Candlekeep Forum
Candlekeep Forum
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Active Polls | Members | Private Messages | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 Forgotten Realms Products
 Forgotten Realms RPG Products
 Xanathar's Guide to Everything
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

sleyvas
Great Reader

USA
5664 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  15:46:17  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moonbeast

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
But I'd love to discuss the actual book



I find that the EnWorld D&D crowd…. (and even the uncouth rabble at Reddit) have more productive conversations regarding 5E D&D material, mechanics, rules, product discussions etc.

I only visit Candlekeep for the one good thing it provides…. Realms-specific lore and info. But as far as gaming discussions? Info for people who actually stay current with the game? It's pretty much anathema in Candlekeep. As noted above, the many veterans of Candlekeep admit that they don't even buy or care to play current D&D products any more. Not only do they not play or buy the (current) game products, they spend considerable effort criticizing them (months before the products are even published).

I hop around and lurk various D&D-oriented websites, and Candlekeep is just one of many. This place certainly has a lot of masters of lore. But the problem with grognards and canonmongers is the inherent pessimism and negativity they harbor. That much is true in any subject (including the most die-hard Star Trek fans, some even hinted death threats at producers when the producers strayed away from the "original vision" of Rodenberry).





And yet some of us ARE interested in 5e. Some of us ARE buying the material. So whenever we say "please start giving some thought to how you title your material", the devs should listen. After all, if 6 years down the road 5e has actually started releasing a decent amount of material and I have to remember WHERE I saw a class ruleset, a lot of times its thinking of titles in relation to what it seems to describe that leads me there. "The guide to everything" doesn't lead me to thinking "yeah, that's the extra class book" and Xanathar makes me think of Waterdeep's underworld. Meanwhile, "Complete Mage" and "Complete Arcane" and "Libris Mortis" and "Book of Vile Darkness" ... all of these do put visions in my head of what the material is about just from the title.

I may be a grognard whose been playing this game over 30 years, and I do think that the 4e ruleset failed and many of the canon changes they made were also failures (though not all, and I do like some of the things they did with 4e regarding the feywild, making godly domains limited in size, etc...), but that doesn't mean I want to see them fail moving forward. I see them slowly righting the ship, and whenever I see something stupid, I will yell in hopes that they see it and start thinking about how they went wrong in 4e. The initial modules they came out with for 5e... nope, wrong thing... Storm King's Thunder, better.... SCAG, better.... and what I've read from Out of the Abyss, adaptable and palatable detail of the underdark(I'm not sure how much I'm into what the demon lords themselves were doing, and I haven't actually delved that yet, so I reserve judgment).

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

Adrix
Acolyte

USA
7 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  18:28:35  Show Profile  Visit Adrix's Homepage Send Adrix a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas

quote:
Originally posted by moonbeast

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
But I'd love to discuss the actual book



I find that the EnWorld D&D crowd…. (and even the uncouth rabble at Reddit) have more productive conversations regarding 5E D&D material, mechanics, rules, product discussions etc.

I only visit Candlekeep for the one good thing it provides…. Realms-specific lore and info. But as far as gaming discussions? Info for people who actually stay current with the game? It's pretty much anathema in Candlekeep. As noted above, the many veterans of Candlekeep admit that they don't even buy or care to play current D&D products any more. Not only do they not play or buy the (current) game products, they spend considerable effort criticizing them (months before the products are even published).

I hop around and lurk various D&D-oriented websites, and Candlekeep is just one of many. This place certainly has a lot of masters of lore. But the problem with grognards and canonmongers is the inherent pessimism and negativity they harbor. That much is true in any subject (including the most die-hard Star Trek fans, some even hinted death threats at producers when the producers strayed away from the "original vision" of Rodenberry).





And yet some of us ARE interested in 5e. Some of us ARE buying the material. So whenever we say "please start giving some thought to how you title your material", the devs should listen. After all, if 6 years down the road 5e has actually started releasing a decent amount of material and I have to remember WHERE I saw a class ruleset, a lot of times its thinking of titles in relation to what it seems to describe that leads me there. "The guide to everything" doesn't lead me to thinking "yeah, that's the extra class book" and Xanathar makes me think of Waterdeep's underworld. Meanwhile, "Complete Mage" and "Complete Arcane" and "Libris Mortis" and "Book of Vile Darkness" ... all of these do put visions in my head of what the material is about just from the title.

