|
I checked Saturday's Gen Con report from Wizards and saw this. Was wondering what other peoples' thoughts were on the changes that were revealed in the report.
|
I checked Saturday's Gen Con report from Wizards and saw this. Was wondering what other peoples' thoughts were on the changes that were revealed in the report.
Nothing new. We already knew of these changes. Nothing that encourages me to pick up the new Realms products.
I checked Saturday's Gen Con report from Wizards and saw this. Was wondering what other peoples' thoughts were on the changes that were revealed in the report.
I am no great fan of the realms as were. I suspect most of this will just conferm many of the fears of the hard core fans who have already been put off.
|
|
Well, I for one didn't know all of these changes, so I was posting them for the benefit of those that, like me, hadn't seen them. Personally, I think some of the revealed changes (groups of drow living on the surface and generally accepted for instance) just strike me as making some of the other changes they made utterly pointless. The axing of Eilistraee and the reversion of her followers to Dark Elves being one example.
|
|
Well, I for one didn't know all of these changes, so I was posting them for the benefit of those that, like me, hadn't seen them. Personally, I think some of the revealed changes (groups of drow living on the surface and generally accepted for instance) just strike me as making some of the other changes they made utterly pointless. The axing of Eilistraee and the reversion of her followers to Dark Elves being one example.
Ok. So there's ONE new thing. *Knew I should have kept in the "most of" in the original reply.* ;-)
Too bad, I liked her. Mystra also gone. I have the companion on order and can't wait to see it; I think the salient point for FR fans is they can still play in teh past if tehy prefer it; and the changes may bring in new players who didn't like teh realms before. Say what you want, but FR is a less 'generic' setting after the Spellplague. Bordering on 'out there', especially considering the landscape, per WOTC now looks like a Roger Dean cover from a Yes album. That strikes me as hearkening back to the 70s while putting a spin on things, which is cool, that's when the hobby began, so it makes sense to me.
But a point many people miss about RPGs is that you can take what you like and leave out what you don't; unless yer playing in a tournament you just make the world what you want. A rehash of FR 3x using the 4e rules now strikes me as pointless so I am glad they took a new direction... and to repeat, the FR of 2 and 3x are STILL USABLE if you prefeer to set you campaign in them. But you may need the new book for a lot of the creature stats I guess.
I have gamed in the realms for years, so I hear ya. On the other hand it DID always striek me as somewhat generic, like nothing earthshaking would ever happen, like I was a speck on a mountain...
THAT seems like it has probably changed.
I will give it a shot, and read it (if just for the fun of it) but if I end up agreeing with you I will just keep using my old FR stuff as I am sure will a lot of others.
and to repeat, the FR of 2 and 3x are STILL USABLE if you prefeer to set you campaign in them. But you may need the new book for a lot of the creature stats I guess.
Problem is that the design philosophy links the New Realms to the 4e rules. Provisions for playing 4e in other eras are null and the "history" chapter is just a couple pages, most of them dealing with revisionist visions of the early "creation history". The DM advice section similarly gives tips on how to "advance the timeline" and underscores that the best option is to start afresh with new characters.
For a good integral approach to eras of play, compare with the 3.5 Dragonlance products by SVP-MWP: they cover the main time periods featured in the novels (with their monograph supplements) and offer advice on eras of play for their generic products (like the Bestiary and the main campaign book).the 4e FR Campaign Guide is basically useless for era play. Creature stats may be somehow useful, but then, many pre-Spellplague groups and menaces are missing of have been greatly changed (cf. Red Wizards of Thay).
Their philosophy has been to "move and forget".
Say what you want, but FR is a less 'generic' setting after the Spellplague. Bordering on 'out there', especially considering the landscape, per WOTC now looks like a Roger Dean cover from a Yes album.
The NW area of Faerun was pretty generic; if you played in the Unapproachable East, Old Empires or Shining South, you had an array of non-generic unconventional fantasy settings.
