Forgotten Realms 4e reviews?

[jdrakeh]

Are there any informative reviews of the new FR online anywhere?

The Amazon reviews are all marred by blind fandom or frothing hatred of WotC (along with the standard assertions that making profit and/or publishing new books is evil, greedy, and magically causes old FR material to suddenly be unplayable).

RPGNet has one review but it's pretty thin at best, giving a kind of summary of the book's contents in general terms without exploring any aspect of the book in depth or detail (and it's also tinged by some minor edition comparison bias).

ENworld has no reviews of the product in question.

Basically, what I'm trying to discern is how 'system free' the book is. That is, how much space is dedicated to mechanics and how much is dedicated to descriptive text? Is this book largely a mechanics collection with comparatively little setting description, or it it more akin to things like A Pirate's Guide to Freeport (which is purely setting description)?

 

[Crothian]

I haven't seen any reviews like. I didn't pick up the books so you won't be seeing a review of it by me.

 

[wedgeski]

This probably isn't very helpful, but having yet to read the book properly, and having only flicked through it/scan-read it three or four times, I find myself ambivalent. It doesn't have the wow factor of the 3E FR book (which was glorious, a true product of WotC D&D in its honeymoon period), and is blandly presented, but it *does* seem to cover all the bases without drowning you in detail (a fair criticism of its predecessor, some would say).

It seems... very nice. But don't take my word for it, as I haven't sat down with it for a good read yet.

 

[jensun]

Basically, what I'm trying to discern is how 'system free' the book is. That is, how much space is dedicated to mechanics and how much is dedicated to descriptive text? Is this book largely a mechanics collection with comparatively little setting description, or it it more akin to things like A Pirate's Guide to Freeport (which is purely setting description)?

From what I have read about it so far it is mainly mechanics free. I think there are a few monsters, the odd statted npc but not much more.

 

[jdrakeh]

From what I have read about it so far it is mainly mechanics free. I think there are a few monsters, the odd statted npc but not much more.

Well, that's promising, at least. I opted to wait for the revised printings of the DMG and MM to come out before I invested any further in the system side of D&D 4e (I own the PHB but, eventually, the errata was just to much for me to deal with). System-neutral stuff, OTOH, I can get now and use with any game

 

[dm4hire]

Candlekeep and Gnome Stew have done reviews and a couple of others I can't remember off the top of my head. It's receiving mixed reviews. As discussed in other threads the general concensus is that either too much was left out or the layout could have been done better. More threats could have been included and a better adventure presented. Having read half the book so far and skimmed over sections I haven't read yet I have to agree about lack of content but it is still a good book as presented. I think the biggest factor as mentioned in another thread is that since the material is split between two books now everyone is trying to judge the book on previous campaign book merits which you can't. As a stand alone campaign book it does the job the DM needs in my opinion but you will definitely need the Player's book to get the complete overall feel. I personally rate the book about 3.5 out of five, maybe a little higher. If you play in the Realms and want to be up to date with the setting then buy it, but if you tend to do your own thing with the Realms you can easily pass on it.

 

[jdrakeh]

This probably isn't very helpful, but having yet to read the book properly, and having only flicked through it/scan-read it three or four times, I find myself ambivalent. It doesn't have the wow factor of the 3E FR book (which was glorious, a true product of WotC D&D in its honeymoon period), and is blandly presented, but it *does* seem to cover all the bases without drowning you in detail (a fair criticism of its predecessor, some would say).

Physical presentation to me has always been secondary to actual utility, so that's not an issue. I actually didn't care much for the 3e FR book, but only because I felt that the mechanics took up more space than the actual setting detail too much space (for me, FR has always been about the setting detail, not the stat blocks). As I mention above, this may mean that the 4e FR setting is a good purchase option, for me.

 

[jdrakeh]

Candlekeep and Gnome Stew have done reviews and a couple of others I can't remember off the top of my head.

Thanks for the suggestions but, in this case, all of the dedicated fan site reviews that I've found are either one line blurbs or frothing screeds that are dripping with the usual venom (or both).

 

[dm4hire]

Have you read Gnome Stew's? I found theirs to be pretty neutral. I agree though concerning Candlekeep.

 

[Shroomy]

Basically, what I'm trying to discern is how 'system free' the book is. That is, how much space is dedicated to mechanics and how much is dedicated to descriptive text? Is this book largely a mechanics collection with comparatively little setting description, or it it more akin to things like A Pirate's Guide to Freeport (which is purely setting description)?

I don't have a review handy for you, I can tell you that with the exception of the adventure encounters in Chapter 1, a smattering of rituals (all two of them), some magic items, and some minor mechanics (such as Circle magic) in the Magic chapter, and the stat blocks in the Threats chapter, the majority of the book is crunch free. Its probably close to a 80/20 split between fluff and crunch.