| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Sousinne |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 19:58:32
Hello again since time out of mind, friends. I need your views on a few issues.
The situation is that I am currently between campaigns. I have felt a growing abstinence from the Realms, and would love to get back into it. However, I am not exactly exstatic about the changes made to the Realms, and while some novels written for the 4th edition are more than worthwhile, it's not a setting I want to play in.
So, I sat down and had a think about what I enjoy and what I don't enjoy of what's been written for the Realms. If I am not doing continuity anyway, why not put it at a time period I really like?
I particularly enjoy the Ed- and Grubb-style realms. This means most of 1st and 2nd edition sourcebooks, but apart from Cloak of Shadows, Cormyr, a novel and Stormlight, I never got stuck on Ed's books. People kept complaining about the powerful NPCs of the early realms, but I saw them as something akin to the heart of the setting.
Exceptionally good things are the various Volo writings, his guides and the Dragon guides to the Realms. Oh, and the guide to all things magical. The dungeon crawls, oddly enough for their flavour. The arcane age supplements. The archaic FR series.
There are a good number of things written for 3rd edition, of course, but as I said, much of the heart was gone. I will not comment on 4th.
So, this got me to thinking: Why do I enjoy those things in particular? Why not others? And when did the Realms and I diverge in tastes?
I remember feeling a strong sense of being let down by Thornhold. It was a good book, but it was where the fall of the Harpers began. The events of the Year of the Unstrung Harp followed. After that, it seems, not much improved. Another part might be that during 3rd edition, the perspective was different. Instead of imbuing the setting with mystery, they revealed existing secrets through novels and sourcebooks. Perhaps that's the issue for me.
So, what am I asking you? Well, I have had some ideas.
* A campaign focusing on the Western heartlands (Iriaebor, Asbravn, Berdusk) and the Harpers. While the senior Harper dustup leaves many Harpers disillusioned, there are a good number who see no difference between then and now; the old struggle still needs warriors. They deal with internal strife, relations to wizards in the area, Harper enemies old and new, the various priesthoods, ancient legends and mysteries.
* A far-reaching trading campaign, showing the sights of places like the Shining South, Vaasa and Anauroch. Traveling in a caravan, it's about spreading news, various perspectives on different conflicts, relationships with other travelers, the passage of time and how people change with it.
* A classic tale set in the North, where the heroes explore various famous dungeons, see the effects those places have on their surroundings, meet the frontier mentality of the hardy people there, and get involved in plots hatched in ancient realms of the land such as Ardeep.
Anyone who could help me on this? Have I missed anything about 3rd edition Realms? Is my analysis correct? Which of the above campaigns hold most promise? Can I change anything to improve them?
Another thorny issue is that of rules. I would have a hard time going back to AD&D 2nd edition. Does a 2nd edition fluff campaign change simply due to using 3.5 as a ruleset? |
| 17 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 22:05:43
quote:
Originally posted by rjfras
If you use Firefox, you can get an free add-on "PDF Download" that lets you save webpages into pdf format so they are searchable, copy-paste'able after, etc and are much easier to look at and file then saving the pages as webpages with their needed folders, extra files, etc....
Or you can copy and paste everything to Word.  |
| rjfras |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 20:26:39
If you use Firefox, you can get an free add-on "PDF Download" that lets you save webpages into pdf format so they are searchable, copy-paste'able after, etc and are much easier to look at and file then saving the pages as webpages with their needed folders, extra files, etc.... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 02:07:15
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
You know, it would be nice to see these Realmslore articles combined in a PDF
Yes, it *is* nice to see them combined into a PDF. 
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 21 Jun 2009 : 00:11:28
And for more adventure hooks, check out the Candlekeep Compendium! There are some good ones in there, thinks I.  |
| Dart Ambermoon |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 22:21:13
It would be nice to see most WotC site articles combined in PDFs...but there again I wouldnŽt be sure as to whether one would actually be allowed to post such a PDF if one did it himself. I usually just copy what I want into Word docs and print it out. |
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 20:54:18
You know, it would be nice to see these Realmslore articles combined in a PDF |
| Dart Ambermoon |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 18:15:19
The beauty of your Harper campaign idea is that youŽd be able to immerse your players in the background of it all bit by bit. Another upside is, that Harper biz might drag the PCŽs elsewhere quite quickly ("Now ye, go get that magical thingy out of this here deadly northern dungeon before some dastadly NPC does..." or "This caravan looks more than suspicious...time for you to pose as guards and travel awhile...think of it as unpaid holiays..."), so you could still implement elements of your other ideas that youŽd like to implement.But as Mace already said, it depends a lot on whether your players would be interested in such a campaign.
