quote:

---

Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal

2 years to go before the publication of the new FRCS is a long way and things can change...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mumadar Ibn Huzal

2 years to go before the publication of the new FRCS is a long way and things can change...

---

2 years? I was under the impression that the new FRCS would see the light of day at Gen Con Indy 2008, in time for the launching of the Living Forgotten Realms campaign... correct me if I'm wrong, but if this is the case, I wouldn't bank too much on that "things can change" theory...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markustay


Food for thought - someone over at the WotC boards brought up the fact that Candlekeep might be gone a hundred years from now.

So.... should we start throwing around new names now....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mkhaiwati

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markustay


Food for thought - someone over at the WotC boards brought up the fact that Candlekeep might be gone a hundred years from now.

So.... should we start throwing around new names now....

---

How about... Hamsterburg or Furrykeep?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Garen Thal

Your recollection is correct, PDK: FRCS is due out in August 2008. It's actually the fourth 4E product to come out (excluding teaser products), after PH, MM and DMG--in that order. Apparently, they are releasing books for 4E in the same order of their purchasing power for 3E.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Asgetrion

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mkhaiwati

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markustay


Food for thought - someone over at the WotC boards brought up the fact that Candlekeep might be gone a hundred years from now.

So.... should we start throwing around new names now....

---

How about... Hamsterburg or Furrykeep?

---

Hey, I'll vote for either one of these!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Asgetrion
However, it's not yet in their hands, since *all* design for the future of the Realms is being done in-house (Rich may be the only guy that has any say in the matter at the moment).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

If in a fell swoop, you come and tell me, "Here's how the Realms will be in 100 years" then you've singlehandedly made my life as a DM worthless, as both the players and I now know that whatever we do in our games, it won't affect the Realms a single bit.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

At least with a slow year advancement (as we've seen since the FRCS) I can pace my games to be just behind or after most current events, "surfing the canon wave" so to speak, and make my players feel they're having an influence on the world and be the cause or have a hand in these canon events.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

If the 100-year jump happens, I can see many people 'reverting to their own Realms', which I would hate to see, as this effectively becomes a dead setting.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sanishiver
The Realms, its history, its events, its NPCs, etc.. etc.. etc.. are all there for DMs to take, jump off from and build their own campaigns around. That's how the game works..

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sanishiver

The following idea is, IMNSHO, wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. x100 wrong.

I can't believe I'm actually reading this. With 30 something years of gaming history behind us, with the Realms being what, 20 years old as a setting? --and still people actually write that any future product releases automatically overwrite what goes on in their campaigns?

What?

As though the long-standing, indestructable precedent of 'Make it your own' doesn't apply.

As though the Realms couldn't possibly advance in history (even though it will anyway) because people's campaigns are too sacrosanct to meddle with.

As though PCs are all automatically immortal, so the flow of history can't possibly have an effect on their deeds.

::::::

The Realms, its history, its events, its NPCs, etc.. etc.. etc.. are all there for DMs to take, jump off from and build their own campaigns around. That's how the game works..

Subjecting one's campaign to the wills and whims of the setting creators first and foremost is just asking for player-based disappointment, as they watch their spineless DM wipe their efforts clean because �some book said so�.

A DM can't even say they're letting their players have influence on the setting if 'whatever happens next' will automatically override what the players have done.

I can see where you�re coming from here. A timeline jump could certainly lead to the first claim you make happening, with the conclusion having a bit more substance to it than the similar 2E to 3E that came about 7 years or so ago.

To wit: �I�m not going to buy your FRCS because you�re changing the Realms into something it isn�t! Many (online) people feel this way and since we�re such a big majority your Third Edition is going to fail and so the Realms is too and it�s all your fault WotC.� ...bleh. Much vitriol at first, but really no more effective than a fart in the wind.

But how about now, between 3E and 4E? Me, I don�t think this will happen.

Here�s why: If I�m having fun with my Realms campaign and I�ve got scads of books to draw from, I won�t stop playing in it just because the timeline jumps 100 years forward.

But neither would that be the end of the Realms for me. I�m a fan of the Realms because it�s the Realms. I�m not going to copout and quit on the setting just because the next FRCS might detail an era other than the one I play in.

My interest in the Realms has always been centered on the fact that it drives my imagination (which in part helps me to be a great Realms Dungeon Master). From day one of opening the Old Grey Box to now, it�s always been that way. My thirst for knowledge about the Realms and its deep history and my desire to let it all drive my thinking won�t go away simply because the next FRCS could jump one century forward.

If anything, it will enhance my experience. The opportunity for new Realmslore will be huge with the time jump. It�s too big an opportunity to pass up.

I can�t possibly be the only one that still thinks in the traditional (and apparently old fashioned) manner, can I?

---

quote:

---

"Going back to some 4E specifics, one of the the things I have enjoyed about 4E is that it's very much a "yes you can" game. It lets people do fun and exciting things, and it lets them do them without much complication…. I'm still finding traps, unlocking doors, ambushing bad guys, leaping from rooftops, and all of those things, but as I do so I'm far less distracted by the rules than I am under 3E."

* * *

"3e got a lot of things right, but anyone who has played it for a time knows that it gets things wrong. 4e is all about taking the things that work in D&D, keeping them in the game, and fixing everything else."

