| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Gyor |
Posted - 07 Dec 2016 : 16:48:28
Do you want a FRCG? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| rodrigoalcanza |
Posted - 06 May 2020 : 01:37:26
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by rodrigoalcanza
I partly agree with you, but it would include Eric L. Boyd. You agree?
Eric's only substantial work in 2E were the god books. Excellent for what they were, but I think he really hit his straps in 3E when he got to work on more diverse products. The irony is that Eric's most attractive FR craftings remain unpublished. For the moment.
-- George Krashos
Thank you! It's true, you're right! My comment was emotional, because Faiths & Avatar, and the other supplements in this series, are very significant to me. The RPG books here in Brazil were very expensive (and still are!) and difficult to access, especially for a teenager in the 90s. I was very curious about religions, specialist priest and how the gods' avatars were. I struggled a lot to buy Faiths & Avatar and then other FR books, without knowing how to read in English (I practically learned to read English at that moment ... not yet writing, sorry!). So these were my bedside books, daily seeing the names of Eric L. Boyd (and other designers, like Ed and Jeff).
Which ... "Eric's most attractive FR craftings remain unpublished"?
Under Illefarn Anew?
quote:
Originally posted by Delnyn
I'll take a pass on a 5ed FRCG unless by some ESE (Earth Shaking Event) Hasbro cedes all FR rights back to Ed Greenwood. Not that I am holding my breath.
I have this dream almost daily. I can't get enough of dreaming about the wonders that could arise. But I know that in reality this would be very complicated, even due to the size of the FR franchise. |
| Delnyn |
Posted - 04 May 2020 : 03:00:38
I'll take a pass on a 5ed FRCG unless by some ESE (Earth Shaking Event) Hasbro cedes all FR rights back to Ed Greenwood. Not that I am holding my breath. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 04 May 2020 : 02:38:40
quote:
Originally posted by rodrigoalcanza
I partly agree with you, but it would include Eric L. Boyd. You agree?
Eric's only substantial work in 2E were the god books. Excellent for what they were, but I think he really hit his straps in 3E when he got to work on more diverse products. The irony is that Eric's most attractive FR craftings remain unpublished. For the moment.
-- George Krashos |
| rodrigoalcanza |
Posted - 03 May 2020 : 22:40:12
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
Indeed, 3e era seems like a slide into incoherent mumbling. "Something something, or maybe something else, or maybe let DM decide what to shoehorn where, we can't be bothered". So, won't care about continuity, won't care about quality. A disadvantage of having it run by a big company with corporate bureaucracy, internal politics and little interest in any particular acquisition (unless it's someone's pet project) beyond milking it.
IMO, the 2E era had far more egregious Realmslore gaffes and issues than 3E, other than work done by Ed and Steven Schend. In addition, the "shoehorn Earth-analogues into the Realms"-trope reached its zenith in 2E.
-- George Krashos
I partly agree with you, but it would include Eric L. Boyd. You agree?
I liked a big FRCS, written by the main FR authors (obviously with Ed Greenwood), and that the book had more of an "age of game". Dragonlance style. I think I would only play the pre-Spellplague era. Preferably at its best: 1357 DR.
Forgottgen Realms 1st edition: perfect
Forgottgen Realms 2nd edition: perfect (or almost?).
Forgottgen Realms 3rd edition: very good
Forgottgen Realms 4th edition: ...........
Forgottgen Realms 1st edition: ??? (has done as much as possible)
For this reason, a book with diverse possibilities might appeal to more fans, from all editions. But I understand that it would be more expensive. |
| The Arcanamach |
Posted - 03 May 2020 : 16:55:33
Yes because anything that has a chance of giving us new lore is a good thing. |
| keftiu |
Posted - 17 Apr 2020 : 02:41:22
I think my new answer is “no, I want hyper-local sourcebooks instead,” Don’t give me an FRCG, give me more Neverwinter-style releases. |
| RRELIN |
Posted - 17 Apr 2020 : 02:29:12
I agree with the No votes. Too much can be a bad thing... |
| cpthero2 |
Posted - 05 Mar 2020 : 08:13:36
Master Gyor,
I voted no.
I think WotC has done enough of them for now. Mixing in more confusion just doesn't seem appealing.
