| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 17:56:55
|
By choice, I don't subscribe to DDI. I have a friend that does, however, and I sometimes go over and get a peek at the Realms-related material there. And honestly, every time I see an "update" of older material, I regret seeing it.
Finally got to see Dungeon #200, with the update on Skullport. And frankly, it's terrible. They've managed to suck all the cool things out of the old version of Skullport and make it incredibly bland. It even manages to take an interesting plot device, the Crown of Horns, and ruin it as well. It's even amusingly bad: the Crown has been Spellplagued. 
The map is lovely, though. Schley always does great map art. But the content gets a 2 out of 10. If you're going to revamp something, it should be equal to or better than the original.
|
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 19 Jun 2012 18:05:06
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3286 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 18:33:02
|
| Great another 4E FR suscks thread... |
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 18:56:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Great another 4E FR suscks thread...
While I'll agree that there are a lot of threads with negative commentary about the 4E Realms, I don't think it's fair to say that not liking an aspect of the 4E Realms is the same as bashing the entire setting.
Not liking the 4E Skullport is not the same as disliking everything 4E. I'm sure that even the most enthusiastic proponents of the 4E Realms could point to things they dislike about it. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 21:20:16
|
This post is a little bit my article reading philosophy (something I’m still working on) and a little bit my views/opinions on the Skullport article.
First, I can understand the expectation that anything updating ("revamp" isn’t exactly the right word) a part of the Realms to the current era should be as good as all that came before for that part of the Realms, but this article is of limited space and scope, whereas Skullport has had at least a hundred pages written about it in sourcebooks and novels.
For me it’s not reasonable to expect all of that to get condensed into one article that’s all of ten pages.
With ten pages you can at best get an overview. IMO the Skullport article is a good overview of what the place has become after a century of time has passed. The article is organized such that a DM has a pretty good idea at a glance what the PCs will see, encounter and (possibly) fight with.
Beyond that what I generally look for in an article is an entertaining read; the kind of read that’s one part story and one part information; something that communicates to DMs/Players and Realmslore enthusiasts equally. After one page I don’t want to feel like I’m reading dry text. I want to read something that keeps me hooked with mostly interesting/new/updated information.
In terms of the article text, it was too dry a read for me. The article does a good job of talking about what Skullport is after it picked up the pieces, but the story behind what befell Skullport and how it came to be what it is today doesn’t quite grab me. Also, the adventure hooks seemed too pedestrian; something applicable to Waterdeep proper and not dangerous, seedy Skullport. Where are the adventure hooks based on all the “outcast drow, plotting illithids, luckless merchants, spellscarred refugees, and the worst criminals of Waterdeep” that the article talks about?
If the article covers an area of the Realms for which I’m personally interested in the deep Realmslore of the area, does the article information flow naturally from what came before?
I’m not a Skullport enthusiast (that is, it’s not my first choice to set a campaign in), however I don’t feel like the article “ruined” anything Realmslore-wise. I’m curious to know why other scribes feel that way.
To me the best kind of articles are the ones that inspire me to expand on and write about the article contents, either for fan-fiction purposed or for my Realms game. If yes for either, I’m likely to be enthusiastic about future article content and sourcebooks covering the same area or parts of the Realms related to it.
The Skullport article didn’t inspire me to write material to post online or for my Realms game.
Like the OP, I really liked the map for this article (on page 6). It has that old-school feel to it and gives the perfect overhead view of Skullport. The artwork by Brian Valenzuela fits my view of Skullport too. I’d use that illustration in a game for sure.
Ultimately the Skullport article is serviceable and well organized. For people new to the Realms, this article is a good introduction to Skullport. Heck, if I ever play in Skullport, I’ll use the article. However it doesn’t do enough to excite me to choose what it has to offer first, over other post-Spellplague articles written for the Realms.
