campaign guide? Make all the RPGA members buy them to keep playing.
Its what I would do, if I were in charge of that decision.
Just conjecture there, but I do get that 'feeling'. After all, you don't lay people off when things are going 'swimmingly'.
Not that I mind. I've got my PFS!
Probably what they will do, especially since I'm fairly certain the LFR didn't do as well as they expected.
Just conjecture there, but I do get that 'feeling'. After all, you don't lay people off when things are going 'swimmingly'.
Well, anytime you make people jump through hoops to play a game you're going to fail when there are other less costly options.
Show
Dark and Empty
No future; the setting is dead/dying. FR wont die due to lack of fan support, it will die due to lack of corporate support. This 1 setting a year thing reeks of a company trying to make money with no understanding of their player base. This isnt like magic where you wanna play a new set every 6 months. People get attached to worlds in a way they dont get attached to card decks. WoTC doesnt seem to understand that.
I don't get the reference
could you guys explain the dark and empty line?
I don't get the reference
-It's basically the Sembian/Cormyrian equivalent of "G-d damn it!" that is used in the Erevis Cale novels that DELTA has latched on to, that got used to the point that, every so often, someone mocks him (or something in that nature) for using it.
No future; the setting is dead/dying. FR wont die due to lack of fan support, it will die due to lack of corporate support. This 1 setting a year thing reeks of a company trying to make money with no understanding of their player base. This isnt like magic where you wanna play a new set every 6 months. People get attached to worlds in a way they dont get attached to card decks. WoTC doesnt seem to understand that.
EXACTLY!!!
I'm so happy someone else feels this way. With only 2 books, no setting can ever hope to survive the test of time. 4E will most likely end in 2013-ish, meaning 5 long years before we ever hope to see a new Campaign Setting supplement. Its ludicrous to expect the fans to tolerate this. Honestly, I yearn for the days of 3.5, where FR and Eberron were the only shows in town. We had supplements galore and everyone was happy...
EXACTLY!!!
I'm so happy someone else feels this way. With only 2 books, no setting can ever hope to survive the test of time. 4E will most likely end in 2013-ish, meaning 5 long years before we ever hope to see a new Campaign Setting supplement. Its ludicrous to expect the fans to tolerate this. Honestly, I yearn for the days of 3.5, where FR and Eberron were the only shows in town. We had supplements galore and everyone was happy...
Don't worry. I have a master plan to revive FR 10 years down the line. That'll be 5 years after WoTC gives up on it (and d&d in general) as dead in the water and is willing to sell it cheap. In that sense 4E works out good for me
unless someone buys it 9 years down the line
Slightly modified line from one of my favorite movies (MIB). A lot of the people who 'care' about P&P RPGing are over at Paizo these days, and a few other small companies, and they will keep the hobby alive for years to come. The Realms aren't going anywhere - I still have all my 1e/2e/3e books and enough material to last me until the end of time, and with Paizo continuing to support 3e/D20, there really is absolutely NO reason to abandon FR - not now, not ever.
D&D will most likely just become some crappy board game in a few years, and Hasbro will be happy. Large companies buy smaller companies for TWO reasons - one to better exploit a lucrative IP owned by the company (M:tG), and the other is to kill-off product lines that somehow compete with their own products (D&D).
D&D will merge with Heroscape in a year or two - thats why they are making the minis neccessary for the rules. Collectible minis are just like collcetible cards - the more you have, the better your chances of winning against a number of different opponents. They don't want people getting into 'settings', they want people to buy boxes of expansion-packs - thats where the money is, and thats where the game is headed.
I guess it's a lot cheaper to produce boxes of cheap, plastic miniatures then it is to produce quality books - you can't get those kids in the Chinese sweat-shops to write decent English, but they sure can paint 10,000 little plastic men a day.
And that lead-based paint goes so well with peanut butter. :P
I very rarely check in although I've been a fan of the realms since stumbling on baldur's gate a dozen years ago.
No future; the setting is dead/dying. FR wont die due to lack of fan support, it will die due to lack of corporate support. This 1 setting a year thing reeks of a company trying to make money with no understanding of their player base. This isnt like magic where you wanna play a new set every 6 months. People get attached to worlds in a way they dont get attached to card decks. WoTC doesnt seem to understand that.
While this is unfortunate from your perspective, the overwhelming majority of D&D games are homebrew games in homebrew settings. The people who play in those or in a setting other than FR are not interested in the regional sourcebooks and the extra setting information that people who are FR fans in the sense most on this section of the boards want to see. They may occasionally buy an FR book because there's some specific crunch they want, or a DM may buy one which they can cannibalise for their campaign, but mostly they won't. Then you've got FR fans, who if they aren't playing in a certain region they don't necessarily need a book about it, and if they are playing in a region they might not got it out of a desire to avoid changing things that they've already detailed.
From WotC's perspective, this mean they can produce a book such as "Manual of the Planes" knowing that even if only 10% of their customers buy anything bar the core books and that only half of them will buy this particular one, that's still as many as they'd get if every single FR fan bought a "Guide to Cormyr". Niche products for niche settings killed TSR, and WotC appear to want to avoid making that mistake.
And that lead-based paint goes so well with peanut butter. :P
Lead-based paint on solid lead figurines!:P
What’s the big deal anyway? Some gods died, a few nations crumbled, and half a dozen epic level NPCs got offed. What does that leave the realms with, now, only 43 deities. Besides FR produces high level NPCs by the sack full. In a generation or so you will hardly be able to tell the spell plague happened, except that there will by 30 more Eliminster and Drizzit novels by that time.
Yeesh, at least Dragonlance had the decency to kill off all the Heroes of the Lance, most off who had violent deaths.
**********Warning sarcasm does not translate well over the internet.**********
What’s the big deal anyway? Some gods died, a few nations crumbled, and half a dozen epic level NPCs got offed.
That's a strawman, but even if it wasn't, it still wouldn't change the fact that not everyone has the same tastes you do.
Some quick questions?
Was the damage that much, I have not looked at the 4E book FR book yet?
How many dieties where there before and how many after?
If the setting is 100 years in the futre would not most of the NPCS, be dead anyway?
How many 3/3.5 FR books where there anyway? How many novels from that edition?
Yeah you caught me.
Some quick questions?
For me? Shoot.
Was the damage that much, I have not looked at the 4E book FR book yet?
For some people, it was "that much", it might not have been enough for others, and some people don't care.
How many dieties where there before and how many after?
I haven't counted, mainly because the actual number isn't that important to me, and irrelevant to whether or not I appreciate the 4E Realms.
If the setting is 100 years in the futre would not most of the NPCS, be dead anyway?
Yes, but I think you're overlooking the fact that the "timejump" is in fact a point of contention for some people, not merely something considered to be incidental.
How many 3/3.5 FR books where there anyway? How many novels from that edition?
I don't know. I never counted*, because again the actual number of novels, supplements, etc. is unimportant to me, and irrevelant to whether or not I enjoy the 4E Realms. Heck, the issue of edition is not in itself really that important to me either. Are you trying to make a point, here, and if so, what is it?
*And, I'm not going to find out for you. If you need to know, do an internet search yourself.
Probably what they will do, especially since I'm fairly certain the LFR didn't do as well as they expected.
Actually, over on the LFR/RPGA boards they have mentioned a couple times that the months since the LFR launch have seen RPGA attendance and participation records. From what I can tell, even with a few small glitches along the way, LFR is performing beyond anyone's expectation. Lots of old hands have switched over from previous Living campaigns, and the new edition has brought in many, many new players.
From my own experience running LFR at my FLGS, there is a steady player base of at least two dozen players. Half of which are newish to D&D and many of the rest have limited Realms experience. They are all having a blast. Personally, I think the FR has a strong and glorious future.
At the very least, it is going to be fully supported for at least the next few years that LFR is scheduled to run. Given the strong introduction it is getting with this new player base, I suspect that it will be near and dear to the hearts of many, many new players in the years to come.
There's no roleplaying. At all. Usually, I don't even see someone at the table who has the faintest idea of what their character actually SOUNDS like.
If the RPGA had roleplaying, REAL roleplaying, there wouldn't be more than two combats in a session, you'd have to actually talk to NPCs instead of making skill challenges.
One of the reasons my team took third in the D+D open was because we DID roleplay our characters in addition to being good on time. But those were people I TRAINED with.
How many dieties where there before and how many after?
Roundabout 150, all races included. Most of them were indeed "human" (oftentimes also called Faerûnian) deities. It is hard to tell how many have survived the cull, not least since some have "only" been demoted into a lower status (i.e. something in "striking range" of high-level PCs). At a rough guess about 30 full-time deities remain and about as many "lower-ranking" deities.
In a monotheistic world like ours, 150 deities sound enormous and people often were quoted as saying that they could not decide on a deity and all. To that, keep in mind the following:
- In times gone by the Romans worshipped up to 160 deities, we know the names of more than 400 Celtic deities (though oftentimes - thanks to one monotheistic religion I spare you the name of - not much more) and literally dozens of Egyptian deities too. These people did not fall apart or had nervous breakdowns because of this multitude of deific power.
- Have you ever heard those same people who complained about an oh-so difficult choice when it comes to deities also bemoaning their spell lists, feat list and the like, things expanded with each and every new sourcebook by their dozens?
- Would you, in case you get your driver's licence (i.e. character creation) hand the thing back the next day when you realize the vast amount of cars you can actually drive / buy now? Hardly likely, eh?
Hardly any DM I know has used all things available, but each and everyoe of them appreciated the wealth of possibilities presented and ready for use. I for one have yet to come across any book that can equal the amount of knowldege and information the Faiths & Avatars series gave to us.
Problem is, all those deities and the information contained in F&P was onerous and impractical.
I liked the 2nd Edition class kits, but gobbling up all the lore was not for me, as player or DM.
Having 150 +/- gods in the setting (thanks in no small part to TSR’s “if it’s in D&D, it’s in the Realms” shoehorning policy) was not a good thing.
Hats off to Eric L. Boyd for trying to fit it all together, but a lot of what was in those books was stuff (IMNSHO) that just had to be skipped over.
The "big deal" gods were talked about, the rest mentioned in a list format.
If a deity got left off that list, they likely didn't matter or were needlessly repetitive.
For the lore-obsessed (OK, not the best choice of words, but you get what I mean) there's always going to be like four older sourcebooks they can look in to find an expanded list.
Honestly it is a lot easier to choose a God in the PHB than in the FRCS because there were less PHB Gods and each had only 3 or 4 domains. Compare this with FR and its 150 Deities, each of whom had 4+ Domains which drew from a greatly expanded list of domains.
Please note I love the multitude of FR Gods and their many Domains. i just don't like power gaming min/maxing arses who look to mechanics rather than flavor in the choice of their God. Granted everyone does this to an extent however if your character's personality is already formed then the list of Gods goes from 150+ to a handful, of which it is much easier to choose just 1.
Hey Zanan,
Problem is, all those deities and the information contained in F&P was onerous and impractical.
