But I've enjoyed playing in the post-4e realms the one time I did LFR. Is there anything optimistic to say about it? Or at least hopeful?
Seriously though, if this ends up being baiting or anything, please shut this down. I felt kinda weird asking, but I do want honest, but optimistic opinions of the realms. The people I game with have nothing but negative things to say about 4e and it would help this fan if I got some positive stuff too.
I don't see a problem with using 4th edition rules in the 3.5 setting if that's what people want to do; or vice-versa.
-Cal
I much prefer it actually; but I have rather lost interest in the setting over time and it fails to generate the excitement and interest I see from people when I tell them I am even considering running a game in Eberron (plus the EPG/ECG sound like better books from what I understand to boot; looks like they learned a few lessons). So I won't be running realms games beyond one after next month.
Very well said. I believe my next game will probably be in Eberron as well. Course when the 2010 setting comes out I'll prolly be running a game there as well. I agree though, people just don't get that excitement they used to when FR is mentioned as the setting.
plus the EPG/ECG sound like better books from what I understand to boot; looks like they learned a few lessons).
That was the same exact situation last edition apparently.
I find Eberron to be much more interesting and inspiring as a DM. Too bad my players don't feel the same way.
For me, I've found that time has dulled somewhat my strong negative feelings of the 4E Realms. I find however, and this may just be becuase I'm older now and have less time and money, but I'm not that interested in getting novels and reading them anymore. Not FR novels anyway, although I do really want to try some of Mr. Baker's work becuase I really appreciate his relationship with the fans.
Like any game really, with a good DM and gaming group, anything can be fun really. There's still aot of good stuff about the Realms, even its 4E incarnation. I just wish they had been more respectful of the fans and certain aspects of the setting and not nuked it just for the newbies.
If it excites you, I'd say go for it. Jump in and have fun.
FR has always sucked, but I like it better now than before. I can't think of anything they have changed that isn't an improvement over before. Well, maybe spellscars, but I don't think they are bad…just…meh.
I find Eberron to be much more interesting and inspiring as a DM. Too bad my players don't feel the same way.
Run an Eberron game in the Realms. They won't know what hit them. There is nothing you can do in Eberron that you can't do in the Realms with minimal adaptation. The vice versa is probably true, but it's probably still easier to do Eberron into FR. This way you can enjoy it more (cause you make it sound like FR kicked your dog and urinated in your coke).
There is nothing you can do in Eberron that you can't do in the Realms with minimal adaptation.
Eberron seems to have more widesprad usage of magitech and much of the theme/feel is entirely different. For example things like the lightning rail in Eberron. Some of the things in Eberron would work in FR straight off like the Mournland among other aspects. But the problem is the reasons for these things in FR are really rather silly and have a known direct explanation. In Eberron equivalently; nobody knows what caused the Mourning. Let alone that it was the culmination of the God of magic being completely stupid.
The best advantage about Eberron and what makes me really like it, now I have put effort into becoming more familiar with it, is Eberron lacks the stupidity involving Gods acting like especially dumb NPCs that FR has. In fact nobody is even sure if they are even real to begin with; which makes it a refreshing change of pace.
I honestly don't mean this to be flameing, baiting, or trolling. I'm honestly curious to know if anybody has started to put up with, accept, or actually enjoys the status of the Realms now? I wonder because... well I'm okay with it. Some things bug me, like a few of my favorite characters are dust, along with some of my favorite god/goddesses, and it seems a bit much to me that they 'nuked' the realms just because they wanted to.
But I've enjoyed playing in the post-4e realms the one time I did LFR. Is there anything optimistic to say about it? Or at least hopeful?
Seriously though, if this ends up being baiting or anything, please shut this down. I felt kinda weird asking, but I do want honest, but optimistic opinions of the realms. The people I game with have nothing but negative things to say about 4e and it would help this fan if I got some positive stuff too.
As long as they write good fiction for the universe I will always love the Realms. Now do I like the new fiction for the 4E Realms? For the most part yes....for now. But they need to start tying in old FR more deeply into these novels so I can make more of a connection to what I knew and loved. Blackstaff and Plague of Spells naturally have that and I loved them both, Restless Shore is kind of lacking in the history and I am finding it harder to read.
