My friend DMed us in a Waterdeep campaign for a few years.
He played a cleric of Mystra in Living Ravens Bluff, till it was destroyed.
He looked at the new version in the bookstore.
Apparently Mystra was killed, didn't see it coming, and didn't have her godhood transfer to a ready new vessel.
It seems whoever created the new version knew nothing of the Forgotten Realms.
All the important characters moved away, died, or retired.
With no chosen of Mystra, and no real differences between FR and POL there's no point to it.
The one good thing about the new source book is there are maps.
Case closed then. :D
"Let's nuke it from orbit!"
This just made my day.
Sad fact if ya want your post apocalyptic D&D game there ya go...oh wait we have athas
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn. I won't be playing there in the slightest, but I think I can begin to see why they did it.
My friend DMed us in a Waterdeep campaign for a few years.
He played a cleric of Mystra in Living Ravens Bluff, till it was destroyed.He looked at the new version in the bookstore.
Apparently Mystra was killed, didn't see it coming, and didn't have her godhood transfer to a ready new vessel.
It seems whoever created the new version knew nothing of the Forgotten Realms.
All the important characters moved away, died, or retired.
With no chosen of Mystra, and no real differences between FR and POL there's no point to it.
The one good thing about the new source book is there are maps.
I played and ran the Realms for around 17 years before taking a break. I understand that some might have negative feelings about the changes that have been made, but I can see why they felt the need for mixing up the setting. I think the fans need to realize that when you hitch your games to shared worlds beyond your control, things are going to happen that you don't care for.
I stopped buy Realms stuff becuase of the meta-plot and its increasing role in the settings development. I can't follow L5Rs meta-plot becuase it moves too darn fast for an RPG, and so ignore it when I run that game. It seems like you emphasis the metaplot--"All the important characters..." refers to the NPCs of the setting, whereas I think the PCs should be the important characters.Also, I can't help but point out that the people who worked on the new setting are all long standing Realms writers, including Greenwood and Salvatore, who are obstenibly the most important. Only Sean K Reynolds is the one writer I think should have been paid his weight in gold to work on the book...sorry I don't have it on hand to check the credits...
He didn't buy it and I didn't buy it so I don't know who wrote it.
I am shocked that established game designers might misrepresent Mystra so badly. If a gamer said they killed Mystra in their home game they would be boooed right off the internet. It seems to be a noob mistake. If they got rid of all the things that made it The Forgotten Realms, the player's handbook they come out with next should be completely pointless. They should have pre released parts so they could get fan feedback.
If I play 4th edition ever, it won't be in something forced to immitate POL. Might as well actually play POL.
I think WoTC took the same approach for the Realms as for 4e. To make whole new thing. They change the whole system almost from scratch aiming for new market and I thing they did the same for FR bringing lots of new stuff where there room for new heroes and renewing old characters for new plots.
Don't get me wrong I'm not pro-WotC, but I'm firmly in the position of "Taking what you like, and do the rest as you like".
On a personal note: Personally I never liked the fact that in faerun you couldn't swing a dead cat by the tail without hitting a 20th+ wizard in the head... I hope this changed in the new setting -not that i'm going to use it anyway...
|
What did you expect when they took the "Let's nuke it from orbit!" approach to converting the Realms to 4E?
Lol - I even watched a webcast where Greenwood mentioned that, specifically.
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn.
Think they could have cut a little deeper. Elminster needs to go, and so do all their villains. At least in my mind.
What did you expect when they took the "Let's nuke it from orbit!" approach to converting the Realms to 4E?Lol - I even watched a webcast where Greenwood mentioned that, specifically.
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn.Think they could have cut a little deeper. Elminster needs to go, and so do all their villains. At least in my mind.
I ran Realms campaigns in 2nd Ed,3rd Ed and 3.5 and whilst all the major Powers(NPC's) were there they were too busy doing their own high level thing to get involved or to be contacted. High Level NPC's don't need to be an issue and can be used to enhance a game.
When PC's reach the level of the NPC you can easily slip them into game stories as contacts, adventure starters, captives needing rescue etc and be used rather than an issue.
I did have Elminster disappear however, he had been captured by a unknown enemy. As for the enemies they are awesome, Fzoul, Lord Ches and many others. They are the centre of campaign plots that the characters are standing against.
