So, how much do you think it will change?

My bet: Hardly at all.  Certainly nowhere near as radically as FR had to change.

Because Eberron was, essentially, already a "4e" world, a pre-fab piece of crap that was essentially an excuse for running "4ncounters".   Since FR wasn't "optimized" because it did stuff like have places that weren't for 4ncounters, places where roleplaying might happen but you don't have the chance to bring out the battlemat and D&D minis (TM, Sold Separately), it needed to be butchered in order to make it 4e-compatible.

Eberron, already being full of suck, a product of the worst corporate-board-member thinking of the 3.x era, will not have that problem.  It will require no extra injection of suck.

RPGPundit

in before circle jerk

Quote from: RPGPundit;291372So, how much do you think it will change?

My bet: Hardly at all.  Certainly nowhere near as radically as FR had to change.

Because Eberron was, essentially, already a "4e" world, a pre-fab piece of crap that was essentially an excuse for running "4ncounters".   Since FR wasn't "optimized" because it did stuff like have places that weren't for 4ncounters, places where roleplaying might happen but you don't have the chance to bring out the battlemat and D&D minis (TM, Sold Separately), it needed to be butchered in order to make it 4e-compatible.

Eberron, already being full of suck, a product of the worst corporate-board-member thinking of the 3.x era, will not have that problem.  It will require no extra injection of suck.

RPGPundit

The problem with Forgotten Realms, was there was too much backstory and powerful NPCs and they had to bring it down to Grey-box levels so that people could actually play there again. By 3E it had become a setting for book collectors so that they could marvel over Sean K Reynolds prose. They made a conscious attempt at De-fluffifying them during the 3E era, and it is now the most popular campaign that organized play has ever run, both in numbers of played events and raw number of players.

A catclysm like the Spellplague wasn't out of order because anyone who follows the history of the realms knows there have been a series of them (the Time of Troubles, etc). The reset was just the thing to increase people actually playing rather than just collecting the books.

Having talked to Ari on this topic Pundit's general thrust, stripped of the vitriol, is correct.  There isn't going to be a time line advancement, the upgrade to the 4e cosmology will boil down to grouping planes for ease of monster transfer, and no big cataclysm.  
I love Pundy's description of Eberron, though.  I mean, why would you even bother RPing in Eberron, it's not like the entire setting is an homage to a genre of literature/film or anything.  Oh wait.
I've done plenty of RPing in Eberron, and ran an Eberron campaign to wrap up my love affair with 3e, and a good time was had by all.  Which is, as always, the best revenge.

Here's the article that Sean wrote about it, right when the FR took a new direction, back in.. 2002.

http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/gaming/forgottenrumsstory.html

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;291374The problem with Forgotten Realms, was there was too much backstory and powerful NPCs and they had to bring it down to Grey-box levels so that people could actually play there again.  

I always call shenanigans when i see that. I always find it amusing when people think that they should be spoon-fed exactly how they should play a setting. The really sad thing is that 4e has spelt it out and people have actually been going, "oh, yeah! I can do what i like!" As if it's some kind of revelation.

I ran a FR campaign 3 years ago set in the Silver Marches. PCs never ran into anybody or any back story but I was not trying to keep it canonically or even true to the D&D rules. The Norse pantheon invaded, a single PC fought off an avatar of Tempus, etc. If I ran a FR game, I would definitely use FH instead.

But isn't it a Chekov's gun situation?  Why use all of those pages in the 3e FR book going over the big setting characters in such lascivious detail if the designers thought they would only rarely show up?  Doesn't what you actually put into the book have any effect on the setting?

I agree and disagree with Pundit.

I really liked Eberron with third ed, and I too think it will not change as radically as FR did. That, I do agree with.

Saying that Eberron was essentially a "piece of crap/excuse of a world to stage 4ncounters", however... I can't agree with that. The background is extensive and really original, in some areas. I particularly like the treatment of dragons and elves in that setting, the whole technomagic spin going on there, the background about the War, et cetera. It's a fine setting with 3rd ed, though I'd never think of running it with pre-2nd edition versions of the game.

FR however... is Grey box all the way at my game table, baby.

No, nothing you put in a book really has an effect on the setting. It's the rules, the PCs, and the PC's interaction with the world through the rules that has any actual effect on the setting. Unless said book changes the rules that the PCs use, it's mouthbreating and/or DM fodder. REALLY! What is brought into the gameworld is pretty much up to the DM and the players. The designers are all ultimately actual play's bitch.

And to keep on topic, I like Eberron but I would use something other than D&D.

