quote:

---

Originally posted by CrennenFaerieBane

Wow. So much hatred for what has been an icon of Forgotten Realms, and what has bankrolled a good portion of the projects others have done. QQ more. If Drizzt will bring in new fans and keep a game you all enjoy around, why so much hate? Don't hate something because it's good. And I am not saying you have to think its good.. I am talking about the amount of sales - means its good (i.e. I don't like the movie Titanic, but I don't have much argument to say it's not good concerning the money it's made).

Seriously, this narrow-mindedness is what has allowed things like MMOs to destroy the pen and paper industry. If all you have is this icon left, what else are the supposed to use as a starting point with new fans?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Aravine

I dislike Drizzt because I am annoyed when I read about people that say " drizzt is awesome." sure he's cool, but fanboys have a way of taking that coolness, blowing it way out of proportion, and making that coolness less cool

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CrennenFaerieBane

Wow. So much hatred for what has been an icon of Forgotten Realms, and what has bankrolled a good portion of the projects others have done. QQ more. If Drizzt will bring in new fans and keep a game you all enjoy around, why so much hate? Don't hate something because it's good. And I am not saying you have to think its good.. I am talking about the amount of sales - means its good (i.e. I don't like the movie Titanic, but I don't have much argument to say it's not good concerning the money it's made).

Seriously, this narrow-mindedness is what has allowed things like MMOs to destroy the pen and paper industry. If all you have is this icon left, what else are the supposed to use as a starting point with new fans?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

quote:

---

Originally posted by crazedventurers

quote:

---

Originally posted by coach

""""designers have said that to transfer straight over with an existing character would be difficult if not impossible""""
so Driz'zt won't have stats for 4e?!

---

Excellent news, thats how it should be, no stats at all for NPC's, why stifle creativity and make every NPC homogenous in every game?

I hate stats and stat blocks, I would much rather know Jaethra Coppercoin is a CG HF W3 (chaotic good, human female Wizard 3) who is small, with long brown hair and blue eyes, that is known to have a strange affliction of singing nonsense rhymes when drunk - than the half page write up you get with 3.x of skills and feats. I can make up spells known/carried and any skills/special abilites/stats etc thats easy. However, coming up with a name, dreams and schemes, firends and enemies, past history, current projects is more difficult.

So the less stat blocks the better (one can dream ok? I know that 4E will be as crunch heavy as 3E *sigh*)

Cheers

Damian
ps would make do with just Jaethra Coppercoin is a CG HF W3 thank you very much

---

That was something I liked about 1E and 2E... But 3E had to detail everything to the nth degree, to insure that everything under the sun could be fought. I fear 4E will continue that sad trend.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Markustay

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ardashir

Which is pretty funny to hear, considering that the Realms didn't NEED fixing until after the WotC crew got their hands on it and started the trend of 'RSE Event of the Year'.

---

First they 'broke' it, and now their idea of fixing it is smashing it to bits with a sledgehammer.

I'm trying to keep an open mind about 4e FR, until I purchase the FRCG - after that, all bets are off.

Wouldn't it be funny/sad if the FRCG was the greatest-selling FR book of all time, and then everything that comes out for 4e FR after it is a dismal failure?

Because you know, EVERYONE will buy the FRCG, even if just out of morbid curiousity, which will totally skew WotC into believing its a huge success. then they pour everything they got into it, and it tanks...

Ironic, huh?

Either way, success or failure, I don't see much good coming from this. If it IS a success, that will just make them change FR MORE drastically when 5e comes out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Razz

I dunno, I'm all for story and RP but at the same time I do need detailed mechanics, too. I don't like "making mechanics up as I go along", so to speak. It angers my players, for one, (or almost any player) since it's not set in stone. If it's not set in stone, it leaves it woefully open to wide debate.

I don't need them for combat, there are non-combat scenarios I would need the stats to an NPC. How did they accomplish creating a magic sword? Did they have Craft Magic Arms&Armor or did they have help by having a friend with the feat help them? What makes Drizzt such a mobile combatant? His feats sure do tell me. It's a lot easier than pouring through books and filling in th blanks myself.

Another example, magical NPC so-and-so casted a spell and you want them to cast it again, for whatever reason. But you don't have the statistics for it, nor do you have the time or skill to create the spell yourself. I was quite mad at the end of the "Rage of Dragons" trilogy when that white dracolich casted a spell that seemed like a moving wall of disintegration. I sure wish I had the stats to that spell, it'd be fun for either my NPCs or my players to possess.

