Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Journals
 General Forgotten Realms Chat
 we are what's wrong with forgotten realms
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 4

silverwolfer
Senior Scribe

789 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  01:10:56  Show Profile Send silverwolfer a Private Message  Reply with Quote  Delete Topic
Look over our thread of late , nothing but gods.

no complaints over characters or Cities

we are more curious about the gods then anything else. so that's what they're gonna write about.

Alystra Illianniis
Great Reader

USA
3750 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  01:14:44  Show Profile Send Alystra Illianniis a Private Message  Reply with Quote
No, that's not what's wrong with the FR. The only reason many of us are so interested in them now in the first place, is because so many of them were KILLED or made into "aspects" of otehr deities just before and during 4th ed! THAT'S what's wrong with the FR..

The Goddess is alive, and magic is afoot.

"Where Science ends, Magic begins" -Spiral, Uncanny X-Men #491

"You idiots! You've captured their STUNT doubles!" -Spaceballs

Lothir's character background/stats: http://forum.candlekeep.com/pop_profile.asp?mode=display&id=5469

My stories:
http://z3.invisionfree.com/Mickeys_Comic_Tavern/index.php?showforum=188

Lothir, courtesy of Sylinde (Deviant Art)/Luaxena (Chosen of Eilistraee)
http://sylinde.deviantart.com/#/d2z6e4u
Go to Top of Page

Kentinal
Great Reader

4684 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  01:37:39  Show Profile Send Kentinal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Death of the Weave and changing the map of the world clearly got a lot of push back as well.

Oh yes the wholesale death of deities clearly got push back for fans of the deity.

"Small beings can have small wisdom," the dragon said. "And small wise beings are better than small fools. Listen: Wisdom is caring for afterwards."
"Caring for afterwards ...? Ker repeated this without understanding.
"After action, afterwards," the dragon said. "Choose the afterwards first, then the action. Fools choose action first."
"Judgement" copyright 2003 by Elizabeth Moon
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  01:42:19  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Agreed. That's where a lot of the damage was done, so yes, that's what gets a lot of attention. That's not all that gets attention, though. Just because the latest thread is centered around gods doesn't mean that every thread ever made discussing the 4E Realms over the past five years have been about gods. My own personal beefs have been:

- Zhentil Keep: The destruction of Zhentil Keep just after it was rebuilt after it was destroyed and leaving it destroyed. Because what the Realms needs is one overarching villain (the Netherese) as opposed to multiple and diverse villainous organizations, amirite?

- Maztica, Unther, and Mulhorand: Those three getting scooped up off the planets surface and flinging Returned Abeir, Akanul, and Tymanther onto the map in their place was one of the most ridiculous changes to a campaign setting I'd ever seen. Because entire continents and nations falling out of the sky is a perfectly reasonable evolution of a campaign setting.

- Halruaa, Lantan, Luiren: The destruction of Halruaa, Lantan, and Luiren, countries fairly unique to the Forgotten Realms. Once again, we can't have diversity. Every setting had to fall within that whole Points of Light concept established by core and aren't allowed to deviate in any way. So we couldn't have magical nations, and we certainly can't have countries populated by halflings, because in core halflings are a race of nomadic Huck Finns, so obviously Luiren had to get the axe.

- Elturgard: It's obvious that the one nation on Faerun which would venerate Torm as a principal deity wouldn't be centered on Tantras in the Vast, but would instead be set thousands of miles away beneath a major miracle created by Amaunator. Cause it makes perfect sense that people living with a daily reminder of the power and glory of Amaunator right over their heads would all dedicate themselves to the worship and veneration of Torm.

- Neverwinter & Luskan: Blowing up Zhentil Keep for no good reason wasn't enough. Neverwinter and Luskan also had to be blown up because... Spellplague. Shut up. As for you folks who loved the Neverwinter Nights series of games, here's a big fat middle finger for you.

