• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Are you excited about the Forgotten Realms setting changes?

What do you think about the new forgotton realms?

  • I like the new forgotten realms changes and will use them.

    Votes: 142 33.3%
  • I like the new realms changes, but will keep with the current timeline.

    Votes: 8 1.9%
  • I didn't like the realms until the changes and now I do. I will play forgotten realms now.

    Votes: 37 8.7%
  • I do not like the new changes. The realms changed too much so I will keep the current timeline.

    Votes: 79 18.5%
  • I do not like the changes. I am going to stop playing the realms or stick with 3.5 because of them.

    Votes: 48 11.3%
  • I am so upset with the realms changes that I am not going to play D&D anymore!

    Votes: 2 0.5%
  • I really don't care about the realms one way or the other...who is drizzt? :)

    Votes: 110 25.8%

I already wasn't thrilled with what I was seeing of 4e, and seeing that instead of adapting the system to fit the setting they were trashing the Realms to shoehorn it into 4e sealed the deal of me not wanting to buy or play 4e. Rewriting the map also didn't help (I've got the big 4-part poster map from Dragon from years ago on my wall, all framed and everything, so admittedly I'm shy about parting with it).

Yes, big "RSE"'s are part of the setting, but the last big one was still pretty recent, comparatively speaking. The Fall of Netheril/Karsus's Folly, the Dawn Cataclysm, previously big events like that were centuries or millennia apart, with the Time of Troubles (a.k.a. Avatar Crisis/Godswar) being the latest in the series. A cataclysm even bigger than the Avatar Crisis less than three decades later seems forced. It reminds me of what was done to Krynn, with so many huge cataclysmic events happening in one lifetime (the gods are back, the gods are gone again and all known magic with them, the gods back yet again, each time with a world-shaking war, and with a huge game system jump in the middle. . .).

It feels like it's now the Forsaken Realms, a dark post-apocalyptic setting where most of the gods are dead, demons are running rampant, magic has gone berserk, the map has been redrawn, and aside from a few big kingdoms most of the world is in a new Dark Age. Then again, I didn't agree with the "points of light" concept to begin with, much less sledgehammering the Realms into being Points of Light with Realms names added on.

"It's a hundred years in the future, Shar killed Mystra and kept her from reincarnating, and then magic went wild and ravaged the world in these waves of blue fire. Fighting among the gods has killed most of them, and the planes are rearranged now too. Most of the famous NPC's are dead, and Baldur's Gate is the biggest city now, and a race of dragonmen appeared out of nowhere and is now a main PC race, and tieflings are now a main PC race too. . ." Think how those changes sound. If I didn't know it was the new "official" Realms if I was told about it I would swear it was some idea that some Goth/Emo 13 year old DM came up with.

I never got the problems people said they had with the Realms though. . .

Lots of famous NPC's. Nothing says they all have to appear in your game or show up regularly. I have run the Realms for years and famous big names appear very rarely, and even then usually as cameos or plot hooks. Elminster and Drizzt aren't there to sweep in and save the day for the PC's, they are there to be heroes of novels and video games and provide a way for players to feel like they are in the same setting as the novels and video games they play. A well played short encounter with Elminster can do more to give a "Realms" feeling to a game than any number of precisely recreated small towns or tiny inns from some obscure book or Dragon article.

Lots of backstory/canon. I didn't understand this problem either. That's the appeal, the world is very fleshed out and detailed, to help it feel real. Yes, for somebody to know it all would be an insane task, and if you have players that are incredible canon nuts that will flip out if you change one inn or one NPC's name it's a problem, but I've never encountered that in real life, only on message boards. In reality, I'm a big fan and know the canon pretty well, well enough to run a game lavish in details for casual players that know the basics of the setting and may have read a few novels or played Baldur's Gate or (going way back) Pool of Radiance. If my PC's point to some random location on the map and say "Let's teleport there!" I can look up that land and what it's like and look up that town or whatever and be ready to run quickly, instead of having no idea what most of the world is like aside from a few famous spots.

Lots of Gods. This was something else I saw as a big strength of the setting, that was trashed by the events leading to 4e. There were so many deities providing many churches and orders as NPC organizations to work with (or against), and enough that just about any character could find a religion that fit them fairly well. Not every god is going to have a temple in every town, not even close, some were worshipped in only fairly limited places (Siamorphe being mainly worshipped in Waterdeep comes to mind), so it's not like towns had malls of temples.

Getting rid of most of the personalities, pantheon and world gets rid of most of what makes it Forgotten Realms. These "Fourgotten Realms" seem like just the generic "Points of Light" setting with some Realms names and details added on to help it sell.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mkhaiwati said:
math, isn't it great! groups 3 & 4 leaving outweigh those new ones coming in. biggest group is, yes , those staying, but if WotC goal is more players, they seem losing more than gaining.

