# FR Update at WotC-Year of the Ageless One



## Badkarmaboy (Jan 12, 2008)

Very interesting article by Rich Baker here 

I like it myself, but then I'm not big on FR cannon.


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 12, 2008)

1479 seems to be the start year. Hmmm.


----------



## Green Knight (Jan 12, 2008)

Here's the article. 



> *Countdown to the Realms*
> *Year of the Ageless One*
> _by Rich Baker_
> 
> ...


----------



## humble minion (Jan 12, 2008)

Hmmm.

Evil seems to be being made considerably more monolithic than it used to be - The Shades Did It All.  Thay is a ruin and the Red Wizards seem to be gone or at least largely nullified politically, there's no mention of the Zhentarim at all (they'll probably hurt from the pantheon realignment).  Myth Drannor is spoken of as a generally good-aligned place, so it seems the drow have been driven underground again (and with half the Underdark collapsing, they're probably much weaker).  I suppose this is a logical continuation from the gradually increasing significance that Shar and the Shades were given over the course of 3e, but I can't help but disagree with the choice.  Multiple competing bad guys are much more fun.

The rationale for the Dragonborn turning up is as lazy and shoehorned as you'd expect.  Still, any change so rules-driven rather than setting-driven is going to be difficult to explain elegantly.  I wonder how new-model tieflings are going to be handwaved in?

It's less points-of-lighty than some people were thinking it might be - Cormyr is strong and stable, Waterdeep is still around, and Luruar.  Still a fair bit of civilisation out there.

I fear for the Old Empires, which sadly was one of my favourite areas of 3e FR.  Unther is gone, and Mulhorand isn't even mentioned when the borders of Tymanther are talked about.  Given the pantheon cuts, I reckon Mulhorand is no more, or is battered and unrecognisable at the very least, like Thay.

'Changing Lands' seem directly analogous (because 'blatant copy' is such an uncharitable term!) to the Mournlands from Eberron.  Were the Mournlands that popular?  They always seemed nearly impossible to use in a game, from my Eberron readthrough.

Everything i'm reading seems to imply that the setting is being heavily refocused on Cormyr, the Sword Coast, and the North.  Everywhere vaguely civilised outside that area has been hammered flat.  No Unther, Thay, doubtful Mulhorand, no Sepech, Chondath, Turmish or the Shaar.  Halruaa (with all its wizards) is almost certainly a ruin since the Spellplague.  Haven't heard anything about Calimshan yet, but if WotC is as intent on eliminating real-world-analog cultures from FR as they seem to be then that's got to be on the hit list too.  The heartlands are being redefined as less the 'default' PC homeland that they were in 2e/3e as almost the only plausible one, since outside there seems to be basically nothing surviving in terms of large human/demihuman civilisation - Tymanther excluded.  They're now places to adventure to, rather than genuine parts of the world where people live and go about their business.  Very 4e attitude towards things, for better or worse.


----------



## dungeon blaster (Jan 12, 2008)

With Mystra gone, what will become of Elminster and the 7Sisters? Seems like a good way to get rid of some of them, or at least tone them down a bit.

I agree that the dragonborn were shoe-horned in without much thought. It's too bad, really, and something that I think people will not be happy about.

It sounded to me like Thay will still be around, just weakened. I sure hope the Red Wizards didn't go the way of most of southern Faerun...

I'm not particularly impressed with the increasing influence of the Shades, although I suppose it was bound to happen. If there was a Spellplague, wouldn't they suffer as well? I assume they only use the Shadow weave. Is Shar the new goddess of magic?


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 12, 2008)

I'm sure there are fans of Unther who aren't going to be happy about this, but to me, it reads like a classic Realmsism (immigrant peoples from other planes) redux. I kind of like it.

It's kind of comical how the most popular spots are essentially untouched, moments after we're told how sweeping the effects of the Spellplague were.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> Were the Mournlands that popular?  They always seemed nearly impossible to use in a game, from my Eberron readthrough.



A wasteland full of magic, monsters and ruins seemed nearly impossible to use in D&D? Seriously?


----------



## Guild Goodknife (Jan 12, 2008)

I really liked this preview. The tighter focus seems to be a good approach, i was never a fan of Unther or Mulhorand so i've got no problems with dragonborn stepping in that places (we knew they had to be included somehow, although them being transported from wherever theiy're from by the spellplague is not a terrible original idea i guess it will work, and it leaves room for some interesting story ideas). I strongly belive that the zentarim where only not mentioned because this is just a very brief overview, they're propably still there. 
Can't wait for the FRCS


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> Hmmm.
> 
> Evil seems to be being made considerably more monolithic than it used to be...



This seems to have been a trend in the Realms for some time, and I'm not all that fond of it. I find it ironic that FR villains are sometimes labeled "cartoonish" or overly black and white, when the setting's villains from the the get-go have been scheming merchant groups, secret societies, or over-ambitious nobles - folk that PCs are as likely to be trading with, unknowingly working for, or seeing at parties as actually meeting at crossed swords, and who don't even need to be evil-aligned in order to have dangerous agendas. 3e gave us the Shades, a more unified Thay, and at least one branch of the Zhentarim (the Moonsea one) with a centralized hierarchy and an explicitly religious, autocratically-determined agenda under Fzoul. 

I must say that this piece is pretty evocative and well-written IMO. I'd consider retconning the setting to look like this *without* using the death of Mystra (I mean AGAIN? Come on), the Spellplague, or any of the divine politics. Still, I prefer the situation circa 1e days, with the Sword Coast North being the Realms' most dangerous frontier, not its safe haven. But not bad as things go.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> A wasteland full of magic, monsters and ruins seemed nearly impossible to use in D&D? Seriously?



It's the lack of healing. 4e actually seems to fix this problem rather neatly (as would using some other non-magical hp recovery system, such as Iron Heroes' reserve point mechanic).


----------



## Khairn (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> It's kind of comical how the most popular spots are essentially untouched, moments after we're told how sweeping the effects of the Spellplague were.




I wouldn't call it comical.  More like cheap and lazy writing IMHO.  

They make sweeping changes to the setting but then avoided impacting the more popular locations? Who knew the Spellplague was capable of such discriminating destruction.

Sad


----------



## drothgery (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> A wasteland full of magic, monsters and ruins seemed nearly impossible to use in D&D? Seriously?




Well, kind of. Low-level PCs won't go in the Mournland because it's too dangerous to go places where you can't heal, and the means of getting around it are difficult. High-level PCs can bypass that problem easily, but it adds annoying bookkeeping.


----------



## HeavenShallBurn (Jan 12, 2008)

Don't like it but otherwise don't really care.  If I'm going to use the Realms canon is the grey box anything afterwards is merely an option and most of them unused.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 12, 2008)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> It's the lack of healing. 4e actually seems to fix this problem rather neatly (as would using some other non-magical hp recovery system, such as Iron Heroes' reserve point mechanic).




That's part of it, but it's more the weird-wild-magic-mutant-causing-disaster-area vibe I have trouble with.  I mean, it's evocative and a classic literary device (like the Stain from Mieville's Iron Council) but I always find random environmental threats like that really hard to adjudicate in-game without making them feel either silly and trivial at one end of the scale or overly PC-brutalising at the other.

"Roll a fort save"
"14"
"Right, as you are setting up the campfire, a weird green mist arises.  When it subsides, you have fanged tentacles growing out of your eyeballs and an insatiable desire for human spinal fluid"
"Um..."

I mean, the magic, monsters and ruins are fine, but you don't need the sorcerous equivalent of a toxic waste dump to situate them in.  They do just fine by themselves.


----------



## Mieric (Jan 12, 2008)

Nice article and overview of the coming changes to the Realms.... But it definitely reinforces my impression that the 4e Realms do not appear to be for me. 

I'll just stick with my 1e, 2e, and 3e Realms (sans the Time of Troubles of course).


----------



## Darth Cyric (Jan 12, 2008)

I actually agree that evil being monolithic was a trend that started in 3e, not in 4e.

Personally, from what I've seen so far, I don't see how the 4e Realms are any worse than they were in 3e, and the reboot may very well be a de facto improvement. The 3e Realms failed miserably in my eyes as soon as it completely screwed up all the grand plot points from the last 2e Realms product, the utterly brilliant Cloak and Dagger.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> I wouldn't call it comical.  More like cheap and lazy writing IMHO.
> 
> They make sweeping changes to the setting but then avoided impacting the more popular locations? Who knew the Spellplague was capable of such discriminating destruction.



That's not lazy. They specifically said, long ago, that the popular places that were working weren't going to get fixed.

It's, you know, doing what people _wanted_ them to do with Waterdeep, etc.


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> 'Changing Lands' seem directly analogous (because 'blatant copy' is such an uncharitable term!) to the Mournlands from Eberron.  Were the Mournlands that popular?  They always seemed nearly impossible to use in a game, from my Eberron readthrough.






			
				Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> A wasteland full of magic, monsters and ruins seemed nearly impossible to use in D&D? Seriously?




You can use it. Actually I like Eberron campaigns set near the Mournlands. You never know what horrible monster will come out next. Or maybe the Lord of Blades' minions.

However, you can't actually go in there! No healing, starvation and dehydration serious concerns, and the horrible monsters! Living Spells are fun if you're the DM  The environment makes a trek through Dark Sun's harsh deserts look like a pleasant Florida day... and I'm only exaggerating slightly.

I was in a group that played the Eberron adventure that has us going into the Mournland. We played the adventure unmodified, despite being 8th-level. (Considerably higher than the adventure was written for.) We avoided random encounters but still got our butts kicked when we did have to fight. (This despite being indoors in a weird area where we could heal. I think the DM was being nice to us there.)

Maybe it's a better task at higher levels though, but I simply can't see why a sane adventurer would want to go there. They'd need a *really* good reason.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 12, 2008)

Edit: deleted post due to something horrible going wrong...


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 12, 2008)

OK, after a decade of 'ugh, FR,' I'm interested again.

Very well done, I think. 

I have no problem with the cut-and-paste addition of an entire Dragonborn civilization. That certainly better than "enough random people turned into Dragonborn that they made their own culture and avoided being killed like any other monster."

I didn't see mention of tieflings. (What if they are treated like I just stated... randomly people became them but weren't killed for their devilishly-good looks?  )

I wonder if the shade/shadow-transformed Netherese are the other new PC race (besides Drow?)


----------



## humble minion (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> That's not lazy. They specifically said, long ago, that the popular places that were working weren't going to get fixed.
> 
> It's, you know, doing what people _wanted_ them to do with Waterdeep, etc.




Agree that Waterdeep etc remaining largely intact was inevitable.  Commercial reality and all that.  And to be honest, given all the other changes, if you significantly change Waterdeep and the like then there's basically nothing left of the familiar Realms at all.

The changes aren't lazy, but the _explanation_ is.  If there's been an editorial decision to massively change the entire world except the popular areas in the west and north, then good writing would come up with an event that would logically leave the west and north unaffected.  Instead what we've got is:

OMG GLOBAL CATACLYSM!!!1!  ENTIRE WORLD* WRACKED BY RANDOM MASSIVE DESTRUCTION!!
* - Entire world does not include areas where it would be commercially inconvenient for random massive destruction(tm) to occur.  Don't ask why, it's magic.

If they really, really wanted to get rid of Mulhorand and Thay, why not just make them have a massive war of mutual annihilation?  It's far enough away that Waterdeep and the like won't be in the firing line, it's been on the cards all the way through 3rd ed, and between the Mulhorandi gods and the Zulkirs backed up by the likes of Larloch, surely there's have been enough firepower floating around to spill over into Unther and other neighbouring lands to have whatever other setting-changing effects you'd like (dragonborn, for instance).


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 12, 2008)

Interesting also that he stated the city-state of Shade went to the Plane of Shadow. Is that old language, and he really meant to state 'went to the Shadowfell?' Or maybe the Plane of Shadow merged with the Shadowfell, which allowed the city to regain contact with Toril (now Abier-Toril.) I kinda like that thought. Or maybe he really did mean Plane of Shadow, which is FR-unique and separate from the Shadowfell. Curious...


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 12, 2008)

I agree that it's definitely an evocative piece. However, I liked my Realms the way they were, thank you. This thing is reminding me of Dragonlance 5th Age.... and we all know how that went over.

On the other hand, Realms history is full of sweeping changes that occurred suddenly, it's just hard to see it happen when I was happy with the setting more or less the way it was. Grrrrrr.

I also have to wonder how this will be represented in the novels. I haven't read the latest Salvatore books, but I was under the impression that he wasn't done with Drizzt by a long shot. Are they going to allow him to keep going a hundred years in the past, or are they going to kill one of their top selling novel lines? I'm guessing we'll see how the death of Mystra affects the world through Drizzt's eyes. After that though, I have no idea what they would do with him.

I'm intrigued.... and a little fearful.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> That's not lazy. They specifically said, long ago, that the popular places that were working weren't going to get fixed.
> 
> It's, you know, doing what people _wanted_ them to do with Waterdeep, etc.




Exactly.

The only thing I don't care for is the dragonborn kingdom.

Other than that it looks interesting. 

Lets keep in mind people that this article focuses on familiar locations and organizations, and only a handful of them at that.

We have no idea if the Shades are the only uber-evil orginazation, or anything else really.


----------



## Traycor (Jan 12, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> I wonder if the shade/shadow-transformed Netherese are the other new PC race (besides Drow?)



Ahh! This seems likely. And with Artemis Entreri being a shade these days, they have an iconic character in FR to represent the race.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 12, 2008)

Orcs are the other popular guess for 2nd PC race, although they didn't get mentioned in this article.
(Just reminding myself...)


----------



## Traycor (Jan 12, 2008)

Whisperfoot said:
			
		

> I haven't read the latest Salvatore books, but I was under the impression that he wasn't done with Drizzt by a long shot. Are they going to allow him to keep going a hundred years in the past, or are they going to kill one of their top selling novel lines? I'm guessing we'll see how the death of Mystra affects the world through Drizzt's eyes. After that though, I have no idea what they would do with him.



Salvatore's latest novel, "The Orc King" placed Drizzt in this new future Forgotten Realms timeline during the prologue and epilogue of the book. So yes, he will still be around and kicking in the future.

Go pick up the novel if you want to know more!


----------



## marune (Jan 12, 2008)

Meh.

I was waiting for this and I thought it would be a lot more exciting....


----------



## Khairn (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> That's not lazy. They specifically said, long ago, that the popular places that were working weren't going to get fixed.
> 
> It's, you know, doing what people _wanted_ them to do with Waterdeep, etc.




Sorry Whiz, but even if they announced they weren't "fixing" Waterdeep, the North and Cormyr, the final story they put together is plain poor.  The rationalization for why the epic and devastating Spellplague that could devastate gods and empires but failed to touch 3 locations is ... what again?


----------



## Reynard (Jan 12, 2008)

I am not a Realms fan (I'll be playing the Realm for the first time in over 20 years of playing D&D shortly, in fact) so I don't have an investment one way or the other.  however, the Realms has been a keystone D&D setting for as long as I have been aware of such things, and it strikes me as a little worrisome that in order to make a fundamental D&D setting work for the new edition they have to not only advance the timeline 100 years but enact a Crisis on infinite Earths level "event" to make it mesh with the new rules set.

If anything says "4E isn't D&D anymore", that's it.


----------



## Traycor (Jan 12, 2008)

skeptic said:
			
		

> Meh.
> 
> I was waiting for this and I thought it would be a lot more exciting....



Yeah. Instead of using the article to showcase the new realms, it looks like they used most of the space to calm the worries of the old school FR fans.

Really, the only true change we saw was the dragonborn stuff. The rest of the entire article was, "Not much has changed. Be at peace."

...kinda hard to get excited over that.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> Sorry Whiz, but even if they announced they weren't "fixing" Waterdeep, the North and Cormyr, the final story they put together is plain poor.  The rationalization for why the epic and devastating Spellplague that could devastate gods and empires but failed to touch 3 locations is ... what again?




What would the rationalization been had they destroyed Waterdeep and left Thay alone?

Random chance. 

Did you want them to make a fortitude save for all the locations in the Realms to see if they lived or died?

They took what worked and was popular, altered it a little bit, and rehauled everything else.


----------



## BlackMoria (Jan 12, 2008)

> Yeah. Instead of using the article to showcase the new realms, it looks like they used most of the space to calm *confirm* the worries of the old school FR fans.




The above is more like it.

As an old school FR fan, I am not 'calmed' by the article.  More like a rapid heightening of my apprehensions and concerns.  The initial reaction to the article on Candlekeep is not postive.  I expect a lot of angst once more see the article.


----------



## Traycor (Jan 12, 2008)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> The above is more like it.
> 
> As an old school FR fan, I am not 'calmed' by the article.  More like a rapid heightening of my apprehensions and concerns.  The initial reaction to the article on Candlekeep is not postive.  I expect a lot of angst once more see the article.



You are most likely correct, which is why I'm confused that they took this direction. Older fans that enjoy FR the way it is were going to get worked up one way or another, so why not just hit us with the changes and try to get folks excited about them... instead of tap-dancing around, leaving the old fans pissed and the new fans bored.


----------



## JoelF (Jan 12, 2008)

BlackMoria said:
			
		

> The above is more like it.
> 
> As an old school FR fan, I am not 'calmed' by the article.  More like a rapid heightening of my apprehensions and concerns.  The initial reaction to the article on Candlekeep is not postive.  I expect a lot of angst once more see the article.




I agree 100%.  This article pretty much confirmed for me that the 4E realms is not a place I want to game in.  Not that it will necessarily be bad, but it won't be the realms I've bought every supplement and novel of, and love.  They should have left the realms intact and did a 3E style conversion and said that the new rules were always there, we just didn't realise that some of the characters were actually sorcerers, etc.  

I may continue reading the novels, but don't have any desire to buy/read/or play in the 4E realms.  In particular, not only did they destroy entire countries, but I'm pretty shocked that Baldur's Gate is now the largest city, bigger than both Waterdeep and Calimport.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 12, 2008)

JoelF said:
			
		

> I agree 100%.  This article pretty much confirmed for me that the 4E realms is not a place I want to game in.  Not that it will necessarily be bad, but it won't be the realms I've bought every supplement and novel of, and love.  They should have left the realms intact and did a 3E style conversion and said that the new rules were always there, we just didn't realise that some of the characters were actually sorcerers, etc.
> 
> I may continue reading the novels, but don't have any desire to buy/read/or play in the 4E realms.  In particular, not only did they destroy entire countries, but I'm pretty shocked that *Baldur's Gate* is now the largest city, bigger than both Waterdeep and Calimport.




Baldur's Gate is without a doubt the most famous Realms city to non-Realms players, due to the video games. 

Its not surprising they decided to make it a bigger focus of the 4E Realms.


----------



## TwinBahamut (Jan 12, 2008)

I never really got interested in the Realms before, but the setting described in this article is interesting. Civilization trying to recover from magical cataclysms, fear that the cataclysms may come again, ancient empires rebuilding, a few cities that miraculously survived, flooded with refugees and suffering internal strife...

It is something of a post-apocalyptic fantasy setting, which might be fun. I am tempted to pick up the FRCS now.


----------



## Hunter In Darkness (Jan 12, 2008)

Reynard said:
			
		

> I am not a Realms fan (I'll be playing the Realm for the first time in over 20 years of playing D&D shortly, in fact) so I don't have an investment one way or the other.  however, the Realms has been a keystone D&D setting for as long as I have been aware of such things, and it strikes me as a little worrisome that in order to make a fundamental D&D setting work for the new edition they have to not only advance the timeline 100 years but enact a Crisis on infinite Earths level "event" to make it mesh with the new rules set.
> 
> If anything says "4E isn't D&D anymore", that's it.




thank you for saying that. i am a realms player and dm  and i find this well shoehorned in. it doesnt even look like the realms any more . ya know i could swear the old grey box and 2e stuff pretty much said that without the weave there is no magic , sorry i dont get the spellpleauqe thing . the goddess mof magic has been killed 2 times and magic stoped working that simple without a goddess to control the weave it  cant be accessed  corse i could be wrong who knows(dont say wotc   ).it just seams like a big middle finger to all oldschool realms fans to me. i'll stick with my 1e,2e, and 3e books at lest they can be used togather


----------



## Traycor (Jan 12, 2008)

TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> It is something of a post-apocalyptic fantasy setting, which might be fun. I am tempted to pick up the FRCS now.



