D&D 5E Why FR Is "Hated"

[Lanefan]

I started in 4E, then played some Pathfinder, and then 5E.

Ah, OK. I think (but stand to be corrected) 4e does take a different tack on non-PC adventurers.

Pathfinder, though, should be crawling with 'em.

Lanefan

 

[HobbitFan]

How about if you can't handle criticism of the Forgotten Realms, you don't read a thread titled "Why FR is Hated"? Should we shut down RPGGeek and BoardGameGeek and IMDB because any comments about how Monopoly or Ghost Dad weren't good are crapping on other people's good times. Criticism will not and should not stop because it might offend some people.

I think I must have been unclear. I didn't mean to say or imply even that people shouldn't be critical. I meant more to say that perhaps people should make their points and defend them rationally and not get stuck in "It's crap" vs "No it isn't" type arguments.

 

[Lanefan]

So NPCs used the same rules as PCs in ADnD, in ADnD 2e and in 3e and also it was something only ever introduced in 3e?

Yeah, more or less.

1e and 2e had some NPCs fully use PC rules, some partially use the rules, and others not at all; often at the whim of the (usually module) writer...meaning the DM was left to sink or swim. 3e went all-in on making PCs and NPCs work the same mechanically; a praiseworthy goal but the execution didn't quite come off.

Lanefan

 

[Maxperson]

Your point appears to ignore that the actions of a Demi-God in the past do not present anything like the same dynamic as the actions of a powerful NPC in the present of a campaign setting.

Your arguments for similarity are oversimplifications.

Maybe because I wasn't talking about those demi-gods, you guys were. You guys can't bring them up, claim my point ignores something irrelevant that you brought up, and then ignore that I was only talking about powerful NPCs in present settings.

Elminster, Dalamar, Raistlin, Mordenkainen, and so on are all similar. If any one of those diminishes the PCs, they all do.

 

[Maxperson]

So... 10% is somehow common enough to not be rare? Even the 1e Monster Manual defined the rare frequency as occurring 11% of the time. How rare do you think rare should be? Instead of 1 in 10, maybe 1 in 100? 1 in 1000? How much depends on splitting hairs over the definition of rare?

No, something that is quite literally in every town you look in is not rare. It can be said to be uncommon at best. It's not my problem that the 1e MM has silly rarity percentages. As for what's rare... A home with a million dollar painting in it is rare. Billionaires are rare. My steak is rare.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Maybe because I wasn't talking about those demi-gods, you guys were. You guys can't bring them up, claim my point ignores something irrelevant that you brought up, and then ignore that I was only talking about powerful NPCs in present settings.

Elminster, Dalamar, Raistlin, Mordenkainen, and so on are all similar. If any one of those diminishes the PCs, they all do.

Except Raisltin (from my knowledge) would generally be an enemy of the party while Elminster would be an ally.

(No idea who Dalamar is and Mordenkainen I only know used to be an old PC in GH and was made an NPC)


Saying Raisltin as an NPC who is antagonistic would diminish the PCs is kind of dumb, because it is his job to act as a foil and an obstacle. The PCs would have to overcome him. Elminster helps the PCs and smooths their path, making it actually possible to overshadow and diminish them (whether or not he does is a separate matter and has a lot to do with how he ends up interacting with the party)

You can't just ignore the context and say all wizards are the same thing. They serve different roles.

 

[Maxperson]

I was not aware there was a template for being the chosen of a diety. I figured that was simply a storytelling title to explain why he was a wizard with extreme magic, because he is the chosen of the goddess of magic, who grants him all sorts of goodies because of it.

Nope. It was only a template. A bunch of stat bonuses, some spell immunities, and silverfire. There might be more to it, but no class levels that I can remember.

But we are discussing how mortals gain power/levels correct?

Yes.

If a god can grant power to a mortal and the writers represent that by writing them as a level 6 paladin that is the exact same as representing the washed up thief as a level 10 warlock because he pleased Baphomet by killing an eating his own children in a dark ritual that granted him power or representing a young girl as a level 15 druid after she becomes the Voice of the Trees in a different ritual.

Can you point to an official example of that happening? I'm not aware of any at all. I've never seen a write up that said that the NPC was level X, because his god gave him those levels.

Your point, as I understood it, is that no NPC can just be shown as having a lot of character levels if they have not gone off adventuring.

Or gaining experience through other means. Adventuring is not the only way to get it. It's just the most efficient way to get high level.

Gods can, and they can grant power to others that is represented that way, by your own admission. And if the gods can, any sufficiently powerful source can. An NPC might be shown as a level 20 artificer because they were flung to Mechanus and learned great secrets of the universe, but he never went through the adventuring process of levels 1-19, he just jumped straight to having a whole lot of power with little experience. Or anything else, and it makes sense within the context of the game world to do it this way.

Gods grant templates, spell like abilities, clerical spells when you gain levels, and so on. They do not hand out levels. As for your artificer, that would be a DM house rule/home brew. It's not how D&D works by the rules.