Wizards should have written the realms as per the 3rd Ed and put the modified realms as an optional add on. They could have produced a number of time lines, alternative futures for DM's. Not a huge book but just a slim book covering a 50 year period to cover the flavor that DM's like. £10 book or so. Would've made a lot more sense as everyone I know won't touch the FR 4E setting.
|
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn. I won't be playing there in the slightest, but I think I can begin to see why they did it.
Except the way they did it was ridiculous and unneccessary. A 10 year time jump with some organic changes to the setting could have done what they wanted to the setting without invalidating all the Realms stuff that came before. The way they did it was unimaginative, lazy, and disrespectful to the FR fan base. They just ticked off a lot of people that made the Realms a successful campaign setting and hugely profitable novel line. How is that a good thing?
|
|
What did you expect when they took the "Let's nuke it from orbit!" approach to converting the Realms to 4E?Lol - I even watched a webcast where Greenwood mentioned that, specifically.
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn.Think they could have cut a little deeper. Elminster needs to go, and so do all their villains. At least in my mind.
I think the 4E FR design team watched Aliens too many times. Apparently, they took the quote, "Let's nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure." to heart.
If a gamer said they killed Mystra in their home game they would be boooed right off the internet.
Personally, I pumped the fist when I saw they'd killed her off. I never liked that a good deity had total control of all magic. Judging from their decision to off her, I'd guess I wasn't the only one who felt that way.
He didn't buy it and I didn't buy it so I don't know who wrote it.
I am shocked that established game designers might misrepresent Mystra so badly. If a gamer said they killed Mystra in their home game they would be boooed right off the internet. It seems to be a noob mistake. If they got rid of all the things that made it The Forgotten Realms, the player's handbook they come out with next should be completely pointless. They should have pre released parts so they could get fan feedback.
If I play 4th edition ever, it won't be in something forced to immitate POL. Might as well actually play POL.
Oddly, I kinda agree with Goth. I've been a HUGE fan of The Forgotten Realms since its release on '87, and I'm not all that enthused by what I've seen of the settings "update". I understand that they wanted to make a 20 year old campaign setting new and fresh again, but by destroying every single little thing that all its fans remember so fondly, everything that made the setting so familiar, is going a little too far.
However, all I can think of when I read Goth's post is...Boo Who. I mean com on. "shocked that established game designers might misrepresent Mystra so badly"; maybe she'll get a lawyer and sue them for all their worth; oh wait, she's a fictional character. Awwww...
As much of a fan of The Forgotten Realms as I am, I keep it in perspective; it's just a campaign world, not the real world. If you don't like the new changes, then don't use them (There is nothing written in stone anywhere that says you have to). If some noob kills Mystra in his home campaign, that's his campaign; who are you to say he can't do that, and that he's not allowed to? That's the ultimate rule of D&D; never let the rules get in the way of the fun.
As I've seen, there is always something new, and perhaps better, around the corner; something like Pathfinder! I find myself more and more thinking of Pathfinder's world of Golarion as my "default" campaign setting. James and the gang have put a lot of effort and imagination into this new setting. And I am pleased with what I've seen. And I like what I hear of there upcoming products. Gods and Magic looks interesting.
I guess what I'm ultimately saying is when God, Fate, Karma, or whatever you prefer to call it closes one door, it opens a window. Just don't forget to look for it.
DogBone
My friend DMed us in a Waterdeep campaign for a few years.
He played a cleric of Mystra in Living Ravens Bluff, till it was destroyed.He looked at the new version in the bookstore.
Apparently Mystra was killed, didn't see it coming, and didn't have her godhood transfer to a ready new vessel.
It seems whoever created the new version knew nothing of the Forgotten Realms.
All the important characters moved away, died, or retired.
With no chosen of Mystra, and no real differences between FR and POL there's no point to it.
The one good thing about the new source book is there are maps.
Well in my viewpoint if you don't like what they did to Mystra you simply rule it didn't happen like that!
Most of the 4e system has removed alot of the stuff that was essential under earlier editions so Mystra could be still around whilst Cyric is now truly dead slain in the destruction of dweomerheart whilst Mystra has been reborn in a new vessel who has spent the last century trying to repair the damage done (the new vessel is Adon by the way) the destruction and repair was such that magic was irrevocably altered, Waterdeep collapsed into the ocean revealing Skullport turning the area into a pirate haven!
