| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Gustaveren |
Posted - 15 Oct 2012 : 12:45:59
The more I think upon it, the less interesting do it sound with 5e FR
Personally, do I want realms there is not going to have the spellplague and the timejump, that is, it does not matter what WOTC do with the 5e Realms.
They will not be the realms to me. I have kind of concluded, that my existing roleplaying collection is good enough for my needs and that I do not want to read novels or play computer games in the 4e or 5e timeframe since I want to avoid being reminded about the time jump and spell plague.
I understand that WOTC needs to keep the timejump and spellplague in order to avoid kicking out their new paying customer base and I am fine with that.
It does not make sense to upset their new customers when it seems impossible to convince old customers like me to buy the new products.
I do not want any of the "support for all ages source books" since I do not want to read in any sourcebook there will remind me about the spellplague and the timejump.
It is possible other persons have a different point of view, but new FR sourcebooks no longer contain the magical attraction as they used to do prior to the spellplague and timejump.
I used to wish to know what would happen of exciting stuff to my beloved realms, now it is dreading to hear what new disasters there occur.
The time jump are an absolute no no, it is not just a question of getting back the feeling "this is the realms", it is also the nostalgia feeling for old campaigns and time spend with friends.
It simply does not work when you jump a 100 years into the future.
I know I can not get what I would need in order for the 5e FR products to have any interest for me and I am fine with that.
I do believe, that WOTC is wasting their time and money on a fools crusade trying to win back old customers |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 27 Oct 2012 : 05:25:22
quote:
Originally posted by Zireael
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I'd like to see books like the Menzo one on elven civilizations like Myth Drannor and Evereska.
100% behind you on the Myth Drannor supplement, Although I would prefer a City of Splendors box set treatment(including an amazing city map similar to the one in there).
Add me to the list :D
Woot! Two people behind me  |
| Razz |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 16:56:09
That would be another complaint of mine for this book. The large font, extra white space and page count. If they want the Realms from before, I need to see them do what 2e did with FR |
| Zireael |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 15:02:53
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I'd like to see books like the Menzo one on elven civilizations like Myth Drannor and Evereska.
100% behind you on the Myth Drannor supplement, Although I would prefer a City of Splendors box set treatment(including an amazing city map similar to the one in there).
Add me to the list :D |
| Tarlyn |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 11:11:49
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
I'd like to see books like the Menzo one on elven civilizations like Myth Drannor and Evereska.
100% behind you on the Myth Drannor supplement, Although I would prefer a City of Splendors box set treatment(including an amazing city map similar to the one in there). |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 09:43:34
Exactly this. :) |
| Zireael |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 09:32:48
Posted on Wizards' forums. I want lower price for the current wordcount or an increased wordcount. |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 04:15:52
I think a Elminster's Realms style book on the dwarves of the Far Hills or Earthfast would rock, maybe Citadel Adbar etc. I'd be game for a Great Rift or Shanatar product too, I just never seem to run or play in games that are that far south. Course, a person can always plunder ideas and I'll take any dwarven loving I can get! ;) |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 04:02:04
I'd like to see books like the Menzo one on elven civilizations like Myth Drannor and Evereska. |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 26 Oct 2012 : 00:49:09
quote:
Originally posted by Eilserus
Definitely agree, finding ways to lower costs to increase page count should be a priority. Books should be a minimum of at least 160 pages and preferably 200. Even higher is better of course.
The problem is that the new books have low page counts with low word counts per page, and prices as though they still had a decent amount of content in the books.
The last thing I want is for them to use bigger fonts or more whitespace to cut costs while giving bigger pagecounts. The wordcount is already too low for the price.