Curiously enough, those areas have been razed or redone.The cosmology has changed (+ the apocalyptic touch), it is generic in the sense of being "D&D 4e generic", with the whole new plane system shoehorned into the setting.
Now I can play a Dragonborn from Toril, but no Priests of Osiris, no Lantan engineers, snobby Halruaan mages, etc, etc. They put "a spin on things" by equating it with generic 4e.
I was wondering if someone would be willing to post a review of the FR Campaign guide in terms of a campaign guide itself, not in terms of what it did to/changed in the realms?
I glanced through it briefly, and there was jsut something that seemed...'off' to me. I will go through it later when I get home, but it just felt like they were really stretching some of the content to justisfy the two different books (Campaign and Players guide).
Quick example: Doesn't it actually start off with a little mini-adventure? I thought that kind of out-of-place in a campaign guide.
|
My favorite setting is Mystara, so I have to convert ANYTHING I want to use unless I use a 25 year old rule set. Somehow, I managed to survive and I continue to play D&D.
Totally off topic, but say you did get lazy and decided not to convert anything anymore, why would you have to revert to a "25 year old rule set" when TSR converted much of the setting to 2e back in the mid 90‘s?
Just curious...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
I was wondering if someone would be willing to post a review of the FR Campaign guide in terms of a campaign guide itself, not in terms of what it did to/changed in the realms?
I glanced through it briefly, and there was jsut something that seemed...'off' to me. I will go through it later when I get home, but it just felt like they were really stretching some of the content to justisfy the two different books (Campaign and Players guide).
Quick example: Doesn't it actually start off with a little mini-adventure? I thought that kind of out-of-place in a campaign guide.
Not precisely what you asked for, but this thread from ENWorld is purposed toward sharing opinions of the FRCS. My copy is still in the mail (maybe it'll arrive today?) so I don't know yet, but you can find some fairly decent reviews there. Can't promise they aren't swayed for/against based on the changes affected in the setting though.
It does start with a 30 page module set in Loudwater, I believe, which some have complained about, while others liked. Most of what seems to be said have enjoyed the layout, but I guess YMMV.
Cheers! :)
|
I think I might like the new FRCS.
That big scar where the Great Rift used to be....ouch....ugly on the map. I like the new countries and schisms that have occurred.
Is anyone going to set a campaign in Returned Abeir? (a brand new continent besides Faerun, that gets some Gazetteer-like treatment)
Too bad they didn't give us a map of Kara-tur and the east, but its nice that the FR map goes all the way to Murghom.
I think I might like the new FRCS.
I ended up liking it too.
I wasn't going to buy the FRCS - I haven't played in that setting in years. But there is still a warm place in my heart for the setting as I used to read about it back in the 1e and 2e days and had all the supplements. I ended up getting it.
I certainly wouldn't consider myself a FR aficionado and I could certainly see why one would be upset about "blowing it up." But I think the book is aimed at someone like me - someone who doesn't want to worry about the paint color on the south end of the mayor's building in Waterdeep, whose blood stains the lower left hand corner, or who the 232nd god of Spring is. I'm being facetious of course, but truly I like the idea of "starting over" and a clean slate. I appreciate that not everything is overly detailed, giving the DM plenty to work off of and make the world one's own. I like the Spellplague and how it has scarred and otherwise changed the landscape - it feels more fantastical to me. I like the "dark age" feel of a familiar land.
The book is very DM friendly and overall well organized. At first I was put off by the separation of Player's Guide and Campaign Guide, but now it makes a lot of sense. I'm also happy that I don't have any further investments beyond the two books to feel like I've got everything I need.
My few complains are pretty minor: starting off the book with an adventure is kinda strange to me; the whole Abeir vs. Toril thing is a little hokey. As I continue to delve into the book, I'm sure I'll find other items I appreciate and dislike, but overall I'm surprisingly favorable toward the new Forgotten Realms.