Netheril is only barely beginning to recover their form shadow brethren were banished to the newly formed shadowfell and have only managed to return around the same time magic started to work (well work so and so...) any landmass you don't agree with has disappeared such as Maztica and others have been moved a lot closer than they were (Moonshae Isles for example).
What this boils down to is quite simply the only people forced to play 4e Faerun the way WOTC want it is the rpga don't forget that.
To the rest of you that do persist with 4e Faerun, best of luck and prove the game designers just how wrong their ideas are for 4e Faerun.
Take care and all the best!
|
What baffles me is not WHAT they did, but HOW they did it.
I mean you could have ome up with a mayor realms shacking event that kills of a few Godas and lots of high level NPCs and build in some sense of continuity.
The idea to merge Abeir and Toril was not so bad.
Ao has lost patience with both worlds and merges them.
A battle for domination ensues.
Gods of both worlds pantheons fight each other an get killed. Some opportunists pick up free portfolios.
Heroes of both worlds fight each other too and wipe each other out.
Due to the magic unleashed the landscape is changed.
Some empires fall in the aftermath, some scrabble along and some prosper.
So much opportunities for adventure!
Put all this in a Hardover and Name it the Worldswar or whatever. This is the last 3.5 Book and has lots of suggestions how to end the campaign with a bang. This also includes a lot of lore which NPCs are killed how, why and when.
Bam!
Now 4th comes along and we get fresh new Realms. There is continuity for those old fans (as the above Hardcover explains what happened, eg. hw Alustriel died), there is a starting point for the new fans, unencumbered by many of old lore. And all makes actually sense. And we have some nice inbuild conflicts between "old races" and the dragonborn and tieflings (big cheliax like empire on Abeir).
Leave Toril as it was and put the more fantastic elements (like those flying earthnodes) into the Abeir part. Offer the DMs and groups to pick what style they want to play.
|
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn. I won't be playing there in the slightest, but I think I can begin to see why they did it.
Except that there are a great many of us who played FR regardless the backstories of the all epic heroes. Fact is, I always likes FRCS because of the flavor of the setting. Now it's gone from a Prime Rib to a Hamburger.
--------------------------
Also, in response to Tharon, I suspect that WotC didn't take on such a grand narrative because it was too invested in putting 4e out. IIRC, even the last magnus from 3.5 FRCS was pretty lame, History of the Realms. It looked like a cut and paste of all the various history blurbs from all the other splatbooks, with a paragraph or two at the end to bring us up to speed.
That said, the Thayan Trilogy I've been reading takes place during the Spellplague. For all WotC touts the Spellplague to be, the story reads more like it was an inconvenience over anything else.
Frankly, I like your idea better.
--------------------------
I might add one more thing here. When WotC killed off the old Realms for the new, they not only changed a game setting that people know and love, but also think of all the paperback fantasy books. One reason I read those was to stay up to speed on the Realms. And I purchased A LOT of them. Now, having no interest in the new Realms, I've no interest to continue reading the paperbacks. WotC lost in me a customer twice over.
|
|
I might add one more thing here. When WotC killed off the old Realms for the new, they not only changed a game setting that people know and love, but also think of all the paperback fantasy books. One reason I read those was to stay up to speed on the Realms. And I purchased A LOT of them. Now, having no interest in the new Realms, I've no interest to continue reading the paperbacks. WotC lost in me a customer twice over.
They lost me as well. Once I bought the Grand History of the Realms, and saw what was coming, I switched from my 10 year FR campaign to a homebrew campaign world, and I have no interest in future paperbacks, although I had bought quite a few previously.
I really wonder if WOTC will feel a slump in sales, either from the FR supplement, or from their paperbacks?
|
|
The advantage of that approach is that it does wipe out the ever more complex backtories and levels the playing fields as regards to the large numbers of epic characters running around Faerûn. I won't be playing there in the slightest, but I think I can begin to see why they did it.Except that there are a great many of us who played FR regardless the backstories of the all epic heroes. Fact is, I always likes FRCS because of the flavor of the setting. Now it's gone from a Prime Rib to a Hamburger.
