| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 23 Apr 2008 : 22:06:03
SPOILER FOR UNDEAD
One of the reason promoting the Sellplague and 4e was that the chosen were too powerfull and general mucked up the world.
Spoilers for Undead ahead!!!
After reading Undead, Szass Tam is all but a CHosen of Bane in Power and action(even if he is using Bane). I quite enjoyed it in fact! But how do the Wotc explain it??? Seems like hipocracy to me. Using a fair measuring stick, Tam is way too powerful, time to hit the reset! It would be easy, another wave of blue fire a year or two after the first and presto!
There is no way in the 9 hells to adventure antwhere near Thay without Tam mucking up your campaign with his vast new sphere of influence.
I actually have no problem with it, but it sure makes it look like the Sellplague was a surgical strike meant to criple and kill Mystra and her chosen.
Thanks for reading my rant..............maybe I have overblown it, but seeing a NPC do exactly the kind of things that the chosen supposedly were guilty of just kinda burns as you swallow it ya know?
Mod Edit: RW, I've installed a more prominent SPOILER notice, since such a note won't fit in your scroll's title. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 16:49:59
Baldur's Gate II, when you're in the first market in the game, there's a portrait of Hank in the back. If you click on it, it tells you it was commissioned in respect to him and his adventuring parties and talked about how his bow needed no arrows and shot energy bolts. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 16:45:51
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Heh... I loved that Grand Tour comic. Mostly because it placed the D&D cartoon as canon to the Realms. (Venger was a Manshoon clone!!) 
Now I am sorry I missed out on that comic. To bad the cartoon never got a more central place in the Realms 
The artwork was pretty bad... Bobby somehow looked older than everyone else. Other than a brief bit at the beginning and at the end, it was all Elminster and Presto.
Someone once told me that the cartoon gets a nod in one of the Baldur's Gate games, too. Whoever it was told me that the characters are seen in a portrait on a wall, in some inn or something. |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 15:36:03
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Heh... I loved that Grand Tour comic. Mostly because it placed the D&D cartoon as canon to the Realms. (Venger was a Manshoon clone!!)
Now I am sorry I missed out on that comic. To bad the cartoon never got a more central place in the Realms |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 15:23:23
Heh... I loved that Grand Tour comic. Mostly because it placed the D&D cartoon as canon to the Realms. (Venger was a Manshoon clone!!) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 15:20:16
WotC should re-print The Grand Tour comic and hand it out at conventions. That was a great little introduction into the geography of Faerūn, and also how things work.
Elminster whisks a 'Newb' wizard around the Realms, and shows him all the dangers and all the things we need heroes for, and also explains why he can't be everywhere at once. He basically says "So you want to be a hero? Well, here's all the crap your going to have to deal with on a daily basis."
If Elminster is Superman (or Ironman, depending on you company-of-preference), then you should look at it this way - why does Metropolis still need police? Does Superman handle every bank robbery? Half the time he's off in another galaxy (or dimension) fighting off cosmic threats. Thats Elminster. You still need police (or the town gaurd in FR's case).
As for the PCs - they're Batman (or Daredevil). THEY are supposed to take care of the Bank Robbers (Highwaymen) and Orc attacks (Biker Gangs). However, unlike Batman and Daredevil, PCs can hope to someday have the same power as 'the big guns', and fight off the 'cosmic menaces'... and with D&D, they CAN.
Without the Fantastic Four, Dr. Doom (Manshoon?) would have annihilated all the 'small potatoes' long ago (like Daerdevil, or The Punisher).
Now thats just comic-books, but I can give you a RW example. What if your unit was pinned-down by guerillas/terrorists in some foreign land, and your CO wanted to call in an air-strike for cover, to get your arses out of there?
Are you going to go all 'crybabby' with the pilots because THEY "stole your thunder"? Hell no! In the RW, you are GLAD there are bigger guns looking out for and protecting your behind when you need it. It doesn't make the guys in the field any less the hero.
Anyone who had a problem with Chosen, the Seven, Harpers, etc... needs to look inside for the real problem. When you feel 'threatened' by those with more power then you, then you have some serious issues.
Instead of being part of team, they want all the glory for themselves... thats NO hero.... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 15:08:43
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
The problem I see with Candlekeep and as evidenced very clearly in this thread is that there's not much respect for the opinion of the average Realms gamer if it so much as hints at going against the accepted dogma.