I've managed to have a look at it...and while i am more impressed with it than i thought i would be, i have to say its a little 'spas' i mean, its not a cheap book, but is really contains almost no infomation beyond the very most brief outline of each of the countries. Atleast the major evil organisations get a little detail...but not much.
I've read a large chunk of it...and still feel like i know almost nothing about the setting.
|
|
I've read a large chunk of it...and still feel like i know almost nothing about the setting.
isn't that the whole point though? you know, everyone knew too much about the setting, therefore it wasn't a good setting? those are the players and dms the 4e realms were written for, not the people who have been diehards since day one...
...everyone knew too much about the setting, therefore it wasn't a good setting?
I realize you're being sarcastic, but in some ways, that is the case.
A detailed world is important for novels, making the world rich and full of depth. For a DM, (s)he needs a place to transport ideas, stories, adventures, and his or her own flavor. I buy campaign settings for inspiration - I don't like cross-referencing 10 books to make sure my FR adventure is "official" fare.
I don't think the campaign setting is so lacking in detail as some are expressing. It's about as long as previous incarnations. It's full of ideas, but not the name of Drizzt's 32nd cousin, once removed. I appreciate that.
I don't know you personally, but my guess is that you're smart enough to deal with this one.
You can bet.
Actually I was addressing a concrete issue, which was the campaign guidebook's usefulness for people running other "eras of play". I do not think it is such an outrageous approach to have let that possibility open when the Realms have more than 20 years of novel and gaming material history. I compared the attitude to 3.5 Dragonlance to note that Wizards' strategy is quite different (and I personally do not like it, even if I am "smart enough", when a gaming supplement is less flexible than another, I notice it).For instance, some notes on how to approach pre-Spellplague magic under 4e rules would have been welcome.
In this line, I find the Guide's History section too short. Even though it is ok to focus the product on new gamers (as more veteran ones have several pre-4e materials at their avail), it is also a fact that many people are familiar with the Realms through novels, comics and CRPGs, even if they have not read or played a single Realms tabletop adventure.
In this vein, the book is quite skimpy in details, especially in explaining how all those changes came to be:
1) more background on the pre-Spellplague crises.
2) a more detailed Roll of the Years in the elapsed century between the Spellplague and the initial campaign date.
3)Some additional data on the gods who died or faded.
4) A more detailed essay on how the apocalypse affected the different countries and regions.
I agree with opinions expressed above. I actually bought the supplement to see what they did in terms of the setting's history and political map, even though I was positive it would not be of my liking. I have read through most of the book and I still don't have a clear picture of the Spellplague and the 100 years of history after it.
I've read a large chunk of it...and still feel like i know almost nothing about the setting.
It does start with a 30 page module set in Loudwater, I believe, which some have complained about, while others liked
Well I went to my FLGS today to have a detailed look at the book. And I must say that I was very disappointed.
I liked the 2E setting, sketchy but with richly detailed areas and a lot of mystery. I liked the 3E setting, fabulously rich and complex, the mature evolution of the 2E Realms.
This 4E setting is certainly darker, reflecting our times, and gives just a few details, but it does not have this feeling of mystery of the 2E, and to be honest it seems quite uninspired.
Though I belong to those who think that a reboot was not necessary, it could have been an opportunity to make the FR even more epic. But there is nothing in this book that makes me want to play in this setting.
I don't think that the reboot is the issue though. In my opinion, after the early 3E FR extensions, the quality of the FR line has constantly declined. When I compare the abundance of material of the 3E sourcebook with the meager information of the 4E one, my impression is that a new standard of low quality writing has been set. Period
I still don't have a clear picture of the Spellplague and the 100 years of history after it
Well I could not say it better.
|
|
I don't think that the reboot is the issue though. In my opinion, after the early 3E FR extensions, the quality of the FR line has constantly declined. When I compare the abundance of material of the 3E sourcebook with the meager information of the 4E one, my impression is that a new standard of low quality writing has been set. Period
Where do you think this started ME? I mean, some of the supplement extensions (like Underdark) I thought were very good.
