Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 7987269" data-attributes="member: 7006">Yep, a lot of this is just my opinion based upon what I've heard and seen done thus far.&nbsp; I have no special insight into anything, I'm just extrapolating from available evidence.But here's a point I think that makes the idea of a full-on FRCS complicated.&nbsp; You said that you thought the 3E book was very useful as a &quot;gaming product&quot;.&nbsp; Now I happen to think the 3E FRCS is one of the best campaign setting books I've ever read.&nbsp; But I also know that reading the book itself never inspired me personally to run a game in any specific location there.&nbsp; And this is because no one area gave enough information to me to want to run a game there.&nbsp; The column or page of background info was nice to read as historical info... but for things that I feel I'd want and need to run a game there-- detailed towns, NPCs, hooks for the locations-- no one area had enough to compel me.&nbsp; What eventually DID compel me to run a game in the Realms?&nbsp; The Silver Marches mini-campaign setting book.&nbsp; THAT guide gave me huge amounts of detailed info about a much smaller area, went into great specifics about how the main cities in the Marches were run and how they were different from each other, what all the small villages had for unique qualities, what the specific encounter locations had that made them special, and so forth.&nbsp; As a &quot;gaming product&quot; the Silver Marches book beat the FRCS book hands down in my opinion.Now if I had to venture a guess?&nbsp; I suspect that if you asked the general gaming populace to read both products-- the FRCS and the Silver Marches mini-setting-- and then were to ask them which one would be better and more inspiring to use to establish a new game for your table.... I'm willing to bet that the answer would be Silver Marches.&nbsp; And the reason I say this is because everything they've released in D&amp;D Next and 5E has gone in that direction.&nbsp; D&amp;D Next went all-in on Daggerford and its environs... the Starter Set went in on a smaller scale to the Triboar Trail valley... Princes of the Apocalypse went all-in on Red Larch and its environs... ToA went in on Port Nyanzaru and its environs etc. etc.&nbsp; I just think my experience in a lot of ways probably matches what most of the gamers who aren't Realms fanatics experience too.&nbsp; We want details for specific areas to run a game in, we just don't care about the entirety of the world.&nbsp; And thus WotC has gone in our direction when deciding on what to make products about.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 7987269, member: 7006"] Yep, a lot of this is just my opinion based upon what I've heard and seen done thus far. I have no special insight into anything, I'm just extrapolating from available evidence. But here's a point I think that makes the idea of a full-on FRCS complicated. You said that you thought the 3E book was very useful as a "gaming product". Now I happen to think the 3E FRCS is one of the best campaign setting books I've ever read. But I also know that reading the book itself never inspired me personally to run a game in any specific location there. And this is because no one area gave enough information [I]to me[/I] to want to run a game there. The column or page of background info was nice to read as historical info... but for things that I feel I'd want and need to run a game there-- detailed towns, NPCs, hooks for the locations-- no one area had enough to compel me. What eventually DID compel me to run a game in the Realms? The [I]Silver Marches[/I] mini-campaign setting book. THAT guide gave me [B]huge[/B] amounts of detailed info about a much smaller area, went into great specifics about how the main cities in the Marches were run and how they were different from each other, what all the small villages had for unique qualities, what the specific encounter locations had that made them special, and so forth. As a "gaming product" the [I]Silver Marches[/I] book beat the FRCS book hands down in my opinion. Now if I had to venture a guess? I suspect that if you asked the general gaming populace to read both products-- the FRCS and the [I]Silver Marches[/I] mini-setting-- and then were to ask them which one would be better and more inspiring to use to establish a new game for your table.... I'm willing to bet that the answer would be [I]Silver Marches[/I]. And the reason I say this is because everything they've released in D&D Next and 5E has gone in that direction. D&D Next went all-in on Daggerford and its environs... the [I]Starter Set[/I] went in on a smaller scale to the Triboar Trail valley... [I]Princes of the Apocalypse[/I] went all-in on Red Larch and its environs... [I]ToA[/I] went in on Port Nyanzaru and its environs etc. etc. I just think my experience in a lot of ways probably matches what most of the gamers who aren't Realms fanatics experience too. We want details for specific areas to run a game in, we just don't care about the entirety of the world. And thus WotC has gone in our direction when deciding on what to make products about. [/QUOTE]

Verification