| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
 Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 02:27:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
I will agree with the line in the OP, by the way, that 4th Edition is a wholly different system. It was designed to appeal to the MMO crowd, without realizing that people who want such things will generally go and...play an MMO. Not saying it's bad, but it is the reason I use the Pathfinder system.
I've been wondering about the "similar to MMO" thing for a while, and I'm not sure that's quite the mark the designers were really trying to hit. Rather, I think it was more about creating a system that was both balanced between character types and had a linear sort of power increase as one gains levels. MMOs do that, so I think that's where people get the MMO comparison from, but I honestly think it was more based in an effort for class balance and linear power increases.
Prior to 4E, a jump from level 1 to 2 was a small increase, but power sort of grew exponentially (and often in an unbalanced way). And between different classes, power was often very unbalanced (thinking here about low level fighters vs. wizards and then the flip with high level fighters vs. wizards).
Not everyone wants or likes that sense of balance for everyday home-based games, although it does make things more fair if you're playing competitively or you're in something like RPGA where minor things that are unfair become huge issues and big things that are unfair become flameworthy battles.
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
Edited by - Therise on 08 Sep 2011 02:28:29 |
 |
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 03:41:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
I will agree with the line in the OP, by the way, that 4th Edition is a wholly different system. It was designed to appeal to the MMO crowd, without realizing that people who want such things will generally go and...play an MMO. Not saying it's bad, but it is the reason I use the Pathfinder system.
I've been wondering about the "similar to MMO" thing for a while, and I'm not sure that's quite the mark the designers were really trying to hit. Rather, I think it was more about creating a system that was both balanced between character types and had a linear sort of power increase as one gains levels. MMOs do that, so I think that's where people get the MMO comparison from, but I honestly think it was more based in an effort for class balance and linear power increases.
Prior to 4E, a jump from level 1 to 2 was a small increase, but power sort of grew exponentially (and often in an unbalanced way). And between different classes, power was often very unbalanced (thinking here about low level fighters vs. wizards and then the flip with high level fighters vs. wizards).
Not everyone wants or likes that sense of balance for everyday home-based games, although it does make things more fair if you're playing competitively or you're in something like RPGA where minor things that are unfair become huge issues and big things that are unfair become flameworthy battles.
I also blame the format of 4E for this line of thinking. With everything color-coded and the layout being page after page of powers and the like it's easy to draw comparisons to that of a video game MMO where the powers are listed in a "tree" for selection. This, however, is much where the comparisons stop IMO. It may look like an MMO from the books but I hardly feel it plays like one. The only factor I've seen that sorta breaks the momentum of combat is Immediate Reacton actions. When a monster attacks and PCs use a class power, item power, or some feat that stops the monster's action it throws a little wrench into play and halt the fun.
But I feel it's important for people to understand that while mechanics are sort of absolutes, flavor isn't and should be changes according to player's wants and feelings. Give you a prime example: I was on the Wizbro boards talking with one poster who wanted to make a special Kossuthian worshipper. He wasn't interested in "Divine" sources or classes such as the Cleric but the character was rather spiritual. So another poster's comment was to make him a Dragonborn with a fire breath weapon. Except, don't call him a dragonborn, say it's a human who was given power by Kossuth with the ability to breath fire. Then go Sorcerer and take all the Fire-based powers one could ever want. Call them prayers and reword them accordingly. For that person, the flavor wasn't married to mechanics, and I'm one to favor such beliefs.
Another example is in my new E6 campaign where a player is playing a Gnomish Wizard. He, however, doesn't see himself as a wizard but a steam-ish punk artificer who uses a pistol. The pistol is just for flavor and has the stats of a hand-crossbow (which he took a feat for). The spell components used are placed into a capsul and "shot" from the gun and thus the spell effect occurs. All of it is done through flavor and nothing mechanically changes.
So while the imagery of 4E is akin to WoW or other MMOs, I've felt it plays a whole lot like a Pen'n'Paper RPG.
Sorry to keep the derailment of the discussion going  |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 03:46:14
|
I've flipped back and forth on this topic very often and I've also been afraid to post on it for fear of offending someone. I have REALLY thought about this alot and though I believe 4e Realms is the Realms I finally realized what my major issue is.
