| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Devils Advocate
Acolyte
USA
2 Posts |
 Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 07:13:40
|
|
So, am I a bad Forgotten Realms fan if I prefer 3.5e to 4e?
|
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3287 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 08:34:32
|
Not at all. Play what makes you happy... |
 |
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 09:30:01
|
| Edition doesn't matter here, so long as you are a Realms fan. FR is about the setting, NOT the rules you use. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3243 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 15:11:06
|
Considering we have people playing in 4E, 3.5, 3E, 2E, 1E, Pathfinder, Burning Wheel and I even heard rumors of RoleMaster; I'd say you fit in.  |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36804 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 16:22:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Devils Advocate
So, am I a bad Forgotten Realms fan if I prefer 3.5e to 4e?
We've got plenty of people that still prefer the 1E Realms, and I myself favor something between 2E and 3.xE. I've said more than once, though, that there are elements of 4E that I think can be readily backported to earlier editions and that would work quite well. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Dracons
Learned Scribe
USA
299 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 17:41:52
|
This is about the Realms, not the edition.
We love the realms. No matter the rule setting.
There will be however, some dislike in some editions in terms of lore, but in general, if you love it even the tiniest bit, your welcome here.
Welcome indeed. |
I love PMs! Please send me a message. Even if its Hi. |
|
|
|
Devils Advocate
Acolyte
USA
2 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jul 2010 : 18:08:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Considering we have people playing in 4E, 3.5, 3E, 2E, 1E, Pathfinder, Burning Wheel and I even heard rumors of RoleMaster; I'd say you fit in.
I wish I could find people where I live who are interested in playing 1 & 2e. I'd like to at least try those editions. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 03:27:56
|
Oh yeah?! 
Well I played in No-e! Thats right, back in MY day we used rubber bands shot at army-men!
We didn't have the Realms! We didn't even have a 'region', or even an 'area' - all we had was an old blanket we used to scrunch-up and pretend it was hills!
Damn whipper-snappers.... stay off my lawn! {grumble... grumble}
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 13 Jul 2010 11:55:59 |
|
|
|
Dracons
Learned Scribe
USA
299 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jul 2010 : 03:54:47
|
Really Markustay? I used to play make belive!
That's right! We didn't even have a blanket. It was all in our heads.
Then the special doctors our parents made us go to made it all go away with electricty. Nice electricty. No more heroes in my head anymore. |
I love PMs! Please send me a message. Even if its Hi. |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2010 : 05:34:50
|
Heh... the three campaigns I've been playing in over the last three years have all used 3.5. The campaign I'm preparing to start up (and have been doing so for the better part of two years now) will be using Pathfinder plus some rules tweaks of my own (mostly conversions from 3.5 things that don't yet exist "natively" in Pathfinder). I was almost going to set the campaign in Golarion, but I got such a massive flood of cool ideas for the Realms that I had to use them... which is why it's taken me two years and counting to get this thing going. 
We're reaching the end of one of the campaigns I'm playing in, and I might fill the gap with a blast from the past if the DM isn't yet ready to start his new game... I re-acquired a copy of the second-oldest FRP game out there a few weeks ago... the game that got me into role-playing in the first place... the Fifth Edition of Tunnels & Trolls! It would be neat to run the Realms with that system, just for kicks...
Anyway, everything Markustay said in his last post goes for me too.
Heh... now I have Weird Al Yankovic's "When I was Your Age" stuck in my head... I guess I have to listen to it 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 16 Sep 2010 05:36:34 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2010 : 06:28:44
|
Where are you from Devil's Advocate? I'm playing 1st edition these days...though I honestly don't have any problem with any edition out there right now!
I'm actually teaching my kids 4.5 edition now (bought the nifty new Starter Set...pretty nice actually!).
If you lived in Missoula Montana I'd let you join my upcoming 1st Edition Forgotten Realms game. I tried to start it online...even had some really good players here from Candlekeep, but I really botched it and things went south badly. One of my greatest gaming regrets of all time in truth...
Anyway...I hope you find a good group to game with...and welcome to the Candlekeep Forums!
EDIT: for minor hallucination while typing before. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
Edited by - Dalor Darden on 16 Sep 2010 06:29:36 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 16 Sep 2010 : 15:16:01
|
To echo everyone, play what you want, read what you want, love what you want.
And lest there be any confusion . . .