--------------------------
Also, in response to Tharon, I suspect that WotC didn't take on such a grand narrative because it was too invested in putting 4e out. IIRC, even the last magnus from 3.5 FRCS was pretty lame, History of the Realms. It looked like a cut and paste of all the various history blurbs from all the other splatbooks, with a paragraph or two at the end to bring us up to speed.
That said, the Thayan Trilogy I've been reading takes place during the Spellplague. For all WotC touts the Spellplague to be, the story reads more like it was an inconvenience over anything else.
Frankly, I like your idea better.
--------------------------
I might add one more thing here. When WotC killed off the old Realms for the new, they not only changed a game setting that people know and love, but also think of all the paperback fantasy books. One reason I read those was to stay up to speed on the Realms. And I purchased A LOT of them. Now, having no interest in the new Realms, I've no interest to continue reading the paperbacks. WotC lost in me a customer twice over.
Same here. Let's hope they do feel the slump, and start to reconsider how they are treating FR fans. Surely, the novel sales are going to suffer for their treatment of the Realms. I am definitely speaking with my wallet as far as 4gotten Realms is concerned.
|
|
Also, in response to Tharon, I suspect that WotC didn't take on such a grand narrative because it was too invested in putting 4e out.
They could have contracted freelancers. I bet Ed Greenwood would have been happy to help.
I think WoC thinks that people will buy everything with FR on it as it is a widely reconized brand, even outside of RP circles.
I liked the Forgotten realms. I bought the new book. And it's perfectly fine.
I can understand getting nostalgic. I really can. I know I am. But, honestly, after reading through it now... it's really not bad at all. I rather like it.
Half of me is sad that the realms got changed, and the other half is intrigued by this new world to explore. I think people are being entirely too harsh on the setting, especially when they do not own it.
The book is not tasteless, nor unimaginative, nor terrible. It's still chock-full of way-too-much information, just like the last one (a good thing, I think) and it's still interesting and sounds fun.
I also think calling a DM a "noob" because he kills Mystra in his or her game is rather narrow-minded and unimaginative, especially if he or she runs a great game with it. I think it's that kind of "must be canon" thinking that was ruining the setting in the first place, and it's now obviously angering those who stick by that.
That, of course, and like all of the above, is my opinion. Feel free to ignore it at your leisure.
Well its not killing mystra its the goofy why it was done. same with the tyr/helm BS. I have ran realms games for well damn almost 18 years now on and off and my players have ran into the big boys twice
Once ol' EL ran into them in a dungon when they where hopelessly lost he stummbled though a wall and looked around spotting the pc's he said "I say would of you know what day it is?" when they told him he left though a portal. saying "I would be careful in that room if I was you" they thought it fun and it showed em a way out ..the beholder in that room about got em though.
the 2nd was when Blackstaff need them to fetch something on haper work he was more short with em . anyhow the point is High level NPC are not an issue unless you make it one.
As for mystra I am haveing her combine the weaves in my game giving her a more LN aspect and making her a darker god a bit as the last of midnight mortality leaves. It means the shadow adpet is gone but ya can play shadow wizards at 1st should be fun thats how I am dealing with the PF changes rebuilding the weave is making it as the weave of old. good times
Half of me is sad that the realms got changed, and the other half is intrigued by this new world to explore. I think people are being entirely too harsh on the setting, especially when they do not own it.
I bought the setting and read it through. I've also just this weekend went back and re-read the old grey box set. The two can't even compare. The new FRCG has been scrubbed clean of all the history and lore that made the original box set such a refreshing breath of fresh air.
When you read the FRCG, you feel like you've been dropped into the middle of a long novel or movie. You don't know what's gone on for most of the past 100 years, and you're not sure why things are the way that they are. It's confusing.
On the other hand, the old grey box had an excellent history of the previous two years, inculding lots of details on the major happenings like Lashan's War and the opening of Myth Drannor. You had a good handle on what had just happened, so you could see where things might be headed.
It's the same with the pantheons changing and the new lands appearing. It's tough to say what's changed and what's stayed the same. there's just too little lore in the FRCG, and much of what is there seems sanitary and overly scrubbed. It lacks feeling.
