By Rob Heinsoo, Logan Bonner, Robert Schwalb
-Not being proficient with the 4e rules, which this book is obviously very heavy in, I won’t be able to critique and review the actual mechanical expressions in this book. In a way, though, I think that is a good thing, as the point of the review is to review the book in general, and not how accurately it portrays mechanics, or whatever else.
-First thing I noticed, the first couple of pages are virtually word for word the same as the first couple of pages of the FRCG. Again, and this seems to be the chief complaint of mine here- space. Space is at a premium. Why are you wasting space (albeit, it’s only two pages, but still) on something that’s already in the other book!? Same thing with the full page pictures. Again, the small pictures, with text around them, those are good. The full page pictures, though? Wasting space.
-Looking through the races chapter, the only thing I didn’t really like was that a lot of space was dedicated to “playing a X”. From reading the races’ descriptions, their homelands, characteristics, and the “X in Faerûn” columns, people should have decent ideas of what the races are like. No need to waste space and include examples.
-The Swordmage and the Dark Pact Warlock, I still say should have been included in another book. Being as that they are both new, and meant to be extremely general, as to better fit everyone’s campaigns, there’s no reason to include them in the FRPG book. The Paragon Paths/Epic Destinies, most of those were good. The character backgrounds were also good, though, like the character regions in the FRCG, I think that the uniform 2 pages each format should have been dropped, to give places that have more information on them extra room, and places that aren’t very detailed to have fewer than 2 pages. Though, the character motivations and roleplaying tips columns are totally extraneous, I feel, and should be removed to make room for other relevant information on the places detailed.
-The feats, spells and rituals, again, not knowing the 4e rules, there’s not much to say here. With the rituals, though, I wish that there were more Forgotten Realms specific ones. In all of the Forgotten Realms books, there’s plenty of interesting setting-specific spells.
-The deity section was totally extraneous, being as that it’s in the FRCG. All of that could have been removed, and areas that weren’t detailed in the Backgrounds chapter could have been added in.
-The last couple of pages, the Calendar of Harptos, and the language and coinage and all of that seems, literally, thrown in there at the end. I think it would have been a better idea to include such information at the beginning of the book, for people to read before reading the chapters on different areas.
-Overall, all that said, of a possible Five Beholders, I give the Forgotten Realms Player’s Guide three beholders.
The Swordmage and the Dark Pact Warlock, I still say should have been included in another book.
To be honest, with the FRCG, these are the only two things that made me want to buy the book. If it wasn't for these, nobody outside of anyone wanting to play in the FR would want this book over the FRCG. If these weren't in this book, I would not have bought it. They are very good and well worth it, but in terms of information I don't think the FRPG adds anything that you wouldn't really know from the CG. This is fine, it's meant for players and not the DM - but if it wasn't for those classes and extra stuff, I wouldn't have bought it.
Your other critiques are what they are--as you say right up front, you don't have enough familiarity with the D&D rules to fairly critique this book, consisting as it does mostly of alternate and additional rules for that game.
On the flavor of the rituals though, I'll have to disagree with you. While campaign-specific (or "lore flavored") spells or spell-like game mechanics have rarely, if ever, held the majority in any given Forgotten Realms supplement's list, in this case it seems like there's a goodly number. I'd say almost a third of these either have more application in the Realms than they would in other settings or seem to be designed specifically with the Realms in mind.
Analyze Portal and Walk Crossroads speak to the long tradition of magical travel in the Realms, and to the dangers it now entails. Arcane Mark provides a gaming mechanic for those wizard's sigils that bring a nostalgic smile to any longtime Realms fan's face. Purge Spellplague and Purify Spellscarred are the rare game mechanic that actually can't be lifted into the core "generic" setting, as the Spellplague is what made the Realms what they are today. Shift Mote is another ritual that would only be developed in a world where earthmotes exist as they do here, and of course, the Simbul's Conversion speaks for itself.
