It’s good to hear him say 4E brings the roleplaying back to D&D.
..paid ad..
Citation needed.
-You have the new books, right Alediran? Or, at least, you've skimmed through them. How much of the new rules do you like?
Almost nothing at all. There are few good rules that can work with 3rd edition anyways, and Pathfinder seems to be including them. And I'm dying to see the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, I think of it as the true heir of FR (I've read the Guide to Korvosa at last and they even include the prices of renting and buying homes for each section of the city, it blew my mind when I saw it).
Almost nothing at all. There are few good rules that can work with 3rd edition anyways, and Pathfinder seems to be including them. And I'm dying to see the Pathfinder Campaign Setting.
-Eh, everyone is raving about Pathfinder, but truthfully, I don't think it's anything all that special. I mean, don't get me wrong, I hope Paizo kicks ass with it and all, but it doesn't...speak out to me. The setting or the rules.
-Eh, everyone is raving about Pathfinder, but truthfully, I don't think it's anything all that special. I mean, don't get me wrong, I hope Paizo kicks ass with it and all, but it doesn't...speak out to me.
I rather like it, myself. But then again, I like it for a lot of the same reasons that I like 4E, as it makes many of the same changes.
I rather like it, myself. But then again, I like it for a lot of the same reasons that I like 4E, as it makes many of the same changes.
-Mind you, I like some of the things I've seen. I like the Sorcerer, for instance, since my own version of it is similar, with the heritage and all. And, Stigger told me that Domains are Spell-Like powers, which I like. But, other than that, nothing else in the rules really calls out to me. I haven't done an in-depth review, though. To me, it looks more or less like what I play now, so it's...nothing out of the ordinary.
Think about it: This guy has been playing Dungeons and Dragons longer than most of us have been alive.
He’s worked with numerous major game designers, authors and editors.
If he says something’s fun, it’s a sure bet it is.
And I'm sorry, but you just can't divorce the rules from the setting. As any gamer knows, the game rules are the first step in bringing a game world alive. On top of that, nobody can deny the Forgotten Realms have seen some major changes in order to make it comport to 4E.
The fact that Ed has been critical of the direction 3E took and has since been quite literally shown to praise 4E means a lot.
It means people can have fun playing 4E Dungeons and Dragons.
It follows people can have fun playing D&D in the 4E Forgotten Realms.
Personally, I'm glad that Ed G. likes the new 4e rules system. Lots of people do. But it's not the same thing as saying he's happy about the upcoming 4E Realms, is it?
Are you actually suggesting he isn't?
The idea that he might not like something that was done to the setting is hardly new. Ed has oft stated there are things about the Realms he would have never done to them if he were in charge.
But he gave that power up over two decades ago. Instead, he’s always found ways to contribute positively to the Forgotten Realms.
That sort of mature, always positive adult attitude hasn’t stopped.
And that’s part of why I like the guy.
And I'm sorry, but you just can't divorce the rules from the setting.
-We've been though this many times. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, it doesn't make it true: Rulesets and campaign settings are two separate, but interconnected concepts. Specific rulesets can be used without specific campaign settings, and specific campaign settings can be used without specific rulesets.
-Thus, the reason why people can enjoy specific rules, but not enjoy specific settings, and vice versa.
If he says something’s fun, it’s a sure bet it is.
You must believe everything in commercials. ;) Is Ms. Butterworth's the BEST pancake and waffle syrup in the entire world, just because she says so? Is KFC the best fried chicken in the world because the Colonel says so?
Getting aside from the issue of someone being interviewed who clearly has a vested interest in the product being discussed, maybe he did have fun and love 4E rules. In fact, he probably did have fun. Heck, I had fun playing KotS, but that doesn't necessarily follow that either Ed or I believe that 4E Realms is fun. We'll all really have to wait and see, won't we?
And I'm sorry, but you just can't divorce the rules from the setting.
Of course people can divorce rules from a setting. Any setting, any time. I used Rolemaster rules for a Realms setting once, and it played exactly like the Realms. I've also used 3.5E rules for my homebrew campaign, which is -gasp- completely divorced from the core setting.
Here's something that might blow your mind: some people -might- use 4E Realms without using the 4E D&D Ruleset!
It means people can have fun playing 4E Dungeons and Dragons.
Sure, some will.
It follows people can have fun playing D&D in the 4E Forgotten Realms.
Sure, some will. But the "it follows" conclusion you're making is a reach. It isn't necessarily the case that people who like (or love) the 4E ruleset will naturally have fun playing 4E Realms. Your logic is blurry.
And that’s part of why I like the guy.
That's nice. I like him too.
Is KFC the best fried chicken in the world because the Colonel says so?
-Yes.
-Yes.
Well, I heard that Popeye prefers a different recipe. Yug yug yug! :D
I have to agree that that is a good element of 4th ed. I liked some of the complexity of 3rd edition, myself (spells vs powers), but I can also see the benefits of the system.
Thanks in advance.
-Yes.
"That's because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly, smartass!"Getting aside from the issue of someone being interviewed who clearly has a vested interest in the product being discussed,
This is where your argument falls down.
There is no “issue”, which I believe is your term for “conflict of interest”, at all.
This is because “vested” implies right of ownership.
Ed stopped owning the Realms over two decades ago, as I’m sure you know.
Ed simply isn’t prevaricating. He’s being honest.
And that’s why I like him. He’s a straight shooter.
maybe he did have fun and love 4E rules.
Did you watch the video. There is no “maybe” there.
In fact, he probably did have fun. Heck, I had fun playing KotS, but that doesn't necessarily follow that either Ed or I believe that 4E Realms is fun.
Why would Ed’s contribution contain things that he didn’t consider fun?
We'll all really have to wait and see, won't we?
We will. But I’m positive about it.
Anyway, the 4th Edition Realms are fully integrated with the 4E Rules Set. That’s a fact that can’t be denied. Every complaint about the Spellplague “...not being necessary/they didn’t need to do that” is a recognition of this fact.
This is why the 4E Rules are not “...a separate category all together”. Much of the current Realms’ flavor and setting material is derived directly from the 4E Rules Set.
For the Record: People can try to play with any rules for a any setting they want, if they’re willing to go through the (sometimes arduous) process of making it work and their players want to use game rules other than the one a particular setting was written for.
The statement I originally made in this thread was specific to 4E and the 4E Realms.
This is where your argument falls down.
There is no “issue”, which I believe is your term for “conflict of interest”, at all.
This is because “vested” implies right of ownership.
You really don't seem to understand the difference between "vested interest" and "conflict of interest". Perhaps you should study them.
And vested interests do not necessarily imply ownership. You seem to enjoy jumping to conclusions.
I love Ed’s boundless enthusiasm. It’s positively contagious.
It’s good to hear him say 4E brings the roleplaying back to D&D.
-Man I dig the chick with the blue hair. :D
:D 18DELTA
You really don't seem to understand the difference between "vested interest" and "conflict of interest". Perhaps you should study them.
Enlighten me, then, with regard to your argument that we should be "...Getting aside from the issue of someone being interviewed who clearly has a vested interest in the product being discussed."
Since I seem to not be understanding (according to you) I'd appreciate it if you could clarify for us.
What did you mean, exactly? How should we be regarding what Ed had to say in the interview?
I think I've made a pretty good case that he's an honest guy that says what he means and means what he says.
Was I wrong?
-Man I dig the chick with the blue hair. :D
18DELTA
-That is Solice.
Conflict of Interest: this is a situation where a person with specific responsibilities has competing professional or personal interests that make it difficult to fulfill those responsibilities in an impartial manner.
See the difference now?
-That is Solice.
-Like I care what her name is. :P I just think she is HOT, HOT, HOT!!! ;) :D ;) :D
-Ed wants the Fourgotten Realms to succed, I know I would if I was the creator. I like my settings crunch lite, yet fluff heavy for the reasons we are now seeing. The Spellplague should be a fluff event not a total mechanical reboot of the edition mechanic. It should be an event that adds to the setting without nuking the rest of the setting. ;)
18DELTA
-Like I care what her name is. :P I just think she is HOT, HOT, HOT!!! ;) :D ;) :D
-Yeah, generally speaking, when one has an attraction to a woman, knowing her name is usually a plus. ;)
Vested interest
See the difference now?
I appreciate your posting of the definitions.
Now can you relate them to your point about Ed Greenwood having a vested interest? That is, when you wrote "...Getting aside from the issue of someone being interviewed who clearly has a vested interest in the product being discussed."
I'm still not sure what you're getting at there. I want to make sure I understand you completely.
I appreciate your posting of the definitions.
Now can you relate them to your point about Ed Greenwood having a vested interest? That is, when you wrote "...Getting aside from the issue of someone being interviewed who clearly has a vested interest in the product being discussed."
I'm still not sure what you're getting at there. I want to make sure I understand you completely.
With respect to the video (commercial) that you linked in the OP, it is clear that Ed has a vested interest in the promotion of 4E. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that, it's just a fact. If he expressed dislike or dissatisfaction of 4E, that would be a conflict of interest. Bear in mind that I am not saying that he is lying or even misrepresenting his feelings, nor does the fact that he clearly has a vested interest suggest that he is lying or misrepresenting his feelings. But it does mean that it cannot be taken as a completely unbiased view. It does mean that people cannot point to it as his completely objective opinion.
I'm still not sure what you're getting at there. I want to make sure I understand you completely.
-I don't want to speak for Therise, but...It's not that difficult. Ed Greenwood, having a vested interest in Dungeons and Dragons- in such that he is a freelance author/designer primarily in the employ of WotC, and that his campaign setting (while he does not own it, in the legal sense, in the 'emotional sense') is in the 'control' of WotC- isn't going to say something negative about them, regardless of his personal feelings on the matter. Especially in the context that the interview was conducted- by an WotC employee, for a WotC video series (Gamer Zer0 Radio).
-This doesn't mean he was telling a truth or an untruth.
With respect to the video (commercial) that you linked in the OP, it is clear that Ed has a vested interest in the promotion of 4E. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that, it's just a fact. If he expressed dislike or dissatisfaction of 4E, that would be a conflict of interest. Bear in mind that I am not saying that he is lying or even misrepresenting his feelings, nor does the fact that he clearly has a vested interest suggest that he is lying or misrepresenting his feelings. But it does mean that it cannot be taken as a completely unbiased view. It does mean that people cannot point to it as his completely objective opinion.
He's already expressed his dislike about many of the things relating to the 4E Realms. And he's got even more of a vested interest in the success of the 4E Realms then he does with the 4E ruleset, as he derives income off of the former. And yet despite that, he was all to willing to share his objective, and largely negative, opinion about that. Why would he be less objective when it comes to the 4E ruleset, which he has even less of a vested interest in?
He's already expressed his dislike about many of the things relating to the 4E Realms. And he's got even more of a vested interest in the success of the 4E Realms then he does with the 4E ruleset, as he derives income off of the former. And yet despite that, he was all to willing to share his objective, and largely negative, opinion about that. Why would he be less objective when it comes to the 4E ruleset, which he has even less of a vested interest in?
It's also important, if not essential, to understand something within its context. Videos on the internet can be (and are) taken out of context all the time. This particular video was first posted back in March 2008. How much of 4E Realms was set in stone back in Feb-March? How much dislike did he express then? Was he paid yet?
In any case, we've seen Ed say a few minor negative things about 4E Realms, but he is still actively suggesting that people look at it first and then decide.
And yet despite that, he was all to willing to share his objective, and largely negative, opinion about that.
-To date, he has never shared largely negative opinions about anything.
Why would he be less objective when it comes to the 4E ruleset, which he has even less of a vested interest in?
-The context of the "interviews". In the "interview" he gave at Candlekeep, it was an email to The Hooded One, based on a few queries from fans at Candlekeep. In the video presented, it was a video being shot by an WotC employee, for a WotC video series (Gamer Zer0 Radio), with Ed Greenwood himself being a freelance author/designed contractually bound to WotC for many things, and in the employ of WotC, primarily.
-All of this said, I think we are losing sight of the topic of this thread.
It wasn’t a commercial. Strange you’d assign that term to the video interview, because it strongly implies Ed is there to promote first, share his feelings second.
That’s clearly not the case.
We’re all biased. Must Ed give a totally factual opinion that is iron-clad with neutral tones before we allow ourselves to believe him?
The answer is of course ‘no’. It’s his opinion. Opinions are naturally subjective. So of course we can’t point to his statements as objective, because it’s impossible for anyone to give an objective (read: Fact Based) opinion, especially about gaming.
He likes 4E. One can’t argue that’s not true.
And because he’s been a gamer, game designer and novel author for so long, his opinion carries more weight and value.
Some may choose to ignore his considerable experience and assign it no value. That’s their choice.
Some may choose to assume concepts like vested interest and conflict of interest are at the forefront of Ed’s mind when he makes statements in interviews. Again, that’s their choice.
I don’t do that, though. I take him at his word and reserve final judgment for after I have my own experiences with whatever it is he’s talking about (whether it be novels or gaming products).
The fact that I’m already enjoying 4E and the 4E Forgotten Realms only proves he was right.
How much of 4E Realms was set in stone back in Feb-March? How much dislike did he express then? Was he paid yet?
The major changes to the Realms were planned over two years ago.
As he stated at GenCon 2007, he was brought into the loop by WotC two years prior (at an earlier GenCon).
His words to those of us attending the FR Seminar at GenCon 2007 were very clear: The Realms must change.
It's worth noting that Ed isn't going to become a beggar if his income from WotC dries up. The guy has been employed as a librarian for years and is doing quite well already.
-To date, he has never shared largely negative opinions about anything.[/b]
If you're speaking only about 4E and the 4E Realms, I believe you are correct.
If you are speaking with regard to the length and breadth of the Realms as a published campaign setting, then that's actually not true, LK.
With respect to the video (commercial) that you linked in the OP, it is clear that Ed has a vested interest in the promotion of 4E. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with that, it's just a fact. If he expressed dislike or dissatisfaction of 4E, that would be a conflict of interest. Bear in mind that I am not saying that he is lying or even misrepresenting his feelings, nor does the fact that he clearly has a vested interest suggest that he is lying or misrepresenting his feelings. But it does mean that it cannot be taken as a completely unbiased view. It does mean that people cannot point to it as his completely objective opinion.
Ed Greenwood created the Realms. He has cashed a lot of checks from wrting about the Realms. At what point in time would you say Greenwood was objective about the Realms, in any edition, if he had so much invested in it emotionally and financially?
I think, if you've respected Ed's opinions in the past, you can respect them now.
It wasn’t a commercial. Strange you’d assign that term to the video interview, because it strongly implies Ed is there to promote first, share his feelings second.
All celebrity interviews have the clear intent of promoting a product, whether you're talking about daily morning talk shows or internet-based interviews.
Additionally, I would like to point out that my ability to see a vested interest for what it is (or a conflict of interest, for that matter) has absolutely no impact on my respect or admiration for Ed Greenwood. I would not be here if I didn't like the Realms (at least the 1E-3E versions of it), and I do greatly respect and admire him for his creation and his continued contributions. But that doesn't mean I am going to take an unreservedly positive view of 4E or 4E Realms just because a celebrity endorses a particular product in a commercial, even if I do like him.
And that was a commercial because at the begining it Showed the intent with the D&D Logo!
-Eh, everyone is raving about Pathfinder, but truthfully, I don't think it's anything all that special. I mean, don't get me wrong, I hope Paizo kicks ass with it and all, but it doesn't...speak out to me. The setting or the rules.
Yeah, I checked out Pathfinder, but all it's doing from my point of view is wall-papering over the cracks in the wall.
3rd is just too broken (again, for me) to fix.
Hooray 4th!
3rd is just too broken (again, for me) to fix.
-That much is untrue. It's only as "broken" as the DM allows it to be. That said, that's not the topic, nor is this the section to discuss it.
Hmm what is that old saying?? OHH YEA!! Don't bite the hand that feeds you!:pile:
And that was a commercial because at the begining it Showed the intent with the D&D Logo!
Apparently, if he say anything good, it's biaised ads. Ah.
It bodes well for the game and for the future of the Realms.
Who cares one way or another would be my question... form your own opinion, don't bother with anyone elses is my take on crap like this. ;)
-Exactly. So luminous.
Yep, he's right. I love that movie. I do believe that the Col. was part of the Triumverate.
-The 4e rules, as has been said numerous times, are a separate category all together, and have their good points and their bad points. I dislike about 75% of them, and like the remaining 25%.
And I like about 75% of the new rules, but we all pretty much like about 5% of the new realms. Nobody could believe that Ed is happy about the 4-Gotten Realms
WizO_Unicorn
And I like about 75% of the new rules, but we all pretty much like about 5% of the new realms. Nobody could believe that Ed is happy about the 4-Gotten Realms
To be snarky, what if he stated else otherwise? Would you believe him?
It's Forgotten Realms, also.
To be snarky, what if he stated else otherwise? Would you believe him?
Honestly, probably not. I would think he was merely touting the company line. That would probably be my first reaction. But in fairness, I would think he hasn't been totally thrilled with many of things that have gone on, such as the The Time of Troubles and whatnot
Honestly, probably not. I would think he was merely touting the company line. That would probably be my first reaction. But in fairness, I would think he hasn't been totally thrilled with many of things that have gone on, such as the The Time of Troubles and whatnot
Well, when you sign away your product to a company, one of the things that you'd better be prepared for is for them to do things to it that you may or may not agree with.
Well, when you sign away your product to a company, one of the things that you'd better be prepared for is for them to do things to it that you may or may not agree with.
of course
Note, though, that I did not have the privilege of playing in his game. Sadly there were just too many people there to kill them all, and nowhere to hide the bodies.
Of course, this is all entirely unrelated to what one may or may not think about the 4th Edition version of the Forgotten Realms setting, nor should we infer anything about that from such comments, good or bad.
And I like about 75% of the new rules, but we all pretty much like about 5% of the new realms.
-What things, specifically do you like? Let me rephrase that: You know me...What kind of stuff is there that you think I'd like. So far, I only like the different "Statuses" that exist (Full HP, Bloodied, etc.), the concept of "Weapon Groups", and the reinvisioned Sorcerer.
Nobody could believe that Ed is happy about the 4-Gotten Realms
-At the end of the day, it's filling his pockets, so regardless on how it's changed, I'm sure he's happy that his wallet gets fatter and fatter. If something gave me notoriety and money, I know I'd like it, as long as it kept on doing so.
Nobody could believe that Ed is happy about the 4-Gotten Realms
I do.
Ju god a problem wit' dat? ;)
I appreciate your efforts.
I knew going in that certain people would automatically make the case for not being positive and discourage others from trying to find something good in that video, I just didn't realize it would be so focused.
I just don't understand why people work so hard at making sure we can't build up positive momentum on the FR Forums towards the release of the 4E Realms.
But I don’t think I am, because of the continuously repetitive nature of the behavior.
you just can't divorce the rules from the setting.
I've got to agree with Lord Karsus here. 4e FR and Eberron are (IMO) very different settings, and yet they can use the same rules. Sure some stuff is setting specific (like the spellscar abilities although that seems to just be an extra regional trait IMO) but for the most part the setting neutral rules are independent. That's why I can imagine playing in both settings and having artificers, warforged and swordmages in either setting.
4th Edition's rules do in fact emphasise setting-neutral rules. That's why we don't have a named world setting but instead have the PoL default setting.
The fact that Ed has been critical of the direction 3E took and has since been quite literally shown to praise 4E means a lot.
It means people can have fun playing 4E Dungeons and Dragons.
I disagree with the implication because Ed Greenwood likes 4e, fans of 3e should as well (if you didn't mean that please correct me). Someone who enjoyed AD&D and enjoys 4e but disliked 3e shows that people who didn't enjoy 3e could quite possibly enjoy 4e, not that those who liked 3e should like 4e.
but he is still actively suggesting that people look at it first and then decide.
That sounds like good advice no matter what he thinks of it.
It wasn’t a commercial.
Its a commercial the same way the Penny Arcade podcasts are commercial. IMO both parties are there to enjoy themselves and WotC is using their genuine enjoyment as an advertisement. They're not acting (IMO), but it is being used to push 4e forward as a good thing. For example had the penny arcade people completely hated 4e and it was obvious in the podcasts, they wouldn't have published them.
That said, that's not the topic, nor is this the section to discuss it.
So why make a comment about it before saying no-one should? If this is the wrong place to discuss it, we shouldn't discuss it at all, right?
Honestly, probably not. I would think he was merely touting the company line.
That makes it a bit tough to take that position seriously. If he's for the 4e FR, he's touting the company line. If he's against it then he's showing his true feelings.