They've cut costs too much, and it shows. |
| Razz |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 23:43:44
WotC stated they were releasing the books of older editions. Which means we will all have access to regional info from before. What we need now is UPDATED info on some regions, regions not covered I detail before to be covered in 5e, and regions with little info to be given more info. This includes BEYOND FAERUN material, which is something I hope comes soon and in great chunks...and often. |
| Eilserus |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 23:03:34
Definitely agree, finding ways to lower costs to increase page count should be a priority. Books should be a minimum of at least 160 pages and preferably 200. Even higher is better of course. I could be completely wrong, but I'd guess the D&D division gets X amount of dollars in their budget for the year and that has to be divided out between what products they are going to create and thus dictates page count of what we see. In order to get a higher budget, their stuff has to sell, which is why everyone and their gramma outta buy the Menzo and Elminster's Realms books to show their support of the direction the company is taking with the Realms.
Hopefully we'll soon see what next years product plans on for the Realms, because I'm eager to buy more, especially a volume 2 of Elminster's Realms. I'm seriously hoping we see director's cuts or added material to alot of the old 2E products. I think if they tacked on some extra lore and page count to those classics they'd sell like hotcakes. |
| althen artren |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 22:17:13
My modest opinion says that they should go back to the formula of low coast soft cover
book like the regional book of 1st addition. Worked back then. |
| Gustaveren |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 22:01:12
quote:
Originally posted by Sylrae
I also wouldn't have minded getting some real details on some other drow cities, perhaps a page or two on each:
Sshamath, Ched Nasad, Chaulssin, Eryndlyn, Maerimydra, Sschindylryn.
without having read the book do it sound as if it would have been more interesting, that is, increased chance i would buy it if it contained lore about other drow cities. I have enough lore about Menzo in old products, but not enought lore about some of the other drow cities. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 15:23:10
I think your post is excellent, Sylrae! Well done. 
Cheers |
| Tarlyn |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 11:27:38
Best of Luck not getting flamed. Err.... I meant the WotC forums, what a lovely place to have productive discussions. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 11:17:49
quote:
Originally posted by Sylrae
So I put up my feedback here. I tried to keep it positive (and I think I succeeded).
Feel free to read it, guys. It's relevant to the thread, and I wouldn't mind discussing it here with you.
If any of you with the right contacts could pass the link along to someone important who could find that feedback to be useful, that would be fantastic.
I might sweep the dust off my Wizards account just to agree with you, Sylrae... |
| Gustaveren |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 10:17:08
quote:
Originally posted by Sylrae
As for relaying my feedback to them on the community forums, that's not a bad idea. I might still have an account there.
I no longer have a forum account at the WOTC sites, I originally had one, since I used to participate in discussions in the FR geography sub forum, but it seems, my forum account expired a long time ago. Well, I have not written anything on the WOTC forums since 4e came out |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 03:46:02
So I put up my feedback here. I tried to keep it positive (and I think I succeeded).
Feel free to read it, guys. It's relevant to the thread, and I wouldn't mind discussing it here with you.
If any of you with the right contacts could pass the link along to someone important who could find that feedback to be useful, that would be fantastic. |
| Gustaveren |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 02:10:31
Well, I like to make adventures were I have to make research in a number of sourcebooks, some of them regional, some of them about gods, some of them about ancient history and so forth. I guess, in a 5e FR campaign can you still benefit from the old history and god sourcebooks, but it will be a setting initially low on regional sourcebooks unless they release a number of them in the first year. I guess, 8 or 10 is probably the minimum. You need to quickly get to a point were
1) People feel they have some regional sourcebooks
2) They see what has already been released and assume, there will probably come more sourcebooks next year
Some types of sourcebooks (volo guides) will definately be attractive for old time fans
A volo guide probably have the same value of 5 other types of sourcebooks when we are talking about the feeling of having good sourcebook coverage
quote:
Originally posted by Sylrae
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
What kind of time frame are you talking for this detail? Does it have to be the first year? If WotC actually produced a quality FR article each month on a less popular area of Realms and a single FR source book on a more marketable area of Realms a year, would that be enough?
If the 2e and 3e stuff is still relevant (because the countries are very close to what they were like in 2007 or so), then this sort of release schedule would be sufficient.
If its still vastly different due to the timejump - and the content I already have doesn't do me much good when running a FR game, that sort of schedule would be nowhere near frequent enough.
