But uhh, 4E sounds pretty lame from everything I've read about it. I think it's universally hated. 3 and 3.5 are pretty awesome it should have lasted longer.
That doesn't mean anything to me since I don't recognize that abomination known as 4th Ed.
What they did to the Forgotten Realms and their stupid Spellplague and the culling of gods is unforgivable. To show my displeasure I hit them where it hurts, the refusal to buy any more of their products. The only thing I will buy is 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition rule books and novels at a used bookstore. They won't get any of my money.
I share your sentiment 100%. Personally I see no significant improvement in the subsequent iterations that 'Needed' to happen over 2E/Advanced (I do enjoy NWN1-2 though) and have no interest (or time) to learn later editions.
But question for you. What are you going to do when BG3 is announced as being 4E or Next? (I say 'when' because we all know it is going to happen, more's the pity)
1e AD&D (before UA) is the greatest version of AD&D. 2e is fine, since it's largely compatible with 1e. 3e is tolerable (except if you're the DM and running anything above level 6). 4e is not D&D at all.
4e Forgotten Realms is best ... forgotten (pun intended). Just like 'New Coke'!
That doesn't mean anything to me since I don't recognize that abomination known as 4th Ed.
What they did to the Forgotten Realms and their stupid Spellplague and the culling of gods is unforgivable. To show my displeasure I hit them where it hurts, the refusal to buy any more of their products. The only thing I will buy is 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition rule books and novels at a used bookstore. They won't get any of my money.
I share your sentiment 100%. Personally I see no significant improvement in the subsequent iterations that 'Needed' to happen over 2E/Advanced (I do enjoy NWN1-2 though) and have no interest (or time) to learn later editions.
But question for you. What are you going to do when BG3 is announced as being 4E or Next? (I say 'when' because we all know it is going to happen, more's the pity)
LOL. There's your answer. They are going to say that, because of 4E and the spellplague, that your assention to Godhood was rescended and that you were sent back as a level 1 mortal. Your new quest is to reclaim your Bhaalspawn essence. (it's a joke.... I hope!!!)
I wouldn't count on this being a joke. Actually, such a framework could work, but the game would have to be very, VERY dark. Few companies can pull such a feat in a satisfying manner. Just imagine seeing your former comrades broken, insane, dead.
I would not play that. Frankly, I'd see it as even worse then the way things stand now; as was mentioned earlier, you can head-canon your way around the Spellplague, either ignoring it or assuming that CHARNAME and company were some of the "lucky" few who were just left powerless. This would canonize our beloved NPCs as dead or insane. It would be the proverbial last straw for me.
@PugPug - I think you have it backwards. They came up with some cataclysmic event so that they could make a rules change and sell more product. In other words, the rules change didn't cause the need for the event. the event was an excuse to make new rules.
Hell, the only endings that was not rewritten by 4e were Cernd's and Keldorn's, and that's only because they had the good sense to die before the Spellplague hit. So, no happy ending for CHARNAME and company, just more death, madness, and pain.
Wow. And people say Eberron and Pathfinder are "too dark."
I said that myself not too long ago in a different context. Granted, that was because I seem to be like the only Magic: the Gathering player whose favorite block isn't Ravnica, but still.
Few companies can pull such a feat in a satisfying manner. Just imagine seeing your former comrades broken, insane, dead.
You mean a typical Monday at the office after the weekend?
Cocain is a hell of a drug...
Edit: That plot sounds like the buggy pile of horror that was kotor2, so that makes me anxious. 3.5 was mainly rough on the DM. The power level of individual characters and parties varied significantly, and xp was based on challenge rating. There were many bad mechanics that varied from blatantly overpowered to painfully weak ( level adjustment was either crippling to the point of making your character irrelevant, or so low you could buy it out, which opened a new can of worms for power gamers. Most monster pcs were extremely weak, and often situationally useful only). Similarly, the sheer volume of potential customization meant it was too hard to make sure nothing was abuseable. So yeah, dming sucked, but 3rd wasn't bad.
Actually, divine casters were not affected by the Spellplague, so the clerics, rangers, and paladins only have to worry about the hellish post-apocalyptic landscape they now call home. Lucky them.
Not entirely sure how that makes any form of sense but it's probably for the best not too spend too much time thinking about any of the decisions made for 4e. Actually most of the characters from BG and BG2 would be dead by the time 4e takes off since there was a 100 year time jump from the onset of the Spellplague to when 4e realms started up. So, even if they did survive old age would have killed them off before, or shortly after, the new timeline begins.
As was stated earlier, once 4e came out I also never bought another WotC product and most likely never will. For anyone out there who is a fan of the 3rd and 3.5 editions of the game I'd suggest checking out the Pathfinder system. It's basically a revamped 3.5 and seems fairly well balanced (unlike a lot of late 3.5 additions) because they don't seem to be coming out with 18 new prestige classes each month and instead take a cue from 2e and release archetypes which are more akin to the kits of 2e.
