I finally figured out what I dislike about 4E Forgotten Realms

[The Little Raven]

Okay, that's a fair point. I didn't realize they were encouraging people to play through that period; I was thinking entirely in terms of campaigns that begin in the new age.

They suggest you wind up your campaign when the Spellplague hits, and only suggest you use the time between 1375-1385 if you've got GHotR to tell you the events of those years. They very heavily suggest you start a new campaign in 1479.

 

[Draksila]

It's the DM sourcebook for the setting, not THE sourcebook (since there are two).

This is my point. What people are debating at this time is an incomplete product. Much as the DMG fails to have all the rules and information needed to run D&D without the PHB, I'm expecting the Player's Guide to the Realms to fill in a lot of these gaps. We've already seen in preview info that it gives a further examination of each region from the perspective of what the players would know; I see the Campaign Guide (note Guide, not Setting) as a 'For DM's Eyes Only' book of background secrets. If my suspicion is correct, I'm only truly bothered by the fact that I think they should have released the Player's Guide first.

I will have a negative view of the product if, after the PGtFR has been released, we are still lacking a historical background and timeline or further regional details. Until then I see these kind of complaints as being built on partial information and a misunderstanding of the new way the books are meant to complement each others' details.

Oh, and as a side-note... it may have been simply the personalizations I made to them, but the Avatar series of adventures were among those that my players most frequently requested I expose new players to. They were only beaten out by my group's love of Curse of the Azure Bonds. We strayed off course during those adventures quite often and still managed to hit the selling points of the story; an adventure should be a goldmine of ideas and not a straightjacket, much like an alignment. As always, my opinion only.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

I hate the fact that there wasn't a single adventure leading up to the Spellplague.[/B]

...

The Time of Troubles had adventures published around that event, and other major events throughout 3E. But what about the damnable Spellplague? Not a single iota of supplimental Dungeons and Dragons gaming material, beyond the fan-to-first party published Grand History of the Realms, and a pre-4E Drizzt (bleh) novel. Nothing was set into the players, or gamemaster's hands, to help facilitate their 3E campaigns over to a 100 year later Realmpocalypse(!).

That's not a bug; it's a feature.

The other RSE-based published adventrues are crap, not to put too fine a point on it. For the record, I currently have no opinion on the latest Realms version as I don't own it yet.

 

[El Mahdi]

They suggest you wind up your campaign when the Spellplague hits, and only suggest you use the time between 1375-1385 if you've got GHotR to tell you the events of those years. They very heavily suggest you start a new campaign in 1479.

That's why, in the post Ari was commenting on, I said "lightly encourage".

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

That book is...is...sigh...In general I love 4th ed, but the FR 4th ed book is excerable!!!

An adventure at the start of the bloody book, doesn't bode well.

Then they re-do that cheap trick of the "wipe out all the spellcasters just to fit new game mechanics" foolishness, for the Realms, as folk have complained about.
I could live with it, if it was like, new, well done, which it's not.

Then they mess up the gods (So Tiamat is now Bane's lackey?!?!? In a pig's eye she is!!)

The book uses that crap paper from Keep in the Shadowfell, that smudges, in a HARDBACK?!

It's very poorly organized, compared to the 3.5 book and the gorgeous way the 4th ed core books were laid out.
I like the "threat" section at the rear, but the rest blows chunks!

Oh yeah and Khelben, my fave, gets blown up in some stupid ecological mythal experiment....oh, hairy male spheres !!! :/

Doesn't look like the Realms, doesn't taste like the Realms..it isn't the Realms!!...

Why did they do this?!?!

Sigh,was really hoping for something good...the recent "Swordmage" novel was enjoyable, liked way it evoked the new setting, but the FR campagin book...barf!!

I'm still sticking to the very first Realms boxed set, it had genuine charm, mystery and *STYLE*. Some may accuse it of being too Tolkein-esque. Tough. What's good is good.
Very seriously, go look at that original boxed set, see the books, grok how it evokes the setting.

See the new book and see how it evokes nothing. There's no style, no atmosphere, it's just a bunch of countries and entries and...zilch. It has no soul!

Realms has been "Elminsterized" to death, that damned Volo should be fed, sensitive organs first, into a gnomish fibrous-tree-covering-slicer-dicer !