I may be a grognard whose been playing this game over 30 years, and I do think that the 4e ruleset failed and many of the canon changes they made were also failures (though not all, and I do like some of the things they did with 4e regarding the feywild, making godly domains limited in size, etc...), but that doesn't mean I want to see them fail moving forward. I see them slowly righting the ship, and whenever I see something stupid, I will yell in hopes that they see it and start thinking about how they went wrong in 4e. The initial modules they came out with for 5e... nope, wrong thing... Storm King's Thunder, better.... SCAG, better.... and what I've read from Out of the Abyss, adaptable and palatable detail of the underdark(I'm not sure how much I'm into what the demon lords themselves were doing, and I haven't actually delved that yet, so I reserve judgment).



And these two posts say everything I've been thinking for a while now ... good job, fellas!

"Foaming flagons held up high, we salute those about to die ..."
- A toast overheard at the Yawning Portal Tavern, Waterdeep.

http://outlawdnd.blogspot.com
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  20:36:02  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert


Oddly, though, it didn't become a crap show until someone came in and said people disliking the use of a Realms title for a non-Realms specific book were a bunch of selfish whiners. Before that happened, a couple people said their piece and then were done.

Funny how things get ugly when people are attacked for their opinions.




There's no such thing as a "Non-Realms" specific book for 5th Edition unless the book specifically states so. We've been over this.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

dazzlerdal
Great Reader

United Kingdom
3397 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  20:58:44  Show Profile Send dazzlerdal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I think more than a few of us here class a non realms book as anything that doesn't contribute any additional lore to the realms. Rules are not lore and greyhawk or ravenloft are not the realms so this may be another non-realms book if it is only rules. You can classify the books your own way but I don't agree.

Of course I class a non realms book as anything not containing lore set before 1375 DR but that's probably just me.[

Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9

Alternate Realms Site

Edited by - dazzlerdal on 09 Jun 2017 20:59:41
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1808 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  21:30:29  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

I can't speak for any other 4e fans other than myself but I see more 4th Edition mechanics and spirit in 5e than I see from any other edition.


I was referring to the 4e Realms, not mechanics.


quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

The thing is, I could understand the mentality if the previous stuff was totally inaccessible. If you couldn't get the old books or the old setting info or the old adventures. If it was just gone. I could see being upset that you were forced to adopt the new mechanics, the new setting, the new lore, etc. BUT fortunately you can. There's nothing stopping anyone from running the old Grey Box.


Perhaps I suck at communicating; I can accept that. Yes, I have the old gray box, and I've been enjoying it for 30 years now, like sleyvas and others. The TOT changed the Realms. The return of Shade changed the Realms. The 3e Frankenmap changed the Realms. 4e brought a bizarre *additional* Realms, and mashed that in, changing the Realms. The Idiotplague changed the Realms. And while I appreciate the return to a 1e-ish map, the 100 year time jump still changed the Realms.

So while my animus toward 4e, and WotC for putting the FR logo on something that bears no resemblance to the Realms, can be written off as a difference of gaming style or taste or whatever... I thought perhaps it went without specifically saying that MY Realms, Ed Greenwood's Realms, was sidelined in 1989. 5e leaving most of the Realms vague and open (so far) is great from the angle that I can use new products again, with Ed's design philosophy, without conflicting with canon. It's been 28 freakin years since I could do that!

Yea, sure, I was always free to ignore canon. But I wasn't, really, because I *liked* a lot of authors' work, and I *wanted* to use it. Ed's work obviously, but a lot of others too. Eric Boyd writes great stuff! Steven Schend! Jeff Grubb! Sean Reynolds, Rob Salvatore, Erik Scott de Bie, Erin Evans, Elaine Cunningham! And because the more I ignore, the more it's the case that my Realms was traded in a long time ago for something born on Krypton or bitten by a weird spider.

So in practice... no, the "ignore it if you don't like it" thing really doesn't hold any water. Not just because I was conflicted, or going emo over WotC deciding to put their own lame mark on the Realms, but because ignoring stuff is also something we don't like.


quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

And it doesn't stop there with the rise of the OSR there's new RPGs being made that are tailored to play in a similar style to the older version of D&D if you can't find those older versions.