It also angers my players if I create "unofficial" material. If WotC does it themselves, there is absolutely almost no room for debate. Opening a D&D book and pointing to the text has quieted down many an argument in my games almost instantly. In such cases, my game continues without rational and irrational debate on either side over a made-on-the-spot mechanic.

I do agree, however, that all the details don't have to be there. Tell me their ability scores and skills, I can probably do the feats and equipment and spells. I would like to know if, say, Mirt the Moneylender is a better diplomat than Elminster. How do I know? Simple, just compare the Diplomacy modifiers. It's stuff like that I believe is necessary, depending on who you are, and does offer a lot of help.

I'm quite sure there's a happy medium between the two with just some hard work. Something, of course, WotC is loathe to do unfortunately.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Okay, I guess I need a more overt warning: Let's get back on topic. I don't want to have to start removing posts.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CrennenFaerieBane

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Okay, I guess I need a more overt warning: Let's get back on topic. I don't want to have to start removing posts.

---

Just a question - if Drizzt is being slammed as having too much exposure on 4e FR, and we are discussing 4e FR, why would this be off topic?

Not meant to be snarky, but I don't see why this is an invalid discussion piece.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wooly Rupert


Yeah, but the flip side is that if you leave stats for the DMs, then the DM can do as they need to with the NPC. It gives the DM the flexibility to customize NPCs as they need.

I'd not rely on WotC provided statblocks, anyway, after some of the errors I've read about in them. The most notable one was on the WotC website, in the Alustriel's Latest Consort series. The text said the guy was an accomplished dancer -- and the statblock didn't back that up.

My counter to arguing about things not being set in stone: if there is no published lore contradicting something, and it makes sense in-game, then how can it be wrong?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand

This is actually kinda 4e in general related, but since I can, I will

Anyways, what has confounded me the most was the social-encounter-resolution in 4e... hell, skills like diplomacy make it tough to roleplay out stuff when a more rules oriented player (also a DM) is at the table... "I make a diplomacy check...*rolls* diplomacy 25, I convince them to stay." "Well, then CONVINCE* them (me) that they should stay." "But I just turned their attitude from unfriendly to neutral..."

In 4e social-combat (for lack of a better term) you prolly have situations like this:

Player 1: "I try to intervene on the ambassador's behalf."
DM: "OK, ... roll initiative." dice are rolled
Player 1: "Good, I can act first! I jump up and use *flips through character sheet* 'unfailing speech' usable once per encounter to prove that the ambassador is innovent."
Player 2: "My turn! I'm gonna use 'observant communicator' usable once per day to talk with the guy we suspect..."
Dice are rolled.
Player 1: "Hoody-hoo... I can convince the baron that the ambassador is innocent!"
DM: "Not so fast, buster." rolls a die "The sneaky bard you've seen lounging about has held his action and can now make his move: he uses 'thwart all arguments'..."
Player 2: "The feat?"
DM: "The feat...and succeeds in making your paladin look like a jack-ass in front of everyone..."
Player 1: "But...but... I'm a fighter of good...and justice...he can't do that to me..."
DM: "He can and he did... soon bards all across the North will sing tales of your ineptitude..."

This will be great roll-playing.......

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ayunken-vanzan

That sort of "social-combat" would be better made not by rolling dice but by playing cards like in these card games: in your normal deck there are the most basic skills like “persuade + 4”, “diplomacy + 3”, etc, which you can throw at your opponent, and then there are booster packs with special cards like the above mentioned “thwart all arguments” etc. which make a “social-combat” much more unpredictable.

So if only WotC could be convinced to make something like such a card game for battling your opponents … now, wait a minute ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SiCK_Boy

I actually found the exemple given about the dice rolling in social encounters a good exemple of how I would like to see things work.

To each his own, but personnaly, I think having a mechanic to solve those encounters is simply a way to eliminate arbitrary decisions made by the DM penalizing players that just aren't that good at acting their characters.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mace Hammerhand
It is a ROLE-playing-game. If you disagree I suggest you play Talisman or whathaveyou...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SiCK_Boy

However, I stand by my point that never using any die roll to solve social encounters (and I'm using encounter in the DnD sense, that is an event with major potential impact for the players... I don't mean just about any encounter between any PC and NPC) leaves the door open for much abuse from the DM's part and penalizing injustly certain players.

---