I like to reread the old novels, adventures and supplements over and over and over. Unless I ignore much of what has happened however, I can't really derive as much pleasure from doing so anymore. Now that we're 100 years away from most of those events, too much of it has become obsolete. Characters I loved are gone, events that seemed so important at the time are now all but forgotten. Even some nations are all but a memory.
I love the new material that has come out and that's why this certainly is the Realms (to me). Man, I don't think anything is as cool as the Abolethic Sovereignty in fact! I just wish all of it had been additive instead of a replacement. |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 03:53:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
I will agree with the line in the OP, by the way, that 4th Edition is a wholly different system. It was designed to appeal to the MMO crowd, without realizing that people who want such things will generally go and...play an MMO. Not saying it's bad, but it is the reason I use the Pathfinder system.
I've been wondering about the "similar to MMO" thing for a while, and I'm not sure that's quite the mark the designers were really trying to hit. Rather, I think it was more about creating a system that was both balanced between character types and had a linear sort of power increase as one gains levels. MMOs do that, so I think that's where people get the MMO comparison from, but I honestly think it was more based in an effort for class balance and linear power increases.
Prior to 4E, a jump from level 1 to 2 was a small increase, but power sort of grew exponentially (and often in an unbalanced way). And between different classes, power was often very unbalanced (thinking here about low level fighters vs. wizards and then the flip with high level fighters vs. wizards).
Not everyone wants or likes that sense of balance for everyday home-based games, although it does make things more fair if you're playing competitively or you're in something like RPGA where minor things that are unfair become huge issues and big things that are unfair become flameworthy battles.
I also blame the format of 4E for this line of thinking. With everything color-coded and the layout being page after page of powers and the like it's easy to draw comparisons to that of a video game MMO where the powers are listed in a "tree" for selection. This, however, is much where the comparisons stop IMO. It may look like an MMO from the books but I hardly feel it plays like one. The only factor I've seen that sorta breaks the momentum of combat is Immediate Reacton actions. When a monster attacks and PCs use a class power, item power, or some feat that stops the monster's action it throws a little wrench into play and halt the fun.
But I feel it's important for people to understand that while mechanics are sort of absolutes, flavor isn't and should be changes according to player's wants and feelings. Give you a prime example: I was on the Wizbro boards talking with one poster who wanted to make a special Kossuthian worshipper. He wasn't interested in "Divine" sources or classes such as the Cleric but the character was rather spiritual. So another poster's comment was to make him a Dragonborn with a fire breath weapon. Except, don't call him a dragonborn, say it's a human who was given power by Kossuth with the ability to breath fire. Then go Sorcerer and take all the Fire-based powers one could ever want. Call them prayers and reword them accordingly. For that person, the flavor wasn't married to mechanics, and I'm one to favor such beliefs.
Another example is in my new E6 campaign where a player is playing a Gnomish Wizard. He, however, doesn't see himself as a wizard but a steam-ish punk artificer who uses a pistol. The pistol is just for flavor and has the stats of a hand-crossbow (which he took a feat for). The spell components used are placed into a capsul and "shot" from the gun and thus the spell effect occurs. All of it is done through flavor and nothing mechanically changes.
So while the imagery of 4E is akin to WoW or other MMOs, I've felt it plays a whole lot like a Pen'n'Paper RPG.
Sorry to keep the derailment of the discussion going
Salient points from both of you. The one thing that makes it most like an MMO (if I may continue the derailment briefly here) is the concept of 'healing surges'. The one time I have experienced playing in 4th Edition, we had no cleric - and didn't need one. Once I can rework it to where I can remove healing surges from the game entirely, the "MMO feel" will likely go away.
This will (sort of steering back on topic) do a lot to restore that Greenwood-y goodness to the Realms when using 4th Edition, where the priesthood matters. Some of the changes that make it not feel 'Realms-y' stem from mechanics, but these are, with a little house rule elbow grease, easily remedied. |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 04:12:55
|
I'm not sure I follow the Surge argument you presented. In MMOs, you are usually kept alive by healers who replenish your life pool through spells or technology. I believe the intent of Surges was to manage the economy of the game better. I still recall bags filled with wands of cure light wounds in 3e. Endless adventure as long as you kept them on you.