Analyze Portal and Walk Crossroads speak to the long tradition of magical travel in the Realms, and to the dangers it now entails. Arcane Mark provides a gaming mechanic for those wizard's sigils that bring a nostalgic smile to any longtime Realms fan's face.
-All three of which are generic spells, that could just as easily appear in the Player's Handbook II, or a generic upcoming title.
Amanuensis*
Analyze Portal*
Arcane Mark*
Clear the Path
Dark Light*
Deathly Shroud*
Divine Sight*
Duplicate*
Feat of Strength*
Purge Spellplague
Purify Spellscarred
Raise Land
Seek Rumor*
Shadow Bridge*
Share Husk*
Shift Mote
Simbul’s Conversion
Soulguard*
Status*
Time Ravager*
Tiny Lanterns*
Trailblaze*
Walk Crossroads
Waterborn*
-The spells denoted with an asterisk are general, and have no real tie to the Forgotten Realms, asides for some applications in which they have been used in the setting. Spell/Rituals that, optimally, should have been included should be ones that are Forgotten Realms in origin, or application. The Spellplague related ones are fine, the Earth Mote and Fey Crossroad ones, again are fine. Other should have been things like the Blackstaff spell, or Elminster's Effulgent Epuration, or the Nybor spells, and so on.
(I am a little confused about where you are on the Walk Path ritual, which you first say could be in any "generic" book and then say is "fine," but whatevs)
Anyway, I was just saying that I think there's as many "Realms flavored" rituals in this books as there generally are in other Realms books. If you want more, they're fun to design. And Dragon is always taking pitches--I bet they'd jump on a carefully thought out "Rituals of the Realms" article that updates some of your old faves to current rules and brings 'em forward along the timeline, with lots of cool lore to accompany the crunch. I say go for it!
Originally Posted by Christopher_Rowet
Analyze Portal and Walk Crossroads speak to the long tradition of magical travel in the Realms, and to the dangers it now entails. Arcane Mark provides a gaming mechanic for those wizard's sigils that bring a nostalgic smile to any longtime Realms fan's face.
-All three of which are generic spells, that could just as easily appear in the Player's Handbook II, or a generic upcoming title.Amanuensis*
Analyze Portal*
Arcane Mark*
Clear the Path
Dark Light*
Deathly Shroud*
Divine Sight*
Duplicate*
Feat of Strength*
Purge Spellplague
Purify Spellscarred
Raise Land
Seek Rumor*
Shadow Bridge*
Share Husk*
Shift Mote
Simbul’s Conversion
Soulguard*
Status*
Time Ravager*
Tiny Lanterns*
Trailblaze*
Walk Crossroads
Waterborn*
-The spells denoted with an asterisk are general, and have no real tie to the Forgotten Realms, asides for some applications in which they have been used in the setting. Spell/Rituals that, optimally, should have been included should be ones that are Forgotten Realms in origin, or application. The Spellplague related ones are fine, the Earth Mote and Fey Crossroad ones, again are fine. Other should have been things like the Blackstaff spell, or Elminster's Effulgent Epuration, or the Nybor spells, and so on.
3 beholders is too much for this book though. I'd say two. And that's only 'cause of the extra lore given within the pages. I felt it was more reprint and a few stats then anything really worthwhile.
Anyway, I was just saying that I think there's as many "Realms flavored" rituals in this books as there generally are in other Realms books.
-And that annoys me, too. Player's Guide to Faerûn, being as that I have it in front of me here...It has 88 spells, and of those 88, I'd consider 15 of the Forgotten Realms relevant- as in, it's a spell that has it's original D&D origin in the Forgotten Realms, or was created by someone in the Forgotten Realms.
3 beholders is too much for this book though. I'd say two. And that's only 'cause of the extra lore given within the pages. I felt it was more reprint and a few stats then anything really worthwhile.
