I have been playing Dungeons and Dragons (3.5th edition) since late 2006. My DM (who has been my DM from the beginning onwards) has been using homebrew settings most of the time (recently he started a new campaign in the Planescape setting though). Since January 2009 I have started DMing for a group of close friends in an Eberron setting while at the same time still playing in my own DM's games.
My DM, a long-time Forgotten Realms and Planescape fan, seems to like the Forgotten Realms setting better than Eberron (fair enough). However, he never clearly explained to me what (in his opinion) makes Forgotten Realms the wonderful setting he claims it to be.
Curious what the fuss was all about, I tried and perused the 3.5 Player's Guide to Faerûn. I didn't have the time to read all of it, and nowhere I could find a decent summary of what the setting was about. Recently, I got the chance to take a look at a copy of the AD&D Forgotten Realms Campaign Set (1987). Since -in my opinion- an idea doesn't improve if one elaborates more on it, I decided to peruse this very first Forgotten Realms booklet. To me it seemed a rather cookie-cutter setting, with only a few intersting elements in there (like the NPC beholder Manxam; the sage Elminster; the Anauroch desert and great glacier being located right next to each other). I concluded that this setting might have been new and interesting back in the eighties and nineties, but that since then most of its unique elements have become core (by which I mean 3.5 edition PHB, DMG and MM) and that it is now a setting that's only interesting to people who have been playing in it since the eighties or to people who have read the novels. Perhaps I made this conclusion wrongfully so, so I am turning to the people on these boards to explain to me what makes the Forgotten Realms so special.
So, a long story short: What in the Nine Hells is all the fuss about?;)
Or, to put i in a nicer way: could someone provide me with a short summary or introduction into the Forgotten Realms? Like was done in the ECS for Eberron (pages 7-9: Introduction; The tone of Eberron; Movies to inspire you; The world; Ten things you need to know) or in the FAQ for Eberron Newbies thread at these boards.
Or maybe someone would be willing to answer the following questions for me?
1. Core ethos sentence: [A sentence that describes the core ethos of the world]
Forgotten Realms is a world of sword-and-sorcery adventure, where heroes battle monsters with magic. (WotC's answer in 2002)
2. Who are the heroes? [Brief description of heroes central to the setting. This need not be a comprehensive list.]
3. What do they do? [[What are the main objectives of the heroes, and what steps do they take to achieve those objectives?]
4. Threats, conflicts, villains: [What is the main danger to the world, and from whom does it come?]
5. Nature of magic: [What is the source of magic? How abundant/scarce is it?]
6. What's new? What's different? [What makes this setting unique?]
Many thanks in advance.
EDIT: 26th of April, 2009: added some more info to the six questions (which were actually just taken from WotC's template for settings)
as if real' worldbuilding
intertwined events (the Weave)
mix of picaresque sword and sorcery with high fantasy
open-hearted, fun, humanist, compassionate
egalitarian (local, not teleontological value)
librarian's love, lore and memory
proper names and language
roleplaying over rules
no cheap flashy cool
particular kind of immanent history
In some ways, reading the Old Grey Box makes most sense in the context it was published, after Ed's foundational early Dragon articles which convey so much of how he DMs, builds worlds and thinks. Also bear in mind that it's not a set of ideas which were elaborated on later, but the other way round: an imperfect attempt to distill into a digestible summary, an allusive iceberg-tip, a world that had long been vastly more complex and detailed, to the tune of hundreds of cardboard lore-boxes in Ed's basement (most of which remains unpublished). The parts of the 1987 set that best convey the Realms are probably the month-by-month current clack and the spellbook histories in the DM's Sourcebook, rather than the fairly abstracted A–Z entries.
The Realms' essence, as I assume you realize, isn't something that can be conveyed in any feature list of surface 'unique elements' or gimmicks, but is an intangible feel, a buzz, a hum that you have to listen for and tune into.
Another answer to what the Realms offers over younger settings is over 40 years of love and development by a complex, eccentric, extremely well-read, extraordinarily prolific, highly generous and freakishly creative man, including more than 30 of campaign play, and more than 20 of shared-world design and storytelling.
(The Player's Guide to Faerûn, as you'll have found, is no such thing, but rather a set of rules updates with a couple of miscellaneous essays attached.)
But really, this is too big a subject to deal with all at once! I'd be happy to tackle any less all-encompassing questions, or to elaborate on my list.
1. Core ethos sentence:
2. Who are the heroes?
3. What do they do?
4. Threats, conflicts, villains:
5. Nature of magic:
6. What's new? What's different?
Many thanks in advance.
1) I think the Sage puts it best from the [i][url=http://www.amazon.com/FORGOTTEN-CAMPAIGN-Advanced-Dungeons-Dragons/dp/1560766174]Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting (Revised for AD&D):
Weary of the world around ye? Welcome to my world, where magic rules and dragons fly. Beauty meets the eye often here, and anyone can try to win a throne! Oh, aye, ye can do that in your world, too - but it's all more fun here. - Elminster
2) Well, we had a lot of heroes:
- Elminster, the Old Sage of Shadowdale
- Drizzt Do'Urden, a drow ranger that strives to make the world a better place.
