D&D 4E Rich Baker on 4e Realms changes

[Cthulhudrew]

Remember, the online squawking about the changes is coming from a very small but very vocal minority.

"Remember?"

Is this some kind of known fact somewhere- that the "squawking" is only by a "very small but very vocal minority"?

I ask mainly because I so often see this argument used as a defense against complaints, and I'm genuinely curious how people know that this is the case. How do they know there isn't an incredibly sizable and vocal group that is complaining and being dismissed?

(In any event, it seems to me that if concerns are about the size and history of the Realms being off-putting to new gamers, that it might be a better idea to not try and cram everything in right at the beginning, and just put out smaller, more focused products for the newcomers. Things that would flesh out, say, Cormyr as a setting for people to jump in on, while still giving some new information for the old timers out there, rather than throwing the baby out with the bathwater on the scale it seems like they are doing in a sense.

Then again, I'm not in marketing, so what do I know?)

 

[Dragon Snack]

Don't you know that anyone who disagrees with WotC on teh intrawebs is just part of a 'small but vocal community'...

I knew nothing about the FR before 3.0 came out, but the group I was with wanted to game there. It was cool having a setting with some background that everyone could access if they wanted.

I bought lots of FR stuff (both 3.x and 2E stuff for the fluff) to run my games and expand my knowledge (and oddly, I probably know more than anyone else in my group about the FR now), but I used the background as a starting point - not a constraint. Now that stuff is pretty useless (it's not just history, now it's ancient history) and I'm not going to bother relearning the Realms.

I'll restart my homebrew, if I even bother with 4.0...

As for 'new gamers' knowing about the FR, why is now going to be any different than a few years back (when the video games were first released)? If they didn't make the jump then, why will they make the jump now (into a setting that is different from that portrayed in the games and novels)?

 

[Toryx]

It can be off-putting to start a campaign in the Realms where everyone knows the campaign world backwards and forwards and you don't. The other players are probably genuinely trying to be helpful when they correct a minor mistake you make, but the sheer balance of knowledge working against you is pretty profound and unless you start buying or borrowing the books and memorizing all that, you'll always be the outsider looking in.

With the changes, for a while at least, everyone will be starting off on the same foot. That definitely opens the door for newcomers. Considering that the Realms are going to be the Living Campaign for 4th ed., that's a fairly smart move in terms of Marketing. It also refreshes the world considerably for the legions of people who have been playing the realms for years and are interesting in something new.

Not everyone is rabidly committed to every minor detail that has been accomplished. And because those who are in the middle -- they like the Realms a lot, but they don't quite *live* in them -- aren't that invested in the setting one way or another, they'll never be that vocal about it. They'll wander off to Eberron or do their own homebrews or just kind of quietly exist in whatever appeals to them.

Now that something new and revolutionary is coming out, that silent mass is far more likely to pick up the campaign setting books than they were previously. Which is an effective way to target an existing audience AND welcome in a new group in a way that's not so intimidating as before.

For the first time in years I, at least, am interested in seeing what they do with the setting.

 

[marune]

I've been a FR fan since Ed Greenwood first starting publishing articles about it in Dragon magazine. I've read more FR novels than I care to count, and have enjoyed most of them. I've played in several FR games and am currently running one set in Sembia.

That said, I'm extremely excited about the upcoming changes to the realms. Over on the FR boards I learned that just because I'm not totally negative on the setting changes, it means that I'm 'not a real FR fan.' I wasn't aware that there was a club and a secret handshake. I don't remember voting for the board of censors - and shouldn't I be grandfathered in because I've like the realms for so long?

IMNSHO, this is exactly the behavior (and attitude) that drives off new players.

I love many things about the realms (that's why I run games there), but that doesn't mean that I have to love everything that has ever been written about the realms. I find the changes to be both frightening and intriguing. I believe that the various novels have cluttered the realms with powerful NPCs. I also believe that there are too many gods, most of which are frankly uninteresting (or even uninspired). Recent history in the realms has become so congested that it is extremely daunting for new players (and especially GMs).

My brother-in-law is going to set his first 4e game in Waterdeep. I am looking forward to it with great anticipation.

You are not alone

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

Drizzt has never been important in my Realms. It's important if YOU choose it to be. You don't have to set your game in the Silver Marches, but if you do, there's a nice regional sourcebook that explains what you need to set your game there.

