points of light?
Thornir Alekeg
Albatross!
Yes, with a forward written by George H.W. Bush discussing a million points of light.
In reality, I don't think it does. I think the analogy they are using is done simply to state that the core rules and its iconic characters do not have a default setting like Greyhawk has been in previous editions.
In reality, I don't think it does. I think the analogy they are using is done simply to state that the core rules and its iconic characters do not have a default setting like Greyhawk has been in previous editions.
Aus_Snow
First Post
IIRC, it was pronounced alongside the descriptor "Sword & Sorcery".mhensley said:
Either way, I think it is a reference to heroes (things with PC classes, basically) not being commonplace, and facing by default a world as yet largely unexplored, and full of peril at every turn.
Much like part of the intro to Iron Heroes - again, IIRC.
Regardless of whether I've got that totally upside down or whatever, I think we can expect to see elements of IH throughout a number of 4e game aspects.
HeyJoe
First Post
mhensley said:
It sounds to me almost like they are going the Warhammer FRPG route. The setting for Warhammer was extemely grim. You'd literally have these isolated cities, "points of light" as it were, stuck in the middle of a vast forest or other inhospitable area. The world was very wild and dangerous in the dark places in between the scattered cities and towns.
It is somewhat analogous to Europe after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. Little trade between cities and cultures, vast regions of untamed wilderness or the ruins of formerly prosperous lands which fell into decay when the Empire began to shrink.
My guess is that it won't be a detailed setting, but simply a premise: There are no vast kingdoms ala Greyhawk and Realms, just little towns, city states and principalities in a vast uncharted (and hostile) wilderness. Kind of like Wilderlands, or aspects of the Dark Ages, etc.
I assume the notion is that you can therefore set a bunch of fairly generic adventures in relative proximity without having to deal with big travel issues. "How far is Helpmeburg from Threatenedton? - Oh, not far. You're there already, so let's just start the adventure." That is, not that they intend to forbid you from gaming out wilderness travel, just that you don't have to worry about how to fit DCC 134 onto your campaign map, because you don't have to have a campaign map unless you want one.
I assume the notion is that you can therefore set a bunch of fairly generic adventures in relative proximity without having to deal with big travel issues. "How far is Helpmeburg from Threatenedton? - Oh, not far. You're there already, so let's just start the adventure." That is, not that they intend to forbid you from gaming out wilderness travel, just that you don't have to worry about how to fit DCC 134 onto your campaign map, because you don't have to have a campaign map unless you want one.
HeyJoe
First Post
Aus_Snow said:Oh, *from* points of light. Heh. I thought it was more like "the characters are points of light (. . .)". Well then. I might have got part of it right, and the other bit (heroes being rare or such). . . just ignore that.
Well, that actually could be a part of it too. It's certainly a valid point.
Mighty Halfling
Explorer
HeyJoe said:
That's exactly how I understood it too. I think that's a good plan and it builds a very interesting mood.
cignus_pfaccari
First Post
Korgoth said:
Any vast kingdoms that do exist exercise little to no control over much of their territory, rather like (say) Russian Siberia.
Another similar view is like the Wild West...isolated settlements, howling wilderness, other ethnic groups that range from sorta friendly to genocidal, that sort of thing.
Very interesting, though. Populate either with relatively intact ruins, and you're good to go.
Brad
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
Yep. I really love this campaign assumption. Very much a "Keep on the Borderlands" kind of feel.
I also like how 1st level PCs are already much better than the populace. I think they're getting rid of NPC classes, as a concept. I know James pointed out how 3E's first level is terrible, in that characters--heroes--can take only one or two hits before going down, and a crit can outright kill a character with one shot. I literally lost a 3rd level character that way: crit by an orc's arrow (max damage on the die + Str bonus from composite str bow x 3 = very, very dead elf ranger).
I also like how 1st level PCs are already much better than the populace. I think they're getting rid of NPC classes, as a concept. I know James pointed out how 3E's first level is terrible, in that characters--heroes--can take only one or two hits before going down, and a crit can outright kill a character with one shot. I literally lost a 3rd level character that way: crit by an orc's arrow (max damage on the die + Str bonus from composite str bow x 3 = very, very dead elf ranger).
