The Beastlands
Chult
Damara
Dambrath
Elturgard
Erlkazar
Estagund
Evereska
Evermeet
Halruaa
Hordelands
Lake of Steam
Many Arrows
Moonsea
Murghom
Najara
Okoth
Rashemen
Raurin
Sea of Fallen Stars
Sembia
Tethyr
Thesk
Turmish
Vaasa
Var the Drowned
Velen
Vesperin
While I can see why many of these wouldn't be in a player's guide, others just mystify me. Sure, there's not much player's info from Okoth or Raurin, but why was Sembia omitted? There's no good reason why player background information shouldn't given for Sembia, Rashemen, Thesk, Tethyr, or Damara.
Chult - - mostly antagonist area, only exterior ports
Damara - slightly atagonist, mainly a place good location to fight the warlock knights of vaasa
Dambrath - pretty atagonistic
Elturgard - this could have worked
Erlkazar - very atagonistic
Estagund - could have worked
Evereska - (I think this will have a DDI article)
Evermeet - its a secret, plot element
Halruaa - its fried, no one is from haluaa
Hordelands- antagonist area
Lake of Steam
Many Arrows - antagonist area
Moonsea
Murghom
Najara - antagonist area
Okoth - antagonist area
Rashemen
Raurin
Sea of Fallen Stars
Sembia - kinda blends with Netheril (I think this will have a DDI article)
Tethyr
Thesk
Turmish
Vaasa - antagonist area
Var the Drowned
Velen
Vesperin
did some of them.
My guess is that this has DDI all over it.
We have a winner.
My guess is that this has DDI all over it.
The blurb on the back of the FRPG reads 'It includes information on the many regions where player characters originate....'
But what the book really includes is 'many of the regions' as opposed to 'the many regions..'
If they are putting them in the DDI, then they lied to me on the cover about the contents.
I put a question into the designer's thread (General Discussion? I'm not sure.) about the regions. Hopefully everybody who takes part in this thread will do the same so we can get a response.
Within the beginning of the background section, it states that the section contains descriptions of where adventurers commonly come from. That would preclude some from the list, but it would still leave a lot.
-That said, I do feel that it is in poor form for the FRCG and the FRPG, the two when combined, give the only overview of the current era we'll be seeing, to be missing great deals of information, a lot of it seemingly crucial, or obvious.
-Based on how I understand it, most of those (or, a lot) places are places that are "bad guy" places. Being a "bad guy" is being discouraged.
I get that. That's basically what I meant by "not much player's info". But a lot of the omitted areas are great starting places for PCs. If Thay and Netheril have PC backgrounds, then Sembia and even Vaasa should, let alone Evereska and Damara.
-That said, I do feel that it is in poor form for the FRCG and the FRPG, the two when combined, give the only overview of the current era we'll be seeing, to be missing great deals of information, a lot of it seemingly crucial, or obvious.
That bugs me too.
I'm also a bit mystified about the division of information between the CG and the PC. For example, in the FRCG it's mentioned that the genasi of Akanul were oppressed by a primordial tyrant. You'd think that would be general knowledge, especially for PCs from the region, but the PG says nothing about that.
While I can see why many of these wouldn't be in a player's guide, others just mystify me. Sure, there's not much player's info from Okoth or Raurin, but why was Sembia omitted? There's no good reason why player background information shouldn't given for Sembia, Rashemen, Thesk, Tethyr, or Damara.
I'd bet the answer comes down to "not enough space for everything". Although of course, that doesn't really explain why certain places weren't deemed important enough to have substantial information about them.
They would have had the space had they invested in a few more pages (the book was tiny).
Indeed, but they didn't do that, so...
I'm also a bit mystified about the division of information between the CG and the PC. For example, in the FRCG it's mentioned that the genasi of Akanul were oppressed by a primordial tyrant. You'd think that would be general knowledge, especially for PCs from the region, but the PG says nothing about that.
-There is definitely a big...disjunction in terms of information in the two books. I feel that if they had just combined the two, there would be less disjunction.
-Based on how I understand it, most of those (or, a lot) places are places that are "bad guy" places. Being a "bad guy" is being discouraged.
-That said, I do feel that it is in poor form for the FRCG and the FRPG, the two when combined, give the only overview of the current era we'll be seeing, to be missing great deals of information, a lot of it seemingly crucial, or obvious.