4e played like some sort of MMORPG (rez sickness and all) and as such I don't hold out much hope for this "DnD Next" that is coming out soon. I'll stick with my Pathfinder rules and simply adapt all things FR to fit with that rule system.
If they change the plot, it becomes a different game. The same goes with rules. It's not 4th edition. Period.
As far as consistency with the spellplague is concerned, I partly agree with the initiator of this thread. It nags me that the end stories seem to be lacking a chapter, namely how they escaped the spellplague events. But I wouldn't worry too much about it. The game characters are not major figures in the realms, even if some of them are supposed to have become famous, and it's conceivable that they were lucky enough to escape the turmoil. So their end stories could still be the same.
My unwanted input? Better storyline than the awful "Europe lite", complete with very insulting eurocentricism. I also have a serious thing for low magic campaigns, post apocalypse stuff, and amaunator. Never enough lawful neutral gods! Also, I hated midnight/mystra. Cyric was not perfect, but he was a god with a Caligula complex, and thus interesting. Kel was better, but still a but of a ding. My favourite settings are probably ravenloft and dark sun... Fr was a close 3rd, maybe even a tie.
Frankly, if they just called it "rorgotten frelms" setting I'd have been interested. Most of the characters in the universe were inane caricatures at this point. I have boughts heaps of DnD books, but nothing of 4th. Seemed too mmo to me.
But uhh, 4E sounds pretty lame from everything I've read about it. I think it's universally hated. 3 and 3.5 are pretty awesome it should have lasted longer.
I DM a 4E campaign and find it in many ways superior and in some ways inferior to previous editions. Most of my players have only experienced a little bit of 3.5, and that's after they already played 4E, so some minutia like firing ranged attacks into melee giving penalties, charging being a full-round action, and grappling being much more complicated annoys the crap out of them more so than it does me. We play Pathfinder and 4E, didn't like Next/5E's playtest much. 4E is definitely not universally hated. I recommend giving 4E a shot if you can find a group.
I enjoyed 3Ed, I really did. 3.5Ed was pointless in my opinion, and I can't really seem to grasp or understand any logical reason why WotC would have destroyed the Realms the way they did in 4Ed.
I really can't. Do they get bored? Do they fire the previous developers then hire new ones who want to make their mark?
I get that the Realms has to change, but surely it could have been done in some other way?
I have boughts heaps of DnD books, but nothing of 4th. Seemed too mmo to me.
My sentiments exactly. I don't know if this is merely perception or if it is fact, but give me 2E or Advanced any day of the week. 3E was OK I guess.
I don't get the "MMO" thing. It's still a tabletop game. There's nothing more "MMO" about it than any other edition.
When people say "MMO" style they mean that game mechanics have been streamlined such that they will work with a hand controller, that the mechanics are dumbed down such that even the most casual gamer can understand them and the structure of game play isn't about rich story telling that advances, but more about instance encounters and squatting waiting for the next monster to spawn. I don't know if it is true of 4E, but that is mainly what I hear it is like when I read about other people's experiences. So I qualify my statements with "Or so I have heard".
When people say "MMO" style they mean that game mechanics have been streamlined such that they will work with a hand controller, that the mechanics are dumbed down such that even the most casual gamer can understand them and the structure of game play isn't about rich story telling that advances, but more about instance encounters and squatting waiting for the next monster to spawn. I don't know if it is true of 4E, but that is mainly what I hear it is like when I read about other people's experiences. So I qualify my statements with "Or so I have heard".
It's easier to understand and there aren't as many one-off rules that only apply if certain planets align. Simplicity is not necessarily a bad thing. But, in essence, it's still the same game. Stat blocks and dice rolls. Wizards, Fighters, magic items. It's all there. If people are failing to tell stories, then that's a failing in themselves or their group as a whole rather than the system. The last two sessions of my campaign were extremely roleplay-heavy, and we've had several sessions that consisted of nothing but roleplay and story.
At least it makes me feel comfortable and fuzzy knowing that if Irenicus succeeded in his plan, he would have died a couple of decades later anyway
I think his plan was to become a god, so he would've been safe from the effects. Possibly even used the Spellplague to take his revenge on the other gods as well.
The Spellplague caused the death of some gods (Azuth for example), and forced the rest of the gods to unite with their other aspects in order to survive (Talos + Gruumsh, Sune + this elven godess, and many more).
In other words, the FR cosmology was to complex for this childish and idiotic edtion of the game, so they decided to remove half the gods. Not to mantion that they removed Mulhorand.. what a joke...