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I'm actually teaching my kids 4.5 edition now (bought the nifty new Starter Set...pretty nice actually!).
I believe DD's referring to the 4e Essentials products, which aren't actually 4.5 but rather just expanded options for 4e--the difference being that they don't contradict 4e rules the way 3.5e over-wrote much of 3.0e. I can see why one could see it that way, but it isn't the same animal.
If you ever *did* get interested in playing 4e, you might check out the Essentials products. I think part of the idea is that they are more similar to 3.5 D&D than 4e D&D is.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2010 : 07:40:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
I'm actually teaching my kids 4.5 edition now (bought the nifty new Starter Set...pretty nice actually!).
A not so subtle stab at the Essentials books that just came out? The system hasn't changed-- at least nothing like D8D was to AD&D or 3.0 was to 3.5. |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2010 : 15:34:34
|
I just call it 4.5 because calling it "Essentials" doesn't allow my brain to place it in order with earlier printings of the game.
Like I have said many times, 4e isn't what D&D used to be to me but it is a good system that I like. My "4.5" I like very much too because it is more attractive to my kids than thick rule books.
So, for the purpose of my usually medicated mind keeping track of things, I call it 4.5...though as others have said...it is not OFFICIALLY another edition of the game in any way; but instead just a simpler way of explaining things and getting younger children to play.
The box says 12+ years; but my 8, 7 & 5 year old children all grasp it very easily...especially the choose your own adventure stuff! I miss those days myself! |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2010 : 16:27:45
|
Thanks for the clarification!
To explain what I was talking about, and what I think Matt meant: circumstantially, calling Essentials 4.5 is sort of a pejorative, since people use the whole "They're rewriting the game again!" attack against it. That's the implication of the term "4.5", and it really isn't true in this case.
Essentials is indeed difficult to classify, as WotC's doing something it hasn't done before--adding another level without revising the game, so as to serve multiple functions: draw in players used to "how things used to be," simplify some of the rules, add options for older players, etc.
I compare it to writing a companion story for a novel that doesn't *have to* be read to enjoy that novel, nor does the story rely upon you having read the novel to enjoy it. You can enjoy either or both and in any order.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
IngoDjan
Learned Scribe
Brazil
146 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2010 : 17:13:21
|
| Au contraire! |
Ingo Djan
DUNGEON MASTER AO OF THE DIAMONDS!"I see the future repeat the past. It all is a museum of great news. The Time do not stop." |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2010 : 19:35:28
|
Sic et non?
Cheers
(P.S. Spam +1!) |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
Edited by - Erik Scott de Bie on 17 Sep 2010 19:35:52 |
|
|
|
Hellblazer
Acolyte
Canada
12 Posts |
Posted - 25 Oct 2010 : 19:03:35
|
| I joined the FR by trying out the 4e last year.However, last month my friends forced me to try 3.5e and I simply loved it.According to my DM, we are playing with 3.5 in 4e settings |
The best thing about the future is that it comes only one day at a time. |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 30 Nov 2010 : 01:04:41
|
My group is using 1E Realms with bits and pieces of 2E and 3E, and we use it with the rules for Lord of the Rings / Rolemaster. How's that's for totally different?
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2010 : 05:44:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Thanks for the clarification!
To explain what I was talking about, and what I think Matt meant: circumstantially, calling Essentials 4.5 is sort of a pejorative, since people use the whole "They're rewriting the game again!" attack against it. That's the implication of the term "4.5", and it really isn't true in this case.
I'm not entirely sure I agree, Erik. For me, 3.5 was a vast improvement over 3E, and it's what I believe 3E should have been in the first place; particularly the changes to barbarians, druids, and rangers. However, by the same reasoning, Pathfinder (including the Advanced Player's Guide options) is exactly what I hoped to get with 4E: a system that presented a vast array of customization options for the character classes, instead of one that pigeonholed them all into dictionary-definition roles and giving all classes the same abilities with different names.
And before you say "Oh, here goes Jakk trolling 4E again":
Mechanically, I quite like 4E, and I have adopted the 4E opposed-roll mechanic into my Pathfinder house rules (along with the Castles & Crusades mechanic of a saving throw category for each ability score). Where I think 4E went wrong (imho) was in not going all the way to a classless character advancement system in which skills, feats, spell ability, and other abilities are purchased directly with earned XP, similar to White Wolf's system. Such a move would have far better suited the feel of the rest of the game as a whole. I tried to convert 4E to a classless system, but then I read the beta version of Pathfinder and decided that classless 4E was a project best left for someone else.