Eberron seems to have more widesprad usage of magitech and much of the theme/feel is entirely different. For example things like the lightning rail in Eberron. Some of the things in Eberron would work in FR straight off like the Mournland among other aspects. But the problem is the reasons for these things in FR are really rather silly and have a known direct explanation. In Eberron equivalently; nobody knows what caused the Mourning. Let alone that it was the culmination of the God of magic being completely stupid.
The best advantage about Eberron and what makes me really like it, now I have put effort into becoming more familiar with it, is Eberron lacks the stupidity involving Gods acting like especially dumb NPCs that FR has. In fact nobody is even sure if they are even real to begin with; which makes it a refreshing change of pace.
Well, I did say minimal adaptation. Rarely is anything a simple drag and drop, even elements designed for the setting.
Check the link in my sig, it's a sorely incomplete list of everyday magic in the Realms. That so called "magitech." The gap is not as wide as most make it out to be. A lot of things players take for granted in real life, Eberron attributes to magitech, the Realms just doesn't mention either way. Replacing a street lamp with a continual flame is not that big of a deal, especially since FR already has examples of that and much more. Seriously, don't keep thinking of FR as dark ages with starving dirt farmers and unwashed, uncouth masses. FR is very "renaissance" in vibe, in many instances even more advanced. Much of FR is very cosmopolitan.
I was under the impression that the Lightning Rail is not a vital part of the setting. It's just a aspect for flavor and convenience. A lightning rail in FR is possible, depending on how you want to adapt it.
As for the gods, simply minimize their role. Failing that, FR's pantheon is a complex crisscross of alliances, rivalries and subterfuge. Gods have granted spells under different names or caused complications in unforeseen ways. Nothing the mortals of the Realms knows about the gods is absolute. Yes, technically not even if they are real. Reference the 4E retcon of some gods into one, such as Selune and Sehanine. There are enough contradictions and mysterious about the gods that makes one question what they actually are, if anything at all.
You could even say that the previous instances of the gods in published works could be anything from rival pretenders, crazed but potent mortal braggarts, a wayward godling, or a tall tale. It's up to you.
The same goes for the reasons for things. Whatever event reported in the sourcebooks is just that a report from some source, usually a mundane, mortal source, prone to distortion, lying, bias, weak memory, duress or false recall. This is just for the most blatant things you find difficult to work with. Most of the Realms doesn't need it.
As for ambiguous alignment. FR was bending and even breaking alignment rules since before 3e or 4e, before Eberron was a twinkle in Keith's eye. Aside from that, nothing keeps Eberron alignment rules (or lack thereof) from working in the Realms. There are numerous instances of good doing bad and bad doing good (Elminster, metallic dragons, drow, orcs and orogs, and Szass Tam included).
Now its either Eberron or Golarion now. :D
Looking at the EPG, made me mad, better maps, better everything. I will read Realms novels, just for a good story. Rest in Peace Forgotten Realms, Rest in Peace.
its still to early and wotc waited to long to start the FR articles in dragon and dungeon monthly.
do I like though, no it lost some magic. ask me again in a years time
mind you I tend to like castlemourn and golarion a bit better.
mind you I still hate the vancian spell casting system, it is more of a crutch with out a spell point system to go with.
oh and you guys who like eberron better ore likely to be more political minded and ejoy the intrigue a bir more that myself and others.
when eberrsux first came out and I looked in its campaig setting that was the impression I got from it.
Eberron seems to have more widesprad usage of magitech and much of the theme/feel is entirely different. For example things like the lightning rail in Eberron.
Ironically, the two or three regions where this could have most naturally happened - Lantan and Haalrua - didn't really fare that well in the transition to 4E. I'm not sure... maybe Imaskar could have some of that, they definitely have the magical skill and knowledge to pull it off. With the amount of information given on them in the FRPG, who's to say they don't have any of that?