That doesn't But question for you. What are you going to do when BG3 is announced as being 4E or Next? (I say 'when' because we all know it is going to happen, more's the pity)
WoTC alreay said that Next will not expand the FR timeline any farther. They will allow players to chose the timeline themselves. Which means that they will give rules for old and new important NPCs, cities, and events. So if you don't like the 4e changes (like me) then you can just play before it at any point in time you like. They will most likely even add ancient times like the Netheril empire and the crown wars.
At least it makes me feel comfortable and fuzzy knowing that if Irenicus succeeded in his plan, he would have died a couple of decades later anyway
I think his plan was to become a god, so he would've been safe from the effects. Possibly even used the Spellplague to take his revenge on the other gods as well.
The Spellplague caused the death of some gods (Azuth for example), and forced the rest of the gods to unite with their other aspects in order to survive (Talos + Gruumsh, Sune + this elven godess, and many more).
In other words, the FR cosmology was to complex for this childish and idiotic edtion of the game, so they decided to remove half the gods. Not to mantion that they removed Mulhorand.. what a joke...
Interesting point on the Faerun pantheon... The gods were pretty much borrowed from real world polytheistic faiths (erm, lathandar is supposed to be jesusish, amaunator is Yahweh, not polytheistic), and they did often reuse a given god... Talos and gruumsh are both versions of Odin. The whole Orc pantheon is Viking inspired btw, baghtru being the more accurate idiot Thor of myths. Similarly, sune and the elven love goddess are both Aphrodite versions.
The more interesting ones are gods goddess' from more obscure mythologies, like Loviatar. Nifty! Bhaal though is actually dissimilar to Baal... But the name was reused due to judeochristian tradition of Baal being evil. Most people have little trouble noticing the more heavy handed Mulhorandi and Untheric pantheons, but the consolidations are not really baseless. Talos and gruumsh in particular are basically the same being anyways... Bah!
This btw is another reason I liked cyric. And Helm. *grumble*
Comments
But uhh, 4E sounds pretty lame from everything I've read about it. I think it's universally hated. 3 and 3.5 are pretty awesome it should have lasted longer.
But question for you. What are you going to do when BG3 is announced as being 4E or Next? (I say 'when' because we all know it is going to happen, more's the pity)
4e Forgotten Realms is best ... forgotten (pun intended). Just like 'New Coke'!
Edit: That plot sounds like the buggy pile of horror that was kotor2, so that makes me anxious. 3.5 was mainly rough on the DM. The power level of individual characters and parties varied significantly, and xp was based on challenge rating. There were many bad mechanics that varied from blatantly overpowered to painfully weak ( level adjustment was either crippling to the point of making your character irrelevant, or so low you could buy it out, which opened a new can of worms for power gamers. Most monster pcs were extremely weak, and often situationally useful only). Similarly, the sheer volume of potential customization meant it was too hard to make sure nothing was abuseable. So yeah, dming sucked, but 3rd wasn't bad.
As was stated earlier, once 4e came out I also never bought another WotC product and most likely never will. For anyone out there who is a fan of the 3rd and 3.5 editions of the game I'd suggest checking out the Pathfinder system. It's basically a revamped 3.5 and seems fairly well balanced (unlike a lot of late 3.5 additions) because they don't seem to be coming out with 18 new prestige classes each month and instead take a cue from 2e and release archetypes which are more akin to the kits of 2e.
4e played like some sort of MMORPG (rez sickness and all) and as such I don't hold out much hope for this "DnD Next" that is coming out soon. I'll stick with my Pathfinder rules and simply adapt all things FR to fit with that rule system.
As far as consistency with the spellplague is concerned, I partly agree with the initiator of this thread. It nags me that the end stories seem to be lacking a chapter, namely how they escaped the spellplague events. But I wouldn't worry too much about it. The game characters are not major figures in the realms, even if some of them are supposed to have become famous, and it's conceivable that they were lucky enough to escape the turmoil. So their end stories could still be the same.
Frankly, if they just called it "rorgotten frelms" setting I'd have been interested. Most of the characters in the universe were inane caricatures at this point. I have boughts heaps of DnD books, but nothing of 4th. Seemed too mmo to me.
I really can't. Do they get bored? Do they fire the previous developers then hire new ones who want to make their mark?
I get that the Realms has to change, but surely it could have been done in some other way?
I simply can't understand it.
In other words, the FR cosmology was to complex for this childish and idiotic edtion of the game, so they decided to remove half the gods. Not to mantion that they removed Mulhorand.. what a joke...
The more interesting ones are gods goddess' from more obscure mythologies, like Loviatar. Nifty! Bhaal though is actually dissimilar to Baal... But the name was reused due to judeochristian tradition of Baal being evil. Most people have little trouble noticing the more heavy handed Mulhorandi and Untheric pantheons, but the consolidations are not really baseless. Talos and gruumsh in particular are basically the same being anyways... Bah!
This btw is another reason I liked cyric. And Helm. *grumble*