Mechanics are irrelevant. This is (for me) about the setting.


quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

Which makes discussions like this, simply about a name, sort of silly.


The name is (for me) the tip of the iceberg.


quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

The description easily details why Xanathar's name is on the book...Yes it's a ploy or a gimmick...None of that is shady


Uh... yes it is.


quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

or done to somehow fool people into thinking this is a tome specifically and only designed for the Realms...about the Realms.


You seem too smart to believe this. Using a setting-specific character is aimed precisely at attracting fans of that setting.

It could be that there will be some Realms content... hopefully more than just making up a distinctive "voice" for narration. I'm just noticing (with others, apparently including you) that it really doesn't sound likely. And in that case, it's false advertising and it's deliberate deception, and that's scummy, and I expect better of WotC.

Having voiced my misgivings, and having felt goaded and impulsively responded, I'm content to wait and see.
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1808 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  21:32:03  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert

Funny how things get ugly when people are attacked for their opinions.


Innit, though? Weird...
Go to Top of Page

xaeyruudh
Master of Realmslore

USA
1808 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  21:36:00  Show Profile  Visit xaeyruudh's Homepage Send xaeyruudh a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal

I think more than a few of us here class a non realms book as anything that doesn't contribute any additional lore to the realms. Rules are not lore and greyhawk or ravenloft are not the realms so this may be another non-realms book if it is only rules. You can classify the books your own way but I don't agree.


I love it when somebody saves me the effort of responding, by saying it better than I was going to. Thankya sir!

Nope, not just you.[
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  21:47:53  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal

I think more than a few of us here class a non realms book as anything that doesn't contribute any additional lore to the realms. Rules are not lore and greyhawk or ravenloft are not the realms so this may be another non-realms book if it is only rules. You can classify the books your own way but I don't agree.

Of course I class a non realms book as anything not containing lore set before 1375 DR but that's probably just me.[



5th Edition is pretty persistent in what game world they're placing all their rules in. Every edition from 3 to 5 has had a "default" world that they've built onto.

3th Edition
Designers specifically targeted Greyhawk as the base. The deities, races, names of monsters (like the use of Hill Dwarves, High Elves, Gray Elves), and even some usages of coinage that denotes Greyhawk were all present. The "Complete" series and other supplements were all based on Greyhawk, from Prestige Classes like Radiant Servant of Pelor to the Temple Raider of Olidammara to using famed monsters and demon lords like Iuz, ALL were set in Greyhawk. The Adventures like White Plume mountain, and Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil set in Greyhawk. The Living campaign was set in Greyhawk. You could change the flavor of these adventures or monsters or rules and most people did, but the default setting was GH.

4th Edition
The designers attempted to create their own world. Nentir Vale and it's surrounding environs were the backdrop for all their rules. Nentir Vale was where towns like Fallcrest, Winterhaven, and Hammerfast lay. There was Vor Rukoth, The Stonemarch, Iron Wolf Hold, the fallen empire of Nerath....All with their own Deities like Avandra, the Raven Queen, Ioun, Erathis, Torog, and Melora. The Dragon Adventure path....Scales of War....set in Nentir Vale world. Most of the Adventures set where in either a generic D&D setting or Nentir vale with a few going to different settings like FR, Eberron, and Dark Sun.


5th Edition
the designers determined that the Forgotten Realms would be that backdrop setting. The PHB is pretty clear where they intend you to play. Example, the Human entry has a nice list of Human Names and Ethnicities in which they detail no less than 9 different Forgotten Realms ethniticies along with their description and common names (*gasp* just like in the 3e's Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting book!).

Then you have deities from the Forgotten Realms listed in the Cleric's description (among other pantheons) for which deity presides over which domain OR with the Monastic Orders and how 2/3 of this relates to The Realms.

Finally we have the supplements 5th Edition has produced. All besides one are set Adventure Paths, all of which are based in the Forgotten Realms. There's the SCAG, Tales of the Yawning Portal (narrative set in the Realms detailing dungeons that can be set in the Realms), Volo's Guide, and now Xanathar's Guide to Everything. You don't notice a trend? I'm not exactly sure how much more clearer they can be honestly.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

dazzlerdal
Great Reader

United Kingdom
3397 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  22:00:15  Show Profile Send dazzlerdal a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Well they (wotc, yourself, and many others) can try and tell me what they want me to think or like and i will of course disagree with them until my dying day. I may be wrong, but at the end of the day the only opinion i need to listen to is my own.