It would have been post-apocolyptic if it had been set 80 years prior, but a 94 year (or 104) year advance in the timeline is a long time. Things would be fairly settled back to normal after such a long time.

Think about the difference between 2008 and 1904. Not only have we recovered from disasters from back then, but we've had many other disasters in the mean time.

I doubt folks in 4E FR would even much think about the Spellplague anymore. It would be ancient history.


----------



## Raloc (Jan 12, 2008)

My only problem with the new changes is that it makes a lot of stuff I have unusable.  In 3e games, I can "mostly" use the FR atlas almost unaltered.  4e?  Nope.  Even the fluff from lot of the 2e stuff is unusable now.


----------



## PeterWeller (Jan 12, 2008)

I actually like a lot of this.  Baldur's Gate's growth is pretty logical, and it's cool to see it become really important.  The Shade Netheril puts a Big, Evil Country smack dab in the middle of things, instead of floating off on the edges like the BECs of yore.  I have no problem with the Vilhon becoming a land of crazy magic and death.  Thay lost its charm with the Enclaves, and even though it's sad to see it get messed up so much, at least it remains as a source of Evil.  Even the Dragonborn shoe-horning works.  There are multiple instances of wham, bang, new race and culture show up wholesale through magical-planar shenanigans, but all these prior instances happened "way back when."  Now, we have a case of this old Realms trope as part of the immediate past.  It's also nice to see Amn being more important.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 12, 2008)

The fandom rage is starting high on the WOTC forum. Expect bans and an 'Holy fandom jihad', and Candlekeep become the Paizo + Canonfire.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> 'Changing Lands' seem directly analogous (because 'blatant copy' is such an uncharitable term!) to the Mournlands from Eberron.  Were the Mournlands that popular?  They always seemed nearly impossible to use in a game, from my Eberron readthrough.




I was thinking more like the Cacotopic Stain from China Mieville's books.


----------



## The Eternal GM (Jan 12, 2008)

I've already seen a lot of major negative response to the changes on rpg.net (most seem to be concerned with the name of one minor background character...  But rpg.net is weird like that) and undoubtably a lot more is to follow once the real setting loyal fans see what has been done to their setting.

"Like someone breaking into your house, taking your good furniture and replacing it all with something tacky.  And swapping out all your old music of 20+ years for Britney!" Was basically how I summed it up, not for myself, but for some readers and players certainly.

To me, and I have played FR in a few editions, ran a short campaign in 3.5 and enjoyed a few novels and crpg's set there too...  No, I welcome it all.  Really.

Realms is post-great war and second world war...  For us now I mean.  Over a lifetime has passed since all the tragedy happened, and sure the political landscape has changed.  We've got more migrants from other worlds (c'mon, the dragonborn arrival is no less lazy than all the other demi-humans really) and a much changed pantheon.

Ultimately, I think it fulfills its purpose though.  New fans or casual fans (me included) can enjoy a setting with key elements still intact.  The places are recognizable, but we don't need to have a whole library of knowledge regarding it all.  It's that 'old is new again' sorta approach.

I'm not saying it was absolutely the best way to handle everything.  Maybe comparisons to a DC Comics 'Crisis' (which I regard as the height of shoddy, lazy and pathetic gimmick writing by the way) isn't too far off the mark if you're very invested in the game already...  But then again, I really don't think a 4th Edition that continues on from 3rd Edition made much sense either.

With 4th Edition the slate is clean for FR.  Will it draw in new readers and players?  Dunno.  Maybe it is more of an 'Ultimate FR' than 'Crisis FR' and will really work well.  

It does mean that new supplements have one tidy kick off point.  All the setting information as it comes out will be easy to associate with the new FR world, and not lost amid the details of the last.  I know that somewhere along the line you could ask "Why make it realms at all then?" but we all know that the reason is the marketable name, setting and particularly novels.

So ultimately, I WILL be getting it, and likely enjoying it as much as I did 3rd Edition or any other.  A fair chunk of fans will stick to what they know and like, whether that means swapping editions or not.

After all, I don't think Ed Greenwood's own game will be based upon it.  He and his players decided against the Time of Troubles last interview I ever read with him.  Don't imagine he'll be following WotC's canon for the setting, heh.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 12, 2008)

I hope the Zhents are still there in the Moonsea in Zhental Keep. I'm hoping they've taken control of that northern region to form the Zhent Republic. Also hope Thay still exists. I wouldn't be surprised to hear the Thay wizards made pacts with devils and some of them became tieflings....

Hopefully Thay took over the Symbul's (or whatever her name is) land and killed her.

Hope Amn survived. I did a long campaign there so I learn to like the place.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 12, 2008)

Traycor said:
			
		

> It would have been post-apocolyptic if it had been set 80 years prior, but a 94 year (or 104) year advance in the timeline is a long time. Things would be fairly settled back to normal after such a long time.
> 
> Think about the difference between 2008 and 1904. Not only have we recovered from disasters from back then, but we've had many other disasters in the mean time.
> 
> I doubt folks in 4E FR would even much think about the Spellplague anymore. It would be ancient history.



Well, among humans anyway.  There are probably lots of demihumans all over the place who lived through it.

"You kids today, you've got it easy with your static laws of physics.  Back in my day, I had to get up every day and walk through a blizzard of the dreams of stillborn dragons to get to the only well that drew water that didn't scream when you boiled it.  And when I got there, if my bucket hadn't turned into a Klein bottle, I'd have to rush the water back home before the Dry People found me."

"Sure, whatever Grandpa."


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 12, 2008)

You know... it sounds awesome.

Playing an old fuddled demihuman who was THERE.... and nobody believe his outragrous - yet real - tales.


----------



## The Eternal GM (Jan 12, 2008)

The Ubbergeek said:
			
		

> You know... it sounds awesome.
> 
> Playing an old fuddled demihuman who was THERE.... and nobody believe his outragrous - yet real - tales.




It does amuse doesn't it...  Saying being one of the thunder twin dwarves or something, and all the shoter-lived races just thinking you're a bit 'eccentric' when you go on about the old gods, weird magic and all those magical treasures you had in your adventuring days.


----------



## The Human Target (Jan 12, 2008)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> Well, among humans anyway.  There are probably lots of demihumans all over the place who lived through it.
> 
> "You kids today, you've got it easy with your static laws of physics.  Back in my day, I had to get up every day and walk through a blizzard of the dreams of stillborn dragons to get to the only well that drew water that didn't scream when you boiled it.  And when I got there, if my bucket hadn't turned into a Klein bottle, I'd have to rush the water back home before the Dry People found me."
> 
> "Sure, whatever Grandpa."




Thats fantastic.


----------



## Voss (Jan 12, 2008)

The Human Target said:
			
		

> What would the rationalization been had they destroyed Waterdeep and left Thay alone?




Why did Thay suddenly sprout a giant mountain of writer fiat, again?  I wasn't clear on that.  I guess 'the Spellplague did it' is the answer, but really...

Speaking of which, there were two things that really bothered me

First,  the dragonborn just popping in.  Literally.  Granted, a lot of the barely-fleshed-out-copies-of-real-world-nations needed to go, but this was just like watching the authors bring in the industrial eraser and just hack out part of the background, and crudely drop the new PC race in. 

Second, the spellplague doesn't affect extremely magical areas.  It stemmed directly from Mystra's destruction, but, somehow, where her influence is strongest (mythals and whatnot) isn't affected. That seems completely and utterly backwards.  

I also can't see Cormyr surviving between a conquered Sembia and the might of the archwizards.  Send some humanoid hordes in, while armies from Sembia attack, and then just gate some extra armies into the unprotected cities.  Crunch.

Anyway, uninspired and sad.   I was amused by the mention of the Moonshaes (and the inevitable Feywild), but confused as to why Amn would bother with them.  But mostly I'm just glad I don't have an emotional investment in FR.  

Snerk.  'Changing lands'.  Heh.  At least they aren't called Realms of Chaos...


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 12, 2008)

The WOTC forum hinted that the destruction is strangely stopped or mellowed around the ruins and ancient outline of one of more ancient empire...

There may be an Atlantide Cause there.


----------



## Khairn (Jan 12, 2008)

The Human Target said:
			
		

> What would the rationalization been had they destroyed Waterdeep and left Thay alone?
> 
> Random chance.
> 
> ...




I understand what they did, and why they did it.  All I was commenting on was the poor rationalization.  They wanted to change the entire world (which they did) but wanted to keep the places that everyone knows best intact (which they did).  So they just decided that the Spellplague stopped at certain geographic locations for unknown reasons.  As FR stories go, that's one of the most arbitrary and nonsensical that I have seen.  But that's just my opinion.


----------



## Sammael (Jan 12, 2008)

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
			
		

> I'm sure there are fans of Unther who aren't going to be happy about this, but to me, it reads like a classic Realmsism (immigrant peoples from other planes) redux. I kind of like it.



Considering that my next campaign is called "Reclamation of Unther," and is focused on driving the Mulhorandi troops out of the place, you can imagine what my opinion of this change is.


----------



## Jack99 (Jan 12, 2008)

Well, at least we now know if the dragonborn are willing to wear dragonarmor


----------



## Orius (Jan 12, 2008)

Doesn't really bother me.  I suppose some Realms fans might be royally pissed, but most of the areas that got smashed up seem like the remote regions that were underused anyway.  By making them messed up like this, you know unstable magic and terrible monsters, I think perhaps it gives a reason to put paragon and maybe even epic level adventures in those places were they wouldn't have worked as well before.  

The smashing of Thay probably is related to the removal of spell schools.  Weren't the Zulkirs all based on the old schools?

Ad Unther, I don't know how popular that area was, but from what I know, it was a copy and paste from real history area of the Realms.  

Don't really know what to make of this new Netheril.  The Bedine stuck out like a sore thumb (especially with more Arabian analogues down in Zakhara and that place just off the east edge of the map) anyway.  I have no idea what these Shades are, but I gather it's something based on 3e developments.  I also note that with Mystra gone, some of the influences that kept Netheril from recovering from its literal fall (ie Mystra rewriting the rules of magic so there'd be no more Karsus-style deicide) are gone as well.

As for the Sword Coast, Waterdeep, and Cormyr being largely unchanged, not surprising.  That's where most players like to hang out anyway.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 12, 2008)

Just remember that they can fix this all very easy. When 5E rolls around and they realize that they've just destroyed the sales of their premier campaign setting, all they have to do is write a novel that sends the twisted, shattered Elminster back in time to stop Mystra from every buying the farm. Bam! Reset to the end of the 3E timeline without having to worry about 5th Age..... er, I mean the 4E iteration of the Realms. Of course then you'll have all the people who invested in the books upset, but hey, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

Why does this new vision of the Realms remind me of the setting for Guildwars?


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 12, 2008)

But... troublings futures...

What if it's GOOD? 


What if the new FR is POPULAR?


What if at the end, the new age is prefered?


----------



## BadMojo (Jan 12, 2008)

I've got a definite feeling of "meh" with regards to the changes.  I don't see anything that's really exciting, but I don't really miss the things they tossed either.

I'm certainly not sorry to see Mulhorand and Unther go.  They always stuck out, in a bad way, to me.  They're like ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia with...hobbits?  Did more than three people actually ask for that?

With regards to Thay, I only skimmed the article but it doesn't really say that the country is gone and the Red Wizards are dead.  Weakened, but I don't think they've gone the way of Unther and Mulhorand.


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 12, 2008)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> I'm certainly not sorry to see Mulhorand and Unther go.  They always stuck out, in a bad way, to me.  They're like ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia with...hobbits?  Did more than three people actually ask for that?




I actually liked them and had considered setting a campaign there someday.   :\


----------



## Green Knight (Jan 12, 2008)

BadMojo said:
			
		

> With regards to Thay, I only skimmed the article but it doesn't really say that the country is gone and the Red Wizards are dead.  Weakened, but I don't think they've gone the way of Unther and Mulhorand.




It's not gone. Rich Baker has pretty much stated elsewhere that Thay's still around (as is Szass Tam), and that there'll be a novel series detailing Thay in the 4E Realms.


----------



## EditorBFG (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> The rationale for the Dragonborn turning up is as lazy and shoehorned as you'd expect.  Still, any change so rules-driven rather than setting-driven is going to be difficult to explain elegantly.



Actually, if I recall correctly (haven't done much with my Realms books the last few years), there is precedent for Unther being overrun by a non-human race from another dimension. The Orcgate was there, I think. So there is a setting-driven logic to Unther being the place where a dimensional gate opened up.


----------



## Hunter In Darkness (Jan 12, 2008)

that was the thay area that the orcgate wars happned IIRC


----------



## WhatGravitas (Jan 12, 2008)

Huh... strange. Reading it, it doesn't feel like the Realms I've learned to know over the last years (mind you, I've only seen the 3E Realms, so Time of Troubles and 3E-retcon are more of an internet tale to me), still a lot of Realmsian feel was changed.

On the other hand, it sounds like a pretty interesting campaign setting (if I ignore the fact that this is the new FR). So I'm probably going to like it.

But miss the old realms a bit. Old FR and 4E FR are more like BSG and BSG re-imagined to me.

Cheers, LT.


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Jan 12, 2008)

Hah! I like the new realms. The changes are big enough  to buy the new FRCS. If i had owned the 2e one back then, i´d never bought the 3e setting book - far too few things changed
And i´ve already lots of  ideas how cool the dragonborn can be in the setting: the shades and Comyr are trying to gain the trust of the planar newcomers, courting them with gifts and threats alike. Sounds like a diplomatic mission by the players could be in order, eh?   

And regarding the way the wrote the Dragonborn into the setting: I love that they had the balls to do it the lazy way. You know, like a over-stressed DM would have done it: "Dragonborn? Uh, they, well, came... from another world. Yes! Thats it! Do you want to play one?"

Oooh, and the thing about Baldurs Gate as a sprawling refugee city: Can i smell a BG city book? Can i?


----------



## Mortellan (Jan 12, 2008)

Looks like the FR fans on the WotC boards overwhelmingly hate these changes so far. I'm sure the 4e FRCS will still be a bestseller however.


----------



## ZombieRoboNinja (Jan 12, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Second, the spellplague doesn't affect extremely magical areas.  It stemmed directly from Mystra's destruction, but, somehow, where her influence is strongest (mythals and whatnot) isn't affected. That seems completely and utterly backwards.




I think the theory is that it's not magic ITSELF that went crazy, but the Weave, which is just the INTERFACE wizards use to access magic. So permanent enchantments remain in place, and permanent wards like Mythals help to push back the gusts of wild magic blowing all over the place. Meanwhile, all the wizards are going around batshit insane saying, "What do you MEAN I get new spells every encounter, and I can cast Magic Missile whenever I want? My whole world is gooooone!"


----------



## delericho (Jan 12, 2008)

I'm not an FR player or DM. These changes make me no more likely to become one than I was previously.

Actually, that's not accurate. These changes make me _less_ likely to pick up the FR than I was previously - if they're willing to advance the timeline by a hundred years and utterly change the world, what is to stop them doing that again, and trashing a world that I have become invested in? Better to just not become invested in the world in the first place, IMO.

(Note: I came into AD&D with 2nd Edition, so I'm not familiar with the Time of Troubles in any detail.)

I think I would have just gone with a full reboot of the setting. Still, it's their call.


----------



## ferratus (Jan 12, 2008)

I think a reboot will probably be what's next for the Forgotten Realms.  This seems to solve few of the complaints that people had with the setting.   One complaint was that the Forgotten Realms had too much obscure backstory to get through.  How does this solve things?   Sure, you might know as much as the grognard about the new setting because so much has changed, but this just adds more ruins for extinct civilizations to figure out the backstory for.

The uber-NPC's that people didn't like (namely Drizzt and Elminster) are still around, plus given the massive changes that have happened in the 3e forgotten realms novels, the PC's still seem to have bit parts.  If the novels can take away or change such foundational things as Myth Drannor, the PC's are always going to be second rate heroes.  

So I would say that perhaps rebooting would solve these problems.  I don't mean changing it back to the original box set (which would only please the very hardcore) but rewrite the setting so that it synthesizes the old and new and thus simplifies the backstory and makes it fresh.

For example, consider this alternate chronology for Myth Drannor.  The Drow come out of the Underdark with plans of conquest.  They recruit several tribes of savage humanoids of the region.  The exiled Siluvanedan Houses who allied with the Dlardrageths join with their ranks, bringing their summoned demons.   This army proves an effective engine of destruction, but disintegrates into warring factions over the spoils.  The drow army is disbanded and forms small bands of survivors and raiders.  The Zhents, looking to cash in on the ruined elven city, summon devils to fight the Demons.   They break free because of the Mythal's enchantments, and you now have a Devil vs. Demon turf war.

There, I pretty much put things back to the way they were in the 3rd edition FRCS and removed a whole load of backstory.   The story is essentially the same, but reduces overlap between Myth Drannor and the High Forest (which in turn could be an unfallen Illefarn as a point of light to contrast with Myth Drannor's darkness).  Plus, I can set it 50-100 years in the past so that Myth Drannor is still fresh for the picking.

This I think would produce a fresher setting than destroying until it is new again, and a lot less forced.


----------



## Wormwood (Jan 12, 2008)

The Ubbergeek said:
			
		

> The fandom rage is starting high on the WOTC forum.







I'm shocked, shocked to find fandom rage on the internet!


----------



## TwoSix (Jan 12, 2008)

Mortellan said:
			
		

> Looks like the FR fans on the WotC boards overwhelmingly hate these changes so far. I'm sure the 4e FRCS will still be a bestseller however.




It's hard to sustain your nerd rage without actually buying the offending object.  And they say WotC doesn't know what it's doing.


----------



## TwoSix (Jan 12, 2008)

ZombieRoboNinja said:
			
		

> I think the theory is that it's not magic ITSELF that went crazy, but the Weave, which is just the INTERFACE wizards use to access magic. So permanent enchantments remain in place, and permanent wards like Mythals help to push back the gusts of wild magic blowing all over the place. Meanwhile, all the wizards are going around batshit insane saying, "What do you MEAN I get new spells every encounter, and I can cast Magic Missile whenever I want? My whole world is gooooone!"




Exactly.  If the electrical grid went down all at once, the places hit the hardest are the places that don't have their own generator.  Not a perfect analogy, I know.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 12, 2008)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> It's the lack of healing. 4e actually seems to fix this problem rather neatly (as would using some other non-magical hp recovery system, such as Iron Heroes' reserve point mechanic).




Quick fix in 3.5:

Use Rope Trick. Heal in the extraplanar space, that is not the mournland, and proceed.


----------



## Tharen the Damned (Jan 12, 2008)

Raloc said:
			
		

> My only problem with the new changes is that it makes a lot of stuff I have unusable.  In 3e games, I can "mostly" use the FR atlas almost unaltered.  4e?  Nope.  Even the fluff from lot of the 2e stuff is unusable now.




This is why you HAVE o buy the new FR Stuff. The world is changed and all the old (and unfun) Stuff is of no use.
FR is a Brave New World now!


----------



## La Bete (Jan 12, 2008)

Well out of that article, two thinks leaped out:

Baldurs Gate - First reaction was "a teeming hive of scum and villainy" Yay! (Even if it's not)

Drifting earthmotes with wierd aerial forests - As a player I'd want a keep on one of those, with a gurard of halfing giant bat riders, stat!

I mostly liked the 1e-3e realms, and have played/gm'd them a few times, but this all looks pretty interesting.


----------



## Henry (Jan 12, 2008)

ZombieRoboNinja said:
			
		

> I think the theory is that it's not magic ITSELF that went crazy, but the Weave, which is just the INTERFACE wizards use to access magic. So permanent enchantments remain in place, and permanent wards like Mythals help to push back the gusts of wild magic blowing all over the place. Meanwhile, all the wizards are going around batshit insane saying, "What do you MEAN I get new spells every encounter, and I can cast Magic Missile whenever I want? My whole world is gooooone!"




