| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Jorkens
Great Reader
Norway
2950 Posts |
 Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 15:38:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
[I have run 4e for the game store pretty extensively. I still frankly think it added nothing better to the game. 4e realms only subtracted from the good of the realms, it added nothing positive.
I might give you that warlord was the best contribution 4e gave to d&d but that alone is not worth what 4e's legacy will truly be: a mistake that fractured the fan base.
Ultimately it will be remembered for fracturing and arbitrary changes.
The same claim has been made against every version of the game since Gygax. I could say the same for 3rd. and s 1st ed. fan will often say the same about 2nd. The idea that there is some sort of unified 1-3 ed. that was bastardized with the advent of 4ed. is not as clear as some people want it to be. |
No Canon, more stories, more Realms. |
 |
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 16:52:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
[I have run 4e for the game store pretty extensively. I still frankly think it added nothing better to the game. 4e realms only subtracted from the good of the realms, it added nothing positive.
I might give you that warlord was the best contribution 4e gave to d&d but that alone is not worth what 4e's legacy will truly be: a mistake that fractured the fan base.
Ultimately it will be remembered for fracturing and arbitrary changes.
The same claim has been made against every version of the game since Gygax. I could say the same for 3rd. and s 1st ed. fan will often say the same about 2nd. The idea that there is some sort of unified 1-3 ed. that was bastardized with the advent of 4ed. is not as clear as some people want it to be.
I never claimed a UNIFIED edition AD&D to 3rd, but it followed a logical organic progression. 3rd edition even brought back some of the popular 1st edition options that were ditched with 2nd edition.
THe public design philosophy of 4e, which was to break all of the sacred cows, makes it a pretty clear outlier from the progression of the previous editions. There is clear publci evidence they wanted to make it different from the original progression. When people asked how to convert their campaigns the WOTC response, was don't convert them, it is best to start new. AD&D was my favorite followed by 3rd edition. Though 3rd edition was vastly different and similar to 4e, I can identifiy the AD&D elements in 3rd edition. I cannot do that with 4e.
I convert many products of AD&D to 3rd edition, and it is easy. That conversion is not easy or intuitive when converting AD&D to 4e. 4e's rules system does not follow from the ones before.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
Edited by - Mournblade on 23 Feb 2014 16:55:45 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 17:12:20
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
[I have run 4e for the game store pretty extensively. I still frankly think it added nothing better to the game. 4e realms only subtracted from the good of the realms, it added nothing positive.
I might give you that warlord was the best contribution 4e gave to d&d but that alone is not worth what 4e's legacy will truly be: a mistake that fractured the fan base.
Ultimately it will be remembered for fracturing and arbitrary changes.
The same claim has been made against every version of the game since Gygax. I could say the same for 3rd. and s 1st ed. fan will often say the same about 2nd. The idea that there is some sort of unified 1-3 ed. that was bastardized with the advent of 4ed. is not as clear as some people want it to be.
The transition from 3E to 4E was the only one that saw another company pick up the old ruleset and then use it to outsell the publisher of D&D. If nothing else, that right there indicates a very fractured fanbase. |
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!  |
|
|
|
GMWestermeyer
Learned Scribe
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 17:15:31
|
I am sorry to stir the crap back up. The fact is, I'm not much of a Realms fan anymore. I drift over here on occassion when i get in the mood to enjoy the Realms again... and my ongoing campaigns include a game set in the Realms still. For those who may remember, Mercs, the Black Guard PBEM game is still going. The Guard is currently defending the town of Nagarr from a Mintaran army in Marpenoth 1369.
But, like all my RPG campaigns, it's been stalled for a couple years. Work and family issues did most of the damage, and now that my son is older he has expressed more interest in miniature warfare, HALO, 40k, and we both play Flames of War every Friday.
When I do get interested in AD&D I tend to be more excited by the old 1e & 2e material, Greyhawk, and Spelljammer rather then the Realms. I want to read the Realms novels I loved, those by Grubb & Novak, or Elaine Cunningham, and that's what inspired me to return and ask some questions.
Anyway, I am sorry, once again. If you love the current Realms enjoy - Just ignore this ole grognard. :)
|
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true."
Homer Simpson, _The Simspons_ |
|
|
|
sfdragon
Great Reader
2285 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 18:03:46
|
| trust us, a good deal of us don't...... |
why is being a wizard like being a drow? both are likely to find a dagger in the back from a rival or one looking to further his own goals, fame and power
My FR fan fiction
Magister's GAmbit
http://steelfiredragon.deviantart.com/gallery/33539234 |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 19:42:17
|
Hindsight is a funny thing. Those we villainize today may be tomorrow's heroes.
The Senate murdered Caesar, but he was a tyrant. By destroying the 'heart of Rome', they liberated it.