The book is not tasteless, nor unimaginative, nor terrible. It's still chock-full of way-too-much information, just like the last one (a good thing, I think) and it's still interesting and sounds fun.
I'll agree that the book is not tastless, but it lacks flavor none the less. I can't put my finger on what's missing, but something sure is.
Perhaps it's just the jarring changes. I keep wondering what happened to X, Y, or Z. And usually there is little to no coverage. For example, I know Phlan survived and has not been absorbed by any of the evils nations on the Moonsea. But other than that, there's no info in the book about this place. It's a dot on the map and that's all.
I also think calling a DM a "noob" because he kills Mystra in his or her game is rather narrow-minded and unimaginative, especially if he or she runs a great game with it. I think it's that kind of "must be canon" thinking that was ruining the setting in the first place, and it's now obviously angering those who stick by that.
I agree with no name calling. But when that "DM" is actually in chagre of the setting as an author and editor, and he ignores (or wose yet overides) 3.5 editions of established lore about Mystra, the Weave, her Chosen and the safeguards that both she and AO (her boss) have established against the weave going out of control, then I can't disagree with the sentiment that it was a "noobish-like" move.
There are certainly ways to have magical devistation without ignoring a major point in the FR canon like that one. Any decent Realms GM could have done better, and many of them on both WotC's FR Board and Candlekeep have shown how it could have been handled without just ignoring what had gone on in the past.
Again, these thoughts are my personal opinion, and your perfectly within your rights to disagree.
It's the same with the pantheons changing and the new lands appearing. It's tough to say what's changed and what's stayed the same. there's just too little lore in the FRCG, and much of what is there seems sanitary and overly scrubbed. It lacks feeling.
I can definitely agree that there is much less lore than what was contained in the Old Gray Box. Then again the 3e Campaign Guide couldn't compare to it, either. :/
I suppose this falls in line with their thinking that the DM should make most of the story which, admittedly has me underwhelmed.
I keep wondering what happened to X, Y, or Z. And usually there is little to no coverage. For example, I know Phlan survived and has not been absorbed by any of the evils nations on the Moonsea. But other than that, there's no info in the book about this place. It's a dot on the map and that's all.
I can empathize here. I was really looking forward to something of Icewind Dale, but it is only mentioned in one sentence, in passing. It doesn't even seem likely the place could be around anymore since it's only trading partner, Luskan, is a City of Anarchy.
There are certainly ways to have magical devistation without ignoring a major point in the FR canon like that one. Any decent Realms GM could have done better, and many of them on both WotC's FR Board and Candlekeep have shown how it could have been handled without just ignoring what had gone on in the past.
If there was a better way to handle things I can agree it should have been pursued.
---
You, more than any other 4e FR detractor have influenced my thoughts on this matter. Thank you for your friendly and civil candor.
Also, in response to Tharon, I suspect that WotC didn't take on such a grand narrative because it was too invested in putting 4e out. IIRC, even the last magnus from 3.5 FRCS was pretty lame, History of the Realms. It looked like a cut and paste of all the various history blurbs from all the other splatbooks, with a paragraph or two at the end to bring us up to speed.
But this is really a freaking copy paste ! It's actually a shortened copy of the "Temporal Chronology of the Primes" which was available free on the net years before the book's release here.
The two can't even compare. The new FRCG has been scrubbed clean of all the history and lore that made the original box set such a refreshing breath of fresh air.
I agree 100%. A lot of interesting remarks were done in this respect in this older thread.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
What baffles me is not WHAT they did, but HOW they did it.
I mean you could have ome up with a mayor realms shacking event that kills of a few Godas and lots of high level NPCs and build in some sense of continuity.
The idea to merge Abeir and Toril was not so bad.
Ao has lost patience with both worlds and merges them.
A battle for domination ensues.
Gods of both worlds pantheons fight each other an get killed. Some opportunists pick up free portfolios.
Heroes of both worlds fight each other too and wipe each other out.
Due to the magic unleashed the landscape is changed.
Some empires fall in the aftermath, some scrabble along and some prosper.
So much opportunities for adventure!
Put all this in a Hardover and Name it the Worldswar or whatever. This is the last 3.5 Book and has lots of suggestions how to end the campaign with a bang. This also includes a lot of lore which NPCs are killed how, why and when.
