| Author |
 Topic  |
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
 Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 04:02:36
|
| Amazon has the 4th edition Player's Handbook I listed at $20 right now. |
 |
|
|
Mumadar Ibn Huzal
Master of Realmslore
1338 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 08:24:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Honestly, while we don't like some of what we've seen coming, there remains the fact that we have next to no real information. We're all getting worked up at shadows, here. We know something's there, but at the moment, the shadow is all we can see. We don't know the true shape of what we're facing.
Until we know more, I don't see how we can make any decisions. There are some good people at the helm, and they will, hopefully, explain things in a satisfactory light. I think we owe it to them to at least give it a shot.
I'm not saying to go all gung ho for the 4E FRCS, or that we should rush out to buy it and every other 4E FR product. I'm just saying wait until we actually know more, before deciding whether or not to howl for WotC blood.
Couldn't agree more with this statement. 
As and as far as a new name for Candlekeep? Why, if (big IF) it would disappear from the physical Realms, it would likely only be as a precautionary measure by Alaundo & co to keep all the precious lore safe.
It'll remain Candlekeep(.com) and be located just beyond that gate/portal yonder. Yes, your staff of planewalking will also work, just make sure you carry the required book/tome/scroll unless you want to find yourself on the wrong plane... |
|
|
|
Warrax
Learned Scribe
Canada
128 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 15:44:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
Amazon has the 4th edition Player's Handbook I listed at $20 right now.
Amazon.com?
That'd be an American price. Though that does seem promising. The 3e and 3.5e books were RIDICULOUSLY expensive, as were most of the splat books. |
|
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 15:49:23
|
After a RSE, Candlekeep would certainly inhabit a pocket universe where lore would be the most valuable asset. Merchants would trade their goods for stories of the past. A couple apples for a peasant story of rain and grain, a basketful of bread, honey and fruit for insights on this or that particular tavern, a week's load of food and luxury goods for that tasty story about a certain heroine, and so on. Of course, parchments and paper, where the tales would be laid on, and any other means of keeping history records, would follow close in price to the stories themselves. Perhaps Sigil would find it interesting to shield Candlekeep from perils of the new reality and embrace the pocket universe as part of that city.
The important thing is we, the scribes, will always be here. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
|
|
Sarkile
Acolyte
USA
4 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 21:22:10
|
| Well, I just found out about this today. Pretty disheartening. It seemed like WoTC has been trying to kill off various characters recently, but I didn't imagine them trying to run Faerun through an apocalypse. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 21:58:38
|
The Age of Apocalypse...Faerûn style.
Truth be told, it could be worse... they could bring the return of Bane and not bother to explain it. No...wait...they did that. Maybe we'll get a Mad Max kinda Realms, where it's really hip to wear black leather and beat each other to bloody pulp while riding on horse carts, where the horse carts are actually propelled by wands and other magical gadgets that various factions fight over, and in addition to the KKK...err...CCC, we get the New Society of Dwarves And People...NSDAP, where the master races (plural in this case) are either short and stocky dwarves or slender and elegant elves.
Sorry, but the more I think on this the worse it gets... |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 22:18:14
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
The Age of Apocalypse...Faerûn style.
Funny you should say that, as I've had some ideas about this . . . but I need a bit more info before I put together anything resembling a working idea. Hoping that the Grand History answers a few more questions on this front . . . think . . . think . . . think . . .  |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 22:24:35
|
I told one of my players about the future of the canon Realms, and she said "Was für 'ne Scheiße ist das denn?"
Run it through a translator, I won't get banned for using profanity in English  |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 22:26:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
The Age of Apocalypse...Faerûn style.
Funny you should say that, as I've had some ideas about this . . . but I need a bit more info before I put together anything resembling a working idea. Hoping that the Grand History answers a few more questions on this front . . . think . . . think . . . think . . .