I am sure some of you may understand what I am getting at. What positive thing did 4e do for us? Well, Hasbro no longer controls the biggest piece of the P&P RPG industry, and thats kind of major. Had they not completely pissed-off most of the fanbase, they may have gone on controlling (and steering) RPGs for some time, and what might 5e (or 6e, or even 8e) looked like then? A tactical miniatures game - a toy poising as a game - like their Heroscape?
Had they taken the slow and steady approach, and continually 'dumbed down' the rules (and lore) as time went on, we would have eventually found ourselves with no decent alternatives to turn to. P&P-RPGs would have been dead, for all intents and purposes. So Villainize who you want, but those designers we keep mocking - they set us free. Paizo wouldn't have the lion's share right now had they NOT alienated most of us.
Or in other words, "the king is dead! Long live the King!"  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 23 Feb 2014 19:45:12 |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 20:13:10
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
A world might change in its fanbase and form, but to proclaim it dead when official writing stops is pure nonsense, as is the idea that the number of fans is the only way of grading its health.
Hardly.
If the Realms goes the way of the settings you've described, it dies.
Yes, there will be old fans that would still support it. I know I’d keep collecting Realmslore for Loremaster.org until I ran out of source material.
There might even by those who learn about the Realms from fansites that pop up to support the setting should its time with WotC end.
But there will be no more published support. No more financial backbone or means to reach as many new gamers and readers as possible.
No more novels, adventures, etc., written by professionals for the gaming audience. No more continuation of the setting.
Which is to say I see your point, but it only goes so far.
The reason the Realms was sold to TSR was to get it into as many hands as possible. And to have many hands working on it. Mothballing the setting would curtail that activity considerably.
Watching the Realms "retire" would be a terrible thing. For a lot of gamers and fans of the setting, that would be the end of the setting.
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
The idea that there is some sort of unified 1-3 ed. that was bastardized with the advent of 4ed. is not as clear as some people want it to be.
QFT.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No one said you have to like every single thing to prefer to stick with canon. You could ignore the Rage of Dragons, for example, without it having an effect on your 3E Realms.
Except that you’re not “follow(ing) developments as they happen,” as you put it earlier.
If you’re running a canon game, you can’t ignore canon events unless those events don’t intersect with where your players are located. (If they’re in a city or town that the Rage passed by, for example.)
Diffan’s point about sticking to an era one already prefers is sound, because there is a lot of historical information for the 1E-3E period. Start early and let history take its course while you pin campaign events on it. Easy.
DMs just don’t have to worry about what’s going on in the post-Spellplauge era when they already have so much from an earlier era to work with. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 20:29:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Jorkens
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
[I have run 4e for the game store pretty extensively. I still frankly think it added nothing better to the game. 4e realms only subtracted from the good of the realms, it added nothing positive.
I might give you that warlord was the best contribution 4e gave to d&d but that alone is not worth what 4e's legacy will truly be: a mistake that fractured the fan base.
Ultimately it will be remembered for fracturing and arbitrary changes.
The same claim has been made against every version of the game since Gygax. I could say the same for 3rd. and s 1st ed. fan will often say the same about 2nd. The idea that there is some sort of unified 1-3 ed. that was bastardized with the advent of 4ed. is not as clear as some people want it to be.
The transition from 3E to 4E was the only one that saw another company pick up the old ruleset and then use it to outsell the publisher of D&D. If nothing else, that right there indicates a very fractured fanbase.
It should be noted that the publisher of D&D started to fall when they themselves fractured the (at the time) fan base with a release of a "new" design change and system overhaul in an attempt to reach previous edition players. This was called Essentials. Some liked it. Others, I dare say a majority of 4E players, didn't. Especially when the news came out that pre-Essential products wouldn't be supported anymore though supplements and DDI information. This (again, IMO) majority of players stopped purchasing any and all content after it's release because they felt the designers were back-peddling on their game and not producing the stuff that continued to make the the #1 best seller up to that point. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 22:34:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
No one said you have to like every single thing to prefer to stick with canon. You could ignore the Rage of Dragons, for example, without it having an effect on your 3E Realms.
Except that you’re not “follow(ing) developments as they happen,” as you put it earlier.
If you’re running a canon game, you can’t ignore canon events unless those events don’t intersect with where your players are located. (If they’re in a city or town that the Rage passed by, for example.)
Diffan’s point about sticking to an era one already prefers is sound, because there is a lot of historical information for the 1E-3E period. Start early and let history take its course while you pin campaign events on it. Easy.
DMs just don’t have to worry about what’s going on in the post-Spellplauge era when they already have so much from an earlier era to work with.
I didn't say that people that prefer to stick with canon would use 100% of it. But the point remains that if you prefer to play in a supported setting, sticking somewhat closely to the canon version, then you are SOL if you don't like the latest edition. People don't choose to play in a published setting so that they can make up everything that happens themselves, and that's what they have to do with this "just do the era you like" attitude.