I'm not defending the Surge system, just trying to provide some perspective. Also, to ask how this relates to it being a MMO system. |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 04:30:02
|
| I think he's referring to self-heals in MMOs. And I think it's a good point really. Self-heals are available to many classes in MMOs not to mention bandages and consumables. |
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 04:42:24
|
1E and 2E had adventurers stocking up on scrolls and potions, most especially any of a curative sort. Many NPCs of note would carry a hidden stash of such things (or trinkets allowing them to instantly escape and access their hidden stash) so they could prevail in threatening situations with abusively abundant staying power.
However magic items were generally more difficult and costly to obtain prior to 3E. Magic vendors were actively discouraged in the DMGs and typically only appeared in special locations (such as Menzoberranzan) where shopping would generally be something of a risky adventure in itself. None of this nonsense about just plunking down a pile of gold and picking up tailor-made magical items by the end of the week. Indeed, players didn't even know the exact properties of magical items (in theory) since such things were generally only within the domain of DM-side references.
I'll admit that both approaches have considerable merits and downsides, but the old grognard in me fears inflationary escalation of magical power and refuses to easily let go of controlling all access to magical treasures. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 04:49:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
1E and 2E had adventurers stocking up on scrolls and potions, most especially any of a curative sort. Many NPCs of note would carry a hidden stash of such things (or trinkets allowing them to instantly escape and access their hidden stash) so they could prevail in threatening situations with abusively abundant staying power.
However magic items were generally more difficult and costly to obtain prior to 3E. Magic vendors were actively discouraged in the DMGs and typically only appeared in special locations (such as Menzoberranzan) where shopping would generally be something of a risky adventure in itself. None of this nonsense about just plunking down a pile of gold and picking up tailor-made magical items by the end of the week. Indeed, players didn't even know the exact properties of magical items (in theory) since such things were generally only within the domain of DM-side references.
I'll admit that both approaches have considerable merits and downsides, but the old grognard in me fears inflationary escalation of magical power and refuses to easily let go of controlling all access to magical treasures.
Stocking up? In 1E and 2E? Wow. I don't remember ever being wealthy enough to have ever had a stockpile of heal wands, scrolls, or potions. Maybe we always played light on treasure. |
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 05:00:00
|
I'd be pretty hard to get rid of the Surge system in 4E because a number of aspects of the game are focused on it. And while it's a technical term that sounds game-ish, I think it adds balance to the game over all. It helps to represent how much your body can withstand. For example, your body needs to rest and replenish itself and no amount of healing will do the trick (ie. you're out of Healing Surges). Another reason why they're good is because it can help mitigate other aspects of adventuring. For example, when the group is out in the wilderness and they fail a Skill Challenge to navigate properly they lose X-amount of healing surges depending on how bad or good they did. Think of it as a character's "Grit" or "Personal Fortitude" and once one person has reached their max, they're done and need a good rest to recover.
And if Old Man Harpell is refering to Second Winds, I think it's important to keep in perspective of the Action Economy that drives most TRPGs. No character wants to spend his whole turn healing themselves when they could be contributing to the fight, and so it's a painstaking choice to use your Second Wind (unless your a Dwarf). In additon, you can only do it once per encounter so it's there but don't break the glass in case of an emergency lol. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 05:45:27
|
quote:
Stocking up? In 1E and 2E? Wow. I don't remember ever being wealthy enough to have ever had a stockpile of heal wands, scrolls, or potions. Maybe we always played light on treasure.
I'll admit I'm sometimes mildly magnanimous about dispensing disposable healing items. It's quite lame to lose decent characters simply because of a little bad luck or bad decision or whatnot, and - as pointed out - earlier game mechanics lack the 4E innovations which add a little bit of staying power to all characters. (Although I have learned to be careful with this tendency; my greedy grubby sneaky bastard players like to hoard things when they can.)
