Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 11:11:44	Show "The Eminence of Araunt is a far-flung kingdom of the dead whose citizens across Returned Abeir (and now, Faerûn) are linked not by geography, but by a common ideal. The Eminence believes that every royal crypt and every forgotten corner of the world where undead yet serve masters long gone is actually a principality of Araunt. Sometimes tomb robbers notice the Eminence’s symbol (three vertical slashes) and wonder what it signifies, but few ever discover the truth." http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080722a
#2 colman Jul 22, 2008 11:12:53	The Eminence of Araunt is a far-flung kingdom of the dead whose citizens across Returned Abeir (and now, Faerûn) are linked not by geography, but by a common ideal. The Eminence believes that every royal crypt and every forgotten corner of the world where undead yet serve masters long gone is actually a principality of Araunt. Sometimes tomb robbers notice the Eminence’s symbol (three vertical slashes) and wonder what it signifies, but few ever discover the truth. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4ex/20080722a
#3 colman Jul 22, 2008 11:13:41	Bah. LK got to it just before me - someone kill this one.
#4 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 11:15:00	-Sure can do. I'll have it merged/closed. ;)
#5 colman Jul 22, 2008 11:18:49	I don't find this as silly as you do, but then I'm more inclined to be open minded since I'm not attached to 3e canon Realms. I find the idea interesting but, as has often been the case with this sort of thing (the 3e FR campaign book seems to have been an exception) , missing motivation. Why do they want to extend their network? What are they after? Are they a trade union for guardian undead? ("And now, oh Dark Lord, we come to the issue of breaks. Our members feel that at least once an eon ...") Do they want to ultimately turn the whole world to undeath? What are their goals? On the other hand, it does suggest to me the ritual "Walk the paths of the undead", a seventh level ritual that allows you to see and travel along those routes - with an Arcana check which determines the outcome and travel time: fail badly and you'll end up somewhere random on the network ("Hello Mr Lich, um, just passing through, don't mind me ..."), succeed well and you'll get there really quickly. It'd make for a fun side-adventure in a campaign where other portals weren't handy.
#6 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 11:22:00	Are they a trade union for guardian undead? ("And now, oh Dark Lord, we come to the issue of breaks. Our members feel that at least once an eon ...") -This is why I find this article fairly stupid. From what I gathered, the master of this organization believes his "kingdom" to consist of various tombs, all across the world. This is their 'kingdom'.Wait...What?
#7 colman Jul 22, 2008 11:24:52	Looks to me like the meat has been eaten by an editor ... as if the definition of the "common ideal" has disappeared somewhere.
#8 quale_ Jul 22, 2008 11:24:53	I don't get this, their ''ideal'' is that every crypt is part of the kingdom, and what they do with it, tax such places? what exactly do they want?
#9 Belorin Jul 22, 2008 11:29:08	Now this is a great idea! A Kingdom of the Dead that exists wherever a crypt or tomb is guarded by undead set there by it's creator. I wonder if Open Grave will cover a core version of this? Returned Abeir is really growing on me. Bel
#10 banpai Jul 22, 2008 11:33:40	I was a bit underwhelmed too, I liked the part about portal liked crypts all over Faerun, it felt very FR to me. It just feels that the motivation is missiong in the whole thing, having a and increasing a kingdom of Undead is ok and fine, and there is something hinted about royal tombs and bound guardian undead, but well it seems just that there is something vital missing. It almost feels like the bone naga was drunk one day and decided that building a kingdom out of burial sites is extremly cool... Well maybe it makes more sense if we get the statblock and description for the founder. The rituals on the other side sound pretty nice, and worth statting To say something good I kinda like hte picture of the second undead, and while it´s not overy impressive if you look at the damage output (it´s a striker after all) it has phasing so it can appear through a tomb wall, attack and retreat - seems to be a perfect guard for a tomb.
#11 colman Jul 22, 2008 11:36:05	It occurs to me that maybe there is more on this in the rest of the Abeir section - "ascendent" indicates that they may have a significant influence there. That might clarify the missing bits.
#12 Belorin Jul 22, 2008 11:36:37	What you have to remember is that the Kingdom was based on Abeir, which may have had an entirely different structure. The way I read it, upon coming to Toril, it's discovery of rival groups wasn't exactly good news. Bel
#13 18DELTA Jul 22, 2008 12:24:31	- 18D:embarrass
#14 18DELTA Jul 22, 2008 12:26:38	-:embarrass 18DELTA
#15 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 12:30:32	-I want to see one of them try to break into and "link to" an Elven crypt, just so a Baelnorn, or some impressive protective wards, or some Tomb Guardians can kick their asses.
#16 calabask Jul 22, 2008 12:41:52	Didn't you hear? Baelnorns got retconned into Skeleton Cheiftains. :p Seriously though, this could be interesting if it was explained a bit more I think, perhaps more info will come.
#17 scizor Jul 22, 2008 12:50:03	I never even knew there was a difference between Abeir and Toril! Isn't it Abeir Toril, the Cradle of Life? The whole planet of FR? I haven't exactly dug very deep into 4e FR, so what am I missing here?
#18 18DELTA Jul 22, 2008 12:52:44	I never even knew there was a difference between Abeir and Toril! Isn't it Abeir Toril, the Cradle of Life? The whole planet of FR? I haven't exactly dug very deep into 4e FR, so what am I missing here? -Not much. The new-school designers were too lazy to learn the lore. :embarrass 18DELTA
#19 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 12:54:21	I never even knew there was a difference between Abeir and Toril! Isn't it Abeir Toril, the Cradle of Life? The whole planet of FR? I haven't exactly dug very deep into 4e FR, so what am I missing here? -See the 'Abeir' FAQ thread. You are missing quite a lot. In short, a massive retcon which made 'Abeir' a separate, but connected world.
#20 serphet Jul 22, 2008 12:55:31	I think this split was either the sundering, or the comet thing that hit the world (thus changing it from 'one land') ahh it's -31000 dr. very clearly states what happened 'tearfall'
#21 serphet Jul 22, 2008 12:57:13	-See the 'Abeir' FAQ thread. You are missing quite a lot. In short, a massive retcon which made 'Abeir' a separate, but connected world. oh my mistake... posted at teh same time
#22 18DELTA Jul 22, 2008 12:57:43	-See the 'Abeir' FAQ thread. You are missing quite a lot. In short, a massive retcon which made 'Abeir' a separate, but connected world. - 18DELTA :D
#23 gomeztoo Jul 22, 2008 14:01:24	The networks is not a bad idea. The kingdom... hmmm. I don't see it yet. If you ahd dorpepd the kingdom nomer and instead just went for an undead organisation that seeks to expand their control, that would work better. Though I would have aimed for an organsiation that isn't so obviously ruled by an uber-dictator. I suddenly see the cybermen before me. Think about it: it's not THAT different: a group of creatures (cybermen/undead) that want to either delete/kill you, or make you one of them... And both groups come from other rworlds/dimensions. Now all we need is a doctor... ;) Yes, dumb idea to call it a kingdom, but many possibilities... I have a whole bunch of ideas already. Gomez
#24 markustay63 Jul 22, 2008 14:32:58	You can read more about the concept HERE. That should be coming out right around the time the FRCG does. Now we can play Death Knights in both games. :D BTW, the trailer is worth watching, if just for the gorgeous eye-candy. ;)
#25 josephl Jul 22, 2008 15:27:44	If used properly I could see this as a very Greenwood-esk plot device. Your players are stuck between the Cult of the Dragon and Thay and out pop a few more undead with a completely different motive. Kind of like the Skulls in Skullport, they're always fun to throw out there as an aside to a real adventure.
