| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Feb 2010 : 04:37:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I'd have to agree with Cleric Generic as to which one is better, it depends. I found the 3E supplement sooo rich with lore and a good balance of crunch thrown in that I reference it quite frequently, no matter what edition I'm using. The main problem I have is that its too saturated with information that I feel I can't do anything without stepping on toes, falling into a Lich's den, or offending some arch-wizard turned barkeep in every town, city, or hammlet.
I don't know if it's me or what, but I just don't see the over-saturation that everyone talks about with the 3E book. For instance, in the FRCS, Cormyr has 4¼ pages of lore on geography, towns, people and plots/rumors. The 4E FRCG has 4 pages of the same.
Here's a breakdown, just from the table of contents of each:
FRCS FRCG
Intro ................4 pages 2 pages
Character-building ..46 pages 0 pages*
Magic ...............22 pages 12 pages
Life in Faeûn .......22 pages 7 pages
Regions ............134 pages 154 pages
Deities .............28 pages 22 pages
History .............12 pages 3 pages
Organizations .......12 pages 50 pages
Adventures ..........10 pages 32 pages
GMing ...............13 pages 0 pages*
I think it's pretty glaring that history and life in Faerûn was chopped (by 75%/66%) while the Organizations (the baddies waiting to be defeated by your adventuring party) and the adventures themselves have been increased (by over 400% and 300% respectively).
*The lack of Character-building or GMing items isn't meant to imply that their isn't any of this information available in the book, just that it's been folded into other sections.
|
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 20 Feb 2010 04:38:16 |
 |
|
|
Cleric Generic
Senior Scribe
United Kingdom
565 Posts |
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 20 Feb 2010 : 23:56:17
|
| Oh, it was definitely more dense, but I honestly don't believe that it was so crammed with information that it felt like you were tripping over one monster/encounter after another. Yes, there were a lot of books created that built on that information but, and this is pretty key, these books were published according to what WotC saw as a demand for information. Even now, if they saw a large enough outcry for published material (beyond the DDI stuff), they would fire up the printers yet again. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 03:44:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
. . . or offending some arch-wizard turned barkeep in every town, city, or hammlet.
Damn, I hadn't heard that canard in months.
It's not borne out by all of Realmslore, let alone the basic overview information in the 2001 FRCS, which as I recall devotes about one page to each 20,000 square miles. |
Edited by - Faraer on 21 Feb 2010 03:53:24 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 04:08:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
. . . or offending some arch-wizard turned barkeep in every town, city, or hammlet.
Damn, I hadn't heard that canard in months.
It's not borne out by all of Realmslore, let alone the basic overview information in the 2001 FRCS, which as I recall devotes about one page to each 20,000 square miles.
It was an exaggeration, I know, but it still illustrates the fact that in many 3e supplements for FR there was so much detail that I believe the efforts could've been better used somewhere else. Why did the authors of said supplements feel the need to not only name the owner of bars/shops/etc. but give them alignments and class levels? I just don't think it was necessary and now because of that, it's canon. I know I can change what-ever I want, but I prefer the "lite" apporach. Great taste, less filling IMO. |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 04:14:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
. . . or offending some arch-wizard turned barkeep in every town, city, or hammlet.
Damn, I hadn't heard that canard in months.
It's not borne out by all of Realmslore, let alone the basic overview information in the 2001 FRCS, which as I recall devotes about one page to each 20,000 square miles.
It was an exaggeration, I know, but it still illustrates the fact that in many 3e supplements for FR there was so much detail that I believe the efforts could've been better used somewhere else. Why did the authors of said supplements feel the need to not only name the owner of bars/shops/etc. but give them alignments and class levels? I just don't think it was necessary and now because of that, it's canon. I know I can change what-ever I want, but I prefer the "lite" apporach. Great taste, less filling IMO.
Let me get this straight... You prefer as little information as possible about the Realms, but you're participating in the forums that details the Realms as much as possible and where the most popular thread is asking Ed for more and more details on every barmaid and noble half-mentioned in a short story.
Edit: After posting, I feel I have to add an apology to Diffan. I don't mean to offend anyone, but sometimes stuff just gets the better of me and I feel I need to respond. Again, I'm sorry Diffan. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 21 Feb 2010 04:15:47 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 04:24:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
I don't know if it's me or what, but I just don't see the over-saturation that everyone talks about with the 3E book. For instance, in the FRCS, Cormyr has 4¼ pages of lore on geography, towns, people and plots/rumors. The 4E FRCG has 4 pages of the same.
