| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
 Posted - 03 May 2013 : 20:43:14
|
Subtle-style tieflings and genasi may still be around, but the emphasis weights heavily on the new kind.
Just because a city leaves one original storefront on a redeveloped block but builds a skyscraper around it doesn't mean the single store continues to define the character of that block. The new obviously takes precedent due to sheer exposure and activity, especially as all the paths and signs point to the new element. It's not the Realms' fault, it's mostly 4E's art style bleeding into games in general.
That's not counting the other radical shifts mentioned before, 4E Realms remains an prime example of a setting adapted to the rules, not the rules adapted to a setting.
One can argue if that's good or bad depending on personal preference. One can say 'well at least these other elements from later books didn't get incorporated, or these bits from other settings didn't make it in'. One can say I don't use them in my game.
What cannot be argued is that a notable number of visual, thematic, geographic, and lore shifts occurred. Entire regions were subtracted and added to cater to the new prevalence of those races, with the predominant depictions being of the overt variety.
Just because the old monkeys still hang around the corners of the room, doesn't mean we ignore the posse of 800-pound gorillas tearing up the middle of the place. |
 |
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 00:07:49
|
| I am human, and I live in a human world. I don't want to play a human. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 08:12:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I am human, and I live in a human world.
Hey, me too! What a coincidence! 
But I want to play a human, or a dwarf, not a freak.
Still, although my feelings are the same as Markustay's, and I understand that MT's rant has nothing to do with intolerance, I tend to agree with all that Venger said.
MT, I am afraid it has to do with our age. The gamers have changed, so their tastes have changed (it is clearly shown in the above posts), so D&D has changed, and as a consequence the Realms have changed. We can only accept it, and we may choose to play our own games in the Year of the Prince, with 2e rules, if that makes us feel better.
What I mean is, there is no absolute truth, even about what is best for the Realms, even if this means saying bye bye to F0 human characters with lots of power in their hands, now they're Ari10/Exp10 and we must cope with it.
I think Thieves World was a good example above, I felt a loss too there. But that's the way things go, and it would be selfish to wish things will never change.
|
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 08:21:42
|
dwarfs are freaks.....they are like...half the size of me, that is seriously freaky and unhuman like.
This can all be put on a sliding scale, myself I enjoy being a warforged and lizard folk, but every now and then I just have to be a greenskin naga. |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31799 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 09:14:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer
dwarfs are freaks.....they are like...half the size of me, that is seriously freaky and unhuman like.
Setting aside the confusing "freaky" aspect, I often interpret this perspective as even further reason to roleplay a particular demihuman character in my games. I love getting into the mindset of a D&D racial-type that I'm not normally accustomed to -- as it usually tends to promote plenty of new and creative ideas for campaigning.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 10:29:28
|
I really think people have a misunderstanding of how open-minded people are in the Realms. There are really only a handful of places in the Realms where "monstrous" races (AKA those that look less-than-human) can do business and be expected to be treated pretty fairly.
In particular we're talking about major metropolitan areas like Waterdeep, Silverymoon, and Athkatla. Even in these places there still may be some discrimination! In fact, of the three places listed I can only imagine drow walking around openly in Athkatla... and even then, they would face hostility. They'd only be accepted there for their coin.
For the most part, I think genasi could pass in most places, depending on what they looked like. The less human they look the more problems they'd face. Though they'd be relatively safe in most metropolitan areas.
Even in a place like Waterdeep, a monstrous creature - such as a Troll, Lizardman, Kobold, Goblin, etc. - they'd still face bigotry and discrimination. It wouldn't matter that they're Lawful Good Paladins of Torm. They'd be frequently harassed by guards... and hell... if something goes missing and a goblin is nearby, who do you think is going to be blamed?
My point is that racial discrimination exists in the Realms. It is not some Utopian place where people see past race. In 99.99% of the Realms a lot of the freaky sub-races are kill on site. If you look like a monster, people are going to assume you're a monster. People aren't going to look at a tiefling who has bat like wings, a tail, red scaly skin, and horns and go; "Oh hey! It's Bob the Tiefling!" Most people are going to look at that thing, and think "Oh crap. There is a devil or a demon walking down the road. Sound the alarm!" Then said tiefling is going to be lynched by an angry (and extremely fearful) mob.
The overwhelming majority of the Realms is rural. If you look at the population of the various towns, cities, and regions they list the various races there.
Cormyr for example (according to the 3E FRCS) is made up of 85% humans, 10% Half-Elves, and 4% Elves. This leaves 1% for Other races. A big chunk of that 1% is going to be the other standard races: halflings, dwarves, and gnomes. This reduces the number of monstrous races even lower.
A tiefling adventuring in Cormyr may be only one of perhaps five or less in the ENTIRE KINGDOM. If there are other tieflings in Cormyr at the time they are likely to be in Suzail or Marsember because they are metropolitan port cities.
What do you think the people of a small village who have never before seen a tiefling, and almost certainly don't even know of the existence of such a thing will say when they see one for the first time? What will they think? They're likely to take one look at the thing, and whether or not they can identify it the first word on their lips is either "devil" or "monster."
Even a dwarf traveling the more rural areas of Cormyr would probably get attention. Many such places may have never seen a dwarf. Of course, they've no doubt heard of dwarves, and thus would be very interested in meeting one. He would likely feel as if he were part of some circus freak show, the way people would come out to gawk at him. Then those who speak to him would likely sound extremely ignorant.
