New Race: Revenant (is FR losing its "setting feel"?)

516 posts / 0 new
Last post
For what it's worth, after reading today's Spotlight Interview (quoted in part by Mudbunny above and available here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4spot/20090515 - no DDI required!) I sent an e-mail to Mr. Sernett asking a few questions about Revenants, Forgotten Realms, and mentioning some of the concerns raised in this thread.

I'm waiting on permission from him to quote his e-mail to you, but I will share at least this one tidbit:

The last point is that revenants are both undead and alive in many ways. For the purposes of keywords, they are both. So even if a cleric of Kelemvor did know something about revenants, their nature is up for debate.

Make of it what you will, I'm hoping to share more with you all very soon.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

I give a fig about the lore of the Realms. That the "legal" race has been introduced without rhyme or reason and "breaks" the lore of the setting is not my fault.

And the Realms, unlike say other settings, is *all* about the lore.

And that's fine if you give a fig. You are entitled to your love of the lore, your dedication to it, etc. Read the old editions until your eyes bleed. Strip naked, smear yourself in peanut butter and roll around in old realmslore articles if it makes you happy (just not in public please :P)

However, in LFR, a worldwide public campaign, you have to realize that everything isn't always going to fit into your view of how things should be and expecting it to be so is unrealistic. Some lore may be stretched, sometimes beyond the breaking point. Someone may be playing an option you don't like. Insulting people who want to play a dhampyr or a revenant doesn't do anyone any good and just makes you look bad.
EDIT: Also, just because they haven't been int he lore prior to 4e, doesn't mean they can't fir the lore post-spellplague. As example, i point to the shadar-kai.

Many of the problems can be overcome with a little intelligence. If during PC intros at the table someone says they are a Revenant {insert class here} and you're playing your Cleric, just tell them to not announce that in character because your cleric is a zealous follower of Kelemvor and would never knowingly work alongside an undead without trying to kill them. It keeps you from looking petty or a jerk. If the player doesn't play along with that then the onus is on him, not you. If they are a new player and don't know the lore, then educate them and tell them that he wouldn't want to announce his undead status to followers of Kelemvor. If they're a dhampyr, work with the player to come up with some tense, but fun, roleplaying. Dhampyr are not undead (they are very much alive) but your cleric ay see them as "one step away." Removed enough that he won't attack on sight, but they have that legacy that makes you uneasy.

What you don't want to do is leave the table in a huff (makes you look like a jerk) or start deriding them and jeering them because of their choice of character. Your suggestion of announcing during marshaling so you can choose an appropriate character is a good idea. Everyone wins.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
So, because of a few potential mini-spoilers, and also to avoid presenting any kind of official stance, Matt has actually requested I not share his entire e-mail.

However I will paraphrase and expand on a few things he said (or at least that I'm going to allege he said - so you can blame me, not him).

The most important point was - we're all in the game to have fun. It might be that having a little (or a lot of) tension between "my" Revenant Warlock and your Kelemvor-worshiping Cleric will be a lot of fun (assuming your character recognizes a Revenant for what it is). It might also be that I'm playing the Revenant because I like the character concept and would really hate to get a lot of static at the table.

At the end of the day - it's important to remember that we're in the game to have fun.

We often highlight that the main job of the DM is to make the table as fun as possible for all involved.

I think it's equally important that we, as players, make the same effort.

Someone opting to play a Revenant at your table isn't doing so to wreck your sense of fun, your sense of immersion, or what you feel is "right" about the Realms[1]. They're choosing the race because it's what they find to be a fun option.

How YOU react to that choice is something that can VERY MUCH impact on that person's sense of fun.

Just as you're not wrong for playing an undead-despising Cleric/Paladin/Other of Kelemvor. They aren't wrong for wanting to play a Revenant[2].

It's up to us, the players "behind" the characters to make sure we're not ruining each other's good time. If that means you have to make an exception "just this once" to work with that odd-looking stranger whose race you can't quite pin down great!

If it means you have to leave the table, so be it.

If it means you can compromise and banter/argue/threaten/make like difficult for the other character - without disrupting the rest of the table - awesome.

But remember that LFR isn't "your" game or "my" game - it's our game - and we should all work together to keep it fun for everyone involved.