I missed this one earlier... And I quite disagree with you. Disagreeing with a mistaken impression is far from the same thing as not respecting opinions that go against the accepted dogma. There are a whole lot of different opinions on a whole lot of different aspects of the Realms. Heck, we have people that don't even like the Time of Troubles. If ignoring canon events isn't going against the "accepted dogma", then I don't know what is. However, I've not seen any disrespect being shown there...
I don't see that anyone's opinion is being disrepected, and it's certainly not a forum-wide thing. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 15:01:28
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
So unless one considers 4e rules better and also prefers to generally build the realms oneself with little official lore background, there are rather few incentives to change edition... 
Hence the reason a few of us are switching to Pathfinder (or each individual's favorite rule set) and using the lore we want.
Which, as has been mentioned elsewhere, what we should've been doing all along.  |
| skychrome |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 14:42:21
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Not according to the current business plan. The current business plan is that all forthcoming lore that pertains to FR will either be in novels or part of the DDI. Until they change their business plan or 5E comes around, we're not going to see any new Realms sourcebooks.
This is another of the objections a great many people have.
WHAT????  Awwww man... 
Well, at least one may say that it is consistent with what they claim to be the idea behind 4e.
To a certain degree I think it would be more bitter to 3.X fans, if they had nuked the lore of the realms (saying "there is too much lore")only to start building the same quantity of new lore for 4e...
However that does basically imply that 4e is and will actually be not much more than a set of rules with lore being defined by DMs...
So unless one considers 4e rules better and also prefers to generally build the realms oneself with little official lore background, there are rather few incentives to change edition...
- |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 13:46:40
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
No, I get your point. I would also get irritated if someone instrumentalized characters that I personally like very much to be one of the main reasons for 4e.
I know that Mystra's chosen are more complex than I put it, still they do not work that much for me and I would say this also if there was no 4e, it is completely disconected from that.
Not a big deal, the setting is fortunately big enough to make this a minor issue.
I cannot even provide a rational argument why I do not hook up with them.
In that case, we're cool. I can understand a disconnect with characters (even though I love Elaine's writing, I never 'got' the Magehound novels). |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 09:25:05
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
The problem I see with Candlekeep and as evidenced very clearly in this thread is that there's not much respect for the opinion of the average Realms gamer if it so much as hints at going against the accepted dogma.
Well, I cant see which dogma I am following. I have never had a problem no matter what differences I pointed out when it comes to my version of the Realms. I cant remember there being much talk one way or another about the choices people make for their own, gaming-version of the Realms. But an opinion on the Realms as presented and written should be discussed.
Myths about the Realms, such as the constant vigilance of the Chosen or Elminster as Ed's alter-ego should, in my opinion at least, be discussed. In a courteous and respectful manner of course. Unfortunately that doesn't always happen, especially when the 4ed. (which is a part of the Realms and should therefore be as valid a subject as anything else Realmsian, no matter what ones personal feelings are)is involved.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 05:25:37
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
So far 4e has dumped more landmines than positive stuff for me, but I also recognize that it is still too early to give a final judgement on this considering there are lots of sourcebooks yet to be published.
Not according to the current business plan. The current business plan is that all forthcoming lore that pertains to FR will either be in novels or part of the DDI. Until they change their business plan or 5E comes around, we're not going to see any new Realms sourcebooks.
This is another of the objections a great many people have. |
| skychrome |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 05:00:25
No, I get your point. I would also get irritated if someone instrumentalized characters that I personally like very much to be one of the main reasons for 4e.
I know that Mystra's chosen are more complex than I put it, still they do not work that much for me and I would say this also if there was no 4e, it is completely disconected from that.
Not a big deal, the setting is fortunately big enough to make this a minor issue.
I cannot even provide a rational argument why I do not hook up with them.
|
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 04:32:47
But see, that's the argument we're talking about. The 'X-men' or 'Justice League' of the Realms. Yes, they are powerful figures in the Realms, but do they go around being do-gooders all the time? No. They aren't some cosmic force trying to make sure everyone plays nice.
Go read up on Ed's thread about some of the Chosen that have never been written about (I think it was talked about a week or two ago). There have been chosen that their main purpose was to travel to other planes and places and bring back magic to Faerūn that was new and different. A big portion of Elminster's job description was placing magic items and artifacts around the Realms for adventurers to find and use. And it they aren't placed there for 'goodly' folk to use to fight evil, but for the advancement of magic, for good or ill.