Here's a breakdown, just from the table of contents of each:
FRCS FRCG
Intro ................4 pages 2 pages
Character-building ..46 pages 0 pages*
Magic ...............22 pages 12 pages
Life in Faeûn .......22 pages 7 pages
Regions ............134 pages 154 pages
Deities .............28 pages 22 pages
History .............12 pages 3 pages
Organizations .......12 pages 50 pages
Adventures ..........10 pages 32 pages
GMing ...............13 pages 0 pages*
I think it's pretty glaring that history and life in Faerûn was chopped (by 75%/66%) while the Organizations (the baddies waiting to be defeated by your adventuring party) and the adventures themselves have been increased (by over 400% and 300% respectively).
*The lack of Character-building or GMing items isn't meant to imply that their isn't any of this information available in the book, just that it's been folded into other sections.
As Cleric Generic said, the text was much smaller, but that was taken into account. Not to mention that the 3e book had 21 extra pages to play with. I don't know if there was a limit to how many pages they had to use, but if it was restricted, then I think we got the meat of the campaign under those restrictions. If the print was smaller, then we probably would've received even more information.
They chopped the history of FR mainly because it's been a black-hole for the past century. They do however reference GHotR to fill the history before the void (yes, I know it's just there so people will buy it and make WotC more $$).
And the saturation I mention isn't in the page count or how many words the book has, but the content of those words. To me, it felt as there wasn't much wilderness or "Forgotten" areas left to explore in the places my gaming group liked to play in. It was as if every town already had their heros/heroins to defend it, and evil never won in the setting.
For me, I like the darker look FR has taken. It's not exactly the Points of Light campaign everyone feared, but it does have a more dangerous feel if you leave the safety of your town's walls. |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 04:36:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Let me get this straight... You prefer as little information as possible about the Realms, but you're participating in the forums that details the Realms as much as possible and where the most popular thread is asking Ed for more and more details on every barmaid and noble half-mentioned in a short story.
Edit: After posting, I feel I have to add an apology to Diffan. I don't mean to offend anyone, but sometimes stuff just gets the better of me and I feel I need to respond. Again, I'm sorry Diffan.
It's cool man, no offense taken. But in a sense, yes that's how I feel. I've never asked Ed for more info, haven't checked out those scrolls, and don't feel the need for more detail when I can do that myself. I love the Realms for so many reasons, some of which include the (now reduced) Pantheon, cities/countries, geography, vastness and scope of Faerun, diversity, and how things often don't interconnect with themselves. An exmple of that would be famine in Waterdeep might not overly effect the city of Silverymoon or Suzail. It seems realistic to me. But that realism doesn't need to be sooo detailed that my own ideas and thoughts wouldn't matter in a canon-run world such as Toril. And yes, I understand that in My Realms, I can do what I want and discard what I want, but when a player would contradic the name of a bar or it's owner, or have some additional or deeper detail of a place that goes against what I might have planned, well that sorta sucks, lol. Not to say that my players would go out of their way to do that, but it's happened through no fault of their own.
I get that your passionate about the Realms, and that's awesome. And yes, the drastic changes WotC made to this beloved setting have really hindered/split much of the fan-pool to the new setting, but the changes have been soo much more to my liking than before. It's just the difference of opinion.
Again, it's all good. If I could I'd buy you a beer I would  |
Edited by - Diffan on 21 Feb 2010 04:40:11 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 04:37:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It was an exaggeration, I know, but it still illustrates the fact that in many 3e supplements for FR there was so much detail that I believe the efforts could've been better used somewhere else.
I've found that kind of exaggeration has plagued discourse about the Realms for years in two main ways: miscommunication when it's not clear what level of hyperbole someone is using, and too many people actually believing the exaggerations, because it's what 'everyone [a few loud people in particular online communities] knows'.quote:
Why did the authors of said supplements feel the need to not only name the owner of bars/shops/etc. but give them alignments and class levels?
Ed and many others have discussed at length the advantages to his lifetime project of progressively detailing the Realms in his campaign notes and, a long way behind playing catch-up, in print and now online. One of the big ones is that it enables people who aren't world-class improvisers to run a busy, alive-feeling multi-stranded campaign that feels like a real world. These advantages are no more mysterious than those of working from a brief structure. And of course there are many secondary worlds designed the minimalist way, and few that give us what the Realms does, for those who appreciate the detailed lore, and few people with Ed's extraordinary creativity to create them for us.