I'm thinking a good speed would be like a Golarion-like release schedule. A 96-page softcover book each month on something setting related, in addition to modules and adventures, and a hardcover maybe every 3 or 4 months.
The modules can include 16 pages of unique monsters, and 16 page articles. Like articles on a deity, or a town, or a faction.
|
| Sylrae |
Posted - 25 Oct 2012 : 00:44:32
For the record, I don't consider the designers of 4e to be incompetent. I think they made some terrible business decisions that served to alienate and offend their customers. They didn't listen to customer feedback, and ended support for the sort of game their customers wanted, and started producing a drastically different sort of game in its place, dropping much of the flavor, under the same name. They discontinued PDF sales (would have been fine) and then told DTRPG that the customers who already bought them should no longer have access to them (Serves to create ill-will toward wizbro).
I have picked up and played 4e, and I've sat down and read through and analyzed the game mechanics. It's a very elegantly designed game, and it does a very elegant job of doing what it does. The problem is I would argue that what it does is not D&D. It plays like Disgaea: Hour of Darkness, and includes some of the D&D trappings, but has a much different sort of atmosphere. I liked Disgaea: Hour of Darkness. But it's not a substitute for D&D. It's a very different game.
If they had used the 4e rules as a new edition to the D&D Minis or Chainmail game, and continued to release something more akin to D&D 1, 2, or 3, and had marketed 4e as a TBTS(Turn Based Tabletop Strategy Game) which you can play in Addition to D&D, they would not have offended so many people.
As for the 4e Realms, they made changes to please non-customers at the expense of customers, and tried to shoehorn the flavor changes to their core game into the Realms, even when they didn't fit.
The game they designed is well designed. It's just not the game we wanted, (Like giving someone Halo instead when they wanted Skyrim) and they didn't listen to the people telling them that.
As for relaying my feedback to them on the community forums, that's not a bad idea. I might still have an account there. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 23:35:49
Sylrae, if you sincerely want to convey your input to WotC (which I think you should, because this is great feedback), I suggest you post this on the WotC community forums.
In revising, I'd avoid any confrontational phrases (I know you dislike 4e, but don't suggest the designers were incompetent, etc), as they make WotC less likely to hear you and it's irrelevant to the point you're making anyway. Keep it positive, and you're more likely to get the response you want.
Cheers |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 21:22:15
quote:
Originally posted by Erik Scott de Bie
Ed is in the wheelhouse.
I absolutely believe it is important to keep talking about how you want Ed to steer the setting, though, because we don't want WotC getting to a point where they think things are "fixed" and no longer need to consult Ed as heavily. He is a guiding star on the Realms and they would be crazy not to use him, and the design team is specifically avoiding being crazy this time around.
Cheers
Which, I think all of us would admit, makes them infinitely better than the last team they assigned to the realms.
The content is starting to look much better, and the setting is looking like it's going in a hopeful direction. That's why there are so many more curious and hopeful posts on candlekeep than there were the past 4 years.
Menzoberranzan and Elminster's Realms have shown us that the new team can competently design the realms if they try. (Yes I know many of the 4e authors are still around, and many were around before 4e as well - but if the people giving them orders are as far out of touch as they were in 4e, they can only do so much to make it palatable).
The new team has instilled a sortof curiosity into a bunch of people who feel personally slighted by the last team. I would say we're cautiously optimistic about 5e Realms. Hoping that the new team can go far enough to fix the setting that the last team broke, and go beyond and make good products as well. The bar is set pretty high, and the stakes as well. If they don't meet the bar, they won't get their old consumers back.
But it looks like the quality is now less of a concern for the consumers.
I'm personally still concerned about the publishing issue. If things continue in the 4e publishing style (low pagecount, high whitespace, big font, (low wordcount), high price, no PDFs), even if the content is great, I won't shell out for all the books, only the ones on topics of special interest to me, and the other ones will be added to my "pick it up if I see it for a good price" list. - Which puts it behind the "2e and 3e books I want that I didn't get when in print - find these on eBay" list. And obviously, they don't profit from that list since I'm having to buy used.