For another set of reviews responses, see the WotC forum page dedicated to the article HERE. The contrast is…interesting.  |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 19 Jun 2012 22:45:45 |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 22:37:13
|
There just wasn't enough room to detail Skullport out properly. It was a decent article, but I found it lacking in things like mindflayers, drow, duergar, Calishite slavers etc and all the old stuff that made the 2E Skullport book really good. What about the Promenade? I'd like to know what happened to the various factional presences in the city myself, perhaps we'll eventually see this. A series of Greenwood Skullport articles would be slick. Not sure I like what happened to the The Eye and honestly, I thought of Misker the Pirate Tyrant when I was reading the description for it. I was under the impression the Skulls had been destroyed, along with the mantle in Skullport.
All in all, it was a good base to start with, but we need moar! :) |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 23:52:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
What did they do to the Crown of Horns?
It was found before the Spellplague, then when the Spellplague ravaged Skullport it essentially warped the Crown and its wearer into a monster.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 19 Jun 2012 : 23:57:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Great another 4E FR suscks thread...
Although I titled the thread "Skullport in 4E" and went on to say that they took out all of the things that made Skullport cool - and warped a really cool thing (the Crown) into boredom, this isn't "4E hate".
Unless you're saying that ANY negative review of anything in 4E is now some sort of crime against the setting...
Grow up, 18Delta. I realize your fanboyism will knee-jerk against anything negative, but this isn't simple 4E hate.
|
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! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
|
|
Brimstone
Great Reader
USA
3286 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 01:30:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Great another 4E FR suscks thread...
Although I titled the thread "Skullport in 4E" and went on to say that they took out all of the things that made Skullport cool - and warped a really cool thing (the Crown) into boredom, this isn't "4E hate".
Unless you're saying that ANY negative review of anything in 4E is now some sort of crime against the setting...
Grow up, 18Delta. I realize your fanboyism will knee-jerk against anything negative, but this isn't simple 4E hate.
|
"These things also I have observed: that knowledge of our world is
to be nurtured like a precious flower, for it is the most precious
thing we have. Wherefore guard the word written and heed
words unwritten and set them down ere they fade . . . Learn
then, well, the arts of reading, writing, and listening true, and they
will lead you to the greatest art of all: understanding."
Alaundo of Candlekeep |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 03:50:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Great another 4E FR suscks thread...
Although I titled the thread "Skullport in 4E" and went on to say that they took out all of the things that made Skullport cool - and warped a really cool thing (the Crown) into boredom, this isn't "4E hate".
Unless you're saying that ANY negative review of anything in 4E is now some sort of crime against the setting...
I do think a distinction should be drawn between the more useful review of "this article doesn't appeal to me and here's why" vs. the purely negative condemnation "this article just sucks; it took out all the cool things (which I won't actually list)." The OP sounds a little more like the latter.
The thread prompts the question "what is your purpose in posting this review?" Is it to do an analysis of the article, or is it to express your discontent with the piece?
Generally speaking, saying a 4e article is "good" or "bad" is a pretty empty sentiment. Discussing specifics is the only way to have a meaningful discussion that doesn't get your review dismissed as "4e fanboyism" or "4e hate."
In this case, here are some questions for discussion:
1) What are these things you mention that made earlier Skullport cool (in your estimation) that have been "sucked out"?
Obviously, the old Skullport has stuff not mentioned in the (10-page*) article, but what is specifically listed as "sucked out" or "removed"?
*It's also admittedly extremely difficult to write a 10 page article that "equals or improves on" the 200ish pages already written about Skullport. If anything, this article can be seen as a "addition" to the lore about Skullport, not an attempt to rewrite or revamp it. The place is basically an entire adventure site and requires its own sourcebook to detail the way you seem to want it detailed.
2) How is it boring to you that the wearer of the Crown is spellplagued into a monster?
To me, that sounds like a cool concept, not a boring one. The crown sort of already turns its wearers into monsters just from Myrkul's influence--this just puts an additional complication on it. Is Myrkul trapped inside the warped Crown? Has it affected his essence? Etc.
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" |
|
|
|
Eilserus
Master of Realmslore
USA
1446 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 04:10:00
|
| 5E should make the bearer of the Crown of Horns travel the Realms to various holy sites to Myrkul collecting relics and other doo-dads so we can have him back as a god. :) |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 04:50:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
5E should make the bearer of the Crown of Horns travel the Realms to various holy sites to Myrkul collecting relics and other doo-dads so we can have him back as a god. :)
That was already done with Xvim, before Bane's rebirth (or, as I believe, before Xvim took Daddy's identity for himself). |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 05:11:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
5E should make the bearer of the Crown of Horns travel the Realms to various holy sites to Myrkul collecting relics and other doo-dads so we can have him back as a god. :)
This is assuming, of course, that Myrkul wants to be a proper god again.