"Is it true that ALL dwarves are mastercrafts folk when it comes to forge work?"
"Is it true if a dwarf kisses lead it turns to gold?"
"Aren't all dwarves male?"
"Is it true that dwarves can't use magic?"
An elf might face something similar...
"Don't empty his chamberpot, Merle! Gurthian is payin' 5 whole silver for the elf's dung! He swears that it's magic and if sprinkled over his fields it will increase his harvest!"
Dwarves and elves would likely face things like that all the time... even little annoying stuff like little village children wanting to touch the dwarves beard or the elf's ears... just because they're curious.
Then halflings and gnomes would have it worse. Gnomes would likely either be mistaken for halflings or dwarves, as they are literally the "forgotten race" - thus such rural people have never heard of them before. Halflings would likely face various types of discrimination, mostly related around thieving. If a halfling is around and something goes missing, he's likely going to be blamed, because -EVERYBODY- knows halflings are natural thieves.
Then you start moving into the more monstrous, like half-orcs. Half-Orcs may not even be allowed into some of these more rural communities. In fact, there is a chance they could be attacked on site. If they get in it's only because of the assurances of their companions, and with the full knowledge that should he go on a sudden murderous rampage, that they will be held responsible for -ANY- crimes he commits. Merchants would absolutely refuse to do business with him, and if he's lucky enough to have his companions to convince an innkeeper to let him stay... ha. He's going to likely be forced to sleep in the stables, and at night the stables would be barred from the outside to prevent him from getting out. They'd basically treat him like they would a dangerous savage animal.
Places like Waterdeep and Silverymoon are special places. They are special precisely because of the multicultural nature that exists there - that doesn't exist elsewhere.
In fact, if you try to make multiculturalism a big thing in the Realms you start running into some problems. Primarily, with the deities of the setting. The more the races mix the more their deities will ultimately be brought into conflict. You would start to see the racial pantheons disappear as they begin to merge into the Faerunian Pantheon. (And not all deities would make this merger.)
The Faerunian Pantheon is in fact a conglomeration of many deities worshiped by the various human ethnic groups in the Realms that have merged into a single loose pantheon. You have a lot of deities who simply didn't make the transition at all, because they either merged with an existing deity, were destroyed, left the Realms, or faded from lack of worship. In fact, it was explicitly stated that the Mulhorandi Pantheon and the Faerunian Pantheon were about to enter such a process. Deities such as Hoar and Tiamat, for example, had already merged into the Faerunian Pantheon from the Untheric Pantheon.
So, if you like the racial pantheons the last thing you want is a big kumbaya session between the races. I'm honestly not sure how the Gnomish pantheon has survived, nor am I sure how the Halfling Pantheon has not already begun such a merger. However, this should be taking place.
Anyway, that's my take. It's how I've always handled it. I've always seen places like Myth Drannor (prior to it's fall), Silverymoon, and Waterdeep as very special places due to their very accepting and open natures. After all, that's what made them special. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 04 May 2013 : 13:26:17
|
I was going to do the quotey thing - everyone here is making good points, and I'd like to respond individually, but I don't have it in me ATM to bother with all that editing.
I agree pretty much 100% with Dark Wizard's sentiments. The only thing I would add to that is that - YES, we can ignore what we don't like for our games - I am doing that right now. I have an amazing (IMO) blend of PF/FR history and geography with various bits from other settings thrown in. It is precisely what I want, and nothing exists there that I don't want.
But thats not The Forgotten Realms, its my own mish-mosh homebrew. I can't ignore the canon elements of the setting in novels because that would be ludicrous. So while I may continue to purchase setting material (if the quality is there) to cherry-pick from, I can't see myself running a pre-fab world ever again, nor will I read novels about a setting that doesn't interest me (like the post-plague Realms). The 'just ignore it' argument doesn't hold water for fans who don't game.
And I find nothing wrong with folks who want to play non-humans. To be perfectly honest, I find myself playing female characters at least half the time (not because they aren't human LOL, but because also want to play something I am not). In fact, the last character I actually played in a D&D game was a firbolg, and most of my male characters before that were dwarves. I can relate to all of those because they are enough like me for me to be able to 'get into' the character. I feel it only becomes a problem when folks want to be something completely alien to a human - how does anyone really know how a sentient reptile would act?
In the RW, I wouldn't sit down at a table with someone who was thinking about how good I taste (well... thats not entirely true... but I won't go there  ), so why would I do that in a fantasy world? I understand that people from that world may not have our biases, but still... I just can't relate to anyone who would sit across from something with the head of a crocodile and have a pleasant conversation with it. Its a good thing I don't live in a Scify universe, because I would probably be a xenophobe.
By the same token, I would probably be looking at him and sizing him up for a new pair of boots.
EDIT: And then there is the problem of redundancy - with only 6 major stats, just how much variance can we really accomplish? There are only so many ways we can adjust those +/-2 to the stats before some races are (statistically) exactly like others.
quote:
Originally posted by Ze
MT, I am afraid it has to do with our age. The gamers have changed, so their tastes have changed (it is clearly shown in the above posts), so D&D has changed, and as a consequence the Realms have changed. We can only accept it, and we may choose to play our own games in the Year of the Prince, with 2e rules, if that makes us feel better.