Because they don't like the 4ed Realms, can't see why anyone else would like the 4ed Realms, and many hope it will fail so that WotC will see the error of their ways and be forced to go back and undo the damage they have made. It's amazing how easy it is to read what you want into something when so much emotion is involved.
These forums are for people who like the 4e FR forums as well. I'd ask that those who hate it and are hoping it will fail to please remember that and try to give us breathe to talk with those who also like it.
Eh, everyone is raving about Pathfinder, but truthfully, I don't think it's anything all that special. I mean, don't get me wrong, I hope Paizo kicks ass with it and all, but it doesn't...speak out to me. The setting or the rules.
It's hilarious really how so many people are raving about Pathfinder as some sort of messiah game championing the cause against the evil that is WotC, when the whole thing is simply 3.5 with a bunch of 4E stuff thrown in for good measure. Had it been released as 3.75 under WotC's own label, it would've been burned at the stake as an outrageous attempt to bleed the gamers dry.
Still, one can't blame Paizo for seeing an opening and taking advantage of it, even though I won't expect Pathfinder to offer serious competition to 4E in the long term, if at all.
These forums are for people who like the 4e FR forums as well. I'd ask that those who hate it and are hoping it will fail to please remember that and try to give us breathe to talk with those who also like it.
I didn't mean to say that they weren't. I was just trying to explain the reason behind the negativity. Personally, I think I might be the only person who is still sitting on the fence about 4ed FR. I see the positives, I see the negatives, and now I am waiting for the final product to see what was actually made from this bizarre and drastic attempt. However, if you are wondering why people would be saying what they are saying, that is the reason why.
It's hilarious really how so many people are raving about Pathfinder as some sort of messiah game championing the cause against the evil that is WotC, when the whole thing is simply 3.5 with a bunch of 4E stuff thrown in for good measure. Had it been released as 3.75 under WotC's own label, it would've been burned at the stake as an outrageous attempt to bleed the gamers dry.
Still, one can't blame Paizo for seeing an opening and taking advantage of it, even though I won't expect Pathfinder to offer serious competition to 4E in the long term, if at all.
True. I also like Paizo and hope this pays the bills. After it wears thin I cannot wait for them to put out some fun 4E material. Actually I hope they just put it out under another label or publisher because I want to see it sooner than later.
if you are wondering why people would be saying what they are saying, that is the reason why.
I'm not wondering why they're saying it, I'm wondering why they're repeating it day, after day, after day, after day. I'm wondering if they'll ever stop.
First, I enjoyed reading some of your blog posts. I’ve never done play by email, so it’s been informative to read a little about it.
I disagree with the implication because Ed Greenwood likes 4e, fans of 3e should as well (if you didn't mean that please correct me). Someone who enjoyed AD&D and enjoys 4e but disliked 3e shows that people who didn't enjoy 3e could quite possibly enjoy 4e, not that those who liked 3e should like 4e.
To be clear, just because Ed Greenwood likes something doesn’t mean others should or are supposed to like it.
I do feel that if Ed happens to enjoy a gaming product that it's a reliable, informed endorsement.
I think Ed’s enjoyment bodes well because of his statements that 4E puts the roleplaying back in the game.
For the record, I disagree with Ed’s implication that it (roleplaying) was missing from 3E, but even so I can still appreciate that someone of his caliber was able to connect with the 4E rules in a roleplaying manner.
The Forgotten Realms are a great setting because of its depth and flavor. That flavor comes out at the gaming table in the form of interactive roleplaying between the DM and the players.
If 4E supports and encourages that, then I feel comfortable concluding people will enjoy 4th Edition and the 4E Realms because the game will help bring the setting alive.
So why make a comment about it before saying no-one should? If this is the wrong place to discuss it, we shouldn't discuss it at all, right?
Bloody well said.
-What things, specifically do you like? Let me rephrase that: You know me...What kind of stuff is there that you think I'd like. So far, I only like the different "Statuses" that exist (Full HP, Bloodied, etc.), the concept of "Weapon Groups", and the reinvisioned Sorcerer.
I don't think there is a Sorcerer class in 4th ed yet...
But ok, stuff to like about 4th ed rules:
- Balance. Seriously. One guy does not outshine another (or everyone outshines each other at various points)
- Class roles. I miss an alternate controller though
- Monster advancent is easy. Monster creation if fairly easy.
- Multiclass feats keep things working and people effective even with odd combos (though I see no need to limit them to only one class)
- Rituals make interesting alternatives for spells, though I find several of them way too expensive to be any real use
- The Paladin's challenge ability
- Full plate is cheap!
Gomez
For the record, I disagree with Ed’s implication that it (roleplaying) was missing from 3E, but even so I can still appreciate that someone of his caliber was able to connect with the 4E rules in a roleplaying manner.
That was not what he was implying, IMO. What I think he was implying was that 3rd ed was so rules-intensive that by focusing on learning the rules, you had less time to focus on the roleplaying.
Gomez
It's hilarious really how so many people are raving about Pathfinder as some sort of messiah game championing the cause against the evil that is WotC, when the whole thing is simply 3.5 with a bunch of 4E stuff thrown in for good measure. Had it been released as 3.75 under WotC's own label, it would've been burned at the stake as an outrageous attempt to bleed the gamers dry.
Some people probably would, yes. For myself, though, and for many others here, our objections have nothing to do with the 4E rules set or their release - it has to do with the changes that were made to the Forgotten Realms setting that coincide with that. I was initially inclined to be positive towards 4th edition, and I still think there are many positive things about the rules themselves, divorced from setting.
If WoTC had released the Pathfinder-style/3.75 rules instead, and put the same sort of changes (Spellplague, dead gods/NPCs/etc) into the Realms, I would have been just as upset. Conversely, had they not done the things I found objectionable, or more importantly implemented them in such a way that I found less intrusive and objectionable... well, that would be another story as well.
Please do not use this thread to debate where people should post.
WizO_Unicorn
So why make a comment about it before saying no-one should? If this is the wrong place to discuss it, we shouldn't discuss it at all, right?
-Sharing my opinion on the topic at hand, and then as Forum Lead, informing other that topic was leading down a path that would result in flaming and bating, which is a hastle I'd rather avoid. Why do you make posts with the sole purpose to illicit negative responses from the community? Baiting is against the CoC, which can be read at the top of your internet browser.
I don't think there is a Sorcerer class in 4th ed yet...
-There is an upcoming one, then, in any case.
But ok, stuff to like about 4th ed rules:
- Balance. Seriously. One guy does not outshine another (or everyone outshines each other at various points)
- Class roles. I miss an alternate controller though
- Monster advancent is easy. Monster creation if fairly easy.
- Multiclass feats keep things working and people effective even with odd combos (though I see no need to limit them to only one class)
- Rituals make interesting alternatives for spells, though I find several of them way too expensive to be any real use
- The Paladin's challenge ability
- Full plate is cheap!
Gomez
-Alright, but many of these things, I don't like (or don't know of), which is why I asked Merrik, because he probably has a decent gauge of what I like and don't like. ;)
-What things, specifically do you like?
I like the new pantheon. I like the core setting. I like the new combat rules. I like how everyone gets a set of abilities that can choose from. No longer is a ranger just a fighter that tracks.
I don't think I like the way the wizard was redone. I'll to wait and see on that but personally I think they should have stuck with the old magic system. I don't like that paragon paths start at 10th level, I think thats too late.
-
-At the end of the day, it's filling his pockets, so regardless on how it's changed, I'm sure he's happy that his wallet gets fatter and fatter. If something gave me notoriety and money, I know I'd like it, as long as it kept on doing so.
Perhaps. I am sure ultimately he loves the deal. I just think he is sitting there thinking why did they have to do that?
No sir
I like how everyone gets a set of abilities that can choose from. No longer is a ranger just a fighter that tracks.
-Ah, that's another thing I like. Rather than picking a single feat, they get an assorted bunch of "feat-like" powers/exploits/whatever they were called. That's cool. I don't like the ones that are inherently magical in nature (if any are), but I like the overall idea.
I don't like that paragon paths start at 10th level, I think thats too late.
-Well, most Prestige Classes began circa Level 7-15, so that's right around the same area, for the most part. Since I've learned that PPs are more like Substitution Levels than Prestige Classes, though, I don't like them as much.
Perhaps. I am sure ultimately he loves the deal. I just think he is sitting there thinking why did they have to do that?
-Well, only he knows, so...
To be clear, just because Ed Greenwood likes something doesn’t mean others should or are supposed to like it.
I do feel that if Ed happens to enjoy a gaming product that it's a reliable, informed endorsement.
I think Ed’s enjoyment bodes well because of his statements that 4E puts the roleplaying back in the game.
For the record, I disagree with Ed’s implication that it (roleplaying) was missing from 3E, but even so I can still appreciate that someone of his caliber was able to connect with the 4E rules in a roleplaying manner.
I had a rather heated discussion with a friend yesterday about 4e. He basically said "it's like a computer game or a table top miniatures game, it's like WoW and I don't like it. You can't Role Play with such a system." I disagreed quite heartily with him (raised voices made my other half and the other person who was here for our bimonthly game slink very quickly out into the kitchen!).
To my perspective, the rule system doesn't matter a whit, you can Role Play without a system - and in fact, I have done a lot of free formish role playing in my life, some of which was very loosely based on the various DnD systems over the years (2nd Ed and 3rd Ed mostly)... It has been quite liberating. In my experience, you don't need rules to Role Play, and because you don't need rules, you can Role Play with any system you like... But some people are just too attached to the "style" of the system. To my friend, 4th Edition isn't Dungeons and Dragons at all, but a whole new system he finds rather distasteful. I am hoping that I'll one day be able to coax him into playing it and showing him what I meant in our discussion when I said that Role Playing has nothing to do with Rules Systems.
I'm not wondering why they're saying it, I'm wondering why they're repeating it day, after day, after day, after day. I'm wondering if they'll ever stop.
Part of the reason we go on about this is because we're in mourning. Personally, I'm mourning the loss of almost everything that first drew me to the Realms in the first place. The Chosen of Mystra (the Seven Sisters in particular), Mystra herself, Eilistraee, the current NPCs of Cormyr, and the list goes on.
It's not the Forgotten Realms any more. It's its evil twin, the Rorgotten Fealms. It doesn't work for me unless I change the name and treat it as a completely different setting. I am currently feeling guilty because I just looked at my other half and said "You know, I could probably work with the 4e Realms if I just completely divorce it from what has gone before. I mean, it's going to have new NPCs and things in it that I could possibly like or even come to love, so really it's a totally new setting, and I should treat it as such." Perhaps it's because I'm tired, or maybe I've just finally exhausted my anger and frustration and am now resigned to what is happening. *shrugs*
Who knows what the future will bring? I guess I'll just take a look at the campaign setting in the store and decide then if there's enough to pique my interest in this new Rorgotten Fealms.
That makes it a bit tough to take that position seriously. If he's for the 4e FR, he's touting the company line. If he's against it then he's showing his true feelings.
All I mean, is that it would be hard to convince me if he say he's happy about 4e realms he isn't just touting the company line 'cause I just can't see how he could be. He may very well like the 4e rules system. Thats a different issue
Because they don't like the 4ed Realms, can't see why anyone else would like the 4ed Realms, and many hope it will fail so that WotC will see the error of their ways and be forced to go back and undo the damage they have made. It's amazing how easy it is to read what you want into something when so much emotion is involved.
I am sorry, but I am really interested in this. So does this mean you think, that when you keep on complaining, and spread such propaganda, Wizards will for certain change everything back?
Don't get me wrong I don't mean anything with this comment, but as long as I have been browsing these forums, every time someone posts something positive, there are 10 reactions to it that they disagree.
As I agree that is what a forum is about, I do agree with John that you should give those who do love the 4e Forgotten Realms, should be given a chance aswell.
I am sorry but saying (from the same person on different topics) the same thing thing over and over again is not productive. But that is just me I guess.
On a other note, if I don't like something, I won't buy the product. And if I never plan on playing the product, I won't be posting in the forums at all, let alone stroll through forum day in, day out.
This somewhat difficult with a thing like the realms though, because they are old and a lot of people are really emotional attached to it, I realise.
But to be honest I had to say I think the chances Wizards would 'rectify' the changes in the 4e Forgotten Realms are very slim, because they were needed to a certain degree.
About Ed. He may have done something different with the Setting but he may admit it may not have been the thing that was most financially beneficial for himself or the Realms in hte long run. Catering to the diehard core fans (especially if they are not all that numerous) that get bent out of shape easily does not help the franchise in the long run but developing the setting so it can hook in new fans (old and young) is the best thing in the long run IMO.
Star Wars is a thing I am luke (no pun intended) warm about when it comes to anything outside of the movies. I am now hooked though on the Legacy Series which is 100 years after the Han and Luke era. It is a darker book but it is still Star Wars and is a fun read. It makes me want to play in that era and play in a SW Saga game. I played in a Rebellion era game with the RPG game and was not inpired and just bored because that era is like Dragonlance for me, all the big things were already done by the Big NPCs. So they took a chance and altered the setting and fans seem to be digging it and new fans are getting into the setting. Yes the die hard SW fanatics are still in the Rebellion era screaming and yelling "shenanigans" but who cares about them? Evidently they don't make up the biggest part of the SW consumer or the setting would be catered more to them.
-I hate Star Wars Legacy. The entire concept behind it, as someone aptly put it, is, "Hey, let's take everything that's cool (Sith, Empires, Jedi, Bounty Hunters), mush it together, and make money! Awesome!"
See? I think is fun and would want to game there now where I did not want to before.
You hate the new SW, I like it. Somebody is making money and it is helping the Franchise get new fans.
You hate the new FR, I like it. Somebody is probably going to make money and it will most likely help the Franchise get new fans.
Most of the fans of SW I know like the new Legacy as well as the old stuff. I am sure it will be the same with the FR fans I know. Again they ar not too much like diehard fans about either game and setting.
See? I think is fun and would want to game there now where I did not want to before.
I like it as well. Its a fresh take on things and a sort of natural evolution of some of the ideas
The thing I see with SW Saga is you can play in any era you wish. KOTR, Empire, Rebellion and now Legacy are all viable areas t oplay in. Fo me KOTR and Legacy are the only eras I would play in.
don't forget the upcoming Force Unleashed Sourcebook
don't forget the upcoming Force Unleashed Sourcebook
Not sure about that book. What does it got inside?
Not sure about that book. What does it got inside?
The Force Unleashed is the era after the jedi are killed and the empire is just taking root. Its new novel, video game and sourcebook
I am sorry, but I am really interested in this. So does this mean you think, that when you keep on complaining, and spread such propaganda, Wizards will for certain change everything back?
No, I don't think any of us are that naive. On the other hand, what propaganda? We're not saying anything that's untrue as a general rule. For myself, personally, as I've already said in this thread - most of the thing I loved about the Realms have been changed or destroyed. I have the right to be upset, and I have the right to express that to WotC on their forums.
Don't get me wrong I don't mean anything with this comment, but as long as I have been browsing these forums, every time someone posts something positive, there are 10 reactions to it that they disagree.
As I agree that is what a forum is about, I do agree with John that you should give those who do love the 4e Forgotten Realms, should be given a chance aswell.
What, aren't people allowed to dissent? That's just ridiculous.
I am sorry but saying (from the same person on different topics) the same thing thing over and over again is not productive. But that is just me I guess.
Should I point out the irony here? Someone else posted almost exactly the same thing not more than 13 posts before you. Who is supposedly posting the same things over and over again? I'm confused.
On a other note, if I don't like something, I won't buy the product. And if I never plan on playing the product, I won't be posting in the forums at all, let alone stroll through forum day in, day out.
So now you're implying that those who dissent and don't like the new Realms don't have a right to post here? I don't think that's your call to make. (If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry, that is how it came across though.)
This somewhat difficult with a thing like the realms though, because they are old and a lot of people are really emotional attached to it, I realise.
But to be honest I had to say I think the chances Wizards would 'rectify' the changes in the 4e Forgotten Realms are very slim, because they were needed to a certain degree.
Needed? So I'm wrong now because I liked the Realms for the very things they've chosen to change? Thanks a lot, brightbane.
But to be honest I had to say I think the chances Wizards would 'rectify' the changes in the 4e Forgotten Realms are very slim, because they were needed to a certain degree.
needed? how? We needed to destroy half the gods why? because the average the gamer is not bright enough to distinguish them? Why did we need Abeir or the changelands or a 100 year jump? We didn't need them at all. Whether or not they are desirable is a different arguement
So just try and post positive things and try and help people with good ideas.
This place can be a decent source of info and gaming ideas for players if enough positive folks speak out. It is really tough sometimes and I have not been as nice as I should but now when I see a post that irks me I go to another forum for a bit or just walk away. That usually helps me not post the first thin on my mind (which is usually pretty negative ;) ).
Please do not use this thread to debate where people should post.
WizO_Unicorn
Why do you make posts with the sole purpose to illicit negative responses from the community?
I actually don't. In this instance I felt that I had a point to contribute, however you're quote implied that anyone discussing the topic further would have their posts deleted (I'm still not certain so I'm just dropping it).
I did have 2 of my posts deleted, in one I felt I had a valid point to make, although I do agree it was poorly worded (due to my frustration). I asked the Wizo if my reworded post would break the CoC and result in another deletion (I don't feel it does, but considering it was a reworded part of a deleted post I felt I should make sure) but unfortunately the WiZo has yet to respond in either the affirmative or negative.
I would ask that you post up some examples where you feel the sole purpose was to illicit a negative response from the community, but
Please do not use this thread to debate where people should post.
WizO_Unicorn
So I guess I'll just ask you to PM me if you'd like to talk about this further.
I actually don't. In this instance I felt that I had a point to contribute, however you're quote implied that anyone discussing the topic further would have their posts deleted (I'm still not certain so I'm just dropping it).
-Only WizOs have the capability to delete/edit posts.
-Only WizOs have the capability to delete/edit posts.
Correct, however as a forum leader I'm sure you're much more aware then I of which posts would warrant a deletion and those that don't (given by the fact I did make 2 posts that were deleted which I didn't think they would be). So if you appear to be warning people that its possible, I'll take heed.
Correct, however as a forum leader I'm sure you're much more aware then I of which posts would warrant a deletion and those that don't (given by the fact I did make 2 posts that were deleted which I didn't think they would be). So if you appear to be warning people that its possible, I'll take heed.
-Most posts, I don't tag as 'Reported', simply because WizO attention isn't necessarily a good thing. So, whatever posts you are alluding to, I don't know. That said, as I said to someone via PM a little bit ago, it's always a good thing to "be aware" of what you are saying.
So just try and post positive things and try and help people with good ideas.
This place can be a decent source of info and gaming ideas for players if enough positive folks speak out. It is really tough sometimes and I have not been as nice as I should but now when I see a post that irks me I go to another forum for a bit or just walk away. That usually helps me not post the first thin on my mind (which is usually pretty negative ;) ).
surely you are not talking about my posts
surely you are not talking about my posts
Perhaps at one point. You were pretty steamed a few months ago. Your posts have calmed a bit since then. Hell with me who knows what can set me off. That is why I just walk away for a bit. Better safe than sorry, especially nowadays around here. It is just plain stupid to get myself banned for a really pigheaded comment.
Perhaps at one point. You were pretty steamed a few months ago.
Anger turns hate, hate turns to suffering
You are right. There have two points where I was just "steamed". When it became known that we were getting a 100 year jump. To that point, I was pretty excited about the 4e changes. In fact, I left these boards and candlekeep for a few months after that was announced because I was p.o.'d about the changes that were getting leaked
The second time was when we were told there would not be a steady stream of supplements. I so very much enjoyed getting a new supplement and digging into it. I figured that a few good supplements might get me over the horrible decisions they have made to that point. Now I can't even get that. Very upsetting.
The second time was when we were told there would not be a steady stream of supplements. I so very much enjoyed getting a new supplement and digging into it. I figured that a few good supplements might get me over the horrible decisions they have made to that point. Now I can't even get that. Very upsetting.
-Thats the joy of DDI.
Then again just buy one book and use its 4E mechanics, and use old lore. Each setting is going to be a carbon copy of each other mechanicaly. Good bye to the days of the unique setting with 4E. 
18DELTA :embarrass
Anger turns hate, hate turns to suffering
-The Jedi, with their haughty and elitist ways, we're very good at causing a lot of that, suffering.
To that point, I was pretty excited about the 4e changes. In fact, I left these boards and candlekeep for a few months after that was announced because I was p.o.'d about the changes that were getting leaked.
[Begin Boards Promotion]
-Don't do that. We're cooler here. Much more lively, too.