And as I say, the advice to play in the preferred era, even if it's not supported, comes across as "I got what I want. If you don't, that's tough." |
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! |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2390 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 23:10:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding (see "redundant creature" template ), but if you ignore the obviously loonie parts, a lot of materials are okay, a few are even good.
Look you guys I know you did not like 4e but that whole issue is moot now. To continuously rant on about it is unseemly as is your denigrating of the authors who worked on it.
A setting that does not grow and evolve will soon enough perish. [...]If you are willing to look at it objectively then I am sure you will be able to find at least a few things you like about 4e.
I have 3 problems with this:
1) Copypasting the stuff written by others is not "working" - except for a wikipedian or something.
2) Dropping fertilizer on top of something does not, in itself, make it grow. Sometimes it just buries viable things under a thick layer of dung.
3) Objectively, the existence of creatures who prefer to eat dung does not automatically make it a valid upgrade to the cake.
I won't elucidate my point further, given that you evidently are thinking on the level of "like/don't like" and call agreeable with you "objectively". 
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Or in other words, "the king is dead! Long live the King!"
Or without euphemisms - "you killed it, you bought it"? Except, as Wooly Rupert already pointed out, this doesn't seem to actually work. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 23:24:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I didn't say that people that prefer to stick with canon would use 100% of it.
I know you didn't. It's just that when the phrase "stick with canon" or something similar is used, it means just what it says: following canon to the letter.
It just seems counterintuitive to me to say, "follow canon" and then say, "but you don't have to if you don't want to."
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
But the point remains that if you prefer to play in a supported setting, sticking somewhat closely to the canon version, then you are SOL if you don't like the latest edition.
It really should be "supported era" and not "supported setting."
That aside, if your play style is to "ride the wave" of time as it advances in a setting, playing a somewhat canon game that relies on each novel and sourcebook to give you the events that you can sample for your campaign, then yes you're out of luck.
But that in no way means a given era is now useless.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
People don't choose to play in a published setting so that they can make up everything that happens themselves,
With all due respect, your claim is 100% not true.
People do it. All the time.
I know DMs that have done this and have played in more than one D&D game set in the Realms, where that fact of the setting took an extreme back seat to what the DM had in mind.
Likewise, DMs who like Cormyr--like me, for example--will use Cormyr as a framework, but then build whole adventures and campaign arcs around it of their own devising...as well as borrowing from Dungeon magazine, 3rd party products, you name it, for inspiration and ideas.
Never mind the DMs who like a particular slice of an era and game there over and over and over--including those that borrow liberally from current Realms era material in order to play in older eras.
The Realms is a framework for helping DMs to unleash their creativity. It's absolutely not a fully realized world where all DMs must take their cues from and use only the setting's products, as though those products give a DM everything he or she needs to fully run a game.
That, and campaigns are personal expressions of a DM's (and to a lesser extent his or her player's) creativity. Campaigns--especially Realms campaigns--work best when the DM really invests of him or herself into the campaign.
The setting is second to the DM. It always will be.
Your logic seems to be that if new materials aren't being released for a given era then DMs must be at a total loss for what to do because their campaigns aren't being supported.
The point I (and I think, Diffan) am trying to make is that when you have 20+ years of products for a given era, it does not follow that there is some lack of material.
DMs can quite easily progress from the OGB onwards and play for years of real time, if not decades, before getting anywhere near the last few pages in Grand History of the Realms.
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
And as I say, the advice to play in the preferred era, even if it's not supported, comes across as "I got what I want. If you don't, that's tough."
Oddly enough, the advice simply recognizes that things are what they are. If you like having fun, then knuckle down and make the most of it.
There's simply no good reason to stop enjoying older eras simply because shiny new toys aren't being made for it. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
Edited by - Jeremy Grenemyer on 23 Feb 2014 23:28:21 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 00:16:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Thauranil
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding (see "redundant creature" template ), but if you ignore the obviously loonie parts, a lot of materials are okay, a few are even good.
Look you guys I know you did not like 4e but that whole issue is moot now. To continuously rant on about it is unseemly as is your denigrating of the authors who worked on it.
A setting that does not grow and evolve will soon enough perish. [...]If you are willing to look at it objectively then I am sure you will be able to find at least a few things you like about 4e.
I have 3 problems with this:
1) Copypasting the stuff written by others is not "working" - except for a wikipedian or something.
You mean like the plethora of 3E books that just re-told us all the same stuff that was in previous books? Great example: Waterdeep: City of Splendors supplement. NOTHING in that book was overly surprising or even really all that unique. It was rehashed material that most people already knew.
Now, please point out to me the specifics of where part of 4E were "Copy-pasting".