Some nice Harper tidbits usable as plot hooks (which you could adapt to suit your campaign) can also be found here : http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/rl. See the entries "Storm SilverhandŽs quiter days" by the man himself...erm, parts three and four I believe. And check through Master GreenwoodŽs replies by all means...gazillions of plot hooks therein.
Being a fan of the "Ed- and Grubb-style realms" myself, IŽd also advise you to use the search function on this very site as to glean things that might have been expanded upon in 3E, since topics often feature a rough summary of events concerning a special event/location/NPC, which might give you an idea how things were expanded and whether or not said expansions are of interest to you. IŽd also echoe including the Moonstars...interesting campaign dynamics right there. |
| The Hooded One |
Posted - 20 Jun 2009 : 17:09:38
Sousinne, there's no need to buy the "Harpers are gone" notion. In the Realms, they never went away, they just had schisms at the top. Down at the local level, Harpers went on being Harpers and helping other Harpers (and Moonstars).
Ed has been generating ongoing intrigues, from nasty merchant cabals to full-blown treasonous plots, for us in the "home" Realms campaign for thirty years now. Large and small, they just keep happening; I'm sure if you ask him in his Questions thread, he can provide you with a stream of ideas that he's used, down the years.
Not to mention endless "new" Volo inn and tavern and eatery reviews.
love,
THO |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 07:00:28
quote:
Originally posted by Sousinne
I am speechless. So many answers, and so many great minds working in similar ways. =)
All great minds operate like mine. That's how you know it's a great mind!  |
| Sousinne |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 04:12:45
I am speechless. So many answers, and so many great minds working in similar ways. =)
I'll be back soon with more questions for you, on a number of thorny issues. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 02:38:35
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I regard the days of 2E as the golden era of Realmslore. That's why I'd start right after that golden era.
Aye.
For myself, I'd want to start right back at the beginning, with the Ol' Grey Box, I think.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'd do both, actually -- Moonstars and Harpers. Start with Harpers, intro some of the Tel'Teukiira slowly, and not reveal for a while that they're actually Moonstars instead of Harpers.
Indeed. Having a Harper agent whose actually a Moonstar would be a suitable basis for this campaign. And would reflect the few examples we have of such Moonstar NPCs in the Realmslore.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 01:39:11
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If I was to start a Realms campaign today, I'd use 3.5 rules. The timeframe would prolly be somewhere in the 1371-1372 range -- after Cloak & Dagger, but before any of the big stuff from 3E.
I'd actually drop back to 1e or 2e. I'm still not that familiar with the 3e rules stuff. And I'd set the timeframe around 1357 DR to 1367 DR.
I regard the days of 2E as the golden era of Realmslore. That's why I'd start right after that golden era.
I'm more familiar with 2E rules than 3.5, but I've read enough of 3.5 to be convinced it's the best ruleset we've seen to date.
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Now, as for your possible campaigns... I'd favor the Harper one, but I'd prolly mix in elements of the North one, as well.
I'd go with this. But I'd tweak it just a bit, and feature the Moonstars instead of the Harpers.
I'd do both, actually -- Moonstars and Harpers. Start with Harpers, intro some of the Tel'Teukiira slowly, and not reveal for a while that they're actually Moonstars instead of Harpers. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 19 Jun 2009 : 00:55:47
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If I was to start a Realms campaign today, I'd use 3.5 rules. The timeframe would prolly be somewhere in the 1371-1372 range -- after Cloak & Dagger, but before any of the big stuff from 3E.
I'd actually drop back to 1e or 2e. I'm still not that familiar with the 3e rules stuff. And I'd set the timeframe around 1357 DR to 1367 DR.
quote:
I'd use 2E lore, except where it was updated by 3E. Aside from the RSEs, there was some good stuff in the 3E era.
