| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Sage |
Posted - 16 Aug 2008 : 06:56:50
Okay, since it seems like official tidbits about the 4e FRCG are starting to filter in from Gen Con, I thought it'd be useful to set aside a temporary scroll for the duration of the Con. This will make it easier for readers to access any of the relevant info that scribes attending the Con will post.
Thus, rather than opening new scrolls elsewhere around Candlekeep, I'd prefer you all to post your information here, in this scroll.
Thank you.  |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 20 Aug 2009 : 16:47:26
I always had a bit of trouble with Ravenloft as a campaign setting. Some of the adventures were great, but I always thought they were better fitted into other settings than they were in Ravenlofts loose collections of lands. |
| Matt James |
Posted - 20 Aug 2009 : 12:28:59
I feel Ravenloft should have a series of Dragon/Dungeon articles instead of a full-blown campaign setting book run. But who knows, at around year 7-10 of 4e, it may make the cut. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 20 Aug 2009 : 11:39:49
Well from what WotC just released earlier this week (or the one before) Dark Sun will be the campaign setting for 2010. Having hated 2E rules, I've no idea what this setting is about aside from the fact that there are supposedly no Gods. Interesting to see how they work in all of those Divine power-based classes into the setting.
As for Ravenloft, well we'll see what happens. I believe that Dragon Lance will get the "Go Ahead" as the 2011 campaign setting but maybe the year after?
quote:
Originally posted by Rabiesbunny
Oh, goodie. Ravenloft. AND 4th Edition. Let's just fill it with those super-special Tiefling Warlocks Toril is now filled with, make them vampires, and including in their starting gear a copy of Twilight.
Well aren't you just full of joy and cheer....
Yea, WotC should just let Ravenloft stay dead and work on a new setting. That way, it may lessen the ceaseless whining they hear about every undertaking they take to revitalize older, less known settings that haven't been around since the early 90's just to appease the "older" generation of D&D players who already don't like the new system and are no longer customers anyway.
Hey, at least WotC might regain some dignity that way.
|
| The Sage |
Posted - 15 Apr 2009 : 05:37:06
Well, we've heard nothing further about any new RAVENLOFT developments in 4e. I'm not sure whether that's a good or bad thing at the moment, though.
|
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 15 Apr 2009 : 03:47:35
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
With them having pulled back the license and the simple fact it was one of the only settings that was published in 3E, I think it's safe to assume we'll see Ravenloft after Eber-whatsit. Dark Sun is another likely possibility, since they're redoing one of the novel series for that setting (perhaps as a way of testing the waters). Greyhawk is another possibility, but I'd not put money on that one.
Actually, according to "Digital Insider #6," we've learned that RAVENLOFT will likely be established using the 4e D&D rules set in this month's issue of DRAGON. From what we've been told, it won't be a separate campaign setting but, rather, something that will be "folded into the core [story]." I'm assuming this means that it'll be completely canonical according to D&D 4e.
Oh, goodie. Ravenloft. AND 4th Edition. Let's just fill it with those super-special Tiefling Warlocks Toril is now filled with, make them vampires, and including in their starting gear a copy of Twilight.
Sounds like an evening! :)
It feels as if no good can come from this. I like Ravenloft, but a 4e Ravenloft seems...I dunno.
Edit: I just realized what an old thread this is. Oopsie! ^^; |
| The Sage |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 14:29:35
quote:
Originally posted by arry
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
. . . I'm curious to see whether it will be maintained, modified, or ignored completely.
I reckon it'll be ignored completely, to do otherwise wouldn't be 'PC friendly' 
I'm not so sure about that. I think the overall concept will be maintained, but it may be weakened somewhat to make it more "PC friendly" -- allowing players plenty of opportunity to interact with this part of the core D&D world. |
| arry |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 12:59:25
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
. . . I just don't like to jump to conclusions.
Oooh, I love jumping to conclusions. I mean, most of the time you miss, but the feeling you get when one goes squish under your hobnailed boots can't be beaten  |
| arry |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 12:54:46
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
. . . I'm curious to see whether it will be maintained, modified, or ignored completely.
I reckon it'll be ignored completely, to do otherwise wouldn't be 'PC friendly' |
| The Sage |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 00:50:35
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
WotC did the official Campaign Setting, then Sovereign Press (Weis' company) was publishing the rest as a third party OGL.
My vote's on them for the 2010 release based on the novel line alone. They are still publishing new stuff and re-releasing classics. Nice segway to bring the readers back.