#26 rauric Jul 22, 2008 15:34:36	I am happy to see some monster writeups. The FR campaign book will be bought by non-fans because of the need for more monsters and items and feats. It's sales success is guarranteed. The artivle about the new faction does not feel complete but that is because they made several references about Returned Abeir and I do not fully know what that means yet.
#27 markustay63 Jul 22, 2008 16:09:10	If used properly I could see this as a very Greenwood-esk plot device. Your players are stuck between the Cult of the Dragon and Thay and out pop a few more undead with a completely different motive. Kind of like the Skulls in Skullport, they're always fun to throw out there as an aside to a real adventure. Hmmmm... if the skulls survied (which they probably didn't), I would have to assume that Araunt would consider Skullport as one of their Realms.
#28 sfdragon Jul 22, 2008 17:04:17	my thoughts are meh on this, I foresee Thay crushing them
#29 SoulCatcher78 Jul 22, 2008 18:25:53	The idea of another power hungry group of undead doesn't do much for me (given that the monster stats were for lvl 15-16 encounters, I don't think they'll get much use any time soon). The ritual for moving between crypts has a lot more potential than the rest of the article (IMO) espescially if the rest of the existing (known) portals of Faerun have been malfunctioning (or just down right broken). Someone mentioned the idea of guardians between portals in another thread and I think that this would be a great fit for that. You may pass but you have to give something up (life essence = 1 healing surge) to use the pathway unmolested (no free lunches here adventurers). While it shouldn't stop the party from using them, they will use them less frequently if they have to pay a price to the ferryman. This could also be a great foe for any PC Necromancer (or at least a competitor) and the ritual might be something that sounds like it would work well with that particular class. Seeing how Orcus has his fingers in the Undead pie (along with everyone else nowadays), how long will the "kingdom" remain free from that influence. The flip side is that they could make a great tool to be used to hammer groups who don't subscribe to Orcus and his control. Even if you don't use the entire contents of the article, you can't help but think of things after you've read it (even if the name is rather blah). I think that's what I'm looking forward to the most with the new FRCS, lots of ideas sparked from the design rather than a "use as written" setting.
#30 Mr_Miscellany Jul 22, 2008 18:51:44	Wherever the dead are, the Eminence of Araunt may be close behind. I like it. Makes Faerûn feel like a much bigger place.
#31 BadCatMan Jul 22, 2008 19:31:04	I almost liked it. Mainly because it's similar to how I envisioned Larloch and Warlock's Crypt, a vast and mysterious kingdom of the undead. Hmm. I hope Larloch has survived, then he could kick Araunt in the bony backside and annex it for himself. But what do they do? What do they want? How is a DM supposed to use these, as written? As is, there's no difference between adventurers barging into a crypt and discovering your traditional undead tomb guardians, or discovering members of Araunt. No change in reaction or intent or theme. (Perhaps some undead police arrive, arrest the PCs, throw them in a jail until trial by an Arauntian court for graverobbing?) Actually, it feels like the various undead kingdoms in RPG computer games, like the Dead Nations in Planescape: Torment, or the the Battle Of Bones village in the Neverwinter Nights fan-mod Shadowlords (odd reference, I know, but the whole trilogy was excellent). Wherein thanks to the mechanics of computer games, people and undead just stand or wander about aimlessly all the time. That's Araunt: undead standing around doing nothing until PCs arrive, and inform them that they're in the Eminence of Araunt, and attack. (Though at least Dead Nations and Battle Of Bones had undead merchants and mini-quests and competing factions to keep things interesting. Araunt doesn't seem to even have this.) PS: Doomhelms? Whatever happened to Helmed Horrors? A better name, a Realms classic, and one that everyone would remember from the computer games.
#32 rauric Jul 22, 2008 20:20:18	Helmed Horrors are in the MM.
#33 BadCatMan Jul 22, 2008 20:45:41	Oh... I was thinking of the NWN version that didn't have legs, probably because they'd reused the model from another creatures. :embarrass
#34 Therise Jul 22, 2008 20:55:51	This is a huge pile of dumb. Especially considering the new and "improved" Thay. They got rid of Kiaransalee and her underdark city for this. Terrible. No telling how they've gimped or retconned Larloch.
#35 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 21:50:30	I am happy to see some monster writeups. The FR campaign book will be bought by non-fans because of the need for more monsters and items and feats. It's sales success is guarranteed. -Speaking as a non-fan concerning other settings, I do not buy game materials because of more monsters, items, feats, spells, PrCs, and so on.
#36 Therise Jul 22, 2008 22:04:37	-Speaking as a non-fan concerning other settings, I do not buy game materials because of more monsters, items, feats, spells, PrCs, and so on. That's interesting, I never did either. I bought Dragonlance material because some of the story elements appealed to me, but I never got into Eberron (or come to think of it, Mystara, Spelljammer, or most of the Planescape things) - they just didn't appeal. General books of just monsters, stat blocks, feats, or PrCs never grabbed me. With the pre-4E Forgotten Realms, though, I did buy a ton of things that I didn't "need" but sometimes just wanted so I could stay relatively up to date on lore and canon. I think I bought almost everything for 2E, because it was just plain fun. My own game really diverges from canon, but I still liked having all the canon lore in sourcebooks even though I knew that I wouldn't use 75% of it.
#37 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 22:07:51	-I bought a few Core books (Psionic Handbook, Expanded Psionic Handbook, Draconomicon, and a few others), for the stuff within the pages, but that's because the primary focus is/was the mechanical aspects, which is what I was looking for. Setting-specific books, the pages primarily are concerned with information about those settings, which I am not interested in, hence me having no interest in them. And, I am hardly the only person who thinks this way. Especially with books being $29.99-$40.00 a pop. -With the Realms, I don't play D&D there, but I'm interested in the reverse of what I just said: the non-mechanical, setting-specific stuff. So, those I buy. Well, bought.
#38 rauric Jul 22, 2008 22:38:52	-Speaking as a non-fan concerning other settings, I do not buy game materials because of more monsters, items, feats, spells, PrCs, and so on. I know but other gamers do. That is probably why they are doing it because it probably will sell. From what I have seen people want more monsters, classes, feats, items, and powers. Any new book that has any new bit of crunch in it will probably be picked up. This may be bizarre and abstract to you but perhaps you are not WOTCs mass target audience. Many gamers online and people that I know will pick up the Players FR Guide just because of the races and Swordmage class. Some of these people did not appear to be fans of the setting.
#39 lord_karsus Jul 22, 2008 22:43:15	I know but other gamers do. -Yes...I was kind of insinuating that I am a casual player of D&D, and thus, indicative of how the casual player of D&D works/acts. The casual person isn't going to drop $29.99-$40.00 on a book where they'll be using less than half of the book. That's why core books sell so well. Because, all of the book is intended to be generic, and is mechanical. Lemme think of some random book...Dragons of Eberron. Majority of that book isn't the mechanical stuff I'm looking for. I'm not going to drop that much money on a book where most of the book is setting specific, and as such, not my primary focus.
#40 Mr_Miscellany Jul 23, 2008 1:25:49	-Speaking as a non-fan concerning other settings, I do not buy game materials because of more monsters, items, feats, spells, PrCs, and so on. Then you are in the minority. :P Seriously, I think you'd be surprised at what a casual gamer will or won't purchase from setting-specific products.