As for theme and feel - I have not played any Eberron game, but from reading the ECS I suppose you may be right. Then again, theme and feel is something unique for each DM and even each game - while the setting may help, it is in no way necessary.
To keep it more optimistic ... The elevation of Myth Nantar was a good idea, also the changes in Vaasa, reducing the size of Anauroch, the increased appearance of fey, Sarifal, Elturgard, Elfharrow (Athasian, tough I liked old Misty Vale, overall some changes in the geographical monotony of Shaar is not bad), the slums of Baldurs Gate (adds more intrigue, locals vs. newcomers), Zhents no longer being the army of Bane, changes around Azulduth, looks better with all that lakes down there, Simbarchs in Aglarond instead of the Simbul, the mad sage Elminster, no more CR 30 NPCs with complete stats taking space (I miss the short stats tough, DMs need to have some sense about the relations of power, 2e FRCS was pretty good with the NPCs in this matter).
The changes in Calimshan are partially good, with more genasi, I like less human-centric worlds, but it was done at the expense of a well developed culture. They could have just make the ''genie gene'' awaken in more people. The introduction of shifters was odd, why not something involving the plots of Malar and Selune or the People of the Black Blood, makes more sense than destroying Dambrath.
And I never was a fan of every race having its own pantheon, Golarion is better here, e.g. elves have one or two exclusively elven gods and the rest they share, so the god changes weren't an utter failure. I like that there are no divine ranks now, but there are no independent demigods, the exarch idea was pretty bad. Deneir and Oghma, Jergal and Kelemvor, yea that's fine but not for many others.
As for FR gods being stupid, in numerous mythologies of Earth gods act stupid, FR is based on that. I've always taken the Athar like view on them, they are powerful but it's uncertain and unlikely that they are divine. Eberron is better in one aspect, in FR gods are behind everything while Eberron has a greater variety with the Undying Court, the Silver Flame, the Inspired, the Blood of Vol etc.
Other than that the whole ''finally the adventurers are the center of attention'' concept is riduculous, cause they always were. People somehow never realized that the stories about high level NPCs were there so they can experience them directly, taking their place. And magitech, FR is high, I mean really high magic setting, magic is around every corner, if you can't imagine what that implies in normal, everyday life there, then try harder. FR just doesn't brag about it. Tough we always need more examples of simple, practical uses of magic.
Personally I won't switch the campaign to another setting as long as I think that its basic ''skeleton'' (e.g. Eberron's Five Nations) is better than Faerun's (Silverymoon – Waterdeep – Iriaebor – Cormyr – Westgate – Dalelands – Zhentil Keep – Thay). The players should have the best options available all the time. Ravenloft or Dark Sun style game can be easily run in the Realms. Eberron and Golarion are full of nice importable ideas, but that is all.
We don't get options for evil player characters or NPC's anymore. And we don't learn anything about the cool stuff that happened like the return of Myth Drannor and the Srinshee.
I figure Ed's next big novel deal may involve Abeir somehow.
when eberrsux first came out and I looked in its campaig setting that was the impression I got from it.
As to the OP's question: I like the new Realms. I'm not sure I like them better than the old, but I definitely feel that the sweeping changes made accomplished their purpose. The crushing weight of all those years of canon has been lifted, for many.
I like the return of Myth Drannor and Netheril (in a new form). I realize both were under way in 3E, but each state now has a century under its belt and can truly be said to have returned. I like the more open nature of Evereska, and I like the disappearance of Evermeet. I guess there are many changes that I really enjoy.
I still prefer Eberron (Eberrsux, to some :P ) and my own homebrew setting to FR, but it is a good setting.
The Realms I most prefer is the Realms of my own work, which resembles the canonical Realms in every respect I like best, and eschews those aspects that don't do it for me.
That may sound shocking (that there are aspects I as an author don't care for), but it's really not at all controversial--I guarantee you no one has ever liked *every* aspect of *every* edition of the Realms. It's just too large and broad in its scope, meant to appeal to everyone at least in some respect.
One shouldn't expect any particular version of the Realms to please in every aspect.