I *Want* to want to buy them all. But I have that part of my brain that tells me "This product is overpriced! The pagecount is being inflated to try to trick you into thinking its a good amount of content!" At which point I stop seeing things from the perspective of "Ooh! Well written FR content! Buy it all!" and start thinking "Woah now, that's crazy expensive. Do you *REALLY* need that particular book? Look at what it's about and skim it. Is it one of your favorite topics in the Realms? Is it important to your current campaign? If not, you probably don't want it for that price. Check Amazon, or Ebay, or the 'used' shelf downtown, and wait for it there for 50% cover price." As a result, instead of buying most or all of the products they put out in a year, I'm likely to buy 1-3 products they put out in a year.
I acknowledge that the new team has a better direction, and therefore I'm more likely to want the books, but I do worry that there simply won't be enough content to justify the pricetag, and then they will cut the product line short because they're not making the sales they want.
And I should note: it's not like I'm saying "I will buy no more than $150 in forgotten realms content in a year." It's not a price issue. It's a price/content issue. If the writing is good, the setting isn't a bland and uninteresting mockery of what came before it, and the amount of content in a book for the price is good, I have no problems dropping $500, or even $1000 a year into getting the content they put out. If I'm having the reaction mentioned above, I will likely spend no more than $150 a year. But that's not a matter of budget, or a matter of 'is this content capable of profit', it's a matter of 'cutting corners and production costs so much that we're losing our profits'. I suppose $150 a year is more than the $60 or so they've gotten from me in the past 4 years, but its still nothing compared to the $1700 or so that I have in 3e products ($900 or so being FR content), and the $400 or $500 I have in 2e FR products (which they could have gotten, and more, if they were still making them available and I didn't have to hunt them down on eBay), and the $200 in PDFs I bought on DTRPG before WotC pulled them all, and (aggravating me) cut access to purchased pdfs to the customers who already paid for them. And most of the 3e stuff I have, I bought back in highschool - when I had much less of a disposable income.
If I could send this to the people who make those decisionss, and ensure that they saw it, I would. Perhaps they would reevaluate their production system. I'm sure I'm not the only person with a disposable income who feels this way. |
| Erik Scott de Bie |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 16:02:46
For clarity's sake:
Let there be no mistake: Ed has considerable influence over the Realms going forward. He is not now, nor has he ever been, nor will he probably ever be an employee of TSR/WotC, so he doesn't have *creative control* over their IP, but they are consulting heavily with him. He currently has an unprecedented consulting contract on the setting, where they route most things through him.
So yes, Ed is in the wheelhouse.
I absolutely believe it is important to keep talking about how you want Ed to steer the setting, though, because we don't want WotC getting to a point where they think things are "fixed" and no longer need to consult Ed as heavily. He is a guiding star on the Realms and they would be crazy not to use him, and the design team is specifically avoiding being crazy this time around.
Cheers |
| deserk |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 12:39:51
To be honest, I am still very bitter about what happened to FR in 4E. To me, it felt they purposely neglected their original fans in favour of WoW/MMO crowds. Turned this setting from a huge, rich and colourful one to a smaller, generic and bland one. All for maximum $$$.
I'm still willing to give 5E a look. But I'm doubtful it'll be enough to heal this setting completely.
I really do hope though, that Ed Greenwood will have strong influence over the direction of FR in 5E. |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 04:44:51
quote:
Originally posted by Tarlyn
What kind of time frame are you talking for this detail? Does it have to be the first year? If WotC actually produced a quality FR article each month on a less popular area of Realms and a single FR source book on a more marketable area of Realms a year, would that be enough?
If the 2e and 3e stuff is still relevant (because the countries are very close to what they were like in 2007 or so), then this sort of release schedule would be sufficient.
If its still vastly different due to the timejump - and the content I already have doesn't do me much good when running a FR game, that sort of schedule would be nowhere near frequent enough.