In short, if they'd called Essentials "4.5," they might have attracted my attention more than they did by not doing so. But either way, my hard copies of the Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide and Bestiary 2 arrived today (still Dec 22 here on the Pacific coast of North America), and I have tomorrow off work, so I'll be reading into the wee hours tonight.
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Essentials is indeed difficult to classify, as WotC's doing something it hasn't done before--adding another level without revising the game, so as to serve multiple functions: draw in players used to "how things used to be," simplify some of the rules, add options for older players, etc.
I compare it to writing a companion story for a novel that doesn't *have to* be read to enjoy that novel, nor does the story rely upon you having read the novel to enjoy it. You can enjoy either or both and in any order.
Cheers
So... Essentials is the "New Spring" of 4E? Given that the 4E ruleset may have now exceeded (in number of volumes, at least) the Wheel of Time, I think the analogy is a good one. |
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. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2010 : 06:18:21
|
quote:
Wooly Rupert
... I myself favor something between 2E and 3.xE. I've said more than once, though, that there are elements of 4E that I think can be readily backported to earlier editions and that would work quite well.
The hamster has the truth of it; 2E is (so far) the richest trove of D&D lore to draw from, yet 3.5E is generally the "best" rules system for my tastes.quote:
Hellblazer
... According to my DM, we are playing with 3.5 in 4e settings
lol, my group does much the opposite: we import some amount of 4E lore into the older FR setting. 
I kinda wish Essentials carried a better name, "4E Expansion" or something, to deflect some of the perceived confusion/criticism with this "Edition" rewrite. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
mensch
Seeker
80 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2010 : 09:26:12
|
Yup, I'm always amazed by the amount of Forgotten Realms lore which can be salvaged from 2e and used in 3.5e. Take the whole Netheril set or the Bloodstone Lands campaign, which have never been reprinted in full in the subsequent updated rulesets.
The only acquaintance I had with 2e was in the Baldur's Gate computer game. It took me quite a while to find out that having a negative armour class was actually a good thing... |
Some say the world will end in fire, Some say in ice. From what I’ve tasted of desire I hold with those who favor fire. But if it had to perish twice, I think I know enough of hate to know that for destruction ice is also great and would suffice. – Robert Frost (1874 - 1963) |
|
|
|
Knight of the Gate
Senior Scribe
USA
624 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2010 : 09:44:57
|
Listen up you berks: 4th edition is totally useless. Except for the parts of it I use. Which are mainly High Elves=Eladrin, Primordials, the Feywild concept, the new take on the war of light and darkness,,, and a few other things. Besides that, it's rot. Of course, I AM looking it over for some more gleanings. And I DO have a lot of 2E spells and magic items, not to mention 2E lore. But 2E lore is piddle compared to 1E lore. Which makes 3E lore look like what the cat dragged in. Except where 3E lore deals with cultures left untouched by 2E. But other than that, all those editions are bad b/c I use the AGoT d20 system. Modified by house rules of course. Which someone probably hates. Which is OK, since I hate them. Personally.
Anyway, I'd say you're OK here, DA. I bet someone here is open-minded enough to deal with your heresy. |
How can life be so bountiful, providing such sublime rewards for mediocrity? -Umberto Ecco |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2010 : 10:11:48
|
| 4E just hasn't hit its stride yet, given enough time it'll be dripping with tons of disconnected lore (new and old, balanced and breaking) and will eventually require a 5E cleanup just to become playable again. I approve of the Essentials concept, and I understand what Wizbro is attempting to accomplish (with some success), though I'm a little puzzled about why they would deliberately introduce what will be seen by many as a "fork" into a parallel D&D "edition" ruleset after they invested so much effort into unifying the product line in the first place. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4438 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2010 : 04:12:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arik
4E just hasn't hit its stride yet, given enough time it'll be dripping with tons of disconnected lore (new and old, balanced and breaking) and will eventually require a 5E cleanup just to become playable again. I approve of the Essentials concept, and I understand what Wizbro is attempting to accomplish (with some success), though I'm a little puzzled about why they would deliberately introduce what will be seen by many as a "fork" into a parallel D&D "edition" ruleset after they invested so much effort into unifying the product line in the first place.
