| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
 Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:06:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I think I can safely say Jar-Jar Binks is where I firmly step behind the grognard line and shout "not in *my* Realms".
On purpose I left out my between brackets comment (without Jar-Jar Binks and the funky accent), just to see who would be the first to react  
I have to agree with you there... that concept is far too "jarring"...  |
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. |
 |
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:06:58
|
Super Wizard does not win with the statement that Dwarves did not have Rune Magic, on that count he unfortunately loses... They actually did have Rune Magic and besides, the ancient dwarven Deep Shanatar subkingdoms of Torglor and Korolnor had rich magic traditions (patron deities were twins Diinkarazan and Diirinka prior to their banishment). This is at least 2e lore from DGttU.
A 'fluff' explanation for the 2e rules on dwarves and magic can be that the arcane tradition in dwarven culture suffered more in the racial decline compared to other traditions. And the majority of the remaining dwarves had no longer an affinity with arcane magic, relying more on the divine and their martial prowess and a painfull memory of what their race had once been capable of could have created a collective mindblock towards things arcane that resulted into a sort of (for lack of a better term) allergy for arcane magic. Since the events of the Thunder Blessing they have recovered some of their racial pride and combined with rediscoveries of ancient Rune Magic and their rituals (e.g. Rune Caster PrC in 3e) broke their mindblock. |
Edited by - Mumadar Ibn Huzal on 20 Jan 2012 23:11:16 |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:13:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Super Wizard does not win with the statement that Dwarves did not have Rune Magic, on that count he unfortunately loses... They actually did have Rune Magic and besides, the ancient dwarven Deep Shanatar subkingdoms of Torglor and Korolnor had rich magic traditions (patron deities were twins Diinkarazan and Diirinka prior to their banishment). This is at least 2e lore from DGttU.
A 'fluff' explanation for the 2e rules on dwarves and magic can be that the arcane tradition in dwarven culture suffered more in the racial decline compared to other traditions. And the majority of the remaining dwarves had no longer an affinity with arcane magic, relying more on the divine and their martial prowess and a painfull memory of what their race had once been capable of could have created a collective mindblock towards things arcane that resulted into a sort of (for lack of a better term) allergy for arcane magic. Since the events of the Thunder Blessing they have recovered some of their racial pride and combined with rediscoveries of ancient Rune Magic and their rituals (e.g. Rune Caster PrC in 3e) broke their mindblock.
Awesome, thanks!
|
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! |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:26:37
|
| there is a little more on the topic here |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:37:32
|
Superwizard is talking about my competition: http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16105
I will also note that the Crystal Shard predates the Avatar Trilogy and the Time of Troubles (which is the marker for second edition). In the Drizzt series, the ToT doesn't happen until Siege of Darkness, as I recall.
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" |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4454 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:57:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Superwizard is talking about my competition: http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16105
I will also note that the Crystal Shard predates the Avatar Trilogy and the Time of Troubles (which is the marker for second edition). In the Drizzt series, the ToT doesn't happen until Siege of Darkness, as I recall.
Cheers
Does that mean that in 1E, Dwarves could cast arcane magic and in 2E they couldn't? Sorry, I have about a years worth of knowledge of 2E/AD&D and what remaind of Baldur's Gate games, lol. |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jan 2012 : 23:59:21
|
| I'm pretty sure 3E was the first time dwarves were allowed to cast arcane spells. |
|
|
|
Super Wizard
Acolyte
31 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:00:18
|
Mumadar,Super Wizard *maybe* does win!
Super Wizard did no say Dwerfs did not got Rune Magic. I said dwarfs did not have ARCANE magic.
And DGttUD does not say that dwarfs have arcane magic; it say dwarfs of Torglor and Korolonor had RUNE magic.
And you know that Rune Magic can be done by priests and Wizards... er Arcane and Divine spell-caesters...
So I hope that this can be reconciled for the 5ed!!
(But if not 'Super Wizard' [I will come up with better name] gets to be in the new DownShadow!!!)
w00t w00t!
quote:
Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Super Wizard does not win with the statement that Dwarves did not have Rune Magic, on that count he unfortunately loses... They actually did have Rune Magic and besides, the ancient dwarven Deep Shanatar subkingdoms of Torglor and Korolnor had rich magic traditions (patron deities were twins Diinkarazan and Diirinka prior to their banishment). This is at least 2e lore from DGttU.