Best regards,
|
| keftiu |
Posted - 17 Jan 2020 : 00:55:32
quote:
Originally posted by Stonwulfe
A country-by-country Atlas of the Forgotten Realms with high-detail artwork and Encyclopedia/CIA World Factbook-like entries on the economy and trade of each region/country would be something I'd gladly pay $250 CAD for (provided it was hardcover open-bind with good quality paper and a fabric binding. No true-binding. The glue just breaks and then you lose sections, pages, etc.
Do you know how much that would cost, and how many copies would need to sell just to break even? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 09 Jan 2020 : 01:03:04
quote:
Originally posted by George Krashos
quote:
Originally posted by Stonwulfe
A country-by-country Atlas of the Forgotten Realms with high-detail artwork and Encyclopedia/CIA World Factbook-like entries on the economy and trade of each region/country would be something I'd gladly pay $250 CAD for (provided it was hardcover open-bind with good quality paper and a fabric binding. No true-binding. The glue just breaks and then you lose sections, pages, etc.
You are in the minority unfortunately, IMO. I think that there would be a small number of FR fans, the diehards if you will, who would buy such a product at that price point.
-- George Krashos
I'd want to, but it would require saving up for -- that's nearly $200, US. I don't often get to drop that much on frivolous stuff.
(I have dropped that much and more on frivolous stuff, just not often!) |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 08 Jan 2020 : 22:42:31
quote:
Originally posted by Stonwulfe
A country-by-country Atlas of the Forgotten Realms with high-detail artwork and Encyclopedia/CIA World Factbook-like entries on the economy and trade of each region/country would be something I'd gladly pay $250 CAD for (provided it was hardcover open-bind with good quality paper and a fabric binding. No true-binding. The glue just breaks and then you lose sections, pages, etc.
You are in the minority unfortunately, IMO. I think that there would be a small number of FR fans, the diehards if you will, who would buy such a product at that price point.
-- George Krashos |
| Stonwulfe |
Posted - 08 Jan 2020 : 20:39:49
A country-by-country Atlas of the Forgotten Realms with high-detail artwork and Encyclopedia/CIA World Factbook-like entries on the economy and trade of each region/country would be something I'd gladly pay $250 CAD for (provided it was hardcover open-bind with good quality paper and a fabric binding. No true-binding. The glue just breaks and then you lose sections, pages, etc. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 07 Jan 2020 : 01:21:34
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Voted no. Every change in 5e has been to make the setting less dynamic and to remove parts I enjoy in favor of returning parts I disliked. No thanjs.
The changes are already done, whether they write a 5e setting or not. If anything, a 5e campaign book could add something you may like to the setting
As an example, and I say it as someone who approached FR towards the end of 4e, so this is not my personal experience (even though I didn't like many things that 4e did, mostly its subtractive design), this is how older fans felt with the arrival of 4e, but I've read some people saying that they warmed up to at least *certain* aspects of 4e with the addition of new material.
And this is without taking in account the fact that 4e went out of its way to destroy beloved characters or elements, sometimes in spiteful ways--basically, it came to exist at the cost of much of what a lot of what FR-lovers, well, loved. 5e at least tried to keep some of what 4e added around (for example, the Dragonborn still have some land. And nothing says that portals to abeir no longer exist and that you can't go there), so--unlike in 4e--there could be a chance for some lore to come up regarding those areas (heck, even in 4e some designers managed to sneak in lore about certain areas in the older eras).
I also disagree that *every* change in 5e has made the setting less dynamic. Some actually added back variety, new players and plot hooks (like the return of many gods and their faith--which 4e had taken away for really hollow reasons--or of cool nations like Halruaa), even though WotC did nothing to explore those events and their consequences (but keep in mind that this last point has little to do with the changes themselves, and everything to do with the implementation, which was a problem for 4e too).
Finally, there's always what Diffan says.
There's much that I agree with here. The spiteful removals, but also warming up to some of the 4e ideas (I liked Tymanther… I liked the warlock knights... I liked genasi city... I like the idea of the undead society but not so much the realm. I'm less fond of Returned Abeir, but that's probably more due to less familiarity to it). I'm also happy to see places return. |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 07 Jan 2020 : 01:19:41
I’ve decided a 5e book is nothing more I really want; though I could mine it for possible information “from” around 1357 DR.
