| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Thauranil
Master of Realmslore
India
1591 Posts |
 Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 08:16:16
|
A lot of people seem to want Tyr back but frankly I think Torm and Bahamut are doing a much better job than him and should be retained.
After all his slaying of Helm was unjust and his behavior in the days leading to his fall was erratic at best. Who needs an unjust, erratic God of Justice? |
 |
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 09:50:29
|
re: evil gods on the short-list... putting them in the Players' Guide directly encourages new players to pick evil alignments. I don't see any scenarios where that could be a good plan. Even ignoring the gaming table for a moment, it will hurt sales. Parents don't want their teen or pre-teen kids to be getting into a mindset which is specifically geared toward hurting people and tearing society apart. Back at the gaming table, some DMs (drama queens imo) might tolerate or even encourage players to choose evil, but in general evil is devious and uncooperative even in the best of times. Frankly, the party needs all the cooperation and mutual trust they can get, to survive what a decent DM will throw at them.
D&D is not a pvp game, and imo it should never become one. Evil motives among the PCs should be limited to special circumstances like charms, curses, artifact possession, and the occasional one-off to release tension where everybody just goes nuts on the world and each other for a session. Because every once in a while it's a dramatic change of pace... but "all evil, all the time" gets just as boring as playing Lawful-Stupid. Plus an evil PC's life expectancy is a lot shorter. Imo, of course.
Experienced players don't need to be told that evil is an option, and inexperienced players shouldn't be told. Let them see the downside of evil before they jump into it to be edgy... so that when they do choose it, because of course they will eventually, they'll actually play it well. 
The short-list is for deities that heroes will pick, and who will support heroes. Evil deities don't support heroes... they support reavers and warlords. The PCs will be seen as such by some folk, but it shouldn't be their stated goal. The short-list isn't for describing all the deities the PCs will know about... the DM will provide that info within the campaign context along with stuff like the geography the PCs will know about, and famous NPCs they've heard of. The short-list is just for picking a patron power for your PC. And evil shouldn't be on the menu.
All just imo. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 16 Feb 2012 09:52:15 |
|
|
|
idilippy
Senior Scribe
USA
417 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 14:34:32
|
I disagree with pretty much all of that, especially labeling DMs who allow evil PCs as "drama queens". You can limit your PCs to following only good gods in the same way you could limit your PCs to only playing Humans, or forbid the Paladin class. The Player's Guide however needs to accommodate other groups, including those who would want to use evil PCs or non-evil PCs who follow or at least give respect to evil gods. I would expect the Player's Guide to spend time on every race, even Dragonborn, though I don't play in a Realms where they exist as a nation. In that same manner, the Player's Guide shouldn't ignore evil gods because new player's shouldn't play evil characters. That's the DM and individual game's choice, and it shouldn't be made for them.
Also, a PC doesn't have to be evil to know about an evil deity, especially one of the major ones. A neutral follower of Mask is a rather obvious possibility, or maybe a LN Hoar follower if Hoar is kept as an Evil god. Knowing their enemies could be another reason to let PCs see evil gods in the Player's Guide, and for another it doesn't matter the alignment for some evil gods, they hold useful portfolios and should be common knowledge. Every sailor or person by the ocean wants to avert Umberlee's wrath, anyone doing some thievery would probably send a quick word Mask's way, or Talos called to in a storm. |
Edited by - idilippy on 16 Feb 2012 14:36:47 |
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 15:05:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I like the idea, but I'd play it slightly different... Once he came back, he would still be, in part, fragmented. He'd be physically intact, and still quite powerful, but some of his memories would be gone -- not enough that he'd be that foolish again, but enough that he would know he wasn't what he once was.
And I'd make him a powerful archmage, but far from being at that top of the pile... That said, he'd sometimes (erratically!) be able to cast spells or strengthen his magic beyond his normal levels, and he'd also be prone to something similar to, but not as random as, wild surges.
