D&D 5E Ed Greenwood to write 5E's Forgotten Realms

GX.Sigma · Jun 7, 2012

delericho said:
Likewise, while Han Solo is typically presented in such a manner as to be technically rules-legal, his stats are so incredibly high that you would need to use random rolls and cheat to have a hope of matching him. Under the recommended chargen method from the books (and, incidentally, the required method for organised play), it is not possible to generate a "1st level Han".

I don't know anything about Star Wars RPGs, but I don't think Han Solo should a 1st-level character.

delericho · Jun 7, 2012

GX.Sigma said:
I don't know anything about Star Wars RPGs, but I don't think Han Solo should a 1st-level character.

You mistake my intention. Perhaps I just wasn't clear. Allow me to clarify.

I'm not saying that you should be able to build a 1st level character who is the equal of Han Solo.

What I am saying is that you should be able to build a 1st level character who, through his adventures, gaining XP and levels, and following the RAW, should be able to grow to a point where he becomes the equal of Han Solo.

(If Han Solo is 15th level, say, then it should be possible to build a character at 1st level who, if he chooses all the same skills, talents and feats, then by the time he reaches 15th level will have the same stats as Han Solo. In all three of the d20 versions of Star Wars, this is only possible if you use random rolls - which are disallowed for Organised Play - and have freakishly good luck on the rolls. Effectively, you have to cheat.)

delericho · Jun 7, 2012

Rogue Agent said:
That's a separate issue (which also hasn't been true for all versions of the Realms) and has nothing to do with what your originally quoted.

No, but it has a great deal to do with the second post I quoted, where you said:

Rogue Agent said:
I have little patience with 1st level characters who think they're the Kings of the World. You want to deal with the kinds of problems that Elminster is dealing with? Work for it.

If it is impossible for the PCs to "work for it" as you say, then the objection is justified.

The text actually says the exact opposite of that.

It's like claiming that any RPG set in the latter half of the 20th century makes the PCs "largely irrelevant" because other people have the power to declare nuclear war and render their accomplishments moot.

If the game's about nuclear brinksmanship, and the PCs get to courier documents while James Bond deals with the real menaces - and the book makes it clear that this is what's going on, then you're damn right I'd be annoyed.

(And if you actually believe that, you must not have a very high opinion of your own, apparently irrelevant life.)

Funnily enough, I'm not the protagonist in a fictional story.

In any event, last I checked, it was at least theoretically possible for me to reach a point where I would have control of a nuclear arsenal.

I remain unimpressed with the whining.

Conversely, I am unimpressed with your insults.

Yora · Jun 7, 2012

Elf Witch said:
I would not mind if they did what they did with Dragonlance and let you choose what time you want to play in.

I just hope that the setting does not only have the stuff from 4e which imo ruined the Realms.

I think the best thing they can do is the "KotOR solution".

Make the Spellplague world basically a separate setting that effectively is an alternate timeline. I'm not too exited about the Empire Era of Star Wars, but I totaly love the Knights of the Old Republic Era, with its own iconic planets and species.
3rd Edition and 4th Edition realms are about 100 years apart and you can easily write any new books in a way that simply does not mention any changes that happened after the split. Continue 5th Edition where 3rd left of, and as long as you don't get to the spellplague date, there won't be any real conflicts in consistency.
Everyone is happy. Except for the people who'd like more books about Spellplague FR.

Herschel · Jun 7, 2012

Fenes said:
You're not the omly one. 4E wrecked the Realms, and replaced detailed regions with barely-described clichee. The Realms are not 3 books, are not entire regions reduced to a single paragraph which offers no real information, but a tapestry of history and details that make a region come alive.

They blew the Realms up because so many people were sick & tired of teh bloated mess it had become and they wanted to open design space back up. Some fanboys were going to get upset but they didn't need to advance their personal timelines if they didn't want to. One of my 4E games is still in the pre-ToT Realms.

Lwaxy · Jun 7, 2012

They p'oed more people with wrecking the Realms than they made happy though.

Hussar · Jun 7, 2012

I'm curious. For those who say that we should go back to the Grey box Realms, which, IIRC, is a couple of hundred pages long, at best, why is the three 4e FR material viewed as "ripping apart the tapestry" of Realmslore?

I mean, if you want to go back to a much more open Realms, isn't that exactly what 4e gave you?

Herschel · Jun 7, 2012

But it's new open vs. old open.

Yora · Jun 7, 2012

Hussar said:
For those who say that we should go back to the Grey box Realms, which, IIRC, is a couple of hundred pages long, at best

192 to be precise.

The problem with the Spellplague Realms is not it's style, but the fact that it basically destroyed most of the setting and replaced it with something entirely new. People don't want new, they want old.

RangerWickett · Jun 7, 2012

When FR came out, we did not have the Lord of the Rings movies, God of War, World of Warcraft, or Game of Thrones. Times change.

Then again, Coca-Cola is still the same as ever (aside from that period of New Coke . . . and replacing sugar with high fructose corn syrup). People like Coke. The packaging has changed, but the core of the experience is the same.

So just repackage FR for the modern day.