You thought about introducing Apocalypse to Faerûn? Maybe as an old magical mutated being from ancient Mulhorandi past? And then we could also have Professor Elminster's Magical School for Gifted Youngsters... way cool  |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Victor_ograygor
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1073 Posts |
Posted - 17 Sep 2007 : 23:43:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
I told one of my players about the future of the canon Realms, and she said "Was für 'ne Scheiße ist das denn?"
Run it through a translator, I won't get banned for using profanity in English
Made a link to my players about 4 edition (see the link at the bottom)
The first answer to my post at my home site was: Can’t you do us all a favour Steve please don’t drink when you update your site. (Information about Cyric killing Mystra)
And after finding out this wasn’t a joke they said: It seams that the same guys creating dragon lances ending are now working on forgotten realms ending.
And those XXXXXXX idiots they are destroying my hobby
- Saturday we all met and a going talk about these changes, but I think that there are on group how a not going to buy 4 edition stuff.
The Future of the Forgotten Realms
http://www.123hjemmeside.dk/Drakul/3654153
|
Victor Ograygor The Assassin and Candel keeps cellar master
Everything I need to know about life I learned from killing smart people.
Links related to Forgotten Realms
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9571
Adventuring / Mercenary Companies / Orders / The chosen from official sources
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11047
Priests in Forgotten Realms.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9609&whichpage=1 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 01:00:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Warrax
- Community: Yes, because Community is something I need WotC to sell me on when the internet has already provided this; gleemax.com social networking tools. w00t. *waves flag*
Exactly, what is candlekeep.com? There's been a vibrant online community for years. Granted, I didn't expect those guys to get on stage and tell us that their upcoming products were mediocre and "same old same old", but in truth I think a lot of what they talked about isn't anything particularly "revolutionary".
By the way, I also agree with many of the points Asgretrion made before, such as how juvenile some of the marketing language is. |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Darkmeer
Senior Scribe
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 03:27:16
|
After reading all 26 pages of this... again,
After reading what Victor_ograygor has posted,
After reading what I can from Wizards,
I have not gotten a feel for the new edition at all. I do not like the way 4e is being presented (I feel that they are talking down to us), and I'm not exactly fond of the deicide and time jump for the realms. I'm not happy with the Succubi=Erinyes, I'm not happy with the racial non-information I'm getting... The list goes on, given that what I've seen is true (if not, then my feelings are invalid)
Now, I am trying to keep an open mind, but I'm failing at it. I see it and hate that I'm not keeping an open mind.
Now, one can argue that the system doesn't make the game, but in our case both need to be true to the story. D&D is fairly close to what the realms is, not exact, but that's okay. We enjoy it regardless. What the system needs to do is FIT the idea of D&D. From there, we can angle a good Realms game.
In order to keep players, one must have a good, if not great, system to work with. In the case of 4e, I feel that it had better sing, lest I NOT pick up the new system. Realmslore, I fear, will suffer in my game more than usual, as I'm only going to take what I like and NOTHING else (note: I might pick up Realmslore, if I thoroughly inspect it first).
One last thought, and this is contrary to the tone of this post. I have played the Wheel of Time RPG and the published adventure that went along with it. Now, if that adventure can be so lovingly crafted for a SET timeline, I feel that there can be a way for the 100 year jump in the realms to be crafted so that such an adventure can exist. Perhaps a 3.5 1384-1386 adventure, a 4e starter (things falling apart) 1395-1405, and then a 4e beginning set 1484-1485. There, bridging the gap, and helping bring the naysayers (such as me) across the gap.
/d |
"These people are my family, not just friends, and if you want to get to them you gotta go through ME." |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 04:36:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Granted, I didn't expect those guys to get on stage and tell us that their upcoming products were mediocre and "same old same old", but in truth I think a lot of what they talked about isn't anything particularly "revolutionary".
Wizards aren't saying 4E is revolutionary, because that's a direct claim that would incite doubt. The buzzword is the innocuous-seeming 'evolution', used in a powerful form of verbal deception known as presupposition, common in advertising and propaganda, which leads people to accept claims not made directly: here, that what's new is better (distastefully exploiting popular misunderstanding of evolution). |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 05:11:29
|
Oh, my, oh, my...