I think I'd also play it that he was "reassembled" by a Halruaan archmage, and maybe either merged with him or took over the Halruaan's body when he died -- this would provide a motivation for being into the idea of a Halruaa 2.0, since Karsus 1.0 was a big rock when Halruaa 1.0 was founded.
I would rather Karsus keep his madness away from Halruaa 2.0. I know that it will never be as it was, but I see Karsus as a rather self-destructive power, and therefore would not like him heading up the resurgence of a nation that I loved before the Spellplague was senselessly used to blow it up. I think that it would make more sense if one of Mystra's chosen whose fate has not yet been disclosed fled (or was directed) down there to try and help rebuild the nation.
And on the subject of Mystra (and I know that there are rumors that Ed is working toward re-creating/forming her in the 1480s Elminster series), I would rather she be left dead and a new deity of magic come into play (or have the title divided up by several deities of different ethnicity so no one is "too powerful"). The 4e design team already made the mistake of following an old trope and killing her a 3rd time, wouldn't it be just as bad to resurrect her a 3rd time?
Also, I agree with the advocates for Cyric's death (or better, demotion to a mortal—albeit a powerful one—again). He is what I feel is yet another overplayed trope. |
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)
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 16:43:00
|
Nobody liked my 'hairy thunderer' concept?
Random Thoughts (in no particualr order)
Bahamut over Tyr any day. Or have Tyr get his hand back, and give him to the Talfir (Moonshaes, Lantan, etc) and call him Nuada. 
Connect him to the Fey/Elven pantheon now and its pure win.
You know, the whole 'God of Time' thing can be used to good effect, if WotC were so inclined. What if the Time Portfolio is being held by someone or something, either until another power's 'return' (Kronos?), or it is keeping it hidden (a portfolio locked away in the 'Vault of Time', or some such McGuffin).
Then, if they did want to do a reset (which I truly doubt they want), they could say the Time-God has returned, and set the timeline "back upon the correct path" (in other words, taking the whole 'the Black Chronology is an alternate timeline prophesy' thing to another level). In fact, they could even say this enigmatic 'Time Power' is Ao's boss (and at that point, WotC can even remove Ao from the setting entirely - just say he 'got fired').
And it would be interesting if this enigmatic 'Watching God' set karsus as the new Temporal Gaurdian of Realmspace, as punishment for his own past failures. A 'gaurdian of the timestream', rather then an actual time-god (which should be an uber over-power, IMHO).
Perhaps Mystra was holding the portfolio at one point, and during the ToT it got 'locked away', and after the ToT, with no-one 'gaurding time', Shar was able to steer events down her own path. There is lots they can do with this.
@Sfdragon - Take my NuaDA god and give him the 'nada' portfolio.
The Simbul would make a great new goddess of magic, just because of her name alone (I'm a big fan of self-explanatory deific names).
Now that Mystra's dead, Kelemvor has so much more potential to be a 'dark & brooding' god (more like Hades). Make him bitter over Mystra's death, and its total win. He needs a little less 'boyscout' and a bit more grim reaper. At least give him a hooded black cloak or something (his Cloak of Despair?)
Ergal - a new (for 5e) entropic power - his aspects should include both Nergal and Jergal. They can make him a primordial if they still want to run with the 5e lore (he could even be given the time portfolio - he could represent its 'eventuality' aspect). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Feb 2012 16:51:04 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 17:14:10
|
People are going to play evil characters, whether we think they should or not. I don't think they should be presented with those options in the player's nook, though. That's definitely advanced stuff.
I'm warming to the concept of changing Mask to neutral, rather than evil, but I think one could bring him back as neutral evil and it would be fine. Maybe the player's guide should include three evil deities, just in case? Hmm...
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" |
|
|
|
Varl
Learned Scribe
USA
284 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 17:25:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Yep, I mean "commonly worshipped" AMONG ADVENTURERS. Basically, what deities is a new player going to look at and say, "cool, I understand where that deity is coming from", without getting ties up in the details. FR has a huge capacity for awesome detail and nuance, but that can just be overwhelming to a first timer. If I'd wanted to play an elf cleric on my first FR game and the DM handed me a list of 15 fey deities and 20 "human but close" deities, I would never play a cleric again.