A 'fluff' explanation for the 2e rules on dwarves and magic can be that the arcane tradition in dwarven culture suffered more in the racial decline compared to other traditions. And the majority of the remaining dwarves had no longer an affinity with arcane magic, relying more on the divine and their martial prowess and a painfull memory of what their race had once been capable of could have created a collective mindblock towards things arcane that resulted into a sort of (for lack of a better term) allergy for arcane magic. Since the events of the Thunder Blessing they have recovered some of their racial pride and combined with rediscoveries of ancient Rune Magic and their rituals (e.g. Rune Caster PrC in 3e) broke their mindblock.
|
Unstoppably Awesome to the Max |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36844 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:13:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Superwizard is talking about my competition: http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16105
I will also note that the Crystal Shard predates the Avatar Trilogy and the Time of Troubles (which is the marker for second edition). In the Drizzt series, the ToT doesn't happen until Siege of Darkness, as I recall.
Cheers
Does that mean that in 1E, Dwarves could cast arcane magic and in 2E they couldn't? Sorry, I have about a years worth of knowledge of 2E/AD&D and what remaind of Baldur's Gate games, lol.
Pretty sure the no magic thing dates back to 1E, as 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! |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:18:51
|
| "...Diirinka gave sorcerous magic to his savants..." granted that this is in the write up of Diirinka for generic D&D and not FR specific, but in the FR pantheon Diirinka always had the portfolio of Magic. |
|
|
|
Super Wizard
Acolyte
31 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:27:30
|
What book and on waht page is 'dat, bro?
quote:
Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal
"...Diirinka gave sorcerous magic to his savants..." granted that this is in the write up of Diirinka for generic D&D and not FR specific, but in the FR pantheon Diirinka always had the portfolio of Magic.
|
Unstoppably Awesome to the Max |
|
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:29:16
|
in the 2e Monster Deities, can't recall the complete title of the top of my head and the book in question is packed away with most of my D&D stuff for moving.
edit:
blue cover book in the DM supplement series; the red cover ones were the player supplement series like the complete fighters handbook etc.
|
Edited by - Mumadar Ibn Huzal on 22 Jan 2012 10:09:38 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:32:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Super Wizard
Mumadar,Super Wizard *maybe* does win!
I appreciate the enthusiasm, but maybe we can tone down the arguments/antagonism? Thanks.
This thread and my competition are supposed to be POSITIVE. Please refrain from antagonizing people.
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" |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31798 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:39:45
|
| I'll also note that there were [although very rare] instances of dwarven wizards in 2e. Behring was one, a 3rd-level Wizard, Male Dwarf, CN, and who lives in Daggerford. 'Tis one of the rare dwarves who can wield magic, The North: Daggerford. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31798 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 00:52:55
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Also, I'm flattered that many of you enjoyed my version of how Warforged came to be in the Realms. There are also other canon examples of how they came to be such as early Imaskari blood golems or even wizard experiments that hace been altered somehow.
I've got to finish writing up my own versions, at some point... I've got three different versions of Realms-based warforged I've come up with. None of mine exist in numbers larger than a couple dozen.
Which is probably reminder enough for me to try and finish up my multiple takes on the subject of Realms-based warforged as well, including those special tidbits about psionic-forged [or psi-forged] constructs too. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jan 2012 : 02:28:11
|
| Putting aside the Thunder Blessing, the situation of dwarf wizards can be seen in terms of approaches to game rules. The 1E/2E class and level restrictions represent the normal combinations, suitable for most characters, tournaments, etc. The very rare dwarf mages who exist in Realmslore can be represented by the DM simply making an exception to the rule. 3E tried to put as much choice in possible in players' hands, and its approach can represent the exact same situation of dwarves and the Art, before or without the Thunder Blessing. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2012 : 17:08:51
|
I have some HB Dwarven lore, which easily rectified the Bruenor thing.
Every dwarf, during some point in his life - usually later but not necessarily - gets a racial compunction (Divine urge?) to create his "Great Work". He sequesters himself, working on the project for months, sometimes years, until it is completed. No two two are exactly alike, and although usually taking the form of some type of weapon, any sort of creation is possible, including jewelry, staves, crowns, thrones and statuary, etc... even non-magical items (of an immensely beautiful and ornate nature, so as to be considered priceless).
The power (level) of the Dwarf has no bearing on the final product, although the item is normally related to the dwarf's chosen profession (ie, an armorer would likely craft a piece of armor), and in rare cases even young and inexperienced dwarves have created greater artifacts, and ancient, knowledgeable dwarves have created non-magical works of art.