My own current Realms is OGB with essentially Stygia where Mulhorand is and Shem where Unther is. My “Grey Realms” has Greyhawk where Kara Tur is and the Hordelands blend into the Paynim lands in between Greyhawk and Faerun.
I for sure left the corporate Forgotten Realms long ago. |
| George Krashos |
Posted - 06 Jan 2020 : 23:25:39
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
Indeed, 3e era seems like a slide into incoherent mumbling. "Something something, or maybe something else, or maybe let DM decide what to shoehorn where, we can't be bothered". So, won't care about continuity, won't care about quality. A disadvantage of having it run by a big company with corporate bureaucracy, internal politics and little interest in any particular acquisition (unless it's someone's pet project) beyond milking it.
IMO, the 2E era had far more egregious Realmslore gaffes and issues than 3E, other than work done by Ed and Steven Schend. In addition, the "shoehorn Earth-analogues into the Realms"-trope reached its zenith in 2E.
-- George Krashos |
| Diffan |
Posted - 06 Jan 2020 : 15:16:55
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
Indeed, 3e era seems like a slide into incoherent mumbling. "Something something, or maybe something else, or maybe let DM decide what to shoehorn where, we can't be bothered". So, won't care about continuity, won't care about quality. A disadvantage of having it run by a big company with corporate bureaucracy, internal politics and little interest in any particular acquisition (unless it's someone's pet project) beyond milking it.
That's a far bit disingenuous don't you think? You make it sound like every person on the Forgotten Realms team, including people like Ed Greenwood, Sean K. Reynolds, and Richard Baker didn't give a flip about anything regarding the material post 1999 and I find that exceedingly hard to believe.
Maybe....just maybe you simply didn't like it but the quality was just as good? Nah, people don't like things so they equate that with either poor writing (yet decidedly ignore or don't mention the poor writing of the stuff they do like) OR blaming big CORP (because, hey Evil Empire amiright?).
I mean, lets look at Iyachtu Xvim - or otherwise known as the "deity" they named by grabbing a fistful of darts and throwing them at an alphabet wall - and what a dumb concept the entire deity was? Or about the ridiculous conquistador-Helmite excursions into the "West" or what is basically 'Hey I can play a Realms game as Cortez!!' 
Face the fact that the Realms continues to be, as it's ALWAYS been, a kitchen-sink setting. With knights, samurai, wizards, space-crafts, cthulhu, vikings, and Baskin Robin flavor of Elves, Dwarves, Halflings, and other non-humans; with a variety of magics from Weave to Shadow-Weave to Gem magic to psionics and "mind" magic, to "Land"-Magic. Governments from Mageocracy to Feudalism to Free-City states to Undead-run States, etc. There is literally nothing outside the possibility of happening in the Realms, from the 40+ years of novels, games, and supplements.
It's ok to not like certain parts of the setting (I'll certainly never play in a Kara-Tur or Al-Qadim setting) but that doesn't make it inherently bad or poor writing. It just means that it's not to my tastes.
|
| TBeholder |
Posted - 05 Jan 2020 : 09:59:56
quote:
Originally posted by Gary Dallison
they are also exactly the things WoTC have been trying to avoid since 3e.
they want to be able to put whatever they want whenever and wherever they want without a fan telling them they got it wrong and forcing some errata or other update.
the less detail about the sundering the more they can blame on that. the less timeline info the more they can shoehorn in with later adventures. details will only constrain them and they dont have or want the resources to do lore checking.
Indeed, 3e era seems like a slide into incoherent mumbling. "Something something, or maybe something else, or maybe let DM decide what to shoehorn where, we can't be bothered". So, won't care about continuity, won't care about quality. A disadvantage of having it run by a big company with corporate bureaucracy, internal politics and little interest in any particular acquisition (unless it's someone's pet project) beyond milking it.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Also, in some media, they should advertise it as 'The world of Drizzt'.
Since that's how it will inevitably end up, this would be too much truth in advertising.  |
| Irennan |
Posted - 04 Jan 2020 : 23:24:15
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Voted no. Every change in 5e has been to make the setting less dynamic and to remove parts I enjoy in favor of returning parts I disliked. No thanjs.