A cheat sheet for players, new or veteran, is all that's needed. One page, varying font size depending on the number of deities one uses, and hand it out on character creation so they can choose the deity. |
I'm on a permanent vacation to the soul. -Tash Sultana |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 17:33:20
|
Nah...
Stick with the 'no evil' in the beginner's books. You need to establish a baseline early-on, otherwise things turn ugly fast. We don't need 1st level parties killing each other.
Add the evil deities in with the DM Campaign Guide, and maybe more with a 'running the Realms' type book. Players should have options, but options that could effect balance (and balance has just as much to do with playing as it does with mechanics) should be sprinkled-in as we go along. All it takes is one 'bad seed' to ruin a session for everyone. Another three 'evil options' could even be put on line, in a Web-Enhancement.
I'd say make Mask an aspect of Garl*, or combine him with Vhaerun (if Vhaeraun doesn't get amalgamed into 'the Masked lady'). On the other hand, they could call a deity 'Masque', and have it be both enigmatic and androgynous (appearing as either male or female, or neither). That would actually cover all three.
I prefer Eilistraee as a separate entity though - she is one of my favorite gods. The 'rebellious daughter' taken to extremes. Mask and Vhaerun as 'Masque' would be the route I would take in 5e (going so far as to say he was also the known as No-Cha in the east).
I also think they should play-up the Utter east stuff (obviously I have a vested interest in that), and then we could get Kali (Khali-Mar), the 'Black Earth Mother', as a replacement for the rather boring Bhaal (and that name is way too similar to several other powers).
C'mon - who doesn't want an uber-kewl 'murder cult' plunked down somewhere? If their main base is out-of-the-way (like the Utter East), then it disturbs no previous canon, and is additive in nature. I even set her as a replacement deity in Sentinelspire, in the 4e Horde/K-T stuff I was working on.
Can you picture one of the powers of such a priest/slayer class? They could grow extra arms and climb shear surfaces. 
*EDIT: I take this back - thats not a good fit at all. If they were to make the racials do double-duty, he'd be better as our 'trickster' god. Certain human performers, charlatans, and even unethical traders might throw a few prayers his way.
According to Ed, the general make-up of a faith doesn't preclude members of other ethnic, racial, or national groups. It is theoretically possible to have an Orc worship a member of the Seldarine in FR. In fact, it is fairly common for folk (of all races) to pay homage to several gods. I think playing this up (because it IS FR canon) would be the best way to go in 5e - it would also help blur the lines between 'human' and non-human gods (because there really is no such thing - once you ascend to a deific state, you no longer possess the flesh you had). Only a newly arisen power would be so narrow-minded.
If I lived on a world with dozens - perhaps hundreds - of gods, I sure as hell wouldn't want to piss any of them off.
Only priests should have a single deity, and even then there should be some leeway (which we also had in canon). If the deities are on good terms, or part of an Intheon (a Pantheon-within-a-pantheon), it should be allowed (tripartiate and nature deities fall into this category, for instance). |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 16 Feb 2012 18:04:36 |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 18:08:01
|
I've not been a big fan of making Druids be basically just specialty priests of nature deities. They can still worship nature deities, but instead of making them chose a patron to get divine magic from, maybe druids and rangers can just tap into nature's divinity itself.
And allow clerics of the Adama. Just say it's an agreement between Zionel (Gond), Curna (Oghma), Lucha (Selune), Torm and Waukeen to grant spells to these priests. |
Edited by - Eladrinstar on 16 Feb 2012 18:10:19 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 20:17:26
|
Thats Grewhawk old-school.
They had something called the 'Old Faith', which did precisely that. GH was mostly like FR with its deities, but in that one thing it was more like Eberron (worshiping a concept rather then a specific god).
Good call - I like that better myself. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 20:44:26
|
| Arcana Evolved has "The Green," which is a similar concept, and I think that Golarion has something similar as well (but I don't remember what it was called). |
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)
|
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 21:58:32
|
Combining gods, or making one an aspect of another, is too similar to the misguided side of 4e, imo. Oversimplification, cutting back, losing variety... all bad.