I liked the 2nd Edition class kits, but gobbling up all the lore was not for me, as player or DM.
Having 150 +/- gods in the setting (thanks in no small part to TSR’s “if it’s in D&D, it’s in the Realms” shoehorning policy) was not a good thing.
Hats off to Eric L. Boyd for trying to fit it all together, but a lot of what was in those books was stuff (IMNSHO) that just had to be skipped over.
Well ... F&P was an attempt to press bits and pieces of three books into one while also adding prestige classes, hardly necessary deity stats and the like. Much of the info on deities were and could simply have been C&P'ed, for not that much had changed for most of them. In the age of web-enhancements et al, such a thing could IMHO easily have been done, yet we never really saw anything deiific been done FR-wise after the F&P web-enhancement, still in 3E times. Well, apart from the introduction of substitution levels in Champions of Valor. This, prestige classes aside, was one way of easily adjusting the specialty priest kits to 3E, but I would reckon that at the time the end of 3,xE was already decided and thus not much came our way since.
I did quite a lot of PrC work during the last few years (some can be seen over at the DnD-Gate), will compile them and hand them over to the scribes of Candlekeep in the not too distant future.
As for the necessity of all those deities. Well, I never touched certain regions of the Realms throughout my "career" as a DM, be that Calimshan, Chult, Evermeet, Cormyr or the Dalelands. Though I would not want to miss them from my FRCS' just because of that. For I reckon that not everything that does my fancy will strike a chord with another DM and s/he may well play all her/his adventures in said Cormyr or the Dale)lands.
(Now that I wrote it twice, I actually had some drow adventurers of mine raid the tower of Ashaba once and put the family of Lord Amcathra to rest (for a time).
Roundabout 150, all races included. Most of them were indeed "human" (oftentimes also called Faerûnian) deities. It is hard to tell how many have survived the cull, not least since some have "only" been demoted into a lower status (i.e. something in "striking range" of high-level PCs). At a rough guess about 30 full-time deities remain and about as many "lower-ranking" deities.
In a monotheistic world like ours, 150 deities sound enormous and people often were quoted as saying that they could not decide on a deity and all. To that, keep in mind the following:
- In times gone by the Romans worshipped up to 160 deities, we know the names of more than 400 Celtic deities (though oftentimes - thanks to one monotheistic religion I spare you the name of - not much more) and literally dozens of Egyptian deities too. These people did not fall apart or had nervous breakdowns because of this multitude of deific power.
So how many of those Roman deities are known from one site, one province, one diocese? How many of them have worshippers throughout the Empire/Republic, because that's the area you're comparing with Faerun's gods? With the Celts, how many of these 400 deities are a Nemausos and how many a Bel? Who is Faerun's equivalent to the God of Beech Trees?
Whether this is a valid comparison is another matter. The Roman deities are associated with Roman culture, the various Celtic deities with different celtic cultures. In Faerun you have various non-human pantheons, the Mulhorandi deities, the remnants of the Untheric pantheon, and a mix of deities with no particular cultural background that have absorbed lesser deities from other cultures until there's one deity for a portfolio. This consolidation into a narrower range of deities isn't exactly the way proto-Indo-European pantheon devolved into separate cultural deities such as Dyaus-pitar, Zeus, and Jupiter.
As for the Roman deities, Wikipedia provides a good list of major and "not so major" deities. Having studied the subject I know that most of the "major" deities were known to most Romans all over the republic or empire, while the rest were, as I said, more often than not, "used" when required.
People now may come in and say that the Realms may not need so much stuff and all, but ... it has all been done already and there is or was hardly any workload required to bring this into 3,xE or even 4E. As I also said above, people are always more than willing to gulp info on a new dragon lair, ruined castle, spells and whatnot - why sh/would they not be interested in as much and diverse info on the deities. Especially if not much effort is required to provide it again?
NB: Obviously, putting together certain "older" deities into one, say "moon goddess", "god of fury" and whatnot is in a way reasonable a thing to do, if decently explained. I for one would have no problem if they had actually said that the divine entity known as Talos to the humans is the same worshipped as Gruumsh by the orcs. Or that Selûne is the same as the elven Sehanine. But to turn the old material and info on its head by proclaiming Gruumsh actually masceraded as Talos for aeons (not solely to the worshippers but his fellow deities as well!) or that this god slew that one ... just for the sake of culling the panthei? Well, well ...
The number of important deities in a pantheon rarely gets particularly high. The Romans certainly seem to have identified less than thirty deities for whom it's worth appointing even a part-time priest. Those I'm sure would be known to everyone, and people would also know the dieties associated with their profession. But I doubt a Roman farmer would know which goddess he would need to appease if he was arguing persistently with his wife and much less how to do it, at which point he would probably go to a flamen or other priest and be guided through the necessary steps (most likely, after the priest looked it up himself).
I'll b quite honest though, I'm not personally bothered by the number of deities that exist. I cope perfectly happily with Glorantha's multiple pantheons and the interaction between those deities, so coping with a smaller number in Fearun isn't a problem. But if there aren't going to be any significant cultural associations attached to most of the deities, I really don't regard the thirty 4e gives as being better or worse than a larger number. It's similar to the number of major figures found in many pantheons.
Of course, we are speaking about one "nation" (the Romans) here, not different races or other nations who followed similar concepts of the divine (Greeks, Egyptian, Hetites, Phoenicians ...). Nor the Germans or the Celts ... who did have their own panthei - more or less widely cast and as "developed" as the more "civilized nations". (Not that we know much about those, of course.) Now, take this and try putting it onto a continent with hundreds of nations, dozens of races over the course of 20,000odd years. Wouldn't you expect a multitude of deities, or at least as much if not more than e.g. one real world "nation" like the Romans? I most certainly would ... and do.
Well, the farmer would know, because Romans were indeed pretty pious people.
Of course, we are speaking about one "nation" (the Romans) here, not different races or other nations who followed similar concepts of the divine (Greeks, Egyptian, Hetites, Phoenicians ...). Nor the Germans or the Celts ... who did have their own panthei - more or less widely cast and as "developed" as the more "civilized nations". (Not that we know much about those, of course.) Now, take this and try putting it onto a continent with hundreds of nations, dozens of races over the course of 20,000odd years. Wouldn't you expect a multitude of deities, or at least as much if not more than e.g. one real world "nation" like the Romans? I most certainly would ... and do.
Wouldn't you also expect that the Celts would worship Celtic gods, the Romans Roman gods (mostly), the Egyptians Egyptian gods? Yet there's no Calishite pantheon, no Chondahtan pantheon, no Damaran pantheon. So it's not necessarily correct to compare the two situtations. The FR "pantheon" has already been slimmed down massively to eliminate the original cultural pantheons and create a generic "human" one, and mostly lacks the specific local gods that are prevalent in so many historical ones. There's plenty of scope for that sort of local deity even in previous editions, but they've never appeared.
-Well, there is/was a Calashite Pantheon, a Talfiric Pantheon, and so on...
Key word highlighted. It is not the same any more.
-To say that the "Faerûnian Pantheon" is a pantheon is a misnomer. Humans from X, Y, and Z can worship anyone they want, yes, but in specific places, the worship of A, B, and C is primary. Regional pantheons are minimalized, but certainly exist, and are always evolving.
Please note I love the multitude of FR Gods and their many Domains. i just don't like power gaming min/maxing arses who look to mechanics rather than flavor in the choice of their God. Granted everyone does this to an extent however if your character's personality is already formed then the list of Gods goes from 150+ to a handful, of which it is much easier to choose just 1.
Many players enjoy having a lot of options to choose from, though. And as time goes by, the list of PC options (of all types) for 4E is only going to get greater.
Many players enjoy having a lot of options to choose from, though. And as time goes by, the list of PC options (of all types) for 4E is only going to get greater.
I have no problem with a multitude of Gods, like Old Faerun had. In fact, I love it. The problem I have is when people stop looking at the fluff of those gods and choose a god based solely on what mechanical benefits can be gleamed from them.
The problem I have is when people stop looking at the fluff of those gods and choose a god based solely on what mechanical benefits can be gleamed from them.
-Some people are just like that. It can't be helped, unfortunately.
You're going to get the same thing in 4e anyway, with the Channel Divinity feats and deity-specific Paragon Paths. Choice of deity will always affect the mechanical advantages.
Many players enjoy having a lot of options to choose from, though. And as time goes by, the list of PC options (of all types) for 4E is only going to get greater.
Maybe...
Thats the plan anyway, but so far I haven't been very impressed with their plan.
Its seems like most of it was sewn-together with empty promises.
Bluenose ... you see, it is quite obvious that not all Roman or Celtic deities were worshipped at one certain spot at any given time. But neither are all Faerûnian deities. There is a selected group that everyone would know and pay heed to at certain times though - a core everyone knows. I wouldn't compare Faerûn with the Celtic deities (as I said, we know of 400, a list that need not be exhaustive), but with the Roman, Greek or Egyptian panthei. The point is that the number of let's say "worked out" deities did not bother a Roman in the slightest, s/he paid tribute when it was deemed necessary. Like any FR character does (something you can actually often read in novels - no matter which "patron" deity the character actually has). And it is not exactly the case that the FR deities watch over doorsteps, the house well, the baby's sleep and the like either. Most have a more or less defined area of interest, portfolio or whatever you may name it. And most of them have been reasonably chosen too, though one can always argue about the figure as such (especially when it comes to alignment et al).
As for the Roman deities, Wikipedia provides a good list of major and "not so major" deities. Having studied the subject I know that most of the "major" deities were known to most Romans all over the republic or empire, while the rest were, as I said, more often than not, "used" when required.
People now may come in and say that the Realms may not need so much stuff and all, but ... it has all been done already and there is or was hardly any workload required to bring this into 3,xE or even 4E. As I also said above, people are always more than willing to gulp info on a new dragon lair, ruined castle, spells and whatnot - why sh/would they not be interested in as much and diverse info on the deities. Especially if not much effort is required to provide it again?
NB: Obviously, putting together certain "older" deities into one, say "moon goddess", "god of fury" and whatnot is in a way reasonable a thing to do, if decently explained. I for one would have no problem if they had actually said that the divine entity known as Talos to the humans is the same worshipped as Gruumsh by the orcs. Or that Selûne is the same as the elven Sehanine. But to turn the old material and info on its head by proclaiming Gruumsh actually masceraded as Talos for aeons (not solely to the worshippers but his fellow deities as well!) or that this god slew that one ... just for the sake of culling the panthei? Well, well ...
yeah i think they were kind of lax on keeping it orderly. the idea as i understood it back in the early 90s was that there were a set amount of gods that had different names and religions that integrated thier worship into the location and culture. sune was just how you said hanil celani in common. a drow would not turn back to the seladrine after being cast out so they would turn to elistraee who was originally intended to be sehanine/selune as well. but it got all caught up so that these deitys were tangled in different relationships and who was who got really turned around so they decided to just give one name to each god and kill of the excess name that had nothing but convoluted stories.
it works rather simply. elves as an elder race would have a name for each god. they would think of these powers as elven deities. what human would openly worship gruumsh? so the persona of talos was invented. the name and background is there to give it flavor and definition but the curtain has been pulled back so as to allow you too see who is really pulling the strings
Maybe...
