| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 23 Dec 2011 : 18:52:01
I'm a little behind the times, but I guess a few weeks ago a new sourcebook was announced for next summer: Menzoberranzan. It's listed under a cities of intrigue line. Makes me wonder if we will be getting entire books on cities in the future.
If we're going to be rocking out and dusting off some of those old school 2nd edition sourcebooks, we need another dwarves deep supplement!
While I'm not a fan of 4E, I certainly hope the book is the size of the Neverwinter guide and crammed full of uber yummy updated lore! I hope ED is working on this again.
I don't know if these are already finished, but I'm hoping we get more than a rehash of the old information. There has to be someone in R&D who is completely neurotic and has named and listed a good 30 or 40 of the drow houses! I hope they do a good section dedicated to the houses where it lists troop formations or the very least nobles, soldiers, and slaves with important NPCs listed. Stats don't matter much to me, but lore does!
Please give us updated maps! I'm guessing we'll get city maps, but it would be totally sweet to have a few noble compound maps to insert our own creations into. I'll settle for detailed maps of House Baenre though. :) I'd also love for it to give tons of info for the bazaar. Heck, even a name of the vendor and what they sell in a word or three after the name would work.
Please remove House Melarn from the city hierarchy. I'd imagine First Matron Quenthel Baenre would have destroyed them by now as their existence would continuously remind her of her failure to become Lolth's chosen. I guess it may be kind of interesting, but I never understood why the House was placed there. I would think they would rather be in Ched Nasad working to rebuild.
I hope it explains house station a bit. Some sources(4e campaign guide) indicate that a house can move up and down in rank without being destroyed. Until this point I had been under the assumption, from novels and such, that a house only moves up when a family in front of them is destroyed. Rules or a general idea of how to run a noble family in the political climate of the city and how to advance would be kind of fun. Mongoose publishing touched on it with their Game of Bones version, but I never much cared for it. Was an interesting idea however.
Hoping we also have tons of information on merchant and mercenary organizations of the city. Some maps of a few special shops wouldn't hurt. One of the biggest things I see lacking in today's products are good maps. I see tactical grids and battlemaps as wastes of product space. Need lots of good maps to work with. :)
I'd be curious to know what's up in some of the various ruined noble compounds. I always pictured Briza Do'Urden still sitting on her stone throne of rotted velvet as a banshee with the bones of her dead mother in front of her, confined to the ruins of the house by Lolth's magic.
I so wish I could see a sneakpeak of this stuff. Summer of 2012 is forever away! I'm seriously hoping this product does a bang-up job and is just as good if not better than Neverwinter.
So what does everyone else want in the Menzoberranzan product? I'm pretty stoked, but what about YOU? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Matt James |
Posted - 07 May 2012 : 00:56:44
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
The upcoming Menzoberranzan sourcebook will be a pleasant surprise to many of you. Meaning, I expect many to have preconceived notions of what it might be. Fans of Realmslore should very much enjoy it.
It clearly is something I am hoping for, something welcomed.
I trust you are doing well these days?
Hey Kentinel, good to hear from you. All is well, and I have no complaints. Life is peachy :)
I think you'll enjoy this book, as will many others. |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 06 May 2012 : 23:18:35
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
The upcoming Menzoberranzan sourcebook will be a pleasant surprise to many of you. Meaning, I expect many to have preconceived notions of what it might be. Fans of Realmslore should very much enjoy it.
It clearly is something I am hoping for, something welcomed.
I trust you are doing well these days? |
| Matt James |
Posted - 06 May 2012 : 22:45:42
The upcoming Menzoberranzan sourcebook will be a pleasant surprise to many of you. Meaning, I expect many to have preconceived notions of what it might be. Fans of Realmslore should very much enjoy it. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 06 May 2012 : 17:51:10
quote:
Originally posted by raist
But all this ultimately boils down to me, that, there is a new sourcebook coming out and I'll take it lol. Any further detail on ANY part of the drow is good for me and worthy enough for me to purchase it. And it will have new pics, which is ALWAYS a good thing. :)
If you've seen the Neverwinter Campaign Setting, then you'll probably agree that WOTC definitely knows how to deliver a great lore-filled product these days. It's exciting to see what they'll make of Menzo, now! |
| raist |
Posted - 06 May 2012 : 09:04:19
quote:
HIS NOVELS are what set the stage for drow in the Realms. He set the standard. The sourcebook designers (in concert with him during the writing of the Menzoberranzan [Boxed Set]) went on to make that standard more precise over time, but he set it in the first place. So their results should be tested against his, and not the other way around.