What will become of us Realms' orphans...
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmeer
I have not gotten a feel for the new edition at all. I do not like the way 4e is being presented (I feel that they are talking down to us), and I'm not exactly fond of the deicide and time jump for the realms. I'm not happy with the Succubi=Erinyes, I'm not happy with the racial non-information I'm getting... The list goes on, given that what I've seen is true (if not, then my feelings are invalid)
Quickly pulling from memory I'd add the Eladrin/Elf mix, the unreasonable Realmswide Spellplague (reminds me of the Mournland in Eberron), and the large scale deicide, which makes me think all non-evil gods and godesses (the majority of them) are completely incompetent as deities for letting themselves fall into a "trap" for the Nth time. They're deities for gods's sake!!
I can only think Ao has a very dark sense of humor.
quote:
Now, I am trying to keep an open mind, but I'm failing at it. I see it and hate that I'm not keeping an open mind.
Same feeling here. It's quite hard to act like Pollyanna and see only the bright side of things when the little info we're being fed clearly shows the market is more important than the game.
quote:
One last thought, and this is contrary to the tone of this post. I have played the Wheel of Time RPG and the published adventure that went along with it. Now, if that adventure can be so lovingly crafted for a SET timeline, I feel that there can be a way for the 100 year jump in the realms to be crafted so that such an adventure can exist. Perhaps a 3.5 1384-1386 adventure, a 4e starter (things falling apart) 1395-1405, and then a 4e beginning set 1484-1485. There, bridging the gap, and helping bring the naysayers (such as me) across the gap.
I never played Wheel of Time but your suggestion is an interesting way of circumventing the worst of the time jump. I'd stretch the "things falling apart" period at least a couple decades more, however.
What worries me most, though, are all the "empty buzzwords" Warrax pointed out a little earlier. It's crystal clear Hasbro's money-making machine is at full steam. I do not know how deep into the minds (and pockets) of D&D Designers the giant has rooted itself, but the results are becoming unappreciated.
Since this thread is mainly a D&D 4e discussion, I'll focus on that. I see a dark future for official gameplay (perhaps not in the US) for RPGA GMs may start facing an even greater shortage of material if they do not subscribe to D&D Insider. Right now, it seems the core books contents (and the FRCS for that matter) will have very little useful information for you to run a campaign. Perhaps a couple adventures and that's it. Regularly give them your money and you'll have access to the really pertinent canon information.
Please WotC! Give us some REAL good news!
... for right now I'm feeling like an orphan... |
|
|
|
KnightErrantJR
Great Reader
USA
5402 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 05:13:05
|
And now that I posted that, here is what that puts me in mind of . . .
First off, someone on Paizo pointed out that we have shifted from "Vancian" magic to "Rowlingsian" magic. Nothing wrong with Harry Potter, but I'm not sure I want the entire magic system to shift every time there is a new trend in popular fantasy.
The way I think of things is kind of like this . . . without going into specifics of mechanics, can I describe what a wizard does in the same terms? If I can, then its a D&D wizard. If I can't, then it might be an interesting mechanic, but you have created something else.
The following description of a wizard holds true, without much problem, in OD&D/1st/2nd/3rd/3.5 edition D&D:
The wizard has to get a good night's rest to get all of his spells for the day. He has to study his spell books to prepare his spells, and once he casts all of them, he has to rest before he can study and gain more spells. He can cast spells stored in a wand, which holds a finite amount of energy to power various spell effects, and he may prepare and cast spells from scrolls, which hold spells ready to be released by the proper kind of caster. He may also use staves, which generally hold more powerful spells and magical abilities within them, but also have a finite amount of power in them.
Now, there are a lot of game rule variables within that description, but those basics hold true across every edition up until 4th edition.