....................../´¯/)
....................,/¯../
.................../..../
............./´¯/'...'/´¯¯`·¸
........../'/.../..../......./¨¯
........('(...´...´.... ¯~/'...')
..........................'...../
..........''............. _.·´
..........................(
...........................

- Thay: Another original Forgotten Realms creation. A nation ruled by specialized wizards called Zulkirs, of which Szass Tam was just one among many. Let's throw all that aside, though. Let's throw away the politics, the backstabbing, the intrigue, the skullduggery, and the insidiousness and variety of the Red Wizards. What the Realms really needed, I guess, was a Night of the Living Dead ripoff, and for Thay to be all necromancy all the time with scads of undead all over the place.

And hey, earthmotes. Who doesn't love earthmotes. It's just a shame there's no way to include lens flare with the books, because I'm sure the 4E designers would've thrown in some lens flare if they could.

Soooo... yeah. It's not just about the gods.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."

Edited by - Venger on 26 May 2013 04:04:01
Go to Top of Page

BEAST
Master of Realmslore

USA
1714 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  02:53:04  Show Profile  Visit BEAST's Homepage Send BEAST a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Bah, Neverwinter's "destruction" wasn't THAT bad. They just got a volcanic eruption to help clear some room for renovations right down the center of Main Street!

I live in Houston, Texas, and when the city renovated our Main Street a few years back, that schtuff was expensive. So the way I see it, 4E saved those people a lot of GP!

"'You don't know my history,' he said dryly."
--Drizzt Do'Urden (The Pirate King, Part 1: Chapter 2)

<"Comprehensive Chronology of R.A. Salvatore Forgotten Realms Works">
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1853 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  03:52:05  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Venger, you're awesome. That's hitting the nail on the head. It's not the sum-total of the problems, but that's a good chunk of the geography chapter... I would only add something about the giant holes in the ground (and underwater) opened by the Spellplague.

There's another chapter regarding the death/insanity/whatever of major NPCs, including but not limited to the Gods. I've been trying to avoid any/all threads with a whiff of 4e ever since the early stages of Erik's (imo well-inspired) thread about which Gods we'd pick and how we'd organize them for 5e. And that thread really wasn't about 4e, but some of us couldn't help but "go there" because it opened the wounds.

I really do have high hopes for 5e. I haven't been getting as involved in the playtest material as I should, but I try to take a look through each packet. My issue is that the rules don't really matter... I want to see what they're going to do with the setting. That's what I'm waiting for. I'm hoping to be pleasantly surprised, but it's a constant struggle to ignore the precedent set by 4e.

But I see silverwolfer's point... any WotC staffer who is charged with keeping track of what we're talking about may get a skewed idea. Not just currently but in general. Simply reading the list of active threads is a pathetic excuse for conducting opinion polls, but... some of us aren't really making our opinions known on the WotC site, and aren't saying much here either because there isn't room on any PG-13 forum for our honest reactions. I agree that we're talking about the things that are messed up, but will WotC see that? Who knows.

FWIW, if anyone is listening, I think where 4e went wrong was in turning the design philosophy of the pre-4e Realms inside out. Whatever ideas someone had about "re-envisioning" the Realms, or "thinking outside the box" ...those ideas were where the screwups started.

  • Ed's grey box was like an almanac of the Realms... just enough to introduce the flavor of a bunch of areas, to whet players' appetite for this unexplored world, and give DMs just enough to build a campaign anywhere in the northwestern quadrant of Faerun.

  • 2e was an explosion of new stuff, marred only by the stupidly mismanaged Time of Troubles.

  • 3e was another explosion of new stuff.

  • 4e was an explosion, and there was new stuff, but the philosophy changed. Instead of wondering what's going to be created next, I'm wondering what's going to be axed next. In previous editions, ignoring the stupid (and this is part of why it's stupid) ToT, there was no destruction.