The point is that the Chosen aren't there to fight evil, they are there to make sure magic is available to all that want to use it. To encourage people to study spellbooks and find new ways of magic. And here's the key to all that. If Mystra truly wanted the Chosen to simply 'wipe out the evil baddies', she would REFUSE them access to the weave. No magic, no spells, no items so that a lowly fighter with a sharp knife could take them out. But she sees the importance of good and evil to bring out new magic from old.
Unfortunately, there *was* a time (discussed during the Trial of Cyric novel) that she was accused of lacking in her duties because of her goodly nature as Midnight. But from that point forward, she strived more to being non-judgmental about the people calling on her for magic. (At least in my interpretations.)
I hope this makes it a bit more clear as to where I'm coming from and while the subject kind of annoys me when the 'Justice League of Mystra' stuff comes up. And I do understand why you may view it that way and that I may not have changed your mind and will respect your view and speak no more on this. |
| skychrome |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 04:19:53
I understand that the chosen as an excuse for 4e are a sensitive topic, especially in a non-4e forum.
Apparently the power of the Chosen of Mystra is a bad excuse for explaining 4e, still I understand that part of the players did want them to lose power.
Apparently it is up to every DM and players which role the chosen play in the realms.
I like the concept of the chosen of gods very much and on the other hand I feel that Mystra's Chosen are a bit overpowered for my taste.
I do not know how to explain it well, but for me there is a difference in the general feeling as a player in a world, where there are powerful NPC, but not a whole bunch of X-Men that work on behalf of a godess dedicated to good.
Something I cannot explain rationally, especially as no one obliges me to even recognize them.
If I was playing in truly evil aligned groups, it would be different I guess as they would then figure as what Szass Tam may be to good aligned groups: the villain(s) of some great adventures in a great setting. 
Now, all of this is no reason to make an edition change. So far 4e has dumped more landmines than positive stuff for me, but I also recognize that it is still too early to give a final judgement on this considering there are lots of sourcebooks yet to be published.
Personally I feel lately more and more attracted to pre-1370 or rather pre-1358 settings, when realm events subjectively happened at a bit slower scale... |
| Jakk |
Posted - 22 Jul 2009 : 02:44:07
Regardless of individual feelings, I think that (ironically) 4E forced on us exactly what Ed wanted us to *choose* to do from Day 1 of the Old Gray Box: to make the Realms our own and feel free to disregard canon if and when it suited us as DMs. The sad thing is, it comes at the expense of any and all future lore possibilities unless you buy into DDi on faith that it will contain something useful to you, and even then, it still handcuffs you to the canon timeline. That, more than any specific story- or character-related decisions, is why I refuse to buy into the 4E Realms. If I'm going to have to create all my own lore anyway, it may as well be for a version of the Realms that I'm going to enjoy playing and DMing in. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 22:46:35
Oh, it's definitely just an excuse. Always had been too. I believe that Ed'd original thoughts on PCs that showed up at Elminster's tower looking for help or advice found out he was away on 'business'.
Unless you have specific plans for the NPCs to be part of your story, then any inquiries (both in-game and out-of-game) should be the DM's prerogative to say "Sorry, they're not here right now, but if you'd like to leave a message, they should be able to get back to you in a few months after they clean up after that Dragon's Rage down south."
quote:
By Mr_Miscellany
I can't help but wonder if this didn't come up during any of the design meetings during the two year process that hammered out the Spellplague. I cringe at the thought of someone saying, "Well, if we're going to reduce their power, why not eliminate them and be done with it?" Or words to that effect.
You and me both, brother. In fact there's a few of us here that harbor some suspicions on the front that it was actually something a bit more sinister. But we've promised not to discuss it in public. |
| Mr_Miscellany |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 21:52:15
Hello Ashe, quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Heh... How is it that I find I can agree and disagree with you at the same time, MM?
Well giving my poor performance in most posts (in terms of communicating without offending) I'll take that as a win.
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe RavenheartYes, it's about perception of these individuals due to the sales of novels and such highlighting them. But it is the responsibility of the DM to explain why the NPCs aren't involved if the question comes up. Even if that explanation is simply that they are too busy with an uppity wizard trying to raise an army of undead warriors in Thay.
Ah, here's where I disagree.
