The New Forgotten Realms - (About) A Year Later

[Mean Eyed Cat]

I have been running games with the FR setting in every edition right from the get go; 1st, 2nd, 3rd/3.5 and now 4th edition. I also own every piece of FR related product that was ever produced and am a die-hard fan. Truth be told, I love 4th edition and, IMHO, think it is probably one of the best editions produced. Living in a small college town, I have not had a problem finding people who are willing to play and like 4th edition FR. One year later, we are still going strong (and we don't even use the Living FR stuff).

Right after 4th edition FR came out, I couldn't even stand visiting the WotC or Candlekeep boards. Way too much negativity. Lately, they've become a little better.

Now, that being said, there are certain things I didn't totally agree with when 4th ed. FR came out. Swapping out and/or destroying huge tracts of land with the whole Abeir-Toril/Spellplague catastrophe seemed a little too extreme. But, there were also prior historical aspects I didn't like either (the Time of Troubles, events with the Horde and Maztica mirroring real-world cultures, etc.)

So, does all of these changes affect the games I run? No, they don't. My games observe the current changes and I simply move on. I still play the game I love in the setting I love.

 

[Nai_Calus]

I don't run or play FR largely because there's too much damned history to keep straight(And large swaths of hugely popular elements I frankly don't give a damn about learning all about). I read novels and some of the setting books and that's about it.

I still don't like 4E FR. Nuked some of my favourite things, explicitly killed at least one character I liked, and most of the rest are likely dead due to the time jump.

It's the time jump I think, that bothers me so much. The Spellplague would have been an interesting thing to deal with the process or aftermath of, but instead it's so far back in time now that only Elves, oh sorry, Eladrin, are going to remember it. (I don't remember, does 4e FR note anything on Elven/Eladrin lifespans being different in FR, or are they supposed to now only live about 300 years as well, in which case most of Elven history no longer makes sense and hell a lot of the elves alive during the Spellplague are now also going to be dead.) The interesting thing is a hundred years in the past, we have very little information on what *happened* in those years, NPCs people did like are long gone with no idea when or how... 4e FR seems like a place without a history to me right now, rather than one with too much history, and both I find problematic.

If I were ever going to run FR, though, yeah, back to the grey box. That's a good read and not so bloated, and you can add to it from later things what you like.

 

[catsclaw227]

..... the Scarred Lands Gaz over the hardcover. ....

Man, I really loved the Scarred Lands. And Gazetteer was really good too.

 

[MrMyth]

BTW, I find it funny that when the "h4ters" claimed the voting system was "abused" by 4E fans and this was the only reason why 4E won so many EnNies (a ridiculous claim, IMO), people rose in defence of WoTC by saying that the results actually showed how popular 4E really is among gamers (which I agree with). Now, when someone says that very same award (and/or the lack of existing FR threads on several boards) could be used to make some conclusions about the popularity, success and quality of 4E FR, suddenly this award seems to be some vague and obscure backyard trophy that's only given to the judges' best friends and therefore not indicative of anything (alright, that's hyperbole, but you get the point).

I'm, ah, not sure there is any disconnect between saying, "The EnNies is a legitimate reward that highlights quality products" and "Something not being selected for being one of the best products of the year does not stand as proof of it being a terrible product." If every product that didn't make the EnNies is thus a failure, than that encompasses pretty much the vast majority of the gaming industry!

I certainly wouldn't claim that 4E FR is such an outstanding product it should have deserved an EnNie. But there is a very large area between that, and being a failure. I think it is a solid, middle of the line product, and entirely functional as a setting and as an RPG resource. That's a very different thing from an actually terrible product.

I do expect 4E Eberron to make the list, because it is an absolutely brilliant work. But that should be a mark in its favor, not a criticism of another product for falling short of such a high bar...

 

[MrMyth]

If he already knew that there wouldn't be more than three books -- and I know he's a guy who wouldn't talk of it unless they really planned to do something -- why make such claims?

It's a good question, but maybe... you should provide some exact quotes? Given that everyone else seems to be remembering things differently - including those who had direct knowledge of when some of these design choices may have been made - it seems most likely you simply misread what was being asked. I suspect it may well have been asking what sort of support articles people might have wanted to see in DDI, or similar.

Everything I've seen indicates the '3 settings' choices was made well before any previews of 4E FR were really hitting the community.

