Charwoman Gene
Adventurer
The Ubbergeek said:
It's the End of the Realms as we know it. (and I feel fine)
Ah, now I am blending images of drunken frat boys shouting "Leonard Bernstein" with geeks saying Drizzt Do'urden
Another Chris Perkins Interview - 4th Edition Realms
- Thread starter Uzzy
- Start date
It's the End of the Realms as we know it. (and I feel fine)
Ah, now I am blending images of drunken frat boys shouting "Leonard Bernstein" with geeks saying Drizzt Do'urden
The Little Raven
First Post
Zaukrie said:
Nobody. Hence, the ever-present need for heroes.
The Little Raven
First Post
Zaukrie said:
A setting's purpose should be to provide a framework for the players to be the heroes, not to worry about all the "What if the players fail and someone else has to save the day" heroes. Having backup NPC heroes all over the place is what makes people feel like adventuring in some settings feels unimportant, since if they fail, there's some powerful NPC to pick up the slack and save the day.
The Ubbergeek
First Post
Zaukrie said:
In one region, yeah. Even with PoL, you think there would be only so FEW high characters in teh WHOLE WORLD?
TwinBahamut
First Post
Yes. They better get to work quickly, cause it is going to be a long, hard road to level 30.Zaukrie said:
Barastrondo
First Post
I don't know what the demographics are for play groups who run multiple campaigns in the same setting, but I'd guess they're pretty numerous. Bob's game deals with PCs saving the north, Michelle's deals with the South, etc.
That said, I would imagine that the default assumption is that each region can handle its average problems pretty well, but needs PCs for when things get beyond the NPC's capability to handle things. By reducing the average level of the NPC protectors, you let PCs be really vital a lot sooner. And of course, the arbiter of when things get beyond the NPC's capability to handle things is going to be the DM, so I'd guess it'd all work out pretty much the same way it does in largely any other campaign setting.
That said, I would imagine that the default assumption is that each region can handle its average problems pretty well, but needs PCs for when things get beyond the NPC's capability to handle things. By reducing the average level of the NPC protectors, you let PCs be really vital a lot sooner. And of course, the arbiter of when things get beyond the NPC's capability to handle things is going to be the DM, so I'd guess it'd all work out pretty much the same way it does in largely any other campaign setting.
JoeGKushner
Adventurer
Mourn said:
I'd agree with you that WoTC thinks that way if...
1. There were no new FR novels.
2. The new FR novels weren't cannon.
3. Drizzt and Elminster weren't around.
The Little Raven
First Post
JoeGKushner said:
Two characters remaining doesn't prove a point for either side. It simply means that the two most well-known characters of this setting will remain the two most well-known characters of the setting. We have no other real information from which to draw conclusions about their use in the setting.
The first two points are understandable, but stem from the assumption of no more metaplot going forward, and I think that cat's been out of that bag for too long to put it back.
The Ubbergeek
First Post
JoeGKushner said:
Logical fallacy - they, as other high npc, are no porblems by themselves. Elminster is usually just stuck in his tower and don't do much, and the importance of Drizzt is severely overblown - he is just a local hero.
All in all though, they do not in any way block pc from becoming heroes - even now. it had been explanined quite frequently and it's a trite debate.
Even novels are not a problem if you take and let go of you don't want and need. You can even say 'different, alternate universe'.