Yet tiefling a core race and warlock a core class...
Seriously, with the new format (larger Fonts and blank pages coupled with lower page-counts), we are getting about 1/5 the info we did with 2e sourcebooks.
WotC products simply aren't worth the paper they are printed on anymore.
Yet tiefling a core race and warlock a core class...
-Yeah...And...? I don't get the reference.
Seriously, with the new format (larger Fonts and blank pages coupled with lower page-counts), we are getting about 1/5 the info we did with 2e sourcebooks.
WotC products simply aren't worth the paper they are printed on anymore.
-Being as that I have it opened, in front of me, for research purposes right now, the FRCS is 320 pages, in total.
Evereska - (I think this will have a DDI article).
For Everska, it is shown on the small map with the Netheril info so I believe any Everska origin characters can use the Netheril region.
Sembia I could see doing that, but evereska... its completely different (though the regional benefit fits still).
I'd bet the answer comes down to "not enough space for everything". Although of course, that doesn't really explain why certain places weren't deemed important enough to have substantial information about them.
The same lazyness of the Developers during previous editions that focused too much on some places while leaving the rest of the setting very undeveloped. They can't escape their weaknesses even on this edition.
The FRCS wasn't a good source for Forgotten Realms information? Is there another book or books I should get? I ordered a few edition 3 books that should be arriving soon.
depends on if you take your FR campaign lore as deeply as someone takes say... Tolkien lore.
Yet tiefling a core race and warlock a core class...
Well, obviously it is hoped that players will choose to be non-evil tieflings and non-evil warlocks.
The same lazyness of the Developers during previous editions that focused too much on some places while leaving the rest of the setting very undeveloped.
You mean the thinking that left whole regions underdeveloped so DMs could develop them on their own?
God forbid the designers ever put the needs of DMs first.
You mean the thinking that left whole regions underdeveloped so DMs could develop them on their own?
God forbid the designers ever put the needs of DMs first.
Because DMs supposedly "need" lore-bereft, underdeveloped regions when they're buying sourcebooks, is that what you're saying? LOL.
Because DMs supposedly "need" lore-bereft, underdeveloped regions when they're buying sourcebooks,
Yup.
Just about anyone who's gamed in the Realms for more than a handful of years knows this was part of the orginal design intent for the Realms, where sections of the setting would be named but otherwise left alone for DMs to develop as they saw fit.
Try again.
Yup.
Just about anyone who's gamed in the Realms for more than a handful of years knows this was part of the orginal design intent for the Realms, where sections of the setting would be named but otherwise left alone for DMs to develop as they saw fit.
Try again.
But what about descriptions of regions that players want their characters to hail from? Not to mention a regional benefit for being from there...
Often, players create their characters independent of the DM and it is nice to have an official source for things like regional benefits so the DM won't be bothered by a half-dozen players, one at a time.
Heck, I’m still waiting for my own copy to come in at my favorite local gaming store.
About the only thing I can say is this is a good opportunity for players to get a word in edgewise with their DMs on possible benefits from as yet “unwritten” regions. Take all you can get, I say.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I apologize for the offensive things said. You are correct, we should be civil. We are just a little frustrated because we thought we were buying this:
The complete guide for building Forgotten Realms characters!
This product includes everything a player needs to create his character for a D&D campaign in the Forgotten Realms setting,
And yet, many of the regions we wished to make characters for were left out. I, for one, feel I was misled.
To where may I voice my objections and ask my questions. I put a question in the designers' thread, but how long should I wait for an answer and whom may I contact if my questions are not answered.
As a note, the post was perfectly civil.
-Yeah the old grey box from 1987 has some undeveloped parts in it. :D I guess Ed and Jeff Grubb are lazy developers and designers too.
-This unfounded bashing (that some posters do and yes I am guilty of it too) of the current WotC crew is getting old folks. Wait a couple of years and we will get a new crew to bash and rake over the fire.
Just wait we will get some new punching bags. 
18DELTA :P
Keep with the criticism, I say.
I'm pretty sure the WizO wasn't talking to you RUMPLESTIX.
WizO_Chaos was just being proactive, I think. Misc and I sometimes get rowdy, and it looked like a friendly reminder to be... friendly.