I also recall that there is a precedent for Mystra dying and magic not going "poof": The Time of Troubles itself. After the Karsus Incident, the reason for her placing a portion of her magic in various Chosen and other vessels was not just because of the concerns of other gods over her power, but so that she would not be the only thing holding the Weave together. When she died, magic didn't go *blip**off*, but more like "short circuit." The disappearance of the Weave might be artistic license for what really happened, which was the alteration of the weave into something else entirely.

All in all, I'm not happy with the changes, but I admit they might be popular ones. like Whisperfoot, I always wanted to do a Thay/Mulhorand/Unther campaign, but my players never wanted to -- I couldn't get them jazzed about something like it. So, maybe the FR designers have a point...


----------



## Henry (Jan 12, 2008)

Tharen the Damned said:
			
		

> This is why you HAVE o buy the new FR Stuff. The world is changed and all the old (and unfun) Stuff is of no use.
> FR is a Brave New World now!




Bah. There's one good thing -- don't forget there's still a wealth of old FR stuff on RPGNow...


----------



## JeffB (Jan 12, 2008)

I was curious to start getting some info about the "new" Realms. I'm an old Grey Box fan, but hardly a Realms Scholar or hardcore fan, so I thought I'd "wait and see".

That said, I thought this article sounds like something a tween-age DM would come up with. Its just "lame". Then again, I've found most of the major changes to the Realms are pretty lame over the years. Cloak & Dagger had alot of good info and they just kind of glossed over/ff'ed  it all for 3E. 

Anyhoo these kinds of 4E changes are def not to my tastes. I'll stick with that old grey box and the first few FR# supplements.


----------



## jasin (Jan 12, 2008)

Raloc said:
			
		

> My only problem with the new changes is that it makes a lot of stuff I have unusable.  In 3e games, I can "mostly" use the FR atlas almost unaltered.  4e?  Nope.  Even the fluff from lot of the 2e stuff is unusable now.



Assuming you like the 4E rules but don't like the 4E FR, couldn't you just run 2E/3E FR using 4E rules?


----------



## Brakkart (Jan 12, 2008)

Traycor said:
			
		

> Ahh! This seems likely. And with Artemis Entreri being a shade these days, they have an iconic character in FR to represent the race.




They made Arfemis a shade? Lame! They already had an iconic shade to represent the race, he's called Erevis Cale!


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Jan 12, 2008)

Brakkart said:
			
		

> They made Arfemis a shade? Lame! They already had an iconic shade to represent the race, he's called Erevis Cale!




They did it so he could live a hundred plus years, actually. Also, this means Drizzt can't beat him just by waiting twenty years. (It's already implied that Artemis had gotten a bit slower with age, contrast to the still-young Drizzt.)

At least, that's what I *assume*. IMO, the only iconic shade shouldn't be good-aligned. (For that matter, doesn't Erevis Cale have some additional powers anyway?)


----------



## Sitara (Jan 12, 2008)

Whats the point of the changes if the Sword Coast (where most people play anyway) remains unchanged?

i would have preferred if they had destroyed Waterdeep, made Elminster go mad due to mystra's death and become a lich and a major setting villain, make Thay into a lawful good paladin/white mage stronghold, and have the Zhentarim completely destroy the Harpers and now be led by Elminster the LichLord. 

Then the would go ahead and reveal that Elminsters successor is a wizard called Rajaat, with some very interesting take on wizardry. rajaat would go onto become a very powerful 'good' wizard, and recruit 12 apprentices of his own.  

Soon, Rajaat would go on a crusade against 'evil' and start killing all evil races. he would be very popular in Faerun. 

Meanwhile some adventurers would finally kill elminister the lichlord. (via published advanetures...aka your group would do this)

In dndn 5E they finally push the setting ahead 200 years, and now reveal that Rajaat and his 'champions' actually destroiyed most races; but their particular brand of wizardry somehow altered the fabric of the world. Also, Rajaat even drew upon the sun for power and thus has nearly killed it. 

The setting would be renamed DarkSun, adn that would be FR's new future.

Thoughts?


----------



## Shieldhaven (Jan 12, 2008)

I was a Realms fan for a long time, but I really disliked the direction of the continuing development of the world's flavor over the past few years. This article piques my interest again, particularly with the discussion of Cormyr and Sembia. There was a time when I didn't think I'd say this, but I'll be buying a copy of the 4e FRCS on the day of its release or very shortly thereafter.

Haven


----------



## Kraydak (Jan 12, 2008)

What happened to dragons?  The older dragons are powerful spellcasters, and thus one presumes would go insane.  Unfortunately, dragon populations (especially at the older age categories) replenish very slowly (much longer than 100 years)...

Dragons are the most iconic race to have such problems, but I think a lot of races will.


----------



## Kaodi (Jan 12, 2008)

I suppose it might be interesting to see what is in store for a middle-aged Driz'zt. A little less whirlwind of death, a little more thoughtful tactician might do him some good. And you know, with a hundred more years laid on, perhaps he will be a much more mature character now.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 12, 2008)

Mortellan said:
			
		

> Looks like the FR fans on the WotC boards overwhelmingly hate these changes so far. I'm sure the 4e FRCS will still be a bestseller however.




Exactly.
Sorry, hardcore FR fans, but you've been fired. The truth is: FR as it stands has been driving people away (due to complexity and bloat) much faster than it has been attracting new players. Pretty much the only FR fans left are the hardcore fans. Left as it is, interest in FR will just dwindle away.

The big shakeup for 4E provides a new entry point and is geared to attract more new players than the number of old players it alienates. WotC knows full well that the hardcore Realms fan will think 4E FR is the suck... and they bid you adieu.  They also know that despite the internet rage, many of you will eventually switch. 

As an aside, I've noticed those in the 'against' camp seem to mutate their argument to remain against it.
Examples: 'OMG, they're changing the Realms!' When it's revealed that the parts of the Realms best-liked are relatively the same: 'Well, that's pretty pathetic and lazy.' Huh? You were upset they were changing it, but now you're upset that they didn't change the part you liked?
Further, while many cry that the changes are lazy, unbelievable, and poorly executed, I have yet to see one suggestion of how it could have been done better. I suspect the underlying statement is: 'they didn't change the Realms to match my exact vision of them.' 

Am I defending 4E FR? Not exactly. (I admit I do like the changes and they are attracting me back to FR after over a decade.)
I'm more pointing out that the hardcore fans need to realize that they aren't the target market for this anymore.


----------



## Voss (Jan 12, 2008)

jasin said:
			
		

> Assuming you like the 4E rules but don't like the 4E FR, couldn't you just run 2E/3E FR using 4E rules?




Sure.  If you can find other people who want to do that.  

It reminds me all too much of the time of troubles.  Poorly though out justifications for things that don't *need* justifying.  Its much like trying to listen to Metallica after the Whiny Therapy Movie. All the weak points are rubbed in your face, and you can't quite remember what the original appeal was.

As far as the drifting earthmotes and aerial forests go, I was very tempted to make a Skyrealms of Faerun  joke, but decided not enough people would remember Jorune.


----------



## hopeless (Jan 12, 2008)

*Let me get this straight...*

The new FR timeline is set a century ahead...

No problem with that so far,

The spell plague causes many mages to go insane or just die outright with the dragonborn arriving from another world as a result.

Personally I'm going with those sorcerors said to have inherited their powers from dragons are transformed into the dragonborn, those with fey heritage become eladrin and those with infernal or abyssal heritage become tieflings... yes tieflings are already present but what the heck!
The deaths and insanity is because of this transformation and why those areas protected by mythals are uneffected since they do block this effect which everyone else thinks is the result of mystra's death and the breakdown of the weave, HOWEVER if that was the case the shade's city would have been expelled back into the shadowfell or whatever they call it now and the only effect on mages would be the lack of spells and liches and those dependent on magic for existance being pretty much wiped out of existance...

So I'm going with my theory, the dragonborn are local and have developed after a century of experiencing the same sort of ostracising as half elves do except people still don't like them and they developed their own communities as a result, the tieflings of whom i suspect Thay plays a major part here will be making their presence felt albeit so far the shades have been blamed since their physical change has left their true identities a secret for now.

The shades are still the bad guys they're seeking the Netherese lost legacies and had to rediscover how to cast outside of their protected city but their shadow mythal has given them a major advantage in that area as they are naturals at illusionary magic courtesy of Shar's benevolence (if you can call it that).

Anyway are they really razing hell on the wizard community boards about this?


----------



## Stereofm (Jan 12, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Sorry, hardcore FR fans, but you've been fired.
> 
> The big shakeup for 4E provides a new entry point and is geared to attract more new players than the number of old players it alienates. WotC knows full well that the hardcore Realms fan will think 4E FR is the suck... and they bid you adieu.  They also know that despite the internet rage, many of you will eventually switch.
> 
> I'm more pointing out that the hardcore fans need to realize that they aren't the target market for this anymore.




Good points. You know, there 's solution to the problem : don't like something ? Do like me : don't buy it !

If you protest emptily before WOTC diktats and still keep buying their stuff, why the hell should they change their lines ? Their only weak point is their wallet, so roll a crit againt it !


----------



## GVDammerung (Jan 12, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Whats the point of the changes if the Sword Coast (where most people play anyway) remains unchanged?




Sight unseen, of course, this is the crux of the matter to me.

I have not been a huge FR fan.  As such, the 4e changes to the Realms presented the opportunity to let me reconsider the setting.  I like what I've read of the changes in the Realms circa 4e but a number of the changes seem to affect only out of the way places while leaving the "core" Realms (Sword Coast, Dales, Cormyr) largely intact.  Thus, it looks like the "core" stays pretty much the same but that the changes to the outer ring of areas give the core areas something new to deal with on their periphery.  This is, I think, probably a "safe" strategy but hardly an inspiring one.

If the goal was to keep existing FR fans grooving but give them some new scenery at the edges, I think 4e FR works as described.  If the goal was more to invite new players into FR, I don't see the changes to mainly just the periphery doing that.

IMO, the Sword Coast needed to change, and the Dalelands and Cormyr if 4e FR was not to be just 1-3X FR with a cosmetic change.  "Its Malibu Stacy!  And she's got a new hat!"  Well, okay, but only existing Malibu Stacy fans will be excited/outraged that the same old doll has a new hat.  Or would that be old hat?


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 12, 2008)

I figured out what it is about this that's bugging me. It isn't that they're making fundamental changes to the setting, I mean look at the difference in the real world between 1908 and 2008. What's bugging me is that drastic changes are taking place too soon after "the present." In other words, heroes have been fighting and dying to make Faerun a better place, and what do they get for their efforts? The whole world goes mad and they have nothing to do with it!

I think this vision of FR is interesting, and actually makes me want to take a look at it, but they should have advanced the timeline further. Set it 500 years in the future, then give extensive notes on how things developed in the "modern" era for those who want to keep their games set there, and then start the 100 years of chaos at the 400 year mark. By doing it this way, it would only affect the longest living NPCs in the Realms since the others would have died by now, otherwise it would be a fresh new start.

So when do the Realms get flying cars?


----------



## glass (Jan 12, 2008)

Devyn said:
			
		

> They make sweeping changes to the setting but then avoided impacting the more popular locations? Who knew the Spellplague was capable of such discriminating destruction. Sad.



Did we read the same article? If by 'not impacted' you mean 'still there' then that is true in the case of Cormyr and Waterdeep (Thay, not so much!).  


glass.


----------



## Sitara (Jan 12, 2008)

They shoulld have had a meteor strike Faerun, completely obliterating everything and ushering in a new ice age. 

Whats more they would leave it compeltely open for individual gm's to figure out the cause of the metoer; maybe it was a yuan-ti ritual, maybe a backfired spell from thay, maybe netherese were behind it, maybe it was mystara's counterattack, etc etc


Talk about your points of light eh?


----------



## delericho (Jan 12, 2008)

Stereofm said:
			
		

> If you protest emptily before WOTC diktats and still keep buying their stuff, why the hell should they change their lines ? Their only weak point is their wallet, so roll a crit againt it !




Their wallet has about a million hit points, and we have daggers. This may take a while.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Jan 12, 2008)

> I think a reboot will probably be what's next for the Forgotten Realms.  This seems to solve few of the complaints that people had with the setting.   One complaint was that the Forgotten Realms had too much obscure backstory to get through.  How does this solve things?   Sure, you might know as much as the grognard about the new setting because so much has changed, but this just adds more ruins for extinct civilizations to figure out the backstory for.
> 
> The uber-NPC's that people didn't like (namely Drizzt and Elminster) are still around, plus given the massive changes that have happened in the 3e forgotten realms novels, the PC's still seem to have bit parts.  If the novels can take away or change such foundational things as Myth Drannor, the PC's are always going to be second rate heroes.
> 
> So I would say that perhaps rebooting would solve these problems.  I don't mean changing it back to the original box set (which would only please the very hardcore) but rewrite the setting so that it synthesizes the old and new and thus simplifies the backstory and makes it fresh.




A Reboot would more likely fail.  Despite people's "bitching" about Elminster and Drizzt, those two characters are critical to the market--Elminster is the soul of the realms, having been it's "narrator" in a lot of the older product and considered the main character of its creator, Drizzt is now a classic fantasy character in the mold of Conan and Elric, thanks to Salvatore's novels.  They may be considered "Mary Sueish" (a term I really hate), "Overpowered", etc, but they are successful.  They have been reducing other NPCs power and I think that will satisfy some people.

Keep in mind a total reboot would upset not just the gamers but the novel readers, and since both are tied in together, I doubt they'd do anything to upset the novels--remember, Dragonlance ended up becoming a novel-only line at one point.  In my opinion, they are likely to turn this campaign setting into a fiction line and cancel the RPG line if push came to shove.

A reboot would only really work if the property was dormant for years or even decades--like BSG or He-Man.  Otherwise, memories would be too new.  Most people want the familiar, not the new.



> Sorry, hardcore FR fans, but you've been fired. The truth is: FR as it stands has been driving people away (due to complexity and bloat) much faster than it has been attracting new players. Pretty much the only FR fans left are the hardcore fans. Left as it is, interest in FR will just dwindle away.




Do you have sales figures or the information on whether or not sales have dipped?  Could it be that the supplements were re-written to new formats people didn't like?  Considering how popular the novels are, I don't think this is the case.  I think more or less they are trying to make the changes serve their purpose while making it as palatable as possible.  I'm sick of people dismissing hard-core fans of anything by implying they are losers or nutjobs.  If it wasn't for their passion, FR would die.  



> I have not been a huge FR fan. As such, the 4e changes to the Realms presented the opportunity to let me reconsider the setting. I like what I've read of the changes in the Realms circa 4e but a number of the changes seem to affect only out of the way places while leaving the "core" Realms (Sword Coast, Dales, Cormyr) largely intact. Thus, it looks like the "core" stays pretty much the same but that the changes to the outer ring of areas give the core areas something new to deal with on their periphery. This is, I think, probably a "safe" strategy but hardly an inspiring one.




Well, the goal was not to complete reboot or change FR, but to bring it in line with the 4th Edition and make it feel fresh for that game.

The suggestions I see people making sort of boggle me.  It would be like rewriting Peanuts to make Charlie Brown a cool suave winner and make snoopy a "real dog" without thought balloons.  It would be like making Spider-Man a female super-villain.  

If you're not a fan of what exists, why would you waste time wanting to play a setting that is completely different yet uses the same name/trademark?

At it's core, Forgotten Realms has a style and certain expectations.  Of course they are going to keep the fans interested--if they wanted something completely new they'd just create a new setting!  We should expect to see elements like Cormyr and Waterdeep and Myth Drannor, Elminster and Drizzt, Balder's Gate and Neverwinter.  We can also expect new things to be put down, new rules of magic to fit the classes, new empires and states for the new races, etc.  It's pretty much a compromise.

I'm on board because I don't see a lot of major disrespect, Ed Greenwood is still involved, etc.  It looks like they've done the best compromise they could.


----------



## Teemu (Jan 12, 2008)

humble minion said:
			
		

> The rationale for the Dragonborn turning up is as lazy and shoehorned as you'd expect. Still, any change so rules-driven rather than setting-driven is going to be difficult to explain elegantly.



Do you know how elves got into Toril?

Dwarves?

Mulan humans?

Orcs?


----------



## Twiggly the Gnome (Jan 12, 2008)

GVDammerung said:
			
		

> IMO, the Sword Coast needed to change, and the Dalelands and Cormyr if 4e FR was not to be just 1-3X FR with a cosmetic change.  "Its Malibu Stacy!  And she's got a new hat!"  Well, okay, but only existing Malibu Stacy fans will be excited/outraged that the same old doll has a new hat.  Or would that be old hat?




Yeah, I'm not sure where the outrage *or* the excitement for these changes is coming from. From my perspective, this stuff is pretty much on the level of Elminster switching to cherry pipeweed.  :\


----------



## EATherrian (Jan 12, 2008)

I've always liked the Realms and these changes seem interesting.  There are some questions though.  I've always wondered why a city as powerful as Waterdeep never tried to expand its influence inland at all, become a true city-state or the seed of a new kingdom?  How did Cormyr expand so much when last we saw it, there was danger on all sides?  I'm assuming some bad things happened to Sembia.  I will miss Mulhorand if that does disappear.  Real-world analog or not, I always thought it had a great back story, and will miss it if it goes.  All in all, I think the changes are interesting and can't wait to read a more in-depth chronology of that missing century.

Bill


----------



## Sitara (Jan 12, 2008)

Wowo I posted two fantastic ideas on where to take the realms and no one noticed??


----------



## delericho (Jan 12, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> A Reboot would more likely fail.  Despite people's "bitching" about Elminster and Drizzt, those two characters are critical to the market--Elminster is the soul of the realms, having been it's "narrator" in a lot of the older product and considered the main character of its creator, Drizzt is now a classic fantasy character in the mold of Conan and Elric, thanks to Salvatore's novels.




Any reboot would absolutely have to include these two characters, and also key locations such as Waterdeep, Baldur's Gate, Myth Drannor and the Underdark.



> A reboot would only really work if the property was dormant for years or even decades--like BSG or He-Man.  Otherwise, memories would be too new.  Most people want the familiar, not the new.




Agreed.

However, I'm far from convinced that the changes being done don't have all the negative effects of a reboot, and none of the advantages. Time will tell on that one.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 12, 2008)

Here's the big 'don't know' about Rich's article: To what extent does it read like a PR release or a movie pitch because that's what it is, and to what extent is that kind of top-down, garish, ego-first, nuance-be-damned thinking actually how the new Realms has been conceived and is being done?

Of course, another question is which are the parts Ed's working on? Tymanther, maybe? If so, how easily will we be able to use it as a _gate_-linked other world rather than as part of Realms 2008?

This article supports the coherent picture that the new setting is built with very different design principles from the Realms I know. Ed's worldbuilding philosophy and writing/DMing sensibility, to me, is the Realms; not the proper names of people and places. No wonder there's concern, then, from people who like it.


			
				humble minion said:
			
		

> Evil seems to be being made considerably more monolithic than it used to be - The Shades Did It All.



It seems an extension of the exposure and prominence the Shadevar got in the 3E period at the expense of subtler groups not made up by the Wizards authors, from the Malaugrym to the Twisted Rune.


			
				Whisperfoot said:
			
		

> This thing is reminding me of Dragonlance 5th Age.... and we all know how that went over.



The crucial difference is that there weren't hundreds of large cardboard boxes of unpublished Age of Despair lore, and scores of characters with intriguing hinted stories, that we may now never see.


			
				The Human Target said:
			
		

> Baldur's Gate is without a doubt the most famous Realms city to non-Realms players, due to the video games.
> 
> Its not surprising they decided to make it a bigger focus of the 4E Realms.



It wouldn't be surprising if Wizards had capitalized on the success of the _Baldur's Gate_ and _Neverwinter Nights_ games with any competence.