[1] - Probably
[2] - assuming Revenenats are compiled into Dragon 376 and therefore become RPGA legal
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Many of the problems can be overcome with a little intelligence. If during PC intros at the table someone says they are a Revenant {insert class here} and you're playing your Cleric, just tell them to not announce that in character because your cleric is a zealous follower of Kelemvor and would never knowingly work alongside an undead without trying to kill them. It keeps you from looking petty or a jerk. If the player doesn't play along with that then the onus is on him, not you. If they are a new player and don't know the lore, then educate them and tell them that he wouldn't want to announce his undead status to followers of Kelemvor. If they're a dhampyr, work with the player to come up with some tense, but fun, roleplaying. Dhampyr are not undead (they are very much alive) but your cleric ay see them as "one step away." Removed enough that he won't attack on sight, but they have that legacy that makes you uneasy.

I have been doing that. I have been making it clear during character intros that Asioniel will not tolerate undead of any sort and she is the budding little jihadist when it comes to undead.

...to the point where people come up to me and quote back at me some of her infamous catchphrases and sayings....
The last point is that revenants are both undead and alive in many ways. For the purposes of keywords, they are both.

Warfoged - Living Construct
Revenant - Living Undead

Bet me =P

Haha. Wow, good call. :P
Haha. Wow, good call. :P

Well, remember - "Living Construct" is not the same as "Living; Construct" - which would be both keywords.

It's possible that the Revenenat will be "Living Undead" but it also might be "Undead; Living" (which would be having "both" keywords).

We still won't know for sure until the article is published.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Well, remember - "Living Construct" is not the same as "Living; Construct" - which would be both keywords.

It's possible that the Revenenat will be "Living Undead" but it also might be "Undead; Living" (which would be having "both" keywords).

Yeah... too bad "Living" isn't a keyword (unless you're talking about an RPGA campaign).
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
Yeah... too bad "Living" isn't a keyword (unless you're talking about an RPGA campaign).

Not yet anyhow. ;)

you never know what those crazy R&D types will come up with next.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

If you dislike Living Forgotten Realms you can always play Undead Greyhawk... :D
I guess that your Cleric will find out the other player is a Revenant the first time you pop off Turn Undead and the Revenant is within range. Gee wonder why my party member took damage and got shoved and immobilized. Hmmm
its funny ... remember that inter party conflict I mentioned ....


I saw it in about 5 posts "rawr Except my awesome living undeadness... or quit playing LFR"

I expect Gencon will have some lonely tables because of this

oh and 1 more thing quoted from another thread

No, Vecna is from Greyhawk. He has no place in the Realms.

Gomez

Raven queen is from Greyhawk (and definatly not Kelemvor) and has no place in the realms
Raven queen is from Greyhawk (and definatly not Kelemvor) and has no place in the realms

Raven Queen is from the "undefined" default Points of Light campaign.

As a general rule, her FR equivalent is Kelemvor - hence some of the sticking points.
WolfStar76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide

Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter

Raven queen is from Greyhawk (and definatly not Kelemvor) and has no place in the realms

What Greyhawk references have you been reading?
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
was another thread about Vecna in the realms ... that quote was an argument posted by someone and I just adapted it
As a general rule, her FR equivalent is Kelemvor - hence some of the sticking points.

And that is mostly to place rules items (such as requirements for feats, PPs, etc).
Still, 3rd ed D&D had somethign that were not really undead, but a 'good' version that was similar (deadless, iirc, but I may be wrong) . Maybe a revenant could be that, and Kelemvor might accept (or at elast tolearte) their existence.

Gomez
was another thread about Vecna in the realms ... that quote was an argument posted by someone and I just adapted it

It would have made more sense if your 'adaption' was true.

It isn't.

Vecna is from Greyhawk.

The Raven Queen is not.


-karma

LFR Characters: Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard | Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard | Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric

AL Character: Talia Ko'bori Silverwane - Tiefling Tome Fiend Warlock

I expect Gencon will have some lonely tables because of this

bwahahah, not likely. I expect some singular lonely PLAYERS at Gencon who can't accept how the campaign works, I expect LOADS upon LOADS of full happy content tables, especially those playing ADCP1-1 at my tables =p

I wonder if I can start my own Adventuring Company and just invite every group that sits at the table that doesn't have a adco already started to join it so they can run the mod =P I wonder how many people I can get to join over the duration of the con.
Blah blah blah
was another thread about Vecna in the realms ... that quote was an argument posted by someone and I just adapted it

Except it made no sense because the Raven Queen isn't in Greyhawk. :P

@Ibixat - If you sit me on a generic, i'll join.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
ok either way ... Kelemvor would not Create "Living Undead" nor would he allow such a thing to exist .... and by the Summary given for the revenant they were created by the Raven Queen(of course now I cant seem to find that referance ... I know it was in this thread). and since so many people insist that Kelemvor = Raven queen.... why make something that you seek to destroy and believe is an abomination
ok either way ... Kelemvor would not Create "Living Undead" nor would he allow such a thing to exist

If WotC says that he does, he does.
Mudbunny SVCL for DDI Before you post, think of the Monkeysphere
If WotC says that he does, he does.