That was basically my point, IMO he should always at least be consulted considering he created the ways that they live and the environment in which they live within.
But all this ultimately boils down to me, that, there is a new sourcebook coming out and I'll take it lol. Any further detail on ANY part of the drow is good for me and worthy enough for me to purchase it. And it will have new pics, which is ALWAYS a good thing. :) |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 06 May 2012 : 02:00:49
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
But it does counter your notion that his being a novelist somehow leads his writings to be inaccurate. His contributions by novel (especially the biggie, Homeland) are what got this ball rolling.
So that completely undermines your theory that his being a novelist somehow makes his novels inaccurate. HIS NOVELS are what set the stage for drow in the Realms. He set the standard. The sourcebook designers (in concert with him during the writing of the Menzoberranzan [Boxed Set]) went on to make that standard more precise over time, but he set it in the first place. So their results should be tested against his, and not the other way around.
-His novels simply focus on his stories (as novelists do). Various aspects of Menzoberranzan's culture that are not relevant to the main characters or events in the books that take place in or are otherwise related to the city don't particularly get featured, and as a result, Drow society in books that he has penned only show an incomplete picture of what Menzoberranzan's society is like. Reading only the Dark Elf trilogy, and the snippets of novels and short stories that take place in Menzoberranzan, the Drow and the city seems overtly 'militaristic' and centered/dedicated wholly around the worship of Lolth- at times, seemingly to the point of dourness, in some characters/ This is in some contrast as compared to to other Forgotten Realms authors who have written about happenings in the city or characters from it and have painted a more complete depiction of Menzoberranzan's culture. We know, given all of the sourcebooks and novels and everything else detailing Menzoberranzan that residents, and Lolthite culture in general is not as 'militaristic' as R.A. Salvatore novels present it to be (because they primarily involve nobles and other establishment figures engaging in political machinations).
-Chronologically, more data is available to later authors, as more about Drow in general is written in both D&D and in the setting, sure. Does that change the main complaint, that depictions of society aren't wholly accurate? It adds an asterisk and an explanation, but doesn't change that they aren't, in light of the information we have. Various Greek scientific manuscripts contain all kinds of enlightening information, but contain premises that we know are inaccurate- the geocentric cosmological model, for example. Their descriptions of stars and planets aren't wrong, but they are inaccurate, as we know the heliocentric cosmological model is correct.
-Less comprehensive, if you will. I define that as less accurate, however. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 05 May 2012 : 22:47:36
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-Doesn't change the fact that his primary contributions to the setting are in the forms of his novels (and short stories), while his involvement in sourcebooks (especially in the present and in the past) are minimal.
No, it doesn't change the fact.
But it does counter your notion that his being a novelist somehow leads his writings to be inaccurate. His contributions by novel (especially the biggie, Homeland) are what got this ball rolling.
And they're also what set the stage for sourcebooks about drow in the Realms.
So that completely undermines your theory that his being a novelist somehow makes his novels inaccurate. HIS NOVELS are what set the stage for drow in the Realms. He set the standard. The sourcebook designers (in concert with him during the writing of the Menzoberranzan [Boxed Set]) went on to make that standard more precise over time, but he set it in the first place. So their results should be tested against his, and not the other way around.
quote:
-As compared to sourcebooks, which detail complete Drow society, in both Menzoberranzan (and especially Menzoberranzan), the depictions that he has in his novels of Drow are fairly limited and incomplete- primarily because he is an author first and foremost, and he is generally keeping to his own conceptual ideas of the stories he is writing.
That his novels focus on selected characters, Houses, or aspects of House rivalry does not in any way make them less accurate.
It makes them less comprehensive.
Few novels are ever as comprehensive as reference works, though.
quote:
Compare to Elaine Cunningham who, in Daughter of the Drow, presents a much more complete picture of Drow society in Menzoberranzan (and then, of course, of other Drow in other settlements as Liriel Baenre travels and encounters them).