I just got the Cormyr adventure too (for $5!) and its not bad either (of course I didn't think and adventure was worth $30)
If people wana play in the past they still can with a bit of conversion. But this book is not a reissue, it adds to the story by advancing it. considering old books still around, whats wrong with that?
Where do you think this started ?
The early extensions (Monsters of Faerun, Magic of Faerun, Lords of Darkness, Faiths and Pantheons) were literally crammed full with fluff, plots, adventure ideas. Races of Faerun, The Underdark, The Shining South, and The Unapproachable East were good, but there was already a tendency to "fill pages" with too many new classes, races etc, that were not really useful.
The last generation supplements ? Dragons of Faerun, is basically a compilation of free articles of Wizard's website plus some useless crunch. The City of Splendor is half the size I expected, and gives much less info than the 2E version. Champions of Ruin and Champions of Valor are a pale remix of Book of Vile Darkness, Book of Exalted Deeds and Lords of Darkness ....
When you have a setting with a rich history, a catastrophe like the Spellplague, is the occasion to attract both new players and old players who knew the setting too well. If this is done correctly, it adds even more depth. But this is not what I felt when I read the 4E sourcebook, the message I understood was "These are the new Realms, deal with it".
If this is the new reference book for DM, there is way too little info. You will find more fluff here and here, and it's for free ! By the way, I know a lot of homebrew settings which are better written and more consistent than this iteration of the Realms.
Now, I think I can stop to rant on about this book and go back to my campaign. ;=)
If people wana play in the past they still can with a bit of conversion. But this book is not a reissue, it adds to the story by advancing it. considering old books still around, whats wrong with that?
Point is, the story has not been "advanced". Basically a vague reason for the apocalypse has been given and a small gazetteer of the Realms 100 years after has been included as an status quo.
It is ok to "leave the details vague", but in this case "vague" is almost "absent". It actually minimizes the impact of the Spellplague because no description of its impact on main NPCs, important countries, organizations, is really given during the intervening years.
Again, it is the first time TSR/Wizards does that. They may be infamous for introducing apocalypses when rules changes come up, but they tended to do it with careful presentations of the events via different products (of varying quality, but the attempt was made nevertheless):
* Greyhawk Wars and From the Ashes for AD&D1 to AD&D2
* Avatar Trilogy and module series for AD&D 1 to AD&D 2 in the Realms
* War of the Immortals for OD&D to D&D Challenger Rules in Mystara
* DL 5th Age plus some bridging AD&D adventures from Dragonlance AD&D to DL SAGA.
All these products took as a base starting point to present game-wise (or story-wise) how the world changed through those crises and how the timeline moved plus offering some tips for having the PCs at the core of the events, if that option was desired.
The New Realms approach is the opposite, the resulting situation appears as a given, information for its development from the previous state of thing is minimal. "Game" factors (to provide a fast-access self-contained setting easily pliable to 4e) have totally overshadowed any care for campaign development materials or love for the setting's story. You may like or not mind, but it is quite hard to defend that it does not show a total change of spin in WotC's approach to campaign settings.
So, they did exactly what they've been saying for a year that they're going to do. I still don't understand why this is so surprising.
The issue is not "what they did", but "how they did it". I'm not against changes, but the development of the spellplague backstory and its impact on the world is serioulsy lacking, whereas it should have been central and detailed extensively.
You may like or not mind, but it is quite hard to defend that it does not show a total change of spin in WotC's approach to campaign settings.
Unfortunately, I think you are quite right.
So, they did exactly what they've been saying for a year that they're going to do. I still don't understand why this is so surprising.
WotC has said several times that they thought that the Realms had too much backstory to absorb in order to be used effectively by DMs, and that they were afraid that this was going to stop people from becoming new Realms fans (read: customers).