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
2) Dropping fertilizer on top of something does not, in itself, make it grow. Sometimes it just buries viable things under a thick layer of dung.
The fact that you equate the transitions from pre-4E to 4E "dung" says it all. Should I be taking anything else you say from here on out with anything more than a grain of salt?
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
3) Objectively, the existence of creatures who prefer to eat dung does not automatically make it a valid upgrade to the cake.
I won't elucidate my point further, given that you evidently are thinking on the level of "like/don't like" and call agreeable with you "objectively".
Except that there are those who instantly recognize the changes as the "CAKE" and previous aspects of the whole "dung".
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Or in other words, "the king is dead! Long live the King!"
Or without euphemisms - "you killed it, you bought it"? Except, as Wooly Rupert already pointed out, this doesn't seem to actually work.
Or you could, ya know, just continue to keep using what you've always been using. I'm fairly certain that no one at WotC took your AD&D books away or forced your campaigns to adhere to the Spellplague. Does it stink that you don't enjoy the changes? Sure. Do you have THOUSANDS of pages of material to work from at that point? Yes. There are those of us who've quite enjoyed the post-Spellplague era, the 4E mechanics, and the overall tone of the setting. We've only had, what?...5 years of material to go on and now that's mostly gone. So sorry if I'm not considering your dilemma with anything other than a cold shoulder, there's a lot of information, detail, and lore that was just straight out not even explained in the last 5 years that are being abandoned. |
Edited by - Diffan on 24 Feb 2014 01:35:58 |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 00:45:03
|
I think people tend to overanalyse and miss the point by a wide margin. What the "complaining" us people who like some iteration of the Realms better than other boils down to is just the following:
"WotC people, if you don't make products that I like, I won't buy them."
No one (alright, not most people) is saying "Hey, you ruined the Realms! I want all the money I spent on it back, and my time too, plus damages!" We're all totally fine with using the stuff we like and disregarding what we don't - and that's precisely the point. We're going to disregard it if we don't like it, and that doesn't make WotC any money. That works for people who like OD&D, AD&D, 3rd Ed., 4th Ed., a mix of them all, people who use GURPS to play in Faerûn, people who are only interested in Realmslore, people who buy novels but don't care about the overall setting, etc.
I guess there's a period of sadness, maybe a few days usually, when the person realizes the product they like was discontinued. After that it's just about telling the world what we like and would spend money on in the hopes it'll be made. |
Never sleep under the jackfruit tree.
Tales of Moonsea - A Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World. Check out our website at http://www.talesofmoonsea.com and our video trailer at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am304WqOAAo&feature=youtu.be, as well as our thread here at Candlekeep: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12955
My campaign thread: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16447 |
Edited by - Mapolq on 24 Feb 2014 01:00:00 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 01:41:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think people tend to overanalyse and miss the point by a wide margin. What the "complaining" us people who like some iteration of the Realms better than other boils down to is just the following:
"WotC people, if you don't make products that I like, I won't buy them."
No one (alright, not most people) is saying "Hey, you ruined the Realms! I want all the money I spent on it back, and my time too, plus damages!" We're all totally fine with using the stuff we like and disregarding what we don't - and that's precisely the point. We're going to disregard it if we don't like it, and that doesn't make WotC any money. That works for people who like OD&D, AD&D, 3rd Ed., 4th Ed., a mix of them all, people who use GURPS to play in Faerûn, people who are only interested in Realmslore, people who buy novels but don't care about the overall setting, etc.
I guess there's a period of sadness, maybe a few days usually, when the person realizes the product they like was discontinued. After that it's just about telling the world what we like and would spend money on in the hopes it'll be made.
QFT.
There are a few parts of the Forgotten Realms that I just don't pay attention to or don't utilize on purpose because I have no interest in them pre-4E. They might as well not even exist were I'm concerned. 4E changed them and made the places that I DO want to become interested in and adventure there. But they're doing away with them again (at least, I think so) and now either I can A) stop purchasing EVERYTHING for the setting completely or B) buy what I feel still holds true to what I want to run and ignore the changes they've made. |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2390 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 03:20:08
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
and began the unseemly tradition of switcheroo (as in, blatantly lift stuff from 2e books, drop in some lame junk, then tout it as newly created by the new authors) and even more blatant padding
[...] quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
I have 3 problems with this:
1) Copypasting the stuff written by others is not "working" - except for a wikipedian or something.
You mean like the plethora of 3E books that just re-told us all the same stuff that was in previous books? Great example: Waterdeep: City of Splendors supplement. NOTHING in that book was overly surprising or even really all that unique.
Your argument brings victory over my... no, wait, it's my argument. You don't read the text you quote or what? I consider this in itself a good example of problems with copypasta.
And why "Waterdeep"? IIRC, every single 3e book is shamelessly padded by excerpts from core rules inserted at random into stat blocks.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
2) Dropping fertilizer on top of something does not, in itself, make it grow. Sometimes it just buries viable things under a thick layer of dung.