The changes are already done, whether they write a 5e setting or not. If anything, a 5e campaign book could add something you may like to the setting
As an example, and I say it as someone who approached FR towards the end of 4e, so this is not my personal experience (even though I didn't like many things that 4e did, mostly its subtractive design), this is how older fans felt with the arrival of 4e, but I've read some people saying that they warmed up to at least *certain* aspects of 4e with the addition of new material.
And this is without taking in account the fact that 4e went out of its way to destroy beloved characters or elements, sometimes in spiteful ways--basically, it came to exist at the cost of much of what a lot of what FR-lovers, well, loved. 5e at least tried to keep some of what 4e added around (for example, the Dragonborn still have some land. And nothing says that portals to abeir no longer exist and that you can't go there), so--unlike in 4e--there could be a chance for some lore to come up regarding those areas (heck, even in 4e some designers managed to sneak in lore about certain areas in the older eras).
I also disagree that *every* change in 5e has made the setting less dynamic. Some actually added back variety, new players and plot hooks (like the return of many gods and their faith--which 4e had taken away for really hollow reasons--or of cool nations like Halruaa), even though WotC did nothing to explore those events and their consequences (but keep in mind that this last point has little to do with the changes themselves, and everything to do with the implementation, which was a problem for 4e too).
Finally, there's always what Diffan says. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 04 Jan 2020 : 22:27:13
quote:
Originally posted by keftiu
Voted no. Every change in 5e has been to make the setting less dynamic and to remove parts I enjoy in favor of returning parts I disliked. No thanjs.
I get where you're coming from keftiu. Looking at the changes they made...again....to the Realms, and as a 4E Realms-fan, it's really difficult to see the parts you've come to enjoy with the post-Spellplague Realms get ripped away really stinks.
However since the change of the Realms from 3e to 4e I've adopted an approach to the setting that has been really freeing. Basically I treat the Realms-lore as information to use, or disregard, at my leisure. For example I read a bunch of the Adventure League adventures set in Hulburg, a town I had come to really love since the Blades of the Moonsea novels. But reading the adventures....nothing was kept in them about the actual novel that affects the setting. All the major players and characters are gone or not talked about at all. Very disappointing. Still, I'll change what I need to make it work.
The thing is, we have the blocks to build from and take from that to go forward. |
| keftiu |
Posted - 04 Jan 2020 : 22:01:23
Voted no. Every change in 5e has been to make the setting less dynamic and to remove parts I enjoy in favor of returning parts I disliked. No thanjs. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 22 Dec 2016 : 19:13:44
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I voted yes but I'm well aware of the fact that getting one for the whole setting just isn't profitable for them right now. WotC's release schedule is very specific and tailored to their Adventure Paths. Storm King's Thunder, Prince of the Apocalypse, Out of the Abyss, etc. ALL are adventures for players that are set in the Realms that all have regional information and that's intentional because they WANT you to use their books, their rules, their stuff and not just take a regional thing (devoid of edition-based rules) and switch to Pathfinder or RIFTS or even an earlier version like 4e, 3e, or a TSR version.
That goodsir, is a very telling point. I even moreso understand why they're doing this as adventures that contain regional info, and I think that's their method moving forward, until they've done enough regions to consolidate data into a campaign guide later.
Well that would be a cool idea waay further down the road. Personally I think they're investing TOO much on one area (Sword Coast/Western Heartlands). I'd love to see some adventures in the Utter East, The Moonsea, the Sea of Fallen Stars (think sailor adventure path fighting sea monsters and the Abolethic Sovereignty), the Moonshae Isles, or even the Dalelands/Myth Drannor. None of these places have really been touched outside of a novel or 3. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 22 Dec 2016 : 16:16:59
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I voted yes but I'm well aware of the fact that getting one for the whole setting just isn't profitable for them right now. WotC's release schedule is very specific and tailored to their Adventure Paths. Storm King's Thunder, Prince of the Apocalypse, Out of the Abyss, etc. ALL are adventures for players that are set in the Realms that all have regional information and that's intentional because they WANT you to use their books, their rules, their stuff and not just take a regional thing (devoid of edition-based rules) and switch to Pathfinder or RIFTS or even an earlier version like 4e, 3e, or a TSR version.
