| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 11 Apr 2014 : 11:15:57
For several years now, I have heard this argument coming from naysayers of the Forgotten Realms and I just don't get it. It's not like all the unique NPCs get together, magically appear, and write themselves into a DM's adventure. I've had people tell me they hate FR because Drizzt is out there to save the day so why are they needed. Drizzt doesn't exist in my FR games but some people are still not happy unless those NPCs have been written out of the offical core campaign.
Just don't understand this argument.  |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Mapolq |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 22:56:11
I don't know what's the problem with players knowing there's a 10th level Cleric of Mielikki in Silverymoon. Sure, if they metagame her exact level and other stats, her identity, motivations and goals, that's going overboard, but the general idea that someone there is capable of casting Raise Dead or similar level spells and such? I want my players to assume that in one of the greatest and most cosmopolitan centres of magic and learning in Faerūn, there's someone who can do it. Otherwise, what's the point in those spells even existing in the first place?
Edit:
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
(...)
The players can still use the majority of the information they may read in the books (and maybe even novels for that matter) for their immersion in the Realms (the vital foundation for a Realms campaign) but they can't use NPC levels to metagame through your adventure. They have to actually interact with people in order to accomplish anything... *le gasp*!
Somehow, I missed it. Yes, this. I mean, isn't this something that players usually learn on their first session of any RPG set in a published world? It's how the game works (not that you can't do differently but it would seem really, really strange to me - not an RPG, but more of a play, where everyone's read the script). |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 19:48:13
An afterthought getting back to one of the original points of this thread: It's very easy for a DM to say "The NPC names and levels given in the published books may have been changed."
You're not committing to changing anything; you can leave everything the same if you want to. You're just giving yourself the latitude to change things without opening the door for players to whine about inconsistency with the published lore.
The players can still use the majority of the information they may read in the books (and maybe even novels for that matter) for their immersion in the Realms (the vital foundation for a Realms campaign) but they can't use NPC levels to metagame through your adventure. They have to actually interact with people in order to accomplish anything... *le gasp*!
|
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 19:44:03
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Yes, but what that instantly does is create greater workload on the DM's part, something that I'm trying to avoid. I have to create notes and now those notes have to contain information just for them to know about. Further, my players are allowed to borrow any books I have, so it's possible during reading out-of-campaign that they come across this information.
I guess I've always viewed this as part of a DM's role, so I don't look at it as extra work. The job I take on as DM is giving the players the information their characters would know, as a tool for immersing themselves in the world.
I have no objection to the players reading between game sessions... only to combing the books for useful information during the game. Everyone should (imo) copy down the relevant spell details, magic item abilities, etc before we start. Play time is for play, conversation, and Doritos. (Of course, the books are still there, and there are exceptions to every rule... I don't even really make it a rule.)
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Then it makes them being the focal point of a murder/mystery sort of difficult.
Not sure what you mean here. I'm just saying they don't have to be allowed to take the body anywhere. This can be a challenge for them to work around, or rather it can prevent things from being too easy for them, without being an adventure-ending obstacle.
Maybe they have to interview (and surreptitiously detect lie) relevant living people rather than using speak with dead.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
I don't honestly see why? It's not an evil spell nor is it a spell restricted by any churches that I'm aware of in the Faerūnian pantheon. I'd even think churches like Kelemvore would use this spell to make sure the deceased's last wishes were carried out.
I wasn't thinking of the spell itself being evil, or about alignment at all really. I meant it on more of a social/superstitious level. People want the dead to be left in peace. Speak with dead would (imo) be seen as disturbing the dead. It's disrespectful at the very least; in some cases, bad things happen when you do that. It's for that reason that I think good-aligned churches would have issues with it. Evil churches wouldn't. Neutral churches could be anywhere in the middle; I would think Silvanus would oppose it (it's unnatural) while Waukeen wouldn't care much.
If there was no fear surrounding death, in the real world, there would be no fear of ghosts, or of skeletons. The Zombie Apocalypse wouldn't be a thing, because we would all understand that (in the real world, at least) dead things remain dead. But people do fear dead things, and death itself, and even the possibility of undeath. There's even more reason for common folk to be superstitious in a fantasy world where undeath is real and psychotic wizards/priests hide in the strangest guises, and in a timeframe similar to a period on Earth when plagues popped up and killed 25% of a city's population without warning.
Just explaining my take/suggestion. YMMV obviously.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
For the NPC in the example, it would cost her 300 GP (going by the rules in v3.5). Not impossible for a group of 1st level characters to come up with after a few encounters with hostile creatures.
Not impossible, but 300 gold is still a chunk of money for 1st level characters. Personally, I would want masterwork armor and weapons, and other permanent items/benefits, before I'd want to give up my share of loot to buy a one-time speak with dead cast. But then again I'm probably CN.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
This would, I think, bring into question her alignment (which is Neutral Good). A person of NG alignment who denies people help for any of the above reasons would, to me anyways, raise some eye-brows about how she came by such an alignment. Especially if the group was willing to pay and/or donate to her church or cause or even perform some task she or her church might have (ie. side-quests).
I don't mean that she would maliciously withhold her assistance. She's a high priestess of a temple, though, right? She has a bunch of initiates and temple staff to supervise, community service events and long-term projects to oversee, the next sermon/service to plan/write, daily prayers/ceremonies to conduct for the clergy, probably separate services to hold for paranoid/elitist noble families (whose donations help her temple provide for the poor and thus buy her patience), and undoubtedly appointments with visiting priests/druids and the ruler of the city and perhaps other civic groups/organizations to attend/host. Plus, she needs some personal time every once in a while to recoup her energy and meditate for her own personal/spiritual growth. It's not hard to fill up a high priestess' 24 hours.
So while she might want to help people, in general (consistent with a NG alignment) she doesn't have the time or strength to perform every single task that's asked of her by the hundreds or potentially thousands (depending on the city) of people who make requests that end up on her figurative desk.