[/Begin Boards Promotion]
I love Ed’s boundless enthusiasm. It’s positively contagious.
It’s good to hear him say 4E brings the roleplaying back to D&D.
I might very well watch that video later. I like 4E too, although I haven't been able to actually play it yet.
It's nice to hear that Ed likes it too.needed? how? We needed to destroy half the gods why? because the average the gamer is not bright enough to distinguish them? Why did we need Abeir or the changelands or a 100 year jump? We didn't need them at all. Whether or not they are desirable is a different arguement
Like I said to certain degree, if you asked me where I stand, I would say:
I don't like gods dissappearing, neither do I like the 100 year jump.
I would say we did need them though, only to let FR accesable to new player.
I always say the more the merrier
Heya,
No, I don't think any of us are that naive. On the other hand, what propaganda? We're not saying anything that's untrue as a general rule. For myself, personally, as I've already said in this thread - most of the thing I loved about the Realms have been changed or destroyed. I have the right to be upset, and I have the right to express that to WotC on their forums.
Ok propaganda was not well put, I apolise
What, aren't people allowed to dissent? That's just ridiculous.
That's not what I ment, I ment it is not very nice to tackle peoples opinions with numbers.
Should I point out the irony here? Someone else posted almost exactly the same thing not more than 13 posts before you. Who is supposedly posting the same things over and over again? I'm confused.
So now you're implying that those who dissent and don't like the new Realms don't have a right to post here? I don't think that's your call to make. (If that's not what you meant, then I'm sorry, that is how it came across though.)
I am sorry but that's indeed not what I meant.
Needed? So I'm wrong now because I liked the Realms for the very things they've chosen to change? Thanks a lot, brightbane.
Never did anyone say you were wrong, and I didn't like some of the changes as well. Although I do want to add this post was not with the intend to point at anyone, just a general feeling I have about the forums here presented.
-Everyone is allowed to share their opinions, be they positive, negative, or otherwise, so long as they are within the bounds of the CoC, which can be viewed at the top of your screen.
As I am allowed aswell
@brightbane, I understand where your coming from and there is not much that can be done about it on the internet. The Net and it's various forums are negative places at times. Just remember those folks across the Net are many times just the vocal minority. There are many lurkers out there on many sites that could voice their opinion in a positive manner or give a counterpoint to certain negativity but either are afraid or just don't care because they feel the people that are complaining are...well complainers.
So just try and post positive things and try and help people with good ideas.
This place can be a decent source of info and gaming ideas for players if enough positive folks speak out. It is really tough sometimes and I have not been as nice as I should but now when I see a post that irks me I go to another forum for a bit or just walk away. That usually helps me not post the first thin on my mind (which is usually pretty negative ;) ).
I know, I was merely trying to defend John.
And I totally agree with you.
I'm surprised how the 4th edition can be appealing to anyone
Thanks for that sterling contribution to this thread.
And considering how well it's selling, apparently there are some people (including me) who enjoy it. Shocking I know!
I'm surprised how the 4th edition can be appealing to anyone
And you think my posts are amusing Lord Karsus? :D
Although I have to thank Quale, me thinks, for making my posts necessary at all
I would say we did need them though, only to let FR accesable to new player.
-This is a fallacy. The Forgotten Realms are accessible to players. If they weren't, there'd be no fans of the setting, now would there? ;)
As I am allowed aswell
-Yeah, you're included in the 'everyone' part. ;)
And you think my posts are amusing Lord Karsus? :D
-Not particularly, no. Merrik. Now, his posts are always good.
When asked about Paizo's new setting in the "Ask the Designers" thread, Rich Baker diplomatically wished them the best of luck. The guys at Paizo haven't directly said anything negative about WotC's people or products either (they still sell WotC products, including 4e ones!)
In fact, no-one in the business is saying anything bad about anyone else. You see, the game-designers in this industry are a small, close-knit group, and even if they are on opposites sides of the fence one day, they may be working together the next.
Ed plays and enjoys 4e... big deal. I play and enjoy Monopoly, but that doesn't make it D&D either (although I did try to add roleplay elements to it once...)
The bottom line is that just because someone isn't dissing something doesn't neccessarily mean they support it - they are just being diplomatic because all these guys know each other personally.
Ed also designs for Golarion (and enjoys it!), so does that mean Golarion (Paizo's Pathfinder setting) is better then FR, because Ed enjoys it? Don't read into it so much.
I think I would enjoy playing in a 4e game as well, just not a fantasy one. I think WotC accidentally created the PERFECT set of super-hero roleplay rules! I hope they realize that and jump on it - otherwise they'd be missing out on something that could be HUGE for the 4e ruleset.
-Well that and a "Grand History of the Realms." :D
18DELTA ;)
I think only DMs should read anything beyond the CG and the PG - the players have NO BUSINESS reading through sourcebooks!
Thats why I think all the PrCs, Feats, and player-material should be in a seperate pull-out (no longer neccessary), or down-loadable for FREE from the WotC site, so only the DM need have access to ALL the books and info via the DDi.
That's how Paizo handles everything - the player stuff can be downloaded from Paizo for any of the Adventure-arcs for FREE, keeping the players away from the modules themselves.
I remember a time when ONLY the DM owned the DMG and MM... as it should be. A player who reads the MM is cheating!
I think only DMs should read anything beyond the CG and the PG - the players have NO BUSINESS reading through sourcebooks!
-And, if they are fans of the setting, themselves?
I remember a time when ONLY the DM owned the DMG and MM... as it should be. A player who reads the MM is cheating!
-I have a House Rule in my own games. Anyone with at least 10 ranks in Knowledge: Nature can make a DC check (DC = whatever my whim is, depending on the creature). If they pass, I allow the character to consult the Monster Manual.
I would say we did need them though, only to let FR accesable to new player.
I always say the more the merrier
A. I have yet to see one good reason why killing off gods makes the Realms more accessible. Unless you believe the average gamer is too dumb to comprehend 75 deities instead of 25. i choose not to believe that.
B. I suspect the new FR is more likely to chase away old gamers than add new ones
I might very well watch that video later. I like 4E too, although I haven't been able to actually play it yet.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I like 4e as well, with some problems. I just don't like the 4-gotten realms
I'm surprised how the 4th edition can be appealing to anyone
Not really. Once you get through the kneejerking hatred its actually quite a good ruleset. Even people here admit that!
Ed plays and enjoys 4e... big deal. I play and enjoy Monopoly, but that doesn't make it D&D either (although I did try to add roleplay elements to it once...)
I'd love to know what makes D&D, D&D. Because having played a bit of 3.5e and 4e, I absolutely love 4e and find 3.5e a lot of hardwork for the same effect.
Ed also designs for Golarion (and enjoys it!), so does that mean Golarion (Paizo's Pathfinder setting) is better then FR, because Ed enjoys it? Don't read into it so much.
How can we assume Ed enjoys it? If he's said so, isn't he just pulling Paizo's corporate line?
I like 4e as well, with some problems. I just don't like the 4-gotten realms
We realise this as you make it abundantly clear through your silly abbreviation of the setting.
Even people here admit that!
-Yup. As has been stated, the rules are the rules, and the setting is the setting. They are two entirely separate entities. There are a few 4e rules that I like.
We realise this as you make it abundantly clear through your silly abbreviation of the setting.
Its not mine, but I do find it appropriate
Not really. Once you get through the kneejerking hatred its actually quite a good ruleset. Even people here admit that!
The rule set is pretty good with a few exceptions. I am not a fan of what they did to the wizard though I haven't played it yet. On the surface, I am not a fan and think i prefer the old spell system
On the surface, I am not a fan and think i prefer the old spell system
Heh, different strokes for different folks. I absolutely hate the old spell system, although I do like how its got some left overs in the new one (you can have times when you have to make a choice between preparing spell A or spell B, but it isn't all the time).
Why wizards would have to rely on something as mundane as a crossbow is beyond me and you NEVER read in novels where wizards use anything but spells, staffs, and wands.
-The novel I just finished reading this morning featured a Wizard (Shield of Weeping Ghosts)who used a sword, and an axe. :P
The following post is not a personal attack. My usage of the phrase “weak argument” applies strictly to the argument in quotes below, and is meant in the technical sense of what a weak argument is from a critical thinking standpoint.
-Yup. As has been stated, the rules are the rules, and the setting is the setting. They are two entirely separate entities.
Please note that "as has been stated" doesn't equate to any kind of fact in this matter, much less a consensus opinion.
It’s little more than a weak argument trying to gloss over the very real fact that the 4E Rules and the 4E Forgotten Realms are interrelated.
4E promotes good roleplaying and makes for exciting fantasy encounters. I know this because I play 4E and (as of tonight's campaign session) am still having a blast with it.
Good roleplaying and fun encounters are necessary elements of the Dungeons and Dragons line and are necessary for a good Forgotten Realms campaign. I know this because I’ve been gaming for over twenty years in the Realms.
The fact that the Forgotten Realms has seen significant alterations to match the 4E rules-set only enhances the play experience, by blending the game rules with the setting’s lore.
If someone wants to swap in another rules set and try to make it mimic the uniquely 4E elements of the current Forgotten Realms, all the more power to them. Play what you want and have fun, I say.
But that fact that someone can try to do that in no way proves this setting and these game mechanics are separate.
We aren’t looking through a magic television anymore. Now we’re using an HD Television to watch a show that’s being filmed on a newly renovated soundstage and shot in HD.
-The novel I just finished reading this morning featured a Wizard (Shield of Weeping Ghosts)who used a sword, and an axe. :P
*sigh* and nothing is stopping you from doing that in 4e. My point being that wizards aren't restricted to a slot amount for all of his attacks, which is a good thing. BTW, which novel line was the book in, it sounds interesting?
It’s little more than a weak argument trying to gloss over the very real fact that the 4E Rules and the 4E Forgotten Realms are interrelated.
The statistics for the new Forgotten Realms setting are created using 4e Rules. That is, indeed, a relation, but it doesn't mean the two are not two separate entities.
A setting exists mostly of background, history, places, cultures, etc, none of which are - in conception - rooted in any rules. Using 4th ed rules is, of course, convenient, as they have been created for you, but it not necessary. If you don't like the rules, you can use others. Likewise, if you don't like the setting, you can use another setting and still use 4th ed rules.
So the two ARE separate entities, since you wouldn't be able to do this if they weren't.
They are packaged and shipped together, but just because it is in the same box doesn't make it the same thing. It does make it more convenient (less work) to use them together.
4E promotes good roleplaying and makes for exciting fantasy encounters. I know this because I play 4E and (as of tonight's campaign session) am still having a blast with it.
I have played 4ed for most part of a year, and I did not see how the system of rules itself 'promotes' roleplay. In fact, some elements such as skill challenges, while a novel idea, make it harder, and risk turning a fun social encounter into dice rolling. It doesn't have to, but I, as a DM, have found skill challenges especially hard to do - and to get my players roleplaying during it (they manage a lot better outside a challenge since they then don't have to bother thinking about skill rolls).
Our impression of the game initially was that is made a good skirmish game - but lacked roleplay elements. I think most amended that later, when we stopped playing the dungeon crawl combat-only playtests and I ran a LFR adventure, but it still feel awkard during skill challenges, and combat is more a part of the game than ever before.
4th ed has lots of good points. Balance, fairly simple rules, and at least an attempt to reward non-combat encounters with xp. But i.m.o. it does not promote roleplay better than any other system. You risk less getting swamped in the rules than 3rd ed, but it's heavy focus on combat does not promote roleplay. Like mostly all other systems roleplay is something you add yourself, and I actually found that easier in 3rd ed.
But that fact that someone can try to do that in no way proves this setting and these game mechanics are separate.
Actually, that is quite the definition of it being separate: that you can use one without the other.
The fact that the Forgotten Realms has seen significant alterations to match the 4E rules-set only enhances the play experience, by blending the game rules with the setting’s lore.
While there are significant alterations to match the core rules, the two (Rules vs. Campaign) don't need to be related if a person doesn't want them to. It's really easy to set the 4e Core rules in a 3.5 setting (ie. pre spell-plague) OR run 3.5/2e Core rules in a post spell-plague Faerun (if you want a head-ache). It's the separation from Core and Campaign that has been in Dungeons and Dragons since DragonLance and Forgotten Realms first appeared. While different rule-sets support certain editions there's nothing limiting a DM to switch the two around.
A. I have yet to see one good reason why killing off gods makes the Realms more accessible. Unless you believe the average gamer is too dumb to comprehend 75 deities instead of 25. i choose not to believe that.
B. I suspect the new FR is more likely to chase away old gamers than add new ones
Well to point A. it totally agree, to be honest. Cutting in the number of deities, will limit the number of ideals and believes a cleric can choose to follow. Meaning limiting players choices
And to point B, at the moment I am trying to get a large number of people interested in the LFR in the region I live. These people are all part of a ' student society'. We are talking about roughly 30 people who are going to start, or want to start, when LFR hits (We are lacking some GMs unfortunatly) All these people used to play DnD, some only once in a while though.
Although noone used to play in the Forgotten Realms and all said it was too much material to swallow at start, in the 3rd Realms, or too much power characters like Sisters and the lot.
Now all these 30 people are excited about the new realms, post spellplaque.
(Not all are totally convinced by the new rules system though). Roughly 10 of those people are bugging me atleast once a week about what cool things the discovered or read about the the new Realms. Sometimes quite tiresome I must admit ;)
Hence my previous statement: the more, the merrier. I would never get those people interested as it was in the past. And it never scared anyone away, quite the oposite, actually.
I have played 4ed for most part of a year, and I did not see how the system of rules itself 'promotes' roleplay. In fact, some elements such as skill challenges, while a novel idea, make it harder, and risk turning a fun social encounter into dice rolling. It doesn't have to, but I, as a DM, have found skill challenges especially hard to do - and to get my players roleplaying during it (they manage a lot better outside a challenge since they then don't have to bother thinking about skill rolls).
Agree there, although I think it was added to promote roleplaying.
It was meant for the new player, the one not familiar with roleplay, or the one too focused on combat, but it will have quite the opposite effect in my opinion.
Where the previous mentioned will just see it as another combat encounter, just without the fighting. But with skills.
The good thing about skill encounter is, that the will earn exp, and is rewarding as such. It rewards players to think cleverly and act according to their character, which can be troublesome at times. This only applies, though, when you force your players to act out their skill use, and not just let them roll a die.
Please note that "as has been stated" doesn't equate to any kind of fact in this matter, much less a consensus opinion.
-And, note that no matter how many times you repeat yourself, it doesn't make what you are saying on the issue correct, which it's not.
But that fact that someone can try to do that in no way proves this setting and these game mechanics are separate.
-Yeah...that's kind of the definition.
*sigh* and nothing is stopping you from doing that in 4e.
-I didn't say that. You said that in novels, your example was always the case. I provided the information to disprove your notion.
BTW, which novel line was the book in, it sounds interesting?
-The Citadels series. They can easily be identified, as they use a different material on the cover than normal. Personally, the book was both good and bad at the same time. The other titles in the series never grabbed me, though. I picked this one up because I am a fan of Rasheman.
Thanks for that sterling contribution to this thread.
And considering how well it's selling, apparently there are some people (including me) who enjoy it. Shocking I know!
you're welcome, sales don't represent the quality, the hype and imperfection of 3e are mainly responsible
Not really. Once you get through the kneejerking hatred its actually quite a good ruleset. Even people here admit that!
it's not hatred, could care less about the rules, keep buying this monotonous trash then
tough I understand why some people think they are good, when that's all they have and can't imagine anything better
As to the setting and the rules being seperate, I see no reason why that shouldn't be the case with any RPG setting. Sure it takes a bit more work to adapt a setting from a ruleset it was designed for to another one it was not, but so long as one's willing to slog through it, theres nothing that says it can't be done. Certainly its easier to use with its native ruleset, but that's neither here nor there.
-I just don't like the GSL, and what they 'did' to the Realms.
-Thats why I am staying 3rd Edition. Yes I do have the 4E Core Rule Books. ;)
-I will check out the 4E Realms books at the Barnes and Noble.
18DELTA :P
tough I understand why some people think they are good, when that's all they have and can't imagine anything better
I have a choice between 3.5 (which I've played) and 4e. I'm finishing my 3.5 game, although if my character dies I won't be making a new one. I find it much more annoying to use then 4e. Although I'm sure that won't stop you from making such baseless comments in the future.
-And, note that no matter how many times you repeat yourself, it doesn't make what you are saying on the issue correct, which it's not.
May I suggest that instead of posting the equivalent of "No it's not!", you might try addressing the salient points made in my argument?
I've yet to see any comments from you in response to my points about how the 4E Realms are integrated with the 4E Core rules, which form the basis for my argument that the two are integrated and enhance each other.
On the other hand, gomeztoo did an excellent job of this by showing how the 4E rules don't work that well for him. Whereas I claimed they promote roleplaying, he shared his own in-game experiences and concluded the opposite was true.
I can’t argue with his experience. So I accept it.
In response, I’d like to say that I’ve had a different experience with the skill challenge system.
I admit that at first it read came off as a clunky add-on to the rules, but after one or two attempts at using it on the fly, I found that my players responded to it.
I first tried the rules out in roleplaying encounters for KOTS; once with the NPC Elf Ninaran and the other with Lord Padraig (whose name I changed to Lord Rallyhorn to better fit Cormyr).
It was in that second encounter with Lord Rallyhorn that the rules really started to shine. I should admit that if the adventure and the official FR Conversion for it didn’t have the depth of back story for the adventure they did than I might not have been as successful.
I don’t agree with gomeztoo that the setting elements of the 4E Forgotten Realms (“...background, history, places, cultures, etc,”) are not rooted in the rules. On the contrary, we have the Faerûn-reshaping Spellplague that’s touched every part of the Realms and not-coincidentally allowed WotC to drop the 4E magic rules into the setting, include the Dragonborn core race (along with their attendant Abeir-related lore), the Shadowfell and the Fey Wild, the restructuring of the planar framework, and so on...and there's a load of new 4E game rules centered around all these things.
This was all done to fit the Realms around the 4E rules set.
And it’s all good. I can happily agree and disagree with gomeztoo, because he’s played the game and I get to read about his experiences which better informs me about how people play 4E and lets me contrast them against my own.
I'd love to know what makes D&D, D&D. Because having played a bit of 3.5e and 4e, I absolutely love 4e and find 3.5e a lot of hardwork for the same effect.
I've been pondering this myself, lately, after the "discussion" I had with my friend about it. The only thing I can conclude is that there is a certain style or set of systems within the Dungeons and Dragons game that have been there from the first Dungeons and Dragons set in the 70s. 4e however...
I don't think anyone would argue that 4e doesn't represent a fundamental change in style. The first thing that jumps out at me is that magic no longer works independently of other systems within the game. The same rules govern it as govern what a non-magical character can do. In some ways, while everyone else got, to varying degrees, more flexible, the magic using classes had their flexibility reduced. (Please note two things: I have, as yet, been unable to get the 4e Rule books, and also what I am saying here is merely an observation - I am not saying it's better or worse than what has gone before, just different.)
@Mr_Miscellany:
There's one flaw in your argument about "the 4e Rules and 4e Realms are interrelated"... The 4e Realms are still a couple of months away from publication. What sources we have of the Realms now, still use the 3.5e and earlier rulesets.
Do you think that earlier sources would automagically convert to 4e just because one is using the system? Of course not.Personally, I agree with Lord Karsus... And the reason I agree with him is because I can see how I would adapt the Forgotten Realms to GURPS or Storyteller with very little hassle. I'm confident enough of this to think that I could convert a new Realms campaign to either system on the fly if I had to.
May I suggest that instead of posting the equivalent of "No it's not!", you might try addressing the salient points made in my argument?
-I have, multiple times, in multiple threads.
I've yet to see any comments from you in response to my points about how the 4E Realms are integrated with the 4E Core rules, which form the basis for my argument that the two are integrated and enhance each other.
-This is not the topic. The topic is whether or not the rules and the setting are separate entities. As I already said, they are interconnected, but are far from inseparable, as numerous people have provided personal examples. Rules and the setting are two distinct entities. It's not that hard.
Carzy, wild and memorable.:D
@Mr_Miscellany:
There's one flaw in your argument about "the 4e Rules and 4e Realms are interrelated"... The 4e Realms are still a couple of months away from publication. What sources we have of the Realms now, still use the 3.5e and earlier rulesets.
:embarrass Yeah, I use 3E lore info (like Volo's Guide to Cormyr) in my 4E game. What else can I do?
Do you think that earlier sources would automagically convert to 4e just because one is using the system? Of course not.