I'm thinking a good speed would be like a Golarion-like release schedule. A 96-page softcover book each month on something setting related, in addition to modules and adventures, and a hardcover maybe every 3 or 4 months.
The modules can include 16 pages of unique monsters, and 16 page articles. Like articles on a deity, or a town, or a faction. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 04:44:06
You know, a LOT of dungeons are old Dwarven delves. It wouldn't be too hard to create a new sourcebook that combines the two - a book of FR dungeon sites, and the dwarven lore to link them all.
Ed being the editor-in-chief on that one, of course, but different folks handling different 'dungeons'.
GK gets the Mines of Tethyamar.  |
| Tarlyn |
Posted - 24 Oct 2012 : 03:18:12
quote:
If I'm going to go forward with FR, I will want the level of relevant amount of details in the setting to quickly catch up to the collection of 1e, 2e, and 3e books which were relevant in 2005.
A slow release schedule or an brief summary like much of 3e and 4e got isn't enough detail, when the 1e and 2e material is so far out of date.
It took 1e and 2e a long time to develop that detail and release strategies around setting specific material was very different(and unprofitable).
quote:
I want more information than a couple paragraphs about major cities and countries.
The Forgotten Realms coverage in 4e was abysmal in terms of quantity. If I had liked it in the setting guide and player's guide, I would have been quite sore about the lack of further support and detailing.
3e had less setting coverage than I would have liked;
What kind of time frame are you talking for this detail? Does it have to be the first year? If WotC actually produced a quality FR article each month on a less popular area of Realms and a single FR source book on a more marketable area of Realms a year, would that be enough? |
| Sylrae |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 23:21:53
quote:
Originally posted by Gustaveren
One of the points there attracted me to the original realms were the huge amount of sourcebooks, well I had to buy them all, even though it took some time, but the point is, if WOTC want my money, do they have to make a release schedule were they fast get to good sourcebook coverage with lore about the realms.
Basically this.
The biggest reason to play in Forgotten Realms is that there are mountains of detail in the setting, compared to everything else (Golarion is starting to catch up). It was the the setting that had enough information to fill a detailed Encyclopedia. If I wanted information, I could look it up, and it was detailed and rich, and the setting felt alive, and lived in.
I want more information than a couple paragraphs about major cities and countries.
The Forgotten Realms coverage in 4e was abysmal in terms of quantity. If I had liked it in the setting guide and player's guide, I would have been quite sore about the lack of further support and detailing.
3e had less setting coverage than I would have liked; but I could supplement it with purchases of 2e books that were still relevant. About 50% of the books I bought during 3e for FR were 2e books, like Volo Guides, and some of the boxed sets (Menzoberranzan, Ruins of Myth Drannor, etc). If I'm going to go forward with FR, I will want the level of relevant amount of details in the setting to quickly catch up to the collection of 1e, 2e, and 3e books which were relevant in 2005.
A slow release schedule or an brief summary like much of 3e and 4e got isn't enough detail, when the 1e and 2e material is so far out of date. |
| Gustaveren |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 13:31:35
quote:
Originally posted by CorellonsDevout
Personally, if I were to buy such sourcbooks, I'd want it to be like the other FRCG: info on every region/god/race, etc, but more detailed than 4e. Regional books are a good idea, but it'd also mean you'd have to spend more money to find out about one region.
One of the points there attracted me to the original realms were the huge amount of sourcebooks, well I had to buy them all, even though it took some time, but the point is, if WOTC want my money, do they have to make a release schedule were they fast get to good sourcebook coverage with lore about the realms |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 23 Oct 2012 : 05:25:12
If Razz gets his wish, then I want mine to come true next: an equally huge gazeteer covering dungeons and ruins of the Realms (most of them new locations).
The way I see it, if Ed can get me hooked* on a magic item like The Book of Dragons, listed in Elminster's Forgotten Realms, even though there's no game mechanics attached, then I'm sure he can do the same with a variety of dungeon and ruin locations.
*By "hooked" I mean wondering about the book's exact powers, where it might be located, how I might introduce it in my campaign... |
|
|
