| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Entromancer
Senior Scribe
USA
388 Posts |
 Posted - 27 May 2013 : 06:16:44
|
| I prefer the possibility of these magnificent deities with a greater emphasis on how humans chose to serve or thwart them. I'm more intrigued by the cultures and aesthetics of the Realms, particularly King Obould's establishment of an orcish nation, the genasi and dragonborn. More intriguing stuff from the staples of the genre--the elves and dwarves, say--that sets them apart from their counterparts in the mileu is something I would very much be interested in. |
"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul
"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul |
 |
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4460 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 06:56:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
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.
There is always Goodwill. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 07:19:02
|
I honestly don't see this site having a major impact on general WOTC decisions for 4 and 5e. Given the way most business's operate. This site might be examined for information on general features as a measurement tool, included with a host of others, but as a single insturement, I don't believe that our impact is that considerable.
That said, I for one would prefer a view more on the setting than the Gods, however, if they manage to combine the two, then I can be satisfied. |
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
12020 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 07:19:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
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.
Okay, that I can agree on. The problem being keeping that character sheet hidden. Some person in the company may get the wise idea that "this would be great as a hand out at Gen Con only for those who've paid to come", or "I can share it with my own buddies", or even something as simple as "Man, I need to get these f'ing fans off my back and I've got the copy right here". Or even worse... the chuckleheads leading the company that's leading the company just blatantly look at how many hours someone was paid to develop these internal character sheets (which would actually be pretty large) and think "hey, this'd make a good quick hall of heroes supplement that we could sell and be in the black fast". |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 10:18:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
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.
Okay, that I can agree on. The problem being keeping that character sheet hidden. Some person in the company may get the wise idea that "this would be great as a hand out at Gen Con only for those who've paid to come", or "I can share it with my own buddies", or even something as simple as "Man, I need to get these f'ing fans off my back and I've got the copy right here". Or even worse... the chuckleheads leading the company that's leading the company just blatantly look at how many hours someone was paid to develop these internal character sheets (which would actually be pretty large) and think "hey, this'd make a good quick hall of heroes supplement that we could sell and be in the black fast".
Well, there are lot's of clearly epic FR novel characters that don't have published character sheets. A lot of the characters from Paul S. Kemp, for example, don't have their game mechanic information published. However, I'm pretty sure Paul has character sheets for them.
However, even if they were it's a DM's job to adjust the world accordingly. I think it's better if they have this as explicit advice in the 5E FRCS, so even if they are published later - say in an adventure or something - there still remains something we can point too.
I think too many people have the assumption that Elminster MUST be this level. That's just false - our worlds are driven by narrative. The D&D rules are not meant to simulate the FR; at best it only approximates. So, as a DM I can have Elminster doing things the rules don't even allow to NPC's, and STILL have him be just a level nine wizard when fighting the PC's. I mean, really, does Elminster even follow the rules perfectly in the novels? I'm pretty sure if we took a critical read of the novels we'd find Elminster doing something the rules would never allow - and that's okay!
I mean, would a -GOOD- DM who wants to bring Larloch into the story as an antagonist against the PC's who were only, say around 10th level, keep him around 40th level or so? I'd hope not. I'd just have Larloch do some awesome stuff before entering battle against the PC's, and if they need any explanation for why he seems so weak after being able to do X, Y, and Z - I'd simply say he blew his spell power on all of that and was weakened when it came to facing them. He didn't think he'd need that much power to destroy you - a failing of all arrogant wizards. Or some such hand waving narrative explanation.