This I will quote, because I need to respond to this directly. It hits home.
The last few weeks I have been asking myself, do I really want 5e D&D/FR to be successful, or do I want it to be what I want it to be? I think - maybe - my nostalgia has tainted my views somewhat, and I find I have been having to edit (and re-edit, and re-re-edit, etc) my posts here, far more then should be normal.
So now I wish 5eD&D and whatever the future holds for FR the best of luck, but I fear we have 'grown apart'. We do this with re-life relationships, so it only makes sense it could happen with other things we love. I'm not sure if I am currently 'in love' with FR, or just in love with my own memory of it, which is something completely different. We tend to 'color' our memories of things that occurred doing a more joyous time, and ignore/forget the 'bad stuff'.
So me wanting the 'old Realms' back is like the 50-year-old guys who goes out and buys the Corvette they wanted when they were 18... and look ridiculous. I either have to learn to run the kinds of game kids today want to play, or hang-up my DMs hat.
I remember when it was all about the story. Now its all about how many times you can blow up the Enterprise.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 04 May 2013 13:32:21 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 04:13:06
|
quote:
So me wanting the 'old Realms' back is like the 50-year-old guys who goes out and buys the Corvette they wanted when they were 18... and look ridiculous.
Hey, there's nothing wrong with that. :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZjviMmXIY8
As for 5E Forgotten Realms, I've pretty much ignored the 4E Realms almost from its inception, so if the 5E Realms isn't what I want I'll continue to not pay it any mind. Hopefully it'll be something I find worthwhile, but if it's not then it's no major loss.
I can also definitely understand the dislike of game tables where everyone is some kind of weird creature and classic D&D races are underrepresented or non-existent. The Warforged, Tiefling, Genasi, Dragonborn, and Deva adventuring party would be pretty goofy setting wise. And as someone who favors Humans for a player race, I wouldn't mind seeing more Humans played at the gaming table. I think the best way to see that, though, is for Humans to be on an equal plane with nonhumans when it comes to stat bonuses, because really, that's what killed interest in playing Humans all the way back to 2E.
Under current 5E playtest rules, every nonhuman race gets a +1 bonus to two stats. High Elves have +1 Dex, +1 Int, Mountain Dwarves have +1 Con, +1 Wis, Lightfoot Halflings have +1 Dex, +1 Cha, and so on. IMO Humans should have a +1 bonus to any two stats in addition to whatever racial bonuses they may have (whether it's a bonus skill and bonus feat like in 3E or something else). The idea should be this: Nonhumans excel at certain classes while Humans can excel at every class. So High Elves and Humans make for the best Wizards, Hill Dwarves and Humans make for the best Fighters, Lightfoot Halflings and Humans make for the best Bards, etc. That, I think, would go a long way towards making a Human player character more popular, as most players won't feel that they'll have to sacrifice stat bonuses to play a Human. There'll still be the different racial bonuses (Lightfoot Halflings will be Lucky, Fearless, Halfling Nimbleness, and Naturally Stealthy, while Humans have some other equivalent bonuses), but when it comes to stats they'll be on an equal plane.
Of course, that doesn't change that some races just feel more exotic and there'll always be players who'll be drawn to playing something that feels more exotic and more new, like a Warforged, Dragonborn, Tiefling, or whatever, but putting them on an even keel will at least make a Human player race a more appealing option because stat bonuses do play a large role in what race many players choose when they come up with a character, and most people don't want to play the race with the subpar bonuses, even if they'd otherwise prefer to play a Human character. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 08:41:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So me wanting the 'old Realms' back is like the 50-year-old guys who goes out and buys the Corvette they wanted when they were 18... and look ridiculous. I either have to learn to run the kinds of game kids today want to play, or hang-up my DMs hat.
That's hogwash to put it frankly. Its like claiming you need to get rid of old Beatles albums and get Justin Beaber instead. And if you don't want too, you stop listening to music. It might be harder to find someone that shares ones interest than if it is the newest thing, but there are always people of different tastes.
The constant claim that liking something from the past is "bad nostalgia" is a bit of BS; the past is different and some things are better and some things are not. It is the same combination of taste and objective elements that constitutes everything we "know" and interact with. If you like it you like it it doesn't become a problem before one starts to demand that every one else should.
I want the old Realms back and not only because of nostalgia, it is because it is a setting that sparks my imagination and the Realms of the last thirteen years does not do that. For someone else the Grey box and Harper novels might do absolutely nothing and that's cool, but I wont sigh and say to myself that you "have too" go with the times.
Nah, too bad of a mood to continue this rant; I'll just end up sounding like an idiot. Come to think of it is it probably a bit to late for that. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 10:23:04
|
I honestly don't understand a lot of the problems expressed. I don't disagree that there seems to be an upsurge in people wanting to play "exotic" characters. However, if a DM is staying even marginally close to canon most of the exotic characters people put forward would face -horrible- lives.
"Just so you know, most people in the Realms don't know the difference between a Tiefling and a Devil, and if people assume you're a devil they're going to freak out and likely form a lynch mob to kill you."