Mechanics? You are correct: Of course not.
Lore? I think most of the lore about locations that were not transposed right out of Faerûn will be still useful, and then some.
On to LK's post...
This is not the topic.
But it is. It is. It's all I've been talking about.
It's good to see you admit they are interconnected, because they are. More so in 4E than in any previous edition, I'd say.
Inseparable, though? For the 4E Realms, I think it depends on how much you can keep and what you’re willing to drop in order to use another rules set.
IMO you won’t get the same play experience out of the 4E Realms if you try to use another set of game rules. You can probably capture some of the new flavor, but you'll have to ignore or write out the rest unless you can accurately model it with the rules you decide to use.
It's not that hard
Off the cuff remarks like this aren't helpful. I've been trying exceptionally hard to reign it in. It would be a huge help to me if you started returning the courtesy.
:embarrass Yeah, I use 3E lore info (like Volo's Guide to Cormyr) in my 4E game. What else can I do?
Not much, at least not until the 4e Realms products come out.
But that's part of my point.Mechanics? You are correct: Of course not.
Lore? I think most of the lore about locations that were not transposed right out of Faerûn will be still useful, and then some.
Lore is useful no matter which system you're using.
Any DM who knows multiple systems will be perfectly capable of taking Realms lore from both 4e and 3.5e and earlier and incorporating them into a Realms game using any system - or even no system at all!
What I am saying is that the setting is a separate entity from the system. Role Playing in the Realms can be accomplished regardless of the system.
It's not much of an issue for me because while I like what I've seen/heard of the 4e System, I don't like the 4e Realms. So, like you, if I manage to talk my difficult friend into it, I'm going to be using 3.5e (and earlier) Realms lore in a campaign that uses the 4e rules. I just won't (at this point anyway) be switching over to 4e Realms when the books are finally released. (I still haven't managed to complete the lateral leap to enable me to consider 4e Realms a different world entirely from 3.5e and earlier Realms.)
Yeah, I use 3E lore info (like Volo's Guide to Cormyr) in my 4E game. What else can I do?
Just FYI, Volo's Guide to Cormyr is a 2E supplement. :P
IMO you won’t get the same play experience out of the 4E Realms if you try to use another set of game rules. You can probably capture some of the new flavor, but you'll have to ignore or write out the rest unless you can accurately model it with the rules you decide to use.
Out of curiosity, what do you see as the new Realms flavor that would be lost or ignored if one didn't use the 4E rule set? What is it that's so new or different that specifically requires 4E (considering that we haven't seen the full printing yet)?
Just FYI, Volo's Guide to Cormyr is a 2E supplement. :P
I know, I know. It's like a 3E book to me anyway. It and Volo's Guide to Waterdeep are always with me for every Monday game.
Out of curiosity, what do you see as the new Realms flavor that would be lost or ignored if one didn't use the 4E rule set? What is it that's so new or different that specifically requires 4E (considering that we haven't seen the full printing yet)?
Did you know I figured that if anyone would ask these questions, it'd be you? Truth!
The first thing that comes to mind are the new 4E races. For the Eladrin, this technically means re-casting Moon and Gold elves in a new light, but there’s also the Dragonborn and the Tieflings.
If we don’t use the 4E rules, we don’t use the 4E races. How do you explain out the Dragonborn and Tieflings and all the attendant (and valid) Realmslore that goes with them? They’ve had 100 years to write their history, remember?
The Eladrin are linked to the Feywild and have in-game powers that source it. Since they can’t be used, do you depower them and ignore any 4E Realmslore associated with the Eladrin’s resurgent connection with the Feywild?
If not, do all Moon and Gold Elves then get to use the equivalent of Dimension Door at 1st level? If yes, shouldn’t that require a level adjustment?
How about under 2E?
Opting to use the new races links a DM and players into the 4E FR Player’s Guide.
If you’re using 2E rules with the 4E Realms, how do you approximate Dragonborn? Do you dig up the old 2E Monster Manual binder that has stats for Saurials?
But then the race’s outlooks are different too. Do I tell my 2E-playing friends to use the Saurial stats, but look to the 4E FR Campaign Guide for instructions on who the Dragonborn are and how to play one?
If yes...why not just use 4E completely and be done with it? You’d have to be a very diehard player to acquiesce to a DM’s request to buy a 4E book, but then use it only halfway.
Ahh...magic. The absence of the Weave. But the 4E Realms will see the use of magic still.
I delight in the fact that Wizards can finally cast cantrips like Prestidigitation at will and as often as they like. That’s something that’s been needing to be incorporated into the rules since like forever. Now we get that flavor through mechanics, so all the cool little things we read about mages doing in FR novels (like one of the Chosen as a cat scribing her mark on the floor to tell another who she is, then the mark fades away) can be done by players.
Seemingly minor, but from a player’s POV it’s important.
For a DM, it’s gravy.
I think I’m digressing now, but that’s fine.
Just remember:
Remember, mechanics have always influenced Realmslore. Otherwise, Greenwood wouldn’t have had to structure the Realms as he did in order to ensure the game mechanics didn’t take over when it was his personal setting only.
And the more I think of it, the more it seems the idea of using 3E or other rules in the 4E Realms is just like asking for a headache. Boasting that it can be done smacks of much quick bravado and very little actual rumination.
It could be done, but why go through the hassle?
As to the 4e Races, I don't really see how it would be all that difficult to convert them over to 3e, fluff and all. Just takes a few DM judgement calls to accomplish from what I recall of them, most of which aren't all that difficult. If you want the elves to keep those eladrin abilities, I don't see why you shouldn't... as to LA stuff, I don't use those rules myself, and abhor them on principle. I can understand their presence considering some of the horror stories, but I'm fortunate to have very mature and reasonable players, so its a luxury I have available to me.
Ideally, I think I'd use a hybrid of Star Wars: Saga, 3.5e, and the Alpha Pathfinder rulesets, cherry picking the parts I liked the best from each, though it'd be hands down for SW:S making up the bulk of it (I was rather bitter 4e wasn't more like that system to be honest)... a little work converting over the classes, but worth it if it means I can run a setting the way I want to. Not like I'm not in the ongoing process of building exactly such a system for use, while the campaign is going on around me... work in progress I guess. Luckily, my players don't mind being my guinea pig so long as I don't drop the ball with the storyline... do that and I'm in for it for sure. Haven't yet, but it can be a bit of a dance at times...
Really though, the only thing you need is a capable DM who's fast enough on their feet to ad hoc and make judgement calls as needed. For me at least, the fun and story are more important than exact approximation of a settings details and mechanics.
I think I lost this one anyway. I just read over at Candlekeep about someone who imported MechWarrior rules into his FR game with much success.
I used Rolemaster rules with FR for a long time, worked really well too.
-Yeah, generally speaking, when one has an attraction to a woman, knowing her name is usually a plus. ;)
I never knew the name of the last girl I ended up with! I just referred to her as "girl." Works like a charm!
The first thing that comes to mind are the new 4E races. For the Eladrin, this technically means re-casting Moon and Gold elves in a new light, but there’s also the Dragonborn and the Tieflings.
Dragonborn and Thieflings existed in 3rd edition, too (in one way or another), and even in 2nd edition. Eladrin used to be elves. You can still use those. Even if you wish to make elves teleport, any game system has means to make new races. It is only a matter of applying the rules of the system you use to make the race you want (and most systems have fiend- or dragon-descended races anyway.
Since they can’t be used, do you depower them and ignore any 4E Realmslore associated with the Eladrin’s resurgent connection with the Feywild?[?QUOTE]
What lore would that be? There is no such lore afaik. And as said, you can just use that link as flavor in your system, and if you wish to add teleport, use the system rules to allow a race to do so.But then the race’s outlooks are different too. Do I tell my 2E-playing friends to use the Saurial stats, but look to the 4E FR Campaign Guide for instructions on who the Dragonborn are and how to play one?
Probably. I expect that the majority of the FRCG will not deal with any rules at all.It could be done, but why go through the hassle?
Most likely for a preference for a set of rules. Some people really like GURPS. Some people make their own system. I would likely not bother to do so myself, but if someone was to invite me for a game of FR 1472 , using GURPS, I can adjust just fine.
Gomez
It's good to see you admit they are interconnected, because they are. More so in 4E than in any previous edition, I'd say.
-Admit? Admit!? Geeze...I've been saying from the beginning, from the first time we've had this conversation, that the two are separate, but interconnect entities. And, if I recall correctly, the first time I said this, you were very..."dismissive" of the fact that the two are separate but interrelated entities. Knowing you, you probably challenged the concept of the two being interconnected.
Inseparable, though? For the 4E Realms, I think it depends on how much you can keep and what you’re willing to drop in order to use another rules set.
-Which makes the two 100% separable.
IMO you won’t get the same play experience out of the 4E Realms if you try to use another set of game rules. You can probably capture some of the new flavor, but you'll have to ignore or write out the rest unless you can accurately model it with the rules you decide to use.
-Doesn't matter that not everything can be translated 100%. That's what always happens. 1e can't be translated to 2e 100%, 2e can't be translated to 3e 100%, 3e can't be translated to 4e 100%, and so on, including whatever other rulesets and combinations you want. The lore of the setting says constant. Elminster is an arcane magician. In 1e, he might have been a 'Magic User'. In 2e, he's a 'Wizard'. In 3e, he's a 'Wizard'. In 4e, he could theoretically be turned into a 'Sorcerer'. In another ruleset, he could theoretically be a 'Spell Weaver'. In Marvel Superheroes, he could be a 'Mutant'. Whatever. The setting is still staying constant (Elminster is an arcane magician), while the rules are coming and going.
-That something is difficult =/= impossible.
I never knew the name of the last girl I ended up with! I just referred to her as "girl." Works like a charm!
-Well...Whatever gets you through the night...
-We've been though this many times. No matter how many times you repeat yourself, it doesn't make it true: Rulesets and campaign settings are two separate, but interconnected concepts. Specific rulesets can be used without specific campaign settings, and specific campaign settings can be used without specific rulesets.
-Thus, the reason why people can enjoy specific rules, but not enjoy specific settings, and vice versa.
Yeah, the campaign is just the setting irregardless of what rules you are using. Most rules are there to resolve combat anyway, and what you do or who you interact with and how you interact with them is what actually brings the campaign to life.
I could interact w/ NPC's the same way in original, boxed set, AD&D, 3E and now 4E. What brings the game "life" is what I stated earlier: interactions.
Yeah, yeah, I know, the glory that comes with the slaying of dragons and other beasts and stuff does too, but in the end, no one actually knows unless you tell the stories, and that's the best part, telling the story (IMO)!
I love Ed’s boundless enthusiasm. It’s positively contagious.
It’s good to hear him say 4E brings the roleplaying back to D&D.
Normally i dont coomment on stuff liek this but Its a well known fact that even independant writers have contracts and those contracts involve certain demands. How many times have you seen an actor talk about how great a movie is and then years later denounce it as crap. Its in the contract.
If you want to hear Some of Edds opinions about the new realms then go over to the candle keep forrum.
If you want to hear Some of Edds opinions about the new realms then go over to the candle keep forrum.
-This is his quote, for clarity. People can read into this whatever they like:
Show
Hello, all. I continue to receive e-mails, phone calls, snail mail letters, and in-person queries, beefs, and pleas for reassurance from longtime Realms fans - - and continue to be humbled by the depth of your feeling for the Realms. Thank you, everyone.
Though I am frantically busy trying to get things done before flying off to Australia (during which trip I will almost certainly fall e-silent, BTW) I will try to respond to scribes who have posted in this thread, as I come to your posts in the e-mails THO forwards me.
Red Walker, you’re welcome, thanks for the love, and you are very, very right to say: “Fear of change is natural, and greater fear of Big changes is too!”
The reactions of Realms fans were expected for this very reason. Of COURSE everyone will be upset, or at least anxious, in some way, whether eager for change or hating its possible/probable consequences. Wooly Rupert and others are correct to say we haven’t seen enough yet to really judge the so-called “new” Realms, and I agree.
None of which doesn’t make opinions on it, based on the little we have seen, perfectly valid. Zandilar isn’t the only one to decide that the changes she’s heard about thus far seem “so... well... dumb, to put it bluntly.”
Please, please, all of you: respect each other’s opinions. Disagree with them as heatedly as you want, but please bend over backwards not to disrespect each other for holding them. As it happens, the way the “peekaboo” revelations have thus far appeared (I’m guessing so as to foment maximum “buzz” and therefore unpaid publicity), I agree with Zandilar. Those don’t sound like MY gods. :}
However, Chosen of Moradin quite rightly points out that “a timeline is not an explanation of what happens. It's only a summary. And a summary cannot explain clearly anything. The summary of the Fall of Myth Drannor don't explain the Fall of Myth Drannor. So, to see exactly what happened, we will have to wait until the next FRCS.”
Correct. As I’ve always said, mortals in the Realms can never know the “truth” about divine deeds and intentions, only what’s reported to them. By deities, priests, soothsayers, “possessed” madwits, and in dream-visions - - and ALL of those sources can be mistaken or misinterpreted, or can lie and distort or slant to further their own agendas. Yes, even the gods themselves. So what appears in THE GRAND HISTORY OF THE REALMS is what “the loudest reports say” happened, not what every being in the Realms personally saw and therefore “knows” (and agrees) happened.
It should be obvious to everyone by now that there are major changes in magic and the deities underway, and that the Spellplague is part of that. We now know that it begins in the Year of Blue Fire, in a dramatic way, and that part of Bob’s newest novel takes place a hundred years in the future (at a time when almost all human characters alive in the Realms of “today,” if they haven’t found some magical means of prolonging their lifespans - - in a “magic unstable and unreliable” situation - - will have perished of old age).
Which brings us to eiglos, who posts: “My only current played character in the Realms is a Priestess of Lurue. Her future must be uncertain, unless Lurue returns to her original role in the Realms.”
Passing over the obvious points that everyone’s future is always uncertain, and that the particular priestess will almost certainly have died of old age by the time of THE ORC KING anyway, we know that gods can and have been subsumed by other gods, and that “dead” or fallen gods are still worshipped fervently, just as before, because other deities adopt their followers, still grant spells, and so on - - so mortals may or may not know the true fate of the deity they worship. This MIGHT be one future for this specific priestess. Lurue (or any other deity, for that matter) could of course survive “unchanged,” or change in divine power but keep the same looks, portfolios, aims, and credos. Deities tend to shift subtly all the time in these things, however. And IF we are talking a century of time, that’s a lot of roleplaying (in terms of real-world duration). So for now, eiglos, roleplaying “life” for your priestess can be very much “business as usual.”
I personally would welcome the separation of, say, The Living Realms and the “history” RPGA play therein develops, from my own home campaign. If characters played in an RPGA adventure slay a wizard and blow up his tower, and I’m using both wizard and tower extensively in my home campaign, the potential conflict vanishes; the destruction won’t occur until the future (if mage and/or structure “go down” in my campaign, there’s plenty of in-Realms time for the one to be brought back to life somehow and the other rebuilt, to “explain away” the conflict).
A gamer can play in their own current campaign just as before, peek at eventual 4e Realms releases in hobby shops, at conventions, and via online discussion, and either decide never to go to 4e, or (if the new material at some point seems really exciting) “jump” the characters from one Realmsdate to the other by some magical means (even if it’s “caught in a portal for a century,” and I set just such weirdness up with some comments in SWORDS OF DRAGONFIRE that also “start to” explain the 2e to 3e “map changes” in the Realms without being too explicit, for those who didn’t make the change). Or, if a DM and player group collectively decide to move to the “new” Realms, they can even try to arrange cached treasure and PC breeding so as to “set up” descendants of their favourite characters as adventurers in the future Realms.
So, eiglos, your priestess can have a long and rewarding life and career, regardless.
However, this leads to another important point Zandilar raised: “If I run my campaign prior to the Year of Blue Fire, then I don't need the 4e products. Since I don't need them, I don't buy them. Since I don't buy them, WotC doesn't get my money. WotC doesn't get my money, and it is starting to look like a lot of the "old guard" are going down this path... So WotC starts to loose money, and eventually the line will get cut.”
This is indeed the Big Risk in all of this, the “roll of the dice” that I wish someone had never decided to make (because I personally value the ongoing development of a shared and unbroken imaginary Grand History of a fictional fantasy setting as something magnificent in itself, an achievement we should all continue to contribute to).
Yet it’s happening regardless of my personal wants, and I choose to be onboard trying to paddle and steer, rather than left behind swimming in the water, calling out that perhaps we should have set a different course.
Zandilar is perfectly correct to post: “I've never ever had problems with a business wanting to make a profit. That is, after all, the purpose of a business. But what they're doing here is taking a HUGE risk with a known quantity. They're risking the entire Realms product line with this move, and they seem to have gone to great lengths to rub us old guard up the wrong way with the changes they're making. (Just my perception, I'm sure they haven't deliberately set out to slight us.)”
I don’t think anyone at Wizards set out to deliberately upset or slight anyone. I do think it has been decided to make these changes swiftly, and that very “brutal rapidity” is increasing some of the upset along with the “buzz.”
However, there’s no reason at all to move your own campaign if you don’t want to. IF there’s a hundred-year jump, that’s a LOT of time to roleplay through; most FR campaigns I hear about don’t cover more than ten to twelve years in the Realms unless they incorporate “down time” jumps of their own, before they “run down” and the folks involved start anew.
Yes, the Spellplague is going to shift the flavour of the Realms (if wizards are dying or their magic is going wild or failing, and priests are all upset, too, it follows that the “tone” of daily life and therefore of roleplaying will change a bit), but the Realms is a big place, and there’s no reason yet to suspect that “all civilization will fall.” Waterdeep, Silverymoon, Cormyr - - I don’t think a century will sweep any of them away. CHANGE them, yes, but they’re all changing constantly, anyway; we just usually live with the changes as they’re happening rather than seeing a “big jump-cut.” Nor is there any reason, based on what we’ve seen thus far, to believe that the Spellplague is a single big event, over in a short time; the very name implies something of longer duration, with almost certainly (if real-world “plagues” are anything to go by) varying results from place to place and person to person (this city or region largely unaffected, that wizard untouched, this one over here driven mad; that allows DMs plenty of “elbow room” to preserve the “heart locations” of a beloved campaign, and favourite PCs and NPCs, too; it’s “the rest of the Realms” where the BIG changes occur . . . something that a lot of DMs have already been doing for two decades, as they steer their own campaigns around events in the published Realms).
None of which means my arguments should be seen as quelling, denying, or belittling the personal anger and upset longtime Realms fans are feeling over this. Believe me, I know how you feel. :}
Neriandal Freit, your queries don’t come off as offensive, at all (and I’m glad you loved that little scene in EL’S DAUGHTER; one of my favourite moments, out of everything I’ve written). I hear you and I sympathize, deeply. (And yes, I’ll check out “Redeemers of Dawn,” and let you know; somebody please give THO a heads up when the new Compendium is released, okay?)
My answer begins: Although I know the Realms is intended as “a place to play,” and therefore should be something of a haven from the unpleasantnesses of real life, so we can hold on to elements in it we love and hold most precious, even in the Realms everything changes. I hate changing anything in the published Realms before I finish the (admittedly endless) task of detailing every corner of it (we still aren’t really off the first continent, are we?), but the alternative is static boredom . . . dust settling on statues in silence.
Everything changes; eventually, everyone (even deities, as they are conceived of in the Realms, with power tied to worshippers) dies. So with that said, my "answer direct" to you becomes another question: In real life, and in the Realms, do you NOT fall in love with someone, or befriend them, or work with them on something that interests you both and that you can both be proud of, because someday both of you will die?
I don’t think so. Despite yourself, even if you know we’re all rushing to oblivion, you do it anyway. In the end, that’s what “living” is all about.
We know we’re all doomed (as the song goes: “We’re here for a good time/Not a long time”), but we go ahead and love, laugh, climb mountains, read books, and fall in love with the Realms anyway. At least I did. :}
If it helps you decide, I intend to go on exploring the Realms, bringing us all more detail. Some of it in the “now” Realms, and some of it in the “new” Realms.
I strongly suspect the published Realms will shortly become “new Realms only” in terms of the time-setting of products - - and that many fans may step back from that new Realms. That’s an individual choice I certainly don’t want to try to (further than by setting forth my views here) influence for everyone. It’s going to have to be your call.
I hope you’ll join with Xysma and others in “clinging to the merest sliver of hope that Ed, Eric, and the rest can salvage what at first glance is going to be a nightmare for those of us who love the Realms so dearly,” and therefore at least give the new Realms a look.