#41 Mr_Miscellany Jul 23, 2008 1:43:21	I find the idea interesting but, as has often been the case with this sort of thing (the 3e FR campaign book seems to have been an exception) , missing motivation. I wonder if the design philosophy isn't to leave a lot of the obvious questions unanswered, so individual DMs can fill them in however they want. It goes back to something Ed Greenwood said recently, about how the new Realms set up would seem to allow DMs to write in as much as they wanted. I do like this preview, though. Once again they've given us something that's interesting and a refreshing take on things. That said, I'd like to see the Eminence of Araunt further detailed in a new Dragon Magazine article. I'd like to see more sample crypts/locations under their control. A whole adventure in Dungeon Magazine would be even better. :D
#42 colman Jul 23, 2008 2:15:39	I wonder if the design philosophy isn't to leave a lot of the obvious questions unanswered, so individual DMs can fill them in however they want. You might be right, though I find it a little maddening. I guess I'd ascribe a long-term goal of turning all of Toril into a kingdom of undead to them, but with plans stretching over millennia. They're undead after all ... needs something else though. Maybe they hate change? (Guardian undead after all) So they want a dead world, unchanging and preserved? Maybe they hate time? Which would put them in sympathy with a lot of commentators on these boards!
#43 reneshat Jul 23, 2008 5:45:44	With every new "preview" that comes out, I become more and more certain that I will buy the FRPG but not the FRCS. To say that I've been disappointed so far with what they have shown me of the FRCS would be an understatement. I went from being certain I would pick it up when it came out, to being pretty certain that I won't be. I am just floored that they killed Mystra and brought on the spellplague for THIS!?!?!?!?!?!?!
#44 infinite_ant Jul 23, 2008 6:29:56	Heh, this is pretty cool, an Abeir based Entity expanding his kingdom through Faerunian tombs/crypts/unhallowed places. Hopefully this means Returned-Abeir will be detailed at some time. Deathways seem pretty interesting, isnt/wasnt there a fey portal system in the Realms? As a DM I'd probably use the Deathways more.
#45 rauric Jul 23, 2008 6:53:58	It seems an organization you might join if you were a goodly individual that liked undead of a certain sort (guardian or crypt undead.) Basically this little tidbit might just be the start of something greater. Perhaps some future novels will flesh out what the Eminence really is about.
#46 lord_karsus Jul 23, 2008 9:45:27	Then you are in the minority. :P Seriously, I think you'd be surprised at what a casual gamer will or won't purchase from setting-specific products. -And, again, I am a casual D&D player, and I don't buy books in which the majority of information isn't "mechanical" stuff, but instead, is "fluff" for a setting that I don't follow. I am hardly in the minority. In fact, I am likely in the majority, being that we have concrete proof via Amazon.com, and other websites that setting-specific sourcebooks sell less than core sourcebooks, that are generic in nature. This just bolsters my argument.
#47 lord_karsus Jul 23, 2008 9:46:39	With every new "preview" that comes out, I become more and more certain that I will buy the FRPG but not the FRCS. To say that I've been disappointed so far with what they have shown me of the FRCS would be an understatement. -Have there been any previews of the FRPG? Just wondering.
#48 18DELTA Jul 23, 2008 9:59:56	-Have there been any previews of the FRPG? Just wondering. -They will more than likely start those After the FRCG comes out.:P 18DELTA ;)
#49 lord_karsus Jul 23, 2008 10:13:00	-They will more than likely start those After the FRCG comes out.:P 18DELTA ;) -Gotcha.
#50 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Jul 23, 2008 14:11:35	-After reading that, I must say, I'm very underwhelmed. That was pretty much my reaction as well. The article didn't strike me as being very "Realms-ish".
#51 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Jul 23, 2008 14:17:43	- -With the Realms, I don't play D&D there... You do now, remember.;)
#52 markustay63 Jul 23, 2008 14:19:34	Seriously, I think you'd be surprised at what a casual gamer will or won't purchase from setting-specific products. I buy whatever I think will interest me, be it Core, FR, other worlds, 3rd party, or Splat. I have two Eberron books, and I'd like to get a third (secrets of Sarlona). I have no interst in running the setting, but I wouldn't mind trying out a character in it if I could find a game. This same goes for other settings, be they TSR/WotC or 3rd party. Heck, I hated DL, but I have two Dragonlance sources (the Map book and the Minotaurs one). Didn't care for Darksun either, but I have the boxed set and two sources from there as well. I also buy the MM's for EVERY setting, even non-D&D/D20/OGL - I just love monsters. :D I used to buy every splat book, but after RoD I decided to start being a little more decerning whilst making my purchases - that one book pretty much changed my buying style, and now I look over a book for at least an hour at Borders before decided to spend my cash. So I guess I will buy the 4e FRCG, and the 4e Eberron setting, and probably whatever other setting book they come out with, just for the plothooks, monsters, feats, and classes. I think I'm a pretty average 'Gamer-Geek', so I guess WotC knows what they are doing. If the feed me crap, I'll still buy it (but only if the subject matter interests me). There was even one or two FR products I didn't buy in 1e/2e because I didn't care for the subject matter (like CotD). Strange, I know...
#53 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Jul 23, 2008 14:19:50	Hopefully this means Returned-Abeir will be detailed at some time. Dunno, isn't detail the bane of new players?
#54 colman Jul 23, 2008 14:24:03	Hopefully this means Returned-Abeir will be detailed at some time. I got the impression that it was going to be covered in the FRCS.
#55 Therise Jul 23, 2008 14:36:07	(...) I think I'm a pretty average 'Gamer-Geek', so I guess WotC knows what they are doing. If the feed me crap, I'll still buy it (but only if the subject matter interests me). There was even one or two FR products I didn't buy in 1e/2e because I didn't care for the subject matter (like CotD). Strange, I know... I dunno... maybe I'm not the regular gamer type. I think it's really important to scan a book, see if you mostly (80%) like it, and evaluate it for usefulness (at least 40%). I rarely make impulse buys, as I think it's important in life to discriminate wisely, to get the best and most useful things. Otherwise, I'd end up with a home full to the brim with chachki and other things that were mildly interesting in the store but would never really use once I got them home.
#56 markustay63 Jul 23, 2008 16:00:17	Well, if I discriminated wisely, I wouldn't own ANY of the Spelljammer books. :P
#57 Mr_Miscellany Jul 23, 2008 21:22:02	-In fact, I am likely in the majority, being that we have concrete proof via Amazon.com,... Concrete proof from Amazon.com? There's no such thing. Like MarkusTay63, I used to purchase every splatbook that came out. Nowaways I'm a little more discriminating, though not overmuch. ::::::::::::::::::: Infinite-Art, You bring up a good point. Makes me wonder if Abeir didn't have a whole series of Deathways akin to Torrilian (Torrillian??) Fey Crossroads?
#58 Ra-Tiel Jul 23, 2008 21:57:01	[...] Lemme think of some random book...Dragons of Eberron. Majority of that book isn't the mechanical stuff I'm looking for. [...] *bzzzt* Wrong answer. You should think more along the lines of Races of Eberron. That book was setting neutral, while still contributing something to each of the specific races. :P All 4E setting books will be "setting neutral" in that they don't have a seperate style that makes them look like intruders in the Core series of books on your shelf, which in turn could easily convince people to buy the books if only for the crunchy bits.
#59 reneshat Jul 23, 2008 22:56:49	-Have there been any previews of the FRPG? Just wondering. The preview with the Swordmage and the Genasi was a preview of the FRPG.
#60 18DELTA Jul 23, 2008 23:00:08	-I wonder what the Twisted Rune thinks about these clowns from the Returned Abeir? God that makes me want to throw-up in my mouth.:P 18DELTA :embarrass
#61 rauric Jul 23, 2008 23:35:04	-And, again, I am a casual D&D player, and I don't buy books in which the majority of information isn't "mechanical" stuff, but instead, is "fluff" for a setting that I don't follow. I am hardly in the minority. In fact, I am likely in the majority, being that we have concrete proof via Amazon.com, and other websites that setting-specific sourcebooks sell less than core sourcebooks, that are generic in nature. This just bolsters my argument. I think what they plan on doing is adding very cool gaming stuff that is very "crunchy" in the Setting books that will attract "core only" people. This means fun things that used to be in a "Complete" book will only be attainable through a Setting book. This plan is so they can sell more books but also try and hook some people who may not want to pick up a "dirty" Setting book. It will (IMO) work on the $$ side of things but it will probably only draw in a few new fans of any of the settings. Plus Dragons of Eberron is a 3E book and had a different design goal. It had more fluff than anything and that fluff was Eberron geared. I think they tried some magical locales that could be used for any setting but they really didn't try to make it for the "core only" crowd. The new EB stuff in a year from now will probably have a class or two and two more races that many "core only" players may want because they are fun to play and they cannot be had anywhere else.