I'll echo Wooly on this. But I'd only draw from 3e lore when it didn't necessarily contradict my own Realmslore. I've built my Realms on the firm foundation of 1e/2e lore, and expanded upon it. Sometimes going in completely alternate directions to what Wizards demonstrated with their own 3e material. Thus, a lot of the 3e RSE-stuff and all its associated lore is inapplicable in my FR.
quote:
Now, as for your possible campaigns... I'd favor the Harper one, but I'd prolly mix in elements of the North one, as well.
I'd go with this. But I'd tweak it just a bit, and feature the Moonstars instead of the Harpers.
|
| Mace Hammerhand |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 22:43:50
The thing about the Harper campaign would be knowledge, most players (in my experience) mostly play and pick up mysteries and lore along the way, plus the amount of material available can be slightly daunting. So to make a Harper campaign work the players would need to know a lot about the organization in general, and also a bunch of history to make the game worthwhile, IMO.
The caravan business could work, but it might get stale if people were just trading and fighting of bandits, again from the players' perspective, sure there will be things like news etc, but the main issue is: what do the players like.
I mean that's the thing with any campaign, if you have high and mighty intrigue planned for the PCs and they just wanna kill shite all of you will be unhappy.
Find out what your players want and adapt. In my experience only a small, very dedicated group will be interested in politics intrigue and so on, because that's when you can play things out... I DM a group of 7 players, once a month for some 6-7 hours, right now we're on D&D hiatus and play Vampire, one player already quit the game and will return to D&D cuz VTM is too boring to him, and some others also would like to see less talk and more kill...but even though we play in L.A. the other players have only the real-world-knowledge and no fraking clue about what is actually being played in the background... they just play, and...sometimes things just end badly.
As for rules, I take it you're familiar with 3.x and have the earlier sourcematerial available...just use it, it makes no difference. However, if you wanna play long and epic tons of adventures strung together with the same core-group of PCs I'd suggest to use the alternate XP-table found in Unearthed Arcana and still apply the regular CR/XP ratio from the DMG. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 22:32:14
If I was to start a Realms campaign today, I'd use 3.5 rules. The timeframe would prolly be somewhere in the 1371-1372 range -- after Cloak & Dagger, but before any of the big stuff from 3E.
I'd use 2E lore, except where it was updated by 3E. Aside from the RSEs, there was some good stuff in the 3E era.
Now, as for your possible campaigns... I'd favor the Harper one, but I'd prolly mix in elements of the North one, as well. |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 20:43:24
I would favor scenarios one (harpers) and two (caravan). IŽd actually prefer the caravan one, as long as there is a through line in the story. Of the two options, it has the highest risk of being episodic.
Regarding which iteration of the Realms to play in, I strongly prefer 2E. It is the richest in terms of depth and available resources. 2e material, which was low on crunch, is readily adaptable to later rule systems. IŽm playing 4e rules in the 2e Realms with no difficulties. |
| Teneck |
Posted - 18 Jun 2009 : 20:26:01
quote:
Originally posted by Sousinne
Anyone who could help me on this? Have I missed anything about 3rd edition Realms? Is my analysis correct? Which of the above campaigns hold most promise? Can I change anything to improve them?
Another thorny issue is that of rules. I would have a hard time going back to AD&D 2nd edition. Does a 2nd edition fluff campaign change simply due to using 3.5 as a ruleset?
I believe you did miss something as far as the "mystery" in the 3.0-3.5 FR material...while there WAS a lot of mystery in the older material the new stuff has it's share as well...the difference being that a lot of the old mystery s were solved(explained), but a whole new set of mysterys were unearthed because of or in spite of all the new material. I have spent hours and hours of quality time with my FR campaign setting book, and I still find new things in it that I would like to try/play as a player and as a DM.
As to the rules update, in reality there is not much "massaging" needed to use the 3.5 rules to an existing 2ED game, I found that a simple character sheet update/ transfer not only gets things put in the right places but helps you as a DM get your mind set focused on how the new stuff fits in.
This is only my personal opinion of course but I have been a fan of the 3.0 and 3.5 since they came out...and NO..I won't mention the 4ed...*points at Mace Hammerhand and says "ditto"* |
|
|