Cheers
Check the link in my sig, it's a sorely incomplete list of everyday magic in the Realms. That so called "magitech."
Reading what Eberron books I have they present this far better than FR. It's more logically designed and added to the world than what you see in FR. Eberron also takes this concept a lot further than FR, with things like flying airships and the lightning rail being particularly prominent and common examples. FR has places that are like it; but they are exceptions and not norms in FR.
So Eberron in many ways logically and more fully adds the effects of magic to its world than FR from what I understand of Eberron thus far (I have only really begun reading about the setting).
I was under the impression that the Lightning Rail is not a vital part of the setting.
You know, having read about Eberron and started digging into it as a setting if you can't see how the lightning rail would have a massive and dramatic influence on the world...
Actually here is another way of thinking about it if I may ask; do you think the transcontinental railway in the US was insignificant?
It's just a aspect for flavor and convenience. A lightning rail in FR is possible, depending on how you want to adapt it.
It's not already there and established in FR. Whereas in Eberron it's a deep and integrated part of the entire setting.
It's also pretty important in terms of Eberrons history from what I've read.
As for the gods, simply minimize their role.
You are aware the current 4E realms are the entire result of FRs in-built "God rot" over numerous years finally making its repercussions on the setting felt? The entire spellplague means the roles of the Gods cannot be minimized in terms of how it affected the setting.
Though in other ways you could view it as a reason for why the Gods might withdraw from the world more (but I see that as being hard to support frankly with how central they are to the settings theme).
Failing that, FR's pantheon is a complex crisscross of alliances, rivalries and subterfuge.
You mean a gigantic bunch of complete grade A idiots?
Let's point out again Mystra got killed by Cyric, whom in any logical pantheon with individuals who weren't total morons would have been dealt with a long time ago. FRs pantheon reminds me more of some terrible Kindergarden than a pantheon of Gods to be rather blunt.
There are enough contradictions and mysterious about the gods that makes one question what they actually are, if anything at all.
If they are actually competent then I agree.
One thing I've never been uphappy about with 4E is killing or removing Gods. Albeit 4E did annoyingly just go with "tiering" Gods instead. Don't get me wrong from the above though, I definitely liked the idea of killing Mystra and such forth as it's an excellent story mechanic for a lot of changes I want to make. I just dislike that it was the equivalent of the three stooges assassinating the Queen of England. It just cemented how incompetent FRs pantheon is and they really have been destroyed by novels making them into high level, but as stupid as possible, NPCs.
It's up to you.
The things here that you've missed is this all requires work from me.
When I could just use Eberron which already does all of the above and better. I don't need to make anything up, it's already a core (and important) part of the setting people aren't sure if Gods exist. Magical tech and the ramifications of widespread magic use are already well detailed and considered in Eberron. Eberron has an entirely different feel to its theme and setting than does FR.
Why would I bother doing a lot of work to "Eberronize" FR when Eberron does it better already?
If I run FR, I run FR because of the aspects about it I like and not because I want to Eberron it.
I guess in the end though I can't be bothered running the realms because I just don't find I want to bother discussing it or anything else anymore (and there is a reason for that). It doesn't get my players excited like Eberron does, it has a host of problems remaining even when many of the things I disliked like the superfriends got cut and the things I do like most about the new setting I've discovered Eberron also does when I read enough about it (the Abolethic Sovereignty; Call of Cthulhu like elements for example).
I also must take a shot at Wizards as well. I am severely disappointed in the fact they basically dropped FR like a gigantic load of crap once the two core books came out. DDI support was slow and where there has been DDI support I think there have only been around a handful of good articles on the realms. A good example of something that really made me start rethinking if I wanted to keep running realms games was the Sharn article. Core Sharns are fantastic, creepy and have plenty of plot hooks/story potential coming from a dead and destroyed universe into others for their own sinister reasons. FR Sharns are some byproduct of a failed Elven defensive ritual. One of these is awesome and the other is extremely lame. But this is getting aside from the point the DDI support for FR was not great and really allowed my enthusiasm to dampen and "move on" (as well as these forums). Maps like that in the Cormyr article and the Moonshaes article are really inspiring; but they've come far too late for me. In addition, the poor quality of the FRPG really got to me and it's arguably the worst 4th edition book I own by a league and a half (but then again, 4E splat books have been excellent). Like comparing the EPG with the FRPG; it's pretty clear that FR suffered heavily for being the first setting out the door (so to speak).