Having said all that I'll point out that we play "hardcore" D&D. Resurrections are not impossible by any means, but they are hideously expensive and hardly ever available when needed. All new characters, even replacement characters, start at level 1, no exceptions unless reincarnate or wish or somesuch is cast. Players can get a little leeway if they want to adopt a henchman or spare NPC (or even reassume an ex-PC who suffered from polymorph into NPC) who's already at a higher level, otherwise it's up to the rest of the party to keep their wimpy brand new little comrade alive until he closes the gap and can pull his own weight. It usually doesn't take very long anyhow, and it gives all the players more swag and brag and kudos and fond remembrances, they feel (quite rightfully) proud of their accomplishments. Hardcore is the best way to go. Interestingly, it keeps the players very sharp and encourages them to make (generally more balanced) character build decisions they wouldn't otherwise consider; you only die once, so working on staying alive and getting some economy from your points and building characters with a focus on cooperating and synergizing is far more valuable than making pumped up hyperspecialists who can excel at breaking records with one role (or roll) yet are otherwise half-useless. No more old-style thinking "I somehow exert my 19 strength on the problem", instead they think "should I put the points into strength or into something which helps the whole party?" |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 08 Sep 2011 05:52:37 |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 08:15:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
quote:
Stocking up? In 1E and 2E? Wow. I don't remember ever being wealthy enough to have ever had a stockpile of heal wands, scrolls, or potions. Maybe we always played light on treasure.
I'll admit I'm sometimes mildly magnanimous about dispensing disposable healing items. It's quite lame to lose decent characters simply because of a little bad luck or bad decision or whatnot, and - as pointed out - earlier game mechanics lack the 4E innovations which add a little bit of staying power to all characters. (Although I have learned to be careful with this tendency; my greedy grubby sneaky bastard players like to hoard things when they can.)
Having said all that I'll point out that we play "hardcore" D&D. Resurrections are not impossible by any means, but they are hideously expensive and hardly ever available when needed. All new characters, even replacement characters, start at level 1, no exceptions unless reincarnate or wish or somesuch is cast. Players can get a little leeway if they want to adopt a henchman or spare NPC (or even reassume an ex-PC who suffered from polymorph into NPC) who's already at a higher level, otherwise it's up to the rest of the party to keep their wimpy brand new little comrade alive until he closes the gap and can pull his own weight. It usually doesn't take very long anyhow, and it gives all the players more swag and brag and kudos and fond remembrances, they feel (quite rightfully) proud of their accomplishments. Hardcore is the best way to go. Interestingly, it keeps the players very sharp and encourages them to make (generally more balanced) character build decisions they wouldn't otherwise consider; you only die once, so working on staying alive and getting some economy from your points and building characters with a focus on cooperating and synergizing is far more valuable than making pumped up hyperspecialists who can excel at breaking records with one role (or roll) yet are otherwise half-useless. No more old-style thinking "I somehow exert my 19 strength on the problem", instead they think "should I put the points into strength or into something which helps the whole party?"
Interesting you should call it 'hardcore'...I run campaigns in much the same fashion, and I've never considered it hardcore. Not saying you're wrong, mind - just never occurred to me that way. Of course, unless a character does something incredibly stupid, or their player does something to tick me off (rules-lawyering is an automatic death sentence for that person's character), I will never go out of my way to injure or kill a character.
I too tend to be miserly in my parsing of magic...I am fortunate that the players I have are all thoughtful sorts who will stop min/maxing at a certain stage and insure that their character can survive what I throw at them. Some of them learned it the hard way  , but I don't think that 4th Edition is doing our playstyle any favors (hence my use of Pathfinder). I am far too big a control freak to just let my characters waltz into a magic shop in Baldur's Gate or Waterdeep and pick up an economy six-pack of cure light wounds - heck with that. And if you brew it yourself - find the ingredients, grasshopper. I'm generous with reducing XP costs for these things if they impress me with roleplay and effort, but I refuse to allow the 'Sword Coast Common Market' to develop.
That said, 4th Edition has features that fit perfectly in a Realms context - a wizard or sorcerer always has a spell to throw, for example. Does Elminster 'run out of his daily allotment'? Hardly - in game terms, he always has something...even if it isn't of any immediate use to him. Point to 4th Edition.