Example: Let's say the PC's have been working for Khelben Blackstaff and Laeral Silverhand. It's near the end of a long and dangerous campaign. They've managed to steal a powerful Netherese Artifact that Larloch wanted and store it away in Blackstaff Tower. Larloch has decided that he's going to lead a direct assault against Blackstaff Tower to get it. They know he's coming, in fact he's already in Waterdeep laying siege to the city - attempting to goad out the Blackstaff to fight him - demanding the artifact. He's brought with him a crap-ton of his liches. Do I make Larloch fight the mid-level PC's as a level 40+ NPC? Of course not. The Blackstaff orders everyone to get to the top of the tower, and he and Laeral take to the air to draw the attention of Larloch and the Liches away from the innocent folk of Waterdeep. He gives orders to his apprentices at Blackstaff Tower, and tells the PC's to remain on the tower and wait for his signal.
I then begin narrating what happens as Larloch and his liches set upon Laeral and Khelben. I talk about the awesome and immense display of magic unleashed, and how they can feel the Weave starting to fray from the intense draw of magical energy. Khelben gives his signal and his apprentices within the Tower use a Macguffin Artifact inside to seize upon Larloch and hurl him to the Tower - where the PC's are - and a barrier immediately surrounds the Tower trapping Larloch on top with the PC's. Khelben's voice would magically boom across Waterdeep telling the PC's to stop Larloch while he and Laeral hold off the other liches. I describe Larloch as being weakened from the spell battle above Waterdeep, and his power to draw upon the Weave being constrained by the artifact inside Blackstaff Tower that is being controlled by Khelben's apprentices.
This is how something like this is handled - a DM doesn't even need character sheets for anyone but a "weakened" Larloch, since everything else is done through narrative.
Of course, most of these characters are not meant to be direct antagonists to the PC's anyway, so even having them have stat blocks doesn't make much sense. It's pointless to know Elminster's stats when all he's going to do is give the PC's a quest.
I think this is something that started with later editions of D&D where suddenly people had to have rules for -everything-. |
Edited by - Aldrick on 27 May 2013 10:47:34 |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 10:36:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I think this is something that started with later editions of D&D where suddenly people had to have rules for -everything-.
Let me just make an old man's comment: this thirst for details is a consequence of the higher level of information the internet has been introducing in the last 20 years (in any field).
It's not bad by itself, it just changes things.
Regarding D&D, my opinion is that the habit of statting out everything was born on the internet (and WotC was good at following people's demand, as any company should do if they want to thrive).
Like, people want Elminster's stats - they want them badly. If we don't give them, A) people will complain and B) will make them up themselves, circulating them on the net.
Easier to give them what they want, so we keep it canon, we can control things AND we please the mass (ok, I know, it's not the "mass", it's just the group with the loudest voice - this switch occurs often in social systems like the web).
Wolly/Sage, forgive my slight offtopicness.
|
|
|
|
Aldrick
Senior Scribe
909 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 10:52:55
|
Ze -
I agree that people will make up stats for NPC's like Elminster anyway and circulate it among themselves. However, is that really a negative or a bad thing? Does it really matter if he doesn't look much like the canon Elminster?
I realize that novels try to give the illusion that the NPC's are doing things through D&D-like mechanics, but the fact of the matter is they're still largely narrative. Like I said, I'm pretty sure if we took a really critical reading of any D&D character, but especially a character like Elminster, we'd find that he has "broken the rules" in numerous places.
I don't think that's a bad thing, because the goal of the book is to tell a story. Mechanics shouldn't get in the way of the story. The rules exist in the game to ensure that everyone is fair, and there is some general semblance of balance. |
|
|
|
Ze
Learned Scribe
Italy
147 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 11:24:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I agree that people will make up stats for NPC's like Elminster anyway and circulate it among themselves. However, is that really a negative or a bad thing? Does it really matter if he doesn't look much like the canon Elminster?
To me and to you, not at all. Probably not even to Ed.
I'm not sure WotC is fine with this.
As I wrote above, they would be missing the opportunity to give people what they ask for (thus improving people's sentiment towards the Company), while maintaining control. It's, like, cheap and effective marketing. 
