| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
 Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:31:08
|
Has any of you tried to use FR as the setting of a different game than any edition of D&D ?
One of my player suggest me to try Burning Wheel... I'm reading it currently to know how much work it would need.
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:33:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Has any of you tried to use FR as the setting of a different game than any edition of D&D ?
One of my player suggest me to try Burning Wheel... I'm reading it currently to know how much work it would need.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it  Seriously, the realms was created from D&D |
 |
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:50:54
|
Well first, FR was created before D&D and D&D changed a lot during all these years.
Second, well.. I don't want to break the CoC.. so is there someone interested to talk about it in there? |
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 04:51:48 |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:51:11
|
The Realms existed before D&D was published. It was not created with D&D in mind.
I'd rather do a freeform Realms RP. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31774 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:55:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by scererar
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Has any of you tried to use FR as the setting of a different game than any edition of D&D ?
One of my player suggest me to try Burning Wheel... I'm reading it currently to know how much work it would need.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it Seriously, the realms was created from D&D
As GD said, the Realms, specifically Ed's home Realms, has been in existence since 1967 -- without any RPG rules. It wasn't until 1987 that the "official" TSR Realms was brought into being as a D&D campaign setting and given a stat'd basis, as we've seen in the 1e Ol' Grey Box.
|
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 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 04:55:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
I'd rather do a freeform Realms RP.
I'm sure freeform with Ed is fun, but it can be argued that freeform isn't really an RPG anymore.
I also think that the majority of player's and DMs want to keep the game aspect so it explains my OP.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 04:56:30 |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 05:00:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Well first, FR was created before D&D and D&D changed a lot during all these years.
Second, well.. I don't want to break the CoC.. so is there someone interested to talk about it in there?
Yep, In the mind of the one who created it yes, and later applied D&D as the outlet for his creation. Feel free to read the following quote from the back cover of Elminster; the making of a mage. " Ed Greenwood is the creator of the forgotten realms fantasy world, which became the setting for his home D&D game in 1975".
I can still keep digging my friends, I was only stating "my opinion" here and what I was reading, not trying to get into a CoC issue with Sceptic. Feel free to PM me if you would like to go further, other then that, Yes I was trying to talk about it further . Offical answer, no I have not tried a different venue for the running the realms, and would not. |
|
|
|
Archwizard
Learned Scribe
USA
266 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 05:56:03
|
I've heard people swear that combining Mage: Ascension rules with the Planescape setting is a most awesome gaming experience. A similar set up may work with Storyteller and Forgotten Realms. I don't know the system myself so I can't comment.
Judging by some of the Realms novels, particularly the stories I've read by Ed, and from the general atmosphere of the background lore, any system that tries to mechanically accommodate the Realms should have rules flexible and intricate enough to account for the power and flavor of magic and spellcasting traditions. Also, the same goes for the swashbuckling swordfights and dashing clash of arms.
D&D had the detailed spellcasting side for a long time. D&D 3e gave the warrior types something to do besides a basic attack. Though in general 3e may be getitng too complex for its own good, a bit like 2e at its end.
|
Edited by - Archwizard on 22 Jun 2006 07:20:23 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 06:08:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Archwizard
Judging by some of the Realms novels, particularly the stories I've read by Ed, and from the general atmosphere of the background lore, any system that tries to mechanically accommodate the Realms should have rules flexible and intricate enough to account for the power and flavor of magic and spellcasting traditions.
First problem here, D&D 3.x isn't flexible at all. It offer many options yeah, but they are fixed and deterministic in their effects.
Don't try to do Ed's style of silver/spellfire or that famous story of a powerful sorceress disintegrating an island.
That being said, my goal here is to list all the problems the D&D 3.x rules have trying to support a “narrative” approach to FR.
To end it, if you want to play Diablo in FR, D&D 3.x rules work fine, if not, you'll get some problems. House ruling fixes to those problem is not easy as it may seem. (It's what I do from the first days of 3E).
|
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 06:46:27
|
quote:
First problem here, D&D 3.x isn't flexible at all. It offer many options yeah, but they are fixed and deterministic in their effects.
