| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
 Posted - 28 Apr 2008 : 15:25:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
No prob except it seems the WOTC site has gone fubar atm. :)
Oh great. Although, I'm not too surprised, since that website is known to be a bit funky. |
"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) |
 |
|
|
Hawkins
Great Reader
USA
2131 Posts |
Posted - 28 Apr 2008 : 16:50:11
|
| I like 4e Core art over 3e Core art, it seems to me to be somewhere between the 3e Core art and 3e Realms art (which I vastly preferred to 3e Core art). However, I like 4e Realms art (the very little bit I have seen) less than 3e Realms art, seeing as it seems to be the same quality as 4e Core art, which I do not think is as good as 3e Realms art. Now, for 4e Cover art (Core or Realms), I vastly prefer 3e Cover art. I love the how they looked like tomes that you might find in an old library (maybe even Candlekeep), and the 4e cover art seems to be focused around large pictures, and to me is reminiscent of the art on the boxes of World of Warcraft and its expansion (and while I think that the 4e rules set will lend itself better to video games and is designed to draw more of the "video game generation" into D&D, I do not think that it is making it into an MMO). |
Errant d20 Designer - My Blog (last updated January 06, 2016)
One, two! One, two! And through and through
The vorpal blade went snicker-snack!
He left it dead, and with its head
He went galumphing back. --Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass
"Mmm, not the darkness," Myrin murmured. "Don't cast it there." --Erik Scott de Bie, Shadowbane
* My character sheets (PFRPG, 3.5, and AE versions; not viewable in Internet Explorer)
* Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Reference Document (PFRPG OGL Rules)
* The Hypertext d20 SRD (3.5 OGL Rules)
* 3.5 D&D Archives
My game design work:
* Heroes of the Jade Oath (PFRPG, conversion; Rite Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 1: Cantrips & Orisons (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Compendium Arcanum Volume 2: 1st-Level Spells (PFRPG, designer; d20pfsrd.com Publishing)
* Martial Arts Guidebook (forthcoming) (PFRPG, designer; Rite Publishing)
|
|
|
|
ShadezofDis
Senior Scribe
402 Posts |
Posted - 28 Apr 2008 : 19:59:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by lowtech
quote:
Originally posted by ShadezofDis
I just sort of balk at the concept of Realmsian travel being remotely safe. A handful of places, a small handful at that.
The degree of trade and material welfare portrayed in previous Realms material is inconsistent with that view; the Underdark was like that, but the portions of the surface that resembled (somewhat) a points of light theme were explicitly described as exceptional in this regard compared to the "civilized" South and Heartlands. This does not mean the latter resembled modern-day Denmark, merely that the points of light theme (as we understand its meaning) is inappropriate for the Realms.
I have to disagree.
The Western Heartlands aren't terribly civilized with plenty of dangerous areas. Sure, a large, well armed caravan could probably avoid having to fight and smaller groups could potentially pass unnoticed but I just don't see it being easy or nice.
Calimshan isn't very safe, Tethyr isn't very safe, Amn isn't very safe, the Boarder Kindoms aren't very safe, the Shaar isn't very safe.
I mean, I certainly could have a vastly different view of the Realms but I wouldn't say there are many "safe" areas and even those "safe" areas have their threats. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2008 : 20:30:37
|
The very fact that caravans disappeared all the time, and required a large contingent of gaurds at all times, even when travelling well-known routes, shows just how 'Points of Light' the Realms already was.
The same can be said for the large number of missing trade ships, and their need to carry soldiers and Sea-mages to fend off the constant Pirate Attacks. the more I listen to the last Podcast, the more I realize that the guys in charge just didn't 'get it'. 
Prime Example:
The Amnians are attacked from WITHIN from humanoids living in their own mountains, and have nearly half their towns and cities looted before the marauding army is finally hemmed in, and then before either side could make any more headway, they were both attacked by the Tlicallis, forcing them to ALLY to defeat a common threat.
Where, in the above paragraph, do you see the reference the designers made to the Realms being "too civilized"? 
And Amn was one of the most 'modern' nations, in terms of exploration and trade - I'm just not seeing anything they are talking about. Its like listening to people at the LGS who only know about FR second-hand, and have never really ever bothered to read-up on it. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 29 Apr 2008 20:33:35 |
|
|
|
ShadezofDis
Senior Scribe
402 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2008 : 21:22:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I'm just not seeing anything they are talking about. Its like listening to people at the LGS who only know about FR second-hand, and have never really ever bothered to read-up on it.