WOTC have not said that though.

And has said, repeatedly up until now, that he doesn't.
Not to drag another thread into this one. But would your party Cleric have to ask permission to use Turn Undead if another player in the party is playing a Revenant?
There are a coulpe of questions that would need to be answewred before that question can even be asked.

1 - Would a PC know, by looking at the revenant, that they are a revenant?
2 - Will they be affected by things that have an effect on undead.
Mudbunny SVCL for DDI Before you post, think of the Monkeysphere
Not to drag another thread into this one. But would your party Cleric have to ask permission to use Turn Undead if another player in the party is playing a Revenant?

Because Turn Undead (and a few other Divine powers) does auto damage to anything with the Undead keyword. So, if the Revenant is Undead the Cleric will need their permission in the same way a Wizard needs permission from players before dropping a Scorching Burst or Fireball on them.
This little signature is my official and insignificant protest to the (not so new now) community redesign. The layout is lousy. The colour scheme burns the eyes. The wiki is a crippled monstrosity. So many posters have abandoned this site that some major forums are going days without posts. The 4e General Discussion board regularly has posts on the front page from two or even three days ago. This is pathetic. Since I have to assume Wizards has a vested interest in an active community I wish someone in charge would fix this mess.
Because Turn Undead (and a few other Divine powers) does auto damage to anything with the Undead keyword. So, if the Revenant is Undead the Cleric will need their permission in the same way a Wizard needs permission from players before dropping a Scorching Burst or Fireball on them.

Heh forget about clerics, their paltry burst 2 1d10 is weak I say, WEAK, fear the Avenger and his burst 5 3d10 =P (since yeah at level 1 you may just outright kill another revenant PC lol)

And yeah I know it scales up, but I played my avenger today and wanted to cry that in 3 mods I've fought no undead yet =(
Blah blah blah
WOTC have not said that though.

which is probably why mudbunny started the comment with the word "if," instead of saying "wotc says he does do he does."

and, fwiw, i could very much see an instance where kelemvor, in his obsession against undead, comes up with a way to rationalize creating bodies especially for some special or very useful souls to come back to the world. living bodies with dead (not necessarily undead) souls... it sounds like it could be a very compelling bit of story to me. who knows, maybe FR revenants will be more directly connected to kelemvor than his clergy. wouldn't that just make some heads explode. :D

yes, it is complete speculation, but so is the vast majority of this thread...

guess the entire issue will be known one way or another by monday... and then everyone who doesn't agree with it can start screaming about how lame it is, and how it isn't true to canon, and how much LFR is ruining the REAL Forgotten Realms...
who knows, maybe FR revenants will be more directly connected to kelemvor than his clergy. wouldn't that just make some heads explode. :D

If this happens, this will be StarBog --> :headexplo

:hoppingma

;) (just teasin')
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
Heh forget about clerics, their paltry burst 2 1d10 is weak I say, WEAK, fear the Avenger and his burst 5 3d10 =P (since yeah at level 1 you may just outright kill another revenant PC lol)

No, you wouldn't, since the avenger's power affects ony ONE undead that you choose (it's a striker power). So it can't target a PC.
The invoker and cleric's affect all undead in the burst (the invoker's is a bigger burst, but only dazes, while the cleric's immobilizes).
No, you wouldn't, since the avenger's power affects ony ONE undead that you choose (it's a striker power). So it can't target a PC.
The invoker and cleric's affect all undead in the burst (the invoker's is a bigger burst, but only dazes, while the cleric's immobilizes).

Yeah but given the amount of asshattery so far in the thread don't you think the Avenger's of Kelemvor want to use it on the revenant to begin with!