#62 rauric Jul 23, 2008 23:37:25	Well, if I discriminated wisely, I wouldn't own ANY of the Spelljammer books. :P Good man. I cannot say I am with you though because I picked up several in my teens when I thought "Jamming" was kewl.
#63 markustay63 Jul 24, 2008 23:28:30	I thought it was cool at first as well (the first boxed set was, anyway, and a few after, like The War-Captain's Companion), but then it went all down-hill from there. WORST monsters EVER.
#64 ywhtptgtfo Jul 24, 2008 23:35:46	Speaking of which. I find that the AD&D handbooks tend to have much higher quality than their 3ed counterparts. Am I the only one finding this?
#65 Belorin Jul 25, 2008 1:43:49	I think what they plan on doing is adding very cool gaming stuff that is very "crunchy" in the Setting books that will attract "core only" people. This means fun things that used to be in a "Complete" book will only be attainable through a Setting book. This plan is so they can sell more books but also try and hook some people who may not want to pick up a "dirty" Setting book. It will (IMO) work on the $$ side of things but it will probably only draw in a few new fans of any of the settings. Plus Dragons of Eberron is a 3E book and had a different design goal. It had more fluff than anything and that fluff was Eberron geared. I think they tried some magical locales that could be used for any setting but they really didn't try to make it for the "core only" crowd. The new EB stuff in a year from now will probably have a class or two and two more races that many "core only" players may want because they are fun to play and they cannot be had anywhere else. Actually, I think the plan is that the CS book will be mostly fluffy with only the min. daily req. of crunch. The PG will be the crunchtastic with just enough fluff for public decency. Bel
#66 quale_ Jul 25, 2008 2:53:47	Speaking of which. I find that the AD&D handbooks tend to have much higher quality than their 3ed counterparts. Am I the only one finding this? agrees
#67 Diffan Jul 25, 2008 7:59:02	The Araunt monsters remind me of the Reth Dekala from the Tome of Battle (except without the unholy balefire). Not a horrible excerpt IMO but mainly because there is a large portion unexplained. It allows me to fill in the gap of their motive and reasons. Too bad they don't have any lower level versions to throw at my level 1 PCs :D.
#68 markustay63 Jul 25, 2008 16:09:38	Now that I've begun to wrap my mind around 4e, I'm starting to embrace this 'half-lore' presentation. Instead of getting upset about it (as most old fans have), from a DM/Gaming perspective it really puts the reins back into our hands. Now, if your a fan and NOT an FR player (like LK), then I can understand your problem with it. No longer will fans be able to find out every miniscule detail, because there simply aren't any. On the other hand, our imaginations have been set free, no longer held-back by the shackles of over-developed campaign lore. It's a brave new world.
#69 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Jul 25, 2008 17:36:21	Well, as I've said before, LK is actually a player in an FR game--the same one I'm in. I can definitely see an advantage to less detail in a campaign setting. That said, I stopped feeling "constrained" by canon for what feels like a long time, now.
#70 18DELTA Jul 25, 2008 18:09:38	-Not trying to be a 'Bitter Betty'. You got to love it when the Realms are being 'shoehorned' into Eberron and not the other way around. You know when Maztica is being 'shoehorned' into the Realms. :D -I was just over at Paizo and was reading a thread called 'The Destruction of the Realms' so yes people are talking about what is happening to The Realms on other forums. -I had a thought, what if Steven Schend and Sean K. Reynolds (And the other designers that left before and after Hasbro bought WotC. Most of whom are making a good living due to the OGL.) were still working for WotC? WOULD THIS DESTRUCTION OF THE REALMS BE TAKING PLACE?. -They left and opened the door for a new batch of designers to make their mark on the game of D&D and The Realms. -WotC did start on their 'Negative Nancy' campaign on the Realms from the start(GenCon last year). Remember the Staff Blogs? -One question, would this be happening if the old set of designers were still working For WotC? I really don't think so. Maybe this is what Rich Baker meant by 'fighting Battles behind the scenes for The Realms that we will never know about'. Maybe these 'New-School Designers' wanted to scrap the Realms and run with Eberron? 18DELTA
#71 Ra-Tiel Jul 25, 2008 18:53:30	[...] Do we know anything of the official numbers of sells from the FR brand? Do we know how much profit the FR brought in for WotC? What if the profit from the FR was not high enough? What if the only available options would have been "dump the FR" or "adapt the FR to appeal to a larger audience and create a larger profit"? And what would you say if WotC went with the first option, perhaps because a market analysis had shown that there wasn't a profitable market for settings like the FR? Many users have expressed their opinion that it would have been "better" for the FR to be dumped and just die instead of the change currently taking place. I'm not sure on that one. "Be careful what you wished for - you might get it."
#72 18DELTA Jul 25, 2008 23:50:23	- -When did I mention money? Other than some people making a good living of The OGL. -I was talking about how most of this mess wouldn't be happening if the 'Old-Guard of the Realms Designers were around'. -Good Grief. :D 18DELTA
#73 Ra-Tiel Jul 26, 2008 6:29:10	[...] -When did I mention money? Other than some people making a good living of The OGL. -I was talking about how most of this mess wouldn't be happening if the 'Old-Guard of the Realms Designers were around'. [...] I think you misunderstood me. Yes, we can wonder if the changes would happen with the "old" designers around. But, if we go around and ask this question, we must also ask whether the Realms would be continued at all. What's the inherent reason for the changes? Only the edition change? I don't think so. I think there's more to it other than "all classes have powers now". That was what I'm getting at. What if the FR weren't as popular (or as profitable) as many people claim them to be, and the only way to keep them around was to do some drastic changes to hope for a broader audience?
#74 rauric Jul 26, 2008 6:30:32	...
#75 markustay63 Jul 26, 2008 12:40:38	Can we PLEASE get back to the topic at hand - the Eminence of Araunt. There are plenty of other threads to carry on this line of discussion.
#76 colman Jul 26, 2008 12:56:20	A question: what are the rules for posting home-cooked fluff and stuff around here? Does one just add a big note in bold at the front warning that it isn't canon?
#77 markustay63 Jul 26, 2008 12:58:24	Absolutely - Homebrew is not only welcome, it is GREATLY appreciated. Go for it. :D *Just make a note that it is your own lore, and not canon, and all will be well. ;)
#78 18DELTA Jul 26, 2008 13:18:27	Can we PLEASE get back to the topic at hand - the Eminence of Araunt. There are plenty of other threads to carry on this line of discussion. -So...I wonder what the Twisted Rune thinks of this 'Group'. Are they trying to take control of it for their own purposes. Or are the Fighting each other. :P -I wonder if their has been any contact with Larloch and his 60 Liches? ;) -Is that better Markus. :D 18DELTA ;)
#79 Mr_Miscellany Jul 26, 2008 13:44:38	I was wondering the same thing about Larloch and Co.