That sums up my feelings quite well.
Though I don't know who the people at LGS are. 
Anyhow, I feel like the Realms they talk about (the one with the problems) is some Realms I haven't seen. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 29 Apr 2008 : 21:31:31
|
"Local Game Store".
Or wherever - the people who badmouthed the setting, even though they've never read any of the sources about it. Those, unfortunetly, were the very people the new edition is trying to attract, by 'reinventing' the Realms (by taking out all those things those naysayers were complaining about).
So, even though the designers have admitted that those preconceptions are wrong, they still obviously felt the same way and agreed with those folks.
The people who dislike FR from the beginning...
I remember years ago there was an ad campaign for a cereal, and this whole debacle brings it to mind -
"People who don't like Chex cereal, never TRIED Chex cereal"
FR is the new 'Chex cereal'.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Portella
Learned Scribe
United Kingdom
247 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2008 : 01:44:29
|
| they are really going to push the new "points of light" or "Candles of light" concept. they want new look, civilized orcs, untameable lands where "adventure" lays just outside o fyour door. |
Purple you say?!
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 01 May 2008 : 23:39:35
|
I have NO problem with a nation of Orcs - Mystara had one, and toward the end, so did Greyhawk. Hell, even Spelljammer had advanced Orcs with their own 'cosmic empire'. All of that is nothing new, and since I am a big fan of those first two settings, and a player of WoW, I can easily except it into FR.
After all, Orcs have always been there, and have been a 'major player' in the North since time immemorial.
Dragonborn and Aberrations... not so much.
What I don't get is how a nation of civilized Orcs fits into their 'Points of Light'.
Its actually VERY contradictory.
As are all those other brand-new nations that are 'popping-up' all over the place. Points of Light, or points of randomly added races and countries?
Genasi and Tieflings I can tolerate, and can even see them as a natural 'evolution' (although the Genasi Kingdom should have appeared in Calimshan, IMHO). The Dragonborn just leave me shaking my head, on so many levels... |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 01 May 2008 23:41:06 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36996 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 00:20:24
|
I can dig a nation of civilized orcs, too (and I really liked Spelljammer's scro). I just don't find the birth of the Kingdom of Many Arrows to be believable, nor do I find the idea of going from savage usurpers to peaceful neighbors in a handful of generations believable.
Tieflings I can dig, in small numbers. Ditto for genasi -- I really like them, but again, only in small numbers.
If the dragonborn had a different name, and had appeared in some other manner than the spontaneous appearance of an established nation, then I wouldn't have a problem with them. I am actually intrigued by the race, just not their history. |
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!  |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 02 May 2008 00:22:56 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 01:01:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
What I don't get is how a nation of civilized Orcs fits into their 'Points of Light'.
Its actually VERY contradictory.
I was thinking the same thing. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 01:03:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If the dragonborn had a different name, and had appeared in some other manner than the spontaneous appearance of an established nation, then I wouldn't have a problem with them. I am actually intrigued by the race, just not their history.
Have you read the history for "core" Dragonborn, in the Races and Classes preview book? It's a bit different from what we know about Dragonborn in the Realms. Check it out and see if it tickles your fancy. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36996 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 04:02:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
If the dragonborn had a different name, and had appeared in some other manner than the spontaneous appearance of an established nation, then I wouldn't have a problem with them. I am actually intrigued by the race, just not their history.
Have you read the history for "core" Dragonborn, in the Races and Classes preview book? It's a bit different from what we know about Dragonborn in the Realms. Check it out and see if it tickles your fancy.
I can't say that I have. My general distaste for 4E kept me from being interested in the preview books, as did the fact that they're just previews.
Either way, they should have changed the name of the race. I don't know if it works better in Core, but the FR backstory makes the name nonsensical, and the fact that there was already a dragonborn race just confuses things. |
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! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 02 May 2008 04:07:31 |
|
|
|
ShepherdGunn
Seeker
USA
89 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 09:40:19
|
Wooly, understand that the people that are currently working on things don't really care if the name of a care is the same as a pre-existing race. I mean the fact that "high elves" are now Eladrin, instead of just a sub-group of Elf, that Halflings have grown a foot, Gnomes are now spokesfolk for Fey Rights, and dwarven women are now "sexy", where does creating a new name for a race that isn't even born from dragons come into play?
I will admit, there are some aspects to the rules system in and of itself that has perked my interest, but every time the Realms gets mentioned, I want to either scream in rage, or weep.