I believe that was our point. :)
I actually really love the Mage system, too. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
Edited by - GothicDan on 22 Jun 2006 06:47:44 |
|
|
|
Archwizard
Learned Scribe
USA
266 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 07:19:19
|
I did not mean to state that 3e (or even any edition of D&D) was unequivocally flexible. The statement you quoted was what I thought the ideal rules system for FR should take into account. Which is not to say that system is 3e.
With the sentance following that, I wanted to say that 3e made options for the melee types more interesting, approaching the detail that spellcasters had for the last three editions of D&D. I should have elaborated more to make myself better understood. Despite 3e being more complex, within its Core rules it has built in some of the options for bladework found in only in the supplements for 2e (Combat and Tactics, Fighters Handbook). So at least warriors and rogues have some options, which mages and clerics had with their spells all along. Weapon Specialization was an optional rule in 2e, where as magic school specialization were core options. In 2e core rules, once you had one weapon specialization, all the other weapon proficiency slots could only be used to obtain proficiency in more weapons. |
Edited by - Archwizard on 22 Jun 2006 07:27:55 |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 07:30:06
|
Though note that FR drew heavily from optional rules which were appropriate to it.
And in FR, spellcasters always tended to be more powerful than non-spellcasters.. So WotC trying to balance the classes so much kind of goes against this. |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Archwizard
Learned Scribe
USA
266 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 07:46:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Though note that FR drew heavily from optional rules which were appropriate to it.
Yes, I'm just saying that such fitting optional rules should be accounted for in the ideal system for FR.
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
And in FR, spellcasters always tended to be more powerful than non-spellcasters.. So WotC trying to balance the classes so much kind of goes against this.
My comments had nothing to do with power. Of course spellcasters in FR are more powerful, they are in all editions. That does not mean that non-casters should have nothing to advance towards and almost no options to choose as they increase in experience. They could have just as much to play around with in regards to the rule set, which could help explain personalized techniques and specialities.
The rule set should help with the flavor. Bladesingers wouldn't be quite the same without their Bladesong style. They could just be regular Elven Fighter/Mages called Bladesingers, but the Bladesong style is an example of where the rules help to describe why Bladesingers are Bladesingers and not regular Fighter/Mages.
I feel 3e at least made both non-magical and spellcasting classes egalitarian in the sense of having a similar number of options within their own fields, even if the fields are vastly different in power. Again, this is not to say 3e is great, all these options could be detrimental. However, within the context of its own rules, 3e offers all characters something to do. |
Edited by - Archwizard on 22 Jun 2006 07:56:48 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 07:48:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Though note that FR drew heavily from optional rules which were appropriate to it.
And in FR, spellcasters always tended to be more powerful than non-spellcasters.. So WotC trying to balance the classes so much kind of goes against this.
Magic is really powerful in FR, problem is, PCs shouldn't have/want to handle all powers of the Weave. The problem with DND3.x is that a design principle is that everything available for NPCs will also be available for PCs and to make it works, we'll give mechanics to handle it. Then someone create that awful Spellfire weaver feat... and then Mystra's chosen template, silver fire and the like.
And all Diablo kiddies are building on WOTC boards "kewl-uber-combos" with these toys... 
Seriously, the Greyscale idea of Burning wheel seems good to handle such things, but I'm only on my first read of the rules.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 07:52:15 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 08:19:30
|
I have used an old edition of the Swedish Drakar och Demoner rules for the realms since the late nineties and am so satisfied with the result that I have not gone back. You loose some of the charm the old d&d editions had, but the benefits we saw in-game made it worth it. The last month or so I have been playing around with the GURPs rules to see if I could use them for Realms gaming and I think I can make it work pretty well.
The realms should be used with the system one is most comfortable with, the adaptions are in my experience pretty easy so long as those playing are fans of the rules one plan to use and if they are asked for advice of how to adapt the rules and the realms to each other. |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 08:24:20
|
| I miss the old Bladesingers.. And Elven High Magic. *sad* |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Disturbedone0777
Acolyte
USA
3 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 19:29:18
|
| The realms are easy to run inside the rules given by the D&D rules sets, however I have found more systems that I like inside the world. One being the game castles and Crusades which is still d20 system but doesnt so heavily rely on numbers as it does roll playing. Combat is so much faster in battles without tactical movement. I have liked the uni-system as well but that would take a bit more time to convert and Im not really wanting to do all that work. |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 19:31:34
|
Ok, now it's time to ask some few interesting questions.