In any event, once my FR games finish I will be moving onto Eberron or other settings. I will finish my current games in FR though; but I just don't feel like returning now.
It's not already there and established in FR. Whereas in Eberron it's a deep and integrated part of the entire setting.
It's also pretty important in terms of Eberrons history from what I've read.
I have wondered about that myself - FR has both its archmages and recently, or at least until recently, its inventors. My explanation for the relative lack in utility magic (at present) is that with the fall of so many great magocracies, and the cataclysmic destruction they tended to end with, the great majority of the people - including many mages in the "less magical lands" - are wary of using magic for many purposes, probably schooled in the inherent danger of using magic for anything like they did in Narfell, Imaskar, Nether. More recent events such as the ToT (which involved a period of dead magic iirc) reinforced the notion of magic being, at least at times, unreliable. That, and the high cost of training and employing magic users (which, again, some richer cultures can easily meet, but many can not) on a regular basis, means that in most cases magic will not be used where mundane methods have a similar chance to succeed. It's not a perfect explanation, but I find it quite believable that many societies of FR will be more careful with using utility magic than those in Eberron, or at least the iconic Eberroni societies - weren't there some dino-riding halflings on one of the continents? I don't know how much magic they will use ;) .
You mean a gigantic bunch of complete grade A idiots?
Let's point out again Mystra got killed by Cyric, whom in any logical pantheon with individuals who weren't total morons would have been dealt with a long time ago. FRs pantheon reminds me more of some terrible Kindergarden than a pantheon of Gods to be rather blunt.
Heh, I admit, at times their behavior leaves a lot to be desired. Then again, the ancient Greek and Mesopotamian deities were a bunch of nitwits at times as well... Not that "their" mortals were much better (Paris, you dumb .... , I am metaphorically looking at you). Anyway, I explain some of the illogical actions FR deities take by viewing of them as being not just masters of their portfolios, but bound by them as well. It's a little like something I remember from a nWoD game - a shark spirit can't be anything else but a shark spirit, even if it wants to, or needs to be in order to survive. Likewise, a deity isn't just a uber-powered NPC, but an incarnation of its portfolios, and has to stick by them no matter what. For example, Bahamut might have the intelligence to conceive of, plan and build a space elevator, but as a deity of nobility it has to act nobly even when it means, more likely than not, being suckered into something dumb, just as Tymora and Beshaba encouraged their clerics to act as reckless thrillseekers even when it wasn't in the clerics' or deities' interest. Likewise Cyric was a freaking psychopath, but that was his job. I can see him being the psychotic maniac that plots the downfall of all existence. It is that he managed to be so freaking successful that annoys me - apparently he and Shar were the personal favourites of whoever was deciding the direction FR was going to take. I never got why Mystra had to die (again) for the 4E system to work - mechanically it wouldn't make any difference, and the fluff could be adapted either way.
Anyway, back to the OP - I find the new Realms vaguely interesting. However, they have very, very little in common with the Realms as I know and like - rather, they are a separate setting loosely based on FR.
4.0 realms did that for me, disgusted me so much that i actually lifted my "setting racist" head up to see what else was on the table. even the novels dissappointed me.
we play points of light 4.0 at our gaming table now, with a separate 3.x game coming to those who played 4.0 and didn't like it. im a player in 4.0 and im enjoying it but i don't see myself dming the realms any time soon for 4.0. so i am dming 3.x realms soon.
WotC did us all a favor by freeing us from our FR 'addiction' - no longer are we shackled by the ultimate and un-equaled setting.
Its was a wake-up call, and many of us should thank WotC for showing us just how bad things could get. Now, as educated consumers, we weigh our options carefully.