A rulebook is not a realmsbook unless it adds some lore to the realms (classes arent lore and rehashed lore doesnt count). Furthermore 5e is not even set in the realms its set in some horrible, nightmarish, souless, empty, alternate version.

Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions Candlekeep Archive
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 1
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 2
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 3
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 4
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 5
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 6
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 7
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 8
Forgotten Realms Alternate Dimensions: Issue 9

Alternate Realms Site
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  22:04:03  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

I can't speak for any other 4e fans other than myself but I see more 4th Edition mechanics and spirit in 5e than I see from any other edition.


I was referring to the 4e Realms, not mechanics.


Fair point.


quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

The thing is, I could understand the mentality if the previous stuff was totally inaccessible. If you couldn't get the old books or the old setting info or the old adventures. If it was just gone. I could see being upset that you were forced to adopt the new mechanics, the new setting, the new lore, etc. BUT fortunately you can. There's nothing stopping anyone from running the old Grey Box.


Perhaps I suck at communicating; I can accept that. Yes, I have the old gray box, and I've been enjoying it for 30 years now, like sleyvas and others. The TOT changed the Realms. The return of Shade changed the Realms. The 3e Frankenmap changed the Realms. 4e brought a bizarre *additional* Realms, and mashed that in, changing the Realms. The Idiotplague changed the Realms. And while I appreciate the return to a 1e-ish map, the 100 year time jump still changed the Realms.

So while my animus toward 4e, and WotC for putting the FR logo on something that bears no resemblance to the Realms, can be written off as a difference of gaming style or taste or whatever... I thought perhaps it went without specifically saying that MY Realms, Ed Greenwood's Realms, was sidelined in 1989. 5e leaving most of the Realms vague and open (so far) is great from the angle that I can use new products again, with Ed's design philosophy, without conflicting with canon. It's been 28 freakin years since I could do that!

Yea, sure, I was always free to ignore canon. But I wasn't, really, because I *liked* a lot of authors' work, and I *wanted* to use it. Ed's work obviously, but a lot of others too. Eric Boyd writes great stuff! Steven Schend! Jeff Grubb! Sean Reynolds, Rob Salvatore, Erik Scott de Bie, Erin Evans, Elaine Cunningham! And because the more I ignore, the more it's the case that my Realms was traded in a long time ago for something born on Krypton or bitten by a weird spider.

So in practice... no, the "ignore it if you don't like it" thing really doesn't hold any water. Not just because I was conflicted, or going emo over WotC deciding to put their own lame mark on the Realms, but because ignoring stuff is also something we don't like.


Ok? Like I said I'm not going to tell you to stop complaining about them putting Realms-based names on their books. All I'm saying is that this time around, it's my opinion it'll get little to no traction.

quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

And it doesn't stop there with the rise of the OSR there's new RPGs being made that are tailored to play in a similar style to the older version of D&D if you can't find those older versions.


Mechanics are irrelevant. This is (for me) about the setting.


One name on a book now dictates the entire setting? What if they come out with Elminster's Guide to all things Magical and it goes to detail 99% of generic magical items and spells NOT specifically designed for or from the Realms? Or what if they create Drizzt's Delve into the depths Below and all it details is more generic Underdark stuff not essential to the Forgotten Realms (with new content of cities of Drow NOT Menzoberranzan)? Should we expect to see more of the gnashing of teeth?

quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

Which makes discussions like this, simply about a name, sort of silly.


The name is (for me) the tip of the iceberg.


But that's 90% what this thread has been about!

quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

The description easily details why Xanathar's name is on the book...Yes it's a ploy or a gimmick...None of that is shady


Uh... yes it is.


Where did they mislead you?

quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

quote:
Originally posted by Diffan

or done to somehow fool people into thinking this is a tome specifically and only designed for the Realms...about the Realms.


You seem too smart to believe this. Using a setting-specific character is aimed precisely at attracting fans of that setting.