Bam!
Now 4th comes along and we get fresh new Realms. There is continuity for those old fans (as the above Hardcover explains what happened, eg. hw Alustriel died), there is a starting point for the new fans, unencumbered by many of old lore. And all makes actually sense. And we have some nice inbuild conflicts between "old races" and the dragonborn and tieflings (big cheliax like empire on Abeir).
Leave Toril as it was and put the more fantastic elements (like those flying earthnodes) into the Abeir part. Offer the DMs and groups to pick what style they want to play.
Nicely done. I like it. This would have been a great route to go. Alas...
|
|
All things being said, I can understand why folk would be mad - it's along the same line as finding Minas Tirith has been dozed to make way for the new Wal-Mart ...
For me however, I don't have a deep emotional attachment to FR, aside from all the time I spent in Phlan and Neverwinter, so I rather enjoyed the book.
|
|
The FR were my first and only campaign setting I used so far.
That being said of course I felt disgusted by the announcement of the upcoming changes.
Having bought the book in the meantime, I think differently:
Yes, they changed a LOT. Yes, they propelled the timeline 100 years into future. But no, it is still the realms, the map is still recognizable, many nations and major organizations still exist, and quite some new interesting evil guys and NPCs appeared in the meantime. One of the most often proclaimed complaints was effectively countered: High level NPCs lost a lot of impact on the setting (even though they never posed any problem in *my* campaigns in the past).
All of this makes the setting interesting for both old fans of the setting (who can use their historical knowledge of the setting to good effect) and new players alike (who will have an easier time of getting into the setting).
So in short: A good continuation of this long time setting.
For those people who dislike the changes too much, there is some consolation: The past timeline is still official canon of the realms as being confirmed here by the setting authours.
I bought the setting and read it through. I've also just this weekend went back and re-read the old grey box set. The two can't even compare. The new FRCG has been scrubbed clean of all the history and lore that made the original box set such a refreshing breath of fresh air.When you read the FRCG, you feel like you've been dropped into the middle of a long novel or movie. You don't know what's gone on for most of the past 100 years, and you're not sure why things are the way that they are. It's confusing.
On the other hand, the old grey box had an excellent history of the previous two years, inculding lots of details on the major happenings like Lashan's War and the opening of Myth Drannor. You had a good handle on what had just happened, so you could see where things might be headed.
I hesitate to say this at the risk of sounding old and burned out, or worse, like a ditz who can't read two paragraphs of fluff without getting bored and wanting to punch an orc, but that's largely why I grew to dislike the Realms. I didn't want to -need- to know the history of the past two years, or of the lore of the history of the past two hundred. But I felt like I was supposed to before I stepped into a Realms game. When I opened the Forgotten Realms Campaign setting book alone, I felt inundated with info I needed to browse and absorb before I could make a character.
Regions and region feats... I remember thinking, well, crap, that's a good feat, but if I want it, I have to be from this region. Do I really want to be from there? Do I want to know that much about my character before I've even started playing him? (Grant you, this last part comes from my having an improvisational style of roleplaying, not because I don't care about developing my characters.)
Oh, okay, there are a slew of gods. Crumbs. I can't keep half of them in my head, and I need to pick one or else my character gets crammed in a wall. Again, it gives off the vibe that being in the know is enforced to play in a Realms game.
Obviously, since most of my D&D friends during college always wanted to play in the Realms, and I did play with them, I was able to muddle through, though almost all of my characters came from Waterdeep and a fair amount had "Some Guy" listed on them under Diety.
I'm not trying to lash out at the Forgotten Realms overstory or whatnot, honest. Just that I have an easier time prepping for a Greyhawk or Golarion game without feeling like I flunked history if I didn't stay up the night before, cramming at the CS book.
I have DM'd and played FR since 88. I wanted to chime in on this discussion because it is a subject I hold near and dear to my heart. Though a few things they did I don't mind the rest is just a tragedy. I won't support 4e in any form and since Wizards always puts out a new edition a few years later I can only hope the next will be better. Or should I say "4e is so bad there is no way it can get worse with the future editions of Dungeons and Dragons."
Do I want to know that much about my character before I've even started playing him?