This is considered (by dwarves) to be part of their nature, and is 'mandated' by their gods. Ergo, the magic used to create the items (but not necessarily the magic in the item) is Divine - it has been reported that in some cases the dwarf's hands even glow with an 'other-worldy light' during the fashioning.
Runes can be added to these items, normally during their creation but in very rare circumstances at some later time. These Runes are unrelated to the forging of the item in most cases, but some scholars believe that the 'Creation Magic' that the dwarves are gifted with is indeed related to Rune Magic in some incomprehensible way.
And in extremely rare cases, some dwarves have been allowed to create a second 'Great Work'. These dwarves become folk-heroes, and often rise to demi-power status. Folktales tell of a dwarf who was able to create three, but Sages of Dwarven lore find no proof of the veracity of these tales.
Once again, home-brew lore.
Sorry Erik - I dd it again. I just can't help myself, dammit. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 22 Jan 2012 17:10:23 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36844 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2012 : 17:25:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I have some HB Dwarven lore, which easily rectified the Bruenor thing.
Every dwarf, during some point in his life - usually later but not necessarily - gets a racial compunction (Divine urge?) to create his "Great Work". He sequesters himself, working on the project for months, sometimes years, until it is completed. No two two are exactly alike, and although usually taking the form of some type of weapon, any sort of creation is possible, including jewelry, staves, crowns, thrones and statuary, etc... even non-magical items (of an immensely beautiful and ornate nature, so as to be considered priceless).
The power (level) of the Dwarf has no bearing on the final product, although the item is normally related to the dwarf's chosen profession (ie, an armorer would likely craft a piece of armor), and in rare cases even young and inexperienced dwarves have created greater artifacts, and ancient, knowledgeable dwarves have created non-magical works of art.
This is considered (by dwarves) to be part of their nature, and is 'mandated' by their gods. Ergo, the magic used to create the items (but not necessarily the magic in the item) is Divine - it has been reported that in some cases the dwarf's hands even glow with an 'other-worldy light' during the fashioning.
Runes can be added to these items, normally during their creation but in very rare circumstances at some later time. These Runes are unrelated to the forging of the item in most cases, but some scholars believe that the 'Creation Magic' that the dwarves are gifted with is indeed related to Rune Magic in some incomprehensible way.
And in extremely rare cases, some dwarves have been allowed to create a second 'Great Work'. These dwarves become folk-heroes, and often rise to demi-power status. Folktales tell of a dwarf who was able to create three, but Sages of Dwarven lore find no proof of the veracity of these tales.
Once again, home-brew lore.
Sorry Erik - I dd it again. I just can't help myself, dammit.
That's pretty much my thought. A one-off, perfect crafting, created with some divine blessing thrown into the mix. It was Bruenor that made me think of this, along with other random things like the Dragonlance novel Stormblade or the fact that such a non-magical race (as dwarves were in 2E) seemed fairly adept at crafting magical goodies. |
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! |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2012 : 18:45:00
|
Stop apologizing, MT--that kind of lore is exactly what I want. 
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" |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
497 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jan 2012 : 19:51:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Stop apologizing, MT--that kind of lore is exactly what I want.
Cheers
I agree. No apology needed, Markus. I will, in fact, be appropriating (in an unabashedly shameless fashion) that bit of dwarven factuality you have provided for us.  |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 00:49:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
I'm pretty sure 3E was the first time dwarves were allowed to cast arcane spells.
You are correct, at least in the Rules as Written... personally, in 2E I thought dwarves, because of their probabilistic anti-magical nature, made excellent wild mages... and I played one for a while, because my DM thought so too. Instead of the level-variation table determining when a wild surge happened, that was determined by my racial magic resistance; if I succeeded on my magic resistance roll when casting a spell, it generated a wild surge. I gotta say, it made for some interesting adventures, when wild surges are occurring at ten times the frequency of a non-dwarf wild mage... |
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. |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 03:24:42
|
2E Complete Book of Dwarves. One of the best tomes ever written. Wizards were featured in that book as enemies as dwarves and traditional foes I thought. I played a battlerager once, using the kit in there. That campaign lasted until about 3rd level when we scrapped it. My dwarf started killing bar patrons after being insulted and I couldn't pass the wisdom or intel check to stop the rage, so I kept on singing and chopping. Funny memory. ;)
Made extensive use on the mining charts for the dwarven mine we ran too. I really should compile a new list with all sorts of the various metals published in 3rd era books. Mining and running the business to sell crafted goods was fun and in the end our mountain mine/city was something like five or six pages of tunnels and chambers drawn out. Sadly, I have no idea where that big map went, but it looked much like the old Mithral Hall map in the drawings of the tunnels and chambers. |
Edited by - Eilserus on 23 Jan 2012 03:27:05 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 03:50:19
|
| I'm just curious, what do people expect will be 5E's position on sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers? These things did not exist until 3E/4E. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36844 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 04:19:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I'm just curious, what do people expect will be 5E's position on sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers? These things did not exist until 3E/4E.