#80 markustay63 Jul 26, 2008 15:33:40	Damn... hadn't even considered Larloch or the Twisted Rune. Good lore'n, guys. :D I was thinking about those Lich-priests and Zombies in that giant hole where Mezro is now... Shows you where my mind is at. :embarrass
#81 18DELTA Jul 26, 2008 23:42:07	-We shouldn't forget about 'The Boneyard' from 'The Underdark' book. :D -A Giant Crypt should interest these clowns. :P -Oh, thats if it didn't get 'trashed' by some Hot-Shot 4E Designer! ;) 18DELTA
#82 markustay63 Jul 26, 2008 23:48:52	Considering its location, I can't see it being harmed (but you never know). Its not under Thay - just nearby - and its nowhere near where any of the major geographic upheavals are occurring. Hmmmm... I wonder how Szass Tam feels about these guys...
#83 18DELTA Jul 27, 2008 0:01:44	-He is probably trying to Rule The with an Iron Fist! :D -They would make some great behind the scenes 'Goons' for 'Tamy'. -Thats if 'Tamy' didnt get 'Trashed'.......well you know the deal. ;) -What ever happened to 'Charles Phipps' 'Ultimate Realms Thread'? -An Idea. What if the 'Spellplague' Killed off all of the Gods, and ruined all of the Planes? Oh, that Would be 'Dark Sun' right? 18DELTA :D
#84 Diffan Jul 27, 2008 10:02:09	I could see Szass Tam working with them, maybe giving them a large portion of their own domain in/around Thay so they can be called upon for his wishes. Or you could go a completely different direction and have Tam's legions battle those of the Araunt for domain or territory. Either or, it could really flesh out well for a campaign.
#85 naex Jul 27, 2008 22:44:10	I see the Eminence as an expanding kingdom, just not a traditional one. Lots of adventure ideas. From meeting emissaries looking for the same grave sites as the PCs, to encounters with undead who have already signed on, and the retaliatory strikes of the Eminence for violating their kingdom. Also jobs defending sites that are known to be being targeted for growth by the Eminence, such as the city of the dead in Waterdeep, or the royal mausoleum in Cormyr. I assume that the Eminence hasn't taken over every undead in the realms, so... As well as their interactions with the various Liches in the realms.
#86 Belorin Jul 28, 2008 1:18:11	Could you peition the Eminence for access to a crypt or gravesite under their control? A whole new level of middle managers to deal with. Bel
#87 aldareth Jul 28, 2008 1:37:08	-So...I wonder what the Twisted Rune thinks of this 'Group'. Are they trying to take control of it for their own purposes. Or are the Fighting each other. :P -I wonder if their has been any contact with Larloch and his 60 Liches? ;) -Is that better Markus. :D 18DELTA ;) make your knowledge checks ;) Streetwise DC 40: The Eminence is not friendly with other groups, cults, or nations of undead. It was ascendant in Abeir but has made contact during the last decade with Faerûn. Now Araunt is aware of such groups as the Twisted Rune, the Cult of the Dragon, and Thay. Since then, the secret kingdom has begun a slow campaign to bring all of these, even Thay, into Araunt. More than one skirmish has already been fought.
#88 Mr_Miscellany Jul 28, 2008 1:42:10	Also jobs defending sites that are known to be being targeted for growth by the Eminence, such as the city of the dead in Waterdeep, or the royal mausoleum in Cormyr Darn it, naex beat me to the punch! I wonder if certain city states or nations might not negotiate with the Eminence for the safekeeping of their dead? The Eminence could draw fees or a toll of some kind to visit the dead in exchange for their safekeeping and the guardianship of same.
#89 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 12:34:05	Could you peition the Eminence for access to a crypt or gravesite under their control? A whole new level of middle managers to deal with. Bel To visit, maybe... But if you mean to "despoil & loot", the NO, I can't see them being up for that. And if you promise to only read the inscription on a tomb, and then turn around and rob it, you will have the Araunt on your butt for all eternity (because they HAVE all eternity to find you!) Then a gain, a good punishment would be to simply make you one of them. These guys are starting to sound more and more like the Free-willed Undead of WoW - a combination of the Forsaken and the Scourge. But because I like WoW fluff (which is way better then 4e FR fluff), I'd rather have them stealing stuff then trying to be creative on their own. ;)
#90 forse Jul 28, 2008 16:22:52	Forsaken[/i] and the Scourge. But because I like WoW fluff (which is way better then 4e FR fluff), I'd rather have them stealing stuff then trying to be creative on their own. ;) Interesting. Could you motivate why you like WoW fluff? Not that I'm saying you shouldn't, just interesting to hear what you like about it. I am quite divided when it comes to WoW lore. On one hand it often feels like a patchwork, with clichées and little believability. But on the other hand WoW has it's good sides.
#91 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 16:37:58	Well, they have probably had just as many 'ret-cons' as FR has, but the fans don't seem to mind as long as it improves the overall setting (a big difference to how P&P gamers think). I think I like WoW lore because it reminds me of 2e FR lore so much - we have the Dark Portal (Orcgate Wars), and recently I was playing in the city of Silvermoon in WoW, helping the Blood Elves (4e's new Eladrin) take back the Towers of the Sun and the Moon! It doesn't get much more reminiscent then THAT! :D Anyhow, it's almost like playing FR, with all its different intelligent races and political/evil groups with their own agendas, except they've 'kicked it up a notch', with some low-level steam tech and primitive guns, not to mention those wonderful flying ships (Blimps) the Goblins make, that are everything the Halruaans should have been. Its almost like playing "X-treme FR", but without all the sillinesss they tried to add with the spellplague and Abeir. In fact, I've been considering for a long while now of porting over all those groups and factions from Warcraft in FR, but never knew quite how (because of FR's incredibly detailed history). Now 4e has sorta "answered my prayers" - I can dump all the WoW goodness I want into my version of FR, and won't have to worry about crapping on previous lore. Burning Blade, Dark Iron Dwarves, The Defias, Steamwheedle Cartel, Bloodsail Buccaneers, Timbermaw Hold, Cenarion Circle, etc, ect... here I come.
#92 alediran Jul 28, 2008 17:28:05	Now that I've begun to wrap my mind around 4e, I'm starting to embrace this 'half-lore' presentation. Instead of getting upset about it (as most old fans have), from a DM/Gaming perspective it really puts the reins back into our hands. I had that with 3rd edition, don't need any of this new crap design to do that. I had more control with lots of lore than with the spare parts they give us now. I get inspired by lots of history, not by a little. That's my biggest problem with the nWoD right now, great material, but I don't have a clue how to use it because I don't have anything to start from, no pattern to compare my story, and that screws with my internal process for making stories. For example, I created a whole campaign in Halruaa by completely improvising on-the-spot with all the Realmslore that exists in my head. Without that Realmslore I would be forced to actually spend time preparing every session to have something to give my players and it would never give me the flexibility that I enjoy with the True Forgotten Realms.
#93 naex Jul 28, 2008 17:37:34	I had that with 3rd edition, don't need any of this new crap design to do that. I had more control with lots of lore than with the spare parts they give us now. I get inspired by lots of history, not by a little. That's my biggest problem with the nWoD right now, great material, but I don't have a clue how to use it because I don't have anything to start from. Go back and read the original gray box books if you want to see what can be done with almost no lore... Those first books had almost no info on many of the things we take for granted about the realms now. No grand history, just a couple of years worth of "news and rumors", and short blurbs about places, people and organizations. By the above standards of needing lots of lore, you wouldn't have liked the Realms back then. 20 years of additions have filled in the gaps. To borrow and twist a phrase "Faerun wasn't built in a day", we have many years to create new lore to compliment the old. Just use your imagination, after all that is what the game is about.
#94 alediran Jul 28, 2008 17:43:39	Just use your imagination, after all that is what the game is about. I use it a lot, I just hate settings without substance because they don't INSPIRE me to DM in there. The True Realms are the only setting that has continually (until the first announcements for the 4gettable realms) inspired me to DM, no other setting was able to do that for me.