Then you open up Races of Faerun, and read them the following text:
quote:
"Carrying the taint of evil in their very souls, tieflings are persecuted and feared in most parts of Faerun. Those with gross physical alterations are often killed at birth, and even those with less noticeable physical traits are sometimes killed by their own horrified parents. Occasionally a tiefling is born to someone indifferent to its appearance, determined to redeem it, willing to exploit it, or evil enough not to care about its nature, and these tieflings are most likely to survive to adulthood.
...
Tieflings live as outcasts. Feared for their evil heritage and often acting appropriately to their ancestry, they learn to keep people at a distance and hide that which makes them different. Like all the planetouched, they are different from their own parents; rarely has a tiefling been raised in a home filled with love. Tieflings are bitter folk who expect eventual rejection from even their best friends and easily fall into lives of crime, depravity, and cruelty. Tieflings look upon true fiends and other evil outsiders with envy and fear."
---
Okay, so maybe at this point the player decides they want to play an aasimar instead. Surely, they must be more accepted, right?
That's when you open Races of Faerun once again and begin reading...
quote:
"Most aasimar are wary of their human neighbors. Even those raised by parents who understand their heritage cannot escape the stares of other children and adults, for humans fear that which is different. Aasimar usually experience a great deal of prejudice, which is all the more painful to the good-inclined aasimar who truly wants to help others survive in a hostile world. Aasimar are often seen as aloof, when in many cases this is a protective measure born of years of misunderstandings.
...
Aasimar rarely have siblings who are other aasimar, for the heredity of the supernatural is a chancy thing. Because of this, few aasimar get to know another of their kind.
...
Although aasimar are mostly human, they rarely feel like they fit in among human society. Instead, they get along best with other halfbreeds - namely, half-elves and half-orcs - because they and aasimar usually share the same sort of semi-outcast background."
---
Awww. It seems that even aasimar are shunned and mistreated by most. Wait a minute! They mentioned half-orcs! What does Races of Faerun say about those? Those guys are pretty common, right?! They have to have an easier time than planetouched!
quote:
"Most half-orcs are surly individuals who endured horrible childhoods. They are too coarse and savage to fit in well with humans, and too fragile and thoughtful to fit in with orcs. As a result, the majority of half-orcs grow up alone and without any influence from orc or human society. Thus, half-orcs speak their mind and act upon their feelings without any fear of repercussions. They are nomads, loners, and hermits at best, and murderers and savages at worst.
Without a place to call a home, and often without a family or close friends to count on for companionship, half-orcs learn from an early age to look out for themselves. This is often interpreted as greed or selfishness by other races, but too many half-orcs have learned the hard way that they are not welcome in any land, and must provide for themselves.
...
Half-orcs have uphill battles to fight when interacting with most other races, since many are quick to assume that their orcish blood carries with it an inherent savagery and cruelty. Most half-orcs return this suspicion and trepidation when interacting with others. They make friends only with difficulty. Once trust is established, it is often a fleeting thing that can be fractured with one misinterpreted comment. Often, a half-orc joins an adventuring company and never feels fully at ease with her traveling companions no matter how many times they have proven their loyalty."
---
Geeze! You mean Half-Orc's aren't like, totally accepted and embraced? Why are people so freakin' racist?! What about Half-Elves?
quote:
"While elves and half-elves are respected and admired in many parts of Faerun, humans in lands where elves are not commonly encountered can be resentful of elven blood. Elves are graceful, attractive, long-lived, mysterious, and skilled with mighty magic, and humans who do not know them well can easily come to regard elves - and, by extension, half-elves - with envy and fear.
...
In lands where there is a long history of elven-human conflict, such as Tethyr or Sembia, her elven blood marks her as different and dangerous, with all the fears and suspicions one might expect."
Yeah, there are even places in the Realms where Half-Elves are disliked, feared, and shunned.
My point is this, the vast majority of people in the Realms aren't somehow enlightened on the notion of race. In fact almost all of them are bigots toward one group or another. Even other humans mistreat each other. If you're an Illuskan and you're traveling south to Calimshan you're going to be treated like a savage barbarian there. The majority of people you'd encounter there are going to see you as a backward, smelly, illiterate savage. You can expect merchants to try and screw you over - after all, you're just a stupid barbarian. Someone might even attempt to enslave you. After all, barbarians belong in chains for their own good, right?
The Realms may be different from the real world in many ways, but an enlightened view on race and culture isn't one of them. This is one of the reasons Silverymoon and Waterdeep are so unique and special in the setting. It's one of the few places where multiculturalism and multiracial groups interact openly, peacefully, and on somewhat equal ground. (More so in Silverymoon on the "equal ground" part than Waterdeep, but Waterdeep is more open to who they'll accept than Silverymoon.)
I'm sorry, but if a DM is sticking close to canon a player who wants to play a half-dragon half-fiend isn't a problem. It isn't a problem because pretty much everywhere said PC goes he's going to be enemy #1 - people will never see him as anything more than a dangerous monster. He should be treated accordingly - so I would make this abundantly clear to the player before character creation even starts.
I'm completely fine if people want to ignore all of this in their Realms. I understand why many people would do so. However, this is how it is according to the canon lore. |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 13:34:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So me wanting the 'old Realms' back is like the 50-year-old guys who goes out and buys the Corvette they wanted when they were 18... and look ridiculous. I either have to learn to run the kinds of game kids today want to play, or hang-up my DMs hat.