He's has said many times that it's the characters more than the geography or history who are the Realms. Giving their name and alignment (a shorthand for their behaviour and moral outlook) is the most basic information imaginable. Class levels are intended by Ed to be 'rough rules of thumb if you don't decide otherwise', as discussed in the DM's Sourcebook of the Realms, and the impulse to stat out characters consistently and at length was an imposed TSR and then Wizards one. |
Edited by - Faraer on 21 Feb 2010 04:42:56 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 21 Feb 2010 : 18:40:49
|
| I should note that WotC no longer prints GHotR, so I am unsure of any profits they are still gaining from it in 4e ;) |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2010 : 23:36:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
I've found that kind of exaggeration has plagued discourse about the Realms for years in two main ways: miscommunication when it's not clear what level of hyperbole someone is using, and too many people actually believing the exaggerations, because it's what 'everyone [a few loud people in particular online communities] knows'.
I thought the exaggeration was pretty clear, but next time I'll try to be more....blunt. Sorry for causing any confusion.
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Ed and many others have discussed at length the advantages to his lifetime project of progressively detailing the Realms in his campaign notes and, a long way behind playing catch-up, in print and now online. One of the big ones is that it enables people who aren't world-class improvisers to run a busy, alive-feeling multi-stranded campaign that feels like a real world. These advantages are no more mysterious than those of working from a brief structure. And of course there are many secondary worlds designed the minimalist way, and few that give us what the Realms does, for those who appreciate the detailed lore, and few people with Ed's extraordinary creativity to create them for us.
As much as I admire the the depth and scope Ed and other's have contributed into the setting, to me it sort of hampers free thinking on the part of a DM. Again, I point to the knowledge a player has over his DM and bringing that knowledge to the table. In a canon setting such as FR, the more detail = more canon and that means less of an "artistic" license. Personally I enjoy more freedom.
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
He's has said many times that it's the characters more than the geography or history who are the Realms. Giving their name and alignment (a shorthand for their behaviour and moral outlook) is the most basic information imaginable. Class levels are intended by Ed to be 'rough rules of thumb if you don't decide otherwise', as discussed in the DM's Sourcebook of the Realms, and the impulse to stat out characters consistently and at length was an imposed TSR and then Wizards one.
I never agreed with the imposed statting of the iconic characters (and deities) in the Realms for a number of reasons, one of which seems that some of the designers really don't know the 1st thing about character creation or synergy.
And I think that even extends to the small "blurbs" that certain NPCs would get along-side the flavor and detail about a specific area/bar/inn/etc.. I mean, I don't need to know that Jannar Somberholm is (N male Chondathan commoner 3/artisan 3/rogue 2/hexblade 7/) and he runs a small inn. Seriously? If your going to include detail about this guy, then put in details that will matter to my game, not statistics and levels that probably won't have any place at the table unless you want to make him a main villain. And if you do, the levels they give probably aren't going to be good to begin with.
Of course this is just my observation and opinion and I don't intend to offend anyone here. |
Edited by - Diffan on 23 Feb 2010 23:41:05 |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 27 Feb 2010 : 16:44:02
|
The 3E FRCS was written with the goal of condensing all the (then) known lore and giving a DM as much as possible to work with in the Realms, all in one tome, in addition to updating each region slightly based on current events (drow invasion of Cormanthor, war in Cormyr, etc...).
It's a fact WotC cut over 100 pages from the FRCS in order to reach their page count limit.
Contrast with the FRCG, which was not written to be a super-summary. If you printed the FRCS in the FRCG style larger font and unused space on the page format, you'd have an absolutely huge book.
The FRCS never made me feel overwhelmed in terms of what I could do as DM (I liked ignoring stuff, though). In my opinion the Realms under 2nd Edition D&D were much more prone to the "another super high level wizard over the next hedge" problem. |
|
|
|
UkplayerX
Acolyte
United Kingdom
2 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2010 : 12:35:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So you played with a photo-copied set of Rules, too, eh Steven?
Now THAT takes me back. One of us would sneak into the school photocopier room while another would be on lookout. That's what happens when teachers let 6th formers use the photocopier!! LOL |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2010 : 13:38:48
|
Welcome to the Keep X. |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2010 : 19:13:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It was an exaggeration, I know, but it still illustrates the fact that in many 3e supplements for FR there was so much detail that I believe the efforts could've been better used somewhere else.