Not enough info to call it. Though I'm inclined to think those things will continue into 5E. The trend since 3E has been to give more options per edition, not to take away. |
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! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31798 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 04:47:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I'm just curious, what do people expect will be 5E's position on sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers? These things did not exist until 3E/4E.
Well, the "everybody-has-minor-powers" bit isn't really anything new. Wild talents and aberrant minor abilities were around in the Realms long before 3e/4e.
In terms of what we can expect from 5e, though, I'm curious about how the divide between the various arcane classes will be established. But for now, it's all just rumours and speculation. We don't have any hard or canon info to work with... |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 05:14:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I'm just curious, what do people expect will be 5E's position on sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers? These things did not exist until 3E/4E.
I never liked sorcerers when they came out in 3.x, not to found of them in 4e either.
and I hate the warlock completely
that said, I dont off hand care on theirpostion though I can hope that the warlock does NOT show up in the first phb again.. |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 05:49:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I'm just curious, what do people expect will be 5E's position on sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers? These things did not exist until 3E/4E.
I'm thinking that sorcerers will still be around unless they change all arcane magic to cast-on-demand and remove spell preparation altogether (I think they were gone from 4E because of how the powers mechanic worked, but I didn't play that much 4E). The warlock of 3.5 I thought was interesting; don't know how it was done in 4E. The everybody-can-heal thing was one of the big things that initially turned me off about 4E, but I think it can be done more plausibly with a separation of stamina and lethal wounds, as in Pathfinder's Ultimate Combat book. With this system, self-healing would work on stamina (which come from Hit Dice and level), but not on lethal wounds (which are based on the Constitution score, not modifier). I think (and hope) that what we'll see (judging from what has been said officially so far) is a set of options, a la Unearthed Arcana, that allows players and DMs to play the type of game they want to play (1E/2E, 3.x/PF, or 4E), and that's why they're not calling it 5th Edition. I would love to see this, as I think that Unearthed Arcana was the only splatbook for 3.x (apart from Frostburn, Sandstorm, and Stormwrack) that didn't involve grotesquely overpowered class options, but I'd love to see a variety of options for multiclassing; what we need (compared to 3.x) is fewer classes and more ways to customize them, and this is what I love about Pathfinder (and loved about the 3.x Unearthed Arcana). Anyway, that's my take on the core; returning you now to solutions for the Realms in the new edition... hopefully. |
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 23 Jan 2012 05:50:20 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 07:32:32
|
Ah, perhaps I should've chosen better wording on my question. I was asking about sorcerors, warlocks, and everybody-has-minor-healing-powers - as they fit into the Realmslore.
I personally dislike sorcerors and warlocks entirely, I just feel that ye olde Vancian wizard is the "proper" way of doing things in the Realms. I'm even a little leery of psionicists, I mislike how psions manage to be slightly redundant spellcasters who entirely sidestep magic. Although of course I sometimes waver when I see interesting things involving these other classes which simply are not present (by choice) in my Realms setting. And I'll admit that, putting aside my bias, it seems that the Realmslore explanations for these things is not too unacceptable for what it is.
The minor healing abilities distributed across every class are brilliant from a game-mechanics standpoint, and I heartily approve of their inclusion. But from a Realmslore standpoint there's a lot of contrived shoehorning which doesn't really seem to be a good fit. Sage, I agree that psionics, innate magics, wild talents and other miscellaneous intrinsics which could be used for healing purposes have been around forever ... those things are still around, and they're not quite the same thing as saying every bard could learn how to cast healing songs. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 16:31:43
|
Once again, not the appropriate thread, but since the topic has swung this way...
I was thinking long and hard the past two nights about what (I think) 4e 'got wrong' (rules, not setting). What they did was perfectly balance the classes - but this has been happening incrementally with each 'upgrade' of D&D.
