Halruaa is teh gone. It is swamp now. thxu.
bleh. stil love fr, but blaaah.
Some hate it, they want more detail.
Some like it, they feel it is more open to DMs making it their own.
WotC plans to fill in some of the gaps with articles on the DDi. So have hope that this isn't all we get to see of these lands and that as with the initial grey box release, soon we will have more lore than we could possibly use in one lifetime.
One of the main points about having so little information is to make the setting generic enough to accomodate any adventures/modules that they publish. Instead of being setting specific, future releases are being made to fit anywhere. The reason Mystra died was to accomodate the new 4E magic system.
So the less is more saying definitely applies here.
I'm assuming this has been discussed already, but what is up with the less is more writing style in the 4e books?
less equals charge more
I've got a few ideas brewing.
-All I'll say is since when was the "less is more/more with less" mantra a good thing?
Since it made region entries easier to read, for one thing. I can't begin to explain my relief at being able to read through an entire entry without having to cross-reference with two different ones because of a random mention of some place or person or artifact that I'd never heard of but which was apparently of paramount importance to that region's history...
Since it made region entries easier to read, for one thing. I can't begin to explain my relief at being able to read through an entire entry without having to cross-reference with two different ones because of a random mention of some place or person or artifact that I'd never heard of but which was apparently of paramount importance to that region's history...
-That person, place, or artifact is still of apparent paramount importance, but now you don't know about it. Not a fortuitous position to be in from where I'm sitting. That's akin to a history book failing to mention Napoleon during the French Revolution.
...- it seems more like a capstone for the Grand History than a self-contained gazetteer.
-See, that's what I think the problem is with this book. It shouldn't be like that. It's the FRCG. It should give readers a light- but complete- heads up on what the setting is. Like the FRCS did, more or less. Again, we shouldn't be leaving Napoleon out of the French Revolution textbooks. Or, appreciating them to say something like, "A powerful general overthrew the existing monarchy, was then was exiled, returned, was exiled again, and died".
-To quote the Princess Bride, there should be more "''splaining", and less "summing up".
Going forward with this unique approach, they are already planning the 5e books.
Each will have a single page in it thats says USE YOUR IMAGINATION.
I can't wait to buy those! Instead of selling me some crummy old setting full of history and depth that doesn't work for me, I get to make it all up myself now!
Isn't that special?
I think sometimes we are just TOO lucky to have a swell buncha guys doing this for us.
;) :P
Going forward with this unique approach, they are already planning the 5e books.
Each will have a single page in it thats says USE YOUR IMAGINATION.
I can't wait to buy those! Instead of selling me some crummy old setting full of history and depth that doesn't work for me, I get to make it all up myself now!
Isn't that special?
-Heh, that's funny.
-MT, want to go into business together? We'll get the jump on WotC and Paizo yet!
-See, that's what I think the problem is with this book. It shouldn't be like that.
Agreed... fortunately, they managed to keep segments that wouldn't make any sense at all if you weren't familiar with the setting to a minimum (for instance, the stuff on High Imaskar makes repeated reference to the gods of Mulhorand without actually explaining what was so special about them, but this is one entry out of a few dozen, most of which are pretty self-contained).
It's the FRCG. It should give readers a light- but complete- heads up on what the setting is. Like the FRCS did, more or less.
'Less' would be my preference. Thing is, the 3e book had many of the same issues as this one: it assumed that the reader already knew something about the Realms and thus didn't feel the need to explain certain things (which is why I for one have never been able to read through it all the way). Also, it had a 15% smaller font size than most D&D books, so it was dense as a dwarf star... great for a reference book, not so much for consistently entertaining reading.
I'd prefer a happy medium between the two, but I'm also conscious that we've only got half the story. I expect the Players Guide to give more of an overview from the newcomer's perspective and not be as dependent on extant knowledge (and, if the Amn excerpt is to be believed, I won't be disappointed).
Ther's no school like the old school. :D
-MT, want to go into business together? We'll get the jump on WotC and Paizo yet!
LOL - we'll sell people "build your own setting" kits. :D
LOL - we'll sell people "build your own setting" kits. :D
-It's a done deal then. Elf & Orc Enterprises.
Don't forget the undead too. Then you can branch out into the RTS market with a Warcraft 3 knockoff.
That was the game that keeps me away from WoW.
I've been toying with the idea of running the Warcraft D20 RPG, but my boys (my players) want to get away from Warcraft when they play D&D.
Say what you want about the online-game, but the world the game is set in is very cool and flavorful (not to mention gorgeous, if you have a high-end video card).
I have to agree with Naex,
One of the main points about having so little information is to make the setting generic enough to accomodate any adventures/modules that they publish. Instead of being setting specific, future releases are being made to fit anywhere. The reason Mystra died was to accomodate the new 4E magic system.