- Alias, a stunning warrior that was created by foul magics but won her freedom
- The Kendrick, royal heirs to the throne of the Moonshaes
- The seven sisters: Lady Alustriel, Ruler of Silverymoon; Dove Falconhand, Ranger and Knight of Myth Drannor; Laeral Silverhand, Lady-Mage of Waterdeep and consort to the Blackstaff; Qilué Veladorn, Drow priestess of Eilistraee; The Simbul, the Mad Queen of Aglarond and deadly foe to the Red Wizards; Storm Silverhand, Lady Bard of Shadowdale and fierce defender of her adopted homelands and the witch Syluné who fought and die for Shadowdale, but lived on as it's ghostly warden
- Khelben 'Blackstaff' Arunson, Former Lord of Waterdeep, Mage mighty of the city and keeper of many secrets and power
- The Companions of Mythril Hall: Allies of Drizzt Do'Urden who have spent many a year fighting for goodness in the savage north. These include Bruenor Battlehammer, dwarven king of Mithril hall, his adopted children, Wulfgar; human barbarian of the native tribes and Cattie-Brie, a human girl raised by the king from near infancy and finally, Regis the halfling thief, whose hunger for food far outweighs any desire for adventure
- The Royal Obaskyr family of Cormyr, hanging on to the throne admidst nobles that crave their undoing
- The Knights of Myth Drannor: An adventuring company based out of Shadowdale that have seen members come and go, but still fight against the dark forces that threaten the Dalelands and the Elven wood that is home to the fabled city of Myth Drannor
- Erevis Cale, a thief and cleric of Mask, striving to fight darkness with darkness
- The Harpers: A band of adventurers and bards sworn to fight the forces of evil at every turn
- Arilyn Moonblade, lady Harper and half-elven swordmistress that carries one of the famed moonblades of Evermeet. She is often accompanied by Danilo Thann, a would-be bard (but better wizard).
- Many, many more
Alas, many of those mentioned above have died either right before the Spellplague or during it. Many new heroes have been introduced since then, but their stories are still being written. (And the official company line is that the Realms is for YOUR characters to become the heroes).
3) Why, they adventure of course! They right wrongs where they can and prevent hardships where they must. Some are tragic heroes (like Erevis) who strive toward the light and to do what's right, but most are people that realize evil only wins if good does nothing.
4)Ah, those that would see our heroes fail are legion in number:
- The Zhentarim, a black network of thieves, slavers and assassins. They seek to subjugate all of Faerûn using everything from foul magics and deals with Beholders, to praising Cyric and/or Bane in their quest for tyranny
- The Red Wizards of Thay, a powerful cabal of wizards that rule their lands with an iron hand, but seek to conquer more. Their most heinous member is the lich Szass Tam, master of Necromancy
- The City of Shade: Once a powerful member-state of the ancient Netheril Empire, Shade disappeared when the goddess Mystryl died to prevent the world from being torn asunder from a greedy wizard's grab for godhood. They returned to the Realms millenia later to begin to reestablish their empire
- Artemis Entreri, a master assassin and probably one of the deadliest men in the world.
- Many assassin guilds, conspirators against the rule of the land and others that want nothing more than to quench the light to rule in darkness
5) Magic in the Realms was, for years, ruled by the goddess Mystra (herself being reborn a number of times when all was threatened). She looked after the Weave, that strange binding that empowered all magic on Faerûn and kept it from burning over the lands, destroying all in its path. For, you see, all worlds have a magic. Some, like ours, the magic is very low and hard to see or access. But in the case of Abeir-Toril, the magic is very strong, almost too strong for it could tear the world asunder.
6)With the release of Fourth Edition, the world has been burned away like chafe. Most of the old heroes are gone, and those that remain are few and not as powerful as they once were. Cities, countries entire continents were destroyed or replaced on a whim when the Spellplague burned and twisted across the world without logic or reason. Gods perished and the Realms of old were no more.
Hope that answers some of your questions. If you want more detailed information, I'd point you to picking up pdfs of the 160+ books of previous editions (but, alas, WotC doesn't want to sell them anymore), or look for them on eBay or Noble Knight. Also, there is a WEALTH of lore and answers to all of your questions at Candlekeep and it's respective forums
Enjoy!
2. If you talked to most folk in Faerûn about 'heroes', in the shining-mantled, danger-facing sense, most would speak either of a warrior of local legend or renown, or of adventuring companies, who form an integral but ambivalently viewed subculture within Realms society. The people Ashe lists, though heroic in their own right, are mostly novel protagonists, which I mention because a major caveat in understanding the Realms is not to take the novels as typical of it -- the books department has often favoured lone heroes over adventuring bands, for instance.
3. What wrongs are, though, is not always something everyone agrees on. Heroes, like everyone else, also work to their own betterment (glory, knowledge, wealth, magic), and serve particular causes (political, philosophical or religious) -- often knowingly, but often accidentally or through manipulation. That many-layered social and political web, in which folk seek to direct others without their knowing, shape events in the small or larger scale, and achieve through diplomacy, trickery or friendship what they could't by force of arms or magic, is another Realms hallmark.
4. Other typical PC foes are members of the evil priesthoods ('priesthoods that are violent'), and innumerable merchant cabals, small conspiracies, slavers, brutish adventurers, corrupt or short-sighted governments, officials and nobles, to name the more obvious. Larger-scale underlying conflicts include the rising merchant class against nobility and (in some places) royalty, agricultural and urban encroachment into the wild lands and older races, how magic is to be used, memory and forgetfulness, and many struggles over resources.