From past and prior lore, we know the Crown of Horns Myrkul is quite happy remaining in the artifact. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 06:04:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brimstone
Great another 4E FR sucks thread...
That was pretty much my take too.
I'm sorry you were made to suffer for your first response in the thread.  I hope it doesn't happen again. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Therise
Master of Realmslore
1272 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 06:15:19
|
I had a nice, point-by-point response to Erik's post in the works.
But now? Just forget it. Delete the thread. |
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! |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 06:42:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
Delete the thread.
Why?
I for one would like to hear what others who've read the article have to say about it.
That includes you. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 20 Jun 2012 : 18:32:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Therise
I had a nice, point-by-point response to Erik's post in the works.
But now? Just forget it. Delete the thread.
Did you want to send it to me? I'd definitely be interested to read it.
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" |
|
|
|
Tarlyn
Learned Scribe
USA
315 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2012 : 01:34:56
|
I haven't read the article, but the crown of thorns had a lot of possibilities making it into a monster really reduces its uses in my opinion. In general, I am not a fan of taking a great plot hook away and not replacing it with anything. For instance, the fate of Sammaster from the 2ed cult of the dragon supplement was left up to the DM and different DMs could play with it in different ways. Ed actually provides several ideas to give inspiration. The Year of Rogue Dragons series takes that tool away and to the best of my understanding doesn't provide a new interesting tool. To me it sounds like this article provides a monster for level X adventurers to kill, which is a lot more limiting then the possibilities available with the original crown of thorns.
-PC could get it
-This could focus on PCs needing to remove it
-Could also focus on PCs needing to work with the crown
-Campaign Villain could have it
-An ally could have acquired it and a large crunk of the campaign could revolve around saving an old friend from corruption.
-Demons or devils could use it to try and ascend to godhood
-Crazy cult formed around the item dedicated to reviving Mrykul
The above is not an extensive list, it is just what jumps to mind without reading the information about the item again.
Furthermore, it was an item that is known throughout the editions that Realms fans have a common understanding of what it was similar to Vecna's Hand and Eye for standard D&D / Greyhawk. |
Tarlyn Embersun |
Edited by - Tarlyn on 21 Jun 2012 01:38:08 |
|
|
|
Eltheron
Senior Scribe
740 Posts |
Posted - 21 Jun 2012 : 01:49:02
|
| I've read it, and the whole backdrop is pretty dull. WRT the crown of horns, it's fused into the flesh of a feral monster that basically lives as a bottom-feeder. It's taunted by Myrkul's voice, but how does it really make sense to taunt a mindless thing? Seemed to me like it was just a hand-off article written without much thought put in. The new factions aren't interesting really, and the sense of underworld danger is absent. YMMV. |
"The very best possible post-fourteenth-century Realms lets down those who love the specific, detailed social, political and magical situation, with its thousands of characters, developed over forty years, and want to learn more about it; and those who'd be open to a new one with equal depth, which there just isn't time to re-produce; and those repelled, some past the point of no return, by the bad-taste-and-plausibility gap of things done to the world when its guardianship was less careful."
--Faraer |
|
|
|
Thrasymachus
Learned Scribe
195 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2012 : 11:55:23
|
I also don’t subscribe to DDI. It took me a bit to get access to #200. A bag M&M’s to be exact.
We’re just going to take TSR 11348 – Skullport. This is what we got in that product.
Power Groups: 19 different ones
Areas: Mmmm-mm-mmmm Here we go…
Lower Level: comprised of the Sargauth, and Skull Island. Skull Island has 12 detailed areas
Lower Port: detailing 38 buildings
Lower trade Lanes: Another 14 areas
Lower Heart: 23 Areas
Central Level: Which is divided into Central Port, Central Trade Lanes, Central Heart and details 43 areas.
Upper Level: comprised of Upper Trade Lanes and Upper Heart and we get 10 areas
Total - About 140 detailed areas.