4th Edition is a moot point for me at this stage, but sooner or later I may dust the rules off and give it a try - after I 'tweak' it some, of course. |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 18:03:08
|
Not to derail the topic further into the 4e discussion, but a thought on the healing surges issue: The main reason I like healing surges is because it allows the game to keep functioning. In 3.5 (and it was even worse in earlier editions), you had basically one fight and had to rest to replenish those hit points. Then one fight, and have to rest. Sometimes you'd have a string of small fights, but you'd have to rest ultimately. And you'd have to rest a LONG time. It would help to have a cleric, of course, but even so you'd spend a couple days of your cleric casting healing spells, then rememorizing spells, then healing again, etc. And it really put a drag on play with some frequency.
Now this isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I have been at many, many tables where the game gets really bogged down while the cleric burns his cool divine spells in order to heal everyone else.
Healing surges are a way to keep the game moving. Mechanically, they are a measure of roughly how many encounters you can do, and the baseline assumption is 4-5. This is basically a whole adventure without having to do a long rest, and then when you do, you can get back into the action without taking a week sabbatical.
Also, I have never thought of hit points as a "life meter" or anything like that. To me, they're a measure of fatigue and endurance/personal drive. When your hit points go down, you're getting tired and clumsy, making it more likely for you to get hurt by an attack. When you get bloodied, it means an attack has broken your defenses and actually hurt you. In this paradigm, a second wind is indicative of exactly what the book says: you catch your breath, focus on the battle, and fight defensively for a moment. It's not a "self-heal," but a refocusing--which everyone can and should do in a real-life fight.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 08 Sep 2011 : 20:17:39
|
What I like about the mechanic is that it allows the party's cleric type to actually participate in the action, rather than simply setting himself up as a first aid station full of nothing but healing spells. Each member of the party is self-reliant enough to keep muddling through the mire without strictly requiring medical backup unless things get nasty indeed.
Although this rules mechanic might be new (and a little harder to explain in-game) to D&D it's nothing new to RPGs in general. FASA's Earthdawn RPG is the first game title I know of which employs this logical construct, it even established the now-common "healing surge" and "wounding" terminology which was adopted into 4E and other games. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 01:24:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
What I like about the mechanic is that it allows the party's cleric type to actually participate in the action, rather than simply setting himself up as a first aid station full of nothing but healing spells. Each member of the party is self-reliant enough to keep muddling through the mire without strictly requiring medical backup unless things get nasty indeed.
Although this rules mechanic might be new (and a little harder to explain in-game) to D&D it's nothing new to RPGs in general. FASA's Earthdawn RPG is the first game title I know of which employs this logical construct, it even established the now-common "healing surge" and "wounding" terminology which was adopted into 4E and other games.
I admittedly did not play Earthdawn (although I have a couple of the books).
I have known my players to set their strategy up to the point where a Healing Surge would be overkill...and I suppose that is the fault of the (three) DM types in our group. Then the players receive this extra mechanic that lets them plow through content without actually needing a healer (as was evinced the time we ran through the system) in such a manner that attempting to properly utilize said mechanic comes off as an attempt to squish them like insects.
I am not saying that is what the designers intended. But I am saying that is what is happening, at least with the slick creativity that is the group I play with. They do awesomely well with Pathfinder, so I'll not worry about making a switch, at least not at this point. |
Edited by - Old Man Harpell on 09 Sep 2011 01:24:37 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 03:45:45
|
| I just can't say the Surge system is any worse than carrying a bag of wands ;) I think the original detractors of the edition change found a sore spot and jumped on it. It persists today. |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 03:47:12
|
| Bringing this scroll back onto topic. I think the OP's question is odd. I don't look at the Realms in terms of editions. It's been stuck in my head that the actual timeline takes precedence. 1480 DR exists and is indeed the Realms. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 04:01:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
I just can't say the Surge system is any worse than carrying a bag of wands ;) I think the original detractors of the edition change found a sore spot and jumped on it. It persists today.