5. It says much of the study and use of arcane magic in the Realms that it's called the Art, and Ed has developed it -- its workings, culture, ecology, philosophies -- far beyond the D&D rules and their finite spell roster. There are hundreds of unique published Realms spells, and thousands more are known to exist. Realms magic often involves long-lasting fields and ward-spells, and systems of spells and counterspells that, for instance, scry and shield from scrying. While not omnipresent, mechanized or stripped of wonder, the role of magic in Faerûnian society has been intricately considered and worked out, though Realms sources don't call attention to this as Eberron has to its version. The magical Weave is a metaphor for the interconnection of people, happenings, lore, and the natural world. Realms magic is also typified by the "Pages from the Mages" and related articles that introduced the setting before the 1987 boxed set, in which the histories, lore and continuing struggles and intrigues over magic items and spellbooks matter more than the details of their game-mechanical effects.
6. As with Gary Gygax's work, the Realms' particular originations and implementations are often very much more rewarding than the simplified or modified forms that were adopted into general D&D lore and the larger fantasy field it's influenced. Likewise, many of the Realms' literary influences are in early- and mid-twentieth-century fantasy that's now little read by the media fantasy generation. In other words, what's new and different is not always the latest thing that's been published or happened.
(By 'the Realms' I'm referring to the world originated by Ed Greenwood in 1966/7 and published by TSR and Wizards through 2007. Others can speak of Wizards' 2008 version.)
And a counterpoint to Matt's answers:
2. If you talked to most folk in Faerûn about 'heroes', in the shining-mantled, danger-facing sense, most would speak either of a warrior of local legend or renown, or of adventuring companies, who form an integral but ambivalently viewed subculture within Realms society. The people Ashe lists, though heroic in their own right, are mostly novel protagonists, which I mention because a major caveat in understanding the Realms is not to take the novels as typical of it -- the books department has often favoured lone heroes over adventuring bands, for instance.
Just want to point out the only 5 out of the twelve I mentioned started as 'novel protagonists'. The rest were established by Ed in the original treatment.
(By 'the Realms' I'm referring to the world originated by Ed Greenwood in 1966/7 and published by TSR and Wizards through 2007. Others can speak of Wizards' 2008 version.)
All very true. ESPECIALLY while I bolded.
You have the best introduction to the Realms there is: if you don't fall in love with it from that, perhaps you're unlikely to.
-Very true.
I concluded that this setting might have been new and interesting back in the eighties and nineties, but that since then most of its unique elements have become core (by which I mean 3.5 edition PHB, DMG and MM) and that it is now a setting that's only interesting to people who have been playing in it since the eighties or to people who have read the novels. Perhaps I made this conclusion wrongfully...
You did conclude wrongly if you assumed everyone had the same impression about the setting that you did.
I did not play D&D in the eighties, and I did not start reading FR novels until AFTER becoming interested in the setting.
Try reading the intro of the 3e FRCS (or the 4E FRCG).
For myself, I started playing in the Realms right at the tail end of 2e. I didn't read a novel until just a couple of years ago starting with the Fighter and Wizards series. So you don't need to be with the setting since the early days to like it.
1. Core ethos sentence:
2. Who are the heroes?
3. What do they do?
4. Threats, conflicts, villains:
5. Nature of magic:
6. What's new? What's different?
Many thanks in advance.
Apart and in addition to what was already said...
1: The one that comes to my mind is the description of FR as a panoramic fantasy setting: the background for your adventures is an entire world of fantasy with all the variety of heroes, villains, and legends that such a world should have. Basically, even though there are overarching plots, themes and conflicts regions are also markedly different.
2. There are more heroes that could be named; every region has had its own great battles and adventures, and all of them have no lack of heroes of all sorts - cunning tricksters, devout priests, veteran warriors and masters of the arcane mysteries. Every town often has one or several individuals who have accomplished extraordinary things as adventurers and have since settled down. As you can imagine, not everyone prefers to end his/her life on the cold stones in an unknown dungeon, especially when they have been recognized as heroes for their community, have the means to enjoy an ok life there, and have seen a few of their former compatriots come to grizzly ends. Most of them are, after all, regular folk who just happen to have more courage, dedication, or dumb luck. Those who have devoted their entire life to a cause are much less common, but still too many to list here, even if all were known. The FRCS lists some of the better known ones.
3. The active adventurers usually adventure. Others tend to either live in the communities they have chosen to associate with (in one capacity or another) or live in solitude and the middle of nowhere. Many notable NPCs are members of, or lead, various organizations. These associations, and the conflicts they are embroiled in, are one of the reasons high-level NPCs in the Realms tend to be rather conservative and, so to say, passive. Basically what Faraer said - oh, and most of them have a life, which often takes some time
.4. Racial, social, religious and other conflicts are pretty common, and villains can come in any hue. While FR is a more traditional fantasy setting (i.e. orcs are often a villainous race, and most non-drow elves are good or neutral) there are no lack of groups that would seek to oppose the PCs. The most powerful tend to keep each other in check, and thus routinely try to use cats' paws and external agents against one another, so your regular bandit lord may be just a bandit lord - but s/he may be the agent of a much more powerful enemy. One thing I have noted is that the many powerful groups/cabals/cults and the high-level adventurers mean that sometimes, the guy sipping his beer across you in the bar is more dangerous than your average mature adult red dragon.
5: it is hard to give a detailed description, or at least better than those already given. I would disagree with some of the before, however; as I understand it, Mystra is/was less the goddess of magic and more magic personified - the sentience of all the force, ley lines and conduits that encompass Toril. A note in comparison to Eberron: while most regions in FR do not have the utility magic that some regions in Eberron boast, there are numerous examples in Faerun's history where this was indeed the case. That most of them met perilous ends at least partly due to their reliance on magic (Imaskar, Netheril, etc) might explain the rather conservative attitudes of some mages towards the casual use of magic. In 3E FR, Haalrua, Thay, Deep Imaskar and to some degree Silverymoon are the regions where you can expect to see the highest integration of magic in society.