What's wrong with the Forgotten Realms, in 4e, is that it's not the Forgotten Realms. It was created with a different design philosophy, it has a different feel, and it is a different setting.

I don't understand the statement, uttered in plain English in an interview with WotC staffers, that they were running out of places/stories to write about. That is the epitome of... *sigh* I'll stop.
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  04:09:41  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'll keep it short (for once), and just say that Venger hits on pretty much all the main points. I agree with pretty much everything he wrote.
Go to Top of Page

Cbad285
Learned Scribe

160 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  06:19:03  Show Profile Send Cbad285 a Private Message  Reply with Quote
IMO at the end of the day, the realms can come sweeping back to their glory days. Personally for me it's 2.5 right up until 3.0 came out. But for all the cases of change and concern on the state of the setting, the land itself can be resewn no matter the new layout. The rich history can never be taken away, and the gods matter exactly d#k. The Greeks had their gods and eventually they passed into mythology. Just like the real world, the realms are going to suffer the change of religions passing away. It's actually an amazing example of how people rely so heavily on their understanding of god or the gods to put their world into perspective. I personally would love to see some heretic burnings find their way into future novels for worshiping the pagan gods. If fantasy worlds mirror our own world, with just a spice of magic, then how would a reformation play out in a place like Waterdeep? But all in all, if the gods are so unimportant as Ed himself has said, and its really the priests who write our faiths, then I imagine that once wotc get a true grip on what works and what doesn't work, we will see the realms go back to a setting where the simple man is much more interesting than say, the quarrels of gods and the events that overshadow the real virtues of Greenwood's creation.

But as always, these are just my personal thoughts on the matter, and really have no barring on what is right or wrong with the setting. I personally ignored all of the spellplague, the sundering and made use of new products and cannon as I see fit to best make my home campaign more intriguing.

The sentiment still stands. If you don't like what you see, ignore it and make up your own rules. :)

"Beware the Dream Fever!"
Go to Top of Page

Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader

USA
2717 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  12:00:31  Show Profile Send Jeremy Grenemyer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

But I see silverwolfer's point... any WotC staffer who is charged with keeping track of what we're talking about may get a skewed idea.
Not likely. There is nothing here that hasn't been said a hundred times already.

Any WotC staffer with an ounce of sanity left would have seen this scroll a mile away and avoided it like the plague (no pun intended).

Near as I can tell, WotC's already well along on the path to changing things. Novels are being written. Adventures too. The process is already under way.

But if some bold WotC employee has braved this latest tidal wave of complaining, know this: I like how the 4E Realms turned out. It aint pretty, but it's still the Realms. I'm looking forward to seeing the setting advance a little for the sake of 5E and the Sundering.

Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver).
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
4425 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  13:25:53  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Blah blah, whiney blah. Pretty much sums up a lot of feelings people had with the 4E Realms. It's just that some authors enjoyed deities have have been killed so they're trying to "Fix" that by bringing them back.
Go to Top of Page

Entromancer
Senior Scribe

USA
388 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  14:30:19  Show Profile Send Entromancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Luskan is better now. The idea of a city of rogues under the imagined thumb of an ambitious dark elf mercenary is quite appealing. I would've preferred it remained as lawless as it was post-The Pirate King (before the timeskip).

Given the hit that the pantheon took, could any exceptionally powerful mortal mage/cleric/shaman/etc find a way to ascend to godhood to fill that void in the pantheon? Or perhaps humanity could step up to decide its own fate?

"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul

"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36779 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  15:01:05  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
As much as I don't like what was done to the Realms for 4E, I don't think it's appropriate to bash people that like them or the Neverwinter games.

To each his own, and all that.

I also don't think it's valid to dismiss complaints about 4E as whining. One person may have perfectly legitimate reasons for liking or disliking something, and we should all respect their opinions.