And, not being Lawful, she doesn't have the compulsion to satisfy everyone. Her goddess and the church come first, her temple and staff come second, her city and its citizens come third, and everyone else is somewhere after that. Donations might bump someone up her priority list a bit, though never into a higher group, but she still has to be convinced that services she performs for outsiders will contribute to the service of her goddess plus the common good. This convincing is usually a matter of roleplaying the conversation or at least making skill checks, but the PCs don't get to speak with her directly so that hampers them a bit. They have to settle for convincing the gatekeeper and hoping that he likes them enough to put in a good word for them. Failing to pressure the high priestess on their behalf doesn't make the gatekeeper evil; his loyalty is to her, not to them.
She will probably make an effort to help the PCs, if she understands and trusts their motivations, but she might be unable to, or it might have to wait a few days, or whatever the DM decides. There's plenty in those first three priorities to keep anyone busy all day and night for a lifetime.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
The approach and give the full details to Nethoer and that an audience is requested at the earliest of her conveniences and give the information over to him. Now if she refuses to cast the necessary spell, even with payment OR donations OR future promise to aid her in any way she likes, I'm sure there are other temples in the region with a 5th level Cleric who's willing. And who knows which player might have that information on hand.
If they're unable to get an appointment with this particular priestess, or they get the impression that it's going to be several days before she'll see them and they want to do something immediately (or need to, due to having access to the body for only a brief period of time) then they should figure out an alternative. And it's up to the DM to prepare for that. I would have some encounters planned for some of their options.
If they try to take the body out of the city, there will be challenges to overcome: smuggling the body to the gate without attracting attention, distracting or bribing the guards to let them take the body out of the city, protecting the body when they're inevitably beset by bandits or monsters on their way to the other city, etc.
If they go to another temple within the city, maybe they have to protect the body anyway... from a group of stray/escaped dogs who are attracted by the scent. Killing the dogs definitely has repercussions, but they also attract attention; what to do, what to do?
My real point is that speak with dead is never the only tool in a PC's belt... and in a lot (probably the majority) of situations it's not the best one unless the party has a cleric who can cast it. It's the quick & easy solution, on the surface, and among my motivations as DM is often a desire to encourage deeper consideration: the easy solution will frequently have consequences that make it less easy in the long run. If everything was easy, logical, and tidy, roleplaying would be devoid of mental stimulation. It also gives me a bit of fun when I unexpectedly let them succeed with the easy route every once in a while, and they second-guess themselves. 
|
| Diffan |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 18:05:41
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Instead of combing through the pages of information and giving them tid-bits here and there, I might hand over the Regional book called Silver Marches
I wouldn't direct players to read anything in a WotC book during a game session. And I'm not saying my way is better; I'm just saying it avoids this situation. Handing them a book sends the message that the answers to their questions lie in published material, and invites the metagame thinking that we're trying to get away from.
Handing them your notes is not better... they're yours, and by definition not for the players' eyes.
Yes, but what that instantly does is create greater workload on the DM's part, something that I'm trying to avoid. I have to create notes and now those notes have to contain information just for them to know about. Further, my players are allowed to borrow any books I have, so it's possible during reading out-of-campaign that they come across this information. It's not difficult to remember than in Silverymoon, there's a 10th level Cleric of Mielikki around the city OR any number of higher level NPCs there.
So it's either doing more extensive notes so that the player's assume that their presence is needed to overcome the situation at hand OR figuring out reasons why so many NPCs aren't there OR just don't want to help.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Then, when the murder / mystery is underway they can just take the corpse to her, pay her to cast Speak with Dead and now I have extra work to either nullify the effects of this spell, find a reason why she won't help, OR just allow them this bonus and possibly drastically reduce the mysterious aspect of the campaign.
1. They don't have to be given permission/access to take the body anywhere. Depending on the circumstances, they don't have to be given access to touch it, or even see it. Certainly the city watch and citizens looking on would raise strenuous objections to a dead body being carried around the city without the proper conveyance (the equivalent of a hearse), protection (superstitious people believe that evil spirits and diseases inhabit corpses), and at least a modicum of respect.
Then it makes them being the focal point of a murder/mystery sort of difficult.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
2. Speaking with the dead is probably anathema to many good-aligned churches, and some religious organizations may refuse to perform the spell on principle.
I don't honestly see why? It's not an evil spell nor is it a spell restricted by any churches that I'm aware of in the Faerūnian pantheon. I'd even think churches like Kelemvore would use this spell to make sure the deceased's last wishes were carried out.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
3. There should be charges associated with spellcasting services. Speaking with the dead, in particular, should be expensive when it's requested by adventurers who haven't performed significant services for the city in general or the temple in particular.
For the NPC in the example, it would cost her 300 GP (going by the rules in v3.5). Not impossible for a group of 1st level characters to come up with after a few encounters with hostile creatures.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
4. Ranking clerics may not be available to cast spells for outsiders. It's not unreasonable for a high priestess to simply decline to meet with anyone who isn't (a) a member of her congregation, (b) a native or long-term resident of her city, (c) a generous and politically connected donor to the temple.
This would, I think, bring into question her alignment (which is Neutral Good). A person of NG alignment who denies people help for any of the above reasons would, to me anyways, raise some eye-brows about how she came by such an alignment. Especially if the group was willing to pay and/or donate to her church or cause or even perform some task she or her church might have (ie. side-quests).
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Had the book just said that she's a cleric of Mielikki then I could assign whatever level/class I wanted
I totally agree that all stats should be left out of the general body of sourcebooks. I like the Volo's Guide format, which puts all the NPC stats at the end, near the index, where they can be accessed when desired and ignored the rest of the time. If nothing else, I hate breaking up the sentence with levels and alignments... it's tacky and distracting.
Agreed. And that's all I'm really asking for the new edition. Major NPC stats I'm ok with. These guys are supposed to provide some difficulty for the players and stats help a DM figure out when or how these NPCs come into the picture. They're also fun to read. It's just the insignificant ones that I really have a problem with. I'd like to know more about them, specifically, than just level/class. Their motivations, desires, schemes, etc. are far more valuable to me than the quick alignment, level, class blurb we get. Further, it instantly pegs these characters into a specific level-range.
The high-priestess of Mielikki in a low-level adventure might be 3rd or 4th level. In a mid-level game, she might be 12th or 14th. In an epic game, she's seen possibly as high as 18th or 20th. That way she's usable in EVERY possible scale, not just a set thing that you take it or leave it as is.