Being free of D&D mecanics, we need to look at those fundamentals aspects of FR.
The first will be : Raw Magic, The Weave, the Art and the Power.
Should different kind of access to the weave (both Art and Power have sub-categories) have different mechanics or only different flavor ?
Why the Art is very limited when it comes to heal damage ?
Do we really need a fire-and-forget and a spontaneous version of the Art ? Why armor penalize some use of the Art and not others ?
Why Kossuth doesn't use the Power to enable his worshipers to hurl fireballs ?
Why a deity like Talos grant healing spells ?
Other questions this topic are welcome. Before answering, take the time to read the related chapter in Magic of Faerûn.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 19:43:10 |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 20:18:34
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
Why the Art is very limited when it comes to heal damage ?
Why Kossuth doesn't use the Power to enable his worshipers to hurl fireballs ?
Other questions this topic are welcome. Before answering, take the time to read the related chapter in Magic of Faerûn.
Art spells that heal damage are not that limited in FR, we just don't see a lot of them because healing is supposed to be for divine casters in D&D. But Ed has mentioned over the years that there are some healing spells that are used by the wielders of the Art, but they haven't really seen print.
As for Kossuth, I'll point out that his specialty priests in 2e could use fireball and fire spells that are arcane spells. So, I see no reason why they still couldn't in the current rules..... |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 20:43:36
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Art spells that heal damage are not that limited in FR, we just don't see a lot of them because healing is supposed to be for divine casters in D&D. But Ed has mentioned over the years that there are some healing spells that are used by the wielders of the Art, but they haven't really seen print.
Ok, that's exactly what kind of thing I'm looking at.
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
As for Kossuth, I'll point out that his specialty priests in 2e could use fireball and fire spells that are arcane spells. So, I see no reason why they still couldn't in the current rules.....
And what would you say about my Talos with healing spells question ?
In fact I could ask it in a more general way : Should all "clerics" have some spells in common or each spell list should be tailored for the deities. In this case, no cure spells for Talos and Ilmater (maybe?) and all fire spells for Kossuth, etc.
|
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 20:44:30 |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 21:02:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Skeptic
And what would you say about my Talos with healing spells question ?
In fact I could ask it in a more general way : Should all "clerics" have some spells in common or each spell list should be tailored for the deities. In this case, no cure spells for Talos and Ilmater (maybe?) and all fire spells for Kossuth, etc.
I didn't answer the Talos question, which is why I removed it from my quote, because I didn't really have any thoughts on it. :) But, again for my games, there are some deities that don't grant healing spells that often or they grant other spells that are more in line for thier portfolios, ethos, the deity itself, etc. Healing spells are part of those but so is resurrection, and weather spells, and etc.
So, yes, I feel that each list should be tailored for the deity but it's hardly ever been this way for D&D. :) Even in 3e now all deities, in general, allow some form of turning/rebuking undead while in the old rules, at least for FR, this wasn't the case.
I also tend to keep the old rules, which is no longer the case, of demipowers can only grant spells up to a certain spell level, lesser powers grant a few more, intermidate a few more, and greater powers all spell levels. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 21:08:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
So, yes, I feel that each list should be tailored for the deity but it's hardly ever been this way for D&D.
Ok that's it, and in this thread, we don't bother about removing things that comes from D&D instead of FR feel (I created the other thread for that topic).
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
I also tend to keep the old rules, which is no longer the case, of demipowers can only grant spells up to a certain spell level, lesser powers grant a few more, intermidate a few more, and greater powers all spell levels.
Another thing I add to my list. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 21:08:26 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 21:34:53
|
I find it a little difficult helping with this as I have no idea how the system you are planning to use works. I am not trying to be fresh here, but could you explain a little better what you are after, I want to answer you but I cant really grasp what you are asking.
Sorry If I am a bit dense here. |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 22:25:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
I find it a little difficult helping with this as I have no idea how the system you are planning to use works. I am not trying to be fresh here, but could you explain a little better what you are after, I want to answer you but I cant really grasp what you are asking.