I’m going to go right on exploring the Realms, and if that means finding some way to paint in bits of the “Lost Years” in the time-jump, I’ll try to find some way to do that. We MIGHT end up with a Realms of the novels that’s far “ahead in time” of where you or other gamers might be roleplaying, and therefore not conflicting much with your unfolding play. Lovely smell over here, steak sizzling over there, so to speak.
I KNOW it hurts when you’ve come to love and cherish a fictional place and characters, that you can enjoy in your imagination, and someone goes and stomps on what you hold precious. Yet what lies your imagination can be only be hurt if you let it be.
In the Realms, this has all happened before; the Mystra you loved that scene about is Mystra Number 2 (Number 3 if you count Mystryl). The Realms you love grew out of previous planet-shaking debacles. and you may come to like the post-Spellplague Realms.
Or not. I understand and respect both your love for the Realms, and that you feel the way you do right now.
Kuje expressed his dismay early on in this, and many other scribes have cried out between him and you; I understand and sympathize with all of your misgivings and raw emotions. I went through the same thing at a secret summit meeting at GenCon some years ago; believe me, heavy-hitter novelists and game designers who love the Realms have argued about this “change” over and over heatedly.
There’s always a strong streak in gamers and game designers of what I said onstage at the Killer Breakfast this year, when Tracy asked me what my character was going to do, and I replied: “Being a game designer, I go for the bright shiny object.” We always feel the lure of what’s exciting and new.
Yet I deliberately left the ever-busier city where I grew up (“home”) to go and live in the country, to try to cling to some of the good things of the past that were slipping away in the big city. So I’m going through this struggle, too. Lose Syluné? Hell, lose ALL the human NPCs I spent forty years bringing to life? This had BETTER be good!
Wizards of the Coast obviously believes it will be. I’m going to do my best to help them make it so. I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . . .
So saith Ed.
love to all,
THO
Though I am frantically busy trying to get things done before flying off to Australia (during which trip I will almost certainly fall e-silent, BTW) I will try to respond to scribes who have posted in this thread, as I come to your posts in the e-mails THO forwards me.
Red Walker, you’re welcome, thanks for the love, and you are very, very right to say: “Fear of change is natural, and greater fear of Big changes is too!”
The reactions of Realms fans were expected for this very reason. Of COURSE everyone will be upset, or at least anxious, in some way, whether eager for change or hating its possible/probable consequences. Wooly Rupert and others are correct to say we haven’t seen enough yet to really judge the so-called “new” Realms, and I agree.
None of which doesn’t make opinions on it, based on the little we have seen, perfectly valid. Zandilar isn’t the only one to decide that the changes she’s heard about thus far seem “so... well... dumb, to put it bluntly.”
Please, please, all of you: respect each other’s opinions. Disagree with them as heatedly as you want, but please bend over backwards not to disrespect each other for holding them. As it happens, the way the “peekaboo” revelations have thus far appeared (I’m guessing so as to foment maximum “buzz” and therefore unpaid publicity), I agree with Zandilar. Those don’t sound like MY gods. :}
However, Chosen of Moradin quite rightly points out that “a timeline is not an explanation of what happens. It's only a summary. And a summary cannot explain clearly anything. The summary of the Fall of Myth Drannor don't explain the Fall of Myth Drannor. So, to see exactly what happened, we will have to wait until the next FRCS.”
Correct. As I’ve always said, mortals in the Realms can never know the “truth” about divine deeds and intentions, only what’s reported to them. By deities, priests, soothsayers, “possessed” madwits, and in dream-visions - - and ALL of those sources can be mistaken or misinterpreted, or can lie and distort or slant to further their own agendas. Yes, even the gods themselves. So what appears in THE GRAND HISTORY OF THE REALMS is what “the loudest reports say” happened, not what every being in the Realms personally saw and therefore “knows” (and agrees) happened.
It should be obvious to everyone by now that there are major changes in magic and the deities underway, and that the Spellplague is part of that. We now know that it begins in the Year of Blue Fire, in a dramatic way, and that part of Bob’s newest novel takes place a hundred years in the future (at a time when almost all human characters alive in the Realms of “today,” if they haven’t found some magical means of prolonging their lifespans - - in a “magic unstable and unreliable” situation - - will have perished of old age).
Which brings us to eiglos, who posts: “My only current played character in the Realms is a Priestess of Lurue. Her future must be uncertain, unless Lurue returns to her original role in the Realms.”
Passing over the obvious points that everyone’s future is always uncertain, and that the particular priestess will almost certainly have died of old age by the time of THE ORC KING anyway, we know that gods can and have been subsumed by other gods, and that “dead” or fallen gods are still worshipped fervently, just as before, because other deities adopt their followers, still grant spells, and so on - - so mortals may or may not know the true fate of the deity they worship. This MIGHT be one future for this specific priestess. Lurue (or any other deity, for that matter) could of course survive “unchanged,” or change in divine power but keep the same looks, portfolios, aims, and credos. Deities tend to shift subtly all the time in these things, however. And IF we are talking a century of time, that’s a lot of roleplaying (in terms of real-world duration). So for now, eiglos, roleplaying “life” for your priestess can be very much “business as usual.”
I personally would welcome the separation of, say, The Living Realms and the “history” RPGA play therein develops, from my own home campaign. If characters played in an RPGA adventure slay a wizard and blow up his tower, and I’m using both wizard and tower extensively in my home campaign, the potential conflict vanishes; the destruction won’t occur until the future (if mage and/or structure “go down” in my campaign, there’s plenty of in-Realms time for the one to be brought back to life somehow and the other rebuilt, to “explain away” the conflict).
A gamer can play in their own current campaign just as before, peek at eventual 4e Realms releases in hobby shops, at conventions, and via online discussion, and either decide never to go to 4e, or (if the new material at some point seems really exciting) “jump” the characters from one Realmsdate to the other by some magical means (even if it’s “caught in a portal for a century,” and I set just such weirdness up with some comments in SWORDS OF DRAGONFIRE that also “start to” explain the 2e to 3e “map changes” in the Realms without being too explicit, for those who didn’t make the change). Or, if a DM and player group collectively decide to move to the “new” Realms, they can even try to arrange cached treasure and PC breeding so as to “set up” descendants of their favourite characters as adventurers in the future Realms.
So, eiglos, your priestess can have a long and rewarding life and career, regardless.
However, this leads to another important point Zandilar raised: “If I run my campaign prior to the Year of Blue Fire, then I don't need the 4e products. Since I don't need them, I don't buy them. Since I don't buy them, WotC doesn't get my money. WotC doesn't get my money, and it is starting to look like a lot of the "old guard" are going down this path... So WotC starts to loose money, and eventually the line will get cut.”
This is indeed the Big Risk in all of this, the “roll of the dice” that I wish someone had never decided to make (because I personally value the ongoing development of a shared and unbroken imaginary Grand History of a fictional fantasy setting as something magnificent in itself, an achievement we should all continue to contribute to).
Yet it’s happening regardless of my personal wants, and I choose to be onboard trying to paddle and steer, rather than left behind swimming in the water, calling out that perhaps we should have set a different course.
Zandilar is perfectly correct to post: “I've never ever had problems with a business wanting to make a profit. That is, after all, the purpose of a business. But what they're doing here is taking a HUGE risk with a known quantity. They're risking the entire Realms product line with this move, and they seem to have gone to great lengths to rub us old guard up the wrong way with the changes they're making. (Just my perception, I'm sure they haven't deliberately set out to slight us.)”
I don’t think anyone at Wizards set out to deliberately upset or slight anyone. I do think it has been decided to make these changes swiftly, and that very “brutal rapidity” is increasing some of the upset along with the “buzz.”
However, there’s no reason at all to move your own campaign if you don’t want to. IF there’s a hundred-year jump, that’s a LOT of time to roleplay through; most FR campaigns I hear about don’t cover more than ten to twelve years in the Realms unless they incorporate “down time” jumps of their own, before they “run down” and the folks involved start anew.
Yes, the Spellplague is going to shift the flavour of the Realms (if wizards are dying or their magic is going wild or failing, and priests are all upset, too, it follows that the “tone” of daily life and therefore of roleplaying will change a bit), but the Realms is a big place, and there’s no reason yet to suspect that “all civilization will fall.” Waterdeep, Silverymoon, Cormyr - - I don’t think a century will sweep any of them away. CHANGE them, yes, but they’re all changing constantly, anyway; we just usually live with the changes as they’re happening rather than seeing a “big jump-cut.” Nor is there any reason, based on what we’ve seen thus far, to believe that the Spellplague is a single big event, over in a short time; the very name implies something of longer duration, with almost certainly (if real-world “plagues” are anything to go by) varying results from place to place and person to person (this city or region largely unaffected, that wizard untouched, this one over here driven mad; that allows DMs plenty of “elbow room” to preserve the “heart locations” of a beloved campaign, and favourite PCs and NPCs, too; it’s “the rest of the Realms” where the BIG changes occur . . . something that a lot of DMs have already been doing for two decades, as they steer their own campaigns around events in the published Realms).
None of which means my arguments should be seen as quelling, denying, or belittling the personal anger and upset longtime Realms fans are feeling over this. Believe me, I know how you feel. :}
Neriandal Freit, your queries don’t come off as offensive, at all (and I’m glad you loved that little scene in EL’S DAUGHTER; one of my favourite moments, out of everything I’ve written). I hear you and I sympathize, deeply. (And yes, I’ll check out “Redeemers of Dawn,” and let you know; somebody please give THO a heads up when the new Compendium is released, okay?)
My answer begins: Although I know the Realms is intended as “a place to play,” and therefore should be something of a haven from the unpleasantnesses of real life, so we can hold on to elements in it we love and hold most precious, even in the Realms everything changes. I hate changing anything in the published Realms before I finish the (admittedly endless) task of detailing every corner of it (we still aren’t really off the first continent, are we?), but the alternative is static boredom . . . dust settling on statues in silence.
Everything changes; eventually, everyone (even deities, as they are conceived of in the Realms, with power tied to worshippers) dies. So with that said, my "answer direct" to you becomes another question: In real life, and in the Realms, do you NOT fall in love with someone, or befriend them, or work with them on something that interests you both and that you can both be proud of, because someday both of you will die?
I don’t think so. Despite yourself, even if you know we’re all rushing to oblivion, you do it anyway. In the end, that’s what “living” is all about.
We know we’re all doomed (as the song goes: “We’re here for a good time/Not a long time”), but we go ahead and love, laugh, climb mountains, read books, and fall in love with the Realms anyway. At least I did. :}
If it helps you decide, I intend to go on exploring the Realms, bringing us all more detail. Some of it in the “now” Realms, and some of it in the “new” Realms.
I strongly suspect the published Realms will shortly become “new Realms only” in terms of the time-setting of products - - and that many fans may step back from that new Realms. That’s an individual choice I certainly don’t want to try to (further than by setting forth my views here) influence for everyone. It’s going to have to be your call.
I hope you’ll join with Xysma and others in “clinging to the merest sliver of hope that Ed, Eric, and the rest can salvage what at first glance is going to be a nightmare for those of us who love the Realms so dearly,” and therefore at least give the new Realms a look.
I’m going to go right on exploring the Realms, and if that means finding some way to paint in bits of the “Lost Years” in the time-jump, I’ll try to find some way to do that. We MIGHT end up with a Realms of the novels that’s far “ahead in time” of where you or other gamers might be roleplaying, and therefore not conflicting much with your unfolding play. Lovely smell over here, steak sizzling over there, so to speak.
I KNOW it hurts when you’ve come to love and cherish a fictional place and characters, that you can enjoy in your imagination, and someone goes and stomps on what you hold precious. Yet what lies your imagination can be only be hurt if you let it be.
In the Realms, this has all happened before; the Mystra you loved that scene about is Mystra Number 2 (Number 3 if you count Mystryl). The Realms you love grew out of previous planet-shaking debacles. and you may come to like the post-Spellplague Realms.
Or not. I understand and respect both your love for the Realms, and that you feel the way you do right now.
Kuje expressed his dismay early on in this, and many other scribes have cried out between him and you; I understand and sympathize with all of your misgivings and raw emotions. I went through the same thing at a secret summit meeting at GenCon some years ago; believe me, heavy-hitter novelists and game designers who love the Realms have argued about this “change” over and over heatedly.
There’s always a strong streak in gamers and game designers of what I said onstage at the Killer Breakfast this year, when Tracy asked me what my character was going to do, and I replied: “Being a game designer, I go for the bright shiny object.” We always feel the lure of what’s exciting and new.
Yet I deliberately left the ever-busier city where I grew up (“home”) to go and live in the country, to try to cling to some of the good things of the past that were slipping away in the big city. So I’m going through this struggle, too. Lose Syluné? Hell, lose ALL the human NPCs I spent forty years bringing to life? This had BETTER be good!
Wizards of the Coast obviously believes it will be. I’m going to do my best to help them make it so. I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . . .
So saith Ed.
love to all,
THO
-This is his quote, for clarity. People can read into this whatever they like:
Indeed, Lord Karsus, and after reading Ed's quote many months ago on CK I found certain segments cheering (like his upbeat and "wait and see" attitude) and other sections poignant and full of... well... loss, I suppose.
Show
Lose Syluné? Hell, lose ALL the human NPCs I spent forty years bringing to life? This had BETTER be good!
What lore would that be? There is no such lore afaik. And as said, you can just use that link as flavor in your system, and if you wish to add teleport, use the system rules to allow a race to do so.
It's presumptive on my part, but I think we're going to see new lore that links the Feywild into the Realms.
I'd be surprised if WotC just tossed it into the Realms without providing details of what the Feywild being 'connected' to the Realms did to Gold/Moon elven society.
As for the rules, it's real easy to say "oh just add in the teleport". It's a whole lot harder when player A (not playing an Eladrin equivalent) rightly objects that Player B can jump around the battlefield at 1st level when A can't. Shouldn't player A get something from the 4E race descriptions to compensate?
Plus a DM has to compensate in his encounter building.
Probably. I expect that the majority of the FRCG will not deal with any rules at all.
My first assumption was that the FRCG would have lots of rules. However, since the Core Rulebooks moved magic items into the Player's Handbook, it makes me think the FR Player's Guide will follow the same format.
I'm curious to learn if the FRCG will detail spellscar rules, though.
I've got to agree with Lord Karsus here. 4e FR and Eberron are (IMO) very different settings, and yet they can use the same rules. Sure some stuff is setting specific (like the spellscar abilities although that seems to just be an extra regional trait IMO) but for the most part the setting neutral rules are independent. That's why I can imagine playing in both settings and having artificers, warforged and swordmages in either setting.
4th Edition's rules do in fact emphasise setting-neutral rules. That's why we don't have a named world setting but instead have the PoL default setting.
I agree with this. I believe one can in fact divorce a setting from a set of rules. As of 4E, the FR setting will have gone through 4 sets of rules.
I believe the rules are just there so that the game is actually a game.
I'm curious to learn if the FRCG will detail spellscar rules, though.
It appears those rules will be in the FRPG. The FRCG will probably talk about Spellscars, but actual crunch will likely be in the FRPG.
But to be honest I had to say I think the chances Wizards would 'rectify' the changes in the 4e Forgotten Realms are very slim, because they were needed to a certain degree.
Few if any people here expect the Realms to be "changed back".
That said, it's certainly not a fact that the Realms "needed to change" in the way that they did--not for everyone.
no. no warforged in FR.
-I don't believe there are plans to import them wholesale, so no worries.
-I don't believe there are plans to import them wholesale, so no worries.
Lets hope so
Lets hope so
-If they do incorporate them, I hope that it's like how they incorporated "Eladrin"- took an existing group (Sun/Moon/Star Elves) that was similar to the new race, and turned their mechanics into that new group, while leaving the lore alone- I wouldn't really have much of a problem. The Blood Forge Golems of the East, for example. Close enough to Warforged. Perhaps awakened Golems, in general. Just, I hope, if this type of this is done, that they're not forced down everyone's throats.
This is indeed the Big Risk in all of this, the “roll of the dice” that I wish someone had never decided to make (because I personally value the ongoing development of a shared and unbroken imaginary Grand History of a fictional fantasy setting as something magnificent in itself, an achievement we should all continue to contribute to).
Those words say it all.
But as Karsus has said, there are ways to adapt 4e changes to the realms in your game while not disturbing the lore too much. The Warforged could be Blood Forge Golems that were altered by the Spellplague and set off into the world, and this could be an opportunity to use the Utter East more as a homeland for this new race.
The Warforged could be Blood Forge Golems that were altered by the Spellplague and set off into the world, and this could be an opportunity to use the Utter East more as a homeland for this new race.
At this point all speculation points to the Warforged being printed in the Player's Guide to Eberron (with what we saw in Dragon a playtest version). As such I just don't see the presence of Warforged in FR being given official weight. Instead if anyone wants to have them they can use either the MM, Dragon article or the PGtE and whatever they decide will be specific to their FR campaign.
At this point all speculation points to the Warforged being printed in the Player's Guide to Eberron (with what we saw in Dragon a playtest version). As such I just don't see the presence of Warforged in FR being given official weight. Instead if anyone wants to have them they can use either the MM, Dragon article or the PGtE and whatever they decide will be specific to their FR campaign.
Perhaps not, but certainly future entries in supplements and Dragon articles about Warforged may have references to how they may be applied to the Forgotten Realms and personally I find if they are properly fitted into the lore of the world they can make great contributions. (I find the idea of warforged marching out of the Utter East after enslaving the Mar people just screaming "return of the Imaskari").
I'd be surprised if WotC just tossed it into the Realms without providing details of what the Feywild being 'connected' to the Realms did to Gold/Moon elven society.
I wonder if they will. WotC may not be eager to 'remind' people that there was a 3rd edition, as it migth confuse (or ' scare away') new customers. So I am sort of doubting it.
My first assumption was that the FRCG would have lots of rules.
The FRCG will detail the world, which generally means cultures, places, people, organizations, etc. - lots of fluff that does not need rules. Look at the 3rd ed version for an example.
I expect you'll see some rules, like NPC and monster stats, but that is likely to be dwarfed by the other content
May be different for the Player's Guide, though.
Gomez
Perhaps not, but certainly future entries in supplements and Dragon articles about Warforged may have references to how they may be applied to the Forgotten Realms and personally I find if they are properly fitted into the lore of the world they can make great contributions. (I find the idea of warforged marching out of the Utter East after enslaving the Mar people just screaming "return of the Imaskari").
-And/or novels as well. Personally, truthfully, I'm not even that "incensed" should/if Warforged were introduced. But, not in an "in your face" manner. I'd want them to be relative minorities.
-And/or novels as well. Personally, truthfully, I'm not even that "incensed" should/if Warforged were introduced. But, not in an "in your face" manner. I'd want them to be relative minorities.
Yeah, more the novels in my case since currently I'm not even in a D&D group and I doubt I could find one like yours that plays old-school FR. I agree, elements from core can be positive to FR as long as they are made more subtle. Now Tyrmather is a classic example of what you don't wanna happen to a setting when the designers get too excited about a fancy new toy. I don't even like the dragonborn anyway (bad draconian ripoff without the sense of setting Dragonlance gave to draconians) and would just love to see existing reptilian races like the Yuan-Ti march in there and just slaughter them all.
Normally i dont coomment on stuff liek this but Its a well known fact that even independant writers have contracts and those contracts involve certain demands. How many times have you seen an actor talk about how great a movie is and then years later denounce it as crap. Its in the contract.
I doubt any company would put that sort of language in a contract with someone freelancing for them, but when someone has a financial stake involved with the potential for future work with that same company, it tends to moderate your public comments at the very least. It makes little sense to bite the hand offering you $ to write books, even if you might not like the company or what it's doing with whatever particular IP is involved.
I'm speaking in general terms here, and not any author in particular btw. I'd be interested to see what various people have to say about the genesis of 4e when 5e hits, because that's when we'll see absolute honesty on the topic. Right now you've got some authors being very silent on the matter, some being polite but slim on details (as they get contracts with other companies), some being rather vocal (and notably not getting any more freelancing with WotC), and some folks buttering WotCs backside like the most obnoxious fanboy ever. And honestly, I have a hard time saying anything bad about it in every one of those cases, especially to those writers who try to make a living on their talent, or have a large monetary stake in not alienating a major client.
The smaller the industry, the more cautious people tend to be when money is on the line, regardless of their like or dislike for a system/setting/company.
-If they do incorporate them, I hope that it's like how they incorporated "Eladrin"- took an existing group (Sun/Moon/Star Elves) that was similar to the new race, and turned their mechanics into that new group, while leaving the lore alone- I wouldn't really have much of a problem. The Blood Forge Golems of the East, for example. Close enough to Warforged. Perhaps awakened Golems, in general. Just, I hope, if this type of this is done, that they're not forced down everyone's throats.