What I thought was really really cool about FR back then was the tons and tons of aberrations and weirdo monsters. FR is like the iconic beholder/mindflayer setting. The aboleths.. and I love the sort of primitive empires like the Yuan-ti one and Chult, and the Mulhorand quasi-egyptian one (Imaskar?) I love genasi and mercenaries like the zhentarim.

What I didn't think was cool was having to know all about spellfire, which archmage controlled what area, the weave, the alternate planar setup, and the overly detailed lingo they wanted you to use.  It sort of mounted up, even if you tried to play down to a local area, like "Ok, this campaign will be set in the Moonshaes only.." you would still run across who the ruler of the region or  his 5 heroic sons were before too long, because if you didn't use that stuff it wasn't "real forgotten realms", and there was a lot of stupid arguiing about canon.

Eberron was designed with foreknowledge of this problem in mind. I think some of the rulers of the places are detailed, but the whole thing is a lot less set in stone and more focused on PCs being the heroes instead of just some random walk-on in the area. In XE for example, we would often have adventures where the players would have to save the city of Stormreach- and there was one where the PCs were called on to help avert a war between Karrnath and Breland.

...And the characters weren't much higher than 7th level or so.  

In LFR now, they still have a lot of the NPCS, but the player characters are the heroes. I think there's one adventure (Gorge of Gauros) that pits them directly against Szass Tam, and in last years Gen Con special, they run afoul of Fzoul Chembryl's plot. Much of the "destroyed realms" (the death of Mystra, for example) is functionally still around, it's just in ruins. For example, last night, my character was exploring a ruined temple of Mystra and set off a series of magical wards that predated the spell plague and it ended up spell-scarring her. She also discovered several statues dedicated to the 4 lost Yuir gods one time, when they ended up on an adventure that took them into Aglarond.

I bought some of the early FR campaign setting books, but as time went on the more they brought out the less I liked it.  It went from something I thought was kinda cool to something I really didn't like at all. I agree that it became a much better setting for novelists and fans of canon than it was as a gaming resource.

I think the points of light concept for 4e is a good approach - better than the over developed late 3e FR - although for home campaigns I'm wondering if people are using FR or making up their own game worlds?  (For the RPGA they obviously need a standardized world that D&D fans are familiar with, and next to Greyhawk or Krynn that would definitely be the Realms)

Personally I think I'd get into the new races, mechanics and tone of 4e more if it were tied to an original and more interesting and campaign world (eg. even someone's homebrew) rather than layered overtop of FR.

Edit:  Serious question for people playing 4e -- do you use FR exclusively or your own campaign world?

Quote from: DeadUematsu;291395No, nothing you put in a book really has an effect on the setting. It's the rules, the PCs, and the PC's interaction with the world through the rules that has any actual effect on the setting. Unless said book changes the rules that the PCs use, it's mouthbreating and/or DM fodder. REALLY! What is brought into the gameworld is pretty much up to the DM and the players. The designers are all ultimately actual play's bitch.

And to keep on topic, I like Eberron but I would use something other than D&D.

I agree that the designer's are play's bitch, but you're still getting something out of the book, or you wouldn't buy it. Eberron has a noir feel because of words written in the book and transmitted to the GM.  If we reduce a setting to only the things you use in your game, we really have nothing to talk about.  My Eberron could be so wildly different from your that there would be no association.  But that's unlikely, because the book transmit themes and ideas, since that's what books do.  The fact that there were a whole bunch of high level guys in the FR book certainly had an effect on  lots of peoples' games, even if it didn't effect yours.

Quote from: Stuart;291401I bought some of the early FR campaign setting books, but as time went on the more they brought out the less I liked it.  It went from something I thought was kinda cool to something I really didn't like at all. I agree that it became a much better setting for novelists and fans of canon than it was as a gaming resource.

I think the points of light concept for 4e is a good approach - better than the over developed late 3e FR - although for home campaigns I'm wondering if people are using FR or making up their own game worlds?  (For the RPGA they obviously need a standardized world that D&D fans are familiar with, and next to Greyhawk or Krynn that would definitely be the Realms)

Personally I think I'd get into the new races, mechanics and tone of 4e more if it were tied to an original and more interesting and campaign world (eg. even someone's homebrew) rather than layered overtop of FR.

Edit:  Serious question for people playing 4e -- do you use FR exclusively or your own campaign world?

Excuse my public masturbation:

http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=11468

Quote from: Stuart;291401Edit:  Serious question for people playing 4e -- do you use FR exclusively or your own campaign world?

I use my own campaign world for my home campaign. I think most people use their own campaign worlds.

Living Realms is set in the Forgotten Realms.

The question itself makes me think you might be confused about what the living campaign actually is.