#95 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 17:49:13	To be honest, the presntation in the Old Grey Box was way better, though. It was very 'flavorful', whereas these excerpts have been bland as dirt. They read like a textbook, not a story, and it was that story-like aspect that first drew me into the Realms. If I wanted lists of information, I'd read an encyclopedia. ;)
#96 naex Jul 28, 2008 19:09:25	To be honest, the presntation in the Old Grey Box was way better, though. It was very 'flavorful', whereas these excerpts have been bland as dirt. They read like a textbook, not a story, and it was that story-like aspect that first drew me into the Realms. If I wanted lists of information, I'd read an encyclopedia. ;) Flavorful yes, but not a lot of meat to sink ones teeth into. Just the bare bones of the setting. My point was that it didn't give you any more to go on then you have now, less in some ways, because there wasn't 20 years of lore to go back to if you had a question, nor was there a nifty Message Board or website to go to to get more.
#97 Ra-Tiel Jul 28, 2008 19:10:34	[...] If I wanted lists of information, I'd read an encyclopedia. ;) Well, encyclopedia entries are better for presenting information. I don't like to have to browse through half a dozen pages to find out who the mayor of this town or the ruler of this empire is. :P
#98 Mr_Miscellany Jul 28, 2008 19:27:29	So....about this Eminence of Araunt.... ;) :::::::::::::::::: I bet I could squeeze these guys into H1 or even H2 without too much work...sort of as a mysterious third party trying to get a leg in on the action at Keegan's Keep or within Thunderspire.
#99 naex Jul 28, 2008 19:32:02	I think it is a great idea, with lots of adventure ideas, as I stated somewhere above. Also ties a lot of the undead in the realms into a larger plot. Now you never know who is coming after you for grave robbing, uhm... I mean for adventuring.
#100 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 22:37:51	You do now, remember.;) -Whoops. Old habits die hard. Dunno, isn't detail the bane of new players? -Supposedly. ;)
#101 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 22:42:31	Concrete proof from Amazon.com? There's no such thing. -Whatever. If you don't want to believe that cold, unbiased numbers don't lie, that's your own thing. *bzzzt* Wrong answer. You should think more along the lines of Races of Eberron. That book was setting neutral, while still contributing something to each of the specific races. :P -Um...Being as that the book is Races of Eberron, it's not setting neutral. It's an Eberron book. It talks about those specific races in Eberron and such. Anyone can use them, of course, in however method they want to, but that doesn't change the fact that the book is written for the Eberron setting about Eberron races. All 4E setting books will be "setting neutral" in that they don't have a seperate style that makes them look like intruders in the Core series of books on your shelf, which in turn could easily convince people to buy the books if only for the crunchy bits. -Setting books will be setting neutral? Say what? -Maybe I misunderstood your point, maybe you misunderstood mine. Books written for X setting are about X setting.
#102 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 22:45:32	However - and they have said this, numerous times - ALL the mechanics in the settings books are for EVERY setting, NOT just the one they appear in. So if the FRPG gets a Swordsage class, then thats the Swordsage class for EVERYONE. What that means is that we FR fans will HAVE TO buy Eberron books, just to get the 'core' rules inside of them. Pretty sneaky, eh?
#103 naex Jul 28, 2008 22:48:32	However - and they have said this, numerous times - ALL the mechanics in the settings books are for EVERY setting, NOT just the one they appear in. So if the FRPG gets a Swordsage class, then thats the Swordsage class for EVERYONE. What that means is that we FR fans will HAVE TO buy Eberron books, just to get the 'core' rules inside of them. Pretty sneaky, eh? Yes, but if FR is a guide, you will only have to buy the player's guide to get the nice crunchy bits, and most of the rest will be DDI stuff. Campaign Setting will probably be mostly fluff.
#104 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 22:50:43	I think what they plan on doing is adding very cool gaming stuff that is very "crunchy" in the Setting books that will attract "core only" people. This means fun things that used to be in a "Complete" book will only be attainable through a Setting book. This plan is so they can sell more books but also try and hook some people who may not want to pick up a "dirty" Setting book. It will (IMO) work on the $$ side of things but it will probably only draw in a few new fans of any of the settings. -Right. Yes, yes, yes, I know. This already happens, though. Eberron has those Shifters, and Warforged, and tons of feats, spells, items, and so on. All that aside, never once have I thought about buying the Eberron Campaign Guide because of a specific feat or two, or a few spells, or for Warforged stats. I have some Warforged-like things in my own setting, but I used stats for a monster found in the MM2 for them, in lieu of Warforged stats, which would fit decently as well. I'm not going to spend $29.99-$40.00 for one or two things. -This is the point I am making. Plus Dragons of Eberron is a 3E book and had a different design goal. It had more fluff than anything and that fluff was Eberron geared. -Any other Eberron book works the same way. RoE. ECG. Whichever. The song remains the same. In your own words, things in those books had information that was "Eberron geared". If I'm not interested in Eberron, even in the 4e era, I'm not going to buy those books, because they are "Eberron geared". Well, as I've said before, LK is actually a player in an FR game--the same one I'm in. -Right, right, right. You're the only reason I make the trek. ;)
#105 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 22:52:06	However - and they have said this, numerous times - ALL the mechanics in the settings books are for EVERY setting, NOT just the one they appear in. So if the FRPG gets a Swordsage class, then thats the Swordsage class for EVERYONE. What that means is that we FR fans will HAVE TO buy Eberron books, just to get the 'core' rules inside of them. Pretty sneaky, eh? -As I said, this is already done. Certain feats are only in certain books, certain spells, certain PrCs, or races, or whatever else. People aren't going to buy a $29.99-$40.00 book for, say 1 class.
#106 naex Jul 28, 2008 22:54:36	-As I said, this is already done. Certain feats are only in certain books, certain spells, certain PrCs, or races, or whatever else. People aren't going to buy a $29.99-$40.00 book for, say 1 class. Wanna bet? People over in the other forums are salivating to get their hands on the swordmage even if they have no real interest in the realms. There are going to be a lot of copies sold just for the one class.
#107 18DELTA Jul 28, 2008 22:57:08	Yes, but if FR is a guide, you will only have to buy the player's guide to get the nice crunchy bits, and most of the rest will be DDI stuff. Campaign Setting will probably be mostly fluff. -I don't know...going by the 'Excerpts'. I would rather pay $10 a month for a possible BRJ article. :D -Not only does the Fluff leave me 'MEH'. I also despise the maps WotC is trying to cram down my throat. 18DELTA
#108 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 23:03:38	Wanna bet? -Yes, yes I do. People over in the other forums are salivating to get their hands on the swordmage even if they have no real interest in the realms. There are going to be a lot of copies sold just for the one class. -And, let me remind you of something some people love to say over and over and over: The boards community are indicative of the "hardcore" fanbase, and not the general fanbase.
#109 naex Jul 28, 2008 23:10:41	-And, let me remind you of something some people love to say over and over and over: The boards community are indicative of the "hardcore" fanbase, and not the general fanbase. I admit I have said it myself... :| However if the Swordmage is the only Arcane Defender class, there are going to be a lot of non-realms people buying the FRPG for that one class, or a lot of copies made of those few pages.
#110 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 23:22:52	Which was all part of their 'evil' plan. If everything is for everybody, you force everyone to buy everything, upping your profit margins with minimal effort. One wonders, exaclty, what some of these guys really do all day long? -I don't know...going by the 'Excerpts'. I would rather pay $10 a month for a possible BRJ article. :D Its $15 a month - the same price as for a World of Warcraft account. And if you have to make a choice, trust me, the WoW account is the more worth it of the two. ;)
#111 lord_karsus Jul 28, 2008 23:27:01	I admit I have said it myself... :| However if the Swordmage is the only Arcane Defender class, there are going to be a lot of non-realms people buying the FRPG for that one class, or a lot of copies made of those few pages. -This. Being as that I don't own the DMG 3.5, for example, I have no shame in saying that I photocopied the PrCs in that book that weren't in the DMG 3.0 from someone, and that I just stuffed those new "pages" in-between the cover and first page, where they stick out.
