Keep your filthy points of light away from me!

[Kae'Yoss]

They've also said that the standard setting is entirely new. Why is Points of Light so bad for an entirely new setting? Why should it not have the PoL assumptions when, in fact, it makes for a mechanically perfect default setting that they never, ever have to release sourcebooks for?

The problem is that they seem hell-bent on changing the Realms so that it conforms to everything 4e is doing and introducing:

The 4e standard cosmology changes, and the Realms' cosmology changes (with its own RBE "explaining" that change) so it's just like the 4e standard cosmology.

4e is apparently all about "Points of Light" so the Realms need big catastrophy and many cities destroyed so the Realms scream POINTS OF LIGHT.

4e magic works differently, and they kill off deities to explain why Realms Magic now works differently (which also means that you couldn't play "historical" campaigns properly with 4e rules, since they would play in a time when wizards didn't have arcane strikes).


They don't have to write sourcebooks for the standard campaign setting, because the Realms are just like that, so they just release FR books.

 

[Zurai]

Ah. So, in the end, you aren't complaining about WotC ramming Points of Light down everyone's throats or WotC saying that Points of Light is the only way to make a world.

What you're saying is that this is just another "I don't like the rumored Forgotten Realms changes".

 

[Kae'Yoss]

"The Simbul was always a sorcerer. You just didn't notice." Not a big change, I admit.. but one that leaps to mind.

That's rules changes. I have no problems with those. I have a problem with story changes that explain those rules changes, instead of treating the new rules as a new way to describe what has always been as it is.

In 2e D&D, the Simbul was a wizard
In 3e D&D, the Simbul was a sorcerer/wizard
In a Storyteller/WoD-rules based FR campaign, she'd probably a Mage of some sort (Warlock, Theurge, Enchanter, whatever)
In a L5R 3e FR Campaign, she'd have insight rank 6 or so and be part of a wizard school probably with a fire affinity and a water deficiency.
In a True20 FR Campaign, she'd be an adept.

I could go on, but I think I've made my point: The setting should not rely completely on the ruleset. Its story should not change when the ruleset changes.

And, much more importantly, it's genre/type should not change because of ruleset changes.

 

[Rechan]

Unfortunately a lot of the campaign setting doesn't touch on this. I've had this argument before and I have to admit, despite how easily you could focus on this aspect without changing the setting, the actual ECS book describes the Five Nations as being largely pretty secure. Your Eberron may vary as mine certainly does, but it isn't an unreasonable disconnect.

Depends on what you mean by "Secure".

Take a look at the maps. Unless the red dot goes through an area, there's no lightning rail. That means there are only two real ways of communication between "Points of Light": Orien mail services and Speaking Stone stations. Your little hamlet out there may not have a Sivis Enclave big enough to warrant a speaking stone. Sort've like how you can live in a town in the US not big enough to warrant a redlight or a McDonalds.

So with that said, take a look at the map of say, Breland. While the whole South of Breland has a lot of populated areas, North and North East are very sparse. The Northeast is especially dangerous, given its proximity to Droaam.

If you're anywhere in the Northish areas, and no where near the lightning rail station, you are boned. That's a lot of room for darkness. A lot of disconnect from the south of Breland.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the Mournland is smack dab in the middle of Khorvaire, so countryside that was once peaceful and had no monsters now has monsters just strolling out of the Mournland in all directions. So you have the edges of all the nations around the Mournland with a new influx of beasties.

Also, something that must be realized is that Eberron doesn't just have points of light, but there are points of darkness IN the light. You have cultists worshiping the fiend bound in the Silver Flame in Flamekeep/Thrane. You have Quori infiltrating Sharn, Q'Barra and many other cities. The Emerald Claw is a terrorist organization that could attack in any city. Incursions from Khyber could happen in the countryside or in your back yard. Cults of the Dragon Below could infiltrate the city, made up of the nobles or the guildhall down the street. The Swords of Liberty, a terrorist organization in Breland, want to overthrow the king and institute a Democracy - which would severely de-stabilize Breland, if not the Five Nations.

I see Eberron like the night sky. Sure, you have groups of light points around constellations, but you still have lots of void, and lots of isolated points.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Ah. So, in the end, you aren't complaining about WotC ramming Points of Light down everyone's throats or WotC saying that Points of Light is the only way to make a world.

What you're saying is that this is just another "I don't like the rumored Forgotten Realms changes".