There's a new edition coming out, and we have promises that at least some of the complaints about the 4E version of the setting will be addressed. I really should like to see more focus on the future, and less on the past -- particularly since we've been seeing some of these complaints repeated ad nauseum over the last few years. It's pretty bad when an avowed opponent of those changes is sick of the complaining and has to defend those that like them.

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!
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  15:27:46  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

...we should all respect their opinions.

There's a new edition coming out, and we have promises that at least some of the complaints about the 4E version of the setting will be addressed. I really should like to see more focus on the future, and less on the past...


I think this is really good advice.

This is one of the reasons I took the time to create my other thread. I'm hoping people will begin shifting away from all the things that went wrong in the past, and instead shift their focus toward what could go right in the future.

What's done is done. The only thing that matters now is what will happen next.
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  15:46:05  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
... I don't think it's appropriate to bash people that like them or the Neverwinter games.


If you're talking about me, I didn't bash people who like the Neverwinter games. Hell, I've been playing Neverwinters Nights 2 a lot lately. I was making a sarcastic joke about the treatment of people who liked the Neverwinter games, considering what they did to Neverwinter and Luskan in 4E, and that those changers were like a giant middle finger in their direction on the part of the 4E developers.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."

Edited by - Venger on 26 May 2013 15:49:10
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
15724 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  16:50:00  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer

Look over our thread of late , nothing but gods.

no complaints over characters or Cities

we are more curious about the gods then anything else. so that's what they're gonna write about.
Yes and no.

We didn't break it, but we certainly helped to keep it 'broken'. Whether you think that 4e was an epic mistake, or that our constant complaining about it drove away more casual fans, either way we certainly didn't help matters.

You are right about the gods - we put too much emphasis on them, so they put a ton of emphasis on them. Ergo, people who aren't fans are going to get the idea that only gods matter in FR... so why bother playing a normal, mortal character? I said this another thread: "If you want to do stuff that matters, you may as well go play in Golarion."

Because unless you are farting thunder storms and picking your teeth with mountains, you just don't matter. look at everything our characters did in 1e/2e/3e - we did nothing to prevent the world from going to 'Hell in a handbag'. Nothing we did mattered, at all.

I want MY players to play in a world where they make a difference, not sit on the sidelines watching a bunch of Mary-Sue Munchkins stomp all over the setting. I am not saying that is (always) the case, but thats the common perception. How can we 'shine' in a room full of 'gods'?

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone


Edited by - Markustay on 26 May 2013 16:51:01
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  17:13:42  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Whether you think that 4e was an epic mistake, or that our constant complaining about it drove away more casual fans...


Huh. Well... mission accomplished!

quote:
I want MY players to play in a world where they make a difference, not sit on the sidelines watching a bunch of Mary-Sue Munchkins stomp all over the setting. I am not saying that is (always) the case, but thats the common perception. How can we 'shine' in a room full of 'gods'?


I'm starting to believe that there's a subset of D&D players who aren't satisfied unless their characters are the one and only Mary Sue's in the entire setting. Only a short while ago I read a comment by a person saying that nothing his low-level adventurer accomplished mattered, because if he died then another adventurer would come along and get the job done. This guy was talking about low-level play (say 3rd level), so he was there griping about the prospect of a 3rd-level NPC potentially being around and, according to him, negating his own heroics. Is there any setting WotC could produce that could ever satisfy someone with that mentality?

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Tarlyn
Learned Scribe

USA
315 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  18:07:37  Show Profile Send Tarlyn a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
I'm starting to believe that there's a subset of D&D players who aren't satisfied unless their characters are the one and only Mary Sue's in the entire setting. Only a short while ago I read a comment by a person saying that nothing his low-level adventurer accomplished mattered, because if he died then another adventurer would come along and get the job done. This guy was talking about low-level play (say 3rd level), so he was there griping about the prospect of a 3rd-level NPC potentially being around and, according to him, negating his own heroics. Is there any setting WotC could produce that could ever satisfy someone with that mentality?