This level of detail, this "historical realism" are precisely the reasons why the Realms are so well-known, and cherished by many players and DMs including your servitor. If you don't like it, or if it is too much detail for you, than have more fun with a less developed world. That's fine with me.
However, your post seems to imply that this justified a reboot of the setting, and I disagree with this line of thought. If I don't like a setting, I will simply not play in it, but I won't ask to butcher it either. I find, personally, that most changes brought to the 4E Realms were half-cooked and lazy to say the least. Many long-time fans of the Realms are not disappointed by the changes themselves (the FR have always been very dynamic and versatile), but rather by the pathetic way they were integrated into the setting.
Well, as much as I enjoy being quoted seven times, I would like to say that I thought I could see why they did it, not that I liked it in any way and didn't think that it was an incredibly lame way of dealing with things (which I didn't and which it was).
Technically speaking though, Mystra did not have complete control over all magic. Shar had her Shadow Weave, to which Mystra was blind.
But are the Realms really the Realms without the complexity and the backstories ? Is Planescape really Planescape without the Factions ? I know it is subjective, but I don't think so.
|
|
For me, this whole thing about the FR rebooting is just a part of the bigger issue/fact: that WotC decided to take the D&D brand, mechanics,and core background/assumptions into a new direction that would -hopefully to the management- create a new buzz and develop the market.
If that meant walking all over the old D&D tropes, and firing the old guard for it, so be it.
That's what it comes down to. I hope the new fans of the game appreciate the new setting. I'll stick to the Grey boxed set personally.
|
|
Wouldn't that relegate the game to stagnation, though?
Part of me can't help but think that the whole evolution and stagnation concepts as we talk about them for role-playing games are mirages. Would you consider a game like Chess "stagnant"? Its rules didn't change for the past centuries, you know? [Sure, you'll find the odd product adding a twist to the Chess game (Tempest on the Chessboard comes to mind), but really, the core, mainstream rules haven't changed]
I think this whole idea of game evolution is just an artefact of modern consumerist marketing.
"Quick! Got to have the NEW product, the NEW color, the NEW shape! Doesn't matter if the product we have works just fine! No, no, no! Let us not think, but BUY! Follow the Fashion of the Day! Show off to the other kids in the school yard (or 'RPG community' if you will)." And so on.
Malarkey, as far as I'm concerned. All it is, my friends, is the old recycling of goods destined to sell you the same product over, and over again without having to expand what already is. It's cheaper, easier, uses less resources and -gasp!- imagination. It's win-win for a game company.
|
|
Wouldn't that relegate the game to stagnation, though?Part of me can't help but think that the whole evolution and stagnation concepts as we talk about them for role-playing games are mirages. Would you consider a game like Chess "stagnant"? Its rules didn't change for the past centuries, you know? [Sure, you'll find the odd product adding a twist to the Chess game (Tempest on the Chessboard comes to mind), but really, the core, mainstream rules haven't changed]
Chess does not involve esthetic sensibilities, imagination, or storytelling. RPGs will never conform to static rules like chess because the game must meet the whims of taste rather than the scrutiny of mechanical game play.
4e represents a response to growing and changing memes in fantasy entertainment from anime and manga to video games to the shift in fantasy literature since Harry Potter came on the scene. It may not be a good response to those changes but that was surely a part of the games design.
|
|
I played over 30 hours of Living Forgotten Realms this weekend and I skimmed and selectively read the campaign guide. I never really like FR but I really enjoyed myself. I feel for the diehard FR fans but frankly the setting looks cool and the Living Campaign is a whole lot of fun.
CWM:
Does this suggest that setting may now be sufficiently different as to 'no longer be the Forgotten Realms'?
I can't really answer that. I read the grey box (which is still somewhere in my basement) and I didn't really like it. I read the 3e FR stuff and there was just way too much detail so I never really used it. I have read some of the fiction (mostly R.A. Salvatore's stuff) and the games this weekend felt like it would fit in the world as he described it.
|
|
I disagree, CWM, because you do have games still on print which basically haven't changed to the core since their first publications decades ago. Call of Cthulhu comes to mind. Sure, you have Cthulhu d20, Delta Green, Trail of Cthulhu and CthulhuTech gravitating around, but the core game is still reprinted, with very thin differences between printings.