Keep with the criticism, I say.
Huh... there's something I never thought I'd see you say. Well done, Misc!
I agree. Good criticism is important, and generates thoughtful discussion.
I'm pretty sure the WizO wasn't talking to you RUMPLESTIX.
Keep with the criticism, I say.
-Right on Mr. M!
-RUMPLESTIX, can I call you RUMP for short.
Criticism is ok as long as it's not blatant WotC smashing/bashing/calling them lobotomized monkey dung, well you can get my point. :embarrass CRITICISM IS OK AS LONG AS IT IS CONSTRUCTIVE. Now some of this reactionary OFG The Sky is Falling we dont get 25 different races of Elves, gets old really, really fast. JMHO.18DELTA
In the previous FRPG, they had a charts compiling information from all the regions for players to use. This included languages, regional feats, and bonus equipment. In 4th ed. FRPG they had some player character bonuses listed with each region. Couldn't that have been given for all regions, even those that didn't merit a 2 page description?
Also, I have a problem with the orc section. In 3/3.5 FRCS and FRPG, Thesk was one of the primary locales for orc characters. In the 4th ed. FRCG, Thesk was mentioned as having the largest concentration of orc blooded citizens in the Realms and that its suzerain was a female orc. However, in theFRPG section about where orc-blooded characters may come from, Thesk was completely left out. It seems to me that they deliberately did not mention such an important place regarding orcs in the race description because they did not want people looking for things they left out.
From the list above, I don't see it's omited, so I must assume it is in the book. [SARCASTIC]Hey, as Drizzt himself said, it's still possible to find another good-aligned drow[/SARCASTIC]. So, with the ideas given above as an example:
You can play a drow dark pact warlock from Menzoberranzan, but you can't actually play a human rogue from Sembia?
Where's the classical character concept of a hero that actually comes from a majoritarily non-good or evil area and that background hampers his popularity. This attitude from WotC to decide what is good or evil, or what you can play or not is beginning to annoy me very much.
Valgard I haven't got or seen the FRPG, but from what I see here, something comes to my mind:
MENZOBERRANZAN
From the list above, I don't see it's omited, so I must assume it is in the book. [SARCASTIC]Hey, as Drizzt himself said, it's still possible to find another good-aligned drow[/SARCASTIC]. So, with the ideas given above as an example:
You can play a drow dark pact warlock from Menzoberranzan, but you can't actually play a human rogue from Sembia?
Where's the classical character concept of a hero that actually comes from a majoritarily non-good or evil area and that background hampers his popularity. This attitude from WotC to decide what is good or evil, or what you can play or not is beginning to annoy me very much.
That's just it, Menzoberrazan is NOT included in the FRPG for regional backround benefits, neither are many regions What gives?
Something else, I just noticed.The ghost of eventide has regions listed to choose from to meet the paragon path requirements that aren't in the FRPG: Evereska, Elturgard, and Sembia.
What gives?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. This has DDI marketing all over it.
What better way to sell DDI than retain some of the information that players may feel they need?
There is enough information in the rulebooks to fulfil the "all you need is the books" claim and no more. The rest will be rolled out as "optional" material in the DDI. It is my considered opinion that this is exactly what they are doing.
And if I am right then I consider them to be very clever indeed. It is just a shame that I consider the tactic to be abhorrent.
AS far as I remember Erlkazar was omitted in 3e too. It stopped to exist after 2e.
-It's back now, you know.
-I feel bad for those people living there.
once again... that city is meant for baddies, thats the idea behind the FRPG, they don't want players to have juicy details available to them.
once again... that city is meant for baddies, thats the idea behind the FRPG, they don't want players to have juicy details available to them.
Where are Drow PCs suppose to be from then? I'm genuinely curious as I am a bit worried about when one of my players will want to play a Drow and how to incorporate it into the world.
-Yeah...And...? I don't get the reference..
Tiefling = demonblood = traditionaly evil race
warlock = pacts with devils and other nasty stuff = traditionaly evil class
Just seems a bit mixed message to me.. unless they want CG drow type stuff..
Often people like to make things new. After making 10 000 000 elves from Myth Drannor, Everska, and Evermeet they might like to do something like be from Gwynneth. All they had to do was mention it.