Compare the publication dates:
- The Dark Elf Trilogy, Book I: Homeland, AUG-1990
- Menzo [Boxed Set], DEC-1992
- Starlight & Shadows, Book I: Daughter of the Drow, AUG-1995
Just from looking at that list, one should be able to see very easily that Elaine had tremendous resources to draw from when telling her first drow tales, which Bob did not have when he began. Of course she might be able to present a more complete picture of Menzo than Bob was able to, years before. (I wouldn't know, because I still haven't read her books, yet.)
But a greater degree of completion does not equate to greater accuracy. It equates to greater precision. And those are not the same thing at all.
I know that Bob explored inter-House rivalries and matronly intrigue on a far wider scale in his "Legacy of the Drow" mini-series, in which he drew extensively from details that had just been hammered out in the M[BS]. He had only scratched the surface in Homeland.
And the "WOTSQ" books, especially Byers's Dissolution (JUL-2002), described life in the city with much more visceral detail than I had ever read before. I really enjoyed being able to read about the sights and sounds of Menzo that an average citizen might experience, as opposed to just the perspective of a privileged noble son.
But at no point did I think to myself, "Whoah, that's so cool, and it goes further into detail about 'X' than I ever thought possible before, but it sure means that Bob is wrong, though."
So I don't get where you're coming from, LK. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 05 May 2012 : 17:32:49
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
I'm inclined to disagree with your characterization of him being "only a writer". He is THE writer who first incorporated the drow into the Realms. AFAIK, Ed had no intentions of doing so, himself.
-Doesn't change the fact that his primary contributions to the setting are in the forms of his novels (and short stories), while his involvement in sourcebooks (especially in the present and in the past) are minimal.
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
It would seem to me that it is the sourcebooks (ironically labeled, since the novel Homeland would seem to be the true source of the idea of drow in the Realms) whose accuracy should be drawn into question.
-As compared to sourcebooks, which detail complete Drow society, in both Menzoberranzan (and especially Menzoberranzan), the depictions that he has in his novels of Drow are fairly limited and incomplete- primarily because he is an author first and foremost, and he is generally keeping to his own conceptual ideas of the stories he is writing. Compare to Elaine Cunningham who, in Daughter of the Drow, presents a much more complete picture of Drow society in Menzoberranzan (and then, of course, of other Drow in other settlements as Liriel Baenre travels and encounters them). |
| raist |
Posted - 05 May 2012 : 10:13:47
Nah, I chatted with him on facebook and he more or less made it sound like his input was merely input. Sounds like it was for the most part complete and he might have just said hey this is gonna happen in my book such and such.
On a side note, I agree that Homeland is pretty much a core book for drow information though. I also think that the WOTSQ novels are really good cases for how drow lives are played out in a lot of ways as well. They did a really good job detailing a the interactions between the various social classes of Menzoberranzan drow IMO. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 04 May 2012 : 22:08:00
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Karsus
-As long as his influence isn't too great. No offense against the man, but I don't think his depictions of Drow society are very 'accurate', if you will. That's probably a bi-product of the fact that he's only a writer[...].
I'm inclined to disagree with your characterization of him being "only a writer". He is THE writer who first incorporated the drow into the Realms. AFAIK, Ed had no intentions of doing so, himself.
The game sourcebooks are supposed to be mechanical interpretations of his (and other drow-related authors') stories.
It would seem to me that it is the sourcebooks (ironically labeled, since the novel Homeland would seem to be the true source of the idea of drow in the Realms) whose accuracy should be drawn into question.
But if you want to talk about the idea of some of his stories possibly contradicting one of the sourcebooks that he has had a hand in, such as the original Menzoberranzan [Boxed Set], then yeah, I could concede that his novels might not be the most accurate in such an instance. Heck, sometimes his newer works even diverge from his own older novels!) 
With all that being said, I don't think it's even possible for RAS to have "too great" an influence on anything drow or Menzoberranyr. Any influence he might have would have to be described as being just about right.  |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 04 May 2012 : 20:04:57
quote:
Originally posted by raist
I found out some good news yesterday. I was talking to the man, R.A. Salvatore himself and he said that he has got to read the book and that he gave the writers advice on it and also gave them the info on future drow stuff he is writing. So, I see this as an extreme positive. I hate when core books come out and then a novel that releases later changes the entirety of the core book, but at least we know that won't happen with this one.