It seems that the designers were worried about wizards having to rest for 8 hours once they used up their spells, and that at high levels wizards had too many spells to prepare. Alright, you could actually change wizards so that they had a set number of spell slots, that they can fill with whatever spells they wanted to, and they only have a maximum level spell that they can cast. They could have refined the "reserve feat" system for having minor magical effects available if you have a more powerful spell still prepared and uncast. They could even have set up a "rest for an hour, get back X number of spell slots" mechanic that would allow a wizard to still have to rest and study their spellbook, but wouldn't require a full "night" of "camping."
I could be wrong, and I'm not a professional game designer, but it seems there was a lot of room to play with this class without tearing down the system and rebuilding it from scratch. |
|
|
|
Darkmeer
Senior Scribe
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 05:38:16
|
Thanks Thauglor, I am pleased to know I'm not the only one
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
Oh, my, oh, my...
What will become of us Realms' orphans...
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmeer
I have not gotten a feel for the new edition at all. I do not like the way 4e is being presented (I feel that they are talking down to us), and I'm not exactly fond of the deicide and time jump for the realms. I'm not happy with the Succubi=Erinyes, I'm not happy with the racial non-information I'm getting... The list goes on, given that what I've seen is true (if not, then my feelings are invalid)
Quickly pulling from memory I'd add the Eladrin/Elf mix, the unreasonable Realmswide Spellplague (reminds me of the Mournland in Eberron), and the large scale deicide, which makes me think all non-evil gods and godesses (the majority of them) are completely incompetent as deities for letting themselves fall into a "trap" for the Nth time. They're deities for gods's sake!!
I can only think Ao has a very dark sense of humor.
Yep. Seems about right. The eladrin/elf mix smells of Warcraft. I've looked at the "concept art" that they've offered us and thought "blood elf." The fact I love the WoW RPG and Blizzard's world, it doesn't mean that I want that to be my everyday D&D game.
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
quote:
Now, I am trying to keep an open mind, but I'm failing at it. I see it and hate that I'm not keeping an open mind.
Same feeling here. It's quite hard to act like Pollyanna and see only the bright side of things when the little info we're being fed clearly shows the market is more important than the game.
The market more important than the game? (not directed at you, btw). WE are the market darnitalltoheck! If this market were sooooo important, why didn't they put the core books & the "beginners" box sets in Wal Mart or somesuch, that way they'd be gaininng new and more fans. Grr... I could rant a long time about that one.
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
quote:
One last thought, and this is contrary to the tone of this post. I have played the Wheel of Time RPG and the published adventure that went along with it. Now, if that adventure can be so lovingly crafted for a SET timeline, I feel that there can be a way for the 100 year jump in the realms to be crafted so that such an adventure can exist. Perhaps a 3.5 1384-1386 adventure, a 4e starter (things falling apart) 1395-1405, and then a 4e beginning set 1484-1485. There, bridging the gap, and helping bring the naysayers (such as me) across the gap.
I never played Wheel of Time but your suggestion is an interesting way of circumventing the worst of the time jump. I'd stretch the "things falling apart" period at least a couple decades more, however.
Honestly, I dislike the novels of the WoT, but I love the RPG. The RPG was created as a one-shot, and the adventure went through the first few books, and worked. Although the stretching of time would be easy (we have a century to work with), I think an ending, a middle and a new beginning are needed in order to keep existing fans, and to regain much of the excitement that was lost.
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
What worries me most, though, are all the "empty buzzwords" Warrax pointed out a little earlier. It's crystal clear Hasbro's money-making machine is at full steam. I do not know how deep into the minds (and pockets) of D&D Designers the giant has rooted itself, but the results are becoming unappreciated.