			
				TwinBahamut said:
			
		

> It is something of a post-apocalyptic fantasy setting, which might be fun. I am tempted to pick up the FRCS now.



I'd have a look at Ed Greenwood's _Castlemourn_, then, too.


			
				Orius said:
			
		

> Cloak & Dagger had alot of good info and they just kind of glossed over/ff'ed  it all for 3E.



There's a long record of new authors and managers coming along and putting their mark on the Realms with poor care for what's come before.


----------



## Zaukrie (Jan 12, 2008)

Interstingly (at least to me), some of these changes mirror things I had been considering or had already done. I never thought that the godswar had enough effect on the world, so I had put places in where magic went haywire. I had also mostly trashed egypt, er unther, and made the inner sea much bigger and put Rifts Atlantis (altered) in there, to explain why the Red Wizards weren't more powerful. I had altered Sembia quite a bit. I think I can work with all of the changes so far, and I like what I read.


----------



## schroederlance (Jan 12, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Whats the point of the changes if the Sword Coast (where most people play anyway) remains unchanged?
> 
> i would have preferred if they had destroyed Waterdeep, made Elminster go mad due to mystra's death and become a lich and a major setting villain, make Thay into a lawful good paladin/white mage stronghold, and have the Zhentarim completely destroy the Harpers and now be led by Elminster the LichLord.
> 
> ...




Sounds great except for one thing...

In Dark Sun lore, Rajaat used Arcane Magic to destroy the other races and defile the world. Arcane magic was unknown before Rajaat discovered it, the rest of the world only used Psionices.

Otherwise, good idea.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 12, 2008)

delericho said:
			
		

> Their wallet has about a million hit points, and we have daggers. This may take a while.



That's the thing...no matter how many people you get on board a boycott, nobody will notice the lost revenues.  Books will still fly off the shelves.  The "if you don't like it, don't buy it" line reads like "if you don't like it, shut up and give up."  The only thing that FR fans can do (and I'm not one of them, by the way; I couldn't care less whether they have the setting die in a fire) is complain and hope that they will be heard and responded to.


----------



## Troy70 (Jan 12, 2008)

I plan to wait and see what more info come out on FR before I get it.


----------



## Uzzy (Jan 13, 2008)

You know, there are many ways the designers could have fixed perceived problems in the Realms, without resorting to such drastic measures as these. (Regardless of the lack of truth behind these problems) Better presentation, limiting the scope of novels, using the likes of Elminster as they were originally intended etc. They could even have just left the Realms as it is, and make another setting that would appeal to others who dislike the Realmsian style. 

But for whatever reason, WoTC decided they needed to overhaul the entire thing. It makes me sad. I'll do my bit to tell WoTC how I feel about these changes, and not buy the 4th Edition Realms book. All I can do, really. I've got just about enough material to last me a while though.

The new Realms is not something I'd want to play in. Ah well. I'm upset that countless plots, characters and groups will never now get the attention they deserve (I wanted to know what would happen between Alusair and Calednei, for one). Meh, I'm at the acceptance level right now.


----------



## Raloc (Jan 13, 2008)

jasin said:
			
		

> Assuming you like the 4E rules but don't like the 4E FR, couldn't you just run 2E/3E FR using 4E rules?



True, true.  Could do that.  I've never had any of the problems most complain about running the Realms (too many high level NPCs, factions etc., since I just don't make them important, it's assumed they're all off doing their own thing and don't have time to be saving the necks of younger adventurers, or helping them stave off a thread against Toril).  Of course, to some degree the 4e FR gets rid of the (crucial) need for some of the old fluff (my example is for instance, having never run Calimport, I needed to look at 2e books to see what the deal was to run properly, and it worked great).


----------



## Raloc (Jan 13, 2008)

Tharen the Damned said:
			
		

> This is why you HAVE o buy the new FR Stuff. The world is changed and all the old (and unfun) Stuff is of no use.
> FR is a Brave New World now!



Well, I definitely feel the whole "must buy it because it's so different".  But I never found the Realms to be really fundamentally unfun.  That being said, most people here wouldn't consider my games very strict interpretations of the Realms anyway.  Main thing is that I won't be able to use the FR atlas, which I find extremely awesome.  It really allows you to (especially over ORPG for instance) to let the players go where they will, since you just pull up the appropriate map and bingo.  If they redid that, I'd definitely buy.


----------



## Whizbang Dustyboots (Jan 13, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> Do you know how elves got into Toril?
> 
> Dwarves?
> 
> ...



Yeah, to me, the dragonborn's arrival is the most Faerunian part of the whole piece.


----------



## caudor (Jan 13, 2008)

I'm buying the whole thing hook, line, and sinker.  I like the FR changes!  More danger. More drama.  Less baggage.  Fresh fluff.

Of course, I'm excited about 4e in general too.

Something tells me the first half of this year is going to drag by.


----------



## Neil Bishop (Jan 13, 2008)

Uzzy said:
			
		

> You know, there are many ways the designers could have fixed perceived problems in the Realms, without resorting to such drastic measures as these. (Regardless of the lack of truth behind these problems) Better presentation, *limiting the scope of novels*, using the likes of Elminster as they were originally intended etc. (snip)




I think you have hit the nail on the head here.

It doesn't matter if FR4E's campaign setting is a marvellous piece of work (I think most people, according to various reviews etc..., consider the FRCS for 3E to be outstanding) because, within no time, a series of novels will come out and resolve some of the interesting plot hooks that are to be found in the new campaign setting.

This is what happened in 3E. Obould the orc king was revealed as a potential BBEG in the FRCS and then also in _Silver Marches_, an outstanding regional supplement. What does WotC do next? They hand off the whole plot hook to a hack writer (1) and he resolves the plot hook in a trilogy.

Also, FR3E suffered from not having an introductory adventure or series of introductory adventures that would show a new FR DM how to use the setting as his own campaign world. Will this be addressed or, like in 3E, will the first adventure be a mini-campaign for 10th+ level characters where the backstory is only fully known after about four years as it gradually resolved in a series of six novels?

I suppose my essential point is this: the campaign setting can be good or bad, that's almost irrelevant, what really matters is whether there will be a clear and defined strategy as to how the novels and the game world will interact. (2)

1: I know R A Salvatore is a best-selling author and from time-to-time can write well. However, he has become almost a parody of himself, just as George Lucas did with Return of the Jedi and great chunks of prequel episodes. And RAS suffers from the George Lucas "ewok and gungans" syndrome with clinically insane characters with really stupid names and strange  speaking patterns (normally with dwarves: witness the dwarf, Athrogate, in the Artemis novels [and what's with naming a male assassin after a Greek goddess?] or those insane and inane Bouldershoulder Brothers in the cleric series).

2: Of course, I don't think there will be for two reasons: (i) I am sure that the novels are significantly more profitable than the game world; and (ii) I don't think that this sort of strategic thinking is something that WotC would like to do for fear of it tying their hands if they have a new idea later.


----------



## Kraydak (Jan 13, 2008)

Uzzy said:
			
		

> You know, there are many ways the designers could have fixed perceived problems in the Realms, without resorting to such drastic measures as these. (Regardless of the lack of truth behind these problems) Better presentation, limiting the scope of novels, using the likes of Elminster as they were originally intended etc. They could even have just left the Realms as it is, and make another setting that would appeal to others who dislike the Realmsian style.
> 
> But for whatever reason, WoTC decided they needed to overhaul the entire thing. It makes me sad. I'll do my bit to tell WoTC how I feel about these changes, and not buy the 4th Edition Realms book. All I can do, really. I've got just about enough material to last me a while though.
> 
> The new Realms is not something I'd want to play in. Ah well. I'm upset that countless plots, characters and groups will never now get the attention they deserve (I wanted to know what would happen between Alusair and Calednei, for one). Meh, I'm at the acceptance level right now.




The funny thing is the Spellplague is... irrelevant with regard to the things that people like about the changes.  If you want to ease the burden of canon, the utterly dominant change is the 94 year jump.  Everything else is gravy.  Which makes the proposed changes look like a deliberate chainsaw attack (we want to savage the FRs, how do we justify it?) as opposed to an attempt to reduce a perceived (real or no) canon/high level NPC overload.  An example of the later might be:



> An anti-RSE....
> 
> At t=0, Mystra and friends decide that enough is enough and off Cyric (AFAIK the most unpopular diety). Ao smacks Mystra around, resulting in minor weave changes appropriate to the new ruleset (and finds temporary replacements for Cyric for those regions that need them). Seeing how well giving mortals a god's job worked last time, Cyric's replacement/replacements get a *long* education. With Cyric's portfolio temporarily lapsed, FR enters a period known at "The Great Calm" where nothing much happens (by FR standards). In real-world terms, WotC agrees to publish nothing canon in The Calm. We end up then with:
> 
> ...





You get something for everyone. You want novels as canon, play post-Calm. You like the current NPC cast, play early Calm. You find the current (or novel based) canon overwhelming, play mid or late Calm.  All the NPC/canon overload issues are dealt with by a time jump.  Nothing anyone considers "sacred" is destroyed and you have a built in division for a given group's desired "canon" level.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 13, 2008)

Neil Bishop said:
			
		

> It doesn't matter if FR4E's campaign setting is a marvellous piece of work (I think most people, according to various reviews etc..., consider the FRCS for 3E to be outstanding)



It's a very good and thorough piece of work, but in retrospect it spends too many pages flatly cataloguing, without distinguishing what's fundamental about the setting and what's peripheral, and not enough describing what the Realms is like and how it works. It's not surprising that many fail to understand Faerûn's high-level intrigue, for instance, because it isn't described in any one place. In contrast take the far more coherent 1987 _Forgotten Realms Campaign Set_, or the _Eberron Campaign Setting_ which lays out that world's sensibility, principles and influences at the start.

Wizards seemingly realized this, and have said they're making the 4E _Campaign Guide_ more focused, in part by removing parts of the Realms (including Unther, Halruaa and Chondath) the designers feel lie outside the setting's core feel. On the other hand, they're making changes which concede to ideas about the Realms they know are mistaken, having not even attempted to clarify or explain the actual situation, and Rich Baker at one point referred dismissively to this kind of explanation as 'lecturing'. It really would not be all that pedagogically difficult a task.







> because, within no time, a series of novels will come out and resolve some of the interesting plot hooks that are to be found in the new campaign setting.



Although Rich has said the RSEs will fall off for a while after the Spellplague, I also see little precedent for hope that Realms novels won't continue to hotshot and use up plot threads faster than they replenish them.







> Also, FR3E suffered from not having an introductory adventure or series of introductory adventures that would show a new FR DM how to use the setting as his own campaign world.



Yes; extraordinarily there's only one really good, representative introductory adventure for the Realms -- Ed's FRQ1 _Haunted Halls of Eveningstar_ -- and it's too small (two-thirds was cut in editing) to really show off important aspects of Realms adventuring such as the hallmark multi-sided, multi-stranded conflicts. (The recent _Shadowdale: The Scouring of the Land_ looks a lot like the campaign adventure we should have got 15 years earlier, but it was too compressed in its use of historical elements, too tied to the ongoing timeline, too short on the social aspects of the Realms, and too late.)







> I suppose my essential point is this: the campaign setting can be good or bad, that's almost irrelevant, what really matters is whether there will be a clear and defined strategy as to how the novels and the game world will interact. (2)



I think there have been several good-faith attempts to make the relationship work better, but the two have different real and perceived calls on the setting, and again, there's no reason to think the new Realms will solve this legitimately hard problem.

Bob Salvatore's insistence on using dwarves as comic relief still baffles me, given his respect for and debt to Tolkien, who did so much to redeem them from that. As for Faerûn-authentic naming, that's something that otherwise first-rank Realms authors, such as Jeff Grubb and Elaine Cunningham, took a while to figure out.


----------



## outsider (Jan 13, 2008)

Neil Bishop said:
			
		

> 2: Of course, I don't think there will be for two reasons: (i) I am sure that the novels are significantly more profitable than the game world; and (ii) I don't think that this sort of strategic thinking is something that WotC would like to do for fear of it tying their hands if they have a new idea later.




Here's an interesting quote from the WoTC boards about this subject:



			
				WotC_RichBaker said:
			
		

> A good point, and one that I can't easily address off the top of my head. I'm not well versed in what the Living Realms campaign is planning (hey, there's only one of me!) but I think you're right--we would want to treat major plot arcs in Living Realms as canon events for the world. My hope is that we'd avoid real RSE-plot threads in any format for a while, and make sure that canon advances are mirrored across all formats at a reasonable pace--so novels, game product, Living Realms, and D&D Insider material all pull in more or less the same direction.




This plan has alot of potential if they stick to it.


----------



## Voss (Jan 13, 2008)

outsider said:
			
		

> Here's an interesting quote from the WoTC boards about this subject:
> 
> 
> 
> This plan has alot of potential if they stick to it.




Nah.  It sounds like the death of plotlines to me, Dark Sun style.  
DM (at the end of a session): And as you approach the city of Tyr/Zhentil Keep/whatever, you meet the contact that will smuggle you into the slave pens.  Next week we will pick up with the negotiations and intrigue.

DM (the following week): Sorry folks, the latest book came out, and apparently Drizzt and Elminster showed up, freed the slaves and killed the god-king.  Sorry.  So we're heading on to your next destination, and we just have to hope WotC doesn't kill that plot line too.


The only reasonable thing to do is just play in the Realms and ignore whatever garbage WotC hacks out for a 'storyline', or just play in your own world where you don't have to worry about this kind of thing.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 13, 2008)

I wish Rich luck with that intention, but as stated there it's no different a plan than has been tried before, with limited success. Trying to coordinate RPGA events too is not promising, especially given the dreary precedent of the Living City campaign.


----------



## Neil Bishop (Jan 13, 2008)

> Although Rich has said the RSEs will fall off for a while after the Spellplague, I also see little precedent for hope that Realms novels won't continue to hotshot and use up plot threads faster than they replenish them.




I'm sure Rich has said that in good faith but the reality is that RSEs sell novels and novels make more money than games. The plot threads will be used up on no time, I am sure. Wasn't a similar commitment made at the time of 3E?



> I think there have been several good-faith attempts to make the relationship work better, but the two have different real and perceived calls on the setting, and again, there's no reason to think the new Realms will solve this legitimately hard problem.




That's my guess too and, absent a solution of this problem, in no time at all FR will once again be a difficult setting to come to terms with for new DMs because of the preponderance of novels.

Of course, this is UNLESS WotC can make (and keep!) a commitment to leave aside a certain (and significant) area as a novel-free zone. However, this area should be the subject of a range of introductory products. I'm thinking of a cross between the BECMI version of D&D's _Thunder Rift_ accessory and 3.5E's _Shattered Gates of Slaughtergarde_ but with a major emphasis on FR-flavoured power groups.

The grey box provides a precedent for this sort of commitment: subsequent publications provide a precedent for not keeping this commitment! Yes, Sembia, I am looking at you....



> Bob Salvatore's insistence on using dwarves as comic relief still baffles me, given his respect for and debt to Tolkien, who did so much to redeem them from that. As for Faerûn-authentic naming, that's something that otherwise first-rank Realms authors, such as Jeff Grubb and Elaine Cunningham, took a while to figure out.




To me this is a key part in protecting the FR IP. If I ran Wizards (and I hope I never do: good hobby, bad business!), I would be including clauses in the writers' contracts that expressly forbid the "jarjarbinksinisation" (OK, so I invented a new word) of FR. I think, personally, that sort of nonsense is more damaging than the appearances of Elminster and the Chosen that is often moaned about.

On the subject of the "jarjarbinksinisation" of FR, I would also be putting similar restraints on the RPGA with Living Realms. Things that happened with Raven's Bluff were an embarrassment both to FR and the D&D game. If they're not going to treat the brand with some respect, take it off them.

So, yes, the first time a cleric of Sune is named after a pr0n actress, the RPGA loses the setting!


----------



## Orius (Jan 13, 2008)

I still say it doesn't sound too bad.  The popular areas haven't changed, and I think I see a pattern here for typical Realms campaigns:

1-10:  You start off in the North/Sword Coast/Cormyr with low level adventures.  It's pretty much like the FR have always been.

11-20: With more experience under your belt, you can tackle the areas of the Realms that have been affected by the Spellplague.  These are probably dangerous areas, but the challenges I'd imagine are probably intended for paragon level adventures.  One thing to remember about the FR is that they go all the way back to 1e rules, so adventures past level 10 are going to be harder to set up, since the setting as originally written was set up with the 1e rules.  I'm guessing the Spellplague gives them an excuse to put in adventuring areas more suitable for paragon level players that didn't exist before.

21-30:  Probably involves the planes or something.  Dunno.

I also agree that they should probably reign in some of the writers, particularly the freelancers.  Whoever's running the creative side of the Realms should take both games and novels into account, have some people like Baker or whoever's in charge at WotC, Greenwood, Salvatore, and Cunninham come up with a big overall plot line, and then make sure the other authors don't go around futzing too much with the setting canon.  Of course, some plot lines will get resolved, but maybe set things up like adventures where the PCs can accomplish similar goals to things happening in the novels (kind of like the old DL when it was first created).


----------



## Hussar (Jan 13, 2008)

Whisperfoot said:
			
		

> I actually liked them and had considered setting a campaign there someday.   :\




But, you didn't actually do so.  That speaks volumes right there.  It may have been interesting, but, just not interesting enough.  Sounds like a whole pile of the Realms material to me.

Anyone else think that the new FR looks a lot like the old Scarred Lands?


----------



## Voss (Jan 13, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, you didn't actually do so.  That speaks volumes right there.  It may have been interesting, but, just not interesting enough.  Sounds like a whole pile of the Realms material to me.




So anything that doesn't reach of a 'threshold of X number of campaigns actually use this' gets the Giant Not-Making-Enough-Money Eraser?  Thats a poor way to handle a setting.


----------



## reutbing0 (Jan 13, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> So anything that doesn't reach of a 'threshold of X number of campaigns actually use this' gets the Giant Not-Making-Enough-Money Eraser?  Thats a poor way to handle a setting.




Well this is a game setting after all, you'd assume that the material you present will actually be used in the game. If that's not happening then what's the point? Of course FR is also a setting for novels and that complicates matters.

Oh, and they do need to make enough money. Because if they're losing money you won't be seeing any new realms stuff at all.


----------



## Imban (Jan 13, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, you didn't actually do so.  That speaks volumes right there.  It may have been interesting, but, just not interesting enough.  Sounds like a whole pile of the Realms material to me.




Look, I thought the whole hanging Unther/Mulholrand plot was lame and wanted Shuruppak to fall down a well for as long as I can remember, so I don't have a horse in this one, but that's a really silly statement. We can't all run every campaign we've wanted to run, and that *doesn't* mean that the ones not run were somehow deficient or not interesting enough. For instance, just a month or two ago I was brewing an Exalted campaign that I canned because another of my friends declared he was running one that had a similar premise and had more idea formulation done on it. This doesn't mean that the setting I had chosen for my game was "not interesting enough" compared the setting he had chosen for his, or anything like that.

There are lots of reasons why you might hold off or can a campaign, lack of interest only one among them. *shrugs*



> Anyone else think that the new FR looks a lot like the old Scarred Lands?




While the new FR has a good bit more magical geography, I sure hope not. I hated the Scarred Lands with a fiery passion because they adhered strictly to the White Wolf trope that everyone was either living in a rubbish heap, screwed seven ways from Sunday, or blatantly evil. Granted, Cormyr is apparently doing better than ever, and Myth Drannor seems to still be a good guy nation after its rebuilding in late 3e, so I don't think this one is coming about.

Honestly, I get more of the Scarred Lands cosmological feel in the core setting. While the Scarred Lands cosmology had some strong White Wolfish influences ("all wizards' spellcasting is contributing directly to a future armageddon!"), it wasn't bad, all in all. I'm not sure how much I appreciate the Gods vs. Primordials struggle taking place in the core setting, since it tends to be an overwhelming focus in whatever cosmology it's in, but whatever.