No, it isn't. I just illustrate that Points of Light is more than some innocent suggestion. They don't just say that it's a nice way to make a campaign, they base the standard campaign setting on that premise, AND change one of their two big campaign settings to better fit that premise.

 

[Stone Dog]

Depends on what you mean by "Secure".

Look, dude. I agree with you. I'm just saying that the way the main book is written is different than how a lot of people play it. Karnnath comes right out and says that you are pretty safe from anything more serious than being hassled for your paperwork. The book can support both interpretations or a mix of them. A lot of people have the four remaining Five Nations being pretty bright with bits of dark flecks and more real darkness the farther you get from the boarders. A lot of people have the whole continent being soaked in shadow with bonfires and rivers of fire where the roads and rails are. Both sets are right. Eberron (and any setting really) should be about possibilities and not hard canon. The maps should be to smaller scale, but they are printed with a great big scale so if you like it you might as well run with it. Orien leaves Khorvaire with a pretty decent infrastructure between the trade roads and the rails while Deneith can offer plenty of patrol services. Or maybe not.

Eberron has lots of room for the PoL dial to go way down to pitch, but there is just as much room to have it cranked up to shiny.

 

[PeterWeller]

It is the scale. If you play the Realms, getting stuff rammed down the throat is somewhat of a given.

The net sum of the Time of Troubles (which didn't turn everyone's crank, I agree), the changes amounted to killing three gods off, promoting replacements, and put limits on some magic. Easy enough to retcon if you didn't like.

This time, they are killing off a whole whack of gods, destroying planes, and changing the game world (geographically, magically, politically, economically, etc) on a very large scale way which will be very hard to retcon short of totally ignoring the whole affair.

Comparing the net sum of the ToT to what is happening now is poor logic. They killed off a whole whack of gods with the ToT as well. As far as really important gods go, the ToT killed off 4, while the Spell Plague and associated events have only killed 2. Sure, lots of other side deities are biting it, but people forget that the ToT caused the death and dissolution of an entire pantheon, as well as a number of deaths amongst the mostly pointless demigod community. Also, while the Spell Plague causes massive casualties amongst the world's wizards, the Time of Troubles involved the death of every last member of specific base class.

As far as the supposed sweeping political, geographic, and economic (and magical, when you look at the net sum of the matter) changes are concerned, there isn't enough evidence to show that they actually will be that total and sweeping.

To bring this back to the Points of Light discussion: First of all, I don't see how points of light is really any different from how D&D has always been. Forgotten Realms, Mystara, Greyhawk, Eberron, Dark Sun, Dragonlance; all of these settings have evoked the idea that the forces of good must constantly fight against the encroachment of evil. Look at the Silver Marches and tell me that those cities aren't points of light in a dark world. Beregost, Baldur's Gate, and Candlekeep are also points of light in a dark world. Those Dales that produce so many mighty and famous heroes; they do so because they are points of light in a dark, drow and demon infested forest.

They aren't forcing Points of Light down your throat. It's always been points of light. Like how the old core classes and class groupings have become explicitly defined by roles and power sources, points of light is just the developers making a long held assumption of the fantasy role playing game explicit.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

There are a few problems I have believing that the changes to FR are designed to bring about a points of light feel.

First, it was recently revealed that the FR team met (and included Ed) about 2 years ago plotting out the novels for the coming years. It is clear that that plotting came up with many (most?) of the changes we see coming for FR.

Second, the decision to move the rules to 4e came long after this.

So there are two distinct events that are driving the changes to FR. A couple years old meeting devising the progress in the setting's novels, and the advent of a new rules system. I'm guessing that with all of the changes coming down the line from the novels that they just decided to take the opportunity to add a few more changes to the list to explain fundamental alterations to the rules.

It would be worthwhile, IMO, for someone at WotC to give us a breakdown of the changes proposed by the two-years-ago meeting, and the changes added to explain the coming of the new rules.

 

[The Little Raven]

No. Because in 3e, they didn't feel compelled to change the Forgotten Realms to make it cleave to everything that 3e does.

If FR 3e didn't feel compelled to change FR to make it cleave to 3E's rules, then why did we suddenly have dwarf wizards and elven paladins? Why did sorcerers suddenly come out of nowhere, along with all these monkish orders? Why did high magic merely become an element of 3e's epic level "seed"-based system?

I don't know what book you read, but 3rd Edition makes massive changes to FR to get it to run by the new system.

 

[Desdichado]

Does anyone besides me think this thread might have been a lot better if it had said "Keep your filthy points of light off me, you damned dirty ape!"?