It could be that there will be some Realms content... hopefully more than just making up a distinctive "voice" for narration. I'm just noticing (with others, apparently including you) that it really doesn't sound likely. And in that case, it's false advertising and it's deliberate deception, and that's scummy, and I expect better of WotC.


Did you read the excerpt?

"Assembled here for the first time is new information on adventurers of every stripe. In addition, you’ll find and valuable advice for those of nefarious intent who must deal with such meddling do-gooders, including the Xanathar’s personal thoughts on how to dispatch anyone foolish enough to interfere with his business dealings. Alongside observations on “heroes” themselves, the beholder fills the pages of this tome with his personal thoughts on tricks, traps, and even treasures and how they can be put to villainous use.

Complete rules for more than twenty new subclasses for fifth edition Dungeons & Dragons, including the cavalier, the inquisitive, the horizon walker, and many more.

Dozens of new feats and spells, and a system to give your character a unique, randomized backstory.

A variety of systems and tools that provide Dungeon Masters new ways to personalize their home games, while also expanding the ways players can engage in organized play and shared world campaigns."


It's pretty specific in what this book is about. It's plain as day. If you're expecting there to be lots of Realms-specific notes and tie-ins to the Setting with lore I'm going to tell you right now that you'll most likely be mistaken. The book isn't about that.

quote:
Originally posted by xaeyruudh

Having voiced my misgivings, and having felt goaded and impulsively responded, I'm content to wait and see.



There we can agree.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."

Edited by - Diffan on 09 Jun 2017 22:08:42
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 09 Jun 2017 :  22:06:40  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal

Well they (wotc, yourself, and many others) can try and tell me what they want me to think or like and i will of course disagree with them until my dying day. I may be wrong, but at the end of the day the only opinion i need to listen to is my own.


I simply pointed out the facts. Believe and play what you want. I never said otherwise.

quote:
Originally posted by dazzlerdal

A rulebook is not a realmsbook unless it adds some lore to the realms (classes aren't lore and rehashed lore doesn't count). Furthermore 5e is not even set in the realms its set in some horrible, nightmarish, souless, empty, alternate version.



Then why not just play in the "true" Realms?

(not a rhetorical question. Genuinely curious)

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."

Edited by - Diffan on 09 Jun 2017 22:16:37
Go to Top of Page

Swordsage
Learned Scribe

137 Posts

Posted - 10 Jun 2017 :  04:20:09  Show Profile  Visit Swordsage's Homepage Send Swordsage a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The Forgotten Realms is widely considered to be the most developed, detailed, extensive, immersive campaign setting in he history of he (A)D&D game. There is no other official campaign setting that matches it IMO in that way. Such as it is, it also made a sizeable contribution to the financial fortunes of the company that owned the D&D brand at whatever time in its history. It has received ongoing support from the company, fans, designers and authors for 30 years. So now, after all that, it has been consigned to the role of "placeholder". I think that equates to the setting being disrespected. Just like Greyhawk was in 3rd Edition. Using it as a placeholder does nothing for the brand (and detracts from it, because of the bland, generic content that is attached to it), does not generate new FR fans and likely, as this thread shows, alienates more than a few existing FR fans.

No doubt someone in Marketing thinks that this is a splendid idea and a good use of "valuable IP". Maybe they should talk to the people who thought the same thing about Greyhawk at the time of 3rd Edition - you know, that well known setting 10 or so years ago that is now a corpse. None of the 5th Edition game products now produced by WotC require the Realms other than it provides a series of existing names, locations and maps to save some game designer a couple of hours. I could take every "Realms" product released in 5th Edition and file off the place names and replace them with my own made up names in about 15 minutes and it wouldn't change any of the products one iota in terms of quality and gameability.

So adios to the old Realms and welcome to the shade of the Realms. In another 10 years we can all talk about how it got Greyhawked, consigned to gaming history and never recovered.

The Swordsage
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 10 Jun 2017 :  04:49:15  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Thankfully we Realms fan have all that plethora of information, canon, novels, amd game supplements to draw from and use. Use and play what you like :-)

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

TBeholder
Master of Realmslore

1426 Posts

Posted - 10 Jun 2017 :  12:22:01  Show Profile Send TBeholder a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by moonbeast


I only visit Candlekeep for the one good thing it provides…. Realms-specific lore and info.