That's cool. I imagine he had to let them know what's happening in Menzo in his novels so it lines up with what will come out in the sourcebooks or vice versa. Wonder if we're finally going to see the Baenre family topple from power. I somehow doubt it, but I guess you never know. ;) |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 04 May 2012 : 18:43:31
quote:
Originally posted by raist
I found out some good news yesterday. I was talking to the man, R.A. Salvatore himself and he said that he has got to read the book and that he gave the writers advice on it and also gave them the info on future drow stuff he is writing. So, I see this as an extreme positive.
Me too.
I like it when game designers are able to interface with people who’ve had a big influence on what the designers are working on.
Were you able to chat with him in person on his message boards?
|
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 04 May 2012 : 17:56:18
-As long as his influence isn't too great. No offense against the man, but I don't think his depictions of Drow society are very 'accurate', if you will. That's probably a bi-product of the fact that he's only a writer, and 99.9% of the Forgotten Realms Drow stuff that he writes about is centered upon conflict of some sort. |
| raist |
Posted - 04 May 2012 : 17:14:18
I found out some good news yesterday. I was talking to the man, R.A. Salvatore himself and he said that he has got to read the book and that he gave the writers advice on it and also gave them the info on future drow stuff he is writing. So, I see this as an extreme positive. I hate when core books come out and then a novel that releases later changes the entirety of the core book, but at least we know that won't happen with this one. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 01 May 2012 : 01:36:47
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
How the hell do you guys follow this conversation?
I'm inclined to agree.
And, folks, for those involved in the current bout of side-topicness, can I ask that you all take it to PMs or emails, instead of cluttering this otherwise productive discussion?
Thank you.  |
| raist |
Posted - 01 May 2012 : 01:07:54
I follow solely due to the fact that any conversation about the drow intrigues me and has my interest lol. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 22:32:05
How the hell do you guys follow this conversation? |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 21:30:47
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I've not "nurtured it" as a "refined hatred", either... But that doesn't change the fact that a wholly unnecessary change invalidated prior lore.
People like to use that word “invalidated” and I really wonder why? When reading the novels or playing the game, I decide what the Realms is to me. Yes I understand what’s “official” is important to a lot of people, but if I’m talking about my own personal happiness (which is really important to me, no matter how much it may seem I enjoy banging my head against a wall here at Candlekeep) then no, the infravision change isn’t really something to get worked up over.
Based on the sales and overwhelming success of the 3rd Edition D&D core rulebooks and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say for most people it wasn't an issue either.
Whether or not the Infravision-is-now-Darkvision change was “wholly unnecessary” isn’t settled. Rather it’s an issue that’s been called up like some half-forgotten Edition War zombie and taken over a scroll that was originally about the new Menzo book.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
It's more than a little annoying if you read the sourcebooks, too, which were drawn, in part, from the novels.
If you’re reading them for Realmslore only, I can see that.
If you’re playing the game (which sort of assumes you like the game), well, I’d wager it’s not that big a deal.
I still think Narbondel is cool either way and I’m willing to bet most older readers and gamers enjoy the Realms enough that they can ignore the change as they see fit when reading or playing.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And I do think it was arbitrary, since they were sweating scientific accuracy…
I guess we’re using the term ‘arbitrary’ in two different ways.
You seem to be viewing it entirely from a setting-first perspective: “Don’t change the rules if those changes affect prior Realmslore” seems to be the motto. Or more specifically, “don’t worry over the science when so much else that’s scientifically implausible isn’t worried over.” If you do these things and cause big changes to the setting, well that’s a little arbitrary.
What’s not initially clear in SKR’s take is this: he’s not worried about the science first; he’s worried about game mechanics first. Otherwise he wouldn’t have asked any of several questions that your average player would have come up with during play had Infravision been kept in 3rd Edition D&D. Remember, this work was done for the (then) next iteration of the D&D game. They were concerned with what was best for the game and took a deliberate, specific approach that concerned itself with making changes that promoted ease of play and kept the game moving.
That method can’t accurately be described as an arbitrary approach to doing things, and it wasn’t.
Rules that directly affect player choices or get in the way of player actions are much more likely to have the effect of slowing the game down. That’s the distinction here: what affects play and what doesn’t? What’s going to tie up the DM in a rules discussion with players?
You ask me, I think that’s where the decision to remove infravision rested. Rightly or wrongly, they concluded that Infravision was open to interpretation and prone to slow the game down.