Sorry, just horrified by that damned book. They had BETTER not do that to the Spelljammer and Dark Sun books when they come out.

No wonder the entertainment industry is in crisis: cheap common denominator does not, in the end, set up a community that has anything more than the lifespan of a fruit fly in a blast furnace.


I feel very "dwarven", so I do...sigh

 

[Keefe the Thief]

See, i adore the Grey Box, and am currently running a campaign in it. And i really like the 4e book, because FR was a setting screaming to be pruned. They reduced the number of the gods below 100, for heavens sake.

And it´s okay to not like it. Hey, many people loved the lore-accumulation aspect of the realms. But... vomit? "Cheap common denominator"? What´s going on?

 

[Shroomy]

Didn't Khelben "Blackstaff" Arunsun die in a novel during the 3e FR era?

 

[El Mahdi]

That book . .

. . . that damned Volo should be fed, sensitive organs first, into a gnomish fibrous-tree-covering-slicer-dicer ! . . .

. . . I feel very "dwarven", so I do...sigh

Dude, you might need to take a day or two to catch your breath! This was pretty entertaining and funny. Thanks for your colorful critique.

I don't agree with every critique you have, and I have a few of my own that you didn't mention, but I think this thread is doing a reasonably good job of showing people what's in the book and what's not - and giving some useable critiques for people to decide whether they want to buy this or not.

I can sum up everything I think about the book with this: I feel disapointed by this product, sadly disapointed.

 

[Silverblade The Ench]

Keefe,
well, by "lowest common denominator", I reffer ot the fact that that the music and film industry is in deep kak.
One has seen catastrophic falls in sales, yet still tries to blame anything other than the fact they have backed/wanted cheap pap, rather than pay and support quality. So music scene has imploded, with more folk looking for artists in non-traditional way (I don'tmean illegla stuff, I mean, rather than buy the over priced bloat CDs, they go to concerts, buy individual tracks direct form musuician's own sites).

Then, for film, since the corporate "bean counters" have total sway, they only back "Known successful material", this means we are getting a huge load of rubbish re-makes and sequels.
We may lambast the old studios for abusing the stars, but at least many of them loved making great pictures.

For the FRCG book, I refference that entire sad debacle, because it seems ot me, that FR4 th ed, has come foorm the same stable of outlook:
"Keep it simple, keep it cheap!"
To paraphrase a cheap conjuror
The art work is fine. Some of the concepts are fine, but over all, it's a cheap, lousy, tasteless "self-service meal".
It doesn't stick to my ribs.
it doesn't make me go "WOW, that's cool!" it doesn't make me think, it's simple stuff, but with no connection.
There's no unity, it's a fractured mess. it doesn't stir me at ALL


Shroomy,
Well, I don't read as much of the Realms books as I want ot, so you maybe right.
Problem is, for every FR book I enjoy, there's at least another I throw at a wall, scream about WTH I wasted money on it and why a perfectly good tree was wasted on that, rather than more useful toilet paper...ya know?

I think the epitomy of lousy D&D books was back in the TSR era, when they did some murder msyteries...ah yes, the smithy take sout his trusty 40lb hammer to fight...oh really? Ever used a sledgehammer when working metal? They generally weight about 10lbs or 20lbs for ones for wall smashing or post driving, *not* 40lbs. Only one man I knew could swing a 56lb "Bushing" hammer one handed, and certainly NOT in a fight (and he was the strongest person I've ever met, bushing hammers were not used in normal work, hence their weight, was for a specific job).
in other words: writers should actually check what they are talking about
um, applies to me too, I guess

The timeline of Khelben's death seems ot be the very end year of the original Realms? 1374.
Damn, I liked Khelben, ever since I played Eye of the Beholder 2, i had a soft spot for him

And the ridiculously stupid way they erased Halaster in "Return to Undemrountain" PO'd me off no end
I don't care much about stats for NPCs, nice if they do 'em, not a biggie to argue about, but to casually erase them...at least, Halaster's death was utterly cheap.
No Halaster, no Undermountain, simple as that.
I don't usually like dungeon crawls, but I adored Undermountain...and they ganked that mad old bugger who made it so "fun".


El Mahdi,
*doffs hat and bows with a theatrical flourish*