Isn't this exactly what Candlekeep.com is supposed to do?
quote:
But as far as gaming discussions? Info for people who actually stay current

Like, an RPG version of salon.com? Isn't this what rpg.net does?

"It is inferior—for coffee—but it is pretty fair tea."©

The other side of which is what the problem with the late breed of uninspired copycats is. The question here is whether what's inside is reflected on the box, or do we see de-facto false advertising... again.
As long as it's a rabbit and it's sold as a rabbit, or if it's a cat and it's sold as a cat - everything is fine. If it turns out that a cat is sold as a rabbit - we have a problem.
Ultimately, the animal in the bag is either a rabbit or it isn't. We will have a definitive answer to this very quickly once the bag is opened.
Notions that "I've heard now they make new cool rabbits who can meow! U dun understand PR Ogress!" can appear for only one obvious reason, which is why they are treated accordingly.

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
Go to Top of Page

DiscerningDM
Acolyte

USA
6 Posts

Posted - 10 Jun 2017 :  19:57:28  Show Profile  Visit DiscerningDM's Homepage Send DiscerningDM a Private Message  Reply with Quote
The 5e launch has made a *lot* of people FR fans, by making it the default, and adventures (hardback) and community play (downloadable) all happening in different areas of the realms. The packed-to-capacity FLGS and Con scene for Dungeons and Dragons is full of people discussing Waterdhavian guilds, Luruar's fate, theories about the Seven Sisters, conspiracies in Cormyr, Athkatlan politics, and trouble on the Moonsea.

As someone who respects the heck out of this form I've lurked on forever, I wish the reception on the boards was more positive. The current designers have really gone out of their way, I think, to weave lore and the FR directly into every gaming product. They don't do splatbooks or straight adventures, everything comes with FR lore included.

If you're not playing the game, especially in public play or via DM's Guild, you're not able to get a sense of how vibrant, vital, and exciting FR is right now.
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 11 Jun 2017 :  05:39:07  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by DiscerningDM

The 5e launch has made a *lot* of people FR fans, by making it the default, and adventures (hardback) and community play (downloadable) all happening in different areas of the realms. The packed-to-capacity FLGS and Con scene for Dungeons and Dragons is full of people discussing Waterdhavian guilds, Luruar's fate, theories about the Seven Sisters, conspiracies in Cormyr, Athkatlan politics, and trouble on the Moonsea.

As someone who respects the heck out of this form I've lurked on forever, I wish the reception on the boards was more positive. The current designers have really gone out of their way, I think, to weave lore and the FR directly into every gaming product. They don't do splatbooks or straight adventures, everything comes with FR lore included.

If you're not playing the game, especially in public play or via DM's Guild, you're not able to get a sense of how vibrant, vital, and exciting FR is right now.




Thank you for that perspective! I haven't attended any Adventure League play and rarely download stuff from the DM's Guild but I'm encouraged to hear how vibrant things are with the players that do those things. I think it's important to get that sort of point of view in places that have become sort of a large echo chamber.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page

moonbeast
Learned Scribe

USA
286 Posts

Posted - 12 Jun 2017 :  10:08:13  Show Profile Send moonbeast a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by DiscerningDM

The 5e launch has made a *lot* of people FR fans, by making it the default, and adventures (hardback) and community play (downloadable) all happening in different areas of the realms. The packed-to-capacity FLGS and Con scene for Dungeons and Dragons is full of people discussing Waterdhavian guilds, Luruar's fate, theories about the Seven Sisters, conspiracies in Cormyr, Athkatlan politics, and trouble on the Moonsea.

As someone who respects the heck out of this form I've lurked on forever, I wish the reception on the boards was more positive. The current designers have really gone out of their way, I think, to weave lore and the FR directly into every gaming product. They don't do splatbooks or straight adventures, everything comes with FR lore included.

If you're not playing the game, especially in public play or via DM's Guild, you're not able to get a sense of how vibrant, vital, and exciting FR is right now.




Well said.

Alas, many of the participating FLGS (the ones that spend the effort to recruit for Adventurers League games) are often packed with Friday night gamers, many of them are new converts to RPG gaming in general. It is a vibrant scene indeed.