But it's only my take, I may be wrong. 
|
|
|
|
sleyvas
Skilled Spell Strategist
USA
12020 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 13:46:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ze
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
I agree that people will make up stats for NPC's like Elminster anyway and circulate it among themselves. However, is that really a negative or a bad thing? Does it really matter if he doesn't look much like the canon Elminster?
To me and to you, not at all. Probably not even to Ed.
I'm not sure WotC is fine with this.
As I wrote above, they would be missing the opportunity to give people what they ask for (thus improving people's sentiment towards the Company), while maintaining control. It's, like, cheap and effective marketing.
But it's only my take, I may be wrong.
Like I said before, double edged sword. Its why I'm on the fence about it. I personally would be happy knowing that they've got a hidden character sheet, and I wouldn't even be too upset if they "change out" abilities on said spreadsheet as new abilities come available over time. I say this because when 3E first came out, I "re-developed" Sleyvas, trying to fit him in with the rules of the time. It wasn't until 3.5 that there were prestige classes and feats that allowed me to truly recreate him as I'd pictured him in late 2nd edition (note, this goes for a lot of my 2nd edition NPC's that I converted). Sleyvas and Targuth Agneh needed the eldritch knight prestige class, their teacher Flarik Calroegen worked best with ultimate magus to fill in both bardic and wizardry skills (he's always been a patient, knowledge pursuing, storyteller, but with armor and some ability with weapons... and even better now, minor healing without being beholden to a god), Daeronness Shenandra Tarsorek of Talos needed the mystic theurge |
Alavairthae, may your skill prevail
Phillip aka Sleyvas |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 15:21:08
|
I don't think WotC gained anything by killing of all their iconic characters. It is still a very common complain that FR has too many high level character despite the fact that they were virtually all removed in 4e. All they really did was succeed in ticking off all the people that read the amazing supplements like 2ed Seven sisters and Heroes Lorebook that defined those characters.
quote:
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.
There are plenty of threads here about other topics. Also, it doesn't make a lot of sense to complain about cities when they showed the map last GenCon and virtually all the 4e changes were removed. Characters...well unfortunately, they are sticking with the 4e changes, so it is unlikely that many of the lost characters could return. The gods on the other hand might or might not becoming back, the explanation given on that was really vague. So, it allows for the most debate. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2013 : 15:25:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
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.
Well, the constant edition-bashing probably drives away a lot prospective fans, so if 5eFR fails, it may be (in-part) because WE 'doth protest too much'.
Even if we aren't 100% crazy about it, we should at least give it a chance - if we start ranting again, it won't matter how good it is. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 27 May 2013 15:26:24 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2013 : 00:09:41
|
Candlekeep.com influences freelancers and authors FAR more than any employee at WotC. Markustay is also correct in that the edition-bashing does affect prospective fans. It doesn't need to go away (I don't think it could--someone will always complain). Dissatisfied people have a far louder voice on the internet than content customers.
I can spare some of you some pain: There's always going to be things you dislike. 2e was a mess of a game for me, but I ignored a good portion of the rules. It turned out great for me in the end--but not because of the rules as written. |
Edited by - Matt James on 28 May 2013 00:13:01 |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2013 : 03:32:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
I don't think WotC gained anything by killing of all their iconic characters. It is still a very common complain that FR has too many high level character despite the fact that they were virtually all removed in 4e. All they really did was succeed in ticking off all the people that read the amazing supplements like 2ed Seven sisters and Heroes Lorebook that defined those characters.
Agreed, and it's for the simple fact that WotC will never get rid of the NPC's which those critics hate the most, Elminster and Drizzt. You have a segment of people who just don't care how many fans Elminster and Drizzt have, how many books those characters sell, or that every single Drizzt novel has made the New York Times bestsellers list. So long as those two characters are still about, then those people will never stop. And as they've said time and time again over on the WotC boards, they're completely unable to enjoy the setting because, so long as those two characters exist, they can't have any meaningful adventures in the Forgotten Realms because Elminster and Drizzt are better than their characters, are capable of handling all the real problems, and are apparently even intrusively invading their home campaigns.