That’s why I agree with the removal of infravision. In my opinion making changes that speed up play and limit rules discussions are generally good changes to make, even if they alter the flavor of a campaign setting.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Rules should serve the setting, not the other way around.
Sometimes the setting informs the rules and the two work rather well together, as in the case of Prestige Classes (when they’re done right), just as the rules do a lot to inform the setting. After all, infravision is a D&D game rule that grew up in the form of Realmslore.
(Narbondel, please say thank you to Gygax and Co.)
Ideally I’d like to see the rules divorced from the setting. There’s real potential for that to kill a setting’s flavor but if we balance that against when rules changes alter or detract from flavor…well, why not try a rules-divorce for 5th Edition?
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No one reads novels for the rules, they read them for the stories.
Actually that’s not true. Yes a lot of people read novels for the story, but some—if not most—people have read or do read the novels with the full expectation the rules will be reflected in them (or had one of those “wait, how can he/she/it do that when the rules don’t allow for it?” moments).
Otherwise there would never have been so many discussions (well, ‘rants’ if I’m being honest) about Drizzt putting bracers of speed on his ankles in order to run faster.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I guess I'm not understanding how you can like something and not be bothered by things that detract from it.
I guess it’s because I don’t view the setting in (what is to me) a one-sided manner. The Realms have always been a place to set fantasy fiction in and to play D&D games in.
That, and I don’t see the net negative over the loss of infravision. I’m mean, it’s not like they only subtracted from the setting without adding anything back.
And I did say I do feel irritation when changes are made I don’t agree with. But then I let it go.
Would you say you’re at more of a middle ground? As in this is one of those things you prefer not to let go?
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Or if they'd've asked if it was really that big a deal.
They playtested the new (at the time) rules and surveyed DMs and players about their games before releasing 3E. I don’t recall if they ever asked about infravision specifically in the surveys, though I’ll bet they got a lot of feedback on darkvision vs. infravision from the playtests. I wish they had published their playtest feedback online in some form.
And that’s it for me. I learned a lot, but I’m starting to repeat myself and in the process I helped kill another scroll. Outsiders wanting to talk about the new Menzo book are probably shaking their heads in disgust.
Sorry.
EDIT: fixed quote tags |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 20:05:43
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So you're a fan of a setting that has, as one of its core strengths, a well-defined continuity and a rich history, and it doesn't bother you when these things are arbitrarily changed…
I wasn’t happy to see the change then, but it’s not like I’ve held on to this bother and nurtured it into some form of refined hatred over the past twelve years or felt it was somehow necessary for me to no longer think of Narbondel like I did in the past when I was a kid or make sure I had to specifically not describe how Narbondel used to work for my players if the subject ever came up during play.
That would be pretty stupid, since the point of the setting and the game is to have fun and enjoy it.
I've not "nurtured it" as a "refined hatred", either... But that doesn't change the fact that a wholly unnecessary change invalidated prior lore. And that is something I find irksome. It's not much more than a point of reference, but it's still irksome.
It detracts from the enjoyment of the setting when something is described for years as being one thing, and then becomes something totally different.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I get the sense that if you’re someone who just reads the novels, the switch from “Narbondel is this” to “Narbondel is that” would be more than a little annoying.
It's more than a little annoying if you read the sourcebooks, too, which were drawn, in part, from the novels.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
But for someone like me who reads novels and plays D&D in the Realms, it’s like this: there was a change and I thought it took away some from the flavor, but I understood why the change was made and I know for a fact it was not made in bad faith (see the link I provided earlier, if you haven’t already), nor made arbitrarily or on a whim.
A setting is all about the flavor. Taking away that flavor diminishes the setting.
And I do think it was arbitrary, since they were sweating scientific accuracy on a type of vision, but not worrying about the aerodynamics of flying horses or how a large powerful bird can spring up out of the ashes of its own corpse or explaining why someone who breathed and had a reflection should somehow lose the reflection, no longer breathe, and still keep wandering about, in search of his or her now entirely blood-based diet.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
As I mentioned earlier, sometimes the rules trump the setting. To me it was one of those “oh well, life goes on” kind of things. No big deal.
Rules should serve the setting, not the other way around. No one reads novels for the rules, they read them for the stories -- and the setting is its stories.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And not all retcons have been driven by rules changes. Some have happened thru whim of the designers, some have happened thru not bothering to do sufficient research.