Thats the plan anyway, but so far I haven't been very impressed with their plan.
Its seems like most of it was sewn-together with empty promises.
More content (and thus, more options) is inevitable because that is precisely how WotC sells books. If they stopped putting out new content, what would be left to sell?
More content (and thus, more options) is inevitable because that is precisely how WotC sells books. If they stopped putting out new content, what would be left to sell?
DDI and novels, of course.
Novels make more money - they appeal to a wider audience and are far less expensive to produce.
Sourcebooks appeal to a limited audience and are expensive to produce, and thats why they want to move everything but a few setting books a year to the DDi.
I don't expact a slew of splatbooks like we used to get, because that would defeat the entire purpose of the DDi - something they are really trying to push right now.
DDI and novels, of course.
Novels make more money - they appeal to a wider audience are are far less expensive to produce.
Sourcebooks appeal to a limted audience and are expensive to produce, and thats why they want to move everything but a few setting books a year to the DDi.
I don't expact a slew of splatbooks like we used to get, because that would defeat the entire purpose of the DDi - something they are really trying to push right now.
Right, Markus, but from what I can tell DDI is all about new content. To a lesser extent, the novels are as well.
I don't think the Realms have a future when it's all about money for WotC.
-Its been about money for the last 8 or 9 years.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) :P
-Its been about money for the last 8 or 9 years.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) :P
-It's been about money since the setting was purchased by TSR from Ed Greenwood. That's what business' do- make money. You can't fault them for that.
Turning out quality products should be part of the equation too though..
I ran a creature tonight (Hobgoblin Warchief) in our 4E Realms game that lets you rearrange the position of all that creature's allies on the map that are within five squares of the Warchief, by shifting each ally up to three squares.
All of a sudden the wizard and warlock are surrounded by Hobgoblin Soldiers and the Warchief, with a line of Hobgoblin Grunts between them and the other three players (Paladin, Rogue and Cleric).
So the three players charge and break the line of grunts, while I gleefully pound the crap out of the two casters before they escape back down the hallway and trigger a portcullis trap to save their sorry hides. (That’s in area 14 of the Shadowfell Keep adventure, for those that have it.)
Fun stuff....
Whether or not a game is set in the Realms, a good D&D game is always one that’s about having fun playing the game. Although the 4E rules take some getting used to, they have thus far in my experience proven themselves very conducive to fun, group oriented game play, whether that involves strategic encounters in the dungeons of Shadowfell Keep or matching wits with a stubborn Cormyrean noble (via a Skill Challenge encounter) to get him to part with closely held family secrets regarding the origins of Shadowfell Keep.
In some instances 4th Edition game play can flow so well that you don’t need all that much window dressing (read: Realmslore) to maintain a sense of disbelief with a group of players.
We're only up to level three so far. If the game play remains manageable and fun, I think it's fair to say the 4E rules do have a future.
But will the Realms? At this point I still don't know. I guess it depends on whether WotC intends to rely on teh strength of their rules set or the strength of the setting.
D&D has always been about making money, else Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson would have never printed-up the manuals and started a company around them. Don't ever think otherwise.
What I think has been lost is that the folks working on it truly love the game. I get the feeling "its just a job" to most of them now.
I do not get that feeling from the Paizo people though.
Since I don't know ANY of these people personally, I could be completely wrong, but if that is the case, then the WotC guys need to work on their 'people skills', while the Paizo people should be given an Academy Award for good acting.
Also, being an independent author for a company you are already a paid designer for is definately a conflict of interest. It may not seem so on the surface, but you wind-up dictating your day-job by your 'side-work'.
And I don't really care WHO protests otherwise - you wouldn't be human if you DIDN'T do that.
Since the novels make more, that comes FIRST, even if it means "the game be damned". Now, if you aren't an author and only part of the game company, would you really be making decisions that better the 'story telling' end of things, while upsetting most of the fanbase?
Turning out quality products should be part of the equation too though..
-Doesn't have to be. Isn't that the primary consumer complaint? In the past, X makes a product that people like, but as X becomes more established, or whatever, the quality of their product slips somewhat. That goes for nearly anything, really- books (first time novelists really try to make an impression, while established ones often seem like they're not trying anymore), worker productivity (when you're first hired, you want to make a good impression, but once your job is guaranteed), politicians (newer politicians have the 'spark' and want to make the world a better place, while many older politicians fall prey to the corruption and stagnation of the proverbial beltway)...
and then usually only after a full week in office. :P
But yeah, the same can be said for restaurants - the first two or three years they are usually great, and then the portions start shrinking, and the prices go up, while the quality starts to go down...
Damn... I'm fat....
Anyhow, for any of us who have tried to follow any creative persuit, be it writing, or art, or designing, or even cartography (:D ), you learn after awhile that inspiration cannot be 'forced'.
To do whatever you want - like us homebrew/Netbook folks do for the most part - is fairly simple, but when you have deadlines and are told to work on something that really doesn't interest you ATM, how the hell can anyone expect great things?
This goes well with what LK said above, concerning best-selling authors. Its one thing to write a book about whatever takes your fancy, but quite another to write one under contract.
I personally don't think I could do that.
And dead wookies would never lie...
Anyhow, the point is, if your really not 'into' D&D, your never going to design anything great for it. Good, perhaps, if you get lucky, but never great. greatness requires that certain feeling of excitement and accomplishment one gets... not the feeling that you just earned your paycheck (and we all know "we desereved to be paid more").
Whatever... this is all based off of 'the vibe' a I get when listening to certain game-company people, which could be due to any number of things.
Its also hard to be creative when you have the feeling the axe is about to drop at any moment.
We are currently doing odd jobs in Amn and my gnome is trying to get the PCs to head to the Moonshaes so he can learn more about his gnomish heritage. I am pretty excited to hang in the Isles for the whole campaign. We have a small ship already thanks to my artificing and may become Privateers for the Isles and fight against Amn invaders. One PC is a self-proclaimed giant killer so he should have fun on the isles and another is a witch of Rahseman who is looking for new forms of magic. Plus this is the first time since I played Rauric that I am running a good pc. I like it
So the Realms do currently have a future for my group! :D
What are your FR 4e games like?
Later in the adventure we found a way to get our souls back. Our souls were in a magical orb that the BBEG had. After we beat him we took it back to a wizard we were working for. Apparently all of our HPs are in one big pool and we can use each others HPs in an odd fashion. The DM is creative to say the least. ;)
That only happens in Illinois...
and then usually only after a full week in office. :P
-I'm not fully getting the reference. Political corruption?
Anyhow, for any of us who have tried to follow any creative persuit, be it writing, or art, or designing, or even cartography (:D ), you learn after awhile that inspiration cannot be 'forced'.
To do whatever you want - like us homebrew/Netbook folks do for the most part - is fairly simple, but when you have deadlines and are told to work on something that really doesn't interest you ATM, how the hell can anyone expect great things?
This goes well with what LK said above, concerning best-selling authors. Its one thing to write a book about whatever takes your fancy, but quite another to write one under contract.
I personally don't think I could do that.
And dead wookies would never lie...
-I agree. At the same time, though, deadlines looming over my head would certainly cause me to focus solely and primarily on the project, which would, in turn, cause it to get done much quicker, as opposed to about two years and not much to show for it. But, yes, at the same time, in theoretical retrospect, I might not necessarily like what I have.
That's a big portion of the problem. The 4E Realms was redesigned by committee and looks like a big compromise where they wanted to have their cake and eat it too. They wanted a reboot but didn't want to completely split with the past to try and keep a few old school guys around.
A compromise written like much of 4E in general for the Least Common Denominator.
That's not a popular POV to expouse I realize. And I'm not trying to open a simplification versus dumbing down arguement.
Let me use an example from campaigns I played in and ran years ago. The games I have the fondest memories of are one where Dungeon Master and players alike really like the world they are playing in, their chararcters and each others' company.
My best games were run in D&D games in Middle-earth, which I loved as a kid or Shadowrun or Star Trek or Star wars when I was really into those universes.
Basically, I don't see the love from wizards. I donj't see the energy and I don't see the excitement. And so I don't see newbie d&D and new realms fans catching the bug so to speak.
Novels might keep the Realms alive but not necessarily as a game setting. Two books, espeically of the quality of these two, aren't enough either. And LFR reaches only a small number of fans. Ditto with only the occaisonal DDI article.
All that and the D&D guys seem to be working with a small staff of writers plus freelancers, who are shuttling between major projects. I don't think honestly they have the ability to give any one campaign setting the attention it deserves becuase they have so much on their plate. They are working tto hard on core books and the next setting coming out.
Let me use an example from campaigns I played in and ran years ago. The games I have the fondest memories of are one where Dungeon Master and players alike really like the world they are playing in, their chararcters and each others' company.
-This is, I think, the 'worst' part of DMing in a homebrew world. The players only know what I tell them, since maybe 35% of all of it is written in documents they can access, if they wanted. If I decide to reach into the past, and reintroduce an NPC from the past, or include an NPC that turns out to be an interesting/affluent character (which I am planning on doing in one of my games shortly), it doesn't have as much as a "Cool!" factor. For example:
Forgotten Realms: "Laughing maniacally, the Lich steps out from the shadows, revealing himself to be Sammaster, the legendary Cult of the Dragon founder."
My Setting: "Laughing maniacally, the Lich steps out from the shadows, revealing himself to be Espar Hoken, the Lich who led the Dark Cabal of Sephir centuries ago.
-You guys don't know who Espar Hokan is, what the Dark Cabal of Sephir is, what what Sephir is, period. So, it's kind of ho-hum. Same thing with my players.
I'm running a naval based campaign in the Sword Coast based on pirating and encroaching regions of spellplague "infected" water that is beginning to spread out. If you've watched an old cartoon called "Pirates of Dark Water" that's the general theme and inspiration.
Running a relatively planar campaign that starts in Cormyr, which allows me to bring in a wide variety of different threats. As I like to keep my campaigns consistent, the events in the other two campaigns have impacts on this one (like the Inner Sea being at war due to the antagonist from the above campaigns actions). This allows me to make Cormyrs situation more desperate and explain the somewhat unnoticed movements of the antagonists of this game (who are acting somewhat opportunistically).
Another campaign is very inspired by Promethean the Created in theme (yes a WW game) and is set entirely in Algarond and Thay.
All of these are going very well and for once, I just haven't had the same issues or problems I've had before running campaigns in the realms. There is no "let's go after X NPC", because I just calmly explain that the spellplague has managed to kill or heavily disable most of them. Without their power they have gone into hiding or simply gone missing (EG: Simbul, who is still living with Elminster keeping care of him as he's highly diminished in power and gone partly insane: afraid of his own magic).