Anyone remember when we had different amounts of EP to level for each class? In OD&D, each class practically had its own set of rules. Then in 3e, we were given enough freedom - with PrCs and Feats - to duplicate most anything any other class could do. Perhaps the thing that 4e (rules) got wrong was that they 'perfected' it too much? That by finally completely leveling the playing field (literally), they've sucked all the flavor right out of it?
But as I have said, we have been seeing this incrementally. Remember that each level of each class used to have its own name? I thought that was so cool when I was 16. By the time we get to 3e, they started dropping the naming convention of the spells; this was something that actually begun in 2e, when the Netheril box (and probably others) gave us different 'setting-specific' names for spells. I didn't like that at all - it sucked some of the life out of the setting, IMHO.
Those kinds of things - the kewl names in front of the spells, and the naming of each level of each class - those were flavorful things that excited our imaginations. This is what D&D must recapture. No more 'undetailed' lore', and monochrome maps that leaves us shaking our heads, rather then wanting to play there.
In other words, EXCITE US. Put the wonder back into D&D - thats whats been missing. I want my imagination to soar again, not pour over dozens of splats trying to figure out 'the best build'. Lets get back to thwacking stuff for phatt lewts, and doing stupid things that gets us killed... but in a manner we will remember years from now and still be talking about.
Thats MY D&D.
EDIT: On the subject of sorcerers - thats the perfect way to split the Vancian casters from the 4e power-type casters in the new 5e rules. Ed obviously (to me, anyway) had lots of different ways for folks to 'do magic', including 'natural talents' (hedge wizards) and 'gifts from above'. Having different types of magic and different ways casters work, to me, IS The Realms - 5e may be the most perfect rules for FR we have yet seen.
I realized my post was weird in that it didn't relate to the subject directly, but my point was that diversification is a good thing, and Sorcerers, IMHO, are a great fit for FR. So are Warlocks, warlords, witches, etc... |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Jan 2012 16:38:23 |
|
|
|
Apex
Learned Scribe
USA
229 Posts |
Posted - 23 Jan 2012 : 18:08:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Once again, not the appropriate thread, but since the topic has swung this way...
I was thinking long and hard the past two nights about what (I think) 4e 'got wrong' (rules, not setting). What they did was perfectly balance the classes - but this has been happening incrementally with each 'upgrade' of D&D.
Anyone remember when we had different amounts of EP to level for each class? In OD&D, each class practically had its own set of rules. Then in 3e, we were given enough freedom - with PrCs and Feats - to duplicate most anything any other class could do. Perhaps the thing that 4e (rules) got wrong was that they 'perfected' it too much? That by finally completely leveling the playing field (literally), they've sucked all the flavor right out of it?
But as I have said, we have been seeing this incrementally. Remember that each level of each class used to have its own name? I thought that was so cool when I was 16. By the time we get to 3e, they started dropping the naming convention of the spells; this was something that actually begun in 2e, when the Netheril box (and probably others) gave us different 'setting-specific' names for spells. I didn't like that at all - it sucked some of the life out of the setting, IMHO.
Those kinds of things - the kewl names in front of the spells, and the naming of each level of each class - those were flavorful things that excited our imaginations. This is what D&D must recapture. No more 'undetailed' lore', and monochrome maps that leaves us shaking our heads, rather then wanting to play there.
In other words, EXCITE US. Put the wonder back into D&D - thats whats been missing. I want my imagination to soar again, not pour over dozens of splats trying to figure out 'the best build'. Lets get back to thwacking stuff for phatt lewts, and doing stupid things that gets us killed... but in a manner we will remember years from now and still be talking about.
Thats MY D&D.
EDIT: On the subject of sorcerers - thats the perfect way to split the Vancian casters from the 4e power-type casters in the new 5e rules. Ed obviously (to me, anyway) had lots of different ways for folks to 'do magic', including 'natural talents' (hedge wizards) and 'gifts from above'. Having different types of magic and different ways casters work, to me, IS The Realms - 5e may be the most perfect rules for FR we have yet seen.
I realized my post was weird in that it didn't relate to the subject directly, but my point was that diversification is a good thing, and Sorcerers, IMHO, are a great fit for FR. So are Warlocks, warlords, witches, etc...
The wonder can come back as easily as reprinting the 1st edition rulebooks (well, ok after the High Gygaxian has been translated perhaps). The classes shouldn't be balanced, magic items should be wondrous things found infrequently during adventures, not everyone should have access to every ability, the DM should the the primary controller of the game, you don't need spelled out rules (especially ones that have a game effect) for things that you can simply roleplay, etc. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
One Canon, One Story, One Realms (5e)
Topic Locked