For that matter, what about the hidden city, Rh..., or whatever, you can't expect us orc fans to pat too much attention to spelling. It would be cool to play an Eladrin from there or perhaps a drow. But no!
Sorry for my rant. There have been so many things I expected and didn't get.....
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Does anybody else find it funny that WizO_Chaos is calling for order?
Anyway, I agree with those that think it's better to leave some room for the DMs to integrate their own creations in the world. Nobody is saying you can't pick a region not in the FRPG and add your own character backgrounds and regional benefits.
Where are Drow PCs suppose to be from then? I'm genuinely curious as I am a bit worried about when one of my players will want to play a Drow and how to incorporate it into the world.
Some drow do come from and live in other places.
There were Eilistraee worshipping drow in Cormanthyr and the Dalelands, some of the good drow or their descendants are likely still left.
My own half-drow PC comes from a non-evil family of crinti (which include some drow) that is based in East Rift (house Huruafair). It's for use in LFR, but it is an example of how to incorproate drow without assuming every single one of them fled Menzoberranzan.
As to the PP requirements: you can obviously be from another region without having player guide material. It just requires a bit more effort from your DM.
That said, it would have bene better had they left out areas such as Luskan, Netheril, or Thay from the player guide, and replaced them with Evereska, Elturgard or Vesperin as areas where it is more likely player characters (the good guys, in general) come from.
Does anybody else find it funny that WizO_Choas is calling for order?
Anyway, I agree with those that think it's better to leave some room for the DMs to integrate their own creations in the world. Nobody is saying you can't pick a region not in the FRPG and add your own character backgrounds and regional benefits.
I have to disagree, at least in part. The FRPG is for the players to use. If my DM is not going to let me use what is in the books, why should I buy it. If the things are left out, then I'm going to have to spend my time and his time getting approval for the things I want. Then, he would be annoyed if I changed my mind.
What do I agree with? The WizO statement was hilarious.
A heroic character fleeing the darkness of her upbringing and family is an oft used concept in D&D, both by players and in novels. It is ironic I find that this is a simpler background story to craft as a human than a drow with the material at hand. Drow though more surface and PC friendly now are a race this concept is almost standard in.
Finally having a chance to flip through the book three regions specifically stand out by the descriptions as a Drow's simplest regional choice. Luskan as a home to exiles from throughout the Realms and a evil murderous place in general calls out. Waterdeep being the cosmopolitan city that it is also has room for a small drow population. Finally there is the Vilhon Reach, sparsely populated by unspecified yet hardy and wary peoples. Players of older lore will know that area would be humans and Elves of the Chondalwood, but I did not see anything that specified that.
Again, despite being a simplified reset of knowledge players with experience in the older lore will know that Cormanthyr, Luarar (drow sneaking north from the High Forest), and Thay are all places that house drow with a more fitted potential background that matches the concepts most often used for drow. There are even further places, but again, this requires digging through older lore obscure or not. Being all that a player needs the FRPG should present enough basic information. As is, the FRPG doesn't specifically present any suggested regions for a drow to use as a homeland. All other player races currently available are presented with such suggestions and even a few other races such as Kenku.
Being all that a player needs the FRPG should present enough basic information. As is, the FRPG doesn't specifically present any suggested regions for a drow to use as a homeland. All other player races currently available are presented with such suggestions and even a few other races such as Kenku.
Indeed, I would agree with this statement. It didn't pass unnoticed to me that the example Drow characters in the FRPG made no mention of locational origins...
For the record, I don't disagree with drawing a "DM friendly line" between antagonist locations and homelands. I just think that drawing that line and not including places like Everska (generally) and more specifically not including the Drow cities when you introduce the Drow Race (mechanically speaking) is lunacy.
Where are Drow PCs suppose to be from then? I'm genuinely curious as I am a bit worried about when one of my players will want to play a Drow and how to incorporate it into the world.
-Anywhere? I recall from one of the preview articles that featured the Drow that Drow were now somewhat common on the surface, and that they were somewhat common in metropolitan centers. They're still watched, but the "shock" is that they appear, to begin with.
Where are Drow PCs suppose to be from then? I'm genuinely curious as I am a bit worried about when one of my players will want to play a Drow and how to incorporate it into the world.