I have a notion, but I don't know how far it will go. Candlekeep ignores 4e. Candlekeep makes a stand, and announces that THE fan site for the Realms is just going to flat out ignore the changes made by WotC. No needing to "vote with your wallet". Offer to Ed and who ever else is interested the opportunity to say what THEY want to have happen to the Realms. No Spellplague, no death of Mystra, no Elminster goes Nutso... Take a stand, instead of complain. What's WotC going to do? Shut down the site?
Most of my games take place dealing with a city called Norcastle (thus my website norcastleabbey.com) that sits on the banks of the Lake of Mist in the Endless Wastes. My contributions would be kind of limited in scope to this site. There are so many out there, though, fans that love and care for the Realms, authors that have put together some of the greatest stories I've ever read, into this wonderful, breathing, living Realm. We don't need WotC. Paizo has proven that. If this site becomes the Forgotten Realms then WotC will have no hold. As long as we don't make money on it, they can't touch us.
Here is what I say... we stop bemoaning our fate and start to take action. We work together to keep the Realms together, and ignore the idiocy that has grabbed a hold of WotC (also know as Hasbro). I think we have all been stunned, time and again, by what has come out of the laughably named "Design Team". It's time to stop being stunned, and to do something. (Like maybe start a new scroll called "Our Realms") |
"Man does not live by bread alone, likewise, blades and arrows aren't the only things that can kill him." |
|
|
|
Yasraena Dawndancer
Acolyte
USA
13 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 10:01:30
|
As the webmaster for Norcastleabbey.com...some disclaimers.
Norcastle is the creation Shepherd Gunn, though located in most games in the Forgotten Realms it is its own creation.
Secondly the Abbey website is underconstruction and not ready for guests...(thanks to a stupid hacker and my distraction with a recent surgery.)
Thirdly, Shepherd nor I support copyright infringement or encourage others to violate their legally binding contracts.
However, as DMs and Players, he's right, we can outright ignore their changes in our games and petition Hasbro to select a new development petition.
Anyone thought about a letter writing campaign/petition. If peanut packets can ressurect a TV show, why can't we save the FRCS with a mass of letters (REAL PAPER AND STAMP LETTERS) to Hasbro Corporate, WotC corporate etc...
About 25 million people play D&D, only a fraction of those play FR, but if bombarded with a few thousand letters, we could make a change. Get your gamer groups to write letters, friends, people at the local comic shop. Take form letters and petitions for people to sign and mail them in. 25,000 signatures is a powerful message. I know I could get around 100 easily just thinking of my gamer circles. There are enough of us to do something. |
One who has true faith and good deeds, never fears death. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36996 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 13:16:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by ShepherdGunn
What's WotC going to do? Shut down the site?
It's an option of theirs. They could also do things like clamp down on what people who work for them or are under contract to them say online. We exist at their sufferance, and we're already pushing it with the rampant anti-4E talk. Becoming an "official" anti-4E site will not do anything good for us.
Besides, just because the overall Shattered Realms looks bad to us now, it doesn't mean there aren't going to be some real gems of goodness buried in it here and there. |
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! |
|
|
|
ShadezofDis
Senior Scribe
402 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 13:21:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Besides, just because the overall Shattered Realms looks bad to us now, it doesn't mean there aren't going to be some real gems of goodness buried in it here and there.
Yep and there's also the fact that no matter how far the boat drifts out over the edge there is always the possibility it will come back into the sea.
Or something like that.
I shouldn't post so early. |
|
|
|
Afetbinttuzani
Senior Scribe
Canada
434 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 14:07:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
It's an option of theirs. They could also do things like clamp down on what people who work for them or are under contract to them say online. We exist at their sufferance, and we're already pushing it with the rampant anti-4E talk. Becoming an "official" anti-4E site will not do anything good for us.
I agree with Wooly.
Realistically, the release of 4E cannot be stopped with any number of letters (based on very limited information) at this point. I think that we need to wait until 4E comes out. Then we can properly evaluate it and, if it is as badly done as most are anticipating, we can begin to coordinate our efforts at developing a coherent, viable unofficial alternative. |
Afet bint Tuzaní
"As the good Archmage often admonishes me, I ought not to let my mind wander, as it's too small to go off by itself."
- Danilo Thann in Elfsong by Elaine Cunningham |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 20:37:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I can't say that I have. My general distaste for 4E kept me from being interested in the preview books, as did the fact that they're just previews.