The fact that you equate the transitions from pre-4E to 4E "dung" says it all.
So, do you agree in general with the observation above or not? If yes, you don't even argue which variant is appliable 4e sort of "growth" - but then, what you're arguing about? Using some nicer word for "dung"?
quote:
Should I be taking anything else you say from here on out with anything more than a grain of salt?
I'm not going to tell you your diet. What do you take without grain of salt? How do you take your... cake v. 4.0 - with salt, or without?
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
3) Objectively, the existence of creatures who prefer to eat dung does not automatically make it a valid upgrade to the cake.
I won't elucidate my point further, given that you evidently are thinking on the level of "like/don't like" and call agreeable with you "objectively".
Except that there are those who instantly recognize the changes as the "CAKE" and previous aspects of the whole "dung".
Why "except"? I covered this case! Wichever you like, these things still aren't the same.
So, if you truly think the old version is dung, how throwing a cake into it can be a good thing? Would be better off placing it separately, preferrably far away. Isn't this so? And if so, we're actually in complete agreement on the latter point: I don't want MUD shards and glo-tattoo in my Realm, and you don't want Realms in your glo-tattoo MUD shards either.
"There are whose study is of smells,
And to attentive schools rehearse
How something mixed with something else
Makes something worse."
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by TBeholder
Or without euphemisms - "you killed it, you bought it"? Except, as Wooly Rupert already pointed out, this doesn't seem to actually work.
Or you could, ya know, just continue to keep using what you've always been using. I'm fairly certain that no one at WotC took your AD&D books away or forced your campaigns to adhere to the Spellplague.
1) You didn't actually contradict my point in any way, much less defeat it. I'm puzzled as to why you stick your reply to it at all.
2) Does possibility of continuing to use something seem to be non-trivial enough to you that you need to mention it?
3) Your argument is symmetrical, so let me bounce it back: I'm fairly certain Hasbro thugs would not take away your 4e books if all and any WoW nonsense in FR was rolled back - in v5 or whatever.
4) You fail to address the main issue, namely: FR v.4 simply have little to nothing in common with Realms as such - except a gold egglayer (which could be transfered in an existing setting, as Ravenloft demonstrated many times) and a few borrowed names (which is paintjob and doesn't really make two things the same). Unless we are to interprete the previous quote as your complete agreement on this point, that is. |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 03:20:41
|
Telling people to shove off and go into the corner with their old material is a dismissive thing to say, even if those who say it don't mean to be. That's the firing the fanbase people speak of. If not a wholesale head cutting, it's at least segmenting them in their own isolated ward with dwindling resources.
So what if the past era had thousands of pages. Most of the books are decades out of print, some are harder to find, some go for collector prices. Availability declines with each year a book is out of print. The digital PDFs is not an absolute solution. Some don't like reading books in digital, some can't access them, some can't download them or use them easily in a game.
There's issues of rules compatibility. Having a book from several editions back presents an additional barrier of conversion. WotC realizes this and at least tried to offer different rules for the same module for download.
There's issues of presentation, from scan quality to having art and layout consistent with modern publishing standards. Why do both WotC and Paizo use Wayne Reynolds for their covers? It's because his art speaks to this current generation of gamers (and likely gamers from generations up and down). Why do major RPG publishers go for glossy paper with full color interiors and artistic layouts with many graphical elements. It's because those elements have become the norm for published materials today. Why do the comicbook superheroes tearing up the box office over the last decade appeal to today's audience (some of these characters are 70-75 years old)? It's because they've continually updated (image and style) for today's audience. This was even lampshaded in the first Captain America movie where they show what his 40s era costume would look like if kept to the art designs of the era (and we get a bit of the cheesy propaganda Cap during the war bonds shows).
Then there's the issue of awareness. A non-supported property does decline, fans move on, some age out, the setting no longer becomes the "talk of the game/genre". The flow of new fans is reduced and that's the clincher that prevents growth of the old era setting.
The other settings left unsupported aren't dead, their grognards may even desire WotC stay far away from their playground. Don't blame them after seeing some of the 4E FR fiasco. Some have experienced TSR/WotC event shenanigans first hand such as DragonLance's many upheavals and 'Age of' transitions, Planescape's Faction War, Greyhawk Wars and a parody Castle Grayhawk, Dark Sun's Prism Pentad and the slaying of the Dragon-Kings. Yet I'd wager, none of those settings couldn't use a shot in the arm, an influx of new interest and new blood, like with 4E's Dark Sun support.