It's expressly not the DM's job, nor should it be. If a DM goes the route of player vs. character knowledge being wholly separate, how can the DM give the players information about otherwise highly secretive NPC's they ought not know anything about? If on the other hand the DM recognizes his players know something about the setting and are only asking what seem to them logical questions, he's left with the onerous task of answering for those very same NPCs that probably aren't part of his game, before he can get on with the task of running the adventure he or she has prepared.
And anything he comes up with is going to sound like what it is: an excuse.
Either way, this gets at my main point. One can't hand-wave away the presence of such massively well known NPCs. Their influence was always far too disproportionate to their proper place in the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe RavenheartHowever, I still stand that the argument ("Fans don't want these do-gooder NPCs in the Realms anymore") for the redesign of the Realms was not logical, nor needed, to relaunch it into 4th edition rules.
Regardless of the actual reasons why, I don't think the Chosen needed to be removed either. The destruction of Mystra would have been more than enough to reduce them. As well it would have been enough to "put them away" in the sense of progressing the setting without putting the spotlight on the Chosen again.
I can't help but wonder if this didn't come up during any of the design meetings during the two year process that hammered out the Spellplague. I cringe at the thought of someone saying, "Well, if we're going to reduce their power, why not eliminate them and be done with it?" Or words to that effect. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 21:20:53
Heh... How is it that I find I can agree and disagree with you at the same time, MM?
Yes, it's about perception of these individuals due to the sales of novels and such highlighting them. But it is the responsibility of the DM to explain why the NPCs aren't involved if the question comes up. Even if that explanation is simply that they are too busy with an uppity wizard trying to raise an army of undead warriors in Thay.
And, I agree, skychrome has the right to stand up for his beliefs, even though it turns out that most of the discussion that resulted was due to miscommunication of his original post; for which I apologized.
However, I still stand that the argument ("Fans don't want these do-gooder NPCs in the Realms anymore") for the redesign of the Realms was not logical, nor needed, to relaunch it into 4th edition rules. |
| Mr_Miscellany |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 21:09:23
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
Whatever, lesson learned. Never ever post anything here unless I am sure that I have formulated well all aspects of the idea. 
I wouldn't go that far.
If you've an opinion based on your own personal gaming experiences in the Realms, by all means share it. We should all be able to discuss our experiences in the Realms without having to pass muster with the thought police first.
The problem I see with Candlekeep and as evidenced very clearly in this thread is that there's not much respect for the opinion of the average Realms gamer if it so much as hints at going against the accepted dogma.
I -like so many before and after me- enjoy reading Realms novels, reading Realms sourcebooks and basically soaking the place up as much as possible. That TSR and then WotC (though the later to a lesser degree) chose to put the spotlight on the Chosen is and never was a DM's fault. Those companies -and not a DM nor his/her players- made the Chosen out to be like superheroes, in part because that's what they though the fans of the setting wanted more of (and for the most part they were right).
While some would argue a simple reading of the relevant source material would dispel this idea (Farear, I'm thinking of you), this is far too simplistic a notion. It's that source material that created the problem!
It should come as no surprise that most gamers with a smattering of Realms knowledge rightly ask their DM, "Why should we do this? Khelben or any of the Seven could solve the problem in a heartbeat."
That's the setting putting a problem in the DM's hands, not the other way around.
The point that -as ever- people seem to keep missing is that it's about perception. skychrome you did the right thing by standing up for yourself and what you said. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 15:04:45
I apologize for the harshness skychrome. But considering that WotC's decision to 'nuke the Realms from orbit' seems to have come about because of 'complaints' that there were too many Über-NPCs and such, it's sore subject for myself and some others.
Again, I'm sorry for the tone of my previous posts. |
| skychrome |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 15:03:59
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
About 33 evil NPCs versus about 27 good NPCs.
Yep, I can see how the evil guys were clearly outmatched.
Ashe, I wrote "PCs" not "NPCs" as from my personal subjective perception I have noted that playing groups tend to play more good than evil. However I cannot prove that empirically beyond the people I have met.
The other thing is that I am still a bit... astonished... by the rough turn in tone here after my initial Chosen post.
When I read this post now, I can see that what I wrote does not reflect the original idea behind it and to avoid being understood the way you understood it, I would have had to elaborate much more to make the point. So, the fault is mine.
However even though the post looks unqualified (which was not the intention and original idea) I still wonder if the harsh reactions really correspond to what I wrote? This has become really unpleasant.