That goodsir, is a very telling point. I even moreso understand why they're doing this as adventures that contain regional info, and I think that's their method moving forward, until they've done enough regions to consolidate data into a campaign guide later. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 22 Dec 2016 : 15:29:59
I voted yes but I'm well aware of the fact that getting one for the whole setting just isn't profitable for them right now. WotC's release schedule is very specific and tailored to their Adventure Paths. Storm King's Thunder, Prince of the Apocalypse, Out of the Abyss, etc. ALL are adventures for players that are set in the Realms that all have regional information and that's intentional because they WANT you to use their books, their rules, their stuff and not just take a regional thing (devoid of edition-based rules) and switch to Pathfinder or RIFTS or even an earlier version like 4e, 3e, or a TSR version. |
| Kiaransalyn |
Posted - 22 Dec 2016 : 09:02:27
I voted No. I'm happy with the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide and don't see a need for a Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide. Of course, guides for other regions would be welcome. |
| Bravesteel |
Posted - 12 Dec 2016 : 04:04:33
quote:
Originally posted by MarkustayAs I said above, I would prefer the gazeteer-style treatment of The Realms (in lieu of an actual FRCG) to be done by WotC themselves, or at least, more fully backed by them than the DM's Guild, and that could possibly be achieved through TEGG, if they were willing. Their resources may already be stretched a bit thin, though. I don't want such a thing being done here, as 'fan work', because the whole point would be lost (an OFFICIAL update/CG of FR for 5e).
I suppose I understand where you are coming from, unfortunately the only "Official" update would have to come from WotC which puts us all right back to where we were when this thread went slightly off-topic. I feel like an "official" update would pale in comparison to a well organized fan-update to the Realms. Just my opinion.
Edit: I, of course, understand that TEGG doing something would be as close to official as possible, but why leave it there? Since the original grey box first came out the Realms has belonged to all of us (in spirit if not IP rights). |
| Markustay |
Posted - 12 Dec 2016 : 03:11:07
Yeah, I really like this - get the CKC running again. Maybe produce a 'best of' volume first, to test the waters, which would really be us just taking whatever articles we can find the authors for and maybe slapping a fresh coat of paint on them.
Maybe have 2-3 returning 'columns', that we could start in this one - "Current Clack", "Eyes on..." , etc, that would be brand new.
quote:
Originally posted by Bravesteel
What if the CKC was revived for the DM'S Guild and then, separately, there was a series for going into detail about regions, something along the lines of Candlekeep Compendium Presents: Cormyr. I don't feel like burying an extensive region-by-region project in the CKC is a good idea.
As I said above, I would prefer the gazeteer-style treatment of The Realms (in lieu of an actual FRCG) to be done by WotC themselves, or at least, more fully backed by them than the DM's Guild, and that could possibly be achieved through TEGG, if they were willing. Their resources may already be stretched a bit thin, though. I don't want such a thing being done here, as 'fan work', because the whole point would be lost (an OFFICIAL update/CG of FR for 5e).
And, of course, we could feature short stories (in a CKC) as well, by some of our known authors, but that would have to be a separate 'deal', because they may not want to provide material that would only benefit the operation of Candlekeep. So long as each volume has its share of 'crunchy bits', it might be a way of slipping that stuff into the DM's Guild. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 12 Dec 2016 : 03:06:26
I'm always up for more and more FR Lore. I've been very pleased with WotC using FR as the core setting making sure to have loto of familiart things which leads in to the upcoming movie better (like with characters for Marvel movies) |
| EltonRobb |
Posted - 12 Dec 2016 : 00:37:26
quote:
Originally posted by Bravesteel
quote:
Originally posted by Adhriva
You'd still have to find and get permission from all the attributing authors of those articles.
Only if we wanted to put the old CKC up. I think it would be smart to simply revamp it from the ground floor and any authors that want to refresh their old CKC articles for the new version could do so.
This could work. |
| Bravesteel |
Posted - 11 Dec 2016 : 23:48:42
quote:
Originally posted by Adhriva
You'd still have to find and get permission from all the attributing authors of those articles.
Only if we wanted to put the old CKC up. I think it would be smart to simply revamp it from the ground floor and any authors that want to refresh their old CKC articles for the new version could do so. |
| Adhriva |
Posted - 11 Dec 2016 : 23:45:53
You'd still have to find and get permission from all the attributing authors of those articles. |
|
|