So no, killing off Alusair, Caladnei, Khelben, Laeral, Qilue, Wulfgar, Cattie-Brie, etc, didn't change anything, because the biggest "offenders" in their minds, Elminster and Drizzt, are still around and will always be around. And so long as Elminster and Drizzt are there, those same people will continue to be critical of the setting. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 28 May 2013 03:36:21 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2476 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2013 : 20:04:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer
we are more curious about the gods then anything else. so that's what they're gonna write about.
...and it will be written by Lisa Smedman. Again. Of course. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore
USA
1853 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2013 : 22:31:22
|
| This thread started out to be X% productive discussion and Y% blowing off steam, and it's devolved to taking potshots at each other and authors. Can we find something better to talk about? Giant spiders would be an improvement. |
|
|
|
CorellonsDevout
Great Reader
USA
2708 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 01:58:42
|
| I HATE spiders, so giant ones would make me drop everything and run. |
Sweet water and light laughter |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 15:37:46
|
I'm not saying you have to or even should like it, but anyone who categorizes the love and affection we poured into the Neverwinter Campaign Setting (which influences the CO-OP game) as a big middle finger to fans either A) hasn't bothered to read or look into it at all, or B) is totally missing it.
Yes, things change. Sometimes you like them, sometimes you don't. But the 4e Neverwinter franchise is as much about preserving and hearkening back to the awesome things that made Neverwinter great in the first place as it is about innovating and telling new stories.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 16:26:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm not saying you have to or even should like it, but anyone who categorizes the love and affection we poured into the Neverwinter Campaign Setting (which influences the CO-OP game) as a big middle finger to fans either A) hasn't bothered to read or look into it at all, or B) is totally missing it.
That's not a slight against you, as I'm not talking about that book. I was referring to its status in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, which was definitely a pretty big blow, along with every other punch to the gut which that book delivered.
quote:
Port cities north of Waterdeep didn’t fare well in the years after the Spellplague; both Neverwinter and Luskan are now in utter ruin.
The only mention of Neverwinter anywhere in that book. An off-handed comment about how it's "in utter ruin." If ever there was a giant middle finger to the fans of those games, that was it right there. And of course we also had these gems...
quote:
Once a great magocracy, Halruaa today is wholly unrecognizable.
quote:
The great tsunamis that followed the shifting continents inundated Lantan as it ravaged other coasts and island nations. When the water receded, the island land was nearly gone. All its machines, its technology, and its people were drowned.
quote:
The formerly peaceful and tranquil halfling shire of Luiren now rests at the bottom of an immense gulf opening into the Great Sea.
quote:
Once the strongest city on the Moonsea, Zhentil Keep was largely destroyed by Netheril years ago.
 |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 29 May 2013 16:43:10 |
|
|
|
Entromancer
Senior Scribe
USA
388 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 17:43:21
|
| Sounds like a great opportunity for your PCs to re-establish some of those areas that were ruined. |
"...the will is everything. The will to act."--Ra's Al Ghul
"Suffering builds character."--Talia Al Ghul |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 17:53:38
|
| Points of Light, anyone? |
"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 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 18:13:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Venger
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
I'm not saying you have to or even should like it, but anyone who categorizes the love and affection we poured into the Neverwinter Campaign Setting (which influences the CO-OP game) as a big middle finger to fans either A) hasn't bothered to read or look into it at all, or B) is totally missing it.
That's not a slight against you, as I'm not talking about that book. I was referring to its status in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book, which was definitely a pretty big blow, along with every other punch to the gut which that book delivered.
quote:
Port cities north of Waterdeep didn’t fare well in the years after the Spellplague; both Neverwinter and Luskan are now in utter ruin.
The only mention of Neverwinter anywhere in that book. An off-handed comment about how it's "in utter ruin." If ever there was a giant middle finger to the fans of those games, that was it right there.