I've found that kind of exaggeration has plagued discourse about the Realms for years in two main ways: miscommunication when it's not clear what level of hyperbole someone is using, and too many people actually believing the exaggerations, because it's what 'everyone [a few loud people in particular online communities] knows'.quote:
Why did the authors of said supplements feel the need to not only name the owner of bars/shops/etc. but give them alignments and class levels?
Ed and many others have discussed at length the advantages to his lifetime project of progressively detailing the Realms in his campaign notes and, a long way behind playing catch-up, in print and now online. One of the big ones is that it enables people who aren't world-class improvisers to run a busy, alive-feeling multi-stranded campaign that feels like a real world. These advantages are no more mysterious than those of working from a brief structure. And of course there are many secondary worlds designed the minimalist way, and few that give us what the Realms does, for those who appreciate the detailed lore, and few people with Ed's extraordinary creativity to create them for us.
He's has said many times that it's the characters more than the geography or history who are the Realms. Giving their name and alignment (a shorthand for their behaviour and moral outlook) is the most basic information imaginable. Class levels are intended by Ed to be 'rough rules of thumb if you don't decide otherwise', as discussed in the DM's Sourcebook of the Realms, and the impulse to stat out characters consistently and at length was an imposed TSR and then Wizards one.
This post, and the exchange between Ashe and Diffan, got my gears turning on this topic. It's the level of detail that caused me to fall in love with the Realms, and I think that the only excess in that direction was mentioned by Faraer in the last sentence above; at the risk of breaking a metaphor (pun intended), too much crunch is bad for one's teeth. Lore is tender, juicy, and (unlike a steak) certainly not rare and definitely well-done... which most of it has been, including what I've seen of the post-Spellplague lore. The Spellplague itself... I won't go there.
Anyone with the rulebooks can stat out an NPC; I buy a published campaign setting for the NPC names, location names, historical notes, and other creative stuff that I'm not the greatest at coming up with in droves on my own. With that in mind, Wizbro's guidelines for crunch/lore ratio in DDI articles are what has kept me from subscribing. I don't play 4E, although I have adopted some of the core mechanic changes (opposed rolls, at-will/encounter/daily spells) for my 3.x/4/Pathfinder hybrid system (which is still under construction).
Anyway, that's my 2 cents on the debate; I'm glad I didn't find this scroll 2 years ago when I first joined the 'Keep, because I was a bitter and twisted individual back then thanks to the fresh spellscars. I'm much better now. |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
Edited by - Jakk on 09 May 2010 19:17:23 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2010 : 22:16:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
quote:
Originally posted by Jakk<snip> I'm much better now.
No you're not... That's just the meds kicking in. 
 I knew there was a more logical explanation... |
Playing in the Realms since the Old Grey Box (1987)... and *still* having fun with material published before 2008, despite the NDA'd lore.
If it's comparable in power with non-magical abilities, it's not magic. |
|
|
|
dragonfriend
Seeker
Italy
65 Posts |
Posted - 21 May 2010 : 11:38:49
|
| After reading 4e CG I can say that the difference with the 3e CS is that, as a realms player, I can play without the 4e book (that is good by the way) but a can't without the 3e CS. It is the definitive guide, even more than the 2e boxed set. |
|
|
|
Lirdolin
Learned Scribe
Germany
198 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2010 : 09:58:09
|
I think that the main difference between 4th Ed. and all the previous incarnations is that it devalues the books of it's forerunners on a scale not seen before.
This concerns Lore and Mechanics.
Where I could use my AD&D books almost without problems in 3rd Ed.(just making some NSC older or let their heirs show up)it's almost impossible with 4th Ed.
Take Volos Guides, they are almost useless now, because it's not even sure that all landmarks or cities still remain! Not to mention that probably most NSC mentioned are dead, no, probably even their heirs heirs are dead by now.
And worse: No replacement in Sight because of Wizard's "All are One -no setting specific rulebooks after the Campaign/Players Guide and Adventure" philosophie.
Taking my old PC's from AD&D to 3rd.Ed was relativly simple. Thanks to the timejump and rules I sometimes doesn't even recognize as remotely related to the game I play sofar it's next to impossible to convert the PC's to 4th ed.(which by the way is intended by the creators, but hey they graciously gave us ten realmsian years to finish our campaigns - after which the world our heros fought so hard for to preserve goes boom and the goddess they rescued in the last three great adventures is killed - did anyone at wizards consider the possibility that my current campaign would take way longer than 10 years or that I didn't want to destroy all the works of my players characters?) |
Edited by - Lirdolin on 22 May 2010 10:03:30 |
|
|
|
froglegg
Learned Scribe
317 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jun 2010 : 17:50:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brian R. James
Bah, you young whippersnappers with your 3E vs 4E. I don't need a comparison to know the 1st-Edition Gray Box setting is better than anything which followed.