-I was torn between two and a chicken, and three, but I decided to give it the benefit of the doubt, and that if I were more knowledgeable about the 4e rules, I would have liked the mechanical stuff more, in turn, liking the book more.
the book was a dissapointment.
no background for tethyr characters.
reprint was garbage.
the only reasons i had to buy this, was the swordmage, drow and the genasi.
and of course a few of the powers and feats.
the dark pact warlock should of been in the phb or the phb 2.
not to mention i dont think highly of it.
and i will be one severely agitated off moon elf if i have to but living fr books for the tethyran character background
The people in my game group were not going to look at it since we are now playing in Eberron but after a few comments about it from me and after they looked at it I think a few of them will buy the book.
Again I did not read the fluff parts but as a 4E fan it is a great book to have.
I don't do ratings, to me they are pointless.
I wouldn't pay a $1 for it
But your not a 4E fan and so this book was not meant for you or LK.
Edit. Merric is a fan of 4E. I meant a fan of the new Realms.
But your not a 4E fan and so this book was not meant for you or LK.
-It's a Forgotten Realms book. It's meant for Forgotten Realms fans.
-It's a Forgotten Realms book. It's meant for Forgotten Realms fans.
Or, given the amount of crunch, for Dungeons & Dragons players in general, as well (or at least, "in addition"). The particular design aims were probably targeted at Forgotten Realms fans who play the current Dungeons and Dragons game, yeah?
Or, given the amount of crunch, for Dungeons & Dragons players in general, as well (or at least, "in addition"). The particular design aims were probably targeted at Forgotten Realms fans who play the current Dungeons and Dragons game, yeah?
-I didn't say it was not for people who play D&D. It's a Forgotten Realms book, however. It's primary target audience should (and is) people utilize the setting in however way.
-It's a Forgotten Realms book. It's meant for Forgotten Realms fans.
I agree. The book is useful though IMO, because I actually will be buying the other books as well. I'm finding the ideas and such I get from reading through the FR book more than useful, if the Ebberon players handbook is as useful I might pick that up as well. Depending on how I like the class in it and if I want it or not (the artificer doesn't really fit for me).
I've never ran a game in Ebberon before, but I did have the old sourcebook because I thought it was interesting.
-It's a Forgotten Realms book. It's meant for Forgotten Realms fans.
If you are a fan of the FR but do not play 4E I would suggest the Campaign Guide and not this book. This book has lots of crunch for any D&D player. It also gives a quick idea on what the regions and races are like in FR so it is good for the gamer looking to play in the FR. It is redundant when placed nexted to the FRCG but that book was meant more for DMs (or just fans of the setting IMO.)
If you are a fan of the FR but do not play 4E I would suggest the Campaign Guide and not this book.
-This book has information found nowhere else. Information about, say, Goliaths, for example, or some of the plothooks in certain regions, and the "Lore of the Land" stuff, at the end of the book. That's not in the FRCG.
-This book has information found nowhere else. Information about, say, Goliaths, for example, or some of the plothooks in certain regions, and the "Lore of the Land" stuff, at the end of the book. That's not in the FRCG.
Ah ok, so it not that redundant.
-This book has information found nowhere else. Information about, say, Goliaths, for example, or some of the plothooks in certain regions, and the "Lore of the Land" stuff, at the end of the book. That's not in the FRCG.
That stuff is there I think to tie it in for players who will be picking up the PHBII next year. I'm pretty curious about the fact there are several new races (not just Goliaths) including Daevas (Aasimar, who I thought were just obliterated with the setting change) and shifters, who can apparently change into fire salamanders (wtf?).
But your not a 4E fan and so this book was not meant for you or LK.
Edit. Merric is a fan of 4E. I meant a fan of the new Realms.
Thank you for the edit. You are correct. I like the new rules somewhat. I don't really like the new magic system
The reality of it is, I used to gobble up everything from the Realms since the grey box was released with a few exceptions. Now, I won't get the Players Guide or Campaign guide (though I pretty much read the latter), I don't read the Dragon articles, etc etc
But your not a 4E fan and so this book was not meant for you or LK.