As I said above, when the announcement about the continuation of DL novels for '09 was made at GenCon, it was also announced that a 4e campaign for the world was a definite as well. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 00:42:08
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Don't forget they pulled the license for Dragonlance back from Margaret & Co. So that is also on the list. I'd think it would be the 2010 release of choice.
Actually, we learned from the Whitestone Council at GenCon that there will be a 4e book for DRAGONLANCE.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Don't forget they pulled the license for Dragonlance back from Margaret & Co. So that is also on the list. I'd think it would be the 2010 release of choice.
Truth... That one also had some stuff published in 3E, didn't it?
Yes. They included some of the best sourcebooks ever published for the DRAGONLANCE setting. Though each release was often long in the coming. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 07 Oct 2008 : 00:39:34
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
That sucks... I think it was better as its own setting. Especially with the aspect of being nearly impossible to get out of...
Indeed. I'll be curious to see just how the designers responsible for this 4e update of RAVENLOFT will address [if at all] the "impossible-to-escape-from" aspect of the Demiplane of Dread. It's one of the most important elements of the setting itself. So I'm curious to see whether it will be maintained, modified, or ignored completely. |
| Razz |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 19:22:35
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
I think Dark Sun and maybe Spelljammer will do well in 4E, however.
I don't, at least in regards to Spelljammer. As a setting, it was always kind of an odd duck. And it didn't work for a lot of people, because they either couldn't deal with space travel without thinking sci-fi, or they couldn't think of wildspace without wondering where ships got their gravity and why explosive decompression wasn't an issue. And honestly, as someone who loved the setting, I still have a bit of a hard time ignoring those same issues.
So I'd really be surprised if they revived that setting.
Not only that, but I found the official 3E adaption to be quite lacking. It stayed small-scale, and cut some of the flavor and original quirks of arcane space to avoid some of those complaints.
You're probably right, and I do agree on the Polyhedron Spelljammer 3E update. It was severely lacking, I thought. I think a hardbound, one-shot campaign book would've been much better to release, with the Polyhedron as a follow-up for more content. I would love to have seen a Spelljammer 3E setting switch places with that Ghostwalk setting that never really went anywhere. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 18:45:50
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Don't forget they pulled the license for Dragonlance back from Margaret & Co. So that is also on the list. I'd think it would be the 2010 release of choice.
Truth... That one also had some stuff published in 3E, didn't it?
WotC did the official Campaign Setting, then Sovereign Press (Weis' company) was publishing the rest as a third party OGL.
My vote's on them for the 2010 release based on the novel line alone. They are still publishing new stuff and re-releasing classics. Nice segway to bring the readers back. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 18:25:39
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
That sucks... I think it was better as its own setting. Especially with the aspect of being nearly impossible to get out of...
I guess WotC isn't completely confident that Ravenloft setting books would sell that well? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 18:22:24
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Don't forget they pulled the license for Dragonlance back from Margaret & Co. So that is also on the list. I'd think it would be the 2010 release of choice.
Truth... That one also had some stuff published in 3E, didn't it? |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 18:20:21
Don't forget they pulled the license for Dragonlance back from Margaret & Co. So that is also on the list. I'd think it would be the 2010 release of choice. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 17:25:36
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
With them having pulled back the license and the simple fact it was one of the only settings that was published in 3E, I think it's safe to assume we'll see Ravenloft after Eber-whatsit. Dark Sun is another likely possibility, since they're redoing one of the novel series for that setting (perhaps as a way of testing the waters). Greyhawk is another possibility, but I'd not put money on that one.
Actually, according to "Digital Insider #6," we've learned that RAVENLOFT will likely be established using the 4e D&D rules set in this month's issue of DRAGON. From what we've been told, it won't be a separate campaign setting but, rather, something that will be "folded into the core [story]." I'm assuming this means that it'll be completely canonical according to D&D 4e.
That sucks... I think it was better as its own setting. Especially with the aspect of being nearly impossible to get out of... |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 17:06:48
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
With them having pulled back the license and the simple fact it was one of the only settings that was published in 3E, I think it's safe to assume we'll see Ravenloft after Eber-whatsit. Dark Sun is another likely possibility, since they're redoing one of the novel series for that setting (perhaps as a way of testing the waters). Greyhawk is another possibility, but I'd not put money on that one.