That's hogwash to put it frankly. Its like claiming you need to get rid of old Beatles albums and get Justin Beaber instead. And if you don't want too, you stop listening to music. It might be harder to find someone that shares ones interest than if it is the newest thing, but there are always people of different tastes.
What Jorkens said.
Markustay, you may have misunderstood what I meant - why hanging your DM's hat if the guys at your table still play the game you like? Why playing 2e (or even, say, Tales from the Floating Vagabond) would ever be ridicolous if that's what your group prefers?
Another thing entirely is having young players at the table, your kids, for instance. In this case, would it be fair trying to convince them that 2e, 3e, C&C, PF, whatever you wish, was better? Probably not. That would probably lead me to reconsider my actions. And in that specific case, I probably wouldn't choose to play in the canon 1470's Realms, but I wouldn't quit gaming either.
To jump back in Jorkens' metaphor, I'd look for some new group that sounds a bit like the Beatles, for the sake of sharing it with those around me. |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 15:40:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ze
You know, I'm almost ready to try running a game in that era with AD&D, just because you guys have gotten me interested in it, and I'll admit, some of the folks I know like that sort of thing. I've always prefered 3.5, but that's mostly be because that's what I learned first. So, yeah, cary on.
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
So me wanting the 'old Realms' back is like the 50-year-old guys who goes out and buys the Corvette they wanted when they were 18... and look ridiculous. I either have to learn to run the kinds of game kids today want to play, or hang-up my DMs hat.
That's hogwash to put it frankly. Its like claiming you need to get rid of old Beatles albums and get Justin Beaber instead. And if you don't want too, you stop listening to music. It might be harder to find someone that shares ones interest than if it is the newest thing, but there are always people of different tastes.
What Jorkens said.
Markustay, you may have misunderstood what I meant - why hanging your DM's hat if the guys at your table still play the game you like? Why playing 2e (or even, say, Tales from the Floating Vagabond) would ever be ridicolous if that's what your group prefers?
Another thing entirely is having young players at the table, your kids, for instance. In this case, would it be fair trying to convince them that 2e, 3e, C&C, PF, whatever you wish, was better? Probably not. That would probably lead me to reconsider my actions. And in that specific case, I probably wouldn't choose to play in the canon 1470's Realms, but I wouldn't quit gaming either.
To jump back in Jorkens' metaphor, I'd look for some new group that sounds a bit like the Beatles, for the sake of sharing it with those around me.
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 17:08:37
|
You quoted a nested-quote post without posting anything yourself? I am assuming that was an error?
Anyhow, here's the rub... I usually don't play with oder folks. My 'gig' has always been getting new people (which means kids) into the game. I have tried starting adult groups who've never played... that was a nightmare. Too many preconceptions getting in the way (not to mention the "why do YOU get to say what happens?" attitude... they just don't 'get' the whole DM thing, usually).
Kids will have looks of wonder on their faces; adults, looks of disgust, boredom, or some combination of both. When one guy ask me "how do we win?", I responded, "you survive". So when the rest of the party marched off toward the dungeon, he said he was staying in town and starting a business. I guess he won.
When I went to Gencon last year, aside from the designers/authors and and people working in various booths, just about everyone I talked to was under 25. Once you hit about thirty, your open-mindedness goes right out the window (myself included). You've already decided YOUR WAY is the right way to play D&D, and your setting of choice is 'the best'. Young people? You can inspire them, and lead them to new things. Thats where I am at - I have somehow lost that connection to young people, and now I'm just the old curmudgeon shaking my fist at kids and telling them to "get off my lawn". |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 17:31:01
|
| miss post |
Edited by - silverwolfer on 05 May 2013 17:54:03 |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2013 : 18:42:12
|
Re Sightless' post, I think he wrote within the quote - the first lines are by Sightless.
Last reply, as it looks like this thread was hijacked a bit too much. :)
Markustay, I see your point, and I believe that I already stated that my feelings are very similar to yours.
Let me just say that I would so much LIKE to try to involve kids in the game, to the point that I could forget about any problems with the "new" rules and the "new" setting. That is probably due to the fact that I do not have had this luck so far, although turning 40. I'm planning to involve my friends' kids as soon as they'll get to the right age, but that'll have to wait a bit yet. Then I'll let you know how much I can really stand post-spellsplague gods-killing dragontouched kir-lanan zhent characters. ;)
|
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 12:31:59
|
My last post was "You know, I'm almost ready to try running a game in that era with AD&D, just because you guys have gotten me interested in it, and I'll admit, some of the
folks I know like that sort of thing. I've always prefered 3.5, but that's mostly be because that's what I learned first. So, yeah, cary on.
"
I've played AD&D once, as a halfling using the psyonics rules and rather enjoyed it.