Edit. Merric is a fan of 4E. I meant a fan of the new Realms.
The idea that a guide (campaign or player) is specifically written that it was "not meant for" certain people... seems bizarre from a sales standpoint. It's like saying "Therise didn't like that apple crisp, therefore the apple crisp was clearly not intended for her people." What does that mean, really?
I think these books were meant to appeal to a broad audience, but they just didn't. I don't think there's a class or group of people meant to be excluded by design. Something can fail for certain people but that doesn't mean there was a design strategy to make it fail for them.
Its a win for FR.
The idea that a guide (campaign or player) is specifically written that it was "not meant for" certain people... seems bizarre from a sales standpoint. It's like saying "Therise didn't like that apple crisp, therefore the apple crisp was clearly not intended for her people." What does that mean, really?
I think these books were meant to appeal to a broad audience, but they just didn't. I don't think there's a class or group of people meant to be excluded by design. Something can fail for certain people but that doesn't mean there was a design strategy to make it fail for them.
I guess I meant both new books are not meant for LK and Merric since neither likes the changes. They know about the changes and dislike them so the book is not for them. Merric might actually like it for the 4E games stuff within it if he ever plays in a 4E game.
I think the books do appeal to a broader audience. If more people like my gameing groups picks up the FRPG then they have the chance of broadening the fanbase. Some people who hate the books have admitted they bought the books for Petes sake!:D Now they might never pick up an FR book again but WOTC main goal (IMO) wants to sell books and possibly expand its fanbase.
I had to play Eberron two years ago because I could not find anyone around me that was running a Realms game and I did not want to run anything at the time. After a month or two I grew to like EB even though years before I said I hated the setting. After actually reading the books I liked what I saw. I think that is what WOTC is trying to do.
This is just opinion though since I have no data whatsoever to back this stuff up. ;)
-It's a Forgotten Realms book. It's meant for Forgotten Realms fans.
Partially correct.
The book is meant for FR fans and for non-FR players of all kinds.
There is a simple reason why the Swordmage is in the FRPG: So non-FR players will pick the book up.
This is the first non-Core class we've seen since the PHB came out.
This maximizes exposure and puts a Realms product in more people's hands because people like to buy books for mechanics.
When it comes to 4E, we're mechanics light in terms of pages printed.
Just look at the class boards and the discussion the Swordmage generates.
This is a far cry from 3E, where the rules mechanics were both very FR-specific and had a reputation for brokenness and imbalance(Incantatrix, Twice-Betrayer of Shar, Cheater of Mystra, Pun-Pun, ect.). I never saw a core D&D game of 3E that allowed FR supplements.
Partially incorrect.
The book is meant for FR fans and for non-FR players of all kinds.
There is a simple reason why the Swordmage is in the FRPG: So non-FR players will pick the book up.
This is the first non-Core class we've seen since the PHB came out.
This maximizes exposure and puts a Realms product in more people's hands because people like to buy books for mechanics.
When it comes to 4E, we're mechanics light in terms of pages printed.
Just look at the class boards and the discussion the Swordmage generates.
Wouldn't it be more diplomatic to say he is partially correct? ;)
18DELTA :D
Wouldn't it be more diplomatic to say he is partially correct? ;)
Yes. And I don't just edit for any old forum member.
'cept you, of course. ;)
::::::::::::::::::
My major disappointment with the FRPG was that it didn't quite grab me the way 3E's Magic of Faerûn (and older 2E products that focused on magic) did.
That is, where's the lore crossover? Where is the replacement for the uniqueness of magic that was the multitudinous ways and means to access the Weave prior to the Spellplague that existed amongst the various races and cultures all throughout Faerûn?