The short-list is a selection of helpful deities. The long list, in contrast, should have all of the deities worshiped in the setting at any point in time. Cutting powers out is unnecessary and there are always going to be a significant % of people who disagree with who you cut or why... the outcome will always be more-bad-than-good.
The Realms is about building, adding, creating, and expanding. The 4e treatment of the Realms sucked specifically because it destroyed so many things. The Spellplague would have been fine if it hadn't blown up countries and killed off gods. So let's please get away from the idea of simplifying and eliminating. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36965 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 22:36:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hawkins
Arcana Evolved has "The Green," which is a similar concept, and I think that Golarion has something similar as well (but I don't remember what it was called).
The Green Faith, as I recall. |
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! |
|
|
|
Eladrinstar
Learned Scribe
USA
196 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 22:56:28
|
I agree with Xaeyruudh. Stop cutting away the Gods. A huge pantheon has long been a noticeably different aspect of the Realms.
What you should do, that being said, is emphasize Gods that are important for adventurers in one section, and then detail the rest for the DM in maybe a later sourcebook? Also emphasize how pantheons can merge and clash over time, and detail the aspects (Like the Bedine deities) as well. Maybe keep the "racial gods are all aspects" as just a theory some in the Realms have about the divine, not necessarily stating it to be the truth of the matter.
Maybe keep some minor deities regional? Don't detail Siamorphe until whatever book expands on Waterdeep or Tethyr, Mulhorandi for the Old Empires, Shiallia for the High Forest, etc. |
Edited by - Eladrinstar on 16 Feb 2012 22:58:32 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 23:00:14
|
No disagreement with the Spellplague and FR 4E being handled poorly. Though oversimplification in general is not an ideal process for a setting, I believe it can be executed well if given the right consideration. It can even be a complication, not in a bad way, but in the sense of creating more conflict, uncertainty, questions, story hooks, and depth of lore. I wouldn't want all deities to go through this process, but for some it makes sense. I also don't want to see two or more deities just revealing themselves as the same being all along (and Deity A is the real Deity, etc). There should be a reason or hints of such merger. At the very least, there should be uncertainty as to who is the real dominate persona.
I think we have grown to expect too much information on the workings of the pantheon itself. For 5E, FR should work to muddle the divine waters a bit, give DMs more options when portraying the various sects and factions of churches and their various takes on the gods. |
Edited by - Dark Wizard on 16 Feb 2012 23:03:23 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 16 Feb 2012 : 23:14:57
|
so let me get this straight
we want a FR campaign book
a fr player guid
and a fr deities book....
|
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 |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 00:34:42
|
I also like your idea, Wooly. But I guess I'm done with seeing him do stupid stuff. People can change for the better, and I like him to be one of those.
To somehow make up for his catastrophic mistake, he focuses all his might and time in rebuilding Halruaa, which, being a tiny part of the lost Netheril, would make him feel as though he's slowly rebuilding their fallen empire. However, instead of world domination, he'd see to it that Halruaa's main goals would be continuous progress and preservation of their culture.
His relationship to Mystra 2.0 improves a great deal. They can't be considered friends, but neither are they enemies.
He is the most powerful wizard in all of Toril, surpassing even The Srinshee, The Teraseer, and Larloch. But he cares not, for his attention lies elsewhere, not in proving to the world how powerful he is. But when he sees it necessary, or when they affect Halruaa in any way, he'd crush Telamont's plans. |
Every beginning has an end. |
Edited by - Dennis on 17 Feb 2012 02:10:40 |
|
|
|
Jakk
Great Reader
Canada
2165 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 01:56:14
|
I also like this idea a lot... I was re-reading the OGB (borrowed from a friend; all my pre-3E stuff is still a good 250 miles away from me), specifically the bits about the High Forest... and there are some rather interesting bits regarding Karsus in there:
quote:
Karse
The center of the mystical Dire Wood is the ancient ruins of Karse. In olden days, religious refugees who had been driven from the ancient land of Netheril built this city at the base of the base of a tall butte of red stone which their legends held to be the remnants of Karsus's physical form. Though they originally built without permission from the elves of Eaerlann, an alliance was struck and they mined the rich metal deposits of the Star Mounts. Both normal forest and the black dire oaks have thickly overgrown the ruins.