#112 18DELTA Jul 28, 2008 23:32:18	Which was all part of their 'evil' plan. If everything is for everybody, you force everyone to buy everything, upping your profit margins with minimal effort. One wonders, exaclty, what some of these guys really do all day long? Its $15 a month - the same price as for a World of Warcraft account. And if you have to make a choice, trust me, the WoW account is the more worth it of the two. ;) - -I thought it would be $10 a month for a year subscription. -That way I could pay WotC $120 a year for 3 maybe 4 BRJ FR Articles. :D -Or I could spend $30 something bucks, for a bland book with 'sucky' maps, 'uninspired' lore. -Tell me which one is the rip-off. :P -Not BRJ's articles.:D 18DELTA :embarrass
#113 markustay63 Jul 28, 2008 23:47:16	If there's a yearly price, I haven't heard about it (but you may be right). Anyhow, RB didn't sound very optimistic about a lot of FR articles coming out for the DDi - I think they were hoping for the LFR leads to produce all that material for free (so they would have more time to golf?), but I have a feeling their living campaign isn't getting off to such a great start. let's put it this way - I was approached about being a lead. Knowing how I feel about 4e FR, I think that was pretty desperate. Of course, it could just be the LFR guys have seen the maps and they were hoping I'd make some good ones for them. :P
#114 lord_karsus Jul 31, 2008 21:51:33	Anyhow, RB didn't sound very optimistic about a lot of FR articles coming out for the DDi... -Yeah, well, he isn't in charge of any of that, so he can't give us any types of numbers or even estimations.
#115 Mr_Miscellany Jul 31, 2008 22:52:24	-And, let me remind you of something some people love to say over and over and over: The boards community are indicative of the "hardcore" fanbase, and not the general fanbase. The 4E general community beyond the forums will be all over anything character-related that comes out of 4E FR.
#116 rauric Jul 31, 2008 23:23:32	Which was all part of their 'evil' plan. If everything is for everybody, you force everyone to buy everything, upping your profit margins with minimal effort. One wonders, exaclty, what some of these guys really do all day long? Its $15 a month - the same price as for a World of Warcraft account. And if you have to make a choice, trust me, the WoW account is the more worth it of the two. ;) As someone who has canceled his account in May ( after playing contimously from the start of the game and before in Beta) I am one happy camper. Perhaps I will return after the expansion, but for now my money will go to DDI if they keep making things I can use for my game. WOW has (after 3 years?) become redundant.
#117 rauric Jul 31, 2008 23:29:48	Flavorful yes, but not a lot of meat to sink ones teeth into. Just the bare bones of the setting. My point was that it didn't give you any more to go on then you have now, less in some ways, because there wasn't 20 years of lore to go back to if you had a question, nor was there a nifty Message Board or website to go to to get more. Hmmm, again you are correct. The box was very bare bones, just like the current 4E campaign book will be more than likely. Hmmmm.
#118 Khaelieth Aug 01, 2008 7:06:51	No like
#119 Khaelieth Aug 01, 2008 7:19:04	WoW drivel ;p Take a look through the old Warcraft storylines, a lot of stuff back there, when orcs were evil and sheep were nervous
#120 18DELTA Aug 01, 2008 10:40:31	-Lets get back on topic. 18DELTA
#121 lord_karsus Aug 01, 2008 11:40:56	The 4E general community beyond the forums will be all over anything character-related that comes out of 4E FR. -And, as we all know, the likelihood of that is just as likely as "them" not giving a crap that the X is in the FRCG/FRPG, because they are not paying $29-$40 for three pages in a book.
#122 18DELTA Aug 01, 2008 11:53:06	-Enworld is saying that Swordmage will also be in PHB2. ;) -Now the Eminence... 18DELTA
#123 markustay63 Aug 01, 2008 14:05:03	Repeating info from one source to another, when the page-counts are already skimpy and our lore is already at bare-minimum standards (below actually)? That I CAN NOT abide - if you are going to force people to buy every book that comes out, despite setting, then information should NOT be repeated.
#124 Ra-Tiel Aug 01, 2008 15:55:30	Somehow this went completely under my radar. Anyway, let's talk pictures. ;) [...] -Um...Being as that the book is Races of Eberron, it's not setting neutral. It's an Eberron book. It talks about those specific races in Eberron and such. Anyone can use them, of course, in however method they want to, but that doesn't change the fact that the book is written for the Eberron setting about Eberron races. Show You say Races of Eberron is a book for the Eberron game line? Then why doesn't it look like one? Why does it look like a generic (setting neutral) book?
#125 lord_karsus Aug 01, 2008 16:59:48	-How do the illustrations on the cover change the fact that X of Y is a book written for Y? It doesn't. That's silly. -MT brought up a point, that since the 4e Forgotten Realms books don't have Forgotten Realms logos, they are not actually Forgotten Realms products, as as such, aren't Forgotten Realms canon. This, we know is not true.
#126 Ra-Tiel Aug 01, 2008 17:32:35	-How do the illustrations on the cover change the fact that X of Y is a book written for Y? It doesn't. RoE is not part of the official Eberron product line: Compared to: Q.E.D. You can argue with "written for" and "intended for" as much as you want, it's still wrong. That's silly. You are quick to throw this word around, considering that it's synonymous with daft, dumb, idiotic, and imbecile. -MT brought up a point, that since the 4e Forgotten Realms books don't have Forgotten Realms logos, they are not actually Forgotten Realms products, as as such, aren't Forgotten Realms canon. This, we know is not true. Because a logo is that much more important than the official brand name... Logos and brand names can be used in multiple ways: equally important (think of the three "Adidas" stripes and the name "Adidas") combined into one (think "Coca Cola") used independently from each other (think of the "Audi" rings and the name "Audi") 3E Forgotten Realms was an example for #2, and 4E Forgotten Realms is an example for #3.
#127 markustay63 Aug 01, 2008 17:41:36	Just as Monsters of Faerûn is a Monstrous Compendium (core D&D) supplement, and NOT an FR supplement. ;) They've been moving FR into 'setting neutral' mode for months now - as proven by the Undermountain, Draconimicon, and DotU books - ALL originally written for FR but made Core by the end of 3e. And I made certain assertations concerning this fact months before the 4e announcment, many of which have come to pass. :D However, if Eberron does indeed get a logo in 4e, then it puts the lie to weather FR is indeed the new 'core' or not. - we shall see next year.
#128 Ra-Tiel Aug 01, 2008 17:56:33	Just as Monsters of Faerûn is a Monstrous Compendium (core D&D) supplement, and NOT an FR supplement. ;) Indeed. Thanks for reminding me of this one. It falls into the same place as RoE: it has the name on it, but lacks the distinct layout and the logo, as well as not being catalogued in the official setting product line. They've been moving FR into 'setting neutral' mode for months now - as proven by the Undermountain, Draconimicon, and DotU books - ALL originally written for FR but made Core by the end of 3e. Hmmm... I didn't think of the Draconomicon as a FR splat. I mean, dragons are a staple of almost every DnD setting - detailed information about them hardly deserve it to be placed in a setting specific supplement. And I made certain assertations concerning this fact months before the 4e announcment, many of which have come to pass. :D I think it's been quite clear since the first cover of the FRCG was shown that there would be no unique layout for setting specific books. This has been reinforced by the excerpts we got during the last few weeks. However, if Eberron does indeed get a logo in 4e, then it puts the lie to weather FR is indeed the new 'core' or not. - we shall see next year. Out of curiosity: would it be bad if FR became the 4E core setting?