It's a shame you interpret it that way. Me, I see that as an opportunity to re-create something really cool and awesome in its place, which is exactly what happened.
4e FR made some giant mistakes. I have never pretended otherwise. As a freelancer who has never been employed by WotC, I can't speak on behalf of the company or officially comment on their intentions, but I find it ridiculous to think that any of it was intended as a slight to fans. Neverwinter in particular was just setting a stage for some really great development and storytelling, which has resulted in an amazing set of stories and a very popular CRPG.
In re: the OP, I really think the miniscule coverage and shrinking product line did far more damage to the Realms than the 4e FRCG did. Following the Neverwinter model, I think the 4e FR could have been developed into something really amazing, had it had the time, product backing, and leadership to lead it in that direction. WotC didn't choose that path, but is instead going with the Sundering, and maybe that's a better choice. We really won't ever know.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3811 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 18:27:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Entromancer
Sounds like a great opportunity for your PCs to re-establish some of those areas that were ruined.
Such opportunities are up to the DM and his/her players: a DM could wake up with the intention of obliterating a whole nation in his/her version of the setting in order to create campaign hooks and just do it. There's no need to destroy stuff in the published setting to make it happen. Some people liked the now ruined areas and would have liked to read stories featuring them (in their original status, not the devastated one) but, considering the changes, those aren't likely to be written.
Removing or completely modifying elements of the Realms to create 'new campaign opportunities' is not necessary and not cool at all for the people who like them. At this point one could say ''Lets wipe the world clean, it will surely be a great opportunity for all PCs to re-establish it and build something better in its place''. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 29 May 2013 18:28:16 |
|
|
|
Kentinal
Great Reader
4693 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 18:38:55
|
Hmm, one thing I did not see referred to yet though might have missed it. The time jump.
We as players had nothing to do with that choice.
For gaming groups that tend to follow canon any one playing human dies of old age or some how gets magical aid in order to be in the new Realms of 4th Edition.
Map changing and deities changing clearly was discussed, not much at all about the time change itself.
I do wonder if 5th Edition will have much if any time jump greater then a decade. |
"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 |
Edited by - Kentinal on 29 May 2013 18:39:49 |
|
|
|
Kris the Grey
Senior Scribe
USA
422 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 19:08:35
|
Kentinal,
What year is Elminster Enraged set in? I suspect that (or within a year or two at most) is your 5E start date. |
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 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4460 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 20:17:05
|
| Since it's impossible to run a canon game, no one is forced into playing at a specific time periods (or whichever time period is currently being pushed). Further, it's the Forgotten Realms and I'm sure there is SOME way of short-lived character can make the transition to 1479 DR. Mine all did, 3 humans in the group, made it from 1375 DR to 1479 DR via a magical mirrior that held us in stasis for that time frame. Heck, you could even say your character was Spellscarred and *bam* instant way to make the time jump. Also, I know a lot of people who enjoy playing the children of certain previous characters, which sounds like a pretty decent way to make the transition as well. I remember having two characters with such backgrounds who's family history spanned the difference in time and it was a great way to create some personal history that tied well within the history of the setting. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator |
|
|
|
Blueblade
Senior Scribe
USA
804 Posts |
Posted - 29 May 2013 : 21:21:22
|
With all respect, Kris the Grey, Elminster Enraged can't provide us with the 5e baseline date.
According to Ed, all three books of that trilogy are set in back-to-back succession in the spring of 1479 DR (Year of the Ageless One = baseline year for 4e).
And since Wizards has told us the 4e events "happened" (i.e. they're not doing any sort of "it was a dream/alternate dimension/whatever" reboot that would negate what was in the 4e FRCS), they've got to move on.
In other words, to a later year than 1479 DR. Probably not all that many years, yes, but EE's dates will have to be in the rear view mirror.
BB |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2013 : 02:01:02
|
quote:
Originally posted by Entromancer
Sounds like a great opportunity for your PCs to re-establish some of those areas that were ruined.