Rogues Gallery: details 44 NPC’s
Crown of Horns: detail consisting of 1014 Words
Now here’s Dungeon #200 Magazine
5 Power Groups
9 Locations
5 NPC’s
Dungeon #200’s Crown of Horns = “It’s a monsta now. CyaBye”.
I read Therise’s review first, and I went into reading the article kinda sad. I was going to give this another shot. I really want to believe in 4E, and Santa Claus. I was sad because I expected that I was going to be part of the “4E Good – 2E Bad” Pile on, and tell Therise she’s wrong, and she’s a meanie to boot.
But dang it, Therise is right. The article is lame. The Crown of Horns explanation is boring, and I think Therise was being kind. The “It’s not me. It’s the object” has been done dozens of times. I’ll refer anyone not familiar with this to a trilogy called Lord of the Rings by J.R.R Tolkien. I’ll leave it at that because as cranky as I am getting writing this, I don’t want to be Wooly’s problem child of the week.
As a DM I can’t use Dungeon #200. A player who knows Skullport is going to have about 219 questions, and I am not going to pull string from my side and chant “Uhm, Spellplague” over and over as way of an explanation. There is nowhere near the detail needed to make this area useable. The flavorful details have been sucked out.
As entertainment to read for giggles… it’s okay. I am glad I didn’t buy it. And by the way, the guy who did buy it (and allowed me to read it) doesn’t know why he’s still subscribing. “They keep charging my credit card” He kind of laughed, but it was not a healthy thing.
Now it can be said it’s a 10-page article. It’s not supposed to compete with TSR 11348 – Skullport. And my response to that is if Wizards isn’t going to do it right, don’t do it at all. Spend the 10 pages on something other than the equivalent of a drive by shooting. Or (spoiler - crazy thought coming) sell me an updated TSR 11348 – Skullport product. Or release it in Dungeon over 5 issues, or however many is needed to do it justice. Please give me a reason to subscribe to DDI.
I am going to preempt the expected “it’s an opportunity to Make the Realms your Own”. That’s not pee. It’s champagne.
If I have to go through the trouble to detail all these areas myself what do I need Wizards latest round peg in a square hole version for?
The map is really good though. |
Former Forgotten Realms brand manager Jim Butler: "Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon". |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2012 : 14:30:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
I also don’t subscribe to DDI. It took me a bit to get access to #200. A bag M&M’s to be exact.
I should've stopped reading here, but I'll give anyone the benefit of the doubt.
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
I read Therise’s review first, and I went into reading the article kinda sad. I was going to give this another shot. I really want to believe in 4E, and Santa Claus. I was sad because I expected that I was going to be part of the “4E Good – 2E Bad” Pile on, and tell Therise she’s wrong, and she’s a meanie to boot.
But dang it, Therise is right. The article is lame. The Crown of Horns explanation is boring, and I think Therise was being kind. The “It’s not me. It’s the object” has been done dozens of times. I’ll refer anyone not familiar with this to a trilogy called Lord of the Rings by J.R.R Tolkien. I’ll leave it at that because as cranky as I am getting writing this, I don’t want to be Wooly’s problem child of the week.
Right, the good thing about Opinions are that they're all different. The article wasn't interesting to you, that's a bummer. For others, myself included, I thought it was a pretty decent article and possibly an area I'll have my players traverse through. Also, I like the Crown of Horns description and the whole "it's not me, it's the object" thing is basically what it's been for.....well forever. I don't see the problem here.
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
As a DM I can’t use Dungeon #200. A player who knows Skullport is going to have about 219 questions, and I am not going to pull string from my side and chant “Uhm, Spellplague” over and over as way of an explanation. There is nowhere near the detail needed to make this area useable. The flavorful details have been sucked out.
It's a shame when a DM claims they can't utilize any of this information. I just don't know what to say other than "you obviously don't like Skullport". As for the detail, lets RE: IT'S A DRAGON ARTICLE. There are word counts and word limits. It's about as big as something found in an actual, physical magazine.
quote:
Originally posted by Thrasymachus
Now it can be said it’s a 10-page article. It’s not supposed to compete with TSR 11348 – Skullport. And my response to that is if Wizards isn’t going to do it right, don’t do it at all. Spend the 10 pages on something other than the equivalent of a drive by shooting. Or (spoiler - crazy thought coming) sell me an updated TSR 11348 – Skullport product. Or release it in Dungeon over 5 issues, or however many is needed to do it justice. Please give me a reason to subscribe to DDI.