I've also got some really good people to play with in 4th edition, the vast majority of them being either new, or having stopped playing 2nd/3rd edition for a variety of reasons (particularly cited is the imbalance between casters and everyone else).
I think part of the reason I'm not hopeful (and this relates to what you guys are talking about) about the future is that I don't see the 4E realms as a labor of love for many of the developers.
Personally, I wish they would drop the "2 supplements and a poor adventure*" per campaign setting as well. The FRCG IMO was perfectly alright, but I wasn't really impressed with the FRPG. The FRCG is a useful resource, but I would kill for a FR specific Manual of the Planes like book. The MotP that is published is excellent though, but it's hard to apply because it really makes a lot of very Greyhawk assumptions about things, especially planes like the Shadowfell and this means there are quite a few bits that aren't as worth-while to me.
Much of the book is completely relevant and useful though, but it did confuse me (Dagon for example is mentioned in the FRCG but not in the MotP, causing me quite a bit of confusion). DDi has yet to impress me. The best articles they've released are too few in number, the Cormyr article (which was excellent and exactly what I am wanting from DDi) and the FR Epic Destinies article. It's been a bit of a desert and this is adding insult to injury on the fact this months dragon/dungeon were really poor in content as well.
I disagree with the amount of projection though that goes on with the likes of the quoted section above. In general, the 4E supplements released so far have been excellent: Manual of the Planes, Draconomicon and Martial Power are all equal or better than equivalent 3rd edition products. The problem I have is that DDi is not filling in the extra detail like region specific maps and such (again, exactly like the Cormyr article, where is more content like that gone to?).
The campaign I have in Cormyr is easily one of my favourite campaigns I've run in 2nd/3rd/4th. Much of this is facilitated by the excellent map provided, which just looking at it gave me numerous adventure ideas for me straight off. Originally I was going to move my PCs around a lot, but I've now decided not to do that and have based a lot of the campaign around Cormyr entirely.
Personally though, the core products are really well done and have had a considerable amount of thought into them (Draconomicon in particular). If the core books keep going along the way of Draconomicon, Manual of the Planes and Martial Power it's going to be pretty solid for 4th edition (despite the doomsayers). Where I'm disappointed primarily is in the DDi stuff, because there just isn't enough by far and they need to step up there. I can't imagine Dragon keeping up with two campaign settings (FR and Eberron) at this rate with any fairness: they can't even publish enough stuff to add to FR at the current rate!
*Scepter Tower of Spellguard is only alright. All of the H1-H3, P1-P2 etc adventures are far better. There is a far superior adventure, IMO in Dungeon with a frozen Warlocks tower that is both more interesting and more fun.
I've been and will always be a big realms fan but Mystra dying again was so hackneyed I thought it was a joke and I suspect everyone else here did too. Merging a lackluster continent with the planet was tired and contrived. The constant running Shar/Spellplague explanation for everything is as weak as an episode of Xena.
4E has turned off my players but if we start playing again, like most others I imagine I'll cannibalize aspects of the various realms editions and novels to put together my own homebrew one.
Is it the SETTINGS fault "your" players run to the iconics to get a problem solved...or might it be something else?
Maybe it could have saved it if it tried to capture a 1E feel and not handed you everything, perhaps given an overview of a few areas and hinted at some future potential groups or goings on.
Oddly, I actually think that is exactly the sort of feel the 4E realms has now. You don't get the details of NPCs like you did in the 3rd edition book and everywhere is more "dark", with less detail. Reading through the book gives me many ideas on where to set campaigns and similar, but there isn't a lot of detail given to many places (most only have a couple of pages at best). People are mentioned, but their general ideas, goals and such are generally only mentioned briefly. None of them get statted, except for some of the antagonists (but that's fine).
I'm not sure how 4E doesn't fit this exactly, because it's under detailed if nothing else in many cases.
The worlds been overdone, every corner mapped, detailed and lore saturated.
-Should I be the one to mention that, of all of Abeir-Toril, of the many continents that exist, only one is fleshed out in any great detail (Faerûn). Three others are fleshed out halfheartedly (Kara-Tur, Maztica, and Zakhara), two, we have names of, but possess no other information (Osse and Anchorome), and all of the other landmasses are terra incognita.
MUST ask this...again
Is it the SETTINGS fault "your" players run to the iconics to get a problem solved...or might it be something else?
-By George I think you are on to something very curious.
18DELTA (Chosen of Cyric) ;)
Later in the adventure we found a way to get our souls back. Our souls were in a magical orb that the BBEG had. After we beat him we took it back to a wizard we were working for. Apparently all of our HPs are in one big pool and we can use each others HPs in an odd fashion. The DM is creative to say the least. ;)
That is pretty creative.
-You guys don't know who Espar Hokan is, what the Dark Cabal of Sephir is, what what Sephir is, period. So, it's kind of ho-hum. Same thing with my players.
Point taken, but I've enjoyed your game so far!;)
In total, my 3 games have seventeen different players between them and they are all having fun, enjoying the general world and I am [for the first time in years running DnD] having fun behind the screen.
That's good, but I have to admit, I'm a bit confused--you've run the game for years, but only now you're having fun? That just strikes me as a lot of time invested in something you weren't enjoying.
Also, just a note--the 4E "core setting" isn't supposed to be Greyhawk.
As someone who's been playing FR campaigns since the 1E grey box, I think the Realms are going the way of Dragonlance. The worlds been overdone, every corner mapped, detailed and lore saturated.
No, that's not true at all.
No, that's not true at all.
I don't know. I kind of felt that way about the 3e realms. I stopped playing in the realms (until 4e) because of it...
I don't know. I kind of felt that way about the 3e realms. I stopped playing in the realms (until 4e) because of it...
I accept that some people feel or felt that the FR setting is or was too detailed for them.
That wasn't quite what Link182 said though. He or she asserted that the FR has "every corner mapped, detailed and lore saturated." That is untrue, as vast sections of Faerun (in addition to the aforementioned other continents) have been given only very scant detail and attention.
But my opinion aside, as I said a few pages ago, long-lived mutli-media intellectual properties that make a gazzilion dollars don’t go away.
The Harpers, Elminster, or some of the other uber npcs take care of whatever it is.
If they were true, the FR novels would only ever be about the doings of major characters (by the way, most of the Harpers aren't "uber NPCs"). However, that is not the case.
Maybe I had a crappy FR DM 17 years ago, but I certainly don’t miss the good old days where my character was vitally needed to pick up Elimister's laundry or go get Drizzit’s autograph.
Sounds like you did have a crappy DM, going by what you're saying.
As someone who's been playing FR campaigns since the 1E grey box, I think the Realms are going the way of Dragonlance. The worlds been overdone, every corner mapped, detailed and lore saturated.
DL got a crappy apocalypse remake in the mid nineties and what followed was several years of mediocre suck in the waning days of 2E. In 2000 the setting got an apocalypse-free reboot which mostly used political and societal upheaval (with only a dash of retcon) to make DL a viable campaign setting again. As I previously stated, with almost no uber NPC’s running around DL, there was little forced stage clearing that needed to be done to make it a world where even low level PC’s could be relevant. What followed was a well received and commercially successful line of 3.5 DL books put out by Margret Weiss productions.
Point taken, but I've enjoyed your game so far!;)
-That's good, then.
-Like I said before, the claim that "every corner was mapped out" is fallacious. Faerûn recieved the most attention, but plenty of Faerûn still has yet to be "mapped out". Leaving Faerûn, Kara-Tur, Zakhara and Maztica had a great deal of development, but there's even larger swaths missing there. Osse, Anchorome, and Katashaka, we know these are other continents, and that's all. And then, there's all of those other landmasses that are not even named.
-And, I haven't even gotten to the Underdark, under the sea, or in the clouds, where additional people/places exist.
If they were true, the FR novels would only ever be about the doings of major characters (by the way, most of the Harpers aren't "uber NPCs"). However, that is not the case.
Sounds like you did have a crappy DM, going by what you're saying.
I don't dispute what you are saying but having a campaign setting where you actually have a world spanning secret society of good led by an epic level nigh-immortal wizard who has a scores of powerful allies , is a narrative barrier you will have to write around if you want something meaningful for your players to do.
Can I ask at what point in time did D&D become a game where the DM was NOT in complete control at all times?
If I had a player say "Lets go find Elminster and solve the problem!", I'd say "you're right! You find Elminster, and he solves the problem. In fact, he solves ALL your problems from now on, and you get to sit home a lead a very long and fruitful life as a pig-farmer in an obscure village. The End... roll a new character".
-This is, I think, the 'worst' part of DMing in a homebrew world. The players only know what I tell them, since maybe 35% of all of it is written in documents they can access, if they wanted.
Hmmmm... I'm starting to see the 'rift' between you and I, and why we disagree on some points so vehemently, while on others we are on the same page.
Using 'known' figures is anethema to me. FR's history is for ME, not my players. I guess I'm blessed to have ones that are completely ignorant of the setting, elst I'd be running a homebrew (or GH again).
Seriously - if you have players that read all the sourcebooks, how the hell can possibly throw any surprises at them? When they meet that 'merchant' who is secretly an informant for the Kraken Society, I don't want them to say "Hey! I know that guy! He's works for the Krakens! I read it on page so-&-so in the blah-blah sourcebok!".
And if they read novels, thats even worse. Talk about getting the wrong impression about the Realms...
Seriously - if you have players that read all the sourcebooks, how the hell can possibly throw any surprises at them? When they meet that 'merchant' who is secretly an informant for the Kraken Society, I don't want them to say "Hey! I know that guy! He's works for the Krakens! I read it on page so-&-so in the blah-blah sourcebok!".
-I disagree. Well, firstly, if the player says, "Hey! I know that guy! He's works for the Krakens! I read it on page so-&-so in the blah-blah sourcebook!", he/she is in the wrong, as he/she is using Metagame knowledge to influence what his/her character thinks/does. In the game I am in, "Crazy" Ali just met Treespeaker Rhomathiir (Sp?) from the Wealdath. Did he know who the individual was? No, just an Elf of seeming importance. Did I know who the character was? Of course. Did I let that change how Ali reacted towards him? Nope.
-That said, I'd rather have a player go, ""Hey! I know that guy! He's works for the Krakens! I read it on page so-&-so in the blah-blah sourcebook!", and find it a cool situation, but not obviously use Metagame knowledge. That's the crux. If they do, they're just being dummies.
-In one of my games, the characters are currently going through the ruins of the House of Lore, a Candlekee-like repository of knowledge. The secret society they belong to learned that the 'Golbrana Chronicles'- a journal of the Wizardess Golbrana- contains the location of an ancient and extremely powerful Demilich who was sealed away, because the power of Elven High Magic and Human War Magic would not destroy him. I know how "legendary" the character is, but my players do not. I got the following reactions: "Sure. It gives us something to do.", and "There are things we can take from there. How much are we being paid for brining things back? And there's things to kill, probably. Good."
-Now, imagine that you and I were playing a D&D game. How would you react (not your characters) if I told you that your characters were going to be recovering a tome that could revive Tan Chin (again). Or perhaps Geldelrin (Sp?) Sethomiir?