Sorry If I am a bit dense here.
I don't ask you to do my work (using Burning wheel to handle FR), my goal here is more to extract FR ideas/flavor as a setting from what is has inherited directly from D&D rules and tone (Balance is the number one priority). |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 22:44:14
|
OK lets see; the weave and its role. One of the problems with the D&D magic Vance inspired magic system is that it limits the magic to the spell user and his books. That system is OK in itself, but to present the realms one gets a heap of trouble. The weave that Ed speaks of seem more like a mana form that one "plugs into" for different effects. one could almost compare it with Lucas image of the force. in theory all magic is part of the weave but it manifests itself in many different forms. This will also break with the traditional class system of D&D, so the question of balance can become difficult in some cases.
Is this more what you were thinking of? |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 22:45:25
|
Since Balance isn't the number one priority for FR's magic system (separated from any mechanics), trying to make it the number one priority in a new game system and STILL try to make it appropriate to FR is impossible. Sorry.
And note that Kuje was answering your questions/statements - don't tell someone not to talk about things when they're taking the time to answer your specific comments. That's a little rude. :) |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 23:10:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Since Balance isn't the number one priority for FR's magic system (separated from any mechanics), trying to make it the number one priority in a new game system and STILL try to make it appropriate to FR is impossible. Sorry.
Hmmm.. where I said that I want to make it balanced in the new system ?
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
And note that Kuje was answering your questions/statements - don't tell someone not to talk about things when they're taking the time to answer your specific comments. That's a little rude. :)
Where I said to Kuje not talking about something? I confirmed his idea and said that effectively, here we don’t have to bother with D&D restrictions. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 23:14:38 |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 23:12:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
OK lets see; the weave and its role. One of the problems with the D&D magic Vance inspired magic system is that it limits the magic to the spell user and his books. That system is OK in itself, but to present the realms one gets a heap of trouble. The weave that Ed speaks of seem more like a mana form that one "plugs into" for different effects. one could almost compare it with Lucas image of the force. in theory all magic is part of the weave but it manifests itself in many different forms. This will also break with the traditional class system of D&D, so the question of balance can become difficult in some cases.
Is this more what you were thinking of?
Exactly. |
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 23:14:50 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 23:23:35
|
Its difficult to set up clear points for the Realms as each persons take would wary; I would concentrate on the writings we have from Ed, both on this site and in print and then try to organize the impression one gets from this. When one has a clear picture of how one envisions the realms it is easier to decide what one sees as the important element and what the "feel" is. After twenty years in print there are some game elements one may want to delete and some one wants to add. Then work up the rules for how one can get this to work as a game for one self.
I will try to think a little more about this tomorrow, but on this side of the world it is to late for me to really get my brain working. |
|
|
|
GothicDan
Master of Realmslore
USA
1103 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 23:27:17
|
quote:
Where I said to Kuje not talking about something? I confirmed his idea and said that effectively, here we don’t have to bother with D&D restrictions.
Apologies. The wording made it seem like you were 'adding it to a list of things you didn't want to talk about at all.' :)
quote:
Hmmm.. where I said that I want to make it balanced in the new system ?
You said that Balance was the greatest priority. Or did you mean that it wasn't? |
Planescape Fanatic
"Fiends and Undead are the peanut butter and jelly of evil." - Me
"That attitude should be stomped on, whenever and wherever it's encountered, because it makes people holding such views bad citizens, not just bad roleplayers (considering D&D was structured as a 'forced cooperation' game, and although successive editions are pointing it more and more towards a me-first, min-max game, the drift away from 'we all need each other to succeed' will at some point make it 'no longer' D&D)." - ED GREENWOOD |
|
|
|
Skeptic
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1273 Posts |
Posted - 22 Jun 2006 : 23:56:29
|
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
Apologies. The wording made it seem like you were 'adding it to a list of things you didn't want to talk about at all.' :)
No problem
quote:
Originally posted by GothicDan
You said that Balance was the greatest priority. Or did you mean that it wasn't?
In D&D 3.x it is, in MY "perfect RPG" isn't at all (priority is the story). |
Edited by - Skeptic on 22 Jun 2006 23:57:37 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
FR without D&D