----------



## JosephK (Jan 13, 2008)

I'm a fairly old-school (quasi old-school atleast, some 16 years of ongoing campaigns) and I really like this write-up. Imo, one of the more iconic traits of the realms is change - cataclysmic change.. While the ToT was a almost just a little ripple compared to a hundred yearlong cataclysm, the history of the realms is littered with cataclysmic scale events. Granted, it has mainly been done as in the form backstory before (except the tot?), not really done while people were actually playing, but I still think it's kinda cool. Vast Empires come and go, races (and monsters) come and go, the land is scarred (literally) from numerous of these events. Now some new guys have come, old empires are gone and new scars have appeared - the realms have been shaken up.. Imo, the write-up reads like quintessential realms stuff 

/just hope Fzoul makes it!


----------



## humble minion (Jan 13, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, you didn't actually do so.  That speaks volumes right there.  It may have been interesting, but, just not interesting enough.  Sounds like a whole pile of the Realms material to me.




To be fair, there's a bit of chicken and egg about that argument.  Did nobody play in the Old Empires because they weren't properly detailed, or did WotC never bother properly detailing them because nobody played there?

Remember, the FRCS was very very scant on Old Empires info.  There was slightly over one page on Mulhorand, and about the same on Chessenta.  Unther had nearly two pages, but that included an NPC statblock.  Murghom and Semphar got a paragraph each.

By comparison, every one of the Dales (population about 30000 each) had a writeup of about a page and a half, plus the page-long regional overview at the start of the section.  It's just plain _easier_ to run a Dales campaign than it is to run an Old Empires campaign - there's much, much more info.  And of course, it's worth remembering that the Time of Troubles and the invasion of Unther turned the whole region upsidedown _twice_ since the last time WotC/TSR published any detailed material on the Empires, (hell, when the Old Empires book was published, it was still 1st ed and Gilgeam was still alive!) so it's not like the pdfs in the back catalogue are going to be of much help either.  Chessenta got a bit of coverage in Dragons of Faerun, but in general, a GM running an Old Empires campaign has to do pretty much everything him or herself.

There was enormous potential in the 3e Empires, but to be honest, the whole region has gotten so little support over such a long time that I'm not surprised very few people based campaigns there...


----------



## Stereofm (Jan 13, 2008)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> That's the thing...no matter how many people you get on board a boycott, nobody will notice the lost revenues.  Books will still fly off the shelves.  The "if you don't like it, don't buy it" line reads like "if you don't like it, shut up and give up."  The only thing that FR fans can do (and I'm not one of them, by the way; I couldn't care less whether they have the setting die in a fire) is complain and hope that they will be heard and responded to.




"Shut up and Give Up" : That was not my intended meaning, far from it.

If you think lost revenue does not matter to them, why do you think arguing will help any more ?

Besides, I will reverse your argument : if you complain, gnaw your teeth, AND Keep buying ... why would they listen to you ? What matters to them is the level of their sales. As long as you buy there is no reason for them to change, you only prove them right.

When I don't like a book, I don't buy it.
When I don't like a film, I don't buy the ticket.
When I don't like a video game, I don't buy the video game

The list is long, and could go on but I don't like the FR 4 e ? Then ...

I don't see ANY reason to buy something you do not like. When you do so, it ceases to be a leisure, and becomes an addiction.

So people, bump up your will saves !


----------



## Stereofm (Jan 13, 2008)

delericho said:
			
		

> Their wallet has about a million hit points, and we have daggers. This may take a while.




Quoted from Dork tower : These are the little Things that count.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jan 13, 2008)

The Eternal GM said:
			
		

> I've already seen a lot of major negative response to the changes on rpg.net (most seem to be concerned with the name of one minor background character...  But rpg.net is weird like that)



If you mean my thread, that has nothing to do with the Fourth Edition time-jump, since Alicia Kendrick (FFS!) is dead now. I imagine. It was sparked by the publication of the Grand History of the Realms article covering the Moonshae Isles.


----------



## Tharen the Damned (Jan 13, 2008)

Raloc said:
			
		

> Well, I definitely feel the whole "must buy it because it's so different".  *But I never found the Realms to be really fundamentally unfun.*  That being said, most people here wouldn't consider my games very strict interpretations of the Realms anyway.  Main thing is that I won't be able to use the FR atlas, which I find extremely awesome.  It really allows you to (especially over ORPG for instance) to let the players go where they will, since you just pull up the appropriate map and bingo.  If they redid that, I'd definitely buy.




Nah, I just made fun of the whole 4th edition hype that many things in 3rd were "unfun" and they changed it. As the Realms get change big time they must have been unfun.
Just an ironic joke.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 13, 2008)

After reading _World and Monsters_, I'm inclined to think that the Shades of Netheril are actually Shadar-Kai.  
The fluff in the FR article about the shades, shadow-transformed, humans from a city that went to the Plane of Shadow, etc. is all very close to the new fluff for Shadar-Kai presented in W&M. Not exact, but close enough to easily be FR version. Fits in line with their efforts to make Shadar-Kai more front-and-center.

Making this assumption, I now doubt my original prediction that the shades/shadow-transformed will be the other PC race.


----------



## Imban (Jan 13, 2008)

Hmm. That's possible, but I'm not sure how likely - the Shadar-Kai and Shades historically have been miles apart in terms of culture, even if they have many superficial similarities. I'd say this depends on how appropriate the Shadar-Kai stats are for the Shades, since the MM's been worked on first. If they won't be, Shades will have their own writeup for the Realms, instead of just their own culture and name.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Hmm. That's possible, but I'm not sure how likely - the Shadar-Kai and Shades historically have been miles apart in terms of culture, even if they have many superficial similarities. I'd say this depends on how appropriate the Shadar-Kai stats are for the Shades, since the MM's been worked on first. If they won't be, Shades will have their own writeup for the Realms, instead of just their own culture and name.




I've been out of FR for a while... are Shades something already FR-specific? (versus just a generic undead?)


----------



## Imban (Jan 13, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> I've been out of FR for a while... are Shades something already FR-specific? (versus just a generic undead?)




Yeah, they're actually not undead at all. They're humans from an ancient kingdom of mages called Netheril who happened to have their floating city on a trip to the Plane of Shadow when magic went haywire and Netheril fell thousands of years ago.

Now they have cool shadow powers and are led by Telamont Tanthul, a guy who could quite probably take Elminster in a knock-down-drag-out fight, and they're finally back on Faerun. (And apparently, as of 4e, taking it over.)


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Yeah, they're actually not undead at all. They're humans from an ancient kingdom of mages called Netheril who happened to have their floating city on a trip to the Plane of Shadow when magic went haywire and Netheril fell thousands of years ago.




OK, I didn't realize all that was already part of the backstory. I recognized the name Netheril, but I thought the rest was newly crafted in the 4E article. Guess that's not the case.

So, where does that leave my last few posts? Well, it looks like the Shades have some close similarities to the Shadar-Kai, but maybe that's it, just similarities.

Thanks for the education!


----------



## helium3 (Jan 13, 2008)

JeffB said:
			
		

> That said, I thought this article sounds like something a tween-age DM would come up with. Its just "lame".




Heh heh. I don't care about the realms one way or the other, having never played in or ran a FR game, but I do agree with this statement.

There's something about about massive cataclysmic devastation wrought by magical catastrophe that totally reminds me of when I was fiddling around with campaign worlds when I was in high school.

I thought the reveal on the Dragonborne origin was lame. They should've done what they did with Ebberon and the mournland and left it up to the DM to flesh out.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 13, 2008)

*Which FR characters you hope made it*

Here's a question: Which FR characters do you *want* to be in 4e?

Myself; Manshoon (Zhent clone), actually as much of the 1e Zhent team as possible (Fzoul and Semennon kiss and make up). The saurials, Amn's council of 6, A grandson of that Waterdeep Paladin city lord, Azoun V sounds fine to me. And Red Wizards, esp. Sazz Tam. That might be it for me.

I just History of the Realms. Why is there a picture of a warforged??


----------



## Teemu (Jan 13, 2008)

helium3 said:
			
		

> I thought the reveal on the Dragonborne origin was lame. They should've done what they did with Ebberon and the mournland and left it up to the DM to flesh out.



Again, I gotta point out the origins of elves, dwarves, orcs, and Mulan humans. They all came from another world.


----------



## Mephistopheles (Jan 13, 2008)

Teemu said:
			
		

> Again, I gotta point out the origins of elves, dwarves, orcs, and Mulan humans. They all came from another world.




It's not out of line for FR but it does seem kind of lazy. Another Mystra frag (I suppose it's becoming a tradition), another interdimensional import.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 13, 2008)

Mephistopheles said:
			
		

> It's not out of line for FR but it does seem kind of lazy.




Out of curiosity, what wouldn't be lazy?


----------



## Incenjucar (Jan 13, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what wouldn't be lazy?




Almost anything else?

This is essentially "They fell out of the sky."

At least the Sauriels were kidnapped.


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 13, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Interesting also that he stated the city-state of Shade went to the Plane of Shadow. Is that old language, and he really meant to state 'went to the Shadowfell?' Or maybe the Plane of Shadow merged with the Shadowfell, which allowed the city to regain contact with Toril (now Abier-Toril.) I kinda like that thought. Or maybe he really did mean Plane of Shadow, which is FR-unique and separate from the Shadowfell. Curious...



I really hope that 4e FR will ignore the Shadowfell. Feywild is no big thing, the plane of Faerie was part of FR history anyway.

But the whole Shadowfell concept simply doesn't fit within FR, the FR deities take the souls of their followers to their realms. They don't leave them standing on some odd plane until the vanish to Nirvana


----------



## Imban (Jan 13, 2008)

Mighty Veil said:
			
		

> Here's a question: Which FR characters do you *want* to be in 4e?
> 
> Myself; Manshoon (Zhent clone), actually as much of the 1e Zhent team as possible (Fzoul and Semennon kiss and make up). The saurials, Amn's council of 6, A grandson of that Waterdeep Paladin city lord, Azoun V sounds fine to me. And Red Wizards, esp. Sazz Tam. That might be it for me.




I'll go with... most of the Interchangable Masked Power Figures can stay - ditching them wouldn't really change anything but would confuse people who seem to remember the Masked Lords or Council of Six or whatever. Elminster, Drizzt, and Artemis have to stay since they sell books. Maybe not Artemis, but he IS a Shade now. I'd probably keep the more useful and memorable of the Seven Sisters, like Alustriel and the Simbul around.

I'd actually prefer to have kept most of the non-stupid Gods, but we knew 4e wasn't going that way for a while. I mean, Ghaunadaur can slime off and reveal he was Juiblex all along, and I always really had it in for Kieransailee, but I *liked* Vhaeraun.

As far as bad guys, Szass Tam and Manshoon are definitely big names that need to stay. Maybe we can even get less incompetent and more active Zhentarim in 4e, so that Manshoon can be doing stuff - the guy has a great character design, and should totally be used more. I actually hate Telamont Tanthul with a fiery passion, but I was pretty dang sure he wasn't leaving the Realms, and lo and behold he sure didn't. I probably would have kept Halaster around instead of having him go out like a mook, but whatever.

For most of the Random Super Archmages (Ioulaum, Larloch, Arthindool the Terraseer, Aumvor the Undying, the list goes on), I wouldn't declare them dead, but I'd quietly not mention them again. Especially with Ioulaum, Arthindool, and Aumvor, who stay hidden all the time anyway. That way, people who actually liked those guys - for example, I always liked Larloch - can put them in their Realms if necessary, people who are just starting out won't know about these guys unless they become important, people who disliked them can always consider them dead, and if I felt like going back on this design decision later - for example, I had *just the place* for Aumvor the Pillsbury Doughlich in this module I was writing - well, he was never *really* gone.



> I just History of the Realms. Why is there a picture of a warforged??




Beats me. It's got nothing to do with the Realms. Heck, it's got nothing to do with its own *caption*. A good few Grand History of the Realms pictures suffered severely from this, with the "destruction of Jhaamdath" or whatever being a bunch of mages sitting around and chilling out with no destruction in sight, the Warforged, and other questionable art choices.


----------



## Reaper Steve (Jan 13, 2008)

Mighty Veil said:
			
		

> I just History of the Realms. Why is there a picture of a warforged??




I remember reading (but will never find the source) that a WotC type stated that it was a 'typo.' (Somebody pasted the wrong art into the layout.)


----------



## Uzzy (Jan 13, 2008)

Grand History of the Realms had an art budget of practically zero, so they couldn't commission any new art for the book. Any money that was spent went on maps. The art in the book itself is all reused stuff, from older products. Which really sucks.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Seven Sisters, like Alustriel and the Simbul around.
> 
> I'd actually prefer to have kept most of the non-stupid Gods, but we knew 4e wasn't going that way for a while. I mean, Ghaunadaur can slime off and reveal he was Juiblex all along, and I always really had it in for Kieransailee, but I *liked* Vhaeraun.
> 
> ...




The 7 Sisters can have died in the Spellplague, especially Mary-sue Simbul. I'm sure the old schoos of Thay will be gone and in its place a bunch of Hogwort schools. But if Thay is still around, and I hope it is, with gnolls, slavery, Red Wizards and all. I sure hope they finally kill Simbul and had a military victory against her and those damn berserkers and witches.

I fogot about the minor gods. Yeah, some I like. And like you, some I hope reveal themselves to be demon lords (or iconic demi-power) we all know about. They did it with Bahumet(sp) I see reading the HotR, getting him into the world after having Tiamat in there for so long.

Sammaster and the Cult. I like both of them too.

Telamont Tanthul is who again?

When I saw that warforged picture I thought they might have found a history snippet of golems someone built. Which could be used later, and expanded on, for why warforged are in the Realms (going on the rumor that they'll be in  PHB2 and since that silly rule of theirs says all core stuff will be in the Realms...). I think it's safe to say Narfell will be reborn with tieflings again for 4e. My guess, there was a Deep Narfell under the ruins all this time! Gee.

Reading the HotR just showed me again how over-all useless gnomes and even halflings are to that world. Why do they keep them. Even beholders have played a more active role in the Realms then them. Notice that?


----------



## Darrin Drader (Jan 13, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> But, you didn't actually do so.  That speaks volumes right there.  It may have been interesting, but, just not interesting enough.  Sounds like a whole pile of the Realms material to me.
> 
> Anyone else think that the new FR looks a lot like the old Scarred Lands?




Actually the reason I didn't actually do it has a lot to do with the fact that I'm finally coming off of a 2 year gaming drought. My life has been complicated for a while (kids being born, moving to a new town, etc), so I haven't had the time to run any of the games I've wanted to. Add to that the fact that I was going non-stop designing for D&D in one manner or another since 3E came out, and I finally find myself a bit burned out by D&D and the fantasy genre in general. Right now I'm actually playing Darwin's World using the True20 rules. 

What I had considered doing was running some specifically Egypt flavored adventures, such as Necropolis. There's a couple others that would have fit in as well too. Right now it looks like when I return to fantasy, I'll probably not be using the Realms or any other WotC setting as I've found that the Goodman Games setting is more to my liking.


----------



## Imban (Jan 13, 2008)

Mighty Veil said:
			
		

> Sammaster and the Cult. I like both of them too.




Erm, not to burst your bubble, but Sammaster's been dead since late 2e. The Cult of the Dragon is okay as a villain group, but shouldn't really be one of the head-line villain groups of the setting.



> Telamont Tanthul is who again?




Leader of the Shades / new Netheril. Level-ridiculous archmage.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 13, 2008)

Uzzy said:
			
		

> Grand History of the Realms had an art budget of practically zero. The art in the book itself is all reused stuff, from older products. Which really sucks.




That was fine (and obvious). But a warforged with a caption about a green dragon? Couldn't they have reused that (awesome) picture of a knight holding a two-handed sword, getting ready to swing at a green dragon (who's skipping along out of a forest). It's the cover for Basic D&D's Companion boxed set.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 13, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Erm, not to burst your bubble, but Sammaster's been dead since late 2e.




But his lich form keeps popping up.


----------



## Uzzy (Jan 13, 2008)

Mighty Veil said:
			
		

> That was fine (and obvious). But a warforged with a caption about a green dragon? Couldn't they have reused that (awesome) picture of a knight holding a two-handed sword, getting ready to swing at a green dragon (who's skipping along out of a forest). It's the cover for Basic D&D's Companion boxed set.




Don't ask me! I'd have preferred that WoTC treat the book with some respect and commissioned lots of fresh art for it, especially as it was intended to 'wrap up' all the previous Realms histories into one book.


----------



## Filcher (Jan 13, 2008)

JosephK said:
			
		

> Imo, one of the more iconic traits of the realms is change - cataclysmic change...




QFT. When will the next great Realms upheaval take place? The crystal ball says 5E.


----------



## ashockney (Jan 13, 2008)

*Hardcore FR Fan Reaction*

I would consider myself a hardcore FR fan.  I have run over ten major campaigns based in the FR, set in all three editions of the game.  I own most of the published materials put out for FR, or have at some point.  I've read a few of the novels, especially Doug Niles and Ed Greenwood.  I've enjoyed reading the bulletin boards, and participating in the community that follows and speculates on the world.  Finally, I've attended numerous convention seminars, and participated by questions regarding the history and future of the realms.  

I definitely don't consider myself so hardcore that I would be considered a "scholar", just don't know that much detail, and I've always kind of had my own "take" on the FR, which lends itself to my gaming.  

So, I've read the story presented on the wizards website.  I've always been a fan of seeing the area move forward, and to see the story move forward with it.  The introduction of the shades, for example, in third edition was sweet.  

These changes are good, albeit pretty significant.  There are some areas that I'll have to make some alterations because of the role the heroes in my campaigns have played on areas of the world that they have sent a "wholesale" destruction.  

In general, I can tell you that reading this account left a very bad taste in my mouth.  I agree with Whisperfoot, that upon further consideration, it is the very "third party" element of this change.  When my campaign, and the FR world I run, went from 1st to 2nd edition, the event of the time of troubles did carry that campaign, and my characters through this transition.  This wholesale change doesn't offer my players that option, and as such, will limit their "buyin" to these changes.  My players have a clear understnanding of ownership of this campaign world (20 years later) and probably would "reject" these ideas if I presented it too them.  I'd also be concerned with arbitrarily moving the world forward 94 years for two key reasons.  The first (and I hate using it, but it's really true) is the investment we already have in the realms.  Specifically, I've spent how much money and time learning the realms?  Blackstaff, Laeral, Peirgieron, Mirt, and all are just gone?  So if I want to run a Waterdeep campaign in 4e, I'm to dump, City System boxed set, Waterdeep and the North, the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd edition writeup in the respective player's guides, The North boxed set, Undermountain and Undermountain II boxed sets, Volo's Guide to Waterdeep.  Oh, no.  That's really disappointing.  The second concern I would have is the level of understanding my players will have in starting up a new FR campaign, set in the 4e realms.  My players know the old realms pretty well, and we've not played D&D together for sometime.  At first blush, I think I would have to essentially "ignore" this material to get them to play, and re-write the 4e elements into our "FR" world to make it fit as smoothly as possible.  We'll advance the story to do so, but probably not more than 30 to 50 years.

To be specific, regarding the spellplague, I'm not thrilled.  The reason is not because of it being "lazy writing", it's just not very cool.  When I'm reading this, I'm asking myself, "what's in it for my players."  If they're safe in their respective cities, then they are surrounded by destruction and will inherit refugees.  There is no cool, big bad guy to kill.  There's no big "threat".  It's just a plague.  In defense of the writers, there's nothing wrong with it.  It could much, much worse.  It could be "Highlander II" with aliens coming in from nowhere, who'd "always been there" and they're ALL IMMORTALS!   This is not that, and there's nothing structurally wrong with it.  There are a few tantalizing bits, particularly Baldur's Gate, the Moonshaes, and Cormyr.  

So, as everyone else has pointed out, we talk with our wallets.  So what if they're daggers!  Well, I'll probably be buying 4e FR, at least to check it out, steal their ideas, and write them into my own 4e transition campaign.