Cormites consider the Harpers 'Busy-bodies', and thats exactly what they are. They are not about 'good' or 'evil' in my games, they are about 'getting the goods' on everyone.
The kind of nosey peopole who don't last long in the real-world, like that neighbor I once had...
That is pretty creative.
Yeah he is known for it. I tried copying some of his wonky stuff a while back having my pcs wake up from an "abandoned" magical research facilty in the Mournlands and the PCs found out that they were gestalt and could have telepathy with each other as long as they stayed within 60 feet of each other. Basically it was an experiemnt one of the nations was working on to make "super soldiers" by "twin-souling" common adventurers. I carried it over to 4E and just made the pcs pick a multiclass feat for free and they can still "talk in their heads." I am trying to figure out if he is trying to one up me.
Anyway we are still playing and I don't think the gimmick is the reason. He is also not going to run a canned adventure anymore so I think we will be playing in his campaign for a bit even though he has add. ;)
I a Cormyrian at heart.
Cormites consider the Harpers 'Busy-bodies', and thats exactly what they are. They are not about 'good' or 'evil' in my games, they are about 'getting the goods' on everyone.
The kind of nosey peopole who don't last long in the real-world, like that neighbor I once had...
-Unfortunately, I think the Harpers do(id) lean towards 'Good'. The Moonstars, on the other hand, they seem(ed) to lean more towards stark neutrality, doing what needs to be done because it needs to be done. Them, I like.
Thats kind of how I use them anyway. I don't like my heroes being too 'goody-gooody'.
There was also that female Harper/Stripper in Cormyr: A Novel that I hated, so I can't seem to get away from them...
I like the Moonstars better myself, but I detest the name. Perhaps take the concept of the Moonstars and apply it to the Harpers?
-I agree, with the name. In my own setting, I have an organization that has a similar function, acting as a "universal information gathering" organization. I call it the Akh'Tel'Shil (ATS), meaning 'Duty from the Shadows'.
DB
I'm not totally sure where Faerun is heading these days. It's a totally new setting compared to what it used to be ....
I'd say it's more like totally new game rules, but the setting is more or less the same (IMO).
Call me crazy, call me a traitor, call me whatever. I really enjoy playing D&D in the 4E Realms.
I like leaving the house every other Monday to go to game with just two rulebooks (FRCG, FRPG) and a binder with my adventure and DM’s screen in it.
I don’t even need to bring the core rulebooks since my buddies have them.
Contrast this with the veritable wooden log of books I carry around for my 3.5 Realms game.
I like the simplicity of it. I’m a very experienced DM and I enjoy making stuff up as I go along. Having just two and three page explanations in the FRCG of the places in the Realms I like to use makes it easy for me to build on the information therein.
I like the challenge of it. When things change in the Realms, it puts players and DMs and Realmsfans (that don’t play D&D) on the spot. Some don’t like to see changes, sure. But I do when it’s a wholesale set of changes due mostly to the advancement of time.
I like returned Abeir.
MarkusTay has asked me in another thread why I wanted to go “down south” in my 4E Realms game.
Two big reasons are Tymanther and Akanûl. A third is the Abolethic Sovereignty, which conveniently lay in between Cormyr (where my campaign is at) and those two realms.
I enjoy the change of flavor. When you’ve gamed in the Realms as long as I and my players have, a change of pace is very enjoyable. It lets us treat places and things we “know” about the Realms as unknowns again. Add to that our choice to treat both our ongoing 3.5 and 4E Realms games as being in the same Realms instead of separate and you have an additional layer of uncertainty owing to the unique path our 3.5 game has already taken.
That’s fun because discovering something new or discovering a big change in the Realms during play is always a blast and so a big motivation to play.
But most of all I like the advanced timeline. That’s got to be one of best fuels for creative DM thought out there for DMs that are somewhat familiar with the Realms. It basically pushes you to consider the new setting from a “what’s transpired?” point of view.
When Manshoon the vampire has lived for a century through the Spellplague, consolidated his power over Westgate and the surviving Zhentarim, what does that mean? How did he do it? What secrets of magic and of returned Abeir has he uncovered? Is he dealing with the Eminence of Aurant or the Ironfell Council? Has he restarted any of his long term plots that were thwarted when all of his clones awoke? Have any of those plots come to fruition?
Basically, Manshoon being Manshoon, what can he have accomplished in 100 years beyond what the Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide tells us?
My bet is: A LOT.
That’s what’s so fun about it for me as a DM. All these ideas and possibilities constitute fun thought exercises and are the seeds of future adventures and campaign arcs.
I invite those of you who have pondered things as I have to include your thoughts here.
I invite those of you who enjoy playing in the 4E Realms to post why you enjoy it, especially if your reasons are different then mine.
Lastly, let’s be careful not to let an edition war ignite here. Webster has the power to close threads and he will use it if we give him reason to.
I'm not totally sure where Faerun is heading these days. It's a totally new setting compared to what it used to be so it might have a future, but then again, it is all up to wizards of the coast and the fans to figure out if it has a future or not.
I'd say it doesn't - simply because future roleplayers won't come into much contact with the setting. Presenting a setting that consists of only two books (and you can't very well leaf through DDI to find out if the setting has to offer what you're looking for), in your FLGS's bookshelf right next to settings with significantly more published material, these two books probably won't draw much attention and certainly won't sell like hot cakes, so my guess would be that the FLGSs will drop them soon enough (or at least give them a less attractive place in the shelf to make room), some time after Eberron is out and gets all the limelight. I've never seen ads by WotC promoting the Realms either, and I'm fairly certain I won't be seeing any when the Realms are an old hat and Eberron is all the craze at WotC.
So I think that sooner or later the Realms will truly be forgotten. Sure, there's DDI, but WotC seems to think the rules come first, with the actual settings a mere afterthought. So you have to be a D&D player (or more specifically: a DDI subscriber) in the first place to actually come into contact with FR-related material. (And if you're a D&D player, chances are you've already found a setting you like.) I can only speak for myself, but I'm a D&D player because I'm a FR player. If the Realms were published by Decipher, I'd be a CODA player instead. So I think the setting has to speak for itself, appeal to its potential future fans on its own. The greatest ruleset ever invented by man won't do you much good if you don't like the setting that comes with it; but if you really like a setting, you'll either make do with the rules even if they'e not to your liking, or you'll convert everything and use a ruleset you like.
So I really can't see how the 4e FR customer base is supposed to grow. In my opinion, those who stayed on board for 4e FR and those the new setting has won over (and will win over until it's replaced by Eberron as setting of the year, thereby being pushed out of the spotlight) will make up the lion's share of the future customer base. Where fresh blood is supposed to come from, I don't know. But the way I see it, WotC doesn't even want new FR players once Eberron is out. They want D&D players, and they try to appeal to the setting-related tastes of their customers only as long as they feature a setting - which isn't long to begin with.
DB
They want D&D players, and they try to appeal to the setting-related tastes of their customers only as long as they feature a setting - which isn't long to begin with.
DB
-This mindset is alien to me.
Which part, thinking it could be the case, or that a business might do it? ;)
-Neither. That people flock to the "new" thing- whatever it is, setting, video game, car, puppy- and 'abandon', so to speak, the "old" thing. And then move on yet again with something new.
-Case in point, I guess, I still play my SNES.
Serious question here, asked because I'm not sure that they do.
Basically what I'm seeing is the Realms at the sort of critical stage that Dragonlance was under the 5th age crud or Greyhawk ran into after Gygax left.
I'm speaking of the Realms here both as a creative endeaver as well as an intellectual property.
4E has divorced itself from its past both in terms of history and in terms of the fan base.
New fans and those cannibalizing the sourcebooks for their own homebrews are the new market. Is this a group that will support the realms as a seting into the future?
All fans of whatever generation of the game really have going into the future are the novels, which WOTC doesn't seem too clear on how they will use, and the digital stuff.
Same concern, is this enough to keep the Forgotten Realms around?
I can see a situation very clearly where by the next edition, the Forgotten Realms have gone the way of Greyhawk and faded into obscurity or, thinking more positively a little, shrunk down to just an intellectual property with a novel line like Dragonlance.
Here's
....First lets look at why Dragon Lance fell into ruin. The entire campaign, continent, setting, etc... was based on the heroics of a few people (The Heroes of the Lance). When the writers decided to kill them all off and make second generations, third generations, etc.. of the original characters it started the decline. Then they did something even more stupid and allowed a Goddess to steal a world..... enough said. The one major flaw I see there is the fact that alot of the world and fan based put too much emphasis on the core characters. They ran the show.
This is not the case for FR. In Faerun, you still have powerful NPCs who rule countries, have exciting adventures, blah blah, but the world doesn't seem to revolve around them as it did in DL.
Second, lets look at one reason Greyhawk turned for the worse. I believe it was two-fold. First being that the entire setting became the "core" setting for 3.x (something 4e didn't to do FR). There was no Greyhawk setting, per se, just the core books. No real maps, informative backrounds on specific areas, no flavor for human races, nothing compared to FR. This (i think) was a huge mistake. Second one being the decline in the Greyhawk novel line. When I went to the book store, I would see rows upon rows of Forgotten Realms novels and I think I saw 2 Greyhawk books: Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil and Decent into the Depths of the Earth (both of which I bought). FR doesn't seem to have these problems because it's separated from core and it's novel line still sells lots, promoting the setting.
It's these reason alone I belive FR will not only maintain a good standing throughout 4e but succeed as well. There are some who hate the changes, as there were some who didn't like specifics of 3e FR. You can't make everyone happy, and if 4e Realms is your cup of tea, then drink up. If not, well I'm sure you still have your 3e, 2e, 1e stuff and theres more than enough info there to last you a lifetime of adventure.
Here's
There are some who hate the changes, as there were some who didn't like specifics of 3e FR. You can't make everyone happy, and if 4e Realms is your cup of tea, then drink up. If not, well I'm sure you still have your 3e, 2e, 1e stuff and theres more than enough info there to last you a lifetime of adventure.
The latter part is correct. With regards to the first sentences ... this is not exactly like "change", but more like CHANGE. A touch of Hamburg 1943 or Nagasaki 2 years later. They are still there too.
Second, lets look at one reason Greyhawk turned for the worse. I believe it was two-fold. First being that the entire setting became the "core" setting for 3.x (something 4e didn't to do FR). There was no Greyhawk setting, per se, just the core books. No real maps, informative backrounds on specific areas, no flavor for human races, nothing compared to FR. This (i think) was a huge mistake.
Are you sure that the Greyhawk setting wasn't in decline, commercially, before 3E? It seems to me like you are simply assuming Greyhawk was doing fine until it was made the "core world", and it all went downhill from there, but I haven't seen any evidence of this.
Also, while 3E Greyhawk did not have nearly the amount of material on it that the FR had, there was some material for the Living Greyhawk campaign that did describe the current world (such as the Gazetteer). So, it's not accurate to say that there were no real maps, background information on specific areas and no flavor for the human races--all of that actually did exist.