Well, to be fair, I DID say I was a control freak. I can maintain some control over that bag of wands.  And I'm guessing that's it, to a large extent. Plus, I am truthful when I say it seems like a pen-and-paper version of World of Warcraft in the manner the mechanics play out. Probably just me, I realize. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 04:18:17
|
I'll happily suggest that if your players would view a healing surge as a bit of a redundant overkill then you simply need to damage them a little more.  |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 04:30:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Bringing this scroll back onto topic. I think the OP's question is odd. I don't look at the Realms in terms of editions. It's been stuck in my head that the actual timeline takes precedence. 1480 DR exists and is indeed the Realms.
I agree...but I would point out that what brought us up to the 1479 DR point does not feel like the Realms, in many respects.
In some places, like the Sword Coast, you pretty much can dismiss the differences as minor. Even the working-over that Neverwinter received has a plausible explanation and background. Name almost any feature north of Amn and west of the Dales, and it's still what we remember.
In my opinion, what happened in Halruaa, for example, is not 'Realms' in flavor. Nor was trashing the Vilhon. Or 'draining the Sea of Fallen Stars'. And I am sure other people have geographical gripes (in fact, I am sure of it).
I have mellowed my criticisms somewhat, but one thing that can never actually be fixed is the 100-year time jump. I would imagine that this, more than anything, is why folks like the OP asked the question to begin with.
A few years after my grandparents passed away, my family had the occasion to visit the farm in British Columbia they had lived in since my mother was a kid (until she left home, yadda yadda). I remember walking through the farmhouse then - all the utilities were shut off, there was no furniture, and the building was empty. Barren, desolate, and cold, if I may say so.
It was the building where I had accumulated a wealth of memories of happiness, security, and love amongst family over more than two decades, including many summers in residence, which I will always have. But it was no longer giving me those feelings - it was like walking through a crypt.
At the risk of sounding dramatic, that was the feeling I first had when cracking open the FRCG for the first time. This was not the Realms I knew and loved - it was similar to walking through that empty Canadian farmhouse.
Since then, I have been able to do with the Realms what I cannot with the places of my childhood - start fixing what I view as flawed and damaged, and outright avoiding what I cannot (i.e. I will never, ever have my campaign leave the Sword Coast, unless it is to visit the Moonshaes - which I can accept the changes of - or Returned Abeir).
My example is a bit less cheerful than Wooly's 'peanut butter and jelly', but no less applicable, I think.
Edit: Ayrik - don't think for a minute that I haven't been tempted to do just that.  |
Edited by - Old Man Harpell on 09 Sep 2011 04:38:30 |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 04:43:58
|
| Old Man Harpell, I didn't mean to infer I was speaking to your comments directly :) Sorry if it came off that way. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 09 Sep 2011 : 07:32:10
|
Nah, it's all good.  |
|
|
|
Razz
Senior Scribe
USA
749 Posts |
Posted - 11 Sep 2011 : 06:51:16
|
What I'm wanting to see is the lifting of NDA on what I call "dead lore". As in, Realms stuff everyone is pretty sure will never be covered and, thus, can't possibly break NDA.
A few examples; official Maztican lore, Kara-Tur, Lantan, Unther, Mulhorand, some deities, etc. I'd point out specifics but it's late and can't think of any at the moment.
Or a series of Dragon articles that detail something from "way back" (pre 4e) and then has snippets of what became of it currently (post-4e). |
|
|
|
Matt James
Forgotten Realms Game Designer
USA
918 Posts |
Posted - 12 Sep 2011 : 22:45:01
|
| Razz, that wouldn't work well at all in a business model. Though, I could see some very small treatments being drafted up that might cover it as teasers. The last sentence you put, however, is definitely possible. Keep your eyes peeled ;) |
|
|
|
Bakra
Senior Scribe
628 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2011 : 19:03:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Razz, that wouldn't work well at all in a business model. Though, I could see some very small treatments being drafted up that might cover it as teasers. The last sentence you put, however, is definitely possible. Keep your eyes peeled ;)
*coughs* October *coughs* |
I hope Candlekeep continues to be the friendly forum of fellow Realms-lovers that it has always been, as we all go through this together. If you don’t want to move to the “new” Realms, that doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with either you or the “old” Realms. Goodness knows Candlekeep, and the hearts of its scribes, are both big enough to accommodate both. If we want them to be.
