RPG Soapbox

Every time I tried to incorporate Psionics it screwed my game. Maybe it's overpowered. Maybe it just doesn't play well with others. The vast majority of players and DMs I have talked with had the same experience.

In 3.0/5 at any level past 15th a Wizard will wipe the floor with any other class or class combination. There's no 'game balance' in D anything except maybe 4e (which is NOT D and D, no matter what the morons at WotC call it).

When 3.0 first came out me and a couple of friends settled in for a few days to test the above claim and it was proven. When 3.5 came out we reassessed it, and it was still true.

Hell, surf the web. There's plenty of scientific and nonscientific assessments of class value and levels.

Next...

Why Forgotten Realms? As a long time D and D player (my first D and D purchase was the red Basic boxed set- the 1983 edition for you youngsters. I was 9 years old!) and once avid AD&D player, I hate Forgotten Realms. The sig characters were all so grotesquely overpowered (Drizzt anyone? "Oh, I rolled 4 over my THAC0... you're dead. No save, nothing. Just dead.") and the rules so convoluted and conflicting that it became unplaylable. Greyhawk, on the other hand (3.0/5's setting) is clean, reasonable, and fun.

If someone set a campaign in Greyhawk I'd be more inclined to play. I'd do Dark Sun too. Or Spelljammer. (*waits for the shitstorm*) Or even Planescape.

Forgotten Realms is consistently one of the most popular D&D campaign settings. Rich setting with RA Salvatore writing novels and HUGE support from both TSR and then WotC? It makes sense.

The Realms is awesome. Frankly I support WoTC's decision to cut down the number of settings. Greyhawk, FR, and Eberron. To be honest I haven't done much in Greyhawk but Realms and Eberron are both pretty awesome.

Forgotten Realms suck because it is constantly being used. It is like the two dollar whore that has been used way too much.

I be honest though. If 4e had a different name other than DnD would people stop complaining about it?

Eh. With the exception of the Warforged Eberron is bland. Speaking on a literary level, RA Salvatore is a fucking hack. His characters are monodimensional and uninspired, his storylines are derivative, and his writing style is boring.

Greyhawk is flat out awesome. Planscape was odd, quirky, and engaging. Spelljammer was novel and interesting.

They kept the fan made setting (Eberron) because they were contractually obligated to (I believe), they kept the Realms because they knew they'd make money off it if for no other reason than the Drizzt and Elminster fanbois out there.


David,

I like 4E as a tactical strategy game. I think its balanced and well written. I dislike it entirely because it's WoW not D and D.

Regardless of what you think of the content using the Realms is like writing programs for computers. You write for Windows because that's what people use and are familiar with. Sure there are other greats out there, but if you want to be successful you have to go where the people are.

D&D has the beauty of working in multiple spaces however. A unique setting may have worked just as well in an online game...but again, Realms gets the average gamer geek going.

I agree implicitly. But I don't follow where hating some hack writer for a setting means hating the setting itself.
"I hate New York."
"Bad experience there?"
"No. Robert De Niro is from New York originally."
"...so?"
"I don't like Robert De Niro movies."
"..."


The books have a good balance of low and high NPCs, and the 3.5 Drizzt is fairly weaksauce. Off the top of my head, I remember NPCs being presented in the core book who were only level 4, with several being in the 5-7 range. Having a few established strong ones is no worse than Greyhawk's Lord Robilar (Fighter 24), Mordenkainen (Wizard 27), Rary (Wizard 24), Turin (Fighter 4 / Rogue 5 / Assassin 8 ), Tenser (Wizard 16 / Archmage 5), Org (Rogue 18), Althea (Cleric 18), Bigby (Wizard 19), et cetera, et cetera. There are simply more of them in the Realms because the Realms is larger, just as there are more setting NPCs at lower levels.


Manshoon ftw. Besides, the only decently selling video games were Forgotten Realms. Baldur's Gate (+Expansions), Baldur's Gate II (+Expansions), Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance, Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance 2, Neverwinter Nights (+Expansions), Neverwinter Nights II (+Expansions), etc etc. Granted, Planescape is well known, but was a financial flop at its conception.


Agreed. "You got your WoW in my D&D!" "No, you got your D&D in my WoW!" I dislike fourth edition for the same reason I'd have disliked fourth edition if they replaced Magic with the Force and half the classes with Jedis and Droids. I enjoy Star Wars, but not in my D&D. I enjoy WoW, but not in my D&D.

Logically, you're entirely correct. That doesn't mean I have to LIKE it, however. Your point is valid, but my point still stands- someone make a D and D chat that is NOT in the Realms, and does not use 4e and I'll most likely play.





Not quite. You'd be better off using Terentino. I dislike Salvatore because his 'writing' is viewed as valid source material for the Realms. He writes in the Realms, he writes crap, thus the novelized canon of the Realms is crap (over all). Again, it may not be entirely reasonable, but...