----------



## Mirtek (Jan 13, 2008)

Mighty Veil said:
			
		

> When I saw that warforged picture I thought they might have found a history snippet of golems someone built. Which could be used later, and expanded on, for why warforged are in the Realms



AFAIK they did exactly that with the GHotR. The snippet they used was the storyline of the old  Blood&Magic PC game. With a little bit of good will the golems forged from the Bloodforge can be used as the first "Warforged" of the Realms


----------



## Raloc (Jan 13, 2008)

Tharen the Damned said:
			
		

> Nah, I just made fun of the whole 4th edition hype that many things in 3rd were "unfun" and they changed it. As the Realms get change big time they must have been unfun.
> Just an ironic joke.




Ah right right gotcha.

On a side note, I don't seem to see the problem with the novels "stealing" plot threads, because of a few reasons.  First, I find it pretty crazy to buy all those books.  Second, it would take an inordinately huge amount of time to catalog all the changes in each book, and how each relates to others.  Third, if something would limit my or my players' enjoyment of the game (having it changed in unfavorable ways from the RAW FR) I pretty much just ignore it.

Most people I know can't even read that many FR novels, anyway, and really don't care to incorporate everything into the game.  I'm totally fine with that, because for me there is a definite mental divide between "FR game" and "FR novel".  If things are introduced in supplements that appeared in novels, I incorporate them based on usefulness to the game.

Some might say my FR isn't the "real" FR, but it works fine for me, and the other DM in my old group did the same, and everyone likes our games.  *Shrug*

Honestly I'm not too concerned about the changes, since I have two potential groups.  One is new to the game in general and wouldn't miss anything, and another would probably rather stick with 3.5e or change FR to be 3.5e FR with 4e rules.


----------



## Lonely Tylenol (Jan 13, 2008)

Mephistopheles said:
			
		

> It's not out of line for FR but it does seem kind of lazy. Another Mystra frag (I suppose it's becoming a tradition), another interdimensional import.



If Mystra didn't die, how would the inhabitants know that they were going through an edition change?  It's like the captain coming on and telling you that you're flying over the equator.


----------



## Fenes (Jan 13, 2008)

The Realms' problem were and probably are the novels, who seem to suffer from the "bigger, better, badder" syndrome - every second novel had to shake up the entire realm. I never had a problem with the "high level NPCs", those were easy to assume "busy", but left and right, novel characters had all the altering stuff.

So I made my own Realms.


----------



## Aloïsius (Jan 13, 2008)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> If Mystra didn't die, how would the inhabitants know that they were going through an edition change?  It's like the captain coming on and telling you that you're flying over the equator.



By the way, who will replace her ? Shar ? I mean, if magic has been stabilzed, it means that there is a new god(ess) of magic ?


----------



## DrSpunj (Jan 13, 2008)

Dr. Awkward said:
			
		

> If Mystra didn't die, how would the inhabitants know that they were going through an edition change?  It's like the captain coming on and telling you that you're flying over the equator.




Ha! Alright, I've been into Iron Heroes and reading quite a bit of David Gemmell in what free time I've found, so I haven't been reading/following FR twists & turns too much in the last year or so.

In what storyline/novels did Mystra die this time? Thanks in advance for any info.


----------



## humble minion (Jan 13, 2008)

DrSpunj said:
			
		

> In what storyline/novels did Mystra die this time? Thanks in advance for any info.




The bare bones are mentioned in GHotR.  It remains to be seen whether the whole business will get a novel series to flesh it out.


----------



## Mighty Veil (Jan 13, 2008)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> By the way, who will replace her ? Shar ? I mean, if magic has been stabilzed, it means that there is a new god(ess) of magic ?




My guess: depends on the power sources out there and given to players by the gods who found a way to harness it, but they may not be in control on who gets to offer it. 

So if a group of evil adventurers want to be psychic warrior, warlocks, cleric, etc.

Malar will want to offer nature, arcane, shadow pact, fey pact, psionic, and divine source to a group of adventurers who worship him or are evil. He offers it and if they knowingly or not knowingly accept it. He grows in power or at least, doesn't die in the Astral plane, er, ocean, er... sea. Astral sea. Davey Jones Astral Locker.

Nature is manifested by the land but the portfolio and responsibility of Silvanus. But Malar can still get Mask to steal a stream of it for his use. Lets him offer druid spells to an evil dragonborn druid. Azuth and Skull-guy managed to get out of the Astral Locker and figured out how to harness the raw arcane energies. So did Shar and Corellon (or maybe just Corellon and Shar did). Shar demands a (warlock) pact to use her arcane magic from mortals. Azuth and Lich-god had a hard enough time getting a new way to harness magic. Some they'll give it directly (sorcerors) but the majority in written form (wizards). Written form means anyone who studies it can use it, the gods have no control over who can or can't be a wizard. And so on.

Malar makes a deal with Shar to offer her shadow magic to his adventurer. The reborn psionic god is unaligned, so doesn't care. Showing you don't need a weave a lame goddess for magic.


----------



## Voss (Jan 13, 2008)

I'm not too fond of that.  It essentially makes all spellcasting classes alternate cleric builds.  Warlock, wizard, sorcerer and druid magic shouldn't really come down from a divine source.  Or psionics, for that matter.


----------



## Filcher (Jan 13, 2008)

Sorry if I missed this: 

Has it been stated if Elminster is alive in the 4E Realms?


----------



## Faraer (Jan 13, 2008)

Aloïsius said:
			
		

> By the way, who will replace her ? Shar ? I mean, if magic has been stabilzed, it means that there is a new god(ess) of magic ?



There won't be one.







			
				Filcher said:
			
		

> Has it been stated if Elminster is alive in the 4E Realms?



He will be.


----------



## Corinth (Jan 14, 2008)

Not liking what I'm seeing.  Not that I can't work with it...and I know just what I'd like to do with it: put it in the path of the Burning Crusade.  Then we can have literal WOW vs. D&D combat. ;-)


----------



## Orius (Jan 14, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Yeah, they're actually not undead at all. They're humans from an ancient kingdom of mages called Netheril who happened to have their floating city on a trip to the Plane of Shadow when magic went haywire and Netheril fell thousands of years ago.
> 
> Now they have cool shadow powers and are led by Telamont Tanthul, a guy who could quite probably take Elminster in a knock-down-drag-out fight, and they're finally back on Faerun. (And apparently, as of 4e, taking it over.)




Huh, so they're the guys I was beating on at the end of Shadows of Undrentide.  And I thought thought they were unimportant.

Though I was beginning to suspect as much as I read this thread.


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 14, 2008)

In many ways, it looks to me as if 4e FR will be getting back to its roots. Sword Coast, Cormyr and Cormanthyr will be fully fleshed out areas, while many of the other regions of the realms will be left to be developed later, or purposefully left blank for individual GMs to use in their own campaigns.

The new FR seems to have a lot in common with the Gray Box.

I have a lot of sympathy for those GMs who are running long-lived campaigns in FR. I suspect that this is the source of much rancor with the new FR. My own style has been somewhat different since 3e came out. I tend to run campaigns that last for a few years. The characters begin as novices, and as they grow in level and their stories affect the region they live in (hopefully for the better). Each story eventually comes to an end, and I begin a new campaign in a different region. I am lucky that the new edition will coincide with the natural stopping point of my current Sembia campaign. The massive changes won't affect my enjoyment of the FR.

The same thing is happening with my brother in law's Waterdeep campaign (and his FR Age of Worms campaign). We are currently playing our last adventure before our characters retire (should they survive). I am looking forward to his next (4e) Waterdeep campaign, in which some of us will be playing the descendants of our current 3e characters.

The changes to FR do not affect our campaigns. The changes seem new and exciting, even to old FR fans such as ourselves. All in all, we are very happy at the timing of these changes.


----------



## Dire Bare (Jan 14, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Erm, not to burst your bubble, but Sammaster's been dead since late 2e. The Cult of the Dragon is okay as a villain group, but shouldn't really be one of the head-line villain groups of the setting.



Actually, the Rage of Dragons RSE had Sammaster return . . . . only to get iced again by the end of the story (of course).  Good shared-world fantasy villians are like comic book characters, you can always bring'em back if you want!!!


----------



## Orius (Jan 14, 2008)

I've always though the CotD was stupid myself.  I'd have no problem at all with the Spellplague wiping them all out.


----------



## Le Noir Faineant (Jan 14, 2008)

Oh boy.

And me thought there could be nothing worse than Dragonlance's War of Souls.


----------



## Mephistopheles (Jan 14, 2008)

Reaper Steve said:
			
		

> Out of curiosity, what wouldn't be lazy?




I meant lazy in context for FR. Killing off Mystra and having a people transported onto the world has already been done numerous times in FR history. Surely they have enough talented folks working on it to be able to come up with a new twist.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 14, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> So anything that doesn't reach of a 'threshold of X number of campaigns actually use this' gets the Giant Not-Making-Enough-Money Eraser?  Thats a poor way to handle a setting.




Is there any better way?  Sorry, but, if a given region isn't getting a whole lot of loving, and not much interest, then, why not trash it and get something different?

This whole attitude of "Gee they're changing crap that I never actually used" seems pervasive.  Whether it's stuff like dumping bards and gnomes or now FR baggage, why do people get so protective of stuff that isn't actually seeing play?


----------



## hexgrid (Jan 14, 2008)

Mephistopheles said:
			
		

> I meant lazy in context for FR. Killing off Mystra and having a people transported onto the world has already been done numerous times in FR history. Surely they have enough talented folks working on it to be able to come up with a new twist.




History does have a tendency to repeat itself. The fact that it's happened before just establishes the likelihood of it happening again.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 14, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> This whole attitude of "Gee they're changing crap that I never actually used" seems pervasive.  Whether it's stuff like dumping bards and gnomes or now FR baggage, why do people get so protective of stuff that isn't actually seeing play?



Because there's no evidence that it isn't "actually seeing play". Of course, your mistake of equating "interest" and "time" speaks for itself.

I see nothing "pervasive". That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

That article was interesting - it certainly was a butchering of a game world that made the much-maligned Time of Troubles seem like a great idea. I'm sure this "new FR" will be great for a subset of newcomers. Whether more newcomers will make up for the droves of already-purchasing FR consumers leaving is something we'll have to wait to see. Coming from the world of business, my guess is "not bloody likely".


----------



## Voss (Jan 14, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> Is there any better way?  Sorry, but, if a given region isn't getting a whole lot of loving, and not much interest, then, why not trash it and get something different?
> 
> This whole attitude of "Gee they're changing crap that I never actually used" seems pervasive.  Whether it's stuff like dumping bards and gnomes or now FR baggage, why do people get so protective of stuff that isn't actually seeing play?




First, it isn't about stuff that people don't actually use. People do, in fact, play bards, and gnomes and use Unther for something.  The better way would be to do something interesting with the material that exists, not summarily delete it because the writing team, from all appearances, lacks a single creative bone.  

Second, its a matter of self-interest.  Even if some people don't care about what is getting obliterated today, they might care about whats on the chopping block tomorrow.  Accepting the crappy changes without a peep means taking any influence the audience might have and flushing it down the toliet.   If they had a solid, well-written design, I might worry about public influence making it crappy.  But they don't, so they might as well accept public influence to make at least some of their existing audience *happy*.

Third, I don't think they actually have meaningful statistics.  They might think no one uses Unther (or whatever), but I want to see them prove it in some meaningful fashion.


----------



## Stereofm (Jan 14, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Second, its a matter of self-interest.  Even if some people don't care about what is getting obliterated today, they might care about whats on the chopping block tomorrow.  Accepting the crappy changes without a peep means taking any influence the audience might have and flushing it down the toliet.   If they had a solid, well-written design, I might worry about public influence making it crappy.  But they don't, so they might as well accept public influence to make at least some of their existing audience *happy*.
> 
> .




There is another angle : the Times of Trouble had plenty of design problems, but you could *PLAY* through it, and in a home game, you could potentially take your world to an interesting new direction. Even outside the canon.

The 4e direction seems like "our way or no way". now be a good sheep and pay.

Of course, this is entirely subjective, and my viewpoint IS biaised.


----------



## MisterWhodat (Jan 14, 2008)

One of the first things myself and my fellow DM do when deciding where and what for a new campaign, we are prepping for our 4E FR campaign now, is find an area that has not been detailed too much.  This gives us carte blanch to make up NPC's and towns and whatever the hell we need to get done what we want to get done.  Now if we start a campaign and then a novel comes out that totally goes against everything we have done, we ignore the novel.  If you are running YOUR game then once you get started YOU control what is canon and what is not.  

I like the little press release from Rich, gives you just enough info to have us filling up five pages on here asking about everything else.  

As an aside, why do people who have no interest, as they themselves state, in the Realms feel the need to post in a Realms specific topic about how they don't play they Realms?


----------



## Benben (Jan 14, 2008)

MisterWhodat said:
			
		

> As an aside, why do people who have no interest, as they themselves state, in the Realms feel the need to post in a Realms specific topic about how they don't play they Realms?




Welcome to the internet!  

Seriously though,

I'm in the camp of long time Realms fan who likes most if not all of the changes.

I'm especially happy that Thay and Halarua being toned (beaten) down.  I always wonder why these countries weren't more dominating in a setting that previously handed out so much power to arcane spell users.


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 14, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> I'm sure this "new FR" will be great for a subset of newcomers. Whether more newcomers will make up for the droves of already-purchasing FR consumers leaving is something we'll have to wait to see. Coming from the world of business, my guess is "not bloody likely".




Again with this attitude. I have yet to see that FR consumers will be leaving in droves. I have seen people complaining in the forums and promising to do just that. We have no idea how representative that sample is. Most of the hard core FR fans I know are happy with the changes and plan to get the new FR books asap. I would never claim that this group is representative however. We don't know.

I do take umbrage with so many posters implying that only newcomers to the Realms will like the new edition. There are lots of us who've been fans from the beginning who are happy with the ideas presented thus far.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 14, 2008)

Being someone who learned of FR with the first novels when they came out in french and who ended up taking it as the prefered world by the Dragons of Summer Flammes event, I say that while I am not agreeing with every changes, I will at the very least give it a chance and read the book(s).


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jan 14, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> That article was interesting - it certainly was a butchering of a game world that made the much-maligned Time of Troubles seem like a great idea. I'm sure this "new FR" will be great for a subset of newcomers. Whether more newcomers will make up for the droves of already-purchasing FR consumers leaving is something we'll have to wait to see. Coming from the world of business, my guess is "not bloody likely".




This is such amazing nonsense. I used to be a big FR fan before 3E continued down the road that 2E had put it on, and really continued to boring-up the Realms. I bought virtually every 1E and 2E area supplement, and sadly, a lot of of the novels, as well as every FR-themed computer game post-1990. I really like the sound of what I'm hearing about 4E, and I will be purchasing the 4E FRCS.

I'm not a "newcomer". A "returner", maybe, but perhaps that's beyond you seemingly weak comprehension.

There's no evidence that anyone is "leaving in droves", either. Based on this and other forums, it seems like most of the OMG I WONT RUN THE 4E FR 4 SURE! types also, in other threads, admit that they're pretty anti-4E per se, and thus were hardly going to buy any 4E products anyway, and the "leavers" seem far from numerous. "I'll wait and see" and "I don't like the sound of it but we'll see" are really the reasonable responses at this stage - claiming they've ruined everything is drama-club nonsense.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jan 14, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> That article was interesting - it certainly was a butchering of a game world that made the much-maligned Time of Troubles seem like a great idea. I'm sure this "new FR" will be great for a subset of newcomers. Whether more newcomers will make up for the droves of already-purchasing FR consumers leaving is something we'll have to wait to see. Coming from the world of business, my guess is "not bloody likely".




This is such amazing nonsense. I used to be a big FR fan before 3E continued down the road that 2E had put it on, and really continued to boring-up the Realms. I bought virtually every 1E and 2E area supplement, and sadly, a lot of of the novels, as well as every FR-themed computer game post-1990. I really like the sound of what I'm hearing about 4E, and I will be purchasing the 4E FRCS.

I'm not a "newcomer". A "returner", maybe, but perhaps that's beyond you seemingly weak comprehension.

There's no evidence that anyone is "leaving in droves", either. Based on this and other forums, it seems like most of the OMG I WONT RUN THE 4E FR 4 SURE! types also, in other threads, admit that they're pretty anti-4E per se, and thus were hardly going to buy any 4E products anyway, and the "leavers" seem far from numerous.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jan 14, 2008)

Sounds like the Realms might be interesting again.
Now, if they'd just kill of about hundred or so gods...


----------



## The Little Raven (Jan 14, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Third, I don't think they actually have meaningful statistics.  They might think no one uses Unther (or whatever), but I want to see them prove it in some meaningful fashion.




They don't owe you any inside look at their market research or their decision-making process. They know far better what drives the sales of their books than you, or any poster on this forum.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 14, 2008)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> Again with this attitude. I have yet to see that FR consumers will be leaving in droves. I have seen people complaining in the forums and promising to do just that. We have no idea how representative that sample is. Most of the hard core FR fans I know are happy with the changes and plan to get the new FR books asap. I would never claim that this group is representative however. We don't know.



I agree - we don't know. When it comes to numbers, I'm only guessing as much as the next guy. My evidence comes from Candlekeep (certainly a very much high-purchasing group), in which the reaction is decidedly negative. Same with the WotC boards. Your source?



> I do take umbrage with so many posters implying that only newcomers to the Realms will like the new edition. There are lots of us who've been fans from the beginning who are happy with the ideas presented thus far.



As you've stated on multiple occasions in multiple posts. Of course, I suspect you're in the minority. Are you? Nobody knows for sure, but that's why it's only my suspicions.



			
				Ruin Explorer said:
			
		

> This is such amazing nonsense. I used to be a big FR fan before 3E continued down the road that 2E had put it on, and really continued to boring-up the Realms. I bought virtually every 1E and 2E area supplement, and sadly, a lot of of the novels, as well as every FR-themed computer game post-1990. I really like the sound of what I'm hearing about 4E, and I will be purchasing the 4E FRCS.



Ooooh... Not just nonsense, but "amazing" nonsense. Woo! Of course, it's nothing of the sort, but you keep on with those great phrases. Good on ya!



> I'm not a "newcomer". A "returner", maybe, but perhaps that's beyond you seemingly weak comprehension.
> 
> There's no evidence that anyone is "leaving in droves", either. Based on this and other forums, it seems like most of the OMG I WONT RUN THE 4E FR 4 SURE! types also, in other threads, admit that they're pretty anti-4E per se, and thus were hardly going to buy any 4E products anyway, and the "leavers" seem far from numerous.



Heh. My "seemingly weak comprehension". Another good one from you, Ruin Explorer. As noted above, my evidence is from the Candlekeep and WotC boards. It's the internet, and not representative in any way, shape, or form - but I'll stick with my guesses, and you can stick with yours. If you want to quibble between "newcomer" and "returner", go right ahead. I suspect you won't be getting very far.

"Weak comprehension" indeed. Ouch! The irony.


----------



## Badkarmaboy (Jan 15, 2008)

Why can't we all just love each other?  Sigh.

FWIW, I would not base the potential sales of 4E FR stuff off of the reaction on Candlekeep or the wotc boards for a minute.  Especially wotc-it's the same 5 knotheads ranting on for 25 pages.  It seems like foaming hysteria over there.  ENworld may have it's moments, but at least it's a fairly reasonable discussion.

Also, given global sales of Wizards FR products, Candlekeep is probably a drop in the bucket.  It's also a pretty diehard segment of the buying public.  I just can't see it as representative of the population as a whole.  If you do Arwyn, more power to you.  

Last thing-I got the feeling (esp. on the wotc boards) that there was much discontent amongst the anti-4E crowd with the Time of Troubles and a good portion of stuff put out in 3E.  If that's the case, why did that stuff end up selling as well as it did?  It makes me wonder how much all this rancor will end up effecting sales.

Once folks calm down (and get a look see at what's put forth) I bet attitudes will change somewhat.  If they don't...eh.


----------



## Aloïsius (Jan 15, 2008)

I don't worry for the sales. WotC know what they do, and I bet sales will at least be on par with 3e.

I don't worry for the overall quality or consistence of the whole product : it's FR, remember ! This is not about consistence, this is about giving your PC the best playground possible. And I think they will just do that. 