I still need to work on the diplomacy thing. It is for the best, being a putz on the forums can probably cause the same bad karma that being one in the real world can cause.:D
To be honest I am a different person and gamer than I was when the 3E FR book first hit the shelves. I see things in a different light now and am a fan of two settings now. I am not "enthralled" like I was back then but I still like the books and think they work for the gameing fans old and new. I love the addition of Returned Abeir. I see great stories that can be told with that whole region.
Thank you for the edit. You are correct. I like the new rules somewhat. I don't really like the new magic system
The reality of it is, I used to gobble up everything from the Realms since the grey box was released with a few exceptions. Now, I won't get the Players Guide or Campaign guide (though I pretty much read the latter), I don't read the Dragon articles, etc etc
You're not alone there. You prolly realize that already, just thought I'd commiserate ;). I've collected and played the Realms since the Forgotten Realms Adventures book for 2nd edtion. I've no real interest in the current incarnation of the Realms though.
I'll read the novels if they keep the line going; as far as a game setting though, it's the end of the line for me. Come to think of it, I went through much the same thing when Dragonlance started the Fifth Age stuff.
As a longtime fan, I felt compelled to buy the Campaign Setting (don't regret the purchase; I would have bought it regardless if I was a fan of 4e or not). I bought the Player's Guide, not as a fan but because I think the Swordmage will prove popular in other 4e games (of which I'm occassional player). Also, I think the Genasi are cool ;). As a Realms book though, I have no interest in it at all.
I think these books were meant to appeal to a broad audience, but they just didn't./QUOTE]
Why do you say that?
Why do you say that?
Based on my experience with players and fellow DMs, and reading the boards here and several others elsewhere.
I guess I meant both new books are not meant for LK and Merric since neither likes the changes. They know about the changes and dislike them so the book is not for them. Merric might actually like it for the 4E games stuff within it if he ever plays in a 4E game.
I do like some of the 4e stuff, with the notavle exception being the magic system. I haven't played it really. The Realms are so bad its highly unlikely I would eve play a 4e realms game.
The Realms game I was in is drying up at this point. With all thats happened, there is a pretyy decent chance I will hang up my D&D shoes at least for the forseeable future. Perhaps I will begin a Star Wars Saga campaign
Based on my experience with players and fellow DMs, and reading the boards here and several others elsewhere.
The idea was to attract new gamers to the FR while hopefully not distancing themselves too much from the old guard. Certainly, they knew a fair number of the old time Realms junkies would be disenfranchised by this. they are hoping the number of those gamers is not too substantial
There were two PG before this book (AFAIK) and neither really satisfied the PG title. Nor does this one as a whole.
Races
The drow are IMHO no player race and are not exactly describes as such either. The corresponding dark path warlock also clearly walks the darker side, yet, as with the drow, you do not get anything saying that this is not exactly meant for players. All is being commented upon from the viewpoint of a drow player, how she can do this or that, use this ability or that. Not a single word is being spent on the fact that drow within Realmspace are neither a common sight nor actually welcome. And this includes the DM.
Likewise, the genasi or tieflings for that matter. Just imagine your FR village north of Cormanthor and a troupe of adventurers happens by, lead by a sinister looking - drow, a horn-headed tiefling and a fire genasi who's got flames instead of hairs. And ... nothing happens and all is fine!
Then again, all this fear and hate of demons, drow and weird looking people might have changed over the last 100 years ... even though nothing has been said about it.
I was a bit baffled about the non-appearance of the gnomes - again. They are among the supporting cast: Many other kinds of creatures also roam the world of Toril, serving as allies or adversaries of the players. "Serving" lays a the finger on the nerve here ... the Realms revolve about the players.
Why the outsider's denomination "eladrin" was used for those "higher" elves is still beyond me, since it is in essence a "mute term", since in game they are still moon/sun elves, in the rules they are "fey".