Agreed, as a guy who likes to play a drow PC, I'm left to my own devices and the DM's approval for any character I create until something official comes along. The FRPG could have certainly included a chart listing every regional bonus and not "spilled the beans" as it were.
Although that gives me an idea for a good thread "The Book of Abeir Toril; Backgrounds & Regional Benefits"
Regions may include neighboring kingdoms that share geographical and/or cultural similiarities. Regions not listed either give no special benefit or are left up to the DM to determine what benefit they grant.
All the drow underdark cities (and the Underdark in general) could probably have just been a single region but maybe they assume the races that hail from them already have a 'regional benefit' built in like darkvision.
They could have avoided some of this with a disclaimer of:
Regions may include neighboring kingdoms that share geographical and/or cultural similiarities. Regions not listed either give no special benefit or are left up to the DM to determine what benefit they grant.
All the drow underdark cities (and the Underdark in general) could probably have just been a single region but maybe they assume the races that hail from them already have a 'regional benefit' built in like darkvision.
If you put it that way it just doesn't sound like this:
The complete guide for building Forgotten Realms characters!
(Now if I can just figure out some more of this computer stuff...enter?...)
It's been stated a few times that a lot of the missing areas are adversarial areas. Personally I don't find that reason either satisfying or compelling. Think of it from the point of view of PC's, areas where evil dominates is going to produce heroes to fight that darkness. And the point raised that if they had room for Thay, then they should have had room for other so-called adversarial lands is a good one.
I'm greatly disapointed that my RPGA Orcish Paladin of Kelemvor can't be from Vaasa like I originally planned.
With any luck, some will be in Dragon before long. Rich Baker hinted at it in his respose to my question on missing regions in the ask the desgner's thread
FRPG, 160 pages, $29.95
The way I see it, the whole, "we didn't have enough space for it, maybe you'll see it in a DDI Article (that we have to pay for)", just doesn't cut it. That's 64 pages they had to 'play with' and still be at the $29.95 price range.
Unless of course this is like 3.5, where the FR books are just more expensive compared to the 'Core' books. I have 'Core' in quotes because supposedly the reason for the FR logo not being on the front covers of 4e FR is because they don't want those unfamiliar with the Realms not to pick it up. Thus, "hey, it's another D&D book, cool I'll pick it up." Which doesn't jive with me 'cuz FR is dang popular with all the video games and novels, you'd think the FR logo would attract more attention then the D&D one, or at the very least BOTH seen on the cover would increase sales. I mean , the FR logo IS on the back for beep's sake! :raincloud
I mean hey, if the economy didn't suck, I'd be like, "yeah, the FR people put out good stuff, so I'm willing to spend extra to represent". But, the economy DOES suck, so that's not happening. Besides, if WotC is worried about selling campaign setting/related products, wouldn't it make more sense if it was cheaper. I mean, the same price is fine, but 64 pages less for the same price is just rediculous IMHO!
Sorry about that, first rant ever on these boards, can you tell I'm just a wee bit miffed? Especially since so much was obviously left out. I mean hey, if all we're getting is three books/setting, wouldn't it make MUCh more sense to cram as much in as possible?
Once again, I love the 4E material, just have a problem with what's NOT included!
-Teo
Adventurer's Vault, 224 pages, $29.95
FRPG, 160 pages, $29.95
As a completely generic book that will be purchased by a much larger percentage of the player base, Adventurer's Vault had a higher print run, which reduces the per-unit cost (and allows them to pass along the savings). It's also why the PHB is bigger than the other two core books, but costs the same (as it's the #1 seller in every edition of D&D).
Unless of course this is like 3.5, where the FR books are just more expensive compared to the 'Core' books.
Print runs. When you create products for a niche of your total player base, you sell far less copies of that product.
Which doesn't jive with me 'cuz FR is dang popular with all the video games and novels, you'd think the FR logo would attract more attention then the D&D one,
Not if you pay attention to the fact that FR is just a niche of D&D.
Besides, if WotC is worried about selling campaign setting/related products, wouldn't it make more sense if it was cheaper. I mean, the same price is fine, but 64 pages less for the same price is just rediculous IMHO!
Reducing the price on a book that will sell far less copies is a way to kill off your already thin profit margin.