The latter part is correct. With regards to the first sentences ... this is not exactly like "change", but more like CHANGE. A touch of Hamburg 1943 or Nagasaki 2 years later. They are still there too.
Yep, as will the Realms be ten years later. I can't tell people to like the changes WotC has made, nor can I tell them to even accept them. All I can advise is to take things in stride and do what makes you happy no matter what setting/edition your happy playing in.
Are you sure that the Greyhawk setting wasn't in decline, commercially, before 3E? It seems to me like you are simply assuming Greyhawk was doing fine until it was made the "core world", and it all went downhill from there, but I haven't seen any evidence of this.
I didn't really play all that much before 3E, so I am assuming Greyhawk was doing fairly well. I could be wrong, but I have no basis for comparison between the editions. But for me to look at the fall of Greyhawk and compare it to whats going on in the Forgotten Realms, I'm fairly secure that the same won't happen.
Also, while 3E Greyhawk did not have nearly the amount of material on it that the FR had, there was some material for the Living Greyhawk campaign that did describe the current world (such as the Gazetteer). So, it's not accurate to say that there were no real maps, background information on specific areas and no flavor for the human races--all of that actually did exist.
Your correct and I did find some info, maps, NPCs, etc on the setting, but it took me to go through internet sites and fan fiction stuff to get there. If someone doesn't do Living Greyhawk or have the Gazetteer, how would they find out more info just on the rule books alone? There was no separate line, like we saw for Forgotten Realms and Eberron, for Greyhawk and that (I believe) was a mistake.
So yes, I was incorrect to say there was no info for this sort of stuff. I should have said, there was extreamly limited "info" for Greyhawk that you would find at your local gaming store.
edit: im still iffy, I will wait and see if the FR has a future, and untill then
The age of the setting - as standard fantasy-fare (albeit excellent), it was generic enough to have staying power, as did GH. However, in the end, it was that same 'genericness' that made people lose interest after awhile. 'Niche' settings usually have strong followings, but they have a much faster rise & fall rate then the more generic ones. However, it is the 'shiney' from those settings that slowly leeches off the fanbase of the more generic ones.
The second thing - and only time will tell how much of a mistake this was - the changing of eras. This has been the downfall of other settings, but I think DL may have been hit the hardest. My brother-in-laws's group were huge DL fans, but the group split up and went to other genres once they couldn't decide what 'era' their games should be set in.
So you've got the GH problem of stagnation and genericness, coupled with the new problem of an era-change. Sadly, the second is supposed to be a fix for the first, but I think setting-doom is inevitable after awhile, and jumping the timeline around only hastens the end, in most cases.
I don't think 4e killed FR, I think it was heading down that path anyway. Computer Games have been stealing all the 'new blood' RPGs have always gotten over the years, and 4eFR was probably WotC designer's last-ditch effort to save a failing niche-hobby.
Its not so much FR -it's the whole damn hobby.
I don't think 4e killed FR, I think it was heading down that path anyway. Computer Games have been stealing all the 'new blood' RPGs have always gotten over the years, and 4eFR was probably WotC designer's last-ditch effort to save a failing niche-hobby.
Its not so much FR -it's the whole damn hobby.
Quoted for Truth.
I didn't really play all that much before 3E, so I am assuming Greyhawk was doing fairly well. I could be wrong, but I have no basis for comparison between the editions. But for me to look at the fall of Greyhawk and compare it to whats going on in the Forgotten Realms, I'm fairly secure that the same won't happen.
I don't think Greyhawk was doing fine before 3E came out because From the Ashes, the sourcebook that apparently POed a lot of loyal Greyhawk fans, came out back in 1992, over 15 years ago. And of course, there are the things Faraer mentioned (and he knows more about the subject than I do).
That being said I can appreciate your not wanting to compare what's happening with the FR to what happened with Greyhawk. Comparisons like that aren't always appropriate.
Your correct and I did find some info, maps, NPCs, etc on the setting, but it took me to go through internet sites and fan fiction stuff to get there. If someone doesn't do Living Greyhawk or have the Gazetteer, how would they find out more info just on the rule books alone? There was no separate line, like we saw for Forgotten Realms and Eberron, for Greyhawk and that (I believe) was a mistake.
So yes, I was incorrect to say there was no info for this sort of stuff. I should have said, there was extreamly limited "info" for Greyhawk that you would find at your local gaming store.
True, it is limited, and I always did think the "Greyhawk-lite" thing done in 3E was kind of stupid (either use the setting or don't, don't merely use in it a half-baked fashion).
I don't think Greyhawk was doing fine before 3E came out because From the Ashes, the sourcebook that apparently POed a lot of loyal Greyhawk fans, came out back in 1992, over 15 years ago. And of course, there are the things Faraer mentioned (and he knows more about the subject than I do).
-Driderman, Driderman, Does whatever a Drider can...
True, it is limited, and I always did think the "Greyhawk-lite" thing done in 3E was kind of stupid (either use the setting or don't, don't merely use in it a half-baked fashion).
-Agreed, beautiful. The "This is kind of Greyhawk, but it really isn't" thing didn't really fly in my book. Mind you, I didn't use much of the 'Core' world for anything, but either use the Greyhawk setting, or don't. Don't be wishy-washy.
Yep, as will the Realms be ten years later. I can't tell people to like the changes WotC has made, nor can I tell them to even accept them. All I can advise is to take things in stride and do what makes you happy no matter what setting/edition your happy playing in.
I know ... and fair enough. I got myself 30odd 3E books and have loads more of AD&D material too, so I will be happy till I pop my clogs. Hope you will still be about creating 3,xE NPCs for the community too!
I know ... and fair enough. I got myself 30odd 3E books and have loads more of AD&D material too, so I will be happy till I pop my clogs. Hope you will still be about creating 3,xE NPCs for the community too!
-Now that sounds interesting. ;) Yes I have more than enough older books to read and use untill mstran likes the 4E Realms. :embarrass (Irony Folks) :P
18DELTA (CYRIC IS THE ****) :D
I know ... and fair enough. I got myself 30odd 3E books and have loads more of AD&D material too, so I will be happy till I pop my clogs. Hope you will still be about creating 3,xE NPCs for the community too!
Yep, ever you need an NPC, just let me know.
Sure it is fine. Like the Old Sage says if with guys like BRJ on the payroll working out the 4E/FR rough edges (for some) then things are good to go.
Some fans who do not like the change will either deal with it an play or go somewhere else. New fans will be brought in like they were in 2E and 3E and carry on as long as WOTC supports it. That is the ticket, support from a company. Greyhawk disappeared because TSR wanted to dump it and support FR. Eberron does not have a traditional D&D feel so it will never be the "Flagship" setting like FR will be. FR sells video games and pc games. It sells books. If sales are fine than it will be fine.
Boards like these mean nothing in the end, one way or the other.
I have to disagree here. I do not think FR has maintained the mantle of a flagship setting. I honestly think Eberron will take that title when it is released.
FR worked better for previous editions. It is obvious by way of 4th edition, that 'traditional D&D feel' is not what it used to be.
The two FR product books were good quality, but the adventure they made was hideous. You needed a shoe horn to use it. They could have come up with a much better introduction, especially if trying to attract new players.
I played 4th edition D&D for several months but it felt more like I was just playing D&D miniatures. It stopped working for me as D&D.
I don't slag it as useless, but I think 4th ed was detrimental to that 'traditional feel' the realms had that you pointed out above.
I am pretty much done with 4th edition, until DARK SUN is released. At that point I am willing to give it another go.
Until then my PC's are having a grand old time stopping the assassination of Mystra.
I don't think 4e killed FR, I think it was heading down that path anyway. Computer Games have been stealing all the 'new blood' RPGs have always gotten over the years, and 4eFR was probably WotC designer's last-ditch effort to save a failing niche-hobby.
Its not so much FR -it's the whole damn hobby.
Hmmm I have to agree with you about the computer games. However I see gaming as a hobby still running strong. I do not think however that WOTC has as much influence as it used to.
Overall very well said.
I have to disagree here. I do not think FR has maintained the mantle of a flagship setting. I honestly think Eberron will take that title when it is released.
FR worked better for previous editions. It is obvious by way of 4th edition, that 'traditional D&D feel' is not what it used to be.
The two FR product books were good quality, but the adventure they made was hideous. You needed a shoe horn to use it. They could have come up with a much better introduction, especially if trying to attract new players.
I played 4th edition D&D for several months but it felt more like I was just playing D&D miniatures. It stopped working for me as D&D.
I don't slag it as useless, but I think 4th ed was detrimental to that 'traditional feel' the realms had that you pointed out above.
I am pretty much done with 4th edition, until DARK SUN is released. At that point I am willing to give it another go.
Until then my PC's are having a grand old time stopping the assassination of Mystra.
Even though I am an EB fan I must say that FR is probably the more popular setting with a bigger fanbase and will be the bigger of the two settings. The FR franchise is also a good moneymaking product when it comes to books and vid/pc games.
It is all about different strokes. I am a novel fan from 87 and a game fan since 2000 and I am currently playing (unlike other folks around here) in the new era and it still feels like the Realms to me.
It is all about different strokes. I am a novel fan from 87 and a game fan since 2000 and I am currently playing (unlike other folks around here) in the new era and it still feels like the Realms to me.
Hmmm... and I've been a game fan since 83, a novel fan since 88 and I chose NOT to play in the new Realms, but to continue playing in the Realms before the Spellplague. Does that make me a bigger fan than you? Or is it all a matter of what your preference is for play?
Hmmm... and I've been a game fan since 83, a novel fan since 88 and I chose NOT to play in the new Realms, but to continue playing in the Realms before the Spellplague. Does that make me a bigger fan than you? Or is it all a matter of what your preference is for play?
My response was just to counter Mourn's. I wanted to state that I still think the Realms feels like the Realms and I figured explaining that I was a fan since 87 (novel and supplement) would show folks that long term fans can like changes. I also stated that I actually played in the 4E Realms. I boled it even. This was to show I have actually played in 3E and 4E Realms and to me both feel the same to me. It is just my feeling and opinion about the new edition.
I used to hate, loathe, and ridicule the world of Eberron. I bought the book, barely looked through it and hated it. Two years later I actually played in the setting and fell for the setting. If I had remained pigheaded, and stubborn about the setting I would have let my ignorance rob me of some fun gameing sessions. This was an epiphany for me. If I did not try something I thought I hated I might be here arguing against the change to the FR.
My response was just to counter Mourn's. I wanted to state that I still think the Realms feels like the Realms and I figured explaining that I was a fan since 87 (novel and supplement) would show folks that long term fans can like changes. I also stated that I actually played in the 4E Realms. I boled it even. This was to show I have actually played in 3E and 4E Realms and to me both feel the same to me. It is just my feeling and opinion about the new edition.