Yes, empty buzzwords are awful. They make me much less excited about the game. I can't remember the issue, but when 3e was being released, they did posit some similar articles, although there were some serious spoilers (stats for Tiamat & Bahamut). This gave a glimpse into the new system, and made it much easier to make a transition. Sure, there were buzzwords, but the new edition just... drips with them. Buzz is good, but when the buzz wears off, are you happy with what's next to you? (Speaking of books here, as my books lie beside the head of my bed, next to my wife  )
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
Since this thread is mainly a D&D 4e discussion, I'll focus on that. I see a dark future for official gameplay (perhaps not in the US) for RPGA GMs may start facing an even greater shortage of material if they do not subscribe to D&D Insider. Right now, it seems the core books contents (and the FRCS for that matter) will have very little useful information for you to run a campaign. Perhaps a couple adventures and that's it. Regularly give them your money and you'll have access to the really pertinent canon information.
Please WotC! Give us some REAL good news!
... for right now I'm feeling like an orphan...
For some, Thauglor, the news of a new edition is good enough news for them. For other, such as us, we will be left orphaned on the mean streets of Seattle.
I also want to know how much is included in the base price of the D&D insider, whether or not there's "a small fee" included for every blasted thing in the game or not, above and beyond the subscription.
/d |
"These people are my family, not just friends, and if you want to get to them you gotta go through ME." |
|
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 05:55:51
|
Being myself a Wizard, I've been toying with spell systems for at least a decade now. Some of them have seen the light in a few of my campaigns. What I am going to say is strictly my point of view and nobody should feel it as a criticism of their own choices.
That said, for me slot magic (Vancian mode on) are not the greatest of systems. I must point out that it strongly hinders the PC's magical development and, worse, it limits player creativity extensively. Why should a fireball always be a perfect ball? And can I change the colour of my fireball? Those are very simple examples of what I'm saying. The bright side of it is that it's quite simple to keep track of your spells.
Point-based systems may solve the above limitations, giving the oportunity for the PC to mold her spells as she sees fit, and thus bringing more colour to the use of magic. I came up with a system based on a logarithmic table, which allows the same results of metamagic feats. The only problem? It's too difficult for any new player to keep track of all the possibilities available and, of course, of all the points spent. It eventually became a system for hardcore Wizard players who can manage a large load of numbers and calculations without being a hindrance to gameflow.
I even tried a hybrid system, which actually turned out to work pretty well. But the wheight of heavier calculations were still an impediment for the system to take off.
I'm not at all against new magic systems, as long as they allow for as much creativity as a player can show. What I didn't like about the little I read of the new system is the restricted use of implements for this or that area or school of magic. Orbs, wands and staves may alter the way a Wizard wields magic and I'm very excited about this perspective. However, I'm against implements having arbitrary use restrictions.
Perhaps it's time I revisited my last set of house rules. |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 06:18:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
I must point out that [slot magic] strongly hinders the PC's magical development and, worse, it limits player creativity extensively. Why should a fireball always be a perfect ball? And can I change the colour of my fireball?
It doesn't so limit creativity -- look no further than the Realms, which (even before it was adapted to D&D) combines Vanceian magic with just the flexibility you mention, as seen often in Ed Greenwood's fiction -- for instance the flaming sphere scene in Spellfire, or the fireball-crafting in "Elminster at the Magefair". It would have been lovely to see this discussed in sourcebooks, perhaps with some rules guidance, but it works fine in Ed's and other people's campaigns.
Of course, different magic systems were among the first big topics among the first generation of professional and armchair game designers right after the release of D&D, along with alignment and hit locations. There were no right conclusions then or now about which is 'best'. I like D&D, and the Realms, with Vanceian magic. But we have several versions of D&D that use it, and D&D is now diverse and diffuse enough that while I wouldn't be enthused by a system that pandered to impatient MMO players unwilling to plan their spells, I also wouldn't want designers to stick with something they don't love themselves, when so much of the game has already been and will be changed. |
Edited by - Faraer on 18 Sep 2007 06:20:50 |
|
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 07:16:36
|
I agree with you Faraer that slot magic may not limit creativity... but only if you don't follow the rules to the letter. I wasn't thinking of the novels when I last posted. Magic (and other things) in the novels can easily surpass what is predicted in the rules. Funny you mentioned those examples. Spellfire really presented more magic than 2e expected to show. Shandril herself was an aberration of magic (and so was spellfire). And Elminster... ah, the Old Grumpy, hadn't the rules been twisted a little, he could have never existed as a multiclass NPC. One could argue that El was not human (anymore) and that the 2e dual-class restriction of humans would not apply to him. But then again, as a GM you can always argue and twist the rules to your own designs.