Here can be found the black glade, a circle of 13 towering dire oaks; the intact, ageless home of the evil archmage Wulgreth; and an eerie black pyramid which oozes evil.
GAME INFORMATION: Karse fell into ruin around the same time as Hellgate Keep was occupied by demons, when the death of the evil wizard Wulgreth caused the creation of the Dire Wood. The wizard yet lives on as an intensely evil, lich-like being within the black pyramid. He seeks pure blood from the heart of Karsus to return to true life. An avatar (minor physical manifestation) of the dying god Karsus dwells in a temple atop the butte, his everflowing blood contributing to the magical nature of the Dire Wood, while deep within the butte, Karsus's gigantic, living heart beats ponderously.
Was anything ever done in canon with that avatar of Karsus? I know all kinds of things went down with both Wulgreths around the Return of the Archmages, and I didn't really care for any of it, so I don't recall the details, but I don't know if that avatar of Karsus was involved in the storyline at all. Regardless, I'd like to see Karsus ascendant in whatever is done in the way of a post-4E timeline. The Spellplague seems like just the thing to re-energize such an entity...  |
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. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 01:56:25
|
The only problem is, where do we draw the line of the 'long list'?
All the racial deities? Most of them used to be core, but FR is going to be core, then we will have ours, PLUS the ones from all the racial guides. Also all the ones from Dragon magazine. Then we have to include all the monster gods (that adds another god book from core). Then we have to add all of the K-T gods (thats still FR, right?), Maztica, Zakhara... lets not forget the little-known leucrotte pantheon detailed in Elminster's Ecologies. There are also the Hordeland aspects of other gods, dead gods, all the deities mentioned in Desert of Desolation (a number of 'Earth Pantheons).
Heck, if Planescape gets rolled into the 5e FR core model (and it well might), we have to include ALL the gods. eh? And not just the ones from DD/LL - we'd have to include the gods of Krynn, Oerth, etc... the Newhon gods, Lovecraftian ones, Michael Moorcock's (Ed did mention several of them in his old Dragon magaizine dieites article).
Ad infinitum.
The very nature of FR - its inter-connectivity to all other worlds and planes - makes it very difficult to limit the sheer number of deities available. That's why I like Erik's approach, and then others can get sprinkled-in as we go along. When we have a boatload spread around, THEN we can get a god-book; a compendium of all deities presented to date (or just keep a running tally in the DDi - wouldn't that be easiest? A fully organized FR/D&D index to EVERYTHING? I'd pay for that, right now).
The reason why 'god books' were necessary in past editions is because we didn't have an internet, or it wasn't utilized to its full potential. There is no need for such a resource, if they keep all the info online, as they feed it to us in splats.
One of the biggest hurdles of past editions was organization - how much of each thing to put in the splats (Feats, classes, deities, NPCs, races, skills & powers, etc, etc), and then how to look anything up when you need it (Have you ever remembered reading an interesting Feat, and then tried to find which book you read it in? That used to drive me NUTS).
The internet (DDi) now has the potential to allow the splats to do what they do best - give us an enjoyable sampling of a little bit of everything (including the deities), and still keep things organized in such a way that you can easily find what you need when you need it.
'Little Bites' - don't overwhelm. You tell someone they have 100+ gods to choose from, that's scary. Even a toddler can eat a terrasque if you feed it to them in little bites. All I'm saying is that a deities-only book may no longer be necessary. Get a kindle and a DDi account, and your good to go.
I'd much prefer a regional approach to gods - its something that hasn't been done before. The internet opens up new possibilities in presentation - if D&D is going to stay viable into the 21st century, it needs a facelift. Why do we have errata for digital books? Just upload updates! Between Skype, number-crunching processors, and amazing 3D virtual machines, D&D can actually be the next big thing again; MORPG players are getting bored - imagine a world where the NPCs are controlled by real people. Thats the future of D&D - face-to-face, across the world.