* * *

“I expect that the improvements in game play will convince even reluctant players to switch over to 4th Edition.”

* * *

"Fourth Edition gives characters interesting things to do and interesting choices to make during each round of combat. For example, characters always have some cool at-will powers they can use even after they've used up their 'heavy artillery.'"

* * *

"There will be many more monsters for PC’s to fight. It’s more fun that way. There are very few encounters that are built to be all the PC’s against one big powerful bad guy. There will be more mechanics built to leverage the monsters and THEIR fundamental roles. An ettin will be talking to itself throughout the encounter. This is the “monster’s job on the battlefield” this is how he reacts."

* * *

"Social encounters. For those who don't just want to RP such things without some mechanical impact, the game has rules for non-combat encounters. The example given was social interaction. Unlike 3E, where negotiation amounts to a single Diplomacy check, it's treated almost like a combat in 4E. I make a skill check, but I also tell the DM what/how I'm doing. The opponent responds with behavior (and a check) of his own. I counter with a new check, and new words. And so forth."

* * *

”It's funny. I actually had to go and ask Chris Perkins and Andy Collins this morning what people mean when they're asking whether Fourth Edition characters will be "more powerful" than Third Edition characters of the same level. I assumed the question was relative, and it made no sense to me. 4E characters will be just as challenged by encounters of their level as 3E characters would be if 3E encounter design actually worked. The power level, from that mindset, is the same.

That just shows how immersed I am in 4E, I guess. Andy explained that what he thinks people want to know is whether characters will have more hit points and do more damage. Purely a question of raw numbers, rather than of what those numbers mean in the world.

Given that 3E is inherently unbalanced—low-level characters are too weak and high-level characters are too powerful—I guess the right answer is that low-level characters will be more powerful and high-level characters will be less so. Everyone will be balanced, because we've erased the accident of math.”

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sanishiver

The following idea is, IMNSHO, wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. x100 wrong.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

If in a fell swoop, you come and tell me, "Here's how the Realms will be in 100 years" then you've singlehandedly made my life as a DM worthless, as both the players and I now know that whatever we do in our games, it won't affect the Realms a single bit.

---

I can't believe I'm actually reading this. With 30 something years of gaming history behind us, with the Realms being what, 20 years old as a setting? --and still people actually write that any future product releases automatically overwrite what goes on in their campaigns?

What?

As though the long-standing, indestructable precedent of 'Make it your own' doesn't apply.

As though the Realms couldn't possibly advance in history (even though it will anyway) because people's campaigns are too sacrosanct to meddle with.

As though PCs are all automatically immortal, so the flow of history can't possibly have an effect on their deeds.

::::::

The Realms, its history, its events, its NPCs, etc.. etc.. etc.. are all there for DMs to take, jump off from and build their own campaigns around. That's how the game works..

Subjecting one's campaign to the wills and whims of the setting creators first and foremost is just asking for player-based disappointment, as they watch their spineless DM wipe their efforts clean because �some book said so�.

A DM can't even say they're letting their players have influence on the setting if 'whatever happens next' will automatically override what the players have done.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

At least with a slow year advancement (as we've seen since the FRCS) I can pace my games to be just behind or after most current events, "surfing the canon wave" so to speak, and make my players feel they're having an influence on the world and be the cause or have a hand in these canon events.

---

I can appreciate this approach, because I do the same thing. But I�m not beholden to this timeline either.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Purple Dragon Knight

If the 100-year jump happens, I can see many people 'reverting to their own Realms', which I would hate to see, as this effectively becomes a dead setting.

---

I can see where you�re coming from here. A timeline jump could certainly lead to the first claim you make happening, with the conclusion having a bit more substance to it than the similar 2E to 3E that came about 7 years or so ago.

To wit: �I�m not going to buy your FRCS because you�re changing the Realms into something it isn�t! Many (online) people feel this way and since we�re such a big majority your Third Edition is going to fail and so the Realms is too and it�s all your fault WotC.� ...bleh. Much vitriol at first, but really no more effective than a fart in the wind.

But how about now, between 3E and 4E? Me, I don�t think this will happen.

Here�s why: If I�m having fun with my Realms campaign and I�ve got scads of books to draw from, I won�t stop playing in it just because the timeline jumps 100 years forward.

But neither would that be the end of the Realms for me. I�m a fan of the Realms because it�s the Realms. I�m not going to copout and quit on the setting just because the next FRCS might detail an era other than the one I play in.

My interest in the Realms has always been centered on the fact that it drives my imagination (which in part helps me to be a great Realms Dungeon Master). From day one of opening the Old Grey Box to now, it�s always been that way. My thirst for knowledge about the Realms and its deep history and my desire to let it all drive my thinking won�t go away simply because the next FRCS could jump one century forward.

If anything, it will enhance my experience. The opportunity for new Realmslore will be huge with the time jump. It�s too big an opportunity to pass up.

I can�t possibly be the only one that still thinks in the traditional (and apparently old fashioned) manner, can I?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sanishiver

I can't believe I'm actually reading this. With 30 something years of gaming history behind us, with the Realms being what, 20 years old as a setting? --and still people actually write that any future product releases automatically overwrite what goes on in their campaigns?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by RodOdom

How much are the corebooks?

---