If the rules are to be taken literally, what I believe we do almost 100% of the time, I still think Vancian magic limits creativity. Perhaps I'm also taking into consideration that GMs tend to be the pinnacle of creativity, so that we can offer the best adventure possible to our players. In the light of that, I like to allow my players to mix spells into a new one, more potent (and more dangerous to the caster).
Usually, however, Vancian magic makes the core of my tables. After all, at WotC sanctioned events house rules are not very well accepted. |
|
|
|
Victor_ograygor
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1073 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 07:17:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmeer
After reading all 26 pages of this... again,
After reading what Victor_ograygor has posted,
After reading what I can from Wizards,
I have not gotten a feel for the new edition at all. I do not like the way 4e is being presented (I feel that they are talking down to us), and I'm not exactly fond of the deicide and time jump for the realms. I'm not happy with the Succubi=Erinyes, I'm not happy with the racial non-information I'm getting... The list goes on, given that what I've seen is true (if not, then my feelings are invalid)
Now, I am trying to keep an open mind, but I'm failing at it. I see it and hate that I'm not keeping an open mind.
Now, one can argue that the system doesn't make the game, but in our case both need to be true to the story. D&D is fairly close to what the realms is, not exact, but that's okay. We enjoy it regardless. What the system needs to do is FIT the idea of D&D. From there, we can angle a good Realms game.
In order to keep players, one must have a good, if not great, system to work with. In the case of 4e, I feel that it had better sing, lest I NOT pick up the new system. Realmslore, I fear, will suffer in my game more than usual, as I'm only going to take what I like and NOTHING else (note: I might pick up Realmslore, if I thoroughly inspect it first).
One last thought, and this is contrary to the tone of this post. I have played the Wheel of Time RPG and the published adventure that went along with it. Now, if that adventure can be so lovingly crafted for a SET timeline, I feel that there can be a way for the 100 year jump in the realms to be crafted so that such an adventure can exist. Perhaps a 3.5 1384-1386 adventure, a 4e starter (things falling apart) 1395-1405, and then a 4e beginning set 1484-1485. There, bridging the gap, and helping bring the naysayers (such as me) across the gap.
/d
Welcome to Forgotten Eberon the World formerly known as Forgotten Realms. This game can be played by kids from age 7 – 12, and the rules a damn easy. We only have 4 goods in the world so it should be easy to remember their names and we only use dices when absolute necessary.
Forgotten Eberon is a all profit game and this means that you get broke and we get rich, you just shux up you are a player and we rule, and yes we do not like to here your idiotic idears on what we have done to the former world known as Forgotten Realms..
YOU JUST BUY AORE 4 EDITION PRODUCT UNDERSTAD!!!!
|
Victor Ograygor The Assassin and Candel keeps cellar master
Everything I need to know about life I learned from killing smart people.
Links related to Forgotten Realms
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9571
Adventuring / Mercenary Companies / Orders / The chosen from official sources
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=11047
Priests in Forgotten Realms.
http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=9609&whichpage=1 |
Edited by - Victor_ograygor on 18 Sep 2007 07:19:53 |
|
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 07:18:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
I told one of my players about the future of the canon Realms, and she said "Was für 'ne Scheiße ist das denn?"
Run it through a translator, I won't get banned for using profanity in English
Ans here I thought those thirteen years of German in school was all for naught. I do agree though. |
|
|
|
Victor_ograygor
Master of Realmslore
Denmark
1073 Posts |
|
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 07:21:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauglor
I agree with you Faraer that slot magic may not limit creativity... but only if you don't follow the rules to the letter. I wasn't thinking of the novels when I last posted. Magic (and other things) in the novels can easily surpass what is predicted in the rules. Funny you mentioned those examples. Spellfire really presented more magic than 2e expected to show. Shandril herself was an aberration of magic (and so was spellfire). And Elminster... ah, the Old Grumpy, hadn't the rules been twisted a little, he could have never existed as a multiclass NPC. One could argue that El was not human (anymore) and that the 2e dual-class restriction of humans would not apply to him. But then again, as a GM you can always argue and twist the rules to your own designs.