One idea ...
Look at the "Wonderstar Garrison" in City of Splendors: Waterdeep, pgs. 120-121.
nah. Leave the warforged in Eberron where they belong.
I agree whole-heartedly!
Right now you've got some authors being very silent on the matter, some being polite but slim on details (as they get contracts with other companies), some being rather vocal (and notably not getting any more freelancing with WotC), and some folks buttering WotCs backside like the most obnoxious fanboy ever.
-Can you name names? I honestly don't "follow" these kinds of things (That XYZ does/doesn't like ABC has absolutely no basis in how I form my own opinions on ABC) so, it' be interesting to see who thinks what.
I believe the spell system adds longevity to the wizard's role. There's still the aspect of tactics and when to use your encounter and daily spells and when not too. And I also feel the wizard should do what the wizard was designed to do, cast spells! Espically at lower levels, often the wizard would run out or use his crossbow in lieu of spell casting in case of another encounter up the road. Why wizards would have to rely on something as mundane as a crossbow is beyond me and you NEVER read in novels where wizards use anything but spells, staffs, and wands. And now with their spellbooks, they can learn additional daily and utility spells to expand their repertoire for that feel of 3rd edition.
Yeah, that is one thing about the old rules I thought was silly--a low level mage spends more time as a low-rent crossbowman than an actual spellcaster.
Yeah, more the novels in my case since currently I'm not even in a D&D group and I doubt I could find one like yours that plays old-school FR. I agree, elements from core can be positive to FR as long as they are made more subtle. Now Tyrmather is a classic example of what you don't wanna happen to a setting when the designers get too excited about a fancy new toy. I don't even like the dragonborn anyway (bad draconian ripoff without the sense of setting Dragonlance gave to draconians) and would just love to see existing reptilian races like the Yuan-Ti march in there and just slaughter them all.
Oy, you're Norwegian right? I'm based in Oslo.
EDIT: Damnit, wait. That's someone else. Gotta track down the Norwegian FR'ers and intern them in Poland.
Yeah, that is one thing about the old rules I thought was silly--a low level mage spends more time as a low-rent crossbowman than an actual spellcaster.
It's why I've made cantrips and orisons at-will abilities in my 3.5 games. At least acid splash, ray of frost, or electric jolt will be used more often at lower levels
. One problem I had right off the bat was cure minor wounds. So I changed it to it only works to stabalize or bring up a character's HP to 1.And after all that, it's still good to see Ed Greenwood enjoy the 4th Edition of Dungeons and Dragons.
It bodes well for the game and for the future of the Realms.
Well, to run adventures at cons, he has to use the current rules as that is what most of the players at the con will be familiar with.... but you only have to remember that in his long-running, ongoing home campaign that they are still using 2nd edition rules and that most of the junk that WotC has put in, did not happen in his campaign, like the Time of Troubles and his campaign is quite a few years behind the "current" official "canon" years, mid 1370s in 3.5.... and you can bet the spellplague never happens...
Oy, you're Norwegian right? I'm based in Oslo.
EDIT: Damnit, wait. That's someone else. Gotta track down the Norwegian FR'ers and intern them in Poland.
Nope, I'm Chinese, which is a couple thousand miles off, but I do listen to a lot of Norwegian black metal, does that count?:D
Speaking of which, I need desperatly a lore-loving group that games in the Forgotten Realms.
china norway same diff right?
Yeah, in fact, I just saw a couple of Vikings in Shanghai serving green tea to tourists.;)
Yeah, in fact, I just saw a couple of Vikings in Shanghai serving green tea to tourists.;)
you too?
you too?
Yep, and now one of the vikings has just run away with the tourist's prada bag.
Seeing a viking raid in action these days just isn't as exiciting as one would've imagined. Just another case of the reality not equaling the myth.
Yeah, I expected for them to at least carry off the woman along with the bag...
Star Wars is a thing I am luke (no pun intended) warm about when it comes to anything outside of the movies. I am now hooked though on the Legacy Series which is 100 years after the Han and Luke era. It is a darker book but it is still Star Wars and is a fun read. It makes me want to play in that era and play in a SW Saga game. I played in a Rebellion era game with the RPG game and was not inpired and just bored because that era is like Dragonlance for me, all the big things were already done by the Big NPCs. So they took a chance and altered the setting and fans seem to be digging it and new fans are getting into the setting. Yes the die hard SW fanatics are still in the Rebellion era screaming and yelling "shenanigans" but who cares about them? Evidently they don't make up the biggest part of the SW consumer or the setting would be catered more to them.
Hey, something we agree about ( mostly ). Will wonders ever cease?
However, when you say that the setting is darker than Star Wars used to be, you obviously haven´t been following the post ROTJ books. Since Del Rey as a publisher have taken over the series, the quality and the writing have gone down the drain. They have replaced the Star Wars feeling with a constant doom and gloom setting, killing off indiscriminetely the next generation of Star Wars characters.
Star Wars Legacy is, compared to that, light fluff. And reads much more like classic Star Wars than anything I´ve seen from Del Rey in the last seven years. Well, no wonder, it is not written by them but rather by Dark Horse Comics.
LK: Yeah, they combined to cool stuff with some of the absolute best writing I´ve seen in comics for the last decade? What´s wrong with that? It is a bit derivative of earlier eras, but things like the Imperial Knights are completely new concepts. It works, and it works *well*.
And to point B, at the moment I am trying to get a large number of people interested in the LFR in the region I live. These people are all part of a ' student society'. We are talking about roughly 30 people who are going to start, or want to start, when LFR hits (We are lacking some GMs unfortunatly) All these people used to play DnD, some only once in a while though.
Although noone used to play in the Forgotten Realms and all said it was too much material to swallow at start, in the 3rd Realms, or too much power characters like Sisters and the lot.
Now all these 30 people are excited about the new realms, post spellplaque.
(Not all are totally convinced by the new rules system though). Roughly 10 of those people are bugging me atleast once a week about what cool things the discovered or read about the the new Realms. Sometimes quite tiresome I must admit ;)
I don´t have such a large sample pool, but I´ve got two roleplaying rounds, one with six players which I DM, one with four others, where I play. Both hate 4E Realms with a burning passion. Also, I casually meet with other players in one of the local stores or when playing BattleTech, and all them also greatly dislike the 4E Realms. Take that for what you want.
As for the 4E ruleset, I got the chance to play the game at a convention. My conclusion: It´s a nice miniatures tournament game. But it doesn´t *feel* like D&D in any form or shape. I did not have this disconnect from 2nd to 3rd edition, and I feel like 3rd edition is far from used up. Which is why I am taking my cash to Pathfinder.
However, when you say that the setting is darker than Star Wars used to be, you obviously haven´t been following the post ROTJ books. Since Del Rey as a publisher have taken over the series, the quality and the writing have gone down the drain...Star Wars Legacy is, compared to that, light fluff. And reads much more like classic Star Wars than anything I´ve seen from Del Rey in the last seven years. Well, no wonder, it is not written by them but rather by Dark Horse Comics.
-I'm going to disagree there. The Star Wars novels of recent memory have been leagues better than the garbage that was published in the past. They have relevant and underlying themes, philosophies, symbolism, and serious literary elements absent in most of the old published works. The Crystal Star, for instance? Most of the older Star Wars novels are the same dreary ho-hum garbage over and over and over.
LK: Yeah, they combined to cool stuff with some of the absolute best writing I´ve seen in comics for the last decade? What´s wrong with that? It is a bit derivative of earlier eras, but things like the Imperial Knights are completely new concepts. It works, and it works *well*.
-What's wrong with that? Well, what's wrong with erasing large swaths of Faerûn, and adding and mixing in elements that people newer to the setting find 'cool'? Let's get rid of Silverymoon, and replace it with a kingdom of Warforged Swordmages!
But it doesn´t *feel* like D&D in any form or shape.
-What does D&D 'feel' like?
--What does D&D 'feel' like?
don't know, but it tastes like chicken
-I'm going to disagree there. The Star Wars novels of recent memory have been leagues better than the garbage that was published in the past. They have relevant and underlying themes, philosophies, symbolism, and serious literary elements absent in most of the old published works. The Crystal Star, for instance? Most of the older Star Wars novels are the same dreary ho-hum garbage over and over and over.
Bantam actually brought out a good number of excellent books. The Thrawn trilogy, the X-Wing series, their last duology before DR took over... there were a good number of bad books in-between, but they still felt like Star Wars. Escapist fiction, a space fantasy saga.
DR decided that they´d rather do a "dark" Star Wars and so far have been gleefully doing that, torturing, maiming, killing and diminishing one character after another. In their last book, the Jedi council basically decide they are going to assassinate the antagonist, nobody really dissents, and the univeral concensus on the TheForce.net boards was pretty much that it was a dark side act.
Also, DR decided that doing extra-long story-arcs was a good thing. Now, normally I´d agree on that, but the continuity from one book to another got absolutely dreadful. Characters behaving totally differently from one book to another, facts changing from one book to the next and storylines dropped in the next book. Amateurish, worse than a comic book publisher ( who at least have the excuse that their comics are coming out weekly, not every three months ).
-What's wrong with that? Well, what's wrong with erasing large swaths of Faerûn, and adding and mixing in elements that people newer to the setting find 'cool'? Let's get rid of Silverymoon, and replace it with a kingdom of Warforged Swordmages!
You are being silly. While Legacy is pretty much shaking up the Star Wars universe, it is a separate setting to the others. There is still support for the Old Republic, the Clone Wars, the Republic, the post-ROTJ settings and soon for the setting between episodes three and four.
The old Realms are going to unsupported officially, unless something miraculous happens.
Hence, it doesn´t matter if the setting is a radical departure from what came before. If you don´t like it, ignore it in favour of all the other material still coming out regularly for the other settings.
-What does D&D 'feel' like?
Silky, with some sharp edges if you don´t prune it well.
Okay, a bit more seriously, D&D as I have played it with 3rd edition feels like a game which allows you all the options that you would ever like. It feels like the ultimate costumizable vehicle to create your character as you envision him.
Fourth edition, however, feels to me much more like a miniatures game, a dungeon crawl with characters who use sparkly special moves. It distinctly reminds me of the board game "Descent". For what it does, it does it pretty well. The encounters we had at the convention where I played it, played pretty tense, but the repeated use of always the same powers grated on me. Also, I found it annoying that half the time they don´t work, be they at-will or daily powers.
In any case, it didn´t feel very much like I think D&D should feel. Just my opinion, not trying declare that "feeling" a fact.
Bantam actually brought out a good number of excellent books. The Thrawn trilogy, the X-Wing series, their last duology before DR took over... there were a good number of bad books in-between, but they still felt like Star Wars. Escapist fiction, a space fantasy saga.
-Notice how there haven't been any bad books mixed in-between, that DIDN'T feel like Star Wars (Again, The Crystal Star)? Mmmhmm...
DR decided that they´d rather do a "dark" Star Wars and so far have been gleefully doing that, torturing, maiming, killing and diminishing one character after another. In their last book, the Jedi council basically decide they are going to assassinate the antagonist, nobody really dissents, and the univeral concensus on the TheForce.net boards was pretty much that it was a dark side act.
Also, DR decided that doing extra-long story-arcs was a good thing. Now, normally I´d agree on that, but the continuity from one book to another got absolutely dreadful. Characters behaving totally differently from one book to another, facts changing from one book to the next and storylines dropped in the next book. Amateurish, worse than a comic book publisher ( who at least have the excuse that their comics are coming out weekly, not every three months ).
-All of this = Good. All of this = Leagues ahead of what Star Wars would have been had the setting now evolved as it did.
While Legacy is pretty much shaking up the Star Wars universe, it is a separate setting to the others.
-No it's not. It's the Star Wars "616" universe, fully canon, 100 years +/- in the future, in which everything is a radical departure from what we knew it as.
-Gee, sounds familiar...
These guys sound more menacing.
These guys sound more menacing.
-Whoa, they are awesome! And, now I know all of the lyrics of the Immigrant Song. Super!
-Eh, everyone is raving about Pathfinder, but truthfully, I don't think it's anything all that special. I mean, don't get me wrong, I hope Paizo kicks ass with it and all, but it doesn't...speak out to me. The setting or the rules.
i bought the pathfinder gazateer (kinda the campaign setting) not too bad for the price, but...gotta agree... nothing special to write home about and i cant bring myself to get anything else about it....what fired my rear a bit is Mr. Greenwood's Castlemourn...good lord whatta peice of poopy...think i'll stick with FR. still arguably the best game world out there. so thanks for FR Mr. Greenwood.
-Notice how there haven't been any bad books mixed in-between, that DIDN'T feel like Star Wars (Again, The Crystal Star)? Mmmhmm...
It´s universally acknowledged as the worst Star Wars fiction beside The Glove of Darth Vader. They can´t all be winners, and believe me, a lot of people think that Del Reys stuff nowadays isn´t far from them in the quality of plotting.
-All of this = Good. All of this = Leagues ahead of what Star Wars would have been had the setting now evolved as it did.
I beg to differ. Their take on the franchise is very far from what Star Wars originally was. It´s much more of a prequel trilogy feel, although they chose to make things even darker that most parts of it. It *definitely* isn´t even remotely the feel of the original trilogy anymore, which I count as a Bad Thing.
-No it's not. It's the Star Wars "616" universe, fully canon, 100 years +/- in the future, in which everything is a radical departure from what we knew it as.
-Gee, sounds familiar...
Again, your point is? It actually evolved logically out of things which have happened in the post-ROTJ EU. And, as I said and you conveniently ignored, it is not the only supported setting for the Star Wars line, the older settings still have novels, comics and game supplements written for them. Did you even *read* what I wrote?
Hey, something we agree about ( mostly ). Will wonders ever cease?
However, when you say that the setting is darker than Star Wars used to be, you obviously haven´t been following the post ROTJ books. Since Del Rey as a publisher have taken over the series, the quality and the writing have gone down the drain. They have replaced the Star Wars feeling with a constant doom and gloom setting, killing off indiscriminetely the next generation of Star Wars characters.
Star Wars Legacy is, compared to that, light fluff. And reads much more like classic Star Wars than anything I´ve seen from Del Rey in the last seven years. Well, no wonder, it is not written by them but rather by Dark Horse Comics.
I only read one SW novel so I am not all that savvy. Legacy got me reinterested in SW as a place to game though. I always wanted people to run a KOTOR game but it never happened. There are many fans old and new of Legacy though (at least around me) that I am sure to find a decent game set in that era.
I know people near me that were put off by FR by the end of 2e and left the setting usually for Darksun, Planescape or WOD games. Now they may actually be willing to play/run in the FR again. For me this is a good thing because maybe I don't have to run FR anymore if I want to get a game going there. ;)
i bought the pathfinder gazateer (kinda the campaign setting) not too bad for the price, but...gotta agree... nothing special to write home about and i cant bring myself to get anything else about it....what fired my rear a bit is Mr. Greenwood's Castlemourn...good lord whatta peice of poopy...think i'll stick with FR. still arguably the best game world out there. so thanks for FR Mr. Greenwood.
-I was never interested in Castlemourn to begin with, so I can't attest to it. But, I can say that there are no other campaign settings out there that have whatever the Forgotten Realms have that makes that setting special.
I beg to differ. Their take on the franchise is very far from what Star Wars originally was. It´s much more of a prequel trilogy feel, although they chose to make things even darker that most parts of it. It *definitely* isn´t even remotely the feel of the original trilogy anymore, which I count as a Bad Thing.
-This is far from a bad thing. This is the best thing that can happen to Star Wars. Star Wars =/= The Original Trilogy. Star Wars = Star Wars. It takes away the childish, "blindfolded" perspective the setting has always had ("Duh, Jedi are always good, Sith are always bad, Good Guys always win, Bad Guys always lose, Luke iz teh roxoorz! W00t!"), and makes it realistic- moral relativity, shades of gray, realism, etc.
Again, your point is? It actually evolved logically out of things which have happened in the post-ROTJ EU. And, as I said and you conveniently ignored, it is not the only supported setting for the Star Wars line, the older settings still have novels, comics and game supplements written for them. Did you even *read* what I wrote?
-Which doesn't matter. And, the point remains: Legacy takes place 100 years in the canon future, is canon itself, and shakes up the universe in various and radical ways. The new Forgotten Realms does the same exact thing. Why is the former good, while the latter bad? Very hypocritical, it seems.
The new Forgotten Realms does the same exact thing. Why is the former good, while the latter bad? Very hypocritical, it seems.
C'mon now Karsus, ease of a bit.
Just 'cause there's a difference of opinion doesn't mean we need an online posting battle to figure out who's right.
These are battles that nobody wins.
And for the record I know I need to follow my own advice. I'm trying!
Now consider:
I think you and Lyvannalas have made some good, informative posts, especially for someone like me who has always enjoyed reading Star Ward fiction but has been on the fence about whether to buy the new stuff or not.
But I don't want to loose Lyvannalas over a disagreement. Smart, well-informed people with strong opinions are a boon to these forums.
So can we all just agree to disagree on this one?
Please?
-I was never interested in Castlemourn to begin with, so I can't attest to it. But, I can say that there are no other campaign settings out there that have whatever the Forgotten Realms have that makes that setting special.
True, but from what I know so far, Mystara comes pretty damn close.
True, but from what I know so far, Mystara comes pretty damn close.
-I had to use some Mystara sources in reference for information on Aranea, and from what I saw of it, it wasn't anything special. As aardwolf said, "nothing special to write home about". Seemed generic, nothing-too-special. Like I said with Pathfinder, it didn't have whatever it is that the Forgotten Realms has that makes it special.
-I had to use some Mystara sources in reference for information on Aranea, and from what I saw of it, it wasn't anything special. As aardwolf said, "nothing special to write home about". Seemed generic, nothing-too-special. Like I said with Pathfinder, it didn't have whatever it is that the Forgotten Realms has that makes it special.
Yeah, that's how I felt at first but then the utter depth of the setting literally just exploded in my face at the sheer amount of Mystara material that is out there once Havard gave me all the links. It's almost like 2e FR, with hundreds of immortals, dozens of nations, a long history spanning back hundreds of thousands of years, and a world underneath a world. Right now Mystara is gonna be my secondary setting but it certainly is going to take a while before I get all the material down.
-No, there's no doubt that it has depth. But, again, it doesn't seem to have..."that thing" that the Forgotten Realms has. What "that thing" is, I don't know what it is. Same thing with Greyhawk. There's plenty of information out there. It just doesn't "sing".
Greyhawk just always seemed kind of dull to me, just bread and butter roleplaying. Why bother playing Greyhawk, just play 3e core, they are the same thing except core dosen't have some of the specific details.
I'd say its because it is probably the first setting that you discovered and therefore the impression it has made on your consciousness leads you to judge everything else based on its standards. The same happened with me an Dragonlance. If I just looked into DL now, I woudn't have found anything special about it, but the books really have an influence on the way I see mature fanatsy in general because they were some of the first I was exposed to and I enjoyed them immensely.
Mystara to me just seems like a more Renaissance feeling and impersonal version of the Realms.
Greyhawk just always seemed kind of dull to me, just bread and butter roleplaying. Why bother playing Greyhawk, just play 3e core, they are the same thing except core dosen't have some of the specific details.
-Well, 3e core IS Greyhawk, more or less. It's PseudoGreyhawk.
I'd say its because it is probably the first setting that you discovered and therefore the impression it has made on your consciousness leads you to judge everything else based on its standards.
-It wasn't, though.
Mystara to me just seems like a more Renaissance feeling and impersonal version of the Realms.
-That could be the "thing" that I was referencing. The "personability" of the Forgotten Realms. Maybe.
-
-That could be the "thing" that I was referencing. The "personability" of the Forgotten Realms. Maybe.
Yeah, that was what I was thinking too, Every setting has its own distinctive feeling and different auras register with different individuals. Mystara's feeling seems less warm to me yet more timeless.
-The ones with the most unique "feelings" are seemingly the settings that I enjoy (in theory) the most- mind you, I've never campaigned in any of them. But, Spelljammer, Planescape, Darksun, these were all pretty unique.
I like Planescape, the other two I have never really cared for (never been a huge fan of integrating sci-fi elements into D&D, though I have read a Dark Sun novel before).
Settings whose feelings I enjoy are Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, Mystara, and Planescape. I still like a setting to be grounded in traditional High Fantasy yet have its own distinctive traits that set it apart.
-I never understand when people talk about not wanting to mix sci-fi and fantasy together, in relation to Spelljammer. Science-Fiction is a subgenre of Fantasy.