And wow, never noticed the limitation of one undead guy, probably a good thing I never got to use it then =P will teach me to read stuff better.
Blah blah blah
If this happens, this will be StarBog --> :headexplo

:hoppingma

;) (just teasin')

If it turns out to be the case, I'll get another pin ready to stick into the WOTC voodoo doll I have.
who knows, maybe FR revenants will be more directly connected to kelemvor than his clergy. wouldn't that just make some heads explode. :D

Actually, if they take the time to actually attach Revenants to Kelemvor in a way that makes sense it removes 99% of possible issues.
This little signature is my official and insignificant protest to the (not so new now) community redesign. The layout is lousy. The colour scheme burns the eyes. The wiki is a crippled monstrosity. So many posters have abandoned this site that some major forums are going days without posts. The 4e General Discussion board regularly has posts on the front page from two or even three days ago. This is pathetic. Since I have to assume Wizards has a vested interest in an active community I wish someone in charge would fix this mess.
Actually, if they take the time to actually attach Revenants to Kelemvor in a way that makes sense it removes 99% of possible issues.

it should, yes. but i very much doubt that it will, at least in the aspect of there being many people who will still complain about it.

mechanically, i'm very sure that they're going to make a race that will work well with everything that's already out there. "fluff"-wise, i'm pretty confident that they will address revenants in the realms and come up with something that makes sense.

there's still going to be a certain (generally rather vocal) demographic out there that will refuse to accept any change that they dislike.
All I know is that if they do make them Living Undead (BIG if), I am soooo making a Dhampyr Revenant Cleric/Paladin/Whatever-divine-class-fits-best of Kelemvor... just because I can. I'll even make an Adventuring Company open only to Revenants of Kelemvor. Maybe they could be called the Dogma Killers or something. ;)
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
As a note, since it's relevant to the discussion. Kelemvor already "tolerates" undead under his banner (or at least did in the past). Jergal (Lord of the End of Everything) is his exarch, and many of Jergal's few followers (from 2E sources) tend to be undead toiling away in crypts as scribes, cataloging the end of, literally, everything.
As a note, since it's relevant to the discussion. Kelemvor already "tolerates" undead under his banner (or at least did in the past). Jergal (Lord of the End of Everything) is his exarch, and many of Jergal's few followers (from 2E sources) tend to be undead toiling away in crypts as scribes, cataloging the end of, literally, everything.

No. Exarch is a 4e term. Jergal in 3e is a deity in his own right.
No. Exarch is a 4e term. Jergal in 3e is a deity in his own right.

Yes, but in 2e/3e Jergal is still subservient to the god of the dead.
As a note, since it's relevant to the discussion. Kelemvor already "tolerates" undead under his banner (or at least did in the past).

Not quite. Just because one deity is subservient to another does not mean that everything the lesser deity does is approved by the greater.
Clerics of Kelemvor consider all undead abominations, and do whatever they can to put them to eternal rest. They contend that those who create undead are fit only for swift and utter destruction (an important difference between the Kelemvorite clergy and that of Jergal, who hold that certain undead have their uses).

Just as you're not wrong for playing an undead-despising Cleric/Paladin/Other of Kelemvor. They aren't wrong for wanting to play a Revenant[2].

It's up to us, the players "behind" the characters to make sure we're not ruining each other's good time. If that means you have to make an exception "just this once" to work with that odd-looking stranger whose race you can't quite pin down great!

If it means you have to leave the table, so be it.

Why are you singling out the player who is actually trying to role-play his character, and to follow the lore?

IMO, if the Revenant player can't stand the heat and can't play "in character", he should be expected to leave just as much as the undead-despising Cleric of Kelemvor (if not more so).

---

Disclaimer: This is making some assumptions about Revenants. Namely, that regular humans would find undead walking around... well, scary. If that's the not the case, and Revenants are "blessed" by Kelemvor (or some such) and for some reason we're told that Undead are no more scary than Humans in FR (yay for retconning!), then so be it. At that point we need to just accept the ret-conning, and play in-character according to the "new" lore
Yeah, that got to me too.

It is true that the Kelemvorite chose to play an undead-intolerant character.

However, it is equally true that the player of a revenant also chose to play a controversial type of creature (undead) that is well known to be hated by many in the setting.

So if anything, the onus of "making it work" falls on BOTH players, not just the Kelemvorite player.



-karma

LFR Characters: Lady Tiana Elinden Kobori Silverwane - Drow Control Wizard | Kro'tak Warscream - Orc Bard | Fulcrum of Gond - Warforged Laser Cleric

AL Character: Talia Ko'bori Silverwane - Tiefling Tome Fiend Warlock

So if anything, the onus of "making it work" falls on BOTH players, not just the Kelemvorite player.

True, but that assumes that the Kelemvorite player is willing to compromise, and the statements from the vocal proponents of that faction have not, repeat NOT, been very compromise-friendly.
Sign In to post comments