I used to hate, loathe, and ridicule the world of Eberron. I bought the book, barely looked through it and hated it. Two years later I actually played in the setting and fell for the setting. If I had remained pigheaded, and stubborn about the setting I would have let my ignorance rob me of some fun gameing sessions. This was an epiphany for me. If I did not try something I thought I hated I might be here arguing against the change to the FR.
That's what I was getting at. You played Eberron and liked it. So did I. Don't like much of the Eberron novels, however. You played 4E Realms and liked. I played it and didn't like it. I'm grateful that D&D is in existence to make sure gaming as a hobby doesn't die out, but my preference is not to the new Realms. Also, I like to say that 4th Edition is a good game system from a design standpoint, but I don't enjoy playing in it. Much like the Storyteller system is good for handling WoD, but I don't much enjoy playing in that either.
That's what I was getting at. You played Eberron and liked it. So did I. Don't like much of the Eberron novels, however. You played 4E Realms and liked. I played it and didn't like it. I'm grateful that D&D is in existence to make sure gaming as a hobby doesn't die out, but my preference is not to the new Realms. Also, I like to say that 4th Edition is a good game system from a design standpoint, but I don't enjoy playing in it. Much like the Storyteller system is good for handling WoD, but I don't much enjoy playing in that either.
I think you are an exception around here, someone who dslikes the newer FR but has played it. At least you tried it out.
I did not like the EB novels either until I read a few that finally clicked for me.
My players are starting to use their enviroment during combat and they never did that in 3E so I am happy. I am trying to come up with encounters that are more exciting and site based. Perhaps I could have done this before but for some reason it was not until 4E that I started to do it. Even veteran D&D Dms I played with never used the area around us in a fight much, or at least we as players never thought to use it because a greatsword always did more damage than a chandilier.
I think you are an exception around here, someone who dslikes the newer FR but has played it. At least you tried it out.
If someone invited me to a 4E FR game I would consider trying it. A chance to play D&D is a chance to play D&D.
I won't go out of my way to play such a game, though, because the setting does not appeal to me. Just like I won't go out of my way to try any number of settings out there that do not appeal to me.
My players are starting to use their enviroment during combat and they never did that in 3E so I am happy. I am trying to come up with encounters that are more exciting and site based. Perhaps I could have done this before but for some reason it was not until 4E that I started to do it. Even veteran D&D Dms I played with never used the area around us in a fight much, or at least we as players never thought to use it because a greatsword always did more damage than a chandilier.
Unfortunately, this isn't really a fault of the rules set either. I remember playing a number of 2nd and 3rd Edition games where we used the environment a lot. One of my most memorable was a 2E game where I threw a potion of reduce size into a mouth of a kraken. The DM, on the fly, thought up a few rolls that I needed to make to perform the act.
Where are the articles on other regions ala the Cormyr article etc?
I think we will see one, maybe two more from Brian R. James when he hears back from On High. Probably after the primary kerfuffle associated with the release of Eberron has died down to reassure us that FR hasn't been forgotten. After that? I suspect their focus will be elsewhere.
If FR is going to get one article every two months or worse, I can't see DDI being very good support for established settings at all.
I see DDI being very good support and advertising for the product that is about to be released... or that has just been released. The former to encourage people to buy it, the latter to encourage them to buy DDI (for the optional extensions to the material they have just picked up).
...
Yes, I do tend to get slightly cynical at 4am... but in this case I believe that I have reason.
If someone invited me to a 4E FR game I would consider trying it. A chance to play D&D is a chance to play D&D.
I won't go out of my way to play such a game, though, because the setting does not appeal to me. Just like I won't go out of my way to try any number of settings out there that do not appeal to me.
Interesting because that is exactly how I got hooked on Eberron. A buddy had a game and it was the only game I could get into. The trick was it was set in Eberron. Ouch. Anyway he was a good DM and I started to read up on it a bit and liked the concepts of the place.
@Mattdroz I am just glad for the 4E rules because it is letting me be a better DM (and husband, father ;) ) by making the Enounters so easy to set up. Now I have time to work on the area that the combat takes place in.
Interesting because that is exactly how I got hooked on Eberron. A buddy had a game and it was the only game I could get into. The trick was it was set in Eberron. Ouch. Anyway he was a good DM and I started to read up on it a bit and liked the concepts of the place.
Indeed, the fun (in my opinion) that you have has a lot to do with the people you game with.
I think you are an exception around here, someone who dslikes the newer FR but has played it. At least you tried it out.
I did not like the EB novels either until I read a few that finally clicked for me.
My players are starting to use their enviroment during combat and they never did that in 3E so I am happy. I am trying to come up with encounters that are more exciting and site based. Perhaps I could have done this before but for some reason it was not until 4E that I started to do it. Even veteran D&D Dms I played with never used the area around us in a fight much, or at least we as players never thought to use it because a greatsword always did more damage than a chandilier.
The environment is a great addition to add to any game. Only recently however am I hearing about it because of the 4th edition rules. The environment was always able to be used, and I set up encounters with the solution being environment oriented back in 1st edition.
As long as DM's are willing to rule on the spot. everything is possible.
I find Eberron ok. I'll check out the book on release but I'm unlikely to change my opinion of it as I just flat out do not like Warforged and such forth. I also dislike psionics, so while I don't mind the odd psionic monster (as something different) I don't like psionics at all [and never have]. Psionics are a pretty big part of some parts of Eberron and that's just not something I really care for.
Psionics works for individual worlds. With a magic system already in place in FR, psionics never worked well. I munchkined psionics back in 1st edition, when I was younger, but never really accepted them until Dark Sun was released. Psionics worked great in Dark sun. But generally I think having two magic systems is too cumbersome.
I have always liked the traditional flavour medieval motif of fantasy until I got into Dark Sun. Dark Sun was next to the realms, the best campaign setting made. I am looking forward to a new release of Dark Sun I hope in the near future.
I find Eberron ok. I'll check out the book on release but I'm unlikely to change my opinion of it as I just flat out do not like Warforged and such forth. I also dislike psionics, so while I don't mind the odd psionic monster (as something different) I don't like psionics at all [and never have]. Psionics are a pretty big part of some parts of Eberron and that's just not something I really care for.
I have been running 4E EB since Sept and had not trouble ignoring psionics for now. One Marshal that was after the PCs was a "Psychic Mage" from a dungeon adventure. Nobody really seems to mind.
Even though I detest psionics, and have never, ever used psionics in any of my games, I cannot bring myself to run a set of rules that doesn't include it.
When they finish the rules, I will give them a chance. :D
And then I will run my duel-classed Bardic Gnome Monk with psionics. :P
As long as DM's are willing to rule on the spot. everything is possible.
Very true.
gotta say. Do the realms have a future....I believe it has a bright and bloody future :D it feels right to me. I mean come on folks...we have had the time of troubles, arcane age, bloodstone pass, and thats just some of what we all got to go through, the realms change,,..alot...thats what makes them great. lets keep the faith and battle on past the spellplague and see what happens next
You can do that, but my Realms will never have a Spellplague.
When a company kills off about $500 worth of NPCs that THEY have sold me in the past 20 years, its time to move on...
I wouldn't buy a car with a bomb in it, so I certainly won't pay for lore they can nuke at any time.
Look at the dissent and anger between those who like the new Realms and those who hate it.
With 3.0, there was kind of a quiet passing.
But this has struck up something I like to call "The Divide." People either LOVE the new stuff, or HATE it.
I don't think that's positive. I've tried to find good in the 4e materials and can't. A ranger is useless unless they use a bow, and no one can actually be good at using a bunch of weapons. Everyone is overspecialized.
I can't stand it. Versatility used to be important. Now it's not important anymore. I hate the "stick to your focus or else" philosophy, the hundred year time jump in the Realms, the lack of information about towns, places and people that made the Realms it's own genre.
I'll be blunt. 4e is the Dungeons and Dragons of the desire for expediency. I hate laziness, and I hate the quick route to power. That's all I see here.
I think the Realms have no future except the one we make ourselves.
Look at the dissent and anger between those who like the new Realms and those who hate it.
With 3.0, there was kind of a quiet passing.
But this has struck up something I like to call "The Divide." People either LOVE the new stuff, or HATE it.
I don't think that's positive. I've tried to find good in the 4e materials and can't. A ranger is useless unless they use a bow, and no one can actually be good at using a bunch of weapons. Everyone is overspecialized.
I can't stand it. Versatility used to be important. Now it's not important anymore. I hate the "stick to your focus or else" philosophy, the hundred year time jump in the Realms, the lack of information about towns, places and people that made the Realms it's own genre.
I'll be blunt. 4e is the Dungeons and Dragons of the desire for expediency. I hate laziness, and I hate the quick route to power. That's all I see here.
Your understanding of the 4th edition rule set is clearly astounding.
Time will do that for me.
Lets chat again in about 3 years... if these boards are even still here.
I see they finally closed our favorite complaint thread, for reasons that were purely ficticous.
Ah, well... I'll be leaving you guys to your almost-setting and your 'giant killer statblocks'.
Please, do not derail the conversation with discussion of moderation or VCL action. Those types of posts should be made in the Community Business forum. Any specific complaints or questions regarding action taken against your account should be emailed to us through the Customer Service site.
I don't need to prove I'm right.
Time will do that for me.
Lets chat again in about 3 years... if these boards are even still here.
I see they finally closed our favorite complaint thread, for reasons that were purely ficticous.
Ah, well... I'll be leaving you guys to your almost-setting and your 'giant killer statblocks'.
Negative criticism must be squashed. We must all be assimilated. :borg:
To answer the OP (and stay on topic)... no, I don't believe the Realms have much of a future. My prediction is 5-8 years from now 4.5e will come along and try to appease to the "old" fans, but then it may be too late. IMO.
Things actually have gotten better over the months with some more nasty people leaving or at least toning down their comments.
There is a love it or hate it attitude about the edition and the newer FR stuff, but I think if we acted like adults (both 4E lovers and 4E haters) and try and understand each other's points of view things can be real peaceful around here. Both sides people ;) !
Plus let us not turn this into an Edition War thing please (this request goes out to both "sides").
Orc Piper
Plus let us not turn this into an Edition War thing please (this request goes out to both "sides").
So, you want fans of a game where the object is to kill things and steal their stuff, fans of video games (mostly where you just kill stuff), and fans of novels (where dark Elves with twin scimitars can kill a thousand Orcs without breaking a sweat)....
To stop being combative?
Boy are you in the wrong hobby... butterfly collecting is the third forum on the right. :P
And nerds aremed with 'kniwledge' are amongst the deadliest predators.
The only divide are from the people who cannot get along and see the other's point of view. Stigger and Rino are not fond of the newer FR stuff but do not cause much of a stink about it and I can chat with them and not get heated. When they post it is not only about how they hate the 4E, they post useful stuff and try to be civil with the 4E crowd. Others (seemingly) love to make bashing threads or bashing comments about the new stuff.
Things actually have gotten better over the months with some more nasty people leaving or at least toning down their comments.