Sure, I liked the wealth of gods in 3e. But what's the problem ? I still have my 3e books, and can perfectly add them as sourcebooks for 4e. 

New ideas, new world, new rules... better than same idea, same world, same rules. It's a new edition : it would be dishonest if the damned stuff was the same ! I'm happy this is not 3.75


----------



## IanB (Jan 15, 2008)

If I may put my Comic Book Store guy shirt on for a moment, with regard to the dragonborn:

Worst. Explanation. Ever.

Seriously, they have months to think about this, and 100 years of history to give them plenty of story space to explain it, and they come up with "sucked in from another world"? Argh, that is so completely _lazy_. Even though I don't even play FR, it offends my inner world builder.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

Some weeks or months ago there was discussion about the comment in the Grand History book about “the joining of two worlds” or the “disastrous joining of two worlds.” (speculated to be Aber and Toril) I still wonder what that was referring to exactly, because in this article it sounds like a least two worlds have joined Toril; the fae one connected to it at islands with the pseudo-Celts, and the one with the dragon-born people where Unther used to be. 

It all feels like poorly thought out, “New Coke” kind of deal.


----------



## Voss (Jan 15, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> They don't owe you any inside look at their market research or their decision-making process. They know far better what drives the sales of their books than you, or any poster on this forum.




Owe?  No.

But if they want my money they need to do more than present this amateur hour garbage.  They've presented a lot of fluff changes and some rules changes.  The rules changes largely appeal to me, so I will probably pick up the Core books.  The fluff changes... well those range from a few passable ones to many, many poor ones.  Justifying why they are making such poor choices is one of the few ways they're even going to have a chance at convincing me to pick up a fluff or setting book.


----------



## hunter1828 (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> It all feels like poorly thought out, “New Coke” kind of deal.




Great comparison!      I wish I'd thought of that!


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

I wonder if there in an internet rule that no matter how wretched an idea is, at least a handful of people will ardently support it… sight unseen. 



			
				Mourn said:
			
		

> They don't owe you any inside look at their market research or their decision-making process.




First, even in so far as that is true, it does not mean we are required to have faith in WotC or their products, particularly before we have seen the product. Further, possessing copious amounts of market information does not actually mean they are properly making decisions and implementing plans based on that information. Frankly, it would be easier for them to do what ever the hell they wanted and then point to hidden numbers as justification for what ever they are doing. 

Second, I do not think Voss was demanding to see those “numbers” or to be granted access to confidential WotC information. It appears he was interpreting the situation based on comments, essays and so forth that have been presented by the WotC people. Frankly, I agree with his assessment. 



			
				Voss said:
			
		

> They might think no one uses Unther (or whatever), but I want to see them prove it in some meaningful fashion.




My reading of it is that they didn’t even believe that “no one uses Unther,” but that “Unther bored the WotC creative team,” so it got canned.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 15, 2008)

I suspect Realms-2008 is pretty well thought out, as a Frankenstein designed to appeal to as many different groups as possible while minimizing development costs, with Realmslore rationalizations crafted sometimes post hoc around these priorities, though I dare say with a nice dose of guesswork and designer hubris too.

We don't yet know enough to judge those rationalizations: there's more to Tymanther and the Dragonborn than has been revealed, for instance, as with other things like the death of Halaster.

There isn't much to say about secret market research. It does give their decisions credibility, but it isn't an infallible oracle which we should take on faith, either.


----------



## Wormwood (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> I wonder if there in an internet rule that no matter how wretched an idea is, at least a handful of people will ardently support it… sight unseen.




That's rule 119*, I believe.








*Not to be confused with Rule 118, which states that you can find someone willing to crap on any new idea . . . sight unseen.


----------



## JohnSnow (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> First, even in so far as that is true, it does not mean we are required to have faith in WotC or their products, particularly before we have seen the product. Further, possessing copious amounts of market information does not actually mean they are properly making decisions and implementing plans based on that information. Frankly, it would be easier for them to do what ever the hell they wanted and then point to hidden numbers as justification for what ever they are doing.




I find it hard to believe that you believe the WotC people would so readily shoot the dog that feeds them. Whatever you want to think, _they're running a business._ For those who don't know, that means that you invest resources in profitable areas and drop unprofitable ones.

If re-scoping Unther, Mulhorand, et. al. would cost them money (and it would), then they're only going to do it if they believe there's real demand for the product. At the bare minimum, those areas draw development time from other parts of the Realms that are a lot more popular. There's no way the designers are just doing _whatever the hell they wanted._

What they are doing is following the best market research they have. And they're making decisions based on that information. Will they always make the right decisions? Well, that's a matter of opinion. But if the product doesn't sell well, somebody's job will be in trouble.

But hey, believe what you want. Even if it does just reek of sour grapes.


----------



## mhacdebhandia (Jan 15, 2008)

It's Skarka's Law, actually, usually invoked when people defend monstrous ideas that touch on topics we're not allowed to discuss here.


----------



## Voss (Jan 15, 2008)

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> I find it hard to believe that you believe the WotC people would so readily shoot the dog that feeds them. Whatever you want to think, _they're running a business._ For those who don't know, that means that you invest resources in profitable areas and drop unprofitable ones.
> 
> If re-scoping Unther, Mulhorand, et. al. would cost them money (and it would), then they're only going to do it if they believe there's real demand for the product. At the bare minimum, those areas draw development time from other parts of the Realms that are a lot more popular. There's no way the designers are just doing _whatever the hell they wanted._




Does re-scoping it by air dropping the new and different (and apparently unrelated) dragonborn cost them any less money?  Was there a demand for a giant mountain erupting in Thay?  Random mutations?  

Heck, what about the time jump and the spell plague itself?  They certainly can't poll the not-yet-existent new and returning customers to find out how high the demand for that is!

I don't think your argument makes much sense.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

JohnSnow said:
			
		

> I find it hard to believe that you believe the WotC people would so readily shoot the dog that feeds them.




I've never heard it in terms of "the dog that feeds them."

As for WotC, well, people have a deep capacity to fool themselves into believing that what they wanted to do all along is legal, moral, a matter of good sense, practical, viable and so forth and so on when what they want to do might be none of those things (reading these boards lead one to witness some truly stupendous feats of spindling logic to justify something). That is a significant factor is why so many new business, products, market strategies and the like fail.


----------



## Teemu (Jan 15, 2008)

I have a hard time believing any "true hardcore" FR fan having a problem with Unther or Mulhorand going the way of dodo. I've always understood these areas were some of the less liked, since they're direct real world analogies that came with 2e and which were not part of the original Greenwood world (at least, not in their current incarnation). Chessenta, Mulhorand, Unther - Ancient Greece, Egypt, and Mesopotamia.


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 15, 2008)

or I could also bring up the 'Fandumb' problems - things like the more... hardcore base of a fandom, who think there is One true way, One true canon, and doing any change is a betrayal, a blasphemy, a sin...


----------



## JohnSnow (Jan 15, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> Does re-scoping it by air dropping the new and different (and apparently unrelated) dragonborn cost them any less money?  Was there a demand for a giant mountain erupting in Thay?  Random mutations?
> 
> Heck, what about the time jump and the spell plague itself?  They certainly can't poll the not-yet-existent new and returning customers to find out how high the demand for that is!
> 
> I don't think your argument makes much sense.




No? They can certainly have polled customers...

1) What do you like about the _Forgotten Realms?_
2) Where is your campaign set?
3) What aspects of the campaign do you enjoy the most?

etc.

What do you think all those damn polls they've been putting in the books and the website are about? WotC probably even brought in FR players and asked them about their favorite setting. They found out what those players (on average) liked, what they disliked, and what they wanted changed. This is not rocket science. It's market research. And any decent company knows how to do it.


----------



## Voss (Jan 15, 2008)

1- I didn't say customers.  Not-yet-existent new and returning customers.  You know, the ones that all this 'removal of lore' is supposedly for.  

2- What polls?

3- Is WotC a decent company?


----------



## The Ubbergeek (Jan 15, 2008)

Wotc have louzy marketting and  they could improves their proofreading, but othewise, yes. They are at the very least decent, and better than some companies....


----------



## JohnSnow (Jan 15, 2008)

Voss said:
			
		

> 1- I didn't say customers.  Not-yet-existent new and returning customers.  You know, the ones that all this 'removal of lore' is supposedly for.
> 
> 2- What polls?
> 
> 3- Is WotC a decent company?




1. Well, since not all current D&D players play in FR, that'd be the first place to start. Other than that, there's blind tests.

2. Surveys. They pop up every so often when you join the website.

3. Well...maybe not in all ways...but yeah, WotC (and Hasbro) pretty much knows how to do market research. It's a pretty fundamental part of creating a strategy.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 15, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> Because there's no evidence that it isn't "actually seeing play". Of course, your mistake of equating "interest" and "time" speaks for itself.
> 
> I see nothing "pervasive". That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
> 
> That article was interesting - it certainly was a butchering of a game world that made the much-maligned Time of Troubles seem like a great idea. I'm sure this "new FR" will be great for a subset of newcomers. Whether more newcomers will make up for the droves of already-purchasing FR consumers leaving is something we'll have to wait to see. Coming from the world of business, my guess is "not bloody likely".




Take a look at the threads around here.  Pervasive is the word I would use.  I haven't seen nerd rage like this outside of Greyhawk.  

Hrm, Enworld poll after poll puts bards at the bottom of the list of class played.  Gnomes, again by Enworld polls were the least played race.  I'm sure that WOTC's market research is a heck of a lot more accurate than that.  The fact that NOT ONE SINGLE POSTER on this thread has set a campaign in the Mulhorand speaks for itself.  If something isn't getting used, it's time to go with something else, rather than keep it in just because.  That thinking gave us gnomes for thirty years.



			
				Voss said:
			
		

> First, it isn't about stuff that people don't actually use. People do, in fact, play bards, and gnomes and use Unther for something.  The better way would be to do something interesting with the material that exists, not summarily delete it because the writing team, from all appearances, lacks a single creative bone.
> 
> Second, its a matter of self-interest.  Even if some people don't care about what is getting obliterated today, they might care about whats on the chopping block tomorrow.  Accepting the crappy changes without a peep means taking any influence the audience might have and flushing it down the toliet.   If they had a solid, well-written design, I might worry about public influence making it crappy.  But they don't, so they might as well accept public influence to make at least some of their existing audience *happy*.
> 
> Third, I don't think they actually have meaningful statistics.  They might think no one uses Unther (or whatever), but I want to see them prove it in some meaningful fashion.




Why?  Why keep material that people don't use?  No one seems to answer this.  Unther was underutilized.  Gnomes and bards rarely saw play.  Why make something that no one likes interesting instead of trying something new that maybe lots of people find interesting?

It's not about creativity, it's about realizing reality and learning from mistakes.  Races without a clear vision suck.  So, we eject the gnomes and maybe bring them back later when we can do it better.  Bards in 3e blow.  So, we'll chuck them to make room for the stuff that people actually want to play and maybe bring them back later when they can be done right.  Unther wasn't being used by FR fans.  Yoink, out it goes and we'll put in a mysterious Dragon born nation and culture in this under used space.

If something isn't working, you don't keep it, you fix it.  Sometimes you can fix something without radically changing it and sometimes, you just have to buy something new.  They've decided that going with something new is the way to go.


----------



## Orius (Jan 15, 2008)

MisterWhodat said:
			
		

> As an aside, why do people who have no interest, as they themselves state, in the Realms feel the need to post in a Realms specific topic about how they don't play they Realms?




Even if I don't play, I still have some interest in the setting.  At the very least, the Realms has generated plenty of useable crunch in the past.  Also, as the largest and most popular D&D setting, it's hard to ignore, and I'll have opinions on it regardless of how much of it I play.


----------



## Orius (Jan 15, 2008)

Benben said:
			
		

> I'm especially happy that Thay and Halarua being toned (beaten) down.  I always wonder why these countries weren't more dominating in a setting that previously handed out so much power to arcane spell users.




I second the comment on Halruaa.  The only thing that keeps it from being too illogical is that it's stuck down in the South by itself.  Otherwise, I think it really sticks out, particularly in the case of 1e and 2e where such a high-magic region can wreak all sorts of nasty havoc with the rules.


----------



## Fenes (Jan 15, 2008)

I run a campaign in Mulhorand/Unther, have done so since years.


----------



## Imban (Jan 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> Why?  Why keep material that people don't use?  No one seems to answer this.  Unther was underutilized.  Gnomes and bards rarely saw play.  Why make something that no one likes interesting instead of trying something new that maybe lots of people find interesting?




Unther had a distinct chicken-and-egg problem: it was relatively interesting, if a total real-world ripoff, in its original conception. The Time of Troubles set up a major plot in it, shaking up pretty much everything about it...

...and then nothing interesting ever happened there, metaplot wise, for almost as long as I've been alive. Unther was underutilized because TSR started a change that "ruined" it and then abandoned it like that, never touching it again. Maybe it's better off gone, but the whole storyline could have been handled better, either by TSR or by Wizards of the Coast.

Gnomes and bards also have a heck of a lot of fans. Those two have just suffered from a lack of a clear conception for the former, and a lack of mechanical quality for the latter. To a lesser extent so do half-orcs, but a large segment of the players I know who like half-orcs are just as cool with being full orcs, or other "monstrous" races. I suppose I'm just waiting to see the details of the new version of the gnome to tell whether or not I approve of it, and pretty assured that bards will be back and retain the idea behind the class.

As a sidenote, when a grouping has issues with mechanical quality rather than flavour, I'd be annoyed if WotC decided to remove it entirely rather than work to make it non-useless in the next edition. For example, I dearly hope the Avariel have not been quietly disappeared from 4e's Forgotten Realms. The winged elves were always a race that appealed to me, but their stats in 3e were *so* poor that I don't think I've ever seen a player choose to be one. As such, it's true that Avariel never saw play, but not for a lack of player interest.


----------



## Lurks-no-More (Jan 15, 2008)

IanB said:
			
		

> If I may put my Comic Book Store guy shirt on for a moment, with regard to the dragonborn:
> 
> Worst. Explanation. Ever.
> 
> Seriously, they have months to think about this, and 100 years of history to give them plenty of story space to explain it, and they come up with "sucked in from another world"? Argh, that is so completely _lazy_. Even though I don't even play FR, it offends my inner world builder.



There are very few settings where dropping an entire country, full of odd people, in via a magical event is appropriate and not lousy worldbuilding; but Forgotten Realms is one of those. That's how, in the FR history, _at least_ elves, orcs and the ancestors of the Mulhorandi people have gotten to Toril. There is an established precedent of _exactly_ this kind of a thing happening, again and again.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 15, 2008)

IanB said:
			
		

> Seriously, they have months to think about this, and 100 years of history to give them plenty of story space to explain it, and they come up with "sucked in from another world"?




Well, we had the Saurials sucked in from an alternate material plane back in the day.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 15, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Well, we had the Saurials sucked in from an alternate material plane back in the day.




Hm, they could explain the absence of gnomes as in "sucked of to an alternate material plane"


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 15, 2008)

Walking Dad said:
			
		

> Hm, they could explain the absence of gnomes as in "sucked of to an alternate material plane"




Have they confirmed an absence of gnomes in 4th Ed FR?


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 15, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> Have they confirmed an absence of gnomes?




No, but in the "first" Core Books there will only be a monster write-up.
And the Flash-Video Gnome was not very FR...


----------



## delericho (Jan 15, 2008)

MisterWhodat said:
			
		

> As an aside, why do people who have no interest, as they themselves state, in the Realms feel the need to post in a Realms specific topic about how they don't play they Realms?




In my case, it was because the changes are largely being done to draw in new players, so my stating that these changes weren't going to make me any more likely to play in the Realms was relevant.


----------



## delericho (Jan 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> It's not about creativity, it's about realizing reality and learning from mistakes.  Races without a clear vision suck.  So, we eject the gnomes and maybe bring them back later when we can do it better.  Bards in 3e blow.  So, we'll chuck them to make room for the stuff that people actually want to play and maybe bring them back later when they can be done right.  Unther wasn't being used by FR fans.  Yoink, out it goes and we'll put in a mysterious Dragon born nation and culture in this under used space.
> 
> If something isn't working, you don't keep it, you fix it.  Sometimes you can fix something without radically changing it and sometimes, you just have to buy something new.  They've decided that going with something new is the way to go.




True. It will, however, be interesting to see what they do with Realms 5e, when they decide to drop Dragonborn because no one was using them.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jan 15, 2008)

delericho said:
			
		

> True. It will, however, be interesting to see what they do with Realms 5e, when they decide to drop Dragonborn because no one was using them.




Hehehehe. You may be right there. I suspect Dragonborn will spank Half-Orcs in terms of "raging unpopularity", myself, but then perhaps I underestimate the number of wannabe/quasi-dragon-furries in the world. I have to say, I've never played with anyone who I think would find the concept of the Dragonborn cool or particularly interesting.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 15, 2008)

delericho said:
			
		

> True. It will, however, be interesting to see what they do with Realms 5e, when they decide to drop Dragonborn because no one was using them.



The same they did to half-orcs, gnomes, aasimar, Unther?


----------



## ferratus (Jan 15, 2008)

If I wasn't planning to use lizardfolk as a major race in my campaign world anyway, I certainly wouldn't use them.

Maybe we should do a poll of "Do you plan to play a Dragonborn" and see what percentage we get.


----------



## Fenes (Jan 15, 2008)

A real dragon would be something else, but some lizard with two legs? No, thanks.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 15, 2008)

Fenes said:
			
		

> A real dragon would be something else, but some lizard with two legs? No, thanks.




From *solo-monster* to *solo-group* character?


----------



## ferratus (Jan 15, 2008)

Hey, don't laugh, I used a red wyrmling dragon to play through the first adventure of the Cauldron adventure path of Dragon Magazine with my wife.  With the high AC, decent attack bonus, and rechargeable area of effect spell (breath weapon), she was actually quite effective.

She didn't clear out the dungeon all in one go, but she probably cleaned out the dungeon sooner than a party of 1-3 level PC's would, who would have to rest for all their spellcasters.  She on the other hand, was able to keep going with the healing potions she found.

This actually could be a viable style of gaming play for people who don't get to play D&D very often because they lack players in the area, or simply can't make their schedules match up with other couples.  Use a Solo Monster, match the monster level to a lower adventure level, and see how well a monster can go through the adventure.


----------



## Fenes (Jan 15, 2008)

I was more thinking of that "Council of Wyrms" setting - or of playing a young dragon in a high level campaign.


----------



## Walking Dad (Jan 15, 2008)

ferratus said:
			
		

> Hey, don't laugh, I used a red wyrmling dragon to play through the first adventure of the Cauldron adventure path of Dragon Magazine with my wife.  With the high AC, decent attack bonus, and rechargeable area of effect spell (breath weapon), she was actually quite effective.
> 
> She didn't clear out the dungeon all in one go, but she probably cleaned out the dungeon sooner than a party of 1-3 level PC's would, who would have to rest for all their spellcasters.  She on the other hand, was able to keep going with the healing potions she found.
> 
> This actually could be a viable style of gaming play for people who don't get to play D&D very often because they lack players in the area, or simply can't make their schedules match up with other couples.  *Use a Solo Monster, match the monster level to a lower adventure level*, and see how well a monster can go through the adventure.




If I got the power level right, you should use an elite monster to match an adventurer.
Solo is for "alone".

I have the Dragon Magazine with dragon PC rules (3.5!), but I found their HD progression to slow.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> The fact that NOT ONE SINGLE POSTER on this thread has set a campaign in the Mulhorand speaks for itself.




This isn’t about Unther (Mulhorand has not been mentioned in official literature yet) but people keep mentioning it probably because it seems to be one of the most poorly thought out examples currently available. But I’ll get to Unther in a minute.

*Case No. 1: Thay*

Thay is a better example of what feels wrong about 4th Ed. In the current time line (as the 4th Ed. Realms book has not be released to up date the setting officially), Thay is a sinister nation of evil wizards that has at long last descended into civil war. People do play games involving the Thay we have been presented with for the last two decades. People are interested in the civil war. On some boards there are entire threads about Thay, the war and its major players. 