So the less is more saying definitely applies here.
The FR have always been one of the most detailed and perfectly worked-out setting in D&D history. Half a dozen other settings have been produced alongside it and most of them failed because many people liked the Realms as they were. Then, a few years back, WotC starts a new setting, not as minutely detailed in history and every corner - for the exact reason as given above. Only to publish stuff galore on it too in no-time. Suddenly, people start complaining about FR complexity - AS IF THERE WAS NOTHING ELSE ABOUT. And first that they do is to nuke the 20-year old FR into a setting that Eberron was bound to be? Essentially robbing a full culture of gamers their setting ... to which the newbies and 4E lovers casually reply: "hey, you don't need to switch and go on. Aye right! That's a bout as valid a point as if saying: people, it is fair enough to stick to your Win95/98 computers and there are lots of good games et al about for them (still). But we will only produce WinXP and Vista stuff from now on. See you laters ..."
-All I'll say is since when was the "less is more/more with less" mantra a good thing? People hear that at work and cringe.
When less work means comparitively more money.
-RW
See there's an added element that hasn't appeared in this discussion yet, and that's D&Di. I know it's not particularly pleasing for those of us on a budget, but I think we'll find more FR stuff being released through there than in the books...
Yeah, if and when they ever get that going....Does anybody trust WOTC with anything electronic ? I mean their track record here hasn't been spectacular.
That's a bout as valid a point as if saying: people, it is fair enough to stick to your Win95/98 computers and there are lots of good games et al about for them (still). But we will only produce WinXP and Vista stuff from now on. See you laters ..."
Uhmm... they do this... I don't see a lot of win 98 or older software being produced. And I can't play many newer games on my computer. Each generation of games and software is built for newer computers, so in order to play any game made in the last year or so, I would have to go buy a new computer, since mine is a little older and I have not had enough money to keep up.
Since it made region entries easier to read, for one thing. I can't begin to explain my relief at being able to read through an entire entry without having to cross-reference with two different ones because of a random mention of some place or person or artifact that I'd never heard of but which was apparently of paramount importance to that region's history...
I love doing that. Makes me feel like an archeologist (one of the things I wanted to be when I was younger)
When less work means comparitively more money.
-RW
-Point taken. When used in the corporate world, however, that's never what the phrase means. It's invariably less workers doing more work.
I love doing that. Makes me feel like an archeologist (one of the things I wanted to be when I was younger)
I like it to a certain extent: one of the things I like about TV shows, for instance, is hearing an evocative term that I don't understand and then finding out what it means. However, this is only enjoyable up to a point. Example: when I was coming up with the history of the character I'll be playing in the Anauroch adventure, I had to consult the Lost Empires book (he's Old Netherese, from Selunarra), and found that the entry on Netheril required me to go and read large chunks of the core book, Faiths and Pantheons, Underdark, and The Grand History in order to understand what the heck they were talking about. A person shouldn't be required to do that much research just to come up with a character history: if I want to make a character that has Netheril as a backdrop, everything I need to know should be available in one book under the most logical entry for it.
I'm assuming this has been discussed already, but what is up with the less is more writing style in the 4e books? One or two short paragraphs, the a couple descriptions of the cities and you're done? I miss the detail of old. It's most noticeable in the 4e monster manual, but they have executed their goals well in the new campaign guide as well. Take Thay for example, "Thay harbors the largest population of undead in Faerun." Oh yeah?!? Can't wait to read more, but it's not there, a let down.
Halruaa is teh gone. It is swamp now. thxu.
bleh. stil love fr, but blaaah.
I couldn't agree with you more. I am not a fan of the less is more approach. The reason I buy a campaign setting book is to have most of the work done for me. I know I know, just use your imagination as a DM and fill in the blanks. I do that but I would rather be given detail if I am paying 40USD for a campaign setting. I guess I am trying to say I would rather take away or change something I don't like rather than have to come up with ALL the details myself. Like I said I know I can use my imagination but then I could just not spend the cash and make it all up myself. And quit my job, and all the other things an adult has to do and just spend hours designing the world from the ground up....it's why I like to buy "pre-made" campaigns, it makes it easier on my real life schedule and my players.