Just bring your own snacks.
|
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Feb 2012 02:00:09 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 02:12:21
|
I do not want a ddi account to constantly have access to such things though... rather have it as a book.....
you do ahve a valid point though... which is why I stated I did not want a 5e core setting.. |
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 |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 03:25:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
The only problem is, where do we draw the line of the 'long list'?
The line, imo, is between Realms-specific deities and deities which are not Realms-specific. The racial deities (at least most of them, if not all) remain racial deities, and should be described in core (non-Realms) sourcebooks, like they were in previous editions.
And yes, Kara-Tur, Maztica, and Zakhara are definitely all in the Realms now. I think their deities should be listed in the Realms DM guide... a list, like the one in the 3e campaign setting which just gives name, alignment, portfolio (the main focus of the listing this time, please) and cleric domains. Detailed descriptions of the Celestial Bureaucracy belong in (A) a book specifically describing all the deities of the Realms, or (B) the sourcebooks devoted specifically to Kara-Tur, just like the Faerunian pantheon belongs in the sourcebooks focusing on Faerun. Same with Maztica and Zakhara.
Playing favorites is lame, imo. Encourage the conception (and subsequent sales) of additional settings by not declaring a default campaign setting.
And once again in favor of not condensing/combining gods... is it out of place to quote Ed? I think not.
quote:
I also found it expedient to have overlapping portfolios among the gods. This allows strife among various priesthoods as the prominence of gods within a community or society changes, and allows both nonhuman deities (such as the elvish and centaur gods in the DDG) and human deities (such as the druids’ god or gods) to coexist, both granting spells to worshippers.
(from Down-to-earth divinity, in Dragon 54)
This is a clear and ringing endorsement of deities which are wholly or partially duplicates of each other. Obviously not all of the gods should overlap with someone else, but it's good for role-playing for some of them to do so.
As always, just my take on it. |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 17 Feb 2012 03:28:36 |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 03:33:20
|
| I feel sorry for whomever ends up having to detail The Eight Million Gods of Kozakura. |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:03:56
|
Good one.
First off, If FR is going to be core - which it seems it will be - then saying the racial gods belong in 'core books' doesn't make much sense. Those will be FR books.
Second, we already have mutiple names/aspects of FR gods. I am not saying create more of those - I'd rather leave that up to the DMs. The gods themselves should be an enigma - I just want details of their faiths and priesthoods.
I also believe portfolios should be contested - it makes perfect sense that way (in no RW pantheonic mythos that I know of is the deities' power considered universal the world-over - its almost always regional).
However, I am talking about fluff. mechanically, why should we differentiate between a human god of thieves, a halfling god of thieves, a dwarven god of thieves, etc, etc. Thats just redundant mechanics.
Give us a standard, 1st-edition style Cleric - generic, with one set of abilities based on worshipping 'good'. That would cover neutral as well (in terms of turning, healing, etc). Evil priesthoods can be added in later. When they decide to do a more advanced guide to priests, then we can get speciality priests based on portfolios, NOT the gods themselves. Tell us what a priest of a war-god gets, or the priest of a thief-god, or Sun-god. We can apply those templates to FR's gods, or any others.
Leave the small details - god-specific abilities and unique powers - for DD articles. Use the DDi to flesh-out the splats. Leave them as generic as possible, so that new players don't get overwhelmed.
If players get overwhelmed, we wind-up getting handed 4e - we don't want that again. The layers can be added-in as we go along, here and there. We need a very basic approach at first, and we can build off of that. I think working toward completely different sets of powers and priesthoods for Lathander, Aumanator, Pelior, etc... is something 5e should avoid like the plague.
Hey! I made a funny! {seriously - that was accidental... I amuse myself}  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Feb 2012 04:15:50 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36965 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:04:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
I also like your idea, Wooly. But I guess I'm done with seeing him do stupid stuff. People can change for the better, and I like him to be one of those.