+1 
John |
Long live Alias and Dragonbait! Kate Novak and Jeff Grubb the Realms need you more then ever!
On my word as a sage nothing within these pages is false, but not all of it may prove to be true. - Elminster of Shadowdale
The Old Grey Box gets better with age! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4436 Posts |
Posted - 18 Jun 2010 : 04:50:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lirdolin
I think that the main difference between 4th Ed. and all the previous incarnations is that it devalues the books of it's forerunners on a scale not seen before.
This concerns Lore and Mechanics.
I would say mechanics, yes. But not lore. All the stuff that has come before is still valid. It still happened and is still FR's history. And as far as devaluing previous material, I don't feel the same way. I've been able to convert A LOT of information and material from previous editions to 4th edition. From monster stats, prestige classes to paragon paths, organizations, feats, etc... and all with relative balance. Sure, it took some work and I don't expect WotC to do it for me, but it's something I love to do and I'm willing to share with anyone with a like interest. It's sorta the reason why we should have a strong community.
quote:
Originally posted by Lirdolin
Where I could use my AD&D books almost without problems in 3rd Ed.(just making some NSC older or let their heirs show up)it's almost impossible with 4th Ed.
As I've said previously, I've been able to convert much of 3/3.5 to 4th but as I don't own much (if any at all) AD&D supplements, I can't say I can convert them to 4th. But as far as NPC and what-not, they're not that hard to convert and because they don't follow construction rules as PCs do, it makes them much easier to stat IMO.
quote:
Originally posted by Lirdolin
Take Volos Guides, they are almost useless now, because it's not even sure that all landmarks or cities still remain! Not to mention that probably most NSC mentioned are dead, no, probably even their heirs heirs are dead by now.
And worse: No replacement in Sight because of Wizard's "All are One -no setting specific rulebooks after the Campaign/Players Guide and Adventure" philosophie.
I downloaded alot of Volo's Guides from the WotC site and I use them pretty requrarly for info, names, town size, and campaign Ideas. I like the fact that not everything is handed to me on a silver platter and I like creating stuff that works with both the older settings and my own ideas without much conflict.
EDIT: Sorry if this came off as a "I'm better than you" sort of response. That's not what i'm going for here. I'm just trying to convey a different perspective I had with the transisition between editions. I don't expect people (espically on these forums) to really go the lengths I had in trying to bridge the gap between pre- and post-spellplague Realms and try to convert many of the unique pieces that make up the Realms (mostly from a mechanical stand-point). And I agree that the new design/format of D&D is very much different than previous editions and it's time consuming to change over previous info from a campaign.
|
Edited by - Diffan on 18 Jun 2010 05:55:25 |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jun 2010 : 23:22:10
|
Jumping in for a moment: quote:
Originally posted by Lirdolin
Take Volos Guides, they are almost useless now, because it's not even sure that all landmarks or cities still remain!
How is this even remotely close to being true?
If a Dungeon Master running a 4E REalms game is not sure a city or landmark exists in the post-Spellplague Realms, what is to stop him or her from just using it anyway?
Dungeon Masters using all editions of the game have regularly added in extra cities, landmarks, NPCs, towns, magic items, monsters, etc...to their Forgotten Realms games, because that's what Dungeon Masters do.
They also borrow from other gaming sources, other gaming worlds, etc...and use this material in their Realms games.
No intention of causing a thread-ambush. And I apologize if my remarks sound critical (that's not my intent).
I'm just really confused as to why a Dungeon Master would think it necessary to discard a perfectly useable source of gaming material, just because it dealt with an older era of the Realms.
EDIT: I suppose if a DM were running a game that was designed to follow canon source material absolutely, then the issue of trying to do this kind of game in the 4E Realms would be a real problem since exact source material (like Volo’s Guides) wouldn’t help.
But then by that logic you’d have the exact same “things have changed too much” problem with Volo’s Guide to Cormyr right after the War with Nalavarra ended and half the Forrest Kingdom and its major NPCs were engulfed in flames and killed off.
It’s true to say that the immediate utility/usefulness of the Volo’s Guides has diminished, but only in the sense that they’re out of date (yet that’s debatable; after all, if you run a game set in the exact era of time those books were written for, you have no problem at all).
