Kalamar losing popularity?

[Iron_Chef]

YA, but I've done a lot of conversations of it right here on these message boards. And it was simple and easy to do. You don't need to convert everything under the sun, as long as the feel of Sanctuary is captured; that's what counts.

Links to your Thieves' World conversion notes, Crothian?

 

[Iron_Chef]

(Arnwyn's 80% rule: a d20 book must contain at least 80% usable material for my campaign, otherwise it gets a no-buy... because of the number of d20 books out there, I can find exactly what I want that *does* meet the 80% rule. My personal cost-benefit analysis shows that anything under 80% in a book is a waste of money - and time.)
QUOTE]

I know what you mean. The Kalamar Player's Guide met my 80% rule, partly by eliminating the need for that crappy WoTC Defenders of the Faith book by reprinting all the new domains and spells from it (the only useful feature, as far as I was concerned).

 

[Iron_Chef]

Now see...

Everything MM said in his first post is an opinion of the flavor of the setting. He's not attacked the facts like the first idiot to post here.

Wow, that's the second time in as many posts you've gone out of your way to insult me, this time directly with the name calling. Not very nice, Arcady, and all because I don't agree with you on what the "facts" are. Granted, you have me at a disadvantage, as I do not own the setting book, and am going from memory, several years old. How does advance this thread any?

 

[Numion]

Haven't the FR fans noticed that the newest Kalamar product is written by the father of the FR's?

Kalamar probably doesn't appear on the radar of most FR fans. Besides, it's usually Kalamar that's described as not FR, not the other way around.

 

[Crothian]

Links to your Thieves' World conversion notes, Crothian?

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=27794

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=27940

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=28929

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=29018

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=29635

Those are the threads I can find, I think that's all. It's by no means complete but it's a good start.

 

[Iron_Chef]

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=27794

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=27940

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=28929

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=29018

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=29635

Those are the threads I can find, I think that's all. It's by no means complete but it's a good start.

Thank you!!!

 

[Kichwas]

Wow, that's the second time in as many posts you've gone out of your way to insult me, this time directly with the name calling. Not very nice, Arcady, and all because I don't agree with you on what the "facts" are. Granted, you have me at a disadvantage, as I do not own the setting book

Facts are facts, that's all they are.

Opinions however are another matter.

You went out of your way to earn disrespect by claiming to false facts over and over again. The other individual stuck to matters of opinion, as have most who've been in here discussing the setting - even if one disagrees with them it is possible to respect them.

 

[GrimJesta]

One of the major goals of Kalamar -as far as a fan can tell from the commentary- has been to make sure you jcould just grab your PHB, DMG, MM, and the core Kalamar book and run a complete game. Kalamar was meant to be a setting book, not a rule book.

For that reason they did not make an entire new magic system or anything like that. Instead they presented a world that tries to work given what's in the DnD rules, and leaves it open enough that you can scale it up or down to taste.

BOOYAH!! Thats exactly it. Its a generic, yet flavored world setting. Generic in that people can recognize it, yet flavorful with its Roman-like feel to alot of it, and the whole Orcs and Hobgoblins are PC races stuff. I dunno. I like all the settings. My boy Chriss always DMs FR, and I enjoy the game.

remember folks, its the players and the GM that makes the game enjoyable! A crappy game will ruin even the best settings, and a great group can make even the worst settings seem hardcore!

-=Grim=-

 

[Treebore]

BOOYAH!! Thats exactly it. Its a generic, yet flavored world setting. Generic in that people can recognize it, yet flavorful with its Roman-like feel to alot of it, and the whole Orcs and Hobgoblins are PC races stuff. I dunno. I like all the settings. My boy Chriss always DMs FR, and I enjoy the game.

remember folks, its the players and the GM that makes the game enjoyable! A crappy game will ruin even the best settings, and a great group can make even the worst settings seem hardcore!

-=Grim=-

My first rule of gaming has similiar results: Have fun!

 

[coyote6]

I wanted to like Kalamar, but I, too, felt the CS book was too bland. It just didn't grab my attention or spark my interest the way other settings have (e.g., Midnight, Greyhawk -- the original folio or the LGG -- or Blue Planet). I'm not quite sure what it was -- I think one thing was that it perhaps didn't give a good introduction to the setting. A chapter summing some things up might have helped.

Actually, a short gazetteer (a la the Greyhawk or Ghelspad gazetteers) might not be a bad idea -- it could act as summary and introduction to the setting, and makes a fine thing to hand to players and say, "This is the basics of the setting. You want to play?"

(I haven't read the CS in quite some time, so I make no guarantees as to the reliability of my memory; these are the impressions I remember forming when I first got the CS.)