To somehow make up for his catastrophic mistake, he focuses all his might and time in rebuilding Halruaa, which, being a tiny part of the lost Netheril, would make him feel as though he's slowly rebuilding their fallen empire. However, instead of world domination, he'd see to it that Halruaa's main goals would be continuous progress and preservation of their culture.
His relationship to Mystra 2.0 improves a great deal. They can't be considered friends, but neither are they enemies.
He is the most powerful wizard in all of Toril, surpassing even The Srinshee, The Teraseer, and Larloch. But he cares not, for his attention lies elsewhere, not in proving to the world how powerful he is. But when he sees it necessary, or when they affect Halruaa in any way, he'd crush Telamont's plans.
I'm not a fan of Karsus myself, but I do like the idea you proposed. My version doesn't have him doing stupid stuff, though, or being crazy, or anything like that... I think that his experiences leading up to the Fall, what he's seen since then, and seeing his own actions through the perspective of (or merging with) the Halruaan that "rebuilds" him, would ground him out and make him considerably more thoughtful and apt to think of consequences.
As I said, though, I'd not make him the most powerful wizard around... I think it'd be more interesting to have him dramatically lessened in power, but to still have those "flashes" of his old strength and skill. I'd still have him be quite powerful, but not so powerful that he could ignore any threats or swat down Shade.
And I think I'd have him operating under an assumed identity. If he openly came back as himself, it'd be like the position of Magister was, or how Shandril was treated in Spellfire: apt to be attacked at any instant by a score or two of opportunistic mages.
Actually... The more I think about it, the more possibilities I see here. He could also be used in the 3E timeframe, and instead of rebuilding Halruaa, he's somewhere in the North fighting his own war by proxy against Shade... |
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! |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:07:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by idilippy
I disagree with pretty much all of that, especially labeling DMs who allow evil PCs as "drama queens". You can limit your PCs to following only good gods in the same way you could limit your PCs to only playing Humans, or forbid the Paladin class. The Player's Guide however needs to accommodate other groups, including those who would want to use evil PCs or non-evil PCs who follow or at least give respect to evil gods.
I'm not going to retract the statements I made, because I actually think and believe what I said, and nobody should back down from a position of honesty, but to the extent that I come off as disrespectful or dismissive of anyone else's opinions I apologize for that. The drama queens label was probably out of line. My bad. It was aimed at those who actively revel in having evil PCs in the game, for the intrigue it creates, and I think the title is apt for those cases, but I wasn't careful where I was aiming.
I sometimes believe that my opinion is closer to some subjective standard of correctness, but it's never my intention to discourage someone else from stating a conflicting point of view. Everyone should have a well-considered opinion, state it with all due gusto, then consider the dissenting points of view and make any necessary adjustments, and then put forth the revised point of view. It's not about being right; it's about the best possible solution being reached, in the furtherance of something we all want: 5e being successful and WotC remaining in business. I mean no offense by disagreeing with you, even if the disagreement is huge and boldly stated.
In this case, we're in agreement about the unfairness of trying to prohibit players from playing evil characters. Games are all about having fun, and enjoying a level of freedom that real life doesn't allow us. I agree with your logic. Making arbitrary rules about how people can play the game would kill the enjoyment. I'm not saying we shouldn't allow anyone to play an evil character... I'm just saying we shouldn't specifically encourage it. We were talking about deities to recommend as especially appropriate for adventurers, and I think including evil gods in that section will be interpreted by new players (and potentially a whole lot of parents who don't understand the game) that evil patrons would be a good choice.
So we just have differing views of the scope of the presentation in the Player's Guide. Which, in the big scheme of things, is a pretty small disagreement.  |
Edited by - xaeyruudh on 17 Feb 2012 04:10:00 |
|
|
|
Dennis
Great Reader
9933 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:19:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And I think I'd have him operating under an assumed identity. If he openly came back as himself, it'd be like the position of Magister was, or how Shandril was treated in Spellfire: apt to be attacked at any instant by a score or two of opportunistic mages.