Well, if the idea behind the race itself intrigues you, I recommend checking out the core version if you get a chance to.
quote:
Either way, they should have changed the name of the race. I don't know if it works better in Core...
I think it does. Dragonborn in the core settings are "cousins" of a sort to dragons, both races having been created by the dragon gods. Dragonborn were more than happy to serve their larger kin in olden days, although they have since gone their own way. Contrary to the Realms dragonborn (who hate and war against dragons), core dragonborn aren't mentioned as possessing any particular hostility towards dragons, they just aren't a servile race any longer.
As for two different creatures sharing the same name? Yeah, I see your point about that. That's bothered plenty of people, and with regards to other remade critters, such as the eladrin. |
"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) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 02 May 2008 20:39:55 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 20:43:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by ShepherdGunn
I have a notion, but I don't know how far it will go. Candlekeep ignores 4e. Candlekeep makes a stand, and announces that THE fan site for the Realms is just going to flat out ignore the changes made by WotC. No needing to "vote with your wallet". Offer to Ed and who ever else is interested the opportunity to say what THEY want to have happen to the Realms. No Spellplague, no death of Mystra, no Elminster goes Nutso... Take a stand, instead of complain. What's WotC going to do? Shut down the site?
I don't think they have the out-and-out power to shut down the site--if there was a problem, they'd have to take legal action first, which would involve paying attorneys. However, I'm sure that if the boards turned "anti-WotC" (which, if I'm reading you right, is the proposal, even if that's not stated directly), anyone who is affiliated with WotC in any way, even as a freelancer, would no longer feel comfortable posting here.
In short, an "anti-WotC" website would lose one of its popular attractions--the writers and designers who like to interact with the folks here. |
"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) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 02 May 2008 20:48:29 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 20:49:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Besides, just because the overall Shattered Realms looks bad to us now, it doesn't mean there aren't going to be some real gems of goodness buried in it here and there.
Yeah--kind of like how I can hate the general direction of a novel series (such as the Lady Penitent trilogy), but still get great ideas that I can utilize from it. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 20:51:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
I agree with Wooly.
Realistically, the release of 4E cannot be stopped with any number of letters (based on very limited information) at this point. I think that we need to wait until 4E comes out. Then we can properly evaluate it and, if it is as badly done as most are anticipating, we can begin to coordinate our efforts at developing a coherent, viable unofficial alternative.
And I'd like to point out that not everyone who dislikes the 4E version of the Realms also dislikes the 4E rules. I, for one, find the new rules intriguing. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36996 Posts |
Posted - 02 May 2008 : 22:19:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
I agree with Wooly.
Realistically, the release of 4E cannot be stopped with any number of letters (based on very limited information) at this point. I think that we need to wait until 4E comes out. Then we can properly evaluate it and, if it is as badly done as most are anticipating, we can begin to coordinate our efforts at developing a coherent, viable unofficial alternative.
And I'd like to point out that not everyone who dislikes the 4E version of the Realms also dislikes the 4E rules. I, for one, find the new rules intriguing.
I actually don't like some of what I've read about the rules, myself. But I'm thinking that there will likely be some that can be back-ported to 3.5. |
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! |
|
|
|
Ithil
Acolyte
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 03 May 2008 : 01:48:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
I agree with Wooly.
Realistically, the release of 4E cannot be stopped with any number of letters (based on very limited information) at this point. I think that we need to wait until 4E comes out. Then we can properly evaluate it and, if it is as badly done as most are anticipating, we can begin to coordinate our efforts at developing a coherent, viable unofficial alternative.
And I'd like to point out that not everyone who dislikes the 4E version of the Realms also dislikes the 4E rules. I, for one, find the new rules intriguing.
I actually don't like some of what I've read about the rules, myself. But I'm thinking that there will likely be some that can be back-ported to 3.5.
I like most of what I've seen of the rules. My biggest concern is with Wizards (the class, not the company). I fear they've made them more Sorcerer than Magic-User. I wish they would create a more useful Excerpt and release full text on the Wizard. |
|
|
|
Ithil
Acolyte
USA
40 Posts |
Posted - 03 May 2008 : 01:55:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I can't say that I have. My general distaste for 4E kept me from being interested in the preview books, as did the fact that they're just previews.
Well, if the idea behind the race itself intrigues you, I recommend checking out the core version if you get a chance to.
quote:
Either way, they should have changed the name of the race. I don't know if it works better in Core...