Now, in regards to other comments made here, the majority of players round here play humans and elves in FR games. In non-realms games, then not so much, so far, I don't know anybody that's played a dragon-born. I also know that the most common house rule round here for 4e is to give humans a plus 2 to two stats and 4 skill points to be distrubuted across any two skills of preference. In our games, half orcs, and the like often have to go around in disguise, at least outside of Thetch. Heck, I even had a character nearly lenched in Silver Moon, when we were playing during the transition period, I had no problems accepting that, because given what was going on at the time, I'd see it happening. New players are clearly informed of the possible consequences of certain character choices before hand, and so are given clear warrning to expect people to treat there character badly depending where they go. In my present campaign, using 3.5 mechanics, we have two humans, one half elf, a dwarf, and a hen (halfling). in the 4e campaign that I'm helping to run, we have two human a dwarf, a Gnome, a half orc, and a Keffling. This campaign is currently taking place in the Kingdom of many arrows, where the latter two recieve a little more hassle than the former outside the city of Five Tusks, which strives to be the Waterdeep of the north, or the Silver Moon of the Kingdom, as it doesn't have a port, but wishes it had. Thus, when they leave the city, the humans are often the two viewed with the most suspicion, as the dwarf is a Grey Dwarf, who has no intention of ever leaving the Kingdom, despite prodings to go see Silver Moon by the parties bard. She by the way isn't hassled as much as the fighter, as bards are the superstars of the kingdom, right up there with the gladeators. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12084 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 14:26:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
You quoted a nested-quote post without posting anything yourself? I am assuming that was an error?
Anyhow, here's the rub... I usually don't play with oder folks. My 'gig' has always been getting new people (which means kids) into the game. I have tried starting adult groups who've never played... that was a nightmare. Too many preconceptions getting in the way (not to mention the "why do YOU get to say what happens?" attitude... they just don't 'get' the whole DM thing, usually).
Kids will have looks of wonder on their faces; adults, looks of disgust, boredom, or some combination of both. When one guy ask me "how do we win?", I responded, "you survive". So when the rest of the party marched off toward the dungeon, he said he was staying in town and starting a business. I guess he won.
When I went to Gencon last year, aside from the designers/authors and and people working in various booths, just about everyone I talked to was under 25. Once you hit about thirty, your open-mindedness goes right out the window (myself included). You've already decided YOUR WAY is the right way to play D&D, and your setting of choice is 'the best'. Young people? You can inspire them, and lead them to new things. Thats where I am at - I have somehow lost that connection to young people, and now I'm just the old curmudgeon shaking my fist at kids and telling them to "get off my lawn".
lol, that is so me a few years back. My ex-wife's son was interested in playing D&D with his friend. I figured what the hell and made a character for them and led them through their first dungeon. They had fun.... um, I didn't. The problem is, at 41, its hard to find people my own age (or even in their mid-20's and up) that still want to game. Of course, it doesn't help that I live out in the countryside. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 15:22:32
|
Unfortunately, all I’ve got to go on this is my experiences, since demographic data is lacking. I am twenty eight years old, and at present, I am the youngest D&D player in this area, which consists of eight actively gaming groups. The younger generations are lost to the MMO monster, at least round here. The personal largely responsible for getting me into RPGs, before that I played strictly war games, was forty three. I still rp with them a lot. Is it possible that this is a flook of this area, maybe. Although I do know of some frends over seas that have similar experiences. They are slightly older than I. I say this not to discount your experiences, but to simply state that older D&D players exist, despite the stigma enherent in playing such games, that MMOs players have largely avoided. Unfortunately, this stigma is largely a consequence of the stereotypes that D&D players are maladjusted dweebs, or that the game is inherently evil and should be avoided by all good wholesome folks. Let me say before any thinks I’m making fun of Christians, I am not, as I am a practicener of said faith; and while I cannot say the same of everyone I play with, everyone there knows what I believe and the lines I wont cross in a game.
)tangent finished, we now return you to your regularly sponsored thread).
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 18:08:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ze
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I am human, and I live in a human world.
Hey, me too! What a coincidence!
But I want to play a human, or a dwarf, not a freak.
You forgot the rest of the line: I don`t want to play a human. Being a human in a human world, I want to play a non-human, because I don`t want to be the same in fantasy as I am IRL, even if I could kick butt. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 20:00:03
|
I have no problem with characters in universe having racist attitudes towards orcs/half-orcs, tieflings, elves, dwarves, whatever. That's fine. I include that in my own home brew, despite favoring (half)orcs and tieflings over other races personally.
What I have a problem with is the player attitude of "It's ugly, kill it" "It's not human, kill it." "It's different, kill it." I hate that attitude in players, I hate that attitude in writers. It's moral simplicity taken to an offensive level.
And while I'm fine with the in-universe racism playing a part, I do have issues with writers making it perfectly justified. Playing orcs and goblinoids up as stupid marauding brutes is boring and is done to give the heroes something they can kill without tackling the moral complexity that comes with taking a life, which is something else I find offensive. Killing is never something that should be done lightly, at least not by heroes. It is sometimes, indeed, often justified. But it should never be justified just because "they're orcs", or "they're goblins" or "they're monsters". Because something isn't like us, because it is "the other", is not sufficient reason to kill it with moral impunity. Killing an orc should have no more or less moral weight than killing a dwarf or an elf; a life is a life.
These are my issues. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2013 : 22:03:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chosen of Asmodeus
I have no problem with characters in universe having racist attitudes towards orcs/half-orcs, tieflings, elves, dwarves, whatever. That's fine. I include that in my own home brew, despite favoring (half)orcs and tieflings over other races personally.
What I have a problem with is the player attitude of "It's ugly, kill it" "It's not human, kill it." "It's different, kill it." I hate that attitude in players, I hate that attitude in writers. It's moral simplicity taken to an offensive level.