That was not a surprise. The problems with "backstory" in the realms were actually manifold, they had a point there. But, namely, those "problems" were mostly a huge number of powerful NPCs and organizations which had to be considered when creating and running a campaign. How to justify PCs being "the heroes" when you have Elminster, Harpers, and 7 Sisters to the Rescue, blah blah.
The Realms was also big. A reduction of countries would have been ok. You can easily do that by making the "core lands" of the campaign book smaller and just give general strokes of more peripheral areas (like the PF Gaz and Campaign Setting). If customers show any interest in those lands, they can be expanded in Dragon or whatever.
The paradox is that they have made the land more complex, with the Abeir chunks in Faerun mainland and the new continent replacing Maztica. That last one was so unnecessary, as Maztica barely featured in 3.5, except as a source of income for Amn. The new Realms is potentially more complex. If they just write big-font manuals with little info, that does not follow the design options. It would have worked if their Campaign Manual had been a "Intro to the FR: the North and the Dalelands" or "From Waterdeep to Cormyr" (following customers' preferred settings), with fewer lands and locations and fewer campaign options for players to start with.
Another problem is the alienation of novel readers. The Salvatore novels sell pretty well, and until now they went side-by-side with gaming products. Now you have a sketchy "future" and novels still running in the "past". Speak of spoilage. If Salvatore considered a new Cleric Quintet novel, imagine how it will feel now that players know that Spirit Soaring is derelict and abandoned.
While upset FR fans will probably still buy every FR product, that will probably stop being true in a couple of years and they will have mortgaged FR's future.
Not this upset FR fan. I used to love the Realms...I still do. The real Realms, that is, not the mockery they've made of it. I have 4 books to get to finish out the novel series I've already started - after that, WotC will never see another dime from me. I won't be buying any game books (I looked over the FRCG and was, to put it simply, disgusted), I won't buy any novels from here on out.
I hope that doesn't happen to your setting.
It already has. The travesty they're calling the Forgotten Realms now is not the Realms I know, nor the Realms I want to know. It's a pale, sad imitation of what was a wonderful setting. They took Shakespeare, butchered and burnt it, and gave us "William Shakespeare's Freddy vs. Jason vs. the Loch Ness Monster." If they were going to kill my beloved Realms, they could've at least let it die with dignity, not desecrated its corpse and reanimated it to be the chamberpot-bearer for corporate policy.
As an aside, I want to say thank you again to Paizo for giving me and those who feel as I do a refuge. Golarion may not be the same as FR, but it reminds me of it in a lot of ways, and I can't wait to see the novel line begin.
The difficulty I see with FR is the familiarity that so many people have with it. If your players know about this villian or that plot, then the mystery of the world is lost.
It's like a great book that you re-read. Just not as good the second time. Sure you might find something you missed last time, but you know what's going to happen; the suspense is gone.
As for those who are devoted to the Realms "the way they were": they've been done to death. Apart from rules conversion, what could they possibly sell us? All of the setting has been detailed.
With proper execution, this new FR should feel like the friend you knew in University that you meet on the street twenty years later: familiar, but completely different. Change too much and you feel like you never knew them, and they might as well be a different person.
My 2d.
Craig
The difficulty I see with FR is the familiarity that so many people have with it. If your players know about this villian or that plot, then the mystery of the world is lost.
It's like a great book that you re-read. Just not as good the second time. Sure you might find something you missed last time, but you know what's going to happen; the suspense is gone.
As for those who are devoted to the Realms "the way they were": they've been done to death. Apart from rules conversion, what could they possibly sell us? All of the setting has been detailed.
Well, see, there's been quite a bit happen since they published the 3.0 FRCS, though. There would've been plenty they could've added to the existing FRCS to warrant buying a new, updated one. Not to mention all the regional books and such. And how about more history ones? Like...a sourcebooks just for ancient Netheril, and another for the Crown Wars-era elven nations? I'd have snapped those up in a heartbeat.