6: Depends on every edition. FR is one of the older settings, so there are usually a few things unearthed (often retroactively) with every edition - i.e. demihuman paladins, monks (as martial artists), etc didn't exist before 3e, and then were included as if they had always been there.
As for different... I think the wealth of publications, Candlekeep information, etc has made Faerun the setting with easily the most lore and thus richest history. Sure, the DM has the fiat to deny or modify any piece of the "fluff" in his or her games, but this has made FR very detailed and you have a plethora of hooks, ruins, myths etc to work with. Likewise, your party does not adventure in vacuum; there are many NPCs and organizations that you can participate in, oppose, or bend to your purpose. Also, FR has been (in)famous for the relatively high number of high-level prc. From Commoner to Demigod, you will not be the only one of your power level. The final point that comes to mind, apparently something that the Realms were born with, is the conceptual basing of some regions on various historical cultures, such as Mulhorand and Unther to ancient Egypt and Mesopothamia, and the various cultures in Maztica, Al-Qadim and Kara-tur on the native cultures in Mesoamerica, Arabia, and Asia.
Likely some of what the designers answered is found in the introductions of the various major FR setting books. The 4E FRCG will have the latest "setting statement" for the Realms. It is the official one, the OP should check it out.
Post from Candlekeep:
And hello once more, fellow scribes!
A message just arrived from Ed. This one is in response to Dark Wizard's query (on Page 47 of this thread) for Ed's own Realms-specific answers to the Wizards template for settings (core ethos, etc.).:
Hi. Dark Wizard, I'm afraid you've asked a question I can't legally answer, because as part of the Realms retooling that went on before 4e, I formally and in detail answered those questions for Wizards of the Coast (as did many of their designers), in confidence. They own those replies of mine, and only they can publish them; I can't. I am bound by the NDAs, contracts, and other agreements I have signed, so I must remain silent on this. Sorry.
So saith Ed. Reminding us all of something often forgotten on the Net; there is a "real world" of legal agreements and professional behaviour, that Ed is part of and must abide by, regardless of how much he might want to reply (or how strongly a third party may believe "But surely that won't apply to this! What harm could there be in discussing this?" etc.).
love to all,
THO
Post from Candlekeep:
-What was the question?
-What was the question?
Greetings Ed,
I noticed a question from someone at the Wizards forums who wants to know what the Realms is all about. I know the question has been answered before, both here and in books. What I found interesting is that the interested poster included in his post the questions from the one-page entry format for the WotC Campaign Setting Design Contest of 2002.
Interestingly the sample Core Ethos Sentence uses the Realms as an example. I've always wondered how you would have answered those questions if let's say you were entering that contest with the Realms as an unpublished setting.
Regarding Question #2 and #3, I'm interested in an answer for this section applied to player character heroes and "adventurers" in general. Who are they? What do they want? Why are they here?
Fantasy Setting Proposal Template
1. Core Ethos Sentence. [A sentence that describes the core ethos of the world. For example, Forgotten Realms is a world of sword-and-sorcery adventure, where heroes battle monsters with magic.]
2. Who are the heroes? [Brief description of heroes central to the setting. This need not be a comprehensive list.]
3. What do they do? [What are the main objectives of the heroes, and what steps do they take to achieve those objectives?]
4. Threats, Conflicts, Villains [What is the main danger to the world, and from whom does it come?]
5. Nature of magic [What is the source of magic? How abundant/scarce is it?]
6. What’s new? What’s different? [What makes this setting unique?]
This is the poster's original post from the WotC forum:
(Direct copy and paste of the OP from this thread)
ANyway...mages were ultra uber hyped up in the previous editions....now that the Spellplague has occured, you will be seeing weaker mages.....not ones that can travel into the NIneHells and create hell.
Riiiiiiiight.
Have you met my friend, Szass Tam?
I often had this problem about too many munchkins in the Realms..And all of them were wizards!! WTF! It's like, everytime I ask a question that says something about..."know some munchkins?"..."Yeah, I could point you out to them..but they're all wizards or spellcasters"...I mean, why can't fighters be munchkins...sure we have epic fighters in the Realms..but I've never heard of a munchkin fighter before.
Larloch = Commands 60 plus liches, plus Szazz was not a match for him
Szazz = Been killed so many times, but was ressurected sooo many times by Bane and the Zhents
Manshoon = How many clones does that guy have? He's been killed so many times, and brought back from the dead so many times as well
Serpent Queen = Disintegrated an entire country in the blink of an eye
Elminster/Simbul/Halaster = Raised hell on the NineHells, plus...comeon, I've read most novels with them on it fighting against an army of arrows and spears...and they don't even get a scratch.
There are some epic fighters in the Realms that I know...some doing great feats like beating up a dracolich with a stick, or making two dragons breathe fire on each other....but those feats are nothing compared to the feats done above.
Larloch = Commands 60 plus liches, plus Szazz was not a match for him
Compare to the nations, armies and trade empires commanded by far more numerous fighters and rogues.
Szazz = Been killed so many times, but was ressurected sooo many times by Bane and the Zhents
Manshoon = How many clones does that guy have? He's been killed so many times, and brought back from the dead so many times as well
So? Most high-level characters have been raised multiple times from the dead, regardless of class.