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Nothing, but it still means that it's extra work for me as the DM to make the necessary changes to the notable characters within any given setting. And just looking at the Silverymoon index there are LOADS of NPCs with PC-classes within it's walls.
Going back to your description of having the players read a selected passage... I'm not sure I accept the notion that making a quick list of names and ranks (no stats) is more work than using stickynotes to outline what the players are supposed to read.
High Priestess: Jhaeluire "No time for noobs"
Initiate: Nethoer "Just the FAQs"
Done. That's all the cue you need, in order to remember your decision that when the PCs arrive at this temple they're met by Nethoer in the nave and he answers their questions courteously but briefly. If they wish to see someone further up the hierarchy he'll write down their names and which inn they're staying in, and tell them that a runner will be sent to fetch them when the priestess is available to see them. He won't give them any hints about when that will be but under no circumstances will they be allowed to see her today. If they insist on charging through the temple banging on doors, it will be treated as an attack: the city watch will be summoned, and priests emerging from their rooms will be in combat mode. If they wait, the length of their wait depends on Jhaeluire's estimation of the urgency of their request, as it's communicated to her by Nethoer... so if the PCs are vague or "on a fishing expedition" they're never going to hear from her. Easy, and it doesn't take much of your time.
Yes, that's one way to approach it. My players probably would accept an audience at a later time, which doesn't necessarily affect the outcome of the adventure. But in the light of the adventure at hand, the PCs know about the murder. They want to speak with the corpse to get a better idea of how it went down. They hear though the grape-vine that Jhaeluire's a pretty well-known and high-ranking priestess of Mielikki and they assume that such a person would be willing to aid in their quest to find out the person who murdered the victim.
The approach and give the full details to Nethoer and that an audience is requested at the earliest of her conveniences and give the information over to him. Now if she refuses to cast the necessary spell, even with payment OR donations OR future promise to aid her in any way she likes, I'm sure there are other temples in the region with a 5th level Cleric who's willing. And who knows which player might have that information on hand. |
| Darkheyr |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 02:54:31
It's different. Sorcerers with a careful spell selection and a good amount of metamagic feats are incredibly versatile, and are able to competently deal with just about any situation.
Wizards on the other hand have an advantage in crafting, in niche spells a sorcerer might skip in favour of more generally useful stuff... and in preparation. They might be entirely unsuited to handle a specific problem today, and being the perfect specialist for the same situation the day after.
Both work splendidly, and have advantages and disadvantages. Combining that on a large degree can make the distinction superfluous, though. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 16 Apr 2014 : 02:23:00
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
Speaking of spells being memorized or cast from scrolls. I've always wondered if a wizard should be able to use those spell slots to cast any spell he's mastered. This would require actually managing spells gained through adventuring so you don't just find a book with all 1st - 7th level spells etc.
I know Elminster is a Chosen, and maybe that plays a part of it, but that seems how he pulls it off most the time. Though he did read a few spellbooks in that drow fortress in El Enraged, but by and large he kind of just lets fly with things he remembers that best match the situation.
Too over powering in the hands of PCs? What do you think?
-I think it's the Archmage PrC (3e) that gives the ability to pretty much do just that. You permanently sacrifice a spell slot and gain the ability to select a spell from your spellbook and be able to cast it spontaneously a few times per day. I played an Archmage character once in a Level 20 campaign. It didn't last too long, and I didn't get too, too much mileage out of the character or the stuff that he could do, but having two, three spells, whatever it was, that I was able to cast at will without preparation or anything, it didn't really unbalance anything.
-Sorcerer (3e) characters basically do that for a living, cast magic without a spellbook and have a lot of versatility when doing so. I've never played a Sorcerer into high levels, but I would imagine that it doesn't really unbalance anything. |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 19:44:07
Speaking of spells being memorized or cast from scrolls. I've always wondered if a wizard should be able to use those spell slots to cast any spell he's mastered. This would require actually managing spells gained through adventuring so you don't just find a book with all 1st - 7th level spells etc.
I know Elminster is a Chosen, and maybe that plays a part of it, but that seems how he pulls it off most the time. Though he did read a few spellbooks in that drow fortress in El Enraged, but by and large he kind of just lets fly with things he remembers that best match the situation.
Too over powering in the hands of PCs? What do you think? |
| BEAST |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 19:32:56
quote:
Originally posted by Darkheyr
Yes, all these minor characters can be busy. They have their own life, their own worries - especially those partaking in the running of organisations. Which is why they need the PC's or other adventurers still.
Even Batman needs to take a day off, now and again. |
| Mapolq |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 15:06:33
I don't really think the answer lies in finding reasons why your party can't use Speak With Dead. Of course, in your campaign it could - you are the DM, and you set the tone. But in general, I find it odd that people don't just accept that magic exists in the Realms. It's not all-present, but it does fundamentally change the nature of things.
See this as an example. You might set a modern-day adventure where the group has to take some information to a contact as quickly as possible from an abandoned house near a large city. Then someone has an idea - they can use their smartphone's 4G network to send it, and solve the problem by hitting a few buttons. You as DM have several options, of course. Maybe the information is very sensitive and they might want to take it personally. Maybe the network has bad coverage (and it does seem to happen all the time...). But generally... you just have to accept smartphones exist, else your campaign isn't really set in the modern day, and the players will notice. |
| Darkheyr |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 10:49:01
Another thing to remember - spells need to be memorized, or cast from scrolls. It means a certain effort needs to expended by a helping cleric, and a bit of time might pass before he or she is even able to help, let alone willing.
Yes, all these minor characters can be busy. They have their own life, their own worries - especially those partaking in the running of organisations. Which is why they need the PC's or other adventurers still. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 08:14:43
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Instead of combing through the pages of information and giving them tid-bits here and there, I might hand over the Regional book called Silver Marches
I wouldn't direct players to read anything in a WotC book during a game session. And I'm not saying my way is better; I'm just saying it avoids this situation. Handing them a book sends the message that the answers to their questions lie in published material, and invites the metagame thinking that we're trying to get away from.