Really not following you here. Are you suggesting I'm supposed to find a reason to be upset?
Why would I do that?
I guess I'm not understanding how you can like something and not be bothered by things that detract from it.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
If every 2E D&D game could have been like yours, maybe they wouldn’t have replaced the ability with Darkvision for 3E.
Or if they'd've asked if it was really that big a deal. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 19:33:30
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
So you're a fan of a setting that has, as one of its core strengths, a well-defined continuity and a rich history, and it doesn't bother you when these things are arbitrarily changed…
I wasn’t happy to see the change then, but it’s not like I’ve held on to this bother and nurtured it into some form of refined hatred over the past twelve years or felt it was somehow necessary for me to no longer think of Narbondel like I did in the past when I was a kid or make sure I had to specifically not describe how Narbondel used to work for my players if the subject ever came up during play.
That would be pretty stupid, since the point of the setting and the game is to have fun and enjoy it.
That’s what I mean by “not viewing it as a negative.”
I get the sense that if you’re someone who just reads the novels, the switch from “Narbondel is this” to “Narbondel is that” would be more than a little annoying.
But for someone like me who reads novels and plays D&D in the Realms, it’s like this: there was a change and I thought it took away some from the flavor, but I understood why the change was made and I know for a fact it was not made in bad faith (see the link I provided earlier, if you haven’t already), nor made arbitrarily or on a whim.
As I mentioned earlier, sometimes the rules trump the setting. To me it was one of those “oh well, life goes on” kind of things. No big deal.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And not all retcons have been driven by rules changes. Some have happened thru whim of the designers, some have happened thru not bothering to do sufficient research.
Really not following you here. Are you suggesting I'm supposed to find a reason to be upset?
Why would I do that?
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
I played in 2E, and many of my characters were half-elves, because I liked the option of having infravision. And we never had any arguments or discussions over that. We just dealt with it and moved on.
Cool, so your group was in universal agreement from the start about how Infravision works and you never had any issues during play. That’s awesome.
If every 2E D&D game could have been like yours, maybe they wouldn’t have replaced the ability with Darkvision for 3E.
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 18:15:34
We don't have arguments over my table... at least not between DM and players.
The DM exists for a reason - he adjudicates every instance of 'grey area'. I really wish players and WotC would stop trying to nerf his power. Without him, the game couldn't happen - just let him do his job.
And there have been plenty of times, later-on after a session has finished (usually at the next session) when I was proven wrong by the RAW by a player, and I'd just say "well, now we know for the next time". Its that simple - the game should never stop so people can look up rules. In fact, the only book I allow at my table (for players) is the PHB, and even then its just one copy getting passed around (and you don't read it during your turn).
In the RW, you don't get to look stuff up every time you need to know something (okay... granted this has actually changed since I started playing..) - you get to react, and thats it. Keeping the game moving is one of the DMs major functions; rules are secondary (IMHO). |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 18:07:06
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
... And caused serious retcons.
I don’t really see that as a negative.
So you're a fan of a setting that has, as one of its core strengths, a well-defined continuity and a rich history, and it doesn't bother you when these things are arbitrarily changed? It doesn't bother you to see references in Menzoberranzan lore to using heat vision to tell time, knowing that this has been invalidated? That's just one example, and it's quite relevant to this overall discussion, as well...
And not all retcons have been driven by rules changes. Some have happened thru whim of the designers, some have happened thru not bothering to do sufficient research.
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
EDIT: you’ve played 2E, right? Ever had let’s-break-this-thing-down discussions or even arguments at the table over infravision? I recall having a few.
I played in 2E, and many of my characters were half-elves, because I liked the option of having infravision. And we never had any arguments or discussions over that. We just dealt with it and moved on. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 17:06:52
I am in the middle of reading the Omnibus edition of Return of the Archmunchkins, and in that volume, pg. 104 -
quote:
Spoken by Elminster
"How is it that this Melegaunt could snatch ye and the others from beneath the phaerimm's very noses? They see magic the way dwarves see body heat."
That was at the very outset of 3e - perhaps someone should have let Troy Denning read the new rules first. 
Thats what happens when you make retcons - you create endless ripples. Its heavy-handed, and poor design. Sometimes, you shouldn't fix things just because you can.