And in the past 2 years, it's a known fact that an uptick of celebrities have lent their names to 5th Edition FanGeekery. Anyone can Google this easily, and the "celebrities playing 5e" goes hand in hand with WotC pushing for online social media streaming of D&D sessions (aka live streaming games). It's just awesome to hear when names like Anna Prosser and Will Wheaton are mentioned for participating or collaborating in 5E activities. I could only dream that somehow, some day, I'd get the opportunity to become a "DM to the Stars". LOL

I do applaud WotC's efforts to push D&D into mainstream acceptance. Gone are the old days of the 1970s and 1980s when D&D was stereotyped as a game for awkward anti-social teenagers who lived in their Mom's basement. Gone are those old days when Moral Conservatives and Evangelists would go on TV blaming D&D for satanic rituals and deaths and suicides, etc…. and many TV viewers would actually believe their anti-D&D ranting!

I'm glad that RPGs in general, and D&D specifically, is being accepted more into the mainstream as a viable non-awkward hobby/leisure activity. It took long enough.
Go to Top of Page

Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire

USA
13846 Posts

Posted - 10 Jul 2017 :  16:25:26  Show Profile Send Markustay a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I accidentally started a NEW thread in the appropriate section, because I didn't think for one second that this was the appropriate sub-forum for this product (because of a name in the title?)

As for my opinion... I'll skip this.

I'll also skip Elminster's Guide to Dragons and Khelben's Guide to Butt-Scratching.

I 'may' be enticed to pick-up Alias' Guide to Boob-Mail. Ya know... for the articles...

"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone

Go to Top of Page

sleyvas
Great Reader

USA
5664 Posts

Posted - 11 Jul 2017 :  01:25:34  Show Profile Send sleyvas a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay

I accidentally started a NEW thread in the appropriate section, because I didn't think for one second that this was the appropriate sub-forum for this product (because of a name in the title?)

As for my opinion... I'll skip this.

I'll also skip Elminster's Guide to Dragons and Khelben's Guide to Butt-Scratching.

I 'may' be enticed to pick-up Alias' Guide to Boob-Mail. Ya know... for the articles...




Alias' Guide to Boob-Mail looks like a cloned copy of Sue DeNymph's Guide to Sexting .... but I mean the articles are still good.

Alavairthae, may your skill prevail

Phillip aka Sleyvas
Go to Top of Page

Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
Moderator

USA
30084 Posts

Posted - 11 Jul 2017 :  02:16:07  Show Profile Send Wooly Rupert a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Man, and all I can get a copy of is the latest Cledwyll's Secret catalog...

Candlekeep Forums Moderator

Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com
-- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct

Editor and scribe for The Candlekeep Compendium

I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!
Go to Top of Page

nblanton
Acolyte

USA
13 Posts

Posted - 14 Jul 2017 :  05:01:39  Show Profile Send nblanton a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Seems to me that several folks have hit the nail on the head and realized that this is another step down the road to Greyhawking the Realms. I remember feeling that way about Greyhawk back in the AD&D days (Greyhawk was the de facto setting even if it wasn't the "official" setting until 3rd Ed). It always seemed sorta lame. The Realms feels more and more like its getting that same feeling now. Not really advanced, but parts of its well known lore used as window dressing for what should be a generic rulebook. Every edition has had these (Fiend Folio, Manual of the Planes, Oriental Adventures, Unearthed Arcana, etc.), and I can't see any reason why now it's the time to stop that trend. To me, those variant rulebooks were always a part of D&D the game, and not part of the settings.

It seems that the only person who is adamant that this a perfectly reasonable title for a D&D 5ed Variant Rule's book spells out a WotC apologist message in thier signature.
Go to Top of Page

Diffan
Great Reader

USA
3391 Posts

Posted - 30 Jul 2017 :  23:46:10  Show Profile Send Diffan a Private Message  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by nblanton


It seems that the only person who is adamant that this a perfectly reasonable title for a D&D 5ed Variant Rule's book spells out a WotC apologist message in thier signature.



Well when the shoe fits, perfectly and every time......

luckily no ones forcing you to buy it so Gods be praised there.

4E Realms = Great Taste, Less Filling.

"If WotC were to put out a box of free money, people would still complain how it was folded."
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page
 New Topic  New Poll New Poll
 Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
Candlekeep Forum © 1999-2017 Candlekeep.com Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000