And while I'm fine with the in-universe racism playing a part, I do have issues with writers making it perfectly justified. Playing orcs and goblinoids up as stupid marauding brutes is boring and is done to give the heroes something they can kill without tackling the moral complexity that comes with taking a life, which is something else I find offensive. Killing is never something that should be done lightly, at least not by heroes. It is sometimes, indeed, often justified. But it should never be justified just because "they're orcs", or "they're goblins" or "they're monsters". Because something isn't like us, because it is "the other", is not sufficient reason to kill it with moral impunity. Killing an orc should have no more or less moral weight than killing a dwarf or an elf; a life is a life.
These are my issues.
They are totally resonable ones, and ones that I can agree with. They are unfortunately a biproduct of the AH that has had a near death grip on fantasy for some time. That's why I favor those writers that have actually gone against the AH in their works. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 00:09:17
|
quote:
You forgot the rest of the line: I don`t want to play a human. Being a human in a human world, I want to play a non-human, because I don`t want to be the same in fantasy as I am IRL, even if I could kick butt.
CD, I was just joking, I didn't mean to offend you, and if I did, please accept my apologies.
Just to make two things clear -
1- kicking butt has never been my criterium for creating a character.
2- Even if I play a human in the Realms, it's hardly the same as I am in RL. 
|
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 03:53:40
|
quote:
When one guy ask me "how do we win?", I responded, "you survive". So when the rest of the party marched off toward the dungeon, he said he was staying in town and starting a business. I guess he won.
You should've told him that most of his savings were eaten up government regulations in starting up his business, then the economy crashed, his business went under, and he ended up on the streets and starved to death.
quote:
They are unfortunately a biproduct of the AH that has had a near death grip on fantasy for some time. That's why I favor those writers that have actually gone against the AH in their works.
What does AH stand for? |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 14:00:01
|
AH refers to the Attractiveness Heurestic, also known as what is beautiful is good schema.
In fantasy, what is evil is also ugly, what is ugly, is also evil. While the drow for instance, don't directly follow this mechanism, their constent association with spiders, and a clear linked phobia, is the massive descriminatory feature. My apology for the use of the abbrivation. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12084 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 14:06:45
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
quote:
When one guy ask me "how do we win?", I responded, "you survive". So when the rest of the party marched off toward the dungeon, he said he was staying in town and starting a business. I guess he won.
You should've told him that most of his savings were eaten up government regulations in starting up his business, then the economy crashed, his business went under, and he ended up on the streets and starved to death.
LOL, better would have been that he setup his business on some land he got for cheap. He then carefully saved his money to build his building (which had his living quarters above it to save money). Then, his first customer ended up being a doppleganger that ate him and subsumed his business. |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36906 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 14:07:52
|
| Speaking for myself, the attractiveness, or lack thereof, for orcs and goblins has never been a reason to dislike them. Their millennia-long history of rampaging across civilized lands and killing other folks just because they are there, that's been my reason to dislike them. And when you live in a place where this happens, and where you prolly know someone who was killed by orcs or goblins, then a prejudiced attitude is rather justified. Actions, not appearance. |
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!  |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 14:37:01
|
It's because they are ugly, and therefore evil, that they are given that history in the first place. Oh sure, Elves classed with humans in their day, but they are always given the excuse tha they are dealing with human expantion, etc. it's the ugly "monsters" that engage in mindless brutality and raiding for no point other than, there is a land to plonder. They don't engage in civilization building to any major degree, at least for the most part, they don't engage in trade to any major degree, they simply burst forth to cause problems to the "goodly races".
Hell, in LOTR, there was more of an explanation of why this occurs than in FR.
The problem isn't just the history of FR, the problem is a prevasive element often hardwirred into fantasy itself. It's as obnoxous as cheep perfume. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 15:20:40
|
quote:
LOL, better would have been that he setup his business on some land he got for cheap. He then carefully saved his money to build his building (which had his living quarters above it to save money). Then, his first customer ended up being a doppleganger that ate him and subsumed his business.
Or there's that. :P
And I have to say, I wouldn't mind seeing the more beastial humanoid races becoming major players more often in more campaign settings. An orc empire would be great, and I'd definitely like to see the hobgoblins have their day. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
|
|
|
Kris the Grey
Senior Scribe
USA
422 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 17:59:39
|
On the issue of the ages of gamers and their differing styles of play...
Yes, it is true that RPG gamers entering the hobby during different 'gaming eras (70's, 80's, 90's, 00's, and now) will have slightly different tastes and preferences when it comes to what races to play, what rules they prefer, and what general flavor they like in their RPG games. Yes, that will be reflected in their different ages. You grow up surrounded by certain trends and you tend to reflect those trends in your tastes. That is no different in D&D than it is in books, movies, and video games.
If the hobby grows (and it must to survive long term) this effect means the majority of gamers will always tend to be in the 'up and coming' age cohort and older gamers will see the play styles/game styles/trends of their 'Glory Days' eclipsed by the 'new hotness' (as Will Smith might say). Like death, this fact comes upon all men (or in this case gamers), so we've all got to deal with it at some point.