Character Classes
There are actually but one and a half "character classes", i.e. the swordmage (welcome back, D&D's very own Elven Fighter/Mage) and the mentioned dark path warlock (i.e., just class option). Regarding the latter and what has been said about the drow and their choice for players: Spells of darkness, poison, madness, and spite fill your mind. (Remind yourself, that we are in the Player's Guide)
Alongside this, the spellscarred and I can only warmly recommend Jaleigh Johnson's Mistshore, as she shows us spellscarred folk who are not solely "exploiting the goodies".
In how far these paragon paths really give something to a character to make it special / Realmsish remains to be seen. 6 "powers" spread over 10 class levels?
29 of the 39 presented "powers" have the attack attribut, something that mirrors the "spells" given in the PHB.
Backgrounds
As far as I am concerned, this is what belongs into a Player's Guide, a short and informative description about things a character should or may know.
The "regional benefits" have obviously substituted the regional feats, though, from a glance, they look somewhat imbalanced. A straight +2 bonus on a "minor" skill here, a resistance to cold, fire and thunder which progresses higher) there?
It defies logic that non-adventurers do not gain these benefits.
Feats
Listed for the heroic, paragon, and epic tiers. Not exactyl sure whether it is a great step from 3,xE when feats give a +1 or +2 bonus on things who have generally jumped upwards during the change. In any case, as with 3,xE, any such minor bonus (which does not increase in time) seems to be pretty low a return if you have to roll a d20 anyways.
Rituals
Something probably adapted from the Rashemen setting of old, these rituals are there for the taking for everyone who knows the right words and ceremonies - if they can cover the costs. IMHO a good opportunity for adventure hooks (i.e. uncover some of the rituals) and thus not something I would place in players' hands.
Almanac
10 pages for an almanac ... well, it covers a fraction of the FR essentials, like calendar stuff, deity names, languages, and general knowledge (Spellplague, what's that then?).
Major dissapointment was the language bit, simplified again to early 3E days. Why Undercommon needed to be renamed into Deep Speech is anyone's guess. And yes, drow speak elven again
(Sometimes you wonder why these boards are in existence ...)Thus ...
... surely a neat introduction for beginners of the Realms. Those who have the FRCG don't need the book, as all regional info seems to be a straight C&P. The drow nor the warlock nor the rituals belong into this book, rather a new Champions of Ruin - IMHO. Got a 3,8 out of a possible 5,0 (maps, pics, cover et al get some relevance in the vote).
I wouldn't pay a $1 for it
I have to admit, that made me laugh.
Nice review, and the comments after it were enjoyable as well. I'm not a fan of the 4E Realms, but I do like the 4E ruleset and could probably find use at some point for the mechanical bits.
And by the way, while I understand that not everyone is fond of the "character motivations/backgrounds" stuff, I have to admit I find that stuff fun to read (and they might give me good character ideas, too--I'll take them where I can get them!).
Got a 3,8 out of a possible 5,0 (maps, pics, cover et al get some relevance in the vote).
-Yeah, that's close enough to what I gave it. Glad to see we're in (mostly) consensus.
And by the way, while I understand that not everyone is fond of the "character motivations/backgrounds" stuff, I have to admit I find that stuff fun to read (and they might give me good character ideas, too--I'll take them where I can get them!).
-See, that stuff, I see it as wasting space, in the actual book itself. Such a thing, to me, sounds like the perfect monthly DRAGON/DDI article: 'Forgotten Realms Regional Backgrounds'. Pump out one to three every month in an article, along with motivations and/or backgrounds, and you've got months worth of material, as well as an article that would draw plenty of people.
-See, that stuff, I see it as wasting space, in the actual book itself. Such a thing, to me, sounds like the perfect monthly DRAGON/DDI article: 'Forgotten Realms Regional Backgrounds'. Pump out one to three every month in an article, along with motivations and/or backgrounds, and you've got months worth of material, as well as an article that would draw plenty of people.
Good point. That stuff doesn't have to be in a book.
Good point. That stuff doesn't have to be in a book.