Handing them your notes is not better... they're yours, and by definition not for the players' eyes.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Then, when the murder / mystery is underway they can just take the corpse to her, pay her to cast Speak with Dead and now I have extra work to either nullify the effects of this spell, find a reason why she won't help, OR just allow them this bonus and possibly drastically reduce the mysterious aspect of the campaign.
1. They don't have to be given permission/access to take the body anywhere. Depending on the circumstances, they don't have to be given access to touch it, or even see it. Certainly the city watch and citizens looking on would raise strenuous objections to a dead body being carried around the city without the proper conveyance (the equivalent of a hearse), protection (superstitious people believe that evil spirits and diseases inhabit corpses), and at least a modicum of respect.
2. Speaking with the dead is probably anathema to many good-aligned churches, and some religious organizations may refuse to perform the spell on principle.
3. There should be charges associated with spellcasting services. Speaking with the dead, in particular, should be expensive when it's requested by adventurers who haven't performed significant services for the city in general or the temple in particular.
4. Ranking clerics may not be available to cast spells for outsiders. It's not unreasonable for a high priestess to simply decline to meet with anyone who isn't (a) a member of her congregation, (b) a native or long-term resident of her city, (c) a generous and politically connected donor to the temple.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Had the book just said that she's a cleric of Mielikki then I could assign whatever level/class I wanted
I totally agree that all stats should be left out of the general body of sourcebooks. I like the Volo's Guide format, which puts all the NPC stats at the end, near the index, where they can be accessed when desired and ignored the rest of the time. If nothing else, I hate breaking up the sentence with levels and alignments... it's tacky and distracting.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Nothing, but it still means that it's extra work for me as the DM to make the necessary changes to the notable characters within any given setting. And just looking at the Silverymoon index there are LOADS of NPCs with PC-classes within it's walls.
Going back to your description of having the players read a selected passage... I'm not sure I accept the notion that making a quick list of names and ranks (no stats) is more work than using stickynotes to outline what the players are supposed to read.
High Priestess: Jhaeluire "No time for noobs"
Initiate: Nethoer "Just the FAQs"
Done. That's all the cue you need, in order to remember your decision that when the PCs arrive at this temple they're met by Nethoer in the nave and he answers their questions courteously but briefly. If they wish to see someone further up the hierarchy he'll write down their names and which inn they're staying in, and tell them that a runner will be sent to fetch them when the priestess is available to see them. He won't give them any hints about when that will be but under no circumstances will they be allowed to see her today. If they insist on charging through the temple banging on doors, it will be treated as an attack: the city watch will be summoned, and priests emerging from their rooms will be in combat mode. If they wait, the length of their wait depends on Jhaeluire's estimation of the urgency of their request, as it's communicated to her by Nethoer... so if the PCs are vague or "on a fishing expedition" they're never going to hear from her. Easy, and it doesn't take much of your time. |
| Mapolq |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 02:20:35
Wait, wait. There are a few thousand statted minor NPCs, at most (unless you count those entries saying "23 level 1 fighters in so-and-so town" as statting). The human population of Faerūn is around 60 million in 3E. That means a random Faerūnian is likely to know one or two minor statted NPCs by name, if they've been around a lot. I don't see how that can be overwhelming.
At most, we can argue it's a waste of word-count (and in many cases, I think it is). |
| Diffan |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 02:10:47
quote:
Originally posted by ksu_bond
...so...if they levels and stats are a problem...then why not just ignore them...
Just to reiterate what I had said earlier....
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Now I know that I can ignore everything, but when other players come to the table and they know about certain NPCs or people, they're going to want to know why so-and-so isn't helping. It might be alright for high-level NPCs to be busy, but the myriad of lower-level ones?
So it's a balance of maintaining a plausible campaign where people can use their own information, info provided from source books, or myself while making sure that source of information doesn't override the point of the adventure. Removing high-leveled NPCs isn't very difficult because they're off doing amazing things. Removing or ignoring every single (or most) NPCs that are saddled with classes and levels is something different.
The question is, do they really need stats? Do we need hundreds of NPCs with various classes and levels ALL throughout the Realms? Wouldn't it be easier to list the notable ones and/or ones that can pose a threat to the player characters and just leave general descriptions of everyone else? To me, it's easier to scale any adventure when the people are given descriptive text instead of stats. |
| ksu_bond |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 01:04:34
...so...if they levels and stats are a problem...then why not just ignore them... |
| Diffan |
Posted - 15 Apr 2014 : 00:24:39
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Xaeyruudh and Shadowsoul. Essentially I think we more or less agree on this. DMs need the freedom to change stuff to fit their story, but if they change stuff the players characters should know about in-game, the players need to know this up front, as it affects how the character interprets and interacts with the setting. Things "behind the curtain" that have been changed can be covered with the blanket info that "some stuff your characters don't know anything about anyway, differs from the canon in this game". But don't just use that as an excuse for being lazy, if you're the DM. And of course players should strive not to metagame. That's simply good roleplaying, though it can be a challenge from time to time.
Give us an example of the things you are talking about.
From my experiences, it comes from the sharing of knowledge. For example say I'm running a campaign in Silverymoon and the player's want to know notables about the place, people, sites, etc. Instead of combing through the pages of information and giving them tid-bits here and there, I might hand over the Regional book called Silver Marches and, with sticky notes, section off places and people the player's can read. In the notes are those notable people with classes and levels associated with them OR I say "so and so is a high-ranking priestess within the temple of Mielikki" they can infer that there's a good chance she's far higher in level than the PCs. Then, when the murder / mystery is underway they can just take the corpse to her, pay her to cast Speak with Dead and now I have extra work to either nullify the effects of this spell, find a reason why she won't help, OR just allow them this bonus and possibly drastically reduce the mysterious aspect of the campaign.
Had the book just said that she's a cleric of Mielikki then I could assign whatever level/class I wanted (if any) and the players have zero idea if she's capable of casting spells like Speak with Dead. Again, I feel it's far more the dozens upon dozens of leveled NPCs that range in the 4 - 15 levels that are populating the area and not necessarily the ones who are in the Epic tier so to speak.
Well what would be the difference in you handing over your notebook describing the things that you personally changed in Silverymoon?