Serpent Queen = Disintegrated an entire country in the blink of an eye
No, a small, uninhabited island, and we don't know what kind of preparation it took.
Elminster/Simbul/Halaster = Raised hell on the NineHells, plus...comeon, I've read most novels with them on it fighting against an army of arrows and spears...and they don't even get a scratch.
I have no idea what novels you've read, but I literally shudder to recall just a few of the bodily and psychic injuries they've sustained.
There is, though, a valid point to be made about the focus of the Realms product line, which is well known to have made non-protagonist characters into novel protagonists, downplayed the importance of trade and the priesthoods, and otherwise distorted the actual Realms.
I have no idea what novels you've read, but I literally shudder to recall just a few of the bodily and psychic injuries they've sustained.
I agree.
*recalls how banged up Storm Silverhand got in Stormlight*
Szzazz Tam was from previous editions..very powerful...and thanks to the Spellplague he's a bit toned down now...but considering all that he's still a munckin.
I thought he was more powerful after the Spellplague era. He now dominates all of Thay and came just a hair shy of being a deity of some sort.
Munchkins are NPCs who are overpowered...a good example of this would be:
Larloch = Commands 60 plus liches, plus Szazz was not a match for him
What does it matter? He's meant as a boogeyman, some legendary and mysterious lich doing something dark, nefarious and magical. Larloch is more of a villain character (but not the blatant kind). He's the sort of character 4E FR likes, powerful yet potentially antagonistic to PCs.
Szazz = Been killed so many times, but was ressurected sooo many times by Bane and the Zhents
I think you're confusing Szass Tam of Thay with someone like Fzoul. Doesn't matter either way, both of them are villains for the PCs. 4E FR loves villains.
Manshoon = How many clones does that guy have? He's been killed so many times, and brought back from the dead so many times as well
Makes sense, he was basically the head of a continent spanning criminal organization so powerful it essentially rules several city states and perhaps more. If he had the means, why not create clones to prevent permanent death? Also, he's a villain, so he's good for the setting.
Serpent Queen = Disintegrated an entire country in the blink of an eye
Don't recall specifics, but she's a villain, so she's no problem.
Elminster/Simbul/Halaster = Raised hell on the NineHells, plus...comeon, I've read most novels with them on it fighting against an army of arrows and spears...and they don't even get a scratch.
Halaster is for the most part a villain, so that's no problem. Elminster was captured and at the mercy of devils, that's not very uber. As for the Simbul, someone had to save the old guy.
So what was your point again? You kept pointing out villains in the setting except for the two at the end. Powerful villains is what WotC and players wanted, what's wrong with these characters?
There are some epic fighters in the Realms that I know...some doing great feats like beating up a dracolich with a stick, or making two dragons breathe fire on each other....but those feats are nothing compared to the feats done above.
That's the nature of the game and the nature of their very different roles and powers/abilities.
Halaster is for the most part a villain, so that's no problem. Elminster was captured and at the mercy of devils, that's not very uber. As for the Simbul, someone had to save the old guy.
I don't know that much about Halaster...but either villain or hero, he's still a munchkin.
So what was your point again? You kept pointing out villains in the setting except for the two at the end. Powerful villains is what WotC and players wanted, what's wrong with these characters?
Nothing's wrong with it...I was just stating some possibilities in 4E that perhaps fighters could be more powerful than wizards. Example = Stupud the Stupid an uneducated orc fighter who doesn't even know how to write or read commands an arsenal of 10 archwizards in Kara-Tur.
That's the nature of the game and the nature of their very different roles and powers/abilities.
Well that's changed now....no more uber-ultra powerful mages for us thanks to the Spellplague....take a look at Elminster for example...
I have no idea what novels you've read, but I literally shudder to recall just a few of the bodily and psychic injuries they've sustained.
Hmmm...maybe you're right they do get damage sometimes....but they still own in the end anyway...
So? Most high-level characters have been raised multiple times from the dead, regardless of class..
Can you give me an example of non-spellcasters in the Realms being raised from the dead more than once/twice?
Compare to the nations, armies and trade empires commanded by far more numerous fighters and rogues.
A nation/empire is composed of many people...I think it's unfair to compare one person against one nation
No, a 'munchkin' in RPG jargon is a kind of player. 1It's meaningless to call a character 'overpowered' without telling us the standard you're comparing against, or why you're imposing that standard over the Realms' own.
So you do know what a munchkin is? WHy ask all those questions about what a munchkin is? I had to browse Ed's definition of a munchkin to enlighten yon minds...which was a bit tiring coz my net is slow. :D
While all of you might be correct up there....so....do you....know any munchkin fighters that could have: split an entire island into two with one punch, fought against a thousand troops and lived, etc.?
-It's something that melee-types inherently cannot do. Melee-types are more or less "normal people". "Normal people" can't split an island in two. They can fight against a thousand troops and live, though. Case in point, Drizzt, in The Thousand Orcs.
-That's not really Forgotten Realms specific, though, as much as it is D&D specific, or even..."physics possibly", for a lack of better words. I mean, punching the ground and having an island split in two is pretty...Dragon Ball Z-like (that was the first thing I thought of), and DBZ uses laws of physics that we (and most D&D settings) don't use.
And about Drizzt fighting against a thousand orcs....no, he can't win against a thousand orcs. He had sooo many allies at that time..so that fight doesn't count.
Whattabout One PIece...that was cool too!
-Never seen it (but I have heard of it), so I can't comment.