People who will use the new Realms: 192 (44.65%)
People who will not use the new Realms: 133 (30.93%)
People who are undecided: 96 (22.32%)
People who like the new Realms, but will use the old timeline: 9 (02.09%)
Total votes: 430

You claimed this...

except that there is also the larger combined balance of people hating the changes and either keeping the current timeline or keeping 3.5.

This only works when you ignore the largest group: People who like the Realms and like the changes. Sure, you can claim "Hey, they'll lose more old fans than attract new ones, according to this poll," but that conveniently ignores the larger group of old fans that will remain, shifting the entire poll in the favor of 4e FR.
 

Darth Cyric said:
3e screwed up the Realms, actually. It COMPLETELY RUINED all the wonderful plot points in the last 2e FR product, that gem Cloak and Dagger.

In short, 4e certainly can't screw it up any worse. In fact, there's a good chance the 4e FR could very well be better.
Hmm, seems your opinion of Cloak and Dagger is quite different from Rich Baker's, according to Rich's latest posts.

Instead of using the plots, they'll try to repair the damage that product apparently caused. Not having complete knowledge of the plots or damages in question, I'll stay out of that discussion and instead comment on the original topic:

I find the changes reinvigorate the setting and move more freedom into the hands of DMs instead of leaving it in the hands of the FR lore-addicts. Good move, if you ask me.
 
Last edited:

Lots of famous NPC's. Nothing says they all have to appear in your game or show up regularly.

I'm a critic of the famous NPCs and I've rarely seen them enter a game. (And even then, usually because the players want to say "I spoke to Khelben for ten minutes!")

The problem was why weren't they appearing in the game? This is why DMs often complained that they had to come up with reasons for this (and something better than the Simbul is on vacation right now). They're extremely powerful* and extremely well connected*, not to mention motivated. They don't really care about things like "XP"** or treasure, and (this may just be my experience) but nowadays players seem more interested in moving the story forward and killing stuff than in scrounging for treasure. So the PCs feel weird because the setting isn't logical in a big, breaking the suspension of disbelief way.

*Novel terms. The novels do a better job of describing the characters than the game books do. For good or for ill. Probably ill.

**And that's metagaming, too.
 

wingsandsword said:
It feels like it's now the Forsaken Realms, a dark post-apocalyptic setting where most of the gods are dead

Faiths & Pantheons lists 119 gods. Add Bahamut, and it's an even 120. 10 of them have died. How does 10 out of 120 equal "most"?

demons are running rampant

Are you talking about anything in specific? Because I haven't seen anything about demons running rampant. Monsters popping out of the Changling Lands and similar areas? Sure. But then again, random monsters have always run rampant through every D&D world. The Realms has been no exception to that. However, random monsters is different then demons running rampant.

magic has gone berserk

It did go berserk, but it settled down something like 80 years prior. Magic has been pretty stable for decades in the Realms, now.

the map has been redrawn

Maps are always getting redrawn.

and aside from a few big kingdoms most of the world is in a new Dark Age.

What constitutes "most"? Because from what they've shown, that's now the case. Sespech and Chondath are pretty much done for, as is Unther. But most of Faerun has come out of the Spellplague pretty much alright, not just the big countries.

Then again, I didn't agree with the "points of light" concept to begin with, much less sledgehammering the Realms into being Points of Light with Realms names added on.

How "points of lightish" is the 4E Realms, to be honest? We've got Waterdeep, Baldur's Gate, the Sword Coast, the Silver Marches, and the friendly Orc Kingdom of Many-Arrows to the west. We've got the resurrected Netheril to the north. Imperial Cormyr and Sembia. The Dalelands are still chugging along, as always. There's a resurrected Myth Drannor in Cormanthor. Thay is still there. Unther was replaced by a stronger nation. Amn is still doing alright. When you got a continent packed full of mighty city-states and nations, it hardly fits the mold of the "Points of Light" concept.

Fighting among the gods has killed most of them

Once again, how does 10 out of 120 equal most?

a race of dragonmen appeared out of nowhere and is now a main PC race

You do realize, right, that half of Faerun is descended from non-natives? They came from other worlds. Hell, the people from Unther and Mulhorand are originally from Earth! At least one of the two breeds of Orcs on Faerun is also from another world, and they also appeared in Faerun in that very same region. That part of Faerun has a long history of dragging people from other worlds into Faerun. The Dragonborn are only the latest examples.

and tieflings are now a main PC race too. . ."

...Tieflings were right there in the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting. They've BEEN a player race since the beginning of 3rd edition!
 

Ruin Explorer said:
You're contradicting yourself so severely here ("should have worked harder" implying you know/have a clear idea vs "isn't looking that way", emphasis mine, proving that you do not) that it really makes a nonsense of your whole post. All you're succeeding in pointing out....
....Either way, you're not telling anyone anything they don't already know.