And all it cost us was a couple of really bad sourcebooks... I think that was worth the price of the lessons learned.
GOLARION... FR's TRUE successor.
I stand corrected on the Lightning Rail. I just looked up the entry on the Lightning Rail in the ECS 3e and took a good look at the map. I was previously under the incorrect impression that it was a much more limited and novel rail system.
Still, your conclusion that the existence of a lightning rail somehow indicates superior logic in setting design is false. The whole point of the Lightning Rail is to highlight the greatness of Galifar, when the kingdom was a united continent. It was a time when the vast resources and peoples of the kingdom could cooperate to design and produce a wondrous creation. This further illustrates the current situation of Khorvaire, the rival nations will have difficulty trying to recreate something at the scale of the Lightning Rail (though the Houses could probably still operate throughout the nations and have the resources themselves to do so, it would still be harder than under Galifar).
Faerun has no corresponding realm with the resources or reach/need to build a lightning rail system. Those empires that had the means had alternate methods to travel (Netherese used flying cities, Imaskari used portals, Elves also used portals). Likely, those are superior systems of magical transportation. It would be illogical for the Realms as published to have a Lightning Rail system. That does not mean a DM cannot modify the setting with the conditions necessary for the system, which you feel is extra work. That is your choice. The preference for a Lightning Rail as a logical aspect of magic use is also your personal impression.
The mentions of utility magic in the Realms are sufficiently pervasive to rival Eberron (with some exceptions). Do note that the Realms doesn't have great numbers of artifacers and magewrights who are responsible for the widespread usually item-based magic of Eberron. Instead the Realms leans more towards enchantments and other permanent spellcastings on areas or objects, such as the wards and Mythals. Considering the seemingly close etymology of Mythal and Myth Drannor/Nantar/Ondeth/Rhynn/etc. suggest that the Realms style of magic was indeed vital to the peoples living with it when they had it.
Magic in the Realms is also more service based than manufacturing base. FR doesn't have artifacers but it does have regular mages and hedge-wizards. Many spellcasters offer their spellcasting services to those willing to pay for it. Temporary cosmetic enhancement is common; several sources show this. Magical prosthetics are less common but existent, even outside of Darkvision's mention. Home enchantments and magical devices are common amongst those with the means to acquire them.
How is that not logical? There are people with specific skills offering their time and efforts for appropriate compensation. People with enough wealth purchase magical items and services for their personal use. Magic in the Realms is hardly all about big flashy combat effects. Magic is relatively widespread, but the tone is not industrial like Eberron. Do not mistake industrialization as logical, especially since the Realms does not yet have the prerequisite for magical industrialization on the scale of Eberron due the different prevalence of the artifacing crafts.
Regarding the gods, you have displayed much of your personal bias in your response. That is your view on the matter. It is an aspect of the Realms, it is one you seem to despise. I have no real response to that. Your opinion is yours for your reasons. My previous response to you was partly based on my original suggestion to a previous poster in this thread. You made it into an argument by proxy. Running an Eberron style game in the Realms was only a suggestion to the other poster because I implied his group wants to stay in the Realms and he does not. For him, an borrowing Eberron styling for the Realms game he runs may be one of the few options he has. Your situation is different; you say you have a choice.
I will agree that many of the overexposed tales of the gods do not appeal to me any more than they do you. However, I tend to ignore the portrayal of the gods in the novels and go by their more palatable sourcebook descriptions.
I will also agree that WotC should hold the responsibility for the current state of the Realms. They should have probably done a core-setting book to get the format correct before using on of their established franchise in such a still experimental setup.
Their changes for 4E, in particular the pantheon related cause of the Spellplague highlights the problems with the gods in the setting, real or perceived. Their actions further increased the perception of a faulty and silly pantheon. Nothing in previous lore comes close to the slaying of Mystra and the subsequent "punishment" of Cyric or the entire soap opera debacle with Helm's death. Instead of repairing the pantheon as they intended, they made the gods appear far sillier than ever. No matter your view on the Realms, Everyone simply lost out due WotC’s weak design and storytelling in that aspect of the Realms.