In my opinion, Volo’s Guides are still veritable Realmslore goldmines of lore, names, ideas, places, magic items, plots and descriptions.
|
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 24 Jun 2010 00:08:54 |
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 04:05:11
|
I could use my Volo Guides wholecloth in a 4e game, and my players would be none the wiser.
|
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 14:37:26
|
| I photocopied a recipe for Stag Sausage in one of the guides and gave that as a player handout in a 4E game. Now they want to find more recipes. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Zireael
Master of Realmslore
Poland
1190 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 18:37:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
I could use my Volo Guides wholecloth in a 4e game, and my players would be none the wiser.
That's a great idea in itself. The 4e FRCS is quite lacking in fluff (or was it crunch?), oh, you know, the non-mechanical information that appeals to most of DMs and players. |
SiNafay Vrinn, the daughter of Lloth, from Ched Nasad!
http://zireael07.wordpress.com/ |
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 20:20:53
|
Actually, the 4E FRCG is loaded with fluff. Page after page of it.
Thing is, it was a lot of broad, sweeping kind of fluff that, I admit, looks rather bland when taken as a whole.
WotC did try adding lots of spices (i.e. adventure ideas) on every page, but if you're the kind of Realms DM who prefers (or was brought up on) nice, crisp salads (i.e., uber-detailed Realmslore books) for every meal, it must suck having to switch to tofu with sugar on it.
Though for us really old school grognards, being a DM is about taking a nice base and cooking up something awesome around it.
Some of us older types don't care to have all the work already done for us, because we can do just as good a job —if not better— all by ourselves.
Which is to say I don't have to cook for everyone, just a party of four at the only table in the joint. ;) |
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 24 Jun 2010 20:22:16 |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 20:31:36
|
| Mr. Miscellany, I think you are missing the whole group of us (of which I think there are a lot) who while enjoyed the extra details as a DM, what we really loved was lore for lore's sake alone. Even if I had never participated as a DM, I would still have wanted to buy all the books I did in 3.x for every ounce of lore I could squeeze out of them (I have read almost every one cover-to-cover). And from what I hear, the books from the previous editions of the Realms are even more lore-filled. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Mr_Miscellany
Senior Scribe
545 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 21:06:30
|
I’m one of those people too. ;)
But I’m also confused. Why would people who like Realms books for the sake of lore alone distance themselves (or rather, feel not served by) the 4E FRCG?
It’s full of lore, most of it new. It’s not hyper-detailed, nor is it printed in painfully small font, but the lore is there and that’s undeniable.
It just seems to me that anyone who enjoys lore for its own sake would be doing themselves a disservice by not picking up basically the one source of new information on the Realms and reading it.
|
Edited by - Mr_Miscellany on 24 Jun 2010 21:14:43 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 21:48:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr_Miscellany
I’m one of those people too. ;)
But I’m also confused. Why would people who like Realms books for the sake of lore alone distance themselves (or rather, feel not served by) the 4E FRCG?
It’s full of lore, most of it new. It’s not hyper-detailed, nor is it printed in painfully small font, but the lore is there and that’s undeniable.
It just seems to me that anyone who enjoys lore for its own sake would be doing themselves a disservice by not picking up basically the one source of new information on the Realms and reading it.
It is filled with lore, but it's lore that doesn't interest us. Like turning Wheloon into Escape from NY or the floating islands, or the huge crater that the inner sea is flowing into (but never filling up, which would seem to lead to a flooding of the Underdark and a serious drop in surface water, IMO).
It's not that there isn't any lore, or even that it's poorly written. It's the fact that they changed the face of Faerûn so much that I no longer recognize it, so it doesn't interest me. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 24 Jun 2010 : 22:03:10
|
IMO, it was poorly developed lore (the bits I have read). Not poorly written. The lore in the 3.x books felt like expansion upon what I was introduced to in the books. The FRCG lore just served to remind me how much they changed with the advent of 4e. If they had put more time into how and whys of the changes, and less time into what they were changing, I would have been much more satisfied. Simple ret-conned "it has just always been that way" explanations just piss me off, not soothe my feelings of hurt.
Why just ignore that 3e Dragonborn instead of coming up with a story as to how they became the 4e Dragonborn? -- That is just one example.
Honestly, with changes as big as they made, I want detailed reasons why they are that way now. And the one of the very vehicles that they created to help do that (Countdown to the Realms), they cancelled. Also, I like small print. |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
3e FRCS vs 4e FRCG