I would prefer to keep things positive. You are judging my intentions and reading into my words wrong. I am merely saying by what we've seen so far my opinion is some neglect towards the Spirit of Forgotten Realms, and that I hope that this wasn't the case. I agree with the need for the changes, and the degree the changes took. There just seems that keeping true to the way Forgotten Realms feels is important. Your also taking my statement out of context and judging my character with it. Please show more respect and don't make assumptions. You can disagree with me, but do so politely.

As for the number, pffft, if we went by surveys on specialist messageboards, we'd believe a lot of crazy nonsense. Your math, particularly, is fantastical, and your attempt to work out how many people like the FR before the changes by messing around with these figures? Really silly.

To my understanding, the math is correct of this sampling. Instead of generalizing and mocking, can you please point out constructively how the math is wrong?

* - Some of these posts, and esp. ones on the FR boards/Candlekeep really really REALLY remind me of Marvin the Paranoid Android, to the point where it's actually getting increasingly funny.

Hey, on one hand its a game. Sure... But on the other, people invest alot of time and money in being fans of something they love. There is change coming, and in some of those people's minds that change isn't good. I personally am interested in understanding that from a persecptive of the market as a whole. It is important to me personally and professionally when the movers and shakers of the hobby industry do things right and wrong, and what the reaction of the fans are. Everyone is intitled to their opinion, and although the reactions of some fans are extreme, I am listening to them and doing my best to understand what it is that is upsetting them. My previous post only attempts to reflect that.
 

Mkhaiwati said:
okay, maybe, just maybe, we are interpreting the questions wrong.

1st group is they like changes and will use them.
3rd group, very important, is those who don't use FR and now will. my guess is new players, good idea?

4th group are those who don't like changes and keep same timeline. players leaving!
5th group are those who don't like changes and either drop D&D or stay w/3.5. layers leaving again!

I see group 1 as those currently playing FR and stay with it.
group 2 are new players for FR
groups 3 & 4 are current players of FR leaving

math, isn't it great! groups 3 & 4 leaving outweigh those new ones coming in. biggest group is, yes , those staying, but if WotC goal is more players, they seem losing more than gaining.

For those arguing about the math, this is exactly why it is correct. I too do not see what some people are having touble with. The first group is players already playing and staying. The poll states more people leaving then coming in. Over twice the amount actually.
 

Mourn said:
People who will use the new Realms: 192 (44.65%)
People who will not use the new Realms: 133 (30.93%)
People who are undecided: 96 (22.32%)
People who like the new Realms, but will use the old timeline: 9 (02.09%)
Total votes: 430

You claimed this...



This only works when you ignore the largest group: People who like the Realms and like the changes. Sure, you can claim "Hey, they'll lose more old fans than attract new ones, according to this poll," but that conveniently ignores the larger group of old fans that will remain, shifting the entire poll in the favor of 4e FR.

The mistake your making Mourn is combining the new people playing 4e FR with the old people playing 4e FR. You have to remove the 35.37% from that first total. They are players that were already there. This is the correct math:

Previous fans are equal to 35.37% (1st group) + 2.04% (2nd group) + 18.14% (4th group) + 12.02% (5th group) + .91% (6th group) = 68.48% of the fans who took this poll are interested in/ playing FR before 4e.

After 4e FR fans are equal to 35.37% (1st group) + 2.04% (2nd group) + 9.02% (3rd group) = 46.43% of the fans who took this poll are going to cross over to 4e.

This means 22.05% of the fans who were polled were lost. That is a big hit so far. As we learn more and do a poll down the road, it will tell us if the fans perceptions of the 4e are changing or not. Once the product releases another poll will tell if the feelings of the fan base were correct. So far by this poll, WOTC is losing the faith of the realms fans overall and they are incurring a market loss.
 

Najo said:
The mistake your making Mourn is combining the new people playing 4e FR with the old people playing 4e FR. You have to remove the 35.37% from that first total. They are players that were already there.

And your mistake is assuming that all 100% of that 35.37% were planning to stick with FR into 4E. How many of them liked FR, but were slowly drifting on to something else? How many like the new FR enough that they won't look at 3rd party settings, when earlier they might have?

This doesn't even account for the people who say they don't like it, but may be won over in the future when their disappointment fades and they see what it has to offer.

No, the only thing that this poll shows is that Mark Twain was entirely correct about statistics, and that people on both sides will continue to see what they want to see. ;)
 

Thundershield said:
Instead of using the plots, they'll try to repair the damage that product apparently caused.
Well, Rich Baker's lone point of reasoning is pretty ridiculous. The Harpers NEEDED shaking up. So if by "damage" you mean "making the Realms grow a pair for once," then sure. Then 3e came along and neutered it.

4e is wiping the slate clean of the damage 3e caused.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top