Eberron actually had a commitment in 3ed where the design team would never print NPCs above level 10. Part of 4e FR's design goals was to satisfy the type of player you are mentioning above as well. Which IMO the setting succeeded in doing.

Tarlyn Embersun
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  18:10:44  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Venger

I'm starting to believe that there's a subset of D&D players who aren't satisfied unless their characters are the one and only Mary Sue's in the entire setting. Only a short while ago I read a comment by a person saying that nothing his low-level adventurer accomplished mattered, because if he died then another adventurer would come along and get the job done. This guy was talking about low-level play (say 3rd level), so he was there griping about the prospect of a 3rd-level NPC potentially being around and, according to him, negating his own heroics. Is there any setting WotC could produce that could ever satisfy someone with that mentality?


That's hilarious.

Although, I also think it points out the weakness in level based systems. It creates the perception that you have to be level X to do awesome things, or unless you're level X you don't matter. This is a result of power scaling linearly across the board, so it's not inherently an incorrect perception.

However, what is silly - and the correct response to someone who thinks like this - is to point out that levels are a metagame construct. Elminster doesn't run around and think about being an epic level wizard. He has no idea what levels are, and neither does anyone else. It's completely irrelevant to the narrative of the story being told.

If I wanted to start a game where the PC's began at level 20, and I wanted to put them up against the average stereotypical goblins who could seriously pose a challenge to them as if they were level 1 PC's... I don't need to explain why goblins haven't taken over the kingdom. Why? Because levels are a metagame construct. They do not exist within the narrative of the story.

Still, many people are tied to this concept that even pointing that out won't be enough. Hell, even KNOWING this I STILL forget at times and fall into the same trap.
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  18:20:12  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Eberron actually had a commitment in 3ed where the design team would never print NPCs above level 10. Part of 4e FR's design goals was to satisfy the type of player you are mentioning above as well. Which IMO the setting succeeded in doing.


You wouldn't know it from the people I've been talking to, who still think that they can't have a meaningful adventure with all those powerful heroic NPC's running around. Apparently Elminster or Drizzt will pop up in the middle of every adventure and solve all the problems by themselves because, according to these people, that's what they do, and there's nothing they or their DM's can do to stop this from happening, which is why WotC needs to kill them off and de-canonize the novels.

quote:
Still, many people are tied to this concept that even pointing that out won't be enough. Hell, even KNOWING this I STILL forget at times and fall into the same trap.


Yeah, people need to remember that levels don't exist in the story. My character might be able to survive a fall from a 10 story building because he just has that many hit points, but in a novel or the real world that character would be a bloody smear on the pavement. Likewise, a guy who can take a hundred arrow shots in-game can, in the real world or in a novel, be taken down by a single crossbow bolt. Narrative and game rules aren't the same thing, and yep, sometimes I forget this, too.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist

USA
11686 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  18:34:38  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer

Look over our thread of late , nothing but gods.

no complaints over characters or Cities

we are more curious about the gods then anything else. so that's what they're gonna write about.



Wow, this is a short time view. I could swear a month or two back I was dreaming up ideas to make a new Thayan homeland that will pop back in whenever Maztica returns. Then at one point I was dreaming up different ideas for different kinds of wychlaran. I was also playing with the ley line system seen in midgard. Oh, at one point I was trying to develop a class that worked like the benders in avatar for the realms. I was also thinking about what will happen when Mulhorand and Unther return. I was also thinking about two factions of Thayans that could form in Faerun (one I named the United Tharchions of the Shaar and was "less" overtly evil than the original). We were also discussing ideas like some renegade Netherese, exiled Thayans, refugees of Upper Imaskar <as they will be refugees when Mulhorand returns>, and possibly some Halruaan skyship mercenaries and re-risen Narfellian and Raumathari mages all joining together, re-seizing Thay, portions of Thesk, and portions of Aglarond and making a new magocracy.