There is a love it or hate it attitude about the edition and the newer FR stuff, but I think if we acted like adults (both 4E lovers and 4E haters) and try and understand each other's points of view things can be real peaceful around here. Both sides people ;) !
Plus let us not turn this into an Edition War thing please (this request goes out to both "sides").
That's because it IS a War, Rauric. It is a war of the survival of what Dungeons and Dragons should be.
This is not like 3.0. I absorbed that in six months and it was D+D. It's been almost a year. I have yet to see anything valuble in this system. I play it once a month, and it's perfectly awful. There's nothing about character concepts that intrigue me. Your concept is the powers you can use. Who you are doesn't matter, everything is cookie cutter.
And the powers and their flavor text. Combat, when it's done the way that it's supposed to, feels like episode after episode of Voltron, recycled animation and all.
Spinning Laser Blades (Encounter), Solar Combat Spears (Encounter), Lion Missiles (Encounter), Four Lion Attack (Daily)
Let's finish it off!
Form Blazing Sword! (Daily) '
And all the recycled animation that goes with that.
I don't like that feel.
It is a war of the survival of what Dungeons and Dragons should be.
I suppose we could go and ask Gary Gygax what Dungeons and Dragons should be, which I imagine is supposed to be like 1st edition. Something neither 3rd or 4th edition are.
I guess we both lose there!
This is not like 3.0. I absorbed that in six months and it was D+D. It's been almost a year.
So it's been eight months (two months longer) and IMO, it's doing far better than 3rd edition was after the same time (already had several rather broken splat books: example being Sword and Fist and it went downhill from there).
I have yet to see anything valuble in this system.
I play it once a month, and it's perfectly awful.
I played 3rd edition for several years and it got increasingly awful and is still awful (minding, I concede it never started that way and I really liked 3rd edition at first). 4E improves constantly, which is considerably better than 3rd thus far. Then again, it's still early days yet and it only takes a couple of really badly thought out supplements to really turn the turkey over. Hopefully they have learned from the past however and thus far I'll give them their credit: they are doing pretty well design wise.
There's nothing about character concepts that intrigue me. Your concept is the powers you can use. Who you are doesn't matter, everything is cookie cutter.
Such definitive statements again and my experience is utterly the opposite, minding I have been able to get people to play what they want for years. Also, this is a class based system and I expect there to be a degree of inflexibility. I've yet to see two identical characters, despite having run a campaign in fourth and running 3 others at the moment (plus numerous one-offs and similar). The base concepts are similar, but the execution is vastly different and the player actually roleplaying the character always makes it feel distinct.
Edit: Now I know why I got a sudden sense of deja-vu! I heard this all from people proclaiming 2nd edition was the greatest edition ever and that 3rd edition had destroyed DnD. Now I remember, silly me.
Edit2: Let's all look at what Gary Gygax thinks of what "DnD" should be according to msatran:
I've looked at them, yes, but I'm not really a fan. The new D&D is too rule intensive. It's relegated the Dungeon Master to being an entertainer rather than master of the game. It's done away with the archetypes, focused on nothing but combat and character power, lost the group cooperative aspect, bastardized the class-based system, and resembles a comic-book superheroes game more than a fantasy RPG where a player can play any alignment desired, not just lawful good.
Now, should I tell you what I really think?
Looks like Dungeons and Dragons isn't what it was "supposed" to be as sayeth its original creator.
BTW, doesn't this sound sooo familiar to certain things written above? It does to me to be quite frank and he's just as wrong about 3rd edition (in so many ways) as msatran is about 4th.
Personally, I'm getting more and more inclined towards oWoD rules again, and getting away from class-based systems entirely, though Saga is pretty appealing as well.
As to the whole what D&D should be, given that I didn't much care for Gygax's general game design philosophy or style, I'm not much interested in his opinions. Granted, he did come up with D&D, but to be honest, it didn't have much appeal to me until 3e as a ruleset. To my mind, D&D will always be 3e, at least until a system for it comes out that I find better... maybe 5e will be more appealing for me, who knows...
As to the whole what D&D should be, given that I didn't much care for Gygax's general game design philosophy or style, I'm not much interested in his opinions. Granted, he did come up with D&D, but to be honest, it didn't have much appeal to me until 3e as a ruleset. To my mind, D&D will always be 3e, at least until a system for it comes out that I find better... maybe 5e will be more appealing for me, who knows...
Exactly. 5E will probably be as different as 2E to 3E, as 3E to 4E and such forth. Also, I've been playing since 1E (albeit, only for a while, I never ran 1E DnD, I started playing 1E DnD and then we moved onto 2nd edition AD&D).
The point I am directly derisively mocking was to show how ridiculous it is to claim how DnD "should" be played given a huge number of people are enjoying 4E (half of my players in my games are new, never played much PnP DnD before ever and the rest have) and that Gary Gygax, the creator of DnD disagrees that 3E is even DnD himself (in reality, DnD "should" imo be played like its creator intended if we really want to go down this rabbit hole).
Personally, if someone wants to authoritatively claim that 4E isn't what "DnD" should be, I'm just going to point out the guy who created it thinks 3E is barely DnD and "should not" be DnD. It might put some perspective on the actual weight of internet declarations on how things should be played.
If you can say "Well Mr Gygax sounds absurd there" that's entirely the point I am making. I am hoping this should give people a bit of pause to think about what they are writing when they say "DnD should be like 3rd", because it's creator entirely disagrees. Also, note the similarity in the arguments made by Gygax to detractors of 4E and perhaps, for those who have not gone through all editions of DnD may appreciate the disdain for the endless repetition...
You can do that, but my Realms will never have a Spellplague.
Did they have the Time of Troubles, then :P ?
War? As much as I dislike 4e in general, I'd hardly call it a war. Its a game, with a new edition I don't care for, that in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter a whit. The same applies to the Realms for that matter. Its a setting for a game, and the new edition is not to my liking, simple as that. Same thing happened to me with the new incarnation of the World of Darkness, and the only thing that really happened was that I moved on to 3e, and now its time to move on to something else, or possibly stick with 3e, as your tastes dictate.
Personally, I'm getting more and more inclined towards oWoD rules again, and getting away from class-based systems entirely, though Saga is pretty appealing as well.
As to the whole what D&D should be, given that I didn't much care for Gygax's general game design philosophy or style, I'm not much interested in his opinions. Granted, he did come up with D&D, but to be honest, it didn't have much appeal to me until 3e as a ruleset. To my mind, D&D will always be 3e, at least until a system for it comes out that I find better... maybe 5e will be more appealing for me, who knows...
Thank you. Even though we disagree on subjects comments like this is why I can have a sane rational converation with you.
My 1st D&D was a 2E game that was run by a bad DM so I hated it. I moved to Deadlands and Vamp the M because I found the rules were easier to grasp and I could find more groups that wanted to play. Most D&D games I found were set in homebrews and people seemd to hate FR where I lived in PA.
There's a difference this time out - the last times, all that stuff hapened to the people of FR; this time, it happened to us.
Great point. The fact that some catastrophe happened in the distant past doesn't affect how I see the setting. When a major catastrophe happens in the present time, it DOES affect me--if I accepted those changes in my Realms, the setting would be too radically different from the one I've come to know and love.
I still think if we give it time...it will sort itself out...Big Daddy Bane came back after all and that dude was DEAD! Mystra could conceivably return, things will eventually get more familiar...
It's so much easier to just keep my Realms as I prefer it, and not have to "wait" to like it again (which may never happen).
The only divide are from the people who cannot get along and see the other's point of view. Stigger and Rino are not fond of the newer FR stuff but do not cause much of a stink about it and I can chat with them and not get heated. When they post it is not only about how they hate the 4E, they post useful stuff and try to be civil with the 4E crowd.
Thank you for the compliment.
However, I'd like to clarify one thing in the last sentence--it's really only the 4E FR setting I have a "beef" with, not the actual 4E ruleset.Great point. The fact that some catastrophe happened in the distant past doesn't affect how I see the setting. When a major catastrophe happens in the present time, it DOES affect me--if I accepted those changes in my Realms, the setting would be too radically different from the one I've come to know and love.
-This is a point I've made before, in the past, that people have "yelled at me" for. A catastrophic event taking place in the past "means less" than a catastrophic event taking place in the present. Many events, such as, say, the Sundering, or the Fall of Netheril, were written into the setting as historical events. They happened long ago, we read that they happened long ago, and their consequences have (relatively) been explained and injected into the setting. When a catastrophe takes place in the present, we, as readers, are not "desensitized" to such events. Instead of being denotations in history books, they are current events. Their impact will be longer lasting, as they are taking place in the present, and their impacts will influence the near future as well.
@ LK, there, that should make you feel better...To the matter at hand, I'd tend to agree that stuff in the past is much easier to swallow than stuff in the present. The effects of the event are known, and the repercussions smoothed over enough for things to make sense. With more immediate catastrophe, you get a whole range of consequences confronting you, and run the risk of coming up with solutions to "what happens next" that are going to fly in the face of what officially happens. Not really that big of a deal for many, but it can be a bit daunting if you're faced with something that runs very counter to what you did at home. In this respect, 4e's style is well suited to making this as painless as possible in terms of conflict with official stuff, but at the same time, its going to require considerably more thought as to fallout of major events in the long term.
That's because it IS a War
You know, as a man in uniform I kinda resent this statement. Is a Game! a game mind you that takes me FAR FAR away from the "soldiers mentality", where I can call people in first name basis, where actually one of the rules is NOT to talk about work...
I seriously advise you to measure your words and get your priorities straight
Where the only casualty is people's self-respect.
You know, as a man in uniform I kinda resent this statement. Is a Game! a game mind you that takes me FAR FAR away from the "soldiers mentality", where I can call people in first name basis, where actually one of the rules is NOT to talk about work...
I seriously advise you to measure your words and get your priorities straight
As a supporter of our troops...except Ody...I agree with this statement.
:D
I just cant get over the idea that since the current age of Faerun is filled with chaos that we as gamers are presented with a golden opportunity to really make the realms our own.
The Realms is my own--I never needed a Spellplague for that. Also, I am not entirely convinced that the designers no longer see the setting primarily as a place to tell their stories. Some of their comments have suggested that to me, anyway...
I am excited to think they might add to Forgotten Realms by doing a setting book for Kara Tur, and the Al Qadim area (post plague)
No offense, but the plan is one campaign setting a year. Eberron's this year, then they have Greyhawk, Ravenloft, Dark Sun and Dragonlance that will be released before this. Not too mention that if they do a Oriental or Arabic setting (in maybe 2014?), I doubt very much it will be set in Kara-Tur or Al Qadim, but rather entirely new 'worlds' instead.
OA is far more popular today, then when it was initially released.
That being said, I find only 2 options acceptable for a 4e OA.
They base it on Rokugon... or they hire me. :D
A 4e Al-Qadim would be off-the-shiz as well. Many people found no problem using it without FR, so I think it is a plausible campaign to re-do in this new, wacky 'two books = a setting' universe.
They base it on Rokugon... or they hire me. :D
-This.