Nothing, but it still means that it's extra work for me as the DM to make the necessary changes to the notable characters within any given setting. And just looking at the Silverymoon index there are LOADS of NPCs with PC-classes within it's walls. And the problem isn't the NPCs per-se, it's WotC decision to slap on levels and PC classes onto nearly every single one and I'd say MOST of them have quite a few levels under their belts and they're supposed to be menial characters that's mostly there for flavor and to show that non-PCs can be interesting too. It doesn't mean that they all need levels and classes however. |
| Lord Karsus |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 23:44:53
quote:
Originally posted by Aldrick
When I first started playing in the Realms, I was obsessed with trying to keep my Realms in line with the canon.
-Playing a D&D game (or whatever) using the Forgotten Realms with the intent of being "100% canon" is an impossible thing to do. The second a person asks a question about a seemingly innocuous, unimportant detail that the DM doesn't have an answer to- "Those blue flowers on the ground, what are they called and what do they smell like"- the game needs to come to a screeching halt while the DM either looks it up (if there even is an answer). Doesn't particularly seem fun. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 23:39:22
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Xaeyruudh and Shadowsoul. Essentially I think we more or less agree on this. DMs need the freedom to change stuff to fit their story, but if they change stuff the players characters should know about in-game, the players need to know this up front, as it affects how the character interprets and interacts with the setting. Things "behind the curtain" that have been changed can be covered with the blanket info that "some stuff your characters don't know anything about anyway, differs from the canon in this game". But don't just use that as an excuse for being lazy, if you're the DM. And of course players should strive not to metagame. That's simply good roleplaying, though it can be a challenge from time to time.
Give us an example of the things you are talking about.
From my experiences, it comes from the sharing of knowledge. For example say I'm running a campaign in Silverymoon and the player's want to know notables about the place, people, sites, etc. Instead of combing through the pages of information and giving them tid-bits here and there, I might hand over the Regional book called Silver Marches and, with sticky notes, section off places and people the player's can read. In the notes are those notable people with classes and levels associated with them OR I say "so and so is a high-ranking priestess within the temple of Mielikki" they can infer that there's a good chance she's far higher in level than the PCs. Then, when the murder / mystery is underway they can just take the corpse to her, pay her to cast Speak with Dead and now I have extra work to either nullify the effects of this spell, find a reason why she won't help, OR just allow them this bonus and possibly drastically reduce the mysterious aspect of the campaign.
Had the book just said that she's a cleric of Mielikki then I could assign whatever level/class I wanted (if any) and the players have zero idea if she's capable of casting spells like Speak with Dead. Again, I feel it's far more the dozens upon dozens of leveled NPCs that range in the 4 - 15 levels that are populating the area and not necessarily the ones who are in the Epic tier so to speak.
Well what would be the difference in you handing over your notebook describing the things that you personally changed in Silverymoon? |
| Diffan |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 23:30:54
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Xaeyruudh and Shadowsoul. Essentially I think we more or less agree on this. DMs need the freedom to change stuff to fit their story, but if they change stuff the players characters should know about in-game, the players need to know this up front, as it affects how the character interprets and interacts with the setting. Things "behind the curtain" that have been changed can be covered with the blanket info that "some stuff your characters don't know anything about anyway, differs from the canon in this game". But don't just use that as an excuse for being lazy, if you're the DM. And of course players should strive not to metagame. That's simply good roleplaying, though it can be a challenge from time to time.
Give us an example of the things you are talking about.
From my experiences, it comes from the sharing of knowledge. For example say I'm running a campaign in Silverymoon and the player's want to know notables about the place, people, sites, etc. Instead of combing through the pages of information and giving them tid-bits here and there, I might hand over the Regional book called Silver Marches and, with sticky notes, section off places and people the player's can read. In the notes are those notable people with classes and levels associated with them OR I say "so and so is a high-ranking priestess within the temple of Mielikki" they can infer that there's a good chance she's far higher in level than the PCs. Then, when the murder / mystery is underway they can just take the corpse to her, pay her to cast Speak with Dead and now I have extra work to either nullify the effects of this spell, find a reason why she won't help, OR just allow them this bonus and possibly drastically reduce the mysterious aspect of the campaign.
Had the book just said that she's a cleric of Mielikki then I could assign whatever level/class I wanted (if any) and the players have zero idea if she's capable of casting spells like Speak with Dead. Again, I feel it's far more the dozens upon dozens of leveled NPCs that range in the 4 - 15 levels that are populating the area and not necessarily the ones who are in the Epic tier so to speak. |
| Darkheyr |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 15:50:30
I really believe most of it is simply a perception issue and not something that resembles anything requiring a "My Realms Are Different" approach. Certainly, WotC could've skipped some level listings, but most of the time, all those NPCs simply have other issues to worry about - the higher the level, the more worrisome the things they deal with.
Funny enough, we have a perception issue like that with player characters on an NWN1 server, set in the Silver Marches - a village at the Fork, to be specific. Over the years, a scarce few characters have grown reasonably powerful, especially a pair of archwizards around level 20.
We've had a few people, quite consistently, claiming that characters like that are ruining game experience because they 'always save the day', because there's 'nothing for our characters to do', and the various gripes some of you already listed here, and what I've heard elsewhere about FR NPC's.
Except they don't. Except there are things to do. Because the ingame reality was so far that unless that orc came with an actual orc horde in tow, the archwizard might have given a bit of aid and council, but was otherwise preoccupied with that Morueme dragon being difficult, or with political issues between Silverymoon and Luskan. Or was simply busy building her new tower, or being entirely uninterested in getting every cat out of its tree again, simply because there were far too many cats in far too many trees. In fact, that tower being built is being built, among other things, because said wizards want to be left alone a little more.
But still - people believe this to be a problem. Not because they are doing anything, but because they are there, and could, theoretically, gate in a Solar to flatten that little goblin issue while the level 4 folks just stand there doing nothing. This isn't the case, not at all. Usually they don't even deal with the same type of issue.
Still, people quite often argued for a level cap to keep that in check. An issue of perception - and maybe, of a completely principal desire for 'equality'. |
| TBeholder |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 14:47:33
quote:
Originally posted by Eltheron
How would PCs even know about specific novel characters? Much less traipse off around half the world in search of them - and to do what, exactly? The very idea is really just strange.