-In both the FRCG and the FRPG, that seems to be my chief complaint. We know that two books is all the coverage that the setting is going to get, not including online DRAGON/DDI articles. The designers knew this. As such, as much information should have been squeezed in as possible. Page/space management could have been so better managed.
Major dissapointment was the language bit, simplified again to early 3E days. Why Undercommon needed to be renamed into Deep Speech is anyone's guess. And yes, drow speak elven again (Sometimes you wonder why these boards are in existence ...)
Yeah I agree. This caused me endless confusion when I was writing a group of Drow into my current campaign, because I didn't realise that Drow spoke "Elven" at all. This is consistent with the monster manual as well, but I did think they had their own language (or at least deep speech).
Personally, in terms of stuff that could be cut, I most dislike the adventure. You release 3 books and one of them has a huge segment to a (not very good IMO) adventure? Isn't that the point of releasing 3 books, one of which IS an adventure? That seems rather silly to me.
Yeah I agree. This caused me endless confusion when I was writing a group of Drow into my current campaign, because I didn't realise that Drow spoke "Elven" at all. This is consistent with the monster manual as well, but I did think they had their own language (or at least deep speech).
Well, the drow language thing has been done to death on this board. Obviously, the dark elven speech was some dialect of Elven, as would have been wild elven and the like. But you would expect that after (on Toril) 12,000 years* of isolation with virtually no direct language contacts other than other Underdark races, that modern day Drow (the language) is vastly different from modern day (surface) Elven, which developed on its own account and was always in contact with various other languages, mostly human.
The Drow of today should, at its root still be Elven, but not easily understandable by the odd wild elf happening onto a drow group. Of course, every character could - according to the rules - just spend a couple of skill points and "learn" the language as he could with Terran or Draconic, but in-game I would e.g. always demand someone who teaches this to him/her. And this is not as easily accomplished as is spending two skill points.
There are various sourcebooks with info on the drow language and over the course of AD&D and 3E they ventured back and forward with it being its own language (at least skillpoint-wise) or "just" Elven. Even Ed once intimated that Drow and Elven are not simply the same language anymore.
*Just take these years of nigh total isolation (from surface language developements and contacts) and compare it to the differences between Dutch, English, and German after 1600 years of developement, they all are of the same Western branch of Germanic.
-In both the FRCG and the FRPG, that seems to be my chief complaint. We know that two books is all the coverage that the setting is going to get, not including online DRAGON/DDI articles. The designers knew this. As such, as much information should have been squeezed in as possible. Page/space management could have been so better managed.
A valid complaint I think. Also, this won't be the last time the complaint is brought up. Two books and an adventure, is all the planned coverage any campaign setting will get under 4e.
There's gonna questions (and rightfully so) of whether they could could have squeezed more in or done something a bit different. For better or worse, one-shot (two books) is all we get now.
I don't really disagree with the decision of a two book release, but it does come with certain drawbacks; at least compared to how things were handled in the past, with the expansive book lines for settings. We've been ingraiend to expect lots and lots of detail, and that may not always be possible the way things are now. Gonna take some gettng used to, I think.
We know that two books is all the coverage that the setting is going to get, not including online DRAGON/DDI articles.
Well, plus the appendices and flavor text in the LFR adventures, the same in Dungeon articles and modules, and the lore to be found in novels and short stories, of course. Discounting the two books, the setting is covered by over 1,700 pages of additional material as of this, the sixtieth day since the FRCG was released.
18DELTA
adventures dont have a lot of lore stuff. they have more mechanical stuff. Look at KotSF for example
I think the LFR adventures are a little different. The KotSF and such are designed to be generic, they are not specific to the FR at all. Why would adventures not specific to FR have FR lore?
I think the LFR adventures are a little different. The KotSF and such are designed to be generic, they are not specific to the FR at all. Why would adventures not specific to FR have FR lore?
-Forgotten Realms adventures have very little meat on the bones. The Twilight Tomb is a great example.