Whatever, lesson learned. Never ever post anything here unless I am sure that I have formulated well all aspects of the idea. |
| khorne |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 13:32:32
quote:
Originally posted by Nicolai Withander
I think, that no matter what any one thougt, they wanted a game as easylly to play a WOW. So no matter the age, or skills or knowledge of the realms, a 10 year old could sit down. check atlasloot and go from there...
I'd just like to point out that thought it's easy to play WoW, it's HARD to play WoW really well. |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 03:59:00
Okay... You're claiming there are more "good" PCs than "evil" PCs in the realms pre-spellplague.
Let's see if you're right. Going through all my books and counting the 'Big Names', I come up with the following:
About 33 evil NPCs versus about 27 good NPCs.
Yep, I can see how the evil guys were clearly outmatched.
|
| skychrome |
Posted - 21 Jul 2009 : 00:42:41
Ok, misunderstanding. I thought we where talking about "more good PCs than evil PCs".
Concede to the Elminster example. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Jul 2009 : 18:59:16
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
Sorry, this is an absolutely unsubstantiated myth that has proven to be wrong many times. It makes no sense at all.
Well if you say so... from my perception it is neither unsubstantiated nor a myth.
On the other hand I would never claim to have empirical proof in favor or against this perception. Apparently you have?
-
I have yet to see any novel, play any adventure or hear of ANY group that, all of a sudden, Elminster or one of the chosen showed up and said "I'll take it from here. You go back home." And I doubt you have either.
Not only that, but as it's been pointed out, there are millions, if not tens of millions, of folks in the Realms. That's a lot of people for a dozen Chosen to try to stay on top of. Even with magic, it's just not logical to assume that any plot that threatens someone else has already got a Chosen working to stop it.
Heck, aside from Ed's books, how many of the very large number of novels and short stories set in the Realms actually involve the Chosen? Of those, how many involve the Chosen in a role more active than observation and/or directing others and letting them deal with the problem? |
| Ashe Ravenheart |
Posted - 20 Jul 2009 : 18:40:26
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
Sorry, this is an absolutely unsubstantiated myth that has proven to be wrong many times. It makes no sense at all.
Well if you say so... from my perception it is neither unsubstantiated nor a myth.
On the other hand I would never claim to have empirical proof in favor or against this perception. Apparently you have?
-
I have yet to see any novel, play any adventure or hear of ANY group that, all of a sudden, Elminster or one of the chosen showed up and said "I'll take it from here. You go back home." And I doubt you have either. |
| skychrome |
Posted - 20 Jul 2009 : 16:16:40
quote:
Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan
Sorry, this is an absolutely unsubstantiated myth that has proven to be wrong many times. It makes no sense at all.
Well if you say so... from my perception it is neither unsubstantiated nor a myth.
On the other hand I would never claim to have empirical proof in favor or against this perception. Apparently you have?
- |
| Ayunken-vanzan |
Posted - 19 Jul 2009 : 06:20:00
quote:
Originally posted by skychrome
If one considers that most players rather play good characters instead of spreading evil over Faerun, it makes sense to maintain high level villains and decrease good chosens to provide the feeling to players that they don't have to fear that suddenly a chosen appears and says "ok kids, saving Toril is my job from here on"...
Sorry, this is an absolutely unsubstantiated myth that has proven to be wrong many times. It makes no sense at all. |
| skychrome |
Posted - 19 Jul 2009 : 01:02:31
Hm.. I am no 4e lover but I do not completely agree. If there is a positive aspect of 4e, then in my opinion it is that the number of extremely powerful "good" NPCs decreased.
Yes, Szass Tam is an extremely powerful NPC but he will not compete with players in adventures where it comes to fighting mighty villains.
If one considers that most players rather play good characters instead of spreading evil over Faerun, it makes sense to maintain high level villains and decrease good chosens to provide the feeling to players that they don't have to fear that suddenly a chosen appears and says "ok kids, saving Toril is my job from here on"... |
| Jakk |
Posted - 18 Jul 2009 : 23:04:26
quote:
Originally posted by Uzzy
So, what's to stop Szass Tam teleporting in and annihilating a group of PC's at Level 3, hmm?
If I were DM'ing a bunch of Chosen-haters in 4E Realms, I would have this happen EVERY. SINGLE. SESSION. And if they complained, I'd smile and tell them "this is the world that you wanted to play in, so suck it up."  |
|
|