We can argue classics like the Lord of the Rings have gone on fine without support or more novels. Then why bother with the massive trilogy of the last decade and the countless tie-in merchandising? Or the current trilogy supporting the Hobbit? Simply put, the new support put Tolkien's work on the map, scrawled his name in red marker, bolded, underlined, and circled trice. It's entered into the cultural consciousness as never before. People who never gave fantasy a first look are now fans. The same for Game of Thrones.
With few exceptions, support makes the franchise. It's no surprise fans of a setting want to see support continue.
The situation with the Realms is the Spellplague and 4E presented a pronounced dissonance, and a distinct cut-off and drop-off point. WotC's dilemma is how to reconcile the two portions, because they realized disregarding one segment for another wasn't the wisest choice. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 04:37:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
There are a few parts of the Forgotten Realms that I just don't pay attention to or don't utilize on purpose because I have no interest in them pre-4E. They might as well not even exist were I'm concerned. 4E changed them and made the places that I DO want to become interested in and adventure there. But they're doing away with them again (at least, I think so) and now either I can A) stop purchasing EVERYTHING for the setting completely or B) buy what I feel still holds true to what I want to run and ignore the changes they've made.
See, now this is scary.
If the grognards don't really feel like 5e is for them, and the 4e people now feel disaffected as well, exactly who are they making the 5e Realms for? 
All I can say is that D&Dnext and The 5e Realms had better be absolutely amazing on every single level. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
GMWestermeyer
Learned Scribe
USA
215 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 05:04:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
I think people tend to overanalyse and miss the point by a wide margin. What the "complaining" us people who like some iteration of the Realms better than other boils down to is just the following:
"WotC people, if you don't make products that I like, I won't buy them."
Yeah, that's pretty close.
I really don't care about anyone else's campaign. I just care about the published realms: Is it a consistent, interesting world or not? The answer is, sadly, not for years. It was never perfect, but now it repels me. I regret that they a product i used to enjoy and turned it into something I dislike.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Why do both WotC and Paizo use Wayne Reynolds for their covers? It's because his art speaks to this current generation of gamers (and likely gamers from generations up and down).
People like his stuff? Really? It just looks like rip-off World of Warcraft crap to me. :( But art is in the eye of the beholder.
|
"Facts are meaningless. You can use facts to prove anything that is even remotely true."
Homer Simpson, _The Simspons_ |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 06:18:18
|
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
I regret that they a product i used to enjoy and turned it into something I dislike.
That holds true for a number of fans who did not transition to the 4E Realms. (And some would say this began in 3E, or 2E, YMMV.)
Fans want to support a setting and see more material for it, in spite of the volumes of stuff they already have. If a company/producer can excite fans to want to pay money for their stuff, well they're doing their job.
quote:
People like his stuff? Really? It just looks like rip-off World of Warcraft crap to me. :( But art is in the eye of the beholder.
Again, ymmv. Different strokes and all that.
He came onto the scene early enough and his style is distinct enough that he's not saddled (much) by a copy-cat stigma.
The passing similarity probably crossed WotC's and Paizo's minds. The 4E terminology of roles, powers, and general game style is adapted from/inspired by MMORPG sources.
For Paizo, it's probably because they realized he's popular and recognizeable, and I'd bet they wanted to use him as a shot against WotC. It was a magnificent move on their part, emulate your top rival enough and people will start seeing you in their place. (Like religions co-opting others' holidays and divinities.)
The clear winner of course is WAR himself as he cashes in his checks at the bank from the steady work, a lot of it cover work. It's nuts, he did the Core 4E covers, then designed the Pathfinder Iconics, lots of AP covers, covers to their most of their core rulebook/rules expansions/bestiaries/setting guides. On top of that he's responsible for the 4E Eberron cover (which he lead the 3E visual style and covers as well) and the Dark Sun 4E cover. He also does work for Green Ronin's Freeport. In a bid to keep continuity, many third party Pathfinder publishers have hired him for their covers as well. The man is getting Elmore levels of work.
Also, who are we kidding, Warcraft is a blatant rip-off of Warhammer, at least in terms of visuals.
And Reynolds has done work for both Blizzard and GW, go figure. |
Edited by - Dark Wizard on 24 Feb 2014 06:28:35 |
|
|
|
Dark Wizard
Senior Scribe
USA
830 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 06:27:33
|
| Meant to click 'edit' not 'reply'. |
Edited by - Dark Wizard on 24 Feb 2014 06:28:15 |
|
|
|
TBeholder
Great Reader
2390 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 06:52:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
See, now this is scary.
If the grognards don't really feel like 5e is for them, and the 4e people now feel disaffected as well, exactly who are they making the 5e Realms for?
And for that matter - exactly who did they make the 4e Realms for?
quote:
All I can say is that D&Dnext and The 5e Realms had better be absolutely amazing on every single level.
For several reasons, too.