I think it does. Dragonborn in the core settings are "cousins" of a sort to dragons, both races having been created by the dragon gods. Dragonborn were more than happy to serve their larger kin in olden days, although they have since gone their own way. Contrary to the Realms dragonborn (who hate and war against dragons), core dragonborn aren't mentioned as possessing any particular hostility towards dragons, they just aren't a servile race any longer.
As for two different creatures sharing the same name? Yeah, I see your point about that. That's bothered plenty of people, and with regards to other remade critters, such as the eladrin.
Taking from this, if the dragonborn at one time served evil dragons then revolted, it would stand to reason that they would hate and war against dragon-kind. Thus making that aspect of it more viable for the Realms inclusion.
As for how they got to the Realms, I suppose I might have to break from canon with house rules. If it proves less than exemplary, I could say that the good dragons called the dragonborn from their extraterrestrial home to battle the evil dragons.
The Core concept kind of fits with Bill Slaviscek's Council of Wyrms setting. |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 05 May 2008 : 03:12:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ithil
Taking from this, if the dragonborn at one time served evil dragons then revolted, it would stand to reason that they would hate and war against dragon-kind. Thus making that aspect of it more viable for the Realms inclusion.
As for how they got to the Realms, I suppose I might have to break from canon with house rules. If it proves less than exemplary, I could say that the good dragons called the dragonborn from their extraterrestrial home to battle the evil dragons.
That could work. However, do consider the fact that dragonborn are not all necessarily good. In the core article, it is mentioned that some strive to follow Bahamut (the goodly dragon god), others follow Tiamat (the evil dragon god).
By extension, as far as I can tell, none of the player races are said to be "mostly good", "mostly neutral", or whatever. For example, I think the days of elves being "usually Chaotic Good", dwarves "usually Lawful Good" and so forth are over. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 06 May 2008 : 19:55:37
|
Rather then get all 'quote happy' like I was going to, I'll just address things directly.
I agree with Wooly; although I dislike (and on some things, outright HATE) a lot of what I'm hearing about 4e FR, I wouldn't want this to become the official home of 4e FR detractors. Now, on the other hand, much of the lore that gets 'made up' here comes from people who love the old Realms, so if a lot of it is still 3e (or really, edition-free before 4e), then that is a choice of the authors. For instance, if the next Compendium comes out with only 3e lore, then that is the choice by the individual contributors, and has no bearing on the viewpoint of this site. By the same token, if an article came out in the CK Compendium that DID take place in 4e, then I think we should accept that and treat it kindly, not take up arms against the author. Lore is lore, and that is what this site is about, after all, and everyone should feel welcome.
Like Rinon, I like what I'm hearing about the 4e RULES, and will probably eventually use them (after 4.5 comes out ), but I will be designing MY OWN WORLD, based loosely on FR for that.
@Sheperdgunn and Yasraena - mind if I put Norcastle on my latest Hordelands map? I figure it will be hosted here, as usual, and I have several 'new sites' on it that I will be providing lore for, and would love to include anything you could contribute. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 06 May 2008 19:57:43 |
|
|
|
scererar
Master of Realmslore
USA
1618 Posts |
|
|
monknwildcat
Learned Scribe
USA
285 Posts |
Posted - 08 May 2008 : 02:44:42
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Besides, just because the overall Shattered Realms looks bad to us now, it doesn't mean there aren't going to be some real gems of goodness buried in it here and there.
I agree.
The more I consider the "points of light," the more I suspect it mostly benefits the Living Realms. When RPGA rolled out Living Greyhawk (LG), the Greyhawk setting was skeletal. Over several years the RPGA LG events fleshed out the setting, as PCs matured and created towns and economies and societies. I eventually stopped tracking LG, but not before watching it generate what we consider to be lore on a magnitude which no design team could match.
I've never shown interest in Living Realms, mostly because there's enough extant lore that it's immensely difficult to conceptualize the meshing of the canon with the magnitude of user-generated lore I witnessed in LG.
But perhaps the Spellplague and points of light lore-reboot, returning the Realms to a skeletal state, have (unforeseen?) advantages.  |
Edited by - monknwildcat on 08 May 2008 02:47:37 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2008 : 16:23:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by scererar
WOTC announced the beta version of DDI today, with the monthly cost.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080507a
Like I'm going to pay for a beta version. I'll pass. |
"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) |
|
|
|
Brian R. James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
1098 Posts |
Posted - 09 May 2008 : 18:25:46
|
| Nah, the beta period is free. |
Brian R. James - Freelance Game Designer
Follow me on Twitter @brianrjames |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
D&D 4e Discussion Scroll