Yeah, you are probably right that he isn't important. I just went to him because I started reading the novels the the Crystal Shard series and followed by the Dark Elf Trilogy like a lot of people. I tend to mention Drizzt when I think of prominent NPCs in the Realms.

Which is something I agree with, in a round about way. I like the novels, but prefer them to be small scale and constructive, rather then large RSE's and destructive. Secondly, a good campaign setting book would give you an overview of the area, which would show you that the mayor of that town is a 12th level wizard who protects the town from danger. If you don't read the Campaign Setting Book, what are you doing running the setting?

But the thing about FR is that often the campaign setting comes out and it doesn't mention any details about a town. Then an author decides to set a novel in that town a year later and creates an NPC for his story who lives there. Then a year later, a sourcebook comes out about that area with stats and information on that NPC. Then another author reads the sourcebook and decides to use that NPC in another novel.

However, if you've just read the FRCS you don't know anything about that. In the FRCS it was just some small town with no real background. But if you start a game set in that town without having read all the novels and all the supplements you might be missing stuff. Which is a feeling I don't like. I like knowing everything there is to know about an area. I just don't have time to do that much reading, as much as I'd like to.

It's why I wanted WOTC to release a document every year showing what changes have been made in the setting, or at least put something I think it's important that in a setting with a Metaplot, this happens, in order to keep people up to date with changes in the setting easily, if they so desire.

This is a good idea. I think they probably won't want to do it however, as no one is going to buy novels if you can read a document that summarizes them all.

You don't like learning new things about a setting? That's one of the things that attracted me to it. Layer upon layer of history gives the appearance of a living, breathing world. Now, if the stuff you learnt happened to be vitally important things to the running of the setting, then I'd agree. But again, the FRCS should tell you those vitally important things.

That's not what I meant. I mean there shouldn't be SO much information that things like "You didn't know that this country was at war with this one?" is a surprise to me after reading the FRCS. Or maybe that isn't even so bad but when I hear "You didn't know that the elves had a tree where all of their souls go when they die and that it is what powers magic on their island? It says so in this novel here." is a surprise.

Recently I've taken a great interest in learning more about the Realms since I became one of the LFR administrators. I haven't had time to read through my Grand History yet, though I'm trying. It's just so dry and bland to read.

The people I asked for help when I started in the Realms were nothing if not friendly. Perhaps the others have had a bad experience, but that's not the fault of the setting.

No, it is not the fault of the setting at all. I was just saying that everyone seems to think that fans who really like FR are much better at getting new players into the game instead of changing the game so that players can get themselves into it easier. It isn't true.

Then just stick to the Campaign Setting Book. You can make the same argument against the Eberron Sourcebooks, if you want. Reading the FRCS gives you a good amount of lore so that you can know the setting and be able to run it, and certainly doesn't take more then a few days to read through it.

But it lacks so much information. The Eberron Sourcebook tells you basically everything you need to know about the world. The later books are all about smaller details that you may or may not want. If you don't buy Dragonmarked you might not know that some people who have Dragonmarks can do some different stuff with them than usual, but that isn't a big deal.

If you don't buy one of the FR novels you may not know that the King of Cormyr died or that an evil wizard has placed a curse on an entire country or any number of big deals.

WOTC could have addressed some of the issues with the Realms, both real and perceived, with soft changes, rather then pressing the reset button on the Realms. It makes me sad, but hey, it means I can save some money come August!

They could have addressed SOME of them, I admit. However, the pure weight of the Realmslore won't go away without a reset. They could come out with a new LGCS that just avoids going into details about the world so that it looked easy to learn. However, they would still get players showing up at a table who had read all the 1st, 2nd and 3rd ed stuff about the Realms and wouldn't hesitate to correct "mistakes" that DMs and other players made because they don't know all the details.

If, on the other hand, you tell all those players "All that stuff you know, it's no longer true. You have to learn new stuff just like everyone else. And here is a basic outline of the NEW Realms which assumes everything has changed." All players then start on a level playing field. Luckily it will take another 20 years and 2 more editions before we will likely build up as much lore again.

 

[Vael]

I've never played in FR, aside from CRPGs, but I kinda like the setting. I love Elaine Cunningham's FR books, Danilo Thann and Arilyn Moonblade remain two of my favourite fantasy characters. My antipathy towards Drizz't is less because of the character, but I dislike the author, I don't like RA Salvatore's writing.