Actually, according to "Digital Insider #6," we've learned that RAVENLOFT will likely be established using the 4e D&D rules set in this month's issue of DRAGON. From what we've been told, it won't be a separate campaign setting but, rather, something that will be "folded into the core [story]." I'm assuming this means that it'll be completely canonical according to D&D 4e. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 16:47:14
True, I can tell they are "testing the waters" with some of these settings. I just don't like to jump to conclusions. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 16:44:20
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
And it's probably important to mention that the only setting we've been "promised" so far is Eberron. All the other settings are "maybes" at this time.
With them having pulled back the license and the simple fact it was one of the only settings that was published in 3E, I think it's safe to assume we'll see Ravenloft after Eber-whatsit. Dark Sun is another likely possibility, since they're redoing one of the novel series for that setting (perhaps as a way of testing the waters). Greyhawk is another possibility, but I'd not put money on that one. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 16:02:35
And it's probably important to mention that the only setting we've been "promised" so far is Eberron. All the other settings are "maybes" at this time. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 08:40:35
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
I think Dark Sun and maybe Spelljammer will do well in 4E, however.
I don't, at least in regards to Spelljammer. As a setting, it was always kind of an odd duck. And it didn't work for a lot of people, because they either couldn't deal with space travel without thinking sci-fi, or they couldn't think of wildspace without wondering where ships got their gravity and why explosive decompression wasn't an issue. And honestly, as someone who loved the setting, I still have a bit of a hard time ignoring those same issues.
So I'd really be surprised if they revived that setting.
Also, I don't think it's really that likely. As Brian said recently, with respect to the brief SJ references contained within the FRCG... they exist mainly because there is some historical play between both the Realms and SPELLJAMMER. But, at the same time, those references don't specifically mean that WotC is intent on designing a full version of the setting using the 4e rules set any time soon. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 07:09:30
Dark Sun would be interesting... if it were possible to do conversions between 4E and 3.x. Since it's easier to convert the 2E stuff to 3.x, I'll just use my 2E Dark Sun source material... whenever I can arrange transportation for it. I hate not having my old gaming stuff, more so now that there isn't any commercially published material coming out that I have the slightest use for.
As far as Spelljammer goes, I liked it in 2E, but never really used it. I did rework the planar schematic to completely avoid the "phlogiston hypothesis" however. The "Material Plane" consists of isolated crystal spheres, as described in Spelljammer, but they are floating in the Astral Plane, not a sea of phlogiston in the "Material Plane," which no longer exists as a single cohesive entity. It makes things much more interesting when space travellers have to deal with githyanki attacks. In addition, using magic that allows astral travel also allows you to travel from world to world, creating a new body upon arriving at a world for the first time. When visiting another world via this method, having some form of secure storage for one's body in the world being traveled *from* is advisable, just as with any form of astral travel. Yes, I'll confess to this new mechanic being loosely inspired by "The Matrix" and similar hypotheses. Mind you, never having playtested the change, I can't say that it works 100%... but I like it more than the planar changes made with 4E. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 06:16:53
quote:
Originally posted by Razz
I think Dark Sun and maybe Spelljammer will do well in 4E, however.
I don't, at least in regards to Spelljammer. As a setting, it was always kind of an odd duck. And it didn't work for a lot of people, because they either couldn't deal with space travel without thinking sci-fi, or they couldn't think of wildspace without wondering where ships got their gravity and why explosive decompression wasn't an issue. And honestly, as someone who loved the setting, I still have a bit of a hard time ignoring those same issues.
So I'd really be surprised if they revived that setting.
Not only that, but I found the official 3E adaption to be quite lacking. It stayed small-scale, and cut some of the flavor and original quirks of arcane space to avoid some of those complaints. |
| Razz |
Posted - 06 Oct 2008 : 04:40:34
Ah you are my hero...another Realms fan that ENJOYS the multitude of deities in the Realms. As large as the Realms is, I never onced complained about the number of deities. After all, for a world so large and detailed adding another deity opens up a plethora of possibilities, stories, and depth to an already indepth game world.
I never understood the complaint of so many deities...actually, I believe I never really heard of any Realms DMs or Players complain much about any detail of the Realms. The complaints always came from the designers.
Which, to me, is blatantly rude, lazy, and downright despicable. To dumb down the Realms because they don't have the energy, time, or even have any care for the Realms other than the money it brings is putting a death grip on it. I'm waiting for it to be smothered any moment (if it hasn't happened already). I believe the Living FR they got going is about the only thing possibly keeping it afloat...and the novel lines, unfortunately.