Yea, because if it's not a full 180 page supplemental book then it shouldn't be printed for the Forgotten Realms . Seriously? Frankly the fact that they gave Skullport 10 full pages (well 9 with the map) is quite suprising. Espically when their whole idea of DDI was to be the main vehicle for setting material and NOT supplemental books. But you know what the best part is? You don't have to use any of that stuff NOR did you pay for it! So I guess that's a double win for you eh? |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2012 : 16:05:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It's a shame when a DM claims they can't utilize any of this information. I just don't know what to say other than "you obviously don't like Skullport". As for the detail, lets RE: IT'S A DRAGON ARTICLE. There are word counts and word limits. It's about as big as something found in an actual, physical magazine.
I really don't think it's fair to say that if someone can't use info for an area, then they don't like that area. Each of us is different, and what we look for in our source material will differ from person to person.
Each campaign is different, and every DM and PC group is different. Let's not be dismissive of the opinions of others simply because we disagree.
Also, I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation for material in an article to be useful. I've found use in 2 page articles before. Article length shouldn't dictate whether or not there is use in it. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 24 Aug 2012 16:08:15 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4429 Posts |
Posted - 24 Aug 2012 : 17:24:43
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I really don't think it's fair to say that if someone can't use info for an area, then they don't like that area. Each of us is different, and what we look for in our source material will differ from person to person.
Each campaign is different, and every DM and PC group is different. Let's not be dismissive of the opinions of others simply because we disagree.
To look at 10 pages of lore and not find one single thing that sparks imagination or an idea for a campaign or even character backgrounds is a bit remarkable. I can find outdated information in 2E sourcebooks for my 4E games usable, I can find non-Realms/CORE D&D material useful in my games, I can find inspiration just about any D&D-related source stuff out there and even non-D&D related stuff too. But fair enough, I can agree to disagree at this point. All of this is subjective anyways.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
Also, I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation for material in an article to be useful. I've found use in 2 page articles before. Article length shouldn't dictate whether or not there is use in it.
Again, "useful" is subjective. I too have found useful stuff in 1-2 page articles and in 10-15 page articles and in novels and books. But Thrasymachus problem seemed to be that Skullport was too big a region in the Realms, with too much lore and too much going on to fit into a 10-page article. So if they can't devote 100 pages or more (like a supplement) then they shoudln't do it at all, which I find asinine. I have a feeling that if the articles was 25 pages long there still wouldn't be satisfaction because it changes from the 2E/3E lore on Skullport.
|
|
|
|
The Sage
Procrastinator Most High
Australia
31701 Posts |
Posted - 25 Aug 2012 : 01:58:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
To look at 10 pages of lore and not find one single thing that sparks imagination or an idea for a campaign or even character backgrounds is a bit remarkable. I can find outdated information in 2E sourcebooks for my 4E games usable, I can find non-Realms/CORE D&D material useful in my games, I can find inspiration just about any D&D-related source stuff out there and even non-D&D related stuff too. But fair enough, I can agree to disagree at this point. All of this is subjective anyways.
I'm glad you've noted that this is indeed subjective, because I found those 10 pages to be quite remarkable in terms of presenting some new ideas for any possible campaigns I might one day establish for Skullport -- whether pre- or post-4e Realms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium -- Volume IX now available (Oct 2007)
"So Saith Ed" -- the collected Candlekeep replies of Ed Greenwood
Zhoth'ilam Folio -- The Electronic Misadventures of a Rambling Sage |
|
|
|
Thrasymachus
Learned Scribe
195 Posts |
Posted - 25 Aug 2012 : 02:13:31
|
I am not looking for inspiration. I have got that covered. In regards to the article, other than a paragraph closing of suggested plot hooks, this product doesn’t appear to intend to be inspirational.