And about Drizzt fighting against a thousand orcs....no, he can't win against a thousand orcs. He had sooo many allies at that time..so that fight doesn't count.
-No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. :P
-Hey, Drizzt was alone for plenty of time, long enough that he "reverted" into his Hunter persona, so I don't want to hear it! :P
-Never seen it (but I have heard of it), so I can't comment.
-No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. :P
-Hey, Drizzt was alone for plenty of time, long enough that he "reverted" into his Hunter persona, so I don't want to hear it! :P
I would have to disagree here LK
When Drizzt was "alone" in The thousand orcs trilogy he never went up against a full 1000 orcs. Only groups of 10 or so at a time 
:PI would have to disagree here LK
-No one said he had to kill 1,000 Orcs are the same time!
My bad. I thought that is what you implying in your previous posts ;)I don't know that much about Halaster...but either villain or hero, he's still a munchkin.
Well, no. No, he's not. As was pointed out to you, NPCs can't be munchkins. A munchkin is a PC. The most famous of these was represented by the guy who wrote in to Dragon, many, many years ago, before the publication of FR, asking everyone to send him their character sheets, because his 100th level character had nuked all of Oerth, and he wanted to add up the experience points.
NPCs are just plot devices.
Well, no. No, he's not. As was pointed out to you, NPCs can't be munchkins. A munchkin is a PC. The most famous of these was represented by the guy who wrote in to Dragon, many, many years ago, before the publication of FR, asking everyone to send him their character sheets, because his 100th level character had nuked all of Oerth, and he wanted to add up the experience points.
NPCs are just plot devices.
But he can be a PC as well...
Larloch can be a munchkin too. If played his original way.
But he can be a PC as well...
Larloch can be a munchkin too. If played his original way.
What would be his "original way"?While all of you might be correct up there....so....do you....know any munchkin fighters that could have: split an entire island into two with one punch, fought against a thousand troops and lived, etc.?
Do you know how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? That's an equally relevant question for this thread.
Well that's changed now....no more uber-ultra powerful mages for us thanks to the Spellplague....
Yeah, not even Szass Tam, now nearly a god and supposedly the greatest threat to the stability of Faerun.
Can you give me an example of non-spellcasters in the Realms being raised from the dead more than once/twice?
IIRC, any of the Rangers Three. Beltram (sp?) of Baldur's Gate was specifically mentioned to have been raised many times--perhaps too many times.
I mean, played through his original stats. :D
He wasn't "played" at all, let alone through his "original stats."
Okay...to remove all the confusion about munchkins...why don't we call "them"(the uber spellcasters that I am referring to) as "uber NPCs" (since u all have a problem about me defining them as munchkins)...So...back to the beginning....Why can't fighters be uber NPCs? Why does it have to be spellcasters all the time?
Well not to worry....thanks to the Spellplague...we wont be having too many uber NPCs spellcasters anymore. It's time for the martial powers to shine!!
As to Szazz Tam and Larloch...well there are always exceptions of the rule :wink:
But why cant the fighters be exceptions as well? Grrr....It looks like FR society is doomed to be ruled by spellcasters.
IIRC, any of the Rangers Three. Beltram (sp?) of Baldur's Gate was specifically mentioned to have been raised many times--perhaps too many times.
Wooo....Who's that? Do u have stats for him/them?
Why can't fighters be uber NPCs? Why does it have to be spellcasters all the time?
-There are plenty of high level NPCs who are warrior-type individuals...Abordabe of Narfell is a 30th Level Fighter (2e). Zaknafein Do'Urden was a 24th Level Fighter (2e). High Lama Ning D'Ahn is a 17th Level Monk (2e). Gareth Dragonsbane is a 19th Level Paladin (2e). Bran Skorlson was a 17th Level Ranger (2e). Those are just a few famous people. As was mentioned, the ability of magicians to "ignore" the rules of the universe (via magic) makes these individuals truly notable, while warrior-types lack this ability, and as such, are more mundane.
But I thought Ed said he could be played "that way"?..Well so says he in candlekeep FAQs anyway....
You mean this? (Emphasis mine.)
4.12. Who/what is/was Larloch?
According to Ed Greenwood:
Larloch is a onetime Netherese sorcerer (still possessed of a lot of Netherese scepters, which he knows how to make) who is now a quite insane "ultra-lich" (in this case, the term means he has many unknown powers which are up to you the DM, among them the fact that he can still learn and develop new spells, increase in levels, etc.). He's probably a 46th level evil-aligned wizard right now, and he crafted many of his own undead abilities prior to undeath, which argues that he found his own 'process' for achieving lichdom.
Larloch is served by many (60+ ?) liches, formerly archwizards, whom he guides in concert, as the leader of a telepathic-web 'Overmind.' Thus far, neither psionics nor mind-influencing magics have ever been effective against him or any of his servitor mages, because the others in the link can withstand and overcome such influences, causing them to fail.
In theory, an attack could reach all of them through the link, but some quite powerful Red Wizards have tried and failed (Szass Tam didn't try such an attack, which may be why he survived...he remains fearful of approaching Larloch and his mages, but fascinated by the details of their lichdom, hoping it might yield him some powers.)
One of Larloch's given-to-himself powers (which - in a long, involved, and secret, personally-developed process - cost him 10 years of life and some vitality, irrelevant of course given his goal of lichdom) is automatic spell reflection (of all magic cast upon him). He can by act of will override this ability, for example when he wants to work a spell on himself; otherwise, it always operates.