Hire some real Realms lovers to handle all that, then. There's a huge difference between letting corporate-minds run the game and settings and letting real gamers run the show. Before all this I believed many of the real gamers were in charge, especially at the dawn of 3E. However, most, if not all, have either been laid off/quit or turned corporate.
I am worried at what they'll do to future campaign lines...everything is going to get warped except for their favored child, Eberron. Greyhawk has no prayer, Dragonlance will lose its fans as much as the Realms has, Planescape veteran fans will be outraged, Ravenloft fans maybe be able to pull through...I think Dark Sun and maybe Spelljammer will do well in 4E, however. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 06:03:08
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I, on the other hand, found the old system too limited, and added in several other levels to it. 
Several dozen, in fact...
 Really? Would you happen to have that expanded system available for perusal? I've found some limitations with the existing system too, mostly because of the number of deities (which I like, btw; I'm not trimming the pantheon for anything; in fact, I have *both* Lathander and Amaunator in my campaign, and I had my scaled-down, limited-in-time pseudo-Spellplague result in Myrkul being returned to divinity as a result of Ao's intervention to halt and/or prevent the chaos that was enveloping Toril; no Abeir here). There are actually *more* deities in my post-1385 Realms than there were before 1385, and that includes killing off Tyr (he was too much like Torm, and too derivative).  |
| Jakk |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 05:54:57
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Anyhow, if you just treat the two as completely seperate settings (as I do), its a lot easier to handle. I just pretend the new 4e core world has nothing to do with the real Forgotten Realms.
That's not pretending, you know. |
| Jakk |
Posted - 28 Sep 2008 : 05:33:17
quote:
...This looks like a computer game manual.
But enough about aesthetics! I've only really given it a quick once over but the whole thing feels very undernourished. None of the country entries seem to be more than 2 pages - even for Cormyr, Thay and what have you. The exception seems to be for Menzo-blooming-berranzan that has 2 pages dedicated to the various houses alone.
Now, I'm not saying it feels skewed towards the fans of a certain drow, but it does feel like it's skewed towards the fans of a certain drow... ...
[quote trimmed for space]
Of COURSE it looks like a computer game manual! Ultimately, that's what 4E is designed for... attracting the MMORPG fans, the new virtual gaming table, and the computer game licensing. If you make it look like a computer game, it makes all of those things easier to implement, at least in theory.
And yes, there will always be Menzo-blooming-berranzan. The only reason the time jump wasn't a thousand years instead of a hundred is because they needed to keep Drizzt around to sell novels (and game books too, to a lesser degree).
I can't remember if I've put my 2 cents in already, but in short: I looked at it, I felt unclean after touching it, the bits on Waterdeep and Returned Abeir were interesting and too short, and the rest of the book needs to be bound up with the 4E core and compacted into a magical item: either a Cube of Fourth or a Cube of Farce, depending on the creator's state of mind (Elminster post-Sellplague produces the latter variety, and Szass Tam produces the former).
I find it very hard to suppress my vitriol on this subject... and to keep my lunch down when I think about what's been done to the Realms. I admire Ed for staying on, though... I believe he made reference to staying on to help steer the ship when he talked about his feelings on the new edition. The problem is, the helm has been obliterated like Tilverton and Ordulin, throwing him overboard, and he's steering by swimming behind the ship and moving the rudder by hand, because nobody who has the authority to help him get back on board wants him there. Note that I am *not* referring to the designers here, so don't flame me for lack of respect for the designers. I've done world design for myself, and that was part of the reason I've stuck with the Realms for as long as I have. However, this recent unfortunate turn of events in "canon" lore has given me renewed interest in building something of my own into the pre-Sellplague world that I love, and my own campaign's timeline was already past 1385 before the GHotR came out, so the Sellplague just didn't happen in my Realms. Good thing too, or I'd probably be just giving up and selling my books like some others have done. A touch extreme, and not to my taste either, but understandable.
Anyway, I'm done commenting; take my words how you will, but remember that I'm unique, just like everybody else. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 29 Aug 2008 : 20:04:13
I, on the other hand, found the old system too limited, and added in several other levels to it.
Several dozen, in fact...
But my point was that there is a LOT in the new FRCG you could simply ignore if you don't like it (which is meant to be a positive, believe it or not). |
| Skeptic |
Posted - 29 Aug 2008 : 19:57:34
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Neither will just keeping the gods as they were. Calling a Demigod an Exarch does nothing for the game, IMHO, except help the designers feel ike they were actually being creative.
I very much like the new scale of power (Exarch, God, Greater God).
|
|
|