As the new king of Halruaa 2.0, he'd better expect attacks both from within and without everyday.
quote:
Actually... The more I think about it, the more possibilities I see here. He could also be used in the 3E timeframe, and instead of rebuilding Halruaa, he's somewhere in the North fighting his own war by proxy against Shade...
I'd add that he would gather other surviving archwizards to his cause. He'd also forge a temporary alliance with the Skulls for a mutual gain. |
Every beginning has an end. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:35:00
|
Plus, thats not how the game was designed to be played, by Gary and his friends.
The game was designed to represent a group of heroes who 'save the day'. The PCs are supposed to be heroes - thats the most basic premise of D&D.
Yes, you can play it any way you want, just as I can play monopoly by using my tanks and planes to invade my neighbors properties (you should see some of the weird hybrids me and my friends created), but I wouldn't want Hasbro to build my bizarre style of play into the rules. Most people also play with money in the middle of the board, but thats not in the official rules either. Just because some people like to play the game in a different manner then how it was intended, doesn't mean the rules should cater to those folks.
Thats what 'advanced rules' are for (which is what me and my buds called our frankensteined versions of standard boardgames). Let the initial release be all about unicorns and rainbows - we can 'get ugly' later.
And that just reminded me of what me and a friend did to Belter, a charming little game about mining asteroids by GDW. By the time we were done, we had a 300 page manual and were creating intergalactic empires.
Good times. I love being a gamer. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 17 Feb 2012 04:40:46 |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:50:09
|
| would it disrupt things if whats her name the dancer in the glade came back in the realms 5e?? |
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 |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:52:06
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
First off, If FR is going to be core - which it seems it will be - then saying the racial gods belong in 'core books' doesn't make much sense. Those will be FR books.
That would be a very Unfortunate choice, imo, but I guess we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
It would make Everything a Realms thing. All gods are FR gods unless otherwise stated. All magic items are FR items. So in the event that some poor shmuck comes up with another awesome setting -- or they have a moment of zen and start bringing back old settings -- everything has to say "oh, we borrowed these 12 deities from FR, and we made up these 5 new ones." "you'll find these 270 magical items over in the FR DM's Guide, which you can purchase for $$$$$ (thank you Volo) and here's another 100 we wrote up specifically for this world."
Which points (in my mind) toward FR being the only setting in 5e. I don't have the numbers, but I'm thinking that wouldn't be a smart decision from the profit angle.
It would definitely stink for us, too, because it's nice having the options of cross-setting campaigns, importing magic items or NPCs, or just playing in a different world sometimes. Or at least being able to draw inspiration from how things are done in the other campaign settings.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
then we can get speciality priests based on portfolios, NOT the gods themselves. Tell us what a priest of war god gets, or the priest of a thief god, or Sun god. We can apply those templates to FR's gods, or any others.
Ooo. Somebody! Take some notes. Drug the management's coffee, and put this in.
I like the idea of clerics oriented to a portfolio, with fluffish variations for overlapping deities. This is consistent, but also has flavor.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I think working toward completely different sets of powers and priesthoods for Lathander, Aumanator, pelior, etc... is something 5e should avoid like the plague.
+1, as the kids are saying these days. And I'm going on record (for no particular reason) as saying that Amaunator is lame.
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Hey! I made a funny! {seriously - that was accidental... I amuse myself}
Nerd. |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3763 Posts |
Posted - 17 Feb 2012 : 04:55:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Also, Karsus should be on the expanded deity list, if only as a quasi-power. That thing might well grant spells!
And well met, Lord Karsus--it's been a while since you graced these halls.
-You know what they say: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
...However, having learned from his mistake, he wouldn't do it again. He can target another deity, but chooses instead to focus his strength in reconstructing Halruaa 2.0.
-Why would I do that? Especially if reunited with Karsus the Mad and our third Beholder Mage aspect? |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know) |
Edited by - Lord Karsus on 17 Feb 2012 04:58:42 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
5e FR Deities: What's your list?