Everything is still unified for the most part. I think a lot of people complained that some major Errata occured at approx the same time Essentials came out. People linked the two together and said "edition-revision!" Simply not the case. They've introduced different style of classes (which work perfectly fine in most regards to the original set) and are harmonious with the current set of rules. And the Errata that changed over in Oct/Nov were going to happen regardless of the Essential debut.
From my own experiences of using the normal 4E material and Essential material together, I can pretty much say I've found little change in the way the game plays and no change in how Essential classes work against the 4E Monster Manual and Monster Manual 2 creatures. Different mechanics, same outcome. I link the changes more to that of additional 3.5 content that branched from the norm. Classes that came from the Tome of Magic and Tome of Battle work far differently than normal 3.5 classes, but they relatively change the game little. |
|
|
|
Snow
Learned Scribe
USA
125 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2011 : 17:00:11
|
After 3 years of consistent once-per-week 4.0 sessions (Saturday mornings/afternoons), our local Forgotten Realms mega-group [11 players!) has decided on a vote of 9-2 to re-convert back to version 3.5. It took a long time and a lot of handwringing to come to this vote. We are a fairly affluent group ... with the majority of the players being full-time members and each owning about 75% or more of the entire 4.0 manual line.
For the first 2 years, the majority of our group members became hardcore advocates of the 4.0 line - me included. Then we noticed a bit of "nostalgia creep" coming back into your games. We were also noticing a bit of disenchantment with the 4E F.R. cataclysm timeline. What finally pushed a lot of our players over the edge was the fulfillment factor of playing either 3.5 rules or Pathfinder rules in other gaming groups (non-F.R., mind you) and noting that we had strategic and mutual preferences for the game mechanics and crunch material of 3.5.
So ... the last 3 weeks has been spent converting our mega-campaigns (being played from Dagger Falls to Zhentil Keep) back to 3.5-modified Pathfinder rules. While awkward at first, we now seem to be hitting on all cylinders. The fulfillment factor has been *HUGE*. Only 2 of our 11 members still prefer 4.0, but I think they both enjoy playing with a group is overall happier and more creative in gameplay.
This is not meant as a clobbering bash to 4.0. It's still a viable gameplay system. We just found the enormity of the 3.5 game mechanics to be more intricate, nuanced, and combinatorial expansive. Plus, the pre-Spellplague F.R. (we moved back to the old timeline) is just a million times more interesting and graspable from a continuity standpoint.
|
Edited by - Snow on 07 Mar 2011 17:01:17 |
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2011 : 17:04:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snow
After 3 years of consistent once-per-week 4.0 sessions (Saturday mornings/afternoons), our local Forgotten Realms mega-group [11 players!)...
Holy Cow!! And I thought one group I was in was huge when it hit 8 players + DM at one point. |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Snow
Learned Scribe
USA
125 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2011 : 17:29:54
|
We are 11 total members ... 3 of us DM. Each campaigns lasts about a year, and then we rotate DM responsibilities to keep everyone fresh. :-)
Interestingly, every single member is an ardent fan of the Forgotten Realms. Nobody is lukewarm in their interest about it. We had to close membership to the group, as we do have the occasional person who wishes to join. I hate turning people away though. :-( Especially since our mutual interests are so niche-oriented. |
Edited by - Snow on 07 Mar 2011 17:30:25 |
|
|
|
DBG
Acolyte
United Kingdom
29 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2011 : 17:34:44
|
In ans to the op:
I only play a homebrew version using bits from 1e, 2e, 3e & 3.5e.
I take the bits I like and dump the rest.
|
|
|
|
Alisttair
Great Reader
Canada
3054 Posts |
Posted - 07 Mar 2011 : 17:51:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snow
We are 11 total members ... 3 of us DM. Each campaigns lasts about a year, and then we rotate DM responsibilities to keep everyone fresh. :-)
Interestingly, every single member is an ardent fan of the Forgotten Realms. Nobody is lukewarm in their interest about it. We had to close membership to the group, as we do have the occasional person who wishes to join. I hate turning people away though. :-( Especially since our mutual interests are so niche-oriented.
Just to clarify, you mean 3 of you DM simultaneously? |
Karsite Arcanar (Most Holy Servant of Karsus)
Anauria - Survivor State of Netheril as penned by me:
http://www.dmsguild.com/m/product/172023 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Still Playing 3.5