(Strikes dramatic pose, raises sword to gleam in the sunset, and hopes breeches won’t fall down.)
Enough for now. The Realms lives! I have spoken! Ale and light wines half price, served by a smiling Storm Silverhand fetchingly clad in thigh-high boots and naught else! Ahem . .
So saith Ed. <snip>
love to all,
THO
|
|
|
|
Artemas Entreri
Great Reader
USA
3131 Posts |
Posted - 13 Sep 2011 : 22:07:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Bringing this scroll back onto topic. I think the OP's question is odd. I don't look at the Realms in terms of editions. It's been stuck in my head that the actual timeline takes precedence. 1480 DR exists and is indeed the Realms.
I agree 100% |
Some people have a way with words, and other people...oh, uh, not have way. -Steve Martin
Amazon "KindleUnlimited" Free Trial: http://amzn.to/2AJ4yD2
Try Audible and Get 2 Free Audio Books! https://amzn.to/2IgBede |
|
|
|
see
Learned Scribe
235 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 00:28:37
|
Are they the Realms? I'm not the one to say.
But the current-published Realms aren't my Realms. 3.5 material was already going far enough in directions I disliked I was questioning whether it was worth buying; 4th Edition stuff went even further away setting-wise while the new system mechanics were useless for me. |
|
|
|
Old Man Harpell
Senior Scribe
USA
495 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 00:49:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by see
Are they the Realms? I'm not the one to say.
But the current-published Realms aren't my Realms. 3.5 material was already going far enough in directions I disliked I was questioning whether it was worth buying; 4th Edition stuff went even further away setting-wise while the new system mechanics were useless for me.
They are 'the Realms' if you approach it from an official standpoint...Wizbro, in other words. And also in terms of Candlekeep - all editions are supported here, although you'd do worse than Wooly's 'PBJ' analogy, which is the best I've seen to describe how the Realms comes across.
And while I am currently using the 4th edition Realms (although not 4th Edition D&D), I am doing so with an eye towards 'fixing what Wizbro broke when they decided it needed fixing...when it wasn't broke to begin with'.
And I certainly understand the sentiment of 'it isn't my Realms' - it's Wizbro's interpretation of the Realms, which is realities apart from the Realms the rest of us would have chosen. But it's what we're stuck with, and now we have to fix it, and pester Wizbro to make the repairs they need to.
The NCS is a really good first step, and if we can keep quality stuff like that coming, maybe we can make it back into something resembling what was rather contemptuously yanked out from under us. |
|
|
|
Seethyr
Master of Realmslore
USA
1151 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 01:29:49
|
quote:
Originally posted by Old Man Harpell
The NCS is a really good first step, and if we can keep quality stuff like that coming, maybe we can make it back into something resembling what was rather contemptuously yanked out from under us.
I think it is such good news that the newest product seems to be well-liked. No matter what happens, I will always root for a "comeback" for my favorite setting (even though it never really went away). |
Follow the Maztica (Aztec/Maya) and Anchorome (Indigenous North America) Campaigns on DMsGuild!
The Maztica Campaign
The Anchorome Campaign |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 01:40:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bakra
quote:
Originally posted by Matt James
Razz, that wouldn't work well at all in a business model. Though, I could see some very small treatments being drafted up that might cover it as teasers. The last sentence you put, however, is definitely possible. Keep your eyes peeled ;)
*coughs* October *coughs*
What's coming in October? Something shiny?
|
Female, 40-year DM of a homebrew-evolved 1E Realms, including a few added tidbits of 2E and 3E lore; played originally in AD&D, then in Rolemaster. Be a DM for your kids and grandkids, gaming is excellent for families! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7974 Posts |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 15:56:00
|
quote:
Old Man Harpell
And while I am currently using the 4th edition Realms (although not 4th Edition D&D), I am doing so with an eye towards 'fixing what Wizbro broke when they decided it needed fixing...when it wasn't broke to begin with'.
I've actually done the opposite; having tried a few months of playing 4E rules/system in a decidedly non-4E Realms setting.
How did that work for you, btw? |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Are 4th Ed Realms still THE Realms?