Of course, the gods matter too, because what we've seen them do is horrid, so we're making our voices known.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  18:59:39  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Venger

quote:
Eberron actually had a commitment in 3ed where the design team would never print NPCs above level 10. Part of 4e FR's design goals was to satisfy the type of player you are mentioning above as well. Which IMO the setting succeeded in doing.


You wouldn't know it from the people I've been talking to, who still think that they can't have a meaningful adventure with all those powerful heroic NPC's running around. Apparently Elminster or Drizzt will pop up in the middle of every adventure and solve all the problems by themselves because, according to these people, that's what they do, and there's nothing they or their DM's can do to stop this from happening, which is why WotC needs to kill them off and de-canonize the novels.

quote:
Still, many people are tied to this concept that even pointing that out won't be enough. Hell, even KNOWING this I STILL forget at times and fall into the same trap.


Yeah, people need to remember that levels don't exist in the story. My character might be able to survive a fall from a 10 story building because he just has that many hit points, but in a novel or the real world that character would be a bloody smear on the pavement. Likewise, a guy who can take a hundred arrow shots in-game can, in the real world or in a novel, be taken down by a single crossbow bolt. Narrative and game rules aren't the same thing, and yep, sometimes I forget this, too.


Honestly, a lot of this could be avoided if WotC just didn't stat up a lot of the NPC's like El and Drizzt. I'd actually prefer something like....

"Elminster is the Sage of Shadowdale, and is known to be a wizard of remarkable power. He is known as an eccentric individual in the village, and it is rumored that he is a Chosen of Mystra."

That's really all that needs to be said about him. If people want to know more they can read the novels. If more needs to be written, then WotC should get Ed to write a personality / psychological profile.

Forget levels and stats. A DM *SHOULD* adjust those as necessary for their campaign. Imagine, for example, that you had 30th level PC's. What difference does it make if they know Elminster is only something like 25th level? A DM *SHOULD* increase Elminster's level accordingly, making sure that attacking him would ALWAYS prove to be a challenge - even if they were level 1000. This goes in the opposite direction as well. DM's should actively LOWER Elminster's level if they intend to bring him into conflict with the PC's, and they're much lower level than he is according to the 3E FRCS.

I mean, it's not like Elminster is some untouchable god. It's all about making him an appropriate challenge; so his level in the end doesn't really matter. What matters is the level of the PC's.

Edited by - Aldrick on 26 May 2013 19:02:39
Go to Top of Page

Entromancer
Senior Scribe

USA
388 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  19:01:56  Show Profile Send Entromancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
@Venger: Remind your people that you/they can also write your campaigns so that Drizzt and Elminster don't just pop in. You can write them out of your Realms, or even write them as senile loons who spin a good yarn. There's too much variety in the Realms to let somethig like NPCs deter your players.

"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul

"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul
Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist

USA
11686 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  19:16:35  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I'm on the fence for the statting or not statting of NPC's. The problem I have is that then people try to figure out what Elminster can or can't do and try to fit it in the rules. So, then they start realizing that writer A assumed elminster would go and take feats XYZ, but writer B assumed Elminster would take feats ABC. So, then people get mad because "Elminster breaks the rules". Personally, I've found it a heck of a lot easier to write about a PC or NPC once I've statted out their abilities. It is truly a double edged sword though.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

Entromancer
Senior Scribe

USA
388 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  21:38:25  Show Profile Send Entromancer a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I would go with whichever set of stats enables a better campaign storyline/

"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul

"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul
Go to Top of Page

Aldrick
Senior Scribe

909 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  21:49:37  Show Profile Send Aldrick a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas

I'm on the fence for the statting or not statting of NPC's. The problem I have is that then people try to figure out what Elminster can or can't do and try to fit it in the rules. So, then they start realizing that writer A assumed elminster would go and take feats XYZ, but writer B assumed Elminster would take feats ABC. So, then people get mad because "Elminster breaks the rules". Personally, I've found it a heck of a lot easier to write about a PC or NPC once I've statted out their abilities. It is truly a double edged sword though.