#129 markustay63 Aug 01, 2008 18:21:20	Yes and No. Its something I speculated at WAY befoe 4e was announced, back when people were just toying with the idea. I thought FR becoming the 'Flagship Setting' (which it has now done, and has even been called thusly by 'official types') would have been great, because that would mean ALL core material could be written directly to it, and everyone else would have to get those "In Eberron" addendums or an article series like Class Chronicles (which was still awsome, BTW). However, I then have to look at the 'glass half empty', and take into account what happened to the last 'core setting'. As an ex-Greyhawk DM, I am saddened about it's forced retirement, but at the same time gladdened it never got this horrific 're-imagining' FR got. So yeah... FR as the Core setting has its positive side, but it also loses a bit of it's distinctivness as a trade-off.
#130 Belorin Aug 01, 2008 18:21:55	I have an NPC I used to use to harass the PCs who is a member of the Cult of Dragons, she recently had raised a venerable black dragon as a dracolich. Maybe I'll update her and have her resist a takeover attempt by the Eminence and have the new PCs step in to settle things down. As soon as they're ready, that is. Bel
#131 markustay63 Aug 01, 2008 18:25:05	Hmph... has anyone already mentioned this scenario? I can see the Eminence trying to dominant the old Cult of the Dragon. Basically, its just one aspect of what they are about, and I can see them automatically considering all Draco-Lich controlled areas as part of their domain (weather the Draco-Liches agree to this or not is another story).
#132 Ra-Tiel Aug 01, 2008 18:36:55	[...] (weather the Draco-Liches agree to this or not is another story). Which in turn could lead to a very interesting plot by itself. An all out open conflict between the dracoliches and the Eminence, spilling into various regions and igniting secondary conflicts.
#133 rauric Aug 01, 2008 20:26:24	Lol. Many people will pick up the book since it is the only way to get the Swrodmage class now. Then in a year they will pick up PH2 also. I am suprised gamers have a tough time greaping this concept. Have you ever really been around gamers? :D
#134 Mr_Miscellany Aug 01, 2008 22:30:17	-And, as we all know, the likelihood of that is just as likely as "them" not giving a crap that the X is in the FRCG/FRPG, because they are not paying $29-$40 for three pages in a book. Just as with the front end 3E FR Sourcebooks that were released early in the lifetime of Third Edition, players will buy the new 4E FR books for the crunchy bits because they're just not going to get much else. We've got a lag of sorts until the PHBII comes out. The likelyhood of people going "either way" over just a few pages isn't the same. ::::::::::::::::::::::: MoF is an FR supplement. ::::::::::::::::::::::: We should do a Realms DM excercise for the Emminence of Araunt. There have got to be like a zillion different encounter scenarios and plots we can right up for these guys.
#135 xhereticx Aug 01, 2008 23:20:42	A bunch of undead statues whose ultimate goal is utter "tomb" domination? I think WoTC can do better than that, though it would be interesting to see some of the side effects of their tomb plundering, they could potential wake up something really nasty if they poked around the wrong areas (like Narfell, one of the areas I think 4e actually made better). The biggest questions I think are. Who really are these guys? Where the hell do they come from? Who leads them? What do they really want with these tombs? Are they just a front for something far more sinister? I mean give me some background or lore hooks here. If you want to inspire a DM to do something interesting along a FR line you have to give him more than just brief summaries and statblocks.
#136 Belorin Aug 02, 2008 2:02:01	Which in turn could lead to a very interesting plot by itself. An all out open conflict between the dracoliches and the Eminence, spilling into various regions and igniting secondary conflicts. My plan exactly! Enter the PCs, "Whot's this 'ere now?" Descision point, attack, the Cult, attack the Eminence or try to negotiate a peaceful settlement (like that would work!). Or ally with one side or the other depending on their motivations. ::get's out MM:: Bel
#137 viktor_von_doom Aug 02, 2008 3:38:30	Actually interested in this, which is shocking cause for the most part I never ever wanna run any thing Forgotten Realms related (Find it more fun to read than to play). Probably gonna play them off as a more Unaligned than evil if anything changes.
#138 colman Aug 02, 2008 6:08:52	I'm going with a link to the Dustmen on Sigil, personally. The EoA believe that to achieve "True Death" - not to be confused with oblivion or hanging around some god's domain for eternity - that a) all undead have to be "freed" from binding b) everyone else has to be freed of life. It's a long term plan, but they're in no hurry at all - in fact, the Spellplague has upset them almost as much as it has upset some posters here: by adding all that new land it has set them back centuries.
#139 rauric Aug 02, 2008 6:42:46	Actually interested in this, which is shocking cause for the most part I never ever wanna run any thing Forgotten Realms related (Find it more fun to read than to play). Probably gonna play them off as a more Unaligned than evil if anything changes. I could see a few random people/undead that belong to this group being evil, but I hope it is mostly unaligned. The evil guys can be the enemies that the DM comes up with. to hassle the PCs.
#140 18DELTA Aug 02, 2008 13:41:37	-They could have a Collection Agency. "You got to pay the toll to move through the crypt". :D -That could be one of the ways they generate cash flow. Have a toll authority! ;) 18DELTA
#141 markustay63 Aug 02, 2008 13:55:09	Yeah - not really seeing a true 'bad' vibe here - I'm planning on playing them off like WoW's Forsaken. Just a bunch of free-willed undead that decided to free their 'brothers' everywhere else. Weather they want to be freed or not. Like any other group, you have your good ones and your bad ones, but for the most part they take a neutral stance. They would stop evil Necromancers from controlling undead, but they would also stop would-be heroes from destroying them.
#142 xhereticx Aug 02, 2008 15:08:29	Yeah - not really seeing a true 'bad' vibe here - I'm planning on playing them off like WoW's Forsaken. Just a bunch of free-willed undead that decided to free their 'brothers' everywhere else. Weather they want to be freed or not. Like any other group, you have your good ones and your bad ones, but for the most part they take a neutral stance. They would stop evil Necromancers from controlling undead, but they would also stop would-be heroes from destroying them. You could always put them as servants of Kelemvor (or Jergal, if he's still around, but I'd say Jergal more likely).
#143 rinonalyrna_fathomlin Aug 04, 2008 13:10:43	I'd agree that this group need not be strictly evil--I like the more neutral take on it.
#144 merrikcale Aug 04, 2008 21:11:54	man, does this concept suck
#145 xhereticx Aug 04, 2008 22:05:52	man, does this concept suck Agreed, however putting them as immortal servants of Jergal does give me some appeal, if only they had a better purpose other than just "claiming" forgotten tombs in some feudal fashion.
#146 GreenKnight Aug 04, 2008 22:51:49	-And, as we all know, the likelihood of that is just as likely as "them" not giving a crap that the X is in the FRCG/FRPG, because they are not paying $29-$40 for three pages in a book. You've never seen players buy a book just so they could gain access to one thing or another? I've known plenty of people who've bought a book just to get their hands on a single class in it, a couple of Feats, certain equipment, and so on. Besides, we're talking about more then just three pages in a book. Classes are about 16 pages, apiece, so the Swordmage will likely take up that much. Then there's two pages for races (with two races). Then add in Feats, Paragon Paths, and the Epic Destiny, along the with multiclass only class. So we're talking about, say, 30 pages worth of stuff.
#147 lord_karsus Aug 05, 2008 12:26:06	Agreed, however putting them as immortal servants of Jergal does give me some appeal... -That wouldn't sit very well with Kelemvor being Jergal's superior and all. You've never seen players buy a book just so they could gain access to one thing or another? -No. I've known plenty of people who've bought a book just to get their hands on a single class in it, a couple of Feats, certain equipment, and so on. -And, I know plenty of people who haven't picked up books that pique their interest, because there isn't enough relevant information for them inside.