I suppose they are contrasting Post-Tolkien High Fantasy in contrast to Post-Aasmiov Sci-Fi, they certainly are very different.
'Hardcore' SciFi tends to have a lot more 'Hardware' associated with it.
I personally prefer a story that could take place anywhere, anytime, and everything else is just 'backdrop'.
For instance, we get our Vancian Magic System form Jack Vance's Dying Earth series - which is set in Earth's far future, and technically that makes it 'SciFi' - even though the stories read like pure fantasy.
The Majipoor Chronicles is another example of fantasy set in space (and a pretty darn good one).
Why is the former good, while the latter bad? Very hypocritical, it seems.
No it isn't! He said that the latter would be good if 3.5e FR still had support. It doesn't, so its completely different.
Did you know that technically, Star Wras is NOT SciFi - its a Fantasy set in a SciFi background. ;)
'Hardcore' SciFi tends to have a lot more 'Hardware' associated with it.
I personally prefer a story that could take place anywhere, anytime, and everything else is just 'backdrop'.
For instance, we get our Vancian Magic System form Jack Vance's Dying Earth series - which is set in Earth's far future, and technically that makes it 'SciFi' - even though the stories read like pure fantasy.
The Majipoor Chronicles is another example of fantasy set in space (and a pretty darn good one).
Yeah, I agree with Star Wars. Star Wars can also be consitered "soft" science fiction because it deals with more of the "soft" social sciences like sociology, philosophy, theology, etc.
Yeah, I don't really mind slight sci-fi elements in some fantasy books I read, I just personally think that playing in such a setting for D&D removes the original feeling of the game.
I only read one SW novel so I am not all that savvy. Legacy got me reinterested in SW as a place to game though. I always wanted people to run a KOTOR game but it never happened. There are many fans old and new of Legacy though (at least around me) that I am sure to find a decent game set in that era.
I know people near me that were put off by FR by the end of 2e and left the setting usually for Darksun, Planescape or WOD games. Now they may actually be willing to play/run in the FR again. For me this is a good thing because maybe I don't have to run FR anymore if I want to get a game going there. ;)
The KotOR supplement is coming out in August for Saga edition, so don't give up hope just yet... thus far I'm really pleased with Saga myself.
For me though, I still loved the Realms at the end of 2e, I just hated D&D by then. The rules bothered me no end... 3e brought me back though, and now 4e is driving me off again. Maybe I should just stick to odd numbered editions... kinda like one does with Trek movies, where you only watch every other one from Wrath of Khan... :D
Did you know that technically, Star Wras is NOT SciFi - its a Fantasy set in a SciFi background. ;)
-Don't know if you're being truthful or not, or whatever, but, again, all Science Fiction is a subgenre of Fantasy. Fantasy is something that is, well, non-fiction, with fantastical elements, and all of science fiction meets that criteria.
No it isn't! He said that the latter would be good if 3.5e FR still had support. It doesn't, so its completely different.
-Uh, don't know if your being facetious or not, but okay.
Why, with one, it's okay, while with the other, it's not? That's what I don't understand.
Because one will have new material developed for it. The other won't. I'm not overly sure why you're having trouble understanding that.
That prior material exists is immaterial, since nothing new is forthcoming to 'keep the flame burning', so to speak, and all those folks you cared about are just lost with very little in the way of closure. Same goes with home campaigns.
Personally, I agree that it shouldn't really matter much at all, I've got all my old 2e/3e stuff, and that's all I need. Others don't feel that way, and that's ultimately the point for them.
That prior material exists is immaterial, since nothing new is forthcoming to 'keep the flame burning', so to speak, and all those folks you cared about are just lost with very little in the way of closure. Same goes with home campaigns.
Is it really going to be all that black and white, though?
I mean, we're surely due to learn the fates of many of these (beloved, to some) NPCs as new 4E FR Material is released --I hope the upcoming Backdrop: Cormyr article by Brian R. James gives us something in the way of information on the fate of Alaphondar, Alusair and so on.
What's more, I hope the great impenetrable wall of Non Disclosure Agreements does not keep Ed Greenwood from hinting at possible fates of certain NPCs and parts of the Realms over at Candlekeep.
If anyone can succinctly tie-off an NPC and give them a fitting end in just a few short paragraphs, it would be him.
Whether or not that's valid as a viewpoint is immaterial though, since they don't have to (and shouldn't have to) justify their feelings to anyone, since its mostly an emotional response to begin with. Only WotC and the 4e Realms are going to salve or justify those feelings one way or another, not what any of us say here.
Very well put, too.
Seeing a viking raid in action these days just isn't as exiciting as one would've imagined. Just another case of the reality not equaling the myth.
Drunk Norwegians in Spain isn't a pretty sight, tbh.
But not the same level as enjoyed before.
...
Personally, I agree that it shouldn't really matter much at all, I've got all my old 2e/3e stuff, and that's all I need. Others don't feel that way, and that's ultimately the point for them.
-Why not? As I said, there are still going to be references, tales that are going to be told, and so forth and so on. And, as you allude to in your second paragraph there, you still have all of the material that you do have, so in your own games, why spite yourself? Being as it's your game, you do with it what you want.
If anyone can succinctly tie-off an NPC and give them a fitting end in just a few short paragraphs, it would be him.
Who wants "just a few short paragraphs"? I, for one, would like to hear the stories of those ("beloved, to some" ) characters told at length and in full! There may not be a total discontinuity in lore during the time jump, but from everything I have read to date, it sounds like there will be in the stories recounted in the novels.
I have to accept the possibility that I may be the only lunatic to want this, and it may that my view is only shared by the smallest of minorities... but logically I would I would have thought that even under the cold hard light of "business decisions" it would seem a reasonable expectation that anyone who started reading about the lives of these NPCs would be pretty interested in finishing the tales as a narrative not a side-bar. Money could be made from this.
The only conclusion I can draw that seems to fit the facts is that the decision was to focus all efforts on the post-time jump era as any books harking back to the time before it would serve only to confuse the hordes of new enthusiasts that are being sought. And so, a clean break was made. Logical, understandable, cold.
Quoting freely from Mr Terry Pratchett's Soul Music:
"People will always remember the songs he never had the chance to sing. And they will be the greatest songs of all."
I would like to hear the unsung songs, because even if they are greater in my imagination they are from me, not them.
Melodramatic I know, but hey, this is the internet ;).
"People will always remember the songs he never had the chance to sing. And they will be the greatest songs of all."
-The "after story" of John Lennon...
Even if the new Realms are great, I no longer care enough about them to give a damn. They 'lost me', as it were.
That feeling of 'disenchantment' is something I usually only get with novel series - abnormally long ones, like WoT or the SoT. I understand DL went through that, but I never bothered with that setting (I refuse to play in a setting with 'Dragon People').
I suppose I could say same the same for Greyhawk, when the From the Ashes boxed set came out. I never bothered running the setting after that. I bought the Scarlet Brotherhood for it, and even the 3e Gazeteer, but after that edition-change Holocaust, I never really enjoyed the setting again.
History has a way of repeating itself - I haven't even read the Amn article yet... nor do I care to. I just have ZERO interest in anything new WotC comes up with, and it seems rather pointless (to me, anyway) to run a game in a world where I know the future - the PCs actions are ALL irrelevant at this point.
I will continue to read FR fiction (unless it is still full of RSEs), but I will no longer bother with FR for my RPGing.
To give you another analogy - I used to like Michael Jackson a lot. I loved his Thriller album, and was a big fan (but definately NOT a fanboy). Now, even though that album is still just as great, I can't listen to it anymore because I see what he has turned into. I can't just ignore that - it ruins my enjoyment.
-Why not? As I said, there are still going to be references, tales that are going to be told, and so forth and so on. And, as you allude to in your second paragraph there, you still have all of the material that you do have, so in your own games, why spite yourself? Being as it's your game, you do with it what you want.
Emotions and the responses to those emotions aren't rational. People had a certain amount of emotion investment in the characters, and to see them killed off and marginalized the way they have been (from their perspective) ruins the whole. Sure you could easily ignore the events and whatnot, but that's not the point. The point is that the rhetorical you is upset, your emotional investment makes you see the way they treat favorite NPCs as an almost personal attack, and so the enjoyment of the setting is diminished, if not outright destroyed, by that perception. Logic and reason have no place in the arguement, and will probably only upset people until they come to the same conclusion themselves.
Logic and reason have no place in the arguement, and will probably only upset people until they come to the same conclusion themselves.
-That's always the case...I've reached the point already (more or less), as I am sure you can see.
-This is far from a bad thing. This is the best thing that can happen to Star Wars. Star Wars =/= The Original Trilogy. Star Wars = Star Wars. It takes away the childish, "blindfolded" perspective the setting has always had ("Duh, Jedi are always good, Sith are always bad, Good Guys always win, Bad Guys always lose, Luke iz teh roxoorz! W00t!"), and makes it realistic- moral relativity, shades of gray, realism, etc.
I guess we have to agree to disagree here. You have people on your side who think that way, I have people on my side who think that way... if you want to see what other people think about this, pass by the TheForce.net forums.
-Which doesn't matter. And, the point remains: Legacy takes place 100 years in the canon future, is canon itself, and shakes up the universe in various and radical ways. The new Forgotten Realms does the same exact thing. Why is the former good, while the latter bad? Very hypocritical, it seems.
Um... do I have to repeat my points a third time? Legacy is a time setting for Star Wars, but if you don´t enjoy it, you can still get the novels and other media for the other eras, which are still being produced and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
Yeah, it´s radical changes, but you know what? The Old Rebublic, the Empire era and the New Rebublic are *also* radically different settings. Still, nobody cries into their coffee about how bad they are for Star Wars.
The 4-gotten Realms setting, however, is much more radical, because with its advent, the old Forgotten Realms setting will only be supported by dedicated fans like Alediran. As far as the publisher is concerned, they say good riddance to bad rubbish.
For us fans of the actual setting who will not support the new setting ( I refuse to name the 4-gotten Realms the official one, sorry ), we are forced to either stay with what has been published so far, meaning a static setting, or we drop it.
If the difference between Star Wars Legacy and the 4-gotten Realms isn´t clear by now, I don´t think I´ll be able to explain it to you anymore.
C'mon now Karsus, ease of a bit.
Just 'cause there's a difference of opinion doesn't mean we need an online posting battle to figure out who's right.
These are battles that nobody wins.
And for the record I know I need to follow my own advice. I'm trying!
Now consider:
I think you and Lyvannalas have made some good, informative posts, especially for someone like me who has always enjoyed reading Star Ward fiction but has been on the fence about whether to buy the new stuff or not.
But I don't want to loose Lyvannalas over a disagreement. Smart, well-informed people with strong opinions are a boon to these forums.
So can we all just agree to disagree on this one?
Please?
No worry, if I´d go crying under a table everytime I get into a disagreement with somebody online, I wouldn´t participate at all in forums. I respect Karsus for a good part of his views on other things, but I choose to disagree with him on this particular point.
...if you want to see what other people think about this, pass by the TheForce.net forums.
-I stopped going there long ago, on the basis that there are too many/so many "uniformed" views, as in "X isn't the Original Trilogy, so it automatically sucks". Especially concerning the true nature of the Force, not actually having a 'Light' aspect and a 'Dark' aspect. Very disheartening.
Um... do I have to repeat my points a third time? Legacy is a time setting for Star Wars, but if you don´t enjoy it, you can still get the novels and other media for the other eras, which are still being produced and will continue to be so for the foreseeable future.
-And, again, likewise, your own games/campaigns/materials are not limited due to the "old"/present Forgotten Realms no longer seeing support. If you don't like it, ignore it, and continue on doing what you've been doing in the "old"/present Forgotten Realms.
Yeah, it´s radical changes, but you know what? The Old Rebublic, the Empire era and the New Rebublic are *also* radically different settings. Still, nobody cries into their coffee about how bad they are for Star Wars.
-These are also aspects that were built into the history of the setting. The Days of Thunder, the First Flowering, the Fall of Netheril, these are all dramatic power shifts in the Forgotten Realms, but nobody goes crying into their coffee about how bad they are/were for the setting because it's an accepted part of the past- just like the Old Republic, and all of that other stuff is a part of Star Wars' accepted past.
I respect Karsus for a good part of his views on other things, but I choose to disagree with him on this particular point.
-Do you know what happens to most people who disagree with me...?
As to what happens with people who disagree with you... well... very little. :P ;)
And I suspect Lyvannalas is getting at the idea that those different eras of the setting are getting their own books and information sources still, unlike the Days of Thunder, First Flowering, etcetera... and so are 'still alive' in most respects. Which is definitely not the case with the different eras of FR history. But I suspect you're being somewhat obstinate there for whatever reason...
-Our knowledge on those times is still growing. AGHotR did a lot to expand on them, for example.
As to what happens with people who disagree with you... well... very little. :P ;)
-Yes, I'd rather everyone keep believing that. Better off that way...:evillaugh
-I stopped going there long ago, on the basis that there are too many/so many "uniformed" views, as in "X isn't the Original Trilogy, so it automatically sucks". Especially concerning the true nature of the Force, not actually having a 'Light' aspect and a 'Dark' aspect. Very disheartening.
Oh, you mean the Potentium? Yeah, the believers of that particular fallacy have gotten a real kick in the balls with the last Legacy of the Force novels.
-And, again, likewise, your own games/campaigns/materials are not limited due to the "old"/present Forgotten Realms no longer seeing support. If you don't like it, ignore it, and continue on doing what you've been doing in the "old"/present Forgotten Realms.
Yeah, but nobody will continue to produce new material for the old setting. Well, nobody from WotC at least. But for certain, no more new novels, all offical developments with the surviving characters like Drizzt or Elminster are in the new setting.
-These are also aspects that were built into the history of the setting. The Days of Thunder, the First Flowering, the Fall of Netheril, these are all dramatic power shifts in the Forgotten Realms, but nobody goes crying into their coffee about how bad they are/were for the setting because it's an accepted part of the past- just like the Old Republic, and all of that other stuff is a part of Star Wars' accepted past.
The Old Republic is a setting which is intended to be played in, unlike Netheril, the Days of Thunder, etc. There is going to be a campaign guide for the KOTOR setting out next month ( yay, happydance! :D ), I am planning to resume my Star Wars campaign in that setting after I finish my current Aglarond campaign, there are still comics and a maybe another computer game coming out for it. It´s a living setting.
Even between KOTOR and the Fall of the Republic setting, there are *thousands* of years for which no history at all has been written. Which is *quite* different as for the Realms, as anyone who owns the GHotR knows.
-Do you know what happens to most people who disagree with me...?
They get a face to face discussion with the Don? :P
Oh, you mean the Potentium? Yeah, the believers of that particular fallacy have gotten a real kick in the balls with the last Legacy of the Force novels.
-Yes, and know. Most of the circumstantial evidence that existed, for the most part, hasn't been disproved. That said, it is hardly a fallacy, and is, in fact, the true nature of the Force. Here's a few, specifically concerning Vergere. With all of these Force traditions, to say that only one (the Jedi) are correct is unrealistic- my major criticism with Star Wars, as echoed from earlier.
Yeah, but nobody will continue to produce new material for the old setting. Well, nobody from WotC at least. But for certain, no more new novels, all offical developments with the surviving characters like Drizzt or Elminster are in the new setting.
-Right. But, how is this going to stop you from enjoying your own games, etc?
The Old Republic is a setting which is intended to be played in, unlike Netheril, the Days of Thunder, etc.
-If these timelines weren't intended to be played in, why did TSR release specific sourcebooks in which characters were intended to play in them, the Arcane Age supplements? ;) :P
There is going to be a campaign guide for the KOTOR setting out next month ( yay, happydance! :D ), I am planning to resume my Star Wars campaign in that setting after I finish my current Aglarond campaign, there are still comics and a maybe another computer game coming out for it.
-Can I play? The Star Wars campaign I was all excited for kinda petered out in like two sessions. The DM- "The Biggest Star Wars fanatic [literally, his email and stuff like that is StarWarsFanatic]"- was all huffing and puffing about running a campaign that went nowhere, because of his own..."inability", I guess. Best Star Wars character I ever made, too, unfortunately. And, for the most part, a decent supporting cast as well...
They get a face to face discussion with the Don? :P
-Or, if I'm not around, my associate, Johnny Roast Beef.
-Yes, and know. Most of the circumstantial evidence that existed, for the most part, hasn't been disproved. That said, it is hardly a fallacy, and is, in fact, the true nature of the Force. Here's a few, specifically concerning Vergere. With all of these Force traditions, to say that only one (the Jedi) are correct is unrealistic- my major criticism with Star Wars, as echoed from earlier.
It´s DM Lucas universe, and he clearly says dark is dark and white is white.
More importantly, the books since the NJO have spent a considerable amount of time re-establishing that, yes, there *is* a dark side, and, *no*, you cannot go all nilly-willy using it, because you think you know better.
Also, citing Vergere as an example is not exactly a point in favour for your argument. She was a.) a Sith and b.) a self-confessing serial liar. "Everything I tell you is a lie".
-Right. But, how is this going to stop you from enjoying your own games, etc?
It isn´t. I´m a sad panda that I won´t get any more novels in the old setting, that the Chosen of Mystra are most likely dead, as is Alusair and other NPC's I grew to like.
Look, we got to this point when I was trying to illustrate that Legacy as a setting is markedly different from the New Coke...errr Realms.
-If these timelines weren't intended to be played in, why did TSR release specific sourcebooks in which characters were intended to play in them, the Arcane Age supplements? ;) :P
Hey, no fair using my lack of knowledge of very old second edition books against me! :D
-Can I play? The Star Wars campaign I was all excited for kinda petered out in like two sessions. The DM- "The Biggest Star Wars fanatic [literally, his email and stuff like that is StarWarsFanatic]"- was all huffing and puffing about running a campaign that went nowhere, because of his own..."inability", I guess. Best Star Wars character I ever made, too, unfortunately. And, for the most part, a decent supporting cast as well...
Well, first I need to get my people to level 20 or around that in the Aglarond campaign, which is only 13-14 levels to go. Then I live in Germany... :P
It´s DM Lucas universe, and he clearly says dark is dark and white is white.
-George Lucas is also a dumb turkey who admittedly doesn't read the novel materials, just signs of on them. George Lucas is also a major panderer, and the setting of Star Wars is more than just George Lucas. I think that was the first thing that I said that started this Star Wars tangent. Thus, if he does not even know his own universe, I cannot accept anything that he says as "the final" answer. While other Star Wars fans see him as G-d, I hate the man immensely, with a deep passion.
More importantly, the books since the NJO have spent a considerable amount of time re-establishing that, yes, there *is* a dark side, and, *no*, you cannot go all nilly-willy using it, because you think you know better.
-Yes, and no. 95% of the Unifying Force theory is not invalidated.
Also, citing Vergere as an example is not exactly a point in favour for your argument. She was a.) a Sith and b.) a self-confessing serial liar. "Everything I tell you is a lie".
-Which, in and of itself, could be a lie. ;)
It isn´t. I´m a sad panda that I won´t get any more novels in the old setting, that the Chosen of Mystra are most likely dead, as is Alusair and other NPC's I grew to like.
-Understood. Concerning novels, specifically, just like there have always been scenes, chapters, and all of that that have taken place in the past, I see no reason why this wouldn't happen anymore. Blackstaff Tower, for example. While set in the future, it still will have "flashbacks", and information relevant to the "past/present".
Well, first I need to get my people to level 20 or around that in the Aglarond campaign, which is only 13-14 levels to go.
-Well, hurry up!
Then I live in Germany... :P
-We'll think of something...
-George Lucas is also a dumb turkey who admittedly doesn't read the novel materials, just signs of on them. George Lucas is also a major panderer, and the setting of Star Wars is more than just George Lucas. I think that was the first thing that I said that started this Star Wars tangent. Thus, if he does not even know his own universe, I cannot accept anything that he says as "the final" answer. While other Star Wars fans see him as G-d, I hate the man immensely, with a deep passion.
He certainly could have handled much aspects of the product better, that´s for sure. We just disagree about *which* aspects, I´d say. ^^
-Yes, and no. 95% of the Unifying Force theory is not invalidated.
Erm... well, I need to go to bed, otherwise I´d happily debate you on that for some time. But I´m beat, I got work tomorrow, and after work I DM my campaign. So, I´m off.
But check out the Dark Nest trilogy. The whole point of it was to make Luke notice that, no, you cannot torture your enemies, use force lightning and do other dark side acts without consequence, only because you believe that there is no dark side. Well, that, and set up Jacen as the next villain.