I'm not suggesting that WotC shouldn't have an internal character sheet. That only makes sense.

However, when it comes to NPC's in the game they should be scaled according to the players. It makes sense to say that Elminster should ALWAYS be challenging to players, no matter their level. This means Elminster should either be scaled up or down in power according to the PC's.

For example, let's say I was running a game where the players were Zhents and they were invading Shadowdale. I'm playing in a canon world where Elminster lives in Shadowdale, and is probably at home when this takes place. My players are low level.

Well, it only makes sense for Elminster to come out and try and stop the Zhent invasion. However, it would be a dickish move on my part to throw an epic level NPC at my players who'd have ZERO hope of defeating him. So I drop down his power considerably, and decide that he should be level nine to be challenging to the group but not completely overpowering.

I fully intend for them to defeat Elminster in battle after a tough fight. In the Forgotten Realms there are always more powerful beings than you, and that day the PC's happened to be more powerful than Elminster. It doesn't "break" the setting because he didn't just walk out of his home, yawn, and then cast Meteor Swarm and then go back to his nap. No, Elminster was caught by surprise, unprepared, and out numbered.

In such a battle, I'd narratively open with Elminster attacking some other Zhents in some awesome spectacularly magical fashion.

"You hear arcane chanting behind you, and as you spin around you see HIM! The Sage of Shadowdale himself, Elminster. Just as you spot him he completes his arcane spell, and with a gesture of his hand lightning arcs forth striking those that were following you. They are lifted into the air and howl in pain as the lightning courses through their bodies. Elminster makes a practiced flip of his wrist and they are sent hurling past you through the air to land with hard thuds some thirty feet behind you. You are quite sure that your companions are dead."

Then they'd engage Elminster in battle, and ideally defeat him. As he starts to get low on HP...

"...badly wounded Elminster staggers backward, bleeding from several open wounds. He opens his mouth to once again speak an arcane incantation, but suddenly staggers and nearly collapses. A badly bloodied hand reaches into his robes, and then suddenly there is a FLASH of light and a ROAR of thunder. You find yourself blind and deaf for several long moments. When your sight returns you notice the image of Elminster slowly fading from site, and it can only be surmised that he's somehow teleported away."

I'd then use Elminster as a re-occurring BBGG for the players. He'd be sending Harper agents, spies, and assassins to thwart them and their plans, etc. Basically, I'd run him as one would any reoccurring villain, and at a suitable part of the campaign, the players would finally have a show down and defeat Elminster once and for all.

That's how a DM should properly run Elminster, IMO, if they are using him as an antagonist for the PC's.

The same is true even if he's helping the PC's. "Sure, Elminster is powerful... but he isn't THAT powerful." If the players are low levels, why would they even assume that Elminster is running around doing X, Y, Z? It doesn't have to be a matter of "El is busy doing more IMPORTANT stuff, and is leaving the UNIMPORTANT stuff to you." It could really be, "Elminster just can't do it alone, he isn't powerful enough to do that."

And if someone tried to say, "...but... but... Elminster should AT LEAST be able to cast 9th level spells!" I'd say, that person was looking at things through a metagame perspective. D&D isn't meant to be simulationist - maybe Elminster really can cast Meteor Swarm, how do you know he can't? Maybe you caught him on an off day? Or maybe all the stuff your CHARACTER has heard about Elminster is false, and that he really isn't as powerful as people claim. Or maybe Elminster knows that eventually someday he's going to die, and wants to ensure that there are other people - like the players - who can look after the Realms after he is gone, and he sees the PC's as good candidates. They won't learn anything if he's constantly solving their problems, and holding their hand, so he stands back and offers words of sage advice and wisdom instead - to be heeded or not as they see fit.