The new setting does not advance this plot, it shoot this plot between the eyes. Following the events of Spellplague, Thay (or at least parts of it) were pushed up by magical geology so that its elevation is thousands of feet higher than it was. That’s it – that is the development. In place of a traditional evil enemy that people did use, in place of an interesting plot… we have geographic hurdles. Flipping through the books to check out the rules for mountaineering is going to replace an on going civil war in an evil wizards’ nation. If I wanted to climb a G*d*a*n*d mountain I would go to a mountain. I go to Thay for evil wizards and the civil war, not bare-handed rock climbing. 

What was the thought process behind this decision? If the Realms had to have some hard to climb mountains, why put them of Thay? How is that (the mandated and seemingly arbitrary destruction of the long-standing villain) a better idea than seeing the civil war to its conclusion and possibly letting the players have a hand in the outcome? 

*Case No. 2: Unther*

Unther was, like Thay, in the middle of an on going plot – it was being conquered by Mulhorand. According to the time line in Grand History, this eventually happened. Further, there were developments that had not been seen to completion, such as the appearance of Untheric people transformed by Selune and the growth and goals cult of Tiamat.

However, this is all s*i*c*n*e* so we can have a nation of Gorn-wanna-be’s. Granted, having a nation of warrior-reptile people is a fairly standard trope in science fiction and fantasy. But why Unther? There were other places that could have been replaced with out shooting another on-going plot in the head. For example, there had been little official development with either the Vast or Chondath in recent years. Putting the nation of Gorn-wanna-be’s on one of them would have been development (after a fashion) rather than a random act. Further, Chondath is going to be destroyed in 4th Ed. anyway – it could have been replaced by the nation of Gorn-wanna-be’s, (still a kind of development) and allow the situation with Unther and Mulhorand to develop. In addition, Chondath is closer to places like Cormyr, Sembia and the Dalelands than Unther, thus the new nation of nation of warrior-reptile people would be situated to be more of a threat than it is based on its replacement of Unther.

But that did not happen. Unther was destroyed and replaced and Chondath was simply destroyed and were are supposed to think this is all good.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jan 15, 2008)

So they shouldn't have touched anywhere in the FR that had an on-going plot as of 2007? Good lord, they could barely have modified anything.

Unther was a place, to be honest, that less than 1% of FR players really cared about. You may have been one of them, but you're hardly representative.

I don't think there was anything "random" about them smashing Unther and Mulhorand - they were always silly overly faux-Egyptian settings with really dated the FR, and would make much better "Forgotten Realms" than current realms, as it were.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 15, 2008)

Unfortunately, when the decision-makers change every several years, each with their own preferences and enthusiasms, those explicit and implicit threads are liable to be submerged and lost in the bright, shiny new plots. Trends in the originally published Realms as basic as the open, unpredictable new Inner Sea sphere after the departure of the elves, and the growing confrontation between old (noble, religious) and new mercantile power have been ignored or reversed. I think it's an incompetent way to run a shared world, and Grumpy Celt's cases are just the latest and, with the big timeline jump, most unremediable, of many dozens.

This is part of why the clamour for this sort of 'change' is dubious and often disingenuous, like an ADHD child moving on to a new thing before seeing the last one through. Ditto with the majority of unrevealed dungeons, heroes, magics, and so on in a world the incessant and careless timeline drive encourages the less well-read to mistakenly feel is played out.


----------



## Faraer (Jan 15, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> Gnomes and bards also have a heck of a lot of fans. Those two have just suffered from a lack of a clear conception for the former, and a lack of mechanical quality for the latter.



Realms gnomes have a clear conception, but it's unfamiliar because the more popular elves and dwarves have got so much more attention in print.

But leaving gnomes from the first set of PC races in 4E actually fits the Realms well -- the Forgotten Folk _shouldn't_ be front-and-centre.


----------



## Badkarmaboy (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> This isn’t about Unther (Mulhorand has not been mentioned in official literature yet) but people keep mentioning it probably because it seems to be one of the most poorly thought out examples currently available. But I’ll get to Unther in a minute.
> 
> *Case No. 1: Thay*
> 
> ...




That's some fantastic hyperbole there man.  We were given a snippet of information that Thay had a moutain range stuffed up its butt and you're acting like it's the end all things.  Wasn't it also stated that Ssazz Tamm is still kicking about? And hey, holy crap, there just might be part of that wicked old nation still around.  Maybe they'll get their act together now.  Seriously, Thay was the COBRA of FR villains.  Could they ever do anything right?  

As for the Unther thing...faux Bablyon or warrior lizard kingdom?  Eh.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

Faraer said:
			
		

> This is part of why the clamour for this sort of 'change' is dubious and often disingenuous, like an ADHD child moving on to a new thing before seeing the last one through.




Thank you. That is what I'm getting at. I just felt a need to be specific with case examples and reasoning.

And Ruin Explorer skipped my comments about Thay to go on about Unther... again.


----------



## Ruin Explorer (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Thank you. That is what I'm getting at. I just felt a need to be specific with case examples and reasoning.
> 
> And Ruin Explorer skipped my comments about Thay to go on about Unther... again.




Well boo-hoo? Perhaps because your comments about Thay were patently ludicrous, and if I'm having to "go on about Unther again", dude, it's only because you're ridiculously bringing it up "again". I addressed your bonkers idea that nothing with an on-going plot Dr 1397 (or whever) should be touched in a 100-year jump edition change, the thinking behind which you seem reluctant to explain...


----------



## BlackMoria (Jan 15, 2008)

I sense the heavy hand of the moderators unless people dial it down a bit with the personal snipes and asides.

As for the topic at hand, it is what it is.  WotC has a plan and Chris Perkins and Rich Baker has as much as said that nothing will change based on the plan and the only thing that naysayers can hope for is a superficial change here or there.

The choices are simple

Accept the changes or

Don't accept the changes.

Debating (more like arguments now) the merits or lack of merits of the changes will not change the path that the 4e FR is going.


----------



## Piratecat (Jan 15, 2008)

Ruin Explorer said:
			
		

> Well boo-hoo? Perhaps because your comments about Thay were patently ludicrous, and if I'm having to "go on about Unther again", dude, it's only because you're ridiculously bringing it up "again". I addressed your bonkers idea that nothing with an on-going plot Dr 1397 (or whever) should be touched in a 100-year jump edition change, the thinking behind which you seem reluctant to explain...



You've been around this site since its first days. There's absolutely no excuse for posting with that sort of attitude.

Don't post again in this thread.

Everyone else, please dial any snark, hyperbole or combativeness WAY down. I'm sure you know what's appropriate here, and we expect everyone to conform to that. 

Thanks.


----------



## Arnwyn (Jan 15, 2008)

Hussar said:
			
		

> The fact that NOT ONE SINGLE POSTER on this thread has set a campaign in the Mulhorand speaks for itself.  If something isn't getting used, it's time to go with something else, rather than keep it in just because.  That thinking gave us gnomes for thirty years.



Oh, heavens, I have. Others have posted as much. Though I didn't realize posting such a thing was a requirement in this thread (hint: it isn't).

Of course, the debate still rages with gnomes.



> Why?  Why keep material that people don't use?  No one seems to answer this.  Unther was underutilized.  Gnomes and bards rarely saw play.  Why make something that no one likes interesting instead of trying something new that maybe lots of people find interesting?



Because people do use it - but that's been answered already. It's not a mutually exclusive decision, either.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 15, 2008)

According to Answers.com, Hyperbole is "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in _I could sleep for a year_ or _This book weighs a ton._"

According to Wikipedia, "In show business and in the political arena, hyperbole (known as hype or media hype) is the practice of spending money on public relations, or expending political commentary in an attempt to bolster public interest in (for example) a movie, television show, performing artist, politician, or proposed public policy."

I don't think my comments about Thay or Unther qualify. But WotC is using hyperbole to support Realms 4th Ed.


----------



## Steely Dan (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> According to Answers.com, Hyperbole is "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in _I could sleep for a year_ or _This book weighs a ton._"




I for one would like the words hyperbole, fallacy and straw-man banned from message boards.


----------



## Badkarmaboy (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> According to Answers.com, Hyperbole is "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in _I could sleep for a year_ or _This book weighs a ton._"
> 
> According to Wikipedia, "In show business and in the political arena, hyperbole (known as hype or media hype) is the practice of spending money on public relations, or expending political commentary in an attempt to bolster public interest in (for example) a movie, television show, performing artist, politician, or proposed public policy."
> 
> I don't think my comments about Thay or Unther qualify. But WotC is using hyperbole to support Realms 4th Ed.




It was the whole "The new setting does not advance this plot, it shoot this plot between the eyes" thing that seemed hyperbolic.  I'd say that's an exaggeration used for emphasis.  

And yes, they are using hyperbole to sell the new Realms, no doubt.


----------



## frankthedm (Jan 15, 2008)

Traycor said:
			
		

> Salvatore's latest novel, "The Orc King" placed Drizzt in this new future Forgotten Realms timeline during the prologue and epilogue of the book. So yes, he will still be around and kicking in the future.
> 
> Go pick up the novel if you want to know more!



Nope! Knowing that Drizzle lives to the epiloge tells me this "Orc king" failed to do his duty.


----------



## Raloc (Jan 15, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> It all feels like poorly thought out, “New Coke” kind of deal.



I just wanted to point out, New Coke was a brilliant strategy.  They bring out "New Coke" that they know everyone will hate, act like nothing's wrong for a while, then revert to their perfectly fine old Coke, at which point all the fanatics snap it up like crazy.


----------



## Imban (Jan 15, 2008)

Walking Dad said:
			
		

> Hm, they could explain the absence of gnomes as in "sucked of to an alternate material plane"






			
				Walking Dad said:
			
		

> The same they did to half-orcs, gnomes, aasimar, Unther?




Half-orcs have been stated as specifically slated to exist in 4e because there are too many important half-orc NPCs in FR and heck, one of the Dragonmarked Houses in Eberron is made of half-orcs. Gnomes are the same way, and they've said that something like Aasimar will be coming back, tied to the 4e conception of celestials.

"Suddenly all gnomes across the ENTIRE REALMS die! Especially the one you're playing!" is one of the sloppiest possible ways to handle an edition change, and one of the easiest (and very understandable) ways to get your fanbase to hate it.


----------



## IanB (Jan 15, 2008)

Lurks-no-More said:
			
		

> There are very few settings where dropping an entire country, full of odd people, in via a magical event is appropriate and not lousy worldbuilding; but Forgotten Realms is one of those. That's how, in the FR history, _at least_ elves, orcs and the ancestors of the Mulhorandi people have gotten to Toril. There is an established precedent of _exactly_ this kind of a thing happening, again and again.




I'm really not sure I can accept that having a history of lousy worldbuilding choices excuses continuing to make them.


----------



## lvl20dm (Jan 15, 2008)

While we may not have a full write-up (lots of racial feats and powers) for gnomes, they have said that they will be included with the MM with some guides on how to use them as PC's. Bards will be supported - the design team has said this a number of times. They might even be in the PHB (they have not confirmed number or type of classes yet). 

I have seen no indication that Thay did not go into a full-on civil war or that, after 100 years, it isn't still engaged in one. All we know about Thay is that it suffered significant geographical alterations and that Tam is still around. Perhaps hostilities were forestalled by the Spellplague, but now Thay is more fractured than ever. We simply don't know.

Though apparently this means there is something wrong with me (and the people I play with), I am thinking I will probably play a dragonborn as my first PC. I like monstrous races - many people do - and now we have a one that is playable out of the PHB.


----------



## Badkarmaboy (Jan 15, 2008)

lvl20dm said:
			
		

> While we may not have a full write-up (lots of racial feats and powers) for gnomes, they have said that they will be included with the MM with some guides on how to use them as PC's. Bards will be supported - the design team has said this a number of times. They might even be in the PHB (they have not confirmed number or type of classes yet).
> 
> I have seen no indication that Thay did not go into a full-on civil war or that, after 100 years, it isn't still engaged in one. All we know about Thay is that it suffered significant geographical alterations and that Tam is still around. Perhaps hostilities were forestalled by the Spellplague, but now Thay is more fractured than ever. We simply don't know.
> 
> Though apparently this means there is something wrong with me (and the people I play with), I am thinking I will probably play a dragonborn as my first PC. I like monstrous races - many people do - and now we have a one that is playable out of the PHB.




You're ok.  I don't think anyone can be wrong for what race they choose to play as.


----------



## ChaosShard (Jan 15, 2008)

lvl20dm said:
			
		

> I have seen no indication that Thay did not go into a full-on civil war or that, after 100 years, it isn't still engaged in one. All we know about Thay is that it suffered significant geographical alterations and that Tam is still around. Perhaps hostilities were forestalled by the Spellplague, but now Thay is more fractured than ever. We simply don't know.
> 
> Though apparently this means there is something wrong with me (and the people I play with), I am thinking I will probably play a dragonborn as my first PC. I like monstrous races - many people do - and now we have a one that is playable out of the PHB.




Actually, about Thay, Richard Lee Byers has an excellent (IMO) trilogy in the works, beginning with Unclean. 

To sum it up, Tam creates conditions whereby he and a few Tharchions (provincial governors) are actively at war with the remaining Zulkirs (2 die, the Transmuter, who's replaced by a relatvely incompetent politician/mage, and Aznar Thrul, Tam's chief rival) after a failed "legal" powergrab by the lich. My guess is that if Szass makes it to 4e, he wins the war. Honestly, I don't really do the book justice, if you're into  Thay, it's a great read. This is also given a mention towards the end of the GHotR.

There's nothng "wrong" with someone wanting to play a given race and/or class, and honestly, I think the Dragonborn are pretty interesting as a race in FR. There's a lot that can be done with them RP wise, as well as (hopefully) crunch-wise.

Now, as far as the changes go, I'm still in "wait and see" mode. 

I like Baldur's Gate as a city (ran a 1-to-epic game based largely from there), so seeing it get more attention is (hopefully) good. The growth of the city sounds fairly normal from a historical point of view. Being a NY'er, I can tell you that we still have ethnic neighborhoods sattered throughout the five boroughs, and not due to racism. It's simply that new arrivals tend to move to neighborhods with people of their ethnic/religious group.

The Swrod Coast *not* being wrecked directly contradicts Drizzt's prolgoue in _The Orc King_ where he mentions the region being devastated. Aside from a chuckle at Drizzt, I hated the idea of losing the Sword Coast, so that's good by me.

The GH (IIRC) and Paul S. Kemp's Twilight War Series alluded to Sembia's inclusion (directly or by proxy) in Netheril, so no shock there. 4-way alliance against Netheril isn't too bad, makes for some good adventuring possibilities, but the devil (or shade!) is in the details here.

How they added the Dragonborn isn't awful, but very cliche for FR. It doesn't kill me but I don't love it either.

Surprise Mount Thay? Again, not hating or loving, just kind of meh.


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jan 15, 2008)

Imban said:
			
		

> "Suddenly all gnomes across the ENTIRE REALMS die! Especially the one you're playing!" is one of the sloppiest possible ways to handle an edition change, and one of the easiest (and very understandable) ways to get your fanbase to hate it.




Then again, they _did_ do it with assassins during the Time of Troubles...


----------



## Cthulhudrew (Jan 15, 2008)

kheris said:
			
		

> The Swrod Coast *not* being wrecked directly contradicts Drizzt's prolgoue in _The Orc King_ where he mentions the region being devastated.




Maybe he just meant devastated _emotionally_, like many fans of the Realms are (and will be) when all this plays out.


----------



## kennew142 (Jan 16, 2008)

Arnwyn said:
			
		

> I agree - we don't know. When it comes to numbers, I'm only guessing as much as the next guy. My evidence comes from Candlekeep (certainly a very much high-purchasing group), in which the reaction is decidedly negative. Same with the WotC boards. Your source?




My source, which I've admitted is purley anecdotal, comes from talking to folks at the game days and conventions I organize. In my experience, the reaction has been mixed, with most folks taking a wait and see approach.




> As you've stated on multiple occasions in multiple posts. Of course, I suspect you're in the minority. Are you? Nobody knows for sure, but that's why it's only my suspicions.




I suspect that all of us who really like the changes or really hate them are in the minority. I suspect that the majority of FR fans will wait and see and then decide. I suspect that many (possibly even most) will like the changes once they see them in play.

You're right that I post in multiple threads about people mischaracterizing those who like what we've seen about the upcoming FR changes as newbies or newcomers to the Realms. The reason I keep posting it, is because people keep saying it. Making such statements is not only weak; it is dishonest. It is also an attempt to invalidate the opinions of those who disagree with you.


----------



## ChaosShard (Jan 16, 2008)

Cthulhudrew said:
			
		

> Maybe he just meant devastated _emotionally_, like many fans of the Realms are (and will be) when all this plays out.




I'm more devastated by the arguments over how devastated the Realms are than the devastation itself


----------



## Bryntryst (Jan 16, 2008)

kennew142 said:
			
		

> I suspect that all of us who really like the changes or really hate them are in the minority. I suspect that the majority of FR fans will wait and see and then decide.



Unfortunately, those that lean toward the extreme are the most vocal.  I have all but abandoned the FR forums on the WotC site.  I started visiting when I heard that FR was going to be the flagship of 4E (for lack of a better term).  My experience with FR was comparatively limited; having played mostly DL, Dark Sun and Greyhawk.  I sought to rectify that, but lately it's devolved into pretty much nothing but "I hate Keith Baker" and "FR is dead" threads.

That being said, I am optimistic of whats in store for FR.  Change tends to freak everyone out, but it's not always a bad thing.  Irregardless, I'm reserving official opinion until I've had a chance to digest the 4e FRCS.  I just think its a shame that not everyone does likewise.


----------



## The Grumpy Celt (Jan 16, 2008)

Honestly, 4th Ed. Realms is making me pine for Greyhawk, which I had thought impossible. Before the Realms was run off the Rails I thought Grayhawk was too vanilla. Not so any more.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 16, 2008)

Just a thought about the whole numbers thing.

Hard core fans of the game buy game supplements.  If you were to add up all the 3e FR supplements for FR, you'd get what, 30 titles?  ((I really don't know, I'm ballparking here))  Compare the sales of all those books to a single title from Salvatore and you'll probably have similar numbers.  Heck, make it two Salvatore Drizzt books.  

That's why I don't think that the hard core FR gamer fans really matter.  There just isn't enough of you.  Not by a long shot.  Not when PC games based on the Realms dwarf the book sales.  

Decisions about the Realms are going to take into account a heck of a lot more than just the tabletop gamers.


----------



## Hussar (Jan 16, 2008)

delericho said:
			
		

> True. It will, however, be interesting to see what they do with Realms 5e, when they decide to drop Dragonborn because no one was using them.




And that would be more than fair.  I'd be the first in line to applaud them for doing so.  

Keeping elements because a small minority of gamers like them is stupid.  Sure, try to fix stuff, but, after a couple of years, drop it like a bad habit and try something else.


----------



## TwoSix (Jan 16, 2008)

The Grumpy Celt said:
			
		

> Honestly, 4th Ed. Realms is making me pine for Greyhawk, which I had thought impossible. Before the Realms was run off the Rails I thought Grayhawk was too vanilla. Not so any more.




The first released campaign setting should be as vanilla as possible, in order to introduce people to the new setting elements.  Making a setting that breaks all the rules doesn't mean much if people don't know the rules to begin with.  FR 4e will be the vanilla, Eberron 4e will be the chocolate chip cookie dough.


----------



## Bryntryst (Jan 16, 2008)

TwoSix said:
			
		

> The first released campaign setting should be as vanilla as possible, in order to introduce people to the new setting elements.  Making a setting that breaks all the rules doesn't mean much if people don't know the rules to begin with.  FR 4e will be the vanilla, Eberron 4e will be the chocolate chip cookie dough.



I disagree.  The Core Rules should be the vanilla ice cream.  The campaign settings provide the toppings (nuts, as in FRs case) to add the flavor.


----------