The good news is twofold. First, there are always going to be certain 'classic' conventions of general storytelling (and fantasy stories in particular) that will persist no matter what stylistic changes dominate from generation to generation. I'm not going to get all 'Star Wars Saga/Joseph Campbell' on you and say which ones, but we all know they are out there and that they tend to be the best parts of any story set in any time or place. This is a variation of the concept that there is 'nothing new under the sun' when it comes to us humans, that it's 'all been done' to some degree when it comes to human (or demi-human) interaction. So, no matter the generational tastes, you are never going to be flatly unable to tell a story that appeals to all of the people at your table.
Second, the pace of change in the fantasy worlds themselves is slower than it is in the real world. Sure, you'll have huge RSEs or shifts in available races and what not, but the Realms isn't going to develop steam powered mechs or fleets of tanks, or gunpowder dominated armies, computer networks, or the like. If anything, it's slipped back a bit in terms of civilization given the events of 4E. That means that, no matter shifting player tastes, you can still plop them into a classic fantasy setting recognizable even to starting Gary Gygax/Dave Arenson era gamers (a period I missed by less than a decade).
Despite all of those truths, I know it can be massively frustrating trying to run a game in the way you prefer from your gaming Glory Days (be that 'the story is the thing' or 'door, monster, treasure, repeat') only to have a group of players look at you with confusion (or worse, look around the room seemingly bored with your story). WoW aged gamers just don't tend to enjoy high mortality rate/low stat/low treasure games of the OD&D variety ("oh wow, 2300 sp and a dagger +1 - and that only cost us half the party!") nor do they usually like playing the 'lowly' human when more interesting (and power gaming oriented) race choices abound.
However, there are ways to hook them into some of the more fun parts of the older style of play or make them appreciate the 'joys' of playing a vanilla human. For one, I'm going to get out my little old one trick pony and ride it again for a bit...I speak of course of Play Yourself gaming.
Stating out your players using your system of choice and dropping them into your fantasy world is a great way of getting them to see the setting from a brand new perspective and of getting them to experience play with humans and low/average stat characters without massive magical/racial advantages without complaining that the character race/class choices are 'lame'. Most gamers welcome a one off challenge and even people without the slightest appreciable combat skill (i.e. most everyone) doesn't want to think of themselves as lame and will strive to use their wits to overcome their physical disadvantages with their smarts (relative to the common man in the Realms) and meta-gaming knowledge (of both the game rules and the details of the world itself). This puts the focus on the story and on good old fashioned human interactions (the classic fantasy wheelhouse). Try it, it's a useful exercise in 'role playing 101' for groups of newbies and veterans alike. If it doesn't break your players out of their established generational gaming ruts, nothing will.
Oh, and if you think youunger gamers don't have an appreciation for this sort of thing, think again. The standard 'Walking Dead' style 'Zombie Apocalypse' adventure is a perfect example of this style of gaming. The heroes of such games are often totally regular people dropped into the horrors of a changed world and tasked with survival. If your younger players balk at the concept of Play Yourself' just try pointing out the similarities of the two games. I bet they give your game a try.
As a final note, just to share something I myself discovered only recently (despite the fact that I've been running games of this type for years and years), players playing versions of themselves instead of characters is as old as the hobby itself (and pre-dates D&D - going back to the Gygax/Arenson campaigns of Chainmail). The VERY first RPG games used this convention (Lord 'Robilar' of Greyhawk fame was actually the character of a fellow some grognards might know named Rob Kuntz, his brother Terry played 'Terrik') as detailed in Jon Peterson's epic gaming history tome 'Playing at the World'. It is a long book, but a great read for any fan of the history of the hobby.
|
Kris the Grey - Member in Good Standing of the Watchful Order of Magists and Protectors, the Arcane Guild of Silverymoon, and the Connecticut Bar Association |
Edited by - Kris the Grey on 07 May 2013 18:03:46 |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 07 May 2013 : 18:01:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Speaking for myself, the attractiveness, or lack thereof, for orcs and goblins has never been a reason to dislike them. Their millennia-long history of rampaging across civilized lands and killing other folks just because they are there, that's been my reason to dislike them. And when you live in a place where this happens, and where you prolly know someone who was killed by orcs or goblins, then a prejudiced attitude is rather justified. Actions, not appearance.
Well, look at it from the orc and goblin's point of view. Humans, dwarves, and elves have millennia long histories of raiding their villages, slaughtering their people, and forcing them to live on lands where it's impossible to cultivate anything, giving them no other way to survive than to raid, pillage, and plunder. They have no more reason than to spare a human/elven/dwarven life than the human/elf/dwarf has reason to spare them.
But that's aside the point. I have a problem with writers casting orcs and goblins in this light to begin with. Now, I'm not saying I want orcs to be fluffy, cuddly, friendly people. In my own campaign they are still a very warlike race.
But when it's as simple as they raid and kill for no other reason than that they're orcs, it goes back to the idea that we're giving the heroes or the pc's something to kill without making them consider the consequences of it.
With human bandits they'll occasionally stop to consider that it's society that's forced these men into a life of thievery and murder. With orcs, they're inhuman monsters that kill because that's what they do.
There is a place for creatures of pure and irredeemable evil in D&D. That place is called the lower planes. Demons, devils, yugoloths, etc, these are creatures literally made of evil.
Orcs, goblins, drow; these are mortal creatures possessed of free will who should be cast and written as such. They should be more complex than simple brutes and backstabbing scoundrels. |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
New information on the sundering revealed