And the MM don't get me started, I hate the lack of detail for the creatures. I mean give us something, please. The lack of detail in this new edition is killing me. Also I really was not a fan of any of the FRCS book at all, actually I am rather upset I dropped the cash. It's great that I have all the older FR stuff which is great IMO for the detail, but I was hoping for something more actually a lot more. I also see people saying they tried to make it as generic as possible, why would you even create a campaign setting like FR then? I have no gripes about the new rules, I'm an older guy that has played them all and I appreciate all of them for the different games that they are, my problem is best said by the OP...less is not more in my mind, give us something...like I said lots of us have been at it for a while and have the creatures from the MM down pat, but imagine the newer guys/kids just picking this up. They have no DnD "knowledge" persay like us more experienced players do. These kids would have no history or ecology for say the roper or the mind flayer. I really miss the detail that we used to get, especially for 40USD. Like the OP said, what is with 2 paragraphs and done, it's OK for the smaller locations but some of the more established areas need the detail IMO, it's what made the FR the FR in my mind. If you didn't like the detail you were given then you could always change it. I have not been happy with the new content and the lack of detail. I wanna like 4 edition and I do for the most part, but I want some details not just a bunch of generic crap that can be plugged in if that makes any sense. To me with all the major changes that the FR went through the book should have been full of detail....not there was a spellplague, it was bad, blue fire, mystra murdered, please buy the players guide for more detail. Throw us a bone WoTC and give us some actual detail.
if I want to make a character that has Netheril as a backdrop, everything I need to know should be available in one book under the most logical entry for it.
-That's impossible, being as there are no 'Forgotten Realms Encyclopedias'. A nice thought, though, that. In 2e, when doing research, if you want to be complete to the dot, you have to use multiple sources. In 3e, when doing research, if you want to be complete to the dot, you have to use multiple sources. In 4e, when doing research, if you want to be complete to the dot, you have to use multiple sources. In real life, when doing research, if you want to be complete to the dot, you have to use multiple sources. That's just how it is.
-I'd love for there to be a single book with EVERYTHING in it too, but it's just not something I'd ever expect to see.
Pathfinder's Golarion setting will also undoubtedly be that type of book.
It can be done - they just didn't want to be bothered.
The thing looks like a sloppy rush-job, and there is no reason for that. After three years of development, we have a right to expect something great, and this wasn't, plain and simple.
I think more of us should be writing letters to Hasbro to let them know whats going on.
Chris perkins can be stopped!!!
But only if enough people send in letters. ;)
Each entry gets about as much coverage as the new FRCG, maybe a little more. Try wrapping your head around that!
Bel
-All I'll say is since when was the "less is more/more with less" mantra a good thing?
I don't expect to sway you so please don't debate. I'm simply answering why I like it.
With less is more I get to choose how much I read into it. If I have to read every single source book for a region before playing in it, I might just give up and go elsewhere. But if I get the region divorced from its history by 100 years, then I get to read 2 pages on the region and either run game in that region with me making up everything else for it. Or I can go investigate some more books and find out more about the region.
-That person, place, or artifact is still of apparent paramount importance, but now you don't know about it.
If I don't know about it, it isn't important to the region in my game. I can come up with my own ideas on that region instead. Of course I know this idea is met with derision by certain people here. So as I said, I'M NOT TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYONE. Nor do I wish to debate the point.
But only if enough people send in letters. ;)
Only if enough people don't like what he's doing.
I don't expect to sway you so please don't debate. I'm simply answering why I like it.
With less is more I get to choose how much I read into it. If I have to read every single source book for a region before playing in it, I might just give up and go elsewhere. But if I get the region divorced from its history by 100 years, then I get to read 2 pages on the region and either run game in that region with me making up everything else for it. Or I can go investigate some more books and find out more about the region.
Valid point. Now here is mine. If you are going to have to do that anyways, then why pay $40? Why not spend an extra hour and do it all yourself? And if your going that far, why bother setting it in the Realms? It's pretty much your creation at that point anyways, so why not make it completely your own? Thats the answer I ended up with anyways.
Conversely, if you decided that you wanted to follow the "official" material, then you have already stated that it would recquire more books. The thing is, you have already paid $40 for the FRCG. Shouldn't that be enough to get you going? The FRCS was great in that I could usually get enough basic information to get me started. And yes, if I was going to be focusing in one region, then I would go and buy the source book for the indepth detail to fully flesh out the campaign. The regional books were worth while to me, as I got not only the detailed region history and setting, but a wealth of plot hooks, spells, items, monsters, etc..(unaproachable East is my favorite). to make that area truly stand out from another. However the FRCS was always the starting point, and had what I needed unless I wanted to go that extra mile.
Ok, I am rambling a bit. Bottom line, is that if I am going to buy a source book, I want it as detailed as possible. If I have to fill in for most of it, then why bother buying it in the first place?
With less is more I get to choose how much I read into it.
-You always had the option to decide how much information to "count", "not count", change, and so forth and so forth.
If I don't know about it, it isn't important to the region in my game. I can come up with my own ideas on that region instead. Of course I know this idea is met with derision by certain people here. So as I said, I'M NOT TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYONE. Nor do I wish to debate the point.
-Same as above. The ability to add/remove/alter has always been present.
Of course, my copy is the right version. :P
LK and I are perfect examples of this - we read the same exact book, and come to two different conclusions. :D
Of course, my copy is the right version. :P
-You have the unofficial release of Evermeet: Island of Elves .