So, I find the changes for 4e FR intriguing. I'm interesting in reading about the spellplague, seeing what happens. Will I buy the FRCS? Maybe.

But my main issue with FR was less the overabundance of uberNPCs, my issue was the overactive deities and their soap-opera antics that make the Greek Pantheon look positively simple. I like Eberron's distant dieties.

I will say this, the changes to the Realms make me willing to check them out, and depending on what I think of the FRCS, I might want to have a 4e campaign there.

 

[Khairn]

I've been a FR fan since Ed Greenwood first starting publishing articles about it in Dragon magazine. I've read more FR novels than I care to count, and have enjoyed most of them. I've played in several FR games and am currently running one set in Sembia.

Ditto, except my game is in the Silver Marches.

That said, I'm extremely excited about the upcoming changes to the realms. Over on the FR boards I learned that just because I'm not totally negative on the setting changes, it means that I'm 'not a real FR fan.' I wasn't aware that there was a club and a secret handshake. I don't remember voting for the board of censors - and shouldn't I be grandfathered in because I've like the realms for so long?

I really wish I could say the changes excite me, but I can't. I find most (not all) of the changes to be very contrived and poorly implemented with an overall feeling of being forced. In addition to that, if I want to start a game in the "New FR", the changes being made will effectively render my collection of FR gaming material (fluff not crunch) redundant and ultimately useless.

Recent history in the realms has become so congested that it is extremely daunting for new players (and especially GMs).

I really don't understand that arguement. Why is it "daunting"? I'm not saying that you are wrong, as its a perfectly valid point of view. But isn't it the job of a GM to tailor whatever setting is being played to meet the needs of the players? If the players at the table don't like reading lots of options and history ... then the GM should only work from a few elements and not include the entire realm. Isn't it better to have a lot of information and background that GM's and players can use at their own pace, rather than too little information?

As a FR Fan, I believe that these changes will ultimately be accepted and the storm of criticism will die down. But I also believe that many customers are justifiably angry over the changes and that the FR changes are further fragmenting the player base, just as 4E is also doing.

Just an opinion.

 

[Nikosandros]

Rich Baker
3. No, I can't guarantee no upheavals for three years. First off, it's not up to me. More to the point: I can tell you right now that we don't have any planned, and that we'd like to avoid Realms-shaking events for a while... but if a Bob Salvatore or Paul Kemp or Elaine Cunningham some other talented author drops a truly kick-butt story proposal in our laps that happens to shake the Realms, we'd be foolish to tell them that we can't accommodate that outstanding story. If it's the *right* story, it's the right story.

But why is it bad to have powerful NPCs in the campaign, but it's OK to impose very significant changes in the campaign setting that are decided by fiction authors? That looks to me as a much more serious case of "stealing the limelight"...

 

[Waylander the Slayer]

I haven't read the realms novels or played in FR in 7 years or so. However, the 3E Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting was exceedingly well done and really did not have any of the "percieved" issues. The setting is so vast that almost any type of campaign could be run in it. As for 4E FR, people can choose or not choose to play it. We shall see how the changes play out.

 

[kennew142]

I really don't understand that arguement. Why is it "daunting"? I'm not saying that you are wrong, as its a perfectly valid point of view. But isn't it the job of a GM to tailor whatever setting is being played to meet the needs of the players? If the players at the table don't like reading lots of options and history ... then the GM should only work from a few elements and not include the entire realm. Isn't it better to have a lot of information and background that GM's and players can use at their own pace, rather than too little information?

As a FR Fan, I believe that these changes will ultimately be accepted and the storm of criticism will die down. But I also believe that many customers are justifiably angry over the changes and that the FR changes are further fragmenting the player base, just as 4E is also doing.

Just an opinion.

It is daunting because so much material has accumulated in novels and is detailed nowhere else. It can be frustrating to design something and then to find that everything you've worked on is invalidated by canon. I believe that there is such a thing as too much information. I am very conversant with the realms, so this has never been an issue with me. But there are others I've gamed with who have felt an information overload.

IMO, this is a problem for more than a few players. It affects would be FR GMs much more severely.

I also agree that the firestorm will die down. Some FR fans may refuse to have anything to do with the new FR, but some (even among those now complaining) will convert.