It’s written like a sourcebook. It even uses a similar format to the TSR 11348 – Skullport product.
The problem is that in doing the article in that style highlights that it’s incomplete. If the Skullport is the Mona Lisa, this article updates her left eye, upper lip, and a nostril and excludes everything else. If you want to hang that on your wall, go ahead. For myself who runs a campaign where the players make a left at Misker’s warehouse, and race to the Promenade while being pursued and they want to make use of their knowledge of everything in between to ensure their escape; this product is unusable for me.
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
It's a shame when a DM claims they can't utilize any of this information. I just don't know what to say other than "you obviously don't like Skullport".
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
Again, "useful" is subjective. I too have found useful stuff in 1-2 page articles and in 10-15 page articles and in novels and books. But Thrasymachus problem seemed to be that Skullport was too big a region in the Realms, with too much lore and too much going on to fit into a 10-page article. So if they can't devote 100 pages or more (like a supplement) then they shouldn’t do it at all, which I find asinine. I have a feeling that if the articles was 25 pages long there still wouldn't be satisfaction because it changes from the 2E/3E lore on Skullport.
Funny you should flaunt the word asinine. I don’t believe we have to post a DM resume to post an opinion, but I’ll cut off the ridiculous presumptions at the knees.
My D&D campaigns (PnP, and otherwise) have always been the centered on the Waterdeep, Undermoutain, Skullport areas with weekend getaways to Daggerford for about 20 years. One of the main reasons is the amount of detail, previously supported by over a dozen products to these areas. It’s the reason I can actually make the comparisons, and point out what IMHO are the deficiencies in the latest product.
There’s a lot of presumption here even though I clearly posted what I would would like to see for a product I would buy. Throw around words like “seemed: and “have a feeling” regarding what I believe when I clearly state it. Maybe rereading the posts of what was stated and working with that.
“…sell me an updated TSR 11348 – Skullport product. Or release it in Dungeon over 5 issues, or however many is needed to do it justice. Please give me a reason to subscribe to DDI.”
There’s no need to presume how to make the article satisfactory to my humble opinion. IMHO, just complete the rest of the areas, power groups, and NPC’s. The other foolish (or dare I say asinine) presumption is that any advancement from previous lore is the problem. While the problem IMHO is that there are obviously advances, we don’t know what 80% or them are.
Sidenote: There seems to be an ongoing theme throughout this forum that anything other than a complete buy in of 4E means the scribe is a kind of insurrectionist. I can enjoy RLB’s Brotherhood of the Griffon (4E), and still lament other products, marketing strategies, and concepts that IMHO fall short by varying degrees.
Or can I?
I haven’t seen a update to the forum rules requiring we bow in the general direction of 4E every time we post something that isn’t an absolutely glowing review of the latest product. I am grateful for the opportunity to banter back and forth with fellow scribes, game designers, and authors. I don’t believe that the pros that frequent this forum are here to lap up boosts to their egos. I believe that if the Pros discover a product idea that would be universally loved the Pros will be all too happy to sell it to us. While I find the Dungeon article deficient if there were about 5 more articles that completed the Skullport area I would have subscription to DDI. And that’s why I bother to post the review.
For example there are scribes who have related that they don’t care for product that resembles an encyclopedia. I on the other hand would be ecstatic for such a product. And to the case and point regarding this particular product for me, it’s incomplete for the I-love-encyclopedia types, and still to dry for the other faction.
So it’s another case of let’s try to please everyone, and Wizards will be stunned by it not even satisfying a majority. Read the reviews prior to mine, and there is no instance of 5 stars, or 4, or even three, except that map which most cited as really good.
Your Mileage will vary.
There was a time I would just buy anything that had the Forgotten Realms logo. And in the 4E advancement I now pick and choose. Sue me. I would like to see the game settings products get back to the qualities I enjoyed. Hopefully that won’t be at the expense of another scribe, but I am pretty sure it would be. And my opinion of what makes that quality is one you don’t have to share even if it’s at my expense. I vote with my credit card, and so does everyone else.
|
Former Forgotten Realms brand manager Jim Butler: "Everything that bears the Forgotten Realms logo is considered canon". |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
The "new" Skullport in 4E