Eh, I don't consider playing all the way to epic levels through a campaign setting which I no longer like due to the changes inflicted on it just to fix the things I don't like about it "a challenge." I consider that tedious non-fun (Nevermind that it wouldn't make sense from an RP sense. Why would the same PC fix Halruaa, Lantan, and Zhentil Keep? And what advantage would I get from fixing Zhentil Keep? I want Zhentil Keep so I can have Zhent's to fight, and by the time I'm high enough level to fix Zhentil Keep there won't be any Zhent's capable of opposing me). I tried playing the 4E Realms when it came out in spite of how much I disliked the changes, didn't enjoy the experience at all, and never looked at it again.
quote:
Removing or completely modifying elements of the Realms to create 'new campaign opportunities' is not necessary and not cool at all for the people who like them. At this point one could say ''Lets wipe the world clean, it will surely be a great opportunity for all PCs to re-establish it and build something better in its place''.
Precisely. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 30 May 2013 02:03:03 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4460 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2013 : 02:05:04
|
| Or you could just say that nothing happened to Halruaa, Lantan, or Zhentil Keep. It's really easy to ignore stuff people don't like. Its what I did with FR-Mexico and FR-Egypt for the longest time. Now I at least reasons to adventure there now that they're gone. |
Diffan's NPG Generator: FR NPC Generator |
|
|
|
Venger
Learned Scribe
USA
269 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2013 : 02:08:30
|
quote:
It's a shame you interpret it that way. Me, I see that as an opportunity to re-create something really cool and awesome in its place, which is exactly what happened.
4e FR made some giant mistakes. I have never pretended otherwise. As a freelancer who has never been employed by WotC, I can't speak on behalf of the company or officially comment on their intentions, but I find it ridiculous to think that any of it was intended as a slight to fans.
I never said they set out to purposefully slight the fans, but they certainly didn't give any thought to the fans when they made the changes they did, and they definitely blew off the criticisms of people who didn't like the changes, including their own writers. I saw a video where Salvatore talks about writing a letter to WotC begging them not to do the 100 year time jump, among other things, and that there was a way for them to accomplish what they wanted without going so far, but they disregarded him.
Point is, they should've known better, but didn't, because they weren't really interested in having a discussion (not necessarily with fans, but with others associated with the Realms who'd have a different view on things) on those changes and whether they'd be a good idea or not. It seems that they came up with those ideas and, once decided on, had no interested on listening to a dissenting point of view. And that's definitely a slight against those people who've loyally stuck with the Realms for years, whether a fan, novelist, supplement writer, or even the creator of the setting itself. |
"Beware what you say when you speak of magic, wizard, or you shall see who has the greater power." |
Edited by - Venger on 30 May 2013 02:18:56 |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3811 Posts |
Posted - 30 May 2013 : 02:28:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Or you could just say that nothing happened to Halruaa, Lantan, or Zhentil Keep. It's really easy to ignore stuff people don't like. Its what I did with FR-Mexico and FR-Egypt for the longest time. Now I at least reasons to adventure there now that they're gone.
This thing again, it has been discussed over and over. Ofc people can do whatever they want with their setting, and I think that basically everyone would change things they have problem with in their version of the Realms.
The problem is this: do we get more, new lore or stories about destroyed elements (especially w/o the feel of pointlessness due to already established ''OMG apocalypse!'')? They promised so, but I'm kinda skeptic about it, considering that it'd take a lot of resources to decently cover all the eras and that I remember reading on these forums that WotC staff is like 1/3rd than it was before.
Besides, if we start ignoring a lot of stuff, why even bother with the the Realms then? One could just take the elements (s)he likes and include them in a homebrew setting (or another published one), without the need of a campaign guide or supplements (which would be a waste of money, since like half of more of them would be unwanted stuff). |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 30 May 2013 02:30:44 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
we are what's wrong with forgotten realms