Adventurer's Vault, 224 pages, $29.95
FRPG, 160 pages, $29.95
The way I see it, the whole, "we didn't have enough space for it, maybe you'll see it in a DDI Article (that we have to pay for)", just doesn't cut it. That's 64 pages they had to 'play with' and still be at the $29.95 price range.
I thought that DDI was different from Dragon where Mr. Baker said there could be articles? Was I mistaken?
Why would I have to pay for more when I paid for
The complete guide for building Forgotten Realms characters!
Why did Wizards of the Coast lie to me?
Why did Wizards of the Coast lie to me?
Why did Wizards of the Coast lie to me?
Why did Wizards of the Coast lie to me?
Why did Wizards of the Coast lie to me?
If some WizO or other thinks to say something to me, I suggest they have an answer!
"...present(s) eveything a Dunegons & Dragons player needs to create and run a character in the most recent incarnation..."
Notice "a character". It doesn't say that it will tell you what you want it to i.e. the complete guide to build any character you could want to run in the Realms. It will tell you what it wants to. You can run a character with the information in the book, a Gensai Swordmage probably.
Hence my suggestion about the letter vs. spirit of the phrase. Although, to my mind it would be almost impossible for it to actually carry that one off to everyone's satisfaction. It is all a compromise, sir. Sorry.
Sorry Rumplestix, they will "letter of" this one. The back cover of the FRPG says that it will :
"...present(s) eveything a Dunegons & Dragons player needs to create and run a character in the most recent incarnation..."
Notice "a character". It doesn't say that it will tell you what you want it to i.e. the complete guide to build any character you could want to run in the Realms. It will tell you what it wants to. You can run a character with the information in the book, a Gensai Swordmage probably.
Hence my suggestion about the letter vs. spirit of the phrase. Although, to my mind it would be almost impossible for it to actually carry that one off to everyone's satisfaction. It is all a compromise, sir. Sorry.
I cut and pasted that line from the D&D homepage preview of the FRPG
I cut and pasted that line from the D&D homepage preview of the FRPG
And I copied mine (with bad spelling included by me at no extra cost) from the back of the FRPG itself. it will always be claimed that the one on the product is definitive.
And I copied mine (with bad spelling included by me at no extra cost) from the back of the FRPG itself. it will always be claimed that the one on the product is definitive.
So, if....
Never mind.
My point is that since it was advertised as being complete on the D&D web-site, then if the D&D web-site offers the FRPG's missing information, it shouldn't be only for those who pay for DDI.
So, if....
Never mind.
My point is that since it was advertised as being complete on the D&D web-site, then if the D&D web-site offers the FRPG's missing information, it shouldn't be only for those who pay for DDI.
Oh I agree with you. I was just pointing out that it isn't going to happen that way ;).
Dragon and dungeon are a small part of DDI (which has a monthly fee ~$15)
It will have a monthly fee, sometime in October. As of now, it's still free.
-Hakuna Matatta. You may need it.
Part of my brain says that is probably an elvish saying from one of the books... The other half is drawing a blank.
Part of my brain says that is probably an elvish saying from one of the books... The other half is drawing a blank.
The Lion King... Disney.
Is it sad that I can still remember the lyrics to that song?
Part of my brain says that is probably an elvish saying from one of the books... The other half is drawing a blank.
-That made me chuckle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakuna_Matata_(song)
As I've always said, whether you are laughing with me or at me (usually the latter...), I'm always good for entertainment.
(The Rumplestix carefully slips into a darkened section of the heavy overgrowth.)
The Lion King... Disney.
Is it sad that I can still remember the lyrics to that song?
No.
As for what they advertised it does fit the letter and I think even the intent. The fact that they left regions out was a design decision. Some places may not exist, others may not have a regional benefit (sucks for a min-maxer but makes sense in an RP way since not every place has some sort of unique culture or geography that sets its people apart significantly from others in a way that affects game mechanics), and others may be a different 'nation' but be close enough to a neighbor to be paired with them.
The other option is that they just couldn't come up with benefits for some regions in time, plus it seems they left out regions that RPGA's FR campaign isn't allowing players to come from and that unfortunately had something to do with it. I've noticed a push from certain parts of WotC to emphasize the RPGA, sometimes the expense of the players who aren't part of it.