Rich Baker on the Spellplague and other stuff.

[ZombieRoboNinja]

mystara died in the time of troubles; the mystara was midnight a human npc who was merged with mystara's essence or whatnot. So yeah while it mayhit elminny pretty hard, he actually knew the previous mystara for hundreds of years, midnight he only knew for a decade or so.

I meant it'll probably hit him hard in a more direct sense - he's got some kind of direct connection with Mystra as one of her Chosen, as I understand it, so when she bites it he'll probably have quite a headache.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Heh. Thats supposed to convince someone they aren't inept? Repeatedly saying 'I don't know how this works' isn't exactly inspiring. Nor is saying that blowing up the world wouldn't be useful, so if we're contradicting old fluff, screw it.

Translation: We didn't worry about the little details that people will see as flaws and will eventually blow up in our faces. Its all fine, just buy the book.

Alternate Translation: We didn't worry about all the little details, because we want people to make up their own explainations for things. Questions left unanswered by us should be answered by you, serving as plot hooks for your campaign or an adventures.

That's what they did in Eberron, and I think it works well.
Though it only works if the unanswered questions mostly remain unanswered by later books. (Though they shouldn't away from hinting possible answers, but that's best done if vague or seemingly contradictory...)

 

[Sitara]

I guess Szass taam will be powerless in the new realms, since there is no necro class. heh, a 0 level lich.

IMO I wonder what role bahamut and tiamat will have in the new pantatheon of the realms...

 

[Khairn]

Translation: We didn't worry about the little details that people will see as flaws and will eventually blow up in our faces. Its all fine, just buy the book.

Yeah, that's about it. Trust us. We know what we are doing even though we can't provide any rationale for some of the changes we've been forced to make. Buy the book.

Very underwhelming replies from my pov.

That's what they did in Eberron, and I think it works well.

It worked in Eberron because it was a brand new setting. And that type of design style would have worked great with a new 4E setting. But shoe horning massive changes on FR without any consistent rationale is a mistake.

The comment about Bards is interesting; apparently they may be offered ONLINE.

And "online" for WotC probably means being a subscriber to the DDI.

 

[Steely Dan]

Does anyone know what happens to Elminster yet?

I heard he basically just attends lemon-parties in Calimport these days.

 

[Hussar]

There's one thing about it, after seeing all this FR stuff of late, I've come to a conclusion. I never really got into the Realms all that much, and now I know why. It's not the huge amount of material. It's not the novels. It's the rabid FR fans that make Trekkies look like models of sanity.

It's bloody magic. "Rationale" ??? You need a rationale for the effects of the death of a god and how it affects those whom the goddess directly touches? And you expect everything to work as easily explainable phenomenon?

 

[hexgrid]

Heh. Thats supposed to convince someone they aren't inept? Repeatedly saying 'I don't know how this works' isn't exactly inspiring. Nor is saying that blowing up the world wouldn't be useful, so if we're contradicting old fluff, screw it.

Translation: We didn't worry about the little details that people will see as flaws and will eventually blow up in our faces. Its all fine, just buy the book.

The translation is that the changes were made for meta-game reasons, and the in-game explanation is open to interpretation.

I'm not sure why it needs some specific explantation. There's plenty of stuff in the -real- world we can't explain, after all.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It worked in Eberron because it was a brand new setting. And that type of design style would have worked great with a new 4E setting. But shoe horning massive changes on FR without any consistent rationale is a mistake.

It can work great in the FR too. "shoe horning massive changes" is neither here nor there. It has nothing to do with leaving out the little details. So long as unanswered questions remain unanswered, there is no reason why the 4E FR shouldn't have this style of writing. None. You're just stamping your foot because you're mad about the overall changes, and your response here is really senseless.

Personally, I think the Realms could REALLY use the "leaving out the little stuff" style of writing. I think it'd be a big step up from the "minutae-obsessed" style prevalent in many FR books.

This, together with the recent article at Wizards, really pleases me.

Apparently he froze to death trying to sell matches in an alley in Waterdeep. It's all very sad really.

Please be true!

 

[Steely Dan]

There's plenty of stuff in the -real- world we can't explain, after all.

Exactly, like why people like Jay Z or Allan Thicke have careers…

 

[catsclaw227]

Heh. Thats supposed to convince someone they aren't inept? Repeatedly saying 'I don't know how this works' isn't exactly inspiring. Nor is saying that blowing up the world wouldn't be useful, so if we're contradicting old fluff, screw it.

Translation: We didn't worry about the little details that people will see as flaws and will eventually blow up in our faces. Its all fine, just buy the book.

Why is leaving some things open to interpretation for the DMs considered inept? In some cases he is offering ideas about what may or may not have happened.

If he has contradicted some past fluff, so what? How many times in our own history, have "known facts" been refuted by new discoveries? (earth is flat, sun revolves around earth, man will never fly, etc)