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

D&D 4E Do you think WotC rebooting Forgotten Realms for 4e would be a good idea?

Do you think WotC rebooting Forgotten Realms for 4e would be a good idea?

  • Good idea: Clean out the cruft and polish it up and I may give it a look.

    Votes: 184 51.8%
  • Bad idea: Just update the rules to 4e and proceed as before.

    Votes: 97 27.3%
  • Zzzzzzzzz: Wha? I don’t give a fast flying flumph. Wake me up when 4e gets here. Zzzzzzzzzz.

    Votes: 74 20.8%

Kae'Yoss said:
It seems that they are tired of their old fans and want new ones.

Actually, I suspect that they're trying to appeal to the legions of truly old FR fans (like myself) who are still playing with loving dog-eared FR 1e books. There were a huge number of people who jumped ship from FR during the ToT and later, when the 2e novels started to impede upon the setting to an absurd degree.

With the recent popularity of many 'old school' revivals such as OSRIC, C&C, and BFRPG, I suspect WotC has realized that once alienated fans compose an not insignificant portion of the purchasing demographic and that they can bring those folks back into the fold (at least temporarily) by undoing a lot of what drove them away in the first place.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


rounser said:
To point out the obvious - if you don't like the changes, you can always wind back the clock.

Yeah, but one of the things that make the Realms my favourite setting will be no longer true: That It's a living, breathing world where things happen beside what adventures I make and what my characters do.

But since I won't bother with the Realms any more, I won't bother with the novels, either. They don't play in the Campaign Setting I like, which was the old Realms.

Coupled with the support Varisia will get, I will probably abandon the Realms altogether, except for the occasional nostalgia campaign.
 

From what I've seen I don't like it, as the Forgotten Realms I mean.

It might be an OK campaing setting. I'll leaf through it when it comes out (I'm still not convinced I'll go to 4th to begin with).

If they set in 100 years into the future, I'll be content even if it sucks. I'll just keep playing my games in the FR Present (actually about 5-6 years before the present).

At present, I'm about 25% likely to abondon the FR altogether (as someone who has every Realms product minus 6-7 issues of the FR Comic, that's saying something.
 

jdrakeh said:
Actually, I suspect that they're trying to appeal to the legions of truly old FR fans (like myself) who are still playing with loving dog-eared FR 1e books. There were a huge number of people who jumped ship from FR during the ToT and later, when the 2e novels started to impede upon the setting to an absurd degree.
I suppose I'm in the same boat. I haven't run a FR game since 92. I've only played in a handful since then. Not many DMs will run it. Which leads to why we're having these threads in the first place.
jdrakeh said:
With the recent popularity of many 'old school' revivals such as OSRIC, C&C, and BFRPG, I suspect WotC has realized that once alienated fans compose an not insignificant portion of the purchasing demographic and that they can bring those folks back into the fold (at least temporarily) by undoing a lot of what drove them away in the first place.
Those and I think they'll have a better chance of attracting new players if they simplify a bit.

My fear is that they botch this effort. I support the change, but if it isn't good the realms are toast.

Sam
 

Vraille Darkfang said:
From what I've seen I don't like it, as the Forgotten Realms I mean.
If I was one of these guys that had played it for twenty years I'd be more than a little annoyed, so I see where you guys are coming from.

Sam
 

Kae'Yoss said:
Yeah, but one of the things that make the Realms my favourite setting will be no longer true: That It's a living, breathing world where things happen beside what adventures I make and what my characters do.

But since I won't bother with the Realms any more, I won't bother with the novels, either. They don't play in the Campaign Setting I like, which was the old Realms.

Coupled with the support Varisia will get, I will probably abandon the Realms altogether, except for the occasional nostalgia campaign.

So what you are saying is, it can be a 'a living breathing world where things happen besides what adventures I make and what my characters do' as long as nothing actually happens. You can't have it both ways. You can't have a world not completely in your control as DM and have complete control.

I can understand not liking the changes the newest RSE has brought but you can't lament that there are changes if it's a strength of the setting. As much as the Time of Troubles sucked, the ret-con of 3E was worse. Precisely, because it is a world that is living and breathing. A ret-con is a like a waking from a dream in a TV show. It is jarring and a cheat. I'll take losing a city like Luskan over the 'you just never noticed dwarven sorcerors before'.
 

I think it is a shrewd move by WotC. I could never keep up with FR since I was also fully invested in GH. With GH at a drip I could potentially start following FR again on an even foundation with everyone else.
 

grimslade said:
So what you are saying is, it can be a 'a living breathing world where things happen besides what adventures I make and what my characters do' as long as nothing actually happens.

There is a difference between "nothing happens" and "the world is turned upside down and inside out". It's not black/white.

I can understand not liking the changes the newest RSE has brought but you can't lament that there are changes if it's a strength of the setting.

Watch me.

Changes are a strength. Ridiculous, bad changes are a weakness - of this setting and every other's

As much as the Time of Troubles sucked, the ret-con of 3E was worse.

Was not. It was a great move.

'you just never noticed dwarven sorcerors before'.

You mean "non gold-dwarf sorcerer", right? As far as I know gold dwarves got to be arcanists before 3e.
 

Mortellan said:
I think it is a shrewd move by WotC. I could never keep up with FR since I was also fully invested in GH. With GH at a drip I could potentially start following FR again on an even foundation with everyone else.

Simple solution: Get Grand History of the Realms - the book that was supposed to get everyone up to date.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top