Etc. Etc.
Go to Top of Page

CorellonsDevout
Great Reader

USA
2708 Posts

Posted - 26 May 2013 :  22:35:50  Show Profile Send CorellonsDevout a Private Message  Reply with Quote
If the gods disappear from the Realms, then so do I. If they take a backseat, okay, so log as they still have some kind of presence. They`re as much a part of the Realms as anything else.

But I realize I am in the minority in this view.

Sweet water and light laughter
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 27 May 2013 :  00:18:25  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Entromancer

@Venger: Remind your people that you/they can also write your campaigns so that Drizzt and Elminster don't just pop in. You can write them out of your Realms, or even write them as senile loons who spin a good yarn. There's too much variety in the Realms to let somethig like NPCs deter your players.
They're not my people, but people on the WotC boards. I've said as much repeatedly, but apparently one of them thinks that Elminster and co. are using up all the evil in the Realms, and once it runs out there'll be nothing left for the PC's to do when they hit epic level but guard caravans from bandits or whatever.

I wish I were joking.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
36779 Posts

Posted - 27 May 2013 :  00:59:13  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer

Look over our thread of late , nothing but gods.

no complaints over characters or Cities

we are more curious about the gods then anything else. so that's what they're gonna write about.
Yes and no.

We didn't break it, but we certainly helped to keep it 'broken'. Whether you think that 4e was an epic mistake, or that our constant complaining about it drove away more casual fans, either way we certainly didn't help matters.


I don't see how we helped keep it broken, or that our complaining about 4E had any bearing whatsoever. If WotC had been listening to us, the 4E Realms would have looked very different indeed.

The only thing we could do to help or hinder was vote with our money, and that's certainly what I did -- from when 4E came out until they did the 1E and 2E reprints, WotC got less than $20 from me. Considering that I'd twice purchased almost all of the pre-4E novels and Realms material, that's saying something.

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!
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
4425 Posts

Posted - 27 May 2013 :  01:07:58  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I, OTOH, spend a great deal of money on 4E and FR-4E products. From the 3 main books (FRCG, FRPG, and the adventure Scepter Tower of Spellgard), 3+ years of DDI membership, AND the Neverwinter Campaign Setting. I really wanted the 4E Realms to be a big hit. It had TONS of changes, many of which I thought were great while a few were bad (namley the 100 year gap). Plus I purchased quite a few post-Spellplague novels as well. In the end apparently there wasn't enough of this sort of contribution and now we're staring at D&D:Next.

Did complaining about the Realms these past 5 years help? No, I don't believe they did. I believe in what MT says in that it drove away more casual gamers who might have become interested in the setting (and perhaps all the lore prior to 1375 DR). But really, it doesn't matter anymore. It is what it is.
Go to Top of Page

Venger
Learned Scribe

USA
268 Posts

Posted - 27 May 2013 :  01:20:55  Show Profile Send Venger a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I bought the Campaign Guide and Player's Guide, bought a few months worth of DDI subscriptions, and gave playing a campaign in the 4E Realms a shot. I was totally unsatisfied with every aspect of that, though, and I've since sold off the FRPG. I'm still trying to hock the FRCG but sadly I've had no takers.

"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power."
Go to Top of Page

MrHedgehog
Senior Scribe

688 Posts

Posted - 27 May 2013 :  03:41:49  Show Profile  Visit MrHedgehog's Homepage Send MrHedgehog a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Gods of the Forgotten Realms are the most interesting part. Deities are important in any world, why wouldn't they place an emphasis on them?

The 4th edition rules were good the changes to the Forgotten Realms were not. I don't see why the world needed to be blown up to change the rules... the forgotten realms books were of very, very low quality in comparison to other 4th edition products. Even if you were not aware of previous Forgotten Realms products was...they were atrocious ....The artwork was recycled and/or bad. The layout was unappealing... The writing was poor, etc...
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 4 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2024 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000