Mostly @Aegeri, but to whoever else cares for petty internet arguments.
Coulda sent a PM... just saying...
Coulda sent a PM... just saying...
I don't mean it in any malice. I just felt like his long post deserved a response. I actually shouldn't spend so much time on the forums, especially this week, but whatever, that was fun ... sort of.
The points I made about logical magic use in the Realms are useful in dispelling that weakly support perception of the Realms being some senseless backwater of a setting in terms of taking magic into account.
The second part about the gods is within the topic of this thread. I feel WotC screwed up the Realms even more in the direction they felt it needed fixing in the first place. I actually agree with Aegeri a bit on the silly gods.
I don't mean it in any malice.
I have no idea why on earth you would think I would interpret it in that manner though. Your post is actual fruitful discussion; something this forum has lacked for a long time!
Still, your conclusion that the existence of a lightning rail somehow indicates superior logic in setting design is false.
It is everything taken together as a whole actually; the lightning rail is just a prominent and good example of it. It's basically how it is implemented into daily life and how magic has in a sense replaced science as a way of technological development. This is something that now I have rethought about the concept really appeals to me. Things like magic being used to power printing presses and the creation forges of House Cannith make a good deal of sense. In effect, Eberron considers the effect of magic more widely than FR does. There are also teleportation portals in Eberron, but a lightning rail is a cheaper and more secure (in many ways) way of doing that.
Plus teleportation isn't available to the common man as easily as the lightning rail is. Also, teleportation in FR isn't really all that commonly used as the abundant need for trade caravans show.
Do note that the Realms doesn't have great numbers of artifacers and magewrights who are responsible for the widespread usually item-based magic of Eberron. Instead the Realms leans more towards enchantments and other permanent spellcastings on areas or objects, such as the wards and Mythals.
Certainly, but this isn't emphasised or a core part of the setting currently as it is. This is something that in Eberron influences the entire setting, it's theme and its tone as well.
How is that not logical?
It's just not as logical as the way Eberron has established itself. Again, these things in Eberron are a core and well thought out part of the world; and described. I've been reading the Eberron books through and it's not just an impression, but a reasonable fact that those books really do a great job of explaining the use of magic in the context of Eberrons setting.
The logic is actually there in Eberron. You don't have to speculate or make it up. It's easy enough to add to and similar as well; because it's just a how the world works. This is another thing I like about Eberron (as well as the fact novels aren't canon in that world; a pet hate of mine).
Additionally, things like the lightning rail affect everyone from down to the dirty commoners to the highest ranking noble. Going back to your point about Faerun and teleportation; teleportation is nowhere near as accessible.
Regarding the gods, you have displayed much of your personal bias in your response.
Yes I really do feel now I've been reading Eberron their approach is vastly superior. When you look at an FR book like Unholy and
Show
Szass Tam can apparently quite happily just summon Bane of all damn things and happily "force" him to do things. I mean, WHAT IN THE HELL PEOPLE? COME ON.
As I understand it, they did it in part to make room for new heros, but I always felt that was a great part of the charm of FR- the characters could tread where legends walked- or at least familiar names. The players would recognize references from their favorite books. I remember fondly the reactions of my players when I steered them towards Luskan, which I did intentionally knowing several of them were avid fans of a certain series.
Compounding this, my personal favorite city, Halruaa, was straight out destroyed. It doesn't even get a passing mention as ruins in the player's guide.
Of course, that alone, I could have dealt with. Losing classic gods, I could deal with, but instead of doing things delicately, I'm left with the impression that a sledge hammer was taken to the setting, with shouts of "make way for MY creativity". I know that probably wasn't the case, but it certainly felt that way.
So, really, while I'll still buy the novels, I'm personally going to concentrate more on Eberron, unless our little group decides differently.
Unless, of course, all of this turns out to be Volo having a dream or something. Which would be hilarious.
I have no idea why on earth you would think I would interpret it in that manner though. Your post is actual fruitful discussion; something this forum has lacked for a long time!