The thing looks like a sloppy rush-job, and there is no reason for that. After three years of development, we have a right to expect something great, and this wasn't, plain and simple.
I couldn't agree more, it feels rushed and incomplete....all of it IMO. But I do understand that the core books will be put out every year to make things more complete, which is a good thing I guess, not for the wallet but I understand they are a business, so is life. But the FRCS felt really rushed and incomplete to me. Maybe the Player's Guide will make up for it but that's a lot of cash IMO. I understand that people like the open endedness of it so they can make the world their own but not at 40USD, like I said some of us have very busy real lives and just don't have the time to fill in all the blanks. I had planned on filling in some blanks for certain, like Dragonborn, which isn't our style but I have a lot of work to do to get it where I would like it to be, and the old FR stuff to fluff things up a bit.
It just all seems so... pointless.
-You have the unofficial release of Evermeet: Island of Elves .
Either Way, I prefer my copy of the book. :P
BTW, I need to send you those Annotated Elminster pages... I think you'll really enjoy Ed Greenwood specifically stating Elves ARE Monsters.
BTW, I need to send you those Annotated Elminster pages... I think you'll really enjoy Ed Greenwood specifically stating Elves ARE Monsters.
-We are all monsters...
-You always had the option to decide how much information to "count", "not count", change, and so forth and so forth.
I agree. I'm not saying earlier editions of FR were bad (see my signature), I'm simply saying why I like this one. Liking this one doesn't mean I dislike earlier ones
It was actually playing an earlier one that got me interested in this one.If you are going to have to do that anyways, then why pay $40?
If I'm going to change enough that it would only take 1 hour to replace all the FR content I do use, I'd definitely do that and save myself $40. But I'd use a lot more then 1 hours worth of work. I'm actually thinking of running a second D&D game so I can have an Eberron game and my FR game. I'm just that impressed with what I've read of the new FRCG.
people will be forced to research their chosen play area using 1e/2e/3e material... which is EXACTLY what 4e is supposed to have put an end to.
Well actually they're not being forced. They have a choice, they can either research or build off the FRCG. It would be crazy if people who already own the earlier material didn't use it. However new people don't need to. There's enough in this (without many if any mentions of things not covered in the FRCG).
Also here's a confession: There's no way in hell I'd convert my game or even start a new game in the 4e FR. Way too much has been retconned, and there are too many races from 3.5e that aren't covered in the 4th edition. But I'm new to DMing the FR, so the 4e one isn't a problem for me.
-We are all monsters...
You throw my grandfather up here one more time and its done!!!
The Arduin campaign guide, the World Book of Khaas, Legendary Lands of Arduin is 865 pages covering five continents, thirty-one races, seventy-five nations and numerous regions, legends and deities. In very small print!
Each entry gets about as much coverage as the new FRCG, maybe a little more. Try wrapping your head around that!
Bel
-Huh? ;)
18DELTA
-Huh? ;)
18DELTA
What?
Oh and it's all fluff.
Bel
Something I noticed in going through the CG, It lays more of the lore out as a series of rumors and travelers tales, at least as I read it, than 3rd edition did. In 3rd all the books seem to have Facts, everything was cannon. The new setting seems to let things be a bit more vague, especially with npcs. It actually reminds me a lot more of 1st edition than 3.5 did in many ways.
"Vague" is not the word. "Open-ended" is. They are intentionally trying to stay away from any "facts" that could become canon and mess up the game again.
Not that I thought it was messed up, just, you know....
Forgotten Realms has been a love for me since about 1988 which is when I discovered it with that beautiful grey box. I do not have my 4e books yet because not only for reasons associated with caution but budget I ordered the players guide and Campaign guide from amazon for REALLY cheap.
From what I have seen though on these boards and just what I have read in general FRCS is mangled beyond recognition. Like with 4e I guess Ill be waiting for the next edition to come out and hope its better then this train wreck WoTC is trying to pass off as D&D.
This? This is like saying we are going to upgrade you to an Armani suit, only to fling you the jacket with the collar ripped off.
It simply doesn't pass, no matter how much the product costs or its original quality was worth.
If the new FRCG is supposed to be a DM's guide of sorts to the new realms then one should be able to reasonalby expect some explanation of the changes.
I saw none of that. No explanation of Teiflings as a major race nor a discussion of wherther or not gnomes have been decimated. I suppose we have to wait for the players guide for that. Anyone know what the Players guide is supposed to have in it? Something substantive I hope since the FRCG is a massive fail and waste of money.
Cheers!
We're back to tinker toys again.
They also left out languages. I assume all the old ones are still in effect, but new players only have the list from Players Handbook, which has no regional languages in it. Hope for this in PG as well.
-Sounds like something that would be. Better be.