It's not that bad, but... you did read "Azure Bonds", right? One funny greengrocer of a mage reached Shadowdale and wanted an audience with Elminster. Well... at least Lhaeo had some fun.  |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 11:03:44
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
Xaeyruudh and Shadowsoul. Essentially I think we more or less agree on this. DMs need the freedom to change stuff to fit their story, but if they change stuff the players characters should know about in-game, the players need to know this up front, as it affects how the character interprets and interacts with the setting. Things "behind the curtain" that have been changed can be covered with the blanket info that "some stuff your characters don't know anything about anyway, differs from the canon in this game". But don't just use that as an excuse for being lazy, if you're the DM. And of course players should strive not to metagame. That's simply good roleplaying, though it can be a challenge from time to time.
Give us an example of the things you are talking about. |
| Kyrel |
Posted - 14 Apr 2014 : 00:26:44
Xaeyruudh and Shadowsoul. Essentially I think we more or less agree on this. DMs need the freedom to change stuff to fit their story, but if they change stuff the players characters should know about in-game, the players need to know this up front, as it affects how the character interprets and interacts with the setting. Things "behind the curtain" that have been changed can be covered with the blanket info that "some stuff your characters don't know anything about anyway, differs from the canon in this game". But don't just use that as an excuse for being lazy, if you're the DM. And of course players should strive not to metagame. That's simply good roleplaying, though it can be a challenge from time to time. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 22:16:45
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
The reason for my hatred of the "some stuff is different" approach, is bad experience.
Yea, it sounds like you had a lazy DM. But no, I don't think it's just you. I think a lot of new DMs are lazy. There's nothing wrong with being new, and the lazyness is certainly not malicious in most cases. I think there's a tendency for certain personality types (I'm one of them) to feel compelled to "improve" things. Emphasize a personality quirk here, tweak a physical description there, create or remove a conflict, whatever. I feel like there's nothing wrong with this... the publication of the Realms, and its development as a shared setting, creates the opportunity to do this.
Depending on how much puttering you do, it can become difficult to keep track of everything you've tweaked. And considering the massive pile of things that have been published by TSR and WotC for the Realms, it's impossible to keep the accumulated body of canon in one's head. So while it's poor form to say "It's basically the Forgotten Realms, only different" ...sometimes it's hard to be more descriptive.
It's hard, but it's absolutely necessary. There are a few places where a DM can get away with a minimum of effort. Like random encounter tables, instead of writing out where each monster will be at any given time of the day or night. Still, the monsters that go on that table should be deliberately chosen, and their important stats/equipment noted. If they're only active at night, then don't have them outside and interacting with the PCs during the day. The leader of the patrol/whatever needs a name and/or a word for his rank, because his underlings are going to be saying those words out loud, and you should have a short list of names available to use for other individuals if the PCs engage in conversation. They need physical descriptions that include their visible gear and their BO.
Overall, there's no room for a DM to be lazy. Players need constant descriptions for what they're seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, and in some cases tasting. The more/better description they get, the more into the adventure they are. The more into it they are, the more fun they have. The more fun they have, the more successful the DM is.
So I agree with Shadowsoul, but I also agree with the Luskan example. I'm not going to provide players with a bulleted list of everything I've tweaked... but my job description as DM includes providing the background information that each character will have, and having answers for the players' questions.
So, to make something up on the spot for the Luskan example, I need to have at least one tavern in town that's favored by dwarves. So that if/when the party is looking for dwarves they can ask around (or go barcrawling, I don't judge) until they get the name of the place or stumble into it. If the PC who is from Luskan (but has been out adventuring for the past 5 years) asks what about XYZ tavern, where the dwarves hung out 5 years ago, I can either roleplay a conversation or have the player roll a gather information check (another acceptable bit of laziness) and the player can find out that their previous hangout was bought out by a dwarfhating half-orc 3 years ago; he dumped the casks of dwarven ale out in the street and burned the low stools (handcarved and brought by the dwarves for their own use and essentially donated to the tavern free of charge) and replaced them with four foot tall roughly hewn stumps. The dwarves responded by knocking down a shuttered & abandoned hardware store and building a tavern of their own, which has 5 foot ceilings and a sign over the door that says "Watch yer fool head." All drinks must be ordered in dwarvish, unless you fancy the taste of barslop swept into a tin pail. They won't turn respectful customers of other races away, but only dwarves and friends are welcomed. Those who can't stomach the house brew are "politely" ignored.
This way, I'm free to edit things and the change doesn't diminish the lore which brings the city to life. Hopefully, as long as I have some good dialog prepared, the PCs will enjoy their visit and Stonegut's Home will be on their list of places to return to when they're back in the city later. |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 16:22:43
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Which is exactly why I have never read a fr novel nor will I, and why I remove every novel event from my campaigns except ToT and the Crusade (because thry have too much of an effect on modern realms)
Novels should always have been only a possible result of that story arc with an adventure to accompany it and then a sensible design team to decide on the result in the next sourcebook.
This current approach is nothing short of trash.
Maybe it's just me, but reading fiction set within a setting makes the setting come more alive for me. I've avoided a couple of games entirely, because there was no associated fiction.
Fiction set within a setting can also help the setting keep from stagnating. I got bored with Dragonlance because -- at that time -- no one was moving the timeline forward, and almost all of the fiction was just exploring different aspects of the past.
Exactly. Fiction and specifically the stuff Ed writes, lets me rip bad guy plots, NPC's and all sorts of lore and whip it up into a campaign. Perfect example, in his Spellfire series you can pretty much take that entire caravan run Shandril and Narm are on and use that on your own PC's more or less.
I have pages of notes from the Sage of Shadowdale trilogy etc. Lots of NPCs all ready to use for Cormyr etc.
As much as I'd love to be able to wallow in Realms 16 to 18 hours a day and spend the time crafting entirely unique creations, for the most part I don't have the time anymore. So I borrow and modify. Takes a fraction of the time to adapt an adventure than write one from scratch. Least for me. |
| Kyrel |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 15:07:43
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
I think you are jumping the gun a little too quickly. As a player, you shouldn't be using any of your FR knowledge except when it comes to character creation. If something is different then your DM should let you know, but after that you should be using your character's knowledge of his surroundings and not your own. Sometimes, explaining something that has changed can give away certain plots that the DM may want to keep a secret. This is a big problem I have experienced with players who are familiar with the Realms. They just can't seem to park their knowledge at the door and allow their character's knowledge to lead the way, this is also why they get frustrated when I have changed something. Technically, it's their fault because they shouldn't have come into the game using their meta-game knowledge and assume things are like what they are familiar with.