 

[Henry]

It's a good question, but maybe... you should provide some exact quotes? Given that everyone else seems to be remembering things differently - including those who had direct knowledge of when some of these design choices may have been made - it seems most likely you simply misread what was being asked. I suspect it may well have been asking what sort of support articles people might have wanted to see in DDI, or similar.

Everything I've seen indicates the '3 settings' choices was made well before any previews of 4E FR were really hitting the community.

Another possibility -- as I remember it, Rich Baker said that their plan was to do the "three books and done" idea, but if there were enough public interest, they might entertain the idea of doing more, and then asking what people would like to see, if not for full books, then maybe some expansion material in the DDI. If so, then very likely he was either answered by crickets, or just more venom, so the idea didn't go any further than maybe some DDI articles. I could be wrong, but I do seem to remember a caveat like that shortly before the 4E FR release.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Given the way the DDI is, I wouldn't be surprised if more print support showed up if it wasn't culled from the DDI itself via best of Dragon.

 

[SPECTRE666]

The Forgotten Realms wont get rebooted, that would disrupt the "Sullen Warrior" *CoughDrizztCough* money making machine.

I think that Wizards missed an opportunity with DDI and the Realms. As in started to publish DDI Articles to late. IMO Wizards should have started putting out FR DDI Articles in Jan, not June and July.

Its all about the D&D Brand. Hence, Worls of D&D: The Forgotten Realms article from last week.

During the Realms Seminar at Gencon Bill S. said they "might" produce a Realms game supplement once a year in which he got a good reception.

Ed is currently writing "Elminster Must Die"! I thought it was a joke but THO at Candlekeep confirmed it.

I plan on running a 4E Game set in 225DR. Very Interesting Realms then.

 

[Primal]

I'm, ah, not sure there is any disconnect between saying, "The EnNies is a legitimate reward that highlights quality products" and "Something not being selected for being one of the best products of the year does not stand as proof of it being a terrible product." If every product that didn't make the EnNies is thus a failure, than that encompasses pretty much the vast majority of the gaming industry!

I certainly wouldn't claim that 4E FR is such an outstanding product it should have deserved an EnNie. But there is a very large area between that, and being a failure. I think it is a solid, middle of the line product, and entirely functional as a setting and as an RPG resource. That's a very different thing from an actually terrible product.

I do expect 4E Eberron to make the list, because it is an absolutely brilliant work. But that should be a mark in its favor, not a criticism of another product for falling short of such a high bar...

Absolutely; I'm not saying it's the all-exclusive and all-comprehensive list of the best RPGs of the year, and not making the list is irrefutable proof of a product's low quality. There are only a few slots in most of the categories, so many good products are left out of the voting each year. However, although the list is based on subjective opinions, it's put together by several informed experts on RPGs; to me a product being nominated in one or more categories tells that "this is a product I probably should take a closer look at" (and I also pay attention to Origins and Indie RPG Awards; if the same product appears in two or even all three of them, it speaks volumes of its quality). When 4E FRCG didn't make the list, it's not exactly the same as some obscure Finnish Indie RPG half the judges hadn't heard about not making the list; it's a high-profile product with more visibility and brand recognition and production costs than any other setting this year, and it's pretty safe to assume all the judges were at least vaguely familiar with the contents. And they didn't pick it among the top five candidates.

I wouldn't be surprised if Eberron took the gold next year -- it seems to be a truly great product.

It's a good question, but maybe... you should provide some exact quotes? Given that everyone else seems to be remembering things differently - including those who had direct knowledge of when some of these design choices may have been made - it seems most likely you simply misread what was being asked. I suspect it may well have been asking what sort of support articles people might have wanted to see in DDI, or similar.

Everything I've seen indicates the '3 settings' choices was made well before any previews of 4E FR were really hitting the community.

I'll try to find the quote(s) from RB as soon as the WoTC boards are up again; I'm not deying the possibility that I might be misremembering the whole thing. I *am* quite certain that RB did mention other FR products, but as Henry said, it *might* have been more of a "If the FR books sell enough"-type of comment (well, this would also speak volumes to me about 4E FR's success).

 

[ggroy]

I'm not deying the possibility that I might be misremembering the whole thing. I *am* quite certain that RB did mention other FR products, but as Henry said, it *might* have been more of a "If the FR books sell enough"-type of comment (well, this would also speak volumes to me about 4E FR's success).

On a tangential issue, I wonder if Forgotten Realms was ever on the chopping block back in the 3E D&D days. (ie. If the 3E FR campaign guide had flopped back in 2001, there possibly may have never been any further FR splatbooks after 2001 or 2002).