Mystra (Midnight's predecessor as the goddess) is said to have allowed Larloch to acquire powers approaching those of "old Netheril" in return for 'leaking' spells to persistent adventurers he or his minions might come into contact with, but this may be no more than rumour spread by the Zhents or Red Wizards or Dragon Cultists, designed to lure adventurers into Larloch-weakening forays...
As for Larloch knowing the identities and locations of other liches/Netherese survivors...no, only the one's he's destroyed. Larloch is too self-centered to hunt down folks who don't come within his easy reach. He controls plenty of archwizards/liches already, but may decide to try to either control or destroy a new one when they come into contact. He seems to be pursuing other goals, however. Which ones? That's up to each DM....."
Larloch and his lich minions have no interest in attracting attention that would waste their time and magical resources (and perhaps, if word got around how dangerous they were, even threaten their existence in the face of a concerted attack from various magical power groups working together). Larloch is not interested in ruling Faerun...but he IS interested in creating and controlling a series of magical gates linking many worlds (parallel Prime Material Planes) and Outer Planes...and so rigging their enchantments that anyone using them comes under his control/faces his forceful removal of their magic items, information from their mind, and so forth. The gates are easy for him to create (he licked all of those problems long ago). The control enchantments have been giving him troubles for thousands of years now, and as an obsessive perfectionist, he isn't going to let this rest until he gets everything just so...nor is he going to create the gates until he's ready to put the controls on them.
In short, he's a munchkin only if played that way. All Player Characters have to learn sometime that there are folks in the Realms just too powerful to tangle with. I'm reminded of the original Realms campaign, and the Company of Crazed Venturers attacking Shaan the Serpent-Queen (who briefly appeared in a Wizards Three DRAGON article). She was busy working magic on a small island off Mintarn. They attacked, broke her concentration, and she looked up with an irritated frown. They bid her stop, or they'd destroy what she was working on; to demonstrate, one of the Company mages touched (and disintegrated) a stone he was standing beside.
She shook her head in derision, and touched the island beneath them, disintegrating IT, and dumping the Company into the chilly sea waves for a long swim...whilst she turned back to her spellcasting, floating on nothing and ignoring them once more.
A heavy-handed lesson, but...well, Larloch's in the same league, and more. Just consider him a power of the Realms and Don't Go There.
The statement says he isn't a "munchkin." Only if someone (the DM) purposely plays him as such does Larloch become a munchkin, and that holds true for any player character and NPC. The issue with the Serpent Queen is also summarized above.
Okay...to remove all the confusion about munchkins...why don't we call "them"(the uber spellcasters that I am referring to) as "uber NPCs" (since u all have a problem about me defining them as munchkins)...So...back to the beginning....Why can't fighters be uber NPCs? Why does it have to be spellcasters all the time?
Well not to worry....thanks to the Spellplague...we wont be having too many uber NPCs spellcasters anymore. It's time for the martial powers to shine!!
As to Szazz Tam and Larloch...well there are always exceptions of the rule :wink:
But why cant the fighters be exceptions as well? Grrr....It looks like FR society is doomed to be ruled by spellcasters.
Spellcasters inherently have more out of combat utility (probably still do even in 4E). Aside from that, there are plenty of warrior types that you wouldn't want to tangle with in the Realms. To add to Lord Karsus's list:
Eltargrim Irithyl was the Coronal of Cormanthor, he was a level 25 fighter. I think his 19 levels of wizard were from possession of the Ruler's Blade.
Dabron Sashenstar was a famous explorer from Baldur's Gate. He was a 23rd level fighter in 2e. He's a Merchant Prince as stat'ed in Power of Faerun, so while he might have a bit less martial prowess in 3e, he has followers, resources and connections enough to make up for it.
Several of the Dukes of Baldur's Gate and leaders of the Flaming Fist (one of the largest mercenary organization in the Realms) are around 21st or 22nd level.
Several of the dragon riders of Evermeet in stasis are around level 20, and their dragon mounts are dragons of fairly old age.
Shuruppak and Hamsetis are two martial terrors of the Old Empires.
Gareth Dragonsbane was a 21st level Paladin even in 2e. He's even higher in 3e.
King Azoun was a 20th level Fighter. In older editions he was a Cavalier.
The Realms are not without appropriately potent warrior characters. Also, in the tradition of fantasy fiction, the final villain usually ends up being a spellcaster of some sort, the heroes usually include several warrior types. The PCs are supposed to help fill the difference.
While all of you might be correct up there....so....do you....know any munchkin fighters that could have: split an entire island into two with one punch, fought against a thousand troops and lived, etc.?
In the first case, of course Art can do things that can't be done without Art! No fighter can duplicate the effect of most 1st-level spells. In the second, are you alluding to a scene in which some mage fights an army by mêlée? I'm not aware of any -- it would be very foolish. But a warrior of comparable level would obviously be better able to survive such a battle.
I don't know that much about Halaster...but either villain or hero, he's still a munchkin.
As mentioned above, no character can be a 'munchkin' -- 'munchkins' are players. Even by extension, no munchkin player would play a character with Halaster's self-limiting madness, inhuman patience, or expenditure of resources not for self-advancement but to amuse himself. And how would you know anyway if you don't know much about him?
Hmmm...maybe you're right they do get damage sometimes....but they still own in the end anyway...
This canard, again. You've correctly spotted that protagonists of popular fiction win out in their stories, which has nothing to do with the Realms specifically.
Can you give me an example of non-spellcasters in the Realms being raised from the dead more than once/twice?