Don't get me wrong Shadowsoul. In-game I strive hard not to use information about the setting that the character shouldn't have. But let me give you an example of what I mean. If you are playing in The North and build a character that has grown up in Luskan, I believe that it is fair to assume that this character will be pretty familiar with the common knowledge stuff pertaining to Luskan and at least somewhat familiar with the region in general. He'll know how things are done in the city, he'll have an idea about what shops etc. are placed where in the city, and he'll have an idea about who the major power players are. He'll probably also have some knowledge of a few lesser know facts about the city. If not in details, then probably from loose rumours at least. What he won't know, is the detailed stuff that hasn't involved him. If he's not a member of the High Captains organisations, he won't know how they work inside. If he's not a member of the Arcane Brotherhood, he won't know anything about how that organisation work inside, who get along with who etc. He also won't have a clear idea about the precise power levels of any individual NPC. But he might well have an idea that the leaders of the Arcane Brotherhood are powerful mages, and he probably also have an idea if a particular bar's bouncer is a serious bad-ass in a brawl or not, provided said bouncer has a reputation for it. Living in the North, he'll also know that during the winter, there is no coming and going into and out of Icewind Dale. He'll probably know that one of the major export items from Icewind Dale is Schrimshaw carvings, and he'll also have an idea that Mirabar have a sizable population of Dwarves and that the city exports weapons, armour, and cut stones, and that they ship a good amount of stuff out of Luskan. He'll probably also have heard of Silverymoon and the other major cities of the North and the Swordcoast, and odds are that he'll also be familiar with the recent history of Luskan and the war with Ryat*** (however you spell it). I trust you get my point.
If this Luskanite walks into a landmark bar in Luskan, where his background says that he's a regular customer, I'm expecting that bar to be as described in the canon material. If I walk into a landmark bar, and then get a description that is NOTHING like the canon, I'd really prefer the DM to rename the bar completely, and then tell me beforehand that this landmark, as know, doesn't exist, and never did. Similarly I'll be somewhat surprised if the PC arrives in Mirabar and discover that there have never been any dwarves living there, and their major exports are in fact grain and livestock.
I do get what you are saying, but it's a balancing act. Screw around with the common knowledge stuff that the characters SHOULD know, tell the players up front. It's affecting the characters world view and experiences from growing up. Mess with the inner workings of various organisations that the characters shouldn't know jack about, knock yourself out, the players can learn about it if they get involved with it.
Hope you get what I mean.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 14:26:59
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Im all for advancing the timeline. But a novel should not decide what happens in the campaign timeline merely reflect one possible outcome of the story.
Neither should an adventure determine the results because the majority end would be the obvious path of least resistance.
Novels only eliminate plot hooks and kill characters and the heroes invariably save the day.
As a gaming product we need something more interesting.
So a proper design team should decide the result of the story and any changes to the timeline (although not in a 4e way).
By having novels decide everything the solve/ruin all the hooks before any pcs get a chance and its a lot of work to rewrite the timeline when you dont like the canon result and that makes any subsequent story less useful because your main npcs are already dead.
Its a chain effect that can only result in everyone finding less and less to like about the setting as their favourite characters and organisations and places are eliminated.
Which is why im sticking at 1370s and rewriting the crap RSEs so they make sense and are consistent with npc personalities and motives.
Novels also introduce more characters and more plot hooks. And quite frankly, other than a few exceptions here and there, I'm not aware of plot hooks from sourcebooks that were removed by novels.
Most people's favorite Realms characters are from the novels, not from the source material. And that's because novels introduce these characters and give us a far better feel for them than a dry half-page write-up in a sourcebook. Novels also show us these characters in action, which is again better than that half-page write up.
And the "only result" of novels is not to remove things people like from the setting -- because if that was the case, people like myself wouldn't be here having this discussion. I have bought near-complete sets of all FR material, and the majority of the novels, twice. Not once, twice. It's pretty clear that despite being a fan for 20 years, I've not been driven away... And there are a number of people here who have been fans longer than I. |
| Aldrick |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 14:00:00
I find myself agreeing very strongly with Markus, Wooly, Jeremy and Diffan. What they've written largely maps to my own experiences, feelings, and thoughts.
When I first started playing in the Realms, I was obsessed with trying to keep my Realms in line with the canon. This was extremely hard to do because I couldn't possibly know everything, but I certainly tried my best. One of the major exciting factors about the Realms is that it's a shared world, and that it's basically alive. Stuff is happening all of the time, even in it's most remote places. I wanted people to know that, when they were playing in my games, that they were in "THE REALMS" - the Realms as published.
However, as time went on I became overwhelmed. Things kept going BOOM - as Wooly put it. I'm playing a game in Sembia, and BOOM - Shade takes it over. If I'm trying to keep my Realms as close to canon as possible, how do I make that work? BOOM - elves are coming back, what does that mean for the Dalelands and the surrounding nations now that a powerful military has just rolled through? What does Sembia think, considering their longstanding animosity toward elves? Um, I don't know! BOOM - Drow Pantheon shake up. BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, BOOM.
I couldn't keep up. I was forced to "compromise" and begin offering caveats: X happened, but not quite the way it did in the official setting, Y didn't happen yet, Z didn't happen at all - we're ignoring it.
I was so frustrated with the Realms that by the time 4E rolled around I was hopeful. I was hoping - desperately - that they'd use it as an opportunity to scale back the RSE's, and generally try and clean things up. Of course, no such luck there. I held out hope until I saw the 4E FRCG, and then promptly divorced myself from canon entirely.
I even went so far as to go back and alter past events to make them more to my liking, and in short - my Realms is no longer "THE REALMS" - it is "MY REALMS". My Realms differs considerably from the published setting to the point it might as well be called a homebrewed version of the Realms.