If the rules are to be taken literally, what I believe we do almost 100% of the time, I still think Vancian magic limits creativity. Perhaps I'm also taking into consideration that GMs tend to be the pinnacle of creativity, so that we can offer the best adventure possible to our players. In the light of that, I like to allow my players to mix spells into a new one, more potent (and more dangerous to the caster).
Usually, however, Vancian magic makes the core of my tables. After all, at WotC sanctioned events house rules are not very well accepted.
Well, the creativity just has to be used a little differently. The spells can still be changed and modified, but it needs research and writing. Some of the spontaneity disappears, but then again you get all the adventures that show up with the rumours of your new and unknown spell. |
|
|
|
Mace Hammerhand
Great Reader
Germany
2296 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 08:05:24
|
Some of the arguments the design team use have merit tho. E.g. if a party starts at 8 a.m. and have three major encounters very early on in the day, the casters might well be out of spells and in the arcane casters' case useless for the rest of the day. Sure, there might be a couple of wands, but all in all the wizard and sorcerer can unpack their crossbows and wave them around.
For my campaign (which will remain 3.5) I will try out the alternate magic system presented in Unearthed Arcana. |
Mace's not so gentle gamer's journal My rants were harmless compared to this, beware! |
|
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 09:51:52
|
| The system from UA is interesting. I actually used that system along with another one I found on the internet (I can't remember the name now for a proper reference) as a base for my hybrid system. UA is a good alternative system, but it still lacks a little on the versatility I was looking for. Nice system though and worth trying. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36798 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 10:12:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
First off, someone on Paizo pointed out that we have shifted from "Vancian" magic to "Rowlingsian" magic. Nothing wrong with Harry Potter, but I'm not sure I want the entire magic system to shift every time there is a new trend in popular fantasy.
Accio money! Expecto profitum!
  |
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! |
|
|
|
Thauglor
Acolyte
Brazil
36 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 12:02:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Accio money! Expecto profitum!
Very well thought Wooly. This will certainly be the motto for the 4th edition.
If you apply the currency in use during the Roman Empire you get other fun sentences.
Accio sestercii! Expecto lucrum!
Accio assis! Expecto dinarii!
And what about
Accio impressio quarta! Expecto maximum lucrum! |
|
|
|
Odysseus
Seeker
USA
51 Posts |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 13:09:51
|
Regarding the new FRCS.
To produce a new FRCS wotc kinda have to advance the timeline 100 years+. If they don't then all it would be is a players guide with classes & feats. To produce a new guide they have to have something new to write about. On his blog Rich Baker said they weren't going to do the "points of light" with the realms. And the FRCS is a year away, so I think there's still hope. I am looking forward to what they are going to do with racial levels for the realms races. And I am curious about what they do with classes. There are alot of bards, druids & monks in the realms. And none of those classes are likely to make the PHB1, and the PHB2 comes out after the FRCS.
As to the 4e rules changes.
I'm thinking of it more as a 3B rules. I don't believe its an evolution at all. There are alot of core mechanics they need changing. So a new edition is probably right. But I don't believe it will be a great deal better than 3rd. I do think that there is a good chance we'll get a more setting portable set of core rules. That are simpler and smoother to use, that are more can do, than you can't do that.
Also they are not getting entirely rid of vancian slot system. The wizard class will still have it. But will also have at will and per encounter magical powers/abilities.
|
“Anybody can become angry, that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and at the right time, and for the right purpose, and in the right way, that is not within everybody’s power, that is not easy.” —Aristotle |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
D&D 4e Discussion Scroll
