Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Reynard" data-source="post: 3918092" data-attributes="member: 467">The myriad of 2E campaign settings came with their own core rules?&nbsp; News to me.Let's talk about those three for a moment.&nbsp; Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk were both built upon the foundation of A/D&amp;D assumptions and implied setting, the &quot;flavor&quot; if you will (which is a function of both fluff and crunch).&nbsp; How will they look under 4E?&nbsp; Will they be D&amp;D settings?&nbsp; Will they be modified to meet the new paradigm of D&amp;D flavor?&nbsp; FR, for example, has sizable portion of its setting based around druids.&nbsp; What happens to that portion of the setting?&nbsp; I am not a huge FR fan -- it is a fine setting, I just have never played in it much -- but it seems that if you change the underlying flavor of D&amp;D, you either have to change the underlying flavor of the Realms -- arguably a more powerful brand than D&amp;D itself, given novels and such -- or you have to make the flagship setting not representative of the game.Eberron is a little different because it was built around the base assumptions of 3.5 specifically.&nbsp; &quot;If it is in D&amp;D, it is in Eberron&quot; and all that.&nbsp; Even so, there's still a fundamental flavor shift, which means that Eberron is going to have to shift too.&nbsp; If the Player's Guide to Eberron is any indication, it will mostly eb a matter of choehorning new stuff into the setting, whether it belongs there or not.One of the problems with core settings like FR or Eberron is that, by their nature, they have to allow for everything in the core.&nbsp; There's no option to enforce genre or tone via exclusion*, which is generally what defines a fantasy setting (literary or gaming).&nbsp; For example, at the change over to 3E, FR suddenly had to account for gnome monks and dwarven wizards and half orc sorcerers.&nbsp; how did it do it?&nbsp; Did it come through unscathed? (Agian, I don't know since i am not a FR afficianado -- I am curious what the answer is.)*ASIDE: One thing I wish would have happened at the beginning of 3E was a setting like FR would enforce class limits by race.&nbsp; the option was given lip service in the DMG, but an example from an official, influential product like a setting core book would have gone a long way toward reminding people that it is, in fact, okay to limit options in order to achieve a particular style of play, milieu, etc...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Reynard, post: 3918092, member: 467"] The myriad of 2E campaign settings came with their own core rules? News to me. Let's talk about those three for a moment. Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk were both built upon the foundation of A/D&D assumptions and implied setting, the "flavor" if you will (which is a function of both fluff and crunch). How will they look under 4E? Will they be D&D settings? Will they be modified to meet the new paradigm of D&D flavor? FR, for example, has sizable portion of its setting based around druids. What happens to that portion of the setting? I am not a huge FR fan -- it is a fine setting, I just have never played in it much -- but it seems that if you change the underlying flavor of D&D, you either have to change the underlying flavor of the Realms -- arguably a more powerful brand than D&D itself, given novels and such -- or you have to make the flagship setting not representative of the game. Eberron is a little different because it was built around the base assumptions of 3.5 specifically. "If it is in D&D, it is in Eberron" and all that. Even so, there's still a fundamental flavor shift, which means that Eberron is going to have to shift too. If the Player's Guide to Eberron is any indication, it will mostly eb a matter of choehorning new stuff into the setting, whether it belongs there or not. One of the problems with core settings like FR or Eberron is that, by their nature, they have to allow for everything in the core. There's no option to enforce genre or tone via exclusion*, which is generally what defines a fantasy setting (literary or gaming). For example, at the change over to 3E, FR suddenly had to account for gnome monks and dwarven wizards and half orc sorcerers. how did it do it? Did it come through unscathed? (Agian, I don't know since i am not a FR afficianado -- I am curious what the answer is.) *ASIDE: One thing I wish would have happened at the beginning of 3E was a setting like FR would enforce class limits by race. the option was given lip service in the DMG, but an example from an official, influential product like a setting core book would have gone a long way toward reminding people that it is, in fact, okay to limit options in order to achieve a particular style of play, milieu, etc... [/QUOTE]

Verification