The one thing I'm thankful for that came from 4th Edition was how it forced me to see how ridiculously OCD I was being with the setting. I should have been doing what I am doing all along, but I would have never had the guts to go as far as I've gone.
I mean really, could I have gotten away with turning Cormyr into a feudalistic theocracy with ambitions of empire? An imperial Cormyr that is in a nasty cold war with the returned Elves of Myth Drannor? Elves who are heavily influenced by the Eldreth Veluuthra and are occupying parts of the Dalelands, turning the Dales into an area inspired by modern day Palestine and the Gaza Strip, South African Apartheid, and the United States during the Revolutionary War?
I don't think I would have had the guts to muck with the core setting like that. Nowadays, I keep my setting canon until immediately after the Time of Troubles. After the ToT my setting begins to diverge from canon significantly. I look to the published Realms as a general guideline and inspiration, but that's the extent of their influence on my Realms. Hell, I even lifted interesting things from 4E - like the Warlock Knights of Vaasa. |
| Shadowsoul |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 13:24:08
quote:
Originally posted by Kyrel
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh
And imo DMs can help by pointing out that they're in a modified version of the Realms, where they may not know as much as they think they know... and that's actually a cool thing, because it opens the door for mystery even in Waterdeep and Cormyr and the Dales where a relatively large amount of lore has been published.
While I agree with you on the metagaming part, I'd like to add something to what you write in the quote. As a player I have absolutely nothing against a DM modifying an established setting. I'm generally speaking very aware of the problems of metagaming, and the challenges it brings as a player with extensive RL knowledge of a given setting. However...if there is one thing I absolutely LOATHE, it is when the GM says that "it's basically >>setting<<, but some things are different", and then leaves it at that. What the hell am I supposed to do with that information as a player!? You basically just told me that I have no idea about what is or is not true in the setting, and that I therefor can't draw on any of the stuff I've read about the setting, because you, as the DM, might just have changed it. We might as well be playing in the DM's homebrew setting, which would, in fact, be easier for me as a player to work with. Change what you want to your heart's content in the Realms setting for your game, but make sure that you inform the players about what they should expect to be different.
I think you are jumping the gun a little too quickly. As a player, you shouldn't be using any of your FR knowledge except when it comes to character creation. If something is different then your DM should let you know, but after that you should be using your character's knowledge of his surroundings and not your own. Sometimes, explaining something that has changed can give away certain plots that the DM may want to keep a secret. This is a big problem I have experienced with players who are familiar with the Realms. They just can't seem to park their knowledge at the door and allow their character's knowledge to lead the way, this is also why they get frustrated when I have changed something. Technically, it's their fault because they shouldn't have come into the game using their meta-game knowledge and assume things are like what they are familiar with. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 12:27:10
quote:
Originally posted by Shadowsoul
For several years now, I have heard this argument coming from naysayers of the Forgotten Realms and I just don't get it. It's not like all the unique NPCs get together, magically appear, and write themselves into a DM's adventure. I've had people tell me they hate FR because Drizzt is out there to save the day so why are they needed. Drizzt doesn't exist in my FR games but some people are still not happy unless those NPCs have been written out of the offical core campaign.
Just don't understand this argument.
To me, it's far less about the major NPCs in the Realms. They're not hard to write-off when doing adventures because there's a good chance they're not "at home" doing nothing. For example my group might want to go to Mithral Hall but they probably won't see Drizzt because he normally spends his time outside the Mithral Halls and in the forested area. The problem crops up really only in published adventures where areas are known for their high-leveled NPCs. A low-level adventure taking place in Silverymoon had better have a good reason why Alustriel isn't taking the situation into her own hands, regardless of what the adventure usually entails. If the walls are compromised in an assault, I don't expect the 1st level PCs to handle that (as a player) because there are Spellguards and Alurstriel that's MORE than capable of stopping any sort of assault.
In my experience the problem of NPCs with the Realms came down to two things: overloading the areas with "lesser" NPCs and not actually using the NPC classes, which were designed exactly for this reason. The first part is basically what you'd see in any splat or regional book about the number of people in any given area. For example, looking at the Silver Marches book, the section labled Major Temples describes the temples located within Silverymoon and some of the clerics or people inside. Do I really need to have canon proof that the priestess of the temple of Mielikki is a NG human female Cleric 10? No, I don't. I don't care that Everdusk Hall is administered by a CG female sun elf Wizard 7/ Lormaster 6 because these "stats" aren't useful in the slightest. THIS is the part about NPCs that I really started to hate with 3E Forgotten Realms products. Looking at just Silverymoon you see dozens of NPCs well over the level 9 and 10 ALL with PC classes. How can I write an adventure in the walls of Silvermoon than can be fun for 1st and 2nd level characters and not possibly come into contact with NPCs several levels higher? That's whats frustrating to me.
Now I know that I can ignore everything, but when other players come to the table and they know about certain NPCs or people, they're going to want to know why so-and-so isn't helping. It might be alright for high-level NPCs to be busy, but the myriad of lower-level ones?
So lets hope that the new version of the Realms isn't populated with LOADS of NPCs with tons of PC-class stats, levels, etc. |
| Thauranil |
Posted - 13 Apr 2014 : 11:55:20
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal
Im all for advancing the timeline. But a novel should not decide what happens in the campaign timeline merely reflect one possible outcome of the story.
Neither should an adventure determine the results because the majority end would be the obvious path of least resistance.
Novels only eliminate plot hooks and kill characters and the heroes invariably save the day.
As a gaming product we need something more interesting.
So a proper design team should decide the result of the story and any changes to the timeline (although not in a 4e way).
By having novels decide everything the solve/ruin all the hooks before any pcs get a chance and its a lot of work to rewrite the timeline when you dont like the canon result and that makes any subsequent story less useful because your main npcs are already dead.
Its a chain effect that can only result in everyone finding less and less to like about the setting as their favourite characters and organisations and places are eliminated.
Which is why im sticking at 1370s and rewriting the crap RSEs so they make sense and are consistent with npc personalities and motives.
No offense but some of us love the novels and frankly would be much less invested in them if they did not represent canonically accurate information. So if you dont like novels feel free to ignore them but I dont see how your approach benefits anyone. |
|
|