I'm sorry. I don't get it. Wizards did something to a world that you have total control over? Who cares? If you don't want Mystra dead in your home game, then just ignore the changes they made and play whatever reality YOUR Realms exist in and move on.
As soon as you crack open a game world and start running a game, it's your world, no one elses. If your gaming group defeats King Obould Many Arrows in an epic battle four campaigns ago and then Wizards publishes a book talking about King Obould's many accomplishments 10 years after he was destroyed in your world, are you going to tell your players "sorry guys, your epic campaign that we all loved didn't really happen?"
I really don't get it. I ran the Realms from '87 to '02 and ignored every novel except Icewind Dale trilogy and every supplement. I ran GH from '81 to '87 and then again from '04 to '07 and ignored the Greyhawk Wars and pretty much everything else. My players had fun and I had fun and both game worlds are ready for me to pick up again whenever I want, with what I want.
Wizards is not going to do an IRS audit on your campaign. Yes, you might not be in on all the latest Realmsspeak, but do you really care that much that you're going to get all worried about this and ruin your gaming fun because of what some corporation decides to do?
|
|
I disagree, CWM, because you do have games still on print which basically haven't changed to the core since their first publications decades ago. Call of Cthulhu comes to mind. Sure, you have Cthulhu d20, Delta Green, Trail of Cthulhu and CthulhuTech gravitating around, but the core game is still reprinted, with very thin differences between printings.
True. However, Call of Cthulhu uses a very simple set of rules and its lack of high fantasy elements means that it does not become unbalanced over time like D&D. It also has a stable background source - the lifetime works of H.P.L.
This level of detail, this "historical realism" are precisely the reasons why the Realms are so well-known, and cherished by many players and DMs including your servitor.
Woah?! I have a servitor? Cool.
If you don't like it, or if it is too much detail for you, than have more fun with a less developed world. That's fine with me.
I'm a big fan of development. One of my most favorite things with the folks at Paizo is how good they do at developing a place like Sandpoint or Korvosa. They really made town and city alike feel like living, breathing places, with a lot of noteworthy people living there, providing color, character, and conflict to their homes. I guess that's a difference. I like small development, that spreads outward.
One thing I admit they have a point with on Fourth Edition, is that you need to start small. I'm a fan of getting personal like that in a story. Don't lean on players to know about all the wars and faction manipulations of the courts of Thay unless they're starting in Thay, or they have a reason to get to know someone from there.
However, your post seems to imply that this justified a reboot of the setting, and I disagree with this line of thought.
... Hmm. I get the feeling I may have been coming on too strong. I apologize if that was the case. I really wanted to give the perspective of someone who's had some trouble edging his characters into the grand tapestry of the Realms. There is an entry pressure there that you don't get with the likes of Grayhawk or Golarion.
That said, I agree with your disagreement, for a couple or a few reasons.
1) It doesn't seem like a good idea, however bold, to dump your old fanbase. As many here have demonstrated, the history of the Realms is why a lot of people love it. This smacks of a sort of reverse retconning, invalidating the past events by making it so the future doesn't depend on them.
2) The Realms's done gotten a reputation for blowing up. How many cataclysms are we on now?
3) If they're trying to get new people like me, this isn't really working. At least, not on me. If they just worked on made the new Realms book more... accessible, that would help. Right now, I just feel like I can't trust them not to take dynamite to anything they think isn't working, to make it simpler.
4) 100 years is a weird jump forward in a world populated by elves and dwarves. I mean, this is only a big deal to humans, orcs... and maybe halflings, right? To dwarves and elves, the Spellplague was, like, last October, right? Or maybe a few years ago, with the lifespan shortening thing.
But are the Realms really the Realms without the complexity and the backstories ? Is Planescape really Planescape without the Factions ? I know it is subjective, but I don't think so.
Hard to say. I'm probably not one to ask. Forgotten Realms seems very much the same to me as Grayhawk, and Mystara, and Golarian. The difference is that I know the writers for Golarian enough to trust them to give me compelling stories, characters, and draw me into their world nice and slow, so I end up knowing a lot about it before I even realize I do. I haven't had the same experience with the Wizards of the Coast story writers.
I am a big fan of Planescape, and I know that I was quite disconcerted to see Sigil without the factions in 3E, so that's probably my answer right there.