For most of you who don't have the omnibus, that quote appears on the page directly preceding chapter 11.
Sorry I have nothing to contribute on-topic: I am trying to observe my own signature. Despite my own lack-of-interest, I hope this product is a resounding success. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 16:46:24
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
... And caused serious retcons.
I don’t really see that as a negative.
Now that I think about it, technically the 3E transition simply adjusted the lense (i.e. the rules) through which the Realms are viewed.
If you view the Realms through 2E rules, there is infravision (and other stuff not in 3E and later Realms).
If you view the Realms with 3E rules, there is darkvision (and other stuff not in 2E and earlier Realms).
In hindsight, I think it would have been cool to see infravision stick around in 3E-era novels. I haven’t read all the novels with drow in them, so I don’t know if some kept it, though I’m pretty sure some didn’t.
More reason to separate the rules from the Realms? I think so. That way people (especially those who don't play D&D) can get used to the Realms being presented consistently, without worrying over it changing every time D&D goes through a rules metamorphosis.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm really not sure how a form of vision would be able to cause problems in-game.
It’s good to be skeptical.
EDIT: you’ve played 2E, right? Ever had let’s-break-this-thing-down discussions or even arguments at the table over infravision? I recall having a few.
I remember after the Predator movies came out I couldn’t view infravision any other way than how it was depicted in the movies.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 10:41:04
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
I guess I was ranting to WOTC, too. 
Well, I did a sense of deja vu from your response, as though it were twelve or thirteen years ago.
I can see the frustration, but I think a lot of the responses to why Infravision should have stayed actually sort of champion the idea that the game should be made more complicated than it needs to be.
Veteran gamers might view it as a non-issue, having house-ruled or otherwise reached an accord with their longtime players and friends over how the ability works vis-a-vis the rest of the game, but for new players it would have been a major stumbling block (amongst a whole host of unavoidable other such blocks; you can only reduce them, never eliminate all of them).
So I'm glad they removed it. Yeah, it lessened the flavor but IMNSHO this was one time where a smart, well designed rules change won out over the setting.
... And caused serious retcons.
I'm really not sure how a form of vision would be able to cause problems in-game. |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 07:07:06
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
I guess I was ranting to WOTC, too.
Well, I did a sense of deja vu from your response, as though it were twelve or thirteen years ago.
I can see the frustration, but I think a lot of the responses to why Infravision should have stayed actually sort of champion the idea that the game should be made more complicated than it needs to be.
Veteran gamers might view it as a non-issue, having house-ruled or otherwise reached an accord with their longtime players and friends over how the ability works vis-a-vis the rest of the game, but for new players it would have been a major stumbling block (amongst a whole host of unavoidable other such blocks; you can only reduce them, never eliminate all of them).
So I'm glad they removed it. Yeah, it lessened the flavor but IMNSHO this was one time where a smart, well designed rules change won out over the setting. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 30 Apr 2012 : 04:50:20
quote:
Originally posted by BEAST
I was talking to all those who stated above in this thread that they thought that SKR made valid points explaining why infravision needed to be dropped.
I think he had valid concerns about infravision, but as I said, I don't think it should have been dropped. We accept too much that isn't scientificly plausible to quibble over a type of vision.
I like some of the stuff SKR has done, but in this case, I think that dropping infravision was a mistake. |
| BEAST |
Posted - 29 Apr 2012 : 22:26:06
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Beast, two things:
1. You win the award for biggest wall of text. (4400 words!)
Yeah, and it's especially glaring since SKR didn't use half that many words in the original article! 
Solly. I let it get away from me. 
But I was just trying to carefully respond to each and every point that supposedly was used to justify ending infravision. That whole deal still chaps my hide!
quote:
2. Who are you talking to?
I was talking to all those who stated above in this thread that they thought that SKR made valid points explaining why infravision needed to be dropped. The general concept of dropping it annoyed be, but I thought I would finally address each specific point.
I guess I was ranting to WOTC, too. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 29 Apr 2012 : 20:38:59
Ack!
first Icelander and now BEAST - I feel my Crown of Excessive Verbiage is at stake! 
|
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 29 Apr 2012 : 07:27:20
Beast, two things:
1. You win the award for biggest wall of text. (4400 words!)
2. Who are you talking to?
|
|
|