I would say within the context of “How do these NPCs interact with the PCs” the details matter quite a bit.

The argument is that their existence diminishes the PCs. Most of the NPCs of the Realms don't go around doing lots of things, despite the claims here.

Super Powerful Wizard who loves going around and telling people stuff about the world is going to interact quite differently than Super Powerful Wizard who kills anyone who knocks on his door.[

One is much more likely to interact with the PCs than the other. And the second is only going to come into play if the characters decide to go searching him out.

It takes more than interaction, though. The NPCs have to quite literally be ready to step in and take over from the PCs 24/7 to accomplish what people here are complaining about.

 

[Maxperson]

Except Raisltin (from my knowledge) would generally be an enemy of the party while Elminster would be an ally.

Neither one is going to be an ally. Raistlin is more likely to be an enemy than an ally, but could just as easily be a competitor.

(No idea who Dalamar is and Mordenkainen I only know used to be an old PC in GH and was made an NPC)

What they do doesn't matter. The argument is that the mere existence of high level characters take away from the PCs.

Saying Raisltin as an NPC who is antagonistic would diminish the PCs is kind of dumb, because it is his job to act as a foil and an obstacle. The PCs would have to overcome him.

Not unless they were epic level. I wouldn't do that to a group. More likely, he'd be a competitor after the same thing they are, or a quest giver to get something he wants, but doesn't have the time to get.

Elminster helps the PCs and smooths their path, making it actually possible to overshadow and diminish them (whether or not he does is a separate matter and has a lot to do with how he ends up interacting with the party)

And yet he'll probably never overshadow them at all. Giving them answers that they can get from any other Tom, Dick or Harry sage isn't going to overshadow squat. He'd overshadow them if he were trying to adventure to stop the same bad guys the PCs are after or something similar. Only he doesn't do that.

 

[MackMcMacky]

Maybe because I wasn't talking about those demi-gods, you guys were. You guys can't bring them up, claim my point ignores something irrelevant that you brought up, and then ignore that I was only talking about powerful NPCs in present settings.

Elminster, Dalamar, Raistlin, Mordenkainen, and so on are all similar. If any one of those diminishes the PCs, they all do.

I can do what I darn well like as long as I follow the forum rules.

Your post is muddled. Please explain to me how any of my points are undermined by Zagyg having an origin story as a demi-god.

P.S. One of the weaknesses in your approach to this discourse is your attempt to ignore context and details. You ignore the "hows" and fixate on labels. If you don't understand that how the behavior of Mordenkainen is different from Elminster, how the relationship of Mordenkainen to the gods is different from Elminster, how the gods are used differently in Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms, then there isn't much reason for us to have a discussion. I have tried to explain it and you tend to respond with oversimplifications and waive it off as if somehow you will convince me to stop using my critical thinking skills. You and a couple of others pretend you "got" me because you find relatively isolated examples of similarity between the two settings and ignore frequency and degree. It's rather tedious but I can sit here and watch James Bond and surf the net and check in once in a while and respond.

 

[Maxperson]

I can do what I darn well like as long as I follow the forum rules.

Your post is muddled. Please explain to me how any of my points are undermined by Zagyg having an origin story as a demi-god.

P.S. One of the weaknesses in your approach to this discourse is your attempt to ignore context and details. You ignore the "hows" and fixate on labels. If you don't understand that how the behavior of Mordenkainen is different from Elminster, how the relationship of Mordenkainen to the gods is different from Elminster, how the gods are used differently in Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realms, then there isn't much reason for us to have a discussion. I have tried to explain it and you tend to respond with oversimplifications and waive it off as if somehow you will convince me to stop using my critical thinking skills. You and a couple of others pretend you "got" me because you find relatively isolated examples of similarity between the two settings and ignore frequency and degree. It's rather tedious but I can sit here and watch James Bond and surf the net and check in once in a while and respond.

If we're going to discuss context, then let's discuss context. Elminster is a sage. He talks a lot and gives out advice. Modenkainen on the other hand is a very active adventurer. Which one is more likely to overshadow the PCs? It's not Mr. Talksabunch. Citing more examples of Mr. Talky Talky talking to PCs in adventures doesn't mean he is more likely to overshadow the PCs. The guy who is a mover and shaker of the world, actively engaging bad guys is more likely to overshadow the PCs.

You also have to consider that the DM determines what the NPCs actually do. A DM may have Mr. Talky Sage O'shadowdale become more active in the world, or he may have Mordenkainen retire to a cottage in the mountains and never be heard from again. Those modules you mentioned are ones I've never run, which means Elminster never actually did them in my Realms. They are only suggestions that some DMs may engage in.

Ultimately, whether NPCs overshadow PCs or not has nothing to do with how they are officially portrayed in the material. Nothing at all. It's 100% how the DM portrays them in the campaign.