G'night!
I so much prefer Robot Chicken's version. :D
Erm... well, I need to go to bed, otherwise I´d happily debate you on that for some time. But I´m beat, I got work tomorrow, and after work I DM my campaign. So, I´m off.
But check out the Dark Nest trilogy. The whole point of it was to make Luke notice that, no, you cannot torture your enemies, use force lightning and do other dark side acts without consequence, only because you believe that there is no dark side. Well, that, and set up Jacen as the next villain.
G'night!
-And, the Unifying Force says the same exact thing: It is not the Force itself that is inherently 'good' or 'evil', but it is one's actions that make the Force 'good' or 'evil'. Torture someone with Force Lightning, that's a bad thing. Your intentions are bad. Use Force Lightning to paralyze someone via muscle spasms, or Force Choke to black them out, as an alternative to outright killing them, that's a good thing.
So he had a debate on the ethics of using force lightning to kill a man if that was the only way and a little girls life was at stake.
-This exact debate is included in the Essential Guide to the Force book.
That is why I am no Jedi fan but loiked Force users.
-As referenced in the link I posted above, the Jedi are only one sect, one Force-using tradition out of dozens.
Amusingly, Lord Karsus seems to be trying to inject his own beliefs about lore into what should be a discussion of canon, which is patently against that point of view... how very ironically amusing. :P ;)
-Lord Karsus' views and/or opinions are often more truthful and/or "continuity-ically" acceptable than the official canon. The unification of "Wild" Elves and Wood Elves, and the elimination of the notion of Wood Elves, for instance.
And then there's the idea of who they're acceptable to... not everyone certainly, just some. And still incorrect officially. :P
But still incorrect according to canon... :P
-Just because I like to, I'll cite Races of Faerûn, and how it's incorrect, in terms of "Wild Elves and Wood Elves".
-It's canon, sure, but it's also wrong. Going back to the discussion about objectivisim (was that even this thread?) because something is commonly accepted as official, correct, canon, whatever, doesn't make it, in actuality, right.
Not a huge fan of SW, but if I understand you guys correctly, in D&D terms the one story that showed that there was no 'Dark & Light' sides to the force would be considered a 'Heresy' in D&D rules, am I right?
-An entire (12 books, was it?) story arc began planting the seed, watering, and growing the notion that the Force is not dualistic, in that it has a 'good' and 'evil' aspects. It threw out that notion, and instituted instead that the Force has more to do with morally relativism, where Force Lightning, let's say, isn't automatically bad, and whether or not it's bad depends on the circumstances of it being used. The authors, admittedly, stated that they believe that this is how the Force actually works (at least one, anyway). Then, (dare I say the G-word?) people began complaining and being outraged that the Force as it was presented in the 'sacred' Original movies was being changed, and yada, yada, yada, so, basically, the trail was attempted to be covered, so to speak.
As to the unified versus the dualistic force... I'd tend towards the unified force were it completely a personal taste issue, but the dualistic force in terms of fitting better with the established story.
As to the unified versus the dualistic force... I'd tend towards the unified force were it completely a personal taste issue, but the dualistic force in terms of fitting better with the established story.
-The Unifying Force also works, when used in relation to the story. Intent and action dictate whether or not something is considered evil or not. So, when Darth Vader uses Force Choke with the clear intent on scaring, bullying and/or killing the Imperial officer, he is making the action evil in and of itself. When Luke uses the same technique on the Gammorian guards in Jabba's palace, to knock them unconscious, as to avoid unneeded bloodshed, he is making the action not evil in and of itself. Of course, the Jedi don't believe this, so they refrain for studying abilities that they consider of the Dark Side to begin with.
-I'm sure Ed Greenwood would approve.
As to Luke's using Force Choke on the guards, I sort of took that to be a foreshadowing of his near-fall at the end of the movie, and eventual pseudo-fall during the DE series. He could have used the mind-trick, but opted with a more brutal method instead, which obviously induced fear of him in those poor little piggies. Hence, I agree with its designation as a Dark Side power.
Except... EG has nothing to do with SW... :P
-Shh! I'm trying to make this relevant to the actual topic!
-An entire (12 books, was it?) story arc began planting the seed, watering, and growing the notion that the Force is not dualistic, in that it has a 'good' and 'evil' aspects. It threw out that notion, and instituted instead that the Force has more to do with morally relativism, where Force Lightning, let's say, isn't automatically bad, and whether or not it's bad depends on the circumstances of it being used. The authors, admittedly, stated that they believe that this is how the Force actually works (at least one, anyway). Then, (dare I say the G-word?) people began complaining and being outraged that the Force as it was presented in the 'sacred' Original movies was being changed, and yada, yada, yada, so, basically, the trail was attempted to be covered, so to speak.
Well, no. That´s a highly biased view of how things happened. Greg Stovers novel Traitor established that point of view from the character Vergere, who taught it to Jacen Solo.
Afterwards, Jacen spread that view in the Jedi order and for a while it was the accepted view, resulting in the Jedi doing quite vile acts for some time.
That is, until Luke Skywalker happened to notice, that, ooops, it actually caused his Jedi to drift to the dark side, which still happened to exist and so, to restore unity and order in the Jedi order, he made himself the Grand Master ( with great internal struggle if he´d just set himself up to be a petty despot ), and dictated a return to the old ways of guarding oneself against the dark side.
Show
Jacen, OTOH, merrily continued on his way of "The ends justify the means", because he thought he knew better. Thereby provoking a genocidal war between the Chiss and the Killik and a few years later transforming into a Sith, because he got convinced by one that the only way to save the galaxy was to conquer it. Let´s just say his way turned out to be the exactly wrong one, as he ended up a dark side wreck, homicidally hunting down his family and friends, before having to be stopped by his very own sister.
I like how there are witches (Dathomir) and there is a planet that use the Force like they are wizards. You figure any planet away from trading routes has its own shaman or healer that is really a force adept of some sort. Even the Sith were an order of warriors and wizards right?
Maybe the original ones, I am a bit hazy on that part at the moment. The Sith as we know them now, were fallen Jedi who found the planet of the original Sith and took over the leadership.
WizO_Unicorn
Please return discussion to the topic of the thread, or it may need to be closed.
WizO_Unicorn
Okey-dokey.
Who wants "just a few short paragraphs"? I, for one, would like to hear the stories of those ("beloved, to some" ) characters told at length and in full! ...
I have to accept the possibility that I may be the only lunatic to want this...
Trust me, you are not.
Trust me, you are not.
Then I could hardly ask for better company. I have to admit that of all the regulars here, I had a sneaking suspicion that you and I may have been of similar mind in this.
Now all we need to do is get a few hundred thousand others together and present a total deposit for those pre-orders to WotC so it will endorse completing those tales... well... properly!
Likely? ...
Sadly, I thought not too.
I think it might be worth it to try Ed or some of the other authors over on the Candlekeep forums. They might not be under an NDA to share such information.
I may ask on CK about this... but only after I am blooming sure that someone else has not already asked this fairly impressively obvious question ;) .
;)
(Edit: Miss Miscellany doesn't call me that. She uses the more modern/explicit term for "Dolt!".)
Citation needed.
Whats he supposed to do, come up with Greenwood's tax form?
Whats he supposed to do, come up with Greenwood's tax form?
If he hasn't got proof perhaps he shouldn't go around making baseless claims.
;)
Don't see why its a big deal though, whether he likes it or not, its our opinion of it that matters more to our own games, not his. If someone likes it, then I'm glad they do. If they don't, I hope they have something they do enjoy. Live and let live and all that I say.
Being able to actually see him in the video as well as talk about the game didn't leave me with the impression he was making charritable comments for the sake of the game.
I think he said what he said because he tuthfully enjoyed the game.
If we contrast the (negative) comments that he's made about 3E with his comments after playing 4E, it's reasonably safe to conclude his view on the D&D product has improved a bit.
I'll qualify this by saying I don't think Ed's views translate to 100% of what gamers should want; far from it! I don't even agree with his public statements about Third Edition.
Nor do I think it would be a good idea to "give him back" the Realms.
But so far as 4E D&D is concerned? Well, if the new game was enough to let him enjoy himself at the gaming table, then I think we've got ourselves something good.
Ed, from what I know of him, likes to focus on background, flavor details, and the people and plots, rather than the rules of the game. For people who work that way, 4th ed is an improvement because (at least right now) there are a whole lot less rules to memorize and keep track of.
Otoh, somne players use the rules to flesh out their characters or PCs. A PC can't sing unless he has Perform(singing) maxed out, and the wizard is the guy who ahs to spend one hour each day prepping all his spells (of which he has a hundred). That is a valid way of playing as well, and for them 4th ed is less of an improvement, since those elements have gone. (I'm a bit in between these two styles.)
Others like combat skirmish games with laods of opponents, and others like to be able to deal 150+ damage with one hit. The first will probably like 4th ed, the second possibly less so.
Ed's comment is not valuable because he is the one who says so, it is valuable because he gives us one specific argument to like 4th ed. Or not, of course ;)
But my problems aside, I see your point, but I tend to view longevity in gaming as not necessarily a good thing, since you tend to get set in your ways, as each new edition has amply demonstrated I think. While I don't think he'd really have any reason to untruthful about his enjoyment, I also see it as quasi-confirming a feeling 4e's rules gave me, in that it was a definite step back towards the AD&D days of Single-class only characters, without much support for actual multi-classing (defined as how 3e accomplished it for me), which as I understand it, was something he generally preferred.
While I agree that the rules for combat and such are improved in a lot of respects, and that it does incorporate quite a few improvements mechanically, that class issue is a real deal breaker for me, since it doesn't allow for a flexibility of character concept I feel is necessary for gaming, at least as far as I'm concerned. If I want to build a character who I start off as a wizard, but whom I decide to turn into a cleric because it suits his character development more, my understanding of the rules is that he's always going to advance as a wizard (when I want to cease that progression), and he's never going to be a full-fledged cleric in a lot of respects, at least not without rebuilding, which to be honest, aren't rules I care for on a philosophical level, in any edition, and so ignore the existance of in my campaigns. Thankfully, that's never come up for me, so I've dodged the bullet on being a prick about it.
While I admit I'm far from conversant about 4e's rules, and I could very well be incorrect about those assessments from the look over I gave it, those are just my own personal takes on the matter, and should have absolutely no bearing on what anyone else should or shouldn't feel about 4e. That's their business, not mine.
Though I do agree that it probably would be a bad idea to give him back the Realms at this point...
I expect she'll work out fairly well, becoming a controller with some minor means to aid the party with healing and such.
Though I do agree that it probably would be a bad idea to give him back the Realms at this point...
-Finally. Someone else agrees with me, on this.
-Finally. Someone else agrees with me, on this.
Well to be honest I didn'e even know who Ed was until I started posting here (as Sol Odlanier) so I really don't care oneway or another...
Get an opinion on the matter, or I start beating you with overripe bananas... which I might do anyway, just on principle. :evillaugh
Fine, fine sheesh.... I think FR is like a baby, Ed might be the dad but the whole family has helped raising it.... I don't think it should go Back Exclusively(sp?) to Mr. Greenwood
I'd think of him more of as its mother, but that raises some weirdness with the rest of the 1e Realms team who contributed... :D
No 'b' in there..
I'd think of him more of as its mother, but that raises some weirdness with the rest of the 1e Realms team who contributed... :D
But you see I was trying to avoid the mental Image of Mr. Greenwood Lactating....
Fine, fine sheesh.... I think FR is like a baby, Ed might be the dad but the whole family has helped raising it.... I don't think it should go Back Exclusively(sp?) to Mr. Greenwood
-Exactly. The Forgotten Realms are more than just what Ed Greenwood envisioned X years ago. That vision has been taken, modified, edited, grown, shrunk, trimmed, and the result is what we have today.
-Though, I'm not saying that he shouldn't get the rights, in the case where a product is not produced in the span of a year (which would never happen). I'm just saying that, should the impossible happen, that'd be a bad thing.
But you see I was trying to avoid the mental Image of Mr. Greenwood Lactating....
-Not cool.
-Exactly. The Forgotten Realms are more than just what Ed Greenwood envisioned X years ago. That vision has been taken, modified, edited, grown, shrunk, trimmed, and the result is what we have today.
-Though, I'm not saying that he shouldn't get the rights, in the case where a product is not produced in the span of a year (which would never happen). I'm just saying that, should the impossible happen, that'd be a bad thing.
-Not cool.
Blame it on Stigg....
Then I could hardly ask for better company. I have to admit that of all the regulars here, I had a sneaking suspicion that you and I may have been of similar mind in this.
I'm flattered, thanks.
Blame it on Stigg....
:evillaugh
I had one of my players ask if she could make one of those once... didn't mean to spit coffee in her face from laughing, but I had to give her bonus XP just for the sheer guts of asking. :D
I wanted A Prince Albert Of Cha But now since my Pally(:cloud9
is female I lack the "gear" to use it Almost got one of those once, but it was one of the rare occassions I was actually drunk, and the guy wouldn't do it... said I'd bleed too much. Glad he did really... :D
Sexually?
Ummmmmm.................its why I play
Sexually?
(Only Merrik)
*imagines the King ho-hoing with Zelda, and laughs even harder*
(Only Merrik)
You bet
Now I'm going on vacation for a couple of weeks. I ain't gonna be your target for awhile.
*imagines the King ho-hoing with Zelda, and laughs even harder*
-What does that even mean?
Now I'm going on vacation for a couple of weeks. I ain't gonna be your target for awhile.
-Damn...I'll figure something out.
-For something on topic, I've read on Candlekeep that supposedly, Ed is very disapproving of 4e. Now, I've seen (and cited) his comments concerning the changes to the Forgotten Realms, and he seemed very tentative, but I don't see where people get him being wholly against, and fighting against them, and such. Can anyone clue me in?
:embarrass Linky?18DELTA :D
-For something on topic, I've read on Candlekeep that supposedly, Ed is very disapproving of 4e. Now, I've seen (and cited) his comments concerning the changes to the Forgotten Realms, and he seemed very tentative, but I don't see where people get him being wholly against, and fighting against them, and such. Can anyone clue me in?
Disapproving? No. Diplomatic? Yes. Choosing his words carefully? Yes.
I don't think he's completely against it, I think some things might not meet with his wholehearted approval either.
That's about as much as I've seen over there, but I do mostly hang around the "Questions for Ed Greenwood" thread.
Disapproving? No. Diplomatic? Yes. Choosing his words carefully? Yes.
-Indeed. This is as much as I just said.
-Specifically, the poster in question (who I won't name names), said, "He's not in charge...and we've seen no indications that he approves of it. It wasn't his idea, either...He already argued against the changes, and they overruled him."
-Myself, I've never heard anything supporting that, which is why I brought it up.
Man, I wish I was at that table!!
WotC: the Ebil Conspiracy FTW :D
Sure he could... money, power, bribes, etcetera and so forth can go a long way to 'encouraging' him. WotC obviously got to him... now he's one of them... must be the sublimnal brainwashing ink they used in the 4e books that did it...
WotC: the Ebil Conspiracy FTW :D
It was the fistful of Arby's 2-for-1 coupons and the 6-pack of Mtn. Dew that finally turned the tide. ;)
It was the fistful of Arby's 2-for-1 coupons and the 6-pack of Mtn. Dew that finally turned the tide. ;)
Arby's? He deserves what he gets if he eats that crap...
-What does that even mean?
It means it's damn funny!
OMG!!!
In my old T&T campaign I ran (late 70's, early 80's) I created the god Vibranicus, the Lord of Vibration.
For followers, he had an order of "Leather Nuns". :D
Their Rods of Vibration could be used to induce both pleasure and pain.
I found it kinda weird that Terry Goodkind came up with something similar years later in his SoT series called the Mord Sith.
I wonder if he was one of my old players? :P
-Now Markus don't tease us. Where is the Pictures of the Hot and Sexy Nun's?
18DELTA
I had rather... 'peculiar' tastes in comics when I was a wee lad. ;)
Google 'Leather Nun' and enjoy - I don't want to get kicked off this site. :P
I had rather... 'peculiar' tastes in comics when I was a wee lad. ;)
OMG! I remember that! Peculiar does not begin to describe it...
Bel
It means it's damn funny!
-Okay.
--Damn...I'll figure something out.
I'm baaaacccckkkkk
I'm baaaacccckkkkk
-Phew...I was starting to go through Merrik withdrawal.
-Phew...I was starting to go through Merrik withdrawal.
for sure
for sure
-I think we all were.
It means it's damn funny!
Lady, you need to develop better taste when it comes to your youtube watching habits.
-What was the last actual, relevant to the topic comment...Hmm, a conspiracy? No, I think not. No conspiracies.
Lady, you need to develop better taste when it comes to your youtube watching habits.
Better to have bad taste than no taste, I say!;)
I've seen the Transformer ones (funny!)--that baby video is cute.
There was also a pretty funny GI Joe one, with the Baroness in a bikin... but I usually don't dwell on them long enough to post links.
I looked-up all the George Carlin ones when he died a week or two back - still funny, and it brought back so many good memories of the man.
Better to have bad taste than no taste, I say! ;)
'Ey, 'o, I got taste up da wazoo, 'ere! I'm da freakin' King of Class. ;)
I've seen the Transformer ones (funny!)--that baby video is cute.
Oh, well, in that case, you do have good taste. :D
There was also a pretty funny GI Joe one, with the Baroness in a bikin... but I usually don't dwell on them long enough to post links.
I've just been looking for any excuse to post those Transformers ones, really. :P
Oh, well, in that case, you do have good taste. :D
Oh really?
It means it's damn funny!
"sigh", you and your zelda movies
Try something that is actually funny;) : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9fIjYnPazc
-I don't think so. But, in the end, it doesn't matter if he does or doesn't.
Not sure if he does but like LK says it really does not matter. What many of us play in are not even Ed's realms anymore and have not been since 87 or so I think.
I like Ed for his creative ideas on things. If he published fun things for DDI that were non-FR related Iwould be pretty happy. I think many things he comes up with can be added into any game world.
Not sure if he does but like LK says it really does not matter. What many of us play in are not even Ed's realms anymore and have not been since 87 or so I think.
probably around the Time of troubles I would say
-Remember, when the setting was sold to TSR, they changed things to suit their own needs. Thay was changed. The Moonshae Islands were added in. All of the stuff with Drizzt, and the Drow...
so we agree Ed Greenwood does not like the 4th edition Realms right?
As said we have no way of knowing the answer to that. He probably likes at least some of it.
The one thing we know for sure (because Ed told us) is that the Spellplague and timejump were not Ed's idea. Even if they weren't, I'm not sure if that would mean I'd like them.
I think many things he comes up with can be added into any game world.
I agree--that's what I would do.
As said we have no way of knowing the answer to that. He probably likes at least some of it.
I doubt that
-He'll like the royalty checks he gets, I'll tell you that much.
That one I'll give ya
-He'll like the royalty checks he gets, I'll tell you that much.
That's the only positive thing about 4E Realms, imo. At least Ed will benefit a little.
so we agree Ed Greenwood does not like the 4th edition Realms right?
If you **really** need to know, why no go and ask him straight up on Candlekeep.
Ed most certainly does like 4e FR.
Becasue the alternative, from his point of view, is far worse.
Personally, I have a feeling he feels the same way I do (and I intend to use 4e rules and Realms), but he is far more the gentlman then I.
Sometimes you just gotta go with the flow...
If you **really** need to know, why no go and ask him straight up on Candlekeep.
I believe he was asked about it
Right...but since you were fishing for whether or not it's been "confirmed" whether Ed likes or dislikes 4E FR, I figured you could just go ask him yourself.
I wasn't really fishing for anything to be honest, I was sort of getting the thread back on topic. I don't like Zelda really
As to whether he likes the 4E Realms....that's another topic.
Well, we already know he enjoys 4E. There's video proof of that.
As to whether he likes the 4E Realms....that's another topic.
I like 4E myself. The 4-Gotten Realms are an abomination but the ruleset I like with some exceptions.
-He'll like the royalty checks he gets, I'll tell you that much.
I'm pretty sure that Ed doesn't get "royalties" on the FR product/novel line. As I recall, he sold the rights for a modest sum of cash and a new Apple Mac way back in the late 80s.
He gets paid for the novels and sourcebooks he writes, and the articles he submits and which are published. He's just prolific and talented enough to be one of the few who can make some (not a lot) of money in this game. Remember, he's still got a day job.
-- George Krashos
Bel
I doubt that
Well, he is creating some 4E stuff. I'm sure he likes that.;)
Well, he is creating some 4E stuff. I'm sure he likes that.;)
I wouldn't bet on it