Difference being? With the exception of 'Return to Castle Greyhawk' (coolest module ever!), the sigs for GH didn't make a daily impact. They weren't so far in your face that they could be used as rebreathers. FR's sigs on the other hand, were involved in every single thing. It was just annoying. Besides, with the exception of Robilar, Turin, Althea, and Org... the GH sigs were cool. The Wiz Council members were not only interesting, but they had interesting social dynamics.



Planescape was a flop, sadly. Which sucks, because it (argueably) had the best story out of all the video games.

Now for a bit of history. When the Great Godfather was kicked out of Lake Geneva the usurpers decided that his creation had to be altered to get as much of his material and flavor out as possible. Greyhawk being the orgininal canon setting, they had to axe it. So, they brought in a tabletop campaign to be their new canon setting. The Realms. A relatively cheap knockoff of the 'real world' (re: The East, the Hordes, Maztica..) . In order to sell it to the player/fan base, they shoved it down people's throats with as much lisencing as humanly possible. Crappy comics from Marvel, crappy novels with crappy characters, huge amounts of (contradictory) source books and modules...

Most modern gamers started playing in the Realms, and just don't know that there's much, much better out there. It's not a problem, it's just unfortunate...



Allegedly the main driving force behind D and D 4e is also the idiot that wrote the WoW RPG using 3.5 rules. If so... that and declining sales would explain a lot about why WotC is now so focused on recruiting WoW players at the expense of us old schoolers.

Speaking of WoW I would certainly buy their rpg books if they covert it over to 4.0e.

Thought that is just me. I like the system and I believe I can carry the fluff over. So in my opinion and this is just my opinion I say 4.0e have a much more better system that is balance. Now is it the good old classic DnD? I am going to be honest and say I have to agree that it is not. Hell they don't even have OGL so the old spirit of DnD is pretty much dead in the cold offices of WOTC. I don't hate the 4.0e cause it is just a system. I can hate the people who made it that way.

HB

Wizards are nothing compared to CoDzilla (Cleric or Druidzilla) That's like....powergame 101.

as for psionics...While I disagree it's overpowered.......I find it stupid. I dont need psychic powers in my fantasy game unless it's aberations using it...and even then you can use magic and say "lookit that it's magic brain powers".

Hi there! I'll take 24 hour duration Divine Power + Greater Visage of the Deity, thanks!

Could we PLEASE stop all this criticism of d20 as a whole and continue to use this forum as a way to objectively view the Digital Dreaming d20 game?

There are whole other forums dedicated to the discussion that has been ongoing on this thread. Please move it there. Thank you kindly.

Some of this conversation is relevant to the site. You can't wholly separate the site from the system. I wonder why it bothers you so much?

I... agree... with Bait.

You can't really ignore the system (or platform) when critiquing a site.

Any RPG site is a combination of at least three things:

1.) Game System used
2.) Platform used
3.) Administration and Storytelling

#1.) Is addressed in the multiple posts debating the worthwhile aspects of the Forgotten Realms specifically and D20 in general.
#2.) Hasn't really been addressed.
#3.) Is covered in the multiple posts debating the allowance of Psionics, Psionicists, and various supplements.

The only thing that's even nominally tangental is the debate about 3.0/5 and 4.0. I'll concede that one to you, and agree to cease discussing the pros and cons.
If you can shed some light on why the Realms was chosen over the other settings or even offer us your view on the house rules and what not, that'd be fantastic!

History lesson:

Originally, the site was based in the Iron Kingdoms game by Privateer Press. However, when it became apparent that Privateer Press was not really interested in continuing the game, in the summer of 2003, the setting of the game was changed to the Forgotten Realms. The Forgotten Realms was chosen due to the continued output of setting information and widespread popularity of the setting among the gaming community. I know someone mentioned not liking the fiction based on the setting and I will agree, neither did I. But the setting works independent of the fiction, and offers plenty of play opportunities. Rules have been made to take Grayhawk themed PrCs, Domains and so forth from the Complete book series and accommodate them to the FR setting.

As for why The 9 Swords book is not allowed is less about powers and more about complexity. Combat is notoriously slow online as it is, and many of the rules of this book would complicate combat further, with the rules of stances and so forth. While I personally would have like to have seen the book implemented, playtesting using these rules in combat proved to be cumbersome.

Psionics, quite simply, is not used due to being overpowered. While I am sure this will re-open the debate, it is one I will decline to be part of. I am not one to debate mechanics, as this decision was made by others with much more technical RP and balance knowledge than myself, but I stand by the decision. While I cannot explain how they are overpowered with specific examples, I have seen them become a dominant force in the games that they are used, to the chagrin of the other classes. It was reached as a site decision among the assembled DMs that the psionics were too powerful. This issue has been revisited throughout the years of the site, and despite changes in the DMs, the verdict still stands. We have had the periodic player come by and request that this be changed, but a majority of the DMs and Players would prefer psionics remain out of the game.