-Forgotten Realms adventures have very little meat on the bones. The Twilight Tomb is a great example.
Not exactly.
Reference Into the Dragon's Lair, which is chock full of lore that fills in some major gaps of the background of Nalavara, the Goblins of Grodd and Cormyr's early history.
Or Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave, which has a whole section dedicated to updating the south eastern portion of post war Cormyr.
Not exactly.
Reference Into the Dragon's Lair, which is chock full of lore that fills in some major gaps of the background of Nalavara, the Goblins of Grodd and Cormyr's early history.
Or Cormyr: Tearing of the Weave, which has a whole section dedicated to updating the south eastern portion of post war Cormyr.
-And, as I just said, take a look at The Twilight Tomb. The majority of the space that make up adventure booklets go to mechanics (stats, NPCs, items), or secondary lore (the layout of a building, how NPCs personalities) than lore lore (history, current events, explanations).
-And, as I just said, take a look at The Twilight Tomb. The majority of the space that make up adventure booklets go to mechanics (stats, NPCs, items), or secondary lore (the layout of a building, how NPCs personalities) than lore lore (history, current events, explanations).
Karsus, re-read what I wrote.
I did not say the Twilight Tomb is full of lore, I'm saying your base claim that FR adventures have "...very little meat on the bones," is false.
And I do not even want to start about the open ends in the Lady Penitent series.
Of course, this is mostly irrelevant info, as the Spellplague might or will have changed the "scene and cast" anyways.
Karsus, re-read what I wrote.
I did not say the Twilight Tomb is full of lore, I'm saying your base claim that FR adventures have "...very little meat on the bones," is false.
-The "very little meat on the bones" is the inclusion of lore lore (as defined above). Forgotten Realms adventures (and most adventures, by virtue of being generic, to be able to be set anywhere) contain a small amount of lore lore, and healthier doses of mechanics, and secondary lore, being as that they are primarily mechanically and secondary lore oriented.
-The "very little meat on the bones" is the inclusion of lore lore (as defined above).
OK.
Forgotten Realms adventures (and most adventures, by virtue of being generic, to be able to be set anywhere) contain a small amount of lore lore, and healthier doses of mechanics, and secondary lore, being as that they are primarily mechanically and secondary lore oriented.
...and if you're speaking about all FR adventures (as well as most 3E non-FR adventures), the claims you made above are mostly true, but do not lead to the conclusion of "very little meat on the bones."
Your observation is of course correct that adventures by their nature have lots of game status, numerous NPCs, place and location names and are generally very focused on a handful of areas.
However, this information isn't automatically generic if it's set in the Realms. Nor is this information less valuable than deep lore (your lore lore).
Remember, most 3E sourcebooks didn't go into "ground level" detail like older 2E and even 1E books did. Adventures give us that up close information.
Large adventures can have a cast of (non-player) characters on par with a Realms novel. City of the Spider Queen, for example, had a whole host of NPCs (and not just drow, mind) with their own agendas and personalities clearly spelled out, that DMs could really play up.
Realms adventures also reveal more about the countless tidbits and half-stories that good Realmslore from sourcebooks provide the DM, while also throwing out more tidbits for DMs and players to explore and think about.
The Dungeon Magazine adventure The Door From Everywhere (issue #88, by Roger E. Moore) reveals a plethora of information about unique facets of Cormyr touched on in Volo's Guide to Cormyr (it reveals the true nature of the Laughing Head landmark just south of Sling****, as well as the back story of the Looking Lady who haunts the Hunting the Knight tavern in Monksblade), while also introducing DMs to new lore about ancient Netheril.
I agree that a booklet style adventure like Twilight Tomb is lacking, but that adventure is hardly representative of the sum of available lore from all FR adventures out there.
I think that is a fair assessment of it all.
4th Ed getting the splat books -
Hrmm - wonder where all the anti splat book folks are now?