That was actually a reply to subsistcyber.
It is everything taken together as a whole actually; the lightning rail is just a prominent and good example of it. It's basically how it is implemented into daily life and how magic has in a sense replaced science as a way of technological development. This is something that now I have rethought about the concept really appeals to me. Things like magic being used to power printing presses and the creation forges of House Cannith make a good deal of sense. In effect, Eberron considers the effect of magic more widely than FR does. There are also teleportation portals in Eberron, but a lightning rail is a cheaper and more secure (in many ways) way of doing that.
Plus teleportation isn't available to the common man as easily as the lightning rail is. Also, teleportation in FR isn't really all that commonly used as the abundant need for trade caravans show.
Certainly, but this isn't emphasised or a core part of the setting currently as it is. This is something that in Eberron influences the entire setting, it's theme and its tone as well.
It's just not as logical as the way Eberron has established itself. Again, these things in Eberron are a core and well thought out part of the world; and described. I've been reading the Eberron books through and it's not just an impression, but a reasonable fact that those books really do a great job of explaining the use of magic in the context of Eberrons setting.
The logic is actually there in Eberron. You don't have to speculate or make it up. It's easy enough to add to and similar as well; because it's just a how the world works. This is another thing I like about Eberron (as well as the fact novels aren't canon in that world; a pet hate of mine).
Additionally, things like the lightning rail affect everyone from down to the dirty commoners to the highest ranking noble. Going back to your point about Faerun and teleportation; teleportation is nowhere near as accessible.
I see Eberron as going for an industrial vibe while FR is still on a pre-industrial, slightly more than renaissance atmosphere. There is nothing wrong with that. It's not illogical, just as it's not illogical to not have trains in 1492. The people just don't have the technology/magic, resources and need to build it yet. Certainly the Realms history has shown that when civilizations had the magical skill and need for it, wondrous things were created (flying cities, portal networks, complex city-wide enchantments, crystal-domed underwater cities, nation-wide climate control, skyship fleets). The conditions in the Realms currently are just not right for the industrialization of magic that leads to the widespread use of infused items (artificer goods) and constructs (lightning rail, skyships, warforged).
I do see that in 3e, the use of magic was not as often mentioned. Older books like the Volo guides mention these things often and in a nonchalant, matter-of-fact, usual-daily-life way. Magic hasn't made it to everyone, but it's far more prevalent than how you're stating it. The last two editions seem to focus more on the political stuff, the returned ancient empires stuff, or the blatant monster-bashing stuff. It's what the designers decided to focus on.
Also, since magic as technology and widespread magic has become Eberron's schtick, I feel FR gets the short end of the staff because authors may shy away from mentioning that sort of information in the Realms. Then we have a widening gap between the settings. FR is percieved as more stereotyped primitive dark ages with illogical magic use in society, while Eberron is continually hailed as some logical, well-designed, cohesive setting.
I feel FR did a good job with using magic in a logical manner given it's culture and development. Consider that magic is called the Art and you get an idea of why magic is the way it is in the Realms and why it's appropriate. It's just that over the years, those aspects were neglected in favor of more flashy, epic adventurer stuff.
I'd hate to repeat myself, but again it's a problem more with how WotC choses to currently present the setting than a fault of the setting itself. Thoughtful designers of Realms material once made magic an integral and logical part of everyday life in the Realms within the logical bounds of Realms society and culture, that much is shown and proven throughout publication. I guess WotC just needs to make that theme more clear through the books. I hope there is enough left of the Realms for them to do so for 5E.
Yes I really do feel now I've been reading Eberron their approach is vastly superior. When you look at an FR book like Unholy andShowSzass Tam can apparently quite happily just summon Bane of all damn things and happily "force" him to do things. I mean, WHAT IN THE HELL PEOPLE? COME ON.
That was actually a reply to subsistcyber.
Oh no, I didn't mean to offend or suggest that the post was in malice. I was joking. Reading both your and Aegeri's posts have been very informational; I just replied to the giant block of text led by the very prominent sign that was interpreted as: Dont read this.