With proper execution, this new FR should feel like the friend you knew in University that you meet on the street twenty years later: familiar, but completely different. Change too much and you feel like you never knew them, and they might as well be a different person.
Yes, with proper execution. But they didn't give anything near proper execution. Instead, it's like meeting your best friend from college on the street twenty years later, only they've fallen into a huge depression, have done so many drugs they make Keith Richards look clean, were brainwashed and lobotomized, and were hit by a truck, and when you see them in the street they're like a barely alive, homeless, helpless guy lying against a dumpster in an alley in a pool of their own filth.
|
|
With proper execution, this new FR should feel like the friend you knew in University that you meet on the street twenty years later: familiar, but completely different. Change too much and you feel like you never knew them, and they might as well be a different person.Yes, with proper execution. But they didn't give anything near proper execution. Instead, it's like meeting your best friend from college on the street twenty years later, only they've fallen into a huge depression, have done so many drugs they make Keith Richards look clean, were brainwashed and lobotomized, and were hit by a truck, and when you see them in the street they're like a barely alive, homeless, helpless guy lying against a dumpster in an alley in a pool of their own filth.
So I take it you are not a fan of the new realms? ;>
So I take it you are not a fan of the new realms? ;>
I've been checking reviews (I don't have it), but the overwhelming majority are negative. "Lack of depth" was one quote, but was the tone of a great many of the reviews. It's sounds like there is just very little of the Realms to like or dislike in this product.
And you'd think Loudwater was the most important site on the continent, given the number of pages it gets.
|
|
Apart from rules conversion, what could they possibly sell us? All of the setting has been detailed.
Even with the whole back-log of Realmslore dating all the way back to 1e (including Dragon articles), the setting had hardly been touched!
I hardly consider Shadowdale, Cormyr, Waterdeep, and The Silver Marches (the most overly published areas) to be "All of the setting"...
-That One Digitalelf Fellow-
|
The way to bring new fans to the setting wasn't to blow it up, mash it around, and try and remake it into something that was more simplified.
Rather, what was needed was to package things in such a way as to introduce the setting to someone who knew little or nothing about it beforehand. Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like they've really succeeded in doing that even with the FRCG - instead, most of it is written from the standpoint of explaining it to someone who was familiar with the old edition versions (correct me if I'm wrong).
I kinda found it a big middle finger to most old realms fans. Some will like it some will not. To me I can play mad max anytime I want I like the realms and not this...nuked post apoc setting. eh to each there own I guess.
I kinda found it a big middle finger to most old realms fans. Some will like it some will not. To me I can play mad max anytime I want I like the realms and not this...nuked post apoc setting. eh to each there own I guess.
Except that the vast majority of the Realms is not a "nuked post apoc setting."
I kinda found it a big middle finger to most old realms fans. Some will like it some will not. To me I can play mad max anytime I want I like the realms and not this...nuked post apoc setting. eh to each there own I guess.Except that the vast majority of the Realms is not a "nuked post apoc setting."
IF by vast majority you mean baldergate and water deep then yeah there ok. if ya ment anything south or east of the dalelands all bets are off.
IF by vast majority you mean baldergate and water deep then yeah there ok. if ya ment anything south or east of the dalelands all bets are off.
Um, while southern Faerun was certainly the most devastated region of the continent (and it does contain the biggest region of Plaguelands in the former Halruaa and in parts of the Vilhon Reach southwest of the Chondalwood), its not a complete wasteland down their (Estagund, Dambrath, Durpar still exist, for example). And much of the Unapproachable East and the Old Kingdom's area is still intact, even if the former political entities of Unther and Mulhorand are not (though they have been replaced by Tymanther and High Imaskar, respectively).
eh ya need to talk to the man that made the map then looks nuked to me.