IMO after 4e D&D as name simply lost credibility. In 2e - 2.5e times they could wave a shrink-wrap with a meaningless teaser and say "there are good things inside, oh yes" and folk would buy. But now the attitude "not worth it until proven otherwise" is already here.
quote:
Originally posted by Dark Wizard
Why do both WotC and Paizo use Wayne Reynolds for their covers? It's because his art speaks to this current generation of gamers (and likely gamers from generations up and down).
Fashion. Cargo cult. C-pupil solution ("I don't know the answer, let's copy from the next guy"). Call it however you like...
quote:
Originally posted by GMWestermeyer
People like his stuff? Really? It just looks like rip-off World of Warcraft crap to me. :( But art is in the eye of the beholder.
In my eye it's not anywhere near being as bad as WoW. Though it's still the Glowing Snot FX school and characters tend to look like rubber dolls trying to hide under thick paints the consequences of their plasticizer drying up.
Which is kind of hilarious for promotion of miniatures ("it started out as a halfling...") |
People never wonder How the world goes round -Helloween
And even I make no pretense Of having more than common sense -R.W.Wood
It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo. -Ed Whitchurch |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 12:25:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
See, now this is scary.
If the grognards don't really feel like 5e is for them, and the 4e people now feel disaffected as well, exactly who are they making the 5e Realms for?
All I can say is that D&Dnext and The 5e Realms had better be absolutely amazing on every single level.
Hopefully, for everyone, Markus, or that's what WotC is desperately trying to do. It might turn out to please no one as you fear, but I think that will be largely a result of the quality of the product - they seem to have got the attitude right this time.
For example, I expect Unther will be back, but Tymanther will not be completely gone, and we will see some sort of interface between them. So people who only like Unther can largely downplay the Tymanther bits, people who only like Tymanther can largely downplay the Unther bits, and people who like both can have it all. People who like neither might want to have a look anyway since it's a different place now at least (unless they hate both, then they might want to look somewhere else). So WotC hopes most fans would buy a product set there, whether they are "Unther fans", "Tymanther fans", fans of both or fans of neither. |
Never sleep under the jackfruit tree.
Tales of Moonsea - A Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World. Check out our website at http://www.talesofmoonsea.com and our video trailer at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am304WqOAAo&feature=youtu.be, as well as our thread here at Candlekeep: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12955
My campaign thread: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16447 |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 13:32:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
There are a few parts of the Forgotten Realms that I just don't pay attention to or don't utilize on purpose because I have no interest in them pre-4E. They might as well not even exist were I'm concerned. 4E changed them and made the places that I DO want to become interested in and adventure there. But they're doing away with them again (at least, I think so) and now either I can A) stop purchasing EVERYTHING for the setting completely or B) buy what I feel still holds true to what I want to run and ignore the changes they've made.
See, now this is scary.
If the grognards don't really feel like 5e is for them, and the 4e people now feel disaffected as well, exactly who are they making the 5e Realms for?
All I can say is that D&Dnext and The 5e Realms had better be absolutely amazing on every single level.
There is one way to do this: Bring the original 'feel' the realms had back. For me that is acceptable. A possible no go for me is keeping any Abeir. To me that was another campaign world entirely, that Forgotten Realms was used to sell. Make it its own thing, it had no place being part of the realms.
I am on board with Next because I think Ed Greenwood and the other creators know the mistakes made when they changed the realms to the new 4e realms. It became a different beast entirely.
I can live with Dragonborn and I always used Tieflings, just not the homogenized 4e tieflings.
What would be the no sell for me:
Plague lands remain
Abeir Remains
and
any Abeir realm that arbitrarily replaced an older realm remains.
I would also like to see the Shadow plane and Fey wild separate a bit.'
Bring Evermeet and Evereska back as simply elven nations.
Basically bring the realms back as they were with the story elements in place. I have been enthusiastic enough about NExt to really ditch alot of my Pathfinder campaign and run it in Next. I think it will do well.
No spoilers but Richard Lee Byers book is giving me a lot of hope that they are going to repair alot of the damage with the sundering. The first three books, though good, had me wondering. I think in the Reaver, they finally bring hope of the change back to the Forgotten Realms tone.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 13:39:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mapolq
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
See, now this is scary.
If the grognards don't really feel like 5e is for them, and the 4e people now feel disaffected as well, exactly who are they making the 5e Realms for?
All I can say is that D&Dnext and The 5e Realms had better be absolutely amazing on every single level.
Hopefully, for everyone, Markus, or that's what WotC is desperately trying to do. It might turn out to please no one as you fear, but I think that will be largely a result of the quality of the product - they seem to have got the attitude right this time.
For example, I expect Unther will be back, but Tymanther will not be completely gone, and we will see some sort of interface between them. So people who only like Unther can largely downplay the Tymanther bits, people who only like Tymanther can largely downplay the Unther bits, and people who like both can have it all. People who like neither might want to have a look anyway since it's a different place now at least (unless they hate both, then they might want to look somewhere else). So WotC hopes most fans would buy a product set there, whether they are "Unther fans", "Tymanther fans", fans of both or fans of neither.