It's assumed to be the case with most characters who survive to high level and don't have religious or political bans on resurrection. Why do you think character class has anything to do with it?
A nation/empire is composed of many people...I think it's unfair to compare one person against one nation
The comparison wasn't with one person (which would be the kind of brain-shredding who's-the-greatest nonsense this board has been welcomely free from lately) but with Larloch's undead retinue.
So you do know what a munchkin is? WHy ask all those questions about what a munchkin is?
I didn't ask any such questions.
Okay...to remove all the confusion about munchkins...why don't we call "them"(the uber spellcasters that I am referring to) as "uber NPCs" (since u all have a problem about me defining them as munchkins)...
Let's not. The 'über' prefix in English -- a reference to Nietzsche's [i]
The statement says he isn't a "munchkin." Only if someone (the DM) purposely plays him as such does Larloch become a munchkin, and that holds true for any player character and NPC. The issue with the Serpent Queen is also summarized above..
So...you said it urself...he can be a munchkin.. :P
In the first case, of course Art can do things that can't be done without Art! No fighter can duplicate the effect of most 1st-level spells. In the second, are you alluding to a scene in which some mage fights an army by mêlée? I'm not aware of any -- it would be very foolish. But a warrior of comparable level would obviously be better able to survive such a battle.
But Mages makes whole castles explode in a snap of a finger, disintegrate an entire island too, and destroy cities in an instant...I don't any epic warrior could take out an entire castle/city....Well not untill the Spellplague came anyway. No more uber mages for us.
As mentioned above, no character can be a 'munchkin' -- 'munchkins' are players. Even by extension, no munchkin player would play a character with Halaster's self-limiting madness, inhuman patience, or expenditure of resources not for self-advancement but to amuse himself. And how would you know anyway if you don't know much about him?
Oh yes somebody would...the DM for example.
..whatabout DMs playing Larloch as stated above? The comparison wasn't with one person (which would be the kind of brain-shredding who's-the-greatest nonsense this board has been welcomely free from lately) but with Larloch's undead retinue.
Larloch owns!!
I didn't ask any such questions.Let's not. The 'über' prefix in English -- a reference to Nietzsche's [i]
The OP here. First off, thank you for all the ansers thus far (and special thanks to Dark Wizard for relaying my question to Mr Greenwood). I will go ahead and try to read the original AD&D Forgotten Realms Campaign Set in-depth as some suggested. Fact is, I don't have an awful lot of spare time on my hands, so I won't be able to post here very often, though I'll still read all your reactions.
That being said, I would like to ask to take the discussion on the supposedly large number of high level NPCs elsewhere: that discussion has been going on from reply 14 up to reply 43, and I don't think it has directly something to do with my original question ("What's so interesting about the Forgotten Realms").
Kind regards.
Hello all,
The OP here. First off, thank you for all the ansers thus far (and special thanks to Dark Wizard for relaying my question to Mr Greenwood). I will go ahead and try to read the original AD&D Forgotten Realms Campaign Set in-depth as some suggested. Fact is, I don't have an awful lot of spare time on my hands, so I won't be able to post here very often, though I'll still read all your reactions.
That being said, I would like to ask to take the discussion on the supposedly large number of high level NPCs elsewhere: that discussion has been going on from reply 14 up to reply 43, and I don't think it has directly something to do with my original question ("What's so interesting about the Forgotten Realms").
Kind regards.
-Sure it is. In fact, it is a debate that is very central to the setting. One of the biggest complaints about the Forgotten Realms is the proliferation of absurdly leveled NPCs, that has evolved into something of a fad trope over the years. In order to see something for what it really is, all of those extra layers need to be cut back. In order to see a person for who they really are, you want to observe them in their "natural surroundings", where they won't necessarily be acting out of character in order to curry favors or whatever else. Likewise, in order to see what the Forgotten Realms is all about, any tropes, myths, and so on need to be dispelled. One such myth is not that there is a large proliferation of high leveled NPCs, but that these NPCs do everything, and that the setting's focus is on these individuals/entities, rather than other things.
Yes, I hope we've managed to express something of what the Realms is like, such as with the Ed quote about Larloch, in the process of explaining what it's very much unlike (Dragon Ball Z). But it is indeed distorting to give too much attention to matters that are usually way behind the scenes, out of sight, during game play or storytelling there. If you can find a copy of the City of Splendors boxed set, I'd read the short 'day in the life of a merchant' section to give a better picture of the texture of life in Faerûn and the everyday background against which intrigue and adventure plays out. (A similar piece about a farmer's day was cut from the 2001 Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book for space: one of the tensions in publishing the Realms has always been between highlighting the whizbang fireworks and describing the underpinnings that give them context, credibility and meaning.)
My suggestion is to read the 3e FR Campaign Setting book because it represent the "modern" Realms in a format that is familiar to those who have played D&D in recent years. Your friend who is a Realms fan probably has it, ask him to borrow the book for a few days.
I feel the 4E FRCG focuses too much on what has changed. Without the context offered by the 3e books, some statements might seem strange, but that varies with person. I believe it does have an Eberron style formating, so that may help you get the gist of the Realms
The 2e books while good, are of an older format. Unless you're used to that format, they might seem a bit "off." Though again, that varies by personal tastes.
So...you said it urself...he can be a munchkin.. :P
I think this discussion has reached its course. It's quite obvious from your previous answers what your purpose was. I just hope others don't get confused by your baseless prodding.
We should close this thread before I go gaga again!