My only problem with Tyrmanther is that it was never a part of the realms. It is an arbitrary realm to fit a rules construct. It has been a part of the 4e realms, but there is a distinct difference between the two.
At this point I am willing to accept the 4e realms as a transition state, like an enzyme binding to one site of a substrate but not yet the catalyst. If too much of the 4e realms remains, my campaign skips D&D NExt and we carry on with Pathfinder.
None of the stories of previous authors have to be eliminated if they keep the 4e realms as a footnote.
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 15:27:22
|
quote:
Abraham Lincoln
You can please some of the people some of the time, all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but you can never please all of the people all of the time.
|
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
Edited by - Ashe Ravenheart on 24 Feb 2014 15:27:56 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 15:43:31
|
They need to shoot for 'MOST of the people MOST of the time." I like Abe, but he missed that one.
I think Mournblade has the right of it, too much of the 4e Realms was a bad fit. It would have worked out if they had made these new lands another continent. In fact, I would be okay if WotC/Ao 'merged' the two worlds by restoring Faerun to its former geography (with its previous cultures intact) and placed Tymanther etc. across the sea. THEN provided support for both continents. That, I think, would go in the 'most of the people most of the time' category.
Heck, they don't even have to do it right away. Just a passing statement of strange things going on across the ocean (in a novel and/or campaign guide) followed by a blurb on the two 'worlds' being rejoined (with support to follow) would work methinks. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
ZeshinX
Learned Scribe
Canada
210 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 15:46:40
|
I'll give 5e/5e Realms a try (wish they would just stick to numbering the editions for consistency). It will be a cautious, low-expectation try. 4e/4e Realms was so unappealing to me in every regard that I was very quick to embrace Pathfinder RPG and Golarion. Amongst those I game with, when we say we're playing D&D, we actually mean Pathfinder now. 5e/5e Realms will have to be something truly excellent to draw my attention away from PRPG/Golarion.
I won't say it's impossible, but it's going to be very, very tough. |
"...because despite the best advice of those who know what they are talking about, other people insist on doing the most massively stupid things."
-Galen, technomage |
|
|
|
Mapolq
Senior Scribe
Brazil
466 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 17:08:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mournblade
My only problem with Tyrmanther is that it was never a part of the realms. It is an arbitrary realm to fit a rules construct. It has been a part of the 4e realms, but there is a distinct difference between the two.
I do get your point, but keep in mind Unther wasn't either. It was an arbitrary realm to fit a parallel campaign "theme". Granted, it was gradually being "Realmsified".
I keep saying... I won't get even near to what I want with the 5e Realms (most likely), but it looks like I might be buying some material again, which is a damn good improvement over 4e. Well, I started with Elminsters' FR, to be honest. |
Never sleep under the jackfruit tree.
Tales of Moonsea - A Neverwinter Nights 2 Persistent World. Check out our website at http://www.talesofmoonsea.com and our video trailer at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=am304WqOAAo&feature=youtu.be, as well as our thread here at Candlekeep: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=12955
My campaign thread: http://www.forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=16447 |
Edited by - Mapolq on 24 Feb 2014 17:11:01 |
|
|
|
The Arcanamach
Master of Realmslore
1842 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 19:32:52
|
Maploq, it's true Unther was thrown in to fit the various cultural 'themes' (which I liked, btw). The difference is that Unther was included from the beginning of the published Realms...removing it wasn't the way to go for 4e. And just dropping in a completely new cultures, land masses, etc. wasn't the way to go either.
Mind you, I'm not bashing 4e (anymore), I'm just saying they took the 'easy' way to things when just about everything could have been done with more thought and creativity. I don't think most folks mind the Realms 'evolving' so long as it's done in a reasonably organic manner.
Cheers. |
I have a dream that one day, all game worlds will exist as one. |
|
|
|
Mournblade
Master of Realmslore
USA
1287 Posts |
Posted - 24 Feb 2014 : 19:43:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Arcanamach
Maploq, it's true Unther was thrown in to fit the various cultural 'themes' (which I liked, btw). The difference is that Unther was included from the beginning of the published Realms...removing it wasn't the way to go for 4e. And just dropping in a completely new cultures, land masses, etc. wasn't the way to go either.
Mind you, I'm not bashing 4e (anymore), I'm just saying they took the 'easy' way to things when just about everything could have been done with more thought and creativity. I don't think most folks mind the Realms 'evolving' so long as it's done in a reasonably organic manner.
Cheers.
My response could not have been worded better!
|
A wizard is Never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he Early. A wizard arrives precisely when he means to... |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
It was so much worse then I had imagined...
Topic Locked
